Slashdot Mirror
Mac OS X Panther 10.3 Reviewed
JigSaw writes "OSNews posted a (constructively) critical, but also favorable review of Mac OS X Panther 10.3. The article discusses the new features, what works great and what's still sour, and it also includes a plethora of screenshots." The review's conclusion suggests Panther is "...a worthy operating system, easy to use, easy to set up, easy to get pleased by it. It just works."
Will it fix the massive bugs introduced into Bluetooth that have yet to be fixed?
How about the problems with remote filesystems? Put your powerbook to sleep with any volume mounted, even read-only with no files open, and you'll basically have to restart(not even a umount -f will unmount the volume) because almost every app will show a spinning pizza of death.
How about the bug that exists in most G4 powerbooks, where changing the volume level too quickly under "heavy load" causes the balance to shift?
Every OS X release has been rather half-baked, although Apple is certainly doing better now than with 10.0 and 10.1...but it's still irritating that several bugs which affect me on a day to day basis will require dishing out another $100+, when I just bought a $3,000 laptop 2-3 months ago(my fourth powerbook, eighth mac, btw.)
Please help metamoderate.
Personally, I open and fix a hardware ONLY if I am sure that I will not regret of voiding any warranty (for example, no warrant already).
Less is more !
I think Apple might be doing a Netscape by bloating their OS, I think they have to remember updates sometime AREN'T good things.
I have over 70 freaks, do you?
(he said with karma to burn)
What have you done with the Eugenia we all know and love - you know, the damning with faint praise, lak of spel cjekr, unmitigated beos - er, bias - er, well, you know...
Ok, couldn't resist. I take back all the flame emails - not because it's a favorable-to-Mac review, but because she's far more even handed and objective than ever. Brava, Eugenia!
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
She has some complaints about the dock, but one of them just didn't make any sense at all:
Another personal gripe I have is that I can't change the color of the Dock and I can't place apps beneath it without resorting to hacks
What is she talking about? You don't need to hack the dock for apps to exist beneath it!
Sound waves should be free!
This has been true for a looooong time, but seems to be swept under the carpet. If MS broke this many applications, the linux and apple zealots would be gloating like the DNC at Rush Limbaugh.
Personally, I think its really bad, and I feel bad for the users, but Apple has historically not really cared all *that* much about the end users. If it cant go on the JumboTron behind an AppleWorld keynote speach, it isnt really that important to them.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
Any competent tech can instantly see where you went wrong. Tying a heatsink to the motherboard with insulated wire might work with a PC, but not a Mac. Macs are too high tech for that.
Next time use Bazooka brand bubblegum. ONLY Bazooka brand will work due to the peculiar properties of the confectioner's sugar they use; and of course the bubblegum itself acts as a gap filler.
This is why you should always pay an expert. $50 would have saved you a grand in the long run. You pay to have the oil changed in your car, don't you? You understand that oil changing is a precise process in an expensive and highly sensitive machine. Your Mac is much higher tech than your car and only a trained and experienced tech nows all the little tricks, gained over years in the field.
At least before you do something like this go to alt.comp.sci.screwthenewb. A lot of us hang out there just to forward information like this to people such as yourself.
We're, what you call, altruistic.
KFG
You replaced the fan with one that was not powerful enough, and as a result, fried your CPU... why should they replace/fix your machine for free?
Sure, the fan had what sounds like a well documented noise problem...apple were offering an exchange program for the faulty components. Not sure what the deal is now.
They screw their users over every year, not every couple. Oh, and their non-US users every hour of every day.
I've read dozens of OS reviews like this, were all you get is a review of the install and a quick tour of the new features - only here there's Eugenia's inevitable comparisons to BEOS. Deeply exciting I'm sure, but somehow I suspect better reviews will appear within the next couple of days.
It is not, as most developers will tell you, simply a question of hard work.
Often, to ensure maximum compatibility, you either needs to limit the scope of your modifications or you need to implement compatibility layers.
Needless to say, limiting modifications not only tends to limit innovation but also means you will occasionally be unable to correct historic design decisions. Compatibility layers, in turn, tend to cause a great deal of bloat, especially if you add one layer on top of another.
]{
So good of you to point this out. I stopped using Macs years ago and my memory has gotten fuzzy hehe.
I've yet to see any commercial app broken by any of the incremental OSX upgrades.
Apple's not screwing anyone over. Don't want to upgrade? DON'T.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
Say what you will about Microsoft, but they do spent enormous effort trying to avoid this problem on each release
I can't really comment on how MS addresses this problem, but it is a problem for Apple. The root cause is the way OS seeds are distributed - for better or for worse, the seeding program for Mac OS X is quite different from how things used to work. The GM was declared several weeks ago (build 7B85), however this build is not available to Apple's main developer program.
It was released to Premier developers (the top-end subscription, which is several thousand dollars a year) about two days ago, but right now the vast majority of 3rd party developers have no way to test if their software works on 10.3 or not. Until a couple of days ago, the only people who access to seeds were the "big name" developers who exist outside of the seeding program (Adobe, Microsoft - people with specific products which are critical to areas important to Apple) or people who had obtained a copy through BitTorrent.
I've been in the Premier program in previous lives, and can attest that even that is no guarantee you'll get a seed - for some of the early Mac OS X releases, we paid several thousand dollars a year and yet had to wait for the CDs to get to customers before we could get a build. It's up to Apple how they run their own program obviously, but a direct consequence of this was that we didn't bother renewing at that level - and it looks like this has held true, as this year the Premier program is getting access a whole 10 days before it hits the shops.
