Flirting With Mac OS X

An anonymous reader wrote to us with an article on Byte from Moshe Bar about flirting with using OS X. Taco and I are both strongly considering beginning to use OS X as a primary laptops - anyone else looking at doing this? And anyone from Apple that can get me a good price on super TiBooks? *grin*

Comments

Laptop is apple's strength

[Duds]

I'm certinally considering a Mac laptop. I don't really get on with the design desktopwise, but as a laptop something like the powerbooks look really nice.

Plus what I want in a notebook is low power consumption, good screen, easy access to the smaller number of things I need to DO with my laptop.

Plus of course new toy syndrome :)

I actually think Apple should be stressing this market a lot more than they are.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[statichead]

Put an ibm eraser mouse and three buttons and I'm sold. The touch pad is by far the worst input device on the market today. Apple puts the best ones on their machines they still stink.

I also having personal problems with the ibm thinkpad Microsoft tax, Why can't I buy one without an OS?

decisions decisions decisions

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Nexus7]

Why stop at the trackpoint and 3 buttons? Add an IBM case with IBM engineering too. It won't shine like a cheap whore, but it'll have a subtle glitter embedded in the anti-slip rubber coating. It'll also have an unobstrusive night light. Memory will be cheap, peripherals will be user-swappable, and you'll be able to put bog standard Linux on it. And your money will go to a company that does everything from specialized software to fundamental research, not some self congratulatory Taiwanese notebook rebadger such as Apple.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[syd02]

I prefer Linux, but not on a laptop. Yet.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

you clearly don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about. Apple's industrial design and build has given nothing away to IBM's for over a decade. And yes, an Apple notebook uses off the shelf memory, disks and PC cards. Wind your neck in, you errant fool.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[mAIsE]

I am a UNIX guy, that has switched.

I have X11 from the same code base as linux, check out XonX.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/xonx

If you are familur with the debian tools, you should check out fink, I use it everyday. 1400+ packages and growing.

http://fink.sourceforge.net/index.php

The biggest difference between OSX and Linux and the real deal winner for me, No dual booting anymore I have it all in one OS. I can run commercial applications(M$ office, Lotus Notes etc..) and Fonts look really nice (better than Windows and X11R6) inside of aqua as well as having several beutiful fonts provided by Apple, this is something Microsoft has never really cared about.

I think it is the perfect combination and I am becoming on of those Mac freaks i used to not understand.

Did i mention no installation conflicts with hardware!!! I love Debian but this is the hardest part of installing Debian (how do you get that sound blaster working with OSS again......)

Just my $0.02 but I say go for it.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[bluethundr]

"The touch pad is by far the worst input device on the market today."

Totally subjective, dude. I hear this complaint a lot from people I know. But I have been using Apple trackpads since the mid-90s and to this particular carbon-based life form the trackpad feels so natural to use it feels like its part of my hand.

I'll just tell you what I tell all trackpad naysayers. If you hop on a skateboard, and fall off of it and break y'r arse what do you feel is to blame? The poorly designed piece of wood with wheels attached that slides around unpredictably when you try to stand on it? Or the fact that you haven't become familiar with how to stand on one and make it roll around?

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

I blame the concrete for being so hard, and gravity for just plain sucking.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[rjung2k]

So just out of curiousity, Mr. Troll Flamebait, what Taiwainese company's stuff is Apple rebadging?

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Nexus7]

Quanta and Acer.

http://www.tradeport.org/ts/countries/taiwan/isa /i sar0026.html

Taiwanese manufacturers make great stuff, of course, but I bet it sticks in the craw for those who bought into "Think Different."

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[polakk]

Ok, it might feel really great touching that great, plastic surface, but I dont think that your "hand" will hold a rocket-launcher or a rail gin very well.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[polakk]

rail gun... man i hate those angled keyboards

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

Meanwhile, your precious IBM's are from Acer and GVC. So what is IBM putting their name on, an Acer or an IBM? Is it designed by IBM? Most likely. Does IBM want to be bothered building/maintaining/using a massive production facility? No.

Those "Think Different" computers(btw, they don't use that slogan anymore) are designed by Apple. They're sold by Apple. They're warrantied by Apple. So they bear Apple's brand mark. They just aren't manufactured by Apple, since Apple, like IBM, doesn't want to have to bother with production. Believe me, there's no craw-sticking here, nor is there a reason for it.

And personally, I dislike the cli... erm, nubs that IBM puts on their laptops. They get dirty, and I don't like how they work.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[ealar dlanvuli]

I think it is the perfect combination and I am becoming on of those Mac freaks i used to not understand.

heh, I had the exact same experience. When I first got my iBook it was more for the features it provided than because I really wanted a apple computer (one has to understand, I only have one windows machine in my entire house, and thats for guests that can't figure out what a textured X on the titlebar means, so jumping from one non-windows operating system to another wasn't a risk at all).

After a month, I found it hard to use any of my other computers. All of a suddent I realized I took every opportunity to promote Mac's (this is coming from a sys admin who kept his linux passion in the closet), because it's just so much easier, and at the same time so much more powerfull if you want it to be

I finally found a computer I can really recomend for my great parents, not just say "well I'm sure it will work well enough for your needs". And the really funny part, it's the exact same computer I'd recomend for a hardcore computer nerd.

The only audience I don't think really should get a mac atm is PC gamers, but then the statment "I realized my windows machine was just a console" could be accurate for most people that actually have a need for windows. For them I suggest trying out a xbox. Everyone else should be considering Mac for thier next purchase, even if they decide against it, they need to seriously give it some thought before they get something else.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

..that's ok. I prefer "gin" to rail guns anywa33..

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Nexus7]

My T series is made by IBM. Not GVC, Quanta, or whoever. IBM. Maybe here, maybe in Mexico, maybe in Taiwan or Korea. But it isn't a rebadged "oh, we designed it garbage."

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

"Taiwanese manufacturers make great stuff, of course, but I bet it sticks in the craw for those who bought into "Think Different."

The Taiwanese (and Korean) companies build Apple's laptops and displays...to Apple's designs, not their own.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Maserati]

My company's default font is FuturaBook. I use that at 14 point (19" Studio Display) as my Application, browser (Mozilla) and email (Entourage has very nice mail composition features). And it is absolutely gorgeous.

I had to use TinkerTool to set the Application font and set double scroll arrows at both ends (essential, I paid for DoubleScroll exactly 10 minutes after the demo version expired and suffered while the check cleared) Apple is continuing to include features in their window managers that aren't exposed by the system preferences GUI. But they have always been addressable by 3rd party apps. When OS 8.1 came out, Prestissimo was written to configure Appearance Mananger by Applescript, I still have it on my public share at work. In OS X you can use 'defaults' on the command line, edit plist files in text (check out PlistEditor on the DevTools CD), or use TinkerTool to expose hidden features of the OS. Kind of like unlocking secrets in a video game...

I'm a Mac guy and I have the Purple Book 3rd ed on my desk.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Shanep]

Ok, it might feel really great touching that great, plastic surface, but I dont think that your "hand" will hold a rocket-launcher or a rail gin very well.

I have an old clamshell iBook, on which I write this. I realise your post touches on the poor accuracy and speed of pads within games, but I think you also unknowingly touch on something else...

When I'm finished with my typically long sessions with my iBook, my hand hurts and I don't feel like holding anything shortly after that.

I wonder how most people use trackpads? I'm right handed, I touch my pointing finger with my thumb as if holding a pen, the other fingers are folded in fist like while my pointing finger touches the pad with movement assistance from my thumb (which I find gives less jerky movement). If I ever need small accurate movements, I find rolling my finger around on one spot works very well.

Is this typical? I think my pain is from the fact that my hand is quite tense during usage in this position. I'd use my logitech optical wheel mouse, but I'm having too much fun using it with WindowMaker under OpenBSD. Which will hopefully soon also be on my iBook.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

wow

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Megs]

I wonder how most people use trackpads? I'm right handed, I touch my pointing finger with my thumb as if holding a pen, the other fingers are folded in fist like while my pointing finger touches the pad with movement assistance from my thumb (which I find gives less jerky movement). If I ever need small accurate movements, I find rolling my finger around on one spot works very well.

Ouch. My hand hurts just thinking about doing that, much less when I tried it.

I'm also right-handed, and I have an iceBook. I use my right index finger, with my palm resting on the laptop most of the time (especially when I'm trying to do something precise). My thumb hovers over the button. My other three fingers are curled up in the air above the laptop, naturally, with my pinky being farthest up, rather like an affected person drinking tea.

I'm personally in the "this is as natural as typing or breathing" category with it comes to my touchpad. YMMV.

Meghan

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

did you get gimp running?
seems weird that gimp doesn't run in osx as a standard.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

"rebadged" would imply that these manufacturers could make these same machines for other companies and put their logos on them -- which is not the case. So Apple outsources production of some machines to Taiwan -- so what. They also maintain manufacturing faciltiyes in the states, Mexico, Ireland and other places. I really fail to see your point.

And oh, they did design it and it isn't garbage. I have owned 7 Apple PowerBooks over the last 10 years, only one of them had any quality issues (and it was fixed by Apple for free via Airborne and back to me in 5 days) and they all held their resale value very well (allowing me frequent upgrades -- a nice thing).

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Fillup]

There has been some some discussion about whether " Apple should be stressing this market a lot more than they are," among my group of friends. (I'm a longtime Mac user who had "left the fold" until OS X allowed me to be proud and happy again).

I kinda think they don't need to. They only have so many marketing dollars, and with discussions like this, who needs to pay for this marketing to the UNIX crowd? ;-)

I guess what I am saying is that people who dig UNIX are going to hear about it, check it out, find out more about it, etc., all on their own, especially now with all the buzz and momentum.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[kalidasa]

Fonts look really nice (better than Windows and X11R6) inside of aqua as well as having several beutiful fonts provided by Apple, this is something Microsoft has never really cared about.

Usually I'd be happy to join in on the Microsoft bashing, but this really isn't fair. Microsoft has been putting a lot of effort into adding high-quality internationalized fonts into Windows, as Apple is doing with OS X (I'm impressed with a lot of the work both companies have been doing). There are plenty of things you can bash MS for without bashing them for something they're actually doing a good job at.

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Anonymous Coward]

Although not Rail gin. You need a brand name like Tanqueray

Re:Laptop is apple's strength

[Duds]

What if I now pointed out I'm a windows user who wouldn't touch a desktop linux machine with a reinforced bargepole yet I still think the laptop market is where they need to advertise.

Let's be honest, as a desktop machine, the MAc has few strengths that could convince Joe Public. But a low power fast notebook that can do everything you need to do on the move is a FAR more marketable commodity.

The times...

[los furtive]

...they are a changing.

Re:The times...

[hitzroth]

Yup. I can see the second hand going around my digital watch while I type.

Re:The times...

[Snibor Eoj]

I believe the preferred term is "switching".

I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Anonymous Coward]

As an example, look at this very standard series of commands, used to install Perl 5.8 on my system:

[macosx:~] cd /usr/local/
[macosx:~] sudo mkdir src
[macosx:~] curl -O ftp://ftp.cpan.org/pub/CPAN/src/perl-5.8.0.tar.gz
[macosx:~] tar zxvf perl-5.8.0.tar.gz
[macosx:~] cd perl-5.8.0
[macosx:~] make distclean
[macosx:~] make
[macosx:~] make test
[macosx:~] sudo make install

You couldn't tell this was Mac OS X if I hadn't told you, right?

Hell no! I mean, just because the name of the damn OS is in the prompt; I would NEVER tell it was Mac OS X!

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[lburdet]

prompts can be changed...
back in the days where a funny prompt on the professor's overhead was funny, his was somehow changed to "{student X}deserves an A+$" on his telnet(i think) acct.
good thing the prof laughed :-)

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Anonymous Coward]

I know, I know, but you must admit; it was rather funny considering the prompt set at the time :P.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Anonymous Coward]

Shouldn't it be called GNU/OSX?

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Khopesh]

[macosx:~] cd /usr/local/
[macosx:~] sudo mkdir src

so why is the prompt not [macosx:/usr/local/] now?

and iirc you can change the osx prompt the same way you change any other posix shell prompt: change $PS1.
in bash (osx uses bash, right?):
export PS1='\[\033[0;32m\][\[\033[0;36m\]\u@\h \[\033[33m\]\w\[\033[0;32m\]]\$\[\033[0;37m\] '
(one line) for colors or
export PS1='[\u@\h \w]\$ '
(RedHat-style prompts)

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Marc2k]

OS X (by default) uses TCSH, though when I bought my TiBook with 10.1, Bash was preinstalled. The command prompt is probably just a mock-up (albeit a poor one), the command prompt isn't as annoying by default, it shows your hostname where "macosx" is, though I don't remember if that's your hostname out of the box. Also, you don't need to change your environment variables to have your shell tell you the working directory, that's done by default too (which is why I assumed it was a mockup for display purposes).

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[sh4de]

OS X uses tcsh by default, but bash is available as of version 10.2. Prior to that, fans of bash just downloaded the source and compiled it.

Furthermore, 10.2 stripped the default tcsh shell to its factory set-up. All the nifty aliases that were in 10.1 are now available in /usr/share/tcsh/examples.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[demaria]

"so why is the prompt not [macosx:/usr/local/] now?"

It works on mine, although I'm using tcsh. What I think happened is the author just retyped the commands into his story instead of doing a direct cut-and-paste.

[coruscant:~] demaria% cd /usr
[coruscant:/usr] demaria%

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Lord Kenja]

LOL. It's obviously a doctored example.

As most unix'es the name name in the prompt is the hostname.

Also he forgot to update the prompt where it shows location... It acturlly works in real life... Really, It does! Trust me!

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[jaavaaguru]

so why is the prompt not [macosx:/usr/local/] now?

So if you cd'd to this directory...
/export/home/sandyd/cvs/mozilla/xpcom/tools/regist ry/macbuild/CVS
...you'd like that to appear in your prompt?

Yeah, some of us don't like the wd to appear in our prompt, thank you :-)

I'll just be minimalist and be happy with my hostname% prompt.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[mustangsal]

I WANT OSX on the intel platform !!!

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Psiren]

Yeah, some of us don't like the wd to appear in our prompt, thank you :-)

Saves checking the wd you're in before issuing some destructive command. It's always there in front of you. Another thing I do is make my root prompts bold red. This way they stand out like hell from the rest of the text, just to let me know I have my root hat on. =)

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[dschuetz]

So if you cd'd to this directory... /export/home/sandyd/cvs/mozilla/xpcom/tools/regist ry/macbuild/CVS ...you'd like that to appear in your prompt?

I had my prompt set to a wacky little awk script that parsed out the last three components of a path, so I'd have something like:

[root@anywhere ...registry/macbuild/CVS] #

as my prompt. Worked pretty well. Damned if I know where the code is anymore, though, I've never customized my Linux environments as much as I did the NeXT I used 5-10 years ago.

Also, in NS 3.3+, a special escape code could change the titlebar of the Terminal.app window. So I eventually dropped the path in the prompt and stuck it up in the titlebar instead. Was very nice.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Anonymous Coward]

$ apt-get source perl=5.8.0-13
$ cd perl-*
$ fakeroot debian/rules binary

...blah..blah...

$ su
Password:
# cd ..
# dpkg -i perl*deb

Haha you can't tell its a Mac running Debian GNU/Linux right?

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Eccles]

Speaking of shells and colors, are there any shells that support displaying user-typed commands in a different color or on a different background than the output?

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[SpikyTux]

Well, you can use uname command to tell what kernel it uses. :)

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[jaavaaguru]

I had my prompt set to a wacky little awk script that parsed out the last three components of a path, so I'd have something like:
[root@anywhere ...registry/macbuild/CVS] #

I like that very much. I'll be on the lookout for some code to do the same thing... or maybe just learn awk or sed ;-)

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[syd02]

I'm guessing that macosx IS the hostname. It's not so unlikely.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[kin_korn_karn]

I use a two-line prompt. wd on first line, prompt on second line.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[chegosaurus]

> I WANT OSX on the intel platform !!!

Yeah, and I want Episode III to be great. But it's not going to happen is it?

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Noer]

You still can; I have the following in my .cshrc:
sched +0:00 alias postcmd 'echo -n "^[]0;\!#^G"'

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[mAIsE]

macosx is his UID, bash is the default shell.

Within bash he can change his prompt to anything bash allows.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Grayraven]

Or you could try zsh. I use this prompt, which
does the same thing: '[%B%n%b@%B%m%b]-[%B%3~%b]%# '

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[reneky]

I had my prompt set to a wacky little awk script that parsed out the last three components of a path, so I'd have something like:

[root@anywhere ...registry/macbuild/CVS] #

Or you could switch to zsh, and use:

export PROMPT="[%n@%m %3~] # "

Try it - its a really nice interactive shell.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Hallow]

Multiline prompts are the way to go, eg:
"\n[\w]\n\u@\h> "

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Neben Kabon]

Unfortunately, even if OSX was on intel hardware, it would unlikely be on anything but proprietary hardware. So what would be the use?

We need a company that is as creative as Apple to make a desktop for Linux. Or Apple should try making a desktop for Linux in addition to there present products.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Jeff Binder]

[macosx:~] sudo make install

Evidently his user name is 'macosx'. And for some reason he replaced the \w in his $PS1 with an actual tilde. And he removed the '%' at the end.

Or more likely he just typed it in himself and forgot the '%', and he apparently doesn't know what the tilde means.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[RevAaron]

And I want the Newton OS on any platform that isn't dead! But guess what! Neither of us will get what we want!

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Aqua OS X]

"Mac OS X", that's just what this guy picked as a user name.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[zaphod110676]

In College I was a teaching assistant and worked in a computer lab. When students would leave the lab without logging out we would go in and change their prompt to say something like, "If I forget to log out of my Unix account bad things could happen to it -- The Lab Staff"

It was always amusing to see people who didn't know how to change it back and too embarrassed to ask with the altered prompt months later. =)

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[trash eighty]

why do you need Apple to make a desktop for Linux when a variety of Linuxes already install fine on Apple H/W

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[DavidRavenMoon]

That's not really what the prompt looks like, he must have edited it.

It really shows part of your netword address, like this:

Last login: Thu Sep 26 09:32:09 on console
Welcome to Darwin!
[pcp02174408pcs:~] david%

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Knife_Edge]

Actually, IIRC, 10.2 uses bash as the default shell now. Even if I am wrong, it is now trivial to enable it since it is included in /bin as of 10.2

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[DevNova]

Don't think that the "macosx" in the prompt is the default. It'll be your userid and not "macosx". Unless of course, you choose macosx as your userid.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[yardbird]

This is not an ideal solution, but it worksforme on bash:

My PS1 is set to

\u@\h: `~/bin/pwd-short` {\!}

pwd-short is a Perl script:

chomp ($pwd = `pwd`);
$pwd = "..$1" if $pwd =~ m/.{4}(.{20})$/;
print $pwd;

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[benedict]

You folks are confused. /bin/sh is bash as
of 10.2 (previously it was zsh). The shell
that's assigned to users by default is tcsh.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[benedict]

Can you repost that? Your post somehow ended
up full of line noise.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[jmegq]

Of course, tcsh will do that for you automatically (as will zsh). In tcsh it's %cn , where n is the number of components of the path.

% set prompt="[%n@%m %c3] %% "
[me@here ~/devel/tcsh] %

I cringe when I see awk/shell/perl scripts fired off for each and every prompt... I mean, yes, computers are fast, but... yeech. ;)

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Red Leader.]

I find the full path helpful, but don't like typing commands beginning in the middle of a shell, so I stick a \n character in there and have something that looks like:

hostname:/usr/local/bin
$

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[will]

a good tip, but one to follow with caution if you've done anything unorthodox to the system (and in an apple world, the definition of unorthodox is ironically very broad).

The login script sets $PATH, for example, so fink users will need to edit it to add /sw/bin, and there are various little tweaks such as setting the locale which are good practice, but the sort of thing you really need to know you did, in case something bites you for it later.

read the scripts first...

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[jasenj1]

> I WANT OSX on the intel platform !!!

You can have it. It's called Darwin.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[dschuetz]

Cool, I may have to change my default shell to tcsh, then.

I cringe when I see awk/shell/perl scripts fired off for each and every prompt... I mean, yes, computers are fast, but... yeech. ;)

I never noticed much of a slowdown when I was doing this. And that was on NeXT Turbo hardware (33 MHz 68040 chip). So today's systems oughta handle it with no problem.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Anonymous Coward]

actually it's the hostname...but i digress...
My os x box's hostname is MoonMac and that's what shows at the prompt....just an fyi.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[No_Weak_Heart]

You may want to check out GLterm, I've used it on my iBook under OS 10.1.5 and it provides a much richer set of features than Apple's Terminal.app.

GLterm is a replacement for the Terminal application which ships with MacOS X. It's made to be faster, and to support more common terminal features. It supports full ANSI colors, all vt102 protocol, all DEC function keys, and a selection of useful xterm sequences.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Macka]

> I WANT OSX on the intel platform !!!

And I want that as much as a hole in the head. What makes the Apple experience so good, is the tight integration between software and hardware you simply don't get on any other platform.

Save up your cash and get one .. you won't regret it!!!

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Stigmata669]

Uhh, it doesn't have the OS name in the prompt, it has the name of the disk and then the user name.

"Last login: Tue Sep 24 18:15:48 on console
Welcome to Darwin!
[Icebox:~] ttrut% "

"Get high on ignorance"

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Grayraven]

Uhh, it looks fine to me.. Anyway, you can find more nifty things to try out here

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[rixstep]

> I WANT OSX on the intel platform !!! What - so you can run it on your crappy hardware? You just don't get it, do you? JP Morgan was said to know something about what people get for money.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[MoneyT]

I thought there was an option in the terminal preferences under OSX to have the wd displayed in the titlebar.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[dbrutus]

FWIW, the article writer didn't seem to know that fink existed at the time of writing (he states there is no apt-get which fink uses).

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Anonymous Coward]

Stalking is when a stranger, casual acquaintance, co-worker, or ex-partner:

Leaves repeated, obscene, harassing or threatening messages on your voice mail or
answering machine

Leaves or sends unwanted letters, notes, cards, gifts, or dead animals

Contacts, follows or threatens you, your friends, family members, neighbors, boss or
co-workers

Stalkers are obsessed and will act repetitively. The most common behavior is
conducted by phone and by mail. It is not uncommon to see daily phone and letter
contact.

source

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, if he's so fucking low, why don't you just leave him alone. Then you'll both be happy, and I won't have to come across any more of your juvenile whining.

Re:I did enjoy this part of the article:

[serialdj]

But alas, Apple had the forsight to build Darwin, and Aqua for x86 as well as PPC, just in case.

Might be interesting to boot up my Athalon and see Mac OS X.

Go for it!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a linux guy who made the switch. I love it. You can get a good discount if you are a student or work for the goverment. And a superdrive + Toast 5 = Ability to copy Porno DVDs (under 4.7GB)!

Asthetics

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if you hate Macs with a vengence, at least give them credit for looking look.

All who want to attack the TiPBook's looks should go look at themself in the mirror.

Re:Asthetics

[Anonymous Coward]

I submitted this article yesterday... oh well :)

Anyways, suck it down, linux fan bois:

"I watched in jealous disgust as the guy next to me fired up a terminal window and ssh'ed to some server and ran a pine mail session. During the conference I saw maybe 20 or 25 people running Mac OS X. They outnumbered the few people usually coming to Linux conferences with FreeBSD, NetBSD, or OpenBSD on their notebooks. That's it, I decided. I am going to get a Mac OS X laptop, too. That was a few weeks ago."

The fact remains: MacOS X is everything linux dreams of being.

-- james

Re:Asthetics

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes you should use the same computer and operating system as everyone else then you'll look cool.

Re:Asthetics

[Anonymous Coward]

I found a subtle backdoor in Mac OSX 10.1. You won't find spyware in Linux, which is why my TiBook is now an expensive Debian box with EVERYTHING compiled from source.

Re:Asthetics

[eno2001]

Just like dishing out catty comments like the above has always been the realm of fag0rtz. Pot. Kettle. Black... You must be a homo too. Stop posting anonymously and come out of the closet, it'll make your life so much better.

Re:Asthetics

[mscheid]

I do have an OSX laptop and yes I enjoy it.
However, the close source "topping" (ie. the Quartz-Aqua-Openstep combo) may be nice but suffers from the typical closed source diseases:
- You can't look at the source to see how exactly something works.
- You can't add missing functionality to your favourite app.

If the whole thing was free software I'd probably be totally enamoured..

Re:Asthetics

[BlackBolt]

The fact remains: MacOS X is everything linux dreams of being.

Actually, OSX is everything *BSD* dreams of being. GNU/Linux dreams about being free. The tech is secondary to the freedom aspect. In BSD, the tech is first, and freedom is largely irrelevant, since they don't care whether their code is proprietized, as was done by Apple for OSX, and by Microsoft in many places for 2000 and XP especially. OSX is great, but it's got a different focus. The true comparison is with the BSD's.

BlackBolt

Re:Asthetics

[fault0]

> The fact remains: MacOS X is everything linux dreams of being.

Except that it doesn't run on my x86 boxen. Not many people going to buy macs just for OSX.

Re:Asthetics

[jneemidge]

The BSD code in Mac OS X has not been "proprietized". Apple makes changes to all BSD-derived code publically available under the APSL and almost always returns them to the FreeBSD project under the BSD license. The proprietary code in Mac OS X was written by Apple (or NeXT, now part of Apple). Granted that it doesn't advance the goal of freedom over tech for them to keep their own code private, but they're _not_ taking the route allowed by the BSD license and forking development into an Apple-FreeBSD fork; their BSD code is free in the same sense that BSD is free.

In that sense, the BSD layers of Mac OS X are roughly as free as GNU/Linux; you can get the code, use it without any grief (except the need to release changes you make should you distribute the resulting software), even sell a distribution based on the BSD layers of Mac OS X. What you _can't_ do is use Apple's proprietary code freely. A number of Linux distros do the same thing; the difference is that Apple's proprietary code represents the entire user-visable interface of Mac OS X, and therefore (to most users) the real value-add of the system.

It's also probably true to say that, while GNU/Linux does indeed dream about being free, Linux itself simply dreams about being a widely used OS (witness both Linus' activities and the desire of many in the Linux community to see it as a desktop capable of "squashing Microsoft"). Linus is quite comfortable with close-source code being used on top of Linux; it's a matter of conjecture whether he'd be comfortable with a close-source graphics environment taking over as the premiere Linux desktop, but there's no reason to automatically assume he wouldn't. Linux is the kernel; the reason it's GNU/Linux is because of the GNU tools. Replace them with a FreeBSD toolchain and a proprietary graphics subsystem and you don't have GNU/Linux nor the philosophical goal of freedom.

Re:Asthetics

[Analog Penguin]

Care to explain what that was, since a backdoor in a major OS would normally be huge news?

Re:Asthetics

[twiztidlojik]

Um, what else would you buy a mac for?

I mean, OS X has to play a part in there somewhere.

Re:Asthetics

[scrod]

Thousands of people already have. Do you want to run OS X? Then get a Mac--that's all there is to it. If you're not willing to spend the money, then too fucking bad. You made the decision when you bought a PC. Now you're paying for that decision.

Re:Asthetics

[fault0]

I'm sorry, but thousands of people isn't many. OSX hasn't taken a significant portion of the desktop market from Microsoft nor a significant portion of the server market from Linux and FreeBSD.

I do personally like MacOS. Hell, I love it. I think it would have had a great potential if it ran on PC's. Unlike Moshe Bar, I don't want to squander $3000 to get the equivalent of my $1600 home built box.

Sure, there are a few people switching from WinXP and Linux, but there is an equal number of classic MacOS holdouts. Hell, I even have a few friends who have been bugging me to switch to Macs for the last umpteen years who refuse to use MacOSX on a regular basis until it's as comfortable for them as classic MacOS is *shrug*.

Re:Asthetics

[fault0]

The vast majority of new Mac users are people who've previously owned Macs as their major computer. Apple has good brand loyalty rates.

Re:Asthetics

[gig]

Up in the GUI, you add functionality to apps with scripts and plug-ins. AppleScript is in full swing right now, and the History panels in Adobe and Macromedia and other apps make scripting available to everyone. This has always been the command line of the Mac, and you can use AppleScript to create an application that essentially runs other applications as if it were a user, performing routine or repetitive tasks. When you see it in action, it's quite brilliant, with documents opening up in an application and changing, importing other data, saving, then the document opening in another application and being treated. It's great.

Re:Only 1 button!

[Anonymous Coward]

Get a Microsoft scroll mouse for $20 bucks.

Mac Laptops

[Naikrovek]

I thought about this for a while, but the keyboards that come on Mac laptops leave A LOT to be desired. shallow keys, half-height arrow keys, etc.

And don't get me started on Trackpads v. Trackpoints. If Apple had Trackpoints (the little nipple between G, B, and H on your keyboard) I think i could overlook the keyboard.

And one button mice... We all know that is not enough.

Sure, I can get an external keyboard & mouse, and I would if i were *given* a powerbook, but to me, that's just like having a Mac desktop, because it would never leave my desk. But, if were to *buy* a Mac, it would have to be a desktop, where I can replace the peripherals with something I like.

The point: they should try to make a few more people happy. I would have switched long ago if they had a full size laptop keyboard (every key full size) and a three button trackpoint pointer. I want a Mac in a Thinkpad case.

my two cents on the "Switch" campaign.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Duds]

I don't like the nipples any more than the pads but.

Is this keyboard prob confined to the powerbooks or is the i-book just as bad/worse?

That could be a show stopper.

Re:Mac Laptops

[MoNickels]

The point: they should try to make a few more people happy. I would have switched long ago if they had a full size laptop keyboard (every key full size) and a three button trackpoint pointer.

You mean they should make *you* happy.

It's a different computer: use it differently. As a long time trackpad user, you'd have to squeeze my testicles in a vise to get me to use a laptop with the orange knob right in the middle of the keyboard. I've tried it, repeatedly, and it sucks. It's an infuriatingly useless device. I onced worked in an office where Thinkpads with such idiotic cursor-manipulating devices were standard. Everyone there was a Windows user, not converted Mac users, and a majority of users had mice. They couldn't stand the stupid thing.

Same goes for the two- and three-button trackpoint pointers. Again, I've used them, and repeatedly. It almost requires two hands to use! In fact, that's how most people do it: with two hands. What a logistical and tactical waste of effort. But a one-button trackpad, it's a one-handed device. And you can keep your other hand on the keyboard to control-click, which is natural since that hand is often using other modifier keys, as well.

Part of the reason Windows and Unix users have problems with the Mac's one button (and whine incessantly about it, to such a degree that you want to put *their* testicles in a vise), is because they tend to be unused to the click-and-hold action. On a modern Mac, this will get you the exact same action as the right-click menu. What in God's name you need a third button for, besides having another part to break, beats the hell out of me.

Re:Mac Laptops

[override11]

Dont like nipples...

Cmon man, everybody likes nipples...
:-)

Re:Mac Laptops

[Surak]

What in God's name you need a third button for, besides having another part to break, beats the hell out of me.


In a word: Emacs. Emacs on X makes extensive use of the middle mouse button. Also, X-style copy and paste. Especially in an Xterm.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Alan Partridge]

well, it shouldn't be. If you're expecting a beautiful keyboard on a laptop that's about half an inch thick then you're a loon, if you're upset that Apple's don't have multiple mouse buttons and are too dense to push the Option, Control and Command keys in their stead (hang on a minute, that means you've got - effectively - FOUR mouse click types!) then you're just being deliberately perverse. The modifier key system is GOOD, and gives NOTHING away to the multiple mouse button approach IMHO.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Negatyfus]

I've also grown used to the mouse wheel...

Re:Mac Laptops

[jeremyp]

Why use X (as in windows) with OS X (as in "ten")? Newsflash: it already has a superior graphical environment (IMHO). Having said that, I do run XDarwin on my Mac because my favourite text editor is X only. I get around the three button problem in two ways:

1 - use an external mouse with enough buttons.

2 - set up XDarwin to emulate the middle button.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it too hard to use the damned keyboard? Does copy and paste just belong there because someone once thought it would be cool? Seriously.

Re:Mac Laptops

[mccalli]

As a long time trackpad user, you'd have to squeeze my testicles in a vise to get me to use a laptop with the orange knob right in the middle of the keyboard. I've tried it, repeatedly, and it sucks. It's an infuriatingly useless device.

Whereas I hate trackpads and never use the damned things if possible.

I like Dell's approach on the Inspiron I have - put both on the machine, let the user decide.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Mac Laptops

[Surak]

is X only. I get around the three button problem in two ways:

1 - use an external mouse with enough buttons.

2 - set up XDarwin to emulate the middle button.


So then you admit that you need that middle mouse button, emulated or not? :-P

The point wasn't whether OS X's gui was superior to X's. (I agree, OS X's gui is nice, although I'll say that KDE with Mosfet's Liquid Widgets is pretty darned cool also) The question asked was WTF needs a middle mouse button. The answer is obvious: if you use X, you need a middle mouse button. If you don't, you don't. :)

Re:Mac Laptops

[Manpage]

Speaking of Emacs, The OS X 10.2 Terminal as a option to use the option key to the Meta key. This is the first time I've been able to use Emacs with a real Meta key and it rocks.

Re:Mac Laptops

[blixel]

You mean they should make *you* happy.

Why not have multiple options available and let the user decide which one they want? It's called choice. Everyone wins.

Re:Mac Laptops

[digitect]

if you're upset that Apple's don't have multiple mouse buttons and are too dense to push the Option, Control and Command keys in their stead (hang on a minute, that means you've got - effectively - FOUR mouse click types!) then you're just being deliberately perverse. The modifier key system is GOOD, and gives NOTHING away to the multiple mouse button approach IMHO.

Serious CAD software requires multiple mouse buttons. In AutoCAD 2000 and later, the right mouse hand can control selection, zoom, pan, context menus, and command enter if you are fortunate enough to have three buttons and a scroll wheel. Meanwhile, the left hand is very busy hopping all over the keyboard entering the hundreds of possible commands. With some experience, the CAD user can almost draw without looking down at the keyboard. Except...

We used to use Logitech mice at our firm, but the mouse software was buggy with AutoCAD, requiring the user to hold down the Ctrl key with the left hand while using the right hand mouse scroll button just to zoom around the drawing. This defeated the whole purpose of having zoom on the scroll button: single hand zoom and pan control! My left hand effectively became multi-modal again which requires considerable more thinking (read: slower) effort during production.

A single button mouse might make sense for dinky little point and click word processing but all serious CAD and graphics software (and probably other serious industry-based software) provide much more power at the mouse hand. Apple continues to hold on to this paradigm because it likes both the design implications and the tradition. But it is one of the major reasons Micros~1 ate it for lunch ten years ago: lack of options.

Re:Mac Laptops

[pediddle]

I am seriously wanting to buy a mac, so this is not biased because I'm a PC junkie, but:

On PCs, you do also have Alt, Control, and Shift, and even Meta and Hyper if you use some *nix and map the Windows and Menu keys. Now, combine those with the 6 buttons on my mouse (Left, Right, Middle, Scroll Up/Down, Thumb), that's up to, let's see, ... well, I don't remember my combinatorial math, but something like 5! * 6 = a hell of a lot of different ways to click or scroll. So, as much as I want to get a Mac, there's no question that PCs have the stupid single-button mouse beat in that arena.

Besides, who wants to have to use two hands to right-click?!? When I'm browsing some pr0n I want to "Save Image As...", that means...

Re:Mac Laptops

[rseuhs]

Part of the reason Windows and Unix users have problems with the Mac's one button (and whine incessantly about it, to such a degree that you want to put *their* testicles in a vise), is because they tend to be unused to the click-and-hold action. On a modern Mac, this will get you the exact same action as the right-click menu. What in God's name you need a third button for, besides having another part to break, beats the hell out of me.

You may not believe it, but I feel bored in the second I have to wait for that menu to pop up.

And I need the 3rd button to put windows in the background, jump on scrollbars, open links in new tabs and paste selections of course.

Did I mention that I'd like a mouse-wheel, too?

Macs are expensive, but the price is still acceptable compared feature-wise to top PC-brands. But on Macs you are forced to buy a lot of crap which you don't need and/or will have to replace (Firewire, 1GBit LAN, 1-button mouse) which makes them really expensive compared to a PC that contains only what you are going to use.

Re:Mac Laptops

[rseuhs]

If it were superior it would support Unix-style copy-paste (which is much faster than MacOS-style).

Re:Mac Laptops

[ReVMD]

just hold down the button rather than clicking it, all will come to you.

Re:Mac Laptops

[mjpaci]

If you're spending that much money on AutoCad, you might as well spend ~$80 on a REALLY NICE multibutton mouse, no?

Re:Mac Laptops

[SlamMan]

Well, since I just used the firewire port and the gigabit port yesterday at work, I wouldn't quite consider them useless.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

Blah Blah blah...

You can do everything in the CAD software on the Mac with the one button mouse. You just don't know how and you THINK that you know better. Base your opinions on facts rather than ignorant supposition.

Re:Mac Laptops

[jedrek]

It's not only CAD. I use the left-hand-on-keyboard right-hand-on-mouse position in almost all the soft I use: Maya, Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash. The only time I take my hands off is to type in something. Each of these programs has almost every function accessible from the keyboard - usually via a hotkey, sometimes I have to alt-letter to get a menu option, but I still get it done.

Two things made me realize how dependent I was on my keystroke/mouse configuration. (1) I was showing two friends how to do some stuff in Photoshop and they kept saying 'how'd you do that', and I kept explaning that I hit a key-combo. (2) The beta of Flash 6 came out, but it had no keyboard shortcuts. It was totaly unusable to me. Still haven't gotten into FlashMX because of it...

Re:Mac Laptops

[rseuhs]

OK, my statement was an exaggeration. However it is true that most people don't need Firewire and certainly don't need 1GBit LAN.

Of course Apple can and should offer machines with Firewire and Gigabit LAN, but they should also offer machines without it! (But with PCI slots)

Re:Mac Laptops

[CoJoNEs]

If you're spending that much money on a Mac, you might as well get the multibutton mouse with it, no?

Re:Mac Laptops

[jaavaaguru]

Me too, but my Sun Blade doesn't seem to like my USB Intellimouse, despite it's default mouse and keyboard being USB.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Alan Partridge]

are you seriously suggesting that the AutoCAD user typically designs on a LAPTOP? Does AutoCAD even run on the Mac at all? If you think that Photoshop using professionals are hamstrung by their single button mice, you're an idiot.

Re:Mac Laptops

[troc]

Oh FFS

You don't NEED a multibutton mouse with OSX, that's the whole point. Therefore Apple doesn't NEED to give you one.

OSX works fine without one - this way, if you feel you NEED one (because of some kind of button envy) you can choose the exact mouse you want....

it's called choice.

If Apple sold everything with 3 button mice, you would be in the queue whinging their mice sucked because of their [size/shape/colour/weight/etc] anyway.

Not only that but it's screw up all the Apple uers who have trained their muscle memory for one button.

Whilst I have used multi-button mice for years and I fully support the idea of Apple oferin a choice of 1 or 2 (or 3) with a scroll wheel, the vast majority or users don't care.

Ant who exactly does serious amounts of AutoCad work on a laptop? The same pepole who do their Photoshop Prepress work on 'em?

yeah right.

troc

Re:Mac Laptops

[CProgrammer98]

The modifier key system is GOOD, and gives NOTHING away to the multiple mouse button approach IMHO
Apart from the fact that a right click on the mac becomes a two handed operation instead of one handed. That's important to a lot of people.

Re:Mac Laptops

[CProgrammer98]

but that slows u down. Why click and wait - 2nd mouse button saves time.

Re:Mac Laptops

[MaxVlast]

You're clearly unfamiliar with Steve Jobs and Apple. =)

Seriously, though, they went through that period (want a Performa 6115? Or a 6116? One has a PDS adapter, one has more RAM.) There were a ton of Macs in the retail channel, everything was getting clogged up, and the user had no idea which machine to buy. The company almost went out of business as a result.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Alan Partridge]

again, you show your Mac ignorance. Click and hold for contextual menus in every OSX WWW browser that I've used...

Re:Mac Laptops

[ghack]

Why use X (as in windows) with OS X (as in "ten")? Newsflash: it already has a superior graphical environment (IMHO).


Why? because I feel that I have a moral obligation to use free(as in speech) software whenever I can.

XDarwin...ha!

Re:Mac Laptops

[mobosplash]

I find unix style copy-paste often frustrating. It works inconsistantly and about 50% of the time I want to cut/copy, select something and and paste over it. That's awkward with the middle button paste.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Alan Partridge]

do you only have one finger on your left hand?

Re:Mac Laptops

[JonKatzIsAnIdiot]

'Mac ignorance'

Isn't that redundant?

Re:Mac Laptops

[Jezza]

Aren't you forgetting this is a laptop we're talking about?!

Anyway - when I use a laptop I always carry a mouse in my pocket anyway. Macs support multibutton mice, even stuff like wheels. Really, just put a Microsoft IntelliMouse Explorer in your pocket - what's the problem?

(That isn't a random choice of Mouse either, it's got a foolish number of buttons, is silver to match the PowerBook, it optical, cos you'll be using it on all kinds of surfaces, and it's Microsoft because: a) they make nice mice and b) it drives Macheads nuts c) it is dissarms Windows weenies who try and claim you're a biggot! - A TOTAL win)

Re:Mac Laptops

[Surak]

I find unix style copy-paste often frustrating. It works inconsistantly and about 50% of the time I want to cut/copy, select something and and paste over it. That's awkward with the middle button paste.

With the applications I use it for (Emacs, Xterms, Mozilla, and KDE applications mostly), it works consistently 100% of the time.

And the parent poster is right: it's faster, it's more efficient and it's more convenient.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Jezza]

If you like your PC mouse then take it to the Mac if it's a USB one chances are it'll work (and all the buttons). Mac system software understands multibutton mice, it only that the Mac ships with a single button one.

Oh and for completeness Microsoft's keyboards work fine too. (Go to "MacTopia" on Microsoft's site check out their hardware support for the Mac)

Also have a look at the "thinking mouse" for Macs - enough buttons for anyone I think.

Re:Mac Laptops

[CoolVibe]

The right click becomes a slightly lengtier left click and hold operation, which can be done one handed.

Alternatively, you don't even NEED a mouse to operate OS X, since everything can be accessed through key combinations.

Re:Mac Laptops

[b1t r0t]

It is significantly cheaper to put ports like that on the motherboard than to make people buy PCI cards, not to mention the cost of trying to support whatever crap card the user digs up at his local CompuBuy store. I'll bet Firewire adds less than $5 to the cost of goods, and gigabit Ethernet (vs 10/100) adds less than $10 to cost of goods. And don't forget the economies of scale of purchasing and manufacturing so many units.

Have you bitched at Microsoft for putting a 10/100 Ethernet port on the X-Box when most people will probably never use it?

And FWIW, on the one Mac I have with built-in gigabit Ethernet, I am using it. I can saturate a switched 100MBit connection with it, though I've never tested to see how much more it can push.

Re:Mac Laptops

[guuyuk]

Scroll wheel on a laptop? I don't think I have seen one. On a USB mouse? Yes... I have a nice Logitech that works great on my TiBook.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Alan Partridge]

yeah, I've got an MS mouse on this Mac - can't say I like it much - it's too big, I don't like the wheel, there are too many buttons and it CREAKS under pressure! Give me an Apple Pro Mouse any day or, better still, my beautiful Wacom Intuos II. Double click set on pressure. 'Nuff said.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Rich0]

Here is the root of the problem - Apple is a hardware company. They use the software to get you to buy the hardware.

Notice that with PCs you can get any kind of trackpad/trackpoint/display/keyboard/whatever on a laptop that you want. Sure - Compaq may not give you all the choices, but there are a dozen other major vendors who offer competing designs. You pick the one that is right for you.

If Apple didn't keep such a tight grip on their hardware, you could get similar variety - all at a better price. And Apple wouldn't have to manufacture 75 different varieties of the same product - the risk of developing something new would be borne by the vendor who is willing to take it upon themselves.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm...so using ESC as the Meta key wasn't a "real" Meta key but using the Option key is?

Strange...

Re:Mac Laptops

[Jezza]

Oh okay - I must admit, I've not actually used that MS mouse - I use a "Pro Mouse", but I don't use a laptop much. I remember my old Microsoft mouse was quite good (the original intellimouse). With my rather aged PowerBook (a G3) I use an old NeXT mouse - that really annoys some classic Mac heads!

Yeah the Pro Mouse is cool (mine is the old style black one - matches the Pro Keyboard I got!)

Re:Mac Laptops

[Alan Partridge]

That's important to a lot of people.

who? wankers?

Re:Mac Laptops

[naChoZ]

It's not the sun blade's fault. It's up to the application to support the wheel. I remember reading somewhere how to get the wheel working in netscape. Google will likely turn it up for you easily enough.

Re:Mac Laptops

[rbrunner]

Emacs uses a mouse?! How do I attach one to my VT100. :-)

Re:Mac Laptops

[thomas.galvin]

well, I don't remember my combinatorial math, but something like 5! * 6 = a hell of a lot of different ways to click or scroll

That bothers me almost as much as the single-button mice. I was using some other guy's computer the other day, and his mouse had buttons on top of the buttons; two main mouse buttons, a scroll wheele that was also a button, a button on the right side, two buttons on the left side...I couldn't move the bloody thing without clicking something.

I find having two primary buttons, with a center scroll-wheele/button, gives a very nice balance between "I can make this do what I want to" and "I can use this thing without thinking about it." Of course, I'm not a gamer, so I also don't need 600 possible combinations on my right hand.

Re:Mac Laptops

[naChoZ]

certainly don't need 1GBit LAN

Yeah, people didn't need more than 640K of RAM, either...

Re:Mac Laptops

[CProgrammer98]

lol, no not necessarily.

some examples off the top of my head...

1) games that use right click and can be entirely operated by the mouse

2) websurfing - with my 5 button mouse, I never have to touch the keyboard when surfing unless I want to write a message, such as now) and right click is useful for lots of things when surfing (e.g save image as, browser back for lame sites that open in menuless windows, add to bookmark etc) It's just so useful to have the right click without having to use the other hand - which may be holding a soda, or the phone, or whatever...

Re:Mac Laptops

[rseuhs]

It is significantly cheaper to put ports like that on the motherboard than to make people buy PCI cards, not to mention the cost of trying to support whatever crap card the user digs up at his local CompuBuy store. I'll bet Firewire adds less than $5 to the cost of goods, and gigabit Ethernet (vs 10/100) adds less than $10 to cost of goods. And don't forget the economies of scale of purchasing and manufacturing so many units.

Well, maybe. But then I don't see Apple passing the savings to the user.

Hell, Apple could be cheaper than most PCs. A PPC is (contrary to the common belief) much cheaper than any x86 CPU. But they prefer to be a high-margin low-marketshare business, it seems.

Have you bitched at Microsoft for putting a 10/100 Ethernet port on the X-Box when most people will probably never use it?

Actually, yes I have. I have even called it "the Mac of consoles" because of the unnecessary harddrive (an bundled memorycard would have accomplished the same at a much lower cost). XBox is a comatose patient that needs 1 billion per year just to stay alive. And it will die anyway when PS3 is released... But that's offtopic, I think.

Re:Mac Laptops

[rseuhs]

Most home-users don't even have a LAN and use their LAN-connector for their cable-modem which doesn't even come near 10MBit.

Most businesses have just migrated to 100MBit.

I think it's very safe to say that most current Macs won't need 1GBit LAN even if you assume a livespan of 6 years.

Re:Mac Laptops

[thomas.galvin]

OK, my statement was an exaggeration. However it is true that most people don't need Firewire and certainly don't need 1GBit LAN.

I look at it like an SUV. 99% of the people that buy them are never going to need 4-wheel drive, but they like to know it's there. "uh-oh, gravel...better slide this baby into overdrive!"

Re:Mac Laptops

[Frymaster]

So then you admit that you need that middle mouse button, emulated or not?

only because the author created that need by writing crappy software. in fact all the extra buttons on mice (ie more than one) are there because of crappy software. witness:

in the old (and current) mac os there is only one menu bar visible at a time. whichever app has focus, has its menu across the top of the screen. this is how apple presented the gui to the world back in '84.

later, some guys from harvard decided it would be much better to attach menus to the title bars of windows. due to this "improvement" it was possible to have dozens of menus visible on screen simultaneously. computer using moms around the world were confused - they select the text, go to get "copy" from the menu and... which menu?

the solution was the advent of the "contextual menu" (the right click menu) and the required hardware to support it. lesson from history: poor software design created hardware to compensate.

if you want 3 or 5 buttons (hell, a second keyboard on wheels) that's yr choice... but remember that those are extra buttons for added features. they should not be required for basic operation. any software that demands extra buttons suffers from feature creep.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Hallow]

unix-style cut and paste would be a nice option. I've been forced into a "standardized" ssh client for win32 at work... man I miss putty.

The MacOSX gui may be pretty, and fairly functional, however it's missing 1 *great* thing X11 has in it's favor - network transparency. It comes builtin, native, with X11. You have to use VNC or a commercial remote desktop soultion to come anywhere close (and those only do the whole desktop, not just individual applications!)

Re:Mac Laptops

[MaxVlast]

Yep, they'd just go out of business and it wouldn't be a problem! Remember the clone fiasco.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

No. If Apple offered 3 button mice from the beginning, no one at all would have a problem. There would be no idiots/pricks trying to put down multiple-button mouse users (mouse button envy), or single-button mouse users (incompetent, can't handle >1 button). Using modifiers for common click events wouldn't be necessary, and for the hairier cases the modifiers are still there!

The only hurdle I see is getting people to understand that the left mouse button (for right-handers) is the primary action button.

Re:Mac Laptops

[naChoZ]

Thankfully people with your lack of vision don't run the company.

I wish I could remember where so that I could quote it, but I read somewhere that the average computer user can't use their computer any faster than would require a slow low-end 486. If you've ever watched an average computer user, this makes sense. They're slow, one-step-at-a-time folks. They aren't the types who are thinking 3, 4, TEN steps ahead of where they currently are like the people you see who can use their machine at a ridiculously fast pace.

So why do slow users want faster machines, faster network, faster internet, faster whatever...? Because people are coming up with newer and better ways of making their computers work for them. Think of a time that probably isn't too far away, when a digital video cam is affordable that can hold, say, 1.2GB. Since even average computer users are now housing multiple machines, it's not unreasonable for them to want to shovel a huge file around from one machine to the next.

Even at 100Mbps, 1.2GB takes a while (and don't start citing math about how at 100Mbps it should take exactly X number of seconds, it doesn't work that way...). So, every time someone has to wait a while for a big file to transfer, that's going to be someone who would rather not sit there waiting...

That's only one consumer-oriented possibility. Every single mac user that I personally know is a "media" professional of some sort. Some of the work with photoshop files that are hundreds of MB's in size. I'd wager that of the Apple's 25% (or so) of the marketshare, a huge percentage of that marketshare is media professionals and Apple probably makes significantly more money off of the media pro's than the low-end consumer market. Including 1Gbps nic's is just catering to the bigger picture.

Re:Mac Laptops

[ave19]

I have one of those Dells, and I STILL hooked up a "normal" mouse to it!

There's just no pleasing some people. Like me.

Re:Mac Laptops

[mccalli]

I have one of those Dells, and I STILL hooked up a "normal" mouse to it!

Err...actually , so do I! I have one of those mini-laptop mice attached.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Mac Laptops

[marcelmouse]

sorry, but yeah... my nonprofit translation-firm job is such that I do all kinds of prepress stuff on my laptop. Separations, imposition, blah blah blah.

wierder things have happened.

mmm... nonprofits.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

Worst comeback ever.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Hadlock]

if you're using a laptop for CAD work, you're probably using the laptop as a "desktop replacement" where 99.99% of your CAD work is done at a desk where you have a handy "real" optical mouse of sorts. the trackpad is merely a crutch until you get to the next poweroutlet where you can comfortably use a real mouse again.

why the hell did you ever install the mouse driver that came with it? generic mouse drivers that come with your OS don't generally suck. (and they don't normally cause problems with software, as the software was written with the default drivers in mind)

Re:Mac Laptops

[milkman_matt]

What in God's name you need a third button for, besides having another part to break, beats the hell out of me.
In a word: Emacs. Emacs on X makes extensive use of the middle mouse button. Also, X-style copy and paste. Especially in an Xterm.

I haven't tried it in emacs, but in every other window it seems to work, I just use command x, c and v to cut/copy/paste.. why would I want to use a mouse for it? :)
However, that's just the way I do things, you may disagree..

-matt

Re:Mac Laptops

[falzer]

3) 2d/3d modelling. When all 3 keyboard modifiers combos are used, you either gotta start using keys other than the default modifiers, or extra mouse buttons, or possibly a modal interface.

But I'm sure there will be a mac user who comes up with some attack against 3-button mouse users or some rationalization not to use a 3 button mouse.

• Example: "I do actual work on the computer, not game playing, not spanking off. I don't need a free hand to hold a soda, or phone. The modifier keys are more than adequate. Any software that requires more than (2^3)=eight click modifier key combos is broken. Users don't need that kind of functionality. Are you so inept that you can't press a modifier key? So what if it's quicker to use another mouse button when your finger is already on it? You saved, what, 0.2 seconds? Slooow down, cowboy!"
  

But that's fine for them to stick with a one-button mouse. I guess it all boils down to a matter of preference. People tend to be stubborn, and I for one am never going back to anything less than 3 buttons. =)

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

For ugly cases the modifiers will always be there, but for everything else, my fingers are already on the necessary mouse button.

Re:Mac Laptops

[georgewad]

This IS the great thing about X11. Which is why I have XDarwin on my OSX box. I can yast2 my SuSE, install Oracle on Solaris, admin Veritas... I've stopped using VNC, except to access Windows machines (pre 2K server, for that there's MS Remote Desktop Connection)

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

2^5 = 32 keyboard modifier combinations, 32 * 6 = 192.

If keypress ordered mattered, then 5! * 6 would be correct.

Re:Mac Laptops

[rseuhs]

I'm not saying that we will never have Gigabit LANs. I just say it's stupid and unnecessary to put it in *ALL* computers *RIGHT NOW*. (No, I will not call a device without PCI slots and integrated monitor a real computer)

Sure Apple can offer it. No argument.

But they shouldn't force it onto their customers.

The step from 10MBit to 100MBit was fast, but the step from 100 to 1GBit will take longer because many harddisks can't saturate this bandwidth. As long as harddisks don't improve drastically in speed or RAID becomes standard, I don't see GBit as neccessity.

Re:Mac Laptops

[martyn s]

A bundled memory card would NOT have accomplished the same thing. First of all, let's just ignore Xbox live for a second, which needs a hard drive. We'll ignore it because not everyone needs or will use Xbox live. But let's actually look at the games.

The hard drive really changes a lot. In halo, if you die, it loads instantly when you go back to your checkpoint. No wait. Every gun is in the exact same spot, so it's not like you come back and there are no weapons any more. And not just in the exact same spot as in the default locations. I mean, if you kill a bunch of aliens, and they drop weapons, the spots where they drop will be saved. If you save your game, turn it off, go to sleep and come back the next day, the weapons will still be there, in the exact same spot.

Xbox may very well just die, but there's no good reason for that. Xbox is a superior console, and the only reason for playstation to do better is because of marketing/brand recognition, momentum. And I know there's more to a console than just the hardware, but that *is* what you were complaining about.

And Xbox Live has so much over the other console's online gaming plans, and it even has many advantages of PC online gaming. I'm not going to make any predictions about how well it's going to do, but like TiVo, success in the marketplace isn't necessarily indicative of it's value as a product.

Xbox has a harddrive for good reason, and it makes good use of it. Not only that, the price is still competitive. So why should it bother you? I can understand if it bothers you about the mac, but with Xbox, you are getting *more* hardware, for the same price. What's your problem exactly?

And even if a bundled memory card was used instead of a hard drive, do you think the console would be any cheaper? No, they only have to be as cheap as the competition. They are already selling at a loss.

I strongly suspect you haven't played xbox much. People who are casual or non-gamers tend to have your reaction to the Xbox. They think that because they haven't heard anything about it in the past few months, that it must've disappeared or something. The Xbox is alive and well. And I'm not really concerned about whether microsoft makes a profit or not. As long as the good games keep coming out. Which they are.

Re:Mac Laptops

[cmallinson]

...with my 5 button mouse, I never have to touch the keyboard when surfing unless I want to write a message...

You have to touch your keyboard to type? I've got a 65-button mouse, so I don't even need a keyboard. There are some drawbacks though ... this was a first post when I started writing it.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

With the old netscape I would select something in the address bar and middle click to paste over it. Of course, by selecting something, it would become the new text in the "clipboard". (I know it's not the same.) It fucking sucked. But that's the only place I ever used it, and middle clicking in the netscape window made it go to the link in the "clipboard" anyway.

BTW does the middle-click-goes-to-URL-in-clipboard feature exist in the windows Mozilla?

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

It's too bad you can't plug a mouse into a laptop. Oh wait....

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

Amen, brother. Preach it.
Its about time someone came out and said it. Non-mac users have been bitching about the one -button mouse for 10 years. Its a NON-ISSUE.
If you want a multi button mouse with your mac, then go buy one and STFU.

