Slashdot Mirror


Apple Offers Mac OS X 10.3.7 Update

An anonymous reader writes "MacNN reports: 'Apple has released Mac OS X 10.3.7 via the Software Update utility. Key enhancements include improved AFP support for saving documents with long file names, improved OpenGL technology and updated ATI and NVIDIA graphics drivers, improved FireWire device compatibility, updated Preview application, and improved compatibility for third party applications. The 10.3.7 update is recommended for all users of Mac OS X 10.3 'Panther.' It also includes all previous standalone security updates.'"

457 comments

  1. Dear 10.3.7 by Letter · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Dear 10.3.7,

    Holy sh..

    I just upgraded and I got a 2.2 times OpenGL speedup.

    Wow, Letter

    1. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by Glendale2x · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Uhh I think I replied to the wrong one... my response was to 11098678 about Real's lameness.

      (waiting two minutes to post this...)

      --
      this is my sig
    2. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by The+Illegal+Pirates · · Score: 5, Funny
      Dear Sir or Madam:

      We, the Illegal Pirates of the Internet Who Must Steal Everything No Matter What, already have a cabal of Freedom Hating Illegal Filetraders feverishly working on a cracked version of 10.3.7 which we will release publically for free. Apple's lack of copy protection and free distribution via Software Update has seriously impeded our efforts to violate the DMCA and cost people money, but even these extreme measures will prove insufficient to stem internet piracy of copyrighted software.

      Signed,

      The Illegal Pirates of the Internet Who Must Steal Everything No Matter What

    3. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by Randy+Wang · · Score: 1

      That's really strange - on my older hardware (8Mb ATI Rage 128 Pro) I'm getting a 25% slowdown.

      Ah well - it's not like there was much to lose anyway.

      --
      --- Egads, I glow in the dark!
    4. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by Apiakun · · Score: 1

      I can't believe this is marked as a troll. This is hilarious.

    5. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 1

      That's strange, Apple never packaged an 8 MB Rage card with any tower that OS X is supported on. Are you on an iMac?

    6. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      Dear 10.3.7,

      This almost makes up for the recent update that screwed up fonts and had my publications department whining to us every 5 minutes. Almost.

      Sincerely,
      Me

    7. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by fracai · · Score: 1

      My Pismo, that is still officially supported by Panther, has an 8MB Rage. hardware != tower

      --
      -- i am jack's amusing sig file
    8. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      I hope this helps frame rates with bzflag on my 450 mhz chassis with transplanted 500 mhz g4 cpu and ATI Radeon I pulled from some other machine.

      Cuz now I am playing in 640 x 480 low detail mode for the true old school gaming experience.

      Um, yeah.

      --
      music lover since 1969
    9. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by cosmo_the_third · · Score: 1

      Troll?! I feel like that was a legitamte discussion point.

      I love macs, never would use anything else, but doesn't anyone else wonder what they're doing and not telling you about?

      I feel like it's a really stale decision to block mp3 files from your hardware just because you don't like where they came from. "Protections" like that cause needless incompatabilities and just end up irritating users.

      You may recall from the previous post that Apple wasn't exactly trumpeting their decision to lock these files out of iPod. If that doesn't make you just a tad bit suspicious, I don't know what will.

      --
      http://cyclocosm.com Pro cycling at its worst
    10. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1
      OK, let's call it uninformed discussion points. Apple does not block MP3 files from anyone's hardware, as they also don't block AAC files -- they *do* block Real's hacks on their DRM -- this means that any non-DRM'd files play just fine, but anything that tries to restrict your freedom (except if it comes from Apple) won't work. I'd put this in a similar category to CD players that won't play hacked (DRM'd) redbook CDs.

      After all, Apple makes their update logs public, as can be found here.

    11. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by cosmo_the_third · · Score: 1

      See? Now I am informed. Ah, the magic of the internet. No need to troll.

      --
      http://cyclocosm.com Pro cycling at its worst
    12. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by mmkkbb · · Score: 1

      Why didn't you bother to read the article that was posted earlier? This doesn't even have anything to do with 10.3.7; only iPod Firmware Updates.

      --
      -mkb
    13. Re:Dear 10.3.7 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Illegal Pirates of the Internet Who Must Steal Everything No Matter What

      Copying is not stealing. There's a huge semantic difference. Please don't teach the ignorant masses with false ideas.

  2. Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by four2five · · Score: 1

    I know they had disabled hardware acceleration for Mac's because of issues with the graphics drives. I wonder if these improvements will allow them to turn the acceleration back on. My 12" powerbook would sure appreciate it.

    --
    -or so you'd think
    1. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by four2five · · Score: 1

      I'm gonna RTFA myself. I didn't bother to check the link and they spell it out in there. Sorry.

      --
      -or so you'd think
    2. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by Nermal6693 · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to Blizzard, the 10.3.7 update helps, but a forthcoming WoW patch will make it run even better.

    3. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by 1010011010 · · Score: 1


      I installed it on my 17" 1GHz powerbook, and it noticeably improved the performance of WoW. Inside, I get framerates as high as 75 fps. Outside, I get at least 12. If I turn off the "dashboard", it goes up to 18 or so.

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    4. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by green+pizza · · Score: 1

      The current version of Mac WoW has some major graphics features disabled and/or using slower rendering paths. (Such as multi-pass rendering rather than OpenGL shader language). As I understand it, this was done to work around some bugs found in Mac OS 10.3's OpenGL implementation. Many of these bugs have been fixed in 10.3.7, but you will need to wait for a WoW from Blizzard before you'll see major performance increases. Just 10.3.7 alone probably won't make the game any faster, it might even make it slightly slower.

    5. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by v1 · · Score: 1

      On my 800mhz tibook, I was getting around 18fps with 10.3.3 playing UT 2004. When I updated to 10.3.4, frame rates dropped to about 1fps. Even the main page's animation was this slow. So I had to archive and install and carefully update back to 10.3.3. I accidentally updated to 10.3.4 two weeks later and had to do it over again.

      When I upgraded to a 15" albook, it came with 10.3.4, but frames were great, at 34fps. I accidentally installed the 10.3.5 update, (arg! again!) and frames crashed to 4fps. Archive and install back to 10.3.4 (my third reinstall) and frames were back to 35'ish. I have Software Update set to manual now, to avoid needing yet another reinstall.

      Now I wish I had partitioned my HD when I transferred from the tibook, so that I would have another partition to install and "test drive" the new updates on. I'll probably borrow an external HD and install on that for a test later.

      I don't know what WoW's expected frame rate is, but 12fps seems a bit low for a 17", but then again 75fps is stellar so maybe the outside rendering is just massive. (no fog? long line f sight?)

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    6. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a patch available here

    7. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by 1010011010 · · Score: 1


      The outside rendering is massive. Reducing the line of sight helps. Interestingly, my 1GHz Powerbook now gets better framerates than my Athlon XP 2400+. Hopefully the next WoW patch will improve things further, as well as take care of the bug that causes framerate drops when the "dashboard" is visible.

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    8. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by rb4havoc · · Score: 1

      Wow, you've got a DVI TiBook, and were getting framerates that poor? Mine wasn't far off, but I was getting a whole lot better framerates, and another thing I noticed is that this last time I went to erase and reinstall everything, I made a separate partition for OS X, Classic, and a partition just to mess around with Linux, the performance of literally everything improved on my system, even running WoW. 10.3.7 improved WoW a little, and hopefully with this next patch of WoW, it will improve it even better.

      I haven't been able to try UT 2k4 since I erased and reinstalled, but I'm sure the performance on that will be greatly improved as well. I'm just hoping there won't be another really great game come along before Apple decides to release an update to the PowerBooks in January 2005.

      --
      "There are 10 types of people in this world--Those that understand binary, and those that do not..."
    9. Re:Wonder if this'll help World of Warcraft by v1 · · Score: 1

      Just an update for any who are listening... I just got the opportunity to test play UT on my powerbook, booted off a FW HD running 10.3.7, and the frame rates are good! It looks like whatever they broke in 10.3.5 they fixed in 10.3.7, at least for the 15" FW800 powerbook's video chipset. Anyone care to sample the 12" and 17" powerbooks performance for us?

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  3. PearPC by IO+ERROR · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh no, this is going to take forever for PearPC to install.

    --
    How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
    1. Re:PearPC by kngthdn · · Score: 1

      I was thinking exactly the same thing.

      It took me 8 hours to get just 1 of the 4 OSX discs installed on my PC....

    2. Re:PearPC by CrackedButter · · Score: 1


      It took me 8 hours to get just 1 of the 4 OSX discs installed on my PC....
      Why 4 discs... are you trying to install everything? I can get by on just the one if I just wanted to do a bare minimum install, I highly question your reasons for doing it with all four if you are doing this with a PC. What are you doing it for?

    3. Re:PearPC by c0p0n · · Score: 2, Funny

      It took me 8 hours to get just 1 of the 4 OSX discs installed on my PC....

      But it does because you do it the wrong way. You can start PearPC on a Win2k VMware virtual machine, so you can pause the execution at any time...

      --

      Your head a splode
    4. Re:PearPC by spacefrog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Install worked great on CherryOS, even on this ancient dual P3 box.

      Oh wait, that was a dream, never mind.

    5. Re:PearPC by kngthdn · · Score: 1

      I've actually only installed 1 so far. It's going to take a lot of work to get the others installed.

      What is there to question? It took 8 hours so I could use Safari. The other discs should be quicker and more than worth the trouble. Especially the development tools.

      Besides, I want to get my money's worth and fill up my 4GB image file!

    6. Re:PearPC by IO+ERROR · · Score: 1
      But it does because you do it the wrong way. You can start PearPC on a Win2k VMware virtual machine, so you can pause the execution at any time...

      I just run ppc from a terminal, and hit Ctrl-Z to pause the execution at any time.

      --
      How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
    7. Re:PearPC by kngthdn · · Score: 1

      It took so long because it kept locking up after a couple hours.

      I suspect it would run better from my Linux partition.

    8. Re:PearPC by c0p0n · · Score: 1

      I was actually trying to make a joke. Thanks for ruining it. Now I should get on crack.

      --

      Your head a splode
    9. Re:PearPC by Jedi_Master_SS · · Score: 1

      the reason i installed all 4 disks is i'm a windows user who needs to create some software for a non-profit company which has some users on macs

    10. Re:PearPC by IO+ERROR · · Score: 1

      Ruining jokes is my sole reason for posting to /.

      --
      How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
    11. Re:PearPC by Tom+Davies · · Score: 2, Informative

      Buy a 2nd hand G3 imac on ebay.

      You'll get decent performance for not much money.

      --
      I have discovered a wonderful .sig, but 120 characters is too small to contain it.
    12. Re:PearPC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's actually quite a good plan. I ran development on my G3 Bondi from 10.0 to the release of 10.2, and it built everything just dandy. Only small problem was launching 3rd party applications... ;-)

    13. Re:PearPC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Let's see.

      PC - $
      Win2K - $$
      OS X - $
      VMware - $$$$

      Holy trustfund baby, it appears someone's out of touch with the economic situation.

    14. Re:PearPC by Piquan · · Score: 1

      I'd forgotten how far along PearPC was, so I looked at the web site, and found this gem:

      Because the author has only access to a little-endian machine, PearPC will most likely only run on little-endian architectures.

      Am I the only one that finds something hideously wrong with this sentence? I mean, isn't the whole point of this project to give the author access to a little-endian machine?

  4. All the right fixes? by dave1212 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's hoping it will fix the MIDI issues that occurred with Reason and 10.3.6. It's getting very frustrating to have to troubleshoot this stuff all the time with the Audio MIDI Setup Utility.

    Any word on if Safari has been updated to support type-ahead-find yet? I won't be updating until I hear some Reason users speak up, and this is a sweet feature that should be in Safari by now.

    1. Re:All the right fixes? by Tsiangkun · · Score: 1

      What midi problems have you been having ?

      I haven't been using much midi equipment lately, but the only problem I've noticed is that my keyboard either doesn't get detected, or gets detected but fails to controll the synths even though the green bar indicating a midi signal is being received.

    2. Re:All the right fixes? by purplemonkeydan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Install Saft for type ahead find and other nifty stuff.

    3. Re:All the right fixes? by cmodcmodcmod · · Score: 1

      Regarding Safari & type-ahead-find: installing Saft gives you type-ahead support. Amongst other useful features.

    4. Re:All the right fixes? by maxgoldman · · Score: 1

      find-as-you-type in Safari: http://www.nondeterministic.net/hack/fiwt/

    5. Re:All the right fixes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are heaps more problems with Safari than lack of frivolous features, such as poor or no automatic charset detection, not being able to search for phrases if there's a line break between in the HTML source,

    6. Re:All the right fixes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (cont'd) and cmd-Z (Mac's equivalent of ctrl-Z) not doing undo in textfields, but instead sometimes crashing the program. Pop-up blocking sometimes gets disabled out of the blue. NO CUSTOM KEYWORD SEARCH. Seriously, the only reason I use Safari is for speed and great bookmark management. IE is even more of a joke on Macs, too. (sorry I'm behind a shit ISP that doesn't allow long posts)

  5. Yesterday. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They've been available for more than 24 hours, although we know most people won't install them.

    1. Re:Yesterday. by jx100 · · Score: 1

      funny, I didn't see it when I updated earlier today.. I only updated to .6 then

    2. Re:Yesterday. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe a trojan has disabled your update feature for patches that would remove the backdoor. It happened to me once.

  6. And, oh yeah, don't forget... by metrazol · · Score: 4, Funny

    World of Warcraft. One game is the focus of most of the updates to graphics drivers. Shocking, eh? Makes you wonder, who wanted the patches more? Blizzard, the user base, or Apples lab full of level 40 somethin' developers?

    --
    "Life's funny sometimes." "And sometimes it isn't." --Cat's Cradle
    1. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by BrookHarty · · Score: 1

      I'm getting 20FPS on an ATI9000+G4, I'd like to see benchmarks on the Nvidia 6800 ULtra DDL G5's.

      My PC with ATI 9700 runs 50FPS with everything maxed and anti-aliasing on full.

      In fact, the driver updates mention WoW. :)

    2. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by Mr.+Arbusto · · Score: 1

      I get about 25-30FPS@1600x1200 with almost every visual settings on low. A lot of the problem is my lack of ram. The disk swaps like mad when i do a turn in a city or ride a griffin. Installing the update now, we'll see.

      2x2GHz G5
      512MB RAM
      ATI 9600XT

    3. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      "Blizzard, the user base, or Apples lab full of level 40 somethin' developers?"

      Does it matter? Faster drawing to the screen on this 12" powerbook, that I doubt could ever play WoW, is only a good thing. YAY.

      All I want is civ4 and simcity4 (and maybe something like moo3) to run well on this machine... And it just barely doesnt make it... My fault, I got antsy and couldn't wait for the revision of the 12" pbooks to happen... A better video card would have made a WORLD of difference...

      PS: When will apple upgrade the bus speed of powerbooks(and ibooks)? Is it limited by the g4 chips?

    4. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by geniusj · · Score: 1

      Let us know. But you definitely need more RAM. That would explains your disk thrashing.

    5. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I stopped at level 39. But, hey, I tried.

    6. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by Lewisham · · Score: 1

      Its your RAM chief.

      WoW needs to place a lot of textures into memory, which is causing all the swaps. Once that's in, you should be able to max pretty much everything.

      My 1.5Ghz G4 isn't enough for all the extra processing that needs to be done for the terrain. I only get 20fps tops, usually about 8. I can run at whatever resolution and fancy effects I like, as my top-of-the-PB-line 128Mb GPU isn't being tested. Neither is my 1GB of RAM. It's just the CPU, which is sadly something not so easily fixed :(

    7. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      Since this one game is pretty much at the moment the entirety of the macintosh games library... ... ... not so much.

      Ooooh, burn!

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    8. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither, my guess is that Steve Jobs spend his free time playing World of Warcraft, I think that I bumped into him once or twice during the game

    9. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by SamBeckett · · Score: 1

      I have a DP 866 G4, 1GB Ram, which is below the system specs. The only time I have had noticable performance problems is when I turned everything all the way up at 1200x1024 resolution. I usually run it at 1024x768 in a window and everything is peachy.

    10. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So how many hit-dice does a level 40 Apple developer have anyway? More or less than a level 40 MCSE?

    11. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

      WOW is playable, though not great, on my 1GHz 12" with 32MB graphics card at 800x600. I bought it for my windows box and was pleasently suprised that it would run with that poor of a graphics card on my powerbook.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    12. Re:And, oh yeah, don't forget... by Shadowmist · · Score: 1

      Remember to the PC users of the Horde they're Skull flagged Level 40 Elite Deveopers led by the Level 60 Boss Black Turtleneck. :)

  7. Re:Microsoft Updates Windows XP by FiReaNGeL · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up?

    Slow news day, I guess...

  8. Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by amichalo · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to this note, the ATI and NVIDIA updates in 10.3.7 are good news for laptop owners because they reduce power consumption, thus improving battery life.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    1. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... I'm not sure whether to be impressed with them for managing to hack a bit more battery life, or unimpressed that they released such an unoptimised version to begin with.

    2. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by K8Fan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but does it fix the problem with system panics when resuming from Sleep mode? I understand that it's an ATI driver issue.

      --
      "How perfectly Goddamn delightful it all is, to be sure" Charles Crumb
    3. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Before installing 10.3.7, I had 43 minutes of juice on my iBook G4 800...after installing 10.3.7, I've got 1 hour and 3 minutes! Can't wait to see what it's like when I'm fully charged up again. I was already getting 5.5-6 hours on a full charge.

    4. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by kingkrap · · Score: 1

      not 1776, 1789

    5. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by JohnsonWax · · Score: 1

      My 12" PB shows 2 hrs 2 min remaining from a full charge under 10.3.7. I know for a fact that even playing Battlefield 1942 with the screen at full bright I can get far better than 3 hrs. Give no credence to the menu bar estimate...

    6. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by nordicfrost · · Score: 1

      Same here. I have a 15" PowerBook, I got 2h 30min running everything on, full speed and full brightness. After the update I get 3h with the same specs? Wow!I wonder what I get after dimming the screen all the way down.

    7. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ~5:30 or 6:00, if it's like my old Powerbook but slightly better due to update.

    8. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not 1776, 1789

      I think he's referring to the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

    9. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I had 43 minutes of juice

      43 minutes, whow! My Pentium M notebook (costs 800) runs 6 hours when wlan is switched off and the linunx kernel runs with laptop mode enabled.

      Even when playing Q3A with the CPU running at full 1.4GHZ it takes two hours until the battery runs out of power.

      > 5.5-6 hours on a full charge

      You mean it takes 5-6 hours until your iBook is fully charged?

    10. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We had always suspected that Linux users are dumb.

    11. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by Slur · · Score: 1

      I can confirm that the battery life is improved. Before the update I had about 1:30 left on the battery. I gained a half hour of battery life after the update.

      --
      -- thinkyhead software and media
    12. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by prockcore · · Score: 1

      Give no credence to the menu bar estimate...

      That works both ways.. on my pismo, the estimate says 1 hour 20 minutes, I know for a fact that it'll only last 15 minutes.

      I've tried every little apple hack that I can find, but no matter what I do, the battery life tacks down to about 70% and then goes straight to 0%.

    13. Re:Good news for iBook, Powerbook owners by myov · · Score: 1

      Apple tweaks the battery code with each OS release. It sounds like they finally put things back to the level we had under 10.2. I had to buy a new battery after installing 10.3, because the battery life was so poor.

      --
      I use Macs to up my productivity, so up yours Microsoft!
  9. NT and 2K also. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So these new patches can join the scores of others which remain uninstalled on at least 99% of all Microsoft Windows-based systems. Hooray for Luser exploits. They keep teh intarweb fun!

  10. Better not install it yet by lakeland · · Score: 5, Funny

    After all, we've all heard the horror stories about windows users who installed the windows update only to have lots of software break.

    Surely apple will be similar? ;-)

    1. Re:Better not install it yet by agraupe · · Score: 1

      Quite possibly... I dunno, something about Apple makes it seem safer. I don't like updating my linux system frequently either, because updates are when things change, and when things change, things can go wrong. If it stays the same, it should work. So, I wouldn't install it right away, but usually Apple updates don't fuck things up (because I think they actually test things).

    2. Re:Better not install it yet by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      IIRC, there was only one OS X point update -- I think it was 10.2.3 or 10.2.4? -- that caused real problems. And within a couple of days of its release, they'd pulled it and released a fixed version. So my policy is to wait a week to install the updates; if there are any killer bugs, Apple will probably find and fix them in that time. Much, much, much better than, say, the situation with the infamous XP SP2.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:Better not install it yet by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      10.3 had the ability to wipe clean external firewire drives remember? My mac didn't touch Panther until 10.3.1 because I have a firewire drive.

    4. Re:Better not install it yet by SteveM · · Score: 1

      The release notes form Apple say to disconnect firewire drives before installing this update.

      Release notes here.

      SteveM

    5. Re:Better not install it yet by Moofie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Something about Apple, like their almost bulletproof list of successfull OS upgrades?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:Better not install it yet by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      That's why I specifically said "point release" -- maybe I should have been more specific; I was talking about the downloadable updates rather than the major releases.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    7. Re:Better not install it yet by nordicfrost · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Things can go south with Apple as well. As I mentioned in this topic, I got a /etc/ttys file overwritten after the latest security uodate, and the system just hung on reboot at the "starting logon window" notice.

      Now, as the shit had hit the fan, I was without computer as I oly have the Apple Powerbook. I tried everything I knew, but to no avail. If I had access to another computer, I'd known that the file was overwritten by mistake and restorable from the ttys.applesaved file. Also, the system would start up in single user mode to correct this problem. But I didn't know.

      Anyhoo, I decided to do a Archive and Install type from the 10.3 DVD that was included with the PB. I was prepared to spend the rest of the evening restoring settings and loading programs, but, I was stumped after the install. Everything was at its right place, spare for the wallpaper. Even the document I saved just before rebooting was on the desktop. Every setting, everything was as I remembered it, but the whole system was brand new 10.3 from 10.3.6. Incredible, but a part of the *nix goodness of keeping settings apart from the system on a user base.

      There were two minor SNAFUs with the rollback, I could not start System Preferences from the Apple menu and I had to reinstall Salling Clicker (But it even understood that I had bought and registered the program after install). A quick lookup in the Apple Discussion boards adviced me to chick the old saved system in the thrash and empty it, I did and the System Prefrences menu worked.

      This was something quite different from the time when I had to reinstall Windows 2k to restore the system from some b0rkness...

      MacOS amazes me, but not as much as peoples resistance to it amazes me.

    8. Re:Better not install it yet by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      SP2 has caused more havoc with more people's networking than, I suspect, any other OS release ever put out by any company. I know too many people, personally, who have been fUx0r3d by it to believe the "a few specialized apps" line.

      As for 10.3, see what I said to another poster in the thread.

      I'm sure I'll get modded down for this ...

      I've always believed that anyone who qualifies their statements with that line deserves to be modded into oblivion, just on principle. If you've got something to say that you believe will be unpopular, just say it -- don't try to impress us with how tough and brave you are putting your karma on the line. Or whatever.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:Better not install it yet by man_ls · · Score: 1

      I can't install SP2.

      On a fully legitimate system, the first time I installed SP2, Explorer crashed when I tried to set the firewall options.

      Subsequent installs of SP2, now, Explorer.exe will not start. Ever. Task Mrg>New Task>Explorer.exe doesn't even start the app, my guess is it segfaults right away. So I'm on SP1a.

      piece of shit if you ask me, I *want* to use it, and I don't have the time to reformat and reinstall the applications I have.

    10. Re:Better not install it yet by ender81b · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah SP2's failure rate - where by failure rate I mean turn computer into an unusable state requiring a fresh reinstall - seems to be about 1%. As for breaking specific applications I would say around 5% of people have problems. This is all based on experience working tech desk at an ISP and being a computer tech for the univeristy library.

      Of course, it could be worse. I love SP2 for the fact that as soon as somebody installs it I can immediately shut off Norton "Internet Security" also known as Norton never works right, Norton constantly breaks itself on updates, Norton randomly decides to block port 80 and 25, and - oh by the way - Norton doesn't offer tech support so have fun supporting our product ISPs!

      Not that I hate Norton or anything ;) but, seriously, I wish that company would get sucked into an enormous black hole and never ever ever return.

