Longhorn Release Date...woot.
- Thread starter Stridder44
- Start date
The downside to any database enabled system is keeping the information accurate. MP3 tags are only as good as the information that goes into them. If you're anal retentive and take care to carefully enter tags, you're OK. Many people are pretty sloppy about organization.
We'll see the same issue with a database-enabled file system. Have you ever actually used Word's document Properties feature to add Author, Project, Company, Keywords, etc.? You may be surprised at what you find in there and there is a well known bug that tracks private information in Word docs. But getting back on topic, will you bother using keywords in your document files?
Maybe their system will index all of the words in the documents - that would be helpful I suppose but you can already search on content.
It'll be interesting.
We'll see the same issue with a database-enabled file system. Have you ever actually used Word's document Properties feature to add Author, Project, Company, Keywords, etc.? You may be surprised at what you find in there and there is a well known bug that tracks private information in Word docs. But getting back on topic, will you bother using keywords in your document files?
Maybe their system will index all of the words in the documents - that would be helpful I suppose but you can already search on content.
It'll be interesting.
Arden
Where mah "any" keys at?
Celeborn: 1) Any search will turn up results, no matter what view you use, which is irrelevant to the search anyway. If you select a folder, it will search through that folder no matter what view you use, etc. 2) You can preview files in Column view, if that's what you were wondering above.
hulkaros
The Incredible...
Originally posted by celeborn
Whether it is a service or an actual new filesystem doesn't change the fact that it is new, and by the sound of it anyway, an extremely good idea.
Which we don't know how exactly will end up! Remember that LH will be 2 years maybe down the road from now!!!
I don't think you quite understood me - the new Finder does look like iTunes, yes. What I meant was that just like you can browse your music library by genre or artist you would be able to assign files multiple catogories such as "work", "school project" etc. and browse your files according to this criteria. I think the idea Apple had in Copland was something like dynamic folders - one could do a search and save the result as a continually updating folder. This way any one file could be visible in many folders at once.
BTW, is it possible to do live searches (à la iTunes/Mail) in (the Panther) Finder yet?
Yes, as already others posted, IT IS possible to do live searches and especially on newer, faster Macs, is DAMN fast!
Also, the Places SiderBar keeps EXACTLY the same logic in Finder as in iTunes and not just looks like it! Let me make this crystal clear for you:
-Library (Macintosh HD)
-Radio (iDisk)
-Audio CD (DVD/CD-R)
-iPod (Image Disks, FireWire/USB devices)
-Rendezvous Playlists (Network)
-Smart Playlists (Movies, Docs, etc.)
-Playlists (other folders/items that the User can drop in Places SiderBar)
Got it?
I certainly and sincerely hope so, but bashing good ideas just because it's MS doing it doesn't benefit anyone.
Where exactly was I bashing M$ in my previous post?
Panther rules and I cannot even imagine what Apple will offer us 2 years down the road
Whether it is a service or an actual new filesystem doesn't change the fact that it is new, and by the sound of it anyway, an extremely good idea.
Which we don't know how exactly will end up! Remember that LH will be 2 years maybe down the road from now!!!
I don't think you quite understood me - the new Finder does look like iTunes, yes. What I meant was that just like you can browse your music library by genre or artist you would be able to assign files multiple catogories such as "work", "school project" etc. and browse your files according to this criteria. I think the idea Apple had in Copland was something like dynamic folders - one could do a search and save the result as a continually updating folder. This way any one file could be visible in many folders at once.
BTW, is it possible to do live searches (à la iTunes/Mail) in (the Panther) Finder yet?
Yes, as already others posted, IT IS possible to do live searches and especially on newer, faster Macs, is DAMN fast!
Also, the Places SiderBar keeps EXACTLY the same logic in Finder as in iTunes and not just looks like it! Let me make this crystal clear for you:-Library (Macintosh HD)
-Radio (iDisk)
-Audio CD (DVD/CD-R)
-iPod (Image Disks, FireWire/USB devices)
-Rendezvous Playlists (Network)
-Smart Playlists (Movies, Docs, etc.)
-Playlists (other folders/items that the User can drop in Places SiderBar)
Got it?
