Slashdot Mirror


Konfabulator: Whatever You Want It To Be

Squidgee writes "Arlo Rose, one of the developers who worked on Kaleidoscope, and the ill fated Eazel desktop environment for Linux, has come out with another potentially Mac-shaking app: Konfabulator. Konfabulator lets you run any program written in XML/Applescript/Javascript (It's own little hybrid of all three) in its engine, seamlessly placing the app onto your desktop. Examples of such apps are: A CPU Monitor, a Multi-Clipboard tool, a weather monitor, a battery monitor, etc. It allows for easy developement, beautiful apps, and unlimited functionality."

39 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. what could it be used for? by tunesmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Right now the widgets are a waste of desktop space. What is so special about this in terms of the actual technology? What does it enable that would be worth the desktop space? What's better about it than a cocoa app? I mean, I can have a 256x256 cpu widget on my desktop, or a 16x16 menu item. I don't get it yet. Anyone?

    --
    skkkoooonnnggggkkk ptui
    1. Re:what could it be used for? by addaon · · Score: 4, Informative

      The main thing is just how easy it is to write widgets. It took me about ten minutes to write a widget that keeps track of my amazon associates account, which was something I wanted to just have always visible. But amazingly, it actually makes writing widgets so easy that graphics designers, not programmers, can do most of it, which means that quick one-off widgets are often astoundingly good looking.

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
    2. Re:what could it be used for? by HaiLHaiL · · Score: 4, Informative

      Konfabulator actually has a couple useful widgets. The first is one that let's you hide all windows but finder. Super useful has since i've switched I haven't found an easy way to jump to the desktop. This mades the other widgets more useful as they're easier to get to. While the clock & newsreader widgets are pretty useless, CPU monitoring, net traffic monitoring, a calendar, a to-do list, and an e-bay auction monitor turn my otherwise blue-and-empty desktop into something useful. Oh, and did I mention the nifty widget that shows the current terror alert level? :-)

      --


      reech bee-yond ur clip-0n
    3. Re:what could it be used for? by tamen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I spent an hour making a remote for XMMS running in X11. Most of the time was spent en Photoshop doing the GUI, wich now sits nice an quiet and unobtrusive in the topright corner, half translucent and floating over my other windows.
      As it is now, I can quickly convert the widget to, say, control iTunes on another box on my network, or iTunes on my own box. And I think that most other apps that can be controlled via either Applescript or the terminal can be controlled with a widget.

      I dont knwo about you, but Ive always wanted a more simpel remote formy television and stereo. Now I can at least get simple remotes for most of my apps.
      Oh, and most of my websites too ;)

    4. Re:what could it be used for? by twiztidlojik · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um....
      Command-tab to finder and command-option-H to hide others.

      Option-click the desktop. (Also works with option-clicking other apps in the dock.)

      I think there's about a bajillion more ways.

      I do have a Konfab registration code, I'm happy. But, as I don't have a TiBook (My IBM drive controller died) I'm pretty skrood. Konfab looks very very promising in terms of what you can do with it. Hopefully it won't go the way of OpenDoc ;)

      --
      I will now redundantly add my name to the end of my post. You know, in case you forgot me or something.
    5. Re:what could it be used for? by Ponty · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try cmd-option clicking the desktop. Blow your mind! And then if you're so inclined, cmd-option-m. Bam!

    6. Re:what could it be used for? by tamen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, you used about as much time on the commands as I did. As I said, most of the time was spend doing the GUI.

      What people prefer to use, key/mouseclick, is up to them. I prefer the mouse for this kind of opereation as my left hand ususally supports my head ;) And its limited how many commands you can put on a keyboard, let alone remember. Some of the widgets you dont even have to do anything to, other than look at the gui. I know the weather widget is kinda stupid, you could look out the window. (Then again, if youre looking at the screen, why waste precious pico-seconds looking away? ;) ) But, as you say your GKrellM do, it convays information at a glance, as can Konfabulator be made to. In just the way you want. If you dont like the look, change it. Make it do something more. With javascript, applescript and shellscripting Im hard pressed to think up something you cant do with it.
      personally I would have prefered PHP instead of javascript, but thats just me being a PHP-developer :)

      "A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words" someone once said, and I think he/she was right. It is faster to look at a smiling sun than read the "Partly Cloudy" that a bash script would output. You wont even have to look directly at the picture, just kinda "theres something yellowish up in the corner of the screen... The sun must be shining outside".

