Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: iPad  (Read 10374 times)
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5085


« Reply #40 on: February 07, 2010, 08:20:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: selsoe
How are photographics apps limited by the lack of multitasking?
I do not know for sure that this is a fundamental problem (I hope not!), but many important photographic apps seem to use multitasking, so might be hard or slow to port.

Quote from: selsoe
As for your guess: I'm pretty sure that won't happen. Mac OS is a desktop OS that doesn't present itself to a tablet format in its current form (just as Windows doesn't IMO).
I was thinking about adding touch (and multi-touch) to run on computers that also have a keyboard and mouse, for use with:
- external graphics tablets
- smart boards, now fashionable in education
- possible touch screen iMacs
- an iPad as a mobile "remote control and display", for example to display content that is stored on the Mac OS X computer, not the iPad.
- maybe someday a "MacBook Touch", a different and more expensive animal than the iPad.

Windows 7 already supports touch, so why would OS X not add it?
« Last Edit: February 07, 2010, 08:21:18 PM by BJL » Logged
shutay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« Reply #41 on: February 07, 2010, 09:11:36 PM »
ReplyReply

New netbooks coming out in the future based on the new D410 Atom processor might show some promise for those wanting to use Phocus on a netbook, although don't count on performance being stellar. The new Intel D410 Atom features a number of functions integrated directly into the processor die, dissipating 10W, compared with 24W + 4W in the case of the N270 Atom paired with the 945G chipset, so battery life should be better too and the netbook shouldn't get so hot. But most pertinent to Phocus is that the D410 Atom features an Intel GMA 3150 integrated graphics. Phocus apparently has limited compatibility with Intel's 3100 integrated graphics, which give some hope that it could be usable on a netbook based on a D410 Atom. However, most netbooks don't have any means to add a Firewire port, so in that sense, you will still have to keep a lookout for a model that has an ExpressCard slot so that you can add a Firewire card to it. Plus those 1024 x 600 displays would be rather cramped for Phocus... Processor performance is the same as an Atom N280 though. No increase in clock speed.
Logged
selsoe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #42 on: February 08, 2010, 03:40:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJL
I do not know for sure that this is a fundamental problem (I hope not!), but many important photographic apps seem to use multitasking, so might be hard or slow to port.

I think you are confusing multitasking with multithreading. Multitasking is the ability to run several processes or applications at once, whereas multithreading allows an application to perform several tasks at the same time or distribute a task over several processor cores. I think the iPad supports multithreading, but you still shouldn't expect it to run heavy duty photo apps, just as a netbook can't. Applications doesn't support multitasking, operating systems does.

Quote
Windows 7 already supports touch, so why would OS X not add it?

Because it's a bad idea. The interface in Mac OS and Windows are not made to be navigated by fingers, but by keyboard (shortcuts) and a mouse/trackpad. It just gives users a bad experience if they have to navigate a desktop OS with their fingers.

Mac OS already have some touch support in its development frameworks and the trackpad on the MacBooks also have multitouch support, but if Mac OS ever (and I have a hard time believeing that it will happen) will end up on a tablet, it will be with a vastly different interface and developers would still have to rewrite their apps to support the (multi)touch interface properly - and then we're pretty much back to the iPad.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5085


« Reply #43 on: February 08, 2010, 12:52:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: selsoe
Because it's [adding touch] a bad idea. The interface in Mac OS and Windows are not made to be navigated by fingers, but by keyboard (shortcuts) and a mouse/trackpad. It just gives users a bad experience if they have to navigate a desktop OS with their fingers.
Please reread what I said: I am talking mainly about _adding_ support for touch to the OS on top of the mouse and keyboard interfaces that are already present. How is _adding_ an extra interface option a bad idea?

Some people are using Wacam Bamboo Touch tablets in place of a mouse, apparently liking the touch control options. Perhaps many of these are people who, unlike you, have got used to using touch controls on MacBooks or such and at least sometimes prefer them to keyboard and mouse controls. Anyway, I will trust the judgement of MicroSoft and Apple over yours on whether there is a market for touch interfaces in computers.

Of course, device drivers can already do this, but once many Mac OS X users are using touch interfaces, providing common tools for it in the OS is a natural step.
Logged
selsoe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #44 on: February 09, 2010, 02:52:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJL
Please reread what I said: I am talking mainly about _adding_ support for touch to the OS on top of the mouse and keyboard interfaces that are already present. How is _adding_ an extra interface option a bad idea?

It's a bad idea because it doesn't help the users. Being a software developer myself, I know the value of not adding a feature for the sake of the feature. There is no purpose of adding a feature unless it makes sense. In its current form, I don't think Mac OS is ready for it, just as I don't think Windows is. That is how adding and extra interface option is a bad idea and that is why the tablet concept died many times in Microsoft's hands.

Quote
Some people are using Wacam Bamboo Touch tablets in place of a mouse, apparently liking the touch control options. Perhaps many of these are people who, unlike you, have got used to using touch controls on MacBooks or such and at least sometimes prefer them to keyboard and mouse controls.

