Revised Desktop, Finder Highlight Leopard Additions

When OS X 10.5: Leopard debuts in October, it will feature a redesigned Desktop and new Finder. Those new features were among the changes Steve Jobs introduced during a preview of the forthcoming OS X update code-named Leopard during his Worldwide Developers Conference keynote speech Tuesday. Originally slated for a spring 2007 release, OS X 10.5 is now slated for release in October. It will cost $129, Jobs told WWDC attendees. The finished version of Leopard includes 300 new and enhanced features; Jobs previewed 10 during his Tuesday keynote.

The redesigned Desktop does away with the blue background familiar to OS X 10.4 users. Instead, Jobs said, the Desktop has been redesigned to better accommodate the digital photos that most Mac users employ as the background image on their Desktops. With Leopard, the Menu Bar will be transparent and the Dock will be more three-dimensional. But more significantly, the redesigned Desktop in Leopard introduces Stacks—a collection of folders that reside in the desktop. Apple sees Stacks as a way to clean up Desktop clutter. Files are collected in the Stacks for rapid access; click on the Stacks icon and the Dock and the files and folders fan out or appear in a grid. Clicking on one of those icons instantly launches the relevant app.

View: Full Story
News source: PC World

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

EBay wants developers to take it outside

Next Story

Microsoft urges joint action on cybercrime

98 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Wow, judging by the comments you'd think that there are Xerox machines overheating all over the place.

I think its hilarious that Microsoft got accused of 'copying' OS X (what a load of crap that is), yet when the same thing is said about OS X 10.5 (also untrue), the Apple Zealots rush in with their overly rude comments.

Here's a newsflash: There are similarities in both because (drumroll, *please*), they are both GUI-based desktop operating systems targetted at the same audience. They BOTH have a dock/TaskBar? Shocking! They BOTH have backup utilities? HORROR! They both have Live Previews? NO WAY! They both have an arrow that moves when the mouse does? GET OUTTA HERE!

Do you really think Steve Jobs is so in love with his competitor's product that he wants to implement its features in OS X? No. (Even though they called OS X 10.5 "Vista 2") Do you think Bill Gates wants to turn his market-leading operating system into something that resembles a competitor's product? No.

Vista and OS X are unique products that carry out the same function (operating system) for similar audiences. Just as Coke and Pepsi are similar products satisfying similar needs for a similar audience so are OS X and Vista. Like Coke and Pepsi, OS X and Vista have their own unqiue feel, background, userbase, and features.

Now, can we please get over the 'who copied who' argument?

So true

I am only venting anger because of the zealots getting on my nerves. I just couldn't take it anymore anything MS does or creates gets attacked on some forum.

Iridium said,
So true

I am only venting anger because of the zealots getting on my nerves. I just couldn't take it anymore anything MS does or creates gets attacked on some forum.

I'm much the same way, except the opposite: whenever Apple does something new the Microsoft zealots start flaming.

People on the internet really do need to grow up. If one fanboy joins a discussion, everyone gets riled up and the comments turn into what we've seen here.

I just hate when all the apple fans start saying Microsoft copied this and that when apple copies as well or even more. oh and wow... although i like the new "features"... they are nothing revolutionary like people were expecting eh? :)
Im glad it happened... same as vista lol
Cool now you have a reflective dock and a transparent menu bar :nuts:

Okey listen here,

a few months ago all I had been hearing was how great apple OSX was. After using Linux on and off for a few years i decided that given that OSX derives from unix perhaps it will be interesting so i went to the mac labs at my uni to check it out. Now i have vista home premium on my desktop. I can say that vista just feels a lot better. In fact i gave up Ubuntu which i was trying to replace my xp with for vista. It has really impressed me and i definitely think that Microsoft will give out amazing upgrades as time gos on. Unlike apple who charges for every OS change.

Frankly I am sick to death of Apple fan retards who have never tried Vista. Lets list why you are fan retards. Firstly, Apple copied konfabulator for widgets, stole a version of unix and charged for it with the name OSX. Now they have included suns open source zeta file system ,and copied solaris's Looking Glass dock appearance, and put a price tag on it. Apple have also made its top menu transparent like the vista task bar, put an photo image in the background like windows has had for many years. These are just the features i know about I would hate to see how far the rabbit hole goes for using others ideas especially open source software and not crediting the original developers claiming it as Apple innovation. Furthermore, your father aka Jobs always attacks Microsoft and Bill for stupid things that really make no sense and are nonsense. Considering that Bill has never done that to him and infact used hard worked for Microsoft money to keep Apple afloat in 1997/1998 I think he should shut up.

Now hardware, i said this a few days ago all apple hardware - the iPhone, iPod and iEverything are all not revolutionary just evolutionary and do not deserve all the hype. Apple always locks others out of its hardware and the iPhone will be testament to this. Microsoft encourages 3rd party developers and even allows apple to run Windows on Bootcamp but does apple allow OSX on Windows i think not.

Iridium said,
Now hardware, i said this a few days ago all apple hardware - the iPhone, iPod and iEverything are all not revolutionary just evolutionary and do not deserve all the hype. Apple always locks others out of its hardware and the iPhone will be testament to this. Microsoft encourages 3rd party developers and even allows apple to run Windows on Bootcamp but does apple allow OSX on Windows i think not.