My understanding is that HFS+ is case-preserving. For people switching from Linux/BSD and used to a case=sensitive fs, are there options to get case-sensitive (you can install ufs but you'll lose journalling)
You understand that oil changing is a precise process in an expensive and highly sensitive machine.
Sheez, what kind of car do you have?! Changing oil doesn't take more than removing the plug beneath, let the old oil out and pumping new oil in at the top of the engine. Most people don't do it at home because you have to get under the car..
History matters..
Apple has an Up-To-Date offer to buy v10.3 for $19.95, for those who've bought a Mac on or after October 8.
However, I bought my new 15" Powerbook a few days after it was announced last month (around Sep 18 or so) and plugged my serial # in for kicks. Lo and behold, I qualified!
I've heard rumors it's unofficially extended back just for certain systems....
There are FAR more apps on the PC that crash under XP, just don't work, or are just poorly written. On average, a 3rd party app for the Mac is written with higher programming/compiling standard. And take note, 3rd party apps ARE NOT Apple Apps.
Besides, one of the programs, I believe this guy was talking about was a Haxie that Panther addresses.
Also, I only use respected 3rd party applications. Adobe, Microsoft, and my favorite shareware (Graphic Converter from Lemkesoft) all come out with INSTANT updates if an update needs to be released.
The article extrapolates statistics too much and is a weak review at best. While I don't expect everything to work and everything to be favorable, at least Apple quickly addresses software/OS issues with updates.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
There are always developers who cheat the APIs a little, and mostly the small shops and shareware folks. Many of them don't think it's a big deal because they update soon enough, and some of them cheat them because they can't afford a real QA/testing team. But most of those apps/developers get the bugs sorted out within a few months -- as the article author pointed out.
If you tolerate risk, by all means get the dot zero version any major software release from any vendor.
If you are risk averse, the smart thing is to always wait a little, perhaps until the first update. In the mac world, you could choose to get 10.3.1, whenever that is, if you desired.
Not everyone has the same tolerance for risk, incompatibility, or new territory.
I seem remember a US court suggesting Microsoft's current market share is a result of an illegal monopoly.
Oh wait. maybe you're right, i sould use windows cause it's bug free and never breaks support with 3rd party developers...
It sounds a lot like you don't understand. It's ok. You can use Windows, and I'll use my g4 with OSX
And Windows is the de-facto standard desktop OS. Does this mean it's good?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Actually I'd never have called it "dying" (it seemed to be going at a remarkable pace for a, basically, one-man project), but Hardin says he's decided to accelerate it further by basing the installer on Debian Sarge's instead of rolling his own.
Not connected in any way, but emulating NeXT/OS X goodness rather than Windows seems like a damn nice idea.
Reading your letter, it's perfectly clear that you voided your warranty. Apple has had an exchange program in place to fix the noise issue you were experiencing. Please do not blame Apple for your own ignorance.
Bob
The PC Weenies: 11 Years of Online Tech 'Too
Given that there are just plain orders of magnitude more applications for PCs than for Macs, that's not surprising. It's not, however, a general indictment of the relative quality of Windows XP to Mac OS. And at least MS doesn't charge $129 for patches.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
Maybe that's why my Apple shares are doing so well...
We're all dying, slowly day-by-day. So, what's your point?
The PC Weenies: 11 Years of Online Tech 'Too
Yes, rewriting one of your subsystems, finder, to be multithreaded and have a new interface isn't hard work. Integrating X11 and making sure it works isn't hard work either. Doing all that while most apps still work?
Get over yourself.
--
"I'm not bright. Big words confuse me. But Wanda loves me and that should be enough for you." - Cosmo
"...added a superior cooling system to the machine, quietened it, IMPROVED it in every way..."
can anyone confirm/deny that Apple has expanded ftp support in the finder ? (preferable expanded to sftp also)
Right now, the jaguar finder has built in read only ftp, which plain sux
I know : there are many excellent ftp clients available, but being able to mount a volume over ftp as with the iDisk would be extremely user-friendly.
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
You mean sarcasm.
And yet it's still cheaper to buy the mac OS:
f tw are.html
http://simplest-shop.com/Macintosh--1-229660-so
Let's see
X.1 Sept 28, 2001
X.2 Aug 23, 2002
That puts 11 months between those two releases
And assuming the earliest release of X.3 in sept, that would be 13 months from the last release. And 16 months in december.
By contrast:
Windows 2000 , Feb 17 2000
Windows ME released Sept 14 2000
That would be 7 months
Windows XP Oct 25 2001
That would be 13 months
And lets compare prices:
Mac OS X $130 always (full version)
Windows 2000 $320
Windows ME $110 (upgrade) or $210 (full)
XP Home $100 (upgrade) $200 (full)
XP Pro $200 (upgrade) $300 (full)
So from OS X.0 to X.3
March 2001 to (assumed) Sept 2003 (31 Months)
You've spent $390
From Windows 2000 to Windows XP (19 Months)
Feb 2000 to Oct 2001
You spend at minimum $530 and at most $830
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
I've been using it for about two weeks now, and I'll say that hands-down expose' is the best thing to have to get people's attention when you want to show off a computer. I'm in China, where Macs are a rare breed, and when I show people expose' their eyes practically pop out of their heads. It's worth it just for that.