      Anyway, I like konfabulator and think its a great app. You would almost think I worked for them by the way I defend it here ;)

    7. Re:what could it be used for? by justMichael · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ok, cmd-option-click_desktop is nice. Thanks.

      What is cmd-option-m supposed to do? I get noting...
      Forgive me, I'm a recent switcher and my Mac skillz aren't so l33t.

  2. Re:Two Important Questions by Mad_Fred · · Score: 2, Interesting

    To me, it sounds a bit more like what Mozilla is trying to do, but on one platform instead of all of them (basically). And I have to say that the whole concept appeals to me, anything that makes creating interesting little apps easier seems like a Good Thing to me. True, it doesn't feel all that earth-shattering, but that's really down to what people do with it, and how many people that start doing it. The examples noted in the journal seem very promising. In all, the only downside I can see is that I still don't have a Mac of my own to try this out on :-) ...

    Someone using this to help trolls? You mean, like trolls being ... creative? Interesting concept ...

  3. Not Too Exciting by owlicks58 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I used this about a week ago and the widgets aren't very exiting. It would be helpful if you could lock the widgets so they didn't move, but as it is now it's pretty useless, pretty much just windows floating on your desktop. I use Meteorologist (for weather), PTItunesnotifier (for itunes control), and MenuMeters (for RAM/CPU Usage) and those all go in my menu bar. The menu bar is a much better place for any of these apps because it can be seen globally... I don't spend a lot of time staring at my desktop, where these widgets would be.

    --
    -Alex
  4. Uses Javascript as language. by foniksonik · · Score: 4, Funny

    An important part of this is that it uses Javascript and the DOM as a scripting language. This opens up basic GUI wrapping of OS X API frameworks to a lot of individuals out there who would probably never try programming if they had to use PERL, C, or any other regular language for development.

    So what comes out of this is that non-CS folks can easily put together 1-trick ponies that look amazing. This adds a completely new level of customization for those out there who want to create utilitarian applications for their desktop.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  5. Exactly! by SensitiveMale · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can save most people the trouble of checking out the site.

    1/2 the widgets are clocks.

    1/3 of the widgets are newsreaders.

    The rest are silly widgets that do nothing but take up space.

    All of them are HUGE and take up tons of desktop space.

    If you want to check their forums, I can save you that trouble also. 1/2 the posts are people having orgasms over the product and 1/3 of the people are complaining about the price.

    Right now the widgets don't do anything that menu items or docklets do much better.

    1. Re:Exactly! by mbbac · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't know, the Homeland Security status indicator is a small Aqua-style pill displaying the color and name of the current alert. :)

      --

      mbbac

  6. Haven't I seen this somewhere before? by GoRK · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Woo. Active Desktop comes to the Mac about four years after everyone decided it was pretty much useless. Oh well, I guess some people will really like to fool with it and say how great and superior it is to active desktop even though it is the same exact fucking thing. I made lots of little Active Desktop widgets at one point that are now lost to the annals of time I suppose. It was fun while it lasted.

    ~GoRK

    1. Re:Haven't I seen this somewhere before? by GoRK · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Erm, no not really. Konfabulator is not that integrated. It's more like Active Desktop without a lot of the flexibility Active Desktop has. For instance, Konfabulator widgets cannot register file handlers or generally be loaded/unloaded on demand by the OS itself such as the OpenDoc modules could. Konfabulator widgets also cannot automatically update themselves with new code as it becomes available (unless of course it's implemented internally in the widget), unlike Active Desktop widgets which can.

      And to the guy who said that this was more "Integrated" than Active Desktop, it's really not. If you put a local (d)html page on your drive in the "Local" internet "zone" (sorry bout the lame m$ terminology), scripts on the page can be given access to local resources they need to do anything these Konfabulator widgets could do. You can script active desktop widgets in VBScript, JavaScript, Perl, Python (Using ActiveState PerlScript/PythonScript), and using these languages access enough of the underlying API that you could easily put an entire little application in there (think PerlScript + Win32::GUI app in an Active Desktop widget)

      Don't get me wrong; I hate Active Desktop and Windows and I think the entire idea of little desktop apps will be forever relegated to 'toys' and other useless crap, but I think Active Desktop is a superior implementation over Konfabulator because of automatic updating and scripting language flexibility. At least it has a better name and doesn't sound like it belongs in KDE.

