Comments

1. The first thing I thought when I saw Dashboard was, "this looks a lot like Konfabulator". Has it been confirmed that they haven't bought up the rights to the software? Mind you it wouldn't surprise me if they haven't.

   Comment by ramanan at 02:14, 29 Jun, 2004 #

2. I should have checked the Konfabulator site. Apple, come on, that is lame.

   Comment by ramanan at 02:15, 29 Jun, 2004 #

3. Well, I agree that things look kind of bad here for Apple. But I don't know if I would rake them over the coals too badly quite yet. The new announcements definitely have some questionable similarity to independent deveopers apps (namely Konfabulator), but I don't think they are implemented as well. Remember that this works both ways. Now the guys over at Konfabulator can implement an expose type feature into their app that will make it work like Dashboard.

   The Spotlight technology was something that had been in the works for quite some time, but had not been made public. I don't think they even remotely came close to ripping off Quicksilver. We are talking about integrating this feature into the core of the OS which will make it perform in ways that Quicksilver can't even imagine. Hopefully it means that the searches will work MUCH faster and take less resources on the system.

   A lot of people thought about NetNewsWire when they heard of RSS in Safari, but I am here to tell you, it won't compare. It will be a great feature (especially to let you know when there is an RSS feed on the site), but it won't have the functionality and integration that NNW has with blogs and things of that nature.

   So the net of this post is, don't beat up Apple too bad. Remember that these innovations will ultimately lead to a better product for everyone. The only thing that would have been nice is to have Apple acknowledge that the ideas came from an independent developer like Konfabulator. But for obvious reasons, that isn't about to happen. Such is life in the world of a developer...

   Comment by Frank at 05:56, 29 Jun, 2004 #

4. Tomas, you're right on. What's so funny is how badly Apple suffers from schizophrenia. In many ways they treat their developer community really well (and they certainly believe they do). They are so intent on "being the innovators" that they loathe to give credit where credit is due. (Ironic, given how often Jobs will snide about Microsoft stealing from Apple.)

   What is SO SAD is that it wouldn't take Apple much to sway the developer community. Can you imagine the difference if, say, the developers of Watson, LaunchBar/Quicksilver, Konfabulator, et. al had been recognized by Steve during his keynotes and given a "pat on the back"?

   Comment by Trent at 06:12, 29 Jun, 2004 #

5. We are talking about integrating this feature into the core of the OS which will make it perform in ways that Quicksilver can't even imagine.

   Ah! Isn't that what Microsoft was doing with IE before somebody cried 'bastards'?!

   Whatever it is, the irony is pretty thick here. The least they could do is send some of that marketing dollars to these developers, if not pay them or credit them at the least. Maybe they are starting to belive their own hype!

   Comment by Sunny at 07:53, 29 Jun, 2004 #

6. Frank: "So the net of this post is, don't beat up Apple too bad. Remember that these innovations will ultimately lead to a better product for everyone."

   The problem would be that they are not innovations, they are photocopies. Regardless of wether Spotlight is "integrated with the core" or if Dashboard works slightly different, these features looks and acts like those developed by small independent, now ass raped, developers.

   Comment by Tomas at 08:11, 29 Jun, 2004 #

7. "assraped" and "skullfucked" yeah I guess, if you want to look at it in the way too obvious kind of way.

   And I can understand that small developers might be pissed of be this, or maybe the Konfabulator people will make something better, or perhaps make som really cool widgets for Dashboard instead, either way, the users will get something out of it, and this, my dear flameseeker, is my point; users deserve the best, users don't really give a shit where it comes from. If a great feature is, well, great then why shouldn't it be available to more users?
   Apple took the great desktop metaphor from Xerox, Microsoft took the trashcan from MacOS (just to give an example), and in the end, these features benefited the end user.

   Yeah, I'd probably be pretty pissed if I was the developer of one of these features, but in the end operating system innovations shouldn't be the sole domain of one developer, especially if they increase the userability and operability of the operating system in general.

