Ahh, the good old "code it yourself" answer. Howabout I don't and just keep using the widgets.
Way to ignore the other examples.
Is it easier to show them F12 to get a widget for a phonebook...
Um, what was the key again?
Since they have access to local data, they can be quicker then opening the local application.
That is plainly wrong. Or are we talking about launching address book too? Why not just keep it open... if you're using it so often to justify having it as a widget, just keep the application open, then all you have to do is click on the icon in the dock.
1. FreeBSD underneath - You say this as if it's a tiny feature; more evidence you know very little about OS X, and FreeBSD
No, I included expressly because I think it's a big feature. Yet again you insist that I somehow know very little about OS X and FreeBSD? I think that to make such a baseless remark demonstrates that it is you who knows very little about computers in general. Very little.
2. Intelligent filebrowsing with the finder.
The Steve Capps' Finder delivered with the original 128K Mac *still* blows away today's Finder in terms of elegance, responsiveness and overall usability. Moreover, I see no difference between today's Finder and WIndows Explorer, except for this odd example you give us which really has nothing to do with anything. BTW, I've never had the need for force-quit Windows Explorer. You really want to call that a feature?
3. Security.
We were talking about GUI's, otherwise I'd give you that one.
4. iApps - Free.
Talking about GUI's, remember? And there is a lot of shit you can get for free on Windows. I will admit though that the free DVD Player is nice.
5. Built in Java VM.
That has no end of bugs to it. No thanks.
6. Built in Python.
That I have to download again and reinstall anyways to get it working with GNU readline. Again, no thanks.
7. Intelligent file sharing with permissions; in windows you have to go through hell to get this working.
Eh? I've found exactly the opposite IFF we're talking about networking the same machines. Different machines, all platforms have quirks, even Samba under Linux.
8. System Preferences application... Try getting windows to run an FTP server, or an HTTP server, or an SSH server, or...:-) All with two clicks!
Click on Services. Click on the Service you want to start. Done.
9. No viruses or spyware.
Already mentioned this, and it still isn't GUI-related.
10. Quartz Extreme
When I need fast graphics rendering, it's when I play games (ohmigod, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to bring up the GAMES you can play on Windows and not on Mac, whatever was I thinking?:) )
11. Aqua.
Is getting rather old by now. Personally I think GNOME looks the best of all of them, but then, I am a minimalist. Plus, GNOME let's me make any window fullscreen. Steve Jobs will die before allowing that to happen under Aqua.
12. Spotlight.
You know it's funny, I saved this message of yours to disk, and I'm STILL hearing the disk grind away in the background.
13. NO REGISTRY
NetInfo. ooops. (and you say I don't know what I'm talking about?)
14. Instead of the registry, OS X has an intelligent method of organizing users's preferences. They're all located in a... single folder.
If only that were the case. Besides, many of the preferences you're describing are located in a single folder on Windows here too. I'd call this a tie.
15. Intelligent user organization scheme - Because OS X has real, actual unix permissions
I prefer *nix over Windows in this regard too, but it's a preference only, one that derives from FreeBSD (remember, when you said I don't understand OS X?), and one that ultimately is of little consequence to the end-user in any event, who is simply happy to find their file in the folder where they left it the previous day.
I could go on... but like I said in the other post, you should just learn more.
I'm sure you could, but as we've seen, you haven't really addressed the subject of the thread. You've offered no example of where Mac OS X outshines Windows
Under Windows, to check Jim Breen's Biblical WWW Japanese dictionary I usually have to fire up Firefox (or make a new tab) browse to the site (either via the bookmark in my toolbar or through a google search on someone else's machine) and do my look up.
Firefox is already running, so what you really have to do is click on Firefox then click on a link.
Now, if Apple really wanted to do something useful, they'd let us bind keystrokes to more sophisticated actions, like being able to open up a specific webpage in its own tab and activating the browser. THAT would be cool.
And it would be faster than your Dashboard solution.
First off, any widget that requires an internet connection isn't going to work when the connection is down.
Secondly, I guess I could have been clearer, but I'm talking about the browser together with the stock desk-accessories that ALL of these OS's have... calculator, notepad. And games too.
Want to know the 5-day forecast for the week? Well, of course your browser is already open, so you're not waiting for it to load. And of course you've already bookmarked the exact place where that forecast is available, so basically, you're clicking on a link.
So let me rephrase that...
Want to know the 5-day forcecast for the week? Click on a link.
