Slashdot Mirror
Mac OS X 10.2 "Jaguar" Reviews Pour In
hype7 writes "The reviews on Apple's new Mac OS X 10.2 "Jaguar" are starting to come through. The New York Times (free reg required) heaps on the praise: 'Mac OS X 10.2 is the best-looking, least-intrusive and most thoughtfully designed operating system walking the earth today.' MacCentral is positive: 'From what I've seen Jaguar is leaps and bounds ahead of Mac OS X 10.1 in both speed and functionality.' MacWorld has also chimed in: 'for most users, there are a lot of important improvements in this upgrade: performance boosts, improved printing, and interface enhancements will be immediate benefits. And over time, Mac OS X 10.2's new technologies (including Quartz Extreme and Rendezvous) will make the update even more valuable.'"
Just FYI, Macworld ownd Maccentral and thus anything coming out of Maccentral will be a parrot of what's coming out of Macworld.
Not to say that's wrong, just saying that you might have well only mentioned one of the other and picked a different 3rd example.
--Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
I'm not an american resident, so the only zip code I know is 90210. I suspect that anyone asking for zipcodes gets a heck of a lot of people answering that.
You are not paying $129 for an upgrade. Apple doesn't sell OS upgrades. When you spend $129 for Jaguar you are getting a FULL version of the OS. You don't have to have an earlier version of the OS installed to install Jaguar.
Gotta watch those quotation marks!
If you're worried about losing control of your OS, please take a nice long look at Microsoft, a company that sells very little hardware (and outsources every piece of hardware it does sell, including the X-Box) but is one of the richest and most successful companies in the history of mankind, based solely on OS sales.
Yeah, based on OS sales to hardware makers. If Apple can figure out how to get OSX pre-installed on PC hardware, they'd be rich. They'd be Microsoft in fact, since that's all Microsoft had before they got where they are now.
For now, if Apple makes the OS run on x86 hardware, they don't gain much. In fact they might lose some hardware sales.
RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!! The Macs have become self-aware and created legs to run around and reak havok!
You're thinking of Apple's Mac OS X Family Pack, which lets you install it on up to 5 Macs in one household for $199. I think it's great for people who want to be legal and have more than one Mac at home.
I can't figure out how to post a direct URL (the Apple Store doesn't like deep linking) but here's how to get there:
Considering that most of Apple's income comes from the sale of hardware, your suggestion makes as much sense as telling Bill Gates to concentrate on selling applications and stop mucking about with that silly Windows stuff.
Yup. Samba.
Also NFS.
Also WebDAV.
Also has a PPTP-based VPN client.
Also has "Active Directory" compatibility, whatever that is (some Windows stuff).
And some other stuff you may have heard of, like RPC, FTP, HTTP, OpenSSH, usw.
Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
www.fogbound.net
Mac OS 10 is showing us how a good operating system is designed. That's useful so that Windows users can compare and understand better what they are getting.
I hear MacOS X is great and all, but am I the only one who hears "Jaguar" and thinks not "lithe jungle cat" but instead "pretty but unreliable British automobile"?
...What no one is mentioning is that yes the OS is amazing (worth the high price of a Mac IMO) but the Dev tools are simply fantastic. If your a pro you get all these amazing dev tools for free and if your a beginner now you have a reason to start.
The Cocoa framework is, once you understand it, the easiest, most powerful framework there is. You can make amazing, truely object oriented programs with a full GUI in no time t all. Objective C is a great language and the fact you CAN use all your C/C++ code in your programs and integrate things adds to the functionality.
There is an object called NSTask that allows you, the programmer in code, access and use the function of ANY command line tool in your program. Who else offers something like this?
I really suggest to all developers to take a good look at developing for this computer. It's fun, effeciant and powerful. Not to mention free and of course you have all your favorite command line tools, compilers etc. In fact, every program compiled with the free compiler is GCC.
It's simply, great.
Native Java also =)
"Allez Cusine!"
Has it not occoured to you that the reason that Mac OS X is so stable and fast is because they know exactly what hardware it will need to run?
