[Millennium]

Originally Posted by ambush

I was talking about svg style or XUL style. Something open.

SVG isn't anywhere near sufficient for a GUI, nor is its cousin XForms, and as for XUL... well, go to the OSX forum and tell people you want XUL implemented throughout the OS, and see what kinds of reactions you get. What is this "open" of which you speak? How will it magically improve things? How is the property list format any less "open", anyway? There are open implementations of the property-list standard, and once that's done all that's left is unwrapping into the GUI itself.

Out of curiosity, what did you think of the Renaissance project that I mentioned? Would that be satisfactory?

[iomatic]

Again, I attest, why would it matter to a layperson, heck a programmer even, how a GUI's underpinnings are built? XML/XAML/Straight-up C code…?

What can Vista do that the Mac OS doesn't already rock?

[Rolling Bones]

No Anti-Virus in Vista...

"For unspecified business (not technical) reasons, Microsoft will sell anti-virus protection to consumers through its OneCare online backup and security service."

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/30/1941243

[Ganesha]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

No Anti-Virus in Vista...

"For unspecified business (not technical) reasons, Microsoft will sell anti-virus protection to consumers through its OneCare online backup and security service."

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/30/1941243

Business Reasons:

#1: You make more money selling monthly subscriptions to OneCare then you do giving it away for free.
#2: It makes Vista seem more secure. Hey we don't need no anti-virus!

[- - e r i k - -]

#3: Pressure from existing makers of anti-virus software.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by 11011001

Maybe this XML thing is such a big thing for the Windows people, because they are use to expressing a lot of their interfaces in code. I know this would be a big thing for Java if it natively supported it (I know there are 3rd party solutions).

That's my guess, and as far as that goes, XML does get the job done. There are even simpler solutions, though. If only there were bindings to something other than Tk, Tcl scripts would be an even better format: it's compact but very easy to read, and it has the major advantage of being able to be built up interactively in a shell: you can modify everything on the fly with very simple commands. And before you get after me for the "code" aspect of things, yes, there are WYSYWIG GUI builders for Tk, so presumably something similar could be done for other GUI frameworks.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by iomatic

Again, I attest, why would it matter to a layperson, heck a programmer even, how a GUI's underpinnings are built? XML/XAML/Straight-up C code…?

What can Vista do that the Mac OS doesn't already rock?

These cute 3D buttons that look like scrolls.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

These cute 3D buttons that look like scrolls.

Screenshot, please? I'm not sure I understand what the deal is here.

[Chuckit]

Somebody posted a video earlier in the thread demonstrating how Sparkle (the XAML authoring tool) allows you to create radio buttons that look like 3D models of paper without writing any code.

http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=115387

[Millennium]

That sounds like something you'd use Quartz Composer to do in Tiger.

[theolein]

Originally Posted by Millennium

That sounds like something you'd use Quartz Composer to do in Tiger.

The problem is that QC doesn't do GUI controls, whereas XAML does.

In fact Microsoft is really pushing XAML for a number of reasons, almost none of which have to do with how much better or worse it is than a NIB file.

Microsoft's claims:

1. XAML will work both in the browser (only IE of course, and with a plug-in in a limited fashion in Safari) and for stand alone software. You'll use XAML for every kind of GUI in Windows.
2. XAML is a standard. I don't actually know whether it is an ECMA standard but the specs are easily available. In other words you CAN (Tetenal, don't wet yourself on this point, please) write your own GUIs by hand, as you can in Java, but, AFAIK, NIBs are not a standard and the specs are not open. There are often times when you want to change the code for a GUI by hand (optimising for instance), and it would be nice to be able to do it by hand with NIBs (This point is moot if Apple has released the specs to NIBs in the mean time, but I couldn't find them).
3.XAML is very flexible. I can't really judge, but from the demo of the Speakle tool and the way you can switch between the XML view and the tool view, it certainly does look that way.
4. XAML is very simple. MS, much along the lines of VB, has made doing basic GUIs as simple as creating a simple web page.

In reality, Tetenal is right in that most people won't be making GUIs by hand, but that is exactly what I was pointing to with that video link to Sparkle. Making custom controls is far beyond anything you can do with IB or XCode at the moment. I don't know how much it really matters, but MS (and the legions of developers) will use it as a reason for choosing Microsoft.

[Kerrigan]

I cannot wait until the 0-D interface.