Apple is a hardware company... you get OSX + iLife free when you buy a mac... you cant say that for windows. :)
OSX works best on apple hardware as it is specificaly built on that hardware and for that hardware... no messing with drivers... you cant say that for windows. :)
This is the advantage of Apple... they know all specs of their hardware and are able to fully optimize it for that hardware... you cant say that for windows. :)
That is why will OSX be always more stable and optimized... i tried leo and it seems even faster than tiger on same machine... tried vista too on same machine and it is very resource hungry and you soon run out of mem on 1Gb with few apps open... i cant say that for OSX :)
IMHO vista feels just too fat and with a lot of not really needed "features"...

Yeh fair enough,

vista is a little hungry beast but i think thats because it is designed for the future i think it will flourish as hardware gets better.

PS when you buy a PC you dont really think of the cost of windows because its a PC so its a need. I also don't think that Jobs does not allow OSX to be virtualised for that reason. But i am not worried for Microsoft because they are innovating at an extreme pace realizing that the desktop formats days are numbered with such products as surface, UMPC, tablet, and their web services for easy on the go access. By thier own standards however MS are still sleeping and i think if leopard does well, which i expect it to due to heaving marketing, it will push them into over drive to re-conquer but this time i hope they don't feel sorry for their rivals, actually i don't mind Ubuntu and Mr Shuttleworth as he will probably play fair. All they need to do is start playing super dirty like Jobs cuz in the end it seems to me that consumers and alot of IT people don't care for ethics they just want to be cool and blend in.

I laughed my ass off at this part

Basic Edition = $129
premium Edition = $129
Business Edition = $129
Ultimate Edition = $129

warwagon said,
I laughed my ass off at this part

Basic Edition = $129
premium Edition = $129
Business Edition = $129
Ultimate Edition = $129

And if Apple had more of a market share, they would charge more because they know they would make more. Every time Jobs talks or an Apple commercial is released, it all screams PENIS ENVY!

Agreed. Whether one is a mac or pc user, this is probably where we can all agree that MS really shot themselves in the foot with Vista....MBA 101 marketing segmentation crippleware versions of their flagship OS. Pathetic.

Ugh...God... every single time... EVERY single time this turns into a "My di*k is bigger than your's and I had it first and you liked it so much, you copied it!"... what the hell? Can we all just acknowledge that there are people that like Mac OS X, such as myself, and there are others who like Windows, and any or all flavors of Linux, and even... geez, I don't know... DOS, and BeOS and whatnot... If you like Windows, then use Windows and shut the hell up!... if you like Mac OS X, use it and stop trying to "convert" other people to switch! WHO CARES?... the switch to another OS has to be because the user is convinced that particular OS is going to meet their needs on their everyday life... I you can't see what Apple is doing then I'm afraid you are very very blind or nearsighted... See how the Finder now looks almost exactly like iTunes?... and you think that's because... ?? what?... Steve's mom likes it so much they decided to apply the iTunes navigating look all through the OS??... well, no... it's because people, regular people, not like us who write up posts in tech news websites... grandmas and kids, and teens... Windows or OS X users... they have all grown accustom to using iTunes because the iPod is the market leader MP3 player... and a LOT of people own one... and most of these people use iTunes to put their media in their iPods, so... Apple is betting that by making the Finder as simple as using iTunes, an interface people have grown accustomed to, the mainstream, meaning the people who go into a Best Buy store to buy a computer and have little to no knowledge about all of this GHz, MB, Core Duo, G5, and what have you, and really only care about is that their computer can access the internet and run some kind of word processor, look at Leopard and not be afraid of all of the things people say about Macs (e.g. Macs don't have little to no software, Macs are hard to learn, the switch is hard because they are very different OS's, whatever...) say "Hey, wait a minute... I can use this just like iTunes... is that really so hard to understand?...
The fact of the matter is, Apple is ALWAYS thinking of the average consumer... they rarely think about specific "pro" user features... unless they are on specific pro software like Studio 2.
And, if you wanna get into the whole "Who copied who..." thing... something to think about is that the Dock has been transparent since, I think, the original OS X release... I can't even remember...
If you leave a window behind the Dock, it'll show through... =O I swear!... so really... who cares if some geek in the middle of West Virgina thinks "Mac's sux!" ??... WHO CARES??... I am not gonna stop using my choice in OS or hardware, for that matter, just because some guy doesn't approve of my CHOICE of OS and hardware?...
And if you like Win or Linux, or an inflatable doll with a next generation built in moan maker... then kudos!... use it... love it... I don't know... do whatever the hell you want with it... really... I mean REALLY... who cares?...

While your post was exceedingly verbose, I like your point. Who cares what OS people use, as long as it suits their needs and has the applications and features they like.

Vista is a decent operating system. I'm not sure I prefer it over Windows XP, which was a bit simpler.
Likewise, Mac OS X is a decent operating system. I haven't used Leopard, but I might try it when it is released, as they have added some neat features that might simplify certain tasks.