By the way, how do I type the accent mark in a slashdot posting? Safari lets me enter it, but slashdot strips it.
How about we wait another 8 days before we start talking about problems with Panther. This is more of a what to expect page but I am SURE the beta the author used will be a LOT different then the final product. Geez!
Seems like the author just needed something to talk about since the beta has been available for some time and what to expect was well documented in MacWorld like 2 months ago!
I've been using a preview version of Panther for a month now and I must say that Expose is the greatest GUI innovation in ages. It looks cool in demos, but it's even better when you actually use it. I much prefer it to virtual desktops as a method to organize windows.
Unfortunately it seems to becoming increasingly necessary to check a poster's history before taking them at all seriously :-(
Maybe... JUST Maybe.. Those developers are using APIs that Apple has not made public because they haven't settled down yet?
To paraphrase... I have never understood why Linux device driver developers and users of devices tolerate Linus screwing them over every couple of years by changing kernel internals...
I didn't want to wait another week until the release, so I grabbed the build claiming to be 7B85 that's been floating around on BitTorrent, and put it on a spare G4/350 I've got lying around.
I like the new installer, it's a little more informative about its progress. As for the OS itself, the GUI feels significantly faster, even on a creaky old 350MHz machine without the benefit of enough VRAM to use Quartz Extreme. They seem to have really tightened up the code quite a bit-- for shits and giggles, I ran xBench on it in 10.3, and in 10.2.8 on a different partition on the same drive. Results: Panther, 47; Jaguar, 40-- a decent improvement. I can't wait to see what it's like on my iBook 800, but that upgrade will wait until I have a purchased copy next week.
When I get some more time I'm going to take the Active Directory authentication and Mail.app's Exchange connectivity for a spin and see how that is.
~Philly
you never change the filter? I'll stick to paying someone thanks.
And at least MS doesn't charge $129 for patches.
What do you call Windows98 SE? The Microsoft Plus Packs? The differences between 10.2.x and 10.3.x are much larger than either of these. This is not a "patch" but a mid-sized upgrade. I will be buying the upgrade as it is worth the money.
And as someone who supports both MacOS (9/X) and Windows, there was for more apps that broke (or needed major playing with the compatibility settings) than have broken on me going to the 10.3 beta I am running. And the only apps that I have seen break are ones that do nasty things and use non-documented API's. These are expected to break anytime something breaks, and were hacks to begin with.
Considering that I have tried 12 year old games on MacOS X 10.3 (betas) and they have worked.. I think Apple has done an exemplary job of keeping compatibility.
I have never understood why Mac developers and users tolerate Apple screwing them over every couple of years.
In my case, I didn't. As a former Mac C++ developer, Apple killing OpenDoc was the last straw for me. On Solaris, Sun guarantees that apps from an earlier version of Solaris will run on the latest version. On WindowsXP, Microsoft provides "compatibility modes" so you at least have a chance of getting an app that doesn't to do so (and if it was 32-bit clean to start with, there aren't many of those). So Solaris and Win32 are my platforms of choice.
One big problem we were having with 10.2 was that our our Mac users could see our broadcast CUPS queues from the linux printserver, but when they tried to print to them it sometimes came out garbled, and with PDF's would hang the Mac Printcenter and sometimes the CUPS queue too. It was a while ago, but it had something to do with extra imbedded MAC only filters for imbedding PS images into PDF... getting vauge with time. Anyway it came down to Apple teaking CUPS out of compliance with the CUPS "standard." A patch was submitted (by another slashdot reader - care to speak up?) but I don't know if it was ever implemented. Anyone else know if this had been fixed in 10.3?
Right, it certainly is important. However, having installed Panther, it doesn't require more than a single paragraph. It's that easy.
Yes, because spending time and effort on, say, writing a feature that allows multiple versions of a system library to be installed at the same time for apps that break if you use the wrong one makes much more sense than demanding that your developers write stable, forwards-compatible code.
This guy may be a troll...but what about all of the fried video cards on eMacs? A neighboring school district bought over 100, and over 50 had fried boards in the first three months...and in fact, they're now sending them ALL back to get "repaired" at Apple. POS if you ask me, but it's just what I've been saying...Macs may appear pretty to some eyes, but they have the same Taiwanese crap on the inside...
I seriously doubt it. They'd have to change HFS+, which is case-insensitive, and that might well break a number of apps.
quote from Eugenia: /* why not be able to enjoy Red Hot Chilli Peppers or Linkin Park videos as the average Windows user can at 300 kbps? :P */
Because the word "enjoy" does not immediately come to mind when the words "Linkin Park" are uttered, you can safely say you "enjoy" them just as easily as the typical Windows user by not watching them at all.
Jesus.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
The author states in the article "I installed clean on both my Macs, because upgrading wouldn't work on my 12" Powerbook (Jaguar "had errors" the installation was insisting). That was not a big deal for me as I don't have any important data on my Macs, but it may be troublesome for people who who are trying to install on their primary machine."
Then he goes and gives "Installation" a 10 out of 10. What gives? This actually is a big concern for me though. I don't want to have to do a clean install of this OS. To save all my data, reinstall all my applications, etc. Can I do it? Yes. Do I want to? No. Doesn't anyone else find this a bit disconcerting?
