On Mac OS X programming
Noodlesoft is sponsoring the latest episode of ScreenCastsOnline. Don McAllister does a great job of guiding you through Hazel’s features. Nothing gets the point across like seeing it in action.
You can check it all out here.
Oh, and there’s a discount code in there, if you need any more enticement to watch it.
I’ve been waiting around for Numbers. Well, not Numbers specifically but for Apple to do a spreadsheet. Now that it’s out, I have to say that I’m disappointed. It’s not about features but about the base paradigm. I wanted Apple to revamp how spreadsheets are perceived and conceived. It may be a bit much to expect from Apple except that the new paradigm was already created some 20 years ago, and not only that, Steve Jobs had a hand in it.
Instead of explaining it all here, I suggest you read about Lotus Improv. Here’s a great article describing the history.
In short, Lotus came out with what is now known as the multidimensional spreadsheet. It was one of the first apps on the NeXT platform. It was also a revolutionary new way of doing spreadsheets.
It’s hard to really get a sense of how it works by reading about it. Quantrix has some great Flash presentations. I advise viewing those before reading on.
The main benefits of a multidimensional spreadsheet is that it actually knows about your model. When constructing a multidimensional spreadsheet, you are not constructing a visual structure so much as a semantic one. Those headers aren’t just for your benefit. The row and column headers are, in effect, axes in your multidimensional model. But you aren’t limited to two dimensions. You can define as many dimensions as you want and dynamically rearrange the axes as you see fit. The order of the axes (which axis is the column and which is the row) is just a part of the view and not the model itself. This also extends to charts. They are just graphical views of the same model and if your model changes, the charts can automatically update as well since they are based on the same semantic structure (i.e. the charts are not just one-offs).
The result of this is that the program makes many things natural and intuitive (it only sounds complicated). For instance, “pivot tables”. In the multidimensional model, it’s a natural extension of the paradigm (there’s no special marketing term for it) which makes pivot tables in traditional spreadsheets look like a hack. Natural language formulas also come, well, naturally. The generic headers and cell designations (A1, C5) are gone. You define the items in the headers so a cell is referenced as “Sales:1990” which makes tons more sense. Also, formulas are more based on the structure of the model and not on individual cells. This allows the formulas to be separated out so you can see (and edit) them all in one place (the formulas don’t go in the cells). Because it is a multidimensional model, extending any one dimension (i.e. adding rows or columns) will bring along any formulas with it. Again, this is hard to visualize if you haven’t seen it before so check out the Flash tours linked above.
So, where are the multidimensional spreadsheets now? Lotus did port Improv to Windows but Improv on both platforms ended up being abandoned. To fill the void, Lighthouse (the company I worked at) created a clone, Quantrix (which I worked on). As I’ve mentioned before, the Lighthouse apps were mothballed by Sun.
Since then, Pete Murray (one of the original authors of Quantrix) wrote it all over again, from scratch in Java, and has released it with his new company. He even got rights to the Quantrix name. As linked above, you can check it out at Quantrix (and thanks to Pete for allowing me to link to his demo presentations). Note that it is not priced for the casual user, being oriented more towards the enterprise customer but they do have educational pricing.
There’s also Flexisheet if you want something free, open source and/or native, though it does not seem to have been worked on in years.
iWork’s Numbers is fundamentally a 2D spreadsheet. It does some trickery with the headers to allow for some level of natural language formulas. It has some things here and there to simulate some of the aspects of a multidimensional spreadsheet but it’s still a traditional sheet underneath.
One subtle difference between the 2D and multidimensional models is that in the latter, the data model is expected to be dense. What this means you don’t really have unused cells; all cells are intended to have meaning in your model. It’s not a freeform grid but a packed model of data. For people used to sticking all sorts of random non-computational stuff into spreadsheets, this can be hard to adjust to. Basically, people are using spreadsheets not so much as computational tables but as a big piece of graph paper.
Numbers shifts this around a bit by making the tables a part of a larger freeform canvas. This is a big improvement from other traditional spreadsheets as I’ve always believed cells are for numbers. That clip art or paragraph of text you stuck in there is not a part of the model you are creating. It makes it such that the spreadsheet is used as it was intended and anything you attach to it, you put together with it and not in it. All in all, the separation of table and canvas is a welcome change.
