Slashdot Mirror
Hacking Mac OS X
Bill Hamm writes "DB is carrying a deep interview with Jonathan Rentzsch, who created an open source technology to allow other developers to inject their code into any running process to alter its functions and written papers for IBM to program the PowerPC correctly. The interview is huge and technical, and all over the place in terms of content. Some of the things discussed are the reasons for corporate America's resistance to buying from Apple, software optimization, the importance and history of 10.4's Core Data, why WebObjects is no longer relevant, the status of PowerPC compilers, and why Mac OS X's Finder should be killed off."
Doubling the size of your IT department in order to deal with technical problems is MORE expensive...
Which, many believe, is exactly the conspiracy that IT pushes on management. Bad computers justify their very jobs.
I suggest you read Slashdot
If there are two things I don't like on my PB then it's Finder and QuickTime (player).
Finder does not seem to be multithreaded, if any network communication gets stuck the whole thing does. Even on large directories it's slow. And the way it insists on showing you previews of files (using QT) and then failing. I have to admit that I only use it as application launcher and simple file operations. For anything else the command line or mc works much better.
I like the UI, but the core should be rewritten.
I'm sure a thousand people can (and will) list a hundred complaints each, but I'll give you just one, albeit one that would be *very* easy for them to fix: why the fuck can't I sort by name|date|size|type|label|whatever in column view?
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
The dock works well for what it is designed to do. Quick launch access to Applications you put their. Quick look to see which Applications are running.
Yes there are more advanced application launchers out there. But the normal users won't need/use them. Save these specialized launchers for the shareware market.
I live off a PowerBook. I totally live the PowerBook lifestyle. Between a condo, office and the farm, ongoing presentations at PSIG and CAWUG, train rides, plane rides and on-sites, it's just easier to keep everything inside one machine that goes with me and has anything.
at the risk of being mod'd flamebait... this just oozes Apple marketing speak. seriously... "powerbook lifestyle"? i'm a proud owner of a PowerBook G4 1Ghz 1GB RAM 80GB HD... but i don't live the "lifestyle"... i use it because it gets the job done. same reason i use a (patched) XP and FreeBSD 5.2.1 box with KDE at work. it gets the job done. sometimes, just sometimes, the zealotry among the apple users makes me just a weee bit quezy...
Isn't that what we complain about so much with IE and Active X?
Just wondering.
If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
I guess that's why there are Mac users, Windows users and X users -- for my part I find it incomprehensible that there are people who prefer the Windows paradigm of stacks of windows they blindly Alt-tab through, or having all their open Word or Excel documents globbed together in a giant opaque square. And I don't see why those globs are more attractive in the office than at home. But I'm glad we have a choice.
By the way, when people bitch about Mac usability by complaining about the drag-disks-to-the-trash issue that was resolved a decade ago and has always been a non-issue for any user I've ever seen -- the absence of any second criticism tends to make their point in the opposite direction of intended...
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
To understand the basic complaint about the OS X Finder look at this ArsTechnica article.
Which is essentially asking for a finder that works like the spatial Nautilus (this isn't surprising given that spatial Nautilus was designed based on this series of Ars Technica articles). We all know how well spatial Nautilus was recieved. I don't think you can win - there is no "better" only "different".
In the end I quite like what Nautilus has ended up with - you can pick or choose between the two options, and both are reasonably (if not exceptionally) well implemented.
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
As a desktop admin at a site with over 300 macs, I can assure you that the os x finder is pretty much universally disliked by longtime mac users. They have a hard time getting used to it, and try to do OS 9 type things with it, like leaving everything on the desktop , or making data folders on the root level of the hard drive. If I could banish column view from ever rearing its ugly head, I would. Yes finder, I want every frickin filename truncated to fit in that stupid little column. The dock is nice, but why does it have to be anchored to the sides of the workspace? I'd much rather float it. Or perhaps the new thing of 10.3 piling up icons on top of each other when at least half of my desktop is empty annoys people? You know what I'd really love? A launch terminal button on the force quit dialog (apple-option-escape) so I could kill processes and shut down cleanly when the finder decides that it is not responding and no amount of "finder relaunches" will do a damn thing.
music lover since 1969
I was going to mod you down for this bit "Mac designers were so proud of multitasking that windows didn't maximize automatically -- hardly making efficient use of screen real-estate. (See! There are multiple apps running behind this window!)." but decided the post had some worthwhile things overall.
I suppose it's a usage debate, really, but it always made sense to NOT maximize Windows in the MS-OS's way. It's disgustingly wasteful. With higher res displays, one should not be asking for a wider view of a single window, but how one can use that space for multiple windows. That's efficient multi-tasking, in my opinion. Not having one giant square blocking everything else from view.