[- - e r i k - -]

So you are saying that because developers can homebrew their own interfaces (complete with controls and everything) all developers will go Microsoft? Hah! Only if they are as stupid as Haxial.

Interface rules and guidelines are there for a reason. People already complain about visual disparity even when it's skin deep (aqua vs metal vs plastic). Forgive me if I'm jumping to conclusions, but this just sounds like "skinning" on steroids. Or perhaps acid.

[theolein]

I'm saying nothing of the sort. Microsoft is saying that XAML will cure world hunger and stop global warming. I'm saying that the tools MS is releasing are more advanced than XCode/IB at the moment. That's nothing to fall to pieces about. MS will still have its fans and Apple will have its fans, and both will argue about the relative merits of the various systems for all eternity or until one goes broke, whichever comes first.

[production_coordinator]

Microsoft has made a number of "Vista will have <insert amazing technology here>!!!" only to remove or reduce the functionality at a later time.

It seems to be a wonderful marketing tool.

[greenamp]

And twenty bucks says within one month of Vista retail the net will be cluttered with "[X]-Effect crashed my [dull little box], how do i disable it!!!!!1111111!"

[OreoCookie]

To be honest, I wouldn't know why Apple would push developers to `develop their own GUI'. They are trying developers to stick to the Interface Guidelines (although they should learn to apply them themselves, eat your own dog food).

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

To be honest, I wouldn't know why Apple would push developers to `develop their own GUI'. They are trying developers to stick to the Interface Guidelines (although they should learn to apply them themselves, eat your own dog food).

I agree. One of the things I love about OS X is that most of the applications maintain consistency. It's not perfect, but it's 10X better than Windows.

[Tomchu]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

Microsoft has made a number of "Vista will have <insert amazing technology here>!!!" only to remove or reduce the functionality at a later time.

It seems to be a wonderful marketing tool.

Yeah, and ... surprise surprise, that has only happened twice -- and both features will be released at a later date as an add-on. Unless you can find me proof of this happening more than twice in Vista's history, then your comment is just a cheap shot at FUD. :-)

[Chuckit]

Actually, supplying a precise number of times Microsoft has done the thing they are accused of doesn't let them off the hook for doing it. "This man is responsible for multiple killings!" "Your honor, my client has only murdered two men, so unless the prosecutor can find a third victim, this is merely a tawdry attempt to besmirch my client's good name."

[goMac]

I don't think us developers are looking to create our own widgets. I think we're asking to have widget support in Quartz Composer.

As it is, [b]Apple is forcing us to create our own widgets for Quartz Composer.[b] We're the ones asking for consistency support.

[11011001]

Indeed, and I wish Quartz Composer worked with Core Data. As it is, if you want to use it with Core Data, you first have to convert whatever it is you want to look at to a NSDictionary or a NSArray first. I've really jumped onto this Core Data thing, and am loving it, but there were things I was looking forward to trying in Quartz that are impractical and overly complicated. I've decided to give up, and write it all in OpenGL and Core Image. I have some custom views that need better performance that Quartz alone can offer. On the bright side though, Quartz Composer did give me a good idea how all of this stuff is working.

[iomatic]

*Dusts off archaeologist's hat*

So how does Core Animation compare with XAML (I realize one is an engine, and the other is a language, but bear with me)? A Microsoft-y relative (WAAAY high up) pronounces how awesome and mind-blowing Vista will be, logical fallacies, pejorative usage, etc., yadda yadda. Is this true? (He also told me they're still on time--snicker.) How is the interface and graphics engine going to blow doors off the Mac OS? Current and Leopard?

Apple - Apple - Mac OS X - Leopard Sneak Peek - Core Animation

[Chuckit]

From the sound of it, Vista's graphics engine will be impressive indeed. As for how it compares to Core Animation — well, Core Animation is still under NDA, so nobody can disclose that. Tentatively, it sounds like they will probably be pretty close to neck-and-neck.

[mac1896]

OK, I'll admit that I'm not much of a Windows user (except at work, have to use MasterCAM). I''ve been using and upgrading my Macs for the last 6 years, and I kinda enjoy using either 9 or X.

But, possibly, I can be persuaded to really, really LIKE Windows.

Just tell me, with the touted as "superb" graphics that is running in Vista.........

If I get a new Virus while running Vista, will the graphics kick in like some psychedelic desktop dream moments before my pc melts down.........

