Personally, I find that the key strength of Omni products is their generally excellent scriptability.

Without that scope for shortcuts, extensions, and the linking up of different applications into tool-chains, I wouldn't be able to get my work done, and I would soon move on to other solutions (possibly other platforms).

There are, however, signs that Apple is moving towards a script-free (perhaps services and Automator only) world. Safer for the new shopping-mall profile of OS X, but much less usable as a work-place.

Hamish Sanderson, the author of Appscript, which is now quietly beginning to fail, gives user scripting on OS X about 5-10 years.

Is this something that Omni has thought about ?
Or has the centre of gravity already shifted to script-free iOS consumer devices, leaving the world of work behind ?

Are you already revisiting "Weʼre passionate about productivity" ?

'productivity' -> 'consumption' perhaps ?

Not quite as catchy :-)

FWIW I haven't bought an iPad – not really interested in a device that lacks a USB port – but Microsoft's Touch begins to look interesting …

(At least they seem to have work in mind ...)

[Ken Case]

I agree that AppleScript is very important to the platform, and I understand your concern: when Lion introduced application sandboxes it wasn't clear how sandboxed apps would be able to continue to support the level of scripting we've always enjoyed in Mac OS X.

Fortunately, Apple understands our concerns as well and agrees that AppleScript is important. Last year, we made a detailed list of our concerns and requirements for scripting, and presented those issues to the AppleScript and Security teams at Apple. Those teams have been working together over the past year to come up with ways to address each of our concerns, and to see how they've solved our problems I highly recommend watching Session 206 - Secure Automation Techniques in OS X (free video).

After watching that session last week at WWDC, I now feel confident that we can deliver sandboxed versions of all of our apps without losing any of their scriptability. And because Apple went to the trouble to fix all those issues (rather than simply ignoring them, which would have been much easier for them to do), I feel confident about the future of scripting itself on the platform.

[Ken Case]

Originally Posted by RobTrew

FWIW I haven't bought an iPad – not really interested in a device that lacks a USB port – but Microsoft's Touch begins to look interesting …

(At least they seem to have work in mind ...)

As for the iPad, it's an amazing device which has made many people (including myself) much more productive. That doesn't mean it's for everyone, of course, and it might not be for you—but it's clear that Apple does view iPad as a productivity device, and enterprises have been adopting iPad faster than they've ever adopted any other Apple platform.

Thanks, Ken.

That's a reassuring response. Good to hear that Omni is helping Apple to think these things through.

(Though Hamish Sanderson's response to your point,
and to session 206, is less sanguine … )

One step at a time, I guess ...

Originally Posted by Ken Case

it's clear that Apple does view iPad as a productivity device, and enterprises have been adopting iPad faster than they've ever adopted any other Apple platform.

I'm more than happy to take your word for that, though I notice that the Slashgear article which you cite does say that:

iPad's incorporation into the enterprise market seems to stem from its overall popularity with consumers including those who work for those large companies, rather than any intentional marketing push made by Apple.

A pity that they don't define corporate "uptake" – presumably this means more than one iPad appearing in the IT spend.

As for the advert which prompted your comment "Apple does view iPad as a productivity device", I fear I may have blinked, because I missed any footage of anybody actually producing anything (beyond a personal email).

Ah … watching it again, there is a fleeting adjustment of a pre-baked 3d pie-chart – (slightly diminishing its legibility, as it happens) - perhaps that's what you had in mind :-)

--