digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Mac OS X Leopard's "Quick Look" Leapfrogs Vista in File-Preview Power

musingsfrommars.org — With "Quick Look," Apple is leaping way ahead of Microsoft's Vista in giving users an easy way to preview and interact with files right in the Finder. Quick Look invokes a gorgeous, translucent preview window of amazing flexibility and utility. This article's screen movies and images demo a few of these new Leopard tricks.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -22/+18Looks amazing! Let's hope those top secret features are too. Looking forward to Leopard. I think it will be released in Febuary.
  • dmoney06, on 10/12/2007, -13/+15This is a feature I have really been looking for and its just another reason to look forward to Spring 2007.
    • whistlerpro, on 10/31/2007, -0/+1Little does he know... he will be waiting more than a year... eh folks?
  • fanboydcs, on 10/12/2007, -11/+11wow, that is awesome, Cant wait till macworld!
    • whistlerpro, on 10/31/2007, -0/+1don't get your hopes up, it'll only be the iPhone.
  • unloud, on 10/12/2007, -4/+38While the feature does seem useful I have to say: what on earth has happened to Apple's interface standards the past two years? Why have they increasingly hiding these features under right clicks and doing things that are so un-intuitive?

    Also, why have they gotten multiple window happy lately? They used to pride themselfs with interfaces that are easily viewable in one window and with major features available one click away...It bugs me so much because I see them implementing all of these interesting ideas in their last few operating systems, but it gets marred by the lack of simplistic sensibilities that made me fall in love with the OS originally.
    • nomore, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23I disagree. The whole UI paradigm for OS X has always been a document-based workflow (hense seperate windows) vs MS Windows which is a more task-based workflow (hense MDI)
    • Gofel, on 10/12/2007, -13/+7You sir are the only person I digg in this thread so far, for you are absolutely right.
    • polyphonic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i dont understand why tabs in either the new finder or explorer are not a given. it just seems like the next logical step.

      or even better, how about the option of apple-n docking a new finder window onto the active one so it doesn't cover up the old one? like column view, except with thumbnails and disparate directories.
    • polyphonic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@no more
      which imo would make finder more doc-based... could preview/access multiple files, then one apple-w to close both siamese finder windows
    • folletto, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"I disagree. The whole UI paradigm for OS X has always been a document-based workflow (hense seperate windows) vs MS Windows which is a more task-based workflow (hense MDI)"

      Workflow? Interesting thought.

      That's because the Mac GUI is App-centered, while the Windows GUI is Document-centered:
      * The task switches in OSX switches ALL the app in foreground, while in Windows just the selected window
      * The task manager (Cmd+Tab) on OSX switches between apps, while in Windows between windows.
      * The application menu on OSX clearly states the active application, with no equivalent in Windows that instead highlights the window on the taskbar.
      * Office on Windows opens a NEW tab for each document you open (vs old versions that have just one application tab and MDI), while in OSX you have just the same way to task switch.

      Some details:
      http://daringfireball.net/2003/05/the_problems_with_clickthrough
    • BWhaler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I agree.

      People missed the whole point of single button mouse by default, support for multi-button mouses.

      By assuming one button mouse, you couldn't hide functionality. It amazed me how people didn't get this.

      This philosophy forced Apple and software developers to develop good UI's.

      Now that they can assume two click functionality, it's rapidly becoming a windows world. "Hey just triple right click on the scroll bar to spell check."
    • TylerDurden0, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I think you mean "mice."
  • chrismcelligott, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11Thats really cool, expose is amazing and Apple is just throwing it at everything.
  • millixaw, on 10/12/2007, -21/+14Great. So far Leopard has proven to be a better OS upgrade than Vista. So I guess next year I'll buy that for my PC instead of Vista.

    Oh, wait...
  • Lazyboy0172, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11the page has seen the digg effect already...

    and i dont see why this is better than vista. in vista you can easily adjust the size of the preview in Explorer, you can preview all files from videos to pictures to text documents right in the field where the icon normally would be, and those previews are all able to be resized. and all of these previews are accessible strait from the explorer, no need to install something or open the file in a preview mode like xp.
  • billy_mumphrey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22http://duggmirror.com/apple/Mac_OS_X_Leopard_s_Quick_Look_Leapfrogs_Vista_in_File_Preview_Power/
  • arapro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7thanks for the mirror
  • kendals, on 10/12/2007, -19/+15Looks like some Windows fanbois have been through this digg before everybody else and dugg current comments down. Not surprised- if I was a fan of Vista, and it didn't have useful features like this, I'd go about trying to destroy the competition too ;)
    • ozid, on 10/12/2007, -9/+12I use Vista right now. That isn't miraculous or anything, but it does look neat. I enjoy Vista enough to not be angry at some of the cool things Apple is doing. I actually really like a lot about Vista. But I did have a Vista/Hackintosh OS X setup on this computer for a while. But it seems near impossible to ever get it running as good as even Windows Me, so I just wiped it. I'll use that Partition for Edgy Eft.