      ~GoRK

  7. Groovy by rat_herder · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is an excellent app. As a designer i've dipped my toes in several programming languages , always planning an app to increase my productivity in specific ways. This is a very sweet development environment for a person in my position. It also satisfies a need to develop & distribute gorgeous Aqua interfaces for little apps that manage everyday data. I guess that's really the point...

  8. Weather and Cubicles by migurski · · Score: 5, Funny

    Konfabulator proved its worth when a coworker had to use the weather module to find out it was raining outside.

    Cursed cubicles.

  9. Don't make summary judgements... by grahamtriggs · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I totally agree that the current widgets in the gallery are not particularly useful - and nothing to make me want to buy it...

    But the value of Konfabulator is not in those widgets... the value is in what might come in the future. The value is in what *you* write for yourself...

    As an example, a colleague of mine has written his own widget for monitoring/restarting web servers...

    What is special about it? Nothing much... What does it enable? People with some scripting skills, but not the ability to write Cocoa apps, an easy way of creating small pieces of functionality that are useful to them (if no-one else). What's better about it than a cocoa app? It allows many different pieces of functionality to be hosted in it. It allows creativity. It is an app with components, rather than a multitude of apps eating up menu / dock space.

    No, there may not be any immediate value for you yet. There isn't for me. But Konfabulator should not be judged on what it is... you should keep an open mind to see what it can become.

    1. Re:Don't make summary judgements... by entrylevel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Really? To me, the "value" of Konfabulator is $25, not in what I or others can create for it. (Yes, I'm aware that $25 is the price, not the value, just playing with words to make a point.) If everything it comes with is inherently useless, I have no inspiration to do anything cool with it, hence it has no value to me. The included widgets ARE lame, although some of the third-party widgets I've seen are relatively impressive.

      Granted, this comes from someone who is fairly fluent in bash, AppleScript, C, and Objective-C, so virtually anything that Konfabulator can offer now or in the future, I can make myself, and it will probably perform better. Of course it might take me a little longer...

      I have recently been on a shareware-purchasing binge (I spent nearly $200 before I realized I need to pay my bills first!), and I really wanted to like Konfabulator. Unfortunately, the following things (in order of priority) made me decide to trash it and not give it another look for quite a while:

      1. You get ONE launch, and then the shareware reminder is permenantly on your desktop. Nag screens, timers, trialware, quitting after an hour, hell even a faint watermark would all have been acceptable. About the only think worse than that sort of perma-shareware-reminder window is bonafide spyware.

      2. It really feels to me that Arlo Rose et al are trying to take advantage of both the ease of development in Cocoa and the untapped creative energy of the Mac community. I could be totally wrong about this, but the less work they do, the more the community will do, and they will get paid the same no matter what. I hope the Konfabulator license allows one to retain all legal rights to their creation, including being able to sell it for exhorbitant amounts of cash, if they should so choose.

      3. This is a minor peeve, but still valid, IMHO. Why JavaScript? AppleScript makes much better glue, and would make it very easy for widgets themselves to be highly scriptable and customizable. The syntax is even easier than JavaScript, and enables you to tap into a wide variety of OS X services natively without having to code even more glue between the scripting language and the OS. AppleScript just seems like a much better choice for a Mac OS X-only "widget factory". Hell, you could even have widgets that know how to create other widgets on the fly from user input. Oh well.

      Like I said, I really wanted to like it. Maybe 1.1 will blow my mind.

      --
      Karma: Incomprehensible (Mostly affected by posting at +5, reading at -1, and metamoderating everything unfair.)
    2. Re:Don't make summary judgements... by grahamtriggs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In answer to your points:

      1) Doesn't particularly bother me... theoretically, it's not much different from having a widget on screen... and if it annoys me, I just pick it up and drag it off to the side so only a tiny, tiny fragment is visible...