The Bamboo Touch is basically just a trackpad like the ones on the Macbooks (which I am very familiar with). It's great for pointing and clicking, but it's not your finger that is on the screen, it's a small arrow controlled by your finger. If you put your finger on the screen, it's a very different game because your finger is big and doesn't end in a point. Also, I don't think that those people use the Bamboo Touch to write an e-mail or a 10 page report.
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 940



WWW
« Reply #45 on: February 09, 2010, 03:02:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Occasionally for amusement I demonstrate Phocus exporting fast JPEGS to an iPhone during tethered shooting.

It started off as a bit of a joke but a few photographers who have seen me do it, have started to use it for real in the studio.

It keeps others away from the shooting computer and the piece of software I use (Airsharing) also acts as a webserver so you could have multiple computers/iphones/iPads all looking at the same shoot as it progresses.

Most of the time of course they export to something decent like another laptop, but the principle is the same.

The benefit of the iPad is larger screen, easier to pass round than a laptop...etc etc.

Also I believe the iPad is a gift to many home automation companies... Large colour display, touchscreen, SDK for developing Apps, WiFi...  All for less than a price they could build if for themselves.  I imagine we will see quite a few bolted to peoples walls, controlling media / music, one in the kitchen for recipes...

But as a hardcore tethered machine?  No I don't think so.  I am sure that was never in Apple's perspective.

Just my 0.02.


David


Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
selsoe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #46 on: February 09, 2010, 03:27:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
Occasionally for amusement I demonstrate Phocus exporting fast JPEGS to an iPhone during tethered shooting.

It started off as a bit of a joke but a few photographers who have seen me do it, have started to use it for real in the studio.

It keeps others away from the shooting computer and the piece of software I use (Airsharing) also acts as a webserver so you could have multiple computers/iphones/iPads all looking at the same shoot as it progresses.

Interesting. How do you set it up?
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 940



WWW
« Reply #47 on: February 09, 2010, 05:07:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: selsoe
Interesting. How do you set it up?

1)  Shoot an image tethered.  Export as 'Fast JPEG Preview' to destination of your choice (Network drive, iPhone *Use Airsharing*, FTP server, iDisk, DropBox...etc etc!)

2) Set Phocus to 'Export new Images Automatically'.  (File Menu)

3) Shoot!

4) Image export and transfer automatically to your chosen device.

Airsharing Ap works quite nicely, as does Dropbox which is faster than iDisk.  All would work on the iPad.

Airsharing is particularly smart as it also acts as a local webserver allowing multiple users to view the shoot from any device with a browser on the same network.  See screen dump...


Main Menu *Folder Structure*
[attachment=20141:Screen_s...11.01.59.png]

Image List..  *Only one in this case*
[attachment=20142:Screen_s...11.02.03.png]

Image...
[attachment=20143:Screen_s...11.02.07.png]






David


Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
rolleiflexpages
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 164



WWW
« Reply #48 on: February 09, 2010, 05:53:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
Occasionally for amusement I demonstrate Phocus exporting fast JPEGS to an iPhone during tethered shooting.
David

Isn't this what Leaf has already been doing for a while, first with the iPaQ Windows PC and lately with the iPhone? ;-)

Logged

Pascal Heyman - www.rolleiflexpages.com
Rolleiflex 6008 AF + DB20p, Rolleiflex Hy6, Leaf AFi-II 7
selsoe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #49 on: February 09, 2010, 06:00:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rolleiflexpages
Isn't this what Leaf has already been doing for a while, first with the iPaQ Windows PC and lately with the iPhone? ;-)

Yes.
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 940



WWW
« Reply #50 on: February 09, 2010, 07:14:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rolleiflexpages
Isn't this what Leaf has already been doing for a while, first with the iPaQ Windows PC and lately with the iPhone? ;-)


Errrr... yes.. I am not trying to score points, just pointing something out.

Also this does not have to reply on any other applications if you simply want to export across a network.

Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #51 on: February 09, 2010, 09:06:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
Errrr... yes.. I am not trying to score points, just pointing something out.

Also this does not have to reply on any other applications if you simply want to export across a network.


This is great.  Really useful stuff!  I'll rent a Blad and check it out.  Phocus is a free download?

This functionality should be shouted from the roof tops, as the difference in systems really comes down to workflow.

T
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 940



WWW
« Reply #52 on: February 09, 2010, 10:18:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: TMARK
This is great.  Really useful stuff!  I'll rent a Blad and check it out.  Phocus is a free download?

This functionality should be shouted from the roof tops, as the difference in systems really comes down to workflow.

T

Yep, Phocus is a free download from hasselblad.com.  Full version.

Hope it works out for you!

David

Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
Nick-T
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 462


« Reply #53 on: February 09, 2010, 01:33:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: TMARK
This is great.  Really useful stuff!  I'll rent a Blad and check it out.  Phocus is a free download?

This functionality should be shouted from the roof tops, as the difference in systems really comes down to workflow.

