Slashdot Mirror
Mac OS X "Tiger" Enters Final Candidate Stage
Orangez writes "Apppleinsider.com reports that 'Tiger' reaches the final candidate stage. 'With massive software projects such as Tiger, Apple will sometimes seed several final candidate builds before one is declared gold master...'" The final release has widely been speculated to be in the next month or two.
It has been rumoured for a long time so this final candidate stage is obvious.
It also appeared on my Swiss reseller's catalogue last week.
I'm however glad it'll support my Samsung 213T rotation.
Trolling using another account since 2005.
thankyou you've beening such a wonderful audience
ciao
What will apple do when they run out of felines to name their OSes after?
I woulda got first post but Bittorrent is using all my bandwidth downloading OS X Tiger Final Canidate.
sgarringer@gmail.com
I will bow down and pay tribute for my copy...
Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther
It's Great!
Mind | Body | Spirit | Cash
Interesting... Tell me more about this "release candidate" thing that Apple seems to have invented for large software products? =)
I'd like to see them ship this sooner rather than later. People are excited about this release and we'd like to get our hands on it to become familiar with it.
I hope this release sticks around for a few years and Apple chooses to update it rather than come up with some new cat name and ask people to pay for it. I doubt that, however, since OS updates seems to be a major cash cow for Apple.
They are inadvertently (or purposefully) creating a situation where people are running 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and now 10.4...makes it very tough for developers. We can't assume that everyone has the money to upgrade their OS all the time (and yes, I know they should).
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Or perhaps as an Appple puppet?
70e808a22cb027cde4a6abddf6435d55
Does anyone know what Apple typically does for new systems? I bought my G4 Powerbook about a month ago and curious if I will have to pay the full rate for the upgrade. I recall in the past there have been special discounts/freebies for new owners.
www.lonseidman.com
Any word on how it's expected to run on older hardware: meaning, any G4 from the last 4 or 5 years?
Every newer OS X has run better than the previous version on these machines from my experience, and from what I've heard others say. Realistically, how long can that go on though until newer versions start to overwhelm older hardware?
Anyone with their hands on a pre-release version of Tiger have any insight into this?
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
...torrent ? :D
Rumurs are that it will be presented this Friday (april 1st) and that it will be "unleashed" on April 15. Is it logistically possibly that right now it's not even "gold master" and that 2 weeks later millions of discs are pressed and packaged?
So I believe the 15th as release date is very improbable (by Zarquon), maybe June 6th at WWDC?
Take a look at the topics list. There are more topics that this site deals with than just Linux and technology.
current hardware?
/faster/ than Panther, (which really was faster than Jaguar, big suprise!) and so on.
10.3.x works quite well on Apple's current run of machines, the G4 powerbooks and such. I've always been a bit cynical about Apple handing out bloatware to punish the Apple faithful.
Now, the hype will say that Tiger will be
If this hype were based in reality, Then Tiger should run like a raped ape on a Mac IIci, (which
shipped I think with 6.2) as every Mac OS increment has always claimed performance improvements over the existing product.
I have over 30 "modern" deployed at work. I am not at all happy about the impending release of Tiger. not without a significant bump in available hardware. Yes, the dual g5 (maybe quad soon?) is a wonderful box, but even with Panther, fully updated, it IMHO only runs as it should. You ask
it to do something, it does it. No more, no less.
Like Word Perfect 4.2 on DOS on a 286 (my personal
benchmark of performance). I've always felt that over the years the good folks at Apple bring stuff to a nice plateau, and then punish us by bringing out an OS that chokes our none-too-cheap hardware that WE JUST BOUGHT.
Please Apple, hold this OS until you update the platform (give us SLi) and then warn the
drooling macophiles that you'd do well to stick
with Panther until you can upgrade your hardware.
Thaz all.
--what's happening up the hollar?
http://www.bearwallerhollar.net
I hear that it incorporates some more bluetooth capabilities, allowing to patch the phone call through to your BT headset. Can't wait until the next version of BluePhoneElite and Salling Clicker after the release of 10.4. B.
Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
No, this is nothing new.
Yes, the version number seems to indicate it's not a new version but only an update. You have to simply ignore the leading "10.". It ain't that hard.
Yes, this is actually like Microsoft charging you for XP (NT5.1) after you already bought Win2000 (NT5.0) or NT4.0 or NT3.51 - the leading "10." is like the leading "NT" from Microsoft.
Yes, this is old news, but the issue comes up every time Apple releases a new version of OS X.
But really, I cant wait for tiger.
No matter how carefully tested, any big OS release is a public beta. Until a large number of people have tried the software with a real-world array of hardware configurations, applications, and patterns of usage, nobody knows the hidden gotchas (such as an incompatibility with some old firewire bridge chip that corrupts FW HDs!).
10.4.1 should fix most of the glaring bugs of 10.4, but a two week, watch-the-forums-for-problems period for 10.4.1 will ensure that bug-fix release is stable and does not add yet another major glitch.
I realize this strategy of waiting until the dust settles is cowardly and that I am shirking my duty to help Apple debug its OS. But I run production systems and downtime/corruption is something I prefer to avoid even if it means not staying on the bleeding edge of cool software.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
*yawn*
The Mac Mini (in its default/cheapest config) is perfectly good for surfing the web, checking mail and playing music and DVDs. And it's affordable. I know because I had mine pre-ordered and have been using it ever since it arrived.
Apple's OS software tends to get faster with every release, so you can be sure that Tiger will work fine on a Mac Mini. In fact we have it running on a Mini at work.
If you want a Mac, buy one instead of your next PC. If you really dislike the Mini, iBooks are cheap on E-bay.
Follow me
Looks like there will be a 10.3.9 update soon, interestingly enough.
I really hope that they don't release Tiger early since an unstable, unfinished product isn't good in any one's book. Apple have a history of updating their operating systems every other month with a point release for stability, small new features and such and it would be nice to actually have a finished operating system from day one for once.
I LOVE Panther and I am in no need for upgrading, so my message to Apple is: DON*T RUSH IT! There's really no need. Wait a month or two and get it right!
I would hate it if they released 10.4.1 in May and 10.4.2 in time for WWDC in late June. If they did that (and they will, mark my words) they obviously did a rush job and that'd really suck.
Why not release a time bombed public beta if they desperately need a larger beta test group?