   Comment by johan at 12:03, 29 Jun, 2004 #

8. johan: The examples you mention, of taking ideas from other platforms and incorporating them into your own, is a very different thing than taking entire application concepts from developers of your own platform.

   When Microsoft stole the Trashcan idea from Apple, they didn't rob anything from Apple, like Apple robbed from Konfabulator, and Watson. Apple was not robbed of business (or downloads, or product spread potential) directly because Microsoft too incorporated a Trashcan in their competing OS, but Karelia, the developers of Watson, most certainly were.

   Your analogy would only be correct if Trashcan was an application developed for Microsoft's platform by Apple, and when Microsoft incorporated Apple's idea into their platform, Apple's product became very close to redundant. Alas, that was not the case.

   What Apple did, are doing, and most likely will keep on doing, is very similar to what Microsoft did to Netscape; they take ideas from independent developers in their community, make their own version, and effectively kill the use for the original product.

   I seem to remember it being a big deal when Microsoft did it, even though it benefited users in the exact same way then, too.

   Comment by Tomas at 12:21, 29 Jun, 2004 #

9. #8, Tomas:

   It is a big deal, I can understand that, I can also understand that the Konfabulator people are pissed. But it is however the (somewhat sad) fact that this is the way business work. the good news for the Konfabulator people are that they've been given almost a 9 month head start, if they want to survive they'll need to to go back and look at what they can code up in 9 months. A windows version? Even better integrating with various (web)features? The now have access to Apples new Image+Video Core API's and more, start hacking on some even juicier eyecandy!
   Yeah, they got fucked but if they're smart, and I'm sure they are, they'll realize that there's little they can do about the current situation, except create something even better than Dashboard!

   "Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who" - Monty Python

   Fire, Proteus and AdiumX seems to do fine even though Apple created an IM client (iChat), why? because they offer more features than iChat.

   Comment by johan at 12:32, 29 Jun, 2004 #

10. I've posted a few comments about this (as well as a link back to this entry) on my weblog. I think overall it's quite a good thing what Apple is doing, even if unfortunate for the small developer.

    http://matt.makalumedia.com/archives/000376.html
    

    Comment by Matt Henderson at 12:46, 29 Jun, 2004 #

11. Matt & Johan: I assume, then, that you think it was equally acceptable when Microsoft killed Netscape in a very similar fashion? Were you by any chance standing up for Microsoft at the time?

    Comment by Tomas at 13:18, 29 Jun, 2004 #

12. Apple's accused of having ripped-of Konfabulator's idea with its newly introduced dashboard and being a copycat in general. At least some evidence paints a different picture.

    Trackback from taking the red pill at 14:06, 29 Jun, 2004 #

13. Tomas, I really don't think what we're discussing here can be compared to the Microsoft IE/Netscape situation. Microsoft likely killed Netscape because they considered it (them) a treat to the platform. Apple is likely incorporating Spotlight and Dashtop into the OS to get those technologies into the hands of the masses, not because they feel any threat, nor to hurt their developers. (Netscape probably had an 80% market penetration at the time. What do you think Konfabulator has, less than 1%?) And, as many of those developers even state themselves (Brent Simmons, Erik J. Barzeski), Apple's actions may turn out to be a good thing for them.

    Comment by Matt Henderson at 16:41, 29 Jun, 2004 #

14. I too understand why the people behind Konfabulator are quite upset now, even though they seem to take it rather well (solely judging from their website). Me, as a user, is a bit confused where I should stand and what I should think about the whole mess.

    In a way, Apple ripped off Arlo Rose and Perry Clarke. But in a way, Dashboard is a completely natural evolution of Expos�e.

