advertisement

Weblog:   Two Interesting Points of View on Dashboard
Subject:   Current Debate Raises Questions
Date:   2004-06-30 09:36:58
From:   joshuawait
Good observations about the nature of relationships between independent developers and Apple developers.


I think the latest action by Apple triggered a bit of fear in me, because it seems like a trend. First Apple uses methods for delivering web content seen clearly in Watson and now Apple will use methods for delivering desk accessory content seen clearly in Konfabulator.


I find it hard to know how to respond to my fear. Apparently, a number of people have responding with anger rather than with discussion.


I found Watson slow, clunky and unusable in it's early versions with a dialup connection. Now that I have a broadband connection, I no longer have an interest in the method of content delivery seen in Watson and Sherlock.


My wife enjoys Konfabulator quite a bit, but I find that it's more of a distraction than a useful way of delivering content. I simply wouldn't ever pay the money for the convenience.


Both of these applications are not compelling features for me. I wouldn't upgrade to an operating system to get widget X. However, simply because I, or other people, don't find utility in the particular methods delivery of content delivery does that justify Apple's actions? No, not really. And I fear that their actions may actually squash innovation rather than encourage it.


On the other hand, a web browser is also a method of content delivery. I believe the proliferation of browsers provides opportunity for a better application of the technology. At what point is the proliferation of an application of technology a natural part of developing it's usefulness and at what one point is diminishing the artistic efforts of another person?
Full Threads Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 4 of 4.

  • Current Debate Raises Questions
    2004-06-30 10:11:31  vinbarnes [Reply | View]

    I think the latest action by Apple triggered a bit of fear in me, because it seems like a trend. First Apple uses methods for delivering web content seen clearly in Watson and now Apple will use methods for delivering desk accessory content seen clearly in Konfabulator.

    I thought that iTunes was a 3rd party app that Apple purchased... Is that not the case? Are there any other examples?
    • Current Debate Raises Questions
      2004-07-01 07:53:37  bbrown [Reply | View]

      I think WindowShade was integrated into OS 9. And Stickies was a third-party product integrated into OS X.
    • Current Debate Raises Questions
      2004-06-30 13:46:59  joshuawait [Reply | View]

      iTunes was previous the Cassady & Greene SoundJam MP3 player.

      Apple bought SuperClock! back in the System 6 or System 7 days and then integrated into the operating system.

      Apple, I think, though I may be incorrect, bought the original code for Final Cut Pro before the product went to market which also formed part of the code for iMovie.

      Software development is a process of mulching ideas and code.
      • Current Debate Raises Questions
        2004-07-01 04:21:28  dscotson [Reply | View]

        SoundJam was marketed by Cassady & Greene but developed by an Apple employee in his spare time before being brought under Apple's banner. He is apparently now in charge of Apple's music related software development.

        Final Cut Pro started at Macromedia, with a team lead by an ex-Adobe employee before being bought by Apple.

        Apple also recently bought the Flurry screensaver from a student.

        But I'm with John Gruber (Daring Fireball) on this and personally think Konfabulator, LiteSwitch X and Watson's creators were mainly kicking up a fuss to create publicity and expressing sour grapes rather than because they had a genuine claim on Apple.
Showing messages 1 through 4 of 4.