.....or will a "Quartz-like" little AOL kind of guy run around on my desktop, rendered in 3-D flames, screaming, moments before his last bit of conciousness fades away, along with my HDD..........

[iomatic]

Microsoft Vista: A video play that will dwarf Google, Apple. - December 1, 2006


So 3D charts! Whoopee!

I mean practically everything mentioned as some sort of innovation (recognizing devices, media editing, and the above-mentioned 3D charts) has pretty much been done on the Mac side if not recently, freaking years ago. Except for Sideshow: whoop-de-feckin'-do.

So diddly what? Because of Microsoft's marketshare, it's more significant? Yeah, well, it's still half-baked Microsoft ideas. Sigh. I mean, what am I missing here?

I hate dirty companies that sully the world with their moronic, diluted copy-cat crap.



Please, can we end Microsoft?

[Love Calm Quiet]

I'm not really familiar with this Vista version. Is that gonna be 10.4.9? or 10.5.0 ? Will it make my PB G4 snappier?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

From the sound of it, Vista's graphics engine will be impressive indeed. As for how it compares to Core Animation — well, Core Animation is still under NDA, so nobody can disclose that. Tentatively, it sounds like they will probably be pretty close to neck-and-neck.

CoreAnimation and Vista's graphics engine are for now in different leagues. I've used both, and obviously on the OS X side I"ll have to stick to publicly known information.

Vista's graphics engine is really more than just a graphics engine. It's a new way of designing GUI's that at the very least catches it up with Mac OS X's Interface Builder. Windows GUI's created in Avalon are stored in XAML files, so they can be used on any platform or a web browser. You can even use Avalon GUI's on the web in a very Flash like fashion. Avalon fully supports mixing 2D and 3D environments. You can put 2D interface widgets into a 3D environment.

Core Animation is Apple's answer to Avalon, and from a technical standpoint, it's basically the same thing. From a developer who's working with the API's standpoint... the edge goes to Microsoft. One thing that annoys me is Microsoft has built a lot of tools to allow you to graphically compose rich Avalon based environments. Sparkle, which is Microsoft's tool to build Avalon GUI's, is basically a Flash clone. It looks easy to work with, and makes it so you don't have to be a coder to build nice UI's. In fact, Microsoft is pushing the idea that UI designers working on a team will actually create the UI in Sparkle themselves, rather than just sending UI sketches and mockups to developers.

Apple has announced no such sort of tools yet. Just a framework to write code for. I really like the idea of GUI designers getting their hands dirty and working directly with the UI alongside the programmers, but Apple just isn't there yet.

[::maroma::]

That article said nothing new. And most of the crap they noted are already in the MacOS. God I hate ignorant journalists.

Also, this article is assuming that Vista will be flawless and will be adopted by everyone. This won't happen. The OS can have a billion shiny buttons and 3D graphs and animations, but if it sucks balls no one will use it.

Vista will not revolutionize the video market. It will not bring forth a new era of video into the PC market. I don't get why people don't realize that MS doesn't do this sort of thing. MS follows. They always have, and they always will. Let Apple do what they've always done, which is lead the industry. MS will copy and follow. Same old story.

[PowerPc = Pwnage]

lol, I was looking at a picture of vista, like all of the windows doing various things, and right in the middle of the screen in bold font, it says: PLEASE WAIT, I love it!

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by ::maroma:: 

That article said nothing new. And most of the crap they noted are already in the MacOS. God I hate ignorant journalists.

Seconded. That article was just beyond retarded in it's "Vista will dwarf Google, Apple" statement. Nothing I could gleam from that article or what I have seen from Vista is anything near what Apple or even Google is capable of.

[macroy]

Got a copy from our MSDN folks this week... so far I like it. But I've yet to do anything with it since its been a real busy week. However, my first words when I booted it up after installation was "wow, they turned my HP into a Mac!!" Which got a few chuckles from teh folks around me.

The first thing I can say is that it looks pretty impressive so far. Except for one thing, anytime you do something that may have a "security" implication, you get the "you are trying to do this, are you sure?" ... but it doesn't ask for any authentication (maybe because I'm local admin?). Just seems a bit annoying. I'm sure I can turn it off... but like I said, I haven't really sat down and looked around yet.

Oh, and Office 2007 rocks.

[goMac]

I won't use Vista yet. The compatibility sucks. Can't run anything on it.