Seriously, people. Try and keep an open mind. Give each one a try, and take a look at what applications will be available to you, then make an objective choice.

paragraphs are your friend. :)

msiller said,
Ugh...God... every single time... EVERY single time this turns into a "My di*k is bigger than your's and I had it first and you liked it so much, you copied it!"... what the hell? Can we all just acknowledge that there are people that like Mac OS X, such as myself, and there are others who like Windows, and any or all flavors of Linux, and even... geez, I don't know... DOS, and BeOS and whatnot... If you like Windows, then use Windows and shut the hell up!... if you like Mac OS X, use it and stop trying to "convert" other people to switch! WHO CARES?... the switch to another OS has to be because the user is convinced that particular OS is going to meet their needs on their everyday life... I you can't see what Apple is doing then I'm afraid you are very very blind or nearsighted... See how the Finder now looks almost exactly like iTunes?... and you think that's because... ?? what?... Steve's mom likes it so much they decided to apply the iTunes navigating look all through the OS??... well, no... it's because people, regular people, not like us who write up posts in tech news websites... grandmas and kids, and teens... Windows or OS X users... they have all grown accustom to using iTunes because the iPod is the market leader MP3 player... and a LOT of people own one... and most of these people use iTunes to put their media in their iPods, so... Apple is betting that by making the Finder as simple as using iTunes, an interface people have grown accustomed to, the mainstream, meaning the people who go into a Best Buy store to buy a computer and have little to no knowledge about all of this GHz, MB, Core Duo, G5, and what have you, and really only care about is that their computer can access the internet and run some kind of word processor, look at Leopard and not be afraid of all of the things people say about Macs (e.g. Macs don't have little to no software, Macs are hard to learn, the switch is hard because they are very different OS's, whatever...) say "Hey, wait a minute... I can use this just like iTunes... is that really so hard to understand?...
The fact of the matter is, Apple is ALWAYS thinking of the average consumer... they rarely think about specific "pro" user features... unless they are on specific pro software like Studio 2.
And, if you wanna get into the whole "Who copied who..." thing... something to think about is that the Dock has been transparent since, I think, the original OS X release... I can't even remember...
If you leave a window behind the Dock, it'll show through... =O I swear!... so really... who cares if some geek in the middle of West Virgina thinks "Mac's sux!" ??... WHO CARES??... I am not gonna stop using my choice in OS or hardware, for that matter, just because some guy doesn't approve of my CHOICE of OS and hardware?...
And if you like Win or Linux, or an inflatable doll with a next generation built in moan maker... then kudos!... use it... love it... I don't know... do whatever the hell you want with it... really... I mean REALLY... who cares?...

Chad, my post was HUMOROUS and SATIRICAL. It was not flamebait. So, have you decided to become the arbiter of taste now? If so, you might want to let all of us know beforehand...ahem.

Windows Vista also has stacks. They may not work on the desktop, but they work in every other folder and are tied into Windows Desktop Search.

To use stacks go
Right click -> stack by
and then stack by any criteria you desire

Even WMP11 has the idea of stacks for music.

None of the stuff listed is new or revolutionary.

I just downloaded Safari and haven't had any problems running it under Vista. It even seems to be "somewhat" stable. It, however, is as ugly as hell on a Windows machine (i.e. it doesn't blend well). It is very functional, and I do get a kick out of using the KHTML engine.

As for OSX 10.5, I think they are borrowing alot from Sun. In some ways it looks like Vista (menu bar), but what it really looks like is Project Looking Glass. You also need to add in ZFS. It does look nice though, a lot more refined than the brushed metal look. I see it as a small improvement but needed improvement.

Okay, let's stop all this bickering over who was first. Apple and Microsoft both have a history of stealing ideas.

What should matter is who does them *best*, and in my experience that's Apple in most departments.

I love how apple touts themselves as "original". I cleary remember a program / OS that did the "stacks" idea years ago. Gj Apple.... If anyone knows this program, feel free to share.

New question...

I don't have my macbook with me today, but I've never tried this. Can some OS X user let me know if you can have more than one dock on OS X?

Okay, thank you.

I ask because my whole interface is replaced with docks of varying types and styles now, elminating the taskbar, system tray, and start menu entirely (thanks to objectdock). It's taken me quite I while to make it intuitive, fast, clean, minimal real estate, and aesthetically balanced, but the concept can work (on both XP and Vista, which I have matching 1 for 1 now) and I'd love to try it on my MacBook Pro (OS X side).

I'll search for the hacks, thanks!

:)

Go ahead and bash me all you want but I dont see anything thats really new. Come on I can add a custom toolbar to the taskbar in windows and access my files that way.

I feel people give apple too much credit. ALL they seem to be doing LATELY is making microsofts stuff better.

I would not be thinking this way if it wasnt for apple constantly bashing microsoft. Especially with vista. Considering this has nothing that makes you want to ditch vista for an apple.

So go ahead and bash me all you want but thats my opinion. APPLE only should bash microsoft if they come up with something that cannot be done in vista easily.

I must say this. Apple makes a good case for laptops but they need to work on making it so that people want to replace their desktops with an apple with os x installed.

The trouble is, you can't just compare a laundry list of Leopard features to Vista's and say Vista is better. The key is how the features are implemented, and that is where Apple excels. Unfortunately you have to actually use it to "get it", so it's a hard sell.

Stacks is a different paradigm for organizing files - the Dock has always been able to accommodate folder aliases.

Also overlooked were the features already in Tiger, which gave Leopard a head start.

Wall Street agrees with your assessment. Apple needed something more slam-dunk if it was going to be a compelling alternative to Vista for new PC buyers.

Unfortunately, it seems as though diverting all their resources to the iPhone has set their OS revisions back a step.

Microsoft is breathing a sigh of relief today, for sure.