- Henrik
- when the Shadows descend -
I worked as a Mac Genius when Jaguar came out, and there was an official cut-off date about 5 weeks before the official release. If you purchased a mac between then and the release date, you got the free upgrade. Not the stand-alone OS install, mind you, but the "drop in" upgrade discs that they toss in the boxes of new macs at the store that don't have the OS preloaded. They do have a little give around these dates if you whine enough (hope I'm not violating my NDA...=)
You CAN install the OS from scratch (you aren't forced to do one of those nasty upgrades), but you MUST have the previous OS installed for the discs to work. Which you do, so don't worry. It just means if you ever need to reinstall your OS in the event of a disaster, you'll have to install 10.3 first, then do the format-(or archive)-and-install with 10.4.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
so only one candidate to vote off and we're left with the winner?
doesn't have a network of macs to administer I'll just bet.
Does anyone know how Apple and their distributors deal in general with an 'upgrade' of this type? What I mean is, will OSX 10.4 come bundled with new hardware if I buy that hardware after it is released? Or do I have to buy a new power-whatever and the new OS separately?
I hope somebody attacks Apple with a box of blueberries soon, because I'm looking forward to them releasing the tiger (MontyP)
wouldnt it be nice it they made OSX for a x86.
This has been asked in the past, and won't happen. Apple is not a company who aims to own the whole industry like Microsoft has just to get the money. Apple likes doing things well, somewhat like Ferrari
They could switch and do it, and millions of people could get convinced to use it, but they won't do it. Apple doesn't works that way, period.
All this talk about "point releases" is just semantics. I know most Slashdotters aren't zoologists, but all significant OS X upgrades are SPECIES updates.
Jumping over to Family Canidae from Family Felidae, would you upgrade from a Chihuahua that shits on your keyboard to a Golden Retriever that fetches beer and Hot Pockets? I sure would.
That's about the difference that Tiger is going to be over 10.0 (Cheetah).
If you price out similarly configured ibooks and dells, you will see that the price is not all that different. Add to the fact that as a student, you can get a discount on the laptops (about $150-200 IIRC), and it's a little sweeter. But, there is nothing on the low end of latptops that the mac can compete with in price. A celeron based laptop for $499 will always beat out an iBook, pricewise. OTOH, you have to use a celeron laptop....
The CDs are designed to only run on the model that they came with. You may be able to run the old mac in firewire target disk mode through the Powerbook and install it that way.
Maybe a new better *Linux* will arise. :)
Hey! I tease! Linux is great. Calm down.
If Linus and Apple with their Tiger release got together and released an OS would you have a Liger, only like, the best OS ever? Gosh.
I agree $129 is a bit much. I just bought a Mac Mini a few months ago, the upgrade should be free. You can pre-order Tiger now at Amazon for $94.99 after a $35 rebate.
Online Coupons |
Mac OS XII (Abyssinian)
Mac OS XIII (Selkirk Rex)
Mac OS XIV (Turkish Angora)
A friend of mine works for Apple and he is running in his powerbook a one year-old beta version of Tiger. I was never interested in Macinstosh but since I seen him working on it I was amazed with the productivity one can achieve on that system. And that is an year-old beta! I imagine the RC must be great!
You got to try it!
Maybe by this point they'll have updated the inconsistencies in their man pages...
But I doubt it.
eg "man ps" says "-f" is a valid option, the command tells you otherwise.
Anyone know if they will be stepping away from the annoying netinfo system altogether? What about the automount system? will it be changed at all?
... OS 11.4 Spotted Owl, OS 11.6 Turkey Vulture...
...OS 14.5 CockaRoach, OS 14.7 Earwig, OS 14.9 Silverfish...
...OS 18.5 PungentFungi, OS 18.8 Slime Mold, OS 18.9 Psilocybe Mexicana...
...OS 20.0 HeadAsplode...
... blah blah blah
Oh I think you are a bit off. Its not that Apple does not aim to own the whole industry. If that was the case, why release the mini to try and get the masses to own an Apple? And the iPod is certainly aimed at owning its whole industry. But it's NOT the software industry that Apple wants to own, its the hardware. What you fail to realize is that Apple is primarily a hardware company, not a software company. Sure they sell software, but only to support their hardware business. That is why style is paramount with Apple hardware. Porting OSX to x86 does nothing to promote Apple's core business, hardware sales. In fact it would really hurt it, so that is why I doubt we will ever see OSX on an x86 platform.
Actually, I think they would release the x86 version (reportedly, they have one ready to go, but won't release it), but there are business reasons they won't or can't.
One would be the riot by their developers.
It would be not a huge deal for developers of Cocoa applications to recompile their applications to run on OS X x86.
But many developers took the quicker route of converting their old classic applications to carbon.
It would not be an easy thing to move these carbon applications over to the new platform.
I think it's just too soon for apple to try to force these developers to make another move. They need time to recoup their costs on the current platform. If you try to force a move now, many would just quit OS X altogether.
Also, there's the little detail about Microsoft. I'm not too certain that Microsoft would continue to make Office for the PowerPC OS X in this scenario, yet alone port it to OS X x86.
I know, there are alternative office applications out there. But at the moment, I think it's still too big a risk for Apple to take.
My guess is you will eventually see OS X x86. But it's gonna be a couple of years. Once most new applications are written in Cocoa, it would really be a simple matter to move the entire platform to intel.
But that time isn't now.
- dj
yeah, get a mini. the 'i don't have the hardware' excuse doesn't work anymore.
However don't expect all the bells and whistles with only 32 Mb of video ram.
I have a Mini with a 20" Cinema Display and expose is already choppy (Courtesy of the 1600*1050 display).
I've read Tiger will require 64 Mb of Video Ram for all the cool "Core Video" features.
Does anybody know if they managed to get these features working on the Mini? Apple would be shotting itself in the foot if a 2005 machine could not run their 2005 OS
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity
I bought my first mac (a 15" PowerBook 1.25 GHz) as soon as they were announced. As I recall, it was only about 4-6 weeks later that 10.3 was released. I called Apple and asked about using my 'OS Upgrade certificates" to be told "we currently are not running any promotions with those."
{rant mode on}
I was very upset to think that they would not offer me the option to upgrade at a discounted rate so soon after I bought a top-of-the-line notebook. I've never dropped $3K on a PC before, and it was shocking.
I subsequently contacted customer relations, the apple store, the apple on line store, and even though I was polite and respectful, I got nowhere.
Today my PowerBook sits running 10.2 and I'm counting the days until I can get the 10.4 discs. A couple of months ago, I was at an Apple store, and told my tale of woe to the employees there while they were demo-ing iLife '05 for me.
I was wowed by iLife '05, and proceeded to buy a copy. I was really frustrated when I got home and it would not install!
Now, before you ding me by saying 'it clearly says 10.3 on the box' remember that I was not dealing with Linux where you'd better check compatibility VERY closely. I was in a high touch sales situation where I expected that the sales team would tell me that the software would not work.