I've read many comments here saying how Apple should port the OS if it's so good. But one of the reasons the OS is good is that they don't have to worry that someone will try to run it on an Althalon, or put in there $0.99 NIC and expect it to work. Just ask the Linux community and they'll tell you the bigest headache is getting drivers for all of the hardware that is out there.
So maybe we should think about this in the future. If every hardware vendor had the same quality control as Apple, and was as methodical about testing that everything works together we'd all have an OS that works as well as OS X, no matter what it was.
Trust me if Apple ported there OS to the x86 people would be screaming from day one that it sucks. They'd probably blame Apple for doing it on purpose to get people to buy Macs.
I'm starting to dread when Apple news makes the slashdot front page. That is when 3/4 of the discussion tends to be about multi-button mice, "proprietary hardware" and how we don't want to pay for it, stuipid misunderstsandings about the OS, and on and on and on.
I almost prefer the apple.slashdot.org ghetto that we're usually relegated to. At least there it's about 3/4 people who actually understand something about the platform and don't need to bring the discussion back to "why I don't like this platform" no matter what the original story is.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
I'm Switching(TM) in a few weeks. Can't wait to brag about having BSD as my main kernel (with a Suse/AMD box on the sidelines).
:)
Now, having gotten that out of the way. OS 10.2 is nice. Speed improvement is striking. Not in the way that, "it should have been that fast in the first place", it's more in the way of the first time I installed BeOS on a computer to see it in comparision to WinME.
Networking is definitely faster. I haven't benched anything yet, but I can say if you have a fast line, you will see your web browser of choice speed up considerably.
The "disconnect from Network bug" is still there. Connect to a SMB, AppleTalk, or DAV volume and pull your network cord (or turn off the machine exporting the drive) and you will get the spinning wheel of death.
Video Performance is spooky, even on an origional G4 tower. You really have to see it to understand.
iChat is next to useless, but the auto discovery of other clients is nice.
SMB export was a pain in the ass. You have to enable it on a user by user basis, which wasn't obvious, in the Accounts preference pane. Then after it's enabled for a user, you have change their password. Since the GUI client changes both the Samba password and Unix password for the user, at the same time, the users CANNOT just change their password on the command line. This also raises fears that the Samba passwords are stored in cleartext on the harddrive. I suspect, this is not the case, but haven't look yet. There is no convient way to set the SMB workgroup in the GUI
XDarwin needed to be repaired (which is available at the X on X site and seemingly not part of what Fink compiles) to work. This was annoying.
The firewall has Gnutella as an option to allow.
My SCSI CD Burner stopped working. I suspect the old SCSI bug is back for the time being.
Some other shit I foget....
Burn Hollywood Burn
I think they did look at Microsoft, and what MS could and would do to them if they raised such a challenge.
Office would certainly die, probably IE as well.
Tight integration of hardware and software is a big part of the Mac experience. It avoids problems. MacOS x86 would have tons of problems, many more than windows, more, probably, than Linux, which is known for having driver problems.
I was about to write that most Mac people have never thought about a driver in their lives, but that's probably an exaggeration. They have to worry about them for scanners and stuff like that. But not for the core components of the system. Stuff just works. Which is, of course, the basis of their ad campaign.
Apple makes a profit on their hardware, because their model shields them from direct competition. The tight integration is a core component of their OS. And moving into x86 OS's would trigger an all out war from MS, and pull the plug on software that every Mac OS X user uses all day every day (IE).
Many people are commenting that Apple needs to move to x86, however, I think there are a few problems with that. First of all, Apple has never strictly enforced the licensing systems they have in place. Nearly all Mac users I've dealt with are lax about it too, usually installing the copy they get with their new computer on their older equipment, or borrowing a copy from a friend. There has never been much pressure from anywhere not to do this, because, after all, "everyone knows that Apple survives off hardware". As Apple has no copy protection scheme in place, they are worried that they would loose massive amounts of money by just selling an OS to a crowd which has always viewed the OS as a freebie.