    11. Re:Better not install it yet by Zonnald · · Score: 0

      Now 1 person in 1,000,000 fails to install SP2, Explorer doesn't start when you do and set firewall options.

      QED Peice of Shit - not Windows, I think your computer and/or the way you used it, has cause the problem. Learn some problem solving techniques: none will suggest that when software is updated successfully on 1M+ computers, but 1 fails, that it is the fault of the sofware update.

    12. Re:Better not install it yet by dgatwood · · Score: 1
      It is certainly always a good idea to disconnect unused drives when doing something that overwrites parts of the OS....

      However, there's more to it than that for this release. If you have a drive that doesn't show up in 10.3.6, it will be in a wedged state (bridge chip's microcontroller is hung) until you power cycle it. (I recall hearing tales of folks who tried connecting the wedged drives to other machines and were in a state of panic before they figured this one out....)

      Thus, that recommendation also is probably an attempt to avoid the "it still doesn't work" shouts that could otherwise ensue even after fixing the problem (assuming that the problem is fixed---I don't own any of said firewire enclosures to check).

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    13. Re:Better not install it yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I kinda doubt it. I administer about 50 Windows and 15 Mac computers (typical for a graphic arts company), and have never run into issues with updates from either company. I'm not talking about the 'XP installed a firewall and VPN software won't work until it is configured' types of problems, but real show stoppers that reading the documentation won't help you solve. A little goofyness with Safari? sure, seen it a couple times. It's not going to kill the day

    14. Re:Better not install it yet by ChuckleBug · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've always believed that anyone who qualifies their statements with that line deserves to be modded into oblivion, just on principle. If you've got something to say that you believe will be unpopular, just say it -- don't try to impress us with how tough and brave you are putting your karma on the line. Or whatever.

      AMEN! I can't stand that kind of preemptive whining. It's obnoxious. Only in extremely rare and egregious cases is complaining about being modded a reasonable thing to do.

    15. Re:Better not install it yet by Myopic · · Score: 1

      if you hadn't said something, i would have posted a top-level comment: Sun's java-dev listserv is abuzz with reports that this upgrade can break Java (the reported problem is a segfault when java attempts to run).

      so be careful. i have not personally installed it yet.

    16. Re:Better not install it yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll be modded to oblivion for this, but I agree.

    17. Re:Better not install it yet by jschottm · · Score: 1

      10.2.8 Mark I, if you care. It's part of why arrogant bastards such as myself dismiss Apple as being more of a toy rather than serious datacenter OS. Apple bundled several key patches (SSH and SSL IIRC) in the package update without providing them for 10.2.7.

      I'm a relatively small fry in the computer world, but when my systems are even moderately heavy use, my bandwidth can be measured in 10s of MegeBytes per second. Having to accept a big patch that tweaks things all over the system (and as it turned out, happened to kill some people's ethernet drivers, amoung other serious problems) just to get key security software updated is unacceptable. Yes, I *could* compile the secured versions myself, but why should I pay $1K/unit for software support per year and have to compile mundane updates?

      It also managed to modify something about 12" Powerbooks that caused Linux 2.4.19 on up to stop working, and Apple never could figure out what caused that. They swore up and down to me that nothing firmwarewise should have been modified.

      SP2 broke a lot of poorly written software and confused some people because it automatically turned on the firewall. The companies that wrote the bad code (including MS with Office and the like) should be ashamed, but SP2 overall wasn't bad, and they released preview versions long ahead so that professionals could test their setups.

    18. Re:Better not install it yet by Eccles · · Score: 0

      Something about Apple, like their almost bulletproof list of successfull OS upgrades?

      As a programmer on a cross-platform PC/Mac app, I have to say that this must be some different Apple about which you speak. Apple's OS upgrades have messed up our app far more frequently than Microsoft's. Heck, Apple's most recent screwed with our app by adding a new slowdown between the last developer release and the final version.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    19. Re:Better not install it yet by Moofie · · Score: 2

      Perhaps your Windows programmers are more experienced with their platform than your Mac developers? Just a guess, mind you...

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    20. Re:Better not install it yet by Farmbubba · · Score: 3, Informative

      1% failure rate is impressive. I've had 4 machines that I was hoping SP2 would "fix" and didn't help at all. And several machines that were broken after SP2. In the old days a good rule of thumb was that windows 98 would self destruct after a few years. Now a good rule of thumb is Win XP will self destruct with the first teenager that browses the internet with it.

    21. Re:Better not install it yet by easter1916 · · Score: 1
      don't try to impress us with how tough and brave you are putting your karma on the line.
      C'mon! Like *anyone* gives a shit!
    22. Re:Better not install it yet by agraupe · · Score: 1

      Yes, that would be it. Mac combines the power and stability of UNIX with the usability of Windows (far exceeds it), so why shouldn't the upgrades be an example of this?

    23. Re:Better not install it yet by johnjosephbachir · · Score: 1

      best
      soviet
      russia
      joke
      ever.

    24. Re:Better not install it yet by discstickers · · Score: 1

      I'm running a java applet right now. No problems.

      --
      I have a shitty sig!
    25. Re:Better not install it yet by ccoakley · · Score: 1

      I just ran a few java apps. I use Apple's JVM, so maybe the complaints are for people who like to compile their own VM?

      --
      Network Security: It always comes down to a big guy with a gun.
    26. Re:Better not install it yet by Myopic · · Score: 1

      good to hear the problem might not be universal, or even very common at all. the problem was reported, after all, on a java developers' list, so the reporters were more likely to have funny things installed with their java.

      if you want to double check, make sure you've restarted and type 'java -version' at a terminal (Terminal) prompt. if you get a version string, all is well; reportedly, that command produced a segmentation fault.

    27. Re:Better not install it yet by seamuskrat · · Score: 1

      I have my PB sitting waiting for a cure. How do you fix this overwritten /etc/ttys file. Mine hangs at the same place.

    28. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      MacOS amazes me, but not as much as peoples resistance to it amazes me.

      Why? A security update shafted your only computer but you appear pleased that it was only somewhat shafted and unusable.

      I can't speak for everyone else but I can tell you why I resist Macs: it's because of people like you. Frankly, I find your amazement at MacOS and blind belief in Apple frightening. And when I read accounts like yours I genuinely wonder if some sort of brainwashing was involved.

    29. Re:Better not install it yet by ChuckleBug · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't speak for everyone else but I can tell you why I resist Macs: it's because of people like you. Frankly, I find your amazement at MacOS and blind belief in Apple frightening.

      Choosing not to use a type of computer because you don't like the attitude of some of its users is pretty stupid.

    30. Re:Better not install it yet by skinfitz · · Score: 1

      You mean like 10.3.5 breaking systems that use a list of names to log in to a network server?

    31. Re:Better not install it yet by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      Surely apple will be similar? ;-)

      They have changed the way liveconnect in Safari fails miserably with each othe last few updates, so I have no reason to think this one will be different.

      (Oh well, I hadn't managed to get time on enough Macs to fix the last one properly, so maybe I can use the immanent release of this one as an excuse...)

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    32. Re:Better not install it yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like that awesome iTunes installer that ERASED YOUR HARD DRIVE?

    33. Re:Better not install it yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It also managed to modify something about 12" Powerbooks that caused Linux 2.4.19 on up to stop working, and Apple never could figure out what caused that. They swore up and down to me that nothing firmwarewise should have been modified."

      Yes, and if you tried to get support from me after you'd put some random unsupported software on my branded hardware, I'd tell you to fuck off too.

    34. Re:Better not install it yet by hemanman · · Score: 1

      They are, last "update" (10.3.6) did break some of the very few games you can play on a G4. :-(

      The OpenGL was totally fubar, so I hope they fixed it again.

      -H

    35. Re:Better not install it yet by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      As I mentioned in a previous comment, Apple stuff *does* go south from time to time. A recent update rendered some fonts unusable. When your base is publications, this is a huge problem. For about 2 months some of my users needed to avoid using certain fonts for fear they wouldn't print correctly.

      The big problem I had with the update is that all it said was "improved Fontbook functionality". No technical information on WHAT it improved, just that abreviated text. Not cool.

    36. Re:Better not install it yet by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Eclipse running fine & dandy with Tomcat 5.5; if that isn't a good test what is? ;-)

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    37. Re:Better not install it yet by nbvb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right, they issued a bad point release, so that makes the OS a non-datacenter-OS?

      Go back under your rock.

      I guess you've never seen a Sun BADPATCH.

      Or a withdrawn patch under HP-UX.

      Or even a bad patch with OpenVMS.

      Grow up. Get a clue. Bugs happen. The magic is in what the vendors *do* about it.

    38. Re:Better not install it yet by nordicfrost · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But here's the point: it didn't shaft my computer. Everything was working right after the error was corrected, it was like the error never occurred. I have never claimed that the Mac OS is perfect. It has error and the developers screw up from time to time. But when the error has occurred, it is usually very, very easy to fix and widely discussed by Apple fans raving over 30 minutes downtime on their laptop.

      For the record, here's what I believe about Apple: they are a corporation. They have shareholders and need to cater to their shareholders like every other share-based company. However, they seem to put more work into their product than similar companies. Their computers look nice. Their computers are sturdy. Their OS is nice to use. They contribute to the Open Source community. And most important; currently they are an underdog that has to fight to convince people about their products. This makes for better products.

      I hated Macs in the mid 90ies. I thought that they were buggy, childish and a pain to use. Then Jobs came along and introduced the iMac. I liked the ideas about all-USB and no disk drive, thinking "it's about time". But the OS still sucked. Big time. Then came OS X, especially in its second incarnation. Holy hell. The power of *nix AND a desktop you can look at without thinking "Relax" by Frankie Goes to Hollywood is the current #1 hit? And it plays better with Windows computers than they play among themselves?

      I was convinced and dropped Linux for Mac. I am now a Mac fan, since I have so many good experiences with the Mac, Mac OS and Apple. They are very professional and that is a big issue with me. I hate having to call Dell three or four times to solve an issue that is clearly under warranty. I hate it when a computer is not ready to be used by me, its owner at any time. I hate downtime and issues. With Apple, I have had excellent customer experience, it is a robust system that has proven a catastrophic failure is easy to recover from. So easy in fact that it required three user actions (Insert disc, press command - C during start up, choose 'Archive and install') to recover and have the user settings intact, the computer settings intact, the registration on bought programs intact, everything as it should be. I did computer support for Windows around 2001, and I felt it was something wrong with the system when the callers had to wipe their harddrives to reinstall from OEM discs. This was not the way a computer should work. With the Mac I feel that it is a tool for me to use, like a hammer. Not a veteran car that needs constant attention and tuning just to fulfill its primary obejctive.

      But, above all, I do not believe that Apple is perfect in any way. They ar just currently the best alternative by far.

    39. Re:Better not install it yet by nordicfrost · · Score: 1

      It is discussed in the Apple forums, here's a fix:

      -quote-
      The 10.3.6 update left a zero byte /etc/ttys on my G5, luckily there is also a ttys.applesaved which contains the line that getty needs to start the Login Window application:

      console "/System/Library/CoreServices/loginwindow.app/Cont ents/MacOS/loginwindow" vt100 on secure window=/System/Library/CoreServices/WindowServer onoption="/usr/libexec/getty std.9600"

      I was able to login with ssh to copy the file, but you could do this in single user mode as well (startup with CMND-S)

      sudo cp /etc/ttys.applesaved /etc/ttys

      -quote-

      If you give me your mail address, I can mail you a copy of my ttys file, I'm on a PowerBook.

    40. Re:Better not install it yet by ickoonite · · Score: 1

      The contents of my /etc/ttys file can be found here - you should be able to start up in single user mode (this looks good, but Google is your friend). You can then retype the contents of the file - pain in the ass I know, but it's something?

      The permissions on the file are -rw-r--r--, user root, group wheel.

      Otherwise, target disk mode should be able to help you out.

      Hope this helps?

      iqu :)

    41. Re:Better not install it yet by Pointdexter · · Score: 1
      I've always believed that anyone who qualifies their statements with that line deserves to be modded into oblivion, just on principle. If you've got something to say that you believe will be unpopular, just say it -- don't try to impress us with how tough and brave you are putting your karma on the line. Or whatever.

      I'll probably get modded down for this but hear hear!
      --
      Party Time: Excellent
    42. Re:Better not install it yet by justins · · Score: 0
      Choosing not to use a type of computer because you don't like the attitude of some of its users is pretty stupid.

      Not if you're accustomed to getting your support from user communities online, rather than calling support. It would take an awful lot of zealots to turn me off of an operating system, but I've certainly seen this phenomenon in action. Ask the "wrong" question and everyone piles on with criticism, the question goes unanswered, and the user who is evaluating some new technology says "to hell with it."
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    43. Re:Better not install it yet by macmurph · · Score: 1

      While not directly relevant to your points, you might be interested in this:

      http://news.com.com/Oracle+uses+Apple+storage+gear /2100-1015_3-5480045.html

      Oracle has decided to host 50-100 TeraBytes of data on Xserve Raids.

    44. Re:Better not install it yet by bodrell · · Score: 1
      Of course, it could be worse. I love SP2 for the fact that as soon as somebody installs it I can immediately shut off Norton "Internet Security" also known as Norton never works right, Norton constantly breaks itself on updates, Norton randomly decides to block port 80 and 25, and - oh by the way - Norton doesn't offer tech support so have fun supporting our product ISPs!
      Sorry, that just isn't true about Norton not having tech support. I know because I used to DO tech support for Norton AntiVirus, Internet Security, and a few other Norton products. I will wholeheartedly agree that NIS is a piece of crap. The most frequent call we got was about Internet Security's "Administrator Issue," wherein the computer would spontaneously lose a password file even if you'd never created a password. The Administrator password is supposed to be for people who want to control their kids' access to the internet, but a lot of people without kids fell victim to the bug.

      Oh, and by the way, if the bug was not the user's fault, then the tech support call was free. We did have to send some people to their ISP or OEM vendor if they received an OEM copy of the Norton suite. Also, some stupid ISPs require installation of buggy software (often written in, say, Visual Basic) which actively broke other network programs. And anyone with spyware installed had to call back once they'd disinfected their machine.

      --
      Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a soportar Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a espabilar
    45. Re:Better not install it yet by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      Not if you're accustomed to getting your support from user communities online, rather than calling support. It would take an awful lot of zealots to turn me off of an operating system, but I've certainly seen this phenomenon in action. Ask the "wrong" question and everyone piles on with criticism, the question goes unanswered, and the user who is evaluating some new technology says "to hell with it."

      I'd love to see an example of this. In my experience, the community of Mac users has been a great resource, and I've never seen a case of someone getting trashed for asking an honest question, the occasional troll notwithstanding.

    46. Re:Better not install it yet by jschottm · · Score: 1

      Right, they issued a bad point release, so that makes the OS a non-datacenter-OS?

      No, they refused to release important security updates that are key to many datacenter applications (SSH and SSL) in any form other than the point release. Forcing someone to upgrade hundreds to thousands of things around the entire OS in order to fix critical security flaws is begging for problems and is a very_bad_idea (tm). And as it happens, a number of people got bitten by that. If my server does foo, I don't care if applications bar and baz have been improved nor do I want the latest version of Safari (now with better whatever). I expect to put a server into the rack and update only what is necessary to the task it does until the point it get decomissioned because every unneeded change to other software and library has the potential to cause problems.

      Have you ever done patch validation for a government agency or major financial institute?

      The magic is in what the vendors *do* about it.

      I'm not impressed by fanboyism any more than I am by bouncy icons. After 10.2.8 Mark I, myself and a number of other people took them to task over the bundling of security updates to the bundling issue and they actually changed. But it took a lot of discussion to find people that could even appreciate the point. Apple is a cult of personality that's driven by marketing rather than engineering.

      You *still* can't update a system via ssh. I don't like having to have a Mac with the remote desktop software to update my co-loed servers. I'm always within an arm's reach of SSH. Nor can you fully automate updating.

      You can't integrate XServes in with many existing datacenters because the KVMs don't support USB. When you have KVM infrastructure that spans several floors and costs in the tens of thousands, you don't have the option of ripping it all because Steve decided legacy ports were bad.

      Nor can you fit them in some existing racks, because marketing decided that 1 rackspace would be the only size they build, which means it's quite deep compared to other units. Most 1 rackspace Opterons are that deep as well, but I have the option of getting a shallower 2+ rackspace unit. Let's not forget the "brush against them and the pop out" ejectable drives of the G4 Xserves.

      The entire idea of using binary configuration files is one that I consider to be another really bad one as well.

    47. Re:Better not install it yet by jschottm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I also work with TeraBytes of data, walk through a data center with at least a dozen XServeRAIDs on a regular basis, and my Apple rep has asked if I'd like to evaluate sometime in the Spring.

      Whether or not Apple makes a nice piece of storage kit doesn't have much to with whether or not they have some poor practices with their software.

      Which OS is Oracle using with their XServe RAIDs?

    48. Re:Better not install it yet by justins · · Score: 1
      I'd love to see an example of this. In my experience, the community of Mac users has been a great resource...

      It wasn't really the Mac community I really had in mind when I responded to your comment, although I'm sure it happens there sometimes. It's a much larger problem when people take Linux out for a spin and start asking questions. Particularly when they show the unmitigated gall to relate their questions to their user experience in Windows or MacOS. I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.

      It's less likely a user would abandon their Mac just because the barrier to entry is higher: they've already spent at least a thousand bucks on the thing. But yes, the users are probably nicer, too.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    49. Re:Better not install it yet by ender81b · · Score: 1

      Yes, I should've said "free" tech support. However, nobody wants to call that line knowing that if they determine its "your problem" it costs something like $2.95 a minute last time a checked. And they charge $40 per virus last time I checked as well.

      At any rate, its annoying. Doing microsofts free tech support is one thing but doing norton's isn't my deal ;).

      ps

      We don't use any special software whatsoever (just plain DUN/etc in windows/mac) and with the problems we have with NIS I can only imagine the horrors that techs at AOL, etc have to deal with.

    50. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 1
      Choosing not to use a type of computer because you don't like the attitude of some of its users is pretty stupid.

      Yes it is but that's _not_ what I said.

      '...I can tell you why I resist Macs'...

      That's not: refuse to use; have never used; will never own; will recoil whenever I see one.

      It's simply that I find a lot of the users' advocacy myopic and off-putting.

      And tellingly, I dare to post this opinion, I answer a posed question, and it's 'flamebait'.

    51. Re:Better not install it yet by ProfKyne · · Score: 1

      You almost never ever need to reinstall MacOSX, not even from "archive and install". Not unless that's what you really want to do. If there is a problem, it is 99% of the time always going to be some file that got overwritten, or some prefs file in your ~/Library that's causing some software or other to hiccup. I realize you only have one computer so you didn't have much choice, but if at all possible to get to a friend's house and mount your computer as a firewire hard disk and go from there, or boot from the CD and analyze your hard disk as an external disk, try to do so.

      --
      "First you gotta do the truffle shuffle."
    52. Re:Better not install it yet by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      Yes it is but that's _not_ what I said.

      '...I can tell you why I resist Macs'...

      That's not: refuse to use; have never used; will never own; will recoil whenever I see one.


      OK, Mr. Hairsplitter, let me amend my comment to be more precise:

      Choosing to resist a type of computer because you don't like the attitude of some of its users is pretty stupid.

      There. It still works.

      It's simply that I find a lot of the users' advocacy myopic and off-putting.

      OK, but how does that indicate anything at all about the platform's usefulness to you? When I was car shopping, I went to a Subaru user's board and thought most of the people there were arrogant dickheads. Didn't stop me from considering, and buying, a Subaru.

      And tellingly, I dare to post this opinion, I answer a posed question, and it's 'flamebait'.

      You didn't answer a posed question. I went back and looked at said flamebait's parent, and it doesn't even contain a single question mark. You just wrote a really insulting response to someone else's opinion. That's not just a neutral opinion, and it could reasonably be contrued as flamebait (Here's a free tip: you are usually in flamebait territory whenever you use the phrase "people like you."). But you just go ahead and enjoy thinking you're being persecuted for nobly standing up for truth.

    53. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 1

      But here's the point: it didn't shaft my computer.

      Respectfully, I disagree. You said that the security update you applied overwrote files causing the system to hang on reboot. I know you were able to pull out some discs and fix the error but nevertheless the update did render your computer unusable. I think it's largely irrelevant that you were able to fix it easily because that must take into account your abilities (if you're particularly adept at some subject then everything is easy; if you wanted it to "just work" then it didn't). What I do know is that I wouldn't be happy that I had to fix it in the first place and that somebody else clearly didn't find it so easy to fix. Not using a Mac day-to-day I don't know if this sort of solution is common knowledge but it doesn't look like it.

      What I'm saying, as I said before, is that I find it weird that anyone would appear to be happy that they found it relatively easy to fix a problem that should never have occurred in the first place.

      [snip] - I generally agree with everything up to...

      And most important; currently they are an underdog that has to fight to convince people about their products.

      I think it's great that there's a community that believe in their systems and even champion their cause. You're one of the more level-headed I've spoken with. But I think it's profoundly detrimental to whatever goals it (Apple & community) may have that it should breed such rabid apologists and intolerance to criticism. You say they have to 'fight' to convince people about their products (a task also taken to by their user community). Tone down the rhetoric a touch and more people will listen.

      [snip]

      But, above all, I do not believe that Apple is perfect in any way. They are just currently the best alternative by far.

      For you.

      It's things like this. And BTW it's a good job I don't give a crap about karma :) They're not the best alternative by far. They maybe a good alternative in a lot of situations but they're most emphatically not The Solution.

      Here are a few things I (I, me, personally) don't like. They're not cheap. Don't give me the spiel about being able to run the latest and greatest on older models: I've seen it and it's not pretty. If I want Unix (and I do) I run a *BSD which allows me to offset my knowledge in setting up and running against cost. I don't like the all-in-one monitor boxes of some models. Yes, I've heard from Apple fans that they're easily upgradable and expandable internally; no, I never bought it. And shock, horror(!) :) I don't even like some of the design. These are just a few things off the top of my head... but they do factor in my purchasing decisions.

      Here's a true story that should go some way to explaining my views. One friend of mine was telling me about his new Windows XP box that was the best thing ever, rock stable, never crashed, and easy to use. A couple of weeks later he was reinstalling. A while ago another friend was showing off a RedHat 9 box. It too was the best thing ever, rock stable, never crashed, and easy to use. While he was swivelled round on his chair talking to me it kernel panicked and crashed. More recently, another friend was demonstrating his Apple laptop running OS X. Do I need to tell you it too was: the best thing ever, rock stable, never crashed, and easy to use? A nasty graphics bug (large "unpainted" section of the screen after viewing some photos) covered a significant portion of the screen and refused to go away. The look on his face, I can only describe as wounded terror. The moral of this story is don't overhype your system, and especially: don't always defend it to the hilt.

      If there's something good about someone's system: I'm interested. If there's nothing bad about someone's system: I'm not.

    54. Re:Better not install it yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Choosing not to use a type of computer because you don't like the attitude of some of its users is pretty stupid.

      Choosing to use a computer because of rave reviews on Slashdot is even stupider.

    55. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 1

      OK, Mr. Hairsplitter, let me amend my comment to be more precise:

      Oh good: opening with name calling.

      Choosing to resist a type of computer because you don't like the attitude of some of its users is pretty stupid.

      Not really, no. It's been my experience so far that the best judges of a system are the users (as opposed to the manufacturers, adverts, limited reviews, people responsible for their purchase etc.). If I don't trust their judgement because it appears flawed then I reserve the right to resist (in the sense that I choose not to buy one and if someone asks my opinion on them I'll answer how I please). Another experience of mine is that, in some way, belonging to a community surrounding a system is also very helpful. If I don't like the vociferous users in a community I choose not to want to join in.

      There. It still works.

      No, it really doesn't. It's not 'stupid' either.

      It's simply that I find a lot of the users' advocacy myopic and off-putting.

      OK, but how does that indicate anything at all about the platform's usefulness to you? When I was car shopping, I went to a Subaru user's board and thought most of the people there were arrogant dickheads. Didn't stop me from considering, and buying, a Subaru.

      Really. Are you going to want to join their community then? Are you going to want to go to them for help, tips, advice? Are you honestly telling me that on finding a board full of Subaru-owning (/Subaru fanboys(?)) 'arrogant dickheads' you wanted in on that experience?

      I'm not sure the computer-car analog fits all that well here... but if you don't like the users and you have a viable alternative option you consider to be as good then the user community itself becomes a factor.