Re:Mac Laptops

[DavidRavenMoon]

On PCs, you do also have Alt, Control, and Shift, and even Meta and Hyper if you use some *nix and map the Windows and Menu keys. Now, combine those with the 6 buttons on my mouse (Left, Right, Middle, Scroll Up/Down, Thumb), that's up to, let's see, ...

Macs also have Control, Option (alt), Shift, and the Command key (which is like the Control key on a PC).

You can use any of those as modifiers while mousing. For example, Option-drag copies a file, while Cmd-Option-drag makes an alias (short cut). You can use any USB multibutton pointing device you like.

I use an MS Itellimouse Optical mouse, and USB Overdrive mouse software (which is what the MS Itellipoint is based on). The software allows me to program button functions that can change depending on what application I'm using, so the mouse wheel is a middle button in Maya, and opens a link in a new tab in Mozilla, for instance.

Even without the software, OS X supports right clicks and the scroll wheel.

Also on the desktop Macs you have three extra F keys, which come in handy in programs like Quark, but are missing in the Windows version.

Re:Mac Laptops

[bashibazouk]

only because the author created that need by writing crappy software.

Not totally true. 5 button wheel mice are a very welcome addition to game players. Depends on the game, of course, but many are greatly improved by the added buttons. Some even go beyond "crappy software".

On a side note, though I know I can buy any mouse I want for my new G4, I like the cool design of the one button mouse that came with the computer too much to change it.

Re:Mac Laptops

[macwhiz]

Macs are expensive, but the price is still acceptable compared feature-wise to top PC-brands. But on Macs you are forced to buy a lot of crap which you don't need and/or will have to replace (Firewire, 1GBit LAN, 1-button mouse) which makes them really expensive compared to a PC that contains only what you are going to use.

The "Macs are expensive" argument is hard to justify without making spurious comparisons. A Kia is less expensive than a Saab, and both are cars... but they're hardly equivalent. Many people wouldn't want a Kia, even if you could get aftermarket add-ons to get a decent engine, heated leather seats, and an ignition key between the seats.

Take the latest Gateway, for example: the all-in-one LCD model they're touting as an iMac killer. Yes, it's cheaper than the iMac... if you don't want little things like a modem. By the time you buy such a Gateway that comes with the same equipment -- equipment that most home customers will need or desire -- the price difference vanishes. And as for performance... there's plenty of evidence that Gateway seriously cooked the numbers they use for their claims. Big surprise.

Does the average person need FireWire? Well, judging by the sales of digital video cameras, and the interest in iMovie, I'd say that it's a pretty attractive feature. USB 2.0 is off to a slow start, and its real world performance is poor compared to FireWire. The most popular MP3 player, the iPod, uses FireWire. HDTV cable boxes use FireWire. I'd say it's a standard that's here to stay.

Does the average person need Gigabit Ethernet? No, but the average person doesn't buy the models of Mac that come with it... and it's no longer much more expensive than 100base-T Ethernet. Besides, it wasn't long ago that 100base-T was considered overkill for the home. Now, most people would think you crazy if you suggested that they wire up a home LAN with a 10Mbps hub instead of a 100Mbps switch. In two years, who knows? Gigabit Ethernet may be the standard, and your TV and TiVo might even be using it to talk to your PC.

One button mouse... well, it is easier for new computer users to figure out. But I do tell people who buy new Macs to buy a new USB scroll mouse. It would be nice if Apple included 'em in the box, but it's hardly worth all the gnashing of teeth. Mice are cheap. You can get a name-brand optical USB scroll mouse for $18 or less. It plugs right in and Mac OS X recognizes the second button and the scroll wheel instantly, no drivers required. You can choose the mouse whose shape works for your hand. What's the big deal?

For that matter, why is the complaint that Apple includes a mouse with only one button? Why not complain that they include a mouse? After all, that's an additional expense that's part of the computer's cost. They could cut costs if they left the mouse out, and you had to buy your own! They're taking away your choice by foisting a stylish optical mouse on you!

Oh, wait... maybe it's because that argument is ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as shunning a computer because you're too worked up to spend $18 on a mouse.

Re:Mac Laptops

[spitzak]

WIthout making any claims about what is better or worse, your history is somewhat backwards.

"Contextual menus" were certainly first, the Xerox Parc and the Lisp Machine used these. Often these were the *only* thing you could do with the mouse. They also had the incredible stupid UI design that once you popped-up a menu you had to choose some item, leading the user to have to pick the least-destructive action when they accidentally popped it up.

Less certainly, but I think per-window menus were next. Take a look at older XViews or early X interfaces. At that time only *some* programs had menus, so it made perfect sense to put them on the windows, rather than reserve a piece of expensive screen space for a menu that was not always used. Also point-to-type was commonly used and it is impossible to use that with a shared menubar.

I never saw shared menu area until the Lisa appeared. The original Mac, though later than the Lisa, did not count because it was single-tasking (the whole screen switched when you changed apps, so it's hard to claim the menu bar is special). The "switcher" versions of Mac where you could still see other windows is probably the first version seen by many people.

Re:Mac Laptops

[StarFace]

Pandering the absolute lowest common denominator has never been the goal with *NIX applications in the past, and there has been no reason to pander, either. Since having more than one button only adds power to the user's ability to interface with the software, and the targeted users of the software were all capable of logically discerning which widgets correspond to what -- there is absolutely no reason that they should write software that only uses one button.

The Macintosh platform is an entirely different beast, with an entirely different target group. Even the professionals that use the Mac are, in my six years of experience in the graphics field, less technically inclined on average (there are always exceptions, of course.) They are artists, not computer science gurus, hence the general fondness for the Mac platform amongst them.

Taking an application that was intended to be run on an operating system that is designed for advanced users, and running it on an operating system that is designed for less advanced users -- and calling said software crap because it relies upon conventions that advanced users are used to, is just silly.

Re:Mac Laptops

[StarFace]

True, but it isn't exactly an efficient method of navigation yet. They should have just bitten the bullet, copied MS, and used Alt-Letter hot points to jump around forms and menus. It's a two key solution to what often times amounts to many subsequent presses of tab keys and modifier keys (often with inconsistent results) in X. I think keyboard access on X, at the moment, is mostly intended for handicapped accessibility.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Shuh]

Speaking of Emacs, The OS X 10.2 Terminal as a option to use the option key to the Meta key. This is the first time I've been able to use Emacs with a real Meta key and it rocks.

Terminal-EMACS? Yeowch... I know EMACS is great... but you need to see it in all its OSX glory...

1. Precompiled EMACS 21.1 on Aqua
2. Compile it yourself off the CVS tree.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Elwood P Dowd]

Huh. So you do CAD work on a laptop trackpad with two buttons? I thought those things were unusable for web browsing, let alone CAD design.

You do realize that no laptop manufacturers include a five button mouse as a standard option, right? We were talking about laptops, right?

Mice, on Apple machines, like mice on all machines, are typically an option. When you buy a dell, you can get it with a crappy mouse, or with a good mouse. When you order an Apple, you also have to choose a mouse. It's on a different page of the order form, which may be confusing. It might *seem* like Apple is only selling single button mice.

But you're a computer expert. Apple was concerned with making this less confusing for computer novices. Their mouse input concept is perfect. Admit it.

Re:Mac Laptops

[ealar dlanvuli]

I will agree this is valid, but you have to understand some history.

When GUI apples were first released, your keyboard was a very major investment, and they wanted you to buy a mouse also. It was decided that keyboard modifiers of a single mouse button were more than enough, and at this point there was no pressure what so ever to use more than one. Things like CAD programs would have been completly keyboard operated most likley, and your mouse was mailny to navigate the interface.

Since then the need for at least 3 buttons has been conditioned onto us, because other OS's tend to avoid keyboard+mouse combos whenever possible (for ergonomic reaons I'd assume), but it's not a "need" for most users when they can use intelligent modifier keys.

Apple is very resistant to major changes to thier UI, this is one of the things that makes them good as I understand it. On this issue it hasn't been impressed upon them that most users do things that require a 17 button mouse with 5 scroll wheels and 75 lasers tracking movment in 3d space. In fact most users are quite fine with a single mouse button, the only time this really effects anyone is while on a laptop though, as everyone who cares would have a 165 button mouse plugged in to a desktop anyway.

Apple dosen't see a reason to change the layout of thier laptop, as for most NORMAL tasks, a single button is easily as efficent as a 3 button trackpad, and in many ways is actually better.

Re:Mac Laptops

[rseuhs]

Xbox is a superior console, and the only reason for playstation to do better is because of marketing/brand recognition, momentum.

XBox is only a (slightly) superior console because it has 2 years of technology advantage. XBox is the clearly inferior platform compared to PS2.

Face it: x86 is not suited for a console. Of course you CAN do it, but as some engineer once said: "We can make this building fly, but you won't like the bill". Putting a x86 into a console is stupid. All that backwards-compatibility is not needed and it will cost way too much to produce.

When PS3 is released, MSFT has 3 choices:

• Release a more expensive and less performant XBox2 at the same time plus spend 1 billion/year just to keep it alive.
• Wait 2 years until x86-tech is good and cheap enough and then release a more performant - but still more expensive XBox2. (Just like PS2 vs. XBox1) They'll also need about 1 billion/year just to keep it alive.
• Let XBox die and pretend it never happened.

If you ask me, I'd say choice 3 is the most probable thing Microsoft will do.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Frymaster]

you'll note that i said that " this is how apple presented the gui to the world back in '84." i realize that the parc effort was significantly different... i also realize that it didn't make very far out of the lab.

i'm pretty sure the lisa was out and about before menu-capable x. the single-tasking argument doesn't detract from the shared menu. yes, it was the result of architectural challenges in the os itself, but the single menu is still valid. it led to a menu system that worked. no one saw the need to drastically change that at apple. a good thing!

Re:Mac Laptops

[rseuhs]

Funny, you were shunning another computer because you were too worked up to spend even less on a modem.

Re:Mac Laptops

[anarkhos]

Oh please, drag+drop text is a hell of a lot faster. It doesn't use the keyboard and only requires one button.

Although Cocoa apps are still semi-broken with D+DT. I wish Apple would fix that.

Re:Mac Laptops

[chump daddy]

try using some 3D software and tell me that one button is enough. I have a powerbook and have a 2 button mouse with scroll wheel. I couldn't live without it. it's not a necessity, but it's a luxury. in this day and age, if you can't get yourself accustomed to some luxuries, then what's the point of living?

acorn archimedes computers have always had 3 buttons. and in all their documentation and instruction books/tapes, they name them all.

left = select
middle = modify I think
right = menu

I can't remember the name of the middle button (it's been so long since I've used one), but it has a distinct function that the acorn style guidesa ll said had to be adhered to, thus giving users a consistant environment.

THAT is the key. a consistant environment. if you have multiple buttons that do different things in different apps, that is what frustrates users.

macs have traditionally had one button, and their users know it.

PCs have traditionally had 2 buttons and their users know what they both do.

acorns, as mentioned have 3, the functions being standard.

for good or for worse, each 3 systems have different standards, but they are standard. the users know what they can and can't do.

extras are extras as you say, but every OS uses mouse buttons in combination with keys.. ie, the difference between moving and copying files in OS X and windows, is dependant on whether you're hold down control, or option, or whatever.

at the OS level, the 1, 2 and 3 buttons are standard.

of course, applications that deviate from this are the evil in software.

Re:Mac Laptops

[lingqi]

I like Dell's approach on the Inspiron I have - put both on the machine, let the user decide.

I like pretty much everything about my inspiron except that. the track point digs into the screen and scratches it up. 15" 16x12 screen, that i have paid dearly for, scratched up because of an annoying purple (PURPLE!) fuzzy nipple that I *never* uses.

And -- the damn thing will fight with the pad for control sometimes, rendering the pad not-useable either until it finishes the drift adjustment.

sigh... why have people stopped shipping laptops with small trackballs?

Re:Mac Laptops

[puppybane]

UNIX pasting annoys me, cuz I have a tendency to accidentally click mouse buttons, and accidentally pasting is truly annoying. Also, I have a tendency to highlight things I'm reading. UNIX style pasting doesn't allow you to highlight something else before you paste.

The last big issue is that it breaks the rule about major changes in UI. They need to require directed effort. Holding down a modifier key helps make sure that you want to do a thing. Having an irreversible (especially in a terminal) action require only a simple-to-do-on-accident click encourages such mistakes.

Re:Mac Laptops

[dozer]

any software that demands extra buttons [more than one] suffers from feature creep.

Wrong. Witness any non-trivial Macintosh drawing or CAD program. For example, let's say you want to move an object to the front.

1-button: Click on the object. Move the mouse cursor to the very top of the screen (on my 1600x1200 monitor, that's a long way away -- don't quote Tog here, he used 512x342 screens). Wonder what menu title "Move to Front" is behind. Is it behind Edit, View, Object, or Action? It takes a while to find because these menus are really long and half the items are grayed out. But, hey, that's the way the Apple User-Interface Guidelines say to do it.

3-button: Right-click on the object. Select move-to-front. Get on with life.

Context-sensitive menus rule. You should try them out some time.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

So would 6!.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Chris Marlowe]

Pandering the absolute lowest common denominator has never been the goal with *NIX applications in the past, and there has been no reason to pander, either. ...

Taking an application that was intended to be run on an operating system that is designed for advanced users, and running it on an operating system that is designed for less advanced users -- and calling said software crap because it relies upon conventions that advanced users are used to, is just silly.

The observation is made that X11 software behaves, almost uniformly, in a way that is hostile to people who think the work they do is more important than paying Guru Tax. The answer above says that this is the case, not because X programmers (almost uniformly) don't give a rat's ass about people who are unthrilled by computers, but because UNIX, the programmers, their programs, and the person I've quoted are all "more advanced" than almost anybody else. Features aren't bagged-on in hidden places out of inept human engineering, but because they are too cool not to hide.

This reveals a pervasive, and damaging misconception about human-interface design. UNIX is not the way it is because its users are "more advanced."

UNIX is the way it is because its users are wealthy, strong, and handsome, and everybody loves them.

I wish people would get this straight.

Re:Mac Laptops

[JoeBlows]

have you looked at recent notebooks? all have either a trackpad scroller next to the trackpad for the mouse or an anolog wheel at the bas of the tracpad.

Re:Mac Laptops

[MainframeKiller]

Dont like nipples...

Cmon man, everybody likes nipples...
:-)


I call it the clitoris.

Only thing is, my wife complains that I'm always touching the one on the laptop and not the one on her...

Re:Mac Laptops

[Maserati]

And I thought you were happy to see me :-(

Re:Mac Laptops

[Maserati]

That's in the Keyboard Preferences as of 10.2. User configurable activation of different methods for accessing the menus and other things from the keyboard. Go take a look.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

but that slows u down.

You may want to practice going slower. If you ever "hit the jackpot", it will pay off trust me. Maybe the one button mouse is why mac users get more.

Re:Mac Laptops

[dalamcd]

Actually, he was saying comparing two products on price when they don't offer the same features is silly. And he offered the lack of modem on the Gateway computer as an example of such a silly comparison (calling it an 'iMac killer').

You, on the other hand, are just doing a really shitty job of nitpicking. ^_________________________^

dalamcd

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

> In a word: Emacs. Ok, so what the F you want Emacs for? Grow up, you twit.

Re:Mac Laptops

[gig]

> As long as harddisks don't improve drastically in
> speed or RAID becomes standard, I don't see GBit as
> neccessity.

RAID is standard on the Mac. You open Disk Utility and set it up with a few GUI switches.

I routinely move huge amounts of data between my PowerBook and PowerMac. They both came with gigabit Ethernet standard, and theh ports also do their own sensing so you don't need a crossover cable. Apple was ahead of the curve going to 10/100 just like they are ahead of the curve going to 10/100/1000 because their customers work with lots of data for desktop users. DV movie clips, huge print jobs, multitrack audio. Macs keep their value and get used for many years longer than you would expect, and it's stuff like this that does that. Gigabit Ethernet has been standard on pro Macs for 18 months or so and those machines are going to be great servers later on, with their FireWire and 802.11 antennaes and Gigabit Ethernet and lots of empty PCI slots.

My PowerBook usually has two FireWire drives hooked up to it while I'm working, and my PowerMac has 4-6 drives hooked up at all times, so the big pipe between the machines means no waiting for data no matter where it is.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Zeal17]

YES! That is it exactly....I am a mac user and I use a logitech cordless optical mouse, that has 3 buttons and a scroll on it. That is my preference, on the other hand, if I wanted to use a 1 button mouse, I CAN! How many PC users could use a 1 button mouse?

-Zeal17

Re:Mac Laptops

[Zeal17]

The "switcher" versions of Mac where you could still see other windows is probably the first version seen by many people.

Yay, multifinder!

-Zeal17

Re:Mac Laptops

[Zeal17]

Yeah, people didn't need more than 640K of RAM, either...

Thankfully people with your lack of vision don't run the company.

Heh, Bill Gates said the original quote. (Some time ago)

-Zeal17

Re:Mac Laptops

[SlamMan]

For the record, its a software based RAID, not hardware. Anyway,I completly agree on the use of firewire on thhe Macs. Itsa godsend. All you points, plus one I find can save me hours: target disk mode. Being able to boot one of your machines jsut like its a hard drive and get an absolutly sick transfer speed is great. Even wroks with imacs without GBit.

Re:Mac Laptops

[SlamMan]

I think the biggest hinderance in getting Gbit to work right now has nothing to do with the machines, its the switch sofware. Have you priced GBit switches??
Also, for the record, thier low end machines only have 10/100. I think.

Re:Mac Laptops

[naChoZ]

Yeah, I know. I spent a great deal of time trying to find work-arounds for that rotten limit. Quarterdeck made quite a bit of money off of that short-sightedness too.

Back in the Win3.1 days, I was actually pretty good at memory tweaking and stuff. There was some oddball db app that one of our departments use to run that required.... wtf was that again... it was an old IBM network protocol of some sort.

Anyway, between that and all the other network drivers that were required for the Novell network that this company ran, there wasn't enough memory left over for this db app. We had to load them all up with QEMM, start using video ram as part of conventional memory, that jacked it up to something like 720k and then the app would run. It was ridiculously unstable.

Re:Mac Laptops

[StarFace]

Yes, yes. That is what I was referring to. It enables you to access different areas of the interface with a key combination. The problem doesn't really lie there, it lies in the navigation of the specific areas. For instance, menu navigation requires first the access combination, then many multiple arrow key presses to get to what you need. It is far, far faster to just access the menu with the mouse unless you are going for upper right hand corner, relatively top menu items. With Windows (as well as GTK+ and QT for the most part, as well) you can access any menu with a hot key, and then once you are in the menu you can press a single hot key to access each of the items within that menu drop down. This, at the most requires three key presses, and that is including the Alt button modifier.

The Apple method also has another flaw in that it uses the arrow keys, which are situated on the right side of the keyboard. This either means sweeping your left hand all the way across the keyboard after hitting the menu access key -- or removing your right hand from the mouse. Already at that point, a speedy user could have selected the menu action with the mouse, and we haven't even started arrow key navigation.

All of this might sound a bit picky, as if I'm too lazy to take an extra second, but if you work on time sensative projects all day long, every little second helps, and split second menu access is vital.

The second issue is dock access. When comparing it to the Windows methods, one has to consider that the dock is more powerful than the task bar, so you cannot strictly compare it to Alt + Tab application switching, since you can also launch applications/documents from the dock. So Apple gets a point there, but once again, it opts for a vastly more clumsy method, relying upon a left hand access method and then a right hand arrow key navigation with arrows to select applications. Since you switch applications more often the launch them (at least I do) Apple loses two points for making this method too clumsy. It is still easier to switch applications with the mouse.

So, there is the "Select Window or Next Behind It" option. This behaves in a strange manner that doesn't really accomplish good task switching, so I never use it. Half of the time it seems to pick random windows. I'm sure there is a system, but I'd rather have something come up that shows me what it wants to select *before* it selects, not as it is selecting.

Re:Mac Laptops

[MoneyT]

On a laptop, a single button using modifier keys is a god send compared to multibutton. It's quick and responsive, and you don't have to worry about misclicking (some laptops just have the 2 buttons too close and too similar to tell without checking first). Not only that, but since you're on a laptop, your hands are always right by the keyboard, hitting the modifiers becomes second nature.

Re:Mac Laptops

[MoneyT]

Option-click == save target as

Re:Mac Laptops

[MoneyT]

1) Unplug your current 3 button mouse from your PC, or take one of the extras you probably have lying arround.

2) Plug it into the mac.

3) Go on with your life.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't. The iBook and iMac are 10/100. Only the professional class machines (the TiBook and the G4s) have 1 Gigabit Ethernet....

Re:Mac Laptops

[MoneyT]

Except since all the vendors would be selling at razor thin profit margins, no one would take the risk of developing something new. As a good example, look at PCI and USB in the PC world. PCI has been arround for a long long time, but up until a few years ago, almost every PC MB that you bought had an ISA slot or two, no one was willing to kill the old system in favor of a new system.

The same thing happened with USB. Intel developed it and sat on it. A few computers had one here and there, but no one included it default, and it certainly wasn't used (still isn't used) as a primary port for keyboards and mice.

Having the high profit margins that they do, and being the only manufacturer of macs, Apple has the power to push products like USB, Firewire and PCI (though they didn't push PCI) into the market. Sometimes they do things way ahead of their time (LCD displays on the 20th aniversary mac, the cube, Newton) but a lot of good products come out of their risk taking.

Re:Mac Laptops

[overunderunderdone]

My left hand effectively became multi-modal again which requires considerable more thinking (read: slower) effort during production.

It only required more thinking because you weren't used to it. I've always been a mac guy so I have the same problem when I'm using a two-button or three-button mouse. I'm just not used to it so it requires thinking (read: slower). It took a while to get used to using a second button, I like it more for the scrollwhell than the second button which I only find adds much in limited situations (see below for what I mean)

A single button mouse might make sense for dinky little point and click word processing but all serious CAD and graphics software (and probably other serious industry-based software) provide much more power at the mouse hand.

My personal experience with a two-button mouse (that came with my wacom tablet) is the exact opposite. I find the two button mouse with a scroll wheel useful for the simple point & click stuff where you only need one modifier (the right click) and the scroll wheel is really useful. BUT when using a more complex app I find the measly addition of another button insufficient compared to a single mouse button plus the four modifier keys (and in some programs the spacebar). A total of 5 (or 6) "mouse" buttons that are used in combination to effect a potentially much larger number of varying kinds of mouse clicks. For instance in Photoshop using a brush here is the "lack of options" I suffer with:

1. I click to paint
   
2. control-click for contextual menus
   
3. shift+control click to bring up a DIFFERENT contextual menu
   (Aside from the scroll wheel my two-button mouse is out of tricks. Clicking with both buttons could add another one but Photoshop doesn't appear to use this potential)
   
4. control+option click to bring up YET ANOTHER contextual menu
   
5. option-click to sample a color
   
6. shift+option to bring up the multiple sample tool
   
7. command-click to move a layer
   
8. option+command-click to duplicate & move a layer
   
9. shift-click to constrain myself to 90% angles, or point-to-point straight lines
   
10. spacebar-click & drag to freely move my view of the image (more useful than the scroll whell which only moves up & down)
    
11. Command+spacebar click to zoom in
    Option+spacebar click to zoom out
    
12. control+spacebar for YET ONE MORE contextual menu.

I THINK that's about it. All this without having six buttons on my wacom's stylus ;) There are a few of these I only rarely use, but a surprisingly large number of these different "mouse" clicks are firmly in my "muscle memory". Without sitting at the keyboard I couldn't tell you which keys I hit to modify the mouse click in a particular way. I just do it without thinking it's not slow at all and if I suffer from a lack of options... well there were a few modifier-key combinations as yet unused.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, an easily solved problem.

Re:Mac Laptops

[dbrutus]

Both my and my wife's parents use computers. All four are talented, retired white collar professionals. Mine have a mac and limp around getting things done, my wife's have a pc and limp around getting things done. These are both very common use cases for PCs. My wife's parents continually make the mistake of clicking the wrong mouse button and after the 10th time of telling them which one to use, I just gave up and when I hear "it didn't work" I just say try the other mouse button.

Creating an experience where the system is set up for the novice out of the box is a good move. If you like your multi-button mouse, plug any USB mouse into your mac. It'll work just fine.

I've been using a Mac since 1987. My current mouse is a Kensington Mouse-in-a-box which has four buttons and a clickable scroll wheel (essentially a fifth button). They all work just fine on my Mac and if you're running CAD, I'd suggest getting something similar.

Let's be honest, CAD users generally aren't happy with those $5 mice that ship with most PCs anyway so what's the big deal? Put the 1 button wonders up on e-bay and move on.

Re:Mac Laptops

[schuster]

You've pretty much nailed the whole issue. At the end of the day, multiple mouse buttons are neither good design or bad design. In some situations, they're a good idea and in other situations, they're not necessary. An earlier poster postulated that Apple chose a one-button mouse for ergonamic reasons and that turns out to be accurate. It's also the same reason that they don't ship a mouse with a scroll wheel. Yes, it's faster, but the movement isn't natural.

You may or may not agree that designing for novice users is a good idea, but the fact is, that's who Apple has designed for. This means that they design their software with learnability in mind. This also means that designing the system for one mouse button is the right design decision. Anyone who's ever had to point out the very existence of the right button to a novice user should understand this. Why does the user not realize there's a second mouse button? It's because the movement is unnatural and so it doesn't occur to them. I prefer a multi-button mouse myself, but I'll never suggest one for my mom.

Re:Mac Laptops

[jaavaaguru]

I thought it "just worked" in Mozilla - at least it just works on any Mozilla I've seen recently on Windows or Linux. Maybe I'm missing something.

Re:Mac Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

With all respect, you're clearly missing a key point. When you say "right click on a mac" it shows that you think that this is a "mac" issue. This is not a mac issue. It is a "mouse" issue.
You can put just about any mouse on a mac and like most things on a mac, it will just work. Slashdot is hardly a forum for beginners. We can talk about beginners here, but not many of us are beginners. For us it comes down to preference. (I love my three button w/scroll wheel. How did I ever get by without that wheel?)
As for beginers, consider if you are going to be supporting them, and then decide if out-of-the-box you want them having one button or not.
Cheers,
hb

Re:Mac Laptops

[Surak]

Virtually all X-based web browsers support middle-clicking in the window to bring up the URL on the clipboard.

Re:Mac Laptops

[ealar dlanvuli]

hm, apple+click seems to bring some up

so does my right mouse button

odd I find so little need for them most of the time on my mac though, I'm not sure if thats because I can navigate everything much more sucesfully with my keyboard or what.

I would use MacOS X on a laptop too...

[Captain Pedantic]

...if I was given a "review unit" with it on.

As it is I'll happily continue with my Thinkpad 600 running Debian, XFce and Rox filer. I bet mine with its PII 266 is more responsive than his, too!

Re:I would use MacOS X on a laptop too...

[EvilStein]

If you bet something like that, you'd probably lose.

Mac OS X 10.1.5 on my friend's G4/400 Powerbook ate my ThinkPad 600 (PII/266, 3gb HD, about 192mb RAM) alive.

Just because old hardware is running LINUX most certainly does not mean that it'll automatically work better than anything running Mac OS X.

If you were booted into nothing but a shell prompt, it might, but not really.

Re:I would use MacOS X on a laptop too...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, I'm an old crusty UNIX admin and I bought a powerbook a couple of years ago to run OSX and YellowDog Linux. Well, after OS X 10.1 came out, I trashed the Linux partition because OS X was faster and just better for laptop use (instant on/off is a KILLER feature). Now that 10.2 is out there isn't even a comparison. The GUI is rendered with OpenGL - wow. It's easily as fast as my AMD 1600 pc for most tasks (except Warcraft III).

Re:I would use MacOS X on a laptop too...

[Anonymous Coward]

You go girl!

Go for it.

[matthew.thompson]

10 months ago I used Linux and Windows at home exclusively but wanted a laptop for taking stuff to work and writing on the train.

None of the Windows laptops cut it with battery life or displays so I looked at the iBook. I plumped for the 600Mhz DVD Rom drive beast. It's since been with me to Singapore - great for watching DVDs, work most days, bed for writing, downstairs infront of the TV for emailing, the kitchen for recipes. (I got the airport card as well - nothing to break off so I don't feel scared using wireless networking while actually moving!)

I use nothing but OS X on the beast (Up the RAM to at least 384Mb) and it's great. Proper terminal window to connect to my personal servers, MS RDP client for configuring Works' Windows 2000 boxes. Internal modem for connecting to other networks, Bluetooth for connecting whilst on the train. Best of all IT JUST WORKS.

I've definately reached the point where I no longer want to have all my machines as play toys - the iBook is a workhorse and just keeps on slogging. It'd without a doubt the best PC I've bought so far.

My Name's Matthew Thompson and I'm a system administrator and freelance journalist.

Re:Go for it.

[Xouba]

I use nothing but OS X on the beast (Up the RAM to at least 384Mb)

Ehm ... you don't mean that it *needs* 384MB, right?

<rant>I'm beginning to think that everyone is thinking that OS X is great just because of the everyone-says-it syndrome: there are a few people that keep on repeating that "OS X is cool" again and again, and the feeble minded just swallow it. You know, brainwashing. Yeah, it may be cool, but all this switch fever is something that I barely understand.</rant>

Re:Go for it.

[jbolden]

Its really pretty easy to understand why the /. crowd would like OSX. If you need business apps and Unix apps what are your alternatives:

dual boot -- a pain in the neck and you end up spending almost all your time in either Linux or Windows

Windows + Cygwin -- too weak on the Unix side, things rarely compile correctly

Linux + Wine -- very weak on the windows side too many things don't run correctly

The Unix side of OSX is getting very close to being as good as FreeBSD; and the Business side is very close to being as good as Windows XP (better in terms of interface worse in terms of inexpensive app availablility). Then you toss in Classic and you pick up a few of the Mac 9 apps.

What is so hard to understand why this combo would be appealing to the /. crowd?

Re:Go for it.

[vorpal22]

I'm also a switcher from Linux on x86 hardware to Mac OS X. In fact, I'm one of the earlier switchers - as soon as I heard about OS X, I became very excited, bought myself an old iMac on eBay, and picked up a copy of the OS X public beta.

Since that day, I haven't looked back.

I don't think we switchers are trying to convince you of anything. Out of personal experience, I can tell you that after years of frustrating sysadmin battles with Linux (not to mention dealing with non-standard, poorly-designed, overly complex user interfaces), it was a breath of fresh air the first time I tried Mac OS X. Everything just worked, and worked immaculately. My only complaint would have been the speed issues, but with the release of OS X 10.2, this has been taken care of and is no longer an issue.

Now I can spend my time being productive and actually getting stuff done instead of editing text files in Linux in an attempt to get a piece of hardware or some daemon to behave properly. And the best part about everything is that if I want to get my hands dirty and mess with the UNIX underpinnings and configuration files, I still have that option open to me. Only now, it's a luxury rather than a necessity.

Re:Go for it.

[jeremyp]

Yep, it needs a lot of RAM. My Ti powerbook came with 256Mb RAM and OS X ate all of it. I upgraded to 512Mb and it's been great since then. With the price of memory, I don't think it's a big deal.

Re:Go for it.

[Hobophile]

Linux + Wine -- very weak on the windows side too many things don't run correctly

I'm curious as to what it is that Wine can't handle under Linux. Personally, I feel that Windows shines in two major areas: its Office suite, and its games.

Now, Codeweavers Wine can run Office 2000 really well; I haven't tried the freely downloadable version, but as I believe Codeweavers contributes all their improvements back to the Wine project under the GPL, I imagine it runs Office also. Codeweavers Wine also runs Lotus Notes, Visio, and Internet Explorer 5.5.

A year or so ago IE on Linux would've been a no-brainer; now, with Mozilla in such nice shape, it's hard to get too excited about that possibility. But it does exist.

As for games, well, Transgaming's WineX is currently exceeding many people's expectations with regard to DirectX gaming on Linux. Heck, they had Warcraft 3 working within a couple weeks after it launched. Where's Warcraft 3 for OSX? Thought so. Combined with recent vendor support for Linux (Neverwinter Nights, Unreal Tournament 2003, Doom 3 when it is released) things are looking up on the native front as well.

So characterizing "Linux + Wine" as very weak is grossly unfair. Of the 20 or so applications I run under Windows on a regular basis, I'd say more than half work readily enough under Linux + Wine, and solid replacements are available for most of the rest (Gaim for AIM, Mozilla for IE, native ssh for PuTTY, etc.)

About the only major products I can think of that still don't run are Adobe's line (Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, Pagemaker, etc), and honestly I haven't attempted to get them working. I could be wrong, but I'm sure that if Wine has progressed to the point where it can run Microsoft's prized applications, it can probably handle third-party apps that are less intertwined with the inner workings of Windows.

I would say all that's preventing Linux from being truly competitive on the desktop is a little more third party support (Adobe ports would be awesome) and a little more spit and polish for the GUIs. Red Hat's decision to focus more effort on the desktop segment undoubtedly heralds good things for this area in the future.

In short, I think you're wrong to dismiss Wine out of hand. I also think the main thing OSX gives you is a pretty interface, which is great if that's what you want, but not necessarily wonderful in the "bang-for-your-buck" department.

I'll stick to Linux, keep my free software principles, and save my money for those who give back to the community. Like the Wine projects and Red Hat. And meanwhile I too will have a PC that "just works," and I won't have to sound like a PR plant whenever I post, to boot.

Re:Go for it.

[Large Green Mallard]

Yes, you do need 384MB of RAM. Yes, it's a lot of RAM. But it runs really nicely with that much RAM. RAM isn't that expensive. Apps and OS don't need to run all in 32MB of RAM anymore. More than that is available.

I have three OSX machines. 1 x G4 Desktop (Gigabit Ethernet) with 1024MB of RAM, 1 x G4 Powerbook (800mhz) with 1024MB of RAM and 1 x iBook with 384MB of RAM. And one linux box with 192MB of RAM.

The linux box really liked the memory leak in kppp which made it eat up 380MB of RAM. Was swapping a little..

Re:Go for it.

[Lao-Tzu]

As for games, well, Transgaming's WineX is currently exceeding many people's expectations with regard to DirectX gaming on Linux. Heck, they had Warcraft 3 working within a couple weeks after it launched. Where's Warcraft 3 for OSX?

In the box, when you purchase W3.

Re:Go for it.

[GMontag451]

Where's Warcraft 3 for OSX? Thought so.

Warcraft 3 works perfectly fine on OS X. Every single copy sold is a copy that works on OS X.

Re:Go for it.

[squaretorus]

None of the Windows laptops cut it with battery life or displays so I looked at the iBook. I plumped for the 600Mhz DVD Rom drive beast.

What sort of battery life do you get? And how has it changed over the life of the machine? My Dell started out giving me about 4 useful hours - now its down to about 2 hrs 45min if Im lucky!

Get me a sustainable 5 or 6 hours and I'll buy one today!

Re:Go for it.

[jbolden]

In short, I think you're wrong to dismiss Wine out of hand.

I may be out of date on this issue. I've followed wine's progress mainly from various posts such as your's and frankly your's is the strongest claim I've seen. I'd agree with you that running office is a fairly good test of being there or almost there. I've been following Lindows for example and they had banked heavily on having Wine up to the point you are claiming they are at; but have pulled back and now are going for just an easy to use desktop. Why?

Anyway, the last windows emulation I've personally done was the OS/2 2.0, 2.1, 3.0 and I'd agree that OS/2 2.1 really was a "better dos then dos and a better windows then windows" of course they basically used the windows binaries. Maybe wine is worth another look.

Re:Go for it.

[Altus]

having a large amount of ram under Mac OS X is very good, especialy on a laptop, it helps you avoid paging and keeps your battery life long.

My old iBook had 384 and worked great, until it was stolen, my next laptop will likely have much more ram... sure, it costs power to keep the aditional ram powered but avoiding hits to paged out memory under heavy use condiditons is more valuable. I dont like to keep my laptop pluged in all the time

Re:Go for it.

[fault0]

> Windows + Cygwin -- too weak on the Unix side, things rarely compile correctly

Or people can just use binaries. Recent things like apache2 are even made to run on windows _well_.

> Linux + Wine -- very weak on the windows side too many things don't run correctly

You'd be suprised how far wine has gone even in the last year.

Re:Go for it.

[Hadlock]

i think the ibooks get 5 hours out of the box running everything normally. my powerbook g4 550, @ the lowest brightness/contrast setting, will get about 5 and a half hours of battery use with basic typing and slashdot websurfing. of course, the hard drive has spun down, but it works for me.

Re:Go for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent post! Well reasoned and rational. Slashdot needs more like it.

Zoober

Re:Go for it.

[BlackBolt]

Sounds like you need a format. Fixed my brother's Win98 Inspiron battery life instantly, and everything sped up dramatically. Not that I'd ever advocate Windows over a Mac, but if you're trapped in Windows hell, that's how to get out (load the new RedHat after formatting if you want to stay out).

BlackBolt

Re:Go for it.

[WatertonMan]

I must agree. The only thing I wish was that the TK library was ported properly. That way more admin tools with half decent UI could be found on OSX. That's about the only complain I have and I expect that will be solved soon. Worst case scenario is to install X Windows to run those kinds of Apps. I installed X Windows but to be honest have run it only a half dozen times because there is no need. Even Admin like tools are popping up using Applescript calling shell commands. So the lack of TK isn't as big a deal as one might think. (Although I wish I had it for my python scripts)

Re:Go for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm curious as to what it is that Wine can't handle under Linux
There are several specialty apps, one being one that I use called Finale for music notation. There is no equivilant for Linux (i.e. applications that can save to the same format or have much of the same functionality) and it doesn't run under wine very well (because of special ttf fonts which can probably be fixed and the inability for wine to utilize the midi parts of the application).
That's just an example. Wine isn't perfect, but if you want something closer, you can just use vmware et. al. so it's not as if all is lost

Re:Go for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish I could get Anarchy Online and Morrowind to work :(

Re:Go for it.

[Malor]

I bought a dual-G4, and it's fairly nice, but don't buy the hype. I really suspect there's some 'astroturf marketing' going on, and I think maybe the /. crowd is buying it.

I mean, the system looks FANTASTIC, but the just-works thing is crap. My printer doesn't work with OS/X.. it's the one thing I really wanted to work, and it doesn't. Not even the Gimp-Print people have a driver for it yet.

And Unix stuff is a royal pain in the ASS to get running well.

I posted a long critique on the O'Reilly website, home of the major cheerleading -- I attached it to his second article. (Link here).

It *looks* wonderful. And the notebooks may be absolutely fantastic: I have not worked with one. (Linux is apparently pretty weak on notebooks). But as a desktop... if you're really a Unix guy, you're probably going to be happier with Mandrake. If you're a Mac person, then OS/X is a no-brainer, IMO.... but Unix geeks should be wary. There's simply not as much 'there' there as Apple, and what I believe are its astroturfers, want you to believe.

They should change their logo to: "Everything just works, as long as it's not Unix stuff". (or particular printers)

Re:Go for it.

[rixstep]

Yes. They're workhorses, the iBooks. Don't go for flash when buying - look at the 'labels'.

Re:Go for it.

[MoneyT]

The old iBook (clamshell) got roughly 3 1/2 hours of MP3 playing + wordprocessing + websurfing. 4+ hours of sitting as an MP3 jukebox (car trip from Albany NY to Longisland) and would generaly get 3 1/2 to 4 hours of just about any other program. From what I hear from current owners, the new laptops are just as good and sometimes better. And all of my numbers are after 2 years of use

Re:Go for it.

[pi radians]

At work I have an unsupported printer, and Xerox said that they will never support OS X for that particular model. All I did was copy the PPD for the printer and saved it on the harddrive (I saved it in a folder I called Printer Descriptions in the Library dir.) Then I started up Print Center at just manually selected the PPD. I now have a fully working printer for my G4.

This of course only works if you printer is networked. But for USB printers it is the printer companies that are responsible. Write to them to complain.

Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[mocm]

I have had a tiBook for 1.5 years now and I have tried using OSX from time to time. I can't say that I find it very appealing, but I am probably to used to Linux (I use KDE, Gnome and simpler WMs on several computers). I just couldn't get OSX to feel right. Every configuration (other than those meant to be done by "normal" users) is a pain (well NIS, NFS and automount is).E.g. I could not convice the network setup that my domain has no .xxx at the end and WiFi didn't work at first, either.
Even with the rootless X11 it's not much better and switching to X11 only doesn't make sense. In my view the only advantage over Linux is the DVD player, which is not Linux fault.
As nice as OSX may be for Mac users and newbies as a long time Linux user I have to say it is just to proprietary and constricting for me to use.

Re:Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[davidstrauss]

Windows 2000 Server feels the same way about the domain. Try *.local as the extension.

Re:Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[OrangeSpyderMan]

(well NIS, NFS and automount is)

You're right, NIS is a breeze under linux. Unless of course you want to serve to non-linux UNIX clients, then you'll be tearing your hair out. I'm not saying OS X is where it's at, but I fear that this is, at best, a bad example.

Re:Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[Arkham]

I used Linux (RH 6.2, RH 7.1) for over 2 years, and I think it's a great OS. But it's not an OS that regular users can use like OSX 10.1.5 and 10.2. It's harder to be productive in Linux than OSX. I've said it before, but the fact remains that OSX is significantly easier to set up and use on a daily basis than Linux.

Want some reasons that regular people like OSX better? All the control panels are in one place and follow a consistent design. You can get Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer, Adobe Photoshop, Macromedia Flash MX, and AOL for it.

Want some reasons that many geeks like us like OSX better? Excellent free development IDE (ProjectBuilder & InterfaceBuilder) that makes native apps with an audience of 5 million paying customers. Great commercial tools like BBEdit, Oracle, Sybase, SQLGrinder, and JBuilder Enterprise, that make developing for production systems as easy as developing on Linux.

The DVD issue is really a money issue. With Linux, there's no one willing to pay the money to legally play DVDs. When I worked at ZapMedia, we had a software-only DVD player working under Linux. We had to pay for it, but it can be done. With MacOSX, a small portion of the purchase price covers the R&D and licensing required to have this feature.

I have a 600MHz iBook/DVD that I carry to work every day. The office is all-Windows, but thanks to OSX's built-in SMB browser and CUPS printing support, I can do everything that the Windows machines can do. I might be able to make that happen with Linux using a compiler and a lot of free time, but my experience with Linux in the past is that it's not nearly as simple or obvious.

Re:Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[Salsaman]

All the control panels are in one place and follow a consistent design.

I believe RedHat's current beta attempts to solve this.

Re:Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and Bero quit and all the KDE partisans are up in arms about it too (see yesterday's "Crippleware" firestorem).

Re:Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[mbbac]

WiFi didn't work at first, either.

If you can't get WiFi to work on a Mac, you're just retarded. That's all there is to it. Sorry.

Re:Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[commander in cheese]

While I'm not into name calling, I gotta share a nice Apple WiFi story. I recently put a Linksys WAP and pc card into my work windoze portable and after tons of fiddle fucking I got the @#42 thing to work in Windoze 2K. (the driver works but the management software is MIA, that's for another time). A friend dropped in with his Mac with an integrated WiFi card (never used) and wanted to access his AOL account. I said "just turn on the airport card in your control panel" which he did and bada bing, bada boom it just worked with a non-apple LinkSys Wireless Access Point no less. No fuss, no muss. Confirmed my long standing admiration for most things Apple.

Re:Sorry, I don't see the appeal

[mbbac]

Yep, I use my AirPort card with my Linksys WAP/Router and am can even see someone else in my neighborhood's Linksys WAP in the list available networks under the AirPort menu. Ease of use & range.

duh

[gralem]

I hate to say this here, but I gave up linux about 2 years ago in favor of OSX Public Beta. I had slight problems until 10.0 came out--but since then it's been 100% OSX. Java rocks--BSD rocks. It's the best multimedia system out there (iTunes/iMovie rock for basic functionality).

Today, Jaguar is a no-brainer.

---gralem

Re:duh

[Anonymous Coward]

No-brainer..yeah, that pretty much describes everyone I've ever met using a Mac.

Re:duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Java rocks ?

Really ? You mean the obsolete jdk 1.3 right ?

Because after about a year of 1.4 and now 1.4.1
(and constant bug fixes/improvements on
Win/Linux), JDK 1.4.0 is not even _available_ on OS X.

I don't know. Maybe your definition of "rocks"
is different from the widely accepted definition
of the same...

Ugh, where to begin...

[Anonymous Coward]

The kid's wireless card worked flawlessly while Linux on my IBM Thinkpad insisted there was not enough signal where I was sitting.

Obviously the reception is influenced by the operating system. It couldn't possibly have something to do with the WLAN card he was using.

Max OS X Jaguar has the Gnu C compiler, gcc 2.95-2

Jaguar has GCC 3.1. It even says so on Apple's web site.

It even played my DVD movies out of the box, something I have never managed to do satisfactorily on my Linux notebooks.

Good look trying to skip commercials or watch DVDs from multiple regions.

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[Carima]

Have a google mate. There are plenty of sites dedicated to multi-region mac's. Nice and easy, some need the drive to be flashed though. The fixes for the software work nicely as well.

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[firewort]

Regarding wireless cards:

The Apple Airport Card has an antenna which runs within the inside of the laptop. In the iBook, the antenna runs up the sides of the screen frame. In the Powerbook, it runs along both sides of the palmrest. In the Thinkpad, there is no internal antenna- the card simply juts out the side.

Antennae make a difference, and Apple engineering did pretty nicely when they incorporated the antennna in the whole product line, desktops included. It's hard to fault this good technical design advantage.

Regarding DVD Playback:
For a long time now, on Windows and on Mac, people have defeated region limitations, either by flashing the DVD drive with new firmware, or by using other software. It's pretty common. Of course, commerical skipping is still an annoyance.

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously the reception is influenced by the operating system.

He implied no such thing. Here is what did influence the reception: All current Macs have an Airport antenna built into the case (in the laptop, it snakes up along the side of the screen), while most PC users are forced to use PCMCIA wireless LAN cards, with that big, chunky, fragile antenna sticking out the side.

In other words, another example of why Apple hardware is better. Jaguar has GCC 3.1. It even says so on Apple's web site.

It has both, so you are both right. Can't we all just get along????

Good look trying to skip commercials or watch DVDs from multiple regions.

ZING! You got him there. Apple's DVD player doesn't allow much region switching when playing DVD's perfectly, while Linux DVD apps can fail to properly play DVD's from all 5 regions.

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you mean? Macs are supposed to be easy to use! Why do I have to use Google? Why doesn't Apple's DVD player by default allow me to play DVDs from multiple regions? I didn't buy buy a Mac to download some unsupported and possibly dangerous hack from a scary website!

Get my point? Apple does not protect Fair Use. They protect their bottom line, just like any other company. The only people who think otherwise are delusional mac zealots.

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhh, what part of "The kid's wireless card worked flawlessly while Linux on my IBM Thinkpad insisted there was not enough signal where I was sitting" did you miss?

Why does he say "Linux" if it's a problem with the IBM Thinkpad, and not Linux? I'll tell you why: like most Mac users, he's too stupid to understand how technology works. He thinks Linux has something to do with the bad reception he gets!

Regarding DVD region hacks:
What do you mean? Macs are supposed to be easy to use! Why doesn't Apple's DVD player by default allow me to play DVDs from multiple regions? I didn't buy buy a Mac to download some unsupported and possibly dangerous hack from a scary website!

Get my point? Apple does not protect Fair Use. They protect their bottom line, just like any other company. The only people who think otherwise are delusional mac zealots.

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[Anonymous Coward]

He implied no such thing.

Yes, he did. He used Linux in the same sentence. Why would he do that if he was aware of the fact that is was his hardware which was responsible for the bad reception?

It has both, so you are both right.

Why would anyone who's talking about how great Jaguar is mention that it has an old version of GCC and not mention that it has a recent version as well? Because they don't know that is has the recent version. Because they're too stupid to know.

while Linux DVD apps can fail to properly play DVD's from all 5 regions

Haha, and you don't mention which players. In other words, bullshit. Linux DVD players handle all regions just fine.

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[firewort]

You're obviously reading much more into my earlier reply than I actually wrote.

Moshe Bar isn't a Mac user- he's a linux user. Accusing him of being as stupid as a Mac user is inaccurate and ill-deserved. He chose his words poorly, and you, like many others, understood that he ties wireless performance to the OS.

For a Mac, that's almost the case, since it's pretty rare that you would use anything other than the Apple Airport card for wireless (although for those of us with older powerbooks, or other needs, it is possible to use proxim, cisco, and lucent cards. Users of those cards are not in the majority.)

Moshe Bar's primary language isn't English. You'll forgive this apparent error. I'm pretty certain that he was simply citing the experience and obsvering that the kid with the iBook got signal where he didn't- and that he knows as well as anyone that OS isn't a factor.

As for Fair Use, and Apple, I never claimed that Apple protects fair use. You assigned that to me.

I only suggested that there are ways in which you can do what you want, and Apple won't prevent you from doing them. They don't assist you, but they stay out of your way, which is worth remembering.

Apple protects itself from liability. Shipping a DVD Player application without region management and anti-commercial-skipping would be, as a business decision, suicidal- like asking the MPAA to joust, when you're armed with a dead flower instead of a metal spear.

Haven't they got enough problems, having shipped the iPod, which the RIAA would readily like to outlaw?

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[JabberWokky]

I'll tell you why: like most Mac users, he's too stupid to understand how technology works. He thinks Linux has something to do with the bad reception he gets!

Interesting, considering he's the creator of one of the more powerful clustering solutions for Linux, maintains a prominant fork of the kernel, and has been writing a regular series of deeply technical stories about Linux for Byte magazine for many years.

Yup - the man obviously knows nothing about Linux. You're right - stoopid Mac lusers. He-yuck.

--
Evan (no reference)

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[BlackBolt]

Haven't they got enough problems, having shipped the iPod, which the RIAA would readily like to outlaw?

To be fair, Apple's not taking any more of a risk than say, Sony, or any of the other 200 or so makers of portable MP3 players. People think they're "striking a blow for freedom", or "taking a stand", but really they just saw a good market and went for it. The true test of their moral beliefs and strength is how long they can last when the RIAA bribes the government to heat things up. Hopefully, Apple won't crumble under the RIAA like I'm sure many of the other MP3 player manufacturers are doing at this very minute, busily adding in DRM and restrictions on desired functionality.

BlackBolt

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[BlackBolt]

Apple engineering did pretty nicely when they incorporated the antennna in the whole product line, desktops included. It's hard to fault this good technical design advantage.

TiBook reception is a little lacking, I hear it's due to the Titanium alloy casing...

BlackBolt

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[Anonymous Coward]

You got a PhD too huh?

>KIsSes

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[firewort]

Yes, Diamond Multimedia really made the first stand a few years ago when they fought to be able to sell mp3 players.

Apple has only been the recent target due to their "Rip. Mix. Burn." campaign.

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[MoneyT]

I"m pretty sure that the reason the mac doesn't default play multiple region DVDs is due to legal issues. Even if it's not nessesarily a written law, Apple's lawers have always been on the look out for potential problems. For example, the sound sosumi (sp?) in the mac OS is the sound of a xylophone. However, when they were adding the sound to the system, Apple's lawers wanted the name changed to avoid any possible cultural insults, hence the new name, sosumi (for the people that haven't figured it out yet, it's read so-sue-me)

Re:Ugh, where to begin...

[vsync64]

Dude, for an Apple zealot you really don't know your Apple history. Apple had a little trademark trouble when first starting out, due to Apple Records's previously existing trademark. However, since Apple Records was in the music business and Apple Computer was in the computer business, it was decided that Apple Computer could keep their name as long as they didn't go into any sort of musical business.

When Apple added the sound you speak of, it was the first time that any of their products could produce reasonable music-like sounds, which could be construed as infringing on the trademark, so they called it "Sosumi", thereby snubbing the executives and lawyers of Apple Records.

See "Fuck Warner Bros. with a Pickaxe!" for only 1 of the results an extremely simple Google search turned up.

Pathetic.

PowerBook w/ Mac OS X

[Penguin Follower]

Actually, I am a Linux on x86 user currently, but I am actively seeking out either an iBook or a PowerBook with the specs necessary to run OS X on eBay at this very moment. Funny that this news blurb happened to show up. ;) My primary use for the laptop will be to travel with me to college daily. Anyone else doing the same (switching that is...)

Re:PowerBook w/ Mac OS X

[Anonymous Coward]

You should be able to get a suitable machine for around $500(maximum!) on eBay. (I just checked, and there's a really nice "Pismo" going for $338.)

I run OSX on my Powerbook G3 "Lombard."

That's:
333MHz
384MB RAM
10GB HD
2 hot-swap bays(1 battery, 1 CD-ROM, as configured)
MacOS X 10.1.5

Released: January 1999
Purchased: September 1999(refurbished)
Official name for this model is "PowerBook G3 Series (1999/bronze keyboard)"

It originally ran MacOS 8.6, had 64MB of RAM, and had a 4GB HD.

As you can see, it doesn't take a brand spankin' new machine to run OSX. True, there is a bit of sluggishness, but when I turn off some of the eye candy(like bouncing icons), and don't resize windows much(the sorest point for OSX), it does just fine. It's plenty capable of running an Apache server while I use IE, Illustrator 9 in Classic, do some stuff in the Terminal, make more webpages in TextEdit, and edit gif's and jpg's in GraphicConverter. And if you need Windows apps, you can run VirtualPC(better if you boot in 9, though), and it'll actually boot WinME faster than a Dell Inspiron 4100 P3/866(trust me, I tried it).

Happy Macintoshing!

Re:PowerBook w/ Mac OS X

[Penguin Follower]

Well currently I am bidding on a PowerBook G3 (Wallstreet). Current high bidder is myself at $480. Here is the seller's summary: 266Mhz G3 processor full 1024K Backside Cache at 2:1Upgradable 320MB RAM (expandable to 512Mb) 8Gb Hard Drive 20X CD-ROM ATI RageLTPro Video 2 CardBus Slots Excellent 14.1 TFT Active Matrix Screen (doesn't even have the very common keyboard blemishes on the screen) New Zip Drive Ethernet, ADB, SCSI, S-Video, VGA, audio in & out, and Modem/Printer serial Port, 56K Modem Two firewire ports via Cardbus (brand new) Brand new Battery Brand new Yo-Yo type Powersupply/AC adapter 2 Firewire Cables OSX 10.2 (Jaguar) & OS 9.2.2 Looks and Runs Great (there are a couple of minor scratches from normal use, visable in the picture).

Re:What's the point of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

My guess would be that with the unavoidable hardware security issues for x86 (palladium, TCPA, whatever), it's pretty obvious that linux will not be around much longer as a *coff* viable desktop *coff*. Slashdot is just trying to adapt and ride the wave of the next anti-windows trend. And more power to 'em, I say. :)

yep, but I was urged to wait a while

[evil superstar]

Just this week I have decided to wait a while, since a friend told me he got rumours that the line-up would be refreshed and there might be a price shift in a month or so...

but yeah, been using MacOS X at the office, and it takes a while to get used to it coming from linux, but it's definitely nice.

And of course you can make your laptop dual bootable :-)

Re:yep, but I was urged to wait a while

[Anonymous Coward]

You will be waiting till you turn grey... unless you are already :-)

Make the change!!!

[RealTC]

Well, several months ago I switched over from using Linux/Windows to OSX under an iBook. If it wasnt for OSX then there would've been no way the change would have happened. The best thing about OSX is that:-

1) You have a BSD backend...command line baby!!!!
2) Its very stable....very very stable!
3) its not windows......important part!
4) Has a totally cool desktop.
5) The iBook doesnt heat up as much as the Intel/AMD laptops and is efficient with battery power.

Sure, you have just one mouse button, but mostly I use an external wheel mouse or trackball anyway with 2 buttons.

And no, this isnt an ad for Apple, but after getting tired of XP crashing it was a good persuasion(typo?) to move to OSX.

Re:Make the change!!!

[k-350]

I went from a massive ugly beige Windoze box to a TiBook on OS X. I've also found that it's incredibly stable and hardly heats up at all. The rare times when the fan turns on are when I'm playing Warcraft III, or in prolonged playing of Quake III. It's hellishly efficient with battery power.
As for the one button trackpad, sure, it's fine if I'm not doing intensive things, but I have still got my Micro$oft(TM) optical two button+scroll wheel for when I am using programmes that for me require a right click. This is probably residual from the ol' Windoze days.

Nor is mine an ad for Apple, but XP REALLY looks like a Fisher Price operating system, and I was sick of Windows crashes and lack of quality.

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just you.

Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[g4dget]

I don't get it--why do people keep moaning about Linux GUIs? I use an OS X machine daily. It has a pretty interface. It also has a few really slick applications and accessories, foremost, perhaps, its 802.11b support.

And it's not like that OS X has figured out how to eliminate user confusion, as you will find out when you try to talk computer novices through installations or system configuration over the phone. Yes, even OS X has lots of GUI tarpits: the printer system, AirPort configuration, and network configuration are pretty bad.

But when it comes down to it, I just don't see much difference between Gnome, KDE, OS X, and Windows. All of them let you move files around in roughly the same way, all of them associate files with applications, all of them have lots of dialog boxes with buttons and little rectangles to type into, etc. And all of them run roughly comparable sets of applications. What more do you want?

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. And I don't see anyone mentioning that Finder in jaguar finally got some features from Nautilus (thumbails, folder summaries).

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Anonymous Coward]

"AirPort configuration, and network configuration are pretty bad. "

When I loaded OSX on my TiBook all I had to do was click "Airport Active" in the menu bar. Thats it. In 2 seconds I was connected to my SMC Wireless hub and on the net. Could it be any easier?

