Official WWDC 2004 discussion

By Leif
in Apple (macOS)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Rising Star

am_fek

Posted
Posted
Might I kindly remind you that Apple recently had a series of banners implying that Microsoft will be ripping off Tiger when Longhorn comes out.

<snip!>

Spin it however you want, Apples attitude in these areas is juvenile and cheap at best.  OS X is a nice OS, yes.  Apple hardware is pretty good as well.  But if Microsoft was doing half the crap Apple is pulling right now, there would be a riot over it.

I love your rootie-toot snobbery.. "might I kindly remind you.." Yeah, whatever.

Might I kindly remind you, after you so stupidly used the LaunchBar example, and now imply that MS would never do the same thing; that they are about to do it by killing AppRocket off with WinFS.

You'd better believe they're going to claim WinFS as a breakthrough in the same way Apple claims Spotlight is a breakthrough. So if Spotlight kills LaunchBar and Apple are hypocrites for claiming innovation, how is Microsoft NOT just as bad for their inevitable claims of innovation when they 'kill' AppRocket? AppRocket does exactly the same thing as LaunchBar.

"Spin it however you want".. okay, I think I will! Using your own flawed logic, Microsoft is about to do the same thing you used to defend them, and the same thing for which you termed Apple juvenile and cheap 'at best'.

Thanks for clearing that up! Might I kindly remind you how silly this all is?

Community Regular

gawdflesh

Posted
Posted

Might I kindly remind you that WinFS is what, 2-3 years away? Tiger is 6 -months- away. If/When Microsoft do that, then I'll criticize them the same way, which I've stated about a bazillion goddamn times, if you weren't so blinded by your own idiotic fanboyism to actually attempt to grasp a contrary thought that may perhaps contradict your Apple worship.

"stupidly", eh? So we've gotten down to childish namecalling.

What's stupid is when a braindead zealot can't take two screenshots, put them side by side, and simply say "hey, they look strikingly similar. That's pretty screwed up". Especially when the two programs in question perform the exact same function. Some people can see that that's messed up. Even a few reality-minded Apple fans can see it for what it is. You'd think you could see that, but then again, I'm sure it's probably hard to see much of anything with your head lodged deeply enough in Steve Jobs' ass that your tasting what he ate for lunch.

Veteran

session

Posted
Posted
Might I kindly remind you that WinFS is what, 2-3 years away?  Tiger is 6 -months- away.  If/When Microsoft do that, then I'll criticize them the same way, which I've stated about a bazillion goddamn times, if you weren't so blinded by your own idiotic fanboyism to actually attempt to grasp a contrary thought that may perhaps contradict your Apple worship.

Never mind. Microsoft's not gonna make it anyways! They said that (about WinFS) earlier too.

Grand Master

aristotle-dude

Posted
Posted

Spotlight technology at Apple first appeared in iTunes and then Preview.app for Panther. This technology did not get copied from Quicksilver or Launchbar but rather Live query from BeOS. Lest we forget that one of the guys behind the metadata support in Panther's Journaled Filesystem worked at Be Inc.

Enough of this Quicksilver stuff. The developer of Quicksilver is excited about the new search framework.

If I hear someone say Apple ripped off Smoothstripes, I'm going to scream. How could Apple steal Aqua? Come on people.

Grand Master

PureEdit

Posted
Posted
Spotlight technology at Apple first appeared in iTunes and then Preview.app for Panther. This technology did not get copied from Quicksilver or Launchbar but rather Live query from BeOS. Lest we forget that one of the guys behind the metadata support in Panther's Journaled Filesystem worked at Be Inc.

Enough of this Quicksilver stuff. The developer of Quicksilver is excited about the new search framework.

If I hear someone say Apple ripped off Smoothstripes, I'm going to scream. How could Apple steal Aqua? Come on people.

Very True.

I am not even upset that they took the basic idea from konfab, I always hated that app and it looks like apple has made the idea work a lot better.

Experienced

rstroud

Posted
Posted

Seriously, you all can analyze all you want...oh my gosh, that Ford car has four wheels, they must have copied GM. Ya'll need to calm down, every company borrows an idea now and then. Fanboyism aside, we all need to step away from our computers now and then. There is more to life than Tiger, Longhorn, Apple, Microsoft...so let's all act like civilized, adult human beings.

All that aside, I'll say it again, if I had money, I'd buy a mac...but I'm stuck with my Dell...ahhh well.

Mentor

macman87

Posted
Posted
After watching the entire presentation I have concluded one thing; OSX is far more advanced then Longhorn, in fact it's years ahead of it. Microsoft has a long way before they can get anything close to Tiger's performance and features.

how?

spotlight ( i dunno about the tech) but seems to apples answer to winfs. and core image is agian apples answer to avalon. yes, tiger is going to ship before longhorn, but its not years ahead.