      2) But then you can lay the same argument against any tool... you could even say the same about a web browser, or even an OS... the more widgets, websites or applications, the more inherent value there is, and the more that can be earned by the publisher of the hosting environment, browser, or OS, without them doing anything in particular... they may only be making use of existing standards, and putting together a 'simple' framework for others to make use of, but it is their work, and they are entitled to benefit from it... if you think it's a worthwhile thing for the community, but they are charging too much for it, then develop your own version...

      Although I do agree about retaining the rights to your own widgets... I'm not sure what the license specifies, but then you are free to not use it if you disagree with the terms...

      3. JavaScript - maybe they want to appeal to website designers, who may already know JavaScript, but not Applescript... maybe they want the freedom to port the framework to other OSes at a later stage, and have existing widgets work (as much as possible)

  10. Difference between Konfabulator and .Net... by grahamtriggs · · Score: 3, Informative


    Konfabulator is a desktop tool... there is the ability to make it talk to web servers, and parse the results returned... potentially, you could end up with quite sophisticated widgets that talk to web services, and have some degree of interactivity... .Net is a top-to-bottom solution... .Net gives you the ability to write web services, not just call on them. On the client side, it allows creation of heavy-weight applications. However, writing even small desktop utilities (in .Net) requires a reasonable amount of programming savvy...

    So no, this isn't a lot like what .Net is trying to do... they cater for complete different markets... however, there may be some overlap in certain areas...

  11. they forgot the most important widget by mattnl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    now all we need is a slashdot headlines widget! i think that would make my world complete. m@

  12. Weather monitor by tsa · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have a weather monitor window. It's in my wall. It works great.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  13. Daring Fireball / Crazy Apple Rumors by mcwetboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought John Gruber's review of Konfabulator at Daring Fireball was interesting: he points out that you can't use native widgets -- every graphic element has to be composed -- and that he'd have liked an IDE. He also thinks that adoption rates would be better if they gave away the runtime engine (the app itself) but charged for the development environment.

    I can't see this getting past the "this is cool" stage, or getting anywhere near the "this is useful" or even the "this is indispensable" stages.

    See also Crazy Apple Rumors, which, as usual, hits the nail on the head: "While there is widespread confusion about what Konfabulator specifically does, there is little confusion about the fact that it is stylish and it is the hottest new application for OS X."

  14. FAQ by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Informative

    Uh, wtf?

    Konfabulator is a runtime engine for scripting languages. It allows very functional applets, which Konfabulator calls widgets, to be written quickly without higher level language knowledge. It's $25 shareware.

    All the widgets that come with it are useless to me.

    The widgets that come with it are merely very simple examples! You can make a widget to do that task you've always wanted to do even if you have no programming knowledge. A widget that does about anything can be made with about a page of code.

    OMG, the widgets are just eye candy that take up to much desk space!@ Plus, I have menu extras that do everything!@

    1. Then make a widget that is whatever size YOU want it to be!

    2. Make a widget that ISN'T eye candy (in your opinion), and displays the data however YOU want!

    3. The widgets that come with Konfabulator are simple examples, to show the kinds of things that can be done, while also being visually pleasing.

    4. The size issue has been discussed at length. The response seems to indicate the ability to actively scale any widget just didn't make it into 1.0. (I don't speak for the authors, but that was my interpretation.)

    Konfabulator still isn't worth it to me...like I said, I have menu extras and docklings that do all this stuff!

    If you can't see any purpose for Konfabulator, and can't think beyond applications you already have, and are stuck on the size of the default widgets, then you have utterly, totally missed the point of Konfabulator: to let people with very minimal programming language, i.e. almost anyone, make a small application that does whatever they want it to and looks however they want it to; the ability to actively obtain and display information by any scripted action, or to cause events to occur by any scripted action, all in the interface of your choosing.

    The widget library is all clocks and newsreaders!@

    Konfabulator has only been out for a week, and relatively few people know about it. There are already over 75 widgets. Yes, there are a lot of people who are just "skinning" the existing widgets, but this is the beginning. There are two people who can benefit from Konfabulator: those who are willing to write a little JavaScript, and those who are talented with artwork and graphics. There's nothing wrong with 20 beautiful clocks that people may want to choose from. Lots more widgets will continue to come.

    OMG, they used Java??! Java is slow as HIZZELL on Mac OS X

    1. Uh, this is JavaScript, not Java. They have nothing to do with one another.

    2. As an aside, Java on Mac OS X is not slow.

    This is Active Desktop all over again.