Apple could avoid this by creating their own bios, or some other way of restricting the machines that could install Mac OS X for the x86, but historically, this hasn't worked well, just look at IBM. In the Mac world though, they have been able to hold patents and such on far more of the machine, preventing against unlicensed clones (they prosecuted quite a few companies in the '80s over Mac clones). If they don't have complete control over the hardware, its doubtful that they could prevent clones.
Finally, if we assume that Apple decides to release an OS X port that works on all x86 hardware, they would have to compete with all the x86 vendors on price (Dell, etc.), as well as Microsoft on the OS (and all the OEM agreements that entails), and they would have to set up support for a huge amount of hardware that they don't have experience. This seems unlikely to me.
As a combination of all these issues, I just cannot see Apple moving to x86 any time soon. Sure, they might be able to do it, but I don't see it making sense.
Here's a link to the info you are looking for: http://www.apple.com/macosx/jaguar/compatibility.h tml
--
Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things.
Actually, I would consider the proprietary hardware to be one of their advantages.
Having a standard platform to work with may be why Apple's work is so impressive. With like hardware across the field to work with, OS X software developers don't have to worry about hardware driver interaction issues nearly as much as on a x86 platform.
It's also an obvious advantage in stability areas, where Windows is so completely flawed...since it has to be compatible with such a wide range of hardware.
As much as I'd love to see OS X for x86, I don't it will ever happen. Apple likes having complete control over their products so they can produce the best products. With a few exceptions, Apple arguably releases the highest quality and designed products in the computer industry, and I think that's a real advantage for them.
-brain
Steve Jobs: Hey, Mike, whassup?
Michael Dell: Drinking, a Bud, hoping like hell that the SEC doesn't decide that I'm next.
Steve Jobs: Anyway, what do you think of MacOS on Dell Hardware?
Michael Dell: It'd be a pain in the ass, Steve. Bill's got my nuts in a pair of vice-grips. I'm trying to break loose, but if I make any moves at all, I start paying Microsoft through the nose. I've made a few deals to ship OS-less PC's with Freedos media in the box, but I'm not sure how that's going to work yet.
Steve Jobs: Well, let me give you an offer like this. Supposing you do manage to start selling PC's without Windows successfully. How about you make us a promise to ship a certain volume of PC's with Mac0SX for x86 along with a copy of Virtual PC or something similiar so your users don't lose out on all thier Windows Apps. It should cost about the same as a Windows XP license, if you don't include the cost of the Windows license they have to buy to get Virtual PC to work.
Michael Dell: I'll do you one better. I understand there are some guys out there who've done a really good job with the Wine project for Linux. Crossover, or something like that. I bet with a small infusion of cash, they could get a version ready for OSX in just a few months.
Steve Jobs: Is it any good?
Michael Dell: It plays Warcraft 3.
Steve Jobs: Hmmm...
Michael Dell: Hmmm...
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
I think "ahead of it's time, kick-ass, console gaming system from Atari that no one bought, forcing Atari out of the hardware business", but that's just me.
Didn't get out of the hardware business fast enough? That's an interesting postulation, but I know a few people who still use NeXT workstations for certain tasks, and none who use OpenStep on x86. There has been exactly one successful OS vendor on the x86 platform, but many Unix companies have carved out a good market for themselves selling purpose-built high quality hardware, which apple is doing right now. Putting OS X on that shitty beige Dell with the WinModem, funky sound card, and god-knows-what other cheap knockoff hardware won't give the average user any kind of benefit, if the thing even works at all. This is the problem Linux is running into and having much difficulty with.
___
Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
My iBook was actually the cheapest notebook available with all of the features I wanted. iBook: $1,800. Closest x86 alternative (Sony Vaio): $2300. And considering all of the features, the iMacs are very fairly priced.
Bear in mind that there are other things beside CPU speed, especially with laptops. I wanted a 32MB Radeon 7500, when most x86 laptops have 8MB GeForce2 MXs or ATI Rages. I also wanted to be able to plug the thing into any TV without a converter. My iBook does that with a $19 connector; the x86 ones I looked at need a $100 VGA-to-TV converter.