Grand Master

Chad

Posted
Posted
Okay, that is all well and fine. But you have to admit that Dashboard and Konfabulator look almost exactly alike, no? I am not suggesting that they sue Apple or anything, I just would have appreciated it if Apple maybe bought Konfabulator and made it better or hired Arlo.

Yes, they have. But the semi-transparent black box with the full size icons in the middle of the screen, all in one line with a 5px white border around them changing the transparency of the box within was something new. Lite switch were the original creators and Apple's implementation of this feature was 99 percent the exact same. The general rule when borrowing code or graphics is that for legality it has to be changed at least 30 percent right? cmd+tab was not even 2 percent changed. I am not suggesting Apple sat down and stole their code, but this is pretty clear where they got their idea, same with Konfabulator. I am not suggesting that it is a bad idea or that Apple's implementation is some how worse than the original, but it would have been nice if they would have at least given some credit where credit is due not even mentioning approaching the developers for a license agreement.

So let's follow your logic Superfula. "No, that graphic is not copyright because you just used pictures that someone else made and those pictures have colors in them that God made, so really, your work is just a rip of God. So there ya go, I can copy whatever I want and its fine."

Nice try.

Yes, neither are text-editors. That doesn't mean that I can find a copy of MS Word's source, rename it to Josh's Word and then redistribute it and call it my own.

Okay?

So what does this conclude? No one can ever create anything original anymore because no matter what it has already been done in some shape or form?

Sure they look similar. Konfab and DesktopX look similar too, but you don't see Stardock crying a river 8 miles long. I think Apple DID make it better. For one, I'm sure it will greatly improve upon the ram hog that Konfag is. Perhaps the biggest improvement is that the widgets aren't always showing. You use what you need and their gone.

I'm not talking about how the app switcher looks....I guess you were. I was speaking on the actual implementation of it. In the end, we don't know where Apple got the ideas from. They could have some guy in a hole out in Cali thinking all this stuff up. I do know that some sort of app switcher was one of the biggest requests of Mac users at that time.

You're missing where I was going. I don't understand how the Konfab or Liteswitch guys can be upset at all, since their programs is based ENTIRELY off someone elses ideas. Their ****ed because they stole the idea first. Aka, Bill Gates from Pirates of Silicon Valley.

Watson... Sherlock 2 was just inline with the natural progression of the application. I have no doubt some of the channels in Watson and Sherlock 2 were borrowed from each other, but as far as copying the whole program? No way.

Proficient

SPeedY_B

Posted
Posted

Not sure if this has been posted (haven't read the full thread, sorry)

I wanted to blog briefly to clear up what the widgets actually are written in. They are Web pages, plain and simple (with extra features thrown in for added measure). Apple's own web site says "build your own widgets using the JavaScript language", but that's sort of misleading. The widgets are HTML+CSS+JS. They are not some JS-only thing.

In other words, each widget is just a web page, and so you have the full power of WebKit behind each one... CSS2, DOM2, JS, HTML, XMLHttpRequest, Flash, Quicktime, Java, etc. I'll have a lot more to say later on, but I thought it important to clear that up right up front, since a lot of people were asking me about it in email and such.

:)
Mentor

macman87

Posted
Posted

steve jobs on konfabulator.

Excuse me, but Mac OS 9 had desktop Widgets long before Konfabulator did. Apple was the first to use the term Widgets as well. We never complained when the Konfabulator guys "ripped off Apple" and I think its a bit unfair for them to be claiming we ripped them off now.

Steve

apparently one of the guys at konfab wrote to steve and he replied. :o

more here: http://www2.konfabulator.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3966

Veteran

Bling3k12

Posted
Posted

I posted this in another thread but...

I'd hate to be a developer using a new 15" PowerBook... look how far I get into the install!

Yippee!!!

Little clearer

The Panic is at the top line...

Unable to find driver for this platform: "PowerBook5,4"

Whatever driver it is I am uncertain of but... looks like Tiger is just far too buggy from the start for this user!

Grand Master

Fusion

Posted
Posted
Sure they look similar. Konfab and DesktopX look similar too, but you don't see Stardock crying a river 8 miles long.

No, it was a mere 2 pages. :laugh:

I'm with you on the rest though. I agree they don't have much room to cry about it, but you can feel for a smaller company who has tried to push a product only to have a bigger one come flush it out (which hasn't even happened yet but is much more of a possibility now).

Even so, I am sure someone at Apple has seen Konfabulator before. Why would they just not hire Arlo or buy out the program instead of spending all the money on developing their own? I wonder if there is some advantage for them by starting from scratch, from a business or creative perspective?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.