    No, it's not, because this doesn't suck.

    This is bullshit! They're charging you $25 so that YOU have to go out and do the work of making widgets!!

    Look, you can decide if this thing is worth $25 to you or not. They're not charging $25 for the default widgets; they're charging $25 for an easy-to-use and innovative programming/scripting framework. The default widgets are JUST EXAMPLES. Also, we'd better warn Metrowerks to stop charging for CodeWarrior, after all, CodeWarrior is useless unless you actually make an application with it!

    By the way, anyone reading this at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, we have a site license for Konfabulator. Email for info.

    I still don't get it/think Konfabulator is usless/think it costs to much.

    Well, no one's forcing you to use it. Sorry you don't see the value in being able to quickly whip up little mini-apps that can do pretty much anything, AND be visually pleasing!

  15. A cross platform operations tool? by dmorin · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I'll tell you why this sounds interesting to me. We're in the middle of a massive hardware project at work that is going to multiply the number of servers by something like 16. The operations guys are going bananas trying to get their heads around it. The most useful tools to them right now are things that make monitoring, resetting, alerts and other "simple" operations like that easier. WITHOUT programming, if they can help it. Building their own tools easily slips into the development realm, and they're less likely to get significant resources approved to do that.

    So if this tool allows them to easily whip up things like server or load monitors, then it's a good thing. Of course, we don't use Macs though :), which is why the title of my post is what it is. I'm going to take a quick skim through the site and see if there's any potential (stated or implied) that says that the engine could be ported to traditional Xwindow, which would make it the most generic for them.

    1. Re:A cross platform operations tool? by dmorin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well if you have to write its plugins in C, though, I'm not sure it's the same thing. I was under the impression that this Konfabulator thing allowed you to whip stuff up in an XML/scripty sort of language. The compile phase of C alone puts it in a different category than scripting languages.

    2. Re:A cross platform operations tool? by pianophile · · Score: 2, Informative

      things that make monitoring, resetting, alerts and other "simple" operations like that easier. WITHOUT programming

      Get Big Brother. The free version rocks.

      --

      'Your brain is God.' -- Dr. Timothy Leary
  16. CodeTek Virtual Desktop by elliotj · · Score: 3, Informative

    Anyone know how to make the widgets sticky across desktops when using codetek virtual desktop? I dragged the application to the applications listing in the codetek preferences where you normally put apps you want to be persistent, but it doesn't seem to work.

    Not a big deal since the gallery of widgets so far seems to fall into 3 categories: rss feed readers, system montors, and clocks. None of which I need. But I am interested to see other things as people develop more stuff. Certainly a great way to showcase OS X eye candy if nothing else!

    1. Re:CodeTek Virtual Desktop by Squidgee · · Score: 2, Informative

      Click on the prefrences button (The lil blue dealy on the bottom of the default skin), and drag the Konfabulator icon into the "Applications Virtual Dekstop moves to every Desktop" list window. Close the prefs window, and now they'll move to every desktop! =)

  17. Make programming accessible to novices again! by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm all in favor of easy-to-use, accessible programming systems, and I'm very much against the kind of snobbery that says "everything must be programmed in C++ 'because' that is the language that is correct for modern development.'"

    But I don't quite see why this is a breakthrough or how it is dramatically different from any of a number of accessible programming systems. AppleScript Studio... REALbasic... Hypercard. (OK, I know Hypercard is pretty much dead... but it SHOULDN'T be!).

    What would be a breakthrough would be a change in PHILOSOPHY.

    If only Apple (OR Microsoft) to return to the philosophy of the earliest days of micros, in which an accessible, easy-to-use, elementary programming system WITH GOOD END-USER TUTORIAL DOCUMENTATION was bundled with every computer.

    One of the saddest features of the evolution of microcomputers has been the progressive development of an elitist attitude. In the eighties, retirees would buy these PC things just to see what they what they were all about and days later would be bragging about something they had written in QuickBasic...

    "Computer literacy" USED to mean the ability to write simple programs. Now, it just means the ability to memorize the meaning of Excel toolbar pictograms...