On top of that, I have a PC that is less that 18 months old. I bought the top of the line OS from the vendor, and applications from that same vendor won't run on it? Ridiculous! Even Microsoft doesn't act that way.
I've got apps on Linux that have not been recompiled in 6 years. They run just fine in spite of hardware, kernel, and distribution changes.
The idea that Apple would leave me stranded, and offer me no options other than to drop an additional $129 on 10.3 which will be obsoleted VERY soon seems outrageous!
Oh, and I can't return iLife '05 because I broke the seal on the box. Gotta love Apple's support. I loved the way that during my 90 days of free customer support they told me "we don't support network printing." High touch, and extremely helpful - NOT...
In spite of that, I still love the PowerBook
{rant mode off}
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
Apple likes doing things well, somewhat like Ferrari.
Ferraris are pretty, but they're also prohibitively expensive to buy and maintain, unreliable, and utterly impractical for day-to-day use. Are you sure that's what you want to compare Apple to?
11.0 Halle Berry
11.1 Eartha Kitt
11.2 Julie Newmar
11.3 Nastassja Kinski...
meow!
I like microcars
I mean, if you stick with Microsoft you'll only have to pay for a new OS every 7-10 years or so!
Windows 2000 = Windows NT 5.0
Windows XP = Windows NT 5.1. Can you even get XP Pro for $129?
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
when all those PC users who wanted to test the Mac waters and bought a Mac mini finally load Tiger on it and it eats up every bit of available CPU to run all the snazzy new eye-candy?
Not saying it's going to happen...but what if Tiger completely cripples the new low-end Macs?
GET FREE APPLE STUFF!
Funny how that is eh? Windows and even Linux seem to get boggier every release but I must say that OS X runs faster each release! When a buddy o'mine popped panther onto a 600 mghz G3 Ibook it actually speeded up!! ~impressive~ maybe if Tiger keeps up the trend the old machines will be interesting again! LOL!!
As for the Mini being adequate, considering that it's the samme guts and glory as my Ibook 12 inch, I must agree, the performance is fine especially considering the price and software bundled.
-if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
Alas, the model breaks here. Mac OS stuff is deeply backwards compatible- like OSX.x can run Mac software written back to 1985 in most cases.
You are obviously not a developer
Agreed. Still, I'm grateful it's finally here.
They are not done. CoreData is just being introduced as is SpotLight, CoreImage and CoreVideo. QuickTime is just now being integrated with the Quartz display engine. There are still lots of things to add and make better.
I for one am looking forward to Lion or whatever the next cat's name will be.
It is.
It is.
New widgets and OS features can make you more productive. Just ask some Mac users about Exposé
Andreas
I am most looking forward to having JDK5 (or JDK1.5) support. I have put off using the new Java language extensions for production code because I do a lot of development work using OS X. JDK5 support alone is worth the upgrade price to me.
I am also interested in playing with Searchlight.
This 'component' point of view is valid from the core hardware concepts only but people need solutions. Having a low level component only leaves too much problems open (GUI design paradigms, data and API concepts) to the developer and user. Look at any OS more like a huge set of components all tied together with a specific background and intention. The more high-level the features are the faster and specific the solutions may be.
What impressed me more is these two technologies. It may lead to a complete transformation of the way we code: by simple drag-n-drop, we can combine inputs and outputs, making components, then combine those components with others ad infinitum...
1. The coupon says you have to pre-order by 5/31/05, and then postmark the coupon by 7/1. OK, that doesn't necessarily mean much, but that 5/31 date looks suspiciously as if the release will be June 1.
2. After I ordered it, Amazon gave me an estimated shipping date of 6/1/05.
Now maybe they don't know either and they are just giving themselves lots of room just in case. Or maybe they do know, and this is an indication of a 5/31 or 6/1 release of Tiger.
At one point in time, I heard something about
Apple having a "family" clause in their license. Something like this http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/macosxfamily.html.
Does anybody know if that clause applies if I buy a new iMac? Could I take the Tiger CD that comes with the new iMac and install it on my iBook as well? Is it technically possible? If it's technically possible, is it legally possible?
I'm sure Apple would rather get $500 than $130 from me...
Bryan
My ex-wife's running a 'bondi blue' original iMac as a firewall for hooking up her LAN linked other PCs to the 'net and the web.
:-)
Its my o-l-d hardware but it does the trick. (Nothing kills a virus like screweing with the instruction set.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Then get a fucking job you cheapskate whiner.
Mac OS X isn't revolutionary. It really is the synthesis of everything that we all wanted in an OS back in the late 1980s. If you take the better features of early Macintosh, Amiga, and all those competing projects that were attempting add a GUI to Unix, and mung them all together and then work out most of the kinks, you end up with Mac OS X.
;)
That sounds more KDE to me! And that's why I prefer KDE to any other non-OS X UI!
Seriously, the OS X UI and Cocoa frameworks are much cleaner and better thought-out than a munged hodgepodge of paradigms. Apple's value proposition is related to not just the technical underpinnings but the thoughtfulness of design and attention to end users. Apple sweats the interface details.
And the real question now is. . . Where do we go from here? After achieving the OS that everybody wanted 15+ years ago, now Apple's OS team suddenly find themselves without a goal. They've resorted to tacking on a hodgepodge of minor trinkets and calling it a major upgrade. It must be hard to step back and admit that they're done with this OS, and that continually adding new features to it may no longer be the right approach.
I'm not gonna try to push Tiger as a huge innovation, I have sympathy for your point here. However, to a certain extent, if maintaining OS X on the cutting edge (which may be a relatively slow crawl at times, if you're waiting for enough hardware to drive the really revolutionary stuff like voice recog or more miniaturization or whatnot) means putting up with continuous point releases to keep engineers working, that's fine with me. The US gov't does this to a degree with companies like Electric Boat: they don't _need_ new ships all the time, but they need to maintain the ability to build them, and they can't afford to let the skilled people become unavailable. If keeping a solid core of engineers at Apple paid and happy means the occasional softball release, so be it.
And honestly, I don't think Tiger's a softball release. For me, Panther was, and for any particular Macista a particular OSX release may be. But Tiger's got interesting stuff at the framework level, and who knows how useful Spotlight and Dashboard stuff will be?
If it was up to me, I would focus on maintenance, bugfixes, security, optimization. . . and de-emphasize the OS as a product. Put the OS back in its proper place, I say! An operating system shouldn't be a featured product, it should be merely a component -- a part of the computer, just like the hard drive, the RAM, the processor, etc. -- that is required for running applications.
Work for Intel then?