As I said, the Mac is a compelling alternative whether it's Tiger or Leopard. I don't think the average PC user can tell the difference between Tiger and Leopard, or XP and Vista for that matter. But they sure can tell the difference between Windows and Mac. And Leopard is an improvement over Tiger no matter how you slice it.
Remember, the release of Vista did nothing to slow the Mac's market share growth.

Neomac v6 said,
Remember, the release of Vista did nothing to slow the Mac's market share growth.

Which has only happened because of the switch to Intel so people can run Windows and OSX together, once the novelty wears off the growth will settle and Apple will still have the miniscule market share they have today.

Don't forget the iPod halo effect, and the looming iPhone halo effect. People will be a lot more comfortable with OS X when it's on their phone.

simon360 said,
And for those of you who want the old menu bar back, you can photoshop the background to your wallpaper since it's transparent, and make it look just like it used to. That's the advantage of transparency ;)

lol

I do hope they add a color tint option to the top bar. I'd really like to see a reverse contrast black/dark grey, with white text - as is with many of the pro applications.

No doubt it will be customizable from 3rd party apps, in short time, shortly after release.

Otherwise, that's my only big complaint. I'm really excited for October and am wicked happy over the iTunes-esque interface for the Finder.

And for those of you who want the old menu bar back, you can photoshop the background to your wallpaper since it's transparent, and make it look just like it used to. That's the advantage of transparency ;)


Actually, the advantage of transparency would be to adjust it to what you want, not edit your wallpapers, most users just right click and assign wallpapers, they don't edit them and add in white or black areas because their menu bar is transparent.

Personally, I think it's beautiful. I like the idea of stacks. It's a solution to the problem of the cluttered desktop that plagues many of us, and I think it's a fairly good one. I like the way icons fan out.

Also, although the transparent menu bar is clearly a Vista inspired rip, I think the desktop revisions are really nice. I like the old dock design but the new one is nice as well. I like the 3D aspect, I guess.

Most of all the visual changes I like the iPhone inspired (basically Cover Flow) view in the Documents folder. It's really cool looking, at least, and I hope it actually turns out to be functional. That one seems to me to be an actual Apple original and it's pretty nice.

All in all, I like these changes and I think this OS is actually different from its recent predecesors.

Now if only I had a Mac!

Yeah, Wall Street was looking for something to go head to head with Vista at a time when the new MS OS is at its most vulnerable (PC users being forced to buy entire new systems). They clearly didn't get that from today's keynote.

I don't have all day. Rest assured that most people who've used both agree that Windows is still far behind OS X. (And yes, I'm a Mac fanboy - as are most people who've given the Mac more than a casual glance).

Actually, neomac, I just used vista and os x head to head on the same macbook pro 17 for the past two months on location, and there was no comparison. Vista was faster, prettier, and cleaner in every regard.

Now, the Mac iLife APPLICATIONS remain superior to the default Vista ones (but Vista is catching up on a few on them), but the Vista EXPERIENCE was superior overall on the same Mac hardware.

And since I didn't need any of the iLife apps, I wound up using the Vista side most of the time.

excalpius said,
Actually, neomac, I just used vista and os x head to head on the same macbook pro 17 for the past two months on location, and there was no comparison. Vista was faster, prettier, and cleaner in every regard.

Now, the Mac iLife APPLICATIONS remain superior to the default Vista ones (but Vista is catching up on a few on them), but the Vista EXPERIENCE was superior overall on the same Mac hardware.

And since I didn't need any of the iLife apps, I wound up using the Vista side most of the time.

Good for you, at least you made an informed choice, unlike a lot of the Apple haters around here. But I still suspect you're in the minority. The old adage "Once you go Mac you never go back" still holds true.

No offense, but most Apple related posts you've made on Neowin have been flamebait. At least from my point of view.

simon360 said,
No offense, but most Apple related posts you've made on Neowin have been flamebait. At least from my point of view.

and your point of view matters to who?

acidsex said,

and your point of view matters to who?


It's a forum, if my point of view doesn't matter to anyone, then why are we here? It just seems like you're very anti-Mac.

simon360 said,

It's a forum, if my point of view doesn't matter to anyone, then why are we here? It just seems like you're very anti-Mac.

Dude, Im not anti-mac at all. I would love for a lower priced Mac that has the same hardware that I have on my PC for the same cost. Id jump all over it especially for Studio 2. I just find it funny how Apple has constantly said MSFT has copied them and it looks like Apple has done the same thing.

acidsex said,
Dude, Im not anti-mac at all. I would love for a lower priced Mac that has the same hardware that I have on my PC for the same cost. Id jump all over it especially for Studio 2. I just find it funny how Apple has constantly said MSFT has copied them and it looks like Apple has done the same thing.

Here you go, good sir. It has been proven time and time again that Macs are really not as expensive as most people think. In almost every category, they beat Dell computers in both price and features.

And now that you can run Windows on the Mac, the choice is all yours.

I just wish people would take the time and do a little research before claiming that Macs are overpriced, when they really are quite reasonable.

K3vlar said,

Here you go, good sir. It has been proven time and time again that Macs are really not as expensive as most people think. In almost every category, they beat Dell computers in both price and features.

And now that you can run Windows on the Mac, the choice is all yours.

I just wish people would take the time and do a little research before claiming that Macs are overpriced, when they really are quite reasonable.