If you're stuck on meaningless numbers (like, oh, I dunno, clock speed) then sure, it looks like a raw deal. But when you look at it from a feature and usability standpoint Apple computers blow away the competition.
Apple is trying to kill off native AppleTalk and just using AFP via TCP/IP.
/config/AppleFileServer, and modify the attribute "use_appletalk" from 0 to 1. A full description of the procedure can be found at the bottom of this page, but what I wrote above is enough to get an OS X Mac speaking old AppleTalk.
AFAIK, Jaguar supports mounting Windows shares out of the box. For Mac OS 9.x, you can get DAVE from Thursby.
There is also a means to get OS X machines to speak old-school AppleTalk. Dunno if it'll work in your situation, but you enable it by using the NetInfo Manager application. Go to
~Philly
I'll bite.
Yes, I know this subject has been beaten into the ground ad-infinitum, but it still needs to be said once again: DUMP THE PROPRIETARY HARDWARE.
Apple uses off-the-shelf hard drives, optical drives, RAM, and graphics cards. The only proprietary pieces of hardware are their motherboards and cases.
Apple is selling hardware that is half the speed at 2 to 4 times the price of Intel hardware. Yes, apparently there are enough hard-core fanatics to keep the company alive, but why be satisfied with that? Why sit arrogantly back and just preach to those people?
Half the speed, only if you count Megahertz. Mac OS X comes with lots of software which runs faster than any comparable software in the Intel world, such as their G4-optimized MP3 encoder, which can encode high-quality 160kpbs MP3s at 10x real-time on a 733 MHz G4, directly from a CD. Your P4 may be running at 2+ GHz, but since there are currently no MP3 encoders that are optimized for the P4 architecture, your MP3 encoder is slower. Also, Mac OS X takes advantage of your graphics card for all of its drawing now - something that neither Windows or Linux does. This frees up the Mac's poor MHz-starved processors to do other things.
2 to 4 times the price? What are you smoking? The only way you can get a PC for half the price of a similarly-equipped Mac is by using dirt-cheap components that only work half the time. If you want poor-quality or mediocre hardware, you can get a cheaper PC. If you really want good hardware, a Mac is usually priced about the same, or maybe 10-20% more. (Mac laptops are often a better deal than similarly equipped PC laptops; desktop Macs are usually 10-20% more expensive.)
Yes, I know that Apple is traditionally a hardware company. So what? Being a software company hasn't exactly hurt Microsoft. Software is HUGELY more profitable than hardware.
Ha! Apple has at least twice the profit margins as Dell. They make plenty of money on hardware.
Unfortunately, as long as Microsoft has all of the major computer manufacturers in their back pocket, all major brand-name PCs will come with Windows preinstalled. Nobody has a chance of competing with that.
And besides, what's stopping them from "doing Intel right" and coming out with their own line of expensive hardware? Oh, no one will buy it because it will be so much more expensive? Well, some fanatics will continue to buy it, and meanwhile they continue to make huge $$$ on the software.
The main problem with Mac OS X running on ALL Intel hardware is drivers. Unless you're going to talk all peripheral manufacturers into writing Mac OS X drivers, there'd be no point.
As much as I despise Apple-the-company, I would LOVE to have a real competitor to Microsoft on the desktop, particularly one that was Unix based.
If you're unwilling to buy Apple's hardware, you'd better put your money behind your favorite Linux distro, then. Apple makes a great hardware/software combination and they have no reason to start running on PCs.
I really wish Steve would pull his head out of his ass and stop being satisfied being a boutique.
Yeah, wouldn't it be cool if Apple started advertising to Windows users, letting them know how Mac OS X is fast, stable, practical, and "just works"? Oh wait...