    But I guess I am biased, since I never liked Konfabulator very much - it was fun for a while, but never really useful. What I have seen of Dashboard so far I feel a lot more intruiged by it, mostly because of the spotlight-function. The idea of not having to see the widgets at all, unless I press a button, feels a lot smoother and nicer than having them clutter my desktop.

    But I guess it is the principle of the thing. And yes, I think they should have given Rose and Clarke more credit where credit is due.

    Comment by Pythagore at 16:46, 29 Jun, 2004 #

15. Tomas, I think that before you jump up and down on Apple for doing whatever, it may be wise to look to and ask the people. I, for one, am happy to see Safari RSS. Spotlight will make it tremendously easy for my mom to find things. I'll still use LaunchBar, though, because Spotlight won't be able to play every Shania Twain album or, it seems, do things like "move to" or "open with."

    And I never used Konfabulator, because I never saw much need or purpose.

    Sherlock 3 was in development long before I ever heard of Watson. That situation does not compare - it just happened that Dan Wood created something similar to what Apple had already planned (and started).

    But anyway, perhaps you could ask the developers of the software before you claim that they should be pissed. Perhaps they're not. I've seen an interview with Arlo Rose and he's a bit miffed, but he doesn't seem completely pissed. Dan Wood was incorrectly pissed. The obdev people, well, I haven't seen their response either, but I doubt they're going to say "fuggit, no more LaunchBar."

    Comment by Erik J. Barzeski at 17:21, 29 Jun, 2004 #

16. Matt: "I really don't think what we're discussing here can be compared to the Microsoft IE/Netscape situation. Microsoft likely killed Netscape because they considered it (them) a treat to the platform."

    So what is significant is not what they've done, but what their intentions "likely" were?

    Erik: "I think that before you jump up and down on Apple for doing whatever, it may be wise to look to and ask the people. I, for one, am happy to see Safari RSS.".

    You don't think any users, nor any developers, are happy that Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player are bundled for free with Windows?

    Comment by T. Jogin at 17:30, 29 Jun, 2004 #

17. Tomas, when the discussion is about what's "right" and what's "wrong", then more than just the facts of the matter comes into play.

    Based on my observations of Apple over the past several years, they clearly invest their money doing things that considerably enhance the user experience. That's what they are good at, and that's in the long term interest of their users and their development community.

    When similar applications already existed, they introduced the iApps -- which, in a single stroke, dramatically improved the platform. And they leveraged those applications through integration with .Mac, and ultimately into new products like the iPod and the Music Store. And now we see Apple adding value to iTunes through the ultra-cool Airport Express. There were people that grumbled about Apple killing a few MP3 software players with iTunes, but would *anybody* argue that was the wrong thing to do?

    Another example -- Apple opened retail outlets and an online store, to the detriment to many former Mac retailers. Do you think that was an unfair move? Apple did for retail what the retailers never did, nor could do -- they extended the Mac *experience* and consistency. And that's great for the long-term outlook of this platform.

    Back to software -- I think the recent history of Apple has shown an ability to bring technology to the masses in a way that integrates into the overall user experience, can be leveraged along the OS roadmap, while leaving the market open to the developer(s) who perhaps lead the singular innovations.

    I just recently purchased iView Media Pro, simply due to the introduction to media management that I discovered through iPhoto. And I'll continue to use and upgrade LaunchBar (as will many). And I'll bet makers of advanced RSS readers will see increased sales due to Apple's introduction of RSS to the masses.

    In that respect, I think what Apple are doing is more than fair.

    Comment by Matt Henderson at 19:40, 29 Jun, 2004 #

18. Matt: Good points, all of them. I guess the difference I see with your examples, and what Apple did to Konfabulator and Watson, is that they stole revolutionary new and unique ideas (and then called them their own "revolutionary super unique ultra ideas").

    An mp3-player is not a revolutionizing idea. Neither is a photo album. There is really nobody in particular to give credit for those kinds of application concepts.

