Slashdot Mirror
Tiger Slideshow: Pretty Mac OS X Pictures
RAMMS+EIN writes with a good followup to the recent WWDC preview of Tiger, the next version of OS X. "eWeek has a slideshow illustrating some of Tiger's new features with screenshots. For a textual description, you can visit Apple's Tiger page."
anyone else hate the new look of the menu bar?
This looks really nice. Heck I never play games anymore so that would be the only thing stopping me from switching. All I do is email, internet, documents and other related items.
I am seriously looking at getting a mac with this new OS.
I'd been thinking about this for years - having a "SQL" like file system - and now Mac are in bringing it to the masses! Well, close anyway.. Spotlight uses metadata from all the files on your system to help you easily locate (search) for what you are after, no matter what type of info it is (contact, or PDF, or text file..)
:'(
You can seem from some of the pics on the page shown just how easy it will be to use spotlight. . At the top of every finder window - type the "keywords" and you're there.. Being able to store your "searches" will make this *really* powerful..
Once Tiger comes out I'm seriously considering moving to a Mac platform.. . I never thought I'd see the day...
The Mac is now workable for any type of task... it's *that* fast... but it's still not where XP is.
||| I still can't believe Parkay's not butter.
Those are all great, but to me, I want to know if Tiger has another "new feature": Does it make my computer feel faster?
Pretty much every previous release of MacOS X has brought speed improvements, and I want to know if Tiger will continue that tradition. Not all of us can afford G5s at the moment, and a speed increase would really make it shelling out another 80 bucks or so (.edu discount) worth it.
WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
It's pretty easy to remove applications you don't want. Don't like iPhoto? Drag is from the Applications folder to the Trash.
Also, it's not like we don't have oodles of disk space now. Just don't open the apps you don't intend to use.
How is Dashboard better than dedicating one virtual desktop to these "applets"? Just leave an xcalc/bc, evolution, gkrellm, xmms and whatever other junk you like open on one virtual desktop, and you can switch with a hotkey.
Why make distinction between applications and "applets"? In the pre-multifinder days they had little choice, DA's were basically the only wat to multitask on a Mac. What use are DA's in 2005?
Linux Users More Likely to Pay for Games?
Some people dont like "A Tale in the Desert" and some people are rabid about it. Personally, I like it. While I look for free or low cost software to do what I need, I will gladly pay for quality software if it suits my needs.
Having worked on both, I prefer Linux, however, OSX is VERY nice. I have found its software quality to be consistantly higher than the normal tripe out of Redmond.
>Games on the PC are a different animal, the rate of piracy is much lower.
I'm not sure about that one. I know a *lot* of people who regularly and methodically pirate all their games for their friends
I think software piracy across all fields is pretty rampant, to be honest. Although, I have never been spammed with ads for 'cheap' games like I do for applications (you know the ones, "Legitimate Software!" $50 for anything), and the markup for real pirates is probably much higher on apps, so you do certainly have a point.
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
Other than that, I use IE, and WinZip, and Acrobat Reader, etc. Past that, I use OSS for most of my needs. This includes the Gimp, Cygwin, and such.
Other than the odd games, there is only one piece of software I remember really WANTING in the last few years. Only one that I was excited about.
OS X
In the past few years, I haven't come across any piece of software that I have wanted so much that I couldn't get free. I wanted to program? GCC was great. A good shell on Windows? I've got Cygwin. Etc, etc, etc. OS X just looked so great. Then my brother got a PowerBook, and I've gotten to use OS X once or twice. I want it even MORE now. I already resolved a year or two ago that my next computer would be a Mac so I could get OS X. There are other reasons, but they all pale in comparison to my want for OS X.
I don't mind paying for software when it's worth it. But so often, it's not worth the asking price. That's why I rent 95% of the videogames that I play. They just aren't worth the $60. Only when I KNOW that I really want the game, that it will be good, will I buy it. The titles that describes more than any other are Nintendo titles. Almost everything else I rent first (if I ever buy it at all). I don't mind paying for software at all, it's only fair that the people who make great stuff get money so they continue to do it.
The problem is that so little these days seems worth the money people want. The ones I hate the most are things like AV software. Stuff I shouldn't need, but I'm basically forced to buy.
I want OS X. It's worth it. It's head-and-shoulders above everything else out there.
I'll pay for software, but it's got to be worth it to me. OS X is so worth it, I'll switch platforms to get it. Now that's good software.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
ed2k://|file|WWDC-MacOS_10.4_Tiger_BETA-DVD.dmg|17 55661594|C8F595F390FE56A073D57D6D84CF21F1|/
CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.