2) Universal Access -- So what if you got all your eyeballs, ears and arms, doesn't mean you can't take advantage of the amazing Universal Access controls in Mac OS X. Apple's Text to Speech technology rules. Now my Mac talks to me when certain events occur, "Mutha Fucka! E-Mail Server Down!", "Some asshole is NMAPn' me!!!". I can also hilight text and have the Mac read it to me with a simple keystroke.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
This makes absolutely NO sense whatsover!!
Who would purchase 10.2 that doesn't own MacOS?? Nobody. My brother runs Windows on Intel hardware. He's not going to buy 10.2. Face it people, Apple set the *upgrade* price to be $129, because 10.2 only runs on Apple hardware which comes with an Apple OS.
If you have problems because it is too expensive, then that's a valid concern, but quit saying that they should offer discounts for people who *upgrade*.
command line apps seem very much slower
Believe it or not, it's a graphics thing. Try turning off antialiasing in Terminal.app. The option is found under the application menu, in Window Settings, on the Display pane.
You must not be using Quartz Extreme. With QE, there's no difference between AA and non-AA in Terminal.app.
So why doesn't Linux and Windows have this sort of feature? I would love to see Gnome or KDE rendering everything using my GPU, so that my CPU could do something more interesting.
Quartz freaking extreme.
Imagine - a OS who's GUI is being handled by the graphics card...
what an idea!
QE makes Mac OS X feel like Mac OS 9 - except that you get vector graphics everywhere.
Resizeing the whole screen, watching DVD's thru a translucent window, and drop down menus no longer drag your computer to a halt. - so long as you have a 16 meg Radeon or nVidia video card.
For users of older machines - you'll still like the performance enhancements, plus the longer battery life.
10.2 is worth every dime.
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
Beyond that, know what? If your goal is to run mySQL and PHP as cheaply as possible, you want to be using Linux on a homemade Athlon box. Just like if your primary concern is games, you should use Windows. This isn't about telling every last user in the world to use the same OS.
On the other hand, there are web design and software development apps available for MacOS that make anything on Linux (except maybe KDevelop) look sick. The bundled developer tools alone (Project Builder and Interface Builder) are terrific. You may want to check those out and see if they're a reason to make OS X your primary developer platform.Oh, and if you want a Unix laptop, Apple is clearly the answer, whether you want to use MacOS or Linux.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I believe the point is that people who upgrade from other versions of Mac OS X (which is not the entire user base) should get a discount. People, then, who have Mac OS 9 should pay full price.
I disagree, but that's the statement.
This makes absolutely NO sense whatsover!!
Actually, it does make sense. If the cost of an upgrade doesn't vary whether you keep up-to-date or not, then there is no financial incentive to keep up-to-date. In other words, if 10.3 is going to cost me the same price whether I own 10.2 or not, why don't I just save myself some money and wait a year or so for 10.3? Whereas, if I get a discount for 10.3 by buying 10.2, then I have a reason to keep current.
-Joe
But I'm thinking you've already made up your mind.
...now that they got rid of their OS which was awful (for what I needed), and are now OpenBSD, I'm more likely to switch.
Ummm, it's FreeBSD. There's a difference.
I have seen it, and it is really just window dressing as far as I'm concerned. I have heard that the command line stuff is slower now...
Hmmm. Well, it's just window dressing wrapped around a Mach kernel. It has native (I said NATIVE) open technologies, like Java, OpenGL, and the Cocoa API. And for what it's worth, I will stack Apple's API's, written in Objective-C, against Win32 or MFC any day of the week. But then, you've already made up your mind. I'm sure you think that Objective-C is a complete waste of time, but I see the best of C++, Smalltalk, Lisp, and Java in Objective-C. It's beautiful to use. If you have to look up the word "erudite" in the dictionary, you probably don't know what I mean. As far as the command utils being slower, I have been running a developer seed of Jaguar for over a month, and it compares very nicely to earlier versions of OS X. I haven't noticed a slowdown.
Things I care about are price to performance ratio. Ease of programming (tools available - need mySQL, php, Perl, Java, C/C++, etc). Cost of maintenance (software and hardware upgrades), etc etc.