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[wfolta]

"roughly the same way", "roughly comparable sets of applications".

A Ford Explorer operates roughly in the same way a Porsche dual turbo does, and it has a roughly comparable set of features. Emphasis on "roughly".

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Dephex Twin]

Yes, even OS X has lots of GUI tarpits: the printer system, AirPort configuration, and network configuration are pretty bad.

Huh? Maybe you haven't used OS X 10.2.

To set up Airport I selected "Airport Active" from the menu bar.

To set up the computer to the network I plugged it in. Automatic setup. (If I needed to configure manually it is just System Prefs->Network.)

To set it up for the printer, I... well, I didn't do ANYTHING. That's right. I did nothing. From the first time I clicked print, there is a dropdown menu with the names of all the printers on the network, some I didn't even realize were hooked up.

Honestly, not only are these things not hard on OS X, but I couldn't imagine them being easier!

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[g4dget]

To set up Airport I selected "Airport Active" from the menu bar.

That makes your machine a client of an AirPort network. I'm talking about setting up and configuring the AirPort device itself.

To set up the computer to the network I plugged it in. Automatic setup.

Yes, Apple has DHCP and (now) Rendezvous. Obviously, if you can use them, it's easy to get your machine on a network.

It gets hard when you need to set up things like PPPoE, dial-up, and direct Ethernet connections. Getting a fully functional setup with AirPort and DSL requires going through dozens of dialog boxes. Think that's some obscure setup? Think again: I had to talk several DSL users in my family through this over the phone. It's not pretty. Let's hope Rendezvous will improve the situation.

To set it up for the printer, I... well, I didn't do ANYTHING. That's right. I did nothing. From the first time I clicked print, there is a dropdown menu with the names of all the printers on the network, some I didn't even realize were hooked up.

Again, you live in an environment where someone has bothered setting up the network for you to make your life easy.

If you install the printer yourself, you may have to download drivers, install them, answer a bunch of odd questions, and go through some odd sequence ("don't plug in the printer before...", "now press the something-or-other"). Once the printer is plugged in, if there is a printer fault, like if it's turned off or out of paper, all printing stops and doesn't restart automatically. Restarting the printer is a minefield of dialog boxes and unobvious choices for a non-technical user.

This is in 10.1; I have no idea whether Apple has fixed this in 10.2, but that's besides the point. My point is that Apple, too, ships software that is hard to use.

Honestly, not only are these things not hard on OS X, but I couldn't imagine them being easier!

Well, you obviously haven't talked novice computer users through such configurations over the phone. You'd be surprised how many ways people can find in screwing up and how unobvious and unintuitive the OS X user interface is through the eyes of a novice.

To be honest, the only times things go smoothly are when I can tell people "type the following into a Terminal exactly as I say". Thank God that OS X has a good command line. The problem is that I don't have any idea of how to, say, configure the AirPort base station using command line tools, if it's even possible.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Shuh]

Exactly. And I don't see anyone mentioning that Finder in jaguar finally got some features from Nautilus (thumbails, folder summaries).

It does have thumbnails in the Finder's column-view. Does showing what's in the folder in a seperate column count as a "summary?"

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Dephex Twin]

Again, you live in an environment where someone has bothered setting up the network for you to make your life easy.

Yes: Apple! But seriously, what I mean is Jaguar with Rendezvous gets most of this working for you.

It gets hard when you need to set up things like PPPoE, dial-up, and direct Ethernet connections.

It's all in the network preference pane. I haven't had any confusion with dial-up or direct Ethernet. I haven't done PPPoE but it's right there as an option. It's definitely more intuitive than anything else out there, IMO.

If you install the printer yourself, you may have to download drivers, install them, answer a bunch of odd questions, and go through some odd sequence

I did install the printers myself. This is our home network. The printer I have hooked up to my computer I had to plug in. Then it worked. Printers that were hooked up to other computers in the house that I had just installed Jaguar on suddenly were available as well. It just found the Laserwriter's IP automatically. This stuff is new in Jaguar.

I mean, yes, if I didn't even plug in the network right or something then there would be problems.

This is in 10.1; I have no idea whether Apple has fixed this in 10.2, but that's besides the point. My point is that Apple, too, ships software that is hard to use.

What I said is completely relevant as it shows that, unlike Linux, OS X is rapidly changing any things that are difficult to use, such that 90% of your complaints have already been addressed by the time you are airing them here, and are better than anything out there.

I'm not saying it is utter perfection, but I feel like these are areas where OS X/Jaguar particularly shines.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly.

Besides there are plenty of Aqua themes for
linux.

what linux has come this far and everyone is going to jump ship to apple ?

You can run Office on Apple, and that helps the
Beast.

Stick with Linux you turncoats.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[anarkhos]

The difference is the OS X apps actually behave the same.

Mac OS X has human interface guidelines, the others you mention are just toolkits.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[g4dget]

It's all in the network preference pane. I did ... I have ... etc.

Well, how nice for you. But to a normal user, the whole concept of a "network preference pane" is an anathema.

I'm not saying it is utter perfection, but I feel like these are areas where OS X/Jaguar particularly shines.

OS X does a few very simple things well, and Apple is trying hard to fix things where they can--they really are. But when it comes down to it, unless someone is a nerd like you or me, they will have to turn for help in order to get anything but the simplest networking and peripherals working, just like they do with any other OS. OS X doesn't walk on water, although at least it manages to tread it.

The improvements that OS X offers over, say, Windows do make it worthwhile in my opinion, which is why I keep recommending it to people. But, in the end, I think OS X is a dead end of GUI development, just like Windows, Gnome, and KDE--the whole paradigm just doesn't work well.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[daviddennis]

One reason, which I will agree is a little bizarre, is how ugly Linux fonts look. I know I can theoretically, with enormous difficulty, get them to look at least slightly better than they do, but that would take time I simply do not have.

Out of the box, MacOS fonts make ordinary text look like a printed, typeset document instead of something barely readable.

The other advantage is mainstream applications; I have never really warmed to the GIMP; I prefer Photoshop. I can get it and it looks and works great on MacOS X. Likewise with some super-complex applications like Final Cut Pro and After Effects, which are highly unlikely to get Linux equivalents. For completeness, I'll add Office, even though I rarely use it.

When you spend half your life in front of a computer, it becomes surprisingly important to make it look great. And if you don't like the Windows hegemony but want to be able to use mainstream applications, the Mac is your only choice.

Long may it live!

D

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Dephex Twin]

I think we more or less agree on this topic...

I just think those areas that you mentioned OS X not working well are areas that Apple has improved greatly and (IMO) even surpassed any other OSes' way of doing them.

Now maybe the whole way of doing things is not good enough in your opinion, but I just think to specifically say OS X is bad at these things is misleading. Apple is leading the pack.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, it's the thingy "xx items" under folder name. Now, if it showed file size for files, it would be great.

Also, it column view it shows thumbails only for selected files. In icon view, it shows thumbnails for all files in directory. It is great if you know what picture you are looking for, but you don't know filename.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[rixstep]

I really really really beg to differ with you here.

NextStep was light years ahead of the pack ten years ago, and they're even more so today. All right, eschew graphics and deny they have any effect on you, but who will admit that? NextStep ideas are phenomenal. Or how about onscreen pixels being shared between windows and the desktop? Or how about being able to steer the opacity of any window you create? The Apple GUI doesn't have to be a design victory - it's the NS developers saying 'here, look at this, see if you can do it', knowing full well no one else can. Apple has photographic quality icons; Microsoft has the Teletubbies; and Linux has kindergarten sketches. It's the inherent possibilities, and not just the taste and the design. NS can go in any direction it wants. Vis the new 'textured window' interface: all you have to do is click a single checkbox and any application you want will come up like Calculator, iCal, iChat, and iTunes. And you don't have to be a developer to do it. Any 2yo idiot can figure it out. When you use things like EPS and PDF on the desktop; when you measure screen coordinates in frikkin floating point; when you have 16 bits or more to define a primary additive colour, and not 8 - then you begin to realise where these guys are floating, and how hopelessly far behind they've left the rest of the world.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck Linux, with all its amateurish-looking shit.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Anonymous Coward]

When you use things like EPS and PDF on the desktop; when you measure screen coordinates in frikkin floating point; when you have 16 bits or more to define a primary additive colour, and not 8 - then you begin to realise where these guys are floating, and how hopelessly far behind they've left the rest of the world.

You are a hopeless navel-gazer. Apple didn't come up with these things. Neither did NeXT. The reason why mainstream operating systems weren't using them was because it was too expensive to support them on mainstream hardware. Java2D has had these features for a few years. Now that the hardware is up to it, Windows and Linux are getting it, too.

Apple is only 6 months ahead of the commercial pack, and about 10-20 years behind the technology curve, but they are behaving as if they invented it all, as usual.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and one car is a lot more practical, while the other is an overpriced name brand object for people with too much money. I think you can figure out for yourself which is which. I certainly know which one I'd rather drive.

Re:Why all this moaning about Linux GUIs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm--trouble reading? He's talking about configuring the AirPort itself, not your TiBook.

I switched last december...

[Corporate Troll]

...and I haven't looked back. I admit I only have an entry-level Mac, namely an iBook 600Mhz with 384Meg RAM. Does everything I want, I use it to ssh to my server, has X on it, AppleWorks for when I really want to do some office stuff, "Mail" for mail, Chimera. I can go on and on.
I have a nice PC (well, I think it is nice P-III 800Mhz 786Meg RAM and a 15" flatscreen), but honestly I only turn it on from time to time. Most of the time it's collecting dust. It's become practically useless the day I fully switched to the iBook.
The selling point for me was OS X. First because I'm sick and tired with Windows, and that Linux just didn't cut it for me though I like the *nix command line way better than cmd.exe But having a desktop on Linux that both pleases me and it lightweight enough is just not possible with today's distributions. Actually the only thing I want in Linux is the GNOME and KDE *libraries* and WindowMaker as a desktop. WindowMaker because I like it, the libraries because so many programns need them. But is there a distrib that gives you that? nooo....

OS X gives me a nice unified desktop system (that I like), and the power of *nix under the hood. Honestly, this is exactly what I wanted... And the hardware is sweet, even if a G3 only performs about like a P-II.

Re:I switched last december...

[thunderbee]

The beauty of it is that you can build your own. I did just that: WindowMaker (and I consider moving to Openbox) and some libs (not as many as you want). Runs perfectly, fast even on a small machine, has OpenOffice, Mozilla, and about anything you need. It is my only office tool (ie I don't have a windows somewhere to browse slashdot and bash M$) for tech (SSH, whatever) and admin (OpenOffice, fax,...) tasks.
It's built on a redhat base, but my newer systems are built on top of debian (I also have a sparc on my desk, running debian and openbox).
Give it a try someday ;)

Re:I switched last december...

[WWWWolf]

Actually the only thing I want in Linux is the GNOME and KDE *libraries* and WindowMaker as a desktop. WindowMaker because I like it, the libraries because so many programns need them. But is there a distrib that gives you that? nooo....

Debian? I use WindowMaker + GNOME apps/libs all the time... and if you really need them, you can compile them yourself on any dist =)

And the hardware is sweet, even if a G3 only performs about like a P-II.

What the hell? Wasn't Apple apologising for "toasting" Pentium II because G3 is twice as fast? =) =)

Re:I switched last december...

[Corporate Troll]

I have tried this with Slackware. However, my knowlegde of the dependencies is -ehm- lacking. Thus last time, I ended up with a 1Gig installation anyway just for Linux.
Yes, yes, I will try it again. Unfortunately I do not have that much time. Having Mac OS X actually saved me time. But of course tinkering with Linux is a hobby.

Re:I switched last december...

[Corporate Troll]

Tried Debian Woody. Didn't want to install (well it installed but the apt-get wanted to download stuff and didn't get far). Dunno why. Probably to do that I configured my OpenBSD firewall a bit too tight (I often have problems with FTP and I don't know why even though ftp-proxy is up and running). Actually I have been thinking of going FreeBSD as x86 desktop because right now, I understand BSD systems way better than Linux systems.

Well, I am not a Mac Fanboy of the older days. I will not say that a Mac is faster, because I know it is not true. My G3 definately cannot beat my desktop system in speed. I base this on the general feel and on the calculation speed of Seti@Home packets (Cannot state the average numbers, but it's about 10hours difference in favour of the P-III). I know it is a bad benchmark, but it is the only one I could make. Don't worry, the G3 is plenty of fast for me.

Re:I switched last december...

[BlackBolt]

Well, I am not a Mac Fanboy of the older days. I will not say that a Mac is faster, because I know it is not true. My G3 definately cannot beat my desktop system in speed. I base this on the general feel and on the calculation speed of Seti@Home packets (Cannot state the average numbers, but it's about 10hours difference in favour of the P-III). I know it is a bad benchmark, but it is the only one I could make. Don't worry, the G3 is plenty of fast for me.

You know, CT, I always thought that certain Slashdot trolls were the most honest and openminded posters around (goatse and friends notwithstanding)....

BlackBolt

Not a microkernel

[selkirk]

Well, you see, Mac OS X is a UNIX. Under the surface it runs a 4.4 BSD kernel derived from FreeBSD 3.2. That, in turn, runs on top of a Mach 3.0 message-passing microkernel. Microkernels were all the rage in OS research about 10-15 years ago, but are now generally considered to be underperforming for most purposes.

This is misleading. The Mach kernel in OS X is not a pure microkernel.
Kernel Programming Mach Overview

Re:Not a microkernel

[Anonymous Coward]

Neither is Cocoa a C++ library.
In fact it is Objective-C, another C based OO language, and it is part of the NextStep heritage of OS X.

Re:Not a microkernel

[taweili]

What's a pure microkernel? Mach 3, the "pure microkernel" OS has been in existence for years but it's not really adapted. The contept is nice but do I really want my "listen()" call to create message passing arround the user level program to kernel and become a RPC to the network stack server? Apple only does what's necessary to make Mach perform well while not violating the principle behind microkernel. Mach 4 project in U of Utah was trying to do the same thing.

Overall, does it really matter to you whether it "pure" microkernel or not?

The grin hides the truth

[nagora]

And anyone from Apple that can get me a good price on super TiBooks? *grin*

The truth is that unless someone gets me a "good price" on the hardware there's no chance that I'll get OSX. The interface is quite nice, although that's not enough on its own, and the hardware is great but then a 1930's Bentley is a really nice car but I ain't got the cash.

How much Intel can 500 quid buy? What fraction of an Apple would the same money buy?

TWW

Re:The grin hides the truth

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, Apple's hardware is competitively priced.

That said, here are some Web sites for finding deals:

http://www.powerbookcentral.com/
http://www.dea lmac.com/
http://www.dealsontheweb.com/
http://w ww.apple.com/promo/

Re:The grin hides the truth

[scrutty]

>How much Intel can 500 quid buy?

500 quid would buy you a pretty sucky intel laptop.

Re:The grin hides the truth

[Golias]

The truth is that unless someone gets me a "good price" on the hardware there's no chance that I'll get OSX.

IIRC, iBooks start at $1100 (USD) from Apple's own on-line store. There you go.

I have yet to find a Windows Laptop that can match the functionality, durability, portability, screen quality, battery life (important one there), and hardware features of my $1500 CRDW/DVD iBook for under 2 large.

You can argue that Apple charges more than the Windows world for destop PC's, and you would be correct. But Powerbooks & iBooks have always been sweet deals.

Re:The grin hides the truth

[baskew]

http://www.sonystyle.com/home/item.jsp?hierc=9683x 7018x9132&catid=9132&itemid=50481&type =o

Re:The grin hides the truth

[Anonymous Coward]

I've always had a problem with this inappropriate price comparison. Sure, you could find a Wintel laptop for under US$750 BUT HOW MANY OF YOU SLASHDOT READERS HAVE BOUGHT THAT? If price is so important that you are willing to put up with the deficiencies of such a laptop, why are you typing on that Dell/Gateway/Sony VAIO which altogether costs $2000 or more?

It really is a case of somebody shouting: "Hey! Why did you spend all that money on that BMW? You could've gotten a Ford Focus for under 20K, fool!" as he drives away in a Lexus.

Re:The grin hides the truth

[Golias]

Bigger
runs hotter
less battery life (even with two batteries loaded in)
two pounds heavier (even with one battery)
no built-in WiFi antenna
bigger pixels (the screen is bigger, but the same resolution
not as durable

In other words, that's an inferior laptop for about the same price. Nice try.

Re:The grin hides the truth

[nagora]

why are you typing on that Dell/Gateway/Sony VAIO which altogether costs $2000 or more?

I've never paid that sort of money for a computer.

TWW

Out of reach.

[Soulslayer]

I have been interested in OS X since its release and what little time I have managed to spend using it makes me interested in obtaining a system running it. However the G3 Notebooks are pathetically slow and the G4 Titaniums, while looking gorgeous, are exceedingly expensive.

If there was something beyond the nice display and good OS to justify the price I might be swayed, but right now the cost to value ratio is way off when compared to what you get for similar money in an Athlon or Pentium notebook.

I want to use OS X, I just don't want to go in debt over the hardware.

Re:Out of reach.

[ecki]

However the G3 Notebooks are pathetically slow

Any hard numbers on that or is this just anecdotical evidence? If the iBooks have a problem, then it's not speed, but rather screen resolution and external video capabilities (at least under Mac OS X).

Re:Out of reach.

[Golias]

However the G3 Notebooks are pathetically slow

Actually the IBM G3 chips in the current iBooks are quite zippy, for a laptop chip. The key is, you want to make sure you have enough memory installed so it does not start HD swapping while you are working. I have the 700MHz iBook with some extra RAM, and it compares favorably to my old G4 500 desktop PC.

Oh, and having Jaguar installed on it instead of 10.1.5 makes a big difference, too. 10.2 makes the iBook fast enough that it's become a full-time desktop replacement for me... the old G4 is now a dedicated box for my music studio.

Re:Out of reach.

[Soulslayer]

No hard numbers. That's "feels like" comment having used played aroudn with both a G3 iBook and a G4 iTanium.

"pathetic" is being more than a bit harsh, but it was certainly more sluggish than I am willing to accept, particularly given the cost.

I Sometimes Wish I had Bought an OS X Laptop

[RAMMS EIN]

Last January (that is Jan 2002, if memory serves) I bought a HP Pavilion laptop (yes, the one with the USB IRQ issues). I sometimes wish I had bought an Apple laptop/notebook instead. They have GREAT battery life, a beautiful OS (with hack appeal) and guaranteed to be free of incompatibilities, because Apple is in full control of both the hardware and the OS.
OTOH, I am fairly happy with the laptop I have. It runs Linux just fine, and after applying the usepirq patch every piece of hardware works (except the winmodem, I never bothered to try and get that to work because I don't need it). It is fast and has an excellent display. The only thing that drives me up the wall is the heat it generates. I have a stack of CDs under it to give it enough fresh air - putting it on my desk results in overheating and forced shutdown. I've heard that PowerPC CPUs run cool, so I think that they would really be a better choice. And it saves one from paying M$ tax.

Re:I Sometimes Wish I had Bought an OS X Laptop

[darkov]

I've heard that PowerPC CPUs run cool, so I think that they would really be a better choice.

I dunno, I have one of the earlier TiBooks and they can run pretty hot - enough to not want it on your lap. I don't know if the later ones are cooler. One thing it has never done is forced a shutdown. The worst thing that happens is that the fan turns on, and boy is it noisy.

Re:I Sometimes Wish I had Bought an OS X Laptop

[idiotnot]

ObAOL: Me too! Well, sorta. I bought at Compaq Presario 710 (1ghz Duron/DVD/256M/20GB) instead of the 600 iBook I could have gotten a screaming deal on. I regret it. This is especially true after I bought an old PowerMac G3 just to run OSX on. The notebook sorta runs Linux okay now, but I couldn't say that for the first two months I owned it. I still haven't been able to get the power management to work right under Linux, and get about 45 minutes of battery life if I'm lucky. At least the sound now works with the 2.4.19 kernel.

The G3, on the other hand, has been basically flawless. Jaguar refused to install, but that was due to a bad DIMM. Since I got 10.2 to install, I think I've rebooted it twice. it just chugs along. No, it's not real fast. But then, neither is the Duron running KDE.

And the iBook wouldn't be burning my thighs as we speak....

apt-get, rpm? Portage!

[richie2000]

The part in the article about OS X lacking a package management system got me thinking. Since portage (flirting with Gentoo and it's babealicious) is more or less ports-based, supports recompiles (almost demands them, actually) and is all around probably pretty portable, why not get it running on OS X? From where I'm standing, it would help Apple users with system management and it would help Gentoo users with faster/better ports and ebuilds.

Just an idea. Discuss amongst yourselves.

Re:apt-get, rpm? Portage!

[iomud]

Fink. It's basically apt for os x, bringing most if not all the tools you commonly use on Linux to os x. I can literally use apt-get, which made my transition to os x that much easier as I previously used debian at home.

apt-get replacement

[fungai]

from the article: "Something you will miss when coming from a Linux distribution are tools like apt-get or rpm to easily get and install packages and resolve dependencies. "

well, i most certainly, definitley don't miss rpm, but apt-get for the mac is called fink

Re:apt-get replacement

[honeypea]

Um, don't compare apt-get to rpm. It's like saying you don't like "deb". Rpm's job isn't to resolve dependencies, merely to understand them: RedHat's up2date is there to resolve them, and does it well. And if you don't like up2date, because you have to pay to get the best service, you can always use apt-rpm, which works excellently.

Princing, pricing, pricing

[Ubi_NL]

I'd switch to OSX today if it ran on my hardware.
But, looking at laptop prices, the Macs aren't that much more expensive than Dell. However, looking at the specs you do get a lot less MHz for the same money. But are those figures really comparable (like...erm..comparing Apples to Oranges..whahaherm)??. Seriously; can anyone comment on the price/performance for Apple laptops vs (Dell,Compaq,Sony}?

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[doghouse41]

You can have a Multi-GHz CPU, a laptop that runs cool, serveral hours of battery life, pick any two options...

Seriously, CPU speeds have reached the point where I don't see the value in paying to stay on the bleeding edge of CPU speed.

I've been using a 600MHz laptop with win2K the last couple of years for development, mail, wordprocessing etc, and I don't feel in any need to upgrade. I'd much rather just wait till the machine dies of it's own accord over the next year or two, rather than go out and buy a 2.5Ghz laptop that will be no faster, have no more battery life and be equally obselete in 6 months.

By the time I get to that stage, I'm guessing that the marketeers driving M$ product development these days will have the Windows ship locked up so tightly with Palladium and DCMA compliance that a Mac with OSX will be the only option. (And the 2Ghz Ti powerbook available by then will still be 3 times faster than what I have now!)

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[MrAndrews]

My first-gen TiBook (which I admittedly got second-hand from a liquidating dotcom) cost, when it came out, a good $2000 less than my Dell Inspiron 8000. The TiBook is theoretically under-powered, but it easily holds its own against the top-of-the-line Dell. And what's more, the TiBook can stand up to a 3-year old's bashing and smashing, while my Dell gave me exactly 7 months of service (discounting the blue screen of death the first time I turned it on) before falling apart (hardware and software) so badly I have to run it closed plugged into a CRT all the time to avoid the godawful screen. A very expensive desktop.

Macs may not be as fast as PCs (anymore...and for how long?) but they make FAR better hardware. The reason I don't own a 2-button mouse is because Apple has yet to make one. 3rd-party hardware always feels so creaky and crumbly to me... just like the hinges on the Dell. You don't appreciate a Mac till you grab an iBook by the top of the screen and carry it into another room, just swaying, not even considering how stupid it is to do that.

Now for desktops, building your own might be a better idea, but for latops, no one beats Apple. There are no other small-form-factor power laptops around.

(the Dell's fan is whirring today which is why I'm so sour on PCs right now)

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[Compulawyer]

I have a Dell lattitude C600 with 512 Mb RAM and an 850 MHz PIII mobile processor. It runs a highly tweaked Win 98 version. I also have a TiBook with an 800 MHz G4 and 512 Mb RAM running OS X 10.2 (Jaguar). Let me say that the TiBook is MUCH more responsive.

I tell people that you don't care about speed benchmarks. The only thing you REALLY care about when using the computer is response time. I define that as the time it takes for the computer to execute the command you just gave it (i.e., file saves, close window, open application, etc.). There are too many other variables that figure into designing a computer too pay attention to, even for engineers.

When I compare the amount of time I spend waiting for my Dell to do something versus my TiBook, I feel it is worth the price difference in saved time (BTW, I am a lawyer and make my living charging for time - less time waiting = more productive lawyer = happier clients). You can always make more money - you can never make more time. I am grateful for the time the TiBook has saved me.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[jeremyp]

Apples run PowerPC processors in them. Dells run Intel Pentium style ones. You cannot get a performance comparison by comparing raw clock speed. My Apple laptop has a 500MHz chip in it that Apple *claimed* was equivalent to a 900MHz Pentium (top of the line for laptops at the time I bought my Apple). Don't know if that is true but subjectively it felt very fast until I put OS X on it. The problems with OS X were fixed by adding more RAM.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[angel'o'sphere]

But, looking at laptop prices, the Macs aren't that much more expensive than Dell. However, looking at the specs you do get a lot less MHz for the same money.

You can not compare two different architectures by MHz. Dell is a Pentium where as a Mac is a PowerPC.

You try to compare a truck with a formular one car. Both have > 500 horse powers. But what does 500 650 mean for a truck and a formular one car?

Nothing.

I know that in RL a Mac often feels slower than a PC.

However there are a lot of cases where a MAC *IS* faster than a PC. Despite that a Mac only has 800MHz and a PC meanwhile up to 3GHz.

angel'o'sphere

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[fault0]

> Seriously, CPU speeds have reached the point where I don't see the value in paying to stay on the bleeding edge of CPU speed.

It still matters in games (eg, ut2k3)

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[garoush]

I have a Dell lattitude C600 with 512 Mb RAM and an 850 MHz PIII mobile processor. It runs a highly tweaked Win 98 version. I also have a TiBook with an 800 MHz G4 and 512 Mb RAM running OS X 10.2 (Jaguar). Let me say that the TiBook is MUCH more responsive.

Why of course. But have you tried Windows 2000/XP on your said Dell? You will see a BIG difference.

It's not fair to compare OSX or Linux to Win95/98/ME.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[iso]

While Apple's "Megahertz Myth" material may be a little overboard at times, when it comes to laptops, it's pretty close. Remember that your "Pentium IV" laptop is actually using a "Pentium IV-M" processor. That a mobile Pentium, which has been butchered to make it less power-hungry. This affect performance. Another very important consideration is that when unplugged, most Pentium laptops run at as little as 1/2 or even 1/3rd the rated clockspeed! This, again, is to save power. This can be turned off, but it severely sacrifices battery life.

By comparison, the G4 in a Titanium is the same G4 that's in the desktops, and it runs at full clockspeed all the time, unless you set it to do otherwise. The fact is, a G4 Titanium will cleanly whip the fastest Mobile Pentium chips out there. Laptops are the one market where Apple is not lagging behind.

- j

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[WaKall]

Owning a PowerbookG4 and thinkpad 600, I'll say flat-out that my Thinkpad is a more solid build. I'd wager thats sill true of the Thinkpad T-series - a friend has one and it seems rock-solid.

I've stood on the thing (by accident, of course) and done zero dmg to it. I'm fairly certain it could be dropped and turn out just fine. It's sturdy, only moderately heavy - around 6 lbs - and just generally feels like a tank. It just feels more solid - the lcd mount to the rest of the case never wiggles or wobbles, whereas my powerbooks screen bounces around if I shift my legs.

Maybe I think of it as tough because it's 4 years old and generally worthless now, but it's been thrown around the house a lot, and hasn't come up with any structure problems. And quiet too, but I guess thats to be expected from a P2-233. It's a shame it was just too underpowered for my uses.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[Anonymous Coward]

This article compares Gateway's 2.8 MHz P4 Profile 4 to the 800 MHz iMac. At 1,024x768 resolution, the Gateway does 66.2 fps to the iMac's 62.5 fps in Quake III arena.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[0000 0111]

The reason I don't own a 2-button mouse is because Apple has yet to make one.

Screw Apple, try the Microsoft Intellimouse or Explorer. I have the Intellimouse. It doesn't suck. The only reason Apple only makes a one button mouse anymore is to really encourage developers to make apps work with only one button LIKE THEY SHOULD! But as a user, you should be aware of the fact that OS X has decent, built-in support for multi-button mice with scroll wheels and more. Use them. They are good.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't appreciate a Mac till you grab an iBook by the top of the screen and carry it into another room, just swaying, not even considering how stupid it is to do that.

I do that all the time with my ibook. Never thought about it until now.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[Anonymous Coward]

Why of course. But have you tried Windows 2000/XP on your said Dell? You will see a BIG difference.

Er, yes, but not the kind of difference you think. There's no way that switching from Win98 to 2k/XP is going to speed up the machine.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[MrAndrews]

I had an Intellimouse too, but the thing about it (and boy it's nice having the wheel and extra buttons) is that it creaks when I use it. It's not compact, not tough, it creaks. It's something in the plastics... I dunno. That has always been my issue with PC hardware. It just doesn't feel tough enough somehow.

I was thinking that Apple should make the button on the TiBook (and iBook for that matter) like the scroll wheel on the iPod, so you could have it detect a touch to the left side as a left click or to the right side as a right click, or, if you don't want either, a touch anywhere means just a normal click. Software-driven mouse buttons. That would be very cool.

Tactile response aside.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[MoneyT]

I'm currently using XP on a desktop, and it's been my experience that it responds slower than Win 98 did. I can't immagine how it performs on a laptop.

Re:Princing, pricing, pricing

[jchristopher]

Well, I can tell you that a $1200 Mac laptop runs OS X slowly, while a $1200 Dell runs Windows 2000 quickly. That doesn't mean the Mac laptop isn't worth considering, but you do have to spend more in order to get a machine that is "fast".

Just forget about the clockspeed of both machines for a moment... In my opinion, only the top of the line Powerbook G4 begins to be fast enough to run OS X responsively. Dell's $1000 model will run W2k responsively. Is that clear?

flirting with macos

[Anonymous Coward]

hey, baby! wanna come home with me and look at my processes?

Love to - my eternal request...

[mccalli]

Every time this comes up, I post my request. I've posted to Apple, to Intuit, on the enwsgroups...

Please Intuit - please make a UK-version of Quicken for OS X. Please. Please...

There's a Mac OS X version of Quicken. There's a Windows version Quicken for the UK. Surely it can't be too hard to transfer the config from one across to the other? Can it?

Without Quicken, I have to stay put. I know I could emulate, but that's not really switching away is it? A shame, because I would snap up a Mac or two otherwise (one iMac, one portable).

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Love to - my eternal request...

[Anonymous Coward]

Doens't your Quicken run in classic?

I wish i knew someone...

[n3k5]

I wish i knew someone who bought an OS X box recently so I could have a story posted on Slashdot...

I wish i could afford one

[Chalex]

Yes, OS X is nice. Yes, i'd like to switch to using a Powerbook. However, for a poor college student like me, it's simply not an option. Mac hardware is just too expensive when compared to x86 stuff. With the price of a 1600+ XP at $50 now, you can build a top-of-the-line desktop for under $500. I'd need at least $2k for a Powerbook. :( Apple does have discounts for students, but it's only like $200.

Re:I wish i could afford one

[Anonymous Coward]

I was in the business for a lap about six months ago. When I happened to pass Singapore, I decided to buy one. I went through all computer shops I could find there (alot!) and got prices for lots of models. It ended up with specs and prices for about 10 PC laps and the Apple iBook.

Pitching all against each other, price versus performance, I came down to two: One NEC Versa and the iBook. They were about the same price (about US $1800) and performance. I then decided to jump the MS ship and go for the iBook. I bought the 12" iBook 600Mhz w/ DVD and CD-RW.

It was a killer buy, and I have been extremely happy with it. As most switchers here point out, it just simply WORKS.

Things I love about it:
- Amazing battery time, 4hr+
- Real UNIX. Just './configure && make'...
- Complete development environment included

Today the decision would have been a no-brainer. I've never had any regrets. And the iBook was actually the cheaper of the two!

I had some doubts that I would have to spend $$$ on software if I got a Mac. But the Mac community is changing with the influx of Unix and OSS users, and nowadays you can get all your usual OSS apps on OS X.

On a side note: I installed OS X 10.1.5 on a friend's iBook (500mhz, 64mb) , and it became quite sluggish. Mine has 384mb ram, and OS X flies. I often have multiple compiles running in the background - no probs. Don't cheap out on the memory!

Re:I wish i could afford one

[Anonymous Coward]

apple has said min for OS X is 128. in reality it should be 256-512.

Re:I wish i could afford one

[jbolden]

How can you compare notebook prices to desktop prices. And you can't build a top of the line desktop for $1000 much less $500; you can get a motherboard in a case and some ram for that much.

Re:I wish i could afford one

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are in a qualified major, you can sign up for Apple's Student developer program. $99 and you get a once in a lifetime 20% discount off a single Mac, great deal.

Second impressions...

[g4dget]

I think as Moshe continues to use it, he will either turn into a dedicated Mac zealot, or he will discover that OS X isn't quite the smooth integration of slick GUI and UNIX that he imagines.

For example, he may think he was editing /etc/hosts, but reality is somewhat different. He may copy files with "cp" and discover that some important bits didn't make it. Cocoa looks really nice and descriptive (and I really like Objective-C's named arguments and object model), but it also has its dark sides, for example in the areas of resource management, error handling, and type safety. He'll also discover that there are two different kinds of path names that don't quite mesh and three different sets of APIs, no single one of which gives him complete access to the machine. Carbon and Cocoa applications take different key bindings and handle text differently. A "ps" and some graphics benchmarks will show him that Aqua really has a very hefty footprint and isn't all that speedy. He'll also discover that the Apple file systems (HFS+, UFS) are not all that great compared to what he can get on Linux (ext3, ReiserFS, XFS, ...).

Don't get me wrong: I think it's great that Apple is using a UNIX base, and I think they have done a great job with migrating from OS 9 to OS X. There are some really great programs on that platform. And I think there are quite a number of things Linux would do very well to copy from OS X. But the suggestion that OS X is the heavenly integration of UNIX and GUI that the world has strikes me as not realistic.

Re:Second impressions...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a dual-boot Jaguar/Mandrake Linux on my iMac, and the Linux ext2 filing system is unbelievably delicate. I had a little trouble getting XFree to work, with a few blank screens mandating a forced reset -- it virtually killed the installation, with a gazillion fs errors at bootup, even though the machine wasn't doing anything at the times I hit the reset button.

Jaguar on the other hand almost never has ANY filesystem errors, even if you pull the darn powercord. It doesn't behave like HFS+, in other words -- but then I believe it's really a VFS in disguise or something.

Re:Second impressions...

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously your problems could be easily attributed to many many other things. Try to find a IT tech at work that may be able to solve some of your problems (chuckle ;-> )

Re:Second impressions...

[crawling_chaos]

You know, with a bit of search and replace, almost all of your arguments would have applied to Linux when it was at the same stage of development (say four or five years ago.) In fact, I heard some of my Unix using colleagues use those arguments for sticking with HP/UX, Tru64, and even SCO. Give Apple a little bit of time.

Re:Second impressions...

[tres]

Yeah, those Apple bastards, how dare they make /etc a soft link to /private/etc.

Re:Second impressions...

[blakestah]

For example, he may think he was editing /etc/hosts, but reality is somewhat different. He may copy files with "cp" and discover that some important bits didn't make it. Cocoa looks really nice and descriptive (and I really like Objective-C's named arguments and object model), but it also has its dark sides, for example in the areas of resource management, error handling, and type safety. He'll also discover that there are two different kinds of path names that don't quite mesh and three different sets of APIs, no single one of which gives him complete access to the machine. Carbon and Cocoa applications take different key bindings and handle text differently. A "ps" and some graphics benchmarks will show him that Aqua really has a very hefty footprint and isn't all that speedy. He'll also discover that the Apple file systems (HFS+, UFS) are not all that great compared to what he can get on Linux (ext3, ReiserFS, XFS, ...).

Those are all great points, but utterly irrelevant. I wouldn't argue that linux doesn't have better filesystems, memory management (in 2.4), lower overhead apps, etc.

But to the laptop user, those are not so relevant. He cares about his Airport Wireless card working well out of the box. He digs a DVD playing seamlessly. He is probably happy about the lack of time he has to spend futzing with those things under OS X compared to linux.

OS X does well the most important things to a laptop user (he didn't even mention Office X or all the Adobe art apps). And that is why Moshe Bar is happy. And that is why people are switching in droves to OS X laptops.

Low battery consumption, nice screens, and nice keyboards do not hurt either.

Re:Second impressions...

[loco123]

Agreed. In my opinion the guy should have waited at least a month before writing the article.

I own a G4 Powerbook for over a year and it's pure Debian since few months.

Issues I had:
HFS behaves differently than 'normal' unix filesystems, while UFS incredibly slow compared to the one on BSDs. /etc is like magic and there's no support for Polish locale.

Re:Second impressions...

[Anonymous Coward]

> He may copy files with "cp" and discover that some important bits didn't make it.

Which particular bits do you mean?

Re:Second impressions...

[g4dget]

The resource fork. See here for an article that explains it: http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2002/07/02/t erminal_5.html

Re:Second impressions...

[g4dget]

But to the laptop user, those are not so relevant.

Well, as I was saying: OS X is quite a nice system, otherwise I wouldn't be using it myself. But it just isn't a replacement for Linux or UNIX systems: sometimes OS X is better, and sometimes Linux or UNIX is better, even on laptops, depending on what it is being used for.

Re:Second impressions...

[anarkhos]

Most of the problems you talk about are due to UNIX being a piece of crap.

UNIX filesystems don't support file attributes which weren't invented 30 years ago and they follow the stupid methodology that everything-is-a-file-found-at-a-static-path.

Apple however deprecated toolbox functions which used file paths long ago so Mac OS apps don't care where files are located. You can even move the System Folder anywhere you want. No longer however, thanks to UNIX and it's ugly sibling Cocoa |-p

Re:Second impressions...

[DunbarTheInept]

your .sig:

80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent

life.

That's funny coming from someone who apparently thinks a 63 character line would wrap on a 80 column screen.

Re:Second impressions...

[g4dget]

UNIX filesystems don't support file attributes which weren't invented 30 years ago and they follow the stupid methodology that everything-is-a-file-found-at-a-static-path.

The UNIX designers, in fact, realized 30 years ago that attributed file systems were a lousy idea and rejected the idea; in UNIX, if you want a bunch of things together, you stick them into a directory. Apple is now coming around to that idea, which is why applications now are usually small directory trees of components in OS X. Congratulations.

Only Microsoft hasn't figured it out yet (they are usually a little late), which is why they are gung-ho on building a Rube Goldberg attributed file system that will make Macintosh look like a toy. Microsoft will get over it, too, in a decade or two.

Most of the problems you talk about are due to UNIX being a piece of crap.

Well, if that were the case, then Apple made the wrong choice. Are you going to switch to Windows? Windows has an attributed file system throughout, and many of the other features you love so much on paper.

Re:Second impressions...

[Dirtside]

Well, four or five years ago, Linux had the advantages of costing no money, running on numerous architectures, and being completely free. I'm not saying it's better, but it's not as if MacOS X is in the same scrappy-upcoming-OS situation that Linux was, so it can be a little misleading to compare them this way.

Re:Second impressions...

[crawling_chaos]

Scrappy has nothing to do with it. It's just at a different point in its development curve, analogous to where Linux was a few years ago. Apple could still drop the ball, but if they keep putting effort into it, it could turn out pretty well.

Also, they could could start to borrow. They could grab something like XFS and port it to Darwin. I'm sure that they and SGI could come to an understanding about the licensing.

How does one flirt with an OS?

[dave_mcmillen]

"Hey baby, nice backend . . . Is that BSD?"

"Wanna show me your kernel?"

[C'mon, geeks of the world, there must be dozens more ... just don't try anything like this in an actual bar.]

Re:How does one flirt with an OS?

[that_goatse_guy]

*groan* I'm sure there must be dozens more; but that doesn't mean we should recite them. ;)

Re:uh.

[Anonymous Coward]

pine's for pussies.as opposed to 'telnet $FOO 25'?
j00 r s0 3l33+!!!

I've been thinking the same thing

[spilgnod]

In fact, I'm trying to sell my desktop G4 and Linux boxes in order to offset the cost of a midrange titanium laptop.

They are really sweet machines.

Re:I've been thinking the same thing

[1155]

If you put that e-mail of yours up here, I might be interested in the desktop mac

Chicken! why no t Build a laptop!

[linuxislandsucks]

ah why not build a laptop..it can;t be that hard for you Taco..

Besides we need new interesting content here.. woudl be a good set of articles for us Linux/Unix folks with adm joining the drm army..

Re:apt-get, rpm? Portage! - Fink!

[shiva600]

You should check out fink.

Excerpt form the start page:
"The Fink project wants to bring the full world of Unix Open Source software to Darwin and Mac OS X. We modify Unix software so that it compiles and runs on Mac OS X ("port" it) and make it available for download as a coherent distribution. Fink uses Debian tools like dpkg and apt-get to provide powerful binary package management. You can choose whether you want to download precompiled binary packages or build everything from source."

I guess that`s pretty much what you are thinking about.

Fink, Fink, Fink, Fink: A Package Manager

[MoNickels]

How many times does this have to be pointed out for OS X newbies? There is an open-source, community-driven package manager for the Unix underpinnings of OS X: It's called Fink. It's a port of the Debian tools, including apt. It currently has 1452 packages at various levels of stability, including many of the major applications required for development. It works very, very well, from a command line or via happy little Aqua app called Fink Commander. If you do use Fink, use the CVS tree: the maintainers are very conservative about adding apps to the stable tree, so most of the interesting action is in unstable.

Re:Fink, Fink, Fink, Fink: A Package Manager

[weave]

Fink is a bit raw still when using OX X 10.2. You have to use the unstable tree and even then there are some problems. It'll be spiffed up soon enough.

Nothing beats having a rootless X server running on your Mac! :)

I also enjoy running microsoft's rdesktop on my Mac to administer my windows servers. There is just some weird satisfaction thing there...

Re:Fink, Fink, Fink, Fink: A Package Manager

[addaon]

Can you recommend a good window manager for Jaguar? I used OroborusX under 10.1, and absolutely loved it. It doesn't expect a root window, and doesn't get weird when there isn't one. The aqua-style windows are gorgeous... if nothing else, they blend in. And interleaving just works. Unfortunately, I can't get OroborusX to work at all under 10.2. It installs fine, but at startup, I get a slew of odd messages that basically say "This version of X11 is newer than me, help!" Is there any other window manager that blends into Aqua this well?

Re:Fink, Fink, Fink, Fink: A Package Manager

[MoNickels]

Sounds like you're having one of two problems. Try these links for help:

Installing Fink from scratch for 10.2
Step-by-step instruction for upgrading under 10.2
Jaguar Xterm update

Re:Fink, Fink, Fink, Fink: A Package Manager

[addaon]

I don't think so... the thing is, Oroborus2 is dynamically linked against the gcc 2.x libraries... so the switch to 3.x kills it...

Re:Fink, Fink, Fink, Fink: A Package Manager

[jweatherley]

I installed OroborusX on 10.2.1 and it runs without a hitch so it is possible. What X11 are you using? Have you got the latest OroborusX?

Re:Fink, Fink, Fink, Fink: A Package Manager

[addaon]

Using whatever X11 fink (for 10.2, of course... clean install) installs by default on unstable branch (no X11 for 10.2 on stable). OroborusX downloaded from homepage two days ago. Did you just follow the standard OroborusX drag-and-drop install?

Re:Fink, Fink, Fink, Fink: A Package Manager

[jweatherley]

I didn't do anything fancy when I installed OroborusX. I'm using XDarwin from www.xdarwin.org. I don't know what fink installs so that might be your problem.

Sooo many...

[alvieboy]

[macosx:~] cd /usr/local/
[macosx:~] sudo mkdir src
[macosx:~] curl -O ftp://ftp.cpan.org/pub/CPAN/src/perl-5.8.0.tar.gz
[macosx:~] tar zxvf perl-5.8.0.tar.gz
[macosx:~] cd perl-5.8.0
[macosx:~] make distclean
[macosx:~] make
[macosx:~] make test
[macosx:~] sudo make install


# apt-get install perl

Easier, hmm?

Alvie

Re:Sooo many...

[vorpal22]

[macosx:~] fink install perl

Re:Sooo many...

[reallocate]

Sticking a frozen dinner in the microwave is easier than cooking dinner yourself, too. I can cook, so my food tastes better.

It's difficult to understand the emphasis on packaging systems. It seems, sadly, to be the most important factor differentiating one Linux distribution from another. Aren't they just necessary bandages to patch over the lack of adherence to standard libraries and file systems?

I've used RPM's, apt-get, Slack's tgz's, Gentoo's portage and FreeBSD's ports. They all are great if you work only within the packaging system. Start installing outside the packaging system and, sooner or later, something will break.
Happened to me every time. You can try to prevent this by tracking and recording where all the files go, plus their versioning info. But, if you're going to do that, why bother with a packaging system?

Re:Sooo many...

[Anonymous Coward]

Easier yet, just #!/usr/bin/perl. Perl is already installed on every OS X system by default.

Re:Sooo many...

[Hal-9001]

That's when you compile from source and install into /usr/local or /opt ...

On my old Debian installation, I didn't have any problems doing things this way. Granted, I had only a few things installed this way--Mozilla, JDK and a couple of other things that weren't available via apt-get or whose versions in the apt-get tree were too old--but it worked fine for me.

Re:Sooo many...

[MullerMn]

You can try to prevent this by tracking and recording where all the files go, plus their versioning info. But, if you're going to do that, why bother with a packaging system?

Actually, if you're going to do all that you've just created a packaging system!

As an aside, with Gentoo, unless the thing you're trying to install is really weird, you can create an ebuild for it in a couple of minutes and then have Portage look after the aplication for you. Best of both worlds.

--
Andy

Re:Sooo many...

[herwin]

fink install perl ...

Re:Sooo many...

[Anonymous Coward]

perl came installed on my ibook out of the box

Re:Sooo many...

[Dephex Twin]

Sticking a frozen dinner in the microwave is easier than cooking dinner yourself, too. I can cook, so my food tastes better.

I would say it's more like going to a restaurant compared to cooking dinner for yourself.

Some people like the joy of tinkering with recipes and making their own food. Other people just want to eat something delicious and be waited on, and get on with more important things in life.

Re:Sooo many...

[DreamerFi]

And after installing fink it's just:

fink install perl

Yep, you're right, that is indeed easier...

-John

SWITCH....

[Anonymous Coward]

My name is cmdrTaco,
I run a site called slashdot,
and we like linux and all,
Microsoft sux,
Apple has pretty eye candy,
and it runs linux (knowing that it doesn't),
so I switched to Mac.

Re:What's the point of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhh, you're not very smart, are you?

How exactly is MacOS X going to be able to play next-gen DVDs, open Word documents, read email from Outlook users, etc, if Apple doesn't implement Palladium?

Apple answers to their shareholders. They are going to implement this.

Apple's DVD player has DRM (region restrictions, section restrictions, etc). What makes you think they won't introduce more DRM? The sticker that comes with the iPod says "Don't steal music". Why doesn't it say "Don't commit copyright infringement"? That's right, Apple doesn't care about your fair use rights. They care about their bottom line, and they will implement Palladium and DRM goodies.

yeah me!

[mydigitalself]

i've been mentioning it to a lot of the developers here as i'm really keen to get a mac notebook. they all look at me funny until i remind them that its just "pretty unix" with full office support etc...

then the price tag comes up...

so maybe somebody could answer a question regarding relative performance. i've got a T23 IBM 1GHZ with 512MB of RAM - sort of like this puppy over here. it goes, fast. after using acers, dells and compaqs - if i'm going x86, there's no going back from these thinkpads!

so my question is, what would give me the same feeling of performance? would an iBook suffice or should i fork out the dough and go the powerbook g4 route?

Re:yeah me!

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought an iBook a few weeks ago after finding out all the cool stuff about OSX that you must now be reading all about in this topic... I am now dual-booting the machine with Yellow Dog and OS X. I spend most of my time in OS X, but there is some development I do for work in linux.
I did a speed test between an x86 Xeon 1500 Mhz and my 700 Mhz iBook. Both running linux, compiling the same app with gcc. It doesn't test graphics performance, but compiling is a pretty good test of CPU and RAM performance. Everything on disk was cached beforehand. The Xeon completed in 75.3 seconds, the iBook in 114 seconds. By my calculations, this means the 700 Mhz iBook is roughly equivalent to a 1Ghz Xeon. Not bad. YMMV, of course.

-Ansel.
slashdotibook@oiiiio.net (use eiomail.com!)

Re:yeah me!

[wchin]

The new top of the line iBooks have a 700Mhz G3 with a 512k full speed on-core L2 cache. That gives a big speed boost over the older generations of iBooks. However, as compared to a PowerBook G4, it sports only a 100Mhz system bus (versus 133Mhz), a Mobile Radeon vs. a Mobile Radeon 7500, and the PowerBook as a 1mb L3 cache not to mention the G3 vs. G4 thing. The PowerBook G4 also has built in gigabit ethernet.

Therefore the PowerBook G4 can be substantially faster than the iBook if you are working with a substantial memory footprint, rely heavily on OpenGL, use applications that can leverage the Velocity Engine/Altivec unit or doing big network transfers over gigabit ethernet. Otherwise, the performance different isn't that big - especially comparing operations that are more disk I/O bound (of course). The iBook may even win a few tests with it's larger full speed L2 cache.

As for your Thinkpad, well, both the iBook and the PowerBook G4 would probably be pretty competitive from a raw perspective. However, the performance is going to probably be very different depending on what you specifically are doing - thus w/o additional information on exactly what you are going to do with the machine as well as what your personal perspective on what is important in terms of performance, it'll be difficult to judge.

The PowerBook G4 really has many additional features, and you have to be comfortable with the sacrifices that are made to make the iBook smaller and cheaper.

I'm very happy with my PowerBook G4 800 DVI and it is a substantial improvement over the PowerBook G4 500Mhz machine I used to use. I'm hoping the next update is more of the same - maybe 933Mhz+ and built in bluetooth. It would be nice if it had better 802.11b range too.

TRANSLATION

[Anonymous Coward]

Taco and I are both strongly considering beginning to use OSX as a primary laptops

Translation: We're regulation fags, but thinking of becoming mac fags as well.

Re:TRANSLATION

[Anonymous Coward]

What is a "regulation fag"? I guess I'm too old to appreciate the lingo of kids...

HOw can he confuse Objective C with C++

[Viol8]

The example he gave of coding for cocoa was objective C. Surely someone with his experience wouldn't make the mistake of saying it was C++???? A trivial point I know but he he makes such an obvious and blatant mistake there what else does he get wrong in this and other articles which people take as gospel because he's considered a "guru"?

Re:HOw can he confuse Objective C with C++

[crome]

Well, I did write objective C, but sometimes things get edited into bad shape.

Anyway, the typo is obvious to everybody, no need to get all excited about it.

Moshe Bar

Re:HOw can he confuse Objective C with C++

[gimpboy]

it wasn't obvious to me. perhaps it's because the programming i do is mathmatical in nature, and i've never really had the need to peer into object oriented programming languages (C++). so when i read the example, i thought it was C++.

Linux desktop, Windows for games, and an ibook

[RavenDuck]

I'm one of those people who believes that Linux on the desktop can work (for some of us at least, I'm not going to make my mum use it), and have been using Debian as my desktop for a few years now pretty much exclusively.

I've got an oldish Windows XP box for playing games (Morrowind stole my life!), but it doesn't get booted all that often. It sits on a KVM with the linux box.

However, when I was recently in the market for a laptop, I went straight for an ibook. It's a cool looking, compact, and moderately powerful PC. However, it wouldn't have been an option without OS X.

I'm writing a PhD thesis (in Criminology), and I spend my days in emacs and LaTeX. Emacs 21 rocks on OS X (well, except for the whole one mouse button not working with flyspell), and BibDesk is the best free (as in speech) BibTeX reference manager I have ever seen. LaTeX works beautifully, and with fink I have pretty much the same Unix goodness I love about Debian (and it works almost as well as real Debian apt!).

Of course, I'd like better virtual workspace management (space.app doesn't really do it for me), but on the whole, it's easy to use (for someone who has never used a mac in his life), it looks great, and it is rock solid. Sure, it's not cheep, and it's not free (as in speech), but it's still cool.

Re:Linux desktop, Windows for games, and an ibook

[ciryon]

Your situation kinda look like mine did a while ago. I had a Linux/Windows dual boot where I used Windows for some games that Transgaming couldn't handle. I then bought an iBook and Airport wireless networking. OS X stole my heart completely. I could do anything I could do on my Linux desktop, plus I had games and commercial programs like Photoshop available.

I have now traded the PC to a PowerMac and only use Linux at work and for a "multimedia-server" to stream movies and music to my computers.

Ciryon

Re:Linux desktop, Windows for games, and an ibook

[Anonymous Coward]

For a decent Virtual Desktop app (a REAL one, btw, unlike Space), try CodeTek's Virtual Desktop. It's ain't perfect, but it's about as good as it gets on OS X.

http://codetek.com/php/virtual.php

Doctor StrangeWatson... Or How I Stopped...

[Levendis47]

Worrying and Learned to Love The MacBSD X.2

My company had an extra Silver Tower PPC 800mhz kicking around and we had a mail server crisis (our mail server's primary and backup lines both went down)... So, one of our sys admins and I (I'm primarily a J2EE/Web Developer, but hey, I like vegamite too...) grabbed the PPC machine and carted it over to one of our office locations that hadn't been hosed by Verizon's crappy last mile. We had MacOS X setup with a mailserver and apache running SquirrelMail (something of a porting fiasco, but not bad) inside of an 2 hours. Sans for having to build PHP from binaries, it was a smooth and, dare-I-say, *NIX-like process.

I've since played with what we now call MacBSD X.2 for hosting full open-source web server stacks. It's fasts... It's wicked stable... It's aweful pretty to look at... and best of all, it doesn't make me feel like I have to sacrifice the command/filesystem architecture as a compromise to having a pretty UI... errmmm, ccccougggh-XP...

To say the least, all the anxiety I had over MacOS 7 and 8 being big turds has been vanquished in MacBSD... My fiance and I are planning on picking up an iBook and iMac-17" respectively after the holidays (thanks to /. for the great thread on when the best time to by Apple-wares is)...

I seriously hope Jobs doesn't get too nepoleonic and actually considers the Intel architecture for Apple hardware as well as porting MacBSD X.x over to such an architecture. Intel is getting a bad rap for being bed-buddies with Microsloth. And while I love the idea of broad-pipelining on paper, 4.7Ghz vs. 1Ghz is still a huge difference... esp. when you consider the advantages of 4x/8x AGP and the throughput of a DDR400 memory pathway... drool...

So, Levendis47 sez, "Stop Worrying and Learn to Love the MacBSD X.2", you'll feel good about it in the morning...

blarg,
Levendis47

Re:Doctor StrangeWatson... Or How I Stopped...

[Anonymous Coward]

How does one put this adequately? OS X on an Intel is simply not interesting. The PowerPC is interesting in itself, and always has been. If Motorola doesn't speed up - if people want more clocks per nanosecond - then Apple can always go with the IBM branch, and their fabulous 64-bit chip.

Intel is completely beside the point. Software and hardware integration - why risk that?

So at the end of the day people might ask you - won't Muhammed give in and come to the mountain?

James Gosling uses Mac OS X ....

[surajrai]

I was at Java One conference at Yokohama, Japan today and noticed that James Gosling was using Mac OS X.

http://idisk.mac.com/surajrai/Public/javaone.jpg

I don't know about you but if somebody like James Gosling is using OS X then Apple must be doing something right.

S.r.

Re:James Gosling uses Mac OS X ....

[Anonymous Coward]

Any user, or for that matter creator of java would probably appreciate Apple's implementation of java on os x. They really got it right (at least compared to sun/linux - never tried windows)

Re:James Gosling uses Mac OS X ....

[nebenfun]

knuth uses linux...
carmack develops under linux...

I don't know about you but if somebody like knuth/carmack is using Linux then it must be doing something right.

john

Re:James Gosling uses Mac OS X ....

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you are entirely missing the point. Do they do their development on a Linux laptop with a wireless network card? I don't think so. Use Linux on your desktop and Mac OS X on your notebook.

Re:James Gosling uses Mac OS X ....

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosling is also presenting at O'Reilly's Mac OS X Developer Conference.

http://conferences.oreillynet.com/cs/macosx2002/ vi ew/e_sess/3137

Re:James Gosling uses Mac OS X ....

[afantee]

According to Tim O'Reilly, the Perl 6 core team have switched to OS X, and O'Reilly Network have been seriously considering to migrate its entire laptop, desktop and server line to OS X (if they haven't done so already). Apple are definitely doing something right lately

I ran OS X on my TiBook..

[windex]

And, eventually, I installed Linux on the machine.

Reason one: I'm not paying $130 for an OS update when it's (at least the useful parts) entirely based on user contributions.

Reason two: Getting ordinary software packages to run under Mac OS X takes a lot of time, even for a seasoned developer.

Reason three: Mac Linux distributions are pretty fast these days. The CPU's are well supported and in my experience Linux is faster on the machine because there's no graphics overhead other than the kernel framebuffer.