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
How about a review of the writer's grammar skills? Whew, what a train wreck! That was tough to read.
OS X 10.1 was a free upgrade. The most anyone paid for it was $20 shipping and handling for a CD.
That's a pretty foolish way to think of it, as Apple is clearly assigning version numbers in a different way. Apple obviously plans to keep the "OSX" moniker for a long time, so minor revision changes are in the third digit, not the second.
Here's a better way to think of it: Major OSX revisions include completely new standard applications (e.g. Expose, iChat), as well as OS performance enhancements. Personally, I'd happily have paid the upgrade price for Expose alone.
Actually yes it does fix all of that. And if you send in those neat-o certificated that you "$3000 powerbook" came with, they'll send you a copy for $19.
My
... about half of which are really of Panther running X Windows, not the Panther features mentioned in the review. While it's interesting to see how KDE & Gnome look, it's not really discussed in the review in detail. And the something like the new Expose feature would have been easier to see than explain.
Would you say we have a plethora of screenshots?
Jefe, what is a plethora?
When does this happen in the movie?
They'd have to change HFS+, which is case-insensitive, and that might well break a number of apps.
Case sensitive HFS+ (Journaled) support is now included, as an option, with Mac OS X Panther Server 10.3.
Yes according to this macrumors article , "The additional option is available under the Panther Disk Utility and is called "Mac OS Extended (case sensitive/journaled)"".
User of recent Panther builds verified this option was present. See the related forum .
VMS is also case insensitive.
...introduced in 10.2. I know I'm not the only one who's had their sound balance slide itself over. But no more! *does a happy dance*
-- n
Panther does provide the option of a case-sensitive FS. You have to reformat to get it. Journaling continues to be supported.
"The biggest new feature on Mac OS X, according to Apple, is the new Metal-looking, multi-threaded Finder"
"Additionally, when double-clicking apps to load, a nice effect will zoom in and fade the icon's application, giving the user a smooth launch feedback feeling."
"The effect is like a big bang, with each window shrinking in size and moving outward until they're all on one plane."
"Fast User Switching' is here too and it allows you to change users without logging out of your applications (by using another cool looking QuartzExtreme-powered special effect). "
"If you are using a metal application and you invoke an alert or an "attached" child window on the master window, the effect of the way the child window pops up out is impressive"
Bet they could increase performance significantly if they got rid of all this "gee-whiz" garbage.
And what is with these brushed metal applications? I thought the whole point of an OS was to have a consistent GUI.
Dude, you are correct that there are no laws regarding English being our national language. However, the news was just released earlier this week that 80% of the people in this country speak English as their primary language. The other 20% is spread across all of the (great) languages you mentioned. I do believe that 80%=English speaking country. The only people that want to disagree with this are the ones that don't speak English all that well.
If you follow you outlined procedure what you will end up with is a several quart puddle of oil on the ground and a motor that siezes up within a matter of yards.
You neglected to a) carefully position the vehicle over a storm drain and b) apply Bubblicious (and only Watermelon Wave does the job right) properly over the drain hole in the oil pan.
Please leave this sort of complicated procedure to the pros, we know what we're doing. You don't.
Q.E.D.
KFG
Argh, please tell me 7B85 is not 10.3.0. NFS is buggy in this build. mounts get stale and won't even unmount, "permission denied". Also if the automounter hangs and you kill it you're soon going to be without any disk access, even local one.
why does his uname -a show GNU/Linux?
So far, the only thing I've seen broken by 10.3 is the device driver for MOTU's firewire audio I/O devices. A third-party device driver being broken by a major OS upgrade does not surprise me.
Unfortunately, it's a biggie in my case, which is why I'm still running 10.2.
Sweeeeet! I entered the details for my new AlBook (bought in September) and UpToDate said OK. This is what Apple should have done to begin with.
I know, DNFTT
If you pronounce OS X as OS 'ecks', then you see where the version number REALLY is. As Apple users, we are actually paying for makjor releases:
Also, people have been paying for new version of Solaris this whole time, so I fail to see new OS X as 'minor' and 'free' releases.
Heute die Welt, morgen das Sonnensystem!
You bastard. Stop giving me a bad name. HOMPH.
Join Tor today!
After lots of complaining from new PowerBook users, it seems that Apple changed the qualifying criteria (from just new G5 users to G5 and new 15" PB users) quietly the same day of the announcement. Rumors of this quiet change were found in certain Mac discussion site forums. Thusly, I have my invoice for an Up To Date copy.
That's a very ironic double-negative there...
HFS+ is "case-aware" in that it understands the difference between capital and lowercase letters. It is not, however, case-sensitive. You cannot name a file "MyFile" and "myfile" in the same folder. This makes sense. Apple never intentionally confuses users. A folder full of "MyFile, Myfile, myFile, myfile" is nothing but a disaster from usability standpoint.
Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.
What do you call Windows98 SE? The Microsoft Plus Packs? The differences between 10.2.x and 10.3.x are much larger than either of these. This is not a "patch" but a mid-sized upgrade. I will be buying the upgrade as it is worth the money.
I'm pretty sure you could get all (or most of) the extra patches and drivers (like USB support) in SE from windows update without having to purchase an upgrade. At least in Windows you aren't forced to pay for patches to get bug fixes.
Considering that I have tried 12 year old games on MacOS X 10.3 (betas) and they have worked..
I guess since your old programs work, every old program must work..