    Konfabulator, on the other hand, is obviously rather unique (or was). Also, the fact that Konfabulator and Dashboard are deceivingly similar in appearance, and are both implemented in god-damn JavaScript, kind of makes it obvious that Apple drew most of their, shall we say, inspiration from them. They saw something unique (as opposed to an mp3-player or a photo album), and copied, nay, stole, it.

    Apple implementing these features is better for consumers, absolutely, because they're great features which consumers are going to enjoy. What's missing is respect, recognition, and a god damn check.

    The Apple Design Award could just as well be called the Apple Touch of Death.

    Comment by T. Jogin at 21:04, 29 Jun, 2004 #

19. >>The problem would be that they are not innovations, they are photocopies.

    I'd have to disagree, the problem as I see it is that they are both innovations and copies. Watson would have never existed without Sherlock, and Konfabulator would have never existed without desktop accessories and dock widgets. What both developers did was expand on an idea, and idea that may have been Apple's or may have existed beforehand.

    What made/makes them great is that they both went past what Apple was currently offering, and did it in great ways. Sherlock was good, and the idea to integrate web services to the desktop, was a great idea. But Apple's first implementation focused purely on searches. Is it unreasonable to expect that with or without Sherlock Apple would have eventually moved passed searches. I don't think so.

    The difference is not only did Watson get there first, but their implementation was almost mind boggling at the time. But that's the equivalent of saying Mozilla introduced tabbed browsing. Does this mean no other vendor should use tabbed browsing. Does each and every browser now have to come up with a different metaphor for multiple page browsing??

    Do I think Apple should acknowledge or somehow compensate the developers who got their first—yeah. But I also think its a slipper slope. Someone will always get somewhere first, just because it isn't you doesn't mean you weren't on the same path or going to the same place. Just look at the web or in desktop database design, an integral part of developing is seeing what others are doing. Sometimes mixing and matching ideas. It's part of the cycle.

    Apple doesn't steal code (to my knowledge), but ideas are like leaves, there's always one in the wind, and its darn near impossible to say who saw it first. I do believe some acknowledgement and or perhaps compensation for the Konfabulator crew would be a nice gesture. But I feel that's more for the fact of stating, "you got there first." Not we're purchasing your idea.

    Apple purchased SoundJam, concept, idea, and code, and they made it better. But "web services" that bring the web to you in a discreet little application, that's Sherlock, and hence Watson (even the naming of Watson, tells where the idea came from). Small, discreet little applications (widgets/gadgets) that provide quick access to needed information—that was there with calculator, iChat, iSync, even the airport monitor. What Konfabulator did, and so well I must say, is centralize them under a single controller, make them easier to create, and allowed them to float across the desktop rather then be stuck in the dock, the Apple Menu or the Finder.

    I see the difference between these applications almost as acknowledgement. Look at Unsanity. Their entire business model seems to be built around the acknowledgement that they are creating apps that Apple will surely at some point in the future get around to rolling in or back-in to the operating system. Their apps are pretty much announcements--Apple left this out, we'll provide it, or this is what Apple gave, we think this will better. They acknowledge that their products may have a shelf life.

    Comment by allgood2 at 21:23, 29 Jun, 2004 #

20. allgood2: "I do believe some acknowledgement and or perhaps compensation for the Konfabulator crew would be a nice gesture."

    That's what I think is missing, too.

    "They acknowledge that their products may have a shelf life."

    Agreed.

    Comment by T. Jogin at 21:32, 29 Jun, 2004 #

21. Matt & Johan: I assume, then, that you think it was equally acceptable when Microsoft killed Netscape in a very similar fashion? Were you by any chance standing up for Microsoft at the time?

    haha, whats next? the apple-stole-their-entire-os-from-the-xerox-dudes card?