      And tellingly, I dare to post this opinion, I answer a posed question, and it's 'flamebait'.

      You didn't answer a posed question. I went back and looked at said flamebait's parent, and it doesn't even contain a single question mark.

      Interesting criterion for determining if a question has been asked. Feel free to omit a reply to this if you can't find a question in my previous sentence to answer. I said he posed a question: 'MacOS amazes me, but not as much as peoples resistance to it amazes me.' Did you think OP was just thinking and accidentally carried on typing?

      You just wrote a really insulting response to someone else's opinion.

      I disagree. But kudos to you for assuming offence on someone else's behalf and jumping in!

      That's not just a neutral opinion, and it could reasonably be contrued as flamebait (Here's a free tip: you are usually in flamebait territory whenever you use the phrase "people like you.").

      Firstly, I don't think you're in a position to be handing out 'free tips'. But then again: who'd pay.

      Secondly, I said 'people like you' because that's what I meant. I was specifically talking about users like the OP. If you want to read an offensive connotation into that or see that as 'flamebait' then that's really up to you. As it happens it has sparked off a discussion between myself and OP. I don't see any flames there... but I guess it's all subjective.

      But you just go ahead and enjoy thinking you're being persecuted for nobly standing up for truth.

      Ha! Hardly. They're just my opinions.

    56. Re:Better not install it yet by nordicfrost · · Score: 1

      I know you were able to pull out some discs and fix the error but nevertheless the update did render your computer unusable.

      For twenty minutes. That, my friend is not a shafting of your computer. The most catastrophic failure of an OS, besides erasing the user data, occured and the machine was up and running again in twenty minutes. I think that says a lot about the simplicity of the system. The procedure to restore the system was a simple three-step procedure too boot, easily done via phone. Without destroying the system like in Dell computers. I don't know if they're like that still, but a pal got so tired of it, he bought a separate drive for user data on his Dell.

      I'm not going to pull in the friend-factor too much at this time, just some observations on what the consequences are for me. After two of the three persons I deliver unofficial computer support to (i.e. everything from ISP issues to hardisk failures) converted to Mac, there is only one person who still calls me for help. The two others never need any help. More than anything, this is the point that convinced me. They simply get along with the computer. The last 'support' call was about a frozen iPod mini. The issue was resolved and the iPod rebooted.

      As you see, I don't argue that Apple and its products are perfect. But they are very easy to use, relatively cheap and quite sturdy. Also, they keep their value a lot better than other computers, and that gives me an edge in the upgrade cycle.

      You admit that they might be a good alternative in a lot of situations, but not all. Of course I agree to that, nothing is perfect in everything. But this system is dead-easy to use, very intuitive, has a strong user base, extremely good *nix support for professionals. There aren't a lot of areas this system wouldn't fit in. Lately, I have undertood why so many in the IT business don't like Apple. They are afraid of downsizing. Quick example: at work we do IT. The programmers, designers use Mac OS X, since they pick and maintain their own systems. The rest of us, have to use IS' XP solution. One member of the IS group has even stated that the latest worm attack was caused by a Mac program (An w2k worm), and the boss asked me if that was true because if it was we would have to ban Macs. I told him that it was a blatant lie and showed the proof. He then askedhow many viruses and worms there were for Mac, and got a bit slack-jawed when I said None for Mac OS X.

      For me, the fact that other people I know use them gives me more free time and less irritating phonecalls. Now I can pick up the phone and know that it most likely isn't a call for help.
      I have also discovered the joy of computing again, and that is important to me.

    57. Re:Better not install it yet by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      Oh good: opening with name calling.

      Pretty mild namecalling. But still, I gave in to my baser impulses and shouldn't call names. So I hereby apologize for that. I'm sorry.

      No, it really doesn't. It's not 'stupid' either.

      Yes it does! Yes it is! Infinity! Nyeah! :-P

      Really. Are you going to want to join their community then? Are you going to want to go to them for help, tips, advice? Are you honestly telling me that on finding a board full of Subaru-owning (/Subaru fanboys(?)) 'arrogant dickheads' you wanted in on that experience?

      I bought a frickin' car. I didn't join their "community." I have found other Subaru owners that are very helpful, but that doesn't negate the fact that it would be easy for me to pick out the worst of the whole and paint them with the "dickhead" epithet. I didn't have that experience. Your idea that buying iron means you're obliged to be in a community of any kind is odd.

      Besides, as I've written elsewhere, if you think the Mac community is nothing but mindless fanboys, you're wrong. I'd like to know where a dickhead-free body of users of any platform exists.

      Interesting criterion for determining if a question has been asked. Feel free to omit a reply to this if you can't find a question in my previous sentence to answer. I said he posed a question: 'MacOS amazes me, but not as much as peoples resistance to it amazes me.' Did you think OP was just thinking and accidentally carried on typing?

      That is a statement, not a question. You can infer a question, but he didn't pose a question. Posing a question is an explicit act. Commenting on an offered opinion is not answering a question, so I don't need a question to give a response. I was just saying you didn't answer a posed question. I wouldn't even have answered this, but you challenged me and I had to preserve my honor.

      I disagree. But kudos to you for assuming offence on someone else's behalf and jumping in!

      Come on. Work with me. This is a public forum. You didn't write a private message, and I found it likely to be offensive (I was not personally offended.). Obviously, so did a moderator. Yet you'd rather attribute it to all those mean Mac users and not consider your own behavior.

      Firstly, I don't think you're in a position to be handing out 'free tips'. But then again: who'd pay.

      Cute. You seem to be very fond of judging everything by who says it, rather than its own merit.

      Secondly, I said 'people like you' because that's what I meant.

      I never said that wasn't what you meant. I said that you shouldn't be surprised when you make that kind of remark that people find it offensive.

      I was specifically talking about users like the OP. If you want to read an offensive connotation into that or see that as 'flamebait' then that's really up to you.

      I didn't moderate your comment. I was explaining to you why you're more likely to have actually been offensive than merely persecuted.

      But I think what you're missing is that while you claim to have only been addressing OP and users like him, your statements further imply that such people are representative of Mac users as a whole - otherwise, why would you be so concerned about the "experience?"

      I will now magnanimously give you the last word, should you want it.

    58. Re:Better not install it yet by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      Choosing to use a computer because of rave reviews on Slashdot is even stupider.

      Prolly at least *as* stupid. Not sure if it's moreso or not.

    59. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 1

      Pretty mild namecalling. But still, I gave in to my baser impulses and shouldn't call names. So I hereby apologize for that. I'm sorry.

      Thanks, apology accepted.

      I bought a frickin' car. I didn't join their "community." I have found other Subaru owners that are very helpful, but that doesn't negate the fact that it would be easy for me to pick out the worst of the whole and paint them with the "dickhead" epithet. I didn't have that experience. Your idea that buying iron means you're obliged to be in a community of any kind is odd.

      This is where I think the car-computer analogy goes as far as it can. If you're into a particular computer system then I think you probably want to get involved at some level in the community or even if you don't, I still think you are going to rely on the community in some capacity for help at some stage. I think this happens with cars too to some extent... people who are interested in something tend to want to learn more about it, advance their usage of it, and therefore form communities. I don't think there exists an obligation to join but I do think you miss out on a lot if you don't.

      Besides, as I've written elsewhere, if you think the Mac community is nothing but mindless fanboys, you're wrong. I'd like to know where a dickhead-free body of users of any platform exists.

      I don't. I've spoken at length about Apple stuff with people that clearly know their stuff. I've also been talked at by people who don't. The general trend I've observed is devotion. Which, like it or like it not, I find off-putting if it leads to the overhyping I've talked about here or elsewhere in this thread.

      [snip]

      I said he posed a question: 'MacOS amazes me, but not as much as peoples resistance to it amazes me.' Did you think OP was just thinking and accidentally carried on typing?

      That is a statement, not a question. You can infer a question, but he didn't pose a question. Posing a question is an explicit act. Commenting on an offered opinion is not answering a question, so I don't need a question to give a response. I was just saying you didn't answer a posed question. I wouldn't even have answered this, but you challenged me and I had to preserve my honor.

      Ngggh! Do we have to argue over semantics? :)

      Very well. I think OP posed a question.
      pose. I pick 1a: to present for attention or consideration <let me pose a question>.
      pose I pick v.tr. 2: To set forth in words; propound: pose a question.
      Do I have to link to 'question' as well or are you satisfied that it's 'an expression of inquiry that invites or calls for a reply'?

      Those are the two online dictionaries I use the most. If you've got another source that we can both check then let me know. I maintain that the OP posed a question. True there wasn't a question mark but I think they were wondering aloud on a public forum. For why if not to seek an answer?

      I disagree. But kudos to you for assuming offence on someone else's behalf and jumping in!

      Come on. Work with me. This is a public forum. You didn't write a private message, and I found it likely to be offensive (I was not personally offended.). Obviously, so did a moderator. Yet you'd rather attribute it to all those mean Mac users and not consider your own behavior.

      I'm trying to. I honestly think it was neither offensive nor flamebait. And as far as I can tell neither did the person I was replying to. This is apple.slashdot, I fully expect criticism of Apple or Apple users' attitudes to be moderated such. I don't attribute that to 'mean Mac users' just retardates in general. I think

    60. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 1

      For twenty minutes. That, my friend is not a shafting of your computer. The most catastrophic failure of an OS, besides erasing the user data, occured and the machine was up and running again in twenty minutes. I think that says a lot about the simplicity of the system. The procedure to restore the system was a simple three-step procedure too boot, easily done via phone. Without destroying the system like in Dell computers. I don't know if they're like that still, but a pal got so tired of it, he bought a separate drive for user data on his Dell.

      Again, with respect, I disagree. Having a system that worked be reduced to a system that hangs on reboot is 'shafted' in my opinion. If the underlying system was largely unaffected then good for you. I'm happy for you that you were able to restore it to a satisfactory state in a matter of minutes but, to my mind, it still got the shaft and required fairly technical intervention to fix. I don't want to branch off this current subject and talk about other Apple updates suffice to say that some of them did not go without a hitch and if I was an Apple user I would not be happy about that.

      [snip] - support - that's good for you, shurely.

      As you see, I don't argue that Apple and its products are perfect. But they are very easy to use, relatively cheap and quite sturdy. Also, they keep their value a lot better than other computers, and that gives me an edge in the upgrade cycle.

      I'm not keen to open another front but I think it is suffice to say that I'm not sure if Apple ~"residual values" are that much of a boon. I think if you plan systems carefully then you can usually ameliorate the upgrade cycle.

      You admit that they might be a good alternative in a lot of situations, but not all. Of course I agree to that, nothing is perfect in everything. But this system is dead-easy to use, very intuitive, has a strong user base, extremely good *nix support for professionals. There aren't a lot of areas this system wouldn't fit in. Lately, I have undertood why so many in the IT business don't like Apple. They are afraid of downsizing. Quick example: at work we do IT. The programmers, designers use Mac OS X, since they pick and maintain their own systems. The rest of us, have to use IS' XP solution. One member of the IS group has even stated that the latest worm attack was caused by a Mac program (An w2k worm), and the boss asked me if that was true because if it was we would have to ban Macs. I told him that it was a blatant lie and showed the proof. He then askedhow many viruses and worms there were for Mac, and got a bit slack-jawed when I said None for Mac OS X.

      I hear that! And if you think that sucks try being a FreeBSD user reading Slashdot. (It's dead? Huh. I'm quietly confident it's not.)

      I guess what I'm saying is: pick your battles. Macs aren't The Solution, like everything they have their strengths and weaknesses. I've spent literally hours been told how great Macs are and all it leaves me with is a cold feeling that Apple and it's user community could and would take much larger strides if they toned down the fervour a bit.

      For me, the fact that other people I know use them gives me more free time and less irritating phonecalls. Now I can pick up the phone and know that it most likely isn't a call for help.
      I have also discovered the joy of computing again, and that is important to me.

      Great, good for you. I get a similar kind of feeling, myself.

      I'm being honest here: the notion that I may ever "iPod my BMW" will, whenever I get round to it, be written as a clause denoting brain death in my DNR. But I would, at some point, give Macs a real go and take an interest if the community and advertising was less bombastic. And the sad thing is for you guys is that I know I'm not alone in this opinion. Please just tone it down a little. With any luck it'll spread about and you won't be t

    61. Re:Better not install it yet by Alcimedes · · Score: 1

      Here's a true story that should go some way to explaining my views. One friend of mine.....

      Well, obviously the only constant in all of these stories is you. Must be your fault they all crashed. :)

    62. Re:Better not install it yet by NivenHuH · · Score: 1

      *cough* apple-s at the boot menu will bring you into single-user mode.. (command-line) It's useful if you know what to troubleshoot..

      --
      Just when you make it idiotproof, some idiot builds a better idiot.
    63. Re:Better not install it yet by slargpdx · · Score: 1

      nuh uh

      uh huh

      nuh uh

      uh huh

      etc....

    64. Re:Better not install it yet by slargpdx · · Score: 1

      Not that I hate Norton or anything ;) but, seriously, I wish that company would get sucked into an enormous black hole and never ever ever return. So you wish they were to be purchased by a large corp in Renton Wa?

    65. Re:Better not install it yet by nordicfrost · · Score: 1

      Ok, I have to say that the statement is dead right. As a Linux guy, some of the real downsides with the whole Linux community is thee tendency towards arrogant newvie attitudes. I was a newbie once, and someof the gall I got was pretty hard, almost to the point of giving up. As a result I'd rather google for days than asking a question in a forum.

      But the Apple discussion forums really, really shines. Seriously. It is like a tech forum should be: friendly, well organised and easely searchble. I have found a lot of answers there and now I give back. And newbies always get a "welcome to us, [name]" before an answer or pointer to an answer. Actually, it is one of the features from Apple that I like the most.

    66. Re:Better not install it yet by Listen+Up · · Score: 1

      By your post you are simply a kid at best and an ignorant computer science major wannabe at worst.

      It is almost gauranteed that you neither use *BSD whatsoever (which means you are using it as a hypothetical response to argument based on other people's supposed reputation of it) nor use *BSD 100% of the time for every task.

      The difference is with Mac OS X is that I can use Unix with a Mac interface at the time. 100% of the time.

      Your high school friends or fellow freshman in college are idiots. Also, most likely you are nothing more than some computer tech support moron who is trying to pass himself off as a real programmer/CIO/power user/etc.

    67. Re:Better not install it yet by Listen+Up · · Score: 1

      "Of course I agree to that, nothing is perfect in everything."

      That is an incorrect statement and is based completely on your opinion.

      i.e. The finite set of rules which govern the universe are without fault.

    68. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 1

      I didn't do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't prove anything! :)

    69. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 1

      You missed "times infinity... squared!"

    70. Re:Better not install it yet by alib001 · · Score: 1

      By your post you are simply a kid at best and an ignorant computer science major wannabe at worst... ...you neither use *BSD whatsoever... nor use *BSD 100% of the time for every task... ...Your high school friends or fellow freshman in college are idiots... ...most likely you are nothing more than some computer tech support moron who is trying to pass himself off as a real programmer/CIO/power user/etc.

      Thanks for sharing your opinion. I'll be sure to give it the consideration it's worth.

      Happy Christmas!

    71. Re:Better not install it yet by Captain+Scurvy · · Score: 0
      Surely apple will be similar? ;-)

      Actually, yes. Worse, even. I performed the update to 10.3.7, rebooted, and immediately got a screen telling me in several languages to reboot the computer. Booted into single-user and saw that I was getting a kernel panic right after the Darwin version banner. Luckily, I had a friend's system disks on hand, and I did an archive and reinstalled the system files, which seemed to clear up the problem without losing any important data (I only had to reinstall a few broken applications). After googling around, I found that kernel panics after an update are an uncommon but not entirely rare issue that've been around for several versions now.

      So don't get cocky. Apple ain't perfect.

  11. so far so good... by bennomatic · · Score: 3, Informative

    installed a couple of hours ago, and everything's working great

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
    1. Re:so far so good... by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bennomatic just rung me to tell you all the rest of his message:

      so far, I'm just going to test the finder."

      For some reason he was cut off whilst sending it, and can't get back onto his desktop.
      If anyone could get an engineer sent to his house he would greatly appreciate it.

      [/only_joking]

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
  12. Few things I'm wondering about... by zwilliams07 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Such as this issue with 10.3.6 having Firewire problems and DVD Player issues has been fixed or not. I'm going to wait a while and see what comes up at MacFixit.com and then decide if I want to upgrade.

    1. Re:Few things I'm wondering about... by Rosyna · · Score: 0, Troll

      You know, you could just RTFA to find out. But I think that'd be asking too much.

    2. Re:Few things I'm wondering about... by zwilliams07 · · Score: 1

      Or you could look beyond the little bit of 922 info, and wonder about the 911 FW Chipset problems which is the one that is having the big problem that Apple has been ignoring lately. Or is that too much?

  13. these are the things that make me confident to pur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am a FreeBSD admin who is due a new laptop.

    I have been watching apple for some time and reading user posts about their experiences.

    I had my little sister buy an iBook and she loves it. Of course the first thing I do is teach her how to use a terminal with simple commands via aim, (which she says, is better on MacOS).

    Anyway, it sure looks like I will be getting one mainly because of the shared code with BSD. Seeing such a nice clean update/README was refreshing. I simply cannot wait to use tip on a iBook.

    later

  14. Calculator by Raven42rac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Calculator is still being goofy. It won't draw the calculator itself if you have speak button pressed enabled, you have to disable it, then restart calculator for it to work. This is just my experience. YMMV.

    --
    I hate sigs.
    1. Re:Calculator by g0at · · Score: 1

      Do any of the other modes work for you, besides "basic" and "advanced", e.g. the hexadecimal, expression sheet or graphing views? For me, the window resizes and goes blank.

      Maybe this is related to having installed various pre-release builds on this system in the past, but...

      -b

    2. Re:Calculator by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

      Everything else seems to work, sorry man.

      --
      I hate sigs.
    3. Re:Calculator by yroJJory · · Score: 1

      I'm having this issue, too. Calculator has effectively become useless to me for the last few system revs. I guess I have to do everything in Excel now. Ugh!

      --
      Jory
    4. Re:Calculator by g0at · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing here.

      I've just checked calculator on my Powerbook (which has only official release versions of Panther installed), and the results are the same.

      What I'm talking about is under the View menu, there are additional options (besides Basic and Advanced) that can be enabled by opening up the app bundle and moving several ".calcview" bundles from the Resources folder into the PlugIns folder. After doing this they will also show up in the finder Get Info window.

      Are you saying that you have these enabled, and they work?

      -b

    5. Re:Calculator by adjusting · · Score: 1

      I guess I have to do everything in Excel now. Ugh!

      Why? What's wrong with python?

    6. Re:Calculator by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

      Whoops, nope this is not enabled, I may test it out later though.

      --
      I hate sigs.
    7. Re:Calculator by Carthag · · Score: 1

      I'm having the same problem (10.3.6), I don't remember if it was there earlier, as I hardly ever use the calculator (it's usually quicker to just put the formula in the google field in Safari).

      Anyone have any ideas?

    8. Re:Calculator by dereklam · · Score: 1

      I had this problem on 10.3.6. One workaround is to choose View > Show Paper Tape. This avoids having to disable speak or restart.

    9. Re:Calculator by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

      Let me give that a whirl.

      --
      I hate sigs.
    10. Re:Calculator by Squozen · · Score: 1

      I just tested this on our office testbox and it exhibits the same behaviour. Very odd. :)

    11. Re:Calculator by little_fluffy_clouds · · Score: 1


      Python? What the hell is the matter with bc!

      --
      What were the skies like when you were young?
    12. Re:Calculator by Piquan · · Score: 1

      Nope. I've had my Mac for a little less than a month, got it new from Apple, and it also has the same problem.

  15. Not to insult the hordes of Mac users.... by dteichman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    but doesn't that sound a bit like the press release they issued for the launch of the last update. Not to bag on them too much. 10.3.7 is good software. I've used the dev edition for a little while now (thanks to a good friend). It runs much faster than the previous version I had (original Panther). The speed increase of Open GL is extremely noticeable. Other than that, I haven't noticed much else.

    1. Re:Not to insult the hordes of Mac users.... by Myuu · · Score: 1

      I am fairly confident that Apple has used the same readme for every panther update...seriously OpenGL, Firewire, AFP, etc.

      --

      forget it.
    2. Re:Not to insult the hordes of Mac users.... by Electroly · · Score: 1

      Budget cuts. The readme-writer-guy is serving coffee at Starbucks these days.

  16. Also a patch for server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=300 376

    And I must say, it was painful beta on this one

  17. Obviously your OS is sub-standard and broken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suggest you install Microsoft Windows immediately!

    HAHAHAHAHA! Just kidding. An abacus would be better.

  18. Installed... by nordicfrost · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...works like a charm. Last tim I installed an update, the whole system got b0rked due to an error in writing to /etc/ttys The file got a byte sum of zero, and the logon window hanged upon next reboot.

    No such thing this time, and I think. I feel. I believe that the system is a bit, just a tiny bit snappier in writing to the screen. I'm on a newish Powerbook.

  19. Graphic drivers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ...here's a stupid question. Let's hope for a smart answer: If the kernel of Mac OS X (and +) is *nix style, then why can't we use their drivers for the Nvidia and ATI cards?

    [Insert enlightenment here]

    1. Re:Graphic drivers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm, refering to 'us' as the *nix community... should'a clarified. :)

    2. Re:Graphic drivers? by ValiantSoul · · Score: 1

      Do you mean why can't we use the nVidia and ATI drivers for linux (and in nVidia's case, FreeBSD) on Mac OS X?
      If that's what you mean, its because we do not have full access to the source, and the binaries do not run on the PowerPC processor. Also Mac OS X does not use X11 (although you can use the Darwin kernel and then X11).
      Yes OS X can use X11 however it is not the actual Window server

      If you mean why doesn't nVidia or ATI make OS X drivers and Apple does, its because Apple does not want to give them the required information to writing those drivers.

    3. Re:Graphic drivers? by hunterx11 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because Mac OS X uses I/O Kit.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    4. Re:Graphic drivers? by phatmatt · · Score: 3, Informative

      OS X has its own style of drivers, completely different than any other operating system. It uses c++ to code their IOKit drivers, which make it easy to program, but not portable at all.

    5. Re:Graphic drivers? by melatonin · · Score: 1

      It's Apple's responsibility to provide drivers for OEM parts. If you buy a card from ATi you get your driver updates from ATI's site. nVidia doesn't make Mac hardware, Apple builds those boards.

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
    6. Re:Graphic drivers? by goMac2500 · · Score: 2, Informative

      ATI does most certainly write their own drivers. Apple handles any integrated card drivers because, well, they are Apple built OEM cards. My Powerbook cannot use the ATI drivers because my card is an Apple onboard ATI card. My G3 tower could use the ATI drivers because it used a ATI PCI card. (Both my Apple supplied Rage 128 and my aftermarket Radeon 7000 took ATI drivers). Nvidia also wrote their OS X drivers as far as I'm aware, although I'm sure they work very closely with APple.

    7. Re:Graphic drivers? by ValiantSoul · · Score: 1

      Thanks for clearing that up. Would mod you informative but I can't mod something I've posted to (as you probably know)

    8. Re:Graphic drivers? by souilicrepus · · Score: 1

      But could I/O kit be ported to the linux kernel, despite its C++ness?

    9. Re:Graphic drivers? by hunterx11 · · Score: 1

      It would probably be pretty hard, considering that the XNU kernel OS X uses is based more on Mach than BSD. The underlying philosophy is different, too. Apple very much takes the attitude, "This is how do we it, this is the right way to do it, you had better do it this way too."

      --
      English is easier said than done.
  20. Never post anything here which might benefit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...M$ Windows users! Just because they make up the vast bulk of internet users -- and are the principal sufferers of avoidable security issues -- is no reason to encourage them to install silly things like critical security patches!

    Shame on you, and I hope that -1, Offtopic stings like a sonofabitch!

  21. Extra extra(?) by 1019 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Don't get me wrong, it's not that I don't enjoy seeing Apple updates..I do! But, erm..is this truly front page material?

    --
    shame on us / for all we have done / and all we ever were / just zeroes and ones
    1. Re:Extra extra(?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is front page newsworthy since it was a FREE update. Not $129 like the 10.3 update was.

    2. Re:Extra extra(?) by Myuu · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I am sorry if I come off as harsh but I am sick of seeing these comments and am probably going to copy this reply to every one of these.

