Slashdot Mirror
Google Desktop for Mac Released
Julio Ojeda-Zapata writes "Google on Tuesday will release a Mac version of Google Desktop. This software, like the PC version, indexes the content of a hard drive and serves it up on familiar Google-style search-result Web pages (or via a its own drop-down results list, if you prefer). But Google Desktop for the Mac is streamlined compared to the busy, gadget-y Windows version, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. The focus is squarely on search — including local indexing of an online Gmail account of your choice. It will also index your iDisk."
Does this somehow outperform spotlight without adding vulnerabilities?
MABASPLOOM!
But why do I need a google app to do this when spotlight comes with my mac and does a pretty outstanding job of this already. Am I missing something?
I was asking myself the same question every one else is ("why use this instead of spotlight?") and while I'm not 100% convinced to move over to it, The Unofficial Apple Weblog has a good case for using it; if you're using Google homepage and Google Mail, it integrates with those (showing search results on the homepage and being able to download and search your Gmail).
"There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
Google on Tuesday will release a Mac version of Google Desktop.
The referenced Tuesday was yesterday, not six days from now. It's completely understandable that some stories are posted late, but is it too much to ask that they be edited to remain factual?
ok Google Desktop Search may be good, may be better than Spotlight, etc but Spotlight is "part" of the OS thus is already running even when we don't want it to so now not only do you have Spotlight caching but now Google's app, so your computer is slower. The ability to search your desktop through a webpage is a joke! Why would I when theres a simple icon in the top-right of my screen or pressing Apple+Space to open it up, alot more simplier then through a browser. To search my gmail, why not just intergrate Spotlight search with the gmail notifier for mac, would be easier and simplier. Honestly I think its a waste of Google's resources, I know they mean well but I don't want them to integrate into they're apps, I want them to integrate to the OS! If not then stick to web services Google!
Quicksilver may not be a "search tool" per se... but it searches just fine. Beats spotlight hands down, and has nifty features like triggers. I'm not sure I will need more google in my life...
Chaos is Divine *
Why should I get a Mac when I can do the exact same thing on Vista?
Thanks, I haven't laughed that hard all week.
[gandalf]Run, you fool![/gandalf]
That's not as big a problem as you'd think.
1. Other apps haven't had a problem because of this. Both Mozilla and OpenOffice, for example, insisted on writing their very own framework and widgets, so basically they're _neither_ Gnome nor KDE. Your line of thinking seems to be that that would make them shunned by both KDE and Gnome users, yet that's not really the case. And then there's stuff like XMMS, which doesn't even try to look even remotely like the desktop, and had no problem either.
2. In the meantime both KDE and Gnome can use each other's themes. So you can just write your app with either set of widgets and it won't look out of place on the other desktop.
3. I'd buy your argument if it were some really complex app, with lots of forms and controls. Essentially all you really need there is a freakin' web-page-like page, in a frame. As long as you can draw a white background with a rectangle for the input and a button, you're actually good to go for a simple search app. (The borders and title bar of the frame will be drawn by the window manager anyway, so you don't have to worry about those.)
4. And you don't even have to do that, if your goal is to look like Google. I.e., like a web page. Think about it. You can just serve HTTP on the port of your choice, restrict it to localhost so it's not abusable from outside, your "application" icon just starts a browser on that port. There you go: now the user can use whatever browser they prefer, and have it look like any other page in that browser. They can use Mozilla, Opera, Konqueror if they absolutely have to have a KDE-only environment, or whatever.
Basically, let's lay _that_ tired argument to rest at least in this case. Linux has some problems with mass adoption, yes, but constantly claiming that you can't write apps because there are 2 desktops... is just false, and it's getting repetitive and boring by now.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
> However then you have to think which desktop on Linux do you target? GNOME? KDE?
:) Other desktops are insignificant and will probably addopt GNOME version anyway...
...and we see why Linux is a great server platform, but a lousy
Both. Just build yourself a daemon service that does indexing in background and then add frontends to it (CLI, GNOME/GTK, KDE/Qt). Since frontends will just query a service (via DBUS f.e., or even TCP socket) I would be extremely easy to build multiple frontends for it. Maybe even document the protocol used to query and wait for open source community to build frontends theirself.
Or you could use FreeDesktop.org standard protocols and build a tray residing app - it would work nice in both GNOME and KDE.
So it is really not that hard to build a minimalistic daemon in C which does all the hard work (indexing, queries) and then some frontends in higher level (like GTK/Python, Qt/Python) languages.
> The biggest problem is that "Linux" may be a good platform to target,
> because the desktop is separated from the OS, you CAN'T target the
> "Linux Desktop"
Well you can. You just need to decide if you target GNOME or KDE.
>
> desktop platform because it's not standardized in the same way.
Same ol' trolling...
Good lord, and that's only if you're adding things to an existing PC! That's almost $1200 right there! Note I'm not talking about pond muck systems, but a system that actually would allow an apples to apples comparison of features with relatively equal quality parts. I think you'll find that these numbers may even be low when compared to a Dell system that will actually be able to run Aero/Glass well.
