QUOTE(stringfellow @ Feb 2 2010, 11:18 AM)
Look, I did say OSX optimizations, and to elaborate further, optimizations that would be in place to take advantage to the fact that it is now touchscreen, and in tablet form. If Apple say they can do the iWork suite in touchscreen format, why cant the other suites? Logic Pro/Express is screaming for this, as well as touching up pictures on Aperture, or fixing timelines in Final Cut Pro/Express. While you're out of the office or offsite, simpler forms of manipulations of the controls on these apps can be done on the tablet, and once you get back to the office, docking it back with the Mac Pro, you can you the tablet itself as HID for the fullblown version on its big brother.
In regards to the Pro Apps, ever tried running any of them on a Macbook White?QUOTE(stringfellow @ Feb 2 2010, 11:18 AM)
The key here is optimization, or if you wanna go one step further, a whole new UI for Mac OS X. Think of it as a layering over the underpinings of the actual OS X, just like how HTC skins the WinMo with its Sense UI. Similar horrified looks and expressions were seen when the mouse was introduced, and look where we are now. The time is ripe to move on to touch-based UI.
The current implementation of what's available to produce a semblance of a touch-based input UI is exactly as what wei says "not exactly something that will be of much use on your desk or on your hands". But with such aggresive approach and audienced receptive acceptance for the already excellent touch-based interfaces on the currently available iPhones, and iPod touches, why not take this gathered momentum and move ahead further while "the food on the plate is still warm"?
EDIt: I'd love to stay and chat, but all my bags are packed and I'm ready to go. Yup, leaving on a jet plane. Hey, that's the lyric of that song innit?
Oh yes, optimizations, you've finally gotten the picture here. How much stripping down do you need to do anyways from a full desktop app? For something like this, its actually easier to start from something basic and build up from there, rather than take something big to strip down.The current implementation of what's available to produce a semblance of a touch-based input UI is exactly as what wei says "not exactly something that will be of much use on your desk or on your hands". But with such aggresive approach and audienced receptive acceptance for the already excellent touch-based interfaces on the currently available iPhones, and iPod touches, why not take this gathered momentum and move ahead further while "the food on the plate is still warm"?
EDIt: I'd love to stay and chat, but all my bags are packed and I'm ready to go. Yup, leaving on a jet plane. Hey, that's the lyric of that song innit?
Let's face it shall we, even if you're to strip down from a desktop app, you're still bound to get complaints. What more to say when they have to strip out something else later? Even more complaints?
Added on February 2, 2010, 11:28 am
QUOTE(jiidaineko @ Feb 2 2010, 11:17 AM)
honestly i couldnt picture what you have in mind. as long as the camera work/activated only at ONE direction/orientation, it should work just fine.
Of which pretty much defeats the multi orientation capabilities of the device already. Besides, ever thought of what happens when you need to fit more than 1 person into a video chat session on a screen with portrait orientation? squeeze squeeze squeeze (on the human side)QUOTE(jiidaineko @ Feb 2 2010, 11:17 AM)
that is why when you want to use it, you dont block it? why activate a camera and block the lens? o_O furthermore who on earth rotates it over and over again WHILE USING a camera.
tried using the iPod nano with the camera? Sure, nobody would want to block the lens on purpose, but the form factor does cause this to happen a lot by accident to the point that it gets annoying.This post has been edited by fyire: Feb 2 2010, 11:28 AM
Feb 2 2010, 11:26 AM
Quote
0.0295sec
0.10
6 queries
GZIP Disabled