      Slashdot is such a damn immense community that it has to appeal to everyone. As a Mac owner, this ia big news to me and the comments are helpful. However, I really couldn't give less of a crap about a new kernel update, FreeBSD, a crappy MMPORG release, RMS bitching about something, or a new rc for slack or moz. Yes I use firefox and am a religious debian user, but I really don't care. So you know what I do? I scroll down, I don't go into the thread and post a 'wtf' type comment.

      Its been a couple months since the last point update and the security updates don't make the front page, so yes, I do think it is FP worthy.

      --

      forget it.
    3. Re:Extra extra(?) by Colgate2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It IS, however, free like 10.3.1-6 were...

    4. Re:Extra extra(?) by BlackSabbath · · Score: 3, Informative

      Alternatively you can edit your Slashdot preferences to only view stories on the subjects you like.

  22. um, how about SMB browsing fix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You know, how about a fix so that oh... you could browse for SMB connected printers again? This broke in 10.3.6 HARD.

    Holy shit, 26.4 MB for the delta update from 10.3.6 to 10.3.7? What crack are they smoking?

    1. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by omeomi · · Score: 1

      Huh...didn't know that was a bug...I just thought I had something screwey somewhere on my network...that's interesting.

    2. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      No comment on SMB; I don't use it. But it's worth noting that 10.3.5 introduced a "delta" updates. If you have fewer components to update, you'll get a smaller patch. My 10.3.7 update is "only" 17.1 MB.

    3. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by Trillan · · Score: 2, Informative

      This sounds promising:

      • Resolves an issue that prevented printing to some Windows-based print servers.
    4. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by ytsejam-ppc · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is fixed. Not only did it browse perfectly through my Active Directory domain to my XP SP2 shared printer, but then it actually installed updated CUPS drivers when I selected the printer. And the Word doc I printed from my Mac off my Active Directory shared home folder worked beautifully. Who says you can't integrate a Mac into a Windows network??

    5. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by green+pizza · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Holy shit, 26.4 MB for the delta update from 10.3.6 to 10.3.7? What crack are they smoking?

      Sounds about right for the major OpenGL changes in both the ATI and NVIDIA drivers.

    6. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by dlur · · Score: 1

      Have you had any problems with folders being accessed by a Mac client not being accessible from the server itself or any other PC clients until after a server reboot previous to this update or after this update? Specifically while using SMB client connection on the Mac as opposed to AFP.

      --
      Duris MUD - The best pkill MUD. Ever.
    7. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by ytsejam-ppc · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. No I don't recall anything similar. I only use smb sharing, I tried to set up AFP on the Win2000 box but had no clue what I was doing.

    8. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by bdipert · · Score: 1

      I have my SMB printer access back!

    9. Re:um, how about SMB browsing fix? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Good. :) I guess it's worth buying an ink cartridge for my printer again...

  23. woohoo by famouswhendead · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now I don't need to format my external drives myself.

  24. I use Panther and... by mwielgosz · · Score: 5, Interesting
    this update (10.3.7) seems to have made my old iMac G3 respond faster than before. It seems to draw just a bit faster as well, making my experience with OSX much better. Before 10.3, OSX was extremely laggy on my 400mhz (G3) 128mb ram hardware.

    With performance increases like this, OSX seems to just be getting better - good work Apple.

    --
    -Mike
    1. Re:I use Panther and... by ravenspear · · Score: 3, Funny

      I believe the technical term for OS X updates is "snappier."

    2. Re:I use Panther and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Running OsX with 128 MB of RAM?
      That's a troll. Right?

    3. Re:I use Panther and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. I upgraded my old 450mhz iMac G3 from OS 9.2 to OS X 10.3, and I was just amazed at how much faster the system seemed to load and run. Then I upgraded to 10.3.1, and was surprised again. It seemed like every time I updated, some part of booting the system got faster. It used to take almost two minutes to boot 10.3, now it takes closer to a minute. I actually timed the system load time for my computer verus another iMac of the same type I have running OS 9, and each update really is making the computer load just a bit faster.
      Doesn't seem to do much for making programs run faster, but I love a computer that actually takes less time to load when you add more stuff to it.

    4. Re:I use Panther and... by easter1916 · · Score: 1

      jeez, 400 mhz and 128mb ram? you're pushing it there a bit. glad it's faster though.

    5. Re:I use Panther and... by JohnsonWax · · Score: 1, Insightful

      ... that's 'teh snappier', to be technical.

    6. Re:I use Panther and... by mwielgosz · · Score: 1
      "you're pushing it there a bit."

      Actually, this computer is faster and now more responsive than the PII 450 mhz with 256mb sdram chugging along in the other room, and thats running a fresh install of Windows 2000. I know that PPC architecture is faster than x86 architecture, but in comparason, running a 5 year old OS [2000] vs. one that still gets updated to this date [OSX], Apple takes the cake on this one.

      Not bad for a $100 investment in an iMac.

      --
      -Mike
    7. Re:I use Panther and... by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 4, Funny

      I agree. Since I installed 10.3.7, my mouse now has a second button!

    8. Re:I use Panther and... by The+Infamous+Grimace · · Score: 1

      Updated my Wallstreet 300 (320MB RAM) and it's definately more responsive.

      (tig)

      --
      Ignorance and prejudice and fear
      Walk hand in hand
    9. Re:I use Panther and... by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      Dude, go pick up an extra 128MB or 256MB , it's cheap and even the oldest Bondi Blue iMacs can take up to 512MB (I think). You'll see a HUGE performance boost even with an extra 128MB, for about $20.

      Try here

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    10. Re:I use Panther and... by sh00z · · Score: 1
      Not bad for a $100 investment in an iMac.
      Drop another 50 bucks on 512 MB of RAM, and you'll really be impressed. My G3 iMac is a snappier performer than my wife's 2 GHz Celeron/XP laptop.
    11. Re:I use Panther and... by Gropo · · Score: 1

      As was partially approached in this post, the newfound "snappiness" one experiences from a minor update on older Macs almost always has more to do with the prebinding that occurs at the tail-end of the update than actual code tweaks within the software itself.

      --
      I hate Grammar Nazi's
  25. Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by SteveM · · Score: 4, Informative

    Apple's release notes say to disconnect firewire drives prior to installing.

    From the notes:

    If you have a third-party FireWire hard drive connected, turn it off and disconnect it before installing this update. Reconnect it and turn it back on after installation is complete and you've restarted.

    SteveM

    1. Re:Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by weston · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you have a third-party FireWire hard drive connected, turn it off and disconnect it before installing this update.

      You should see what the release notes *used* to say:

      "If you have a third-party FireWire hard drive connected, turn it off and disconnect it before installing this update. In fact, put it in a seperate, EM shielded room. Actually, now that we think of it, please also back it up. Twice."

    2. Re:Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by elbobo · · Score: 1

      Oops. Too late. "Optimizing volume "Innie": 95% complete". I'm guessing it's a bit too late in the game to worry about disconnecting the firewire drives :-/

      If I'm not back in half an hour ... send out the rescue party :)

    3. Re:Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by pudge · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and it scares me, because I have Mac OS X Server installed ON a third-party FireWire drive. The only way to follow the directions and update it would be to pull it from the enclosure and connect it directly to the computer ... and I am not just about to try that.

      I have most things backed up ... so I guess I'll just disconnect the other FW drives, leave this one connected, and give it a try ...

    4. Re:Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by sbrain · · Score: 1

      I didn't read the instructions. My 10.3.6 (desktop version) was on a third party FW drive. It seemed to update to 10.3.7 without any problem. Gulp.

    5. Re:Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      although running an OS off a firewire drive WORKS....it's not a supported feature. call apple and we'll tell you it was never guaranteed to work.

      tech support is fun

    6. Re:Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by pudge · · Score: 1

      FWI, my server runs off a PowerBook G3/400. The internal HD was dying, and it always made way too much noise anyway. So I partitioned one of my FW drives and moved the OS out to that. Works great, except the built-in "UPS" (i.e., laptop battery) is less useful, since the HD goes down when the power does. :-)

    7. Re:Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by curtlewis · · Score: 1

      I didn't notice that in the Software Update. I had my External 250gb FireWire drive connected, which my iPod is daisy chained through. Both were mounted during the download, install and remained plugged in for the reboot.

      Nary a problem.

    8. Re:Disconnet Firewire Harddrives by Maserati · · Score: 1

      Apple is actually wrong in the release notes. You unmount the volume, disconnect the drive and THEN AND ONLY THEN do you turn the damn thing off.

      I hope everyone reads that and does the Right Thing anyway.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
  26. DP 2.5 G5 6800 Nvidia and UT 2004 by thedogcow · · Score: 4, Informative

    I just updated to 10.3.7. I did run Cinebench but I don't think that is an accurate method of bench testing.

    I ran UT 2004 on my DP 2.5 G5 w/ 6800 Nvidia. WOW. Its like playing on "slomo 2" without using the cheat. Much faster. FPS averaging around 110 with everthing turned on to max.

    --
    Yes! I listen to NYC Speedcore and do math at 3AM. I suggest you try it too.
    1. Re:DP 2.5 G5 6800 Nvidia and UT 2004 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "slomo 2" -- Slow motion?

      For a moment I thought you were being sarcastic.

    2. Re:DP 2.5 G5 6800 Nvidia and UT 2004 by green+pizza · · Score: 1

      "slomo 2" is a cheat to make the game run twice as fast. Sort of like fast-forwarding a DVD. (Ever tried to play Quake with timedemo on? It's kinda like that).

  27. Re:Microsoft Updates Windows XP by Glendale2x · · Score: 1

    However, new Windows exploits and yet another Windows patch/update are hardly news anymore.

    --
    this is my sig
  28. Me too. Bitchin thing was I had to reinstall. by crovira · · Score: 1

    because of a stupid file incomplete load which was trashing the login window software.

    I lost alot of my data when it wiped out the user area. (It wouldn't re-install properly. :-(

    I'm glad they got over that...

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  29. Re:these are the things that make me confident to by ValiantSoul · · Score: 1

    My server and desktop are both running FreeBSD 5.3-STABLE. I bought a 12" iBook in June and I absolutally love it. Go for it!

  30. Re:hypehypehype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The ones from Apple tend to be minor bug fixes and even improvements in the way things work.

    The ones from MS tend to be way overdue security fixes that arrive late, are quite monolithic, break shit and generally a hassle to clean up after. Hmmm, sounds like "Steve Ballmer, party guest from hell".

    Halleluiah.

  31. Re:fuck apple by templest · · Score: 1

    Either that or you can get a "slick" mac and install linux on it. Not to mention 'OS X' is built on BSD, so you don't necessarily have to only use Mac apps. I think people have to realize that 'OS X' is just a pretty interface built for a pre-existing BSD sub-system (granted, with a few proprietary tweaks).

    You, don't even own one, so how the hell could you even talk about how good or bad they are? People get screwed by all companies, all the time. Some screw more than others, and in different ways. You just sound like a Linux fan-boy that doesn't like accepting the fact that there are other viable alternatives to Linux. Your entire thread is nothing more than a childish, stupid, rant. And you deserve a negative karma score.

    *shakes fist*

    You did know you could install linux on a PPC, didn't you? Or did that just slip your mind when you got so excited whilst describing Steve's penis?

    --
    I'm a signature virus. Please copy me to your signature so I can replicate.
  32. update "magic" by SuperBanana · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ...works like a charm. Last tim I installed an update, the whole system got b0rked due to an error in writing to /etc/ttys The file got a byte sum of zero, and the logon window hanged upon next reboot.

    I love it when people are surprised when an update works.

    The whole system "got b0rked" probably because you a)didn't check the disk b)had disk errors c)didn't have journaling turned on.

    I support 100+ macintoshes, and when I check the system disk first (using Diskwarrior off an external drive) and repair permissions, I have yet to have anything more dramatic than the installer not complete the install requiring a second application before rebooting the system. That happened...get ready...ONCE. We have everything from Clamshell iBooks to G3's to Dualie G5s; you name it, we've got it.

    Diskwarrior is excellent insurance, and one can make a boot CD/DVD or use an iPod for booting. Wait about one day to see if there's any major problems with the update or it gets pulled. Run the checks before any update, and boom, you're good.

    1. Re:update "magic" by nordicfrost · · Score: 1

      a) Checked before and after update
      b) Disk checked the week before, no errors
      c) Journaling is on and always has been

      I have never experienced an error witht the updates before, but one time has got to be the first. And this was the first for me.

    2. Re:update "magic" by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      Your anecdotal evidence is compelling, but I doubt you update macs in your environment even the week they are released.

      I know the cracky feeling of wanting to install updates when they come out, I am exactly like that. We need to be extremely careful with updates on the floor though. Imagine, this update is being released 2 weeks from the close of Q4, what If all of a sudden quark had problems, or someone with admin access installed it and wiped out a Firewire drive with hires art on it. I know, backup of the backup of the backup, but these things happen. I helped a guy today who had the sole copy of lots of things on his powerbook, and his filesystem had been corrupted for probably weeks. There were overlapped files even though journaling was on, and the data in question was pitches for multi million dollar accounts,
      Our production studio is still on 10.3.3 because the studio manager had one hiccup on a 10.3.4 system update related to server access.

      I am less concerned with doing point releases on the floor unless they can solve a problem that has actually occurred more than once in my environment.

      --
      music lover since 1969
  33. Re:Why is this on the main ./ page? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea its just a slow day I guess. Things like this should be left to news sites like macrumors.com

  34. MOD parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I too would like to see that SMB bug resolved. Has this been addressed in 10.3.7?

  35. Network Browsing by Khuffie · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What really pisses me off is network browsing. In the original Panther release they fixed this: you could click on the Networks tab, see the computer on the network you want to access, and immediately see the folders on there.

    Then they go and for some reason disable that (it was the number 1 most useful 'upgrade' in Panther), to what was there before: you'd see the computer on the network, and you'd have to mount any folder you want to access...it's really annoying. They have that in the Tiger beta...hope they keep it.

    1. Re:Network Browsing by kTag · · Score: 1

      You need and you'll need to do some authentification before seeing all the folders on there. That's why they are using the mounting phase right now. Tiger will most likely change the authentification phase and won't go through the mounting step.

      --
      kTag

    2. Re:Network Browsing by EXrider · · Score: 1

      If you have some type of directory services set up, that's how it works. Either an Open Directory server, or Active Directory (ugh, still better than NT4 authentication though).

      We have Active Directory on 2K3 servers, and my macs are all bound (or is it binded?) to the directory; when we cruise the network and open SMB shares, no authentication. Now, M$ hosted AFP shares are another story, they totally blow for too many reasons to mention, including they require separate authentication. Services for Macintosh actually got worse in 2003, it worked better in NT4.

      This is totally off topic but, my boss hates Linux (actually fears it would be more accurate), and says "Lets face it, we're an M$ shop, we need to get rid of this kludgey Linux shit!" all the time. We replaced our decrepit NT4 SFM server and moved it all onto the shiny new SAN hosted via SFM on 2K3 and it's actually less reliable then before! My macs get kicked off of the shares whilst copying files repeatedly, filenames now have to follow both OS9 and NTFS naming conventions, and the performance just generally sucks ass!! So I'm about to break it to him, we need to replace this kludgey M$ services for mac shit with a real Mac OS X server plugged into the SAN via Fibre Channel. I was telling him about the file naming issue and how we have so many licensors and press companies to work with that use all kinds of wacky characters in their filenames that OSX allows; he just thought everyone was crazy for using filenames more than eight characters with spaces etc. What gets me is this is a former NeXT guy, he always talks of the glory days of NeXT, but he just doesn't dig OS X for some reason, he's hopelessly stuck on M$ products, like this whole company.

      We're macs living in a peecee world; end rant.

      --
      grep -iw skynet /etc/services
    3. Re:Network Browsing by Maserati · · Score: 1

      I'm gonna have to start reading a.s.r again, should be some gripping reading coming up.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
  36. Re:Why is this on the main ./ page? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IT is FREE is why. Steve Jobs just gave mac zealots a holiday bonus.

  37. I updated a bunch of systems around 22hrs ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The XP patches were available then, but the 2K and NT ones weren't released until a few hours later for some reason.

    1. Re:I updated a bunch of systems around 22hrs ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5 patches were released around 2PM NZ time yesterday (which was December 15th)...4 critical and 1 recommended (an OE update).

  38. Much better performance in Safari by randallman · · Score: 1

    I've got a new iMac and can say that the scrolling in Safari is great now. It was very choppy before.

  39. Screen Spanning Doctor by omeomi · · Score: 1

    Anybody know if it breaks the iBook/iMac screen spanning hack (http://www.rutemoeller.com/mp/ibook/ibook_e.html) ? I'm guessing it doesn't, but one never knows...

    1. Re:Screen Spanning Doctor by xen0side · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have screen spanning doctor running on 10.3.7 and it works fine.

    2. Re:Screen Spanning Doctor by omeomi · · Score: 1

      cool, thanks! I'm used to things in the Windows world, where it's best to find out how much critical stuff isn't going to work once you update...

  40. You found me out! by bennomatic · · Score: 1

    How did you know that I was able to post my message using only the finder? I thought my mojo was secret!

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
  41. I wonder which 3rd-party ITunes plugins... by cutecub · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...this update seeks to destory?

    -Sean

    1. Re:I wonder which 3rd-party ITunes plugins... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Harmony from Real, I believe

  42. Hopefully they fixed the pdf support in Preview by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

    I like Preview, it seems to be much more lightweight than the Acrobat reader, but the PDF display, while good most of the time, was a bit suspect on occaision. Hopefully they fixed most of the problems and I can finally get rid of the adobe bloatware....

    1. Re:Hopefully they fixed the pdf support in Preview by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      amen to that

    2. Re:Hopefully they fixed the pdf support in Preview by Matt+Clare · · Score: 1

      On that note, have you tried Schubert's PDF Browser Plugin, http://www.schubert-it.com/pluginpdf .

      It uses the fact that Quartz uses the PDF standard to quickly draw a PDF in the browser window. So easy to do, yet not done by preview.

      --
      .\.\att Clare
    3. Re:Hopefully they fixed the pdf support in Preview by firstian · · Score: 1

      Bear in mind that Quartz only image PDF into an image on the screen. Preview actually does quite a bit more, e.g., you can select text in a PDF.

  43. Install script is still stupidly written by ldesegur · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I started the installation and went to do some shopping (xmas) to come back and have a dialog on the screen asking me to quit iCal before it could get updated. D'oh! That was prior to installing and "optimizing" (wtf?) the big update. I know that it's ok because I didn't have to restart everything but... Would have it be nice if the installer had asked me AHEAD prior to download to quit iCal instead of waiting the middle of the installation? Doing installs of Quicktime brings up the same stupid dialog (update to pro.) Why does Apple assume that users keep their eyes on the screen during install at all time? A better way would be to answer all questions for every single update upfront then go with the install.

    1. Re:Install script is still stupidly written by SiliconTrip · · Score: 1

      Agreed...

      This happens if you are installing on a headless Xserve and a graphical dialog box pops up, where to I don't know, asking you to register for quicktime pro.

      The command line installer hangs waiting for you to *click* the dialog box.

      Please explain how one can click a dialog box on a machine with no graphic card and no mouse and keyboard connected? Especially if it is a thousand kilometres away...

      confused???

    2. Re:Install script is still stupidly written by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 2, Interesting

      optimizing defragments the large chunks of data on the disk.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    3. Re:Install script is still stupidly written by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And updates prebindings.

    4. Re:Install script is still stupidly written by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Before you run softwareupdate from the CLI, run this:

      $ export COMMAND_LINE_INSTALL=1

      The Quicktime dialogue box will be blocked.

    5. Re:Install script is still stupidly written by wrldwzrd89 · · Score: 1

      "Optimizing" has nothing to do with defragmentation. The optimizing process updates prebindings. "Prebinding" basically inserts the locations of all the various external libraries a given program uses in a special location within the program. Doing this makes applications launch faster, since they don't have to go searching for their external library files.

  44. Re:Why is this on the main ./ page? by 47Ronin · · Score: 1

    IT is FREE is why

    So? 10.3.1, 10.3.2, 10.3.3, 10.3.4, 10.3.5, and 10.3.6 were free also. Even all the security patches and iApp updates were free.

    Same goes for 10.2.1, 10.2.2, 10.2.3, 10.2.4, 10.2.5, 10.2.6, .......etc etc...

    --
    Those who laugh at you for you having a Mac.. are the people who constantly call you to fix their PC.
  45. Re:Screen Spanning Doctor ( Still Works ) by crosstopher · · Score: 1

    Just upgraded, it's still working fine for me ( 1ghz eMac ).

  46. Speedup by Anv*l · · Score: 1

    I wonder if it's just me, but the system feels significantly snappier ;)

  47. Fixes the annoying DNS timeout problem by csoto · · Score: 1

    Using this on a cable modem with Apple AIrPort Extrememe Base Station, 10.3.7 is much improved! No more annoying refreshes required!

    So far, it's a great update!

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
    1. Re:Fixes the annoying DNS timeout problem by Trillan · · Score: 1

      That's the thing that jumped out at me while reading the readme:

      • Resolves an issue in which Safari, Mail, and other networking applications that use DNS lookups could experience intermittent connectivity issues with Security Update 2004-09-30 and Mac OS X 10.3.5 or later installed.

      I'm still downloading, but I can't wait to surf the web without annoying computer-side pauses. Yup, back to "pure" terrible DSL for me...

  48. Re:hypehypehype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, it's true - that's why ;)

  49. No java 1.5 by acomj · · Score: 1

    Guess there going to make us pay for that with tiger..

    Its been out like 3 months on the PC side...

    Sigh...

    1. Re:No java 1.5 by Drakonian · · Score: 1

      There is like another year to go if the wait for 1.4 was anything to go by. It's not exactly trivial to implement a JVM. Too bad Sun doesn't do it for Mac. :(

      --
      Random is the New Order.
    2. Re:No java 1.5 by PierceLabs · · Score: 1

      I've always wondered if that was Apple's choice or Sun's. The Apple and the Sun folks are in reasonably close contact. There is a fair amount of 'shared' code for a JVM though, so at least Apple doesn't have to reinvent it each release.

    3. Re:No java 1.5 by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      I rather doubt it will take another years, the problems with 1.4 were mainly, that Sun made major improvements on java2d and added lots of new apis in the graphical area which directly affected apples bindings into its own os. This time it is only minor improvements on the classlib but heavy work on the compiler. A lot of the more interesting stuff regarding the VM which would affect Apple already comes from Apple. To get JDK 1.5 you probably will have to put Tiger in the tank.

  50. Quicker by ickoonite · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whilst I, like others, question the need for this to be the stuff of the front page, I am grateful for the notification and can now report back post-install.

    I can't quite put my finger on it, but I'm pretty sure I can detect a speed increase, definitely for UI responsiveness - I've got an 800 MHz iBook G3 and a 400 Mhz iMac G3 here, and both seem to have gained a certain je ne sais quoi from the update, the iMac especially.

    Thank you once again, Apple, for a free speedup to my ageing iMac. It is much appreciated!

    iqu :)

    (Seriously, it is commendable, the work that seems to go into these releases. Each point release is bringing genuine improvements, such that it is quite a shock to go back to a mint 10.3 install or suchlike. This is an area where Apple really excels - making even relative relics like my iMac more usable with every new update.)

  51. That's great, but... by HaloZero · · Score: 1

    ...will it fix my battery? After installing 10.3.5, my battery took a huge hit. Lasted about five minutes. Then came 10.3.6. Increased to maybe 20 minutes, where it stays now. Just yesterday I did a clean install on the OS, so I've got no idle bullplop in the background.

    And, yay. World of Warcraft! :-D

    --
    Informatus Technologicus
    1. Re:That's great, but... by Kesh · · Score: 1

      Look further up. Apparently it does improve battery life. I'll refresh my battery later and test it for myself...

    2. Re:That's great, but... by easter1916 · · Score: 1

      Have you tried resetting the PMU? All apologies if you have.

    3. Re:That's great, but... by HaloZero · · Score: 1

      PMU. VRAM. PRAM. Been there, done it. Repeatedly. Good suggestion, though.

      --
      Informatus Technologicus
    4. Re:That's great, but... by easter1916 · · Score: 1

      Facing the same issue with both a PB 17 and a G3/600 iBook... $250 all told to replace both batteries. It sucks.