I certainly and sincerely hope so, but bashing good ideas just because it's MS doing it doesn't benefit anyone.
Where exactly was I bashing M$ in my previous post?
Panther rules and I cannot even imagine what Apple will offer us 2 years down the road
texanpenguin
Registered Penguin
He's right though - Panther isn't the same as a Media Library.
A media library, of course, works far better with MEDIA than it would with documents and applications, because every media file has the same attributes - an author, a title, a source, a year, a genre.
The glorious thing about departing from a heirarchical operating system comes from relocating files. Rather than remove a file from one location and place them back in another, you can simply alter a file's attributes so that it seems as though it exists in a new path.
You could also think of wonderful query-based goodness - sorting is awesome. Plus think of reports! You could instantly list the attributes of all the files in So and so location, or with so and so attributes, for analysing.
The advantages are amazing.
The OS would be far quicker too in every way, just because databases have ORDER.
It's a good system and I heartily agree Apple needs to incorporate a system like it.
A media library, of course, works far better with MEDIA than it would with documents and applications, because every media file has the same attributes - an author, a title, a source, a year, a genre.
The glorious thing about departing from a heirarchical operating system comes from relocating files. Rather than remove a file from one location and place them back in another, you can simply alter a file's attributes so that it seems as though it exists in a new path.
You could also think of wonderful query-based goodness - sorting is awesome. Plus think of reports! You could instantly list the attributes of all the files in So and so location, or with so and so attributes, for analysing.
The advantages are amazing.
The OS would be far quicker too in every way, just because databases have ORDER.
It's a good system and I heartily agree Apple needs to incorporate a system like it.
Has anyone stopped to noticed the UI migration and think about what it might mean.
iCal
iTunes
iPhoto
Finder
AddressBook
Safari
If you factor in the concept of FS meta-data, and "objects" vs. "files", suddenly iTunes starts looking like nothing more than a "Music Finder", iPhoto a "Picture Finder", Address Book a "vCard Finder", etc.
Safari and iCal are little less clear, but they are following similar UI models for managing thie special data.
This thought actually jives with a rumor/comment I heard some time ago (12-18 months) that this was the direction Apple was going. That "Finder" would change quite a bit and there would be a set of "specialized Finders" for different tasks.
Then again it could just be that Steve thinks it looks cool.
iCal
iTunes
iPhoto
Finder
AddressBook
Safari
If you factor in the concept of FS meta-data, and "objects" vs. "files", suddenly iTunes starts looking like nothing more than a "Music Finder", iPhoto a "Picture Finder", Address Book a "vCard Finder", etc.
Safari and iCal are little less clear, but they are following similar UI models for managing thie special data.
This thought actually jives with a rumor/comment I heard some time ago (12-18 months) that this was the direction Apple was going. That "Finder" would change quite a bit and there would be a set of "specialized Finders" for different tasks.
Then again it could just be that Steve thinks it looks cool.
Arden
Where mah "any" keys at?
Well, all applications are really "specialized Finders" in one way or another if you think about it really hard and jab a pencil in your ear.
And iTunes will sort your songs based on the ID3 tags if you set it to organize your music folder, though it still has to move files from one directory to another.
And iTunes will sort your songs based on the ID3 tags if you set it to organize your music folder, though it still has to move files from one directory to another.
I just had to post it, the power of the Windows System Tray or wathever you call it.
Longhorn does really sound like a bad copy of the os x codenames. As you probably have figured out yoursleves.
Longhorn does really sound like a bad copy of the os x codenames. As you probably have figured out yoursleves.
Arden
Where mah "any" keys at?
Ouch! LOL... I hate it when it does that!
I also hate the way the menu bar is at the top of the window and not the screen. If the window is very small, part of the menu will get cut off, and if the window is very close to the bottom of the screen (and also relatively small), large menus will hide part of the menubar... GRR! So annoying!
I also hate the way the menu bar is at the top of the window and not the screen. If the window is very small, part of the menu will get cut off, and if the window is very close to the bottom of the screen (and also relatively small), large menus will hide part of the menubar... GRR! So annoying!