If I had it to do all over, I'd of just bought a cheaper PC notebook and installed Linux on it. Mac OS X wasn't worth dealing with Apple.

Re:I ran OS X on my TiBook..

[Anonymous Coward]

I bash the OS on my TiBook because I actually felt it was shitty and I get modded as troll? If you don't know how to moderate, don't.

Re:I ran OS X on my TiBook..

[BlackBolt]

Please see a previous post to see that you're not the only one to notice this bizarre and irresponsible trend. Watch the lack of response when someone here bashes XP or Linux, then watch the rabid flames if you so much as question the motives of Apple in invoking the DMCA, or "borrowing" Watson, or killing themes, and you'll see that there's a real unfair bias surrounding God's Chosen Platform here on Slashdot. For people who "think different" (and I'm one of them), Mac Zealots sure do like to toe the party line. Hard to have honest debate on how to improve Apple when Apple is "better than perfect" to these guys.

BlackBolt

Re:I ran OS X on my TiBook..

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably because this is apple.slashdot.org, you friggin' idiot. Not everyone needs negative attention to feel important...unlike you. Now go troll somewhere else.

Re:I ran OS X on my TiBook..

[BlackBolt]

You just proved my point. Thank you. By the way, you've been a very busy little AC, defending Apple against the ravages of free speech. I guess you don't think their products are good enough to stand on their own merits without an unpaid task force of impotent little symps "defending their honor". The great majority of the posts here are AC's, and from your sad little attitude, you ignorant puke, I can guess that you're a major contributor to the lousy signal:noise ratio in here.

I'm not a troll, "ANONYMOUS COWARD". *You* are. I'm just engaged in free speech and lively debate. If you're afraid of debate, you're afraid of the truth. I guess this means I'm a better Apple fan than you are. I feel good about that. Thanks.

HTH. HAND.

BlackBolt

current vpn support is crippled

[Anonymous Coward]

Lacks IPSec support. Current VPN client isn't very configurable. Support for auto-configuration proxy scripts is flakey at best.

But, yes it a stable platform and GD that video screen is just beautiful.

Once the VPN stuff comes around, then its a contender.

Not on an ibook!

[supabeast!]

Do NOT run OS X on an ibook. ibook G3 CPUs are not fast enough to run OS X at a usable speed when doing anything that shows off a lot of 2D stuff (A few days ago I wrote a simple C++ program that finds prime numbers and displays them in real-time, and the terminal updates were using almost as many CPU cycles as the number generator was.). Java is also very slow on the G3 ibooks. Other ibook issues include:

- DVD/CD-Rom flakiness on OS X (The DVD/CD drive doesn't always recognize a CD after the disc has been in a while.
- Power management problems. OS X does not always wake up after the ibook has been closed/opened.
- CPU heat. The G3 CPUs in ibooks put out enough heat to be very uncomfortable when in one's lap.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[efatapo]

Ok, well I own a G3 iBook and am perfectly happy with its speed. I hate to point out the obvious, but...

Have you tried installing more RAM?

Have you tried X.2 (Jaguar)? It's much quicker/more responsive

Just a couple of things that really made my iBook go a lot faster. The included 64mb of RAM is not enough, I threw in 256 more and it flies. Also, I have never had a problem with my CD ROM not recognizing a CD, ever. Maybe you just got a bad apple. I love mine and it works great!!!!

Re:Not on an ibook!

[RealTC]

Thats not entirely true, it all depends on what iBook model you are running OSX on.

For example, the OLDER ibook models like those weird colourful ones or even the 500mhz models that came out several years ago, then yes....OSX runs like a snail. But the newer ibooks, the 600mhz/700mhz models that have a 100mhz bus and 16mb Radeon chipset, OSX runs like a dream, especially running Jaguar on the ibook where you now have HW accelerated desktop!

Re:Not on an ibook!

[cuyler]

Which ibook do you have? Shortly before the release of OS X 10.1 (might have been sooner, I didn't notice) Apple upgraded it's ibook line. Before then it had a 8mb ATI Rage video card. Now it has an 16mb ATI Radeon card. This allows the OS X to run Quartz Extreme. This would affect the performance of 2d apps.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[firewort]

Do NOT run OS X on an ibook. ibook G3 CPUs are not fast enough to run OS X at a usable speed when doing anything that shows off a lot of 2D stuff (A few days ago I wrote a simple C++ program that finds prime numbers and displays them in real-time, and the terminal updates were using almost as many CPU cycles as the number generator was.). Java is also very slow on the G3 ibooks. Other ibook issues include:

- DVD/CD-Rom flakiness on OS X (The DVD/CD drive doesn't always recognize a CD after the disc has been in a while. - Power management problems. OS X does not always wake up after the ibook has been closed/ opened. - CPU heat. The G3 CPUs in ibooks put out enough heat to be very uncomfortable when in one's lap.

What you're saying is, don't run OS X on a G3 processor. I say you're incorrect.

I have a G3/333 with 512mb RAM running 10.2, and it's not bad. It isn't a speed demon, but it's fast enough.

The G3 puts out less heat than the G4. It isn't uncomfortably warm, it's just fine- and the cooling fan as only come on once in the 12 months I've had the thing.

Sleep issues- must be something about your/the iBook. Every other machine I have around (powerbook 333, powerbook g4, powerbook pismo) wakes without problems.

Are you running OS X 10.2.1? I highly recommend that you do.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[gozar]

I don't know what iBooks your using, but my new 700MHz book is plenty fast. Of course I maxed the RAM to 640MB, but it supports Quartz Extreme and flies for what I use it for (web programming, Photoshop Elements, etc.)

Everything starts after 1 maybe 2 bounces of the dock.

You will have problems with speed in the terminal if you have anti-aliasing turned on, or transparency turned on without equipment that can support Quartz Extreme.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[addaon]

As a side note, I question the 'heat' comment. I've had many laptops in my day, and none have gotten hotter than a Sony Picturebook... using OS X 10.1, the iBook (600MHz) got hardly warm at all. However, on upgrading to 10.2, I noticed my laptop getting much, much warmer. Still not nearly as hot as that sony... but warm. It turns out that it's the graphics chip (ATI, 16MB) which is generating the heat; disabling Quartz Extreme cools the machine right down. Clearly, this needs a bit more optimization, in terms of engineering... just like to point out that it's not the poor struggling CPU that's getting hot.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[Snuffub]

then i would suggest you take your ibook and get it looked at right away, maybe one of your ram chips got unseated through some freak accident so youre only using it with 64MB or something. my experience with a 400MHz imac (G3 processor) was completely different. with 10.1 and 10.2 (which i used for only a week before upgrading to my new tower) performance was very respectable. playing dvds was hit or miss but asside from that i could do pretty much any consumer type work on it without problem, i never tried to say.. recompile mozilla, or use photoshop for anything over small images but. but for evertyhing else, no problem.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[easter1916]

I noticed the heat increase too, mine is also a 600MHz iBook. How do I disable Quartz Extreme?

Re:Not on an ibook!

[easter1916]

Thanks for the terminal speed tips! That was one of the few annoyances I've had with OS X. Turned both options off and it is much speedier.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[TellarHK]

Well, with 10.1.5 I would have probably agreed with you. I bought the iBook based on my desire to try OS X, and really had started to feel a significant amount of buyer's remorse. The video card in my model doesn't support Quartz Extreme, it only has 64M of RAM base (upgraded to 192 with a luckily compatible cheap stick of 128M) and it's the G3 500 Mhz model with none of the extras.

Prior to acquiring Jaguar, I was seriously considering selling the iBook. It just wasn't -fun- or even pleasant to use under a lot of circumstances. It was sluggish, and I knew it was a model at the end of a generation of hardware. Now that I have Jaguar installed, it has a whole new lease on life. The video responsiveness is much improved, in just about all circumstances. It's still no GeForce, but for an ATI Rage, it's clunking along decently.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[toddhisattva]

Do NOT run OS X on an ibook. ibook G3 CPUs are not fast enough to run OS X at a usable speed when doing anything that shows off a lot of 2D stuff (A few days ago I wrote a simple C++ program that finds prime numbers and displays them in real-time, and the terminal updates were using almost as many CPU cycles as the number generator was.)

Just what is the timebase for the set of prime numbers? ;-)

Okay, so you gots a performance bottleneck printing to Terminal.app -- Grasshopper, this is an opportunity for growth! Fire up Interface Builder & Project Builder, hook your code up to an NSTextField (is there an NSNumberField? It's been a month since I done Cocoa), and be amazed at how easy it is.

For perversity's sake, I like doing Cocoa/Java apps (using cross-plaform Java with single-platform Cocoa just makes me feel good), and run them on my G3s. Yeah, I sometimes scream at the slowness, but so far each and every time, I have found ways around the bottlenecks. They are opportunities for growth.

I gave up my moderator rights to write this, so take it to heart. -toddhisattva

ps: The timebase question is because we really need to use the phrase "real time" more carefully. What you are doing is "as fast as possible" or something, but not "real time" because primes are timeless.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[addaon]

There are third party apps for it. But I don't really recommend it. Disabling QE only increased battery life by about ten minutes (that's wall time... 10.2's battery management is seriously borked), and noticably decreased performance. Unless the heat itself is really bothering you (and it's well within spec for the system, it's just a question of your thigh being warm), I'd suggest leaving QE on. It /is/ slightly ironic that the graphics chip is using possibly more power than the CPU... but in the iBook, the biggest power consumer by far is the screen, followed by the hard drive. Might as well use the hardware you paid for, and QE /is/ nice.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[toddhisattva]

much apologies for unintentional bolding --
grrr -- there's a difference between "b" and "br" dadgummit -- much apologizings

Re:Not on an ibook!

[foo12]

You should really just bite the bullet and replace your 128M stick with a 512M --- you'll feel like it's a whole new machine again.

Re:Not on an ibook!

[TellarHK]

Yeah. I've been trying to scrape up the cash for one, but it's been a little slow since I'm still looking for a job, whee. :)

The author is interesting...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is my favorite part (my emphasis added in bold):

As an example, look at this very standard series of commands, used to install Perl 5.8 on my system:

[macosx:~] cd /usr/local/
[macosx:~] sudo mkdir src
[macosx:~] curl -O ftp://ftp.cpan.org/pub/CPAN/src/perl-5.8.0.tar.gz
[macosx:~] tar zxvf perl-5.8.0.tar.gz
[macosx:~] cd perl-5.8.0
[macosx:~] make distclean
[macosx:~] make
[macosx:~] make test
[macosx:~] sudo make install

You couldn't tell this was Mac OS X if I hadn't told you, right?

Not at all...

Interesting.......

[tanveer1979]

When you cant flirt a woman, flirt OS X hurrrmph

Bravo.

[castlan]

+2, witty troll. +1 humorous for those that caught the reference. -2 for those who, lacking the background to recognize the style of the post, didn't even take note of the unblushing praise that is rare without some form of payment.

You forgot to play the silly background music and to flash the Apple logo afterwards.

Re:Bravo.

[Anonymous Coward]

-2 offtopic

Re:Bravo.

[matthew.thompson]

Actually I can give you loads of little niggles that I have with the box and the OS but they're no more in number than I have with Windows and much less than with Linux.

I'm just recounting my use of the machine and how easy I find things with it.

The end tag line was added as a humorous afterthought.

Apple and Religious Bigotry

[nstrom]

As a company, Apple has a policy of religious bigotry. See here. I'm boycotting them because of this; you should too.

Re:Apple and Religious Bigotry

[artg]

Who's going to care about satanists ?

There's something deeply pointless about a religion that exists only to piss off christians.

Re:Apple and Religious Bigotry

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll have to add this to my list of GOOD reasons to buy a Mac!

Re:Apple and Religious Bigotry

[Anonymous Coward]

Satanism has nothing to do with the Christian religion. In fact Satanism predates Christianity.

Re:Apple and Religious Bigotry

[Anonymous Coward]

Point One: The church of Satan is not a religious organization, it is a philosophical one.

Point Two: If you boil down the Church of Satan to it's essence you get a bunch of atheists who believe in being selfish and pissing off members of other religions.

Point Three: If Apple wants to piss on the CoS, more power to them, after all the CoS has been media whoring by pissing on christians for ages, what goes around comes around.

Point Four: If you are willing to be a member of any organized religion then you have my pity, if not my sympathy. Thinking for yourself is important and trebly so in a religious context. Try it, you might some day have an original idea.

Re:Apple and Religious Bigotry

[noewun]

Except that "Satan" didn't exist before Christianity. There was no Devil before he was created during the Middle Ages. Neither Judaism or Islam have the same approach to phenomenal evil as does western Christianity.

Perhaps you mean polytheism.

Re:Apple and Religious Bigotry

[Anonymous Coward]

Your boycotting Apple because some satanist likes their products? I'm sure there are satanists that like windows and linux, are you going to boycott them to?

Re:Apple and Religious Bigotry

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you be happy if the church started slapping apple logos on it's websites? I think this was a good step as it ensures that Apple is neutral towards all religions.

Switched

[Alexander]

I'm using a PB as my daily driver, even moved the wife to OS X on a white ibook. Put Windows on my x86 box and now it plays Samba share and game machine. I'm very pleased.

try it.

[jpellino]

all you'll get from us is a pile of yes and no votes, plus personal preferences which will want to make you tear your hair out - trackpoints, close boxes, true microkernels, silver vs black paint, raw mhz -

try it on a desktop which you can prolly shake loose faster than a spare tibook

try smalldog or similar for NOS or openbox or refurb tibooks if you must

make sure it's jaguar and try it.

Re: Dell Laptops are Better

[standards]

Really? I just bought a Dell Latitude x200 last night... for my brother-in-law who isn't interested in "switching".

I did some shopping around first - and I just simply couldn't find a laptop as nice as the Mac titanium laptop... light, thin, big screen, built-in DVD. The Latitude was the closest I could find for the money.

But unlike the Mac, the Latitude has no built-in-DVD and a much smaller display. The performance of the Dell by no mean screams over the Mac (The Dell is a 800mhz P3... not even a P4).

And the price of the Dell with the DVD/CD-RW and the other basics isn't any better than the Mac price. Really.

For a laptop, I like thin & light... I don't want to lug around a big thing on business trips. Unless the market changes radically in the next month, my next laptop purchase will be a Mac. For the first time.

Time-based interfaces

[hobbit]

And you can keep your other hand on the keyboard to control-click, which is natural since that hand is often using other modifier keys, as well.

The reason your other hand is using other modifier keys so often is that you don't have enough mouse buttons.

Part of the reason Windows and Unix users have problems with the Mac's one button (and whine incessantly about it, to such a degree that you want to put *their* testicles in a vise), is because they tend to be unused to the click-and-hold action.

No, it's because we think it's shite, which it is. What in God's name you need to hang around for, when you could have a perfectly good right mouse button, is beyond me.

Having said that, I don't think that it's all bad for Macs to have one button. It certainly encourages developers to consider alternatives to large context-sensitive menus, such as intelligent use of drag-and-drop (which to my mind is a better paradigm).

Re:Time-based interfaces

[Dr Pocter]

The whole point in using a Mac is that you actually get things done. (As opposed to Windows, where a bad operating system with a bad interface keeps annoying you.)
On a Mac, if you plug something in, it usually just works, and if you drag something from a CD-ROM to your Applications-folder it's usually installed and you can start using it. (That's "usually" versus "never" for Windows.)
Most people that are using computers didn't study computer science, they don't know why or how computers are working at all and they hardly understand the difference between an operating system and an application.
As a matter of fact, many if not most people never really understood when to click and when to double-click!
So a second and a third mouse button complicate things even more. The reason why every PC comes with a three-button mouse is not that those mice are "better". It's because three buttons sell better than just one button. 2+ GHz Intel processors sell better than 1+ GHz PowerPC processors. Not that anyone would need three buttons or 2+ GHz, but it sounds better.
(By the way I'm not talking about people who know when to double-click and how to handle three buttons.)
So if Macs are supposed to "just work" and to be easy to use, why complicate things and add another two buttons? If it is because applications have bad interfaces then why not fix the interfaces instead?
More buttons aren't necessarily bad. They just make it harder for non-experts. Dreamweaver with a one-button mouse is a pain in the ass and others, like Maya, impossible to use.
Perhaps Apple should deliver the one-button "Pro Mouse" with their consumer systems and a new "Expert Mouse" (or whatever) with the PowerMacs.
But please don't say Apple should simply add another one or two buttons to their mouse, because they shouldn't.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[MoNickels]

The reason your other hand is using other modifier keys so often is that you don't have enough mouse buttons.

So you have a mouse button for shift, caps lock, control, alt and command? Interesting.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[Eccles]

[...]intelligent use of drag-and-drop (which to my mind is a better paradigm).

I don't like drag and drop. Why? Because it's too easy to drop in the wrong place and have something completely different happen than what you intended, and reverting to the old state can be difficult. Dragging a data file onto a program icon? Whoops, your finger slipped and now it's moving the file to the desktop. Gotta wait for the copy to finish before you can even start putting it back, and then dragging it onto the program icon again. Maybe I'm just clumsy, but I'd much prefer a copy/paste-style interface.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[Anonymous Coward]

I call bullshit.
You are saying Windows installs never work, ever?
Gee, I wonder how all those Windows users are typing up emails and writing documents in Word if their installations all failed and nothing ever works?

I'm glad you like your Mac and it makes you feel fucking special, but to claim that Windows software never works is fucking ludicrous at face value. Further exploration of the statement only goes to show your zealotry for the Mac.

I love the G4 dual designs and wish I could afford the setup I want (dual headed 24inch with dual 1.25GHz G4's and fully loaded drives)

Since I can't, I'll stick to what I have a P4-2.4GHz with 512MB RAM running Redhat 7.3.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[Alan Partridge]

no. Any Mac user will tell you that Command-Period will abort such an unintentional operation. It took me YEARS to realsie just how deeply rooted and powerful Drag and Drop is in the MacOS. Thjink different, think fucking easy!

Re:Time-based interfaces

[thomas.galvin]

What in God's name you need to hang around for, when you could have a perfectly good right mouse button, is beyond me.

My first experience using a Mac was to do layout for an on-line newspaper. It went something like this:

[me] Grumble grumble stupid Mac this would be so much easier if I could right click this thing...

[editor-in-chief] Oh, just click-and-hold. The menu will pop up.

[me, clicks-and-holds, blinks a few times] Hey, you're right. Grumble grumble stupid Mac this would be so much faster if I could right click this thing...

Re:Time-based interfaces

[thomas.galvin]

left clicking a mouse is just like clicking a Mac mouse. Right clicking is equivilant to holding ctrl and left clicking. Middle clicking is equivilant to holding alt (or option in Mac land) and left clicking. IIRC, there are also equivilants to esc and meta, but since they aren't supported everywhere, I rarely program them.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[TotallyUseless]

I think he meant to say that you cant install stuff like Office on windows simply by drag and drop like you can on a Mac. I have no idea if this is true or not, I just think that is what he was saying... not that you couldn't install stuff at all!

Re:Time-based interfaces

[TotallyUseless]

when you drag a file around on a mac, if you accidentally let go on the desktop, or on any directory on the same disk the file is on, it will simply move it. no need to wait for the copy. It is pretty much instant. Also, a quick 'command-z' (undo) will zap the file right back to where it was, also instantly.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[milkman_matt]

Also, a quick 'command-z' (undo) will zap the file right back to where it was, also instantly.

I totally agree with this, it seems like a lot of people who complain about the lack of mouse buttons, don't seem to grasp the fact that once you get used to all of the command+key functions, you really don't use a mouse button for much at all ESPECIALLY when it comes to undo/cut/copy/paste, it's all right there on the keyboard, using the command key so that it will work in -any- program (like pico, you can use command c and command v since ctrl c and ctrl v obviously wouldn't work).. since i've been using a mac, i've become FAR less dependant on the mouse. Well, except for opening programs and the like :P

-matt

Re:Time-based interfaces

[Dr Pocter]

I call bullshit. You are saying Windows installs never work, ever? Gee, I wonder how all those Windows users are typing up emails and writing documents in Word if their installations all failed and nothing ever works?

No, I'm not saying that. What I wanted to say is that basic things like installing software are too complicated and Windows has a bad user interface, compared to Mac OS (X). But like you, I wonder how all those Windows users are are "typing up emails" and doing all that other stuff.

I'm glad you like your Mac and it makes you feel fucking special,

Of course I like my Mac, although it doesn't make me feel "fucking special". It makes me feel "special".

but to claim that Windows software never works is fucking ludicrous at face value. Further exploration of the statement only goes to show your zealotry for the Mac.

You're way too excited. Try yoga. Or switch too an easier operating system.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[DavidRavenMoon]

I call bullshit. You are saying Windows installs never work, ever?

This wasn't my post but I'll comment anyway. My experience with using both Macs and Windows has shown that Windows installs fail more than Mac installs. I just installed Quark5 and Photoshop 6 on a PC and had to do Photoshop twice, and then when trying to update Quark, it wouldn't run, so I had to do the install over again.

Except for some recent Adobe upgrades in OS X, this just doesn't happen on Macs.

Gee, I wonder how all those Windows users are typing up emails and writing documents in Word if their installations all failed and nothing ever works?

A lot of PC users us whatever was installed when they bought the computer. And it works fine. It's when they start installing more stuff that they run into problems. You have to realize a lot of PC users can't fix things when they go awry. Macs have always been easier to trouble shoot, but OS X is changing that for many.

Windows has yet to have drag and drop installs.

Of course people that are running Linux or some other Unix are more savvy than your typical Windows user.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[StarFace]

Eh, apply logic. The keys you listed all correspond to keyboard actions. The first two modify the behavior of the keyboard, the second two enable the keyboard to access meta-functions beyond text input (in most cases.) Having a key on the keyboard that does little but give you a pseudo-second-mouse-button is an entirely different type of key, and it screws around with the mental division between mouse and keyboard. It is certainly not intuitive (though Mac users have grown used to it, just as Windows users have grown used to pressing the Start button to shut down.)

Now some applications do use other keyboard modifiers to adjust mouse behavior, typically graphics applications do this. A common one is the spacebar. Usually there is only a handful of these, and usually I bind these functions directly to the mouse buttons (since I have seven of them.) It makes for a cleaner operation, and leaves my left hand free to do other keyboard operations while I pan around with the mouse.

The other "alternative" right click with the Mac is the click-hold, which is clearly designed for novice users. Professionals who are payed for their time typically don't want to sit around waiting for something that could be instantaneously accessed with an additional mouse button. I don't know any pro Mac users who actually prefer a one mouse button. Generally the first thing they do is plug a real mouse into the keyboard and use the Apple supplied mouse as a decoration element. I've got nothing against a one mouse button GUI philosophy, especially for folks who'd rather just use their computer casually. This aside, I don't think anybody could rightfully defend the single mouse button as being something adequate for advanced usage. Even the Apple developers have implied this left and right by allowing "power" users to access more advanced features of the GUI with all manner of ridiculous keyboard combinations that are hard to remember, and rarely menmonic. I think they should just get over their Pride and sell three+wheel button mice as a pro add-on and have these advanced parts of the OS accessible by default using consistent mouse bindings.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[Eccles]

when you drag a file around on a mac, if you accidentally let go on the desktop, or on any directory on the same disk the file is on, it will simply move it.

If you drag to an app in a folder on another drive and miss, however, it will copy. The Command-Z doesn't work to undo this, nor a move to the desktop, on OS 9.1, maybe it does in OS X. (I have a Mac right here, I can test these things.)

Re:Time-based interfaces

[Eccles]

Any Mac user will tell you that Command-Period will abort such an unintentional operation.

But that's cancelling a mouse action with a moderately complicated keyboard action. Switching devices like that takes time. (For that specific case, however, there is a stop button on the move progress bar, so the input device switch is not necessary. Also, escape works for that, and is a single, quickly selectable key.)

Re:Time-based interfaces

[TotallyUseless]

I was careful to say 'on the same disk' in my post. I know dragging to another disk will make a copy, and that command-z will not undo it. As someone else pointed out, command-period will halt the copy. If it was a small file and copied quickly, a control click will help you send it to the trash, and the original file is still right where it was to begin with. The undo command works fine for moving stuff from the desktop when you accidentally drop it there in OSX. I thought it was in older versions of the OS as well, but I guess my memory is failing.

Re:Time-based interfaces

[Maserati]

Or clicking the Cancel button...

Re:Time-based interfaces

[MoneyT]

You can't undo a copy to another disk via a key command. However if you accidentaly move a file, you can undo it with command Z in OS X or in classic it was command-Y (put away). AFAIK command y also works under OS X

change name of slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

to macdot...

what about the keyboard?

[ozzy_cow]

i cant believe noone has mention this yet..

i cant stand the stupid mac keyboard, for those that touch type, did you guys notice that those raised bumps you position your hands on are instead on F and J where its supposed to be on D and K keys? wtf is up with that? i curse every time i sit down in front of a mac :-)

what i really want is os X on pc platform. sweet gui, linux and i can build my own. oc/tweak whatever i want :-)

Re:what about the keyboard?

[dmnic]

um, dont know where you learned typing or what keyboards you use, but on every keyboard/typewriter Ive ever used the bumps were on F/J, not d/k. there *suppossed* to be on F/J and 5 for numberpad.

Re:what about the keyboard?

[vincent99]

The current Apple desktop and laptop keyboards have them on f/j, but I've got an original Apple Extended Keyboard here too and it's got them on d/k. I've also got a Compaq kbd with f/j.

Despite your decreeing, there is no standard dot placement even within the same manufacturer, let alone a universal standard. But as long as we're arguing it , what logic is there in having them on the finger-next-to-the-inside-finger anyway? And how could it not be glaringly obvious that something's not quite right when you sit down and your index fingers are touching because you put your middle fingers on f/j? And who even notices them anyway? I've got 2 kbds right in front of each other with the opposite dots and I never even remembered they were different until you mentioned it.

There's only

Re:what about the keyboard?

[Anonymous Coward]

HUH? where did you learn to type? My keyboard has bumps on f/j and that is where your place your hands. not on g/h
asdf / jkl; ring a bell?
sheesh

Re:What's the point of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unsurprisingly; you've missed my point. The point is not that geeks will avoid palladium (see the 'new toy' comment for the likelyhood of that). The point is that after palladium is in place (and linux and *BSD is truly dead, being unable to comply function), the only alternative (singular) to windows will be OS X. So, palladium or no; Taco and crew are getting ready to make the 'switch' to the next anti-microsoft fad (linux being the last one, os/2 being the one before that....beos being the one ...uh...that didn't matter.;))

Not looking back

[weefle]

I have three boxes under my desk at work. One running Windows XP, one running Debian, and one running Jaguar. The Windows box has been awakened from sleep maybe three times since Jaguar came out, and all three times it was to run NessusWX or some Novell client application that won't run on Mac OS X. I have used the Debian box for netselect a few times (can't seem to find a Mac OS X port for that one yet), and that's about it.

But the Mac... Mail.app filters my junk mail very efficiently. Chimera does tabbed browsing almost as well as Galeon. iCal is young but already extremely cool, letting me keep track of my schedule and tasks. Terminal.app's ANSI colors suck, but it's a good emulator otherwise. Oh, and Fink and XDarwin let me sudo apt-get install gimp and almost anything else I could do on my Linux box.

Oh, yeah, and I can run Word, Excel, and PowerPoint.

I've switched, and I can't see going back.

Re:Not looking back

[weefle]

Forgot to mention, I've been running Linux since the 1.0 kernel, and I've used Linux as a primary desktop for over five years.

Re: Mac mouse buttons

[Raetsel]

I recently had the misfortune to have to use a friend's Mac (running MacOS 8.something) in their office. I think it was worse because it was the hockey-puck mouse, and the ball was probably a bit dirty... but God! I missed that second button. It was... infuriating... even knowing the 'click-hold-wait' for the alternate mouse button function.

Know what? That trick doesn't work in every program! (Aargh.)

So I put up with it for about half an hour. Then I bitched about how it was taking me so damn long to do a few simple tasks, and that a two-button mouse would make life a LOT easier. My friend laughed, and then pointed out the "right" Mac mouse button -- It's <CTRL>-click! (Or was it the 'option' button? It's one of those on the lower left of the keyboard.)

Things went a lot faster after that.

Now, about those trackpoint devices... the first few versions couldn't detect force, or they didn't detect it very well. So the harder you pushed didn't make the mouse move any faster, and people hated 'em for it. Trackpoint versions 3 and 4 (that's hardware versions, not software!) are much better at detecting varying levels of force, and the mouse responds accordingly. Also, you really need to tune the software to your taste (light vs. heavy touch, mouse acceleration becomes very important, etc.) If properly adjusted -- and that's a big "if" -- I'm relatively happy with a trackpoint.

(Just ignore that USB optical mouse in my laptop bag, please...)

I "switched" my laptop to an iBook...

[kikensei]

2 months ago. Still using home brew desktops, but since I can't build a laptop, I figured an OS X, and very sweet looking iBook would work well. There was always PPC Linux and Virtual PC if OS X didn't work out. Well its worked out. I can take care of all my remote administration via command line. The FINK project has ported a lot of good GPL apps to PPC OS X, and incorporates apt-get into the iBook's reportoire. The iBook 700Mhx (my purchase) is not a speed demon. It runs well though, and can play Warcraft3 acceptably. The Airport card range and battery life is awesome. Two features the Ti Books trail far behind in. Since wireless is a big factr I decided to save about 500 bucks and stick with the iBook. Don't regret it. I'm not switching my desktop off of x86 Linux anytime in the foreseeable future but an Apple laptop is a great machine to tote around.

Re:What's the point of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

s/being unable to comply function/being unable to implement palladium functionality/g

After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[ECXStar]

I made the switch and haven't been happier. The cool thing about OS X is that it the low end softwar (i.e. iMovie, iDVD, iTunes, etc...) is almos high end softwar on a PC! Why, because the Apple guys coded all this stuff as multithreaded from the go. You rarely find Winwoes software that's multithreaded unless it's an expensive app or very specialized.

Re:After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[Anonymous Coward]

If your lucky, education will fix your problem.

Re:After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[perlyking]

How have you had 17 years of windows? Or at least thats what I assume you are trying to make a new amusing name for.

Or did you leave a stray "1" in there by accident :-)

More on topic: Demonstration Macs at PC World (pc superstore) have put me off OS X because they were sluggish, grey areas lurked where the OS hadnt quite managed to redraw the screen after a window had been moved, sluggish response etc.. I suppose they could have been badly configured but I thought the whole point of macs is that they "just work".
On the less serious side though they do look good.

Re:After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[hearingaid]

Early beta tester, perhaps?

The original 286-friendly version of Windoze I think was released around '85. That is, Windows 1.0. Nobody used it before 3.0, I know, but it was out before.

Re:After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[ECXStar]

LOL, you ever hear of Windows 286 and 1.0? Yeah, I was networking that crap back in the Netware 1.x days.

Re:After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[JabberWokky]

Nobody used it before 3.0

I used 2.x on a few systems - it wasn't really so much an OS or even a shell as much as a add-on library that things like Harvard Graphics or some other paint program required. Kinda like how the original AOL required... Gem, was it? Some other windowing software of that era. Not Desqview... I was a Desqview user, but whatever it was looked really nice. Windows stunk, although it did support 16 color CGA (aka Tandy CGA) nicely.

--
Evan (no references)

Re:After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[perlyking]

I stand corrected, noob that I am :-)

To repay my debt to slashdot society here is a page that you might find interesting on the subject.

Re:After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[Anonymous Coward]

oh and http://toastytech.com/guis/ is the framed page with index to more goodies.

Re:After 17yrs of Windwoes and 3 yrs of Linux.

[ECXStar]

No problem, as I reach for the Geritol... LOL Those were the funnest days of my carrer. It's funny to hear everyone bitch about Windwoes in the past few years becuase I've been bitchin about it since 85. I love my new dual 1ghz dual! I have my UNIX and a great gui to boost with great software bundled with the OS. If you took the price of what it would take to outfit a PC with equivilent software, an equivilent PC would cost between 300-500 more than I paid for this Mac. I think this is another value proposition Mac should exploit. Not the BSOD thing.

Karma to burn...

[Jerky McNaughty]

A few of my co-workers are getting these machines, but I would prefer to stick with Linux, partly because I don't want to learn the quirks of yet another operating system.

But another big part is (*gasp*)... freedom. I don't get the source to everything in OS X. I can't easily modify anything, recompile, and reap the benefits of my change. I'm not a free software bigot that feels free software is the best thing in every situation (I do, after all, work on proprietary software every day).

Plus, what do I use each day? fvwm. xterm. Emacs. Mozilla. gcc. Perl. Ruby. That's really it. OS X really doesn't give me anything over what I currently use, the hardware is closed, the OS is closed, and it's expensive.

I also don't care about pretty. Come look at my desktop if you don't believe me. My Emacs doesn't even have scrollbars or the cute little toolbar. I got rid of that stuff ages ago in the name of screen real estate.

OS X doesn't make sense for me, but I can understand why it makes sense for others since it probably runs the apps they want to run.

But for me, I'll stick with Linux. But when they bring that little fishtank screen saver up on their OS X machine, I'll agree that it looks pretty damn sweet!

Re:Karma to burn...

[Anonymous Coward]

Turn those scrollbars back on.
Serene Screen

Re:Karma to burn...

[davechen]

I can certainly understand your point of view. Linux has all the tools you need and it works for you. But there are still things about Linux that irritate or frighten the hell out of me that just work on Macs.

I've wasted days trying to get nice looking fonts in Mozilla. I have managed to get it to use TrueType fonts anti-aliased, but they still look ugly. It's like the sampled the fonts at a low resolution and then blurred it. Anti-aliased fonts on Macs just look sooooo much better.

And on Macs I can take random PC cards or USB devices, plug them in, and they just work. The memory card for my digital camera shows up as a disk drive. I just got a USB flash memory dongle. Plug it in and it works. I'm too frightened to even think about using USB on my Linux machine.

And getting Nvidia drivers for my GeForce 4 were a minor pain in the ass. I couldn't get them to compile with the kernel I was running (2.4.8-10), so I had to back down to 2.4.8-5.

All these little tweaky things that I just don't have to think about on a Mac.

Re:Karma to burn...

[Anonymous Coward]

That little fishtank screen saver is up on OS X:

http://www.versiontracker.com/moreinfo.fcgi?id=1 54 60&db=mac

Re:Karma to burn...

[Jonny Ringo]

I'm sorry I don't believe you have use emacs for OS X. Its not the x-windows version of emacs. Its the regulaur one with no scroll bars or pull down menus. Yes the terminal has a scroll bar (god that would be awful if it didn't).

Re:Karma to burn...

[Shuh]

Plus, what do I use each day? fvwm. xterm. Emacs. Mozilla. gcc. Perl. Ruby.

Essentially the same here. But I prefer to have an OS that includes DVD playback, DV editing, DVD-authoring, digital camera/MP3-player interface/management, and more access to commercial apps... all built-in.

That's really it. OS X really doesn't give me anything over what I currently use, the hardware is closed, the OS is closed, and it's expensive.

The hardware is less "closed" than you would think. All the components are essentially the same as what you would find on the P.C. The real issue is only that there is only one mother-board vendor.

"Expensive" is a relative term. Having to dual/triple-boot is "expensive" to me because it costs me time and effort. If I just get a machine that does it all from the beginning, that "expense" has been solved, with a few dollars.

I also don't care about pretty. Come look at my desktop if you don't believe me. My Emacs doesn't even have scrollbars or the cute little toolbar. I got rid of that stuff ages ago in the name of screen real estate.

Right there there with you on EMACS. I hate the scrollbar, and it's a complete waste if you commonly use C-v, M-v, or your mouse-wheel.

Re:Karma to burn...

[Elwood P Dowd]

Yeah, I'm kindof shocked that I'm not seeing many highly modded comments about free software...

I thought a significant minority of Linux users really cared about freedom. I know *I* did. And I still do. But I still run MacOS X on an iBook....

Re:Karma to burn...

[daviddennis]

There actually is a MacOS X native version of emacs, but it's not quite there - it doesn't quite have the right look and feel. I forget the reasons, but I stopped using it and returned to the terminal.

What I really want is xemacs, with variable width fonts and a better user interface, but so far there doesn't seem to be any Aqua version. And the X version simply reminds me of how horrid X fonts are whenever I see it :-(.

D

it's not about free software anymore

[Anonymous Coward]

It's all about novelty, eye candy, and short attention span. When I went off
Ritalin, I began a life long quest for the latest toys. It's all about the most current
of the peculiar. Novelty, toys, rock and roll.

$500 intel equivalent laptop?

[stego]

please show me the $500 intel-based laptop that compares to a ToBook...

Re:$500 intel equivalent laptop?

[nagora]

please show me the $500 intel-based laptop that compares to a ToBook...

I was making a more general point about Apple hardware than just laptops but, in fact, the price difference is even worse in the laptop market than the desktop. Some of that is made up for in quality but not enough.

TWW

Re:$500 intel equivalent laptop?

[stego]

but, in fact, the price difference is even worse in the laptop market than the desktop

I'd have to disagree with that. Price comparisons that I've seen that take into account stuff like the included ethernet and wireless-ready nature of Mac laptops tend to call the price difference negligable.

Every x86 laptop owner that I know has spent some time dealing with some random hardware issue like a modem needing drivers or just not working. I just watched my boss spend 2 days trying to get the modem/network card working on his Sony. That wasted time right there eats up any cost differences that might exist between x86 hardware and Mac hardware

Re:$500 intel equivalent laptop?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you haven't seen the heat sinks in Dell/HP's these days, you don't know the penny pinching going on.

Apple's laptop heatsink is an engineering marvel.
You don't get a cheap PC from Apple.
But, yes you do have to pay for it.

Get an IBook instead of the PowerBook.
Go in at the price point you can afford.

Re:$500 intel equivalent laptop?

[Heywood Yabuzof]

It's actually the opposite. The price difference is very noticeable on the desktop side, whereas for laptops they are quite comparable (features for the money). Shop around - compare specs and you'll soon find out that it's hard to find a "Windows" laptop that meets an iBooks' features for a lower price.

Re:$500 intel equivalent laptop?

[nagora]

It's actually the opposite.

Yes, sorry.

TWW

I switched.

[Tinfoil]

Granted, I was not a hardcore *nix user to begin with, but I did use FreeBSD as a primary OS before the switch, with windows being used for games. I happened upon a frustrated OSX user who wanted to trade his TiBook DVI for a windows machine. Naturaly I traded. It's been a great experience, especially with Jaguar. As much as I hate to say it, they are right.... it just works.

This could be the end of an era

[guttentag]

1. Slashdot editors switch to Mac laptops
2. They discover OmniWeb, which underlines misspelled words in textarea boxes as you type
3. Slashdot readers suddenly begin complaining that the editors have "forgotten" how to spell "properly."

Seriously, I would wait on buying a TiBook if I were you. Apple crippled the processors in every model after the first generation. An 800-mhz TiBook with 32 megs of video ram may outperform a 500-mhz TiBook (8 megs vram, which makes a difference OS X) on most tasks, but the 500-mhz TiBook from January 2001 still encodes MP3s faster than the latest models. There's something fundamentally wrong with that. I would wait until Apple can produce a laptop that soundly outperforms its Jan 2001 model.

Re:This could be the end of an era

[Anonymous Coward]

No not really. If you read that same article there are rebuttals and questions regarding the test methods. Very Important when one is to make sweeping statements regarding the hardware. The Processors in the Laptops are the same as those found in the desktops (unlike the intel way of doing things.) What Apple choose to with the second generation of TiBooks is to drop the backside cache from 1MB to 256k in order to save power and money. This was OK, but definitely not in the best interest of mobile users. The 3rd Generation brought back the 1MB of cache. THe fourth generation upped the graphics processor, and Optical drive and video out options. The Current TiBook now has a built in DVI port _BUT_ they also include a DVI -> VGA dongle to hook up CRTs.

OmniWeb does rock. There are _faster_ browsers out there, but none that _look_ as good.

Mike Jackson
slashdotreader@bluequartz.net

Re:This could be the end of an era

[Anonymous Coward]

The first generation of TiBooks use the PPC 7410, which is a first-generation G4. More recent TiBooks are equipped with processors from the 7455 series, which are significantly different from the 7410.

Firstly, the L2 in the 7400/7410 series is not mounted inside the chip. Thus, 7400/7410 based Macs have a larger L2 cache (the 7410 allows for up to 2 MB) than the 7455, but it can't access the L2 as quickly. The 7455 has 256 kB of on-chip L2 and support for up to 2 MB of L3 cache. However, the 7410 can't prefetch data to the L2 since it only serves as an evacuation space for the L1. The 7455, on the other hand, may use the L2 and L3 caches to prefetch data.

Secondly, the 7455 has more functional units than the 7410. The first generation of TiBooks have two integer units (32 bit), one 64-bit FPU and dual 128-bit SIMD units (AltiVec units). The newer 7455-equipped TiBooks have twice the amount of integer units and SIMD units, but the number of FPU:s still is the same.

Re:This could be the end of an era

[Anonymous Coward]

Same old same old... some twink calls another person's post horseshit and another person interjects facts... which one gets down moderated?

And to think people call boards like this a waste of time!

Re:This could be the end of an era

[robertchin]

You forgot to mention the fact that the 7455, while having a one cycle longer fp unit, has its three fp cores separated so data can be fetched to all three at the same time. And that the altivec units are also separated into four distinct types allowing several different types of instructions to be loaded and processed in parallel.

Re:This could be the end of an era

[MoneyT]

I'd wait on buying the TiBook anyways, they're due for a revamp soon, no point in buying now and then bitching in a few months when the $3,000 laptop you bought just became $1,500

Power conservation on these ain't so great

[signal7]

I have an iBook with OSX.1 on it. The power management features of the OS are very poorly implemented in comparison to the way they were in OS9.2. Previously, you had different options depending on if you had the laptop on battery or AC power. In OSX.1, you only get one profile for both.

Add to that the fact that sleep/wakeup operations while it's plugged into a live network sometimes put the machine in a coma, and it truly sucks. I eventually removed the magnet that causes it to sleep when the lid was closed just becuase it would be more stable.

I'm seriously hoping they fixed these issues in Jaguar.

Re:Power conservation on these ain't so great

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes it is.
1) i get almost 4 hours of power from a full battery charge using the following. If I am not using Airport (like when on an Airplane) _turn_ it off.
2) Dim the screen about half way. These will extend the run time from about 2.25 hours to well over 3.5 hours.

Jaguar fixed the issues with separate power settings for AC and DC power.

Mike Jackson

Re:Power conservation on these ain't so great

[Junta]

I know that at least in 10.2, I've been able to have separate Battery/AC power configurations.

Serious question

[Steve Franklin]

This is a serious question. If it sounds stupid, well, I can't be a genius at everything. To wit:

If Mac OSX is based on the free version of Berkeley BSD or some such, and I can put Free BSD or Net BSD or whatever it is on my Intel based IBM clone homebuilt, then why can't I put OSX on my IBM clone, even if I go out and actually purchase a nice box with pretty graphics at the local CompUSA?

What am I missing?

Re:Serious question

[Toraz Chryx]

the GUI layer (Aqua/Quartz) isn't available in sourcecode form, and it's compiled for PowerPC processors.. hence it won't run on x86 based machines, laptop or otherwise.

Re:Serious question

[Xjaguar]

Hi everybody,
Probably the BSD version was changed to be suitable for Motorola processors, that's why you can't use mac os x with an Intel or similar. Anyway, rumors say that Apple is planning to switch to Intel processors (saw this info on http://www.macosrumors.com).

Re:Serious question

[TheLostOne]

why can't I put OSX on my IBM clone ... What am I missing?

The source.

Someone correct me if i'm wrong (ha.. as if i had to add that on /. ;) but Mac OSX is not open source... only parts of it are.

Sure you could get the kernel ported over.. but what then?

And in case anybody is expecting them to port those remaining closed bits anytime soon don't hold your breathe... being on apple certified hardware is what makes macos macos.

Re:Serious question

[NumberSyx]

then why can't I put OSX on my IBM clone

Well, you can and you can't. OS X is coded and compiled for PPC processors not x86, so going out and buying a copy and installing it on your x86 PC is out. You can however get the underlying OS Darwin, it is free for the download, there is even a port to x86. The problem here is, first Darwin does not come with the pretty OS X GUI, it is command prompt only, you must get the Darwin port of X Windows for a GUI and second, the x86 port of Darwin supports a very narrow band of hardware. If you are considering this, goto the Darwin site and read the hardware compatibility list and build your system accordingly, otherwise you will be very disappointed.

Re:Serious question

[Anonymous Coward]

Fucking stupid asshole. Apple is NEVER going to "switch" to Intel!

Re:Serious question

[Steve Franklin]

Again, I'm showing my ignorance of everything Apple (I once tried to buy an Apple II but the salesman wouldn't let me touch it--he kept playing little tunes and telling me how much fun it was--obviously I don't buy anything I can't try first). I thought there was something in the open source rules that said, if you use this code you have to open source any modifications you make to it. But if they just added a special Apple GUI layer to it, wouldn't it be possible to add a different GUI and run everything Apple on the machine? Or is the real problem the Power PC chip? What would it take to convince OSX that your Pentium 4 was really a Motorola chip? Not that I'd ever actually attempt this... ;-)

Re:Serious question

[Wyatt Earp]

Don't hold your breath for Apple to swtich to Intel.

Re:Serious question

[MaxVlast]

All of the open source parts are still open source. (Even though they're all in the BSD license and don't have to be. Compare BSD and GPL some day.) The closed source parts are written by Apple and kept in a safe deep below Apple headquarters (figuratively.)

As to the latter part, that's not a practical thing to do.

Re:Serious question

[Anonymous Coward]

So the question then is this.. are you ignorant of this topic because you havent bothered to read anything, or are you just stupid by birth?

This is /basic/ stuff.

Re:Serious question

[Steve Franklin]

No, I'm ignorant because what I read tends to be self-contradictory and not terribly authoritative, I suppose because the source is in fact closed and locked in a vault beneath Apple headquarters.

The real question is, are you a troll because of a genetic predisposition or have you contracted an infectious disease, in which case you should avoid any further contact with the healthy population?

Re:Serious question

[Steve Franklin]

So the Apple OSX applications won't run under Darwin because they are specifically written for the Apple window manager as well as the underlying operating system? I've run into this with a laser artwork generator program that runs under Open Windows on a Sun computer but won't run under CDE.

Re:Serious question

[Jezza]

No, the BSD layer hasn't been "changed" for the PowerPC - it's written in C, it's compiled for PowerPC but that's quite different!

Actually there is a lot of the system that is only available as binaries (hence PPC only) AND OS X lack drivers for a stock i586 clone.

As for Apple releasing it for Intel, that seems unlikely at this point. Apple need to keep selling Macs and OS X and the "iApps" are it's way of doing that.

As for an Intel version of the Mac, Why would you want such a beast? It'll be as closed as a Mac, but have a Intel chip in it! At present the PowerPC is faster than the Pentium for the things Macs gets used for (because mostly of AltiVec). Sure the Pentium is fast at some other tasks but those tend to not be the ones that are important to Mac users. As an example iMovie and iDVD lean very hard on the AltiVec and would be much slower on a Pentium system (iDVD in particular).

Macs aren't a expensive as they used to be and it is home of the best Unix out there - why not give it a try on a Mac?

Re:Serious question

[Jezza]

Well for a start the Cocoa libraries aren't open source, nor are the Carbon ones, and you can forget classic!

So no that stuff CAN'T run on OS X on Intel. Aqua isn't going to work either (though I don't see that matters given the above).

However what IS open source can be (has been) ported onto Intel. That's called "Darwin" (a stupid name to be sure). It works and is complete, this gives you a full Unix (of the BSD style) with compilers and lots of toys. There is stuff you'd probably not expect there too - how about a free mpeg4 steaming server? (I know!)

To this you can add X-Windows, and a WindowManager of your choice (personally I like WindowMaker). Now if you want a OS X experience take a look at GNUstep - an open source implementation of the OpenStep API and tool set (Cocoa is based on this). I don't know if anyone has done this yet (but it seems like an obvious thing to do - so I'd not be suprised).

If you're really into this idea - take a look at Apple's Darwin pages, and www.dawinfo.org and www.gnustep.org.

Hope this helps :-)

Re:Serious question

[robbieduncan]

Darwin != OSX

Darwin is the core of the OS. It consists of (iirc) the Mach kernel and the BSD layer, but not the higher OSX layers (Quartz, Open GL, Carbon, Cocoa, QuickTime and so on). So any command line app should run, but iPhoto which relies on Quartz, Cocoa and some other stuff will not.

Re:Serious question

[Steve Franklin]

Thanks. That clarifies matters nicely.

It appears that Apple is basically selling software that only runs on their equipment, with certain minor exceptions like Quicktime. So you have to go out and drop a wad of cash on their hardware in order to get the benefits of the fancy software. Nice scam. ;-) Almost the absolute inverse of Billy Boy and M$.

Re:Serious question

[thomas.galvin]

Esentially.

There are a number of layers you must consider when talking about computers.

At the lowest level is the hardware. In this case, it is the Motorola chips that Apple uses in the Mac.

One step up is the operating system. This operating system must be compiled specifically for whatever hardware it is going to run on. In the case of MacOSX, the operating system is Darwin, and it can be compiled to run on either Motorola chips, or the Intel-esqe chips everyone else uses.

On top of the operating system, there are libraries that programmers use to build their applications. Examples of these are the std libraries in C++ (which is were we get cout from, allowing us to print stuff to the screen), and Cocoa, which is the gui toolkit Apple uses to make all of those pretty buttons and things appeare on the screen. Libraries must be compiled to the specific hardware and operating system they are going to run on. In the case of OSX, Cocoa has only been compiled for darwin on motorola, and therefor will not run on intel-based darwin.

Finally, there are the applications themselves. These are the Mozillas, Words, and iTunes that we all know and (mostly) love. They have to be compiled for the specific hardware and operating system, with the appropriate libraries, in order to run. Most Mac applications have only been compiled for Darwin on Motorola chips, using the Cocoa libraries only available for darwin on motorola chips. Therefore, Mac programs will also not run on intel-based darwin.

Re:Serious question

[Alan Partridge]

not quite, Apple isn't selling software that only runs on their systems, they're selling SYSTEMS, FULL STOP.

Re:Serious question

[eno2001]

Here is (very simplified) the way the layers to get apps to run on OS X work, starting at the bottom:

Darwin Kernel (BSD Licensed)
|
Cocoa, Carbon (API) application libraries (Closed)
|
Aqua/Apps (Aqua and most apps-Closed)

The Kernel (as always) only provides the system calls from APIs to the underlying hardware.

The APIs are what stand between the apps and the kernel. The killer app here is Aqua.

Aqua stands between the user and the other apps in the system (Finder, the Launchbar, iMovie, etc...)

So... you can run the kernel on x86, but you don't have any ability to recompile the GUI based apps to run even if the application source is available. What you would need would be an open source re-implementation of Cocoa, Carbon, Aqua, etc... Kinda-sorta like W.I.N.E. Probably with about the same level of compatibility. Hope this clears it up a bit...

Fooling OS X into thinking that it's running on a Motorola chip wouldn't be effective either. You run into the same problems you did with old Apple emulation... There are chips in the original hardware that provide things that are usually in libs on other platforms. You would have to emulate Mac motherboard, chipset and proc to get this to work. That WOULD be difficult and unsightly. Not impossible though. Just impractical.

Regarding the potential port of Mac OS X to Intel, I won't say it will never happen. I think all it would take is for Apple's new servers to actually take off. Their greatest selling point is that they don't require a license for each client that connects and they provide decent support for Windows clients. If they get enough market share in the server market, and they can sell the OS without having to rely on the hardware, then there is an open door to doing a port. I think this is why Steve Jobs said that AFTER the migration to OS X, anything is possible. Of course I can't see Steve Jobs himself approving a switch to x86 Intel. 4th gen Itanium? Maybe. At least there, you're dealing with what used to be Alpha to a certain extent. I think Steve Jobs still doesn't like dealing with the companies that he percieves as being "inferior", and I applaud him for that. Only the best things come out of clear direction and tight control: Macintosh, MPlayer, the Linux Kernel, etc... ;)

Re:Serious question

[jneemidge]

At least there, you're dealing with what used to be Alpha to a certain extent.

HP-PA, not Alpha. While, thanks to all the mergers, HPCompaq now owns the Alpha architecture, Itanium is more-or-less a strange VLIW descendant of HP-PA.

I'm not sure what advantage Itanium would have over PowerPC, for Apple. The main source of grief for Apple is that Motorola provides Altivec while IBM does not. However, Itanium doesn't provide anything particularly similar to Altivec either. For 32 and 64-bit non-Altivec, IBM makes very nice Power architecture (compatible with PowerPC for all reasonable purposes) chips with plenty of headroom to compete flat-out with Intel.

Given the amount of grief Apple would get from developers about porting applications _again_ to a hypothetical MacOS X-on-Intel (x86 or Itanium), I can't see that happening soon. Even if everything from Apple's side is seamless, a lot of developers would need to consider endianness, performance issues, etc. Also, you lose Carbon (MacOS APIs need work moving to a little-endian architecture) and Classic (unless there's a high-quality emulator built in).

Overall, there's plenty of headroom in PowerPC -- the issue is getting the chip vendors to push it to consumer parts that Apple can use. Their volumes are high enough (and growing) that there's motivation to do that. Any concerns about Motorola's committment aside, IBM _needs_ to keep developing Power-architecture parts for the foreseeable future. As long as they're designing them, why not spend a small delta to make a consumer-grade version and sell an extra couple million chips (compared to the 5-or-maybe-6-digit numbers they'll sell for iSeries and pSeries servers otherwise)?

Between those factors, I don't see MacOS moving to Intel. Apple is likely keeping it on a far-back burner for contingency purposes, but market realities make it the sort of thing you'd see if they were flailing on the verge of extinction and simply had nowhere else to go.

Re:Serious question

[eno2001]

You are correct sir, I hadn't thought about endianess and I am not sure what AltiVec does other than provide MMX-like features that perform better than MMX. :)

Re:Serious question

[Steve Franklin]

But would anybody BUY those systems without the software? Heck, hardly anybody buys those systems even with the software! ;-)

Re:Serious question

[DavidRavenMoon]

If Mac OSX is based on the free version of Berkeley BSD or some such, and I can put Free BSD or Net BSD or whatever it is on my Intel based IBM clone homebuilt, then why can't I put OSX on my IBM clone, even if I go out and actually purchase a nice box with pretty graphics at the local CompUSA?

You can't install OS X, but you can install Darwin, which is the Open Source core underlying Mac OS X, sans Aqua.

http://developer.apple.com/darwin/

And you can get the x86 version here:

http://gnu-darwin.sourceforge.net/

Re:Serious question

[sjgman9]

Apple is a profitable computer company because it sells its own hardware. Thats why everyting works. You can install the BSD layer of OSX on your PC. Its called Darwin. Its a mix of all 3 BSDs with a kernel called XNU.

Re:Serious question

[DavidRavenMoon]

Probably the BSD version was changed to be suitable for Motorola processors, that's why you can't use mac os x with an Intel or similar.

From the Darwin FAQ

Darwin and BSD

Q. Why is Darwin based on BSD UNIX?

A. There are several reasons for this. The first one is historical. Mac OS X draws a lot of its code base from a system called OPENSTEP, created by NeXT Software, which Apple bought in 1997. OPENSTEP and its predecessor, NEXTSTEP, were based on 4.3 BSD. BSD has always had a rich academic developer community behind it, and while much of the original BSD UNIX was not free, its source code was available to anyone who obtained a license for it. The wide development community that arose to support BSD contributed to many of the ideas that drive today's open source community. That community also facilitated a great deal of research, including work to put BSD on Mach at Carnegie Mellon University-code that eventually found its way to NeXT and now to Apple.

Second, BSD is widely respected as clean, robust, and maintainable code. There remains a strong developer community that knows the code base very well and continues the work started at UC Berkeley. In addition, the BSD license is very open, which has made it easy for us to leverage its compelling core technology to enhance the Mac OS.

Best of all, as a result of making this choice, Apple is now an active participant in the BSD community. This allows us to make sure that the capabilities important to Mac users are added to BSD. Being part of the BSD community also gives us access to excellent peer review and keeps us on a path to adopt and contribute to open standards, the benefits of which are well known to our developers. The BSD community has been extremely supportive of Apple since we first approached NetBSD, FreeBSD, and others about doing a better job of sharing code. That happened even before we announced Darwin. Now we're pleased to have become an even more active participant in the community.

Q. Where does Darwin fit into the BSD family?

A. The purpose of Darwin is to provide the core system software for Mac OS X. It is not designed to be an alternative to other excellent BSD options such as FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD. Darwin is simply BSD tweaked in ways we think will help Apple deliver the next great version of the Mac OS. We should note, however, that apart from a few architectural differences (such as our use of the Mach kernel), we try to keep Darwin as compatible as possible with FreeBSD (our BSD reference platform).

Q. Does Darwin offer any benefits to someone who's already using another version of BSD?

A. Yes, it does. Darwin drives Mac OS X, which we consider a compelling new operating system not only for existing Macintosh customers, but also for the BSD community and other UNIX users. Darwin is a great example of BSD running on the PowerPC platform. It offers a well-defined code base from a major computer manufacturer, as well as a really cool graphical user interface (Mac OS X).