  52. It's actually a good idea. by ZxCv · · Score: 1

    Considering that most users don't download the update over a broadband connection, I would think that it's a good idea that they are not asked to quit programs until after the download. What if you want to do some work in the background while the download goes? If the user must quit all apps before downloading, they essentially give up their computer for the entire download+install time, rather than just the install time. I could see some kind of option to enable what you want, but I definitely don't think it should be the default behavior.

    --

    Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
    1. Re:It's actually a good idea. by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      Why can't the updater just quit iCal by itself? This isn't exactly rocket surgery.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  53. How good is OS X, really? by freelance+cynic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isn't flamebait, but an honest question.

    I'm thinking of buying an 12" iBook or PowerBook to replace my old computer. Now, there are a few things that bother me physically about them (they're big and heavy (twice as much as my Lifebook P2040), the battery life isn't really good and there's a blasted trackpad instead of a trackpoint)...

    BUT! I could overlook all that, because I'd really like a computer that Just Works(TM). I love tweaking things in Linux (I run gentoo to give you an idea), but my life is catching up to me now and I find I don't have the time I used to to play with my computer (without doing anything "productive" done).

    Now, I'm asking Apple fans (and detractors too) here: is OS X really *that* great, as I heard? Does it really Just Works(TM)? I'm asking because I've nearly went and bought my new Apple laptop, but then discovered that iTunes doesn't play .ogg files (not without tweaking anyhow). That Appleworks doesn't cut it for me (I need feature that aren't available with it) and since I'm not about to pay a kazillion $ to MS to use Office, I'll have to install OpenOffice. And I could go on... So I'm getting stuff like an .ogg player, OpenOffice, Firefox, etc... which I could all get on Linux (or even Windows). So, tell me, what's so great about OS X? There must be something I'm missing... I'm *this* close to buying an Apple notebook because everyone saying they're great, but I have this nagging doubt that it's not all it's claimed to be.

    Right, wrong? I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this one...

    1. Re:How good is OS X, really? by easter1916 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Damn! You almost had them with your skilled troll attempt -- oh wait, nah, ya didn't.

    2. Re:How good is OS X, really? by BandwidthHog · · Score: 2, Informative

      Any of us Mac geeks here could go on for hours responding to your post (and undoubtedly somebody's writing up a 6,000 word post as I type this), but I'll answer it this way:

      I'm an old school Mac user (print shop graphics since '88) and when OS X hit the scene, I was really looking forward to living my life at the command line, becoming an über hacker, since all my years of troubleshooting skills would need to be relearned. Only problem is, there's nothing to do.

      Sure, in the early days (10.0.4) I was using unsupported machines (603 and 604e clones with G3 upgrades) so some trickery (thank you, Ryan Rempel!) was required to get it to install. But once installed (and I've since moved to a G4 tower), there's just nothing to do. It really is true: everything Just Works(TM), which in my case, has been something of a disappointment.

      I've seen one kernel panic in the past two years, and that happened at the end of the install process for one of the 10.3 point upgrades. The machine booted fine after that, so I don't even really count it. I spend at least as much time using XP at work as I do using this thing at home, and even though my well specced office PC has ~5 times the clock speed, my Mac is *much* harder to bog down or destabilize.

      Also, OpenOffice has been surprisingly good since I started using it recently. In addition to that, I recommend two additional apps for a new Mac user: A $25 app called Little Snitch for more fine grained control over IPFW, and a freeware app called Desktop Manager that gives you a totally freaking awesome virtual desktop implementation with mind bending eye candy.

      In a way, it was actually easier ten years ago to convince people... all you had to do was point out that Macs cost four times as much, but we still bought 'em. Now that they're comparably priced, that argument doesn't work anymore. Ain't that a bitch? Well, no. Otherwise I'd still be using my old dual 604e tower.

      --

      Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
    3. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually itunes does support .ogg files. I dont know when or how, but I have a new 12" powerbook with itunes 4.7 and I accidently copied over some ogg files with my mp3's from my linux box and they play great. For the kind it says "Quicktime movie file" but you still get tags and stuff. Its great. No modifications needed either.

    4. Re:How good is OS X, really? by acvh · · Score: 1

      It is pretty much all its claimed to be. It does Just Work, but if you want to go nuts tweaking it you can do that, too.

      I bought my wife an iMac flat panel, and got myself a used powermac thinking I could use it to experiment on when she had questions or problems, and ended up installing Linux on it because she didn't need me.

      She now has an iBook as well, and loves both. AbiWord is an excellent replacement for Word, at least for us. I use OO.o for spreadsheets when necessary.

    5. Re:How good is OS X, really? by femtoguy · · Score: 1

      I consider myself a crufty old Linux user ( my credentials are that I installed the first Slackware distribution on a 486/25 with 8MB memory 40 MB hard disk, from a whole lot of floppy disks, and I have run it continuously since) and have built many machines from scratch. For three years I ran a dell laptop with various distros on it, hacked a lot of scripts, compiled a lot of drivers, and it mostly worked. 14 months ago, I got a powerbook, and I would never go back. Power management is way better than any non-Apple machine, wireless just works, and I can even run X11 and bash. I have set up Linux on 5 different laptops, and I have never had one work fully. Get the PowerBook.

    6. Re:How good is OS X, really? by SSpade · · Score: 4, Informative

      OS X just works. (Almost - I've seen occasional issues with the CUPS subsystem in older releases that needed either a reboot or a manual daemon restart to fix. But almost.)

      Ease of connecting wifi is one example. To get this powerbook to connect to a netgear AP with WPA was trivial. It just worked. Trying the same connection from an XP laptop was a nightmare of driver upgrades and obscure hex strings.

      The GUI isn't perfect, but it's better than Windows, KDE or Gnome, IMO. (Even if you prefer KDE or Gnome you'll probably still consider the GUI quite workable).

      And it's a BSD box under the covers, with a decent X server, and lots of (good) development software bundled with the system.

      The downside is that while the software that's available tends to be really good there isn't quite the vast range of software you'll see under windows (particularly games).

      I've had two major hardware failures on my powerbook (both fairly normal laptoppy failures - HD started getting flaky and the smart charge circuit in the battery went bad). My laptop gets around 12x7 usage, so no big surprise. Under the AppleCare contract, though, they fixed 'em both (HD was out to be repaired for 4 or 5 days, battery was a no questions swap in the store). That's about the same failure rate I've seen with Dell and Sony laptops - but trying to get Dell or Sony to support them (or even sell spare parts) was an exercise in futility.

      So, while it's not as Truly Perfect as the Apple True Believers will try and tell you, it is a damn fine system. I have a range of systems that I use (Windows, Linux, BSD, Solaris, Mac) but both the laptop and my main desktop are Macs by choice.

    7. Re:How good is OS X, really? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      I'm a recent convert.

      MS Office is really cheap (considering) if you buy the "Student and Teacher" edition. You don't need an ID or have to do anything special; just pick it off the shelf and buy it. It costs $150 USD, not cheap but not THAT much.

      OSX is nice. I use my PowerBook for just about every non-gaming thing I do (with the exception of the occasional Visual C++ program for work).

      It takes a little getting used to, but it's rather fun.

    8. Re:How good is OS X, really? by goMac2500 · · Score: 1

      You can just get a QuickTime plugin for OGG, it should also work in iTunes. Rumor has it the next iTunes may play ogg anyway. Or you could just get an ogg player and not use iTunes.

    9. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Seanasy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Think of everything you like about Linux.

      OK, now imagine an OS with all of that plus a good desktop.

      It'a as easy as that. When you get it you'll start using it, doing the things you normally do with a computer. It'll be pretty, it'll be nice. Then you'll get one of those 'itches.' Can't I write shell script to do this more efficiently? I wonder what running a Tomcat server is like? I don't want to switch out of Terminal to control iTunes...

      It really is the best of both worlds.

    10. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As someone who was in exactly your position, I say, "No."

      Ultimately, the problem is that while a lot of Apple's apps are nice, there are nicer solutions out there. I used Safari for awhile, but gave in to Firefox because, if it doesn't work better, it's at least got a feel that I like more. iTunes takes a long time to get used to, and I started longing for my XMMS (even after adding in .ogg support). I also stuck with Open Office which meant dealing with the X11 app (very nice integration, but still not all there--it'd be nice to be able to OA-Tab directly to specific X11 aps when multiples are running). Mail.app is very nice, if you don't want a text-based client. Terminal itself has slightly different ansi-color attributes that I was used to, so I ended up grabbing two different terminal programs to handle my various wants and needs (one for mudding with Tinyfugue, one for general SSHing). And speaking of Tinyfugue, it takes quite a bit of tinkering to install.

      Put simply, I was installing tons of 3rd party software, which is something I could have done with any PC I'd bought.
      I also noticed significant screen lag, which perhaps would have been addressed in 10.3.7, who knows. To illustrate the point, however, get on a Linux box and the iBook, ssh to a server somewhere, start a screen session, and start cat'ting logfiles. The Linux display will finish noticeably faster every time (in fact, this was the annoyance that got to me most).
      The Aqua gui is nice, but it's not something you spend $1200 on, and on top of all of this, buying an Apple means you lose a significant portion of software you could be running if you'd bought a PC. Overall, it's nice, and if your needs aren't high, then it definitely Just Works. But When it came right down to it, all the drawbacks did not outweigh the positives for me.

      I love the way everything feels on an iBook, but it just doesn't do what I want.

    11. Re:How good is OS X, really? by gbrandt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I get 6 hours on my ibook 14". Frankly thats way better than my Dell laptop which tops at 4 hours. And my iBook is very light.

      For equivelant power and useability, iBooks are light and last longer on battery power.

      Gregor

    12. Re:How good is OS X, really? by ce25254 · · Score: 1

      I know you're comparing to Linux, but I thought I'd add a bit about one experience comparing OS X to Windows (2k).

      I bought a Microsoft Wireless Intellimouse Explorer (USB R/F). I installed the MS driver on OS X, and it works great. I swap this mouse between my home computer (OS X) and work computer (Win2k). *Every* time I plug the USB dongle into the Win2k machine, after it thrashes the disk a bit, it prompts me to install a new USB device. I cancel the message and the Intellimouse functions OK in Windows.

      On OS X, it Just Works. Plug, unplug, plug, unplug, plug... instant response, no messages, no trouble.
      Funny.

      Yes, you probably want more than a 1-button mouse, but actually when I go back to using the Apple Pro Mouse, its small size feels quite nice in my hand, and I can do most everything I really need to do with it.

    13. Re:How good is OS X, really? by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      So, while it's not as Truly Perfect as the Apple True Believers will try and tell you, it is a damn fine system.

      I'm not trying to be a dickhead here, and I'm not objecting to anything you wrote, but I have a general observation.

      It occurs to me that this True Believer stuff is an overblown perception. I know a lot of people like me, who love OS X, but not a single one of them is without some complaints about it. I sure don't know of anyone who says it's perfect. Apple users tend to get pretty devoted and enthusiastic, but I think the caricature of the Apple True Believer/Zealot/Mindless Fanboi is a bit more than is actually the case.

      Just for one thing I dislike about OS X: Lack of thumbnail view in finder windows. You have to go to column view and click images one at a time to see their previews. Annoying.

    14. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really is that good. I was a linux gearhead for a few years. After touching OSX, I instantly stopped looking back.

      It's not that it's perfect. It's that it's better. Incidentally, rumors have it that OGG will be Quicktime-native in a month.

      It is NOT for mission critical datacenter stuff, and it is NOT for playing games. Period. But everything else, it's just a fun little garden of earthly delights once you don't have to fight the fucking OS or core software stack every five seconds.

      It is a beautiful walled garden that makes doing all sorts of things painless. But it is not the second coming of computation... it's just the best consumer/professional computation experience money can buy. If apple says it does something, it WILL DO SOMETHING. If it stop doing said something, apple WILL FIX IT.

      Its' just such a dream to stop fighting the computer. And if something doesn't work to your exact liking, you learn to deal or else bail for third-party. Slavery really can be freedom sometimes.

      Get the warranty, and don't under-buy. When you're spending this kind of money, don't halfass it. Add the memory and get the airport card.

    15. Re:How good is OS X, really? by MacDaffy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your misgivings are well-taken. I've been using Macs for seventeen years. I came to them after a career as a programmer on PC's and the HP3000. Just some observations:

      --You immediately jettison your obsession with malware/spyware/worms, etc. If you aren't obsessed with them on a PC, you're cruisin' for a bruisin'. And that's worth something right there.

      --I don't use AppleWorks unless it's necessary. But there's a myriad of software--free, shareware and commercial--that fits the bill. BBEdit, Nisus Writer, TextEdit--it's MUCH easier to find all kinds of good quality, low-cost software for Macintosh than it is for Windows. There's a much lower ratio of trash-to-treasure on Macintosh because crap just doesn't survive very long. A trip to the Mac OS X side of Versiontracker will bear me out.

      --Wireless networking is mature in Mac OS X. Acquisition of networks is easier. Configuration is easier. The antennas built into the machines get better reception than Windows machines do--and that's laptop AND desktop.

      --Apple hardware purchases hold their value. This machine is four years old. It can be had for about $800. I'd take one in a minute for running Mac OS X. But a new iBook G4 is $100 more. The used Mac market is crazy because the machines are so useful.

      It's not all sunshine and roses by any stretch of the imagination. Panther Release 10.3.6 was a disaster, from what I hear. Busts FireWire. Windows-Mac networking interoperability suffers. There are the shortcomings you mentioned in your own situation. It's a balance. Since you're a knowledgeable user, you can make a more informed decision than most people. Macintosh does have its shortcomings, but everything about it is geared toward one thing: Helping you get your work done.

      Good luck. Hope this helps.

    16. Re:How good is OS X, really? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I've used Gentoo for about 2.5 years now, and an iBook for 1 year. All I can say is, I use the iBook almost exclusively now -- my faster Gentoo PC isn't even plugged in!

      I use Firefox instead of Safari (and with this theme, Firefox looks just like a native app -- it's great. Also, iTunes plays .oggs just fine with the 3rd-party codec. OpenOffice is a little trickier; I've heard that it works perfectly fine, but it's a little annoying to have to start X11. I haven't used it, but there's a native port called NeoOfficeJ you could look into.

      Anyway, you sound like me -- a former Gentoo user that plans to use a lot of Free software. I, at least, prefer using Firefox and VLC and whatnot on OS X rather than Linux -- it's just a lot easier.

      And the biggest difference is this: you can spend just as much time tweaking OS X as you can Gentoo; but with Gentoo you're spending all that time trying to get the system working and with OS X you're spending that time enhancing your experience, because all the normal stuff Just Works.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    17. Re:How good is OS X, really? by ankhank · · Score: 1

      You can go to www.apple.com/Support/
      Look at the threads under OS X
      Note which ones are long, and if you watch for a while, notice which ones keep coming back (because Apple deletes discussions, if they get embarassing).
      Go to Macfixit.com and read forums there.

      How good is it? For beta, not bad.

      It appears to have some basis in intelligent design, rather than having simply evolved by random success or failure after patch and blunder.

      They haven't had a really bad bug -- like, unexpectedly deleted people's external firewire hard drives -- since, um, OSX 10.3.6, which was replaced earlier today by 10.3.7. Wish us luck.

      External firewire hardware from places like, say, meritline.com, is sold with a warning added a few weeks ago saying it's not safe with OS X 10.3 (took'em months to figure that out, apparently).

      On the other hand, my neighbors pay consultants large sums of money every few months to clean out their Windows machines, or larger sums every year or two when they quit working completely, while I just cuss Apple and keep running Disk Warrior.

      I dunno if it's any good. It's at least the best of a bad lot, for commercial operating systems.

      I was happier with a vt-100, Concurrent DOS, PC-Talk and QEdit, I'll admit, and I spent more time outdoors and had more friends who breathed, back then (grin). Try it and see what it does for you.

    18. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Juanvaldes · · Score: 1

      Just for one thing I dislike about OS X: Lack of thumbnail view in finder windows. You have to go to column view and click images one at a time to see their previews. Annoying.
      Switch to the finder, view menu, show view options. Check show icon preview.

    19. Re:How good is OS X, really? by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      On the app side of things it just works, but as soon as you dive deeper you basically run into the same problems as in windows or Linux. I recently hammered basically 5 hours away to get Cups properly running just to find out, that the mac printing system uses cups only for transport only and uses partially its own driver structure. Sure there is the Gimp Print drivers but you are out of luck if your printer is not supported by those. This was just an example there are various other issues like a rather limited hardware support which is way worse than linux (better check out the mac sign on the box) and other stuff. The mac is good, the OS very solid, but dont expect user wonderland with Unix for dummies, it is either User wonderland, or core unix, just depending on what you plan to do with it. But if you need core Unix then better go with Linux instead than shooting yourself in the food with OSXs X.

    20. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      iTunes takes a long time to get used to, and I started longing for my XMMS (even after adding in .ogg support)

      Wow. That comment seriously blows my mind. Anybody using this poster's comment as guidance for choosing their next computer should first decide if they agree with that statement before continuing.

      Damn. Prefers XMMS over iTunes. You must have some seriously decked-out XMMS over there.

    21. Re:How good is OS X, really? by timftbf · · Score: 1

      Yes, for 99% of things it does Just Work.

      I hated OS 9 and earlier Macs. I mean, *really* loathed them. Manual memory management is the dumbest thing ever, co-op multi-tasking is the second, and no command line is the third.

      I hated Windows ever since I came across it too. I came from an Amiga, where by and large things also Just Worked (and they had cool hardware too). I'd been using Linux for a good few years before I came across OS X, and while it is a good OS (I still use it for everything server-side), I tended to spend too much time fiddling with the OS and not enough time actually using it. (Partly because I *could*, admittedly, but partly because I had to).

      OS X is a thing of beauty. If you want things to just work by clicking on pretty buttons, you can, and the GUI is responsive, elegent, and usually makes simple things easy and complex things possible. When you need the command line, it's there. When you want to hack on stuff, there's a full-blown development suite included for free. When you want to pretend it's "DIY" Unix, roll your own apps, there's a regular GNU(-ish) toolchain there, or fink for Linux-style package management.

      I've hit exactly two things that have been harder than they should have been. Re-mapping the keymap to match a PC-102 keyboard is a pain. (Apple's keyboard has lots of punctuation in the wrong places, and anyway I need an ergonomic keyboard with a trackpad, and the only one I've found to suit is PS2-only. I have a PS2USB convertor to get around that.) Secondly, I've never been able to get re-connecting network drives automatically to be very easy. The NFS mount that has all my MP3s on is now in the automounter (via lots of netinfo jiggery-pokery), but my SMB shared drives (home dir on servers etc) still don't re-mount when I log in.

      TTFN,
      Tim.

    22. Re:How good is OS X, really? by nordicfrost · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'll address every topic in order:

      Does it really Just Works(TM)?

      Usually, yes. I have yet to install a driver on my PowerBook. Every printer I have dried to connect to has been automatically found on the network and installed, every weird-ass camera connected has just showed up in iPhoto to import the images. The bluetooth mouse worked on the first try. The Microsoft Bluetooth adapter that refused to work on Norwegian XP SP1 (Since the drivers wouldn't load on the Norwegian edition) worked out of the box on an iBook.
      I have had two instances where it didn't just work. One was a weird-ass printer in my girlfriend's flat, it required a download of some open source drivers. The other is that there is no support for the Microsoft fingerprint scanner that I got to test from Microsoft.

      iTunes doesn't play .ogg files (not without tweaking anyhow)

      Itunes does play ogg. It even has a file icon for ogg, and many rumor mongers among the Apple fan base suspect that ogg support will be native in iTunes soon. Not on the iPod, but that's another issue. The ogg support is done via plugin, but if you want, there's a really kick-ass application called Audion that does a lot more than iTunes. One of the best music players, regardless of platform.

      Appleworks doesn't cut it for me

      Me neither.

      I'm not about to pay a kazillion $ to MS to use Office, I'll have to install OpenOffice

      I have to say, MS Office for Mac is really slick. Using Office 2000 on Windows when I'm at work now feels like I'm writing on cave walls with deer-blood as paint. Lots of nifty and well though through features that actually are useful. Like a toolbox that fades away so you see only the actual paper you are writing until you need the toolbox, then it fades in. Very non-clutter like.

      As for OpenOffice, I used it on Linux before I switched to Mac. I liked it, but it really feels old compared to Office on Mac. Very, very, very old. The experience I had with it on Linux was that it was extremely slow. I think this has been fixed, and there is an very active effort to get the Mac version native. It now runs under the X11 subsystem (Another cool thing with the MacOS X).

      I can tell you how I got into Macs. My mother got a budget for buying a new computer, printer and accessories to use when she edited an online magazine. She had a horrible AST Windows 98 computer that constantly locked up (And it costed me a term paper when it was W95 when i accidentally hit the 'sleep' button on the keyboard that actually crashes W95). Having long since moved out, I was looking for something that needed little attention from my side, and I advised her to by an iBook, after strong recommendation from a photographer friend.

      The ibook was ordered and set up. Everything worked, right out of the box. There was a program for the Agfa Snapscan I donated and the Logitech wireless two-button mouse worked without any thing other than plugging it in (and syncing it with the base). The number of family support-calls went down from four-five a week to every other week. Now, this is remarkable. The Mac had so few issues, that I just needed to have a look at it every six months doing routine maintenance like repairing permissions, checking that everything works as planned. Updates go ahead automatically every week. I have had one problem with the updates, but that's it.

      Then my GF was out to buy a new laptop. I told her that if she got a Windows computer, I would not help her when something went wrong. I'm tired of being the person everyone calls at 22:00 because the term paper went away or the internet connection is down. She got an iBook, and loves it dearly. It seems that persons not familiar with computers see the Mac hardware as a companion, a work mate more than a cold tool that you sometimes have to fight with.

      Some friends that run a company said they would take my advice and buy Macs next time they were going to upgrade. Macs pl

    23. Re:How good is OS X, really? by uohcicds · · Score: 1

      I find myself agreeing with pretty much everything this post says. I've used linux for about 6 years now both at home and work and while it si fun to mess around with at low level, sometimes the Apple approach just fits. I notice how quite a lot of Apple-isms have taken root in Fedora core 3, specifically in Gnome. This is not a bad thing; a more usable linux desktop for eveyone may encourage more users and if that model is based on the relative intuitiveness and simplicity of the Mac interface then so much the better.

      There are of course problems, particularly if you work in networks with them (like not being able to use SMB mounts as homedirs without third party software - trust us we've tried), but much of this is minor.

      The unupdated apache/php problem mentioned elsewhere also applies. Although webserver installs and configs hold no fears for me (doing it and teaching it is part of my job), the way that Apple have it set up on OS X make me fight shy of rolling my own config manually.

      --
      It's not you: I'm just this horrifically socially awkward with everybody.
    24. Re:How good is OS X, really? by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      Think of everything you like about Linux.


      Free as in freedom, free as in beer, no proprietary crap, direct lines of communication with the developers, open source, freedom of choice etc. etc.

      OK, now imagine an OS with all of that plus a good desktop.


      Well, I have zero complaints when it comes to KDE, but... Is OS X "free as in freedom"? Is it free as in beer? Does it push proprietary stuff? Can I talk with Steve Jobs about the OS? Is it open source (yes, some of it is, but not all of it)? What if I don't happen to like the computer it's running on, can I switch to another brand of computer?

      Don't get me wrong, Apple does make some kick-ass stuff (I'm thinking of getting an iPod Mini and a second-hand Titanium Powerbook). But OS X is NOT "Linux + lots of other kick-ass stuff". For me, OS X is not a replacement for Linux. Not even close. The Powerbook I might buy? I would run Linux on it. The Powerbook is one of the best laptops available, and that's why I'm interested in it (although I hate the one-button mouse). Yes, I have tried out OS X. And while it did have lots of eye-candy, I failed to get turned on by it. Yes, it was "nice", no, it wasn't the uber-OS that is destined to rule over other OS'es. I can see why some people think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. I'm not one of those, however.
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    25. Re:How good is OS X, really? by katamerry_damatree · · Score: 2, Interesting
      In 2001 I had to buy a new computer, and despite being a lifelong PC user, went with a newly-remodeled iBook.

      The first thing you notice is that you can't download everything anymore and expect it to work (well, you know what I mean). But it's no biggie; eventually you break the google habit and hang out at versiontracker or sourceforge instead. It's annoying at first- it took months for me to run into X-Chat Aqua, the only free IRC chatter on the platform w/out running ircII etc. out of Terminal, which I can never get working anyway- but you grow into it. Signing up for the ADC emails helps keep you abreast of some of the cooler up-and-coming projects, too.