    Netscape didn't solely die because ms bundled ie with windows, they died because they made some bad decisions and didn't do enough of what needed to be done at that time, among other things the netscape executives decided not to continue dev on netscape5 (yes there was such a thing).
    But thats an entirely different topic, and as someone else said, I wouldn't say it really compares to this situation..

    hat Apple did to Konfabulator and Watson, is that they stole revolutionary new and unique ideas (and then called them their own "revolutionary super unique ultra ideas").

    hmm, ever heard of Active Desktop? that was 1997(-ish) ideas from MS... if we're being anal (and we seem to be that around here) one could say that Konfabulator is Active Desktop, but with more eye-candy.

    
    How many FPS games do we need? it certainly seems like we need some more according to game developers and publishers and certainly to the gamers, since we keep buying them.
    Apparently osx need another widget-thingie.
    Such is the nature of the software industry, and I don't see ID Software bicker and whine about the loads of other FPS games out there, instead, they're creating something better each time which pleases us; the end user.

    Comment by johan at 21:36, 29 Jun, 2004 #

22. There is a lot of debate if Apple totally ripped off Konfabulator when Apple revealed that they would include something called Dashboard. People say that Apple screwed the creators of Confabulator when they did this. Lets see, the confabulator guys rea...

    Trackback from Jacken's Weblog at 00:02, 30 Jun, 2004 #

23. Reading the comments here one finds that either people get it or they don't.

    Look about Active Desktop, sure they got the idea from Apple or whatever else. They didn't steal it from an independent developer and added it to the os. There was no active desktop before on the Windows platform and Microsoft added it. That is patently unlike the Dashboard where these "widgets" have existed as a separate product for more than two years.

    Also its unfair to equate Watson with Konfabulator. Watson was from the beginning an extension to Sherlock (the reason behind the name) and unlike Konfabulator (and the reason why this situation is different) had no prior history at Apple.

    I also think that Netscape is very relevant here because all this arguments you are making here for "platform integration" and "better for consumers" applied when IE 4 came out. Netscape was the only developer of a browser, Microsoft thought it was something that should be integrated to the platform and better for consumers. End result Netscape gets royally shafted. Sounds familiar doesn't it? Its relevant because at that time browsers were unique and the web was an innovation. I will be the first to agree that what Microsoft did was helpful to consumers, making it easier for them to be online without worrying about installing anything else. But surely that is not the view everybody was taking afterwards with the antitrust suits? Those bastards stole!

    All Tomas is asking is for credit where its due. He is not saying that Apple shouldn't add Dashboard, but should give the credit where it is due. Frankly "innovative" has become a much abused term.

    BTW doesn't this give a new meaning to "Rip, Mix and Burn." I say its very prophetic.

    Comment by Sunny at 00:47, 30 Jun, 2004 #

24. Correction: Watson being an extension had roots in Apple but Konfabulator had no roots.

    Sorry, I missed a word somewhere.

    Comment by Sunny at 00:53, 30 Jun, 2004 #

25. Tomas, are you aware that Apple offered Dan Wood a job as an engineer on the Sherlock team? He declined the offer. He wanted them to buy Watson, not just hire him. But it was Wood's choice -- compete with them or join them.

    http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/07/29.7.shtml

    Comment by John Gruber at 03:19, 30 Jun, 2004 #

26. Check out Kapsules . Its a Konfabulator clone for Win XP. Some screenshots: one, two. Doesn't look as polished as Konfab but its there. Frankly I would like to see Konfabulator in Windows as its coming very soon.

    Comment by Sunny at 04:11, 30 Jun, 2004 #

27. John: "Tomas, are you aware that Apple offered Dan Wood a job as an engineer on the Sherlock team?"

    Yeah, I just recently read that (but that's not the impression that the Watson FAQ conveys). Offering Dan a job does make it better, but offering them credit, or, preferably, licensing their technology, is what one would expect from an honorable company.

    Comment by T. Jogin at 07:42, 30 Jun, 2004 #

28. An interesting comment from a similar discussion thread:

    "So who was Konfabulator inspired by? Apple maybe?"