I think Apple has done an exemplary job of keeping compatibility.
Yeah, like how OSX just boots the entire 9 os if you run an older mac app. Give me a break!
Interoperability with Windows is even better now. Samba seems to work really well. There is Exchange support, and VPN access to Windows networks is there too. On the third disk you will also find a package with support for Common Access Cards. ?
huh? really? exchnage?
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
I'm looking forward to using Panther but I'm disappointed that machines that didn't ship with USB are being orphaned with this round. For a workaround we'll have to wait for XpostFacto to be updated. I really doubt that a Wallstreet G3/300 is significantly different to support than a Lombard PowerBook. This looks very much like a purely marketing driven decision rather than one based on technical issues. The drivers already in 10.2.x supported my USB 2/Firewire combo PCMCIA card right out of the box. I wish Apple would understand that many like myself are eager to buy new machines as justified for GOOD reasons (like vastly improved performance for demanding tasks), and that dropping support without good technical cause just breeds resentment and costs them OS upgrade sales. I generally avoid running unlicensed software but I'm feeling very reluctant to actually pay for copies of the OS that need 3rd party hacks to install on unsupported machines. Running Panther here isn't essential, but I'd sure like to see the same version of the OS on the old and new machines. Retiring machines prematurely is not only a waste of money, it is environmentally irresponsible. I suspect that in some settings having a portion of the installed machines orphaned would give Mac-hostile managers an excuse to jump platforms. It's a bit ironic that default OS installs include hundreds of megabytes for printers and languages we won't use, but not the little extra it'd take for slightly older Apple hardware. Shades of "Gil killed my dog" I guess...
You aren't forced to do so on the Mac, either. Unless the Software Update program on my Mac that recently bumped me from OS X.2.7 to OS X.2.8 is just a hallucination on my part.
If this really happened, call Apple back and scream at them.
The $19.95 upgrade is good for ALL G5 systems, regardless of the time of purchase.
Hope that helps.
D
Isn't it hard to accuse Apple of bloating the OS when every release gets *faster* and *more* efficient?
Or the features are *more* effective?
Like better Samba, and thus Windows, networking? Or better printing? Remote volume protocols? Etc?
GPL Deconstructed
Is this only in Panther Server or also in Panther ?
The reviewer rated the part of the installation 10/10 (at the end of the review), although at the beginning of the review he tells us, he could only do a 'fresh install', while 'upgrade' would not work and produce some error.
yeah, sure, perfect 10, i like to be rated in the same way on my next PR.
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
I was about to post the same passage, but for a different reason...
I find that it is only the applications that use unsupported system calls and work-arounds that tend to get 'knocked out' by the system updates. A lot of the interface hacks and such often need to get readjusted after Apple improves the parts of the OS that they don't document.
I find that for the most part, 'properly written applications' (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way -- I undertstand the need to write unsupported hacks and all) actually get better 'for free' with each subsequent update. Speed, file and feature improvements in the guts make their way up to the apps.
Just a thought,
We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
You get used to it, and once you do it is actually an improvement. It allows for more operation between applications without mousing around; just eyeballing. It's one of those preference things. Actually I spend most of my time in the Linux world where all applications act that way. Each window is its own thing, so I was used to it before. I always despised how Pre-X Macintoshes felt the need to bring *everything* to the foreground when all you need to do was select one part of the application for reference.
If you need to see them all at once, that is easy. Just tap the application icon in the dock. This is easier than Pre-X as all of the icons are lined up and visible instead of hidden in the Process Menu in the upper right corner. How is this any more difficult? It is one single click. Even clicking on the corner of a submerged app in Pre-X was just one click. You still have the old Option-Click to hide a foreground application and all of its windows, as well.
I'll take freedom of choice over the OS deciding what is best for you, any day.
Also, what happened to my Apple menu?
I haven't missed it in the slightest. I never liked it much to begin with. I always augmented Pre-X with DragThing. Justification? Everyone is difference. I never used it, so it was a waste of space for me. It doesn't require justification; there is no way to justify personal preference.
Some of the sluggishness may be due to the fact that I have a number of background processes running that most users probably do without (sendmail, mysql, to name a couple).
Now that is a valid gripe that I sympathize with. I think Apple dropped the ball big-time on performance. They fell prey to the whole ReleaseNow FixLater disease -- and they are still fixing it. I hear 10.3 will *finally* have a responsive interface, but I remain dubious of that until I see it. They said the same thing about 10.2, and while it was a marginal increase in performance it was still far, far beneath the level of performance one expects from mere widgets. I am not even exaggerating when I say that my Palm Pilot is more responsive than my one year old Macintosh. Oh and by the way, it isn't the background processes you listed. I run that kind of stuff on Linux as well and it in no way impacts the performance of the UI. I mean, unless you are using your TIBook for a corporate webserver. It's all the interface that is sluggish. The interface and sloppy networking issues (that have thankfully mostly been resolved in later patches.)
the mouse moves MUCH faster in OS 9
I don't know if I would say much faster, but it might be a little faster. Mouse speed has always been intolerably slow on Macintoshes, especially if you use a decent monitor and/or multiple heads. Just about the funniest thing you'll ever see is something trying to get the mouse from three 1600x1200 screens over with the default Mac (either Pre or X) mouse speeds. Fortunatley most mice manufacturer's have their own device software that includes reasonable speed settings. No professional should be using the stock Mac mice anyway. If you are stuck with one, or have to use the trackpad, there are hacks floating around that let you adjust the speed above Apple's artificial limitation.