Seriously, when it comes to defining the place for an OS, you have to take the user into account. This attitude is great for hardware folks and embedded developers, but for desktop people it's toxic. As an end user, I want someone _else_ to make a lot of these decisions, because I don't want to waste my time on them. Having an 'advanced user' preference pane to offer finer-grained control of things is nice, but it shouldn't be necessary for normals.
The goal should be to provide a stable, efficient foundation for apps to run on, because apps are where your work gets done.
Sounds like a kernel to me, and Darwin does a pretty decent job of this. Cocoa frameworks also contribute, and Apple's OS releases typically contain a ton of interesting framework improvements (like CoreImage and CoreVideo for Tiger for example.. Imagine realtime SGI-like stream filters for video and image effects) that make upgrading worthwhile (and mandatory for the new apps enabled and/or improved by these new optimized libs).
AFAICR there's a separate 'family' license for like $200 which lets you install up to 5 boxes and stay legal.
Why would they want to release an x86 OS X? The PowerPC is hands-down a better architecture than the x86. And besides, Apple is in the business of selling systems (i.e. an integrated package of hardware and sofwtare), not OS's. I doubt they're about to produce x86-based Macs. And I seriously doubt that they would want to divorce their OS from the integrated system of which it is a part.
Does anybody know if that clause applies if I buy a new iMac? Could I take the Tiger CD that comes with the new iMac and install it on my iBook as well? Is it technically possible? If it's technically possible, is it legally possible?
Each machine ships with a single license. They also sell a five license version separately. Thus far there has been no serial numbers or any sort of copy protection on any of the OS versions. Technically you can install it on all your machines. Legally you are breaking your license agreement if you do so. I know a lot of people who update their older machines with a single license, but they would also probably have just left the older machines running older software rather than buy a another license. My advice is if you can afford it, buy another copy, if not, upgrade it anyway.
Is that like a P-P-P-Powerbook?
Don't blame me -- I voted for Roslin.
At one point in time, I heard something about Apple having a "family" clause in their license.
Yes, if you buy the $200 family pack that has that license, instead of the $130 single-install-license version.Does anybody know if that clause applies if I buy a new iMac?
No, that clause is only part of the license if you buy a family pack.Could I take the Tiger CD that comes with the new iMac and install it on my iBook as well? Is it technically possible?
Probably, although it might be harder with a restore CD.If it's technically possible, is it legally possible?
No.This only applies to the Mac OS X Family Pack, which you may install on up to five computers instead of just one. It therefore costs a bit more than a single license ($199 vs. $129).
So you may not just use the Tiger CD from a new Mac to update your other Macs.
You'll see OS X for x86 when Apple sells some x86 hardware. Otherwise fuggedaboudid.
:-) Its still more bang for the buck than the x86 equivalent.
An x86 laptop is NOT cheaper than a comparably brain damaged iBook. (the comparison is backwards so the statement makes sense, really.
Either you're terminally broke, in which case, I feel for ya, (but not enough to send money,) or you're terminally cheap, in which case, I feel for your parents. (You should not be allowed to breed [and probably won't since girls want stuff...])
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
I have noticed that if I'm running, say, jEdit, iTunes, Firefox, Opera, X11 and a few random X apps (Konqueror and Kate) all at the same time, then it can get a bit slow. 256mb RAM isn't really enough for a busy machine which is also runnning an Xserver.
:-)
It's definitely suitable for most "normal" users though
Follow me
So, my PB is about a month old. In the Windows world I have always done fresh installs. How so in the MacOS X world? Should I upgrade or do a fresh install? What are the pros/cons to each method?
is the mac mini good enough to play World of Warcraft? That is my only phear... I can port all my work to mac happily but it would suck to just open windows to do some WoW. :P
Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
I've not tried that as I don't own the game. Virtual PC runs Windows XP at a respectable speed, until it uses up the 256mb RAM (I allocated 128mb to XP, but had other apps running in OSX at the same time).
I'm sure if it can emulate Windows at a reasonable speed (seemed to run as smoothly as it does on my 2GHz Celeron Vaio), then it's CPU is definitely up to the task of running World of Warcraft. I'm not sure of the graphics requirements of the game though.
Follow me
Powerbooks still use a stone age FSB speed, unchanged since 2001. I believe it's 167Mhz? stone age for such a sought after piece of hardware.
Apparently 4-6 was a reasonable estimate.
I checked http://www.macrumors.com and found that the 1.25 GHz PowerBook was released on 16 Sept 2003 and that 10.3 was released on 21 Oct 2003.
This is exactly 5 weeks apart. Should Apple have offered me an OS upgrade at a discount, given that I bought a high-end system from them a few weeks before and that 10.3 was a substantial improvement over the OS that shipped on my PowerBook? I think so. Did they? no. They essentially told me to 'talk to the hand.'
Anyone have any whining tips for my future reference?
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
I'll bet the 11.0 "Halle Berry" version sucks.
mbbac
Um, hello? Did you forget Lee Merriwether?
Hmm- Insightful note, and generally true, except.... Since "All Operating Systems are essentially emulators", I'd tend to claim that it still is truly backwards compatible. Classic mode is what I would call a "Quasi-Emulator"- it's sufficiently embedded into OSX that its performance does not suffer the common emulator problems.
In the same respect, Windows XP is backwards compatible to DOS, so it's not a Mac vs. PC argument.
I'm new to the Mac world. If I bought a Mac Mini in the middle of February, will I be eligble for a free upgrade to Tiger?
Having an 'advanced user' preference pane to offer finer-grained control of things is nice, but it shouldn't be necessary for normals.
I've heard that OS X has had an 'advanced user' preference pane called Terminal for quite a while now. =)
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Didn't OS 9 have voice rec? I swear I remember playing with it one day...
OK, so where would you put her in the lineup?
I like microcars
Technically, it's possible to install your Tiger updgrade on multiple computers. Legally, it is not. The 5 license pack is around $200 so if you want to stay legal, I would just get that instead of paying for 2 single licenses. If you have friends/family with Macs, you could all chip in. That way your portion is only like $80 for 2 licenses.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Most likely, not.
Usually Apple provides specific OS that comes with your computer. Thus, the the OS that is on the CD/DVD included with your iMac won't work with an iBook or a PowerMac or a PowerBook since it lacks specific drivers or firmwares. If you want an install CD/DVD that works across all range of Mac hardwares, you should get the boxed retail version.
Maybe they'll be like the US Air Force (B-60 to B-1) and restart after Lion with OS X--Puddy Tat!
Pay your $599 license fee, you slack-off bastards!
I, for one, welcome our new Antichrist overlord.
i dont know how power pc/osx architecture runs... but i know 1gb of ram makes anything on any hardware just run :) I guess ill find out soonish. I know if you run WoW with only 256mb even on an imac g5 it runs choppy...
Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
Really hard, I hope.
If everyone who says that had actually bought it when it was called NextStep / OpenStep / Rhapsody, they probably still would be.
echo 33676832766569823265328479713269.8639857989Pq | dc
I like any other would like to see OSX on a x86, but with solutions like the mac mini, i guess if that little thing holds, its a good investment.
Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
Eartha Kitt as an upgrade to Halle Berry? I guess on the "News for Nerds" site, eyecandy really doesn't matter!
From what I hear, every release of OS X get *faster*, allowing older hardware to run the new OS better than it could it's previous OS.
I would think Micro$oft would want to take a look at this....Of course this would mean people wouldn't have to buy PCs as often...I wonder how Micro$oft's relationship with PC makers compares with Apple making their own hardware...
Something to think about. Any thoughts?
...but you can't pre-order, so this is my assumption that the Tiger price will be the same as the (currently shown) 10.3 price.
One reason they might is the past inability of Motorola and IBM to provide the chips in the quantity that Apple required.
There have been a number of times in the recent past where Apple couldn't ship a product because these two companies were unable to provide enough usable chips.
Sure, Intel and AMD might have similar problems. But then you're looking at a dissimular situation.
If Apple can't get the newest chips from Intel/AMD, then presumably neither can HP, Dell, etc.
- dj
One other thing.
:)
You need to think differently.
I think you and many others make the mistake of believing that if Apple were to release an x86 version of OS X that it would automatically mean that any beige pc would be able to run the OS.
As always, the situation isn't that black and white.
Apple could decide to use the x86 chips, but keep the system a closed one. Meaning they would still have the tightly integrated hardware/software. But the systems would just use a different chip.
There are a number of ways the company could use Intel chips while keeping their system closed.
I'm sure there would be efforts by others to crack it and get OS X running on some junkie Dell box.
But Apple could just make it a moving target with software update. (just as they do now with companies trying to open up the ipod to other music stores.)
- dj
New widgets and OS features can make you more productive. Just ask some Mac users about Exposé ...
... who knows?
As a daily user I'm glad to authenticate your statement. =)
I can't for the life of me understand how I did my day to to work with 5-20 windows open without Exposé.
I had to use a Jaguar machine the other day and felt naked without being able to use it.
Perhaps I'll feel the same way about Spotlight
Four weeks, Twenty papers, that's two dollars
Great, I'll pay $129 for that!
Release candidates? Bug fixing? Beta-testing? Feh! This is why Apple can't compete with Microsoft! Microsoft releases their software the second its finished compiling (1 year compile time due to code bloat).
If you feel like you deserve to get 10.3, just go download it insted of whining!
Sure, but then what's the point of moving to x86? The OP, like many others, seems to want OS X on x86 because they somehow think it'll be magically cheaper. It won't unless Apple allowed "beige box" systems. Which they won't. So why keep asking for x86 OS X? There's no advantage to using the x86 architecture aside from a perceived price gain. I'd rather see Windows, Linux, BSD, etc move to the PowerPC architecture.
I had to check your link to make sure it wasn't the newsreader Unison, which is also pretty nifty. Though I think someone needs to change their name to avoid the confusion . . . Who came first?
Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a soportar Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a espabilar
But that would be pointless. Why change the Mac to use an inferior processor architecture?
Isn't that what I just said?
And that lickable interface! Mmmmm :)
Tiger is a technology release, unlike Panther & Jaguar which included major new applications.
Tiger is all about empowering third-party developers, and therefore the "near GM" candidate will linger for a while in the hands of developers before Apple releases it to the public.
I thought your comment was funny.
(owner of many Macs and AAPL shares)
Apple should really figure out how to stay up with the current versions. Java 5 is a huge improvement over Java 1.4 in terms of startup speed and many other aspects. As a Java developer I'm a bit reluctant to get a Mac because I'm worried that I might have to wait a year to get a Java version after it has been released.
come on.
i can buy a decent chainsaw + safety equipment
for 129 dollars.
it cuts wood really fast.
what does tiger do for me?
other than synergize my updated driver kernels
Because it would be a massive support headache. Every idiot with a PC would install Mac OS and immediately expect nirvana. Apple would have to expand help staff exponentially to deal with the floodtide of yokels wondering why OS X doesn't work on their x386 box with 64 MB of memory.
Control freaks? Maybe... but smart control freaks.
OK children a little lesson from a 58 year old. Women are interesting creatures and with a little experience you will find the cutness and hotness factors do not nescesarily relate to each other.
... Standards and Practices !
I'd take Ertha in an instant over Halle and I bet my ride would be way wilder than one who chose otherwise.
Posting at 0 to avoid the assholes.
PenGun
Do What Now ???
That is due to the way they focused on OS X. Apple focused on all the groundwork(10.0, .1, etc) and foundation and only in .2 and .3 have they focused on optimizing what is there. Each release gets faster because 1. the past release (early OS X) was quite slow) and 2. they optimize non-optimized code. There is a ceiling, one can only assume, on how long Apple can improve speed on each release on moderate/old hardware.
.x release, that is), Steve Jobs has said that this pace is too break neck and they will be slowing down for 10.5 (11?) and on. Can't blame them, their release cycle has been unreal.
PS: Apple has made a release every 12-18 months on OS X (every
There's no advantage to using the x86 architecture aside from a perceived price gain.
Actually there is the issue of availability. Apple has had issues with the supply of PowerPC chips, particularly G5s. On the x86 side of the fence there are no such availability issues as Intel and AMD already have large markets adn produce extremely large volumes. That said...
I'd rather see Windows, Linux, BSD, etc move to the PowerPC architecture.
If this actually happened then the situation would likely reverse as the volume of PowerPC chips in demand would be huge, and some serious productuon facilities would get built to deal with it.
In the meantime Apple will have minor supply issues. Given the costs of switching/porting to x86 I don't see how the gains (in availability) could possibly be worth it.
On another note: Where exactly are the Linux PPC systems? PPC Linux works quite well from what I've heard - why aren't there any people selling Linux PPC desktops or laptops?
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
Apple keeps a list of iSync's Supported Devices on their site.
You forgot one..
11.4 Lee Meriwether
Apple usually does 2 or 3 "Final Canaidate" releases before going gold.
Probably 15-30 days before it goes to the cd press.
Given that derivatives of the PowerPC 970 (aka G5) are being used in the X-Box Next and Nintendo's Gamecube follow-on I'm not sure availability will be an issue in the future. Other PowerPC chips are widely used in embedded systems - there's arguably a larger market for the PowerPC architecture (in general) than there is for x86.