Please. That site just went out and picked the most expensive dell business laptop they could find that had similar specs, i can find a dozen laptops with similar or even better specs than a macbook for less money.

For example:
Macbook - 2Ghz Core 2 Duo, 1Gb Ram, 80Gb HDD, Intel GMA950 Integrated GPU, 13" 1280x800 TFT, Combo Drive. £700
Dell 6400 - 2Ghz Core 2 Duo, 1Gb Ram, 120Gb HDD, ATi x1400 Dedicated GPU, 15.4" 1280x800 TFT, 8x Dual Layer Writer, Vista. £650

If you could downgrade the 120gb hdd, the dedicated gpu and the dual layer writer thast at least £100-150 off the price, but alas Dell on that specific laptop had 120gb minimum and its still cheaper than the Macbook.

I love the reality distortion field Apple and its fanboys have.

Ah, fanboish prejudice.

Some comments are so misinformed, I can feel my brain melt. Not like it's suprising, of course. :cry:

Praise to those with objective opinions.

Ritsuke said,
Ah, fanboish prejudice.

Some comments are so misinformed, I can feel my brain melt. Not like it's suprising, of course. :cry:

Praise to those with objective opinions.

Fanboy? Not at all. I actually loathe Windows but there is nothing Mac's offer other than FCP Studio 2 that make it even worth shelling out thousands on a new computer and then more software. All the things Studio 2 can do, can be done on the PC for a heckuva lot less. None of the stuff Jobs talked about other than iChat will do much to increase sales.

acidsex said,
but there is nothing Mac's offer other than FCP Studio 2 that make it even worth shelling out thousands on a new computer and then more software. All the things Studio 2 can do, can be done on the PC for a heckuva lot less.

This statement almost had me fall out of my chair. :laugh:

Thanks for the laugh.

acidsex said,
back it up...ill listen.

I don't really have anything to prove as I haven't actually made a claim.

You made a comment that was completely uninformed, provided no proof for such a claim, and, when someone laughs at it, expect them to make a counter-claim when you haven't made a valid one, to counter.

The blanket cost comments are still pure gold.

Again, thanks for the laugh! :laugh:

Please let me know when you find a suite as feature-rich and award-winning as FCS, for the price. Here's some homework, already completed for easy comparision, just incase you weren't aware:

FCS2 INCLUDES (for $1,300)

Final Cut Pro 6 - "real-time editing for DV, SD, HD and film"
Motion 3 - "real-time motion graphics design"
Soundtrack Pro 2 - "advanced audio editing and sound design"
DVD Studio Pro 4 - encoding, authoring and burning.
Color - a new color grading application adapted from Silicon Color's FinalTouch. (2K system was once $25,000)
Compressor 3 - a video encoding tool for outputting projects in different formats.
LiveType 2 - a text animation program.
Cinema Tools 3 - tools specific to film processing.
Apple Qmaster 2 - a distributed processing tool.
QuickTime Pro - an enhanced version of QuickTime featuring more advanced tools and some export tools.

If you just spout off some Sony Vegas and Adobe products (excluding AfterEffects) I'll have even more to chuckle over. Just an FYI, FCS has decimated much of AVID's marketshare.


EDIT Sorry all for being so off-topic.

Now you are uninformed. FCP hasnt done much to even dent Avid's market. Theres more now than 10 years ago but dude, Adobe's Production Premium will do the exact same that Studio 2 does. Studio2 has a couple of nice features that may end up in AE as well. The only two out of the bunch that cant be done as easy is Live Type and Motion but with GPU accleration, motion is getting faster in AE.


Ritsuke said,

I don't really have anything to prove as I haven't actually made a claim.

You made a comment that was completely uninformed, provided no proof for such a claim, and, when someone laughs at it, expect them to make a counter-claim when you haven't made a valid one, to counter.

The blanket cost comments are still pure gold.

Again, thanks for the laugh! :laugh:

Please let me know when you find a suite as feature-rich and award-winning as FCS, for the price. Here's some homework, already completed for easy comparision, just incase you weren't aware:

FCS2 INCLUDES (for $1,300)

Final Cut Pro 6 - "real-time editing for DV, SD, HD and film"
Motion 3 - "real-time motion graphics design"
Soundtrack Pro 2 - "advanced audio editing and sound design"
DVD Studio Pro 4 - encoding, authoring and burning.
Color - a new color grading application adapted from Silicon Color's FinalTouch. (2K system was once $25,000)
Compressor 3 - a video encoding tool for outputting projects in different formats.
LiveType 2 - a text animation program.
Cinema Tools 3 - tools specific to film processing.
Apple Qmaster 2 - a distributed processing tool.
QuickTime Pro - an enhanced version of QuickTime featuring more advanced tools and some export tools.

If you just spout off some Sony Vegas and Adobe products (excluding AfterEffects) I'll have even more to chuckle over. Just an FYI, FCS has decimated much of AVID's marketshare.


EDIT Sorry all for being so off-topic. ;)

acidsex said,
Now you are uninformed. FCP hasnt done much to even dent Avid's market. Theres more now than 10 years ago but dude, Adobe's Production Premium will do the exact same that Studio 2 does. Studio2 has a couple of nice features that may end up in AE as well. The only two out of the bunch that cant be done as easy is Live Type and Motion but with GPU accleration, motion is getting faster in AE.