People that own PC's don't like to buy software, so most PC software people use is either cracked shareware or adware. /. users that own PCs, then you're probably right. However, Joe User will buy software. He will buy overpriced software, just because it's what Office Depot carries.
If you mean most
People on Macs actually pay for software, so Mac software (of you can afford to keep up) outclasses that of of the competition.
As I don't use a Mac, I can't comment about it outclassing competition (sounds like macwhore zealotry to me) but Mac software definately looks prettier than the competition.
Apple also makes more software than Microsoft, and OSX comes with more free high quality tools.
Microsoft makes a crapload of software. I really doubt Apple makes more than them. Maybe better quality, but not more. I like the goodies OSX comes with though. Free IDE == shweet, I wish MS did that.
People that use Linux don't like to pay for software or deal with adware and shareware, so they have free second rate versions instead.
Where is your proof? How can you generalize that all users of Linux are freeloaders? I myself use Linux and I gladly pay for my Slackware CDs even though I can get them free off of an FTP site. I also donate to various project. I'd pay for all my games that I play.
How is Apache second rate to IIS? Infact, a of a lot of OS X is free software that's been bundled together. Hell, the core of OS X(Darwin) is opened sourced. Apache, Samba, GCC, and other tools and programs are bundled with OS X. So, going by what your saying, OS X must be second rate.
Don't make generalization about people. It's not nice, and for the most part are not true.
I'm so glad someone else noticed this. I think in the entire time I used Windows, I don't think I bought one program. I used tons and tons of shareware that I never bothered paying for, and instead shrugged off the nagging splash screen. I mean come on, who actually bought WinZip or WinAmp? Why? None of it seemed worth it.
Now with OS, not only have I paid for every version and update of OSX since 10.0, but every single piece of shareware is paid for, including some I used for only a few weeks. I've also purchased tons of commercial software.
_______
2B1ASK1
If money is the only issue for programmers to write better software, why not can the company run by the world richest man accomplish it? Considering money as resource, Microsoft is by far the wealthiest and Linux/FOSS development base is the worst. If you think the number of developers as resource, probably Linux or Windows will come on top of the three, leaving Mac behind. Considering talent as resource, probably all three are even. Lastly, if you think management as resource, IMHO Apple comes first, Linux/FOSS the second, and with a large margin, Microsoft comes very last of three.
It's all my opinion, of course, so you may have a different opinion. And yes, I agree that Apple is doing a fine job for where it is now.
And that was a very extremely useful feature of BeOS. I'm glad the idea lives on in Tiger.
Oh yeah, and the under-the-hood shit they mentioned like ACLs is pretty exciting.
I hope you can access their "smart folders" as directories on the file system. That would make it possible to script all kinds of crazy and weird shit. Hell yeah.
Oh yeah, and one more thing. Their automator thing looks pretty awesome. Drag a bunch of events from a library of events into the damn thing, set some damn parameters, and you can save that setup if you want... it's kind of like scripting, but without any scripting syntax. Smart... very friggen smart.
Oooooooooooooooooooooh well.
But that's different, it clears *all* your history, cache, etc, but sometimes you want to keep most of your history around (because it's useful), just not those "private" moments. It's certainly a good feature, and probably has applications beyond pr0n. I also hope to see a Firefox extension that does this sometime.
Ceci n'est pas une sig
Actually, this is one thing I am really looking forward to. I have been downloading a lot of research papers from arXiv, and I now find myself with well over a hundred files all named like 0903118.pdf. Even if I rename and resort by author and title, the key info I want to search for is really in the abstracts. I am creating a perl script to download the abstracts, reorganise the files/directories, and allow me to search, but spotlight seems much more useful.
Yeah, it is karma whoring :)
r .d mg.torrent
http://66.90.75.92/suprnova//torrents/2052/tige
Please, please, please keep the torrent client up after you have downloaded.
This is probably the only thing on this thread that I feel I can comment on without possibly violating my NDA. As an aside, Apple seemed very strict on NDA enforcement this year.
:-)
The 30" dual display setup is quite cool. Corner to corner very bright and even in temprement. Power and contrast ontrols are on the right hand side. If you have a dual monitor set up like this you might think at first that it would be hard to adjust the left monitor, but the screens tilt swivel quite effortlessly which makes the controls easilly accessible. Of course, power is controlled by the G5 and contrast usually doesn't have to be reset all that often so it's not a big deal.