Q. How does Apple intend to work with other BSD groups?

A. Our goals with all of the upstream source projects-BSD, Apache, Kerberos, GNU, and so on-are to minimize the differences between our code and theirs and to update our code regularly. We already synchronize our code periodically with NetBSD for most of our user commands, and we will soon be doing the same with FreeBSD for our libraries.

Q. Why did Apple decide to share all of its modifications with the BSD community?

A. Although the BSD licenses don't require companies to post their sources, divergent code bases are very hard to maintain. We believe that the open source model is the most effective form of development for certain types of software. By pooling our expertise with the open source development community, we expect to improve the quality, performance, and feature set of our software. In addition, we realize that many developers enjoy working with open source software, and we want to give them the opportunity to use that kind of environment while they're creating solutions for Apple customers.

Although many people think that the rather simple BSD license does little to protect the openness of the code, it has contributed significantly to Apple's ability to adapt the code for the benefit of Mac users. Its emphasis on sharing code has also heightened our own commitment to the open development process.

Re:Serious question

[DavidRavenMoon]

But would anybody BUY those systems without the software? Heck, hardly anybody buys those systems even with the software! ;-)

People buy Macs for the OS, not so much the hardware.

But it is nice hardware.

As far as how many people buy Macs -- most of the media content creation industries, such as publishing and pro audio recording studios, run almost entirely on Macs. Big in TV editing too.

Re:Serious question

[Steve Franklin]

I know. I fell in love with the new cinema monitor. So much so that I went and ordered a flat panel from the same manufacturer. Couldn't quite figure out how to turn it on--they failed to include the part about waving a dead chicken over it in the manual--so I had to send it back. Looked great, though. ;-)

And the transparent speakers are really cool too. Of course, I finally figured out that I could run my audio into my stereo and JBL Control Monitors and blow any silly "computer speakers" away. I'm beginning to think that computers exist in a whole different inertial frame from normal reality.

And yes, I realize that most high end audio/video/publishing stuff is done with Apples, though I think that's changing. I used to be a photoengraver and from what I've heard, they've all gone to Macs for the front end processes. But as an individual user who's not doing multimedia professionally and just likes to do some digital photography and editing now and then and maybe play with some graphics in Corel Draw, I just don't have the bucks for a fancy Apple system. Not that I couldn't afford it. I just dropped close to $3000 building my own system. I just don't see the bang for the buck with Apple. I think you're paying for the flash more than the substance.

Re:Serious question

[DavidRavenMoon]

And the transparent speakers are really cool too. Of course, I finally figured out that I could run my audio into my stereo and JBL Control Monitors and blow any silly "computer speakers" away. I'm beginning to think that computers exist in a whole different inertial frame from normal reality.

I don't care for the sound of the Apple (Harmon/Kardon) speakers. I bought a set of Monsoon MM-702's. But I use my G4 as my home recording studio, so I needed better speakers.

And yes, I realize that most high end audio/video/publishing stuff is done with Apples, though I think that's changing.

Not in the NYC area. I work in the publishing field. It's still mostly Macs.

But as an individual user who's not doing multimedia professionally and just likes to do some digital photography and editing now and then and maybe play with some graphics in Corel Draw, I just don't have the bucks for a fancy Apple system.

But that's the area where Macs shine. With the whole iPhoto-iMovie thing. My PC using friend love the way they can bring their camera over and plug it into my Mac and ImageCapture opens and lets us download the photos. Two of them cant get Windows to see the camera, so I copy the images onto a CD for them.

Not that I couldn't afford it. I just dropped close to $3000 building my own system. I just don't see the bang for the buck with Apple. I think you're paying for the flash more than the substance.

Gee I dunno. I got a pretty good bang for a lot less than you spent, about $1700. And OS X.

Re:Serious question

[Steve Franklin]

"But that's the area where Macs shine. With the whole iPhoto-iMovie thing. My PC using friend love the way they can bring their camera over and plug it into my Mac and ImageCapture opens and lets us download the photos. Two of them cant get Windows to see the camera, so I copy the images onto a CD for them."

My CD1000 puts the image directly onto a CD-R. I really couldn't see playing around with memory sticks or other high dollar plug-in memory. The CDs hold ~130 shots, which runs about a half cent apiece. And no having to carry a laptop around to free up memory in the camera. I made darn sure I had a handle on getting the images into the computer BEFORE I bought the camera. Apple is just taking advantage of the fact that most people don't plan ahead that well.

I'm not knocking Apple. They do what they do well. It's just not my cup of tea.

Re:Serious question

[TheLostOne]

Hmm.. you know now that I think about other issues I'm less intrested in seeing Apple port anything :)

Re:Serious question

[gig]

Basically, there are three levels of Mac OS now:

Darwin - Core OS

This is the software layer between the hardware and the rest of the software on the computer. Darwin runs on Macs and on some Intel systems. It's not some loose pieces of Mac OS X that fell under a particular license; it's the core OS, the really technical part of the operating system that you interact with from the command line. This would have been the whole operating system before graphical interfaces, but now it's the geeky filling inside the candy coating of Mac OS X. Transparency is really valued in this core part of the Mac OS, and ease-of-use often takes a back seat to maintaining traditions and functionalities that have been proven to work. So, in Darwin, there are folders with names like /etc and /bin, there are traditional UNIX tools, there's the file system, the Hardware Abstraction Layer and all this stuff is open so that it can be scoured for bugs, and so that this vital software layer that is the spine of the computer can't be held hostage by a single party, or be made deliberately incompatible with other technologies, or run tasks without the user's knowledge. Darwin is also progressive and modern, with XML configuration files, a simplified directory structure, and ZeroConf networking that makes small, industry-standard IP networks configure themselves.

Mac OS X - Professional and Consumer Desktop

Darwin for PowerPC plus closed-source software from Apple and other vendors, including a great graphical user interface. The emphasis in this version of Mac OS is ease-of-use, simplicity, and good looks. Huge features of the machine may only be exposed to the GUI in one little easy-to-use widget, enabling the user to understand and harness a lot of technology quickly and easily. Huge simplifications benefit the non-technical or new user: an application and all of its files go in a single folder that is presented to the user as a single icon that they can run, move, rename, or peek inside with the use of a contextual menu. There are hundreds of features, but they're presented to the user in such a simplified and friendly way that you can take it all in very quickly. I just read the instructions today for making Mozilla your default browser, and on Mac OS X it is "Go Apple Menu > System Preferences > Internet > Web > Default Browser, press Choose and select the Mozilla icon in your Applications folder." Figure out what it is on your platform and compare. Note that the user is not picking the browser off a list, whether stock or generated ... they are picking the single icon called 'Mozilla' that is in their Applications folder. Whole layers of complexity are just not there to trouble you or to decay as the software installation matures. The Mozilla icon is actually a folder with all of the files and images and whatnot that Mozilla requires, and all you have to do to 'install' it is to place it in the Applications folder, provided your user account has the right to do so. Most apps just come as a single icon on a CD or a Disk Copy image (Macs mount disc images as if they were really on media ... basically, you open a disk image and it is made into a RAM disk and mounted).

Mac OS X Server - Media, Web, Workgroup Servers

Mac OS X optimized for server use instead of desktop use. It's particularly suited to serving QuickTime, MPEG-4, and other streaming media. Apache is the Web server, and all the UNIX stuff you'd want is there or can easily be added. The GUI layer has a number of easy-to-use configuration and administration tools. Licensing compared to Windows is very cheap thanks to use of open source software, and there is also no client access license.

Re:Serious question

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you.

Re:Serious question

[Xjaguar]

Well, as I said, they are just rumors, and I hope they will remain rumors. I'm a Mac user since 1993, and I just love mac os X and the PowerPCs for all the reasons you mentioned :)
And, with the new 10.2 release, I can work seamlessly with the windows-based PCs at work. As for the BSD "changed", I'm not an expert, so I'm sorry if lacked precision on that. Thanks for your explanation.

Re:Serious question

[Jezza]

Well there seem to be a lot of confusion about Apple and the Intel chip set. OPENSTEP for Mach (aka NeXTSTEP) ran on serveral processors, Mac OS X is a reworking of that OS (lot's of new stuff to be sure - but the basic design is unchanged, Mach Kernel with a BSD Unix adaptor, and a custom window manager - in OPENSTEP that was Display PostScript in Mac OS X that's Quartz: a system based on PDF, OpenGL and QuickTime, you could think of it as "Display Acrobat" with extentions for OpenGL and QuickTime)

Now given that this ran on Intel, Sparc, et al. It makes sense to keep those ports up to date, so IF you decide that your choice of CPU is no longer the best you can switch. There are of course a couple of flies in that ointment - none of the existing software is complied for anything other than PowerPC (everything needs to be recompiled - doable but Apple would need developers aboard, most notably Microsoft) and classic won't work (that doesn't seem fixable, but never say never - old Mac OS was originally a 68000 product).

But this is a "get out of jail free card" Apple aren't in this position yet, moving to Intel would hurt the performance of many tools on the Mac - there isn't a business case for it. Also getting Microsoft to come along might be hard - I can imagine Apple porting Mac OS X onto Intel would make Microsoft very jumpy.

Now for Apple to have this option, but not keep it "ready to go" would be stupid - it doesn't need many engineers to keep it upto date. This is a good thing(tm) that Apple have considered this kind of "what if" and have a workable plan. So as a Mac user you should feel more relaxed - plans like this mean that Mac's future is assured, no matter who's inside. (After all, if it works like a Mac, smells like a Mac, and has an Apple Badge - who cares what logo is painted on the CPU?)

But tomorrow? It'll still be PowerPC.

(Trivia: the first editions of NeXTSTEP actually shipped on IBM's early RS/6000, the machine that introduced the POWER architecture that later became PowerPC)

Re:Serious question

[dbrutus]

Supposedly, IBM is going to be unveiling that consumer grade successor chip in October. It's also likely to have Altivec or clone as well.

Re:Serious question

[velocityboy]

Motorola seems to have lost interest in developing the PPC chip to it's fullest potential. If this mindset continues, Apple will have to swith to a different chip or fall too far behind to ever hope to recover. Perhaps the OSX on Intel is an ace in the hole, that Apple can play if it needs to. I Personally would really like to see Motorola and IBM continue developing the PPC architecture, if only to provide an alternative to the x86 architecture.

powerbook

[stego]

Given the chance, get the G4 machine. And I've seen very noticable differences between otherwise similar Macs that have different bus speeds...

Pointing Devices (was Re:Mac Laptops)

[Joff_NZ]

Why does no-one produce laptops with inbuilt trackballs anymore? I don't like either the little knob or the trackpad.. The knob is too fiddly, and I'm always brushing the palm of my hand on the pad..

Laptops need more balls! (pun intended)

Re:Pointing Devices (was Re:Mac Laptops)

[ianscot]

I think originally it was a maintenance thing that made Apple switch; by far the most common part swap on old PowerBooks was the trackball's setting in the case, just going by my personal experience supporting a bunch of them. Physical trackballs got filthy, it made them much less pleasant to use, and when you destroyed the wheels inside you had to give up your machine for a bit.

Now that we have optical trackballs -- like the one right here -- it'd make more sense. C'mon, this is a no-brainer.

Re:Pointing Devices (was Re:Mac Laptops)

[MaxVlast]

A major reason is that trackballs are a lot thicker than trackpads. If you look inside a trackball-bearing notebook, usually there is nothing below the device for lack of space. With laptops so thin nowadays, old-fashioned trackballs just aren't practical. Heck, the ball on a PowerBook 160 is roughly as thick as the entire TiBook.

I, too, miss trackballs, but we're stuck with pads (and I hate points.)

Re:Pointing Devices (was Re:Mac Laptops)

[Jezza]

Simple - the device it too deep. When you're making something as skinny as a PowerBook it just isn't an option anymore. Unless you make the ball really small then it's a pain to use.

I think of all the bad options for pointing devices on laptops the trackpad is the least bad, but really they all leave much to be desired.

Re:Pointing Devices (was Re:Mac Laptops)

[PainKilleR-CE]

Guess Ill just be toting around a trackball for the rest of my life in that case. We use a lot of the trackpads on rackmount systems and I absolutely can't stand doing any extensive amount of work on them. One of our customers even supplied a keyboard/trackball combination for their system.

Re:Pointing Devices (was Re:Mac Laptops)

[MaxVlast]

I actually agree. I use a Kensington TurboMouse 4.0 as my primary pointer-control device.

Questions.

[protein folder]

#1 How much memory do you have? If you don't have at least 512MB you really should get it. If you're swapping virtual memory all the time it's going to run slow.

#2 What font are you using for the terminal? When I got jaguar I noticed a pretty big slowdown in the terminal's responsiveness. I had Monaco 12. installed, with anti-aliasing on. After I changed the font to VT100, anti-aliasing off, the terminal is much faster.

I switched 6 months ago

[deadsquid]

I purchased a Ti back in April to replace my Vaio and ThinkPad X21. I was tired of switching between Linux and Windoze on a regular basis, and wanted something that would allow me all the toys I wanted, the office apps work demanded of me, and a development platform that could go where I went. I also wanted integrated wireless - I _hate_ the antennas that stick out.

I've had a mixed bag of an experience. I'm very used to right clicking items for properties/context-sensitive menus, and the "click-and-hold" drives me insane. That few tenths of a second is just enough to interrupt the flow of using the trackpad, and I use a two button mouse whenever possible.

The click-and-hold also makes the dock less than useful for navigating around the apps if you have multiple windows/instances open and are looking for the familiar "taskbar" approach. I also find the jumping icons instead of a simple flash to grab my attention annoying. I have a couple other beefs about the interface, but nothing I can't deal with. Navigation between apps is icky, and that was my point.

I use the powerbook (funny how we don't call it a laptop) in a variety of places and have a serious beef with the "Location" feature for networking. When I switch to a known area, and switch the location, it seems if chance plays heavily into whether the net connections are used. It's very unreliable, but I seem to have found the majiic sequence necessary to get it to work most times.

That all said, I'm pretty happy with the rest. The apps that make up OSX, such as the DVD player, iPhoto, and iTunes are well thought out, and I wish they were available for other platforms. Third party software has helped with things like PocketPC support, and apps I'm used to with other OS's.

I use Office X (thank you Microsoft, for not allowing me to upgrade cross-platform and fucking me for some more $, thank god for tax writeoffs) so I can use Entourage, Word, Excel, and PPoint as office apps, and I prefer the OSX versions to their windoze counterparts. This lets me fit into the environments of most of the companies I work with. StarOffice/OpenOffice is ok, but I prefer to use the Office Suite when I can.

Finally, I have mysql, apache, and a bunch of mods installed so I can do app development/screwing around without the need for another box or rebooting/using an emulator when I want to use. It's also really nice to have a console/term window on an environment designed for use by regular folk.

The hardware itself is mostly great - beautiful screen, three types of networking, firewire, usb, and the combo drive, and battery life kicks ass. The gripes I have are its size and weight (it's a little too big for my tastes, I was spoiled with the X21), the trackpad could have been designed a little better and including scrolling capabilities would have been nice, and a hd light would have been welcome as I sit and wait for stuff to launch, wondering if it's doing anything.

All in all, I'm happy with the switch to the Ti as my laptop. I don't think I'd use it to replace my desktop, as I still can't play CS and a bunch of other games on it, but for a all-in-one travelling companion it's very hard to beat. I'm happy I made the switch.

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[Doctor O]

I'm very used to right clicking items for properties/context-sensitive menus, and the "click-and-hold" drives me insane

You mention this several times - if you had RTFM, you had found out you can as well Ctrl-Click. There's no need to hold the mouse button unless you want to drag&drop something.

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[extra88]

Regarding your "location" problems in networking, try this instead. Use a single location, Duplicate the relevant interfaces (Ethernet or Airport) and configure the duplicates for each network. I think you'll find OS X uses whatever network connnection works.

Example: you have an Airport base station at home connected to a cable modem on one side and a 5 port switch on the other. When you're at the desk you use the wire and DHCP is provided by the base station. When you're on the couch you use the Airport. In your office cubicle you have to use one static IP but if you do a presentation in the conference room upstairs you have to use a different static IP and a different gateway. A local coffee shop is attempting a pay-for-wireless system but you've discovered you can just pick an unused IP in their subnet so you use Airport with a static IP there.

So, in this case you'd have the following Network Port Configurations:

Built-in Ethernet (home) DHCP
Built-in Ethernet Copy (cubicle) static IP
Built-in Ethernet Copy 1 (conference room) static IP
Airport (home) DHCP
Airport Copy (stealing from coffee shop) static IP

You may have to still switch airport networks but that can be done from the menu bar.

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you feel about the integrated 802.11b though? In my case, I thought that would rule too, but the performance is abominable. I have an old school iBook as well as several Dells with SMC cards hanging out the side and they all have far, far better range than my Ti. It's incredibly irritating. If I'm around the corner in my house from the base, it doesn't really work consistently.

I think the "Location" panel is amazing though. I love it. It always works perfectly for me. It even allows my mom to bring her iBook between her two homes and switch network configurations without assistance.

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[pianophile]

Better yet, avoid using the mouse (almost) entirely and use LaunchBar. You won't regret it.

http://obdev.at/products/launchbar/index.html

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[smack.addict]

As long as you do not have any weird need to configure your network in any specific locations, forget about the Location feature. Everywhere I go has DHCP enabled. As a result, I go home and plug in or walk around, it just knows its IP and whether to use ethernet or airport. I take the TiBook to work, same thing. No reboot, no changing location, no selecting wireless networks from the menu bar, NOTHING. I have not had to touch network configuration in the 18 months since I switched from Win2k to OS X.

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[Jonny Ringo]

Its true that the games don't come out like they do on windows, but there are a lot of good games that are out and will keep you busy. I made a few lists at amazon.

First list is OS X native games:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/listm ania/lis t-browse/-/2HHH2QUBDN95E/002-1264678-5508828

Second list our games that need a patch to be OS X native, the link to the url to get the patch are included:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/listmania/l is t-browse/-/1D11EDOKXVLD1/002-1264678-5508828

There are also a lot of free games you can find on Apple's site, some even opensourced. Have fun!

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[Kevinv]

I've got 3 locations:

Auto-wired
Auto-wireless
No Network

All use DHCP, I just use location manager to shut off unused nic cards to give me more battery life.

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[Jonny Ringo]

damn it for some reason when I copied and pasted the links it put a space in between "lis t" should be list. Sorry about that.

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[mbbac]

The click-and-hold also makes the dock less than useful for navigating around the apps if you have multiple windows/instances open and are looking for the familiar "taskbar" approach. I also find the jumping icons instead of a simple flash to grab my attention annoying. I have a couple other beefs about the interface, but nothing I can't deal with. Navigation between apps is icky, and that was my point.

Dock icons bounce so that you'll know their application requires attention even when you have the Dock hidden.

Re:I switched 6 months ago

[Wordman]

The "click and hold" action can be accomplished instantly with a control-click. Just hold down the control key (yes, control, not the command a.k.a. Apple key) and click. It's a two handed solution, but better than waiting, IMO.

Note, this also means that if you have software to configue your mouse, you can set a button to do a control-click for the "right-click" effect that you are used to. (As an earlier poster said, two button mice will have this mapping set up by default when plugged into a Mac.)

I love mine

[Marc2k]

I recently (well, 7 months ago, but it still never leaves my side) bought a TiBook, and I'll never look back. I still use Windows and UNIX at home, but I'll never look back in terms of mobile computing. I've absolutely never thought that the physical or software interface was clunky at all. Chances are pretty good that if I'm using my laptop, I'll have a table of some sort, and if I do..I carry a USB wheel mouse with a short cord (Thank you HP, for giving me a DESKTOP mouse with a 1.5' cord, now I can actually use it). If I don't have a place for a mouse (airport terminals, planes, park bench), I have no problem with one button mouse with control keys. The keyboard layout is a little funky (don't bother with numlock), but I've had no problem with it, I don't consider it a drawback. The keyboard itself I love too, I don't keep anyone up with incessant clicking, and I type faster with it.

Oh, and no I'm not an Apple Zealot, I've never owned one before February of this year.

Hell ya..

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been meaning to switch over for the longest time.. just no fucking cash.

The kernel is Mach

[Anonymous Coward]

Kernel? That kernel is called Mach. Darwin (which has some ties to BSD) runs *on top of* Mach kernel. Mach kernel is a microkernel. Mach kernel is not a BSD monolithic kernel.

Re:artg and Religious Bigotry

[Anonymous Coward]

1) There is more to it (satanism) than that.
2) First its the Satanists, then the Hindus, then the Buddists, etc... Just because their beliefs are not the same as yours or mine (and if you think they exist only to piss off Christians, you probably have no clue about their beliefs), does not invalidate them.

For a mature GUI, it's the only game in town

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't doubt that by the time my 3 year old son enters the workforce KDE or even Gnome might be up to speed. Windows seems doomed to eternal clunkiness. To the occasional user, no difference perhaps, but when your computing all day, os x is it. (Provided Apple heeds the advice of John Siracusa.

Hemos and Taco secretly want to get a mac...

[protein folder]

But it's like 4th grade crushes, so hesitant and unsure...

"Hey, Taco, I just read about Rendezvous being released open source."

"Wow, Jeff, I, uh, think I kind of like Apple."

"Woah, you *like* Apple?"

"Wait, hold on! I don't *like Apple* like apple!"

So pretty much, they're using this website and posting all these stories to get the trolls out of the woodwork to start flaming apple, as well as the people flaming for apple, and when the number of people who think Apple is cool is large enough in comparison to the number of people who hate it, they can go get the TiBook they wanted and not have to worry about not being seen as Cool.

OS X bashing from a Mac user

[cvd6262]

Yesterday, I was leaving a deptartment meeting when I saw an undergrad friend of mine with his Ti Powerbook in the Mac lab (I'm in education). I asked if he was running Jaguar, to which he replied by showing me his screen. He was still running OS 9.

I was a bit taken back, given Apple's heavy pushing of OS X and Jaguar, but he said it still had "problems" and that he didn't like the interface (for usability).

We use Jaguar on our two video stations in my office, and I think they rock. I'll never run it at home (academics can't afford the hardware), but I find it interesting that even some who can afford it (read: already own a Mac), and might even own a license to OS X, don't use it.

However, another diss on OS X (non-server) is that they have removed, or chosen not to include some of the group scripts (like groupmod).

if you do decide to buy, wait a few more weeks

[frostycellnex]

Rumors coming out of several Mac rumor mills suggest that Apple is going to release a new version of the Titanium PowerBook in early-mid October. It will sport updated CPUs (of course) a beefier video card and (what I've personally been waiting for) a "portable Superdrive" (DVD-R and CD-RW). Not exactly sure yet what "portable" means in this context, but I'm hoping the slimmed down the form factor far enough on the Superdrive to be able to fit it into one of those amazingly thin machines. Hope you switch! frostycellnex

Re:if you do decide to buy, wait a few more weeks

[BlameFate]

Portable Superdrive will probably mean they managed to cram the tray-loading desktop beast into the svelte slot loading TiBook form factor.

That has been the hold up IIRC; you can;t fit a tray loader into a TiBook.

I do it...

[jyoull]

I've used a Powerbook as my primary laptop for about 7 years now, and behind it (since Linux 1.2 or somesuch) has always been some group of *nix servers. I presently have a G4, new in Nov. 2001. I have always used my laptops and servers together for - writing and running net-connected server apps, and running my life (Quicken, e-mail, etc) and prefer a Powerbook for running-my-life stuff, by a big measure.

OS/X is very nice for someone wanting to do this. I prefer the behaviours of the Mac interface and applications and always have. So this is the best of both for me, since I often have a terminal window open while working on a GUI app (e.g. 5 mins ago before I took this break, coding in CodeWarrior, running the app from a terminal window and editing something w/ pico)...

The nice big screen is, well, nice and big. Sometimes too big. I have a courier bag for biking around with it, and a soft, snug case designed just to hold it - recommended if you're going to take it anywhere. Even if it's under your arm it seems to want to smack into things otherwise.

However sometimes the nice big screen is too damn big. If I were doing this again, I'd think about getting the smaller iBook. I do some video editing but it's not an everyday thing for me. ... iBook at half the price but not half the speed, and I'd still have a nice machine for *just about everything* plus money left over for drugs.

It's easy to take from place to place - joining new wireless or wired nets, or switching to a projection display always works very quickly and doesn't screw things up.

Have had a smattering of kernel panics, but not much to get too excited about. Greatest issue seems to be that while that apps are stable and work well, they are not yet mature, but I like them.

I like the feel of the keyboard. I like the trackpad. I've purchased a tiny external USB mouse that I often use as well.

some issues:

case cosmetics: The outer edge of the case (the last 1/4" all around then keyboard, and around the screen as well) is not titanium. It's some cheapass painted crap. The paint wears off and then it looks like your $2,500 Powerbook has a skin condition.

Brittle power supply connector: The AC adapter socket built into this seems designed to snap of. It's very tight and very brittle. Once I heard the motherboard creak a few times, I learned to be plus ultra careful plugging it in.

Do not use if you have a pacemaker: The case is electrically live when plugged into the wall. Go measure one, or if you are sensitive to 60Hz, just run your finger across the titanium surface of one that's plugged in. Wrote to Apple. Wrote to the US gov't agency that oversees consumer safety. No replies.

Excellent marshmallow toaster: WHen it was new, it was quiet. When it was less new (6 mos) it started to be very warm when running. Now it runs extremely hot - the fan comes on a lot. I bought these nice ventilation stands for laptops, and they help a lot (and swivel -too cool), but the whole heat up thing is screwed up.
heat

ln -s versus alias, what the hell? A minor point, or is it. If I `ln -s` to create a link, the Finder is perfectly fine with it. If I create an alias via the Finder, it puts the info in the resource fork rather than doing the Right Thing in the file system. What the hell is that all about?

And my battery died From the start, the promised 5 hours never materialized. Ever. More like 2 hours 45 minutes of runtime on a full charge. Then one day (after about 9 monhts) the battery decided that a full charge would mean 45 minutes of runtime, and that's how it stands now.

I am sending it in for warranty work next week. They can't promise it will come back with my data on it, so I have had to purchase an external hard drive to back it up to ($300) which sucks (yes, i was backing it up regularly to one of my Linux boxes via Retrospect, but I wanted a LIVE backup as well - this is my life and livelihood we're talking about!). It will be gone for a week. Not sure what I'm to do for a week while they have it. I hope that goes okay.

And I am going to have to purchase an Applecare warranty (another $300) for two more years of warranty coverage, considering the record of this thing.

In summary: Buy an iBook if you just want a nice portable computer that integrates nicely with *nix and other systems. Save the extra money for women, booze and Ticketmaster service charges.

Re:I do it...

[khuber]

You might have had some credibility if you hadn't said you were editing with pico. Sheesh.

-Kevin

Re:I do it...

[jyoull]

If that's how you measure credibility, you might want to rethink your standards. I didn't say I edit everything with pico. However, a short script, yes. Does the winner of the whose-dick-is-biggest/i-use-the-most-difficult-edi tor contest have the most cred?

Re:I do it...

[gig]

Aliases aren't file system links, they're links to the file by a special number each file gets (I think it's called a node number). The user can rename the target file and the alias will still point to the target. This aspect of HFS+ is also what lets you rename MP3 files (for example) and iTunes will still know that a song is the same song. It's like the computer is using its own naming convention (long unique numbers) which frees up file names for the user to do as they please. You can rename and move apps and documents on the Mac and stuff keeps on working.

Re:I do it...

[khuber]

I was just kidding, man.

OS X/Darwin

[Glanz]

I made the switch rather easily. Under OS X, on my humble iBook, I regularly use several Browsers[iCab, Chimera, Mozilla1.1, OnniWeb, Opera 6. IE is there somewhere in the system too, but I never use it. I installed Darwin via Fink and I also may simultaneously use XFree and Aqua. I have KDE, Gnome, WindowMaker, Xfce, IceWM, Blackbox, Enlightenment.... all the latest versions. OpenOffice of course, is a must. In spite of the fact I have the same environments and apps as a Linux distro, I find myself using OS X more exclusively. It suffices for all my needs except for Open Office, which will be coming shortly for OS X.

The iBook is simply the best little machine I have ever owned.

Oh, you're going to switch all right

[Silas]

You're going to switch to OS X now, or you're going to switch to OS X later. The only question you have to answer is "what section of the train do I want to be on?" The engine's already rolled past...do you want to be comfortable in the middle coach cars, or running behind the caboose trying to catch up?

Seriously: I'm a switcher...a power-user/sysadmin who used Windozes and frumped around with RedHat/FreeBSD desktops for a long time, got up the nerve to try OS X, and I'm not looking back. I tell people who laugh (as they drool over my TiBook) and/or don't understand that in 5 years, they'll be using OS X too. Their laugh is a little more strained at that point, because I think they sense that I may be right. Maybe they *want* me to be right.

The plunge is totally worth it. If I had the cash, I'd offer you a money-back guarantee. OS X is the future of desktop computing.

From a current user

[galego]

Not necessarily a convert...

I've always like the simplicity of MacOS (it just works) and the power of Unix. I didn't get a shot at Mac OS X until my current job. The previoius job was whatever got shuttled to your desktop by the desktop PC purchaser person and the corporate IT brigade. Here I got to choose and went for a TiBook with only a little hesitation.

I'm extremely pleased...there's lots of commercial and free (beer and/or speech)apps available. I installed Apple's development tools but have yet to play with them. The multi-tasking is very good (IMO). I briefly had something previous to X.2 on it, but now have Jaguar. Jaguar is a definite improvement. I love being able to bring up a terminal amidst whatever other apps are going.

I've dual-booted MacOS/LinuxPPC and Win/Linux...but now I have it all in one box. Dual-booting was a necessary evil...now it's not.

Cheers,
Galego

Recently Switched...

[Anonymous Coward]

Got an ibook for school and no longer touch my high-ish end desktop system.

There is really something amazing about the UI I cant quite mention but it does not get in your way like other OSes. Fink, AppleWorks, PRoject Builder, Opera, Mail, iChat, etc. I dont think Ill ever go back.

Right now im only miffed about ogg support, and that I cant make all apps get the hell out from under my dock.

Been a PC user for 12+ years and I wont go back, heh.

Switching

[Anonymous Coward]

the interface looks nice, but is horrible to use. I came from BeOS 1,5 years ago to OS X. I migrated to FreeBSD two weeks ago. OS X would be a killer if they would have put usability above cuteness of the interface. And with that one button mouse... I never had to move the mouse around that much ever. Instead of just clicking the right mousebutton I had to move up to the deskbar all the time. Doesn't sound like much of an effort, but have fun doing that all day, everyday. Its simply annoying.

-thies

Some other obvious options

[Baki]

1. windows client with X-window server, linux server

2. vmware, run either windows + linux in vmware or linux + windows in vmware (depending on the operating system where you need native I/O and graphics speed the most).

I use both option 1 and 2. A windows desktop for games etc., and fullscreen X-window access to my linux server (running X-windows fullscreen you get a 100% illusion that you're working directly on a linux/unix system). The server also runs vmware with a win2000, for some long-running windows programs such as P2P leeching or mpeg2 rendering. I prefer to do that on the server, since running games tends to cause frequent reboots/crashes on my windows client.

Re:Some other obvious options

[Anonymous Coward]

You actually use a real live networked X-server?

Why?

I've found TightVNC to be much better than X.

Re:Some other obvious options

[jbolden]

1. windows client with X-window server, linux server

This with Solaris instead of Linux was a setup I used at work for a very long time. I liked it so much had it at home (though this time with Linux). Problem it is a 2 machine setup which isn't too bad for desktops but is unworkable for laptops.

So yes I guess I should have included this option but added the 2 machine problem.

Re:Some other obvious options

[ipjohnson]

Yeah but I can put my all in one solution on my lap .....

Re:Some other obvious options

[Baki]

I use VNC to display vmware (running win2k) on, so I can disconnect and reconnect at a later time (while rebooting my client PC :).

However, for real interactive GUI work VNC is absolutely no match to a decent X11 implementation.
VNC is nice to remotely control and disconnect/reconnect to sessions, but for GUI over LAN access, X11 is the only sensible option.

Re:Some other obvious options

[Speed Racer]

With X11, you're limited by the local client stability. That's unfortunate since the client is often Windows (at least in my case it is).

With VNC, you're limited by the remote machine stability. That's much better since that machine is often a server running Linux (again, in my case)

Re:Some other obvious options

[Strog]

With X11, you're limited by the local client stability

While that is true, I find that an X session is more responsive and can use wheel mouse, etc. I really like the Xservers that use "rootless" modes. I really like using remote apps right along side windows apps.

I tend to use both X and VNC(generally tightvnc) when I'm not using a ssh terminal session. Tightvnc definitely narrowed the gap in performance. I remember the first time I used it after using standard VNC. Very nice improvement.

Apple is Non-Free

[SubtleNuance]

Id consider OSX if it wasnt Proprietary, Non-Free software. Sure the kit has its merits, but I cant see getting fooled again...

My experience

[BitwizeGHC]

I do some development work on MacOS (9 and X) and I have something to say about it.

Yeah, it's a nice Unix system, but all that shiny GUI stuff gets in my way most of the time. My primary workhorse machine is still my Linux box. Configuring certain network options is kinda strange, in particular; you can't just go in and muck around in /etc; your settings there will immediately be supplanted by some sort of NeXTStep networking that Apple has.

So in some ways it's a Unix that tries very hard to pretend it's not Unix. When I want to run Photoshop, that's okay, but when I really want to get in and muck with some of the settings, the shiny, friendly upper layers interfere. I don't have a real dislike for Mac OS X the way I did for Mac OS X, but I treat it as its own phenomenon rather than a substitute for Linux or NetBSD.

To develop Cocoa applications, I highly recommend Project Builder over CodeWarrior. CodeWarrior is rather clunky to me but was really the only option in MacOS 9; everybody else (especially Adobe) used CodeWarrior, therefore you had to.

Integration with MacOS X is kinda sorta not-there-yet for CodeWarrior. Project Builder is really geared toward Objective-C and the Cocoa API and was designed from the ground up with the MacOS X environment in mind. It's easy to use, and free.

you are aware that WCIII

[Anonymous Coward]

was released WITH the mac version on the same CD as the win32 vers, right?

Re:you are aware that WCIII

[Hobophile]

No, I wasn't. I stand corrected. I believe I was thinking about another game, possibly UT 2003, which was going to ship with Windows + Linux binaries in the box, with the Mac version to follow by Christmas. I think it's commendable that Blizzard got a Mac version out so quickly; as I recall there have been significant delays before certain titles (Starcraft?) made an appearance on the Macintosh platform.

I apologize for my error. I hope it didn't detract too much from my point, which was largely that Wine isn't as much of a lost cause as people sometimes suggest.

Re:you are aware that WCIII

[Anonymous Coward]

Blizzard has always had a near simultaneous release. Sometimes they have lagged for a month or two. As soon as they have the mac version available, they redo their disks and start shipping their products as hybrid. They have the best cross-platform record (if you only consider Mac/Windows) in the industry.

from a new user

[mibat]

I'm not sure how helpful or informative this is, but here is my experience so far.

I've been using Win98 (I know, painful, but I have this really old scanner that I can't part with.. ^_^) and Linux on my desktop computer for about 4 years now. While I love Linux because of its stability, the CLI, and the variety of software I find for it, it's also been a relentless pain in my ass for the 4 years I've been using. I won't go into it now.

But when I looked at getting a laptop when my school got a few wireless access points (this being my last year I figured I should get the most out of my "computing fee" that I can and abuse the wireless ^_-) my first thought was all of the praise I've heard for OSX. I'd used it a number of times in school computer labs and had a very good impression of it. So with my main train of thought being "I already have a PC and I don't want another one to cause me undue amounts of frustration" and also "I already have a PC and it's no fun to play with anymore" I sprang for an iBook.

I've only had the thing for a week today now, but as someone who's never used a Mac before I was surprised at how fast I got used to the interface and the way the system works. The first day or two found me playing with it for hours on end and getting irritated because the interface didn't work in the windows/linux way (which i have to say is pretty similar in my experience) that I was so used to. It took me 2 days to figure out that to uninstall a program you just drag it into the trash. Look at that!

The thing should seriously come with a better manual. Do a search on "OS X tutorials" ASAP when/if you get a Mac and have never used it before, because Apple's help files came up with 0 results when I searched on "Uninstall program"!

In any case, I have come to love my iBook very quickly and rarely use my desktop computer now because I just love the way OS X works. How can you say no to that beautiful interface and the ability to just click on Terminal and get a UNIX prompt? I can't say enough good things about it. (Except, of course, Apple's help system which I mentioned above.)

All in all, I'd highly recommend it for someone who, like me, is geeky enough to drool over Apple's interface, nerdy enough to want that UNIX prompt at my fingertips and will actually use it, but also someone with little time and even less to spend screwing around with Linux, much as I'd like to. I'm sure that some people will find OS X to be a huge annoyance but I doubt it's for everyone. My suggestion would be to get thee to a friend's house or Apple store and play with it for a few hours total before deciding because it does function in ways that are very different from Windows and your typical Linux setup, IMO.

Darwin Again

[Glanz]

If you do install Darwin 6.0.1 [just released], I recommend going this route http://developer.apple.com/darwin/projects/darwin/ and not the Fink route. Any method requires the Apple Developer Tools which installs a BSD SubSystem on OS X. I have used both the Fink-based and the "pure" Darwin-based systems and the method to which the link above points is by far the fastest and less glitchy of the two. Don't let that "glitchy" scare you! Darwin works much better than Red Hat, for one example, is easier to update, and had the newest versions of virtually all apps.

laptop = OS tax ($$$) . Make your choice

[push_bp]

There's a big difference between buying (or building) a desktop and a laptop that I haven't seen entionned here.

You can't buy a laptop without *paying* for an OS.

So the question is:

- would you *pay* for a game/DVD/etc OS?

- would you *pay* for an OS where you can launch a terminal/vi/emacs off the shelves?

In booth cases you can also install a GNU/Linux distro.

(yes I made my choice last summer: iBook)

Switched and never looking back...

[micq]

I purchased an 12.1 inch iBook 700mhz 640mb ram just a few months back and I couldn't be happier... OS X is evrything I've wanted in a *nix install.. ease of use, yet hands on mangling if necessary... I still use linux on the home servers but only because I already have the boxes...

I say go for it...

I there baby

[Anonymous Coward]

Been using OS X as my primary notebook with VPC (hardly have a need to use it anymore) since July 2001.

Going to remove OS 9 when I upgrade to jaguar. Oracle is there now. I only need some decent multi-track recording software and solid MOTU 828 drivers...life is good and Microsh*t free.

Worked for me... somewhat

[srhuston]

Being a Unix sysadmin, I wanted a laptop that ran Unix. And since I got to hand-hold all the users in my department when they had problems installing Linux on their laptops, I didn't want to do that with my own machine. Stupid little things, like you need to find and download a binary X server, built-in wireless doesn't quite work right... things that can be fixed, but perhaps require little work-arounds that make you end up keeping some sort of Windows on the box just in case you need feature X, Y or Z.

Enter the TiBook, top-of-the-line model that the department got for me (hey, if they want me to support it, I've got to have some way to learn it :> ) On the day it arrived, I powered it on to hear the Mac "Bong", followed by nothing. DOA unit, wouldn't turn on the display, external display didn't work either, nothing. So for the first week of owning it, it was in the shop getting its motherboard replaced. Now, the sticker inside the battery compartment which shows the serial number and MAC address, has the wrong MAC address (on-board NIC was replaced along with the mobo). Stupid little thing, yes, but it makes it look to me like it's got things wrong with it.

So a weekend goes by, and now it's got a purple line from the top of the screen to the bottom, right over F9. Call Apple again, they pick it up on Tuesday, I get it back on Thursday (damn nice if you ask me), purple line is gone but now there's a handful of stuck pixels throughout the screen. Apple says it's "within tolerance", but of the 4 other TiBooks in the department none of them have *any* problems with their screens.

While I love the OS, and adding packages with Fink is simple and handy (I now have a fully functional network analyzer, 10/100/1000 & wireless, running Ethereal, MacStumbler, etc. And unlike a Fluke, it runs Solitaire and Nethack too :> ), I am concerned with two things:

1) It was in Apple's posession more than it was in mine for the first two weeks of "ownership", for service.

2) Why did I just pay a hair over $4000 for what looks like a refurbished laptop, not a brand new one?

Re:Worked for me... somewhat

[base3]

Your story illustrates why I won't buy anything containing an LCD until these secret "dead pixel policies" go away. When they can manufacture them so that they're mostly perfect, and replace them when they aren't, I'll buy one.

Is it not too late to return it to them, then dispute the charge with your credit card company?

Re:Worked for me... somewhat

[herwin]

It sounds refurbished... Was the hard drive new?

Re:Worked for me... somewhat

[srhuston]

Well, when I got it it was brand new, except it didn't work. The hard drive, airport card, and battery are the only things original as shipped from the factory. The display and motherboard were both replaced.

So I'm anal, but when I buy a new machine, I expect the MAC address printed on the sticker inside the machine next to its serial number to actually be the MAC address the machine has. At least until *I* do something to invalidate it. But this was the case before it ever successfully powered on.

I figure at this point, I'll keep it now, since the department paid for it, and if it dies in two years I'll get whatever their latest and greatest laptop is then. I seem to be the only person amongst quite a few who has had any of these sorts of problems, so it's probably a fluke. But a bad fluke on their part, considering I'm the one who recommends hardware/software purchases for the department :>

Re:Worked for me... somewhat

[herwin]

OK, I see the issue. I have a PB G4/500 that I use as a brain supplement, a PB G3/400 that my wife and I use to play DVDs (region-free 8), and a dual G4/1000 desktop that I use for research (neuroscience and security). VPC gives me access to Windows, and fink to the Linux world. No complaints. I suspect your box was a return that was refurbished and sent out again.

Yup, me too

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm going to get an iBook, then after my hols I'll probably get a dual PPC desktop machine. I won't be buying an Intel x86 box again unless AMD x86-64 is cool and/or Apple do a PC :-) I'll still keep my current dual-CPU for Debian though.
I think OS X rocks, I'll be learning Obj-C and coding apps, I feel it's much better than coding for GNU/Linux desktop right now.

I am a convict^H^H^H^Hvert

[sboss]

Hemos/Cmdr Taco,

I am a convert from the windows world (at work due to Office requirements), and linux (at home and personal laptops). The TiBook is very sweet and powerful. MacOSX is easy to use, sometimes too easy. I keep getting caught up in the windows-isms but soon I will be beyond that crap. I have had my TiBook for about 2 weeks now and think it is the best decison I have made in a long time.

My suggestion before plopping down 3-4k for a new mac laptop, go to on the of the Apple Stores (if you can) otherwise goto CompUsa (or other computer store with an Apple Section) and play with the MacOSX machines.

Have fun and I predict that you will buy one.

Re:artg and Religious Bigotry

[artg]

> 1) There is more to it (satanism) than that.

There is may well be more to pre-christian religions than that. But using the character and context of christianity and then choosing the "dark side" is either pointlessly immoral or (rather more often) simply adolescent.

> 2) First its the Satanists, then the Hindus, then the Buddists, etc...

Sure, I have some sympathy with that argument, but there has to be a threshold below which it's simply silly : I see no need to defend those who claim to be Jedi (yes, they have a point to their claim, but it isn't due to a belief in Alec Guiness) or Barney the Dinosaur.

IETF, Internet2 etc

[More Trouble]

I've been going to these sorts of meetings & conferences for years. Everyone brings a laptop. Until recently, they were all x86 machines. A few were running Linux of *BSD, most running Windows. Since iBooks, TiBooks and Mac OS X, the majority of the "Internet Leaders" attending IETF, Internet2, etc, are sporting Macs. Interesting. :w

OS X technical notes

[ejchet]

Hello
I have some updated information on OS X.2. The OS X.2 kernel has been synced with freebsd 4.4-5. Also the userland has been synced with freebsd 4.4-5 also. As for the freebsd kernel running on a mach microkernel that's not true. Basically the bottom half of the fbsd kernel has been taken fon and the mach kernel provides the hardware abstraction. The interesting part is that the fbsd and mach parts work as one in a single address space just like a standard monolithic fbsd or linux kernel for that matter. The OS X kernel is not a microkernel architecture.

Regards,

Eric

Re: Dell Laptops are Better

[d^2b]

Well, I like the look of tiBooks too, but one thing that is discouraging me is that I think 5.4 pounds is not that light! (compare to 3.6 for a thinkpad X24.) Yes, the screen is bigger. Yes the battery life is (might be) better. But two pounds seem like a lot to pay.

I guess laptops is just like anything else: there aint no free lunch.

New PowerBooks?

[Euzechius]

Anyone has any idea when the new powerbooks will be available?

Re:New PowerBooks?

[JonathanF]

There's nothing definite, but there are quite a few rumours passing around. The most common suggests that there will be an update in the 3rd week of October that brings the Powerbook lineup to 800 MHz and 1 GHz, with a Mobility Radeon 9000 video chipset and possibly DDR memory or a Superdrive option.

Personally, I'm eager to see what happens with the new iBooks. There's a rumoured design change that would bring them up to 13" (possibly within the same space as the 12.1" model is now)... even the far-out rumour of a 14" widescreen iBook!

i wish

[entrails_770]

apple stuff is just too damm expensive for normal ppl.....:(

This is sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of you chow your ignorance with things like "this is fake, there is no wd in the prompt" and other such crap. It is a prompt. It can be made to say whatever it wants. It could say slashdot_sucks% and still be valid. Do any of you know how to actually change how your prompt looks of is it the same out of the box prompt that came with whatever distro you use. Also I use OSX on my ibook and not showing the current working directory is it's default behavior.

Re:This is sad

[Anonymous Coward]

My guess is that most of the "experts" here haven't used Linux or UNIX more than seeing it on a school terminal once or twice.

BSD for regular folks

[wrttnwrd]

Just made the switch myself. As someone who's tinkered with FreeBSD but is no expert, OS X is a godsend. I can use an OS that has huge advantages, work in the same environment that most of my web sites are hosted in, but avoid the learning curve for a while.

I know the FreeBSD geeks will say I shouldn't avoid the learning curve, but I gotta make a living, right? OS X made a UNIX-based laptop a legitimate choice for me.

iBook with Yellow Dog Linux is a great combo

[Anonymous Coward]

I paid for the OSX beta, I paid for OSX, I begged for 10.1. I stopped at Jaguar. $129 was too much. I also dislike the fact that they are keeping one foot out of the open source world with their Aqua interface. Yellow Dog gives me a much faster machine. I love their hardware.

Re:iBook with Yellow Dog Linux is a great combo

[Glanz]

You have a good point!!!!! I have never seen Linux run so well on a machine as YellowDog on an iBook. There is also the Gentoo option, but I find it a bit glitchy. I have tried them all and Yellow Dog seems to be the nicest and fastest. The speed is simply unbelievable!!!!!!! I do not believe Mandrake PPC is an option because they will stop their PPC project soon. YellowDog is doing well, and their updates are well maintained.

Flirting?

[ford42]

So, was anyone else expecting this to be an article on going out in public with a Mac and picking up women (or men)? Very disappointing.

OS X on an iBook

[eparkin]

I've been using my 700mhz iBook for roughly 3.5 months now and I have to say, I'm never going back to Linux as a day-to-day machine. I will however keep my FreeBSD server(s) for now.
I'm lead software architect for a financial firm developing fairly large applications (as well as a couple of necessary kludges in this business). I needed a machine (preferably a laptop) which would give me the freedom to move about while taking my development environment with me.
My first foray into real computers started in 1986 when I bought my first Amiga 1000. I progressed through multiple Amigas (I ended up running a 12 Line BBS (Somerton Telecomm) from 1987-1996) and became quite used to certain ways of doing things. Mostly the command line interface and it's unix slant towards directory paths and commands. We used to bust on Macs because they didn't offer anything for the power users.
I moved to WinTel PC's in the latter half of 1996. I was at first enthralled with some of the really "neat" stuff I was able to do, but that lasted about 3 months. The current version of Slackware Linux at the time was installed, and I had a dual boot machine. Win 95 & Slackware. I did my perl development in Slackware, along with website development. Eventually bought my wife her own machine and that too was a dual boot.
Flash forward to roughly 2 years ago. The wife was getting fed up with Win2000 Professional. She went 100% Mandrake Linux. (She's a professional illustrator). Loaded with a SCSI Scanner, The GIMP, etc. she was good to go. I was running FreeBSD in various versions (I still do).
Started seeing and hearing more about these OS X laptops, the iBooks and the TiBooks. Did a bunch of research, decided to go with it and bought a 700mhz iBook w/Airport Card and 640MB of ram/30GB hard drive. I've enjoyed its ability so much that I went and bought an identical one for my wife. She loves it as well. Still have to install Gimp on hers (I have it on mine), but again, she is not only using her Linux box for Scanning because i don't have Gimp installed yet for her to touch up her comic strip (www.doemainofourown.com). That'll happen soon.
End result. Jaguar is killer, and it runs super quick on the 700mhz iBooks. 10.1.5 was decent, and I've heard the older versions of OS X were abysmal so I can understand where some people are coming from. Try it, you'll love it.
My iBook: 700mhz, 640MB ram, 30G HD, Java, Python, Perl 5.8, PHP4, MySQL, Mozilla 1.1, Chimera, GCC 3.1, NetBeans 3.3.2. Ati Radeon 16mb onboard. OpenGL 1.2.. Runs like a dream. Oh, and a firewire webcam.. who needs a video camera when you have one of those.. (iBot).

As a side note: I only found that the majority of people who bitch about OS X and Apple, and about it not being free, are the people who can't afford them. This is their problem, not Apples.

Re:OS X on an iBook

[easter1916]

You spelled 'architect' incorrectly on your sig.

Re:OS X on an iBook

[ealar dlanvuli]

You forgot to add "My name is eparkin, and I'm a computer geek" at the end

all posts praising "switch" must do so, it is the law!!

you have been warned

Re:OS X on an iBook

[eparkin]

Well.. Duh.. If I wrote all that without being a Computer Geek, that'd be a problem, now wouldn't it.. as for the corny switch bit.. uh.. how about ... no.
BTW, I wouldn't have responded at such lengths if I didn't really find this to be such a difference in terms of a useable os/laptop combo.

Re:OS X on an iBook

[Anonymous Coward]

uh it was a joke dude, calm!

Re:OS X on an iBook

[eparkin]

I figured it was a joke, I tried to point that out in my response. No intention here to start a spat. :)

How I installed linux on my ibook

[zojas]

Just got an ibook less than a week ago, and I have it dual booting between OS X 10.2.1 (jaguar) and gentoo linux.

I documented my install on my web page.

OS X is nice, but Linux is much snappier with only(!) 256mb RAM in the thing. I'll be upgrading to 640mb soon though.

Same here, ..

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't switched on my home pc's (Windows & Linux) since I have my powerbook. Better still, next week my parents are getting their iMac. No more windows support for me :-)

I've been a valuable customer for Microsoft over the last 20 years. Now, they are not going to get another penny from me. They've crossed the line too many times, but finally, Apple is a contender. If it weren't for Mac OS X, I'd still be shouting at my windows box.

Would Love To Have A Mac OS X Box, But...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm currently all 'nix at home. Problem is: wife wants a
garden/landscape design package. One of those things that
allows one to lay out trees, bushes, flower-beds, pathways,
the house itself, out-buildings (e.g.: gazebos, etc.) and
so-on. Then you can tell the program to "age" the
landscape. Flowers will bloom, trees, bushes and other
plants will grow, etc. Unfortunately, such applications
now seem to exist only for MS-Windoze :(. So, much as I'd
prefer a Mac in the house, looks like it's not to be :(.

That's horseshit

[greygent]

An 800 dusts a 500mhz TiBook badly, including MP3 encoding. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet that's in an ugly little table...

Hell no!

[Anonymous Coward]

Only _One_ mouse button that is all I have to say. Thank you

Re:Hell no!

[Anonymous Coward]

And only _One_ brain cell apparently -- you can't figure out how to pruchase a multi button mouse?

Re:Hell no!

[DuBois]

There's only one mouse button on the default mouse. You're not the kind of person who settles for the defaults, are you?? Really???

Dead end

[Anonymous Coward]

While I will not deny that Mac OS X is great looking, it is not the future. The desktop is infrastructure; only a matter of (rather little) time before free alternatives push out anything that costs money.
That's the beauty of free software development... it takes its time, but in the end it gets there. It's future proof.
So, don't invest effort in a dead-end street.

opinion of a sysadmin with a TiBook

[Raleel]

It's awesome. I love it. I have a nearly 2 year old hand me down 500Mhz from my boss. I put linux on it first. Linux is fast as hell on it. No question. But then I had problems like playing dvds, getting a kernel that worked the way I wanted it. Yellowdog didn't even get my X right (this was just a few weeks ago when I tried again).

I'm a happy as a clam os x user. It's nice to have everything just work instead of fighting with it all the damn time. I like dicking with systems, don't get me wrong, but sometimes I just want to rip a cd or watch a dvd.

I say go for it. I _love_ my TiBook...the form factor is awesome. Yes, they keyboard kinda blows,, but you get used to it after a while. The one button mouse thing I got over. I do like that it seems that they put everything where I expected it. When I wanted an ñ, I hit option n n...really, i didn't know it before, I just tried hitting option n and got a ~, but selected and up high...I figured if I hit an n again, it would just work. It did. Last night I was zoning out to mp3s watching the visual display full screen. I wanted to move forward a track in my play list. I hit the right arrow instinctually, and it did the right thing.

You are an idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

That is all I can say. It is not [macosx:/usr/local/] now because it was not set to report the working directory. this does not mean it is fake. It means you know nothing about *NIX. Idiot!

Re:You are an idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

Then what was the ~?

I wouldn't call people idiots when you can't even associate ~ with $HOME.

I Did It!

[GeekSoup]

I purchased a (used) PowerBook G3 Firewire, 500mhz, 12gig HD, 640meg Ram, Airport card and Mac OS 10.1.5. It's pretty damn nice.

I do all my Lisp, Scheme, PHP, and Apache development on it.

OSX is ready

[esme]

I've used a bunch of different OSes over the years, starting with DOS 5x/6x, Win 3.1 and MacOS 7x in the early to mid nineties. I used Win 9x for a while, but also started using Linux. I started using Linux fulltime around three years ago, but added MacOS 9 when I wanted to do some video editing -- we got an iMac. When the OSX Public Beta came out, I put that on the iMac and never went back. My wife and I both got new portables about six months ago (iBook for her, work sprang for a TiBook for me), and I've been using that fulltime since. I still have a linux box for a webserver and NAT, but almost never login on the console.

OSX 10.0 and 10.1 had some major problems. But as more apps have been ported from OS9 to OSX, and with 10.2 giving a much needed performance boost, I think OSX is definitely ready. It's a really good user experience, though not as polished as OS9, yet. When I occasionally login to my linux box (RH7.2 w/GNOME), I find it very jolting -- the UI isn't as consistent, the apps seem to take longer to load (maybe the stupid bouncing icons in the Dock are good for something...), etc. With Fink, a reasonably modern JDK, XDarwin, etc., you can run almost anything that's available for linux on OSX.

My only major complaint is that there isn't a decent backup system. All the command-line tools lose your resource fork and HFS+ attributes (which makes the system and apps useless). None of the GUI tools are any good. I've been using Retrospect for a while, but it's very flaky and the interface is horrible. Still, it's the best I've found.

-Esme

Re:What's the point of this?

[derch]

Wish I had some mod points for you...

I switched from Linux to OS X last Jan. I completely agree with you: Slashdot is carrying way too many front page Apple stories.

90% of the comments are rehashes of the one button argument, people disappointed by their Mac OS 2.1 experience, and some idiot saying proclaiming Unix users can't use the Apple keyboard. The only productive Apple stories on /. are under the Apple section. Really, apple.slashdot.org or macslash.com would handle this question much more effeciently.

The costs aren't necessarily that bad

[JonathanF]

You'd be surprised. The 12.1" iBook is a pretty good bargain for a small laptop. I'll use Canadian prices for comparison, since that's what I have to deal with myself.

Most Windows-based slim laptops are actually quite expensive. The closest I've really found to the iBook is Sony's Superslim Pro, which is a full $300 more than the iBook 700 - and it's debatable whether the Sony is faster. CPU arguments aside, the iBook has dedicated video (a Mobility Radeon); the Sony has a chipset with shared video memory, and I can tell you from personal experience that nothing kills video performance like needing to use system memory.

What's more amusing is that the Toshiba Portegé 2000 is actually a popular laptop, but it's $900 more than the same iBook 700... and it's not only slower, it doesn't even come with a docking station. You're paying for chic alone, and really the iBook does a better job of that.

I won't deny that Apple is expensive, but they can make a convincing case in the portable world. I'm looking to replace my clunky Toshiba with an iBook, but heck - if I weren't in university, I'd probably be considering a Powerbook!

Re:The costs aren't necessarily that bad

[call -151]

The comparison gets even more favorable when you factor in the durability issue. My Sony VAIO Superslim-whatever was a nice machine and it was nice not carring the cdrom/floppy stuff around since I only used it when at home, but boy was that thing fragile. Sony's business model is that when something breaks, you send it back to Fremont and it always took several weeks. Even the screws on the base (which kept falling out) were not available to Sony distributors to fix. I cannot be without my laptop for several weeks at a time- and I had to send it back to be fixed four times in just over two years. The thing was ridiculously fragile, had awful battery life, and external video was a hassle.