And what about keyboard shortcuts? I'm not sure what you are talking about here. If anything X is way more keyboard friendly. You might be running into a few differences. Keys have been juggled around a bit for whatever reason. You can do way more with the keyboard though. Even access menu items. It's not quite up to par with Windows on that score, but much better than it used to be. This is probably because you only used it for an hour. Like any system, the keyboard shortcuts are something you get used to after the first hour of usage.
Honestly I never much cared for the Finder. I grew up w
V
According to this macrumors story there is an option in the Panther disk utility. However in 7B85 I do not see this option. I had originally thought it was Panther Server only but maybe this is not the case and they have just removed it from the final release. I suggest you google it if you want more information as this is as much as I know. I suppose you could use UFS if case sensitivity is really a necessity for you.
The idea of having zoomable overviews of desktops really isn't all that new. Some X11 window managers have had them in one form or another. The 3dDesktop project gives you that capability and more (Expose! is a special case in which you map all the windows onto a flat surface).
Expose! sounds like it's nice engineering, but it's not a ground-breaking new insight.
Anyone who is currently using the beta version of Panther, do Adobe products run on it? I heard a rumor that it didnt support Adobe products, and wanted to make sure that was not true before I upgraded.
Heh. Yeah, no important data on my Mac. Just my life!
Sure, it's backed up, but I have neither the time nor the interest in putting things on hold while I reinstall everything - jeez, that's why I'm not on a Windoze platform.
I might wait for 10.3.1. But I'll definitely wait long enough to see what the early adopters go through.
Your comments don't float anymore. Maybe the first time you posted them, yes. But that was last year or so, so now we know you are bluffing.
Your comments don't hold water, and you are trolling in an obvious manner.
Boooh.
TurboD
I bought a new PowerBook when they came out, and had around 3 weeks of testing with both Jaguar & Panther, which i got last monday (dev version). I thought some feedback from a Windows to Linux to MacOS X switcher could interrest some of you folks. I haven't 'officially' switched to MacOS X yet for several reasons. Most of which are minor details concerning habits and my way of working, I'm mostly a Perl dev. The only good reason why i am not switching and won't probably switch in the future is an obvious lack of any kind of basic customization.
;-), others are very very minor and not very annoying.
Most Mac users have a very strong argumentation in favor of their way of working and the gains they get from it, however should that be a reason to force this way of working on all users? This where i do not agree. This ain't a freakin Jihad! Although some of you obviously think it is, my expectations for anything claiming excellency are reliability, performance and flexibility. Flexibility isn't met if i can't change the behavior of my interface to my likings, no matter the advantages and disadvantages of my choices. Your way might be better, just like catholism might be better than islam, there are simply no good reasons to enforce it!
Some of the details: Keep in mind that i only have a few weeks of training ( ordinary everyday usage ) with Jaguar and even less with Panther. If you see something on my list that can be fixed ( easily or not ), please give me some feedback, i might switch the less annoyances i see. I'm not listing all, some will just generate flames
1. I would like to be able to configure the behavior of the 'X', '-' & '+' buttons of a window.
I can understand why some folks say the 'X' behavior is far more logical than the traditionnal behavior. Suppose you start a deamon. The program window pops up, you configure it and close the interface ( window ), not the program. That makes a lot of sense, however, how often do you think a dev like myself configures deamons? Almost never, therefor that behavior becomes useless and very annoying to me. Yeah, yeah now i have to change my habits to 'cmd'-Q, which is annoying and doesn't provide much more efficiency. For me it just becomes another '-'.
I define 'Maximizing' as taking the maximum amount of space a window can. The '+' is not a maximize button for it only maximizes to what the application think is the maximum. I find this simply illogical. Usually, you first resize a maximized window to what you'd want it to be, so the app remembers it and you finally have something that looks like a maximize. In my mind, this is doing too much for something that should require only one setting in system preferences. I don't like setting maximums on all my windows all the time, it's simply annoying as hell.
2. I would like to be able to resize any window from any border.
I don't like dragging before resizing or resizing and then dragging, it's painful and a waste. Yes i do want my windows placed carefully and strategically on my desktop, so i can read from several of them at the same time without touching any controls. With the resize border only in the lower right corner, this becomes extremelly annoying.
3. Moving things around.
Lots of ppl like the dock-style interface MacOS has. I do not hate it, it's just incredibly unconfigurable. You can only move it left, right & bottom and can't even "uncenter" the biatch! True some folks like zooming, genie and whatever fx you can code for it. But you know what ? The most important thing is missing, and that's flexibility. What if i don't want the trash in there, because my dock is tiny ? What if i want the clock on the dock ? What if i want the dock to take the maximum amount of horizontal space ? Etc... I'm not mentionning that weird app bar at the top, with which you can do just about nothing.
Some thoughts about why i would like the clock to be on the dock in the lower right corner. The lower right corner is sim
I think it is safe to say that you rarely if ever used a mac.
Bringing the window you click on and only that window to the front has been a mac thing for years. The only apps I can thing of that didn't follow that were IM apps.
The Apple menu has been ditched in favor of the dock, and that was announced long before OS X was released. If you miss it that badly, go get one of the many hacks to bring it back. Otherwise, just put the aliases of what you want in the dock and you can navigate that way.
