5 ms·

This looks like a cool geek thing but sounds like it has the potential to be a user-interface nightmare. "You have no application configured for removing red-e

by drblast 15y ago

This looks like a cool geek thing but sounds like it has the potential to be a user-interface nightmare. "You have no application configured for removing red-eye. Please select a photo editor for removing red eye from these 1000 choices." For everything I might want to do? Eventually they'll have to pick sane defaults from the most popular choices and at that point it seems like we're back to where we are now. Either that, or it's a security/privacy nightmare. I don't want any site sending photos (for example) anywhere I haven't explicitly given access to, every time. I don't consider myself overly paranoid, either. I do assume that Facebook does have some level of privacy controls in place; it would seem to make this desirable for a user you'd have to defeat those controls without asking.

pilgrim689 15y ago
"You have no application configured for removing red-eye. Please select a photo editor for removing red eye from these 1000 choices." Isn't that better than just not displaying the possibility for removing red eye? Also, if you don't like the choices, you can do as you normally would and navigate to a website that removes red eye (or use desktop software). I'm sure there will be privacy concerns, but "nightmares"? really? They'll just make it so that no data is sent unless you explicitly give it access. That doesn't sound like a nightmare. Where you see all these "nightmares", I just see engineering problems that they're trying to solve, as with every new inventive piece of software.
gojomo 15y ago
Seems pretty easy to solve extrapolating current trends: You have no app installed for action X. Would you like to go to the [Mozilla|Chrome] action app store for options? In the Action App Store: Below are the top N action apps supporting X, ranked by [popularity|featured|rating|price]. All apps in the [Mozilla|Chrome] app store come from verified providers who follow the XYZ privacy policy. Most common packages of functionality would quickly be covered by roll-up apps, but around the fringes – where new capabilities emerge – there'd be openings for new entrants. (In fact, the implied functionality/market model reminds me a bit of two old dreams of the software future: • the 'Superdistribution' concept of Objective-C-creator Brad Cox • the composite-document approach of Apple's early-90s OpenDoc initiative Each saw future software being an assemblage of capabilities from many sources, enabling a richer provider ecosystem.)
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- Someone 15y ago
  That is not extrapolating. Mac OS X Lion already implements it for applications. If you double-click a file named "test.hn", the Finder gives you the option to cancel opening, to choose an application, or to search the Mac App Store. It turns out you can do searches like "extension:hn" or "uti:com.adobe.pdf" in the app store application. (and yes, when reading about is, I thought of OpenDoc, too. I guess this scheme may fail for the same reason OpenDoc failed, that is: because engrained parties have no interest in making it easier for their customers to move elsewhere)

by drblast 15y ago

pilgrim689 15y ago

"You have no application configured for removing red-eye. Please select a photo editor for removing red eye from these 1000 choices." Isn't that better than just not displaying the possibility for removing red eye? Also, if you don't like the choices, you can do as you normally would and navigate to a website that removes red eye (or use desktop software). I'm sure there will be privacy concerns, but "nightmares"? really? They'll just make it so that no data is sent unless you explicitly give it access. That doesn't sound like a nightmare. Where you see all these "nightmares", I just see engineering problems that they're trying to solve, as with every new inventive piece of software.

gojomo 15y ago

Seems pretty easy to solve extrapolating current trends: You have no app installed for action X. Would you like to go to the [Mozilla|Chrome] action app store for options? In the Action App Store: Below are the top N action apps supporting X, ranked by [popularity|featured|rating|price]. All apps in the [Mozilla|Chrome] app store come from verified providers who follow the XYZ privacy policy. Most common packages of functionality would quickly be covered by roll-up apps, but around the fringes – where new capabilities emerge – there'd be openings for new entrants. (In fact, the implied functionality/market model reminds me a bit of two old dreams of the software future: • the 'Superdistribution' concept of Objective-C-creator Brad Cox • the composite-document approach of Apple's early-90s OpenDoc initiative Each saw future software being an assemblage of capabilities from many sources, enabling a richer provider ecosystem.)

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
Someone 15y ago
That is not extrapolating. Mac OS X Lion already implements it for applications. If you double-click a file named "test.hn", the Finder gives you the option to cancel opening, to choose an application, or to search the Mac App Store. It turns out you can do searches like "extension:hn" or "uti:com.adobe.pdf" in the app store application. (and yes, when reading about is, I thought of OpenDoc, too. I guess this scheme may fail for the same reason OpenDoc failed, that is: because engrained parties have no interest in making it easier for their customers to move elsewhere)