Last I checked Adobe's Production Premium isn't even out and costs $400 more. I actually like AE over Motion, but that is slowly changing as they release a better feature set. Motion was pretty far behind (as a realtively young product), but is catching up nicely.

Premiere, Soundbooth and Encore! :laugh:

Software package that can compare to FCS2, for the price? Premiere is okay for consumer and low-end production... even medium-end with a skilled user and Soundbooth and Encore are jokes. Regardless, PP is more expensive, making that null, and Adobe's auxillary apps (dvd, compression, sound, color) are super "meh" in my opinion.

Otherwise, I'd say the Master collection would be a good bet. But, then again, comparing a product that is out to a product that is not.

Just like comparing Leopard to Vista. It's pointless and I don't defend the people who contribute to such frivolous arguments.

Dimensional color grading? Who does that for cheap on the PC? I am really ignorant of that answer, not meaning to be sarcastic. HD grading was very, very expensive and many in the film industry hail Apple for bringing it at a budget price.

I'd recommend anyone to purchase FCS2 and Adobe Design Premium so they can both create the content and develop the marketing materials.

I'd say something silly about the "FCP hasnt[sic] done much to even dent Avid's market" but I made a passionate comment about that, not eleborating on the market. So, I wont argue on that (much) even though we are both wrong in our extremes.

BTW, I'm talking about mid-range post production in comparison to Media Composer, feature for feature, price and who is actually using what. So many in that market are moving or have moved over to FCP and AVID has largely been fased out at many educational institutions, in favor of FCP. It will continue to do so. Just as Quark is hurting at the institution level, with InDesign sneaking in.

AVID's a powerhouse, and is not in any trouble, but they are also a video company that focuses on many, many aspects of that industry that Apple does not. Whether you want to believe the numbers or not, Apple considers FCP to be the dominate app in the market they have chosen to service. AVID will continue to count units sold as part of their marketshare, regardless of whether or not people have moved off that platform.

Regardless, saying that FCP hasn't made much of a dent in AVID's marketshare is just as bad as saying FCP decimated AVID's marketshare. Woops.

Anyway, I still don't see where you are coming from. Where are the apps that match FCS2 feature-for-feature, at the price?

Just becase you have cheap alternatives on the PC doesn't make those alternatives better. Even so, the only alternatives are often more expensive and/or lack the rich-feature set.

I do feel bad for everyone who can't use FCS2, but, honestly, if you are getting into post-production and complain at the price of a Mac, you shouldn't be in post-production. Adobe Premiere or Sony Vegas or AVID Express will suit you just fine and will probably do everything you want.

AMV's, anyone?

Sorry, didn't spell check and I'll talk to you about this more, but not in this subject...PM if you want to discuss further.

Finder-> Vista search (except itunes like flip is missing..but using WPF its easy to acheive it by just a 6months vista based developer!)

Core Animation-> its like Vista Aero Program API. (WPF can do more than this!, just see the Y! messenger for vista example. tons of apps is to rock this christmas season with Rock solid ads from microsoft on vista...and sure a "Buy a PC ad")

The dock is not alt+tab with a 3d interface, it's a start menu and alt+tab. 3d isn't the best way to put it, I admit, but it's more composited nonetheless.

Stacks are folders in the dock. Nothing revolutionary, but they are a new idea nonetheless. Quicker than the start menu. They are part of the dock.

Finder is Mac OS X's Explorer, Spotlight is search. And the new finder is a lot nicer than what there was, I'm not going to say better than Explorer until I try it, but it has several new ideas over Explorer.

Core Animation could, I suppose, be compared to WPF. But we'll see when people start using both in their apps. They seem a lot different to me. Actually, now that I think about it, Apple has been gradually building their own version of WPF since before Microsoft had the ideas implemented in the early Longhorn builds (Cocoa, Quartz, Core *, etc., are all building blocks).

So, before you say nothing in Leopard is new, try and make sure you know something about the OS.

@ guruparan :

ok. lets get this straight. Those comments are so misinformed I don't even know where to begin. So I won't.

I fart in your general direction.

Hi there....I know something about the OS..but nothing about OS X..sorry for tat comparison.

Actually they are fore see comparable features in windows.

And a questions...how about opening 100 window(alike 100 applications in dock?..i havnt seen a screenshot of tat!) (in windows its been hidden using a small scroll up/down buttons)

But from my heart, i am really Disappointed by seeing Jobs wwdc 2007 keynote...its so lame.

guruparan said,
Hi there....I know something about the OS..but nothing about OS X..sorry for tat comparison.

Okay, we'll disregard your comments!

guruparan said,
And a questions...how about opening 100 window(alike 100 applications in dock?

Exposé can handle hundreds of windows.

guruparan said,
And a questions...how about opening 100 window(alike 100 applications in dock?..i havnt seen a screenshot of tat!) (in windows its been hidden using a small scroll up/down buttons)

OS X is application-centric, not document-centric. Whereas in Windows each document is a separate item in the taskbar, in OS X every application is an item in the Dock. If I have 10 files open in Word, there's but a single Word icon in the Dock. I select it, and can navigate through the separate documents with Exposé. OS X's "alt + tab" works in the same way, only showing each application. (I like how it's implemented better, though. You can hide, quit, etc. applications without taking your finger off the Cmd key.)

That said, there are horror stories of people accidentally dropping dozens of pictures and the like onto the Dock, which causes every icon to become really, really, really small.