    1. Re:Make programming accessible to novices again! by Junta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      First off, I must say I'm not sure if bringing software development to the end user is really important these days. Back then, there wasn't really any efficient, practically free methods to distribute software, so if you didn't write it, you had to pay at least a bit to get a copy and go to some trouble to actually go get it. For trivial apps, competent end users could write it up quickly for themselves for less time and money than it would take to find and get pre-made software. Now, computers are far more pervasive, so the competency of the average user is reduced. Also, with the internet, "real" programmes release freeware that pretty much covers the needs people once wrote custom software to do, and google, freshmeat, and versiontracker make it extremely easy to find the right tool for the job.

      All that said, of the platforms in use in homes, I would say Apple is doing the best job in the direction you want.

      With MS, Visual Studio costs money, and the application and APIs are relatively difficult to use and grasp for a beginning programmer.

      With Linux, the development enviornment is free, but even less newbie friendly. Sure you can get some decent IDEs and even some UI design tools for free.... *IF* you know where to look, but documentation is sparse. Adding to this, there is no well defined Linux 'platform' (or *nix platform). You can make pretty likely assumptions about the kernel and glibc... and assume X if graphical (other alternatives are there, but far from mainstream). Beyond that, things become less certain. Qt, GTK+, Motif/Lesstif, Swing, and others are possible, likely toolkits, and with less certainty you can develop with Gnome and/or KDE, or if you want to be daring, you can use a relatively exotic language binding and require that. It all *can* work together, but it is an intimidating set of choices to have to make for a novice programmer, especially one that doesn't want to alienate users by requiring some library they don't have.

      OSX is just incredible. First off, compiler, headers, really nice IDE, all are free and standard (Project Builder). The platform is truly a complete platform and you can make use of any part of it without fear that an end user would lack the libraries required to run it. The API is quite elegant and straightforward. Additionally, there is one great factor that truly makes the sort of things an enduser would want to do very accessible. Interface builder. The hardest part to a novice programmer tackling simple problems is dealing with UI, and Interface Builder makes this so damn easy and the Cocoa framework really make it possible to abstract the code from the interface. Though Apple's applications are not open source, most everything an end user would want to do to them can be done through opening the .nib files in the resource bundle and going at it. My personal thing I tend to do is to make Address Book, iChat, Calculator, and Safari not use the damned Scratched Metal look. Without exposing code, users have a really easy to figure out way of modifying the Interface of Cocoa apps in drastic ways, and I think that is truly great.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  18. Yeah it's true... by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I saw this at first and like many others went 'oooh' at the nice Quartz rendering, and the graphical quality of the widgets. Then I turned it off after about 5 minutes.

    The problem with ideas like this (and don't get me wrong this is a nice implementation; it's the concept I have a problem with), is that they assume your desktop is going to be visible to you. In fact, that is not true very often in modern computing circumstances, as you are almost always running something that is taking up most of your screen.

    After all, why wouldn't you? This is why we want big screens in the first place. Even if you're Aaron Sorkin and you have a 17" PowerBook, you're using that width to show two scripts side-by-side.

    So the problem with Konfabulator is that, to access the widgets, you have to 'switch' to the desktop, which means its no faster than any other application you could switch context to. The desktop becomes an infinitely configurable tabla rosa, which is cool, but it gets hidden by whatever app(s) you're using regularly. (I find this is less of a problem on the Mac by the way. On my Windows machine at work I tend to maximize everything, but on OS X I always leave room around windows... anyways...)

    Now, to take another Mac example, the top-right toolbar widgets. These, I love, and they are the real answer to Konfabulator-type flexibility. They are always visible and always 'live'. I mine alone, I have a CPU/Net monitor (Spy), the weather (WeatherPop), battery, Airport strength, Bluetooth status, iSync trigger, monitor rez, sound volume, and date/time. In a line appox. 15 pixels high. They may not be as lickable as Konfab's widgets but they are much more readily available, and easier to hit with the mouse (top-right corner, Fitt's Law mouse-flinging).

    So you're back to Active Desktop, which no one uses. I think the context-switching is the reason.

    One side-note.. the only really cool thing I want fron Konfab is the webcam feature. I really like the idea of placing borderless, floating webcam images around my desktop...

    --
    If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    1. Re:Yeah it's true... by GoRK · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interestingly enough, webcams are the only thing that adorned my Active Desktop space for the longest amount of time. After a while the resources running Active Desktop weren't worth it.