The bezels are about a half inch so the two together make for an inch between the screens. You probably don't want to have windows straddling the gap, but for a window heavy app like Final Cut or Interface Builder it's not a big deal. The toned down bezel materials draw less attention (which is a good thing for a monitor).
A full screenshot from just one of these 2560x1600 pixel displays is 5,119,035 bytes. If you take lots of screenshots you might be wary about these 10MB dual monitor files will fill your hard disk (it's saved as a two page PDF file).
I was trying to find a neat OpenGL effect (screensaver, visualizer, etc) that used both displays. iTunes just ran it's visualizer on the monitor with it's library panel and the screensaver would do a "flurry" or other effect on the two displays independently (two flurries). I did finally find that you could get just an overwhelming image that straddled both monitors if you turned on zoom display image (cmd-opt-+). There was a photo of a little kid on screen under the mouse and activating that caused the photo to get positively huge with each eye on a monitor and the nose straddling the bezels. Very funny and perhaps a little scary (like being inside a dolls house in a giant's nursery).
The lowest resolution you can crank it down to in the displays panel is 640x480 (each can be set independently). The lowest one I found that didn't leave black edges was 1024x768. That makes the menubar readable from 10 feet away at least. Not that you'd do this often but if you were trying to justify this screen versus a projector for small crowds, that makes a very impressive and visible alternative for small groups.
Feeling the temperature of the aluminum was mildly warm after it had been on a full day, but it was by no means hot (which is good if you're worried about thermal problems throwing off color after a few years of use).
Even though Expose is a very neat feature on my machine, after I opened some windows on these displays, activating Expose seemed to barely shrink anything. It just moved a few things around. I'm used to a much more major game of 52 card pickup when I activate Expose on my 15" powerbook monitor.
On another stand they had the 17" Powerbooks hooked up to the 23" inch displays. I speculated to the Apple rep standing there that they didn't put the 30" display there because the "huge" Powerbook display seems puny next to the 23". He said though that the issues were with the graphics card in the PowerBook that were being worked on. He wouldn't say if that was heat problems or transfer speed (or what), but if PowerBooks can't drive these monitors that'll leave just DVI based machines. (including Windows machines).
Some things I can't say were related to these displays... There were at least 3 (nda) sessions I attended where I kept thinking mentally. "It's about time. I wonder if the 30" displays made the engineering teams decide to finally add this to Mac OS X". The Mac has always said that they have a well engineered foundation for graphics, but I think making these displays a reality will be a nice impetus for getting some of those ideas out of the realm of theory and into reality as well
These displays are a great thing that will benefit Mac users even if you don't have a 30" display.
On the subject of what a platform's graphics library can do vs. what it actually does/is forced to do in practice, you might find this article interesting.
DCMonkey
Heh, I know where you're coming from. I'm looking to buy a cheap portable notebook, and to my surprise the 12" iBook G4 just seems to be the best route to go. There are only one or two PC 12" notebooks at that price (~1200) and they all suck (poor battery performance, hot, bad keyboard, and so on). Laptops smaller than 12" are very rare and prohibitively expensive.
There are two issues with the iBook, though: I don't want to go Apple. Not that I don't like Apple, I've actually grown up with LCIIs and Performas and Ambrosia is the greatest shareware game developer of all time. But it's just not what I want for a laptop. Part of that is also that OS X runs quite sluggish on my GF's 14" iBook G3, and I want a system that really flies.
The other issue is that the iBook is quite heavy for a 12" laptop. It weighs 2.2kg, which although not very heavy for notebook standards, is 200g heavier than the cheapo laptop I mentioned above and 500g heavier than the excellent Samsung X10 laptop with a 14" display.
My favorite choice right now would be the Asus S5200N, which has gotten extremely favorable reviews all over the place (Tom's Hardware, for one). It's a 12" laptop, single-spindle (which apparently means that it has no internal CD-ROM, which is fine by me) has an okay keyboard, is reasonably fast and weighs only 1.6kg. The only thing wrong with it is the moderate battery performance, which is not a big problem since there are batteries with 2x and 3x the juice available for it. Oh and it costs ~1500, which makes it very cheap for a laptop of its class, but a wee bit more than I hoped to pay, and 300 more than the laptop from a hardware manufacturer considered infamously expensive.
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
anyone else have similar problems.. after burning 4 dvd-r using different setting... I kindda got tired of it.
taking your idea one notch further, for pr0n surfing, i've heard from someone else that it's all about fast-user switching.
Extraordinary Vacations. Exceptional Prices