• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Wwdc 2007

SPeedY_B

I may actually be insane.
#7
Just waiting for the Leopard build to become... available now. :p

Also stacks is years old, I couldn't believe it when I saw it announced, I'm pretty sure it was a feature pencilled for 10.3, and originally named "Piles" :eek:

Edit:From 2000...
Apple holds a patent on this one. Developed by Gitta Salomon and her team close to a decade ago, a pile is a loose grouping of documents. Its visual representation is an overlay of all the documents within the pile, one on top of the other, rotated to varying degrees. In other words, a pile on the desktop looked just like a pile on your real desktop.

To view the documents within the pile, you clicked on the top of the pile and drew the mouse up the screen. As you did so, one document after another would appear as a thumbnail next to the pile. When you found the one you were looking for, you would release the mouse and the current document would open.

Piles, unlike today?s folders, gave you a lot of hints as to their contents. You could judge the number of documents in the pile by its height. You could judge its composition very rapidly by pulling through it.
Not exactly the same application, but a very similar concept. :)
 
#10
haha

Watched the keynote earlier in the slightly wee-er hours of the morning. I have to say the whole iPhone Apps thing seems pretty poor. I'd have to agree with John Gruber that if doing apps this way was so cool, so easy and so just perfect then why arent Apple doing their apps this way?

John Gruber as Steve Jobs said:
We know that you want to write your own apps for iPhone, and we’d like to see that too. We love the apps you write for the Mac, and we’d love to see what you might be able to come up with for iPhone. We’re thinking about it, and working on ways that we might make that happen, but we don’t have anything to announce today. The good news, though, is that because iPhone has a real Safari web browser, you can write web-based apps that work great on iPhone.
Had they said that then it might have been better, but the prospect of having to be connected to GPRS, EDGE or some hapless Wifi point just to use some "app" is stupid, and highly costly. While you could argue that at the price of the iPhone people should have enough pocket change to throw at those GPRS/EDGE costs thats a pretty big assumption that they will want to.

This summarises it best
John Gruber said:
Telling developers that web apps are iPhone apps just doesn’t fly. Think about it this way: If web apps – which are only accessible over a network; which don’t get app icons in the iPhone home screen; which don’t have any local data storage – are such a great way to write software for iPhone, then why isn’t Apple using this technique for any of their own iPhone apps?
edit
Just read an entry over at the salon.com, heres a piece of it with good points and one silly one

salon.com said:
Under this compromise, it's unclear if third-party apps would be able to use all of the iPhone's graphics, network or storage capacities. Could you run a version of Skype on the iPhone? Could developers create a jukebox app for iPhone that competes with iTunes? What about a photo-editing program? And what about Firefox on Safari?
Have to agree that no matter what Apple have provided to the "iPhone Web Apps" through Safari the likelihood of them getting access to graphics, network and most certainly storage capacities is going to be fairly low I'd say. Network maybe, but the others are less likely.

Skype is an amazing application and while AT&T will get less of their moneys worth through its use (save on data charges) I don't think Apple should be preventing it from being installed on an iPhone.

As far as jukebox apps for the iPhone, I've not seen better ones than iTunes on the Mac yet so I certainly wouldn't care or bother with an alternative for the iPhone, Photo editing would be quite cool but again doing this with your fingers would just be messy and Firefox on an iPhone, hahahahahahaha, its bad enough on the Mac without slapping it on something with less resources, not to mention you can't get Firefox for Windows Mobile either, though some would argue that at least the potential is there.
 
Last edited:

SPeedY_B

I may actually be insane.
#11
I suppose MiniMo is the closest thing to Fx on a mobile device.

I couldn't agree more that the so called "web apps" is a bit stupid, should I ever get my hands on an iPhone, there's no way I'll ever be using it to connect via GPRS, due to the (presently, at least) ridiculous amount it costs in the UK, so I'd always need to be in reach of an open WiFi spot.

I can see they want to protect their device, much as they tried with the AppleTV, however, surely handing out an SDK to certain folk, such as Skype for example, with the threat of eating their pets should it ever be leaked, must be a better solution.

I don't doubt at some point down the line that there will be hacked apps on the iPhone and maybe even a third party development environment, again, like the AppleTV.
 

Electronic Punk

willalwaysbewithyou
Staff member
Political User
#12
Watched it to check out the id software demo and kept watching it a little.
Thought it was quite funny when he showed the Leopard desktop for the first time and you could hear people laughing because they obviously thought it was a pisstake as it looked like Vista...

Anyway, never really used a Mac but nice to seeoptimisations non-the-less
 

SPeedY_B

I may actually be insane.
#13
I wasn't overly impressed with the Id demo. I was more impressed back when Doom 3 was originally demonstrated on a G3, in it's first ever public outing, however, this "new" tech, seems to be more of the same, with just a few more textures and polygons thrown in to the mix for good measure.
 

fitz

Woah.. I'm still here?
Staff member
Political User
#14
did anyone catch the news that EA is bringing games over to OSX as well?
Managed to catch this on digg what they won't be native ports to OSX but running under Cider which is an emulation layer of sorts..
Cider is a sophisticated portability engine that allows Windows games to be run on Intel Macs without any modi.cations to the original game source code. Cider works by directly loading a Windows program into memory on an Intel-Mac and linking it to an optimized version of the Win32 APIs. Games are .wrapped. with the Cider engine and they simply run on the Mac. This means developers have only one code base to maintain while enjoying the .exibility of targeting multiple platforms and, therefore, multiple revenue streams. Cider powered games use the same copy protection, lobbies, game matching and connectivity as the original Windows game. All this means less effort and lower costs. Cider is targeted to game developers and publishers.
 
#15
Interesting, I'd kind of hope that would be a perhaps initial system for getting a game onto the Mac but with later development spent on writing cross platform game code with OS specific modules. Any kind of emulator kind of thing is going to hurt performance.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Perris Calderon wrote on Electronic Punk's profile.
Ep, glad to see you come back and tidy up...did want to ask a one day favor, I want to enhance my resume , was hoping you could make me administrator for a day, if so, take me right off since I won't be here to do anything, and don't know the slightest about the board, but it would be nice putting "served administrator osnn", if can do, THANKS

Been running around Quora lately, luv it there https://tinyurl.com/ycpxl
Electronic Punk wrote on Perris Calderon's profile.
All good still mate?
Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me ...
Xie
What a long strange trip it's been. =)

Forum statistics

Threads
61,962
Messages
673,240
Members
89,017
Latest member
keithgonzaal