Apple's stuff is hard to steal. So, you're gonna have to pay $129 for an OS. You will need a machine to run it on. You can get an iMac for $800. So, for around $1000, you get a list of features longer than your arm. You get a development tools CD that comes with everything you need for serious development. Java 1.3.1 is pre-installed. The gcc compiler is pre-installed. OS X loves perl. Apache 1.3.1 is pre-installed. Tomcat is a simple download. I develop cross-platform applications for x86, Moto, and SPARC. And I'll even agree with you that programming for the "classic" MacOS was pretty painful. I love OS X, because it is the most efficient development platform that I own, and I'm pretty sure I've tried them all. (I must admit, I do love many things about Visual Studio).
As far as upgrades go, on a G3/G4 tower, just pop the hatch and install your RAID. I did a toolless install of a 512GB RAID two weeks ago. It took ten minutes, literally. The most recent machines use DDR ram, Ultra-ATA drives, AGP4x, PCI. What upgrades do you want?? It comes with gigabit ethernet. It comes with a very nice video card, and many of the towers come "dual-head-ready."
Oh, one more thing. The reason that sliced bread is great is because it's convenient. Someone did the annoying cutting for me. The result is a product that contains less waste and saves me time. Speaking of time, I'm so convinced that you don't care, that I'm not going to waste any more.
Someone has already pointed out that:
Jag-wahr = Jungle cat.
Jag-yu-ahr = British pronunciation/car
I'll point out that:
Jag-wire = OS X update.
You're not supposed to pronounce it like the cat. There should be no confusion when you *hear* the word. This is not mentioned in any documentation, it's just how Steve pronounces it in keynotes.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
I think that they kind of "snuck" this *major* upgrade on us after the fact. Especially to us "switchers". I'm not very happy that less than a month after I bought a G4 powerbook that I'm told that now to have an up-to-date supported OS I need to shell out full price for a new version. Even on major release updates, most other software vendors have a grace period of when you buy the previous release (a 1-3 months) that you get a low-cost or free upgrade to get the new one. That's good business practice. If you did publicize a new major release coming shortly (which Apple didn't do enough of earlier IMHO), you'd give those who just bought the older release a grace period to get the newer release, otherwise your sales will plummet before the next release with everyone waiting for it rather than buying the shortlived previous release. I'd accept a decent upgrade price as I would expect for other OS's/packages.
Had Apple said earlier that 10.2 was going to be a major release change (that was considered a major release change as opposed to 10.0 to 10.1), or announced it as OS 11 (which doesn't go well with their OSX abbreviation as then it would need to change to OSXI), then I might have held off for another month to get my laptop. I was uninformed and paid the price. That doesn't make me happy.
I was told by Apple support when asking about this that I should have known that something like this would be announced at MacWorld (as I guess the Mac faithful are used to hearing), and that had I known past history of MacWorld announcements, I would have waited. Well, if this practice gets well known, then watch system sales drop even more next year before MacWorld as people wait for announcements then too. I don't think Jobs wants to have to stand up and say that they're last month sales are dropping heavily then will he?
If so, you'll like the networking, power and sleep management in OS X. Location management is excellent. You can have arbitrarily many sets of networking environments, and switching between them takes two mouse clicks, no reboot required.
My 500 MHz iBook's wake from sleep time is two seconds, counting from the time I unlatch the lid. I reboot it only after major OS updates - the last one was July 8th. I have never lost work due to a faliure to wake from sleep.
My battery life in the field is about three hours, mostly running emacs and developing code. I can stop in the middle of anything, close the lid, and walk away confident that I won't lose work. The machine will sleep for about two weeks on a full charge (I lose ~7% battery power per 24 hours).
You can even safely run the battery completely dead - OS X's last gasp is to write the complete state of the machine to the hard drive, and when you find an outlet, plug in and reboot, you come back to exactly where you left off. My kids do this with full-screen games.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Let's say that Apple were to port OS X to commodity PC hardware, and were to make their own high-quality (and likely expensive) well-designed x86 boxes running OS X. If you're not running on an Apple box, don't expect OS X support.