      You can get .ogg playback easily in iTunes by downloading a quicktime plugin. You install it by dragging and dropping it into one of the working locations. That's it. There's a slight lag when played, and they don't show up for sharing, but iTunes can both convert them to a more comfortable format and burn them to disc, so if you *need* them shared you can still get around it.

      The painless wireless was already mentioned, but can't be understated- Apple's built-in client handles WEP, WPA, and 802.1x networks with ease; sharing is a matter of going into the Sharing prefs and checking the right boxes, rather than the mysterious restarting affairs of XP.

      Hardware can sometimes be an issue with Apple. My iBook debuted the Combo drive in a spectacularly busted manner, but they had it back to me in less than a week, shipping covered, w/ free backup of data (since I couldn't burn anything). My 2003 12" powerbook's main speakers were crackling- somewhat common that year- and had a few dead pixels, but I didn't bother calling it in. I replaced it with a new one about a year later, and this one has an occasionally unreliable left arrow key. *shrug* YMMV, but their support is great if something does come up. Just consider extending it past the 90 days.

      Yes, I'd say OS X Just Works(TM). Even running beta versions, the only OS crashes I've had were when I was doing something I wasn't supposed to be. Another YMMV, of course, but the unpredictability of Windows drives me crazy now.

      I don't think the "I could get this other software on Linux/Windows" statement is the right way of looking at it. I'm happy I can get most of the better multiplatform software on my Mac. If you need additional features than the bundled software with the OS, it's there, but you have to get it yourself, per usual. But there's a bigger selection than with Linux (and between fink and X11, most of the common Linux choices are here anyway) with- generally- much less effort, and Apple's bundled software is worlds better than Microsoft's. Even if you're stuck with Safari before you can get Firefox or Camino, you're not facing the internet ass first with MSNoPants in your process list. And though it has little to do with word processing, wait until you play with Garageband. ;)

      If you don't like Appleworks (me neither), try AbiWord or OpenOffice, as you mentioned. With any OS you're going to have to fill in the gaps for your use, but Apple has done a great job providing core functionality. TextEdit alone may surprise you.

      USB and Firewire have a monopoly here, so if you're into hobbyist kits and/or PCMCIA hardware, you're either SOL or are planning on starting an adapter collection (and may still need drivers). I have used a Keyspan USB-Serial adapter with my Pbook and it works beautifully, but this still wouldn't be my platform of choice for experimenting with non-mainstream hardware.

      Nevertheless, if you're looking for reliable productivity there's nothing like OS X. Millions of iPod silhouettes can't be wrong.

    26. Re:How good is OS X, really? by ricotest · · Score: 1

      My 12" iBook cost £650 with the educational discount, and that's as much as a similar notebook of that size (maybe slightly faster). The main factors were the easy wireless (you just select a network and bam, it connects) and the 5-6 hour battery life, as well as OS X's fabled ease of use.

      Your drawbacks are trivial. Compatibility and lack of apps really isn't an issue of OS X... everything I've looked for, I've found a Mac port for. The only exception is a purchase of Office 2003 (which is just as beautiful and usable as the rest of OS X) but if you can't get that, AppleWorks is included, or OpenOffice.

      I'd been using iTunes on Windows for a year or so so it was no problem. I ditched Mail and got Thunderbird as well as Firefox, but Safari is fairly respectable. Terminal ansi colours? Screen lag? Wtf? If you're realy getting heavy with the text based stuff, as you mention in your mail client choice, put a laptop in Linux. If you're not using the GUI then of course it isn't worth $1200.

      As I said, I didn't notice the 'lack of software'. My uses are obviously different from yours, though. I found emulators, most open source games, a very good calendar app (iCal), a decent movie player to replace QuickTime (mplayer, with built-in support for most formats) and XCode, but if you don't like that use Eclipse or whatever. It's got development covered very well.

      So it really depends - you do seem ill-suited for it, but don't blame the iBook. Blame your lack of research first, since you would have quickly found out that Apple's software doesn't cover all your needs.

    27. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Aqua is nice, but it is admittedly ahead of its time, and is sluggish. 10.3.7 seems to have improved scrolling across the board, which is nice.

      But I really believe it is a next-generation UI, and is slow just like the classic Mac UI was never really snappy until the 68040 machines came out. (I'm not counting pre-System 7, because it didn't multitask).

      Despite Aqua's shortcomings, it really doesn't seem to bog down the machine when it comes to raw processing. Instead, when the processor gets busy, everything still hums along at full tilt, but Aqua gets choppy.

      In the meantime I still am really liking the direction that Apple is forging with OS X and the consistency of its UI across apps. Despite its sluggishness it continues to get faster with these incremental updates, and in a few years when a base system is a 3 GHz G5 with video on par with a GF6800, we'll forget about its little annoyances, just like nowadays we forget about trying to run System 7.1 on a Mac LC. Then the fruits of Apple's labour will really pay off, while we enjoy our little search boxes, cool zooming effects and drop shadows. Mac OS X will make Longhorn look clumsy, much the same way System 7's UI wiped the floor with WFW 3.11, and using OS 8 made Win 95/98 feel like a toy.

      In my opinion, right now XP and Linux interfaces are nice and quick, but once I now that I've been using OS X for a few years I find other interfaces primitive, despite Aqua's sluggishness.

      I know I'm rambling, but hey - since we're sharing, do you want to know what annoys the hell out of me with Windows these days? The taskbar. If you have an Office app open with multiple documents, each document gets a tile in the taskbar - even though the documents are in daughter windows (don't even get me started on that). You only need to have about 6 open windows on your screen before the taskbar becomes useless. The System Tray is never big enough to show you everything it contains (oh if only things just shrunk to fit their available space like OS X), and the Start menu which causes you to do mouse gymnastics through what is usually 3 hierarchal menus just to launch any app. (click Start, move up and to the right for "all programs", hover there for a moment, move into the list that appears on the right - but not too far or the whole thing will disappear on you, then move up or down to your app's folder, then move down past uninstall, help, readme, and click on the app! now what was i going to do with it again?) Oh, and it's also really cool when it starts hiding items from you when you haevn't used them for a little while.

      Anyway -- happy computing, regardless of which platform's fruits you choose to pick. :)

    28. Re:How good is OS X, really? by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      It's pretty good. I purchased an inexpensive iBook from the Apple store just before they released new models (grumble, grumble). I still rely on my Windows desktop for gaming, and a Linux server for file sharing (thing hasn't fallen over once) but Mac is a decent desktop OS.

      Things I like:

      * Expose is cool. Hope Windows and free OSes "borrow" it. I'd like to move the windows around, though.
      * Safari "just works", which is surprising for an "alternative" browser.
      * Being able to run UNIX applications through Fink rocks. Google it.

      Things I don't like:

      * Not knowing exactly what is being updated in the software. Com'on Apple! Telling me "Fontbook has improved functionality" doesn't explain why some fonts have completely disappeared.
      * Screen real estate seems like it's at a premium. That bar on the top totally wastes space, and the dock (by default) is way too huge.
      * Unexplained errors: spinning beach balls of death, drives that don't want to unmount, an Airport bar that shows decreased signal strength when downloading a lot of stuff (huh?)

      I'm also not too fond of paying for (what in essence are) Service Packs. (You listening Apple? Don't charge an arm and a leg for 10.4!!)

    29. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really depends on what you want.

      For one you get the great apps, that Apple have created themselves. iTunes is hands down the best music player out there - even if you do need a quicktime plugin to play ogg vorbis files.

      Instead of OpenOffice I use NeoOffice, which is based on OpenOffice but doesn't require X11.

      I prefer Camino over Firefox or Safari. Safari is nice and has snapback, which is a brilliant feature if you remember to use it. Firefox has an amazing number of plugins and is pretty fast. But Camino is like a Firefox tailored for OS X. It's just *nice*.

      But what are you missing out on? Well, a consistant GUI for one thing. Nicely packaged applications that can be easily downloaded and installed. If you prefer doing it the *nix way look into Darwinports, which is an implementation of Ports for OS X.

      What's really, really nice, though, is that you have a wealth of commercial applications to go along with your open source of choice. You say you don't want to use MS Office, which is fine and understandable (but I must admit it *is* very nice on OS X, while I don't like the Window version) - but if you *want to* you *can*. Which is an important aspect of using OS X for me.

      My most used apps seem to be (since they are in my dock): Camino, Mail, Adium X (nice IM client - sort of like Gaim but more elegant), Address book (which integrates beautifully system wide), iTunes, VLC, iCal, iTerm, Sofa (automatically fetches album art for iTunes and shows it layered on top of the background), Audion 3 (shareware released as freeware - has nice netradio management), MSN Messenger (yes, Adium does MSN as well, but it's nice to have the real deal if you want to send files to others who use MSN - which is important for group work for me), iTube (internet tv selector), BluePhoneElite (integrates my cell phone with OS X. SMS center, call center etc - all linked with address book), SubEthaEdit (lovely editor with syntax highlighting and realtime sharing), iSync (syncs my powerbook, Palm and cell phone in one go).

      Sure, I could get most of the daily stuff done on a PC with FreeBSD if I wanted to, but making it work seamlessly is the problem. Besides during a recent film production we just hooked up my powerbook and did a rough cut in iMovie while on the set. Extremely useful. We also composed the soundtrack in Garageband and it ended up sounding brilliant. I doubt I could have done the same with something that wasn't OS X - In fact I doubt I could have made things Just Work(TM).

      I don't totally adore OS X. It has its flaws and isn't as fast as I'd like it to be and so on, but the good sides far outweigh the bad sides in my book. I don't really see a realistic alternative. Especially not when it comes to laptop computers.

      Oh, and hey... World of Warcraft ;)

    30. Re:How good is OS X, really? by dfj225 · · Score: 1

      Ok here are my thoughts: I linux unix/linux for its stability, its approach to being a multiuser system, its security, and many other things. I like Windows because I don't have to go through too many hoops to install something, many devices will work just by plugging them into a port, it has many important apps that I would like to use (Photoshop is one that comes to mind), and other reasons. Mac OS X definetly combines what I like best about both approaches and even improves on some areas. The best thing about OS X is that I can still do all of the geeky unix stuff that I want, but when I really need to get something done or I just don't want to be hassled, I don't have to touch any of the things that many people find turn-offish about linux/unix. I can use Photoshop natively and even use MS Office if I wish. To me, OS X is the only *nix that I feel comfortable using on the desktop on a daily basis. Recently I just started playing around with a version of X11 released by Apple. It really is amazing how simple it is to use something that I've often run into problems with under linux. Last night I found that you can completely forgo Aqua and have OS X boot to the console (try typing >console as the username on the login screen). From here you can start the X server and load KDE if you wish. I'm not sure if Gnome has been ported to OS X or not, but I would imagine that Gnome would be possible to have in the future. Another really cool app taking influence from the Unux world is Fink, which is a package manager that allows you to install apps ported from unix/linux by using an apt-get like syntax. Very cool. It really is hard to appreciate OS X until you use it every day. As an operating system it is great. I can't really say to much for all of the Apple apps that come with it. The only ones I really use are safari, mail, and iTunes. Safari is cool and I think it has some really nice UI features. I use Firefox at work and on my windows box at home and so far I haven't felt the need to use it as my main browser on my Mac. Mail is a good app for simple email reading. It does a good job with spam and the interface is nice. Can't really say how it does with more advanced things as I don't really have a need for them at home. iTunes...well I think everyone knows about this program :). I have only used iMovie on occasion and iPhoto, while a nice idea, doesn't seem to have enough features for me to really want to use that to organize my photos over finder. One of the beautiful things about OS X is even if you do end up using all 3rd party apps, you have a wonderful base to run them on. I'm not going to say that it Just Works, because no system is perfect and you can run into problems (although I never have) but it definitely comes closer to Just Working than any other system I have used.

      --
      SIGFAULT
    31. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Mikito · · Score: 1

      I switched to OS X from Windows ME this year, and I have to say that OS X has proved to be very stable for me. So far I haven't experience a single kernel panic--the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death. While applications do crash at times, I haven't had them drag down the whole system with them.

      Applications and devices install painlessly and seamlessly, for the most part. The biggest problem I've had is with a few older applications which had both Win 95/Mac OS versions on the same CD-ROM. These applications aren't OS X native, so they have to be run in the Classic Mac OS emulator. After so many months of not thinking about memory management on this computer, it's a pain to have deal with it in the Classic environment.

      In terms of the interface, there's a certain amount of unlearning to do when you switch from a Windows environment. You have to get used to having a single menu bar at the top of the screen. At first it strikes you as being slightly inconvenient, having to push the mouse pointer that much farther. Later you learn to appreciate the screen space that is recovered by not having multiple menu bars.

      Deleting files also involves getting used to. I was accustomed to using the "Add/Remove Programs" app inside Windows Control Panel. With the Mac OS, you just drag the application to the Trash to delete it. It makes sense, and I guess it's intuitive, if you haven't already learned the Windows way.

      Concerning moving files--OS X keeps track of where you move them, so you don't get the problem of a shortcut or alias pointing to an old, invalid file location.

      For these and other reasons, Windows ends up feeling rather kludgey by comparison, at least to me. However it should be said that the OS X interface isn't as easily customizable as Windows right out of the box, from the graphical interface. There are ways to play around with the interface through the Terminal app and with shareware.

      --
      Anakin Simpson: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy--ooh, donuts!
    32. Re:How good is OS X, really? by justins · · Score: 1
      This [lowendmac.com] machine is four years old. It can be had for about $800. I'd take one in a minute for running Mac OS X. But a new iBook G4 is $100 more. The used Mac market is crazy because the machines are so useful.

      Or because the buyers are so dumb.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    33. Re:How good is OS X, really? by mdarksbane · · Score: 1

      I won't argue with you about the need to install third-party product... but how is this a negative again?

      I assume that I'm buying a computer to run third-party software. I don't expect apple to come up with the best solution for every software I need.

      The thing that really makes the mac (and that people tend to overlook) is the consistancy of the good aqua UI between mac apps. This is enforced both by the Cocoa tools that make making a UI that conforms to these standards quite easy (Interface builder throws up guides when interface objects are the recommended distance from each other, for crying out loud) and the hordes of mac users who will REFUSE TO USE A PRODUCT if it doesn't comply.

      Its why Omniweb was the mac OS X browser before safari came out, because it was the most maclike. I love firefox, but I used to hate using it on the mac because, to preserve cross-platform uniformity, it didn't *feel* like a mac app.

      It's the consistencies in the third party apps (like "Install/Uninstall" instead of "Yes, no, cancel" in their dialog boxes) that are why I use a mac, and did long before apple started coming out with their iStuff.

    34. Re:How good is OS X, really? by memph1st0 · · Score: 1

      iTunes takes a long time to get used to

      are you f'n serious? after reading that, your post becomes invalid.

    35. Re:How good is OS X, really? by www.sharkdefense.com · · Score: 1

      OS X is That Good (TM) for a reason. It's secure. It's Stable and its only running on a known set of hardware specified by Apple.

      I switched about 2 years ago, from P4 machines to a Dual Proc 1.42G G4. Its heaven. I support Wintel boxes all day long and its so nice to get onto the Mac, because its just nice to work with. Is is 100%? No. Here are the highlights from someone who has been supporting Wintel boxes for 10 years:

      1. Minimal security updates. Not weekly MS updates.
      2. No lockups even when I have Final Cut Pro, Adobe Photoshop, DVD Studio 2/3, Safari, Mail, AIM, iTunes, Iphoto (with like 10,000 files) and Compressor working with 1G Ram. Sorry never had WinXP able to handle that workload without coughing and complaining and bogging down.
      3. No more reloading your OS every 6-12 months. (I know you powerusers are out there, how often did you have to reload 98 back in the days, or XP for that matter?) W2k was my only stable OS I ran, which just might be luck.
      4. Designed to be stable and the OS is thought out very well. Its Logical. I interact with all my USB devices from the Windows world, use Firewire well, Intel and linux servers connect fine.
      5. Speed. Sorry, it just feels faster than my p4 2.x boxes ever were.
      6. Unix goodies under the hood, and more.
      7. No viruses!
      8. No Popups or spyware. This is a big one, especially when you have to buy a MAC/PC for an inexperiences user - most support time is wasted on SPyware and telling them what to do what not to click on. BAH. WASTE OF TIME!

      Im a happy owner of a PowerBook15 1.5Ghz and the aforementioned DP 1.42 G4. Yes, I paid a premium, and yes I could have gotten a slew of p4 boxes for the price I paid, but TIME is MONEY and if I can't get video out or DVDs burned, saving that money on unstable boxes is just not worth it.

      The only problems I ever had were with airport extreme and expanding the airport wireless network, but that was about it. I picked up a two button mouse so I could wean myself over, and Ive been very happy. Everything else "Just Works" (TM).

      Put it this way, I have to support Winboxes at work all the time, but at home - Im never going back. If I need to run anything on the Mac which is Windows, Ill just use VIRTUAL pc and run the dreaded XP monster in a Window, where it can be controlled and penned in. ;)

    36. Re:How good is OS X, really? by zojas · · Score: 1
      do it.

      if you buy an apple portable, months later you will think back to your old non-apple portables, and think "boy those things sucked"

      you sound like me a couple years ago. I'm a hardcore gentoo linux user. I bought an ibook to use as a gentoo machine. I kept it dual booting with os x. at first I never used os x. now I find that my ibook spends about 80% of its time booted in OS X!

      OS X takes a bit of getting used to. linux on the same hardware is faster, but OS X is so convenient to use that it's worth the slight performance drop compared to gentoo linux on the same hardware.

      one nice thing about os x, you can turn on 'all keyboard access' then every widget is accessible from the keyboard.

      I put up a page about setting up my ibook for dual boot. the page is getting a bit old now, but it's still interesting. I post on the gentoo ppc forum a lot too, same handle as on here.

      in linux and os x both, when you close the lid, the thing goes to sleep in 1 sec or less. when opening the lid, it's awake and the network is working within 2 sec. in both linux and OS X!

      linux also has great support for the hfs+ (native OS X) filesystem, so when booted in linux, you can mount your os x partition and get at all your files. there is also a project called 'mac on linux' which is like vmware for ppc. it allows you to boot your os x partition on a virtual terminal inside linux. they are working on getting 'mac on linux' to run under os x, so then you would also be able to boot your linux partition when running os x.

      the only bummer for you is that all the new apples come with airport extreme, which has no linux device driver. (the company that make the chip refuses to release any information). as long as you stick to an ATI video chip everything else should work fine though in linux. and of course it all works flawlessly in OS X.

      oh ya, portage is being ported to os x right now! currently, it's pretty rough, but they are making steady progress. the day will soon be here when portage can be used in OS X to install anything that can be installed in ppc gentoo linux. right now I'm stuck using fink, which is similar to debian's apt-get, but not nearly as nice. I have a few packages installed via portage though.

      also, several of the 'big time' Free software packages have been ported to native OS X widget sets: abiword, mplayer, gvim, emacs. And kde is on its way using the native QT port. some others are available in a nice integrated package for OS X (still on top of X11 though), like gimp and openoffice.

      things to watch for: get hfstar and rsyncX. they add support for the resource forks in the hfs+ filesystem.

      my main apps in os x are mail.app (a great imap client; I have my own imap server, so I can get my mail in mail.app, mutt, and kmail), terminal, zsh, screen, and the native port of gvim (carbon gui).

      I've been thrilled with my ibook. if I were to buy one today, I'd get a powerbook though. It would be nice to have the higher resolution display of the powerbooks.

    37. Re:How good is OS X, really? by justins · · Score: 1
      I know I'm rambling, but hey - since we're sharing, do you want to know what annoys the hell out of me with Windows these days? The taskbar. If you have an Office app open with multiple documents, each document gets a tile in the taskbar - even though the documents are in daughter windows

      Right click on the taskbar. Click properties. Check the box next to "Group similar taskbar buttons." Click OK.

      This feature definitely isn't perfect, since you don't have any control over how crowded the taskbar gets before it starts grouping things together. But it seems to be what you want.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    38. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like the poster really wants an ADM3a terminal with a Walkman duct-taped to the side.

    39. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Getting iTunes to play .ogg files is not hard at all.

      http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=200 21 103065300430

      I agree, Appleworks is not a great office suite, but it's it comes bundled with many Macs... so it's Free, as in Beer. I won't talk about Open Office or the other stuff you mentioned, since you're ruling it out of your decision process.

      Here's the thing: You're a little hesitant because you may have to search for a few software alternatives on the Net, which you would have to do in Windows and/or Linux, too.

      So... all things being equal, why Mac OS? The decision is not about "will I have to get software from the net"... We're all agreed that no matter what OS is being used, a person sometimes has to buy or download software that isn't bundled. So what other factors determine an OS decision?

      A) Can you get the work you need to do done?
      B) Can you do the work with as little headache as possible?
      C) Does the OS make your experience more enjoyable?

      With the Mac OS, the answer to all 3 is a resounding Yes. I've owned Macs since 1988 (and a few PCs along side due to work needs). For my personal computing, Mac are just more pleasant.

      There have been many times over the years where clock speed on the Motorola chips lagged behind a little, but it was never enough to make my computing experience less bearable than in Windows.

      It's never any one thing that you can point and say "That's it! That's why I like Mac OS over Windows." It's lots of very small niceties that you never even think about until you realize they're not there when working in Windows. OS 9 was definitely showing its age, since the majority of interface element hadn't changed much from the days of System 7... but the joy is most definitely back with OS X.

      It's still not perfect, but using both OS X and Win XP every day, my KVM switch spends as much time on the Mac as possible, resorting to Windows only when necessary.

      As for your other concerns, I'm not sure where you got your battery life information, but the iBooks have a pretty good duration these days. I'd love to have one of the new G4 iBooks, but things like rent and food must come first.

      I've also seen comments here and elsewhere about Win XP feeling 'snappier', which always makes me shake my head in wonder. The Win XP laptop on my desk is a 1.8 GHz... the Mac is an old G4 running at 400 MHz. The Win XP box FEELS SLOWER! I kid you not.

      The boot times about about the same, but one thing I notice with XP is that even though it shows you the desktop and icons, it takes a few more seconds before any of those icons DO anything. I click the Outlook for email, and sit and wait - the icon is highlighted, but there is no indication that a program has launched and it takes many seconds before the taskbar indicates that a program is starting up. This hold even true for some other programs if I lauch them right at start up. Win XP is so busy chugging along at loading all its background processes at boot, it take forever before the UI is truly responsive to the user.

      Getting back to my example, even after Outlook starts up, it's not fully responsive. It takes longer for the app window to fully render and it become almost completely unresponsive while downloading my email (about 100 messages/day or so - I have a lot of crons that spam me with server messages).

      On the Mac, Mail.app launches quickly, and you can still click into your mailboxes and compose a new message while the app is pulling you 100 - 200 message. Clicking the "new message" button on Outlook (XP) while it's downloading all those messages results in about a 10 - 20 second wait before the compose window pops up.

      Anyway, I'm on a bit of a tangent, but I find that there are weird things in Windows where one would think it would be fast and responsive, but isn't... and it is in the Mac OS even on an older, less-capbable machine. I have a 4 year-old 500 MHz G3 iMac at h

    40. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 1

      Yeah I know about that, and I know I can methodically reorganize my Start menu too, but the point is that this type of stuff interrupts the creative flow.

    41. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Johnboi+Waltune · · Score: 1

      I just bought a 12" Powerbook a couple months ago. (BTW, when I bought, Amazon.com had a $150 rebate, so you might want to check that out.) Before that, my only experience with OS X was fooling around with one in my local Apple Store for a half hour. I was so impressed, and I continue to be so. I feel like I didn't have to 'learn' anything to be able to use OS X. I was doing everything I did on my Wintel box (except play games) just as well within a couple days. It's stable, looks great, and is easy to use. It does, truly, 'just work'.

      I'm competent with Linux, but as they say, it's only free if your time has no value. I'd much rather shell out some $$$ for an app that just works, rather then spend hours twiddling with some stupid config file or trying to track down drivers. I love OS X and it has become my OS of choice.

      --
      "The advanced societies of the future will be driven by competing systems of psychopathology." -JG Ballard
    42. Re:How good is OS X, really? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      --Apple hardware purchases hold their value. This [lowendmac.com] machine is four years old. It can be had for about $800. I'd take one in a minute for running Mac OS X. But a new iBook G4 is $100 more. The used Mac market is crazy because the machines are so useful.