      Take a look at this crap to see a rather extreme example of Active Desktop.

  19. Re:Future of dockapps? by MasonMcD · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wow. Throw out everything I constantly hear from winlots about "Macs don't have enough apps" and from linux zealots that "good apps come from coders scratching an itch." It's been a week, folks. Get some perspective.

    I guess if it's a mac, and looks purty, it will be ignored, dismissed, derided, criticised, then copied poorly. Rinse, lather, repeat.

  20. That's a funny post, but here goes... by daveschroeder · · Score: 3, Informative

    When you start it up, it says something to the effect of "I'll walk you through the startup." and then does a number of things WITHOUT MY PERMISSION. First, it creates a ~/Documents/widgets directory. It doesn't warn me about this until after it is done.

    Guess we'd better also string up Adobe (Acrobat), Oracle (Corporate Time), Qualcomm (Eudora), Apple (Final Cut family), Microsoft (Office), and Connectix (Virtual PC) for putting things in ~/Library/Documents...

    Then it launches a bunch of mini-apps; again, it does not ask me if this is ok.

    That's the authors' judgement call about how to start the application. Your comment would be the same as saying "Microsoft Office started the PROJECT GALLERY without my permission!"

    I ended up in a state where I had all these weird things on my screen

    The setup assistant tells you it's opening up a few sample widgets for you, just to get you familiar with it. It also tells you that you may close any or all of them.

    and no application in my dock/ This thing is running but I have no way to shut it down. I had to open Terminal to kill the app.

    LOL! The setup assistant also tells you that Konfabulator is controlled and accessed via its menu extra, which is represented by two little gears on your menu bar. It's got a "Quit" option right there.

    This thing breaks the entire Apple human Interface guidelines

    No it doesn't, as everything you've said so far is wrong.

    it sticks applications in the users Documents directory which should never be done

    They're not applications at all. (You could also argue that this, and quite a bit of the other stuff placed in Documents, would be more appropriately placed in ~/Library, but that's another discussion altogether.)

    and to add insult upon injury, it only runs clocks and stuff -- there is no way to write your own application that I could see.

    Oh, this is especially hilarious! You apparently didn't look at Konfabulator's website at all, nor did you take two seconds to look at any of the widgets, which are all just text JavaScript code that can be rewritten or modified in any way, nor did you see the fully documented reference for creating widgets, nor did you apparently even READ the post you responded to! Do you think that it's through some magic that the widget library exists? That there is no way to write code, yet people somehow manage, by miracle of miracles, to be doing it?

    Konfabulator: USELESS and HARMFUL.

    Your post: USELESS and HARMFUL.

  21. Re:looks good, not sure how good it is... by Squidgee · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just so you know, you can interface with _any_ command-line application (A ruby app, for example) with the runcommand("commandhere"); call. So literally any programming language can be used with it. Check out my widget CPsUn for an example of this. There are many others out there, too!

  22. Main value is integration of scripts by illovich · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Konfabulator is an interesting thing, I think. Although most of the widgets are silly, I think it's mainly because everyone is trying it out and redoing the widgets thaty come with it (clock, to do lists, news aggregators, etc)

    But it's main strength is that a developer can use applescript (or osascript) or javascript to make widgets. Given that via Applescirpt one can access the unix shell and most of the rest of the goodness under the hood of OS X, Konfabulator really has the potential to be a really nice cheap RAD for folks to make themsleves little system utilities.

    The example of the server checker has been given. You can also write widgets to do whatever can be scripted on the platform, which is a lot. I've also seen a few widgets that run top every so many ticks and parse its output so that you have a readout of the 5 biggest processes. You could also write front ends for any command line utility in about 20 minutes, plus photoshop time.

    Really once you see the software for it's underlying capability instead of the widgets that it comes with, you can see that it's really a pretty decent piece of ware.

    --
    ----- http://illovich.com
  23. Neat and neat by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I downloaded and then paid for Kofab last week, as did a couple friends.

    I really like it and there are starting to be some really neat Widgets.

    PowerMate Battery widget so far is the neatest one. Have a PowerMate, hook it to the Powerbook and use the widget to have the PowerMate tell you how charged the battery is as it sits over on it's CoolPad and recharges.

    Cool stuff.