Where exactly are the Linux PPC systems? Well, you could start by looking here.
When Apple runs out of cool cat code names? Mac OSX "Hello Kitty"?
Trust me, I know from experience. While I have been able to get other APPLICATIONS off these DVDs/CDs (like Quicken 2005...came with my Mac mini, but I want to use it on my iMac instead, and NOT on the Mac mini), I have never been able to get an OS install to work. But if you can do it, best of luck to you!
ONE POSSIBLE EXCEPTION: If you buy your machine and it is after the "on sale" date of Tiger, AND it does not have Tiger installed, you can get Tiger by mail from Apple for $20. This CD *CAN* be used to update other systems. But if your new machine includes Tiger, you cannot get that $20 upgrade CD (the CD is free, the $20 is, of course, for shipping and handling).
I'm glad that someone's happy with Apple
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
TIGER PUNCH ;)
CoreImage and CoreVideo are going to make these effects go as fast as they can on your hardware. It puts the power to do what the Quartz EX people have been doing into the hands of developers. Of course it won't be as fast on older machines, but that doesn't mean it's going to be any slower. Indeed, I'm sure we'll see a speed boost. And when developers can leverage these algorithms then suddenly 3rd party apps become faster too, which really helps with the perception of OSX's speed.
CoreImage and CoreVideo are groundworks for future apps, and proof that Apple really does care about the quality of tools available for its developer community.
If we based our criterion for software features based solely off how many people could derive immediate benefit, we'd end up with Windows, where the masses rule your OS. Apple is growing the OS towards certain goals. CoreImage and CoreMovie are cool, but they're only pieces in a larger puzzle.
Then I suspect you're not paying attention. Or not thinking about the implications or these products.
See? What did I tell you. You're missing the point. Let me bold it so you don't miss it: Spotlight unifies application and file data together! You may be the king of organization, fastidiously organizing every file, but when it comes time you find an address in AddressBook or a Mail in Mail.app, you still need to open these apps.
Spotlight is going to make the content of various apps searchable from a single point. So instead of deciding where to go, opening that app, and using its search feature, you open one search dialog and get all the relative hits. Any Mac user who's tried LaunchBar or the up-and-coming Quicksilver can attest to how powerful this idea is. Being able to open and control apps all from one small, powerful, searchable interface is fast, fun, and efficient. It also follows the theme of Apple caring about its developer community. Your app provides the data in an indexed format and Spotlight integrates the searching into the OS for almost not cost (you need to tell spotlight how to read your data).
This means that your bookmarks, RSS feeds, IRC/IM logs, text files, OmniGraffle documents, whatever, they all get cheap, fast, OS-integrated searching at minimal developer cost.
Excellent example of where Spotlight could do some good. Searching your feeds. Safari stores them and makes Spotlight.framework aware of them, and you get powerful, fast, integrated searching of your feeds.
NetNewsWire and NewsFire will add this as soon as Tiger comes out. You watch.
Incedentally, it seems that the next Safari is going to have incredible HTML and CSS support. This RSS thing is probably just an example to show how to leverage their new XSLT and CSS3 handling. The new web framework looks amazing, if the developer's blogs are to be believed.
For anyone who does develop
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
You're totally right that sometimes we need menubar-less applications, and I think that Dashboard is going to be the king of these sorts of things.
The problem with apps that do that sort of thing on OS X these days is that they're hard to get right. The developer has some hard choices. Do you clutter the Dock with an icon? No? If so how do I close your app, how do I relauch it? Do you put a Menubar Item up there? Isn't that contributing to the clutter? Do you make the app float on top or below? How do you explose it to the apple-tab mechanism?
Dashboard is going to resolve all that and give us a slick new way to microapps.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
I hope there are fewer kernel panics with this one. I have a intel linux laptop and a G5 PowerMac. The laptop has never, ever crashed (since 2002). But I've had about 5 inexplicable kernel panics over the past 18 months with OS X 10.3. My office mate has a G5 PowerMac and he's had a similar number of kernel panics over the past 2 years.
I love OS X but it still isn't quite 100% there as far as stability from my experience.
I have heard it is. Several of Apples' recent software updates (10.3.whatever) have, I am told, been very favorable to WoW (tweaks that speeded it up)--basically, Apple going out of their way to make sure this popular game works great on the machines Blizzard says it will work on.
Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
Or he could just buy the Macintosh version of WoW and forget about all that kludge...
Excuse me, I have to go p. I have an extra now.
I finally bit the bullet and order a DP 2.5 G5 this week, and I've been reading through developer.apple.com, but, does anyone have any good books to reccommend for learning OS X development for an old Windows developer and not-as-seasoned Linux developer?
Apple sort of painted themselves into a corner with the name OSX. It's sort of the 10th version of the Mac OS, but the X was to make it sound cooler and sort of clever, but what comes after? OS XI? That looks weird.
I think they've done just the opposite.
The difference between 10.0 and 10.3 is *huge* -- almost impossible to overstate. What they've done is say "Wow, look at these hundreds of improvements -- and it's only a point release!" for a few years. They're driving expectations up.
When they announce what they're working on for "Mac OS 11", can you imagine how psyched-up the rumor sites and fan bois are going to be? They'll go positively ape-shit.
It's like shipping G4 boxes for several years -- everybody drools just at the thought of having a G5.
They've also made an implicit claim that new major OS releases don't have to look the same as the previous one: when you change the kernel and APIs, you change the interface, therefore when you ship a new major version with a new interface you're allowed to change APIs.
Mac OS X 10.0-10.3 all look subtly different, but overall they're variations on the same theme. They're very different from Mac OS 9. Perhaps they're saving Mac OS 11 for another inside-and-out change. It certainly won't be as big as 9-to-10 was, but maybe they're saving all of the cool things they can't do backwards-compatibly for a big OS 11 release.
Apple also closes the door on older hardware quite fast. It's likely 10.4 will be the last OS X version to support the G3. Or the last one to support it with any optimizations. We know the CI/CV have no G3 fallback, requiring at least a G4 to run. Core-Data and Spotlight probably are not optimized well for the G3. It's likely Apple spent most of the optimization resources on speeding them up on the G4 and G5.
Disclaimer: I am not under any Apple NDA, nor does any of this information come directly from someone under NDA.
There is some new hardware coming out, sometime between "now" and "the end of 2005" (how is that for vague). This new hardware will require extra drivers and code to support some new features. The beta testers have only been able to run Tiger on this hardware, released versions of 10.X don't work much, or at all.
