OS X 10.1 Coming Today (Sorta)

usa35.com writes "News.com has a story detailing the release of Apple's 10.1 update. They say "unveiled" today, probably meaning actually disseminated to us general public folks sometime in the coming days." This is of course the release that regular users can actually use. Supposedly this is a free upgrade. Speed improvements, UI fixes, DVD stuffs. I can't wait to test it out a little. And those new iBooks are pretty reasonably priced (I figure that they can sell them cheap by cutting corners like most of the mouse buttons ;)

Comments

Are office applications optimized for 10.X?

[JustinLong]

I used to work for a company that had a mixed environment of Macs and PCs. The one thing we discovered was that some applications (notably Foxpro, etc.) worked far slower on the Macs. I'm not sure but I was guessing that this was an optimization issue... So is there a noticeable speed difference still between apps optimized on the PC and not for the Mac, and vice versa? In our office right now we mostly use PCs but have a couple of Macs for graphic design and audio work.

Re:Are office applications optimized for 10.X?

[tim_maroney]

I saw a study in a magazine a few years back comparing application speeds between Windows and the Mac. It turned out that all applications they tested were virtually indistinguishable between the two platforms, megahertz for megahertz, except, that is, for Microsoft applications.

Microsoft applications were two to three times slower on the Mac, although Adobe and other vendors' applications were just as fast.

Of course, this is just a coincidence. It's not as if Microsoft would have any commercial interest in making the Mac platform seem inferior to Windows.

Tim

Developer Tools

[Zergwyn]

Besides the obviously needed increases in speed, DVD playback finally works(even better then in OS9 in build 5G64). Also it has much improved Windows interoperability. Apple will be including an SMB client to go with Samba in 10.1.

However, one thing that worries me is whether or not they will include Dev Tools. I bought OSX 10.0 when if first came out, and it came with the disc. The Dev Tools include important things like a compiler for making other programs from the Terminal, and fun things like a Java browser, OpenGL stuff, etc. However, they were not included with my new computer. While I already owned them, so I just loaded them myself, I hope that people won't have to pay $129 just to get some tools that should come with new machines. Thanks Apple, you based the system on BSD, but don't forget the tools we need to really write with it!

OS 10.1 MS Word v X and fun !

[SirStanley]

With 10.1 not only do I get dvd play back on a "Unix Based" os but MS is releasing a preview version of Word X. Now before you Anti-MS Dolts get your panties tied in a Knot. If you don't use Macs and haven't seen Microsoft's Mac software. You're missing out. MSIE:MAC Runs better than it does under windows. (There goes that whole its only "Faster" Cause its integrated into the OS Theory) And Microsoft Office for the Mac has consistently been the most useful Office Suite on the market. Star Office doesn't have anything on it. And Office:Mac has consistently blown the pants off of Office:windows For a long time.

But anyways. Check out the Microsoft mac stuff at www.microsoft.com/mac/ and just drool over screen shots of Office v X

And on a final Note. I love my TiPB I love OSX and I don't understand how I used anything other htan it for all those years.

Re:oh my dear lord

[The_Messenger]

CmdrTaco isn't really what you'd call "hardware savvy." He thinks that Michael Dell will hunt him down and beat him to a pulp if he replaces the Dell-branded keyboard on his Windows PC. He doesn't understand that all problems with Apple's mouse can be remedied in two simple steps: buy another mouse, and plug it in. But, CmdrTaco is something of a fucking retard (a "fucktard") -- he'd probably try to get some sort of refund from Apple for the "mouse tax."

News to lamers: if you don't want a PC with Windows, don't buy an OEM PC. News to CmdrTaco: if you don't want a one-button mouse, don't buy an Apple.

Fucktards.

OS X 10.1 is quite fast

[Anonymous Coward]

I installed it on a G3/500 Blue and White over the weekend (build 5G64 - the GM) and it is wildly fast. Boots the computer from button-push to full in 45 seconds. Opens applications easily 15 times faster (I did a check against 10.0.4 on another partition). Makes my old G3 *feel* like a G4. All in all, I'd have to say they have outdone themselves in this release (or spoiled us by giving us a really slow one first). I invite all Linux-heads to give it a shot - you may be surprised!

OS X supports multi-button mice

[dfdietrick]

I'm using a USB Kensington 3 button mouse, with the wheel, on my TiPB without any special software loaded. All the buttons work fine, and support is even better in the X.1. Basically, the right button works the same as a control click, and the wheel scrolls the Finder windows and application windows. Functionality in Classic mode is dependent on software.

Oh, and the buttons work as intended in XFree86. Rootless X works really well.

X.1 is running great, as advertised. Even my G3 runs well. I have over 300Mb in each machine, so I'm sure that helps. My only complaint is that I need driver support for my older printers. I can use them from Classic, but that can be a pain since I'm pretty much using all OSX apps now.

- Don

New OSX user

[Bluetick]

I've only been using OSX for about a month now (got my first mac then). And I love it. It's a recent Quicksilver model, so honestly, I don't know what people are talking about when they say it's slow, but I guess it probably is on less recent hardware. What I really would like it more customization for the GUI, there's really very little you can do to change the appearance. They have two sets of button colors, and you can change the magnification and size of the dock, as well as the size of icons. Gee, that's fantastic, but that's it! Also coming from X and Windows, it's hell of hard to keep track of applications (maybe just because I'm switching from a taskbar to a taskbar clone- dock). But I seem to get flustered when I have too many applications open. I really wish they'd incorporate multiple virtual desktops like in X.

