Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Still Working on "Piles" Interface?

Peace said:
Well it's just an opinion.Seems like OS 9 went to OS X when they implemented Next and Unix.I could be wrong.So with that in mind if they go to a completely NEW kernel utilizing touch screen GUI's and the ZFS filesystem it would be OS XI..

Just a "thought" :)
Click to expand...

Dont the later builds of Leopard have ZFS support?
 
point665 said:
Dont the later builds of Leopard have ZFS support?
Click to expand...

Yup. But I agree with Peace anyway, the next OS after 10.5 will be XI (or OS 11.0). There's a whole bunch on interesting technology in the pipeline, and I am getting the feeling the Apple is starting to rethink UI design all over again. If they do, they'll bump the major version for something like that...
 
Peace said:
OS 10.5 is Leopard
OS 10.6..dont think theres gonna be one
Click to expand...

wrldwzrd89 said:
Interesting. So you think we'll see Mac OS 11 first? I could see that too.
Click to expand...

One, who gives an expletive about version numbers, and two, what the hell are you basing your opinions on? We only know, with OS X (as opposed to 'Classic') that when we get a new major release, 0.1 gets added to the version number. There's no reason to suspect a version 11.
 
burntoutjoy said:
One, who gives an expletive about version numbers, and two, what the hell are you basing your opinions on? We only know, with OS X (as opposed to 'Classic') that when we get a new major release, 0.1 gets added to the version number. There's no reason to suspect a version 11.
Click to expand...


There's already apps in Leopard referred to as "Classic"
 
Things at the top of the 'Pile' are called 'Shingles' and things at the bottom are called 'Bunions'. :D :D :D :D

j
 
That piles interface would be nice, but I agree that it's a major enough change to the UI to warrant a new version number.

I'm not an expert in version numbers and I don't feel like looking it up, but if you've got version A.B.C of something, the C releases are mainly bugfixes (and I think the odd numbers are more optimizations?), the B releases would be minor updates, and the A releases are major updates.

Then again, version numbers get mangled a lot these days, because they use it for marketing as well.
 
Peace said:
hehehe

Coverflow isn't even integrated with the Finder in Leopard unless you have a version I don't have ;)
Click to expand...

you use it as a finder in iTunes....but there is no "classic app" in os x

now back to topic...if apple has been working on "piles" since 94, wouldn't it have been implemented as something else already...let's say, expose'
 
maxp1 said:
Doesn't it seem like there would be a patent problem with BumpTop? I doubt they could release it without a license from Apple.
Click to expand...

I think that depends on how its worded, lawyers, and how well Apple has been pursuing and using the patient instead of squatting on it
 
It's difficult enough teaching a computer newbie the concept of click-and-drag, let alone perform the tasks presented in the video. I think Mac OS spatial finder will be around for a very long time to come...
 
This sounds like an idea stemming from Jef Raskin's "Zoom World" of which he wrote about in his book The Humane Interface.

I highly recommend the read. Apple Inc. employee #31 had some really interesting ideas.
 
Methinks "Piles" would be a nice new combat to flip 3D in Vista.

Seeing as that's one of Vista's three selling points, when asked "Vista has new superawesomehardwaredrainingflip3D! What does the new OS X have?" you could retort, "Well, there's this new little animation called 'piles' but OS X has had cool things like that for a looong time."

Pretty please with a cherry on top?

-=|Mgkwho
 
I find this idea sort of fascinating because the more I think about how it might work, the more it seems to be a great idea. Piles are just an organizational metaphor very much like folders but they could end up being more transparent and dynamic in usage than folders which is how they may really come in useful at some point.

Here's an example. I have a habit of dragging and dropping links from my browser to my desktop if it's something I want to look at later. Of course, I sometimes end up with a dozen link files scattered on my desktop. I don't need to make a folder for that because there aren't always links there. I wouldn't mind some pile-like metaphor where I could set the preferences like this: "keep all my files of type .webloc in a tidy stack when they exist on my desktop." That way, when there are no .webloc files, there's no empty, useless "links" folder on the desktop and when I have a bunch, they stay stacked and don't clutter things up.

That's what I mean by piles being more transparent and dynamic than folders. They come into existence when you need them and don't exist otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back