    Comment by Matt Henderson at 10:53, 30 Jun, 2004 #

29. Ooops, forgot to reference the thread.

    Comment by Matt Henderson at 10:54, 30 Jun, 2004 #

30. Mark: So why don't they call it desk accessories/ornaments instead of widgets? The metaphor didn't work?

    Frankly the "ornaments" that they are talking about are system utilities such as control panel, paint, clock. Now is that all that Konfab does?

    Nobody is saying that Konfabulator is original. Its something to do with Apple stealing the look, feel, purpose of Konfab and calling it their own creation.

    Comment by Sunny at 11:30, 30 Jun, 2004 #

31. Sunny: "It's something to do with Apple stealing the look, feel, purpose of Konfab and calling it their own creation."

    Their own super unique mindblowing revolutionary creation, even.

    Comment by Tomas at 12:04, 30 Jun, 2004 #

32. Yeah they are believing their own hype now.

    Like I mentioned before "innovation" is becoming a much abused word in the computer industry. It also doesn't help when the media, blinded by the Apple hype machine and marketing glitz starts echoing it as the truth at the expense of common sense, and sanity. I mean even this Konfab/Dashboard fiasco getting justified and being treated as an afterthought by the mac community absolutely confounds me!

    Frankly this Wired article just sums its up. Its all revolutionary, innovative, konfabulous!

    Comment by Sunny at 12:41, 30 Jun, 2004 #

33. I think it's clear that Dashboard was inspired from Konfab. As I argued before, I think this kind of situation *can be* good for the platform, users and in the long-term the development community, even if at the unfortunate cost of the original developer.

    It seems that everybody (myself included) wonder why Apple couldn't have at least given the Konfab developers some credit — something small for Apple that would have avoided this whole bad PR situation. It seems like common sense, and Apple (I would hope) wouldn't overlook such an obvious thing.

    Maybe there's more behind this than those of us in the stands can see. Maybe an official acknowledgment or offer to the Konfab developers could establish an IPR condition that could be later legally exploited should the acknowledgement/offer be refused? Who knows.
    

    Comment by Matt Henderson at 12:54, 30 Jun, 2004 #

34. Matt - Sorry for referring to as Mark in my previous comments. I should be questioning my own sanity.

    Yes, no doubt that Dashboard is inspired by Konfab. Like Tomas has be suggesting all along all Apple had to do was license it and integrate it to OS X. Quite obvious and ethical thing to do.

    Comment by Sunny at 13:17, 30 Jun, 2004 #

35. Sunny, no problem. It is absolutely *amazing* how many people call me Mark. And the weirdest thing is that as many Spanish-speaking people end up calling me Mark, as native English speakers. Maybe I should just change my name. :-)

    Comment by Matt Henderson at 14:12, 30 Jun, 2004 #

36. In a follow-up to an earlier post where I stated we shouldn't be beating up Apple too bad, this is an absolutely MUST READ on Dashboard vs. Konfablator which will make everyone think about the comments they have been posting. There's always 2 sides to every story...
    
    Daring Fireball http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/dashboard_vs_konfabulator

    Comment by Frank at 23:15, 30 Jun, 2004 #

37. Frank: So how did Gruber counter the fact that Apple takes ideas from everyone and calls them their own mind-bending, super-fantastical, creations? That must be the status quo, the modus operandi at Apple then.

    Read my earlier comment (scroll up) on the Desk accessories argument.

    Comment by Sunny at 01:13, 01 Jul, 2004 #

38. Okay, I'm revising my original post. While I originally disagreed with Tomas about most things (in this post), I did feel that even though I thought Apple had done no wrong, that some acknowledgement to Konfabulator would have been good. (see comment #19). After reading John Gruber's post, my slight guilt in thinking Apple did nothing wrong, but Dashboard and Konfabulator sure look similar is absolved.