T
Tmark
David showed me this some time ago and it's a life saver on shoots where there are a lot of people. I send the jpg previews across the network to an older machine (set up for clients to surf do email etc) and use quick look to view the jpgs. On the last shoot I did only the AD stood by the capture machine and the other 8 or so luvvies watched the images on the other machine (which is about 20ft away). BTW the previews were coming up approx 3 seconds after they were shot.
Nick-T
Logged

BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5085


« Reply #54 on: February 10, 2010, 12:50:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: selsoe
It's a bad idea because it doesn't help the users.
I suppose we just disagree on how much end-user interest there would be to adding a touch interface (touch screens and such) to the keyboard and mouse interface.

But since you seem to know something about the internals, what do you think of another possible direction: developing iPhone OS into a more capable "touch device OS" that can handle as much software as possible, and so be as much of a "laptop/netbook alternative" as possible, at least for tasks that are not too heavily keyboard dependent?

Maybe it is better approach for highly mobile device to build on the 140,000 "touch friendly" iPhone OS Apps already available, and port other apps from Mac OS X as appropriate to a "touch plus some keyboard usage" interface.

Any idea how difficult it would be to adapt Mac OS X software to a non-multi-tasking OS like iPhone OS?

Would it make sense to add multi-tasking to a future "iPad OS"?
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3645



WWW
« Reply #55 on: February 10, 2010, 01:35:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJL
Any idea how difficult it would be to adapt Mac OS X software to a non-multi-tasking OS like iPhone OS?

Would it make sense to add multi-tasking to a future "iPad OS"?

The iPhone is basically running MacOS X, but the multi-tasking features have been restricted to the Apple apps in order to cut down on CPU load and memory usage.
Also, the programming model is much uglier than on Mac OS X, in particular no garbage collector seems to be provided -
 

Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
selsoe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #56 on: February 10, 2010, 02:23:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJL
I suppose we just disagree on how much end-user interest there would be to adding a touch interface (touch screens and such) to the keyboard and mouse interface.

Apple isn't controlled by end-user interest (if so, Flash would have been on the iPhone years ago), they make (the right) decisions and the users follow.

Quote
But since you seem to know something about the internals, what do you think of another possible direction: developing iPhone OS into a more capable "touch device OS" that can handle as much software as possible, and so be as much of a "laptop/netbook alternative" as possible, at least for tasks that are not too heavily keyboard dependent?

I definitely believe that the iPhone OS will become much more capable that it is today, because the iPad platform calls for a lot more advanced OS features than the iPhone does. As it is now, the iPad is running pretty much like an iPhone with a more fitting user interface. As it is developed more, I think it will stand out more clearly as an alternative to laptops and its uses will become more apparant.

Quote
Any idea how difficult it would be to adapt Mac OS X software to a non-multi-tasking OS like iPhone OS?

I guess it's mostly a question of adapting the UI and power consumption, but once you do that you have to deal with how to run regular Mac OS applications satisfactory and then I think it will quickly become apparant that it's not worth it.

Quote
Would it make sense to add multi-tasking to a future "iPad OS"?

I don't think multitasking in itself is a goal, I think it would make sense if can be done without compromising battery time significantly AND if it improves the user experience significantly. The fact is that today it is extremely fast to switch from one App on the iPhone to another and since apps can save their states when you quit them, the giant leap you would get from multitasking is not that giant. However I recognize the need to run applications in the background, for instance Skype or some music streaming application. This is not possible today and on the iPad it may pose a problem in the future that apps cannot run in the background. But looking at the platform today, I really don't see how it's become such a big issue. I think many people focus more on the missing check mark on the spec sheet rather on how multitasking would impact the user experience.
Logged
gwhitf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 811


« Reply #57 on: February 10, 2010, 02:29:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nick-T
On the last shoot I did only the AD stood by the capture machine and the other 8 or so luvvies watched the images on the other machine

I'm going in the complete opposite direction -- I'm looking for one of those Polarizing Filters for my 17", so that only the AD (who's standing in direct line of sight of the monitor), can see the laptop screen. It's tough enough with one other opinion -- I can't imagine eight others. All it takes is for the girlfriend of the client to say something like, "Oh, I don't like her hair", and everybody goes scurrying around in a panic, like a flock of geese who've just seen a predator.

Technology is good -- up to a point.
Logged
selsoe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #58 on: February 10, 2010, 02:34:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: eronald
Also, the programming model is much uglier than on Mac OS X, in particular no garbage collector seems to be provided

The programming model is just as pretty as it is on Mac OS X. The API's provided for the iPhone OS are extremely dangerous and covers about as much as Mac OS does. It's true that it doesn't support garbage collection, Mac OS didn't until version 10.5 (Leopard). However, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Automatic garbage collection uses more memory than manual garbage collection does. If you know your ways around memory management, it doesn't pose a problem plus potentially, you save memory (which may turn out as sparse on the iPhone). Many modern applications for Mac OS doesn't use garbage collection even though it's available.

If some of you are wondering: Garbage collection is a way for the operating system to help the developer clean up memory that is no longer in use. If an operating system doesn't support automatic garbage collection, the developers have to free up memory themselves when they are done with it, otherwise it will end up in a zombie state where the system can't use it until the application quits. However automatic garbage collection have a memory overhead because it can't free up memory as quickly as the developer could if he did it himself.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad