Slashdot Mirror

Actually, it was possible with Color Quickdraw and the Display Manager, which were introduced with System 5.

Just to emphasise this, the first Mac that could do this was the Mac II which was introduced in March 1987.

1987. That's 16 years ago folks.

Since then, any Mac that can physically hold more than 1 graphics card has had seamless multi-headed support. That's seamless in the sense of dragging a window so that half of it is on a 24-bit display, and half of it on a black and white display, and things just work. Seamless in the sense of "Holy crap, I've a single 1900x1300 pixel Photoshop window across 4 monitors".

Well, DUH, moron, I was being facetious. I guess that went over your head. Should have expected that from an Anonymous Coward. It should be easy for you to find the FileVault code and link it. Go.

What's not? The windowing code, the source for the core UI libraries, and bundled applications. That's all.

So basically everything interesting then. I'm happy the command-line is open source (*/sarcasm*). Too bad EVERYTHING a user would care about ISN'T open. Basically, everything that makes OS X great is closed, and everything that's subpar is open for the geeks to help them fix.

The OS itself is completely open source.

As always, the Apple Fanatics definition of "operating system" and "completely" is different from everybody elses. There's a common usage for "OS" that you don't seem to understand. When we say the OS we're using is Windows, we mean the total package, not just ntoskrnl.exe. Most of us don't even know WHAT ntoskrnl.exe is. You can win an argument on a technicality, but it's dirty pool. Why don't you quit the misdirection and be honest, Apple can stand on it's own. I have faith in them, why don't you?

That's a surprise, because you don't seem to know much about anything else.

Oh ho ho. You're so funny. This coming from a coward and a zealot troll. Nice. "Try to negate the message by negating the messenger"... That's *Old-school Propaganda*. I've got a lot more credibility than you regardless. I log in, for one. I speak in generalities, ethics and ideas that are common sense. You try to win customers for Apple based on technicalities while avoiding the obvious truths. Answer the original question, which you have strayed so far from: which, LOGICALLY, would you trust more; an app in which the source code is open and available for perusing, or an app in which the source is hidden, and you have ONLY the word of a faceless corporation that it is secure? Of course, if the corporation is Microsoft, you wouldn't trust them, but I know you'll make an exception for Apple because Steve Jobs wouldn't lie, would he? Oh no. Not to make sales or get publicity... Like the "first 64-bit desktop" thing. He claims all the other 64-bit computers were "workstations", not "desktops", even though I know people who've been using them as desktops for years. A bit nebulous, don't you think? I wonder why he didn't say the TiBook was "the first widescreen grey laptop", conveniently omitting the black widescreen laptops, the beige widescreen laptops, and "notebooks" of all colors... My point HERE being that if a company feels it's ethical to stretch the truth to this point, can they be trusted with the security of your vital files?

I got my first Mac in February, 1984. I doubt it.

Apple IIe. 1983. PRE-Macintosh. Mange moi. And I grabbed a Macintosh 128k soon after. If you're a real troll, and you obviously are, you'll demand to fight about the month, day, and minute as well. All any of this shows is that we both come from money and backed a losing horse. By the way, fanboy, your dickhead elitist attitude makes me want to buy a Dell. Probably affects others the same way too. When people smell BS or overexaggerated claims, they back off in disgust. That's what I'm doing.

The point is that you act like a newbie and a fanboy. Honest mistake, I mistook you for someone without a clue. It could easily happen based on the quality of your posts. I outgrew my Steve worship the first time he sent Apple Legal after a fan website, or a guy making icons or themes, or canceled a popular app's development, or made a deal with Bill Gates. By the way, whatever you say is negated and tainted by the fact that you're posting as an AC to avoid the karma slaps people would give you if you were logged in, and because you're obvio

Though it is true that Intel published the USB standard. It was Apple who first shipped an OS and computer that supported it (iMac, 1998). It wasn't until Windows 98 (August) and later that MS finally got something stable with USB. There were some early USB patches for Win95, but they didn't work with all devices and were very unstable. MS's USB support was completely rewritten for Win98.

It was Apple who drove USB with the printer and other peripheral vendors. MS had little to do with USB. USB was mostly an Intel creation.

Next week: Sculley confesses to WIRED that, in hindsight, it may have been a mistake to mention to Bill Gates that "if anybody copies the Mac interface and slaps it onto cheap IBM clone hardware, I'd probably be dumb enough to let them get away with it via a legal loophole, and then, hoo, boy would we be in trouble."

CPU frequency of the fastest version of each model;
8100: 110 MHz PPC601
7200: 120 MHz PPC601
6300: 120 MHz PPC603e
5400LC:200 MHz PPC603ev

The 8100 had 3 NuBus and one PDS slot, the 7200 had three PCI slots, the 6300 had a LC PDS slot, and the 5400 had one PCI slot.

btw, the 6100 also came in an AV model. The 6100 was the entry level powermac.

source

3. PowerMacs appeared in 1993.

I respectfully disagree.

They weren't laptops, they were the original Power Macs. Carl Sagan (and later BHA and LAW; Butt Head Astronomer and Lawyers Are Wimps) was the code name for the 7100.

A brief rundown

Maybe at 15 lbs it was called a "Luggable" and it was 1991, but it cost $6,500
Toshiba is just trying to catch up with the Apple Portable

See, apple was ripping you off even then. The Centris 650 was a slower version of the Quadra 650 (25 MHz vs. 33 MHz 680LC040)
The Centris 650 was introduced in Feb 1993. The Quadra 650 appeared 8 months later. Both models supported 68040 chips, not the FPU-less 68LC040.

Incidentally, the Centris 650 featured the same CPU as the Quadra 700, introduced in October 1991.

Who needs progress?

See, apple was ripping you off even then. The Centris 650 was a slower version of the Quadra 650 (25 MHz vs. 33 MHz 680LC040)
The Centris 650 was introduced in Feb 1993. The Quadra 650 appeared 8 months later. Both models supported 68040 chips, not the FPU-less 68LC040.

Incidentally, the Centris 650 featured the same CPU as the Quadra 700, introduced in October 1991.

Who needs progress?

See, apple was ripping you off even then. The Centris 650 was a slower version of the Quadra 650 (25 MHz vs. 33 MHz 680LC040)
The Centris 650 was introduced in Feb 1993. The Quadra 650 appeared 8 months later. Both models supported 68040 chips, not the FPU-less 68LC040.

Incidentally, the Centris 650 featured the same CPU as the Quadra 700, introduced in October 1991.

Who needs progress?

"...in 1978, back when a "hand-held" was a transistor radio, computers were immobile mainframes..."

The Apple II came out in 1977. If you can't call that a computer then this publication must be written at people who are pretty out of the loop. But it's a Silicon Valley publication; apparently they need new writers.

If they were talking about 1976 (Apple I) or 1975 (Altair) it might be excusable. Heck some people say we had PCs back in 1950. But 1978? The revolution was on.

He gave us the original Apple, the Blue Box, and spends his free time teaching computers to children.

By the way, Apple-History.com has tons of data on every computer Apple ever built, including the Apple ][. Definitely an awesome place to get the specs.

Ah the good old days:

CPU: MOStek 6502

CPU Speed: 1 Mhz

FPU: none

Bus Speed: 1 Mhz

Data Path: 8 bit

ROM: 12 k

Firstly, why doesn't Apple push the design edge further?

Ive never actually was a "bleeding edge" designer. He was always a conservatist - iMacs, G3 and G4, were revolutionary but at the same moment they were oddly familiar - like if you saw something like this before and always wanted to have one.

The one most likely to be "pushing an edge" was Hartmut Esslinger from the frogdesign company, responsible for the earliest Macs (Classic, SE etc.). This period of Apple design ended up in a disaster of the Mac portable, arguably the worst Macintosh ever made, now a true collector's item. Then there was the Robert Brunner period in Apple design, most famed by the failed Newton project. Thus the "pushing edge" designers were not always the best cure for the Apple situation.

Look that the Jonathan Ive's reign in Cupertino gives us no really shocking novelties. They just make desktops, laptops, TFT displays and portable music players. They don't try to launch Something That Never Existed Before - their new products are actually just improved versions of the thing you already knew. But they are well thought, well designed, and REALLY ease to use. Ive is not the kind of designer who want to shock the world with "pushing an edge" - he just want to design a device, that will be a true pleasure to use. Like an iPod. Or an iMac. Or an iBook. Etc.

My first Mac, my first post-Amiga computer love.