Why wasn’t Numbers done as a multidimensional spreadsheet? Several factors come into play here. The main one is that multidimensional spreadsheets are quite different from traditional spreadsheets. If you’re an Excel user then you’d have to unlearn a lot of how you conceive of spreadsheets. In essence, it’s a hard sell to anyone that uses a traditional spreadsheet. The only market where it seems to stick is the financial market, which is not a market Apple is concerned with. It’s too bad, really, since I’ve always felt that the multidimensional model is actually more intuitive for the user who has never touched a spreadsheet. I felt a consumer-level multidimensional spreadsheet would have been the innovation the spreadsheet market needed.
Maybe in the end it was too much to expect of Apple. With innovation comes risk and it’s hard to bet on something that has already failed in the market once. Nonetheless, the innovation is there. The hard part is getting people to use it.
Yes, I’m going to C4 this weekend. It was quite last minute as there was something casting a shadow over my schedule for the month of August. Luckily, that got cleared up at the end of July leaving me to decide whether I should bother scrambling. Considering that I also was prepping my Hazel 2 release, it probably wasn’t a good idea scouring travel sites trying to make arrangements and convincing Rentzsch that the check was in the mail. Hopefully, he won’t try cashing it until after the conference.
Luckily, a hotel room and a not-so-expensive flight to Chicago opened up, so hope to see many of you there. And my offer still stands: if you give me money, I will gracefully accept it.
Also, my official list of people to whom I owe drinks while in Chicago:
Don’t make me explain the first two.
Hazel 2 has been out for a few days and I’ve had a chance to sit back and reflect a bit. Of course, things are a bit different this time than when I was releasing 1.0. For one, I have users now. That meant that I had to split my time to do support in addition to development. But that also meant that I had more people giving me feedback and a larger pool of beta testers. Yes, it’s time consuming to process all that but it made for a better product in the end.
There were a couple decisions that weren’t applicable when doing a 1.0 that I had to deal with this time:
1.2 vs 2.0
When planning the next release, I went back and forth on whether it was 1.2 or 2.0. What’s in a version number anyways? Well, making it 1.2 would have made some things easier. It’s generally understood that point releases are free so there would have been less confusion on that point if it were 1.2. On the other hand, there were major chunks that were rewritten. The artwork was redone. I ended up labeling it 2.0 as it does indicate that it has significant improvements and that the product is more mature, which is the case here.
Why a free upgrade?
Several factors played a part in this. There were issues in 1.x that 2.0 addresses and they were the type of thing I wanted every user to have access to. Plus, I do feel grateful to all of you who took a chance with not just a new application. If I could, I’d meet with every one of you and shake your hand but I get the feeling that it would be unfeasible. In any case, I think you’d appreciate the free upgrade more. You don’t know where my hands have been.
• • •
Overall, the pre-release went pretty smoothly. The one thing that was less than ideal was the timing and length of the prerelease period.
Because of issues with 1.x’s use of launchd, I had to write my own task runner/scheduler. Since some users were being affected by this, I released the alpha earlier so that they could have access to the new fixed version. Also, since it was a critical part of the system, I needed it to be tested for as long as possible. So, in retrospect, the alpha came out a bit earlier with fewer features ready than I would have liked but I felt it was necessary given the circumstances.
As for the length of the prerelease, it did run a bit longer than I wanted. A few factors came into play here including a good bit of contract work I was doing during the Spring and logistics concerning the business (including converting Noodlesoft to an LLC).
What surprised me this time around was the amount of attention my beta received. I had multiple articles in the press at each step of the way which was great. A big thanks to all of you who kept up with the pre-releases and sent in feedback and bug reports. I feel that 2.0 is pretty solid out of the gate as a result.
• • •
In the end, I’m quite happy with how 2.0 turned out. There were some rough edges that I was finally able to polish and I feel like I’ve filled out the feature set while keeping it all cohesive.
What’s in store for the future? I’m still working that out but most likely, 2.1 will be focused on getting Hazel working properly on Leopard (without breaking it on Tiger, of course). I think the next major improvement won’t be in the product itself, but on the Noodlesoft site. People have been clamoring for some sort of repository of Hazel rules so I need to hunker down and figure out how that should work. As always, your feedback helps to shape the future direction of things so keep it coming.
After what ended up being a longer pre-release period than I anticipated, Hazel 2.0 final is out. Lots of new, neat stuff. Nifty, too. If you haven’t been keeping up with the betas then check it out. I feel it’s much closer to my vision of the product when I started down this path last year.
It’s a free upgrade for you registered 1.0 users because I love you all. Yes, there, I said it.
When the smoke clears, I’ll do another post-mortem but in the meantime, download it.