Time Machine, Spaces etc had already been covered. Core Animation is pretty revolutionary, but we won't realize how much until developers start to take full advantage of it. Mail has some nice new features too, as does Safari (sorry Windows users, WebClip will be Mac-only).

Core Animation already exists as the GPU accelerated desktops of Linux/Beryl and Vista. There's nothing revolutionary about it. Now, if someone chooses to turn the interface upside down using these new GPU accelerated desktops (very, very possible), now THAT might be classifiable as revolutionary IMHO. :)

PS I WEEP for the loss of "webclip". Puh-lease.

excalpius said,
Core Animation already exists as the GPU accelerated desktops of Linux/Beryl and Vista. There's nothing revolutionary about it. Now, if someone chooses to turn the interface upside down using these new GPU accelerated desktops (very, very possible), now THAT might be classifiable as revolutionary IMHO. :)

PS I WEEP for the loss of "webclip". Puh-lease.


You have your technologies mixed up. Beryl and Aero are compared to OSX's Quartz Compositor who's design dates back to OS 10.0 (released 2001) and got GPU acceleration in 2002 with Jaguar. Beryl and Aero came far after 2002.

If you want to correctly compare technologies, then Core Animation should be compared to WPF and not Beryl or Aero.

"If you want to correctly compare technologies, then Core Animation should be compared to WPF and not Beryl or Aero."

The intitial point was made and still stands, without having to go to this level of granularity in the comparison.

From the 10 things Jobs talked about, it sounded just like Vista (minus iChat with backgrounds.) Funny how all the remarks and effort that go into making fun of MSFT and Vista that Apple seems to have started their own copy machine this time.

Until they lower their hardware prices or open their OS to non Mac hardware, Apple will be nothing more than the emos of this world and their fan boys.

I'm tired of these comments. Do you see a 3D dock in Windows Vista? Stacks? Finder? Core Animation?

And Windows Vista has advantages over OS X as well, but I don't use it so I can't name them. Just stop with the stupid flaming.

Until they lower their hardware prices or open their OS to non Mac hardware, Apple will be nothing more than the emos of this world and their fan boys.

I've used a Mac only around 10 times in my life, I use Windows all the time, but it still ****es me off when I see pointless comments about Macs, and making comments like they copied Vista. Each OS has its advantages, flaming isnt gonna help. :sleeping:

simon360 said,
I'm tired of these comments. Do you see a 3D dock in Windows Vista? Stacks? Finder? Core Animation?

3D Dock = Stardock's ObjectDock Plus passed the Mac OSX doc years ago. It's nice to see Apple catching up here.

Finder = desktop search, again free for XP (from MS & Google) and built in to Vista

Core Animation = marketing hype for a GPU accelerated desktop, like Vista's by default (or with WindowBlinds on XP). In fact, this feature is so de facto, even Linux has it via Beryl. So, in this case, even the Shareware OS is ahead of the OS X curve.

Stacks = hmm, you're asking for a comparison of a feature (dubious use eye candy at that) that isn't even out yet? I do remember seeing third party betas of this functionality on XP last year, so I don't expect this "feature" to be exclusive to ANY OS by the end of this year.

So, before you go complaining about people ACCURATELY comparing all three OS's, you might want to get yourself a little better educated about them.

I, for one, LOVE these guys competing with one another. If there's anything cute in the new Mac dock, I'd like to see Stardock add it. Vista's new interface can do anything Linux/Beryl or OSX/Core Animation, so I'm looking forward to seeing someone port the cool, functional ideas over. If the Stacks turn out to be a better file management UI than the unwieldy coverflow has turned out to be (talk about a bad signal to noise ratio, eesh), then I'm looking forward to seeing it on Vista and/or Linux.

:)

excalpius said,

Vista's new interface can do anything Linux/Beryl or OSX/Core Animation, so I'm looking forward to seeing someone port the cool,...


Stardock is working on tat...will be releasing a beta version soon. (i read it in stardock webpage, but not sure where , will let you know once i find it.)

And some preview of those stardock with vista are so nice, and for sure it will blew away the beryl stuff.

Finder had Spotlight and Smart Folders built in with Tiger - Released in 2005. I'm not really sure why so many people are comparing the search/virtual folder functionality of the Finder as if it were a supposedly new feature. Am I missing something here?

It's an old feature that is being expanded and improved.

simon360 said,
I'm tired of these comments. Do you see a 3D dock in Windows Vista? Stacks? Finder? Core Animation?

And Windows Vista has advantages over OS X as well, but I don't use it so I can't name them. Just stop with the stupid flaming.

Apple couldn't bring themselves to copy Vista...so they stole ideas from Project Looking Glass instead.

excalpius said,
Finder = desktop search, again free for XP (from MS & Google) and built in to Vista

I mean, it's not like Tiger has Spotlight or anything. (Or, for that matter, it's not like the Finder does anything else but desktop search. Christ.)

excalpius said,
Stacks = hmm, you're asking for a comparison of a feature (dubious use eye candy at that) that isn't even out yet? I do remember seeing third party betas of this functionality on XP last year, so I don't expect this "feature" to be exclusive to ANY OS by the end of this year.

Did you seriously just rag on that list of Leopard features and then, when you couldn't find a concrete example proving Apple's lack of creativity, bitch about it not being out yet?

excalpius said,

3D Dock = Stardock's ObjectDock Plus passed the Mac OSX doc years ago. It's nice to see Apple catching up here.