6 hours on a single battery charge (longer if you sat with the sunlight hitting the screen directly... no backlight necessary) with the HD turned off running Word 5.1 with 8 megs of ram and a 80 meg HD on System 7.1 and a Stylewriter II in the dorm room.

honestly, to write papers in college back in the day, there was nothing better... hell, there was nothing close. 15 pound Compaq not-so-compact 386 laptops? Puh-lease.

if you're not surfing the net, then if you want a note taking machine with a nice and quiet keyboard that can go all day long without being plugged in, you want a PowerBook 100.

then, go back to your dorm to a real computer of your choice and copy notes over from floppy or serial or docked SCSI connection.

Gee, I must be really old but there seem to be a lot of people who have no clue. A pc is not a mainframe. There are many computer architectures in the world, not just Apple and IBM clones. calling an NT box a mainframe is as appropriate as calling a VW bug a super tanker. They both move stuff from place to place and are mostly metal, but just about everything else about them is different.

I don't want to sound angry here, I guess I just take it for granted that people know that 'mainframe' means the giant big-iron business computers sold by IBM (and clones from Amdahl/Fujitsu). So its my fault for not recognizing something I take as obvious.

The computer Obiwan called a "maniframe" was not in any way, shape, or form a mainframe computer. Anything that ran NT was a microcomputer. This is about the smallest weakest class of computers (above apliances like PDA's and Cell phones and calculators).

The mainframe is near the top when it comes to computing horsepower. Super computers are the next step up.

I guess the 64-bit Alpha machines might be classed with their Vax brothers as 'minicomputers'. They could run NT 3.5x. The new IA-64 may be in this class if it is linked to a more powerfull motherboard architecture.

This link will take you to an IBM webpage that shows some of IBM's current mainframe hardware. MicroSoft has never written any commercial software that runs on these. The Z-series can process millions of records a second. The I/O throughput on these beasts is mindboggling. almost everthing in them has automatic fail-over and hot-swap ability, even the CPU's! They are not very good at floating point math. I have never seen a mainframe 'crash'.

Linux does run on these machines as an alternative to the native IBM Z/OS, or along side it. IBM has a version of its own UNIX, AIX that can run on these machines as well. Yes they can run multiple operating systems at the same time. Java and perl and many other open software programs have been ported to the various mainframe OS's.

Links like this say that about 75% of the program source code in the world is COBOL on mainframes. Some programs currently running where I work predate the founding of Microsoft and Apple! I wouldn't be suprised if there are programs running in a bank or a government agency somewhere that predates Bill Gates or Steve Wozniak.

The 8600 is actually one of the faster pre-G3 machines; see this link. They go up to 300 MHz and take the same RAM DIMMs that your 8500 takes. The 8600's the next generation after the 8500 (they went from 8100 to 8500 to 8600 with the pre-G3 PPC midtowers, you see.) I have an 8100 and an 8500, nice little machines. The 8500's been a great Linux box with the RAM upgraded to 96 MB and a 9 GB Seagate SCSI-2 drive in it, running Debian of course :) And I've got it down to the point where I can pull the motherboard out in 4 minutes.

Apple is still a computer company to watch, although it may be of lesser interest to stockholders today. Still, if you were to bet on any one personal computer company to make something that would transform a process, Apple is a safe bet.

Apple is where it is now for several great ideas and collossal screw-ups, many of which determined the company's present destiny.

(My history highlights come from Apple History to make my point easier, and for your reference.)

1977: The Apple II is born, beginning the personal computer boom in earnest. Apple develops, by some estimates, a 75% market share.

1984: Apple develops a successor to the Apple II line, the Macintosh. It used a graphical interface and mouse and was the first computer with a GUI to become commercially successful. Apple boneheads the initial fate of the Mac's success by: (1) failing to make Apple II apps work with the computer, (2) making the system underpowered until 1986, (3) making the computer with a 9-inch screen that was hard on the eyes, and (4) making the Mac very expensive ($2495).

1986: Apple updates the Macintosh with the Mac Plus, with more RAM, external SCSI support, and a true hierarchial file system update for the OS. A software company, Aldus, creates PageMaker, which takes steam as the first desktop publishing program. Apple soon offers the LaserWriter, one of the first laser printers. A good move by Apple that still gives them the lead in DTP and prepress work today.