My iBook seems to have been built for 10-year olds, has great battery life, and has been ridiculously sturdy. The one time it needed attention was when I dropped the screw into the innards upgrading the RAM (oops), and my local Apple place dismantled the whole thing and put it back together while I sat in their lobby using a loaner in under an hour. The 12" screen is great (why would anyone with non-ancient eyes want the 14" model- it's the same screen res, just bigger, heavier (ok, slightly better battery life) and costs way more? I wonder how many people buy it just because it costs more...) and of course Airport is wonderful. It's light, has a sharp display, and good battery life and seriously, I can't think of anything I would want more these days. My killer apps are ssh, vi, gcc and perl so I'm totally happy...

Re:The costs aren't necessarily that bad

[entrails_770]

True they are coming down but trying to break corperate policy so i can have an apple is damm impossible..:( And for personal use laptops are too damm expensive much as i would love to have a cheap apple to play with to add to my sparc stuff...

prices

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't like the old days when Apple products had even higher profit margins than they do today and you could get an awesome educational discount.

This being said, there is another problem with notebooks. Namely you can't really remove much to get a low price build-to-order like I did with a powermac G4. (Of course you just add in cheaper aftermarket parts after getting, essentially, the motherboard/case.)

The best thing that I could say it watch for likely new product introductions, along with high inventories. (Hard to do with Apple as they control their inventory pretty good nowadays, but it DOES happen. e.g. I got what probably is one of the last Pismos to roll off the line before the first Tis for under $2k on what used to be a $3.5k machine.)

Now if price is really an issue, I'd really consider going with an iBook. Especially the 12.1" screen/700M G3. Why? The 12.1" is a VERY VERY nice form factor v. the Pismo/Ti boats. Additionally, I'd suspect what you guys would be mainly using it for the lack of Altivec would NOT be an issue. On top of this the basic G3 core w/o Altivec is slightly more efficient than the base G4 core w/o Altivec. Lastly the power draw of G3s is somewhat better, but this is offset by the lower cap batteries used in the iBooks, but this can be somewhat remedied aftermarket.

iBook rev b 300M

ibook (ice) dual USB 500/66M bus(newer models are 100M bus/8M(16M?) radeon mobility IIRC.) Max memory currently would be base memory + 512M(only one SODIMM slot. Of course the Ti IIRC is in the same boat.) No PC Card/PCMCIA slot, so you'd be stuck with airport for wireless.(The Tis have a single PC Card slot. Should work with non-airport wireless LANs as well, but I haven't tested.)

Pismo firewire, 500M/100M bus. 2 SODIMM slots, max memory of 2G IIRC (640M in mine). Uses bays so you could use dual batteries(handy.) Feels noticeably faster in similar use than my iBook/500/66, although I imagine the 100M bus ibooks are back on basic system efficiency par.

In any event unless you have about $3.5k burning a hole in your pocket, and if this is your first Apple foray, I'd strongly recomend the iBooks, especially if you aren't planning on doing alot of mp3 ripping, and other multimedia work that would be enhanced by Altivec. Video playback, Audio playback etc should be just fine on the G3s. Programming/compiling will NOT be affected by Altivec as it's not well suited to SIMD in most cases, i.e. most non-multimedia applications/research/simulation endeavors. I would als strongly recomend finding a deal on AppleCare(3 yr warranty), normally $300 but you should be able to find it for $200-$250.

Did I mention that the iBook form factor is REALLY REALLY nice. (I must admit that I had been looking at other smaller/sub notebooks for years. Unfortunately the x86 ones are usually premium priced and lack little essential things like DVD/CD drives internal.) Oh yeah, the ibook builtin speakers are still LOUSY. (The smaller screen is sometimes annoying too...but the form factor...)

You might also consider ebay or similar for a used/recent Ti, esp. if you can find one with AppleCare. Alot of Mac users upgrade almost every time a new model comes out?!

Other things: X11(both rootless & fullscreen) IS slower on the *books. Terminal.app has gotten MUCH slower in Jaguar, and there aren't many alternatives. "Text"/Console mode is pretty slow.

There are still alot of areas where Apple could/should spend some development time optimizing base operations, e.g. go open a folder with about a 1000 files and try to do something, also applies to lists of items with large numbers of entries. (EXTREMELY annoying.) Finder is only sort of multithreaded, as lots of things block completely. Networking seems flakier under Jaguar, although better with the 10.2.1 revision. Omniweb seems to have a massive memory leak that has shown up under Jaguar.

Overall though it's pretty good. Aqua/Quartz are much nicer than KDE/GNOME/X11/*wm although not perfect either. Basic "UNIX" support is even better now, although some more esoteric projects willr equire some knowledge to compile/get working. Fink is great for the more common projects, although you'll have to compile everything from source for 10.2* right now. i.e. knowing the /. crew you'd better get the *book hooked up and plan on waiting a few days for everything to d/l & compile/install.

One other little thing, I'd expect at least 3hrs of useful battery life from any of the book if you're just doing lightweight stuff. You should still have enough juice to watch a full 2h or so DVD movie as well. Major compiles, well, you're SOL, probably like 1.5h.

Re: Dell Laptops are Better

[Anonymous Coward]

Well the x200 is an ultra portable, a sub-notebook even. I believe it is .8 inches thick. It is not designed to be a workhorse. A better comparison might be the Fujitsu E series which is 1.2 inches thick, and comes with a combo drive, ATI MOBILITY Radeon 32MB cars, etc. Inbetween a desktop replacement and an ultra portable.

Switched, then Switched Back

[rjamestaylor]

I *did* switch to using a TiBook G4550 w/ 768MB RAM as my primary laptop. This worked well until my web development went from general public-access sites to b2b sites that had standardized on Win/IE[56]. The result--I switched back to Win2k on my Toshiba 2805. Supporting a Windows world via MacOSX is not pleasant.

There were other reasons why I wasn't ultimately satisified with OSX (pre Jaguar...I never did see Jaguar), so see my journal on the subject for more info.

Re:Switched, then Switched Back

[muonzoo]

That's too bad. However, one can argue that you have to work in an environment that really doesn't promote a switch. This isn't Apple's fault. As always, the right tool for the right job.

A.

Re:Switched, then Switched Back

[Into The White]

Your problem with OS X not having a "proper" app launcher is your own fault. All you need to do is create a folder, fill it with aliases to all your apps and organize them any way you like, and then drop that folder in the dock. Right click or click and hold or control-click, and you have what amounts to a "start menu". Interestingly, the start menu was ripped-off from Apple. Apple originated the concept with the Apple Menu back in the classic mac os. But for those used to using Windows, it's not as easy to realize how powerful aliases are in OS X. I think Apple needs to make some sort of utility to manage these "Apple Menus" in the dock, so more users new to the Mac are able to take advantage of them.

Re:Switched, then Switched Back

[rjamestaylor]

• Your problem with OS X not having a "proper" app launcher is your own fault.

Hi! It's nice to meet an apologist for Apple. My name is Robert. What's yours?

Does anyone care that it's not open?

[Urban Garlic]

Several of my friends have OSX laptops, and I don't dispute the props they're getting here, they're pretty and stable, lots of familiar tools, pleasant to develop on/for, all of that is true.

But what about openness, in the opposite-of-proprietary sense? What about community control of the kernel? This is a serious question -- I've never submitted a kernel patch to linux, never hacked my own kernel or written a device driver, but I *have* benefitted from those who've done it -- the scroll-knob on my sony vaio works on my OS because the Linux kernel is open, and some developer out there with a completely unrelated day job hacked up a driver for it. Openness means there's a community, and the community has variety in its goals and breadth in its interests. The hard-nosed economic benefit is that GNU/Linux works on commodity hardware, but the less tangible benefit is the vigor that comes from decentralization. It's the flip side of the chaos and infighting, and I think maybe sometimes we forget the difference between participating in a community, however deeply or shallowly we do that, and buying a product.

OS X is pretty, but it's also proprietary, and restricted in its hardware. I'm not saying its evil or anything, I just couldn't help wondering how many of the commentors really have their eyes open.

just bought an ibook

[Anonymous Coward]

I use linux (RH 7.3, Fluxbox) at work in our solaris environment. Many of our developers are getting powerbooks. They're powerful and beautiful, but a few of our developers have also discovered that they are a bit fragile. I decided on a 700mhz ibook for mostly monitary reasons.

I have to say, I couldn't be more pleased with the ibook. I'd highly recommend an OSX computer to anyone considering it. The ibook is much better than I'd imagined. It's just a fantastic machine.

Switching would be nice if....

[dogeatshouse]

there was an IP based Novell client available that actually worked. We have lots of users where I work, who are devoted Apple and Unix junkies... Problem is that we no longer run IPX and prosofteng's IP client (including the latest beta) has not worked with our Novell 5.x servers. Has ANYONE been able to make the OS X IP client work? It won't even browse the network for available trees here.

Re:Not on an ibook! - maybe yours

[victim]

I wonder how you meausured CPU use. top is tempting, but should never be used for that. It is far too easily skewed by processes that respond to timed interrupts or that yield the processor voluntarily. You should make a benchmark mode where your program does not do the updates for some period and compare its progress to the version with updates.

Wait a ding dong minute! You said terminal updates and simple C++ program. You are printing on standard output to a terminal aren't you?!? Well DUH! So you compute a couple thousand instructions, find a prime and then scroll the terminal window which involves copying a half million pixels. No Quartz Extreme for you, the CPU is doing the scroll.

If this is the case I officially proclaim your test silly on the grounds that...

• You can not possible read those numbers as they blast past
  
• You are using a very general purpose tool, terminal, for a specific high performance operation.
  
• What you really mean to show is how many primes/second are being found. A blasting terminal can convey that, but not with any accuracy and at a great CPU cost. Better to draw a scrolling graph at a fraction of the CPU cost and screen space, plus providing clear temporal trends and specific quantitative data. I'd also have a 'biggest one found yet' number that updates every second.

For more normal tasks...

I run OS X on a 300MHz G3 iBook and a 500MHz G3 iBook. Both do a fine job of document prep, email, and web surfing. The 500 does a fine job in Project Builder, the 300 is a little RAM light for that.

I was testing my opengl network visualization program on the 500MHz G3. 20fps (it is throttled at that, no sense going faster, its not like my T1 lines are going to gib me if I'm a reaction time later :-), full screen, 15% cpu utilization. Seems like plenty of power for me. (Ok, if you put a translucent window on top of the opengl view it goes to 1fps, 100% cpu, but that is probably because this unit can't run the Quartz Extreme.)

headline double-take

[adrenalinerush]

When I first glanced at the headline, I thought it was about "flirting" with OSX. You know, like whipping out your TiBook at Starbucks, and slyly using it as a conversation piece to start talking with the cute chick sitting next to you.

Maybe it's just me, though...

Switching, switching, switching

[Dixie_Flatline]

I had OSX on my G3 300 Powerbook. I sold it to someone in California. Then I sold one of my mountain bikes. It looks like I'm selling my PC as well. Why?

So I can buy me a sweet Dual-G4. Sure, I'll only be able to buy the bottom model, but dual 867s is more than enough for me to do my daily grind on. OSX on the Powerbook sold me. I loved it so much, but I'll admit that it was occasionally a bit laggy. It was excellent for being a remote terminal when I had headless machines around me. I only half switched before, because of the cost. I've decided now that I'm sick of fighting with my machines. The cost of my time is now more than worth the money I'm going to spend. I'm sick of trying to get things like Gnome 2.x to compile (took me a week because of some Xft problems) and then discovering that Gnome 2.x is possibly the worst user interface that I've ever had to beat my head against. I know where I stand with OSX. I start up the computer, it works. I do my work on it, that's all. Add Space.app into the mix, and I've got multiple desktops, and the world is a glorious place. :)

So Hi. I'm Jan Sacharuk, and I'm a games programmer.

Re:Switching, switching, switching

[Anonymous Coward]

VirtualDesktop is a "real" virtual desktop program. You can have windows from the same app strewn across multiple desktops. Last I used it, Space.app was just a program that did hide/show on groups of apps -- so you couldn't hide all but one window from an app, for example.
http://www.codetek.com/

Re:Switching, switching, switching

[Dixie_Flatline]

Hmmm. Very interesting. You're right about Space.app, but the big thing there is that it's free. :)

Still, if VirtualDesktop works as advertised, I'll pay $20 for it. :)

it's dead sexy....

[robp_in_dallas]

face it, the hardware is super sexy.... and if you get bored with the OS, you can just slap linux on it. Or if you really like windows, you can keep osX on it and get all your favorite winders products.

What happened to World New York

[acomj]

This is completely off topics
but I still miss that site...
It reminded me of NY since I've moved away.

It is a nice gui/os but ...

[mrfiddlehead]

It is a nice gui/os but damn if I can't get past the fact taht I can only buy my hardware for the OS from one vendor. That's why I'll never buy a mac. I don't like their hardware, because it's proprietary. I would consider buying their OS if (when) then port it for use on intel hardware. Not because I'm married to intel, not at all, just because that's the hardware that is available from multiple competing vendors. And besides that, I think their design team should be taken out back and shot, or splashed with water or something.

Lemon entry, my dear Watson, lemon entry!

Re:It is a nice gui/os but ...

[Shuh]

It is a nice gui/os but damn if I can't get past the fact taht I can only buy my hardware for the OS from one vendor. That's why I'll never buy a mac. I don't like their hardware, because it's proprietary.

Bet you don't own a car either. After all, once you buy a Ford car, you are locked into one vendor. Ford is proprietary!

We did switch to OS X

[bjelkeman]

I come from a SunOS background and have increasingly found myself having to use Windows computers for the desktop. These days nearly everything is Windows, on the servers and on the desktop.

I work for a small company that distributes Windows web server applications software, but we are quite a relaxed bunch of people so we can select our own desktop computers. One collegue has been running a Mac as his main machine for several years, although his main job is supporting and consulting on Windows based software. He has been running Windows NT on Virtual PC all this time and his Windows installation has been the least problematic we have in the office.

I have now also switched. I am using a PowerBook G4 with OS X 10.2 with Virtual PC for the odd application which doesn't run on OS X that I need. But mainly I use Office, Macromedia Studio and Mozilla for my work, so the Virtual PC doesn't get fired up very often.

I am very happy with this setup and I am also running OS X on a Cube at home, as well as an OS X FTP server.

Not now, guys!? Please consider NOT switching.

[puppetluva]

Here's why you should NOT switch to a MacOSx machine.

1. You are locked into the hardware. What if Apple does something you don't like in the future? What are you going to run, TurboLinux? Forget it. The only distro that treats all platforms the same is classic debian. If you think that getting packages/support on other platforms besides x86 is just as easy, think again.
   
2. Microsoft controls Mac adoption. Think I'm kidding? I was a HUGE mac fan and Mac administrator years ago. Macs started to get popular, so what does M$ do? They fail to release an update to Mac Office FOR EIGHT YEARS. Apple almost goes down the toilet. This will happen again if it is in M$'s best interest. I think that the only reason M$ supports Apple is that Apple can steal the Unix crowd's user-base. M$ is secretly happy about the "switch" ads because they sound so much like Linux advocacy and can confuse the Linux/BSD crowd into going with proprietary software. THEY WILL SWITCH LINUX USERS BEFORE M$ USERS. In most cases, M$ users have no choice, and hence no mobility towards MacOSX in most cases.
   
3. Open Office.org's health is good for everyone. Switching to the Mac enables people to use M$ Office blissfully without contributing bugfixes, comments etc. to OpenOffice --which we all own the rights to use. It just got good enough to replace M$ Office. Don't jump ship now - we are taking over - it just takes time. (You've seen the fruits of our the community's labor, so you know I'm not just blowing smoke).
   
4. The IPod doesn't support Ogg. No players will support Ogg unless people ask for it. IPod means MP3 or WMA formats ( I think ). If you are switching for the IPod, ask Apple to support linux first - or use gnupod. IPod is like a vote for proprietary codecs. We have just gotten free codecs for audio and video (The Ogg Family). . . we should support them.
   
5. You waited for: good, free GUI desktops, mozilla, OpenOffice, XMMS, etc. etc. etc. NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN CREATED IF WE HAD ALL BEEN MAC USERS ALL THIS TIME.
   
6. Believe it or not, Slashdot and linux are wedded. If there was no Linux talk here, a major percentage of the audience would be elsewhere. If Cmdr Taco and others are no longer going to "live the life", this forum will lose its credibility. I'm not here for the articles on space travel and I suspect MANY others aren't either.
   

I don't work for Sun, I don't work for RedHat or any other distro. My choice of helping out with linux works for everybody though. Please stay in the game.

Review of iBook, by a 'Switcher'

[CompVisGuy]

Hi

I bought an iBook about two months ago, and below is a review of the machine. I jusst bashed out the review, so my apologies for the poor structure etc.

I am a PhD student, and I wanted a laptop for the following reasons:

1. To write papers and my thesis on, using LaTeX.
2. To watch movies on if I'm travelling to/from meetings and conferences.
3. To surf the web and send/receive email.
4. To edit code. I didn't want to actually run my code on the laptop, becasuse my experiments often take several days to complete on a high-end PC.
5. To 'log in' to my work machine to check if code is running, channge settings, get a file etc. My work machine runs Windows (sigh), so the laptop has to talk to that remotely.
6. To use on the uni's network, and use my 'home' account (in this case a Windows account).
7. To drive projectors, for presentations at conferences.

I'll focus my review on the above, but first I'll talk about the reasons I picked an Apple.

Laptops are expensive. But in my line of work (OK, I'm a student, stop that sniggering at the back...), I need a computer that I can use when I'm running an experiment on my main machine. It helps to be able to write code/papers on a laptop, so I can sit in front of the TV, or at my girlfriend's place, or in a coffee house.

I originally wanted a Dell, so I could install Linux, but there are problems with this:
1. Linux isn't supported by Dell.
2. Drivers for laptops often come out ages after a new laptop has rolled off production (if at all), and their quality varies. So there's no guarantee that Linux will work and be stable on a laptop. I accept that desktops are another matter -- I have RH7.3 on my home Dell desktop running fine.
3. Dell's aren't cheap.
4. I don't really want to have to pay for a MS OS that comes pre-installed if I'll never use it.

A friend told me about a TiBook that his work colleague has and how wonderful it was. I started checking out the apple.com website, and became quite interested in OS X. Then I saw a colleague's iBook. That convinced me. I could do everything i wanted on the iBook. I bought one.

Firstly, the price of the iBook was cheaper than a similarly-specced machine. It's a 700MHz G3 (which I reckon gives similar performance to a 1GHz Celeron) with 256MB of RAM and a 16MB 3D graphics card. The screen is a 12" 1024x768 TFT LCD. I opted for the CD-ROM version, rather than the DVD-CD/RW combo option because of price (I already have a CD/RW on myn desktop, and I'll discuss the DVD/movie watching later). Apple give an educational discount, which means that the machine cost me just under £1200 (UK Pounds) and that included a 3 year warranty (also discounted). At the time, I could have bought an entry-level Dell laptop, without the 3 year warranty, with a similar spec (but perhaps a DVD drive, and definitely a larger screen (well, in terms of inches, the number of pixels would be the same)).

The first iBook arrived dead. It didn't work. The Apple helpline people were friendly and efficient, and ordered me a replacement, which arrived just over a week later. Although this was a bummer, the Apple helpline people sounded amazed that this happened, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say that my experience was unusual.

When the second one arrived, I was amazed. The design is flawless. There isn't a laptop (or desktop) in the PC world that is as well designed as the iBook. The screen, although seemingly small, is wonderful. It allows the laptop to be small, but you still get the full 1024x768 pixels at 24bit colour -- because the pixels are smaller than those on a 14" screen at the same 1024x768, text and graphics look much nicer -- I have to look very closely to see the pixels. The screen has a well-designed hinge that has the effect of taking the screen away from you when you open the computer -- not like PC laptops that just have a simple hinge. The ports are nicely arranged. The speakers are adequate. The machine has no fan to cool the processor (Apple select chips properly, instead of doing an intel and designing chips that they can write a big number next to and rely on people's stupidity to buy the 1GHz PC because it will be "faster" than the 700MHz Apple [I used to be a chip designer, so I know what the right thing to do is]).

The battery life is amazing (I keep using that word). I can work for 4 hours on a single charge, listening to music (though not spinning the CD). Sometimes for 5 hours.

When you close the lid, the machine sleeps. When you open it it wakes up, often before the lid is fully open. Because of this (and the excellent reliability of the OS), I have shut down/rebooted less than 10 times since getting the machine. uptime tells me that the machine has been up for 6 days (I have never had the whole OS crash on me). Show me a PC laptop that has been up for 6 days! When the iBook sleeps, a white light snoozes from inside the machine, gently pulsating -- this shows evidence of good design: PC laptops use horrid LEDs chopped into their sides without any thought. This excellent level of design is carried throughout the iBook.

But the real test is whether I can do all those things I wanted to.

1. To write papers and my thesis on, using LaTeX.

Yes. There is a free LaTeX distribution called TeXShop which is excellent.

2. To watch movies on if I'm travelling to/from meetings and conferences.

Obviously the DVD-equipped models allow movie-watching, but what about my CD only iBook? Well, there is a free movie player called VLC that will play MPEG files, DVDs and VCDs. I can easily rip a DVD to VCD, and then play that.

[Note: I am only ripping DVDs that I own a copy of -- I do not advocate breaking copyright laws. Those in the US may be limited by the DMCA (write to your representatives, people!).]

3. To surf the web and send/receive email.

Yep. The bundled IE5 is a bit crap, but Opera just released their beta of Opera6 for Mac OSX. I am currently using Mozilla for both web (with their mouse gestures plugin!) and mail. It's fine.

4. To edit code. I didn't want to actually run my code on the laptop, becasuse my experiments often take several days to complete on a high-end PC.

A little trickier. I have yet to find a really good text editor under OS X that I like. I use jEdit on the PC (an excellent Java-based text editor), but even though this is available for OS X (and even gets the OS X widgets), it is a little slow. I guess this is a JVM efficiency thing.

I have used Fink to download XEmacs and NEdit for X windows (OS X ships with an X server, and OroborosX is a Window manager that gives your X windows the look and feel of OS X), but I don't really like these. NEdit isn't as powerful as jEdit, and XEmacs is just weird, as a former PC user, but maybe I'll keep trying.

On the code front, OS X ships with Project Builder, an excellent IDE for application development on the Mac, which IMHO is better than MS Visual Studio. Since moving onto the Mac I've gotten back into C/C++ development. It should be easy to write UNIX apps that can then be compiled on Linux and other Unices.

Because OS X is UNIX, there are loads of apps and libraries out there just waiting to go.

5. To 'log in' to my work machine to check if code is running, channge settings, get a file etc. My work machine runs Windows (sigh), so the laptop has to talk to that remotely.

I used to use the Remote Desktop feature of MS's Netmeeting. Now I use VNC and the OS X VNCThing client to access my Windows desktop.

6. To use on the uni's network, and use my 'home' account (in this case a Windows account).

Yep. Easy. I can't print over the uni's network yet, but then I haven't really tried very hard. I understand printing in OS X 10.2 Jaguar is better. I could probably easily print from the command line, but this is a bit 1970's for me.

7. To drive projectors, for presentations at conferences.

Yep. Easy. Plug and go.

There's only the text editor that's the sticking point, but maybe someone will reply to this post with a suggestion.

Other nice things about OS X:
* Aqua. Lovely. It looks wonderful -- the anti-aliasing is much better than in WinXP. Although KDE and GNOME are fine projects, Aqua is much better IMHO.
* Being able to use one spell-checker in every OS X app.
* Built-in speech synthesis -- I can get the iBook to read me stuff on the web as I work on something else.
* Speech recognition -- I can tell the Chess game where I want to move my pieces!
* More than the one button mouse. I sometimes use an optical MS Wheelmouse, and it works fine without needing to install drivers. Left-mouse, right-mouse, and the wheel all work fine (even in many X-windows apps).
* "It just works". It's one of apple's mottos, and they're right. It does just work.

In conclusion, the iBook is the best computer I ever used (and I've used most major computers from the days of 8-bit processors and most major OSs). If Apple keep up their good work, I will never go back to a PC again.

Re:Review of iBook, by a 'Switcher'

[Etcetera]

A little trickier. I have yet to find a really good text editor under OS X that I like.

Try BB Edit (Lite = free, Pro = commercial). It's generally considered to be the BEST text editor for the Mac. I wish something like it was available for the PC.

I used to use the Remote Desktop feature of MS's Netmeeting. Now I use VNC and the OS X VNCThing client to access my Windows desktop.

Not sure if that's the same as MS's Terminal Server Client, but if so, MS just released a freeware version of that for the Mac as well.

Re:Review of iBook, by a 'Switcher'

[CompVisGuy]

Thanks -- I'll try BBEdit.

Re:Review of iBook, by a 'Switcher'

[scrod]

Not sure if that's the same as MS's Terminal Server Client

It is, and it runs quite well under OS X.

Re:Review of iBook, by a 'Switcher'

[quarter]

you might want to try ultraedit. not free, but supposedly well worth the price.

Re:Review of iBook, by a 'Switcher'

[Etcetera]

you might want to try ultraedit. not free, but supposedly well worth the price.

A friend of mine suggested that, but I found it too "clunky" to use (and kind of slow). For now, I've settled on TextPad as a decent enough replacement. I can dream though.... =)

Re:Review of iBook, by a 'Switcher'

[dumbArtMajor]

You know, you seem very intelligent and have very well-thought out reasons for switching. I think Apple could use a couple switch stories from people like you and others on Slashdot.

My reason for mentioning this is I've been hearing a lot of smack-talk geared at Apple's campaign recently: "The system for people too stupid to use computers," and other such things, which Apple is somewhat guilty of helping to perpetuate with the stories they choose.

If Apples could get together a bunch of really intelligent, hardcore-geek switch ads, it might go a long way in proving it's more than a system for people scared of plug-ins.

Re:Review of iBook, by a 'Switcher'

[jo_ham]

Cut and paste that review into the text box here:

http://www.apple.com/switch/tell/us.html

Welcome to the world of the iBook. I came to all the same conclusions about the iBook when I first got it. My 600MHz dvd/cdrw beauty is the best computer I have ever owned, and I started way back with an Amstrad 1512.

I will never go back to PC again.

that stupid one button mouse

[kin_korn_karn]

if they can write a new GUI for Unix, then why they hell can't they support two or 3 mouse buttons if you want them?

Re:that stupid one button mouse

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, my 2 button mouse works just fine in OS X.

I guess I'm not sure why "they" hell you're having problems.

It Just Works.

[tyler9680]

I bought a TiBook 667 (512 Mb RAM, DVD/CD-RW, etc etc) in late August (so I could get Jaguar with it) and I haven't been happier. Before then I was a Windows XP user, where I used Linux for development. OS X really has the feel and power of Linux, but also has a wonderful UI. I think that is what hooked me on the Mac. I had looked at both Apples and PCs before buying. It was the fact that I could get all the nice parts of the Linux environment and the excellent user interface, but not have to worry about Windows crashing every two seconds. I installed the fink package manager and with that I've gotten most of all my favorite Linux applications. I plugged in my digital camera and it just worked. I plugged in my printer and it just worked. I added an external mouse (because trackpads are annoying after a while) and it just worked. I think you can see where I'm going with this.

Having said all that, its not without its drawbacks. Jaguar is not perfect, sometimes applications flip out and close for no reason, albeit this is rare. The software support is close to but not quite up to par with what I can get on Windows (insert flame here). That being said, I can't think of many more gripes I have for it.

Bottom line:
If you want a good powerful development/multimedia portable solution this is it, however I wouldn't just replace your desktop all the way. I still use my desktop quite a bit, its just nice to have the option of the portability.

I'm switching, too

[Charles Dodgeson]

OK, mod this redundent. I've got little to add to what others have said, but if a hand count matters here, I'll add my voice too.

I recently inherited a G4 and have installed Jaguar (10.2, now 10.2.1) on it. So, I'll make just a few points.

• I don't have to worry about rebuilding my kernel everytime I add some device that I didn't anticipate the last time I rebuilt my kernel.
• The UI is a bit tough to get used to (I know I could put in a more familiar WM, but I want to give this a change), but it is very very nice in many respects. But it ain't X, and I've got lots of old habits.
• fink is a must (as others have already pointed out). People are busy porting and packaging the stuff that I know and use to OS X. Fink is how to manage it.
• Administration can be a problem if you don't know what controls what. For example, some files in /etc really should only be edited by using the System Preferences GUI, while others can be modified by vi. Learning which is which takes some poking around. But this is true of any distro which provides high level tools for adminstration.
• Basically everything works. I don't have to fiddle with things to make the system usable.

My Linux system still remains my primary system for many things, put that is shifting function by function. (The single biggest limit is that I don't have proper air conditioning in the room where most of my boxes sit and I don't like leaving the G4 running all the time, until the weather cools down here.)

If only we had Kazza

[NextAdvantage]

The only reason I turn on my PC any more these days is for Kazza, My ti comes with me everywhere and I love it! It just runs...

My Switching experience

[danielacroft]

Was a windows user (had tried linux (RH|Mandrake) on a number of occasions but it didn't stick) for about 8 years or so I guess.
Switched in May 2002 to a 667 DVI G4 PowerBook w 512MB RAM and 60GB HDD. I added an airport afterwards. Bought Jagwire.

Good Stuff:
*nix goodness - I'm studying comp sci externally (work full time) and I need a *nix machine for that, I also need a box that I can do the usual PC stuff with (word docs, spreadsheets, etc), the PB is that. :)
No, really, it just works. The other thing it does is just not work! It basically ignores stuff that it doesn't understand. For example I installed a 3COM nic PC Card in the card slot. It tells you that it's there but there are no drivers for it so you can't do anything with it. I would love to get a *nix driver for an extra NIC if there aren't osx drivers but I'm using multi-homing for now. Point is that it doesn't crash or complain.
MS software - Like it or loath it, MS software is a requirement for some people, I am one of them (yes that's right I don't want to worry about compatibility with open office or apple works).
Stress level - gone way down when using my PB as opposed to my PC at home or work. (I've sold my PC)

Bad Stuff:
One button - personal preference of course but the one button just annoys the hell out of me.
No Drivers - now that is annoying, I want to add an IR port (BT just works thank goodness) but I can't find anywhere that has drivers for any IR on OSX.
Waiting - waiting for new versions of stuff that has been out for a while is just annoying.
UI - some of the GUI is a bit evil (those damn window buttons are too small for my liking). Button combinations for different stuff (shift + opt + cmd + ...) is often hidden and sometimes not standard (Preferences in apps: cmd + y or cmd + ; or nothing)
Mhz - 667 G4 != 2.0Ghz P4m, no marketing (lies perhaps) please, it's just plain wrong. It might be like a 1Ghz PIII if I'm lucky, perhaps a little more but that's it.

Summary:
Overall the performance is excellent. I only have the 667 but it really does run fast enough at the moment. Of course of if you put me infront of a quad 3Ghz+ Hammer I'm sure I'd notice, but I don't care. Battery life rocks, Try playing a whole DVD and then still having 30% battery life (I had 52% left once but I'm ignoring the outlyers). The TiBook is an excellent machine, if you can spare the $$$(^3) of course.

Re:My Switching experience

[warpedrive]

Uh.. you do know it supports multi button mice right? Just plug one in, you get context menus, etc. on right click..

And there is a defined list of standard key substitutions for menu items as well, stuff that is application dependent is generally variant.

Just FYI.

Re:My Switching experience

[Whatchamacallit]

PowerBook G4 550Mhz - OS X 10.1.5/10.2.1 - IR Port works with my Palm Vx and syncs via Palm Desktop without a problem. Works quite nicely.

I haven't tried IR printing but that's not necessary with HP JetDirect printers at home and the office.

I don't use IR for anything else. Wonder if you can connect to PowerBook's with IR?

Linux AND MacOSX

[Anonymous Coward]

I will never give up Linux

I will not give up OpenBSD neither

and I will use Darwin/MacOSX too

Why do we have to choose? Get Apple Laptop with OSX, old desktop PC with Linux, and Sparc for OpenBSD... That is all *nix!!!

PLUS I RATHER PAY MORE FOR APPLE LAPTOP WITH OSX THAT INTEL ONE WITH WIN XP!!!

PC World

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't ever expect a Mac at PC World to give you a reasonable idea of what Macs are like - they have almost always been crippled by either the staff or kiddies.

I don't know what screen redraw issues you were seeing, but that's something that's never happened to me. You should see the beauty of a translucent terminal window over a DVD window....

Re:PC World

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair they were imacs a year or so ago, I remember thinking they were slow on the redraw. I will take your advice and try not to be prejudiced.

Personal Experience

[zanerock]

I have an older powerbook (Lombard, I think), with OS 9, and I still love it. I would much prefer a newer model with OSX and new hardware too, of course, but even given the age (2... 3 years?) it's still a superb laptop. As far as the hardware goes, it still beats out much of what I see out there (for all but processor speed). The price for an Apple desktop is still silly high, but the laptops are, in my opinion, not only worth it, but the best price/quality ratio out there (with think pads a respectable, but very clear second).

Yes but those are pretty minor nuiscnces

[goombah99]

I'm a 15 year mac and unix user. The parent post was a very good summary of the real nuiscances I have found in OSX. But...and I dont know how to emphasize this enough... Those are ALL of the REAL nuiscances. ALL of them!
On linux, which I dearly love, the number of ways to fuck up is almost endless. The sticky points on apple are partly a matter of getting used to them, not true problems.
For example, I can already tell that someday when I figure out how to use netInfo without making mistakes I will love it a lot more than the /etc/hosts /etc/fstab mess that we call linux. So yeah right now I try to do someething the linux way and it does not work the way I was expecting. boo hoo. Another missing feature is Raid 5. But that's in the works, and in fact you can get third party apps.
As for things like cp and mv not moving the magic bits. well that's nasty surprise the first time you realize it. But then you learn its again because you did not do things the right way. for example, use ditto or rsyncX instead of cp to get the job done. (aside: not actually cp works fine for ANY file you would use under linux, it's just that the mac HFS+ stores more info than linux does and cp is not aware of this info. so if your just moving around linux type files it makes no difference. Most modern mac apps now avoid making use of the extra hfs+ features for this reason). As for HFS+ and UFS, at first I too wished for something like ext3 but then I noticed that I did not need it. ext3 is mainly useful when your computer does not gracefully survive crashes. I have noticed my mac is much more robust and thus has less need. but like RAID 5 its in the works and will be out.

Re:Yes but those are pretty minor nuiscnces

[g4dget]

For example, I can already tell that someday when I figure out how to use netInfo without making mistakes I will love it a lot more than the /etc/hosts /etc/fstab mess that we call linux.

You seem determined to dislike Linux. If you don't like the textual configuration files, you never have to touch them: just use GUI tools. That part is really no different from OS X, since it, too, has the text files and a GUI. The difference is that in OS X, things are even more complicated because there is also the Netinfo database.

On linux, which I dearly love, the number of ways to fuck up is almost endless. The sticky points on apple are partly a matter of getting used to them, not true problems.

Yup: problems are problems until you learn how to deal with them. Same for every system, even Linux and Windows.

The parent post was a very good summary of the real nuiscances I have found in OSX. But...and I dont know how to emphasize this enough... Those are ALL of the REAL nuiscances. ALL of them!

Well, no. Like any big system, there are plenty more, buried in APIs, system management, and other places.

ext3 is mainly useful when your computer does not gracefully survive crashes. I have noticed my mac is much more robust and thus has less need. but like RAID 5 its in the works and will be out.

That is just BS. "Gracefully surviving crashes" is a function of the file system and pretty much nothing else. "ext3" is the means by which a Linux system survives crashes gracefully and recovers very quickly afterwards, and it does (it mostly comes into play when a Linux laptop runs out of power). OS X manages to fix its file system most of the time, but it seems to take a long time to boot after a crash. And while OS X is almost as stable as Linux, it certainly isn't better in that regard.

And, come on, RAID 5 isn't an answer for desktop or laptops. Those come with one disk, and they should boot fast and reliably.

Altogether, you just keep making excluses. "Well, OS X does this, but it really doesn't matter...", "Well, OS X can't do this, but you are really a fool for wanting it to...", etc. Just face the facts: no operating is perfect. Linux requires a lot of fiddling in one area, and OS X requires a lot of fiddling in other areas.

Many Slashdotters NOT Linuxheads. OSX just better?

[Lovejoy]

Believe it or not, Slashdot and linux are wedded. If there was no Linux talk here, a major percentage of the audience would be elsewhere. If Cmdr Taco and others are no longer going to "live the life", this forum will lose its credibility.

No doubt you're right. But I'm one who doesn't care about Linux. And there are also lots like me who are interested in science, technology, and computing who aren't ubergeeks and aren't interested in Linux. Also, I doubt Slashdot has much to lose in the credibility department.

An argument can be made that OSX is the perfect combination of Open Source and commercial interests. OS X finally does "Just Work" with a nifty geek-friendly back-end while many of its technologies are open.

So what you're reading in this thread IS truly terrible for Linux development. OSX has beaten Linux at its own game. If we have true competition rather than Linux or open source zealotry, OS X will win, IMO.

Finally - just because open source development matured (birthed?) with Linux doesn't mean that it will die if Linux dies. In other words - it doesn't follow that future open source development will be dependent on Linux.

I feel your pain. I understand your principles, and I mostly agree with them, but I think Linux will lose.

P.S. - Where can I read about the history of the open source movement?

I flirted, I adored, I switched

[al3x]

I'm happily typing this on a new white iBook 700MHz, rather decked out with a 40GB harddrive and 384MB of RAM. It may not have the raw horsepower of my roommate's Dell Inspiron 8200, but it also weighs a third of that behemoth, has more than twice the battery life, and most day-to-day operations feel faster, and the whole experience is more pleasurable. What do I mean by "pleasurable?" Example: as a longtime Linux user, I prayed for decent antialiasing system-wide (well, except for the terminal). OS X's PostScript-driven graphics layer makes everything look gorgeous, sharp and readable. It's like looking at a printed page, maybe better. And I can keep my terminal and anything under x-font size unantialiased if I so desire. That's pleasurable. It makes the machine I interact with hours a day enjoyable to use. Things just work, by and large. If I want to tinker, I can, but after years of spending hours and hours to get, well, ANYTHING working (somewhat self-inflicted: I used Gentoo, which I still love on the server side along with OpenBSD), it's amazing to just plug in devices and have them work the way they should. I forget who said it, but "Linux is only free if your time is worthless." With college, I don't have the time to tinker endlessly to get a printer working when I've got a paper due. There are tons of open source apps that have either been ported or are being natively developed for OS X. This is a slow transition for the Mac community, however, and you'll still find lots of shareware and commercial programs out there, particularly in the utilities/customization arena. But as someone who's learned to accept that commercial development works for some products and open source for others, I think the OS X community has the right idea in accepting and supporting both. I could go on for hours about how nice it is to have an OS that's actually integrated with its hardware, all the little aesthetic details and polish that Apple throws in, but most readers have heard it all before. I can safely say that as someone who's lived and breathed Linux (with forays into *BSD) for the last six years, I feel utterly satisfied with my switch, and I can reccomend it to anyone looking for a great desktop (or laptop) platform.

Re:I flirted, I adored, I switched

[knife_in_winter]

The quote you are thinking of is here: http://www.jwz.org/doc/linux.html:


But as we all know, Linux is only free if your time has no value, and I find that my time is better spent doing things other than the endless moving-target-upgrade dance.


For what it is worth, that is *exactly* why I switched from Linux to OS X for my primary desktop.

Besides, Apple hardware really is drop dead sexy. :)

MacOS X Security

[herwin]

The security boffins at Qinetiq in the UK like Mac OS X a _lot_--it's locked down out of the box! Unlike certain unnamed vendors, Apple takes security seriously and is extremely responsive in releasing security updates.

Flirting with Mac OS X?

[Steve Cowan]

Aww I was really hoping this article would be about how I can use my iBook to pick up girls in bars... I've tried this a few times and had no success...

"Hey baby, Steve Jobs says once you see this interface you'll want to lick it!"

"Your ~ or mine?"

"Let's make an iMovie!"

Re:Flirting with Mac OS X?

[PatJensen]

Haha. That's good stuff! If I had mod, you'd get my +1.

-Pat

Best OS I've seen in a decade

[krray]

I'm in my mid 30's, have/had MSCE (DOA now :), RHCE, and CNE certificates, multiple degrees in computer science, and just been buried in the computer business for 15+ years. Today I'm the MIS/IT MGR where I work (and partly own :). Anyway...

I remember drooling over the NeXT. Way outside my price range though, but enjoyed working on them with my job at the time at North-Western in IL.

Here at work we grew up on the network originally with DOS, then WFW3.11, 98se, and finally 2K. I skipped 95/98 due to HORRIBLE networking issues. At one point I took a Win98se box home to FORCE myself to completely learn the OS. What a joke! At least my Linux box was moved to the basement and not just re-formatted. The Windows box literally lasted almost 6 months and went flying out the Window one day with too much of the garbage.

I sat there dumb founded. What do I do NOW? I love Linux, but the pissing match between KDE/Gnome, their complex setup/usage and so forth have kept them off my corporate desktops. Did I want to go back to Linux as my main GUI? I did then.

This was six months before OS X beta when I started reading about it. I bought a Cube for myself three months later and used OS 9 for three months. OS 9 was OK, and boy did I have it decked out and functional very quickly.

OS X initially was just OK. Coming from a Unix background it was obviously the right choice. As of 10.2 it's game over (for us :). I'm using source code I wrote ten years ago and compiling it on OS X no problem. Take _any_ package out there (ssh, ftp, apache, whatever) and compile/use it -- or just look around ... it's probably already installed. For example the "df/du" commands that ship with OS X stink, go grab the fileutils package, compile, and install.

It just works. And works. And works.

I personally now have a PowerMac (gave the Cube to my brother for home use), parents on the iMac, and a Powerbook for roaming (mostly the wife). Corporately I use a Mac daily (bouncing between all the OS' w/ VirtualPC -- 98se, 2K, XP, Linux, etc) as well as many Powerbooks in the field.

Interanally we're switching to Mac 100% as the existing equipment is depreciated (4 years) which is a concept Microsoft just does not "get". I thought it was simple accounting... I wish I had an extra 100K laying around so I could by a Mac for everybody _tdoay_.

I will say that my Mac users _never_ call me for help. I endlessly hear from Windows users though... Applications crashing (reboot needed), BSOD _still_ in 2K (though much more rare), configurations mysteriously getting munched, etc.

I have seen the Mac crash. Wow, the last time it happened (the 2nd time, 1st I saw was on BETA) the wife thought world war three had started by my reaction, "WHAT!? NO WAY! THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING!. I DON'T BELIEVE IT. IS THIS THE END?" -- as she came running upstairs to find out WHAT.

Re:Best OS I've seen in a decade

[Anonymous Coward]

> Interanally we're switching I hope that was a misspelling bro. I shudder to think what your family life is like otherwise. ;P~~

BUY A TWO BUTTON MOUSE

[neo]

You'd think you didn't have $12 left after buying that damn computer...

I'm using a two button mouse on my Mac right now and it works just fine, out of the box. Hell, it's set up to a KVM switch.

I didn't have to install any software, it just worked.

Re:BUY A TWO BUTTON MOUSE

[Barlo_Mung_42]

That's fine for a desktop system.
It sux to have to hook up an external device to your laptop to get two buttons though.

I don't understand why the blazes the OS would be made to support the extra buttons but the hardware folks would refuse to integrate it natively.

Re:BUY A TWO BUTTON MOUSE

[tshak]

I don't have room for an external mouse on a bus or plane. I need a fully functional pointing device BUILT IN to a laptop. I have no problem buying a Mac desktop then buying a nice 3 button w/scroll wheel mouse afterwords. But with a laptop, it must be built in. It's a bigger issue then Mac fanatics would like it to be. Apple needs to drop their ego and upgrade their one click pointing devices at least on the Ti's. Maybe it makes sense to keep things simpler on the iBook, but simpler!=efficient and the Ti's being a workstation need to be efficient.

Re:BUY A TWO BUTTON MOUSE

[tarzan353]

And how often are you on a plane? Maybe 1 percent of the time you ever use the laptop? Get a real complaint.

Re:BUY A TWO BUTTON MOUSE

[Anonymous Coward]

Fucking prickass troll

Re:BUY A TWO BUTTON MOUSE

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand why the blazes the OS would be made to support the extra buttons but the hardware folks would refuse to integrate it natively.

That's because you aren't very intelligent.

Re:BUY A TWO BUTTON MOUSE

[Barlo_Mung_42]

Ok. So enlighten me then.
I do own a mac BTW. Its an older iMac with the round mouse. This mouse looks spiffy but it drives me bonkers when I place my hand on it without looking and can't tell that it has rotated until I go to move. I know there is a silly adapter but the adapter should come standard IMO.

Re:BUY A TWO BUTTON MOUSE

[sorbits]

Ok. So enlighten me then.

I wasn't the AC posting the previous, but AFAIK Apple don't want to present their users with two buttons, because that introduce an element of ambiguity -- it's also written in their style guide that all functionality of an application should be reachable with one button.

Why I don't want to switch

[mojowantshappy]

For starters, I do like Mac OS X, we have a lab here at Virginia Tech that has about 500 of the new iMacs, and I have been forced to use them quite a bit. I found Mac OS X to be exactly what Linux needs, it is a Unix based system with a kick ass GUI. However, what is preventing me from going to Mac is the price of Apple computers and the fact that their platform is fairly closed off. If Apple ported to x86, I would be more than happy to try it out, but at the moment I don't have anywhere close to them money and I feel that the PPC architecture sucks.

Only games

[SuperKendall]

If you like Office, then you might want to take a look at Office X - I like at least a few of the programs much better than the Windows counterparts I use at work, and I know there are a lot of other people that feel the same. Personally I pray for the day we all use something other than word to send documents ot each other, but I know it's a little ways off yet.

At this point the Windows box is essentially a console (though a damn fine console). I came to the conclusion about a year ago I didn't want a fussy expensive console, and bought a PS2 and a Powerbook. The PS2 has enough great games I don't get bored, and just enough of the great PC games get ported to the mac to satisfy me (like UT or WCIII).

apple laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

i just bought my first apple machine since my apple 2. i bought an ibook. the determining factors for going apple for me was the low power consumption (i get around 5-6 hours of battery life while using airport), the beautiful looking yet completely reliable os, and its a lot smaller and looks far better than any pc laptop on the market. i mean lets face it ibooks and tibooks are dead damn sexy. i had some concerns about it at first.

i hated the idea of a 1 button mouse but my one of my long mac-loving friends explained it to me this way: macs have evolved without the second button. there is no need for it in macos and its true just borrow someones mac for a week and try it out.

the second concern i had was development. before the ibook i did all of my coding on my linux box (perl and java), and i wasnt sure if i would be able to easily switch between the 2 machines to do and test my stuff but again i was wrong.

third concern was how well does it play with my windows machine. well it has samba preinstalled and needless to say it plays fairly nice and with office for X i can take my stuff on the road with me and the integration with my windows machine is fine because its all made my the same ppl.

so in the 4 weeks that i've had my ibook i can say that i am 100% satisfied and also that OS X is oh so sweet.

i would just say if you are unsure about buying the mac find someone that has one and borrow it for a day or something and try it out. I think you will be pleasantly suprised.

Re: Dell Laptops are Better

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. The Mac loptop has a ton of stuff for it's screen size, battery life, and features (like built-in DVD/CD-RW!).

It isn't as light as the 2 lb toshiba or the 3 lb Dell, but it is if you consider all the other stuff you have to lug around with those other machines, such as the external $400 DVD drive!

Welcome to our Aqua world...

[mtec]

citizens of Splashdot.

Instant on

[SuperKendall]

The instant-on feature of the Powerbook makes it worth something like eight times the money, considering you can get an easy days use out of one battery by only opening the laptop when taking notes. Great for conferences...

I've seen too many people wandering around the office with laptops open because they don't want to wait through the wakeup cycle... if it even wakes!! And of course they are trailing cords because they have to have the thing plugged in most of the time to last a day.

Then you have the great network switching ability, moving between various wireless and wired networks can be done without thought.

Oh, and obligatory reference about the hardware being better quality as others have noted.

Try it on an ibook!

[macsox]

I have been running X on my ibook since I got it about 18 months ago. even 10.2 runs fine on it.

here are some of the things i've never had a problem with:

-DVD/CD-Rom

-Power management

-CPU heat

enjoy!

of

[Anonymous Coward]

If I had it to do all over, I'd of just bought a cheaper PC notebook and installed Linux on it. Mac OS X wasn't worth dealing with Apple.

Do you of any idea how to check your grammar before hitting submit?

Freedom

[SuperKendall]

You can get the source for the basic OS, just not Auqa or Quartz. If you want to alter the Mach or BSD layer, go ahead.

What do I use every day? Mostly Emacs and Mozilla and Java tools. OS X does give me something using those, in that I don't spend as much time configuring or fiddling with the system and therefore get to do more things with Mozilla, Emacs, etc.

I am a great believer in the GPL, and frankly I think OS X is the best possible combination of the Open and Closed worlds right now. When you want things to work they do, and if you want to use Open alternatives they are there and you can work on them. You could run only X programs and ignore Quartz if you liked.

I don't care about pretty but I do care about efficiency, and OS X is the most efficient system I've found. That's why I use OS X.

Re:Freedom

[Elwood P Dowd]

Eh. Kindof. Yes, you can use almost all open source software while in MacOS X. However.

Getting the source is not even close to good enough. Right now, you cannot install Darwin underneath MacOS X. 'Till that's possible, you cannot make a change to the source, recompile, and see the effects. For a serious programmer (which I'm not) I'd imagine that could be pretty frustrating.

Apple has managed a perfect balance, where they get all the benefits of open source, and none of the potential financial pitfalls. It'll be very hard for other folks to make/sell something like MacOS.

It might be the single best example of the difference between free/open source software. Yes, open source has made Apple's OS a great platform. Changing it for your own purposes is difficult.

Re:Freedom

[Brother Grifter]

Changing around certain little bits of programs is really what makes open source great, however, you can hack up programs indirectly built for MacOS X. With all Cocoa GUI programs, each Interface Document is saved as a NIB. You can actually edit this document with Interface Builder.

i.e. I got rid of that buffer seperator in Jaguar's terminal.

Also, because the development model used in creating Cocoa apps (MVC, model-view-controller), you also know what objects are getting messages from an Interface. So I'm assuming it would be farily simple to direct a message to a module you wrote that would do something extra the original model didn't (the parameters, and data types are specified as well in Interface Builder, this always helps too). Creating a connection between a object and Interface component is a simple click-and-drag operation, then you just use Project Builder to write the code.

It might be guess work, but I think its possible. As for Interface changes, those are trivial. I'm sorta suprised no one has really talked about this yet on /.

my reviews

[asv108]

I received the current top of the line powerbook to do some testing for work. I wrote a little review about it. Its pretty darn fast but for the price of my conifguration, I could buy a 3.5 pound Fujitsu P-2000 and build a top of the line Athlon system with 21in CRT.

So if you really want to go for OSX on a laptop you will probably want to go with an ibook unless you don't find spending the extra money painful. Personally, I will be sticking with my p-2000. It has a full size keyboard, DVD, CD-Burner, Built in Wireless, Firewire and 2 USB all integrated in to a 3.5 pound package.

I'll tell you what they want...

[FatSean]

They want to be "different". They want to be "Different" so they can be "cool", but you can only be "cool" if the thing that makes your "different" is better than other people's thing which makes them "different".

It's a fucking computer, why battle over it?

I Just switched from Linux

[brainchill]

I have been using linux exclusively for about the last 3 years I have had to keep (like a thorn in my side) a windows machine in my home to run Photoshop. Because, and we're being honest here, there is nothing in the linux world that will do everything that photoshop will do as well as photoshop does it. This month I made the Apple switch. I bought a TiPbook. I never even wanted to look back. I can run vi, pine, apache and Photoshop all on the same machine withought windows. And the interface just makes you smile. It's like they locked a bunch of graphics designers in a room with a pile of heroin and told them to go wild.

Re: Dell Laptops are Better

[Anonymous Coward]

First point, until ~2Ghz the P3 is faster at everything than similarly clocked P4, peroid. (just pointing that out since you seem to be under the false impression the P4 was superior in any way except scalability).

second, Welcome to the world of getting work done instead of fighting your machine

Re:If I was given a review unit...

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at Apple's web site. Check for an Apple store near you. If there is one, you can check out Apple's laptops for yourself. There is likely to be someone there who can answer your questions. ANY other retail outlet (unless it's Mac only, or some college university campuses) are unlikely to be of any help. There are VERY few skilled/talented 'nix people working retail...

Re:Not now, guys!? Please consider NOT switching.

[victim]

And from the other viewport...

1. You are locked into the hardware. - whatever I buy for hardware I will be locked in to for 3 years. (My buying cycle time.) I don't need anything other than what I have now to be happy for three years.
   
2. Microsoft controls Mac adoption. - microsoft controls my ability to pay my american express bill online. Thats it. AppleWorks does everything I need in an office suite. Freehand takes care of my compositing. I will kiss whoever integrates top notch vector layers with gimp.
   
3. Open Office.org's health is good for everyone. Sounds good to me, but switching to the mac doesn't mean you shell out $300 for Office. That's just silly.
   
4. The IPod doesn't support Ogg True, nor does any other mp3 player. Oops, that was a silly contradiction, you know what I meant. The rumor I hear and believe is that iTunes 4 goes to a plugin architecture for sound formats and ogg support is in. I hopefully assume that means ogg in the ipod at the same time. Sometime next year. I can wait to re-rip my aluminized polycarbonate music ownership tokens until then.
   
5. You waited for: good, free GUI desktops... And I'm still waiting. Its getting better, but I no longer have the time to work on making the tools, I need something that works. (My linux machine that runs the 8ball robot ate 10 hours of my time last night and still isn't right. USB driver problems. Using the USB camera because kernel updates broke the bttv card support. Maybe I'll go back to the bttv and see how that goes. It doesn't take but a couple of those to pay the software bill to get a machine that just works.)
   
6. Believe it or not, Slashdot and linux are wedded communities change and evolve. People's interests change.
   

I also don't work for Sun, I don't work for RedHat either, but do work for Debian. My choice of helping out with linux works for everybody though.

Not True

[asv108]

None of the Windows laptops cut it with battery life or displays so I looked at the iBook.

First of all there is no such thing as a "windows laptop", because X86 can run a variety of operating systems. My PC laptop is a Fujitsu P-2000 and I currently get 7 hours of battery life running Linux on the extended battery. If I take out my media drive and but in the secondary battery I can get 14 hours of battery life.

The brand new powerbook G4 I got from work is lucky if it sees 4 hours.

Re:Not True

[asparagus]

...clicking on your link...

There's a pref in iTunes that copies all mp3's you try to play to your local hard drive. Just turn it off and add the mp3's to your library. iTunes will play them fine off the server.

-asparagus

Re:Not True

[asv108]

Thanks, I found that pref finally, when I was writing the article I was thinking to myself, they had to think of this, thanks for the tip

Re:Not True

[BitGeek]

Remember that x86 processors cut their clock rate to get good battery performance. The x86 design requires a lot of power. So while the G4 is running at full speed, the x86 isn't and that's why you're getting better battery performance-- at the expense of cpu performance.

Re:Not True

[asv108]

Not on my laptop, its a Trasnmeta TM5800 with longrun disabled so there is not reduction of clockrate.

TiBook handout registration thread

[victim]

Sorry if this is redundant, but I couldn't find the thread where the rest of us register to get cheap TiBooks from Apple.

Maybe Apple could have a special refurb sale for switching slashdotters? (Don't get your hopes up, refurbed TiBooks go for about $200 off retail. Damn those computers that keep their value.)

So sign up in a reply to this so Apple knows how many machines to set aside for the Switch-a-Nerd program.

Huh?

[I Am The Owl]

Apple is closed, proprietary hardware and software. Aren't we supposed to inherently distrust closed software because we can't audit the code for bugs and security problems?

We shouldn't trust Apple farther than we can throw them, but we're promoting the use of their closed OS (and an overpriced one, at that.). What gives?

Re:Huh?

[Shuh]

Apple is closed, proprietary hardware and software. Aren't we supposed to inherently distrust closed software because we can't audit the code for bugs and security problems?

We shouldn't trust Apple farther than we can throw them, but we're promoting the use of their closed OS (and an overpriced one, at that.). What gives?

Could it have something to do with the fact that the one company you really can't trust co-opting your "open" architecture and selling your digital ass down the river with DRM?

Not on an iBook? so how do I play Quake III then?

[jo_ham]

I have a 600 MHz iBook, running OSX 10.1.5 with the 8Mb graphics card and 384Mb of Ram.

Not only does it zip along nicely and has replaced my Windows machine about 90% (there are still a few old games I play on the windows machine), but I can play Quake III Arena in lan matches against my friends.

ok, so I have to use 800X600 mode and knock the textures down to 16 bit, but I still get perky, non-jumpy framerates.

I fail to see why you're so down on this hardware/OS combo unless you're just spouting off against it because it's the vogue thing to do.

Get on your thought train - it's still boarding at the station.

Re:artg and Religious Bigotry

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know, pissing off Christians doesn't seem pointless to me. They seem to enjoy pissing me off, who am I to not return the courtesy.

*gasp* Taco? for real?