Given that you're only loading the page for that one link, and not potentially dozens of pages like you are when activating Dashboard, it's much faster.
Mostly, because it's easier to hit F12 than to open a browser tab, click into it, type in the address, wait for it to load, etc.
You need to reexamine the way you use your browser then. Bookmark the address! Stick the bookmark in your Links bar, or in a menu within your links bar. Or drag it to the desktop... one double-click and you're at the page.
Everybody should spend five minutes working to optimize their browser experience. It's easily the most productive five minutes you'll spend on your computer.
As for waiting for it to load... that's my biggest problem with Dashboard. You invoke Dashboard and the widgets come up quick enough, but now you're waiting for all these different pages to load AT ONCE and during this time the GUI is VERY sluggish... I thought I'd enjoy the dictionary/thesaurus widget, but I was wrong. It's unusable. The interface indicates that it's ready for input, but it never is... it's always waiting on other widgets to load!
Like you say, it's easier launching the dedicated app that does the same thing. Or better yet, just keep it open.
You're like Purillo, you can't give an example, so you first insult my "understanding of OS X", and then back it up by sending us to an advertisement by Apple as evidence of same?
Mod this guy up funny.
What really is there that is superior to Windows (besides FreeBSD underneath)? And don't you dare say Spotlight... it's a resource pig too (and one it seems you can't turn off either, much like Dashboard.)
So if it's so ugly, boring & uninspired, there should be a ton of examples as to how, say, Mac OS X is so much more beautiful, exciting and uplifting? Yet, he's only able to give us one:
With Apple's release of Tiger, widgets--desktop applets that each serve one purpose--have jumped to the forefront of everybody's imagination. Why? Because they look slicker than snot!
Excuse me, but Widgets are easily the most retarded thing out of Apple since the Dock.
There isn't one of them that gives you functionality that your browser doesn't already afford. Sure, they're pretty, but what's going to happen is that as people amass more and more of these widgets, the dashboard becomes cluttered and slow (it already is painfully slow on my MDD 1.25GHz G4, and that's just with the stock widgets, with the default set active only). Then there's going to be the question as to how to organize them all... the faux dock at the bottom is already insufficient. I know, let's stick a menu in there! Great idea!
Why not call it the Widgets Menu? And when you choose a widget from the menu, up comes the widget! Just like if you had chosen a bookmark from the Bookmarks menu from your favorite browser: up comes the web page containing the info you sought!
Or, we could create a page of little Widgets links, and then the user could click on the link and up pops the widget! Just as if it were a web page full of links, each leading to a separate page with different and useful functionality!
So my question is, why not just use the browser? IT ALREADY DOES THESE THINGS!
Not as pretty? Find a web page that has a decent designer/artist behind it. Between CSS and the GiMP, there's no excuse for ugly web pages anymore.
If you want to throw stones, throw them at a target that deserves to get hit: the Desktop Metaphor. Menus and windows with scrollbars and dialog boxes and lions and tigers and bears. The same constraints that Windows suffers under are also felt by Mac OS X, Gnome and KDE users too.
The branding has nothing to do with it.
BTW, Chris Pirillo, the guy who wrote this, he's the one who couldn't make the cut as a TechTV ScreenSaver, isn't that right?
Yeah, but if you read the Grokster ruling, it talks about how you can be busted if you could've taken steps to prevent copyright infringement, but didn't.
It isn't a question of Bram now having to look at every single download to see if it's legit and then removing it from the system. All he really has to do is look at the trackers he's linking to, take the two minutes necessary to figure out whether they're dealing in copyright violations, and then delist the tracker.
It isn't just this quote that's the problem, it's the new search engine too.
Together with the Grokster ruling -- and all happening within such a short interval -- he's just too likely of a target now. Once big media realizes that knocking down the Grokster's does NOTHING to stem the tide of wares being traded via BT, they have to go after Bram.
It really sucks that a guy who's given us so much is going to be made to suffer so, but it looks to be damn near inevitable.
As I have yet to get water-cooling working or can honestly put hand re-animation on my resume, I will concede this point. I guess.
But if push came to shove... if the only way in to an installation was by severing some dude's hand and re-animating it in some way, you don't think they could beat that?
OK, not if you're knocking off the local 7/11. But let's consider the other extreme. Let's consider this new national security monster we've just created in Washington. You don't think they'd be able to put this together if they saw the need?
And that once the technology is perfected, that is doesn't trickle down to the lesser players?
Don't think about what happens today. Think about what's going to happen ten years from now.