1985: Bill Gates sends a memo to then-Apple CEO John Sculley (having been hired by Steve Jobs and then, shortly, has Jobs ousted from Apple). Gates recommends that Apple license the Macintosh (warning: PDF) to make it a standard computer operating system. Gates recognized that Macs were great but weren't reaching critical mass. When Apple refused, Gates requested a license to duplicate the look and feel of some of the Mac OS in a product he was considering with IBM. Biggest bonehead move of all for Apple as this would've made the landscape completely different from the OS world we know today.

1988: Apple finally offers a Mac with internal hardware expandability, including a larger screen: the Macintosh II. It was too late for those who chose a more expandable IBM PC. This moves breathes life into its products, and vendor support improves.

1990-1998: Apple creates more good, innovative ideas, such as the PowerBook laptop (whose design elements are commonplace on PC laptops today) and the Newton (the first PDA), but never capitalizes on them as they want to hold on to all rights. This"not-invented-here" policy nearly kills the company as expensive, confusing models aren't clear, and developers find Windows apps more lucrative. Apple's overall market share plummets. Windows 95's debut makes this worse. Apple considers and offers Mac OS licensing, but this only makes Apple's problems worse as 3rd party clones are better products than Apple's.

Apple completely loses its marketing model. Steve Jobs ousts CEO Gil Amelio to return to as company CEO and begins to repair Apple's products and credibility.

In my opinion, Apple's best move would've been in licensing themselves. It may have killed Apple ultimately, but the Macintosh technologies would have survived and improved dramatically as the PC clones have proved out over time.

Is Apple still a force to be reckoned with? Even if you don't know an Apple from a PC, the company history suggests that, if there is a new spin on a computer program or hardware product, Apple usually thinks of it first. Unlike the Apple of the past, however, don't expect Apple to abandon its creations at the first sign of trouble.

Seriously, why is this post a +3?

I don't recall them giving up due to legal expenses. Wasn't Apple a larger company at the time? The mac was already established and Microsoft was just moving into having their GUI "OS" (read: shell on top of DOS, with program groups and icons which didn't really relate to filesystem layout).

I'm sure there was another reason.

That aside, it really bothers me that people seem to think that Apple had few or no improvements over the Xerox PARC GUI and that Apple is just as bad as MS, etc. Apple really did come up with some very important innovations over the PARC GUI. Many of the things we take for granted today in both Windows and Mac OS were ideas that originated at Apple. For more info check out this link:

Apple GUI History

It includes some fairly comprehensive discussion from Bruce Horn a former PARC employee, and Jef Raskin.

Amateur ballooning can be quite a bit of fun. There is a small but active ballooning sub-hobby within the ham radio hobby. Ham radio is an ideal medium for transmitting telemetry from balloons, since we have access to cheap high quality (and high power) equipment.

I participated in a balloon tracking experiment not too long ago. The students of Timberlane Regional High School of Plaistow NH launched several high-altitude balloons carrying APRS transmitters, as a part of their CAPSAT (Coordinated Algebra (II) & Physics Simulated Satellite) project. I was able to track two of them. The balloons carried GPS receivers and ham radio Automatic Position Reporting System transmitters.

The launch was from Hopkinton NH. The first launch went well, and we received good signals from the balloon all the way out into the Atlantic ocean. This was quite a bit farther than they expected the baloon to travel, they had planned on recovering and reusing it :o It was still cool IMHO. Check out this kick ass map of the balloon's track.

The second launch was also a success, and the baloon only traveled about 50 miles before touchdown. Map is here.

The third launch went up with the GPS receiver turned off :/ At last check, it was at 00.000N 000.00W. They didn't launch any more balloons that day.

My tracking station consisted of a Kenwood TH-D7 radio and a PowerMac 7500 604e-180 running XASTIR on Yellow Dog Linux. The full results of the day (and APRS logs for the entire hamfest) are here.

And actually, Apple produced a few desktops along the way that had IDE disks in them. Here is an example, though it doesn't seem to be mentioned on that site. I had about four or five of these things here at work.

They also began using IDE CD-Rom drives quite frequently. I assume the price break was too much to pass up. I have quite a few older Macs here that have both IDE and SCSI controllers on the motherboard.

Additionally, when they had gone full IDE just a few years ago they were still including the option for a SCSI card and SCSI hard drives. I noticed recently (last revision?) that the G4 PowerMac no longer includes the option for SCSI hard drives, though a controller card is still available.