It's a well known fact that the term "hacker" did not originally apply to the people that media now calls hackers.
Cracking refers to people who break into computer systems using nefarious means. Ie Kevin Mitnick is mentioned on the wikipedia page, as he should be since he is probably the worlds most notorious cracker.
Just because the media says it, doesn't mean it's true. And if a cracker ever refers to him/herself as a hacker, you can rest easy because all your base will not belong to them. Anyone worth their merit knows the correct definition and differentations between cracking/hacking/spidering/phreaking/etc.
And just in case you all are too lazy to read the links... Linus Torvalds is listed as a famous hacker. This is the true definition of the term. It's not because he ever broke into computer systems, it's because he's a good programmer.
Also of note is that in the computer science community the word "hack" has gone on to have a somewhat negative connotation. For example, "Dude this code is such a hack." Although this refers more loosely to the "hack and slash" programming methodology... which often results in ugly code that is held together very loosely.
However, an ugly code "hack" and the word "hacker" are distinctly different. Please refrain from falling prey to false assumptions based on media in the future.
How is it that when business users all use the same machine, it's becuase of herd mentality, but when academics do, it's an example of sound judgement. In either case, the end user is not making the decision on the OS. Those decisions are made institutionally.
Also, in my experience in academia, most users in the humanities use the computer for word processing and email. Are there CS depts that use Mac's as their primary desktop? I would imagine it's Windows or Nix.
Business users have much higher demands than the average academic user (at least on the desktop).
My understanding is that XLC does not do Obj-C, which means Apple can use it for some of the underpinnings, but not in general... Although if you're writing a Cocoa app, it's not uncommon to drop down to straight C and compile that separately, in which case you can purchase and use something like XLC. I believe, anyways.
Ah, c'mon... that's not really a solution is it? Previewing is an excellent feature of column view, and it'd be a shame to turn it off since it's usually very handy. Sadly, Finder's brain-damaged handling of non-local storage makes it occasionally a bit of a nightmare.
... for the most part :)
I'm a fan of OS X -- my PC's now just a Wintendo games machine. The Mac has a whole slew of applications I've come to rety on which are just plain better than alternatives (in my experience, of course).
I also think OS X has some really interesting technology in it, and I find it a real pleasure to use.
I don't have a problem with how the Finder works. Of course, there's room for functional enhancements, but I'm not crying out for anything at the moment. But it really handles previewing (especially over network links, as noted) awfully. It's the only app that causes the spinning-wheel on my system. The idea that waiting for the view of a network share (or even my iDisk) to refresh should cause every other Finder window (including the Desktop) to freeze is crazy. Finder's much better than it was in 10.0, 10.1 (where there was literally NO threading) or even 10.2. But the core really needs some tweaking.
QTPlayer's not so bad. I've got the Pro version, since I like having Pro's editing and conversion features. It does its job well, but not spectacularly. I'm not going to rant about it because in a few weeks time, I'll be running Tiger with a much-overhauled QuickTime 7.
What's the frequency, Kenneth?
Replace "PowerBook" with "laptop" and it makes perfect sense. It's not about the brand name, so much as the flexibility that a portable offers. Some people, upon buying a laptop, get rid of all their desktops and live off of the notebook. It becomes a "lifestyle," inasmuch as your work files, eMail, calendar, address book, etc. are all on a single machine. Like the Blackberry lifestyle, or the Palm Pilot (remember those?) lifestyle, or the cell-phone lifestyle.
For the longest time, Mac-heads used "PowerBook" to mean "laptop" the way some people use "Kleenex" to mean "facial tissue."
Or, they don't make/sell crap? Which one is it? Everytime /.ers do these comparisons it seems that the prices are at worst comparible to similar spec'd Win machines. Yes yes, you can build cheaper boxen, great. But I don't think this is what TFA is talking about.
Now, does the receptionist/accountant/sales person need a Dual 2.5 G5? Hell no. An iMac would even be overkill. But, a Mini IMO may be a nice alternative, especially if you have a room full of CRT's laying around like more and more IT departments are acquiring these days (LCD upgrades at my last two places of employment). Sure, you absolutely can buy cheaper PC's than $500, and many wouldn't need the built in FW, Radeon 9200, iLife, etc... that go into the final price of the Mini (throw in a keyboard and mouse too), but take away admin costs (if all hell breaks loose on an any of our Macs, I can reinstall a clean version of the OS in 20 minutes without touching the user space or installed apps) and it more than makes up for it IMO. Now, enter the OS intuitiveness wars below:
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
So people have to own macs to have honest opinions of them?
It couldn't be something like:
1. Person had one, but sold it.
2. Person worked on/with them at his place of employment.
3. Person used on at his friends house.
4. Person actually understands the issue at hand.
Nice attempt at invalidating his comment, should work for more gullible slashdotters.