I think you and I are considering different scenarios. I'm thinking high-end applications, whereas a lot of people seem to be thinking about 7/11's, where I guess this would work well.
It totally depends on the site. If we're talking about the cash register at a 7/11, then maybe having one guy force another guy to put his hand to the machine isn't conspicuous.
I guess what I'm imagining is that this would be employed at much more secure locations. And here I think that carrying in a concealed hand is less noticable than scuffling with somebody in order to get him to put his hand on the device.
You've only got a window of maybe fifteen seconds with the severed hand. You pull it out of the bag, put it on the device -- hiding it under you own hand to the extent that you can -- and when done it goes back in the bag.
I don't know, I guess it depends entirely on the circumstances.
We can pump cold water through tubes in a computer case.
Why not pump hot water through tubes in a severed hand?
You're right about the idiots. But the people who are out to access these resources in the first place aren't likely to be idiots. They're likely to be intelligent people who are after specific pieces of information.
And if all they have to do to get it is to squirt some hot water through the veins of your severed hand, they'll do that.
Or, so I'm guessing.
If put in that situation, I'd still rather give up the password. At least it's something I'm willing to give up.
Biometrics sounds great, right up until the point you run into the desperate dude who is willing to take out your eyeball -- or in this case remove your hand -- just to be able to access whatever it is that is being protected by biometrics.
So who is this really good for?
Wouldn't you rather give up the memorized password rather than your eye or your hand?
But then, how does your employer look at this.
He doesn't give a shit about your body. He just wants to protect corporate assets. From his point-of-view, it is statistically less likely that he'll lose such assets were biometrics used over passwords.
Just remember that when next you go to ask for the raise, and your boss is making you authenticate to the company's grid using biometrics.
Oooooh, look everybody,/. has a link to Freenet (which has a link to some page (which has a link to some other page, which might possibly link to child porn)).
Not only that, OSTG actually *hosts* freenet.
Gotta be a special place in hell for doing that!
And just to be sure we don't forget about Google, you can use Google to find Freenet, so then, Google can be used to find child porn too!
What makes these links possible? THE INTERNET! THE INTERNET IS ENABLING CHILD PORN SOMEBODY MOD IT DOWN QUICK!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Cmd-T is what? Calisthenics?
No, I included expressly because I think it's a big feature. Yet again you insist that I somehow know very little about OS X and FreeBSD? I think that to make such a baseless remark demonstrates that it is you who knows very little about computers in general. Very little.
The Steve Capps' Finder delivered with the original 128K Mac *still* blows away today's Finder in terms of elegance, responsiveness and overall usability. Moreover, I see no difference between today's Finder and WIndows Explorer, except for this odd example you give us which really has nothing to do with anything. BTW, I've never had the need for force-quit Windows Explorer. You really want to call that a feature?
We were talking about GUI's, otherwise I'd give you that one.
Talking about GUI's, remember? And there is a lot of shit you can get for free on Windows. I will admit though that the free DVD Player is nice.
That has no end of bugs to it. No thanks.
That I have to download again and reinstall anyways to get it working with GNU readline. Again, no thanks.
Eh? I've found exactly the opposite IFF we're talking about networking the same machines. Different machines, all platforms have quirks, even Samba under Linux.
Click on Services. Click on the Service you want to start. Done.
Already mentioned this, and it still isn't GUI-related.
When I need fast graphics rendering, it's when I play games (ohmigod, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to bring up the GAMES you can play on Windows and not on Mac, whatever was I thinking? :) )
Is getting rather old by now. Personally I think GNOME looks the best of all of them, but then, I am a minimalist. Plus, GNOME let's me make any window fullscreen. Steve Jobs will die before allowing that to happen under Aqua.
You know it's funny, I saved this message of yours to disk, and I'm STILL hearing the disk grind away in the background.
NetInfo. ooops. (and you say I don't know what I'm talking about?)
If only that were the case. Besides, many of the preferences you're describing are located in a single folder on Windows here too. I'd call this a tie.
I prefer *nix over Windows in this regard too, but it's a preference only, one that derives from FreeBSD (remember, when you said I don't understand OS X?), and one that ultimately is of little consequence to the end-user in any event, who is simply happy to find their file in the folder where they left it the previous day.
I'm sure you could, but as we've seen, you haven't really addressed the subject of the thread. You've offered no example of where Mac OS X outshines Windows
Um, any of the portals? Like My Yahoo or google.com/ig?
