What We Want to See in Leopard

[Flying Llama]

Hmm... I don't want any flames coming at me, but I'll have to agree with sacear. When something is part of the OS, it's usually located in the System folder. The Dock is part of the OS, Finder is part of the OS. Saying it is part of the OS usually means it's core, required and "un-optional" (things would go kablouie if I deleted the Dock).
But I also see what GodBless is trying to say. He's saying it more as a figure of speech. Like when people say their dog is part of their family. He isn't really, biologically part of the family.
So both of you are right. However I must admit that I am slightly with sacear... sorry GodBless...

llama

 

[sacear]

Go to these web sites:

These sites are not small, they have ads that make them money and they give lyrics away for free. Explain this. I am sure they make quite a bit of money. These are just some of the many sites that give lyrics away for free.

As mentioned before Apple already sells songs that have lyrics in them so they legally have the right to distribute the written lyrics of those songs too.

I highly doubt this because of how many web sites give lyrics away for free.

I've never heard of lyrics being sold. This is a new one for me.

PDF files won't really be necessary with a lyric database. If all albums sold on iTunes came with a PDF booklet (as they do when you buy an album in a retail store) file then how would you be able to see lyrics for the individual songs that you buy?

You are missing the point. Just because Apple has a license to sell the songs, does not mean they have a license or right to sell (or even give away) the printed lyrics. Printed music and lyrics are handled completely differently than a performance of the music. A recording is considered a performance, not a publication. Printed music and lyrics are publications. Have you ever heard of sheet music?

Just because a retailer sells songs that have lyrics in them, they do not, do not, legally have the right to distribute the written lyrics of those songs too. Has anyone ever bought a CD and received the sheet music for free? If so, then that would amaze me. Sheet music of a song usually and generally costs far more than a recording of a song. Lyrics are considered part of the written composition, not part of the recording.

Just because I have been given a license and the privilege to drive on certain roads, does not mean that I own those roads. I cannot sell and transfer ownership of those roads. Likewise, just because I have a license to drive, does not mean I have the authority to grant licenses to drive to others. That is the same theory with printed lyrics and music.

Just because there are sites that provide lyrics for free, does not apply at all to the Apple situation, or give Apple a reason or precedent to give lyrics away. Apple is selling individual songs, on a cost per song basis, as a retail agent for the record companies and recording artists. Lyrics are someone's product, just like books, automobiles, and furniture. Those are not given away for free. Those sites do not charge money for the song or for the lyrics themselves. If those sites make any money by selling ad space, that is only for ad space and not for the lyrics. They do not charge directly for or make money directly from the lyrics themselves. The lyric copyright owner cannot prove that the lyrics themselves are being sold directly for money. That is the loop hole. I doubt those sites make quite a bit of money. Once a site charges for an actual lyric, then law suits will come fast and hard.

 

[Flying Llama]

A different version...

Here is the example I made and promised for window switching via cmd+`:

Well, to tell you the truth, it seems a bit "un-aligned" and "un-Apple-like"...
How about this?

llama

 

[GodBless]

Well, to tell you the truth, it seems a bit "un-aligned" and "un-Apple-like"...
How about this?

llama

That is cool! I agree that is better than mine. I am glad I started something that inspired someone to add on to the idea and make it even better.

Edit: One suggestion. Since there is an arrow coming down from the center, it looks like the windows are coming from the Preview Application instead of Finder. Maybe Leopard can have one of these:

 

[GodBless]

No, Safari is not a part of the Operating System.

Then why did Steve Jobs say it was? And why is it on the OS X home page as one of the 8 major OS features? (Here: http://www.apple.com/macosx/)

Really? How do you figure that? So, the Read Me text files are part of the Operating System? Code Line Software's Art Director's Toolkit is part of Apple's Operating System? Thorsten Lemke's Graphic Converter is part of the Operating System? Omni Group's Omni Giraffe and Omni Outliner are part of the Operating System? Intuit's Quickbooks are part of the Operating System? Zinio's Delivery Manager and Reader are part of the Operating System? Microsoft's Internet Explorer was a part of Apple's Operating System? Allume's Stuffit Expander was a part of Apple's Operating System?

I am not talking about a System Restore disk, I am talking about a retail store OS disk. Apple never included much of this software with their OS. Apple only includes this software if you buy a computer not on retail OS CDs or a retail OS DVD.

Microsoft Internet Explorer was never a part of Apple's Operating System. Safari is not a part of Apple's Operating System. It is an application that is included with and runs within Apple's Operating System.

Disk Utility is an Application. Are you saying that it isn't part of the OS? The fact is that Disk Utility is part of OS X and so is iTunes.

 

[michaelrjohnson]

Disk Utility is an Application. Are you saying that it isn't part of the OS? The fact is that Disk Utility is part of OS X and so is iTunes.