I believe that statement is a bit aggressive. I think it was only three years ago that Apple dropped the floppy drive for the New Bondi iMac. This is according to Apple-History.com anyway ... I fully agree with the move but the consumers seemed to be upset - especially in the business world. Zip is not a viable alternative and SuperDisk wasn't marketted well enough.

It hasn't been until recently that CD-R / RW was streamlined enough for the 'common user', and the prices were affordable. I like the idea of USB "keychain storage", but those devices are still rather expensive.

Everything I do is on CD or on a network share these days anyway. I believe there will soon come a time that removable media is irrelivant. I would like to see hardware manufacturers and distributers put together a system where the bios gives you options for a TCP/IP stack and netbooting and there are Internet based boot servers. From there you could do anything you needed across a network.

ummm.. ya actually there were.. u dumbshit... obviously someone needs to learn something about computer history. And the very top parent of this thread isn't offtopic! The ad introducing the first Mac was aired during the superbowl in 1984...

"....hmmmm, yea, and can we turn this thing into a cube too? I happen to like cubes..."

But something I've been lusting after since I found out about them last year or so: an Apple PowerCD. I don't have any idea if it would be useful at all to you, but hey, I'm still geeked I moved up from a Quadra 840AV to a PowerMac 7600/132 (look 'em up on Apple History if you want links) :)

You're getting it wrong. The Blue and White G3s and Yikes machines didn't have an internal firewire port: The Sawtooth did. This port was removed on the dual-processor Gigabit ethernet machines that followed. For confirmation of this, check out http://www.apple-history.com.

> I have linux, doze, and Mac, and the only one that
> doesn't crash often in a blaze of glorified bit chaos is
> the linux box

> I think the aura started fading the year Apple released
> the rather pricey 840AV in a whirlwind of marketing
> hype, that, for me, led to a rather disappointing
> experience

You mean the Quadra 840 AV from 1993?

I think Apple's come out with a few machines and a couple of operating system versions since then. You may want to check out their site to see what you've missed.

Apache is a (sic) "IIS Killer"

I think you have it backwards. IIRC, httpd was originally written by NCSA at the University of Illinois at Urbana, on some flavor or another of BSD or SYSV Unix (BSD, if I remember right...), and is older than NT3.1, at least for purposes of availability. Apache is the end result of a bunch of server admins patching the NCSA sources after NCSA quit supporting httpd (A Patchy Web Server).

The concept of the GUI (and the mouse, for that matter) date back to Xerox PARC in 1975. Incidentally, that was the same time MSwas founded. IIRC, they were selling a BASIC interpreter for some architecture or another of Intel 8008 or 8080 (anybody know the answer to that one?), probably for PL/1, out of Albuquerque, NM. Apple released the first real GUI desktop machine with the LISA in 1983. Windows 1.0 was released around '85 or '86 (the "look-and-feel" suit of Apple vs. MS was basically tossed out because Apple's UI was too close to the PARC Star UI).

As far as invention and innovation go, look to Universities and pure R&D shops. Don't look to Microsoft, unless you want accounting and marketing innovation. DOS has a rather interesting history, as does IE, at least as far as the licensing deals go.

"Do you want to live in a world where things like the GUI, 3D graphics, wordprocessing, webserving, and other commercial products were never developed?"

Most, if not all, of these technologies, originated either on pure proprietary platforms, long since extinct, or on some flavor or another of unix. Word processing in its most raw form has existed since computing cycles became cheap enough for it to be practical. 3D really took off with SGI IRIX and SGI GL, and moreso with OpenGL. In all fairness, MS did join the OpenGL steering council, but they needed to find a way to get around the limitations of the Windows GDI under NT 3.1 so that they could go after the CAD/engineering market.

I will credit you with your point about the arrogance, and to a lesser degree, the "chasing taillights" syndrome. Many people will not try something presented to them with the "[insert commercial product here] Killer" as the main advertising point.

Years ago, Apple began including a very small microphone with their macs. It may have been with the Mac Classic, but I'm not sure (and I bet someone will check out apple-history and find out). Anyway, a bunch of recording industry giants, specifically Apple Records, if I'm not mistaken, got all upset because they though the inclusion of a microphone would begin to undermine the musical industry. Why, I really have no idea.

Apple's response? An included system sound entitled "sosumi." Say it out loud...you'll get the joke.

As far as I know Apple has included a microphone on every model (save maybe a few of the original Powerbooks) since then.