Other than predictable bitching, the first thing that would happen is that Windows would be installed on the box by a number of users who like the hardware, but not the software. The second thing that would happen is that people would likely be able to get OS X running (badly) on cheaper hardware, reducing in the process Apple's reputation for solid and dependable software. This would reduce the user base for OS X software at the same time as Apple's hardware profits are sinking. App developers would flee in droves, and the OS sales would trickle to a halt. In about two or three years, at most, Apple would either be back on PPC (having lost a lot of money) or dead.
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
The student asked the master, "Why don't we port our operating system to a newer, faster CPU?"
The master simply replied, "Even the fastest operating system with no software that will run on it makes you wait forever." And the student was enlightened.
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
They shouldn't of modded you down. He is right.
Keep in mind people that Linux is cheap because development is uh like free. A distro only need to hire packagers and write a few installer scripts to put things together and then add some support staff's. Lets Face it. $50 is not the price of an average os or would a company even break even on a sale at that price. I think we may all be spoiled because of linux.
What apple is offering is really not that bad for amajor upgrade. THe graphics layer had to be rewritten from scratch, smp code had to be re-updated, several apps were added, and I bet apple had to fund some usability testing so they could improve the ui. Its not a 1.2 release but rather a verison 2 release and I think the versioning has confused some people. MacOSX will always stay version 10. If Apple changed to MacOSXI then the OS name would change and confuse consumers. If it were $129 for a bunch of bugfixes (cough cough win98se), then it would be different.
All the other cheaper upgrades so far were minor revisions. ALso if you own version 10.1 or 10.0, you do not have to upgrade. Think about the internals here. System 6, System 7 and System 8, all looked alike from the outside but were totally different inside which made them different releases. Same is here.
http://saveie6.com/
No, it's the OS X users that want a free upgrade
There are quite a few OS X users who are upset that they are going to have to -pay- for an upgrade which will fix many major OS X bugs and or once again support certain features of Apple hardware (ie software WiFi support for OEM Mac antennas) that where disabled with 10.0 or 10.1
OS X 10.0 was by no means a complete OS. And, even though OS X 10.1 was much better, the same could be said for 10.1 as well. I can understand why these people are kind'a ticked off. They want what should've been given to them for free.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
Comparing Apple prices to Dell (the number 1 PC maker in the world) it becomes immediately clear that except for two configurations of the "Dimensions" line, Macs are significantly cheaper (by $496 to $2085) than comparably configured Dells. If anyone is doing the raping, it's Dell, and it made them the largest computer maker in the world!
Synchronizing the systems:
Comparably priced speakers were added to the Mac, Precision 530 and Precision 340 systems so that all would have the same configuration as the Dell Dimension systems. ( which automatically come with speakers )
Optical Logitech mice were added to all Dell systems to match the Mac which ships with an optical mouse.
V.90 modem cards were added to all Dell systems to match the Mac which automatically ships with an internal modem.
3 Year AppleCare Protection Plan was added to Mac configurations to match the standard 3 year Dell protection plan.
All other user configurable hardware ( except processors ) were selected to match point for point between the Macs and the Dells.
Where possible, optional add-on software ( such as virus protection, Office Suites etc... ) has been excluded to acheive a more accurate comparison.
None of the systems were priced with monitors.