I don't notice any difference in mouse speed. Are you sure you don't have the tracking turned down.
Finaly,you could NEVER open apps or documents with the enter key. Enter was always reserved for renaming a document. If you wanted to open a file it was always either command O or command downarrow.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Is it just me, or does the second screenshot with the iconbox look exactly like Enlightenment with any of the generic Aqua themes out there? All in all, I am... well, uninformed :-) Haven't gotten the chance to try 10.3 yet.
(p.s. I call shenanigans on this review's author! Take a look at that collar in her profile! Can you say Apple shill? ;^) )
:wq
And inside that compatibility mode, another compatibility mode. I have old applications in 68000 code, dating perhaps back to OS 6--such as the venerable Word 5.1 (in many respects still the best version) and Canvas 3.5--that still run just fine using the 68000 emulator inside Classic Mode.
Actually, case-sensitivity vs. case-insensitivity is often a file system issue, not an OS issue. OS X has file systems that are case-sensitive (e.g., UFS), file systems that are case-insensitive (e.g., HFS+), and file systems where the case sensitivity depends on the server's behavior (e.g., NFS and smbfs).
OK, so what are the correct descriptions of:
The first and second of those are both "case-preserving", in the sense that the case of letters in a file name is the case that was supplied in the name when the file was created; the first of those is the behavior of most UNIX file systems, and the second of those is the behavior of HFS+, VFAT, and NTFS (when NTFS is accessed via Win32). Saying HFS+ is "case-preserving" in that sense is correct - but it doesn't distinguish it from UFS, which is also "case-preserving" in that sense.
So do you use "case-preserving" to refer only to file systems where lookups ignore case and creates preserve case, reserving "case-insensitive" for file systems (e.g., 8.3 FAT) where lookups ignore case and creates don't preserve case?
If so, you may find that others don't; they might use "case-sensitive" vs. "case-insensitive" to describe the behavior on lookups and "case-preserving" vs. "non-case-preserving" (or whatever) to describe the behavior on creates, so that the first file system type is "case-sensitive" (and "case-preserving"), the second file system type is "case-insensitive and case-preserving", and the third file system type is "case-insensitive and non-case-preserving".
Files should be identified by a series of bytes. Especially as file systems evolve to be more like data bases. We should not have to write huge kludges in software in order to recode the names we want into some idiot's idea of what is a "legal file name". We got rid of record-oriented text-only file data before 1970, replacing them with raw binary data, and it is universally considered a huge win and the basis of all modern computer systems. But since then only Unix has had the brains to realize that these same rules apply to filenames (almost, it still does not like the 0 byte or the "/" byte, but that is enormously better than any other system).
I am absolutely floored that the same people who claim "command line is hard" are the same ones who will argue incessently for case-insensitivity, when this is a feature that is ONLY for use by command-line programs!!! GUI users click on files and would never notice if more than one had the same name, and in modern GUI's they are often clicking on a representation of the data and couldn't care less what the file name is at all.
Why people think this UI issue must be "solved" at such a low level is beyond me. People also confuse one space with two and "0" with "O" but for some reason nobody seems to think it is a good idea to fix that with the file systems, but they seem completely brainwashed into believing that this must be done or the system is somehow "hard to use". In reality it would be trivial to achieve this at the application level (along with spelling correction of typed filenames and many other related fixes) but nobody tries this because of the perverse fact that the non-unique and unpredictable mapping of byte streams to filenames makes such solutions more difficult!
Congrats, you beat me to the punch, I was just gonna make a nasty comment about that one...
"Microsoft always tries to retain as much compatibility with previous versions as possible while Apple doesn't."
I am dumbfounded as to even how to answer this. Yes, there are a few programs that did not work on the upgrade from Jaguar to Panther. However, the essentials had no problems.... AIM, Quicktime, Safari, etc all worked fine for me. Ok, so there are a couple trivial applications that don't work, but I definitely had no problem running Graphing Calculator under the classic environment, which is a completely different environment, and it amazes me Apple was even able to do this.
Now, we compare this with Microsoft, claiming Microsoft sets good standards for backwards compatability? Eugenia Loli-Queru, you should be slapped. I remember I got my computer with Windows ME. Wow was that a great operating system *&cough* but we'll leave that aside for now. I, not knowing much about computers at the time, decided to do the 'recommended' upgrade to windows XP, rather than the full reinstall. NOTHING worked. Winamp didn't work, Quake3 didn't work, Office didn't work, Novell didn't work, I had to reinstall more or less everything save Internet Explorer.
On top of that, there are a boatload of my favorite programs that never worked on NT anything. Good Old NESticle refused to work on XP, compatability mode or not.
Speaking of DOS games, I remember all of the wonderful old goodies. Space Quest, Quest for Glory, all the others... never worked on any platform made on Win98 or later.
So, Microsoft retains compatability but Apple doesn't? Wow.
Partial Credit: The Engineer's Best friend
"Well, the bridge didn't fall all the way down!"
Are you calling me a liar? I can take you to the computer lab and show you. Or are you just denying the truth? I have made similar comments before...and they are still true. They continue to have problems with their eMacs, including recurring failures of the video boards. My comments hold more water than ever...stay away from eMacs!