Then compare that to the prices for a Mini @ $700, a Macbook ~$1400, a Macbook Pro ~$2200, or a slightly above baseline Mac Pro ~$2800 (including the X1900XT).
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Spotlight does have boolean NOT and OR to help make searches more precise, but it's a bit funky to use.
- not-in-spotlight
http://hiram.nl/ipsedixit/artikel/801/the-boolean
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
[1] http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Carbon/Co nceptual/MDImporters/Concepts/WritingAnImp.html
No really. I have been using vista since early alpha versions and the searching is useless at best. The first thing I do after installing vista is to install googledesktop on top of it.
Also the sidebar included with googledesktop (>v5) is much better than the build in one and the gadgets available are far more in numbers and superior in features.
Yes, /. it pretty much anti-MS even though there are some virulent MS fanboi's here. Most here haven't bought any of the MS marketing pile. Now, that said, I reread your initial comment.
Mac Minis can be had for $500 or so. The cheapest Vista PC is about $400 and won't run anywhere near the speed of a Mac Mini, runs Vista Basic (basically XP w/ DRM) and isn't the system I'm comparing. The low-end are AMD Semprons, by the time you hit the first dual core systems, you're in the $600+ range.
I don't care for Vista's new interface design, and the file copy/move/delete issues pretty much kill any incentive to go any further with it. The eye candy is more distracting and disruptive than attractive, and thus kills any attractiveness in it. Add in the DRM'd OS, and there's no reason to run it at all. I like to be in control of what my computer does, thank you, not MS.
Lastly, just to feed the troll a little more because I'm bored, the main point in running a Mac isn't to run OSX (OMG, I just heard a blood vessel pop!) but rather to run the things that run on it. OSX doesn't get in my way, and I am able to accomplish something other than futzing about with my OS.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
The first time I tried the dashboard I could not believe anyone thought this was either useful *or* cool; I haven't touched it since.
I'm an academic writer and I find the F12 call to bring up the calendar and the dictionary + thesaurus a godsend. As with anything, YMMV.
blog
This is a common misconception. DRM doesn't lock you out of your system. The addition of DRM to Vista *enables* you to play DRM'd media, which you would otherwise be unable to play on XP or Mac. Just keep repeating that as you wait 30 minutes to copy a 100MB directory tree on your system.
And I think you mean "legally play on XP or Mac" based on current DMCA law. We can only hope that the iTunes DRM issue in the EU will continue to roll over all DRM issues, because iTunes is actually the biggest argument against DRM I've seen. More software works on Windows than on a Mac. I don't need 500 versions of gems or tetris. What I need is 1 of each of the following: photo editing , photo organization, video editing, CD/DVD burning, Mail. You get all of those with the OS right off the bat. I've since tried Aperture and Photoshop (CS3 beta). Aperture is replacing iPhoto. I have seen no need for anything more than iMovieHD, which IMHO outshines Pinnacle Titanium Studio by leaps and bounds. Basically, I'm fed up of people saying how great SpotLight is when they haven't even tried any competing products. Just give Vista a try and tell us what you think. I intend to, right after SP1 comes out or they issue a patch to fix the file handling issues. That one makes it a non starter for me. I routinely work with hundreds of MB of files, and I find XPs hourglass annoying enough already when who knows what it's doing when I want to move a 6K+ directory tree from location A to location B on the same physical drive. (Hint - from the command line, such a move takes under a second) Basically, those are some of the items have me fed up with MS products. To be honest, I give up. I can see you aren't willing to try it. That's your choice and I respect that. I can't see how suggesting alternative products from Microsoft is trolling but suggesting alternatives from Apple is not, but I can see I am in the minority here so I will go back to my cave now. Have a nice day. You're mistaken. I have no choice but to try it, eventually, unless a large scale change happens in the business world. You should also realize that I have run many other OSes as well, including Solaris, IRIX, OS/2, various flavors of DOS including a deskview instance, various flavors of Linux, etc. I by no means am a Mac fanboy. However, when it comes to comparisons of OSX and Vista, Vista is a johnny come lately to the party and is wearing mostly last years duds and brought flat cherry beer. It doesn't meet any of my needs well, and the one thing it claims to do, DRM, is completely irrelevant to me and is actually a negative considering how invasive the MS implementation is.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
This is par for Google. The road to riches for Google was paved with Linux. Tens of thousands of servers hum along, stuffing cash into the Google coffers and what do we get? Summer of Code? Geek Please. It's nothing short of a slap to the face of Linux Users. We wrote about this in 2005. http://blog.lobby4linux.com/archives/44-Google-Wha t-Have-You-Done-For-Us-Lately.html Looks like audacity is more than a sound file tool...
keywords: ungrateful, jerks, oblivious to what side thier bread is buttered...
Windows assumes you are an idiot...Linux demands proof.