Finder = desktop search, again free for XP (from MS & Google) and built in to Vista

Core Animation = marketing hype for a GPU accelerated desktop, like Vista's by default (or with WindowBlinds on XP). In fact, this feature is so de facto, even Linux has it via Beryl. So, in this case, even the Shareware OS is ahead of the OS X curve.

Stacks = hmm, you're asking for a comparison of a feature (dubious use eye candy at that) that isn't even out yet? I do remember seeing third party betas of this functionality on XP last year, so I don't expect this "feature" to be exclusive to ANY OS by the end of this year.

So, before you go complaining about people ACCURATELY comparing all three OS's, you might want to get yourself a little better educated about them.

I, for one, LOVE these guys competing with one another. If there's anything cute in the new Mac dock, I'd like to see Stardock add it. Vista's new interface can do anything Linux/Beryl or OSX/Core Animation, so I'm looking forward to seeing someone port the cool, functional ideas over. If the Stacks turn out to be a better file management UI than the unwieldy coverflow has turned out to be (talk about a bad signal to noise ratio, eesh), then I'm looking forward to seeing it on Vista and/or Linux.

:)

you really are misinformed tho...

3d dock: yes stardock came out with it first, but who came out with the idea of the dock first? Apple.

Finder: Desktop search, the finder application has been out as long as macs have existed. The spotlight function? has been out since OSX 10.4, which as far as I know came out well before Vista.

Core animation: totally wrong idea here. Core graphics has been implemented since 10.4 and Quartz Extreme (apples hardware based GUI) has been around since OS X 10.2. Core animation just adds upon these features.

Stacks: was originally supposed to be implemented in OS9, in fact apple filed a patent for it ages before any company even came out with the idea.

So, before you go complaining about people ACCURATELY comparing all three OS's, you might want to get yourself a little better educated about them.


Please read above carefully...

YOU asked "Do you see a 3D dock in Windows Vista? Stacks? Finder? Core Animation?"

Therefore, I countered that all three major OS's have similar features to the UNRELEASED ones you are mentioning here.

You did NOT ask "Who had what first invented by whom?" And I did not discuss that either, yet now you are posting that I am "inaccurate" about who had what first. Yet, that is NOT what this conversation is about.

So, why not just admit you were wrong in your initial post, you learned something today about all three OSs, and go and start another thread about who came up with what first? Cause that's not what the rest of us are talking about.

Actually Vista has a much more powerfull equivalent of core Animation built into the WPF or whatever it's called.

3D dock... the start menu has been able to do the 3D thing a long time, and I by far prefer the regular starmeny/taskbar over the dock.

and apple didn't invent indexed desktop search, in fatc MS where the first to demonstrate desktop search, at wich point the apple copy machiens tarted. Resulting in the inferior search engine in MacOS wich is why they keep imrpoving it every version.

either way everyone copies everyone, MS copies good stuff from apple and Apple copies good stuff form MS, like Desktop search, core animation and Time machine.

HawkMan said,
Resulting in the inferior search engine in MacOS wich is why they keep imrpoving it every version.

Spotlight has find as you type, for one, and it's faster on my Macbook Pro than on my moms new Vista PC. And of course they improve it every version, otherwise there would be no need for a new version! Why would you release a new version of something with no new features?

I realize that Microsoft had the instant search idea first, but Apple implemented it far better.

And we'll see the real power of Core Animation when Leopard is actually available with Core Animation programs for it. It could be better or worse than WPF, we'll see.

Quote - giantsnyy said
you really are misinformed tho...

3d dock: yes stardock came out with it first, but who came out with the idea of the dock first? Apple.

The dock originates from the NeXT operating system. Apple took the idea from there, so they didn't invent it either.

Finder: Desktop search, the finder application has been out as long as macs have existed. The spotlight function? has been out since OSX 10.4, which as far as I know came out well before Vista.

Just to clarify, back on the original Mac's, the OS was called Finder. Windows equivalent is Explorer. The search on OSX is called Spotlight and Windows equivalent is Desktop Search and was released quite some time ago for XP...

Core animation: totally wrong idea here. Core graphics has been implemented since 10.4 and Quartz Extreme (apples hardware based GUI) has been around since OS X 10.2. Core animation just adds upon these features.

Core animation, from what I've read, appears to be pretty much the same as WPF in Windows, and Beryl in Linux. It remains to be seen who implements such features better.


Stacks: was originally supposed to be implemented in OS9, in fact apple filed a patent for it ages before any company even came out with the idea.

To my knowledge, Apple do get credit for this; but I've fiddled with similar ideas and it's really nothing that special really.

So, before you go complaining about people ACCURATELY comparing all three OS's, you might want to get yourself a little better educated about them.

Yeah, you might wanna do that yourself too...

FloatingFatMan said,

The dock originates from the NeXT operating system. Apple took the idea from there, so they didn't invent it either.

You do realize how stupid you sound when you say that, right? You do know who founded NeXT don't you?

roadwarrior said,

You do realize how stupid you sound when you say that, right? You do know who founded NeXT don't you?

It doesn't make my comment any less valid. NeXT developed the dock as part of NeXTSTEP OS. That Apple later bought out NeXT, and took their OS and eventually turned it into OSX, means nothing except that they couldn't create their own OS.

Jobs isn't a programmer, he's an administrator; no way did he design the dock feature.