I have four computers on my home LAN. The Windows 2000 boxes are a Pentium 2 233 with 96MB RAM and a Pentium 3 600 with 384MB RAM. The two Macs are an iBook 600 with 384MB RAM and a PowerMac G3 450 with 512MB RAM.

In my opinion, both of my Macs are faster than the Windows boxes. I run only OS X. I don't even have Classic installed. Both platforms have the occasional hiccup where I'm waiting on the computer to do something. However, I get this more frequently on the Windows boxes than I do on the Macs. It's usually Explorer that I have to wait on in Windows -- including the Start Menu. On the Mac, it's probably manual window resizing most of the time. I rarely do this though, I generally use the zoom widget which is far superior to Window's maximize widget. Window dragging on the Mac is also faster than on Windows. Well, I guess they're both really the same speed, but Windows takes a while to refresh the screen where the window was and on the Macs that is not a problem.

None of my Macs are new enough to support Quartz Extreme -- my newest Mac was built in 1999. I'd see better performance on the new iBooks due simply to the fact that they have better video cards.

I have four computers on my home LAN. The Windows 2000 boxes are a Pentium 2 233 with 96MB RAM and a Pentium 3 600 with 384MB RAM. The two Macs are an iBook 600 with 384MB RAM and a PowerMac G3 450 with 512MB RAM.

In my opinion, both of my Macs are faster than the Windows boxes. I run only OS X. I don't even have Classic installed. Both platforms have the occasional hiccup where I'm waiting on the computer to do something. However, I get this more frequently on the Windows boxes than I do on the Macs. It's usually Explorer that I have to wait on in Windows -- including the Start Menu. On the Mac, it's probably manual window resizing most of the time. I rarely do this though, I generally use the zoom widget which is far superior to Window's maximize widget. Window dragging on the Mac is also faster than on Windows. Well, I guess they're both really the same speed, but Windows takes a while to refresh the screen where the window was and on the Macs that is not a problem.

None of my Macs are new enough to support Quartz Extreme -- my newest Mac was built in 1999. I'd see better performance on the new iBooks due simply to the fact that they have better video cards.

Apple used SCSI on nearly all of their computers from the late 80s until '97. That included the consumer Performa models.

bzzzzz, i'm so sorry, but Quada/LC/Performa 630 series released in 1994 used an IDE hard drive.

thankyou for playing, as a consolation prize we have a 10 lifetime supply of spam, enjoy :)

• It's not the original iMac, it's the rev. B imac that is selling for $799.

• It's not the original iMac, it's the rev. B imac that is selling for $799.

The Mac Classic is not the original Macintosh.

It was released in October 1990, see apple-history.com for more details.

Actually the i-bowtie is a Steve Jobs Insanely Great trademark from the 80s.

Steve Jobs circa 1984
I still think Sculley looks scared to have Steve behind him.

I went to disagree with you, but sadly, you are right in a way.

You cannot, however, give full credit to Microsoft for that. A fair share of the credit must indeed go to Apple for releasing AirPort - the first computer manufacturer to make it an option in all of their offerings. The iBook was first in September 1999, closely followed by the PowerMac G4 (AGP Graphics) the iMac (Slot Loading) and completing the lineup in Feb. 2000 with the PowerBook (FireWire). The Xserve doesn't offer AirPort, but then, it's a rackmount server.

Like many things in the computer industry (I sense strong opposition just ahead) Apple made it happen, Microsoft made it big.

Just from curiosity, what is the power cost for running this for a year?

I assume it will be running with the LCD active 24/7. Nothing seemed to imply a normal time-based shutdown (as if anyone here keeps "normal" hours anyway...) so that seems a valid assumption.

That said, what's the power usage for this, and therefore what is the approximate cost to run this for a year?

No, I'm not an eco-freak, I just like to know how much something will cost before before I jump in and do it.

This says 36Watts for the Duo 2300C. Okay.

36 * 24hours = 864watt-hours.
365 days of this = 315360 watt-hours, about 315kilowatt-hours.

My power company charges me about 6 cents per kilowatt-hour. This will cost about $19 per year in energy costs for me.

Amazing, that's actually low enough to be acceptable.

My condolances sir, but neither did the early PowerBooks:

PowerBook 100

PowerBook 100

PowerBook 100

Well, you get the idea ........