      But like I said (below?) this.... I will probably end up with a Mac or two once I get out of school and start working.
  • ozid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11i don't use OS X so maybe its a little hard for me to grasp, but if you have to right click and open it with the previewer, why not just open it anyways?

    it does look interesting though. I have always wanted a Macbook to do my casual computing on. Maybe I will get one of the next generation ones after I am out of school.
    • FunkyWitDaSysTm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2perhaps they put some sort of active badge on the icon (like the turned up corner on the icon) to be what triggers the quickview (or opt+click) rather than a contextual menu item. i'm sorry, but having to go into a context menu is a pain. i'm pretty sure, that even in that instance, there's still going to be a keyboard shortcut that i'll use more often anyhow.

      ;P
    • DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think it will change with the final release. We'll just have to wait and see what the final activation method for quick look will be. Personally, I find the stuff at the last paragraph of the article the most exciting. Finally, thumbnail previews of movies, pdf's, etc.
    • polyphonic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@ funkywitdasystm

      a kb shortcut wouldn't be that much of a benefit for me... when i'm in finder i'm typically using the trackpad clicking through things, not the keyboard, so ctrl-click wouldnt be too different from a shortcut.

      clicking the corner of the icon would be waaay rad though.
    • ronnsprocket, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4i use windows because pc's are cheaper and i use vista because i got it free. Windows Vista already has the thumbnail as a preview. for instance, now when i have a pdf or avi file on my desktop, i see a weelittle picture of my pdf file or my video.

      Oh, and this preview transluscent pane isn't alien technology. people arent going to buy a mac because they can preview stuff after they right click. especially when they already see it on Vista.

      now, i need to go get my oatmeal and get my diggin done by noon. lunch comes quick around this office
  • AzzX, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5Thumbnails any1?
  • FunkyWitDaSysTm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8am i the first to notice that the finder windows are no longer "brushed metal", but now rather have the itunes 7 interface?

    i know we all saw this coming, but now LITERALLY we see it coming...
    • FunkyWitDaSysTm, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1not that it matters much to me. i use the haxie ShapeShifter to make my windows all glassy and transparent (although still looking like finder windows). one thing i will say about vista: although it sucks goat balls (i've tried it and hate it), it does look kinda pretty. i can appreciate that microsoft at least went to the trouble to make an ugly OS far more appealing as they realized that people have to stare at their screens for a large portion of their day.
    • bobthedino, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Well yes, the brushed metal is gone (definitely a good thing) but the shade of the toolbar seems lighter than iTunes 7, and the scrollbars are definitely standard Aqua, rather than iTunes 7.
  • ChrisWickenscom, on 10/12/2007, -27/+2Wow, this is going to make me switch to a mac for sure!
    Not.
    I'm quite content to browse files on a computer that actually has functionality outside of plugging an mp3 player with crappy audio quality into it.
    • unloud, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I really have nothing to say to you except please try to use a Mac before flaming without substance, and if you have tried a Mac please explain why so many people but you feel that it's more useful than just a computer to plug an MP3 player into.

      Oh, nevermind. You were just trolling. I get it.
  • X111, on 10/12/2007, -15/+6Wow!
    Just like Linux has had for years.
    *yawn*

    • p4r4d0x, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6Yes but OSX makes it look good and makes it accessible to the masses.
    • Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10Only now it's on an OS people are actually able to use! (and it looks good)

      (Anyone who is able to operate entirely in Linux has my respect, though. Damned if I could without wanting to pull my hair out.)
  • bigtomrodney, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6If you are going to compare this feature to another platform how about comparing it to Gnome or KDE where it has been for at least 4 years? Yeah it is a nice feature but that's hardly a good comparison.
    • jstone, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3Because the Mac fanboys have to bash Windows to make themselves feel good. Admitting that there is an OS out there that runs on generic PC hardware that is as stable and MORE innovative that OS X is admitting that they were wrong when they spent all that money to buy a Mac.