Oh, by the way, I've had at least a half-dozen iMacs fry network boards in the past two months (but they convert to wireless pretty well afterwards.) I just cannot believe that people are so willing to turn off reality to embrace a computer brand. I am not a troll, I am not trying to get a "rise" out of anyone. I just want people to hear the truth, and give me the same courtesy.
Kind of odd that so many screenshots in an OS X review are of GNOME and KDE apps (or desktops!) running under Apple's X.
They do indeed look better than the old tabs. However, they no longer visually suggest that they ARE tabs. They just look like a line of buttons that were placed oddly.
I thought Apple knew better than this.
I remember being told to fix some of the numerous bugs in the OSX's java implementation, an OSX upgrade would have to be purchased.
It does not run on a x86 :(
When it does I'll happily stand in the long lines to buy it.
I'm running an app from 1992 on Jaguar (via Classic). It still runs beautifully. (That's Microsoft Word 5.1a, the best word processor ever.)
The parent is absolutely right. A lot of developers use unpublished, private API's.
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
Disclaimer: I don't have Panther yet.
I doubt they have expanded their FS support. Apple will stick with HFS+ until they develop something better, hopefully based on BeFS (since they've got some ex-BeOS people working there).
Of course, with the modular nature of xnu (the Darwin kernel) there's no reason why you couldn't port your favorite FS. You could probably pay the Rieser people to port their FS.
Also, if Apple's incorporated any of the recent changes FreeBSD's made to the UFS code they'll have Soft Update support which makes UFS fast without sacrificing the stability that it's famous for, basically removing the need for a journal. (FreeBSD 5 uses Soft Updates + background fsck to do what a journal would otherwise give you).
As for the server, I still support TONS of NT4 machines, and we are only really upgrading them as the hardware wears out or becomes dated. Our network is still about half 95/98 clients; we are also replacing them with Win2k thru attrition.
But unless your hardware compells you, their is not an application-level reason to upgrade.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
I really doubt that a Wallstreet G3/300 is significantly different to support than a Lombard PowerBook.
They're actually quite different at the ROM level, as someone else said. As long as Apple continues to introduce new computers (including various revisions and alternate configurations) it is going to have to slowly stop supporting software Mac OS X the older ones. Otherwise, the QA process would become unmanageable.
The alternative is to go the Microsoft route, overstating the supported configurations to sell more copies, and forcing the public to do much of the QA. Apple moves the window of supported machines forward so that it can ship a solid product in a reasonable amount of time with a good experience for the consumer.
That said, there has to be a business side to this too. For years, Wall Street came down hard on Apple for supporting machines for too long, because it meant less sales. Analysts didn't like the idea of people keeping a Mac for seven years because that's an incredibly long cycle to manage. That's the reality of the stock market. I believe "Wall Street" PowerBooks are five years old, right?
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
It's not the impression I got from using it for several hours.
:) Seriously, I think you're missing the forest through the trees here. You're hyper-focused on a tiny island in a universe of what Mac OS X has to offer. It takes more than a couple of hours to realize that, though.
Wow, that is a long time.
and it would be if I wasn't constantly waiting for the spinning beach ball or for windows to resize
Panther has serious improvements for things like this.
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
take ME out of the equation and it's still more expensive.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Why is Apple stuttering with its version numbering?
I "Mac OS X" is really "Mac OS Ten" rather than "Mac OS Ecks" (or "Mac OS UN*X"!), then saying "Mac OS X 10.3 Panther" makes you sound like a CB radio fan ("Transmission completed, standing by... 3 Panther" "What - you're standing by three panthers?!?! But I digress... )
Apple should already have done what Sun did with Solaris: ... 2.5, 2.6, 7, 8, ...
If Apple had called Panther "Max OS X 3" it would have made it clear that it isn't just a "bug fix" release.
Maybe next time... "Mac OS X 4 Lynx [or some other big cat]".
Looking further ahead, Apple must avoid the strange beast that is "Mac OS XI"... but then again "Mac OS [funky Greek letter]" would be cool (if difficult to post on /.)!
do I need to have Jaguar while I have 10.2.8 MacOS came with my G5?
I mean will I get enough perf with this? Or e.g. same disk/gfx performance?
Real clueless here for now. No shit...
That, and 10.3 isn't out yet, right?
"Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
First, Apple will probably never base their machines on x86.
Secondly, even if they did switch to x86, OS X will never, never, never run on any hardware that Apple has not produced-- so surrender the fantasy of running OS X on some homebuilt shitbox. The major selling point of the Mac is the "it just works" factor-- the tight integration between Apple software and Apple hardware. They won't be able to deliver that if they suddenly have to support hundreds of varieties of commodity hardware flying out of factories in East Bumblefuck, Asia. Microsoft has blown through umpteen billion dollars over damn near twenty years in their attempt to do it, and they still haven't got it right.
Apple is a hardware company, period. Their software is just a selling point for their hardware. Look at iTunes and the iTunes Music Store as another example-- iTunes is a free download, and they barely make a profit on the sale of iTMS music. The whole thing is set up to sell iPods, and ideally induce some satisifed iPod buyers to switch to the Mac.
~Philly
Of course you do. And you check the oil in the gear box and the differential. And you check the fuel filter. And you check the brakes for wear. etcetera. But that's not the point, I suppose..
:-)
I own a classic car so I've discovered a lot of things you should check..
History matters..
The best thing about HFS+ for me is FileIDs. I don't think a single other filesystem supports them.
>80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
>life