So, exactly how DOES your sock taste?

--NBVB

My condolances sir, but neither did the early PowerBooks:

PowerBook 100

PowerBook 100

PowerBook 100

Well, you get the idea ........

So, exactly how DOES your sock taste?

--NBVB

My condolances sir, but neither did the early PowerBooks:

PowerBook 100

PowerBook 100

PowerBook 100

Well, you get the idea ........

So, exactly how DOES your sock taste?

--NBVB

You're wrong. People mod their crap to look like all kinds of things. And Apple recently released these funny looking iMacs that are very often used as mp3 servers. So funky looking equipment is not a surprise at all.

Apple's been making servers since 1993. Take a look.

If you didn't see the difference between MacOS X and BSD, do a little research. I'll provide some Apple links.

• MacOS X Server 10.2 - take a good look around this one.
• Xserve

Apple put a lot of time into harnessing the power of UNIX into a box for Joe Average, and MacOS X Server gives admins the flexibility to do everything they want, without needing to wander through man pages to find that switch.

Apple's been making servers since 1993. Take a look.

If you didn't see the difference between MacOS X and BSD, do a little research. I'll provide some Apple links.

• MacOS X Server 10.2 - take a good look around this one.
• Xserve

Apple put a lot of time into harnessing the power of UNIX into a box for Joe Average, and MacOS X Server gives admins the flexibility to do everything they want, without needing to wander through man pages to find that switch.

>On the other hand, all the PC owners I have
>known are still happy with the 400 Mhz
>machines they've had for the last four years,

My Power Macintosh 7500/100 that was upgraded with a $300 G4 card, ATA/100 card, and a 10/100 ethernet card is running Mac OS X Server 10.1.4 and handling 50 email accounts, 2 websites, and 80 gigs of fileserver for my local 100 meg network holding DV clips and my MP3 collection.

I'd slam in a brand new Radeon 7000 video card in the last IDE slot, but then, i'm using it as a server, so instead, i put in a "Windows Only" USB/Firewire combo card - and it works fine too.

so you're little PC friends have another 3 years to go to "still be happy" - i bought my 7500 in 1995 instead of a 7200 because i thought "I might get some mileage out of having a removable CPU card". The best freaking purchase i've ever made in my whole life.

and if you think that they're going to be upgrading their 400 mHz boxes to P4's, you're sadly mistaken.

Well it's been two years and two thousand posts and look at the mess I'm in
A broken heart and an empty journal, an excess of anal skin -
Well I stew and I cook, on my broken down powerbook
And I say about slashdot, that it's not worth another look.

Take away, take away, take away this Karma cap
Well I'm lonely and I'm tired, and I can't read any more crap
Take away, take away, oh my patience surely will snap
Take away, take away, take away - take away this Karma cap

Well I've searched and I've searched, to find the perfect troll
On physics facts or profane shit, or refusal to pay the slashdot toll
But to talk sense on slashdot is to teach a pig to sing -
You can post all day long, and not say anything.

Take away, take away, take away this Karma cap
Well I'm sick and I'm tired, and I can't post any more crap
Take away, take away, oh will Kathleen sit on my lap?
Take away, take away, take away - take away this Karma cap

Well I passed the bar on the way to my dingy hidden sid
I spent all my money - so did LNUX, soon it's delisted
Will I wake up on the Blacklist, or with a Subnet Ban instead?
You don't have to be Kreskin - it's a fact, I'm already dead.

Take away, take away, take away this Karma cap
Well I'm lonely and I'm tired, and I can't post any more crap
Take away, take away, well I do deserve a bitchslap
Take away, take away, take away - take away this Karma cap!

That machine is ancient in Mac-time. [...] I went out and bought a DP 800 G4 so I could play too.

DP800 means you got a Quicksilver, released in Summer/Fall 2001. If I bought a PowerBook in the same time frame, it would have been a Mercury, with the exact same Rage 128 AGP 2x as Pismo.

In other words: the top-end mobile Mac available at any price only 8 months ago, which was specifically advertised as being a dream machine for video & graphics professionals, cannot use Quark Extreme. That's just plain wrong.

FYI, that would have been the Network Server 500/700.

7100 @ applehistory.

Under the 'codename:' field, it says:
"Carl Sagan, BHA, LAW"

BHA, obviously = Butt-Head Astronomer
LAW? Not sure.

blakespot