      As someone who would like to get a used Mac to try it out, the used market is insane. You can get a high end name brand PIII system for under $200, but to get a halfway decent Mac that can run OS X is like $400. It's nuts.

    43. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was in your boat at this time last year. I hit 34, started my midlife crisis, and decided to stop suffering under windows and stop messing with linux to get things to work. It seemed like every second (or more) person on Slashdot was raving about OS X constantly, so I waited until the April PowerBook upgrades, then maxed out on a 1.5Ghz PowerBook 15" with 1Gig Ram, DVD Burner ("SuperDrive") and a 5400RPM HD. It cost me around $5000 Cdn, which is pretty damn steep, but I accepted it happily as the price of my "freedom".

      My PowerBook arrived. I loved it, just loved it -- for the first little while. It was beautiful to look at, and seemed to be higher quality than my Windows PC in every way. But what I didn't consider was that I had been "brainwashed" by Slashdot's fanatic love of these things. I wasn't looking at it objectively. I WANTED to love it the way everybody else seemed to love it. I was desperate to believe that Apple was "The Answer" I had been searching for -- Linux was too user-unfriendly (a PITA), and Windows was too buggy and came from an evil company who was probably monitoring my every move.

      I found myself overlooking weird glitches (like when it's copying files from my USB drive and it says 30megs of 30megs completed, then 35megs of 35megs, then 40megs of 40megs). I ignored the fact that the Finder is SHIT compared to Windows Explorer. COMPLETE SHIT. I ignored the fact that Preview (their picture/pdf viewer) is SHIT compared to the freeware IrfanView on Windows. I looked for a Mac freeware, but there is NOTHING similar. The best I found was called XSee, and has nag screens galore until you buy it, and STILL isn't as good. I ended up using iPhoto, which is also pretty weak and saves your photos in numberical folders which makes it impossible to manage your photos WITHOUT using iPhoto. I often found myself saying "well, I don't really need that anyway" when something wouldn't work and I couldn't find a suitable replacement.

      There is virtually NO freeware for OS X. EVERYTHING demands money, and a LOT of functionality you take for granted in Windows/Linux is missing in OS X. You NEED to buy shareware in many cases. For example, I took some little 2 minute movies of my trip to Cancun on my Sony Digital Camera. I wanted to import them into iMovie and burn a DVD for my wife. Well, I found out quickly that iMovie only accepts .MOV filetypes, and I'd have to BUY Quicktime Pro to convert my .MPEG files to .MOV before I could use it!!! They don't tell you THAT in the Ad Copy! Not to mention that GarageBand is an Acid Music clone, Acid being available free for download for Windows. Looking back, MOST of the iLife software has free Windows equivalents. Overall, I found that everything on the Mac looked better, but wasn't any more functional than Windows software and demanded a LOT more resources. I find my PowerBook performs only slightly faster than my work Pentium 800Mhz with 64Megs of RAM running WindowsME. The eye candy is a performance killer and keeps you wishing you had a newer computer all the time. Haven't tried this update yet, so maybe it will help.

      I've had a few dead pixels, one right in the centre of the screen (thankfully it went away after a while) and some that are still there in the bottom left corner, and the fan sounds like it's loose or wobbly when it kicks on, but besides that, the hardware is perfect. Absolutely beautiful.

      In the end, I've found that overall, I'm considering a WindowsXP computer for my next laptop. After using the Mac daily for eight months, I can HONESTLY say that WindowsXP isn't that bad, comparatively speaking. It's not a popular viewpoint on here, but if you're going to run proprietary software (despite an open-source kernel, most everything else on OS X is closed source) you might as well run the proprietary software that has the most support, the most mindshare, the most freeware, the most attention. Get a laptop with a legal copy of XP, and run all the Updates automatically (I a

    44. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac USB Ergonomic KB with trackpad. I have one and love it. http://www.adesso.com/products_detail.asp?producti d=118

    45. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn. Prefers XMMS over iTunes. You must have some seriously decked-out XMMS over there.

      It's called brain damage. Happens when you use clones of 5 years old win32 software so much, you convince yourself it's actually good.

    46. Re:How good is OS X, really? by justins · · Score: 1
      Yeah I know about that, and I know I can methodically reorganize my Start menu too, but the point is that this type of stuff interrupts the creative flow.

      Clicking that check box "interrupts the creative flow?" You only have to do it once. As for the Start menu, I'm not sure how obsessive-compulsive you'd have to be to spend a lot of time rearranging THAT.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    47. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree.
      That's basically my experience.
      Especially the role that Slashdot posters had in my decision to buy an iBook.
      Slashdot is very biased when it comes to "Les Belles Pommes".

    48. Re:How good is OS X, really? by ThatbookwritingWheel · · Score: 1

      "And it costed me a term paper when it was W95 when i accidentally hit the 'sleep' button on the keyboard that actually crashes W95" It went *beepbeeppbepp*! Huh? It devoured your paper. It was a really good paper. And you had to write it again, and it wasn't as good. It was, like, a bummer!

      --
      We are all packets in the Internet of life!
    49. Re:How good is OS X, really? by nazzdeq · · Score: 1

      OS X is great. One of the best features that you will never notice is you can just close your laptop and it sleeps perfect. Open it up and your right where you left off without any crashes or lockups like under my new Dell Latitude D600 I have at work.

      The only thing really missing from OS X is a real relational database. Sybase is there, but they're pretty much history. Oracle has a 10g pre-release out and that should be available soon.

      Other than that, it's a much better GUI than anything Linux has. KDE, Gnome....pleeeaase.

      Also, everything just works. Digital cameras, usb drives, printers, scanners, name it. Never had any problems that I have had w/ Linux or w/ a PC.

      -Nazz

    50. Re:How good is OS X, really? by ProfKyne · · Score: 1

      OSX absolutely "just works". However, you will give up some level of configurability, because unlike on Linux the apps tend to be developed for average computer users and thus don't have the option to create dotfiles to configure every last little detail. However, the good news is that if you want or need that level of configurability, then you can probably just use whatever software lets you do that on Linux, except on the Mac. For instance, if you need fine-grained control over your HTTP user-agent header, Safari won't let you change that but you can just install Firefox or Mozilla. Many traditional Unix apps are available via DarwinPorts or Fink. But overall, you can't tweak every little aspect of the UI, and some things will take adjustment (for instance, focus-follows-mouse or whatever. Long ago I gave up my need for this level of control and dove into MacOSX and haven't looked back since, so if that's you, then you'll probably do fine.

      That said, there's one huge difference with MacOSX that most Linux users just can't get accustomed to -- the best stuff isn't free. Nope. Sure, like I said you can get plenty of free software for the Mac. There's the fink and darwinports stuff. There's even some awesome totally-free software that's Mac-only, like SubEthaEdit or Desktop Manager (virtual desktops for OSX). But not everything is free or has source code available. There was a huge shareware community on the old MacOS and that has translated into a situation where there are still actual independent software developers making applications for the Mac and asking for money for them. Often not a lot of money -- obviously not every company can be Adobe or Microsoft and charge hundreds of dollars -- but if you look at some of the awesome offerings from the Omni Group (makers of Omniweb, OmniOutliner, and OmniGraffle) or the stuff from Panic, or BareBones, you'll start to see some really awesome applications -- and then you'll be disappointed that they're not free. You got to get used to that with MacOSX, it's just the way things have evolved in this culture.

      Good luck.

      --
      "First you gotta do the truffle shuffle."
    51. Re:How good is OS X, really? by sunya · · Score: 1

      "Its why Omniweb was the mac OS X browser before safari came out, because it was the most maclike. I love firefox, but I used to hate using it on the mac because, to preserve cross-platform uniformity, it didn't *feel* like a mac app."

      In which case, try out Camino. From the site (emphasis mine): "Camino? (formerly known as Chimera) is a web browser for Mac OS X that has a Cocoa user interface, and embeds the Gecko layout engine. It is intended to be a simple, small and fast browser for Mac OS X."

      --
      MLT - simple and robust open source multimedia framework for Linux
    52. Re:How good is OS X, really? by nordicfrost · · Score: 1

      Hehe... Close. I didn't say bummer, it was more like: You [fornicating] piece of dog[feces]. Burn in [Dante's place], [male genitalia]sucking, [deity]-damned [female genitalia, ryhmes with 'bunt'].

    53. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Grail · · Score: 1

      I run Debian on my servers because Debian package management is the best I've seen. It works, it's simple. I need simple.

      I run Mac OS X on my client machines because I need to look at it all day. Aqua is nice and smooth - it's a polished UI, literally and figuratively. Once you've used F9 (or bound F9-F11 to your extra mouse buttons), you'll quickly forget that there was a world before Exposé.

      Mac OS X looks nice always. The same font will render the same way in every application. The interface is smooth and polished, so you won't suffer eyestrain from jaggies like you do with Keramic, and you can actually read the text. I find text rendered under X11 is hard to read - partly because of the poor selection of free fonts, and partly because of the lack of consistent rendering.

      Besides, you can play StarCraft, WarCraft III, Diablo II and World of Warcraft on Mac OS X (and with 10.3.7, you can now play them in realtime ;)

      I use AbiWord for word processing - AppleWorks just doesn't cut it, even with the DavaVis converters. The people who send me Microsoft Word documents always seem to be using the features that aren't supported in any other MS-Word compatible editor. AbiWord is the closest to usable for me, without going and spending $AU800 just so I can fill in time sheets.

      I've tried a couple of spreadsheet packages for the Mac, and the two best are Gnumeric (but it's X11 based and therefore ugly by nature, GTK based which means ugly by design, but presented to me via Apple's X11 server, which makes it actually look good) and Mariner Calc (it's a commercial non-Free licence).

      The best browser I've ever used is OmniWeb. Again, it's a commercial licence, but worth it (especially since the tech support people actual respond to emails).

      The biggest flaw/fault in the PB is that its aluminium shell significantly reduces its wireless range. I had to buy an extended range antenna for the AirPort Extreme base station just so I could get to the Internet from the other end of the house.

      Mac OS X "just works", and the people at Apple tend (for the most part) to make the right choices, so I'm happy to trust them with future updates to my computer. When there's a new Software Update available, I am eager to install it. As opposed to when there's a new MS Service Pack available, at which time I wonder where I'm going to find the time to fix the machine after the SP is installed...

      And did I mention that with the 10.3.7 update, I can now run Diablo II at 10 times the framerate I used to? It used to chug down to 4fps in combat scenes when running fullscreen in OpenGL mode, now it runs at a consistent 20fps in the heavy scenes (still not as fast as a gaming PC, but very usable). I can't wait to see what kind of improvement 10.3.7 brings to my 333MHz iMac.

      Which brings me to my final point - my PowerBook G4 1.3GHz is no competition to my Athlon 750MHz w/Radeon 9600 video card when it comes to gaming - various sources give me the impression that most games for the Mac are ported from Direct X, which means lots of glue code, which means slower games. The PB excels as a general purpose computer - and it's a whole lot lighter than my desktop PC (3kg for PB vs 35kg + cables for desktop). And I don't have to reinstall the O/S every six months to keep my Macintosh computers stable.

      If you don't want to spend the rest of your life twiddling and tweaking to make your O/S just right, get the PowerBook with Mac OS X. The guys at Apple have already tweaked it for you - all that's left to do is enjoy your work!

      (but until Apple's package management improves a little, and Software Update supports third party applications, I'll stick with Debian for my servers)

    54. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Maserati · · Score: 1

      I'd say the point to this thread is that the UI defaults in Windows are simply wrong. And turn off "Personalized Menus" while you're at it, that's an abomination.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    55. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1
      I'd have to agree with this regarding iTunes on windows. There's several things I don't like about iTunes.
      1. The way it decides to reorganize your files (if you click that option to utilize a folder as its library)
      2. The fact you cannot sort based on path names.
      3. Hot Key control (although, on a MAC OS, there's supposed to be an add-on that allows for this)
      Those are the 3 major irritants in order, as I see them. The reorganizing of the files is probably my fault for not reading the popup box carefully enough, but years of windows popups have pretty much inured me if the first 5 or 6 words don't warn me of dire consequences. #2 is a real issue for me. Though I like listening to my collection randomly, I occassionaly like to listen to an album in sequence. iTunes does not intuitively allow me to do that.

      With all that said though, I'm looking at picking up an iBook as soon as an upgrade to Tiger comes with it, being how that's imminent.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    56. Re:How good is OS X, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget that Windows Media Player quickly becomes your best friend on the Mac, since most of the media files I come across won't play on Quicktime. Get VLC as well, it helps at least.

      Even so, there are way more WMP codecs for Windows than for the Mac. I have lots of files that play under Windows that just choke on the mac. Macs are good for creating media, but they are inferior at playing media.

    57. Re:How good is OS X, really? by hambonewilkins · · Score: 1
      "The Powerbook I might buy? I would run Linux on it."

      Buying a powerbook to run Linux is like baking pizzas in a toaster: it's just not done. If you're going to use Linux then buy a PC laptop: the linux options are superior and you won't be wasting money. If you want to use a Powerbook, then use it with OSX.

      --

      God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
    58. Re:How good is OS X, really? by poopdeville · · Score: 1
      I'm also not too fond of paying for (what in essence are) Service Packs. (You listening Apple? Don't charge an arm and a leg for 10.4!!)
      They're not exactly service packs. Tiger is apparently going to ship with major kernel enhancements and is definitely shipping with a bunch of UI features. The 10.3.x releases correspond more closely to Service Packs, since their purpose to to fix bugs and close security gaps. Anyway, there's always bit torrent.
      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    59. Re:How good is OS X, really? by poopdeville · · Score: 1
      For instance, if you need fine-grained control over your HTTP user-agent header, Safari won't let you change that but you can just install Firefox or Mozilla.
      Try downloading TinkerTools from http://www.bresink.com/osx/. Apple included a bunch of debugging options in their software and just got rid of the menu items leading to them. TinkerTools lets you re-activate those doodles. In particular, it lets you use the "Debug" menu in Safari, which lets you choose your user-agent header.
      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    60. Re:How good is OS X, really? by mdarksbane · · Score: 1

      I used to use Camino exclusively, right before development pretty much stalled on it.

      I've been considering trying it again now that I've heard it's being actively worked on, except I really don't have any complaints with safari that aren't present in camino and firefox as well. Well, ok, I'm not a huge fan of brushed metal, but the buttons are still where I expect them to be, so.. *shrug*

      I want iCab on OS X to not suck. either that or for someone to write a plugin adding all their extra page options to firefox.

    61. Re:How good is OS X, really? by sunya · · Score: 1

      except I really don't have any complaints with safari that aren't present in camino and firefox as well.

      The CSS / JS in Firefox support is much better than Safari / Konq. We have some thumbnail previews generated via JS that inevtiably break on Koqn and Safari, but reder right in IE, Firefox, Moz, & Camino. Also, there seem to be odd positioning / layer bugs in the CSS support for Konq / Safari (our internal tiki wiki does not render correctly when modified). YMMV.

      --
      MLT - simple and robust open source multimedia framework for Linux
  54. Here's one for ya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been having nothing but problems with my firewire buner, and internal factory installed DVDrom ever since the 10.3.4 update. The internal drive only recognized disks about 5% of the time, and the drawer would eject at random, sometimes constantly, some times not for an hour.

    Since the 10.3.7 update, I have a 100% read rate, I've tried 30 disks, DVD's and CD's.

    1. Re:Here's one for ya by zwilliams07 · · Score: 1

      Is that a 911 based chipset burner? Because Apple only talks about the 922 Chipset in the article. My main problem is my backup harddrive is a 180GB 911 Chipset FW400. Back when Panther was released, it made 911 based drives unuseable completely. Apple of course fixed this immediately with the 10.3.1 patch.
      Its been all good until 10.3.6 when a few people announced that their 911 based drives stopped functioning. So because of that I stuck to 10.3.5 and waited for 10.3.7.
      No one has made any specific statements about the DVD Player picture being fixed. Since the 10.3.6 update, people have been complaining about the video being blurry. All Apple has stated is they fixed a handful of things for certain GPUs. Nothing that detailed.

    2. Re:Here's one for ya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry to say this is far older hardware. Hope you find what you need.

    3. Re:Here's one for ya by zwilliams07 · · Score: 1

      14.1" iBook G3 700MHz (Combo Drive/16MB VRAM/Dual USB) Its pretty old now. :)

  55. OS X.II.VII by HermanAB · · Score: 1, Insightful

    They can't even count in Roman numerals, so how can they fix bugs and make improvements?

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
    1. Re:OS X.II.VII by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      Neither can you, so who are you to complain?

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  56. UGH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This thing is a DOOZY I updated and the bloody thing broke OSeX's boot partition. Caveate Emptor!

  57. Apple Calculator Bug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've noticed this:

    Enter 87.68. Subtract 6.1, then subtract 23.43, then subtract 3.16, then subtract 4.99, then subtract 50.

    On my G4 Cube, Calculator gives me a result of 7.1054273576e-15. The correct answer is zero.

    Strange?

    1. Re:Apple Calculator Bug by generic-man · · Score: 1

      I got the same result on my 12" PowerBook.

      Funny, since before I owned a Mac, all the Mac-heads I knew jumped all over Intel for not handling floating point numbers correctly in some old Pentiums.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    2. Re:Apple Calculator Bug by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

      I get 0.

      --
      I hate sigs.
    3. Re:Apple Calculator Bug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I submitted the bug into the Apple Bug Reporter just for the heck of it (and because it's fun!), but from what I can tell I guess it's just a matter of floating point arithmetic having certain inherent limitations.

    4. Re:Apple Calculator Bug by green+pizza · · Score: 1

      >Enter 87.68. Subtract 6.1, then subtract 23.43, then subtract 3.16, then subtract 4.99, then subtract 50.
      >On my G4 Cube, Calculator gives me a result of 7.1054273576e-15. The correct answer is zero.

      That's a classic floating point hardware demonstration. That's the way FP works and is why you should never use a float as the index in a loop! But anyway, Calculator and/or Mac OS X itself should have rounded that tinnnny number to zero.

    5. Re:Apple Calculator Bug by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth, the ancient Windows Calculator gives me zero. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that a different set of numbers would break it though.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    6. Re:Apple Calculator Bug by Halo1 · · Score: 1

      80x86 has 80 bit precision floating point, PowerPC 64 bit. So yes, you have to work harder on a 80x86 to get errors like that

      --
      Donate free food here
    7. Re:Apple Calculator Bug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My G5 gives me the error.

  58. Roman Numeral Humour by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

    Saw a Porsche this morning with the numberplate "IXXI"

    --
    Sara
    Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  59. Colour change after awake from screensaver by waffleman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Has anyone else noticed a colour shift after an awake from screensaver? I'm finding that sometimes there's a shift to a bluer hue. Turning the screensaver on and off sometimes resets it back to the normal colour balance. If this were on a CRT I would say that there's something wrong with the blue gun, but this is on the LCD of an iBook G4.

    Strange. Could it be something with the video drivers?

  60. MOD UP by HeelToe · · Score: 1

    Someone should mod parent up.

    I am a recent Mac convert for my work development environment and my wife's home general computer - I've made the switch and could only be very little happier.

    However, parent's viewpoint is valid and shouldn't be discounted just because it's not pro-Apple.

  61. AArrrgGGhhh!!! by Nehi+the+Ganchark · · Score: 1

    DVD Player STILL isn't working!!!

    Thankfully the fine folks on the VCL project know what they're doing.

    (Everything else seems pretty much the same, although the OS doesn't hog quite as much CPU as it used to...)

    1. Re:AArrrgGGhhh!!! by thecombatwombat · · Score: 1

      What's not working? It fixed the issues I had after 10.3.6.

    2. Re:AArrrgGGhhh!!! by akiro · · Score: 1

      You probably mean VLC? And yes, its the best mediaplayer for OS X, use it all the time :)

    3. Re:AArrrgGGhhh!!! by jimngo · · Score: 1

      Do you have a 3rd party DVD drive and Apple DVD Player won't recognize it?

      If so, then you can get it working again by reinstalling an older version of DVDPlayback.framework. I use Pacifist to reinstall this from my Panther 10.3 install CDs.

      ("DVDPlayback.framework" is in "Contents of EssentialSystemSoftware.mpkg : Contents of Essentials.pkg : System : Frameworks")

  62. Whoohoo! Finally, the freakin' scrolling works! by nazzdeq · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been bitching about the scrolling since OS X was release. Looks like this release finally fixed my concerns. On my iBook 800mhz G3 scrolling is sweet. So, for you lucky G5 types, you should be all set. Nice.

  63. Apple discovers new source of energy? by allrong · · Score: 4, Funny

    Could this be the answer to the World's energy needs? Imagine cities powered by software upgrades...

    Can Microsoft match that?

    --
    What is the inverse of the Matrix?
    1. Re:Apple discovers new source of energy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no but linux already has

  64. Re:Another update... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zero, smartass fuckhead.

  65. This update breaks top. by nizmogtr · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Can someone please try the "top" command and tell me if it works. This update seemed to have "broken" top for me.

    1. Re:This update breaks top. by sxtxixtxcxh · · Score: 1

      works for me...
      after the reboot, i repaired disk permissions first thing.
      doubt that has anything to do with it though.

      --
      for a minute there, i lost myself...
    2. Re:This update breaks top. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Works fine here on 12" powerbook.

      pax et bonum

    3. Re:This update breaks top. by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      No problem here, and I did not even repair permissions yet. What kind of an error are you getting? Locking? Core? not in your path anymore?

    4. Re:This update breaks top. by nizmogtr · · Score: 1

      This is strange. I restarted the system, and now top work. The error had some thing to do with /dev/mem/ permissions. Diskutil fixed that. But it works now. Thank you all for you help.

  66. Still need the Blizzard WoW update by green+pizza · · Score: 2, Informative

    The new drivers in 10.3.7 aren't enough to improve WoW performance, the other key component is an update from Blizzard to re-enable certain hardware rendering features. Then we can finally get the performance boosts that were promised.

  67. 10.3.7 by bigt_littleodd · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm downloading it now, but haven't installed it yet. Already I can tell that my TiBook is becoming... SNAPPIER!

    --
    Let's play Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. I'll be Pestilence.
  68. I don't get it by bakayoko · · Score: 1

    what's so funny?

    --
    A decibel - a RELATIONSHIP between two values of POWER http://arts.ucsc.edu/EMS/Music/tech_background/TE-
  69. Bah... you're just lucky (or imaging things) by green+pizza · · Score: 1

    I think you're experiencing a combinaton of the placebo effect and/or dumb luck. To me. 10.3 feels exactly the same as 10.3.5 and so fouth. But your 128 MB of RAM may have something to do with it. Maybe 10.3.7 consumes slightly less RAM, just enough for it to make a difference on your machine.

    I personally wouldn't run Mac OS X without 384 MB. That's where it really shines.

    But I will tell you that I have indeed experienced major performance boosts from OS X Public Beta -> 10.0 -> 10.1 -> 10.2 -) 10.3. From the "reviews" of leaked developer builds of 10.4, it sounds like there are even more performance boosts to be had in Tiger. But I do think there'll come a point in a year or two, maybe even as soon as 10.5, where G3 users willl start to see performance turn the other direction.

  70. Yes... but don't spend too much by green+pizza · · Score: 1

    If you're a student, the $950 iBook 12" is a really good deal. You get a compact little notebook, 1.2 GHz G4, CDRW/DVD-ROM combo drive, about 4 - 6 hours of battery life (5 hours real-world), and plenty of I/O options. The GPU is only a Radeon 9200, but it's still vastly better than having onboard "integrated" graphics that eat CPU and RAM bandwidth. Plus the Radeon 9200 is actually slightly faster than the crap FX5200 in the 12" PowerBook that costs more! The iBook is small, but thick enough to survive backpack life at 1.3 inches.

    PowerBook hardware is very sturdy and very classy, but you'll pay out the nose for what's essentially only 0.3 GHz faster and Radeon 9700 GPU.

    Anyway, getting back to OS X... I think it's a great OS and I love my iBook, but I still use and enjoy WinXP as well. They are different worlds, but the variety is nice. OS X has a great X11 environment if you so desire and the bundled developer tools and sample code are very handy. There are plenty of Mac sites and even a few that sell games too. Apple's online store is actually a good place to browse some of the more popular commerical apps, I think they try to maintain stock of 100 of the top selling Mac apps. They don't tend to sell the less popular, but still cool fringe apps, so you'll have to hit up some other resellers (like MacWarehouse or MacMall or Amazon) for those.
    http://www.versiontracker.com
    http://www.macsurfer.com
    Both very handy sites.