    John's wrote Dashboard vs Konfabulator which is a far more insighted view into the controversy than mine. I don't always agree with John (for example I love unSanity's APE, and apparently John dislikes it, plenty). I do respect the research and detail he does.

    Not being at WWDC, I pretty much just heard that Dashboard uses Javascript. That's the one component that made me feel that guilty about believing Apple had done nothing wrong. Sure I had my knowledge and arguments (not always based on knowledge) that Konfabulator was nothing new, just a great implementation of things Apple had done before. But I tied that great implementation to Javascript, and therefore felt guilt that Dashboard was using javascript, when before applets/gadgets/widgets on the Mac OS did NOT.

    Dashboard uses Webcore. Wedbcore, the same technology used by Safari, and even iTunes. This is both a Wow and a WOW. Webcore is a totally different puppy than SpiderMonkey. Not that I expected Apple to use SpiderMonkey, I just assumed that they had built their own Javascript platform instead of purchasing Konfabulator's adapted engine (hence the guilt).

    This in no way makes me think less of what Konfabulator is, but it makes me more in awe of what Dashboard potentially is.

    Comment by allgood2 at 03:09, 01 Jul, 2004 #

39. allgood2: iTunes does *not* use Web Kit. C.f.:

    Comment by John Gruber at 03:53, 02 Jul, 2004 #

40. I speak to the developer of QuickSilver regularly in IRC, and he doesn't plan to compete with Spotlight, but use it - by taking advantage of Spotlight's kernel-level integration, he could make QuickSilver faster to an insane degree. And the fact is, I don't think Spotlight does enough to "kill" QuickSilver. Even if there's a keyboard shortcut to get the the Spotlight bar (there'd better be), you can't type "itunes p" and see every song in your party shuffle playlist. Or type part of a person's name, hit tab, and open an IM with them. QuickSilver will be as fine an addition to Tiger as it has been to current versions of OS X - if not more.

    Comment by StarManta at 04:07, 02 Jul, 2004 #

41. >>John Gruber: allgood2: iTunes does *not* use Web Kit. C.f.:

    Right, It doesn't use WebKit but it does use Webcore, right. Isn't WebCore just a framework for HTML and XML rendering, by Apple, or in part by Apple, or somthing akin.

    I admit to using the terms WebCore and WebKit interchangeably sometimes, because I forget which does what, but I'm fairly certain they are not suppose to be interchanged. I used WebCore specifically, because I thought your site mention WebCore NOT WebKit, which made sense to me. Webcore (and pardon my analogy), would be like SGML and WebKit is like XHTML or HTML.

    Lord knows I wouldn't be the first person totally misguided about this so feel free to tell me I'm wrong. Well at least about their relations. I pretty definitive that their is both a WebCore and a WebKit, since Hyatt mostly mentions working in WebKit, but Apple Developer details WebCore.

    Comment by allgood2 at 06:06, 02 Jul, 2004 #

42. allgood2: If I remember correctly, iTunes' interface isn't rendered html at all, it just looks that way.

    Comment by T. Jogin at 07:18, 02 Jul, 2004 #

43. >>llgood2: If I remember correctly, iTunes' interface isn't rendered html at all, it just looks that way.

    Ahh... I thought it was rendered using XML, WebObjects, and QuickTime. I then assumed the XML would be part of WebCore. My bad.

    Comment by allgood2 at 14:51, 02 Jul, 2004 #

44. allgood2: If I understand/remember correctly, the data is stored in XML, but it is not _rendered_ as xml or any other markup-language on screen. I.e. there is no rendered xml, and there is no rendered html.

    Comment by Tomas at 15:11, 02 Jul, 2004 #

45. I am totally confused --OT--, are Tomas and T. Jogin the same person?

    Comment by David at 15:28, 02 Jul, 2004 #

46. David: We are, I am. Sorry about that. ;-)

    Comment by Tomas at 15:51, 02 Jul, 2004 #