MOTUnation.com

mikehalloran wrote:It is the future and many of us know it.

That bears repeating! Wow! I'm impressed. You know the future? REALLY!

Can I get tonight's lottery numbers from you? How about the stocks that will perform the best by this time next year?

Cock sure of this, are you?

For those of us who have been paying attention: The goal has always been an operating platform free of the limitations of the OS. People have been writing of this since long before the Mac.

Yes. I am "cocksure of this." That is the future. Many of us do know this.

Very impressive. And you're sure of all that?

Always in motion is the future.

YODA, Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt”

~ Bertrand Russell

mikehalloran wrote:The ideal OS has always been none at all. Just applications that did what you want in a way that you expect. This is where Steve Jobs has always been heading. It is the future and many of us know it.

Absolutely true. Eliminating the Finder and application launchers would be a good start.

bayswater wrote:

mikehalloran wrote:The ideal OS has always been none at all. Just applications that did what you want in a way that you expect. This is where Steve Jobs has always been heading. It is the future and many of us know it.

Absolutely true. Eliminating the Finder and application launchers would be a good start.

But this is where we run into trouble. I USE the Finder. It's where I get a lot of work done. For example, I collect time-lapse pictures from certain web cams, revealing the changes of different times of day, clouds passing over in fast motion, even seasons changing. QuicKeys is obviously a big help, but in some cases I actually have to download pictures individually by hand. (well, by mouse, trackpad, or whatever) I collect them and organize them in the Finder, then turn them into movie clips in Quicktime Pro, for later compilation and editing in iMovie or Final Cut Pro. I have organizational systems in the Finder that have evolved over 27 years of Mac use, and I find that to be the most frustrating thing about using an iPad: I have no access to my files except through the applications that use them. The Finder is essential to me. The iPad will always feel like a secondary device to me, because it is so limited in that regard.

I like apps that feel independent of the Finder, not just running in some space above it. But I've got to have that Finder.


Shooshie

Shooshie wrote:...I've got to have that Finder.

You're gonna loose that thang. Sure bet...

Shooshie wrote:

bayswater wrote:

mikehalloran wrote:The ideal OS has always been none at all. Just applications that did what you want in a way that you expect. This is where Steve Jobs has always been heading. It is the future and many of us know it.

Absolutely true. Eliminating the Finder and application launchers would be a good start.

But this is where we run into trouble. I USE the Finder. It's where I get a lot of work done. For example, I collect time-lapse pictures from certain web cams, revealing the changes of different times of day, clouds passing over in fast motion, even seasons changing. QuicKeys is obviously a big help, but in some cases I actually have to download pictures individually by hand. (well, by mouse, trackpad, or whatever) I collect them and organize them in the Finder, then turn them into movie clips in Quicktime Pro, for later compilation and editing in iMovie or Final Cut Pro. I have organizational systems in the Finder that have evolved over 27 years of Mac use, and I find that to be the most frustrating thing about using an iPad: I have no access to my files except through the applications that use them. The Finder is essential to me. The iPad will always feel like a secondary device to me, because it is so limited in that regard.

I like apps that feel independent of the Finder, not just running in some space above it. But I've got to have that Finder.


Shooshie

I hope you don't lose anything valuable to you bro. Th ing is, YOU always figure out how to use computer functions to their utmost. If all comp users were as astute as you, then of course finder would stay.
But , when someone like Jobs trashes a feature, it is often based off of whether the world uses a feature enough to keep it.

I don;t know a damn thing about this argument this post has been making about heading towards no OS, I don;t care. But I do know that you...Shoosh, might lose something you luse thoroughly, only because others have not.

Such is the case with us all in using our software. Our favorite features come and go without our consent. Remember DP used to be able to preview all the MIDI effects in realtime? Now, only a few of those functions are available. I used to use that ability all the time. And poff, it's gone.
No one asked me about it...lol

toodamnhip wrote:Our favorite features come and go without our consent. Remember DP used to be able to preview all the MIDI effects in realtime? Now, only a few of those functions are available. I used to use that ability all the time. And poff, it's gone.
No one asked me about it...lol

What? That's gone? I guess I'm not using them every day, but when I DO use them, the whole point is to be able to hear them in real time. You don't print them until you can see how they sound. There's got to be some mistake. MIDI effects ARE real time!

I'll have to take a look at that. Thanks for the heads up.

Shooshie

Shooshie wrote:But this is where we run into trouble. I USE the Finder.

The (perhaps overstated) point is that you shouldn't need to actively use or know about the file system by using the guts of the OS or the Finder. The applications should manage documents, get them from where they are, put them where they need to be, assemble them, delete them, give them attributes, permissions, convert them, back them up, rename them, etc. It may be that the Finder itself is the best application for some purposes, and it may be suitable as a service layer for applications, but for the most part, we shouldn't need access to or have to know about the file system. (That doesn't mean, by the way, that it shouldn't be there, or that there shouldn't be an OS)

Sorry, but I just have a hard time with the concept that I don't need to know or have access to the big picture on my computer, or that it all happens and is controlled by someone, on some "cloud", somewhere..