[g0at]

Just to state the obvious, in case the heads were buried in dictionaries and grammar texts while writing up the story, and happened to miss it...: the iBooks still ship with only one mouse button. Oh the horror! :P

(To the point...: I couldn't imagine using anything other than OS X on my laptop... have been since I bought it... it plain rocks.)

oh, and the heat thing?

[jo_ham]

ok, so it gets warm, but it's not exactly a mini desktop supernova (that award goes to the Tibook and the "whole case as heatsink" idea - still a cool machine though).

Most of the heat I get from my iBook comes from the left wrist support - underneath which is the hard drive. Heavy disc access heats it up a lot. The underside gets warm, but I recently found that it gets warm when it's off and sitting in my lap - how hot are you?

The cooling fan is almost silent and most of the waste heat is removed without fuss.

Join us Taco!

[Aqua OS X]

Come on Taco, do it...join us :)

I did

[krokodil]

After 10 years of using Unix as my primary and only OS on BSD386, Xenix 286, SCO Unix, HPUX (with VUE), Solaris (with OpenWindows and later CDE), Linux (KDE and then GNOME) I switched to MacOS X. With XDarwin and OroborOSX switch is painless and really not big deal.

Screen savers

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that anyone would spend $22 on a screen saver simply boggles the mind...

I use OSX quite a bit

[Satanboy]

you will find quite a few things are different with OSX versus run of the mill linux or BSD.

I have found PERL to be quite a bit different, which means hours of looking up special commands sometimes to get things to work correctly.

I love OSX though for a few reasons, its easy to configure, it runs fairly stable. . . etc.

I say go for it, you will love having an apple laptop. I am in the process of getting an old IBM laptop working as a wireless workstation with BSD, there will be a page about it someday. . .

prices not so unreasonable, considering...

[Anonymous Coward]

My Wallstreet (1998 powerbook) was showing its age earlier this year and I decided it was time to get a new computer. For my use, a laptop is essential, so I did some window-drooling on the TiBooks. While I was at it, a PC friend said I should consider a PC. Not wanting to be a platform-biggot, I said "ok, what'cha got in mind?" He suggested a Compaq and gave me a URL. I went to their site and spent time checking boxes and looking around.

Now bear in mind I don't like buying hardware that's outdated by the time I sign for it at the door, so I get high-end. I did my best to match a high-end TiBook. (minus the larger hard drive) Final tally: TiBook: $3600. Compaq: $3200. He couldn't believe the total, until I rattled off the huge list of things the Compaq he pointed to me was missing that I had to add on. Sure, it started at like $1400 but it was an empty shell at that price. All of these things come standard on the TiBook. That's what people miss - There's only a few models of Apple computers, and even the low-end ones come with things that you have to shell out lots of money for on the other platforms.

What would I lose for that $400 in savings? Gigabit ethernet. 802.11b wireless. Better speakers. Digital video out. Half the battery life. Drop either the Windowed OS or Unix. Slot loading DVD/CD-R. Oh, and that beautiful TiBook look. Ouch! Now the jury was still out on the processor speed though... the Compaq of course has a higher mhz rating but the G4 can't be compared on CPU speed. We put that to the test a few months after I got the TiBook, using Distributed.Net's client as a "balls to the wall" benchtest of raw computational power. Based on keyrates on my laptop vs his desktop of similar speed as the Compaq, we determined a 4.6ghz machine was required to overtake my TiBook.

I couldn't resist the griiiiiiiiin.

Last month I installed X on a server. OK now lets work on getting Apache set up and ... what? OK, the box is checked, now what? What do you mean "that's it"? OS X is like the power of Unix combined with the simplicity of Macintosh, and it's a beautiful thing.

I will freely admit that Macintosh is not for everyone, but they certainly have their place, and it's a bigger place than most people realize.

It's the small things that I like.

[DJ FirBee]

I have run linux on some nice thinkpads. Now I have OS X on a 400 mhz tibook. The cool things about the switch is onboard firewire with the very cool firewire target mode. This boot feature allows you to access your computer as a firewire drive through another computer. Its the best way that I have ever backed up a computer. This laptop has a VGA out that runs a monitor as a second monitor. So you can run your browser on one screen and you development stuff on your laptop screen. NICE. The ethernet port on this computer autosenses between crossover cables and normal ethernet cables so you never need an ethernet cable. Classic mode emulation in OSX runs great for running OS9 stuff. I was a Cisco Engineer, now I do silly Audio/video stuff. Logic Audio or ProTools on a mac is just heavy. Being able to run adobe Premiere, ProTools, Logic and a bash shell, gcc, perl on the same laptop is cool. Built in Airport is cool. A very quiet computer is very, very cool. Long battery running time is very very cool. Scoring audio to a movie wearing headphones on a plane next to some dotcom dork running XP on his thinkpad is very very cool. I lurve my Mac. It's the coolest Unix box I have ever owned.

Re:Not now, guys!? Please consider NOT switching.

[JMax]

And from the other viewport...

Hello moderators! This post and its parent are the most intelligent things I've read on /. in months... these ought to be 5s.

I committed to the switch yesterday.

[crankyspice]

Read all about it on my blog. A quick look at my resume will tell you I'm a Linux fan from way back, but I like what Apple has done... A UNIX for all intents and purposes, with lots of mainstream applications (Office should I choose to sell my soul even further, Photoshop and Premiere, the Macromedia Flash authoring tool, Warcraft III). All without using WineX (none of my PCs are fast enough to run WineX, though they're fast enough for everything else I do), or jumping through hoops. I used to love fiddling with Linux distros; now I'm working full time, consulting as a PHP/Perl programmer, and in law school, so I just don't have time. Hence, MacOS X...

And who's gonna pay for that ???

[Abreu]

We need a company that is as creative as Apple to make a desktop for Linux. Or Apple should try making a desktop for Linux in addition to there present products.

And who's gonna pay for that developement? Do you think people are going to pay 150-200usd for a linux desktop?

Much nicer than an IBM ThinkBrick

[pvera]

At my previous job I used three different IBM ThinkPads. These are great, even if they are expensive as hell and very very heavy. But they worked fine.

At my new job (I am employee #9 on a 11-person company) everybody has macs except me. Since I am the web developer and the code is in asp I inherited two Windows 2000 boxes. I had been dying to switch to mac since January, and this was the last excuse I needed to make the jump.

I got a killer deal for an iBook 600 with 256MB RAM (already upped to 384), airport and MS Office v:X retail. The whole bundle cost me less than a retail iBook 700 with 128MB of ram and no airport.

I am very happy with OS 10.2 and I have been able to do all my ASP work with just BBEdit Pro and the MS Remote Desktop client. I can manage my freeBSD and Linux servers thru the terminal without any theatrics. My friends that used to make fun of me for even considering the mac are now changing their minds when they see how easy it has been for me to make the switch. Plus the iBook is so light I don't feel it on my backpack.

I am of course counting down the days for when I can afford to get a Titanium Powerbook :-)

Thinking about switching... just need some advice.

[voodoo_bluesman]

Hey everyone. Ok, don't laugh, but I'm a sysadmin that supports mainly Windows 2K servers. I'm a *nix lover though, and I spent last night telling myself not to get a Mac because I primarily take care of Windows boxes.

Well, I'm thinking about possibly ordering an IBook (unless I can be convinced to get a PowerBook) coupled with Connectix Virtual PC to allow me to access any necessary MS apps. Is there an MS Terminal Services Client available straight for OS X?

I'd love to switch... just need to cover my bases.

Can anyone offer any advice?

Oh yeah... does anyone have any experience with any cheap multi-tracking Mac software? I do some amateaur musical recording on my XP box here, and would need to make sure I can do that on my Mac.

Thanks!

Re:Many Slashdotters NOT Linuxheads. OSX just bett

[puppetluva]

An argument can be made that OSX is the perfect combination of Open Source and commercial interests. OS X finally does "Just Work" with a nifty geek-friendly back-end while many of its technologies are open.


I'm not interested in open-source. I'm interested in free. That's my problem with Apple. If apple shows you the source-code, but doesn't let you improve or change it, then it isn't free. Linux got where it is because it is free.


So what you're reading in this thread IS truly terrible for Linux development. OSX has beaten Linux at its own game. If we have true competition rather than Linux or open source zealotry, OS X will win, IMO.


I don't understand this comment. My understanding was that Linux' game was to provide a great free(dom) operating system. OSX hasn't done that and won't ever do that. I don't begrudge OSX users. . . and I don't think that we should just be "zealots" in the Linux camp -- but OSX simply won't "win" a game it never played.

Just being Unix is not enough to "win". . . there was plenty of Unix before OSX. Besides, I would prefer that we all "win", rather than have MacOSX "win".


Finally - just because open source development matured (birthed?) with Linux doesn't mean that it will die if Linux dies. In other words - it doesn't follow that future open source development will be dependent on Linux.


I certainly hope you are right. . . but a blow to Linux will CERTAINLY be a blow to the open-source and free-software movements. Free software has been around a lot longer than GNU/Linux, but its development _exploded_ when Linux became usable and the whole system could be free. Trying to create open-software on closed systems is just not as easy and will be subject to obstacles like vendor-interference and proprietary interests.

PS - I'm not sure I really like most of the open-source histories. . . I know that there are books like "Open Sources" and works like "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", but they are more rhetoric than responsible histories.

I made the switch, and am coming back!

[jtaylor72]

Don't make the switch to Apple. I just did, it was very expensive, and I am now coming back to Intel. All I can tell you is that the Dual 1GHz G4 ran slower than my PIII 866 on just about everything. Applications are very slow to open. There is serious lag when moving windows around. You have to move the the bottom right of the window every time you want to resize it. The menu bar is fixed at the top of the primary screen with only one showing at a time. This may not seem big, but beleive me, it gets super annoying, especially if you are running two or more monitors. I had the completely juiced up top-of-the-line G4. All of this talk about Apples being faster than PCs is a bunch of crap! OSX is also very unstable. IT freezes all the time. And forget about doing any kind of development on that platform. All of the tools out there really blow! But hey, what do you expect from a company that still ships with only a single button on the mouse? I made a $3500 mistake, and am advising you not too.

Re:I made the switch, and am coming back!

[iSwitched]

I wanted to leave this one alone, I really did... but...

I have a dual-gig G4 and it kicks ass. It's not a 2.5 ghz screamer, but it's plenty faster than the 1.25 Ghz Windwoes box I left behind.

"The menu bar is fixed at the top of the primary screen with only one showing at a time."

Uh, this is a Mac - did you do any research before buying it, this has always been the way Macs work, and many of us like it that way.

"OSX is also very unstable. IT freezes all the time. "

What version were you running, the 10.0 beta? Mine never freezes and is the most stable and robust OS I have ever used, possibly discounting Linux with no X running.

"And forget about doing any kind of development on that platform. All of the tools out there really blow!"

This is an unreal statement. Let me see, for web developers there's ALL The Macromedia stuff (Dreamwever/Fireworks/Flash/Freehand, etc) and other smaller packages; for C/C++ there's Codewarrior and others, for Java, it has a 1.3 JDK with 1.4 coming soon, plus there's a little IDE called Borland JBuilder and a dozen open source projects. It has all the unix utils you want, a gcc compiler and more. In my opinion, while maybe not a perfect gaming platform, it is near-perfect for a software developer.

So please, if you like what you're using, that's great - but before completely ripping a particular piece of software or hardware, at least check your facts.

Macos X and Linux fan

[papero]

I'm using OSX Jaguar on my iBook at home and work, together with a PC "Linux only". I'm so satisfied that my office Win2k laptop is almost unused.
Personally I think MacOS X is what I've dreamed since Apple acquired NeXT, I mean UNIX + Apple interface , probably the best cocktail. I'd like a world with more Mac clients and Linux servers.
(JTS I use Linux since 1996 and Mac since 1990).

Firewire Target Mode

[DJ FirBee]

Built in Firewire
Built in Firewire that works all of the time unlike Sony Vaio.

Firewire Target Mode
Connect your laptop via firewire to your desktop and back up absolutely everyfile on your laptop to your desktop. This rocks!

Dual Monitor Capability
Run your browser/Telnet in on your laptop display and your development stuff on your squanking huge monitor. All built in to the Powerbooks.

Ethernet with auto-crossover detection
You don't need a crossover cable to connect computer to computer. The circuitry does the 1,2 to 3,6 crossover stuff for you.

Runs really quiet.

Big honking screen at more than 1152 X 768
nice screen baby!

USB stuff works on Macs!

Real FTP Server that configures quick and works.

Light laptop with built in Airport support.
light enough to run to the crapper with

OSX
Really cool multimedia Apps. Bash shell, GCC, blah blah blah. Same laptop. OS9 apps in cool classic compatibility (like vmware) mode.

All conspire to make a Powerbook the laptop on choice for this geek.

This is my second post ever on slashdot. The first wasnt formatted. I have run linux since 1.12. I was an engineer for Cisco, so I have at least some geek karma.

I lurve my Mac enough to get a user account on /. to rant about it. This beats running Linux on even the coolest of thinkpads.

Your gonna love it guys. The hardware alone is worth it.

Re:Thinking about switching... just need some advi

[jtaylor72]

I was doign the same thing, only on a dual 1GHz G4 Desktop with 1.5GB RAM. Virtual PC is not worth the money you spend on it. It is very slow and if you the the graphics lag in OSX is bad, wait until you try to run an app in VirtualPC. Sold my whole system and am going back to Linux/Windows. I just don't understand how Apple can only be at 1GHz and so openly lie about how much faster there stuff is. They are SLOW!

focus follows mouse?

[binaryfeed]

I might have considered switching to OSX full-time (I have an iLamp^H^H^H^HMac) if I could figure out how to have the focus follow the mouse pointer, as well as a few other "goodies" that I like about KDE. Here they are, in no particular order. I would like all of these without running a rooted X-Server:

1. focus follows mouse
2. multiple desktops
3. key bindings to avoid the necessity for using the mouse, i.e. -- "warp"ing to different apps / desktops, etc.

That being said, here are the things I dislike about KDE:

1. Kclipboard sucks ... I wish I could only have the X clipboard active in non-KDE apps (the only one I use is Emacs) and everywhere else I'd just like the sensible Ctrl-C, Ctrl-X, Ctrl-V
2. more difficult to do multimedia stuff (iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD, iMovie are all amazing pieces of software)
3. need CodeWeavers to run MS Office

Anyone managed to get either of these desktop environments into the state that I want? I'd love to hear about it.

Re:focus follows mouse?

[ellem]

1. focus follows mouse
2. multiple desktops
3. key bindings to avoid the necessity for using the mouse, i.e. -- "warp"ing to different apps / desktops, etc.

1 -- yeah me too
2 -- CodeTek Virtual Desktop. Yeah it's 20USD but worth every penny.
3 -- See above

Re:focus follows mouse?

[Anonymous Coward]

>1. focus follows mouse
>2. multiple desktops
>3. key bindings to avoid the necessity for
> using the mouse, i.e. -- "warp"ing to
> different apps / desktops, etc.

1 and 2 can be solved by using the latest "beta" of CodeTek's VirtualDesktop software.

http://www.codetek.com/index.html

3 can be solved by using Objective Development's LaunchBar which offers VERY quick launching/switching to apps. Just type the first few characters of what you're looking for: 'term' for Terminal, 'moz' for Mozilla, 'ps' for PhotoShop, etc. It presents a pulldown menu of items matching your input, and learns which you use most to present as the default. It also launches your browser bookmarks (in browser), address book entries (mail client), documents, c library header files, etc. Highly configurable.

http://www.obdev.at/products/launchbar/index.htm l

Most of the functionality people want that's not there "out of the box" in MacOS X is available either as freeware or shareware. You'd be pleasantly surprised.

Cheers

Re:focus follows mouse?

[binaryfeed]

One last request, and the most important (I can't believe I forgot it in my original post). Session management!

When I log out and back into KDE, the same programs are right there, right where I left them, editing the same files, on the same web page, etc. Anything like that in OS X?

Whatever

[bogie]

You'll excuse the rest of us who are tired of hearing about an OS where the all of the important parts are proprietary and requires and expense hardware platform to boot. Then of course there is Apple itself which treats its users like crap and makes MS(shudder) look benevolent. I tired of this Apple is a good guy crap.

So whatever mod me as troll, but know in the end OS X being nix based does nothing for the opensource desktop because there is nothing opensource about the parts of the Apple desktop that count. What happens if X company does the same thing to linux? Say they do the same thing and throw a proprietary desktop that solves all of linux's problems. Will it be a win when all of the linux desktop vendors go out of business because some commercial company co-opted linux? Thanks but no thanks. I'll "Struggle" a little while longer with my Truly Free desktop.

Re:Whatever

[tuxedobob]

I'm guessing you didn't see the story a month or two back about how Apple has the highest-rated tech support line?

Re:Whatever

[Anonymous Coward]

Who are the "rest of us"?

Fuck you and your mob mentality, sally.

Re:Not on an ibook! - Huh?

[Foamy]

I have a TiBook550 and my girlfriend has an iBook 700. Both with 10.2.

The iBook blows away my Ti in just about everything you can imagine...except, of course, those hours I spend running G4 optimized photoshop filters.

Oh wait! I don't spend hours running G4 optimized photoshop filters. I guess the extra $800.00 is spent only got me an extra 128 pixels of screew width and a slower machine.

Re:Thinking about switching... just need some advi

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup, there's Remote Desktop Connection, released my Microsoft themselves. It's really slick, although it has stability issues on Dual processor machines. On a tibook, no problems.

http://www.microsoft.com/mac/DOWNLOAD/MISC/RDC.a sp

hello?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, but are you retarded? Developer's cd anybody? Comes with python, perl, gcc 3.1, etc etc... is he even running 10.2? He doesn't even add that with the gcc cometh on 10.2 it automagically optimizes for altivec- no extra code required.

Dude needs to read up. :P

bad test methods

[jcsehak]

The article doing the comparison only does the comparison ripping mp3s from a CD. This introduces foreign variables, the most important being CD drive performance (the combo drive may be slower than the DVD one). The author would have done better doing a standard "Photoshop: see how long it takes to gaussian blur a 300mb file" benchmark. His results are therefore pretty much useless.

Dammn, has Apple bought slashdot?

[Anonymous Coward]

As Far as i remember, this is the second story in the last day about how nice and smoth OS X is.

But when i had this Mac under my hands no network
configuration was possible from the command line.

I had to use some point and klick interfaces *puke*
(at least there was no ifconfig or s.t. like that)

And besides the graphical interface is not os,
all config options are not in /etc.

I think slashdot is losing it's base, imho
or base is loosing me...

Re:Dammn, has Apple bought slashdot?

[eadint]

Yea the base is loosing you. why would it be so important to configure you network in the terminal. that like saying hey im not going to take the stairs im going to crawl downt the side of the building. if that is your watermark for a computer. i hope that you get another one. /etc was a bad idea in the beginning. so smart guy. ldap dosent use etc so you not going to use that hugh. usability support and progression i.e. GUI are progression. you just want to rant.

Navigation alternatives

[hayne]

A few points re navigation:

1. As of 10.2 (Jaguar), the Option-Tab is actually useful for switching between two apps.
2. There are several third-party utilities available which provide alternate navigation schemes. One which I thnk many readers would appreciate is LauchBar ( http://www.obdev.at/products/launchbar/ ). With it, you just start typing a few letters of the name of the application (or document) you want and it presents a list of matches. Pressing return gets you where you want to go. It automatically learns which apps/docs you use the most.

An Apple VP's thoughts...

[Jackal4Eva]

This past monday I was lucky enough to have lunch with the Apple VP of their online store. I asked him a question about possibly projecting OSX and Apple over to Linux users... His answer (almost in a laughing manner): We're not looking at that market right now, we want unix users and windows users to switch over.

Once again, Apple just doesnt read their the market at all.

unix style copy/paste is evil!

[ryochiji]

As a Mac user, nothing annoys me more than UNIX style copy and paste. Consider the following example: I want to copy a sentence from one document and paste it over another sentence in another document. On a Mac, I select the part I want to copy, hit Apple-C, select the destination sentence, hit Apple-V. With UNIX style copy/paste, I have to delete the destination sentence first, then select the bit I want to copy, go back to the destination document and paste. By my books, that is NOT faster. And considering how I copy and paste over more than simply copy and paste, it ends up being much slower.

Re:unix style copy/paste is evil!

[rseuhs]

First, you would copy it after the section and THEN delete the section.

For replacing, both methods are roughly equal, IMO. But Unix-style has the advantage that you paste all with the mouse and don't need to mess with the keyboard. Sometimes it's a matter of preference.

But that's why KDE supports *BOTH* MacOS-style *AND* Unix-style, anyway.

Nifty, eh?

Re:unix style copy/paste is evil!

[Anonymous Coward]

But that's why KDE supports *BOTH* MacOS-style *AND* Unix-style, anyway.

Nifty, eh?


The "MacOS-style" is inconsistent. The only surefire way to copy/paste consistently is to use the middle button (which I really dislike).

Many times I have tried to use the other styles of copy and paste, and it seems to depend on what application I am running. Mostly, it is fine when using a single app, but when copying/pasting between different apps... it isn't quite so nifty.

Re:unix style copy/paste is evil!

[Anonymous Coward]

First, you would copy it after the section and THEN delete the section.

And if you wanted to cut instead of copy, you'd have to go back, reselect your original selection, and delete it?

This is a horribly clunky solution to an unnecessary problem. By the time you've pasted in the section, you've lost context and you have to waste time thinking about what part to delete (and what happens if you delete the wrong part?). If we're talking about a subsection of a complicated URL, for instance, the old and the new parts become jumbled together into an indecipherable mess.

The fact that you can do it without the keyboard is a red herring. For one thing, you could use the menus instead of the keyboard. Or assign individual mouse buttons to the copy and paste keystrokes.

The point is that the XWindow-style "selection destroys buffer" paradigm is objectively inferior to the "selection is independent of buffer" paradigm. It's exacerbated by poorly-conceived implementation: since selection is achieved with the most commonly-used mouse button, accidentally destroying your selection becomes a real danger.

SUV Overcapacity

[duck_prime]

I look at it like an SUV. 99% of the people that buy them are never going to need 4-wheel drive, but they like to know it's there. "uh-oh, gravel...better slide this baby into overdrive!"

I'm not sure about 99% -- I know a lot of folks who take the SUV out camping or to see that "nature" stuff, and they seem to like it. But surely many owners would be as well off with a station wgn or something else.

Myself, I test-drove a Land Rover Freelander. It is absolutely amazing. It is essentially Spider-man. It can climb cliffs. It can subdue hostile natives. It is ... awesome.

However, I am deeply suspicious of anything past the city limits of San Francisco. I don't camp. The car would be wasted on me. (Sigh) Back to the old bus pass.

Re:Not now, guys!? Please consider NOT switching.

[Vhalkyrie]

OpenOffice is working on a OS X port. It's currently a developer version using XFree86.

OpenOffice Mac

Chimera is an open OS X mozilla web browser in development.

Chimera

These are just a couple of quick examples, but the ability is there to continue OSS work on a very capable platform - it's already begun. I was amazed I was able to compile and install my favorite tools and utilities, right out of the box.

wireless & dvd

[David Jao]

Integrated wireless antennas are not limited to the Mac world. There are certainly a number of non-Mac laptops which also have integrated wireless antennas. As one would expect, they cost more than the non-integrated alternatives, but Macs cost more too.

The point to be made about DVDs is that installing an all-region DVD player on linux is no harder than tracking down an all region hack for MacOS, installing it, and praying that it works. If you only play DVDs from one region, then, yes, the Mac is much easier. But if you require multi region support (like me), then MacOS is no easier than Linux with respect to DVD support.

My switch story ...

[valmont]

from a win2k dell laptop to an early model TiBook 400mhz/384MB RAM/aiport/10GIG hd ... is in my journal. Another journal entry also outlines some of what i've found to be the nicest features of OS X on my TiBook.

Keep in mind i wrote all that quite a few months ago. Now with Jaguar, things are even smoother, faster, just works even better.

In more recent developments ...

Where i work, a fairly big corporation, engineers are switching in strides to OS X laptops, usually TiBooks . Even the hard-core "Mac dissers" just can't get over how cool those machines are. I am one of the early adopters here with my ol' 400mhz and only 10GIG hard drive, they're all using later models with faster CPU and brigher screen.

It is simply starting to make less and less sense for professional developers and engineers to be running windows versus OS X, unless you are developing windows software. OS X is just too powerful.

My gf just bought a 700mhz iBook. She loves it. She gets around computers fine but had *never* used a mac before. She adapted just fine: M$ Office for OS X, browsing, emailing. I got her one of those USB microdrives so she brings Office files home from her work desktop PC. She's already playing with iTunes and iPhoto.

Re:What's the point of this?

[BlackBolt]

Why is slashdot turning into an Apple cheerleading site?

Turning into? I think you're a bit behind the times, friend. Slashdot's been a hardcore Apple Corporation cheerleading site since OSX Public Beta. Look at the people who get modded up to "+5, Informative" for saying "My PowerBook gets 10 hours of battery life" while the people who say "Funny, mine only gets 2.5" get modded down... The rule is, if you say what we want to hear, you'll get modded up. If you challenge our preconceived ideas, you go down in flames.

But really, this zealotry hurts Apple - once people switch and find out that much of what was boasted about OSX, Apple hardware, and the loving paternal attitudes of Apple Corporate are not what they were cracked up to be, you have a bunch of disappointed new users upset at losing $3000 for believing the little white lies of a massive propaganda effort. My friend at Apple calls the customers the "unpaid, distributed sales force". That's good, if they truly believe in the product and the company, but there are so many flaming zealots here who have lost all sense of reason or balance that Slashdot sometimes reeks of deception and unrealistic bullsh*t. Giving potential users false hopes about Apple hurts everyone. They're strong enough to stand on the truth, they don't need us pimping their wares for them with lies and hype.

And what's worse, all the zealots give Apple the message that they don't have to improve themselves, because we'll buy whatever they're selling and like it under any circumstances! We need to be tougher on them if we want them to improve. Saying "don't worry, you're doing just fine" doesn't really spur them on. Every time they screw up, a small vocal bunch of zealots spark up their computers and attack any criticism of Apple rabidly. If they screw up, they should be taken to task for it, not defended by the "Mac Pack"! By defending their actions, you give them the message that what they did was okay. They will do the same thing again. Think about how you want Apple to be. When they break that mould, if you have to post, try to influence them to be better, not worse. Right now, they're not accountable because you didn't fulfil your duty as a loyal customer, to remain loyal only as long as their behavior and product quality warrants it.

I confess, I'm saying this because I love Apple and want them to be the greatest computer company in the world. Mac users should be harder on them than everyone else; we have more at stake. But I find people glossing over Apple's failures in an attempt to justify their decision to switch. Honesty is the best policy, not furthering your Apple marketshare improvement agenda.

By the way, you spoke out against Apple, you will now be modded "flamebait" and/or "troll".

And so will I. See you at -1.

BlackBolt

Re:Not now, guys!? Please consider NOT switching.

[iSwitched]

Whoa! Last I checked, oss was about more than Linux -- in fact, /. is about more than Linux!

Users of OS X *are* in the game precisely because the OS allows them to both participate and contribute to virtually every project out there.

Besides, Steve Ballmer tells me "Linux isn't going to go away" and he's really smart and rich, right;-)

To Hemos and Taco, I say: DO IT DO IT DO IT, there's room for *both* of the world's best OSs in the /. 'community'.

Re:Sooo many...Apple packaging.

[Anonymous Coward]

That makes me wonder. How does Apple's packaging system compare to packaging systems on other platforms? Better? Worse? Indifferent?

I've thought of bringing it over to Linux, but there's alway the question of patent (licensing) issues.

Re:What's the point of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Why is slashdot turning into an Apple cheerleading site?"

Because the leenux zealots realised that they weren't 'quite' insane enough...and that mac zealots had a bunch of years on them being nuts...

OR...

the mac zealots were zealots first...like they invented everything first (according to the voices in their heads)
scsi
video displays
the color aqua
the comma
etc...

in other words...

ssssssssssssssseeya leenux twats...enjoy your trip to steveland...don't drink the kool-aid

Author of Article is a Blatant Liar (here's why)

[Anonymous Coward]

The following 3 quotes from the article followed by a quote from Apple prove clearly that the author of the article is a blatant liar.

While quote #2 could be an honest mistake, quote #3 exposes him as a liar.

1. ARTICLE: "This review unit runs the Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar operating system."

2. ARTICLE (mistake): "Under the surface it runs a 4.4 BSD kernel derived from FreeBSD 3.2."

3. ARTICLE (lie): "The first thing I check when I sit down at a UNIX workstation is which compiler I have. Max OS X Jaguar has the Gnu C compiler, gcc 2.95-2, which is a good choice for most purposes and also guarantees good C++ compatibility. I actually prefer the 2.96-3 version of gcc; it took only a few minutes to get that and install it, using nothing but the terminal window and a locally compiled "wget." Once I had gcc2.96-3 working, I used a nifty Mac OS X tool called gcc-select to switch compilers system-wide."

4. APPLE: "Jaguar integrates features from state-of-the-art FreeBSD 4.4 and GCC 3.1 into Darwin[...]"

Use %c3 to get the last 3 directories

[phandel]

...in tcsh. For example:
set prompt="(\!) %m %t %c3%# " ...which will give you:
(3) handel 10:48am registry/macbuild/CVS>

As usual, it depends why you want the laptop

[NickDoulas]

I think your perspective will depend on what you're expecting to do with the laptop. I just switched from a Win98 Dell laptop to an iBook. The way I see it, mac laptops "just work", they have sleek hardware design, and they have familiar unix underneath. If you're expecting a mac laptop to essentially be just like your linux machine because it's unix underneath, you might be disappointed. I still use my linux desktop a lot, and I prefer to keep that as my machine to tinker with. I was looking to do video import/edit using a DV camcorder. This seems possible on linux, but I wasn't too anxious to figure out the details. With the iBook, I just plugged in the camera, and was I was editing video within seconds. There were no apps or drivers to deal with. I was even spared the annoying "found driver for new hardware" dialog. I also didn't previously appreciate how smoothly the iBook sleeps and wakes up. I've used a few flavors of windows on a few different laptops, and putting a laptop to sleep, docking it, etc, was never consistently smooth. The iBook is really this simple - close the laptop, it sleeps. Open it back up, it wakes --- within a second or so. It's just great - I essentially never need to reboot, never need to hit the power button, etc.

32,504 800mhz G4's = 45,998 2GHz Athlons =)

[5n3ak3rp1mp]

This from the recent RC5 crack press release:

"Our peak rate of 270,147,024 kkeys/sec is equivalent to 32,504 800MHz Apple PowerBook G4 laptops or 45,998 2GHz AMD Athlon XP machines or (to use some rc5-56 numbers) nearly a half million Pentium Pro 200s."

With some simple math, I think that pretty much answers your question =) At least as far as raw power on tap. How that translates at the top level to user experience is a different story (of course).

Me, I love it...

Re:32,504 800mhz G4's = 45,998 2GHz Athlons =)

[Anonymous Coward]

Give me a break. You do know that their documentation also states that the PowerPC is particularly better suited for the specific RC5 algorithm than Intel cpus? PPC has a rotate instruction builtin, while Intel-based stuff does not - meaning this one particular algorithm will take measurably longer on Intel. Try comparing some real world task performance instead.

I love Macs but it's fact that high end Pentium or Athlon systems destroy the fastest PowerMac in terms of raw system speed. To say otherwise is flat out denial. Hopefully Apple has something up their sleeve (maybe the thing with IBM) to remedy this.

Re:Thinking about switching... just need some advi

[voodoo_bluesman]

Thanks a lot for the info. RDC would give me the abilitiy to do about everything I need to do.

Does anyone know if any kind of VPN software is available for OS X? I currently use a Cisco VPN client on XP...

I almost switched

[matt-fu]

I was eyeing Apple's laptops for several months. My previous laptop had been a (piss poor) Dell Inspiron 3800, and I swore that the next time out I was going with a decent machine. I use my laptop as a primary workstation and am not a gamer, so CPU wasn't a huge issue. The low end iBooks have more than enough. I had additional reason to get a Mac because I'm a musician and do audio recording as a side hobby, so I wanted my machine to be able to handle at least 18 channels simultaneously (which is what my MOTU 828 will handle). Since the audio industry generally develops for Apple first and PC second, I thought I'd get in on some of the love that my Mac-only friends have been seeing for years.

Either the TiBook or the iBook would have been nice. The only thing holding me back was the video specs. 1280x854 on a $3k machine is a joke, one that I didn't quite get. The bigger joke still is the iBook, which won't go above 1024x768 even on the external port, nor will it support dualheading. Yes, that's fine for OS X and watching DVDs, but come on. We're not in y2k anymore. I don't care how many parlor tricks the hardware/software can do, trading functionality for coolness is just dumb. So I decided to wait until Apple upped the specs, at which point I would happily become a switcher.

While waiting (and waiting and waiting), I started looking at PC laptop specs, you know, to psyche myself out about the cool Apple I was eventually going to be using. That's when I discovered that some used Thinkpads were going for under $1k and had more video resolution than the best TiBook (referring to the A20p specifically). So I waited some more, and when Apple didn't bother to upgrade their laptops for the Paris Apple Expo, I hit up ebay and scored an A21p that I totally love. $1k for the laptop, $100 for the firewire card, $50 for the Orinoco Silver card, and I've got a rig with better video (1600x1200 on the LCD, fear) and swappable drive bay. 6 hour battery life? Not an issue, but if it were I could drop $50 on a Thinkpad battery on ebay and be good to go. And now it's being said that maybe in January the laptops will be upgraded? I think I made the right choice.

Sorry Apple, I really wanted to do it. I just couldn't justify paying the extra money and sacrificing the screen resolution for what amounts to coolness points and not having to dual boot. Maybe next time.

Re:I almost switched

[Anonymous Coward]

Yay you! You rock!

I antiswitched

[OmegaGeek]

I have been a Mac user as long as there have been Macs. I fell in love with the first one I saw. I have been actively involved in 2 Mac User Groups.

But I can't justify paying the price differential anymore. I just purchased a laptop and I looked at iBooks and others. I ended up going with an Intel laptop because it gave me the features I need (CD burner, capacious 30 GB HD, and 256 Meg of RAM) for substantially less than an iBook. I'm downloading the disk images for Mandrake 9.0 right now, and by the end of the weekend I'll have a nice speedy little Linux laptop.

One other move on Apple's part that pissed me off - the conversion of iTools (free) to .mac (pay). "The Steve" tells us that it is because the era of free web services is over. I think it has a lot more to do with Apple looking for a new revenue stream. If Apple was willing to give Mac users some services in exchange for the extra price we pay for the machines, it would make the price difference more acceptable. But charging us more money for hardware, then charging for some of the services they use to promote and sell the hardware and OS makes them seem a lot like ... well, I guess it makes them seem a lot like Micro$oft, doesn't it?

Free as in Freedom

[johnynek]

I have a G4 cube that runs Linux. I have played around with OSX, but I keep reminding myself of all the great benefits I have had from using free software. Why would I give that up just because OSX is prettier than KDE or Gnome (I actually use fluxbox).

Witness the amazing gains in free software, at this point, why switch? The party is really cranking (OpenOffice, Mozilla, Vorbis, KDE, Evolution, Theora, etc...)

With linux, you are supporting platform independence. MacOS is just another proprietary system (Don't tell me that their kernel is "open source", who cares? You can't run OSX software with only the kernel, you can't run OSX on Alpha, x86, sparc, etc...)

I have a Mac, and I am choosing Freedom.

Re:What's the point of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey there, chuckles!

You're so smart. I love you. Teach us and fill us with your wisdom. Willing supplicants that we are.

boink!

Apple Laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

I just recently bought an Apple laptop and I couldn't be happier. I have never had an Apple computer before but after seeing OS X I just had to give it a try. I have used PCs all my life ,and while I don't intended on stopping, I have been turning on my PC less and less over the last few weeks. I've got to say, so far, switching has been worth every penny.

What he says is true:

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are a Linux zealot, please consider not switching. Otherwise you can't be a zealot anymore.

Sour grapes

[cnmill]

Yes I can't afford a Ti book and would probably buy one of I could.

However, the thing I love about Linux is the constant challenge and the education that comes along with making it do what I want.

I came to Linux as a complete newbie, and probably still am by most Linux users' standards, but I really get a kick out of researching and fixing a problem or adding a new capability in Linux. It is not easy, but I learn what is going on when I do, and I really dig that.

I have been using it at home boot for a bout two years, dual boot but i hardly ever need windows anymore. Haven't booted into is sonce May, and then just to try out Wolf.

I guess some would call me a tinkerer or hobbyist Lunix user. So be it. I have run out of things I can do in Windows but CAN'T do in Linux, and I am happy about it.

This is a paid promotion brought to you by...

[Derleth]

10 months ago I used Novell Netware on a 286 at my home office, where I served goatse.cx images to the poor, underprivileged trolls barely making it on Slashdot. I wanted a system I could take with me, to keep current on the latest link-munging techniques and image URLs.

None of the Windows laptops cut it with battery life or monitor durability (they tended to commit suicide after the fifth spreadeagled rectum). Worse, none of them could play the video of Ballmer hopping around like a cracked-up horny toad at a sufficient volume to frighten all the small children on a given flight.

So I looked at the iBook. I broke out my mad money, saved over the years from selling bumfight videos online, and bought the 1600Mhz DVD-ROM liquid-nitrogen-cooled iZilla. I had enough left over to buy the optional iHover attachment to prevent it from crushing my legs. I use it everywhere! Showing the finest in Internet goat-pr0n to those who intend to eat veal at restaurants, giving poor premeds a free view of the inside of the colon at med schools, and giving small children nightmares about drugged-up CEOs chasing them down and crushing them, my iBook is there! Its minature keys are perfectly sized for jizim removal, and its one-button mouse is perfect for one-handed Internet surfing.

Of course, I use nothing but OS X on the beast (up the RAM to at least 1200 Megs) and it's great. Proper terminal window to r00t other peoples' servers, Outlook-compliant email client for vectoring all the latest worms, 802.11b card for warwalking around looking for chalk, and best of all, unlike any other OS in the known Universe, IT JUST WORKS.

I've definately reached the point where I no longer want to have all my machines as play toys - the iBook is a workhorse and just keeps on slogging. Mmmm... horse.

My Name's Steve Jobs ... NO! ... it's ... Snurb ... and I'm a network administrator and CEO of ... NO! ... and ... uh ... al-Quaeda operative ... yeah, that's the ticket!

Pluses & minuses

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm typing this on a TiBook 550MHz CPU with a halfgig of RAM.

Good things:

• instant-on after suspend; by the time your hands are on the keyboard it's ready to work
• good typography by default (Linux has bad typography by default)
• real bsd, you can grab apache & python & emacs & build em from source, no prob
• lots of stuff included, so you probably don't need to build apache & ssh & perl & so on because they're already there
• high-quality LCDs; you will never see /. look as good as in the Chimera gecko variant on one of these way-cool LCDs
• Good software installations, most HW & SW just works
• Some of the apple apps (iTunes, iCal, etc) are actually pretty good
• You never have to deal with a termcap or an Xt resource file again

Bad things

• Too expensive
• Kind of slow, the UI keeps getting faster but it still has a ways to go
• Keyboard shortcuts suck. Windows is way better
• Some of the apple apps are lame, e.g. iPhoto
• Titanium case is fragile & easily scratched

Re:Pluses & minuses

[Anonymous Coward]

"Keyboard shortcuts suck. Windows is way better"

Bzzzt. Wrong, turbo. Keyboard shorcuts on windows suck.

"Some of the apple apps are lame, e.g. iPhoto"

Wrong again. You're just not switft enough. Sorry...

The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[jmorris42]

I hear the same bleats from the Mac Faithful every time us UNIX folk say we won't convert without a three button pointer. And it's BS because you have obviously never ran GIMP (fill in the blank with your fav). Programs like GIMP use all three buttons alone AND in combination with the 'bucky bits.'

Three buttons are vital to productive use of non-trivial GUI apps on a *NIX workstation, iBooks, having but one button, therefore are NOT suitable for serious UNIX work, QED.

And it IS possible to have a real keyboard and pointer in a small system. My Thinkpad 570E is damn near as thin as a TiBook and still managed to get a much better keyboard in. (And my Thinkpad is smaller in the other two dimensions and lighter than a TiBook, no neayh! Do wish it had the five plus hours of runtime though.)

And don't even get me started about the raggedy ass userland Apple ships. It is painfully obvious that the BSD portions of OSX is just as much a neglected stepchild as the old POSIX subsystem in NT. And no, downloading fink or the GNU toolchain is no more a solution than adding Cygwin is an excuse for NT's defects.

Try moving an OSX filesystem from one location to another. cp won't do it, tar can't handle the deeply nested filesystem and cpio, while having the same problems as tar, silently fails instead of throwing a warning. Useless!

And the idiocy extends into the GUI portion as well. They ship a utility called "Disk Copy" that does everything EXCEPT copy a disk. This is intuitive?

Give em another couple of years and maybe they will start to learn how to build a UNIX based OS. Perhaps by 2005 they can make it to where Sun was in 1990 or RedHat was with their first offering.

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[Zeal17]

And the idiocy extends into the GUI portion as well. They ship a utility called "Disk Copy" that does everything EXCEPT copy a disk. This is intuitive?

Ummm, I use disk copy to copy CDs all the time....

-Zeal17

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[Van Halen]

Programs like GIMP use all three buttons alone AND in combination with the 'bucky bits.'

Right. And Gimp was never designed for Mac. Really, not much design went into its user interface at all: it's pretty horrid by any professional gui developer's standards. I hear they're seriously revamping it for the next big version - hope so. That said, I love Gimp and use it nearly every day - with my multibutton scroll wheel mouse under OS X. Works great.

Three buttons are vital to productive use of non-trivial GUI apps on a *NIX workstation, iBooks, having but one button, therefore are NOT suitable for serious UNIX work, QED.

If you can't get along with modifier keys (and Xdarwin allows you to setup 3-button emulation so you do get all 3 buttons), then fine. Don't get an iBook. Or get an external mouse and use that.

Macs were never designed to use software with crappy user interfaces - anything that requires multiple buttons plus multiple modifier keys simultaneously is not a good interface. Necessary for the extreme power user, perhaps (see CAD, et al). But still arguably not good. And I'd argue that the vast majority of Unix software (especially open source) has bad interfaces because the programmers lacked any knowledge on what consitutes a good user interface. They're geeks coding for geeks, so they don't worry about this stuff. Apple does - it's their core market. They can't be everything to everyone (and they don't even want to!) so they concentrate on this. They're happy being the BMW of computer makers, as long as they keep making a profit overall.

It is painfully obvious that the BSD portions of OSX is just as much a neglected stepchild as the old POSIX subsystem in NT.

Examples? One I can think of off the top of my head is that "w" is still not fully functional: it doesn't actually display what the users are running. And utmp isn't updated when somebody logs out. Sloppy, perhaps, but critical? Not for me. Apple has finite resources and I'm sure this is pretty damn low on the priority list. (darn, I'm sounding like an Apple apologist fanboy, better cut it out)

Try moving an OSX filesystem from one location to another.

man ditto

But again, I agree with you in part. I think the standard unix utilities do need to be modified to handle Mac-specific quirks. Like handling carriage returns transparently as newlines in vi and less. Or cp, tar, et al handling resource forks (ditto does, but only with a command-line option).

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[jmorris42]

> Right. And Gimp was never designed for Mac.

Exactly my point; thank you! GIMP is a UNIX program adn needs a real UNIX environment, including the hardware portion of the user experience.

How had would it be for Apple to put in a three button pointer and rig the OS to treat them all as one big button by default? Since it isn't a real 'clicky' button (at least on the TiBook I played with) the normal users wouldn't even have to know it was three, just one big button with some artfully placed grooves. They don't really care, we are supposed to adopt the "Mac Way" like some sort of cult. Screw that.

> > Try moving an OSX filesystem from one
> > location to another.

> man ditto

Did. Now go read www.macosxlabs.org where they report that using the switch to copy resources causes unexplainable failures.

It is obvious you are a Mac user who has read up a bit on this "unix thing" that they dropped on you with OSX but you probably don't depend on those subsystems yet. I'm a UNIX user exploring OSX starting from their promise it was "UNIX with a pretty face." It ain't.

And even the graphical part is buggy as hell if you push it hard. I have been rebooting fast and furious after finding new ways to wedge it, almost like Win3.1.

Basically, I like the idea, but judge the current implementation (10.1.x) as beta quality. No, my site won't be buying licenses for 10.2 on the forlorn hope that chasing the upgrade fairy will fix things this quick.

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats because Gimp was never designed for the Mac. You want to see a real graphics application that works well with one button? Look at Photoshop. Well designed Mac apps dont need more than one button. You've obvously have never used one before you decided to bleat that worthless message.

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[overunderunderdone]

Programs like GIMP use all three buttons alone AND in combination with the 'bucky bits.'

How do you fit all those buttons on your stylus? or alternatively: You use a MOUSE?!? for image manipulation? LOL... and you are arguing that one-button is "crippling". You are losing better than half of the functionality of any image manipulation program by using a mouse and you are complaining about one-button + 5 modifier keys being "crippling". Get yourself a pressure senstive tablet, when you use a mouse to edit images after that you will know the meaning of "crippling"

I'm not as familiar with GIMP but on Photoshop there are 12 different ways to modify a mouse click (when using the brush tool, it varies from tool to tool) I only use 8 or so to the point where they are firmly entrenched in my "muscle memory" With those 12 there are still a few modifier key combos that are unused. I'm willing to believe that you need & actually use 3 mouse buttons + 5 modifier keys in combination but I doubt that most people do.

Three buttons are vital to productive use of non-trivial GUI apps on a *NIX workstation

I'll concede that most mac people aren't talking about UNIX apps that expect a three-button mouse when they say one-button is enough. I'm sure GIMP (& others) do suffer from the transition. I will however defend the usuablity of a one-button mouse (plus the modifier keys) when the system and the software is originally designed with that in mind. I very much doubt that you are any more productive with GIMP designed for a three button mouse than I am with Photoshop designed for a one-button mouse (leaving aside the varying capabilities of the two programs) I can assure you quite confidently that with a stylus I am quite a bit more productive. If GIMP *really* is written to be almost unusable without three mouse-buttons I wonder how effective it can be when using a pressure sensitive tablet. Even if you can find a three-button model it would be awkward to use those buttons.

And the idiocy extends into the GUI portion as well. They ship a utility called "Disk Copy" that does everything EXCEPT copy a disk. This is intuitive?

Hmmm... perhaps I have a newer version of Disk Copy, never had a problem copying disks with it.

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[mrjohnson]

Hey, just install Debian if you don't like OSX...

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[Van Halen]

Just now getting to replying. Maybe you'll see this, maybe you won't. ;-)

They don't really care, we are supposed to adopt the "Mac Way" like some sort of cult. Screw that.

All they're doing by providing a one-button mouse is making easier for people who've never used a computer before. That's a substantial part of their market and they know that multiple buttons confuse totally new users (ask anyone who's done tech support). Anyone else can spend $30 (which is nothing compared to the initial system cost anyway) to get more buttons or use modifier keys.

Still, I'll admit you have a valid point - a build-to-order option for multiple buttons on a laptop would be great. Only problem is it'd likely increase production cost a lot to have multiple configurations, and it'd confuse those totally new users who assume "more is better" and get the multibutton version without knowing what it really means. But yeah, I'd love one, myself. ;-)

> man ditto

Did. Now go read www.macosxlabs.org where they report that using the switch to copy resources causes unexplainable failures.

Interesting. A quick perusal of their site didn't show that report obviously, but I'm curious what happened. I've used ditto since I found out about it (after realizing my backups using tar did not preserve the resource fork - ouch!) with no problems. Backed up and restored 40 gigs of user data last week when I upgraded to Jaguar and decided to repartition the drive as part of the process. If it does have problems, then certainly they should get fixed, but I saw none myself.

It is obvious you are a Mac user who has read up a bit on this "unix thing" that they dropped on you with OSX but you probably don't depend on those subsystems yet. I'm a UNIX user exploring OSX starting from their promise it was "UNIX with a pretty face." It ain't.

Heh. I must not be very transparent. I've been using Unix as my primary OS for 9 years, including Linux (started with 0.99p12), FreeBSD (my PC Unix of choice now), IRIX, Solaris, SunOS, HPUX, AIX, etc, etc. Yes, I've used Macs in that time and had an older PowerMac (currently running OS 8.6) which was for music only, but my Linux or FreeBSD pc was always the main machine. Until OS X.

I'm like you - bought a newer Mac specifically for OS X. But I suppose the difference is that I love it, while you still have issues with it. That's fine. There are still plenty of things I'd like to see "fixed" or upgraded. Jaguar was a major upgrade for me - I held off for a month because 10.1.5 was "good enough." But when my login time went from 30+ seconds to 2, and most apps now open in 1 bounce instead of 5-10, I'm quite the happy camper. It's been less than a week, so I can't comment on overall stability yet. But I do hope it's improved over 10.1.5.

Anyway it's been an interesting and enjoyable discussion. ;-)

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[kurisudes]

My logitec USB optical trackball plugs in great to my iBook... and all three buttons work fine. In fact it works better with my iBook than with linux (BAD USB SUPPORT) and windows... I plug it in and it starts working INSTANTLY, no loading HID device driver window or anything...

It does have the support it needs to get the job done with my three buttons and scroll! there is plenty of support for all of those buttons as well... I have yet to come across something without a context menu is OS X

Where's your complaint now?

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[Anonymous Coward]

All they're doing by providing a one-button mouse is making easier for people who've never used a computer before. That's a substantial part of their market and they know that multiple buttons confuse totally new users (ask anyone who's done tech support).

Actually, Mac purchases nowadays are from existing customers upgrading. Apple wants to suck people over from Windows (the whole Switch campaign).

Selling one button mice because it's easier for first time buyers is a dying meme. As computing becomes more and more widespread, there are fewer and fewer "first time buyers"

On a personal note, I was seduced by the Mac/UNIX synergy and became very interested in getting a MacOS X laptop--until I tried it at the store. One mouse button is excessively frustrating and I'm sure as hell not dragging a USB mouse around just becaue Apple wishes I was a first time computer buyer. I bought a Dell instead.

Re:The one button + mods == three buttons fallacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Programs that use more than one mouse button are not 'crappy'. Have you ever used any real 3D CAD system, say IDEAS?

There is no universal law that says that one mouse button is sufficient for all computing tasks. If you can make a GUI work well with one button, fine. Mod keys are OK, but that requires two hands.

My name is Fran�ois J. Perreault ...

[An anonymous Frank]

and I'm a network analyst. When Apple asked for comments from PC users, I sent in my two cents. Never got a reply yet spent all summer looking at models, specs, features and prices. I am now the very proud owner of an iBook 14.x" G3 700 with the base 256MB RAM. I will boost the memory anyhow but I have yet to run out. Mind you I have not installed anything big yet, just War3. As a user experience, everyday I notice or discover something else and I think: "How neat that they thought of that". I almost purchased an extra power supply for nothing, thanks to the design of the one that comes with it, I don't need to buy another one when on the road. It really 'just works'. Very intuitive. I had done some dev work on System 7.0.x a long time ago, but I'm not lost even though I've used and supported all versions of Windows (station and server), many versions of Novell Netware, Solaris (Sparc and Intel), Slackware, Mandrake, Redhat, OS/2, GeoWorks, AIX, HP-UX (a little) and I must forget some. I did buy a Wacom Pen/Mouse pad for home, abd I admit to using the iBook mostly at home for now. But I've had to use a trackpad in the past and I don't mind them, but enough about that religious debate. I switched to Mac for the "Unix with a real desktop" experience and even though I haven't really dug into the Unix side, I'm impressed. Any time I want to know something about my system and might not assume that there's a gui app for it (and there usually is) I lauch Terminal and I'm right at home. The next step is to go get some of the apps I've become accustomed to and expect to use frequently. For example, due to financial constraints, I prefer to use Gimp rather than Photoshop. I've heard of MacGimp but it's slightly outdated and I didn't find anything about an upgrade path, so I'll be doing it the old way, which is an investment I don't mind to make since it'll pay off later when I want to install other X-Window dependant software or tools. Perhaps rpm-for-OSX would be a nice thing, haven't checked if that's in progress.

Trackpads on most PC laptops suck

[cdaveb]

I have used trackpads on several PC laptops and I can see why most PC users are so down on them. But I've also used trackpads on several Powerbooks, and they're a lot better. I wouldn't judge a trackpad by a PC laptop, really give the Mac one a chance.

Personally I've never liked those eraser mice and I hope Apple never puts one on my TiBook keyboard. I use a 3 button trackball most of the time with my TiBook, but when I'm on the road and I'm using the trackpad, it does a pretty good job.

Re:MacOS = good, Apple = bad

[JohnG]

My iBook doesn't look like a toilet bowl, it looks like... a laptop. Where have you been shopping for laptops, home depot?

Re:Only 1 button!

[ECXStar]

Then buy a new mouse. My Trackman Marble works great and has two buttons.

OT: Thanks for the flowers!

[Corporate Troll]

I take that as a compliment. Thank you.

Exactly, that's why I have an Inspiron

[BoomerSooner]

It's like a thinkpad, only cheaper, custom configured, and a hell of a lot easier to install linux on.

That being said I have to agree with the thread stating they need more than one mouse button. If they had a point-stick I would have purchased an Apple instead of a Dell. And it is that simple as to why I chose one over the other.

My company runs Linux & Solaris on the server side and Windows/OS 9/OS X/Linux/whatever works/... on the desktop. As long as you can sftp/ssh to a server then you can choose whatever tool you want. I love OS X I just want more buttons without having to go out and buy a new mouse for my laptop/desktop.

Note to Apple: G5 + 2 Button Mouse with Scroll Wheel acting as 3rd button (see Microsoft IntelliMouse, it's the only thing they've done worth a damn in my opinion, oh yeah natural keyboard too, i freaking hate standard keyboards).

Re:Thinking about switching... just need some advi

[iSwitched]

I made the switch after being a Windows developer for 12 years and had many of the same fears -- ALL of them *groundless* - let me be very clear: I LOVE OS X.

I don't know what the poster who said VPV wasn't worth it was trying to do with it (games? graphic art?), but I use VPC from my dual-gig-G4 for some basic legacy tasks that I need Win32 for, one of which is maintaining an old Front Page web site... I've NEVER had a problem with it - for basic things like poking around a network or using basic office apps its fine, feels like about a pentium 300-400 mhz.

Microsoft's RDC doesn't work on dual-proc Macs, but its nice; even nicer would be springing some $$ for Timbuktu, which is remote desktop between Win and Mac and vice versa.

I recommend switching, I'll never go back...

Re:Not now, guys!? Please consider NOT switching.

[ruiner13]

The rumor I hear and believe is that iTunes 4 goes to a plugin architecture for sound formats and ogg support is in. I hopefully assume that means ogg in the ipod at the same time. Sometime next year. I can wait to re-rip my aluminized polycarbonate music ownership tokens until then.

What i think is more likely is that they will use the built-in encoding libraries of QuickTime. There is an Ogg library already for QuickTime on sourceforge here. If they make iTunes use the QuickTime interface like so many other apps do, then you could import many more file types, complete with plug-in architecture.

BullSh*** I have a Thinkpad 600

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a Thinkpad 600E, 300MHZ and it is slow compared to my Ibook 600 running OS X 10.2 Even my NEWER Thinkpad T20, 650 PIII with 512 ram is SLOWER than my Ibook. The older 600 Thinkpad had crippled Neomagic video and the harddisk controllers were not that fast.

Why not make a link?

[SeanAhern]

Why not make a link so that people can use it easily?

Re:Not now, guys!? Please consider NOT switching.

[00_NOP]

Linux's fundamental strength is that it is free (in both senses). If people want to use OSX, go ahead, but it won't hurt the fundamental case for Linux or stop the Linux juggernaut.

Linux is less than 1% of the desktop but that is going to change for one simple reason - it's dirt cheap.

links

[SeanAhern]

Why not make those things links so that people don't have to cut and paste them? You'd even get around the 'pasted space' issue.

Re:Thinking about switching... just need some advi

[voodoo_bluesman]

Thanks, I'm itching to purchase one right now. I'm really thinking about going with the iMac due to price. Hell, I can get a 17' wide-flat screen and a DVD burner for under $2000. How can I complain?

I think I'm definately gonna do the switch.

Thanks for taking the time!

Not a Problem on Powerbooks

[good soldier svejk]

I don't like either the little knob or the trackpad.. The knob is too fiddly, and I'm always brushing the palm of my hand on the pad..

OS X has an "Ignore Trackpad While Typing" option which pretty well eliminates the accidental trackpading which used to plague me. You'll find it it the trackpad tab of the Mouse panel in System Preferences.

Re:Sooo many...Apple packaging.

[reallocate]

They don't have a packaging system, as such. Apple software updates and most mainstream commercial Mac software is delivered as something called a "disk image". That's simply a batch of compressed files. Click on the icon and it opens to display the files that are inside. Typically, the application -- often a collection of files, not just a single executable -- is represented by a single icon, which you drag to the appropriate folder (almost always the "Applications" folder). That action triggers all the necesary file copying, etc.

If you choose, you can do all this via command line in OSX. Personally, I don't see the gain from that. (Apple has also tweaked the permissions on many standard Unix files and directories, to prevent disaster befalling an unwary user. In fact, by default, the root account isn't active. If you want to become root and muck about with permissions, you're free to do so, of course.)