Since releasing Tiger before the hardware is announced means that legions of Mac fanatics will be picking it apart, they will quickly find the code relating to new hardware names. So it is almost a certainty that Apple will release Tiger at the same time they announce the new hardware. The hardware might ship later, but at least it will be announced by the Tiger ship date. Tiger may be announced as much as a month in advance of its ship date, if past announcements are any guide.
So the speculation is centred around which events in Apple's calendar would be good for announcing a new round of hardware upgrades and new models, as well as releasing Tiger. The WWDC has been a favorite target until recently, as it is now approaching rapidly and Tiger is still in beta, MacPsychics are looking further into the summer for good announce dates.
the AC
My money is on the WWDC for a ship date
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
I didn't see the troll-post, had been modded. I thought you were one of said whiners.
My apologies.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
Sorry I can't find the article on line. I have Popular Mechanic magazine here and basically Jay Leno say's Ferrari's clutches suck requiring a new one ($5,000 a pop) after only about 5,000 miles. So perhaps you should say Apple is more like Porsche.
comment from here
Posted Feb 17, 2005, 10:43 AM ET by Jon F.
Jay is definitely hardcore. He has an uber car collect though he's still concerned with economy. He's been pretty public in saying that he doesn't like to challenge people with is Lambo (4wd car) because "I could take him, but i don't want to waste a $5000 clutch". He states it in the article, and he's said it a few other times. A lot of people can afford to own a Ferrari, not all of them can afford the maintenance. Jay can, but he'd rather improves his collection and drive his cars rather than see them in the shop.
I've owned a few Macs in my day, so I don't really mean this as an outsider or a troll but:
who the fuck sits around and reads rumors about a computer company?
Seriously. I get the feeling that I could just make up any shit that I want to, put it on a mac rumor site, and people would eat it up. Hell, that's probably how Apple gets most of their product ideas -- reading rumor sites filled with made up crap by people who like to laugh at MacHeads.
I really don't get how anybody could be that attached to a piece of plastic or the company who made it. It's not like an ancestoral sword which almost sort of has a life of its own. It's a bloody fucking computer -- a soulless tool that one doesn't even need to get along in life.
"Just ask some Mac users about Exposé ..."
Though no one asked, I have to say that I can attest to how useful Expose' is. Not having the dough to buy a monitor right after buying my PowerMac, I used an old 17" CRT monitor and whenever I had multiple panels (I can't even call them windows) open, it was very useful in dealing with the lack of screen real estate.
"wouldnt it be nice it they made OSX for a x86"
...
But they do, they just don't sell it.
In an interview last year, an Apple executive confirmed that an x86 port of OSX, aka Marklar does exist in Apple's labs and that they are keeping it on par with PPC development.
Before the release of the G5, Steve Jobs said in another interview that they do not plan to move to x86 but that they like to keep their options open.
If you take these two statements and add one and one together, it should become obvious that they have no intent to change their business model from making and selling "hardware including software" to "software including hardware" or even "software only". In other words, Marklar is just an insurance policy against unpredictable disaster scenarios where Apple would be forced to move to another CPU and as a result, Apple have a stronger negotiating position with IBM.
Consequently, for as long as IBM do a good job on fostering PPC, for as long as PPC is competitive, Apple have very little reason to move.
And should they ever decide to move, or should they decide to offer OSX on x86 in addition to PPC, their business model will almost certainly remain the same, meaning OSX will continue to be made to run on Apple hardware only, regardless of CPU compatibility.
So, you would then see an x86 Mac with exactly the same treats as today, from OpenFirmware to Apple's own motherboard designs, not compatible with other x86 hardware. In fact, such an x86 Mac might even have a custom x86 CPU, made only for Apple, ie bolted on AltiVec compatible SIMD. Without specific hacks, OSX would not run on other x86 machines. Likewise, Windows would probably not run on such an x86 Mac without some extra software from Microsoft, eg. Virtual PC or Mac/x86. Such an arrangement would also likely have Microsoft continue MS-Office development for the Mac - even more reason for Apple to choose such a path if they ever were to go x86.
So, whether or not Apple will release OSX on x86, if you want OSX on non-Apple x86 hardware, you will almost certainly have to rig your own.
Mind you, you can do this within limits already today. Darwin, the core of OSX, is available for x86 and it's a free download
http://www.opendarwin.org/en/downloads
You can get GNUstep and run it on top of Darwin x86
http://www.gnustep.org
GNUstep is the GNU implementation of OPENSTEP, the foundation on which Cocoa is build. In addition, GNUstep has some, but not all of the things Apple has added, so you get Cocoa compatibility within limits. This is as close as you can get OSX on x86 today. It's free, but it requires a little more effort than an OSX installation on a Mac. And if you want the OSX eye candy, you will also need to do a bit of DIY. If you do, consider becoming a contributor to the GNUstep project.
Thus, it comes down to paying a little extra for convenience or save some money and put in some work. You can't have it both ways. Remember, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
the macintosh asterisk mailing list http://www.astm
There shouldn't be any versions after Julie Newmar. Having achieved perfection with that release there wouldn't be a need for further upgrades.
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
Any thoughts?
Yeah. The early versions of OS X were dogs, and if you bought into them you got ripped off. Best way to make users think their hardware is running new software better? Make the first releases crap.
-if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
So, pray tell, just for my curiosity: _what_ applications didn't work with the old release? Was there some killer-app or killer-game announced that requires Tiger to run? Is there some much needed functionality comes in this release and was sorely missing in Panther? I'm just, you know, curious.
It's a little harder to argue why people would buy previous versions - I started around 10.1, bought 10.2 for some reasons I cannot remember. It seemed like a good idea at the time...
The switch to 10.3 was partially for performance boost, but a lot for Expose. It works so much better than the stupid Windows Taskbar for switching or searching for windows or even accessing the desktop it's amazing.
But 10.4 (Tiger) has some very compelling features both for the developer (me) and user (me again). First of all, Spotlight looks like a great searching mechanism and I'm already planning to hook a few custom filetypes into the search API.
I also have some ideas for apps that make use of Spotlight, core data, and core image features. These are all new and pretty significant API updates, you may not see a lot of programs that leverage them at first but they are so powerful that as a developer it's a no-brainer to buy Tiger.
Basically Mac users buy updates when they see a set of features that are worth the money to them, and so far they have been. If you think about it ~100 is not much if it improves your working efficency even in some small way, much less dramatic steps.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
At this stage after running out of names they can treat future names as bianry inclusion of the past titles - so the next would be Tiger-Jaguar (or whatever the first one was).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I thought Software Assurance was a plan to pony up dough to Microsoft to keep them from releasing another OS on you. As soon as the "software assurance" funds start to dry up, they release another OS and make threatening noises about new OS'es and whole new technologies just a year or so off...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I have some family using a G4 450 for real work - not just browsing and such that many Slashdotters do, but day to day use of Photoshop, scanning, and document creation with InDesign.