2) Most of the support calls I fielded in the week I had that job were not OS specific, but along the lines of "How do I do a mail merge?"
3) A lot of companies use applications that are specific enough in scope that there aren't any ports to linux or Mac. If Company X NEEDS to use Product Y and Product Y is only availble for Windows, then Company X is going to use Windows, and x86 hardware. It's that simple
Free MacMini
Apple has had *so long* to get the finder *perfect* and it's still not nearly as good as it could be.
looks-wise: when going from 9 to X, they threw a lot of babies out with the bathwater. consider active and inactive windows. in OS 9: foreground window had 3d effects all around it. EVERY OTHER WINDOW was solid light grey and a 1-pixel darker grey outline, period. no question about which was which. in OS X, it's waaaay too overly-cutely-designed and too subtle to be useful. OK, so the drop shadow is a bit smaller? great, that'd be tought to see even if my desktop picture *weren't* black. And the stoplight buttons are not there? OK, thanks. and the titlebar text goes from dark grey to medium grey? OK, super. OS 9 made the state of the computer *obvious.* OS X hides it behind pretty-but-subtle cues.
And the performance isn't nearly what it could have been. Every use BeOS? You make a file on the desktop from within an app, boom, it appears in the background instantly. OS X: make a file or folder, click on the desktop to (hopefully) force a redraw, and a moment later (on a dual-G5) it'll show up. Editing a file that you can see in a window in list view? Save it and BeOS updates the 'date modified' column in the background instantly. OS X? Click the file and it'll update. And the Finder is especially lazy about updating disk usage when you have the 'calculate folder sizes' option checked. C'mon, Apple... I had BeOS R3 for Intel and PPC in *1998*! It's 2005 now! Want me to send you my old CDs?
perfect quote: "Finder X is the compromise between the Mac OS folks and the NeXT folks. Neither won, everybody lost."
great quote: "the entire bastardized notion of switching from metal to aqua and hiding the sidebar when clicking on the toolbar chiclet in the upper right-hand corner. Bonus: notice how if you click on the extreme right of the chiclet and try to switch back, you fail -- the window theme switch moved the chiclet slightly to the left and now you've got to follow it. Gag. Folks, this type of stuff makes Gnome look good."
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Or instead of Apple dropping Quartz, which is a huge part of their appeal (to both users and developers), the Open Source community should start working on and in GNUstep, which is an API-alike of the same technologies that OS X is based on.
Hell, APIs aren't protected I.P., you could make Quartz-compatible APIs for X11 and add them to GNUstep.
It would serve us better to emulate the good things we see out there, not knock them down to our level.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
To "just move" a file you hold down apple, or is it shift? It's basically the same deal on windows, except there you do hold shift.
Are you actually posting comments on slashdot? Why would I ever give a flying god damn what someone who can't move a file thinks? Honestly?
Note: Windows does not come with winamp. Plus, macs DO come with itunes, which is fantastic for music. Are you using winamp for video? Guess what, you're using media player in disguise.
I find that quicktime pro is very nice for watching video's, I find it annoying that quicktime regular can't do full screen. But then again pro is just a serialnumber away!
I'll go ahead and give you guys my software position again: If you pay for software you're a sucker. If you find that it is morally wrong to just type in a serial number from the net then you are a sucker too. Maybe someday when I have money to spare I'll feel differently, as buying it might be cheaper than downloading it when your time is worth money. But when alot of software costs more than I make in a month I'll go ahead and get it from bittorrent while I eat my ramen noodles. I do use OSS, but only when it sucks less than the comercial equivelent. So no openoffice.org, since it is pretty awful, and rarely renders Word documents correctly. Abiword is ok and I use it sometimes.
how many of us have the facilities to back up 60GB?
If you need 60G worth of data, you need facilities to back up 60G worth of data. Data that isn't backed up doesn't exist, it's vapor, patterns in the clouds, sandcastles before a storm.
Hie thee down to CompUSA and get a $100 USB or Firewire external drive at the very LEAST. If you're a business, DLT tape drives give you reliable and ROBUST backups.
Sheesh.
Thats a horrible idea. You want them to ditch great next generation technology just to fit in? Apple is all about next generation technology like Quartz, and how would dropping Quartz help them fit in? Every platform has it's own programming interfaces. Linux does, Windows does, Apple does. Are you suggesting that Linux drop its own API's and have everyone standardly use WINE because thats what everyone else uses? Cause Cocoa is so easy, if I had to code using other API's, I would leave the Mac platform.
Fair enough...kind of. "database independent" is a dangerous term. Almost as dangerous as a senior database architect who is unfamiliar with abstraction. You can have reasonable database independence with optimizations for prevelent databases. The system can be database independent while performance isn't.