Slashdot Mirror
Apple Releases Mac OS X 10.1.3
nbvb
submitted what I'm pleased to say is our first
apple.slashdot.org
story. We'll be posting more news for our sizable
Apple population there in the future. Anyway, He says
"Apple today released Mac OS X 10.1.3. Be sure to click your "Software Update" and "Install" buttons! (Hey, if we can get an announcement every time a new point rev of a development kernel hits the FTP sites, can't we hear about Mac OS X?)" As usual, user reports of the new release have been both positive and negative.
Can we have this theme on the other pages?
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Actually, it doesn't beg the question.
Now, because I'm at work I haven't had a chance to install the 10.1.3 update. Someone please tell me they did some Aqua or ATI 3D optimization on the Rage chipset in the new iBooks. That is -all- I want! Also, I haven't really seen much comments or reports on the update, since Apple doesn't publish a really big CHANGELOG. But Macintouch has a fairly huge reader reports section. If not, I guess I'll have to wait for the next 10.2 beta.
Anyone know how to make non-supported DVD drives play with OS X DVD player.app? I have an LG 12x burner 8x DVD that is supposed to work according to xlr8yourmac.com - it'll work fine in OS 9 but no love from 10.1.2. Cool. Have fun!
-Pat
It's probably a very strategic move into the space of mac info/rumors sites, ~because~ those sites have a dedicated following like /., but with a splintered offering of niche info. In other words, Can /. rule the mac weblog space?
/. will have to deal with or risk dissolving its brand.
Slashdot was probably asking themselves "Why not use our brand and slashcode to bring a superior geek news site to a community that has demonstrated their desire for this kind of content."
The problems you bring up are going to be issues
P.S. I used to visit macosrumors everyday, then they posted a link to this new site "Slashdot"... 1997?
What I would really like is a topic where all these Linux 2.2.0.2.3.4.1.3 and MacOS X 10.1.3 updates are posted so I can skip them. I like to read about a substantially new version of an OS, but why should we be bothered with these minor bug-fixes. The people who use the respective OS's will learn about the update from their own sources (I learned about this update from 5 sites before Slashdot told me about it) and the others couldn't care less about minor fixes that don't affect them.
Besides, the most important reason to read slashdot is for the comments and these topics get the worst comments of all. It's mostly trolling (Mac/Linux/BSD rulez/sucks) and uninteresting trivia (did you know that this update fixes DVD on external monitors?). Get me some serious technology news that illicits comments about the problems of EPIC or an ethical story about censorship.
The Drowned and the Saved - Primo Levi
Basically, Apple makes almost all of its money from hardware sales. Obviously if they sold OSX for x86 systems, thats a sizeable chunk of cash that they'd lose.
I agree completely, but I just wanted to throw in a slightly different interpretation. Microsoft has become an amazing success based on their sales of the Windows operating systems. I can't think of another company that has been that successfull selling primarily operating systems.
They did it in two ways: diversification and licensing, licensing, licensing.
If Microsoft sold only Windows XP, they couldn't be as successful as they are. But because they also sell Office, and SQL Server, and all that other crap^H^H^H^H valuable stuff, they can make a bundle.
Also, Microsoft licenses the heck out of Windows, so for (almost) every computer sold, MS gets a few bucks. To do this, they've had to make some questionable business decisions.
So, given these two facts, Apple can produce OS X for Intel and be successful if one of two things happens:
1. Apple diversifies into an applications company and starts selling stuff like "Mac OS X SQL Server" or "Mac OS X Groupware Product" to keep the cash flowing. Probability: almost zero.
2. Apple gets somebody serious, like Dell, to license OS X for Intel to sell on their PCs. Probability: even less than zero. This actually has negative probability! The very existence of this option makes other things more probable!
So yeah, pretty much releasing OS X for Intel would be a death sentence, either for Apple as a whole, or at least for Apple as we know it.
True. Apple has gained noticeably more respect since the release of OS X, unfortunately, I can't say the same about the Apple enthusiasts. They have a long way to go. Here's why: For the most part, the nerd contingent refered to in "News for nerds" believes in function before form. This is an engineering principle. I am a graphic designer, but I respect and understand the importance of this principle. Many Apple users are of the "Oooh, shiny!" variety, and some even go so far as to deride command line interfaces and less-than-perfect GUIs. It is commonly believed that such people have no place in a serious discussion of technology.
"It's Dot Com!"
First, I have to say, I've had no problems with 10.1.3, and it works fine on my PowerBook G4.
About the apple.slashdot.org site: does this mean that Apple stories won't be cross-posted to the regular slashdot site? If they are still cross posted, then that's cool.
If not, I see a problem: partitioning Apple-related stories away in a separate site from general science, technology, YRO, and other non-Linux stories seems counterproductive and silly. I mean, there's a reason why MacSlash doesn't get a tenth of the traffic as Slashdot. That is, as a Mac user (and Linux and Windows user), I don't care to visit another site that only covers Mac stuff; that's what Macintouch and MacCentral are for.
So if this site is going to be like the latter, you should have done a poll to see which topic had to get off the swingset and play by itself.The Aqua-fied slash look is pretty cool, though.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
I suffered the same fate with my G4 cube 450. The GUI just froze up (although I could still telnet in and gracefully shut it down). To tie up any loose ends I downloaded the 10.1.3 package from the Apple support site and ran the update again. Different fix, same end result.
I'm kind of disappointed that there are problems with this update. Software update has been nothing but solid in the past and it's a shame to see that reputation tarnished. Still, it's a testament to the stability of OS X that it could suffer such a crash and still be totally accessible via ssh or telnet. Much better than the old MacOS.
This
It might be possible to work out a scheme using mouse acceleration to determine whether the user is shooting for the menubar at the top or a window. If there were certain characteristics of the mouse pointer accelerating towards the menubar that are different from those of a mouse pointer accelerating towards a window, it might be possible to use the differences in acceleration to make a distinction between the two situations and be able to apply the following focus to only when the pointer is meant to hit the window.
Of couse, this would probably require serious quantities of HCI experiments and a damn fine usability lab. Some AI work might also be necessary. But it is theoretically possible.
I don't see how focus-follows-mouse would be possible when the menubar is at the top of the screen. If any window was behind the one you're in, you'd lose the focus before you got to the menubar.
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
>DON'T use a lot of hacks, particularly ones that screw
>with the forbidden System folder of OS X (unlike the OS 9
>System Folder, this is Apple's area--unless you really
>know what you are doing, stay out. The things you usually
>find in an OS 9 Sys Folder are found in your Home folder,
>in the Library folder.)
Here, here! I've been hearing a lot of complaints from people (particularly on Macintouch) that say that Mac OS X is giving them problems. After listing all the things that don't work for them, they let loose that they're using Tinkertool, messed around with moving their swap file, they ran the public beta initially and never did a low-level format of their hard drive, or they're running it on a old 9600 with a G4 upgrade and the required kernel hacks to get it working.
I have had no significant problems with updates on Mac OS X. I ran the Public Beta a while ago, but I took the time to do a low-level format before moving to the final version. You couldn't pay me to go back to Mac OS 9 (in fact, on my new PowerBook, I haven't allowed Classic to start even once).
In short, if you play with fire, don't be surprised if you get burned.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.