I think what he's saying is (in this case):

Yes, Disk Utility comes with the OS... It's not an additional install, or a removeable option from the retail Tiger DVD install. However, Mac OS X would still run without the Disk Utility App. It is a program (bundled with the OS) that accesses some features built into the OS. But it doesn't make it "part of the OS".

iTunes and Safari use the webkit (a part of the OS), but iTunes and Safari are not part of the OS. They are separate applications and OS X would run just fine without them.

 

[cwedl]

Just give me a consistent gui and I'll be happy

I second that!

 

[michaelrjohnson]

I second that!

I concur.

It is the simple things that make the most difference, isn't it?

 

[spyker3292]

Mutiple

I want more things, like a thing that lets you switch docks so you can have a lot (there are some but they forget what was on your extra docks) and I want something that lets you have a lot of dashboards so I can have all 100 of my widgets open.

 

[GodBless]

I concur.

It is the simple things that make the most difference, isn't it?

That would be very nice. But since we will be able to run Windows Applications (via an Apple W.I.N.E. solution) like we are able to run Linux Applications now (via X11), why do you think Apple has gotten us used to the GUI inconsistency?

Easy answer: They are making a version of W.I.N.E. for OS X (or are getting us ready for a 3rd party solution but most likely it will come from Apple because they have already made X11 which has less potential than a W.I.N.E. solution).

More discussion about this here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/136412/

 

[sacear]

Then why did Steve Jobs say it was? And why is it on the OS X home page as one of the 8 major OS features? (Here: http://www.apple.com/macosx/)

I am not talking about a System Restore disk, I am talking about a retail store OS disk. Apple never included much of this software with their OS. Apple only includes this software if you buy a computer not on retail OS CDs or a retail OS DVD.

Disk Utility is an Application. Are you saying that it isn't part of the OS? The fact is that Disk Utility is part of OS X and so is iTunes.

Oh jeez, let's not be naïve. Safari, iTunes, Disk Utility, etc., are not part of the Operating System. They are applications that run separately within (or atop) the Operating System. They are enhancements to the Operating System, yet not part of the Operating System itself. System helper applications are different than and separate from the Operating System.

Steve Jobs (and Apple) is speaking in generalities to the mass public with his marketing mojo lingo RDF. Oh, let's look at that for a moment: RDF = Reality Distortion Field. Let's not have our reality distorted here. Most of the [hundreds of] enhancements, improvments, and added features to OS X are really not such to the Operating System. That is just marketing hype. Yet we know better. We are not duped by that. We know the difference between the Operating System and applications. Safari, iTunes, Disk Utiltiy, etc. are applications, not the Operating System (the program that makes the computer come "alive" and work). Those applications reside either in the Applications folder or in the Utilities folder, yet not in the System folder, where the Operating System resides. Just because those applications come included (bundled) with OS X, does not make them part of the Operating System.

If you remove iTunes, will the computer crash or freeze or will it run normally?
If you remove Safari, will the computer crash or freeze or will it run normally?
If you remove Disk Utility, will the computer crash or freeze or will it run normally?

The computer will run normally, because those applications are not part of the Operating System.

Yes, Disk Utility comes with the OS... It's not an additional install, or a removeable option from the retail Tiger DVD install. However, Mac OS X would still run without the Disk Utility App. It is a program (bundled with the OS) that accesses some features built into the OS. But it doesn't make it "part of the OS."

iTunes and Safari use the webkit (a part of the OS), but iTunes and Safari are not part of the OS. They are separate applications and OS X would run just fine without them.

 

[Flying Llama]

That is cool! I agree that is better than mine. I am glad I started something that inspired someone to add on to the idea and make it even better.

Edit: One suggestion. Since there is an arrow coming down from the center, it looks like the windows are coming from the Preview Application instead of Finder. Maybe Leopard can have one of these:

Nice, I was thinking about that but couldn't really find anything. I like the last one, the window switcher would always stay in the middle and the arrow too, but the line would adjust as you command-tab through, very nice!
The one where the arrow comes from Finder and points to the window switcher perpendicularily wouldn't work because what would happen when I select Photoshop etc?
Also, the first one would make it confusing having the window switcher and arrow move around, I might get vertigo!
Good job on the first one, this is going somewhere!

llama

 

[GodBless]

Nice, I was thinking about that but couldn't really find anything. I like the last one, the window switcher would always stay in the middle and the arrow too, but the line would adjust as you command-tab through, very nice!
The one where the arrow comes from Finder and points to the window switcher perpendicularily wouldn't work because what would happen when I select Photoshop etc?
Also, the first one would make it confusing having the window switcher and arrow move around, I might get vertigo!
Good job on the first one, this is going somewhere!

llama

I wonder how Apple's employees that work on OS X get their ideas enhanced. I bet they have some kind of company internal forum or something so that ideas can openly be thrown around.