  71. Good for what you want by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I used Linux for a long time, and currently have to use Windows at work.

    I finally got the PC gaming monkey off my back a few years ago, and bought a Powerbook - since then I bought a G5.

    For what you are talking about, tired of tweaking stuff and want something that works a little more straightforwardly, OS X is fantastic.

    I don't know if you've ever used Cygwin on Windows, but OS X is nothing like that - because it's really UNIX through and through. It's just not X-Windows (though that is an option, as you can install an X-server for free). The Terminal is a real first-class citizen in this OS, you can interact with running programs, drag stuff back and forth from the Finder, and generally have a shell that feels like it belongs with the OS even more than XTerm (and far more than a Cygwin shell).

    It also comes with many common things you use, like Apache and SSH and CUPS and so on. Even better is that means these are kept up to date for you! I used to use debian and run regular updates against a security patching site, but here it's done for you very nicely, and in a reasonable timeframe (usually not quite as fast as the patches are ready, but still pretty fast).

    If you want OpenOffice try NeoOfficeJ, which I use (even though I also bought Office). By default the menus will be fixed in the window (not the Mac Way) but you can get a patch to fix that. NeoOfficeJ requires no X server.

    Also there is possibly the option of Abiword, which I think can also read/write Word documents. Or, possibly you can use TextEdit (built in) to read and write simple Word documents - the next version (Panther) will support tables which is really the only reason I do not use it myself for most WYSIWYG text editing.

    I also love the dock. Some people don't seem to like it, and if you have problems with it there are many extensions you can use to work in other ways... but I greatly prefer the dynamic nature of the dock (it holds the things I am interested in running that day, like a palette of applications for the work at hand).

    It's also very refined, there are just a lot of little touches that make it very easy to use in day-to-day operations.

    I would go for it. Even if the experiment fails, an iBook has a pretty high resale value!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  72. Yes, Tiger for sure... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Though I would not be too surprised to see it come out for Panther in a patch about the same time.

    That to me is the only downside of developing Java on the Mac, though if it really matters you could always get a dev subscription and get early access.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Yes, Tiger for sure... by BadMrMojo · · Score: 1

      Though I would not be too surprised to see it come out for Panther in a patch about the same time.

      They didn't provide updates for 10.1 when 10.2 came out with 1.4... why would they change that now?

      Sure, it's occasionally annoying but if you want the new features, you have to pay to upgrade.

  73. Thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know if that helped the poster, but it certainly helped me. I've been wondering what kind of hardware is good enough for running OS X on, since my budget's a bit limited, and your comments about the 4 year old machince make me feel better. I'm definitely going to look more into the used market now, though with the student discount I may just pick up a new iBook.

    One thing: Perhaps it's because you've been on Macs for a while, but if you know what you're doing with a computer, spyware/malware/etc. are nothing to worry about. Even my friend who certainly doesn't "know" about computers but employs a bit of common sense has managed to stay clean.

  74. Front Page?? by aqsalter · · Score: 1

    I mean I have 2 Macs, and I check apple.slashdot.org all the time... but is this seriously something to post to the front page? I mean really?
    Macs rule and all that, but even I can accept that a minor sytem update would be a pretty slow news day...

    1. Re:Front Page?? by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 1

      Linux kernal updates, revisions of distributions, and Windows Service Packs make the front page too.

  75. Re:quick by carboncopy79 · · Score: 1

    The beta have been circulating in bittorrent networks for a few weeks. I always wonder how they get it. Or it is a thing which is done purposefully by Apple Computers.

  76. Re:these are the things that make me confident to by carboncopy79 · · Score: 1

    Get a PowerBook if you can afford it. I am using an iBook now, but wish I am on a PowerBook. Downloading 26Mbyte on a dial-up connection is a pain.

    I use Slackware full time on my desktop. Am waiting to switch to FreeBSD 5.3 when I have a new harddisk.

  77. Update contents? by carboncopy79 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why does Mac Os X Update for clients do not update Apache and stuff like that?

    I wonder why is this so. Since ALL Mac Os X comes with Apache installed. And other server (daemons). Why do they just release those update in their Mac Os X Server Update?

    I know 10.3.7 didn't include Apache update, but earlier ones certainly did.

    1. Re:Update contents? by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 1
      Why does Mac Os X Update for clients do not update Apache and stuff like that?

      My guess would be that it's because Apache is not Apple software, and they won't include an update until they're 100% sure it's not going to break anything.

      It might not be such a big deal on the desktop OS, but remember that the open-source tools are in sync with Mac OS X Server.

    2. Re:Update contents? by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      The Apple updates _DO_ include updates to the open-source stuff, like Apache and Samba. But you don't get updates to the latest/greatest versions from the source, you get patched versions from when Apple snapshotted the code.

      For instance, 10.3 Server ran Samba 3.0.2, the last update, 10.3.6 updated samba to 3.0.5, even though samba is now at 3.0.10. Apple tries (like almost all vendors) to keep everything the same, while patching for bugs, it's a good idea. I'd be pissed if they tracked the latest versions, this isn't Gentoo, it's supposed to be a stable system to the core.

      You see, version bumps in Apple's OS X only happen when they're nescessary. If Apple can't backport a security fix to a package until it version-bumps it, that's when you'll see the update.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    3. Re:Update contents? by snuffdiddy23 · · Score: 1

      The last security update was almost exclusively an apache update, and a complete x.x.1 update comes if you did not run that update and did run 10.3.7. The bulk of the security updates for mac os x involve venerabilites in open source components that the open source community hath already patched.

  78. Doom3? by pr0nbot · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the graphics driver updates are in response to Carmack's comments about Mac graphics, and are a prelude to a Mac Doom 3.

    1. Re:Doom3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got to www.aspyr.com. This is coming out in Feb 2005.

    2. Re:Doom3? by topham · · Score: 1

      They could easily relate to the fact Apple's opengl is -slow-.

      Between Carmacks comments, the comments from the developer of X-Plane, the experience I've had with World of Warcraft, I can honestly say Apple's opengl sucks for speed.

      As far as I know the implementation is very good from a conformance standpoint. But all comments relating to Display Lists are negative, and they are used to speed up rendering of a scene.

      I played Wow last night after installing the update.. might have made a bit of a difference but it wasn't huge. My PC (with a better video card admittedly) blows away my G5 on frame-rates.

    3. Re:Doom3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blizzard is stating on their tech support forum, that the new features in 10.3.7 will be leveraged in the next patch to World of Warcraft, but they don't give an ETA for that.

  79. snappy systems by zpok · · Score: 3, Informative

    For all you "My mac seems just a bit snappier" people out there, try using Cocktail once in a while to maintain your system a bit...

    ;-)

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
    1. Re:snappy systems by dswensen · · Score: 1

      And for people who like holding on to their money, Onyx does everything Cocktail does and is free instead of $15.

    2. Re:snappy systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, I've never had to use cocktail past its 15 free uses before they whipped out another upgrade (and yet another 15 free uses).

      But thanks, will definitely check out Onyx!

  80. "Native" OpenOffice.org for OS X by amake · · Score: 1

    The preferred implementation of OpenOffice.org for OS X is NeoOffice/J, which is basically OO.o 1.1.2, but it uses Java so that it behaves more like a native app: It does not require X11, it supports native print dialogs, native fonts, all of the OS X international text input methods, and as of recently it even puts menus in the menu bar instead of in the window. I highly recommend it.

  81. How to schedule new features for Tiger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Disable features in Panther.

  82. Safari fixes by Kaseijin · · Score: 1
    Pop-up blocking sometimes gets disabled out of the blue.
    Ever notice that Cmd-K (disable popup blocking) is one key away from Cmd-L (focus on location bar)? If you have OS 10.3, you can assign a different shortcut through System Preferences: Keyboard & Mouse: Keyboard Shortcuts.
    NO CUSTOM KEYWORD SEARCH.
    Install Sogudi.
  83. Mac OS 10.3.x SMB problems that .7 hopefully fixed by dlur · · Score: 1

    Hurm, ok. Yeah I don't use AFP either, but I'm on a Win2k3 box for a server, and as I understand the difference between Win2k and Win2k3 server when it relates to trying to connect a Mac to it is nearly night and day.

    Gotta love it when as-of-yet MS hasn't had a clue on how to fix any of my minor issues that all add up when connecting a Mac to their "standard" SMB implementation on their server, and Apple's theory so far appears to be "It should just work" with no better explanation than that any time I've called or posted in their forums.

    The only interesting thing so far has been that myself and several others are having many of the same issues on the Mac OS 10.3.x clients(haven't installed .7 yet) trying to connect to a Linux or BSD Samba server as people have been having trying to connect to Windows 2003 server boxes using SMB shares.

    Some of the problems are "random" file loss(I haven't had this one), Mac files loosing their application association because the resource thread isn't saving properly(a problem with Mac file types saving a separate Data and Resource thread instead of putting the resource data into the data thread like an NTFS data thread does), and most common of all having the resource thread not free itself after a file is closed(unless you reboot the Mac) which makes the file unable to save properly if someone else opens the file causing data loss for sure if the end user is not careful(and which ones are?).

    I've also had problems with Mac clients being unable to rename container folders that they have full access to and that they created, when the PC clients can rename perfectly. The Mac clients can rename any file, just not folders. Also had many problems with PC clients being locked out of folders entirely, but with Mac clients being able to access them fine(a server reboot needed to allow PC access again).

    All around this has been pretty much a nightmare, with not much fun had by me. I'm getting much closer to trying a 3rd party solution such as Thursby or eXtreme-ZIP.

    --
    Duris MUD - The best pkill MUD. Ever.
  84. "Just works" bullshit by onlyjoking · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Looking at the long list of hardware issues outlined here and others noted on Mac forums the bullshit about how Macs "just work" is looking more and more dated. I use a dual 2Ghz G5 and a 1.5Ghz PowerBook but my zeal has been blunted lately the more I hear of major hardware ****-ups such as the ones fixed in this update. A mate of mine had to send 2 new G5s back to Apple before receiving a 3rd machine which eventually "just worked". Apple should stop marketing their products via hardware compatibility bullshit when there are so many graphics driver issues, FireWire problems and overheating processors.

    1. Re:"Just works" bullshit by easter1916 · · Score: 1

      I have a pal who works in their sales in Europe... you're right. They have major supply chain and quality problems. I've gotten relatively lucky myself, though.

  85. No it doesn't by fracai · · Score: 1

    Optimizing has nothing to do with defragmentation. All it does is update prebindings.

    as an aside, HFS+ is intended to continuously defrag while writing files. it's not the same as a dedicated defrag, but it's supposed to help a bit.

    --
    -- i am jack's amusing sig file
  86. There's a good reason you chose to be a coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're lying.

  87. Re:Mac OS 10.3.x SMB problems that .7 hopefully fi by ytsejam-ppc · · Score: 1

    Is win2k3 better? I have an MSDN subscription, and thought about bringing up a 2003 directory server, but I remember the last time I tried I ran into a bunch of Kerberos authentication problems and gave up trying to connect to the smb shares. Forget about binding the mac to AD. So I'm interested in anyone's success stories with win2k3 server. At least my win2000 server works.

  88. Disable SMB signing. by dlur · · Score: 1

    It's not so much specifically Kerebos authentication problems that you're having if I'm not mistaken. The problem involves the way that Win2k3 server attempts to digitally encrypt all SMB network traffic by default. This is a good idea in theory as it prevents packet sniffing by a physical network intruder for passwords. However, only Windows 2000 and Windows XP Pro clients currently support this authentication type.

    Any other client type attempting to authenticate to the Win2k3 server will fail as it is unable to perform the proper authentication. This is true of Windows 98 clients, Linux clients connecting via SMB, and of course Mac clients connecting via SMB. In order to allow any of these non-current MS clients to connect to the Win2k3 server you need to edit the Domain group policy to disable SMB signing.

    So far as I've read, currently Windows 2000 servers are working better as file and print servers and sometimes LDAP servers than Windows 2003 servers. This will likely change as Apple and MS continue to release updates to _hopefully_ actually make their products work together like they both claim that they do.

    --
    Duris MUD - The best pkill MUD. Ever.
  89. Check your preview program first by Lucky+Kevin · · Score: 1

    I have installed the upgrade and all appears to be ok. However, when trying to read the hi-res Firefox ad (mentioned in a recent /. article) at http://www.mozilla.org/press/nytimes-firefox-final .pdf my preview program just consumes tons of memory and hangs. I have no idea whether it would have worked before the upgrade. Perhaps someone could try it out?

    --
    Kevin
    "It's not the cough that carries you off, it's the coffin they carry you off in" O. Nash
  90. G4 PowerBooks too by Gabriel+Radic · · Score: 1

    The first round of G4 PowerBooks are using the same crappy ATO Rape Pro cards.

    --
    http://twitter.com/gr
  91. 1789 by Gabriel+Radic · · Score: 1

    I think s/he's referring to _la revolution_, not to ...anything else.

    --
    http://twitter.com/gr
  92. Just updated. by zwilliams07 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Decided to take the jump.

    I did the usual, repair permissions, run Disk Utility's Repair, disconnected the FW400 (911 Chipset) drive which I was worried about, updated, restarted, and ran permissions fix again.

    No real problems so far, outside of getting the spinning beach ball at login twice. Outside of that, everything seems consistently faster. Safari loaded before it even got to its second bounce and now it absolutely screaming fast at loading.

    REMEMBER TO DISCONNECT ANY AND ALL FIREWIRE DRIVES BEFORE UPDATING.

    Anyways, so far, so good.

    1. Re:Just updated. by zwilliams07 · · Score: 1

      Also on a creepy note, my DVD-/+RW burner turned on by itself after the installation. Maybe it knew I was going to burn the update to CD. :: checks Library/InputManagers/ for "MindReading" extension ::

  93. Short and Quick by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

    So if you are a Linux guy, OSX is a pretty good place to be. It really does "just work" the vast majority of the time. The thing is, it is not Linux. If you are going to enjoy OSX you really have to be aware that it does things differently. Some things that you know how to do on Linux will not work easily on OSX. I know lots of Linux users who have moved to OSX in the last few years, and most of them are very happy with it. The ones that have issues are the ones who want to do things the "Linux Way" but still use all the OSX features. You mentioned .ogg files, and it is a reasonable example. OSX favors mp3, AAC and a few other formats. Getting itunes to play .ogg is as simple as dropping a plugin in the appropriate folder. You can put it in your user account or the system wide plugin directory. Where people run into problems is when they have all their music sorted in a particular way, with lots of tags, and they try to use iTunes for the first time. By default, it sorts all of your music for you and rearranges things to suit it. You can keep it from doing so, but most people do not think to adjust the preferences before importing their music. This can drive some people absolutely nuts. This is a good analogy for OSX in general, if you do things the way Apple intends, things work well and easily. If you want to do things another way, well maybe it is better to stick with non-Apple-created apps.

    Another thing to keep in mind is there is an application hierarchy. Not all apps are first class citizens. Cocoa apps are fully functional, Carbon apps are pretty good, and X-windows apps just feel like bad ports. Some of the best features of the OS, like system wide services, are only available for Cocoa apps and select Carbon apps. It is so amazing to be able to do spell checking and grammar checking and translations in every program with text, that it just seems so wrong when you use a program where suddenly, none of that is available.

    Finally, a Linux switcher should keep in mind that if they dual boot into Windows, a good number of those programs will be unavailable. If you are a hard core gamer, or heavily reliant on some Windows program, you might want to do some research into what applications are available.

    Good luck. I'm sure you can tell by your posting, but the mac community is very good about providing help and advice. If you are struggling with something forums are even more helpful than linux ones (and no one tells you to RTFM.) If my post has not put you off, go ahead any buy the laptop, you'll be amazed by just how enjoyable using OSX can be. It is just so much nicer for so many little things that you will never notice unless you really think about it.

  94. This is exactly what I don't have time for... by igomaniac · · Score: 1

    I don't have time to spend on getting everything 'just right' the way I like it, if you want to do that you should install Linux and make patches for your favourite open source software. I'm more than willing to take something that works well and adapt to the software's various ideosynchracies. The Apple software like Mail.app, Safari, iTunes, iCal, XCode, Terminal etc. more than works for me, combined with a rock solid WiFi implementation (far better than Windows XP which tends to randomly drop the connection for a few seconds every now and then) this makes OS X my favourite environment to get work done in.

    --

    The interactive way to Go -- http://www.playgo.to/iwtg/en/
  95. 10.3.7 snappier? Not mail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Upgrade to 10.3.7 yields this unhappy statistic. Elapsed time to launch mail: 10.3.6 ~20 - 30 seconds. 10.3.7 ~70 - 75 seconds. Not so snappy there. Otherwise snappier on this G4 PwrBk, 512MB.

    1. Re:10.3.7 snappier? Not mail. by reiggin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Same problem here. Repairing permissions didn't help. Also, DNS resolving takes a lot longer. Very long.

  96. Slashdot moderation by onlyjoking · · Score: 1

    What is it with Slashdot? You point out some blatantly misleading marketing hype and because it concerns a *nix derivative it's suddenly heresy. I'm a Mac user myself fer krissakes.

  97. Software update via shell by revscat · · Score: 4, Informative

    You *still* can't update a system via ssh.

    What are you talking about? That's been around since at least 2002. man softwareupdate and read up on it.

    1. Re:Software update via shell by jschottm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, get back to me when it displays the click through license agreement in the shell rather than sitting there on some co-loed screen miles away. What makes it even better is that the softwareupdate client doesn't give any indication of what it's waiting for, so if you don't know what's going on you think the application's hung.

    2. Re:Software update via shell by jschottm · · Score: 1

      I must correct myself - in the past few months they fixed softwareupdate to allow full remote access. My rep had assured me that such a change would not happen until 10.4. My apologies.

    3. Re:Software update via shell by revscat · · Score: 1

      Kudos to you for checking to make sure. Lord knows there are plenty of people who once they get an idea in their head won't bother to verify it later, and instead forever use it for fodder in the "My Favorite OS" religious wars.

    4. Re:Software update via shell by Maserati · · Score: 1

      Heck, I've got room on my Friends list. Quality people, the both of 'em.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    5. Re:Software update via shell by pianophile · · Score: 1

      Yeah, get back to me when it displays the click through license agreement in the shell rather than sitting there on some co-loed screen miles away.

      I agree, this is a pain. However, you can get around it for the moment by killing the PID you find by typing 'ps auxc | grep -i qt'.

      --

      'Your brain is God.' -- Dr. Timothy Leary
    6. Re:Software update via shell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, this is how we update ALL of the macs where I work. If you want to get fancy, just whip up a little shell script, distribute private keys ahead of time, and you can do them all at once.

  98. SMB fixed for me by sjwrick · · Score: 1

    SMB browsing and connecting to Windows shares works again. Was wondering what was wrong. Also, VNC now allows me to connect to windows machines. Now I can watch what accounting is doing again!

  99. It's ColorSync by Grincho · · Score: 1

    I've had this happen, on and off, in many previous versions of 10.3.x (and maybe 10.2.x too). What happens is that it activates the wrong ColorSync profile for some stupid reason. Go into System Preferences->Displays->Color and click your preferred display profile to get things back to normal.

    1. Re:It's ColorSync by waffleman · · Score: 1

      Right, got it. Thanks!

  100. Battery Rejuvenation Technique by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have had moderate success with doing a very slow battery discharge to extend the battery's life.

    Set the display and hard disks to sleep as soon as possible, but tell the machine itself to never go into sleep mode. Turn the backlighting off, quit all programs, unplug it and just leave the 'book to slowly wear itself out. This may take several hours more than you think it will. After it eventually puts itself to sleep, plug it back in and charge it up. If your battery gets better, you can try it again.

    There are command line tools to check your battery's status before and after this trick, but I don't have them with me. Good luck!

  101. Aqua vs Avalon by riversky · · Score: 1

    I just updated and it seems the redraws and scrolls are a little faster on my 1.5GHZ PowerBook. I was wondering, after chatting with a Windows developer at a local coffee shop in Seattle, was he correct in saying that Windows Longhorn will basically have a copy of the Quartz rendering engine and therefore will have all of the "eye candy" and more that Mac OS X has? He said it does, things like transparency, expose, a dashboard like side bar system and the transitions. What will Apple do next then do you think? A little off subject I know but I'd be interested in opinions.

    1. Re:Aqua vs Avalon by wasabifan · · Score: 1

      You do realize Longhorn is still over a year away right? Tiger will be old news by then, and Apple will already be hyping the next "insanely great" thing. Not to mention, the Spotlight type searching was dropped from Longhorn to prevent the schedule from slipping further. That will be shipping shortly with Tiger.

  102. outrageous by Trepidity · · Score: 1

    As a long-time Macintosh user, I demand this bug be fixed, and will not be upgrading until I can be assured my mouse will not be saddled with a second button!

  103. Binary configuration files? by ZxCv · · Score: 1

    What binary configuration files are you referring to?

    Every configuration file I could find that is anything different from what you'd find on any other *nix system was just a plist file, which is nothing more than an xml file.

    --

    Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
    1. Re:Binary configuration files? by jschottm · · Score: 1

      /var/db/netinfo/local.nidb/ holds the netinfo db in what is definitely not an easy to manipulate state. Witness this mess that used to be required just to change the IP of OS X Server 10.2. (Follow the background information link on that page for even more details of what the problem was.) And the text plist files still tend to have gobs of non-readable information in fields. For example, my dock settings have 6 different data fields filled with "AAAAAAFcAAIAAQdTdnI3QjMzAAAAAAAAAAAA" (and so on).

      And some of the "traditional" unix configuration files in /etc/ are actually created at boot time from other configuration files, overwriting any changes you might have made to the /etc/ files. I suppose this is tolerable, if it's at least documented in each file so you know what's going on. (ie #WARNING! smb.conf will be overwritten with settings in /foo/baz at boot. Use bar to configure samba)

  104. *grumblegrumble* kernel panic *grumble* by FredFnord · · Score: 1

    Well, I've seen a lot of sniping at Windows Software Updates and how they break things and stuff in here. But I gotta tell ya, before 10.3.7 my uptime was directly 1:1 related to the amount of time since the last software update. I would put the machine to sleep, wake it up... the only time I rebooted was when I installed an update that required it. That had been going on for over four months now, except for one memorable experience where I dropped the damn thing four feet onto a hard floor and it froze up on me.

    After 10.3.7? Well, in the last 24 hours I've gotten three kernel panics on my 15" AlBook. All of them while the machine was left unattended, one when the screen was asleep and two when it was awake.

    Argh.

    -fred

    --
    Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
    1. Re:*grumblegrumble* kernel panic *grumble* by SPF22 · · Score: 1

      Fred, your lucky that you have gotten 1:1 for so long. I have multiple Macs, and have had nothing but problems with my 15" pb since installing 10.3 when it first came out. I get a kernel error once about every 2 weeks. This has not subsided since installing 10.3.7.

      I don't have nearly as many problems with my desktops though (dual 800 g4, dual 1.25 g4). I don't know all the technical mumbo jumbo, but when my computer crashes and it alerts me with a kernel error, that raises an eyebrow. I think it might be the version of hardware that has a lot to do with it.

  105. Because it shouldn't. by ZxCv · · Score: 1

    Why can't the updater just quit iCal by itself?

    I hardly think that it doesn't do so because it can't, but rather because it shouldn't. Personally, I feel the installer should simply tell me to quit the apps rather than quit them for me, and it appears that Apple agrees with me.

    --

    Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
    1. Re:Because it shouldn't. by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      Ok, I can agree with you there. However, Apple could still improve the experience greatly.

      First, they could ask at the beginning of the install instead of a third of the way through. I left my machine expecting it to have finished by the time I got back, but it was hung on this silly alert.

      Second, they can update the entire operating system without making you restart until it's over, but they can't update one silly application without forcing you to quit it? They somehow manage to update Safari, Mail, and every other app that comes with the OS on the fly, why not iCal?

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  106. Re:quick by FredFnord · · Score: 1

    Apple developers get the preview builds months before the actual release. It only costs $500 to become an Apple Select member, which gives you these benefits. There are, shall we say, quite a few of us around. So it doesn't surprise me that some of them are willing to share the wealth.

    Frankly, even if I were willing to break the agreement I made with Apple not to do such things, I don't like any of you enough to want to do you any favors.

    Yeah, yeah, I know: you love me too.

    Cheers.

    -fred

    --
    Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.