      (And DON'T say that Linux is hard to use without trying either Ubuntu or Kubuntu. I actually find those two products EASIER to use than a Mac. And i know Macs; we have to use them at school and about 80-90% of the people hate them.)
    • repruhsent, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12@jstone:

      Yes, forcing users to configure every single thing on their system through a million files in /etc, each of which has a different format, is very innovative. Also forcing someone to use a damned "package manager" like Synaptic or apt-get is very innovative. It's the year 2006 people - can't we do something a little better than forcing everyone back to the 70s for command line loving every time we want to do something useful?

      Before you start, I've used Ubuntu/Kubuntu, Red Hat, Fedora, CentOS, Gentoo, Debian, SuSE and a few other distributions.
    • SanHolo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yes, Ubuntu is easy to use. But it is FAR behind the Mac and Windows when it comes to simplicity. Heck, you have to use apt-get to get WPA-2 support! How the hell am I supposed to do that if there is only a WPA-2 protectet WiFi nearby?

      Linux is great, no doubt, but it still has a very long way to go.
  • iAlex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Is this person allowed to show this? However GREAT!!!
  • slatkin, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1How is this any different than spam
  • camix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4This is cool looking and a very nice feature but honestly I'm not the kind of person that likes icons. The first thing I do is change my folder views from icons to a plain old lists with details (size, type, etc). The whole icon thing is a nice thing but I see it as more of a pain in the ass than anything else because it takes longer to scroll through directories with lots of files. Just show me the file name and the extension and allow me to sort it by name, size, type or date and I'm good with that. I don't know if anyone else would agree with me but some times less GUI is more.
    • KyleMistry, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Then just hit Command+2 or Command+3 in a Finder window with those many files.
    • leftspin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Icons allow you to represent things spatially. For example, lots of times I have files in a folder that I'd like to organize according to something other than filename, modified date, etc. For example, group by task or sub-project. I don't want to create yet another folder structure (for example, XCode source files--if you move them, you have to reconfigure your project). I usually put such folders in icon mode and make visual clusters of files. Heck, I do that on my desktop. Over there, I have a pile of URLs I should revisit, and over on the other side I have a files related to a web site I'm building.

      I think you're really missing something if you completely live in list mode, or have turned auto-arrange on.
  • fizgigtiznalkie, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3I'm no mac or windows fanboy, I run OS X, XP, Vista, Ubuntu and SUSE, but I love how when MS does it, it's copying or ripping them off, but when Apple does it, it's leapfrogging or beating them to the punch. Also, a lot of this stuff has been around for years on linux, or the linux crowd codes it within weeks of release, it'd just sometimes you have to jump through a lot of hoops to get it installed like installing the proper manufacturer's video driver and ten dependencies that with throw a warning that the other program needs X version and this program needs Y version and the other dependencies cannot be found, etc.
  • offput, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10OK, before I even look at the result page, or try to defend my statement (as I know I'll be dugg to china) I have to state that I'm neither a windows nor a mac fanboy. I use my computer to do *****.

    So, why is it that any tranlucencies in Vista are attacked, yet a Mac app can "invoke a gorgeous, translucent preview window" and be an amazing program. I think that it's a little hypocritical of Mac adherents to insult Vista and praise Mac for the exact same reason.
    • xxdesmus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Thank you for actually making a logical comment.

      The hypocrisy is just incredible sometimes.
    • weaselmaster, on 11/11/2007, -3/+7There's a lot of people in the world...

      Perhaps the people knocking windows
      and the people praising OSX
      are different people.

      Calling a room full of people hypocrites because two of them have different views is, um... interesting behavior. You look to be the fool.
    • ZachPruckowski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Translucency is neither good nor bad. It's a tool. The issue is how well it's used. In the case of Vista, a lot of the earlier complaints centered around the fact that the way Glass was implemented, it sometimes wasn't clear which window was active or which was "on top of" another. In this case, it's useful because you only have transperency when you open a preview, and only in one or two windows at once, which circumvents that confusion. It's a question of which makes the system easier to use.

      Also, Quick Look, Core Image, Quartz Extreme, and Core Animation run on a 32-64 MB graphics card, while Glass needs a 128 MB graphics card (64 MB is pushing it).
  • xxdesmus, on 11/11/2007, -8/+5That's almost laughable how useless that "feature" is.

    It takes you just as long to preview the documents using this useless feature as it would to just open the document.
    • DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Using this preview thing you could scroll through hundreds of multi-megabytes photos that would probably take a while to open all at the same time in Photoshop, for example.

      It's not just about previewing a single document.
  • Reno582, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3I don't see how more useful that is then live previews or tags
  • bikee4, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Why the doesn't ***** head Jobs Sell this OS separately?
    I could give a ***** about Apple Hardware.
    • weaselmaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The OS works well in part because it runs on a limited set of hardware.