Besides, when you're reaching for the Dashboard, you're usually reaching for a specific widget, not the whole smorgasbord.
Loading all that other crap takes up time you could've have been using to get the needed information via your browser.
There's always the possibility of coding up your own portal page too. And RSS does much of what you're asking for here too.
Now, if Apple really wanted to do something useful, they'd let us bind keystrokes to more sophisticated actions, like being able to open up a specific webpage in its own tab and activating the browser. THAT would be cool.
And it would be faster than your Dashboard solution.
First off, any widget that requires an internet connection isn't going to work when the connection is down.
Secondly, I guess I could have been clearer, but I'm talking about the browser together with the stock desk-accessories that ALL of these OS's have... calculator, notepad. And games too.
Want to know the 5-day forecast for the week? Well, of course your browser is already open, so you're not waiting for it to load. And of course you've already bookmarked the exact place where that forecast is available, so basically, you're clicking on a link.
So let me rephrase that...
Want to know the 5-day forcecast for the week? Click on a link.
Given that you're only loading the page for that one link, and not potentially dozens of pages like you are when activating Dashboard, it's much faster.
Everybody should spend five minutes working to optimize their browser experience. It's easily the most productive five minutes you'll spend on your computer.
As for waiting for it to load... that's my biggest problem with Dashboard. You invoke Dashboard and the widgets come up quick enough, but now you're waiting for all these different pages to load AT ONCE and during this time the GUI is VERY sluggish... I thought I'd enjoy the dictionary/thesaurus widget, but I was wrong. It's unusable. The interface indicates that it's ready for input, but it never is... it's always waiting on other widgets to load!
Like you say, it's easier launching the dedicated app that does the same thing. Or better yet, just keep it open.
You're like Purillo, you can't give an example, so you first insult my "understanding of OS X", and then back it up by sending us to an advertisement by Apple as evidence of same?
Mod this guy up funny.
What really is there that is superior to Windows (besides FreeBSD underneath)? And don't you dare say Spotlight... it's a resource pig too (and one it seems you can't turn off either, much like Dashboard.)
C'mon, let's hear it!
There isn't one of them that gives you functionality that your browser doesn't already afford. Sure, they're pretty, but what's going to happen is that as people amass more and more of these widgets, the dashboard becomes cluttered and slow (it already is painfully slow on my MDD 1.25GHz G4, and that's just with the stock widgets, with the default set active only). Then there's going to be the question as to how to organize them all... the faux dock at the bottom is already insufficient. I know, let's stick a menu in there! Great idea!
Why not call it the Widgets Menu? And when you choose a widget from the menu, up comes the widget! Just like if you had chosen a bookmark from the Bookmarks menu from your favorite browser: up comes the web page containing the info you sought!
Or, we could create a page of little Widgets links, and then the user could click on the link and up pops the widget! Just as if it were a web page full of links, each leading to a separate page with different and useful functionality!
So my question is, why not just use the browser? IT ALREADY DOES THESE THINGS!
Not as pretty? Find a web page that has a decent designer/artist behind it. Between CSS and the GiMP, there's no excuse for ugly web pages anymore.
If you want to throw stones, throw them at a target that deserves to get hit: the Desktop Metaphor. Menus and windows with scrollbars and dialog boxes and lions and tigers and bears. The same constraints that Windows suffers under are also felt by Mac OS X, Gnome and KDE users too.
The branding has nothing to do with it.
BTW, Chris Pirillo, the guy who wrote this, he's the one who couldn't make the cut as a TechTV ScreenSaver, isn't that right?
It's guarding shopping malls? That means it's guarding shoes.
Who cares about shoes?
GRAB THE ROBOT!
Yeah, but if you read the Grokster ruling, it talks about how you can be busted if you could've taken steps to prevent copyright infringement, but didn't.
It isn't a question of Bram now having to look at every single download to see if it's legit and then removing it from the system. All he really has to do is look at the trackers he's linking to, take the two minutes necessary to figure out whether they're dealing in copyright violations, and then delist the tracker.
It isn't just this quote that's the problem, it's the new search engine too.
Together with the Grokster ruling -- and all happening within such a short interval -- he's just too likely of a target now. Once big media realizes that knocking down the Grokster's does NOTHING to stem the tide of wares being traded via BT, they have to go after Bram.
It really sucks that a guy who's given us so much is going to be made to suffer so, but it looks to be damn near inevitable.
Time to donate to the very-soon-to-be-needed legal defense fund.