Updates, deletions, and preservation of personal configuration files seems left up to the individual program. I'm a relative Mac newbie, so others may be a better source hee.

Apple maintains a software update facility to disberse new code and bug fixes. You can run it manully or automatically per a schedule. Works like a charm for me.

Fink is an apt-get look-alike for open source ported to OSX that gets good reviews. I've tried it just enough to know it works rather well.

Remember that a typical Mac user is unlikely to install and uninstall software at the same rate as an ethusiastic Linux user. I suspect most Mac users have no idea about "packaging systems". That's because they really don't need one.

Re:idiot

[srelan]

Almost all companies use contracted manufacturing since the mid 90's you idiot. Wired did an article on this a while back.

Network transparency and VNC

[Weasel Boy]

Network transparency is pretty awesome. Being able to run an app on any machine and put its GUI on any other machine is way cool.

But, for my needs, VNC totally blows away X11's network transparency for bottom-line usefulness. Being able to pick up right where I left off absolutely rocks.

So, for me, "have to use VNC" is not exactly a consolation prize -- it's more like the Grand Prize. Network transparency would be just the icing on the cake.

I switched back

[theolein]

I work in a completely backward mixed Novell, Linux and NT4 server, NT4, Win2k and XP clients. We run a Microsoft Navision financial package. I really wanted to get a TiPowerbook to do my admin stuff (as my old G3 Powerbook was getting really long in the tooth for day to day stuff)but it just didn't integrate well enough with the environment and, here in Switzerland in any case, cost almost $1000 more than a Dell Inspiron 8200.

I got the Dell with XPpro and Debian. It is a good machine and really fast. Even XP isn't as bad as I thought it would be. However WinNT is a desaster and I spend most of my day running around fixing NT problems. We don't want to upgrade to XP all around because our hardware is generally old and some of our stuff doesn't run on XP.

If I had my way we'ld all use Macs. MacOSX isn't perfect and has a lot of quirks (ObjC,C compatibility, Old Java version, lack of a fast browser, lack of application alternatives) but next year I'm getting an iBook.

Re:I switched back

[Ravendon]

Don't worry about it. IE and Netscrape have gotten a lot faster and more stable, plus there is Omniweb, iCab, Mozilla and Opera.

As for the Java and your other concerns, Apple and Sun have teamed up to build a superior Java environment. Obj C is fully compatible with C and C++ code. Application wise, most major apps are available for Mac OS and Mac OS X. If it isn't, there is an open source alternative. Just look around and you will find it.

It all depends who your friends are

[Weasel Boy]

"Even the professionals that use the Mac are, in my six years of experience in the graphics field, less technically inclined on average..."

You said it: *in the graphics field*. My field is computer engineering, and I went to two universities that used Macs in their engineering schools. While it is true that many of my Mac-using friends are just ordinary users who don't want the added complication of Windows, quite a few others are totally gonzo, hard-core techies that also know Windows and Unix better than most people who primarily use those platforms. In addition to being a 15-year Mac user, I myself have a degree in computer engineering and over 5 years' experience of daily use of Windows and 10 years' daily use of Unix.

"Taking an application that was intended to be run on an operating system that is designed for advanced users, and running it on an operating system that is designed for less advanced users..."

I have no idea which operating system you are talking about. The only time I ever felt the Mac was designed for "less advanced users" was before I got to know it. Just because the Mac is accessible to inexpert users does not in any way mean it is limited to them, or lowers the ceiling of capability. I believe the Mac is designed for ALL users, and few indeed are the times that I have ever felt limited by it. In fact, the things holding me back on the Mac right now are my own limitations and preconceptions. The system is capable of much more than I demand of it.

Re:It all depends who your friends are

[StarFace]

I am going out on a limb here, but I would bet that the percentage of engineers using Macs is a lot less than the publishing and multimedia market, let alone the home user market. I am speaking of general, popular usage. There are places where extremely technical people use Macs, because they recognize that the best too for the job is not a religion. I'm not really addressing that group of people, which incidentally, I fall under, and given your list of years under different operating systems, it sounds like that is your motto too. Amongst the latter category, lots of expert Mac users that have added on to the system, both in hardware and software terms. They use multi-button mice, extensions that allow keyboard shortcuts, virtual workspaces, and other such niceties. But again, this really isn't addressing the user space I'm talking about, nor is it addressing the user space that Apple targets.

Preference of choice is a big thing with computer experts. They usually do not want their systems to create a barrier, and when they do, they like systems that allow them to circumvent that barrier. This is why the workstation *NIX systems have grown to be so popular among those who'd rather not put up with system limitations.

While the Macintosh OS, in my humble opinion, is superior to the Windows OS in interface and underlying design, it still has a barrier that I run in to, and this is where we come to preference. You are comfortable within the set of rules Apple lays out, and that is perfectly fine, I and plenty of others are not comfortable. I'd rather be able to switch the stock OS X window manager out with something that has a smaller footprint, for instance, and something that allows me to have transparent control over the system. Blackbox is my favorite window manager. I've grown used to the power that it provides, along with its clean simplicity. I cannot really do this swap with OS X though. Sure, I could set it to boot to X11 and just use the Darwin kernel and BSD system, but then I would have all manner of configuration nightmares since OS X doesn't use the standard /etc files. At that point, I might as well just install FreeBSD or Linux on Apple hardware (which is something that I do. I own an iBook, and it dual boots between Debian and OS X on a regular basis.) I find that when I want to get some serious work done, the Debian system caters to that, and when I want to grab photos from my camera, email them to a few friends, or watch a DVD, it is generally easier to do that with OS X. The right tool for the job.

Incidentally, with that said, I am completely enjoying learning the OS X Cocoa toolkit, and Objective-C. I'm finding that I am more inclined to create custom applications for myself in OS X than Linux.

I'm digressing. The point of the matter is that configuration and optimization should be laid bare for the experts, if they so choose to use it. The fact that you can only change a minimal set of features with OS X's window manager is an example of catering to inexpert users. That's fine and dandy, but it's a frustrating environment for me to work in. That doesn't mean that I am any more expert or inexpert than you, it just goes to show that people are different, and if the OS cannot anticipate and allow people to be different, it has barriers. You just happened to get lucky in that your preferences lie within the barriers.

Re:It all depends who your friends are

[PythonOrRuby]

Besides offering a better interface for novices, you might want to look at how else a consistent interface across the platform benefits users.

It provides an environment where I can go from one OS X machine to another, and instantly be at home, even if someone else is currently using it. It makes it easier to break out of an "assigned computer for each user" way of thinking and start thinking about a more network-centric environment where there are a bunch of machines and a bunch of users, and a server, and anyone can do any of their work at any workstation.

Until the thin client concept really matures, and network transparent windowing systems get fast enough to deal with something like Quartz, this is how Apple has to tackle such a situation.

Besides, Apple has the strongest branding in the industry(what other software or hardware vendor can be almost universally identified by just a non-alphanumerc image?), so it's in their best interest to make their machines recognizable.

Re:It all depends who your friends are

[StarFace]

Once again, to this purpose I completely agree! It's great that there is a company out there that actually does what it says (for the most part) and manages to keep "the users" relatively happy with their products year after year. Consistency across machines is just one nice feature for this purpose.

I just don't subscribe to this model in the specialist market. People who spend 12-16 hours a day on a computer, and are intimate with its inner workings shouldn't have to be fenced in with people who spend 12 hours a month, simply for the convenience of machine consistency. This is why I am staunchly opposed to the thin client model as a global solution.

It's a silly analogy, but you wouldn't expect a biochemist to use the same exact pocket calculator that mother used to balance the check books. A few here and there might be satisfied with that arrangment but they are the exceptions. Sure, having One pocket calculator button layout would make for a more consistent and convenient world where you wouldn't have to hunt for the 'off' switch on an HP 48G, but it wouldn't address the specific needs of expert users either. The same goes for computers. Some people live and breathe these things, others use them like a toaster, or a television set, or a book.

I completely agree with the notion that the Mac OS, both 8-9 and X era is a wonderful philosophy for entry level to mid-level users, and in some cases, even some higher level usage. But the moment it turns into a religion and people start saying that experts should be happy with one button and a relativey unconfigurable interface is when I start quirking my eyebrow.

Oh, and by the way, in response to your user name: Ruby. :)

Using windows emulator on a powerbook with OSX

[Anonymous Coward]

I really want to get a powerbook with OSX. There are a couple of reasons for this.

1.) As a hobby I try making electronic music, and the software is usually well tuned for the apple platform.

2.) I loved it when I used linux as my primary OS. But because I have changed jobs, and also because of school I am unfortunately reliant upon some windows apps. I know MS office runs on the mac platform.. That is great, but I need to know if I can run MS Visual C++ at a decent speed inside a windows emulator?? Is this possible? Anyone try it?

3.) Also multimedia has always been a bitch on linux. OS X is definitely much better.

Hopefully I will get some answers. Please help make me an apple customer!!!

That's TWIN Turbo

[thufir]

sdfadsf asdjfsdk fsdjklf asdf s

DVD Player for Linux

[__aafutm5472]

Off topic, but try Ogle for a DVD player. Works great on my IBM Thinkpad 600E (PII 366) running RH 7.3

User review

[K'tohg]

My account of a Linux geek turned Mac

I loved Linux, BSD, Sun, etc. anything with a propper Bash shell. I would hiss at others as they entered the room with there new Windows ME based hardware. I would scower at others with their up-side-down Apple logos and their shinny happy faces. *shudder*

With Mac OS X all of that has changed. Now I'm one of those shiny happy faces. So why did I switch. Simple: "Based on Unix." Yup That's why. When I saw that a nice and functinoal interface that didn't get in the way ontop of a Unix environment I was almost sold.

Hardware

The hardware is very superior. First thing I noticed is compatability. Not once has my machine fretted about hardware. It has been very polite by either supporting my hardware 100% or nicely letting me know that it doesn't know how to talk to the device.

My TiBook came with two USB ports, A Firewire port, A 1000 Kb/s RJ-45 Jack, A monitor port, S-Video port (with Composite Addapter), 56 Kb/s V.90 Modem and a PCMCIA slot. Eveyone I talk to is amased by the slot loading DVD drive.

The keyboard is nice. It's slim and black with white letters. That in my book is cool. However the keys are weak and shallow. And the Control key is in the upmost worst spot it could be. So thanks to the ease of use of USB I use my "Happy Hacker Keyboard" Plus a Logiteck Optical mouse (3 button w/ wheel).

As for power my machine really kicks but. I got the lower end model at 550 MHz G4 and it's fast. Most of the time I have multiple apps running. Photoshop, Word, iTunes, Mozilla, Terminal (w/ multiple ssh and updatedb at 0000 midnight) and my machine doesn't break a sweat (It's got a fan too)

By far my favorite feature is "sleep mode" all I do is close the lid and the machine suspends itself and a spiffy glowing pulsing LED turns on lighting up the room like a night light. It's that simple. I even had the battery drop out and when I quickly returned it in a panic I found everything was still ok. It is roubust and durable. And it's mad from titanium.

The only two draw backs I saw is the pain on the edges chip off needing a paint job at somepoint. And the price. Apple hardware although superiour is more expensive.

Interface

So far OS X is the best desktop for a Unix environment I have ever seen. It out trumps GNOME and KDE and tottaly obliverates Windows. I may loose some geek factor in favor of ease of use but to be honest Terminal is for those geek things. It it intuitive enough for a kid yet powerfull enough for a serious gamer. Allot is already customizable by default. The look and feel can be customized by a third party app. A few of the Enightenmant features I miss. Mainly the middle mouse button paste. The virtual destop is missing too. And most missed is the sloppy focus. But aside for that the interface is easy and doesn't get in my way Like so many others.

In my eyes OS X compares as if it were just another windows manager on a really well made BSD Distribution. If it ever came to Intel it would rule the world but the hardware is why you should by a Mac. In fact you should get it because it will remove some of the extra thought you use to use the machine and put it to better use. Really the interface does a descent job of freeing you from thinking about it as much. But I'll save more propaganda for more qualified reviewers than myself.

pros

• Easy to use
• fast
• dependable
• perfect multitasking
• compatability w/ windows networks, Unix, And good hardware compatability.
• Looks uber slick
• This is the Docker pants amung computers

cons

• It's a little pricey
• Doesn't have as much commercial software (But you Unix geeks should be used to that)
• $120 for an upgrade from 10.1.5 to 10.2
• It places fear and resentment to those companies who have been sleeping around with Microsoft

Please forgive the poor quality of this review it's my first time. Questions/comments can be addressed in emails or slashdot reply posts.

I am proud to say my Mac is 100% OS X. I have deleted my Virtual PC's so no more windows and Classic (OS 9) has been remove. Fink [sf.net] saved my sanity.

Re:User review

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice article.

Now learn to fucking spell, you imbecile.

Re:User review

[easter1916]

This is the Docker pants amung computers

Sweet Jesus, that's an insult, a con, not a pro.

Not exactly a new idea

[Anonymous Coward]

We need a company that is as creative as Apple to make a desktop for Linux.

It's been tried. Remember these guys?

LaTeX/xdvi on OS X

[retsop-emitemos]

This may be off-topic, it's a request for information.

The only thing holding me back from migrating full-time to OS X (from years of Solaris use) is that I can't get LaTeX, or rather, xdvi, to work smoothly.

Case in point: I *just* used fink to install xfree86, then tetex, then xdvi on a brand new powerbook. xfree86 works great. Latex works great. But, just like everytime I've installed it on OS X, xdvi can't find fonts. So, I effectively can't use LateX smoothly.

Do you use xdvi, and if so, how well does it work for you?

Re: workspace management, I really like xfce (also available via fink. It gives you virtual desktops for X11, although not for aqua (butthen most of what I do is under X11 anyway).

Re:LaTeX/xdvi on OS X

[RavenDuck]

I haven't used xdvi myself, but if you use dvipdf, you can view your documents with preview.app which comes with OS X. Yes, it's one more step (but if you use BibTeX, and references, and the other cool LaTeX stuff, you have to do a few steps before you even get a dvi, so it's not that much more work).

Also there is a packaged called TeXshop which runs dvipdf and previews the PDF document, but personally I've never got the pdf previewer on it to work (and I prefer to use emacs to write my documents)

Re:LaTeX/xdvi on OS X

[retsop-emitemos]

Thanks for the reply. Actually, I do know about the pdf options, and I agree that dvipdf is only a small extra step. But I really like the way xdvi works as compared with Preview -- it refreshes with a single keystroke, and is very fast. If working with pdf, I would actually recommend xpdf over Preview -- assuming you're running X11, that is. It self-updates with a single keystroke, like xdvi. I dislike TeXShop for the same reasons as you (I use emacs too, but under X11 -- courtesy fink). If you're using X11, I would strongly recommend you try xpdf. And I think xdvi is even better (if you can get it to work; if you do, let me know!)

BSD Kernel on Mach

[CreamsicleSeventeen]

Does anyone here know why they did this? Why not use BSD by itself?

Re:BSD Kernel on Mach

[sjgman9]

XNU is the kernel. Its a mix of BSD and Mach. BSD stuff is kicked into kernel space to get rid of the message passing overhead. Also, the Mach Kernel has been around in NeXT for quite some time

Re:Sooo many...Apple packaging.-bundles.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds to me that "disk image" containers would then be a breeze to impliment on Linux. BTW wasn't Apple suppose to be using "bundles" to package their applications? Now that might be a patent minefield. Any experience on how Apple handles "issues" that plague other OS's like library clashes?

I'll never submit to Apple's will

[geekee]

When OSX is available on pc hardware, I'll take a look at it. I refuse to buy an OS from a company that is the only source for the hardware. It's an innovation killer. Sun has the same business practice and look how overpriced their hardware is. My company is switching from solaris to linux as soon as the CAD tools are available under linux. When I put together my pc, I picked the processor, motherboard, etc. that I wanted, not the stuff that MS, Apple or any other vendor decided I should have.

Re:I'll never submit to Apple's will

[Hawthorne01]

I refuse to buy an OS from a company that is the only source for the hardware. It's an innovation killer.

Right. Apple of course, is known for it's lack of innovative hardware....

Hell, they even invented the flaming laptop battery! How much more innovation do you need than that? ;)

Re:I'll never submit to Apple's will

[geekee]

I hope you're being sarcastic about innovative Apple hardware, because, they're behind for the most part in all areas. That's why they're buying third party pc hardware. Of course, no company in their right mind would volunteer to design harware for macs. If Apple doesn't want it, they'll make sure no one can put it in their machines. Remember Exponential? Not only did Apple breech their contract with Exponential, but they wouldn't allow the clone makers at the time to modify the BIOS to boot using the Exponential PPC. They're tactics make MS look like nice guys.

Does it always "Just Work"?

[tony clifton]

So here's what's stopping me from really considering a mac (as opposed to 2nd tier Thinkpad, which I normally get every 2-3 years).

How does it work w/ corporate networks? I do a lot of consulting, and more than once I've ended up connecting to VPN's using Win2k's client, or even worse a 3rd party client like Nortel w/ a SecureID token generator. My big fear is that I'd be SOL there, and worse, I'd get the "oh a mac" groan from IT.

Looks very nice, though..

Thinkpad vs Dell

[sjbe]

It's like a thinkpad, only cheaper, custom configured, and a hell of a lot easier to install linux on.

Cheaper both in cost and in quality. I happen to be typing on a Thinkpad T30 with Ultranav (both the trackpoint and pad). Most of the folks I work with have Dell laptops of one form or another, usually Inspiron 8200s, so I get to work on them regularly. The Thinkpads have a notably higher build quality. Less plasticy feel, superior layout, and of course nobody does keyboards better than IBM. IBM's ultrabay is slick, and there are just a bunch of little touches, like the keyboard light, that make it very nice to use. Don't get me wrong, the Dell machines are fine and great on cost/performance. But they just aren't as nice to use.

Oh, and you can get a Thinkpad custom configured too. Slightly different options and Dell's process is a tad slicker & more flexible but functionally both companies can do the custom configuration thing. And thinkpads ain't so bad to install linux on. Most laptops are a bit of a pain but it's not horrible anymore. (usually anyway)

I Switched

[slashx2002]

I'm sure someone has already said this, but if you are looking for a laptop, then there are none better than the Apple iBook, and Titanium Powerbook G4. I recently got a 700mhz 12" Combo iBook, and it is the best computer I have ever used. I have loved Apple computers for along time, but have used Wintels all my life. Since I have "switched" my computer experience, has been for the most part flawless. There is no blue screen of death, and no other cryptic error messages. If there is ever an error, it is with a MICROSOFT program. Even with that, unlike what Windows would do, it just closes that program, and doesn't mess with other procceses. As far as the mouse situation goes, I didn't think I would like the trackpad, with only one button, but after just a short while of using, thats pretty much all I use. and if I ever need a second button, or want a scroll wheel, I just plug in my Kensington USB PocketMouse. Unlike Wintels, everything on a Mac, just works. So if you are tired of pulling out your hair using Windows, then I greatly urge you, to make the "switch."

Attn: Taco and Hemos, Please ring in

[iSwitched]

I am enjoying the fact that your consideration of a Mac as your next primary laptop has resulted in the second highest comment-count on the front page today, behind only Favorite Windows OSS by a slim margin.

So please, tell us, what have you decided?

//machine_name/current/directory in the title bar

[steveha]

I used to have my shells set up to display the machine name and directory in the title bar of the xterm. It was sweet; you could have a really long directory path and it would all fit up there. (A proportional font helps it fit nicely.) Then the actual shell prompt was history number and a # (if root) or a $ (if not root).

I was using tcsh in those days, and it has a feature called "cwdcmd" where you could set up a command to be executed when changing directories. But you don't need that; you can just alias the cd command itself under bash or whatever.

steveha

Re:focus follows mouse -- 2 out of 3

[Anonymous Coward]

2. multiple desktops

CodeTek VirtualDesktop (2.0, beta, $20, but very nifty)

3. key bindings to avoid the necessity for using the mouse, i.e. -- "warp"ing to different apps / desktops, etc.

LaunchBar 3.2.4 ... the best Keyboard App
switcher since sliced bread. Seriously.

Re:Not now, guys!? Please consider NOT switching.

[victim]

The quicktime ogg library is not yet correct. Apple would never release that.

There seems to be some issue about returning a variable amount of data with each call, but given that variable bit rate mp3s work it seems to me that with an appropriate buffer for reblocking output data oggs should work as well. They may have gotten beyond that, since I last looked closely, but I see on their bug tracker they still have issues.

Still, if the API works out it would make sense for them to use quicktime and save some duplication.

Another Linux switcher

[Yonder Way]

Like a lot of other /.'ers, I switched to OS X from Linux. Oh, I still do work quite a lot with Linux, but my primary computer is now an Apple Powerbook G4 "Titanium" 800MHz. It's what I'm using now to surf /., and what I use professionally for my work (*NIX consulting and videography work).

While it is far from perfect, the desktop environment works better for me than any of the X11 desktops. Gnome was especially painful. There are some real differences to get used to, but once you are used to it you appreciate it.

There is enough UNIX in OS X to keep me happy. I've got MySQL, Apache and PHP running on here. Perl is also installed by default. (MySQL was added later). The networking stuff is awesome, and this is how a portable is SUPPOSED to work. I know you've heard it all before, but this thing "just works".

Now if only Cinelerra ran on OS X natively...

Cocoa Impressions - Nothing is bad about Cocoa

[Paradox]

I'm surprised to hear people complain at all about Cocoa, since it's probably the best C-derivative development environment currently in existance. You list some problems, namely:

• Resource Management
  

  Err, release-retain-autorelease is the best implementation of reference counting you can find that will not break with existant C libraries and not place very specialized rules on how you can handle pointers and casting.

• Error Handling
  

  Excuse me? Cocoa exceptions are just as good as Java exceptions. Way better than C++ exceptions.

• Type Safety
  

  This is more of an ideological argument... people used to C++ seem mystified that it is not an error in Objective C to call a method on an object when that method does not exist! In fact, some people deliberatly do this, making that object handle failed messages in a specail way. It's a really flexible system. The only disadvantage is you may not get all your errors at compile-time (although if you write your code the way apple suggests you will get most of them).

Cocoa is the best thing since sliced bread for programmers that want real OO projects with real OO flexibility but still need to play nice with C libraries and have some form of garbage collection. I will say, with quite a bit of assurance, that there is no API better suited to rapid, scalable application development than cocoa.

As for your many other points, hopefully they will be discarded as OS 9 sloughs off like so much discarded cocoon. Aqua is a hefty player in the window-manager world, but that's because it does more than any other window manager. It makes Enlightenment look like a kid's toy. It makes WinXP's explorer look like vomit. 10.2 is quite speedy, all but 2 operations on QuartzGL are faster than I can comprehend. The slow ones (namely resize on apps that need to redraw their whole view based on window size) and scrolling (which is quite snappy but depending on the app isn't perfectly slickly smooth) are the only operations to show any signs of the massive amount of work QGL goes through to make your desktop look pleasant and handle lighting fast.

So please, don't criticize cocoa until you play with it for some time. The API s a little tough to learn at first (mostly because of the methodology behind its design being so alien to C++ coders) but rapidly makes more sense than any other library out there.

Nothing beats... PINE!?!?!

[jbuilder]

Moshe writes:

Multiple terminal sessions (screen, Linux virtual terminals, Emacs, vim) and a good e-mail client (nothing beats pine).

At this moment I stopped reading the article. Anyone who would say that PINE is a BETTER email client that MUTT (http://www.mutt.org/) is obviously a dolt and not worth the effort.

Re:Nothing beats... PINE!?!?!

[Nugget]

pine: people ignorant of newer emailers.

Re:Nothing beats... PINE!?!?!

[jbuilder]

I really resent being mod'ed down as flamebait on that posting. That was NOT flamebait. PINE is so outdated is almost funny! You like the keystrokes in PINE! No problem! So do I, I just remapped MUTT and I was good to go!

Don't agree fine... But to say I'm flaming? Puhleze... Some moderators are SO touchy.

Re:Nothing beats... PINE!?!?!

[beb]

Hey, I'm not ignorant. Just "old-school" and addicted to the sheer SPEED of Pine (nothing else comes close for me)! =8^)

-9 year Pine user

Re:Nothing beats... PINE!?!?!

[Nugget]

strange, since I've always considered speed and economy of interface to be one of pine's weakest points. It's about the least efficient and most cumbersome interface I've used.

I still say that pine is the Outlook Express of unix mail readers:

They both focus on ease of learning at the expense of ease of use.

They're both preferred by relatively inexperienced users and win mainly due to "first exposure" intertia

The users of both appear to believe that theirs is the only similar email client. ("I like pine because I can ")

Pine embraces the Windows philosophy of monolithic applications by bundline an editor and a newsreader into the mail reader. Very un-unix.

Try mutt, you'll never look back.

Reliable yet not utterly boring

[seawall]

IBooks are just enough different to be a little fun yet still manage to be useful and reliable.

That combination doesn't happen every day.

I work on Linux and Windows machines mostly. I like Linux a lot. There are things I like in Windows. Solaris is in there too and pleasant enough (and before that: BSD on Vaxen, Primos, CP/M and even CDC and IBM card walloping).

The thing is: After dealing with Linux, Solaris and Windows all day, they just aren't that amusing.

The iBook I'm using is reasonably fast with Jaguar, small, light, reliable, has a decent screen, a keyboard/touchpad I can live with (and I usually dislike touchpads). It can run most of what I need and most of what I want and it has just enough difference to be fun.

I find I had missed fun.

That "It Just Works" means I can carry around a machine I find fun. Neat.

Eventually it may stop being fun but for now, I like it a lot.

fa!

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't need out permission. If you want to make OS X your primary environment on your laptop, you go right ahead. You see, it's your laptop and your life. Have a nice day.

No Mac warez

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, watch this one get modded down to hell.

I would love to get a Mac for all the reasons people here are shouting about. But there is one thing that holds me back: the lack of pirate software available for Mac. You have to pay for *everything*. New version of the OS? Pay for it. Latest Photoshop? Pay for it. Etc....

I don't want to get into a flame war about the moral issues of piracy, but if someone can show me where the Mac warez scene is, I'll happily fork out the inflated prices for the pretty hardware.

Re:No Mac warez

[Anonymous Coward]

Such a young Coward. Prolly has no idea what USENET is either...

If it isn't KazAa and Win XP, he doesn't know about it...

What I still want - VPN and VSS Access

[wessto]

At my company we have VPN access in to a Checkpoint firewall. I use SecuRemote from my win2k boxen at home to establish the VPN. Currently, I do not know of a solution to doing this with a mac with the exception of trying to make it work with VirtualPC or something similar.

The other thing I would require is Visual Source Safe access. I know there is Visual Source Offsite (or something like that), but I want to use the normal client. It was not my choice to go with VSS in the first place in our group, but we did...if only we were using CVS things would be dandy, but the fact remains, that if I go OSX, I will lose functionality in both of these areas. Anyone know of a solution for either?

With these two requirements met, I would jump ship in a heartbeat. In fact I may do it just to have a nice personal machine and not worry about doing work stuff on it! I'm ready to switch.

Re:What I still want - VPN and VSS Access

[Erik K. Veland]

VPN is supported by Jaguar (Mac OS X v.10.2)

Re:What I still want - VPN and VSS Access

[wessto]

Yes, but not vpn in through a checkpoint firewall -- possible only by configuring the firewall for special cases (which my company does not do often) or by using the securemote client (a product by checkpoint). Thanks for the heads up though!

Me too ... and I'm loving it.

[Macka]

You're not the only one. I used to use a Linux desktop at home, and a Windows laptop when out visiting customers. I've combined both workloads onto the same 800Mhz Powerbook Moshse uses. I couldn't be happier. It's proving to be a real benefit in so many ways.

Just this weekend I was talking to my brother and he was bitching about a problem he was having trying to get some footage off his Sony video camera. He's got a firewire card for his PC, but 5 mins into the import it would lock up and his PC (WinXP) would crash.

So I called round, plugged it into my firewire port and fired up iMovie. It saw the camera right away and I was able to import the clips. Next step, connect my network port into his hub and connect to a fileshare on his PC (a 30 second job .. no reboot required) and I'm ready to start converting the clips to quicktime movies (Expert mode: Sorensen Codec @ 720x576 resolution) and drop them on his PC.

Actually, that's something else where Mac OS X really shines .. the ease with which you can jump around networks makes working with a PowerBook a real joy. Even when I dial into customer networks, OSX quietly turns off my local ethernet network for the duration, and then restores it again afterwards. No intervention needed from me. It's real sweet.

I'm hooked. I'm so much more productive on OSX than I ever was with Windows or Linux. Best desktop I've ever used.

PS: The longest part of the day was generating the quicktime movies. The Sorensen Codec seems to be the only one that can generate good quality movies at that resolution .. but it's massively cpu bound and takes an age to render.

Network configuration bad .. huh ??

[Macka]

You're nuts .. network configuration on OSX is one of the easiest I've ever seen or used. I constantly travel around between home office, hotels and customer sites; and setting up on a new network is fast, quick, and painless. It takes seconds, and (like any other Unix) there is no requirement to logout or reboot.

This guy doesn't even know what he bought...

[ganiman]

In the beginning of the article he said he bought a G4 Powerbook, then goes on to say he had an iBook. If he knew how much he paid for it, then he should most certainly know which one he got. A Powerbook can cost nearly twice as much as an iBook.

Mac to Linux to MacOSX - I switched twice

[sellers]

I started out liking Mac's simple and work the way it says it works the first time after being a Windows lab admin. Then, a colleage and friend introduces Linux and I realized the power of Linux and the future growth. I fell in love, and still love. When Apple went BSD, and blessed it with a gui and set of api's that make it desktop and enterprise friendly, it was the best of both.
Funny now that the colleage who showed me Linux, now owns a TiBook, and two other colleges joined me with an iBook. The killer is, they are also very refined and it's the small things that you experience that win you over. (like keyboard softness, sleep time, battery, size, soft edges, weight, plug and works!!, etc)

I agree on some points, however IBM graphics

[BoomerSooner]

lags months behind (although they appear to be getting a little better). So far I've only seen people that have problems with their hinges (which is pathetic). But for a compareable Thinkpad to my Inspiron at the time it would have cost $2300 to the $1600 I spent at Dell, and they didn't offer any graphics cards over 8mb (I have an 8100) and the only option for the 15" was 1600x1200 which is too small for me (my dell is at 1400x1050). In the end I've got exactly what I want, for the price I want and a 3 year warranty as well (instead of 1 year from IBM).

Now I do agree IBM's are top notch. In fact that is why I got a Dell. I wanted a point stick/eraser head since that was my favorite laptop (ahhh the good old days of Arthur Andersen, pre-meltdown). I just couldn't pay more for less hardware/software simply over a hinge that may or maynot cause me a problem. Plus I'm very careful with all my things (being poor as a child makes you respect what you own).

Re:What's the point of this?

[Shuh]

Uhh, you're not very smart, are you?

How exactly is MacOS X going to be able to play next-gen DVDs, open Word documents, read email from Outlook users, etc, if Apple doesn't implement Palladium?

Simple:

1. FUD: next-gen DVD's don't need Paladium,
2. Word and Office apps are about to go down the digital toilet with the rent-your-software/DRM model. Open Office will rule!,
3. You need digital rights to read E-MAIL? Outlook goes into the digital toilet... bye bye!

Format?

[JoshRoss]

Jesus, it sounds like tech help in any poor IT dept..

Caller: Help my laptop at first run for 4 hours without a recharge.

Helpdesk: Turn it off, turn it back on.

Caller: Uhh...

Helpdesk: Oh, that didn't work, hmm. You must have a virus. Put the red cd in the drive and hit 'Y' whenever it stops doing anything until it looks normal again.

In a vise

[Pseudonymus Bosch]

As a long time trackpad user, you'd have to squeeze my testicles in a vise to get me to use a laptop with the orange knob right in the middle of the keyboard. I've tried it, repeatedly, and it sucks. It's an infuriatingly useless device.

mccalli: Whereas I hate trackpads and never use the damned things if possible.

I like Dell's approach on the Inspiron I have - put both on the machine, let the user decide.

You are not meaning the testicles, are you?

Tcl/Tk on Mac OS X

[chrsbrwn]

This link might be of interest to you... it's about a binary installation of Tcl & Aqua Tk 8.4.0 for Mac OS X.

It is possible to build python under Mac OS X with TK support as well... I have been running this build, from the WxPython folks, with these instructions from Tony Lownds on how to build the Tkinter module.

I love it...except.

[rawg]

I love my OS X, except the lock-up and crashes. I never used MS windows, so I did not get the experience the contstant crashes. Now that I have a Mac, I can join in with the fun.

When I used Debian Linux on my desktop, I never had one crash. Not one crash in the 8 years that I used it. I have used OS X since June. I installed Debian on it just so I could have a stable system when OS X crashed. Jagwire is much better, but still as I was writing this the DVD movie in the background crashed my system. I had to hit the reset switch.

Re:I love it...except.

[Anonymous Coward]

i casrhed daily in jag, but then apples awesome phone support walked me , a non unix guy, thru booting into single user mode and running fsck -y. havent crashed since

Re:I love it...except.

[Squidgee]

Uhm...

May I ask what crashes yer talking about in Mac OS X? No WAY you are an actualy Mac user.

Hemos, do -not- listen to this...user. I've yet to have my Mac crash. He obviously uses a) Not a Mac, or b) Os 9.

Get an iBook/TiBook; I just recently switched from SuSe/XP, and I love it. :)

Re:I love it...except.

[rawg]

Yes I am a Mac OS X user. I have a Apple Cube to use it on. I love it to death. NFS has a few problems though. There are a few other things that really bug me. Like if I put the system to sleep while PhotoShop is running, then when I wake it, it seems locked up. I wait for about 10 or 15 minutes and PhotoShop will crash and the system will come up. If I transfer a very large file, 100mb, to a NFS drive then my Mac looses its ethernet. I have found that if I turn on my wireless the ethernet will come back. Little stuff like that. I dual boot to Debian Linux and do not have a single problem with my ethernet or lockups. I'm running 10.2.1.

Tim O'Reilly recently said.......

[Anonymous Coward]

He said it would be the Linux and GNU/Unix people who flocked to the Mac and abandoned their previous platform, not the Wintel folk.

Maybe Tim should go into publishing.

Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple laptops are effectively unusable for unix users.

I am a long-time Unix user. That means I need to have the Ctrl key to the left of the A key. This is a genuine need, not merely a want; it is based upon ergonomics. The Ctrl key is heavily used in unix, and it must be easily accessable. It cannot be off in the lower left corner of the keyboard where it is difficult to get at, and where it distorts the position of your left hand such that you can't easily type other keys while holding the Ctrl key down.

Apple desktop keyboards are now all USB. They are all OK. The CapsLock key can be re-mapped into a Ctrl key.

Unfortunately, even in this modern age, all Apple laptops have built-in ADB keyboards. The ADB keyboard is broken-by-design. It is, in general, not possible to remap the CapsLock key into a Ctrl key.

There are some exceptions, but they are horrible kludges. They are horrible kludges because the original design of the ADB keyboard was a horrible kludge. The correct solution would be for Apple to re-design their laptop motherboards to use built-in USB keyboards. This hasn't happened yet. If you run Linux, use Debian's solution. For Mac OS X users, uControl works. There are no solutions (that I know of) for either NetBSD or OpenBSD. Please note once again that the "solutions" above are in fact kludges, because of the original bad design of the ADB keyboard.

Apple is (currently) ignoring Unix users! This is not merely speculation on my part. In an on-going email exchange I am having with an Apple employee (whom I won't name) in their marketing department, the Apple marketing person directly stated to me that Apple was catering to their historic Mac customers, and is purposely ignoring the Unix market. He also claimed that Apple would soon start paying more attention to the Unix market. I won't hold my breath. Apple has been ignoring Unix users for more than 12 years. I expect that trend to continue. (Also note that my Apple contact indicated that Macs would never ship with a 3-button mouse, even though Apple intended to port almost all X-window software and deliver it either on a CD/DVD or installed directly on each Mac's hard drive. How Unix friendly is a 1-button mouse with X programs that often require 3 buttons?)

Apple has now lost two opportunities to sell me hardware. I really wanted an Apple laptop for their superior battery life, and for the PowerPC with Altivec CPU. (The Altivec is vastly superior to the x86 line for DSP.) Because I can't live with the broken-by-design built-in ADB keyboard in all Apple laptops, Sony and IBM sold me laptops instead. If Apple fixes this problem, they will sell me a PowerBook next year; if they don't, I'll still be running OpenBSD on x86 hardware, and wishing I could use a Mac.

Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, they keyboard kinda blows ...

Apple laptops are effectively unusable for unix users.

I am a long-time Unix user. That means I need to have the Ctrl key to the left of the A key. This is a genuine need , not merely a want; it is based upon ergonomics. The Ctrl key is heavily used in unix, and it must be easily accessable. It cannot be off in the lower left corner of the keyboard where it is difficult to get at, and where it distorts the position of your left hand such that you can't easily type other keys while holding the Ctrl key down.

Apple desktop keyboards are now all USB. They are all OK. The CapsLock key can be re-mapped into a Ctrl key.

Unfortunately, even in this modern age, all Apple laptops have built-in ADB keyboards. The ADB keyboard is broken-by-design. It is, in general, not possible to remap the CapsLock key into a Ctrl key.

There are some exceptions, but they are horrible kludges. They are horrible kludges because the original design of the ADB keyboard was a horrible kludge. The correct solution would be for Apple to re-design their laptop motherboards to use built-in USB keyboards. This hasn't happened yet. If you run Linux, use Debian's solution. For Mac OS X users, uControl works. There are no solutions (that I know of) for either NetBSD or OpenBSD. Please note once again that the "solutions" above are in fact kludges, because of the original bad design of the ADB keyboard.

Apple is (currently) ignoring Unix users! This is not merely speculation on my part. In an on-going email exchange I am having with an Apple employee (whom I won't name) in their marketing department, the Apple marketing person directly stated to me that Apple was catering to their historic Mac customers, and is purposely ignoring the Unix market. He also claimed that Apple would soon start paying more attention to the Unix market. I won't hold my breath. Apple has been ignoring Unix users for more than 12 years. I expect that trend to continue. (Also note that my Apple contact indicated that Macs would never ship with a 3-button mouse, even though Apple intended to port almost all X-window software and deliver it either on a CD/DVD or installed directly on each Mac's hard drive. How Unix friendly is a 1-button mouse with X programs that often require 3 buttons?)

Apple has now lost two opportunities to sell me hardware. I really wanted an Apple laptop for their superior battery life, and for the PowerPC with Altivec CPU. (The Altivec is vastly superior to the x86 line for DSP.) Because I can't live with the broken-by-design built-in ADB keyboard in all Apple laptops, Sony and IBM sold me laptops instead. If Apple fixes this problem, they will sell me a PowerBook next year; if they don't, I'll still be running OpenBSD on x86 hardware, and wishing I could use a Mac.

Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users

[Anonymous Coward]

And the Control key is in the upmost worst spot it could be.

Apple laptops are effectively unusable for unix users.

I am a long-time Unix user. That means I need to have the Ctrl key to the left of the A key. This is a genuine need, not merely a want; it is based upon ergonomics. The Ctrl key is heavily used in unix, and it must be easily accessable. It cannot be off in the lower left corner of the keyboard where it is difficult to get at, and where it distorts the position of your left hand such that you can't easily type other keys while holding the Ctrl key down.

Apple desktop keyboards are now all USB. They are all OK. The CapsLock key can be re-mapped into a Ctrl key.

Unfortunately, even in this modern age, all Apple laptops have built-in ADB keyboards. The ADB keyboard is broken-by-design. It is, in general, not possible to remap the CapsLock key into a Ctrl key.

There are some exceptions, but they are horrible kludges. They are horrible kludges because the original design of the ADB keyboard was a horrible kludge. The correct solution would be for Apple to re-design their laptop motherboards to use built-in USB keyboards. This hasn't happened yet. If you run Linux, use Debian's solution. For Mac OS X users, uControl works. There are no solutions (that I know of) for either NetBSD or OpenBSD. Please note once again that the "solutions" above are in fact kludges, because of the original bad design of the ADB keyboard.

Apple is (currently) ignoring Unix users! This is not merely speculation on my part. In an on-going email exchange I am having with an Apple employee (whom I won't name) in their marketing department, the Apple marketing person directly stated to me that Apple was catering to their historic Mac customers, and is purposely ignoring the Unix market. He also claimed that Apple would soon start paying more attention to the Unix market. I won't hold my breath. Apple has been ignoring Unix users for more than 12 years. I expect that trend to continue. (Also note that my Apple contact indicated that Macs would never ship with a 3-button mouse, even though Apple intended to port almost all X-window software and deliver it either on a CD/DVD or installed directly on each Mac's hard drive. How Unix friendly is a 1-button mouse with X programs that often require 3 buttons?)

Apple has now lost two opportunities to sell me hardware. I really wanted an Apple laptop for their superior battery life, and for the PowerPC with Altivec CPU. (The Altivec is vastly superior to the x86 line for DSP.) Because I can't live with the broken-by-design built-in ADB keyboard in all Apple laptops, Sony and IBM sold me laptops instead. If Apple fixes this problem, they will sell me a PowerBook next year; if they don't, I'll still be running OpenBSD on x86 hardware, and wishing I could use a Mac.

Quartz Extreme

[Anonymous Coward]

View the stream and see for your self...Quartz Extreme
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/seybol d_02/

PC convert

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been a die-hard PC user since I traded my Apple ][e for a 286, but recently got a 700MHz iBook for use in the field for work. I think they are fantastic. Now that I loaded Jaguar and its properly setup, the machine performs wickedly. My only real issue so far is that it doesn't like to talk with our exchange server at work, but that won't be a problem for much longer... The BSD core provides all the command line power that previous Mac OS releases lacked and no matter what some people choose to believe its a sexy design.

It does support unix cut an paste

[goombah99]

Yes you can do unix style cut and paste in all of the X-windows, just not the aqua windows. Also as for being faster, I think not. You are apparenly just not dexterous enough to key press when you have your hand on the mouse. too bad for you, most people are. I much prefer the apple style because you cant accidentally paste with a wrong mouse click. and you cant accidentally copy for the same reason.

No they did not cripple the processor

[goombah99]

You are a retard. Did you even read the macslash page to linked to? if you had you would know that what yousay is false.

TiBooks as Workhorses

[rixstep]

Hemos:

TiBooks are capable machines, but they're sensitive. Your graphite exterior is going to mar easily.

The most reasonable explanation for this that I have heard is that the anodised aluminum which was the obvious choice didn't sound cool enough to Steve Jobs.

If you want a knock-about machine, nothing beats the iBook. It's durable and can stand a lot more pain.

If I had to do it again I would not get a Tibook, but would instead start with a Power Mac with dual G4s and then an iBook that I knew I could punish if I wanted to.

As for the operating system itself, what remains to be said? The web was built on its precursor. Jaguar is very stable, and yes of course it is Unix, but I am not sure you are going to get all the flexibility you get with the penguin and for example the KDE desktop tools. Apple's Finder will try to hide things from you, just like you got used to old Billg doing.

Right now we're working on a program to replace the Finder - and not use the Finder interface to navigate the disk, but use the actual Unix underneath, so we can see - and manage - everything. Working through a terminal to rid your system of what you don't want (such as several thousand foreign language directories) is just too much work - and no, shell scripts won't do it, and I don't care what any of the geeks out there say. They'll be revising their scripts at doomsday and still promising results.

TiBooks are sexy as hell - yes, Austin Powers uses one, lots of people do (I do too hehe). But I am not sure it is the box of choice.

Now the G5 TiBook... I have been hearing murmurs about this machine for the past year. Tomorrow's hardware is always better than today's, but I would hold off until I heard something definitive about the G5 - preferably dual G5s under the bonnet hehe.

As for prices - you won't do all that good. BMWs cost money too - and this is the equivalent in the IT field. What you can do is purchase yesterday's top models. Those you will get cheaper. Otherwise stick with middle of the road models, and avoid the funky ones that they don't make too often, or that have to be specially assembled and shipped to you directly from Taiwan. It's a great feeling to get a box like that, but they may possibly have not ironed out all the bugs.

Good luck.

gimp

[Anonymous Coward]

one thing that is holding me back, is the lack of a gimp, has anyone installed and got vanilla gimp working on OS X?

Re:gimp

[Anonymous Coward]

gimp was the app that spurred the whole XonX thing, and gave us the goodness of fink.

look at www.macgimp.org for more info.

Re:question

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just you. You are VERY weird.

IRIX to MacOSX

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a computational chemist mainly using IRIX, but with the current state of SGI I've been looking around. I've been using MacOSX on a TiBook for a year or so and I find I'm spending more and more time using MacOSX. Will I switch completely? If Tripos ported SYBYL (or something similar was available) I'd jump ship tomorrow.

Re:What's the point of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks RMS. Want a Snickers? Want half a dozen?

Re:Shut Up

[Anonymous Coward]

This guy's comment is not a troll. He's just justifiably pissed that there are so many assholes in here. I agree with him - all these idiots should shut up, and these discussions would be more educational if they did.

It is so choice, I highly recommend it

[voodoosand]

Been a mac user since the Apple II (sweet games, and PrintShop...!) but now I truly have been becoming a UNIX geek because I finally can have my terminal and eat it too. Previously, I would have different partitions running OS 9 and Suse Linux just so I could play with the whole unix side of things. Stable as a mother and truly allows me to do things OS 9 could never dream of. I love it and I see big changes in the future because of it. To anyone who is not sure, all I can say is try it, you'll love it.

Re:that stupid three button mouse IS supported

[Anonymous Coward]

Try plugging one in before you bitch. Support is there, out of the box.

The problem with including multi-button mice is that developers will *assume* that they're used, and that, unfortunately, gets you Windows interface hell, where plenty of VITAL options and functions are available *only* through contextual menus.

UI Disaster.

Rule of thumb is that context menus are *shortcuts* for things that can be done elsewhere, through "conventional" navigation.

Hence the inclusion of a single-button mouse, but full support of multi-button mice.

-spheric*

TiBooks for Slashdot!

[donmayer]

If Apple doesn't get TiBooks in your hands right away, give us a call and we'll trade you some super TiBooks for advertising!!! Don Mayer CEO Small Dog Electronics www.smalldog.com

test

[testy12345]

just testing my acc sorry

Heh - I did RTFM, and I know about control click

[deadsquid]

While I switched to OSX recently, I have been using Mac stuff for some time. I just said I'm used to right clicking, think it's intuitive, and prefer it to ctrl-click or click-and-hold. I like the one-click-and-I'm there, and both click-and-hold and ctrl-click interrupts the flow for me.

My preference is the right click, I just happen to like it more than the other two methods.

I suppose you didn't read my post in its entirety

[deadsquid]

I said that I use a two-button mouse whenever possible. On a plane, in a boardroom, or sitting on the couch/outside it can be impractical, if not impossible. I do use the mouse, and you're right, it works just fine with no additional software needed. I was just posting the stuff which irritiated me the most, the click-scheme is one (and always has been with Macs).

Not true!

[John Harrison]

In the Thinkpad, there is no internal antenna- the card simply juts out the side.

Depends on the Thinkpad. You can buy Thinkpads with built in 802.11b. No card jutting out. Of course not all Thinkpads have this, but it is certainly an option.

I've never had a problem with wireless range

[deadsquid]

I've used it at work, in my apt, at a few worksites and at friends places and found the range to be adequate. That said, the offices I've tried it in have been outfitted with good antennas, and my apt and friends place are less than 1,000 square feet. Occasionally it kicks down temporarily from 11Mb/s, but not often and not for very long (probably a cordless phone or microwave being used somewhere).

The main problem I've had with the location feature is changing the networks on the fly. I tend to never turn it off, just put it to sleep and change the settings when I change networks. Most of the places I use it in have statically-assigned addresses instead of DHCP, and maybe that's part of the problem. I have figured out how to get it to switch reliably, but it takes a couple extra steps. No biggie at all, it's an annoyance I can live with - a hell of a lot better than BSODs and rebooting when add software. :)

Avoid sweeping generalizations.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually I wound up using windows 2.1 quite a bit.
It was the only OS that could run the control app for the Neve Flying Faders mix automation hardware at a recording studio I used to engineer at. Had a hell of a time trying to find a 286 mobo when some idiot forced a molex connector in upside down and fried the thing.

Gaming

[Anonymous Coward]

Try playing Quake3 with a one-button mouse. Is that crappy software? What about bzflag, which now has a sweet OSX version.
As much as I love my Mac, I use one of my linuxboxen for gaming.

WHAT?!

[Anonymous Coward]

>> Apples run PowerPC processors in them. Dells run Intel Pentium style ones.

You mean, apple doesn't have intel inside?

"feel"

[Anonymous Coward]

You "feel" that the architecture sucks. Wow. What a well-thought-out argument.

Not as "closed" as you think

[Anonymous Coward]

The kernel source code is publicly available and anyone who wants to download it and fiddle with it can do so. In fact, one of the most persistent bugs in OS X (dialup connection failure in users with DP machines) was patched by a 15 yr-old kid in Scotland.

The Mac has a thriving and savvy developer community, with a great deal of freedom and opportunity to tweak the foundations of the OS. Just because Apple keeps some of it proprietary doesn't mean you're helpless to change anything.

Er, no.

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux is less than 1% of the desktop but that is going to change for one simple reason - it's dirt cheap.

Did Linux suddenly become free yesterday? The reasons Linux has and will continue to have such a low share of the desktop are that a) the office/productivity software available for it is derivative and poor (when it exists at all), and b) it is more time-consuming to configure and maintain than MacOS or Windows. That's been the case for years, and unless you know something I don't there's nothing to suggest it's going to change any time soon.

Re:Er, no.

[00_NOP]

Did Linux suddenly become free yesterday? The reasons Linux has and will continue to have such a low share of the desktop are that a) the office/productivity software available for it is derivative and poor (when it exists at all), and b) it is more time-consuming to configure and maintain than MacOS or Windows.

Typically, you are assuming the market is confined to North America/Europe. Well, it ain't.

What do you expect? He thinks PINE is great stuff

[jbuilder]

nuff said.

Ah, but we do

[Anonymous Coward]

Take a look at Neo. I haven't tried it yet but I've heard very good things.

New switch commercial

[doggo]

(switcher theme)da do da do da do...I'm Rob Malda, and I'm an Alpha Geek.

Disk Copy doesn't copy disks on a Mac

[jmorris42]

Ya, I saw "Burn CD" also. Try copying something off to a FireWire drive sometime. Can't be done. If it was only designed to copy CDs it should have been CD Burner or CD Copy.

And Mac folk rag us about "cp" being cryptic? There is an icon labeled in plain english "Disk Copy" that won't actually copy a disk. Bah!

(And there isn't really a need to dredge up the old drag to trash to eject golden oldie is there? At least on OSX the trashcan icon does switch to an eject symbol.)

This is the Docker pants amung computers

[CreamsicleSeventeen]

Does that make eMachines the "Dickies" of computers? Dell "The Men's Warehouse"?

The ladies must luuuvvv your classy taste!

Re:Thinking about switching... just need some advi

[afantee]

You bet. VPN client comes with Internet Connect in Jaguar, and it appears to work better than its Windows counterpart.

Re:Heh - I did RTFM, and I know about control clic

[Doctor O]

My preference is the right click, I just happen to like it more than the other two methods.

ACK. Personal preference is what this all boils down to anyway. From the productivity point of view it doesn't matter whether you right-click or ctrl-click as on the Mac you press keyboard buttons while clicking very often anyway (while click-and-hold drives everyone nuts who has used a multiple-button mouse before).

I'm working as admin in an advertising agency, also doing some design from time to time (before you ask, yes, I am a professional in both fields), so I know both sides quite well.

You might find it interesting that we haven't switched to OSX yet and we don't plan to do so unless we absolutely have to. OSX might look nice and have lots of features we geeks love, the average designer has no use whatsoever from it and doesn't like to learn how to use his machine from scratch. Also, we don't have OSX versions of the software we use (mainly XPress 4/5, Photoshop 6, Acrobat 5 and FreeHand 9, sometimes Illustrator 9) and frankly we don't need the new features they offer, apart from the cost of upgrading up to 40+ licenses per software, resulting in approx. 160 licenses for the software mentioned above. And then there are all the other tools one needs, like font and color management, most of them NOT working in Classic under OSX (we've been testing on this thoroughly). Nope, we won't switch. We simply cannot afford to. This is what Apple doesn't get.

Taco, did you guys hear??? Someone offered you

[Anonymous Coward]

Don Mayer offered you free Tibooks!!! Jump on this
opportunity. Smalldog is a great company

Mod Up

[theolein]

Right on! And you can advertise on my site as well for a small trade...

NeXTSTEP - Linux - Mac OS X

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess I gave my two cents on my "switch" story. I started using NeXT back in 1990 when I started college in CS. I love NeXTSTEP: elegent GUI and solid Unix under it. The development environment is one of the best. However, NeXT was going nowhere and I was kind of forced into Linux because I need a non-Windows home machine that runs Java for work in 96 but still dual boot it into NeXTSTEP for Intel for other work.

I have followed closely with the development of Mac OS X starting from Rhapsody. However, I never got arround to make the "switch." Is this a switch? I just came home to NeXTSTEP after a couple years of absence. ;) While Apple released TiBook 800Mhz, I need a portable that have enough CPU power and screen estate to do my work on the road. I pick up the TiBook this June.

First thing I did is to move my dock to the right side of the screen so I could pretend it's NeXT. Although NeXTSTEP isn't as fancy as Aqua but it's more simple and productive. Too bad that OS X have to carry on the legacy of Mac OS: inconvience menu bar on top and one button mouse. A lot of time have been wasted in moving the mouse to the top for the menu while under NeXTSTEP, the right button brought up the menu for the active application. Also, why it has to be so hard to swap CapsLock and Control key. I am Emacs user and having control in the bottom left of the keyboard is really bad for my hand. My finger hurts.

Other than these small complains, OS X is great. The Mach/BSD is stable, the GUI looks great, and it got everything I need: the usual Unix tools and JDK. I cannot wait to program in Project Builder and Objective C again.

With no real reason...

[GyrlGeek]

I love OSX. If you use happen to get a good price on an iBook, buy me one too. *smile*
What? I need a Christmas gift too!

doan buy iBook Unless....

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi,

- doan buy a brand new ibook coz it's a little long in the tooth becoz it is G3 600/700.

- check with macrumors or some of the rumor web site on the availablity of the G4 iBooks. (they usually launch it at macworld held quarterly worldwide)

- THe TIBook (titanium book) is good but very pricey.

So, my best advice to you is:

- If you *really* have to buy an AppleNotebook, check out eBay to get a G4 TiBook, or an iBook 600.. By the way , G4 400 mhz beats G3 600.

- if you are worried about support and warranty, assuming that your notebook checks out, send it to an authorised AppleStore and purchase the "AppleCare" This gives you additional ww warranty for your notebook.

- cheers!

Some Recent TiBook Prices

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi,

i am NOT plugging for the following web sites but thought that since there is a level of interests on TiBook prices, i mite as well share with you guys:

- http://www.powerbookcentral.com/daily/viewnews.cgi ?newsid1033152647,30976,
talks about refurbished PowerBook G4s, prices ranges from 2229 to 2988 usd.

- Note that you can get AppleCare warranty by sending the notebook for inspection. Applecare warranty for Powerbooks is a WW international warranty cover product defects.

- www.macsurfer.com
- www.macslash.org

are great places to read up on macs and imho, www.macosxhints.com is a great place for Unix folks to ask/search for answers.

laxx

Curiosity

[Niaivite]

i read just recently about installin OS X onto a IBM clone style computer. but i dont know where. and i'd like some information about how to do this if it's possible.

Java developer says YES

[valkraider]

I am a Java developer. I have been developing in various languages on the PC for over 10 years. I have owned almost every type of personal computer made, starting back with the early "kit" computers.

I switched to Mac at OSX 10.0.4, with an iMac DVSE 500Mhz G3. I love it. No more hardware hassles. No more driver issues. No more re-installing every 3 months to clean up garbage.

Now I also have an iMac flat panel 800Mhz G4 w/ superdrive.

Is OSX perfect? No. Anyone who says so is full of beans. But it *IS* very good, fun to use and works well.

Does OSX interact perfectly with other OSs? No. Anyone who says so is full of kaka. It *does* interact VERY WELL.

Does OSX Crash? Yes. You can make ANY OS crash. Does OSX crash commonly, for seemingly no reason? NO. I have had OSX crash only once in almost 2 years. And I use it pretty hard - much more than the regular users.

Is OSX for everyone? I would say *yes*. OSX can be as simple as you want it to be. I have a login for my daughter with everything locked down except her two pre-school games. Perfect. OSX can be as techie as you want. I run Apache, Perl, PHP. I write Java, and Obj. C, I use Fink, I have OroborOSX for Xwindows support. I use SSH. All sorts of goodies. My wife fits somewhere in between, using a scanner, iPhoto, email/web, and a desktop publishing program.

I say GO FOR IT. The Mac has come of age.

Re:Thinking about switching... just need some advi

[iNub]

If you mean multi tracking as in Impulse of FT2, you want PlayerPRO. www.quadmation.com/pphome.htm

iBook problems

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an white iBook 600Hz with 384Mb RAM running Jaguar. It's great except:
1. Totally unreliable when waking-up.
2. Totally unreliable when starting-up.
I have had to resort to paper clips many times. I makes me think twice about using it for presentations and I've had to endure the smirks of Windows laptop users.