It takes the "personal" right out of "personal computer". I love my iPad for what it is, but the thought of my Mac Pro workstation operating like that makes me sick

Just a little too Mom and Pop for me.

Shooshie wrote:I have organizational systems in the Finder that have evolved over 27 years of Mac use, and I find that to be the most frustrating thing about using an iPad: I have no access to my files except through the applications that use them. The Finder is essential to me. The iPad will always feel like a secondary device to me, because it is so limited in that regard.

I feel the same way here. Which is one of the reasons that both my iPad and iPhone are jailbroken (which has been ruled legal in court BTW). I can access the file system and get email attachments like Word docs etc off my portable devices without pulling teeth when I can't get my laptop on the net to email the document to myself.

Killahurts wrote:Sorry, but I just have a hard time with the concept that I don't need to know or have access to the big picture on my computer, or that it all happens and is controlled by someone, on some "cloud", somewhere..

It takes the "personal" right out of "personal computer". I love my iPad for what it is, but the thought of my Mac Pro workstation operating like that makes me sick

Just a little too Mom and Pop for me.

Shooshie wrote:I have organizational systems in the Finder that have evolved over 27 years of Mac use, and I find that to be the most frustrating thing about using an iPad: I have no access to my files except through the applications that use them. The Finder is essential to me. The iPad will always feel like a secondary device to me, because it is so limited in that regard.

+1,000,000!

I consider myself a Mac power-user. I understand a lot of people out there are computer-ignorant and almost afraid of technology. These people should stick to their iPads.
Why should we be dumbed down? Because Jobs thinks we are too stupid to handle a simple Finder? Is that really so complicated for people?

Such a simple and "brain-free" approach would be fine for my father, for example, who basically uses his iMac as a typing machine and email reader. But us? The PRO users? I have the brains to use the Finder and the need to organize MY files anyway I want. I don't need the stupid computer to make these decisions for me!

I liked a lot of what Lion will offer. But I don't want to be locked into a GUI designed or optimized for technology-illiterate people! THEY should learn how to use a computer. It's not that hard, really...

What I didn't understand about the whole cloud thing is why they didn't take it one step further? Why do we even need to push our files to our devices at all? Why should I need Apple to automatically sync all my devices? In other words, why should I have to "sync" at all? I'd be glad if I never had to own another file and it all just existed in a cloud. What's more-- I don't even want to own applications. Why can't I just log in to my MS Word application and use it online. Now obviously the internet is too slow for pro apps like DP to do this, but things like iCal and Pages... surely we could just get rid of them completely? I actually predict that this will be the solution to the music and software piracy war. To listen to music, you just buy access to online streams of the songs you want. No one would ever physically own a song which means they could never upload it anywhere else or otherwise modify it without consent. The artists would never have to relinquish their songs to iTunes (and be subject to iTunes pricing structure). The artists would keep their songs on their website and people would pay for access. Then, some kind of simple 3rd party software can manage all your licenses to your online music collection, I suppose a bit like an iLok.

Very good point, why should we have to depend on any third party to deal with our data? I pay a pittance for an online file folder to transfer data to my own damn "cloud." 10 or 20GB for like $10 a year? So low I can't remember how much, I can up that to like 100GB for another $20 a year.

Once you buy, create, or otherwise legally obtain data you should be the one who says when and where it goes. Sure, those dumb asses who don't really know squat about computers can have their data (and their heads) in the clouds, but if I am working on a new piece, or a collaborator is working on a new film, or dance, or whatever, we don't want that "out there."

What I am sure of is that my stuff will NEVER be in "the cloud." The cloud is for clods, and that means u. LOL!

As for the disappearance of the OS - well, I'm not as sure as some others about that eventuality and certainly not at all supportive of the absence of a "system" to organize and run things the way I want to.

Feel free to speculate, but don't be so damn sure of yourself. You are just making ass-u-mptions.

It's funny. I was talking to a friend about this and he mentioned the whole "cloud" thing. He's not that savvy with computers. You realize this is all about communicating to the lowest common denominator, insofar as alluding to what MLC has already said, "the cloud" isn't new. The "cloud" is simply space on a server. No big mystery. Most of us use FTP to share files with collaborators. I have "unlimited" storage from my hosting company. If I wanted to put my music collection "on the cloud" I could have done so years ago. In many ways it's just a repackaging that makes it much easier, yet unfortunately makes it difficult for the user to have as much control.

Well, it will all be interesting. I'm trying to find the time to do the reading to see how this will change our lives as musicians/producers/content creators.