 

[GodBless]

Nice, I was thinking about that but couldn't really find anything. I like the last one, the window switcher would always stay in the middle and the arrow too, but the line would adjust as you command-tab through, very nice!
The one where the arrow comes from Finder and points to the window switcher perpendicularily wouldn't work because what would happen when I select Photoshop etc?
Also, the first one would make it confusing having the window switcher and arrow move around, I might get vertigo!
Good job on the first one, this is going somewhere!

llama

Does anyone have any constructive criticism for this one?

 

[GodBless]

Oh jeez, let's not be naïve. Safari, iTunes, Disk Utility, etc., are not part of the Operating System. They are applications that run separately within (or atop) the Operating System. They are enhancements to the Operating System, yet not part of the Operating System itself. System helper applications are different than and separate from the Operating System.

Steve Jobs (and Apple) is speaking in generalities to the mass public with his marketing mojo lingo RDF. Oh, let's look at that for a moment: RDF = Reality Distortion Field. Let's not have our reality distorted here. Most of the [hundreds of] enhancements, improvments, and added features to OS X are really not such to the Operating System. That is just marketing hype. Yet we know better. We are not duped by that. We know the difference between the Operating System and applications. Safari, iTunes, Disk Utiltiy, etc. are applications, not the Operating System (the program that makes the computer come "alive" and work). Those applications reside either in the Applications folder or in the Utilities folder, yet not in the System folder, where the Operating System resides. Just because those applications come included (bundled) with OS X, does not make them part of the Operating System.

If you remove iTunes, will the computer crash or freeze or will it run normally?
If you remove Safari, will the computer crash or freeze or will it run normally?
If you remove Disk Utility, will the computer crash or freeze or will it run normally?

The computer will run normally, because those applications are not part of the Operating System.

Take everything but what will run the computer and you will come up with something less than UNIX. And yes UNIX is an OS. So is Mac OS X. Don't try to say just because it doesn't run the computer it isn't part of the OS.

An OS doesn't run the computer. An OS just makes the computer easier to use.

 

[sacear]

Take everything but what will run the computer and you will come up with something less than UNIX. And yes UNIX is an OS. So is Mac OS X. Don't try to say just because it doesn't run the computer it isn't part of the OS.

An OS doesn't run the computer. An OS just makes the computer easier to use.

Regardless of any of your arguments, those applications are not part of the Operating System.

No matter how you try to spin it, those applications are not part of the Operating System.

You may call an animal with canine incisors, that walks on four legs, has a tail, is domesticated and trainable by humans, and is called "Man's best friend" a cow, however that is a dog and the rest of the world calls that a dog, not a cow. It is what it is, not what it is not. A dog is a dog, not a cow, even if you call it so.

You may call it whatever you want to, yet the reality is that it is what it is and is not what it is not. Those applications are not part of the Operating System.

 

[mkrishnan]

Does anyone have any constructive criticism for this one?

Wow, I like that one a *lot*. You've been doing some nice work on that idea, GodBless!

 

[GodBless]

Wow, I like that one a *lot*. You've been doing some nice work on that idea, GodBless!

Thanks to some help from Flying Llama.

 

[GodBless]

Regardless of any of your arguments, those applications are not part of the Operating System.

My statements never changed the fact that they are part of the OS, they just made the fact openly known.

No matter how you try to spin it, those applications are not part of the Operating System.

I don't spin things. I clear the fog and describe the scene. I don't cover up reality.

You may call it whatever you want to, yet the reality is that it is what it is and is not what it is not. Those applications are not part of the Operating System.

6 out of 8 of the main Tiger features on the Apple Mac OS X web page are Applications. This is not reality distortion as you claim it is, instead it is a fact.

 

[michaelrjohnson]

Does anyone have any constructive criticism for this one?

Yeah... the arrow seems too "delicate". Also, there is no visual heirarchy to help distinguish between the app and documents. Perhaps something more like this:

 

[GodBless]

Yeah... the arrow seems too "delicate". Also, there is no visual heirarchy to help distinguish between the app and documents. Perhaps something more like this:

That looks like this one...

which isn't as good as this one...

because it would make everything shift as Flying Llama pointed out.

Edit: However I do like that the arrow on yours stands out really well.

 

[Flying Llama]

Ya, I also love that arrow, just too bad it would make everything shift. Hmm...

llama

 

[dejo]

An OS doesn't run the computer. An OS just makes the computer easier to use.

So, theoretically, I could de-install Mac OS X and my iTunes will still run, just not as easy?

 

[GodBless]

So, theoretically, I could de-install Mac OS X and my iTunes will still run, just not as easy?

My point exactly. Of course it won't run. An OS is made up of so many things under the hood and on the surface. For example Core Image is under the hood and iTunes is on the surface.

 

[mkrishnan]

So, theoretically, I could de-install Mac OS X and my iTunes will still run, just not as easy?

Well, if by "not as easy," you mean that you won't be able to see the interface, change songs, or actually hear any music at all or do much of anything, then, yes, I think you've got it exactly.

(P.S. This is such a surreal argument, I'm sorry.)