I've justed started watching Alias Season 4, if you must know. :)
As I have yet to get water-cooling working or can honestly put hand re-animation on my resume, I will concede this point. I guess.
But if push came to shove... if the only way in to an installation was by severing some dude's hand and re-animating it in some way, you don't think they could beat that?
OK, not if you're knocking off the local 7/11. But let's consider the other extreme. Let's consider this new national security monster we've just created in Washington. You don't think they'd be able to put this together if they saw the need?
And that once the technology is perfected, that is doesn't trickle down to the lesser players?
Don't think about what happens today. Think about what's going to happen ten years from now.
See this reply.
I think you and I are considering different scenarios. I'm thinking high-end applications, whereas a lot of people seem to be thinking about 7/11's, where I guess this would work well.
A severed hand fits in your briefcase.
It totally depends on the site. If we're talking about the cash register at a 7/11, then maybe having one guy force another guy to put his hand to the machine isn't conspicuous.
I guess what I'm imagining is that this would be employed at much more secure locations. And here I think that carrying in a concealed hand is less noticable than scuffling with somebody in order to get him to put his hand on the device.
You've only got a window of maybe fifteen seconds with the severed hand. You pull it out of the bag, put it on the device -- hiding it under you own hand to the extent that you can -- and when done it goes back in the bag.
I don't know, I guess it depends entirely on the circumstances.
I guess in some venues what you're saying is correct.
In other though, I think the sight of one man forcing another to put his hand to the terminal is going to draw attention to itself.
It's easy in these scenarios to just take the man's hand off, palm it underneath your own, and perform the authentication yourself.
We can pump cold water through tubes in a computer case.
Why not pump hot water through tubes in a severed hand?
You're right about the idiots. But the people who are out to access these resources in the first place aren't likely to be idiots. They're likely to be intelligent people who are after specific pieces of information.
And if all they have to do to get it is to squirt some hot water through the veins of your severed hand, they'll do that.
Or, so I'm guessing.
If put in that situation, I'd still rather give up the password. At least it's something I'm willing to give up.
Biometrics sounds great, right up until the point you run into the desperate dude who is willing to take out your eyeball -- or in this case remove your hand -- just to be able to access whatever it is that is being protected by biometrics.
So who is this really good for?
Wouldn't you rather give up the memorized password rather than your eye or your hand?
But then, how does your employer look at this.
He doesn't give a shit about your body. He just wants to protect corporate assets. From his point-of-view, it is statistically less likely that he'll lose such assets were biometrics used over passwords.
Just remember that when next you go to ask for the raise, and your boss is making you authenticate to the company's grid using biometrics.
Oh man, why not just kick them in the balls too while you're at it!
Can that really be true?
You mean, quadrotriticale?
That was the grain in "The Trouble With Tribbles", was it not?
Is what you are saying that timothy is a tribble?
It makes sense, right? Tribbles breed at fantastic rates when fed.
timothy posts dupes at fantastic rates when fed.
Somebody find a Klingon, quick! Lets' see if timothy goes squirrelly in it's presence!
Having already posted one dupe today, timothy pulls off the amazing feat of posting a dupe of a dupe!
It's a dupe followed by a dupe-dupe!
What do you call that?
Oh, c'mon! It's almost always timothy!
/., diversity means we get several dupes a day, and leave it at that.
It's like OSTG has a program to employ all of the kids from the short bus, and somehow timothy got the gig as editor.
Of that group, he's probably the best at this. So we should show our support. It isn't easy being intellectually-challenged.
But at the same time, we shouldn't be blaming others.
Let's accept the fact that, at least on
Freenet.
/. has a link to Freenet (which has a link to some page (which has a link to some other page, which might possibly link to child porn)).
Oooooh, look everybody,
Not only that, OSTG actually *hosts* freenet.
Gotta be a special place in hell for doing that!
And just to be sure we don't forget about Google, you can use Google to find Freenet, so then, Google can be used to find child porn too!
What makes these links possible? THE INTERNET! THE INTERNET IS ENABLING CHILD PORN SOMEBODY MOD IT DOWN QUICK!!!
lol
Like North Korea or Saudi Arabia.
I suppose next you'll want to ban digital cameras. What? No? Don't you know they can be used to produce child pornography? You support child porn!
Damn, I'm looking at my monitor and do you know what? It can be used to view child porn! Must. Destroy. It. Immediately.
My eyes, they can see! But that means, they can be used to look at child pornography! Somebody blind me quick!
Where do we get these fucking retards from?