      Let Dell, Gateway and Acer make Mac hardware, and you'd be in the same boat as windows - reduced stability, and longer development and testing time for the OS.
    • ZachPruckowski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Because Mac hardware is what pays for Mac software? I mean, Apple makes nice margins on the hardware, which funds the R&D of the OS. So essentially what you want is everything that makes Macs good, without having to pay for it. That doesn't work.
    • KyleMistry, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Then give a ***** about Apple hardware.

      Get your phrases right, fool.
  • playaj82, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Did anybody think that maybe this is just a nice feature for those people who USE OS X

    Who cares whether Vista does or does not do this any better?

    The point is that I do use OS X, and I do want this feature. If Linux or Windows already have it, great, but I want it for MY OS.
  • zacmccormick, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Preview details really aren't that useful. All of the most useful information (file size, time, extension, etc) are given to you and have been forever. When I'm looking for a file, the probability that I have no idea what I'm looking for and need the preview to find it is just about zero. If I'm looking for a movie file, the title is enough, I don't need to see frames of the video to confirm it. And for documents, I might as well just open the document, since that's what the preview window is doing...

    Vista already does too much processing of the files in explorer, and it slows it way down as a result. If you open a folder with a bunch of mp3 files or video files, it goes through them all and opens them to find certain information like length and format, which can take a while if there are hundreds of files.

    Who knows, maybe this will turn out to be useful. Does it support plugins to preview file formats not recognized out of the box? Does it slow down normal file browsing? Does it require a right click to preview? Is this really a leapfrog? or is it a gutsy move to implement something that MS could have years ago had they seen any resemblence of a gain in productivity?

  • jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2When Apple starts copying features from KDE / Konqueror, it is the sincerest form of flattery. I can't even count anymore how many things they've been 'inspired' by lately.

    Anyways, it's about time some of these lesser operating systems started 'leap frogging' to catch up with Linux. And when KDE 4 comes out, it will change everything.
    • idntunknwn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4> I can't even count anymore how many things they've been 'inspired' by lately.
      What other things have there been? All I can think of is Spaces, and I personally think its a damn good implementation of virtual desktops.

      > Anyways, it's about time some of these lesser operating systems started 'leap frogging' to catch up with Linux
      I don't see how Linux is so much better. As other people have said in this thread, Linux has its own usability problems, namely in terms of configuration.

      > And when KDE 4 comes out, it will change everything.
      How so? The underlying base will still be just as difficult to use. Unless KDE 4 focuses on much more than just the UI, Linux as a whole will be largely unaffected
    • nimbusDIGG, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Because its a Mac, bitch.

      PWN Different.ยข
  • mulletman13, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I'm a Mac user, but I noticed something a bit odd.

    In the second video when they were previewing all of the text files, the Mac vs. PC video was highlighted in the bottom Finder window. Well, as we all know Finder displays a preview in the next pane when in column view like that was -- and in that window the grey 'Quickview' border was displayed as well as the regular quicktime controls -- which leads me to believe it was just an effect created in After Effects or something and put into a video. Also this 'feature' hasn't appeared in Leopard previews thus far, it seems to have came out of nowhere.

    I call fake. (digg me down = )
    • DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1QuickView was shown briefly during Leopard's unveiling at WWDC.
  • jonasf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Quick Look seems not only limited to Finder: See http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/spotlight.html
  • BWhaler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I can't wait to buy a Intel Mac and to put Leopard on it.

    I am glad Apple is taking their time with Leopard. It looks like a fantastic OS. Tiger was a bit disappointing in my book, but Leopard looks like a ton of neat and cool things.
  • MOGua, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3OS X needs to "leapfrog" Vista in File-Navigation not File-Preview. The Finder sucks.

    And don't tell me about spotlight or quicksilver for finding the file I want; sometimes I just want to browse my file system.

    OS X Finder needs to be more like Path Finder, which pretty much looks just like the Vista Explorer.

    *I'm a recent Mac switcher.
    • DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have a friend that switched, and when I told him the Finder was about to be revamped in Leopard he said: "What? I really don't see what can be improved in the Finder, it's fine just the way it is."

      I would like it if they did revamp it, as there are some quirks about some basic functionality that should be fixed. But if they only fix those and add a few features, I won't be outraged.
    • leftspin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have yet to find any compelling argument why Finder is bad. I do, however, hear a bunch of people saying that it is. I wish someone would enlighten me.
  • SkydiveMike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Well if that isn't the perfect representation of "Web 2.0" - pretty AJAX-y look with zero useful content
  • TomMcBaum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Article's been pulled.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.