For these tasks it performs pretty well. One thing that really helped was springing for a 64MB video card and a bit more RAM (1GB total now I think, can't remember what I bumped it up to).
I did wait for 10.3 to upgrade them from OS 9 though.
For those that think multiple apps are a problem - not really, as that's more a disc issue than anything. Only multiple CPU intensive apps would kill older processors, about the only things that would really be bad news are a lot of heavy-duty compiles or perhaps video work with a lot of effects. Most other serious use is going to be idling when the user is not actively using it.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The "release" as it is called, is actually a final sword duel to the end between Steve Jobs and Bill Gates atop the Seattle Space Needle. When the skies of seattle light with an unearthly golden glow, you will know either Tiger or Longhorn is releasing that fortnight.
Thus the term "Gold Master".
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
And I'm sure Apple's stance on this has absolutely nothing to do with secret clauses in their agreements with Microsoft. Nothing at all.
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." -
... the blue G3s have ADB, and they run 10.3.
:-)
Oh, and {i|power}book keyboards are ADB.
Almost guaranteed, you put in RAM that doesn't cut it. Powermacs are so picky about RAM that it hurts. The result is that you have to buy RAM that costs about twice as much, though not as much as Apple's BTO.
The other option is some sort of hardware defect. I bought a single G5 and it panicked twice on the first day. I decided to swap up for a dual model anyway, so the store did the exchange without me bothering to ask about the panics. The new model hasn't crashed on me once. Every manufacturer makes a certain number of broken computers. That's what warranties are for.
Carbon Copy Cloner will clone an OS X installation from one machine to another.
It works Mac to Mac, across a Fireware cable. I've used it on everything from Clamshell iBooks to G3 iMacs to 1.25Ghz G4 PowerBooks, from 10.2.x to 10.3.8 - no problems at all.
Unless you format the destination drive it's sorta hit or miss, but they clearly point this out.
So yes, it's *technically* possible. Legal? Other folks have already posted about that aspect.
A message from our sponsor
If you think about it, it's almost like a concession to Windows's application model.
Actually I think it's more inteded to be a return to the origional Apple concept of 'Desk Accessories' which appeared in System 1.0. This included Calculator, Puzzle, a clock/calendar, Notepad and Scrapbook.
I'm really looking forward to having them back (at the moment I have stickies, the address book, iCal and the calculator in the Dock and Dashboard sounds like a much better solution).
Hi! What I really miss on OS X is a simple graphic apps like Paint on windows. Once upon a time there was Mac Paint but it fell of the back of the truck when they whent to OS X from Mac OS. Having to start photoshop or Gimp just to do draw a filled square or some other simple form is a bit overkill for me.
Remember... A boomerang IS NOT the best way to deliver a bomb.
Who the fuck sits around and collects stamps?
I get the feeling that I could just make up any shitty picture I want to, put it on an official USPS stamp, and people would eat it up.
I really don't understand how anybody could be that attached to a piece of paper with a sticky backing or the picture on it. It's a bloody fucking stamp -- a soulless marker for the post office that one doesn't even need to get along in life.
Seriously. Different strokes for different folks, asshole.
Server 2003 runs faster than Server 2000 in some configurations, especially if you have SCSI on the box instead of IDE.
Perhaps your experience is due to the fact that previous versions of OS X were so terribly slow. Certainly didn't impress me the first time I saw a Powerbook with 512MB of RAM.
Those are my thoughts on your witty "Micro$oft" comment. You're welcome.
It would seem you totally got the wrong idea what my post was all about. In no event would I encourage anyone to steal code. My message was and still is this ...
... those who want OSX technologies on x86 have it pretty good. Apple have made their core OS available as open source and there is even a binary installation kit for x86. In addition, their primary API is based on an open standard, OPENSTEP, for which there is an open source implementation, even including development tools that are comparable to Apple's. If anybody wants to roll their own, they don't have to start from scratch, they can jump right in and contribute towards completing any missing bits.
e r/GNUstep/README.Darwin
Don't expect Apple to provide a free lunch. Instead, if you want to have a meal that's not on the menu, go to another restaurant or stay at home and cook for yourself.
Let me say this once again
Instead of fantasising about stealing Apple's code, jokingly or not, you should rather be grateful that Apple has made it fairly straightforward for anyone committed enough to use and replicate OSX technologies on other platforms if they wish.
So, by all means, I encourage you, go ahead, install Darwin x86 and GNUstep on your PC and contribute to the project.
http://www.gnustep.org/resources/documentation/Us
Sure, this means you have to do some work and I agree it would be nice if there was an ISO CD image from which x86 PC owners could install both Darwin x86 and GNUstep all in one go so they could more easily give this a try and perhaps become supporters of the project. Then again, there is nothing that stops you or anyone else from building such an ISO CD image and make it available.
the macintosh asterisk mailing list http://www.astm
...Windows XP runs faster on most hardware than Windows 2000 did.
Are you out of your mind? I've probably done 100 Windows 2000 installs and probably over 500 XP installs and I've never seen an installation of XP run faster than 2000 on comparable hardware. I think anyone with even limited experiences with 2000 will have no problem saying it's faster than XP.
I used the Fink source code packages. Everthing worked fine. I miss KScope though, and it's not available in Fink (or Debian, so it would appear).
Follow me
On the same hardware. A PIII/700 384MB RAM, a single PIII/1GHz with 512MB RAM and a dual PIII/1GHz (Abit mobo) with 1GB of RAM.
Hope that helps.
A tweaked XP install with unnecessary services turned off and no eye candy is faster than 2000, in my experience. Disk I/O is faster, applications load faster, there is less swapping and if you turn off QoSvc networking is also faster.
I'm not saying you *can't* make XP comparable to speed as 2000. You can definitely tweak the hell out of a standard install. But guess what? You can do that with 2000 too.
Ever hear the automotive term "there is no replacement for displacement"? Bascially what it means is that of course you can put a turbo onto a 4 cylinder motor, to make it comparable to a bigger V-8. BUT, you can put a turbo on a V-8 too, which then again makes it put out more power than the 4 cyclinder. With XP and 2000 it kind of works in reverse since you're trying to strip it down instead of add to it, but it illustrates the point. You start with a much bigger OS in XP. Of course you can strip it down to be comparable to 2000, but then again you can tweak 2000.
It's like taking a slow station wagon and putting a giant motor in it and saying but no station wagons are faster than Mustangs. Idiotic.
Ahh, interesting. I hadn't thought of it like that before.