As far as features and stuff, well honestly I haven't noticed any lack of them. The OS is the pinnacle of compatibility and versatility. I can open MacOS9 in classic mode to run Microsoft Office (ya ya, Microsoft sucks, but if you haven't tried their version of Office on a Mac shut up), Internet Explorer under OSX along with whatever else I need, and I with the click of a button I'm transported to a Gnome desktop running my *nix X programs (the ones I don't need to run from a terminal). Oh yeah, and it's got a terminal. Using Fink it's a snap to install Unix software (granted not all the ports I want, but more are coming). It's funny the way it works, Microsoft products are actually much better on Macs. Or of course I could just log out of Aqua all together and run pure Darwin alone, or with X.

I was going to install NetBSD or Linux on the computer, but now I don't think I'll need to.

Re:oh my dear lord

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's better. My hand gets tired faster when using multiple-button mice, because I gotta keep my fingers forked over the correct buttons, or else I will click with the wrong one.

With Apple's "the whole dang mouse is a button" mouse, going from the keyboard to the mouse is a LOT faster. Try it for a couple weeks and you will see what I mean. You don't need to look, you don't need to feel for the edges of the buttons, you just slide your right hand over a few inches from the "jkl;" position, and you are mousing. And "Control-Clicking" is really simple, because the "Control" button is right there under your left hand, in the lower left corner of the keyboard, and so big you can it it with the side of your hand reliably. After a while, you don't even think about it.

Right-clicking seems like a nice feature, until you spend some long hours with Apple's mouse and try to go back to the typical PC one... then you realize that the Apple mouse makes a lot of sense.

Of course, if you are using an OS that demans three buttons (such as one where there are no keyboard shortcuts for "copy" and "paste" *cough*Linux*cough*), then the Apple mouse comes up short. However, one button allows you to do everything, very easilly, in the Mac OS.

Re:Mac OS X restores fair use for DVDs!

[TWR]

Yes, I know it was a movie of the X-Men DVD running in the Apple DVD player app.

But they were able to grab the DVD RUNNING FULL SCREEN and capture it to a QuickTime movie that you can download off the web and watch on any QuickTime-enabled computer. Once you get full-screen DVD to QuickTime, you can convert it to anything and distribute snippets of it, just like Apple is currently distributing a snippet of X-Men via its web site.

I don't think this was done by pointing a video camera at a Mac screen, though I could be wrong.

-jon

Re:Mac OS X restores fair use for DVDs!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure it was not. I also know that in 5G59, at least, it is impossible - Most of Grab (screen capture program built-in) features are disabled, and those that aren't say "Sorry, the DVD player is currently running. Please quit it to capture" (or something to that effect).

Re:This is what 10.0 should have been

[mr100percent]

"
The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all his customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who by peddling second-hand, second-rate technology, led them all into it in the first place. "

--Douglas Adams

Douglas Adams on Microsoft

Re:Which is exactly the problem

[cpt kangarooski]

Er, that's not especially relevant, however.

1) Because mice themselves are not an example of an intuitive interface. No one really ever seems to know what it is, or how to use it, until they've seen it in action. (whereupon it also is revealed as a really easy to use interface)

2) Because contextual menus -- if implemented in a worthwhile way, with proper commands et al -- are the single best menus from a Fitt's Law viewpoint. The time to travel to the location where the mouse already is is 0, and that makes for a pretty infinitely large single pixel. (nb of course that the contextual menu at the cursor's current location may not be appropriate, but it's still a good idea)

3) Because Jef Raskin simply decided to go with a single button by fiat. IIRC he did no user testing. He had seen how multiple mice were used on one of the only other systems to support them widely, the Alto, and hadn't liked it. He was supported in this by only a few people, but they were the only ones who cared either way. I seem to recall reading in his book, or in something online that if he had done testing over a longer period of time, the desirability of modified clicks might have come up. (on the plus side, click-drag-release behaviors were a result of this)

4) Personally, I'd join the ranks of UI experts, not that I consider myself to be one, who advocate adding a second button. Personally, I'd probably have two additional buttons, for symmetry, so that it was useful for lefties. I'd have the software support left handed button assignments and cursors. The main button would be as large as possible, for ergonomic reasons, and the secondary buttons pretty small. For purposes of distinction, they'd be a different color and texture, and have a glyph -- perhaps an arrow cursor w/ menu, on them. If it had an optical sensor, it would be located as far forwards as possible, for maximum control. Even if a plastic periscope was needed. Perhaps I'd find a way to work in my thumb side-mounted jog wheel idea too.

Anyway, I like the Mac, but it's important to sort the legend from the reality.

Re:What doesn't work

[gig]

> if I'm in Classic all day, why upgrade.

Because with 10.1 its possible to run a Web browser in an entirely different memory space than you're running Photoshop. Even Classic apps benefit from OS X's memory management, too, so "Classic" itself thinks it has 1GB of RAM no matter how much you really have. You can set your Classic apps to take advantage of this.

Right now I'm running Word X, BBEdit for Mac OS X, IE X, QuickTime Player X, a couple of betas I'm under NDA for, and no classic apps. If I start up Photoshop in Classic, then Photoshop is running in its own space (albeit along with Mac OS 9). If IE goes down, Photoshop doesn't, and vice versa. This machine itself also has only crashed once in the last six months, too, and that was with 10.0.1 or so and the repeatable bug has been fixed.

For most people, just getting their always-running browser and email client native can make a big difference.

Final Cut Pro is a show-stopper for you, though, because it doesn't run under Mac OS X at all. Apple announced that Final Cut Pro X will ship in the fall, though. It is almost ready. What a system that will be ... Final Cut Pro is an amazing story.