Apple Power Mac G4 ( tower, dual Processor )
Mac OS 10.2 ( Juaguar ) 2 GB PC2700 DDR SDRAM
120 GB Ultra ATA drive
SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce4 Titanium
56K internal modem
Standard keyboard
Apple 1 button optical mouse
Apple Pro Speakers ( $59 )
3 Year AppleCare Protection Plan
$3,757 ( Dual 867 MHz PowerPC G4 )
$5,057 ( Dual 1.25 GHz PowerPC G4 )
Dell Precision 530 series ( tower, dual Processor )
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
2 GB PC800 ECC RDRAM
120 GB 7200RPM IDE Drive
DVD+RW+R Combo Drive
nVidia, Quadro4 900XGL, 128MB, VGA/DVI
V.90 PCI Data/Fax Controllerless Modem
Standard Keyboard
Logitech 2 Button optical mouse
Harman Kardon HK-395 Speakers ( $49 )
3 Year Parts + Onsite Labor
$5,593 ( Dual 1.8 GHz Xeon ) - $1,836 more than low end dual Mac
$7,142 ( Dual 2.4 GHz Xeon ) - $2,085 more than high end dual Mac
Dell Precision 340 series ( tower, single Processor )
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
2 GB PC800 ECC RDRAM
120 GB 7200RPM IDE Drive
DVD+RW+R Combo Drive
nVidia, Quadro4 900XGL, 128MB, VGA/DVI
V.90 PCI Data/Fax Controllerless Modem
Standard Keyboard
Logitech 2 Button optical mouse
Harman Kardon HK-395 Speakers ( $49 )
3 Year Parts + Onsite Labor
$4,754 ( 1.7 GHz Pentium 4 ) - $997 more than low end dual Mac
$5,553 ( 2.53 GHz Pentium 4 ) - $496 more than high end dual Mac
Dell Dimension 8200 series ( mini-tower, single processor )
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
2 GB PC800 ECC RDRAM
120 GB 7200RPM IDE Drive
DVD+RW+R Combo Drive
nVidia, Quadro4 900XGL, 128MB, VGA/DVI
V.90 PCI Data/Fax Controllerless Modem
Standard Keyboard
Logitech 2 Button optical mouse
Harman Kardon HK-395 Speakers ( included )
3 Year Parts + Onsite Labor
$3,526 ( Single 2.0 GHz Pentium 4 ) - $231 less than low end dual Mac
$3,886 ( Single 2.53 GHz Pentium 4 ) - $1,171 less than high end dual Mac
1. Windows should be completely vectorized. This is faster to load than bitmaps, takes up less RAM, and less hard-drive space.
2. One should have the option to turn off all of the fancy features of Aqua -- i.e., shiny effects, transparency, animation. Why? Firstly, many find these features tacky. Secondly, they serve little or no function. Thirdly, to speed things up. Transferring the rendering of the GUI to the GPU is better than letting the CPU do it (note to X-windows WM developers, hint hint), but it requires many users to needlessly upgrade their GPU when they wouldn't have to otherwise. Thus, one should be able to turn off these resource-hogging features.
3. Minimization/maximization. Windows should minimize to their appicon on the dock, and hold clicking on that appicon should bring up a pop-up menu of the instances of it running. Dragging the appicon of a running application off the dock should quit that application, while dragging an instance of it off the apicons menu should close that instance. After the app's closed, dragging the apicon off the dock again should remove it from the dock, if it was a permanent member. Maximization should maximize to the entire screen.
4. Bring back Apple menu, with all the nifty menus. The old apple menu was great -- had applications, control panel, and many other useful menus. The new one should get those features back. Btw, control panel options should be entirely accessible through menuing: why make us open up a whole new window?
5. Keyboard control. Apple has long had issues with keyboard control -- namely, that you can't do everything you want from the keyboard. I suggest a very simple and traditional fix: F1 opens up File, F2 opens up Edit, F3 opens up View, and so on and so forth; in other words, they F# opens up the #th menu item.
6. Scroll bar buttons. Up/down scroll bar buttons should be available at the top and bottom of a scroll bar column.
7. For other things which Apple should integrate into their WM (as should every WM), see this site.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Win XP doesn't crash. However, it does begin getting quirky. Sometimes, with many windows open, it will take 5 seconds to respond to a keystroke. Sometimes, it will stop responding to mouse clicks, or be very slow. It doesn't exactly crash, but it is necessary to reboot to get full functionality back again.
Apple CUPS does not come with Ghostscript pre-installed; MacOS X apps print using PDF, so Apple uses a Quartz-based PDF RIP in place of Ghostscript.
Just grab ESP Ghostscript from the CUPS site, compile, and install. osxgnu.org might have binary packages as well...
I print, therefore I am.