Much harder to phreak payphones here in Oz, they dont use tones to tell the operator how much money has been placed, rather the phone handles all that itself, therby removing the ability to "Red Box" it.
<shamless plug>and even though it only knows how to connect to 1 channel on 1 network i'm told that OpenMac is good (and since it's open source, you can compile it for what ever channels you want) </shamless plug>
did you read what i wrote? i said that case sensitivity breaks things that don't expect case sensitivity (read anything that was written for the mac in the past 18 years) thats why MFS, HFS, HFS+ and HFS+Journeled don't support case sensitivity.
on top of that, any POSIX app that i've used still worries about case, it just gets an error if i try to creat 2 files with the same file name (foo and Foo) just as it would if i tried to create 2 files with the same case and name (Foo and Foo)
(btw, welcome to entry number 1 on my foes list - have a nice day)
POSIX compliance would be nice. snip Yes, you can use UFS filesystems under Mac OS X, but..will fail to run
FYI, one of the reasons why programs fail is because they aren't expecting case sensitivity. besides, case insisitivy is a good thing(TM)... do a google search
if what you say is true, then why doesn't the automatic fsck that you say happens at boot remove this file?
because the file doesn't get removed until Mac OS 9 has had a clean shut down.
sometimes that file can get currupted, and Mac OS 9 can't delete that file (i've seen it!) then your best bet is to disable the start up check...
Mac OS X completely ignores the presance of that file, and uses the Unix method for determining weather or not the File System is clean. i don't know what that method is, but stux appears to:)
Mac OS 9 does it's startup check if there is an inviable file on the HD, it delets the iniviable file upon a proper shutdown. classic otoh, doesn't always delete that file (i don't think it has the permisions!) so, OS 9 thinks that it wasn't shut down properly. just do an rm -f/Shutdown\ Check before rebooting into 9 (alternitivly, you can disable the startup check in the General Controls)
and yes, OS X does fsck upon a power failer, pull the plug and watch how much longer it takes to boot (or boot in verbose)
Who then? Dell? Packard Bell? Micron? Compaq? HP? Gateway?
Toshiba has a new laptop with a cool little LCD embeeded in it's _trakcpad_ (the only thing i didn't like about toshiba's was there lack of a track pad!) showing what'll happen if you tap there:D
granted the rest of the machine was pretty bland, but if i ever downgrade to a PC, it'll probably be a toshiba...
or you can kill the boot screen altogether and do this:
% sudo nvram boot-args="-v"
now you can see what your machine is doing while it boots - juse like any other unix out there (i don't know if it works under Jaguer, but thats how it is in every other version of Mac OS X from DP3 through 10.1.5)
(does anyone know how to format it to "set boot-args to debug=0x100" for getting my kernal panic back too?)
X11 apps use a plethora of ugly widget sets, all of which look and feel completely different from one another and from Aqua. There's no way Apple would endorse or implement such a flagrant pile of different UI's on their carefully-crafted OS. Can you name a single X11 app that comes even close to conforming to the Apple UI guidelines?
have you looked at any java apps on OS X lately? they use aqua, but, as you stated above, they don't follow apples UI guidlines!
i don't have a clue how x-11 is done, but if it is anything like java then apple might be able to aquafy all those x-11 apps, and they'll be just as good^H^H^H^Hbad as java:)
The availability of X11 native on OS X would discourage developers from making their applications at all Mac-like in appearance or functionality, leading to less mindshare for Apple's way of doing the GUI.
i agree, make those x-11 developers work to make there apps work on OS X, either port it, or include directions and say all over them "this looks nothing like aqau because we are lazy bums - thanks for your money"
Apple is still fighting with application developers to get them to Carbonize their apps. Carbon blows, big time. It's a stopgap solution crafted solely to allow ports from OS 9. (If you are developing a brand-new program for Carbon, allow me to BITCH-SLAP you out of the 80's with the clue stick a few times. ) Apple, and anyone with a brain, knows this. Apple's ultimate plan is to ditch Carbon like a hooker bad case of genital warts. Carbon ties Apple to the Motorola PPC platform which is looking more and more like an evolutionary trichordate (good potential, slow development causes it to be overwhelmed by the competition).
i don't see carbon ever going away, it would be like microsoft killing the 16-bit windows API - it's there so that you can run your older software. not only that, but carbon is used when porting from Windows and (dum dum dum) X-11 apps to Mac OS X, you can't exactly port from windows to cocoa. (though it's been done, Quake III for OS X is a cocoa app! well, it's a BSD app with a cocoa front end) classic otoh is going to be just like WINE, it'll work, if you've got Mac OS 9
Apple surely won't go out of it's way to deny X11 on OS X, but you can bet they won't include it with OS X v10.3 or or OS X v11 or whatever.
that would be insane, apple is now shipping the most widely distributed Unix in the world! why would apple want to piss off the unix switchers? (i'm sure there are more then windows switchers!)
As a side-note, does anyone have a theory on how Apple will name their products in the future once the 10.x numbers run out for them (or they get sick of 10.x)? Mac OS XIV anyone?
i'm sure that they will continue to call it Mac OS X for the next couple of decades, it'll just be Mac OS X 11.0 etc.
Slashdot Mirror
i remember when i thought it was "Sdandard Computer Serial Interface"
and it was pronunced "Ess-See-Ess-Eye"
ahh... the ignarance (and golability) of youth
Much harder to phreak payphones here in Oz, they dont use tones to tell the operator how much money has been placed, rather the phone handles all that itself, therby removing the ability to "Red Box" it.
the way it should always have been
wait they still use those?!
hmmm.. maybe i should try this phreaking thing i've read all bout...
(the above was only a joke, i have never phreaked, and i probably never will... phreaking is so.... 1970's)
and don't forget the Mac OS X Hints book
x-chat isn't as good as x-chat?
don't you just love recursion?
<shamless plug>and even though it only knows how to connect to 1 channel on 1 network i'm told that OpenMac is good (and since it's open source, you can compile it for what ever channels you want)
</shamless plug>
don't forget that the carbon sound manager will make boy band music tolerable, and increses your penis/bust size by 30%!
says the man with the 6 GB HD :P
did you read what i wrote? i said that case sensitivity breaks things that don't expect case sensitivity (read anything that was written for the mac in the past 18 years) thats why MFS, HFS, HFS+ and HFS+Journeled don't support case sensitivity.
on top of that, any POSIX app that i've used still worries about case, it just gets an error if i try to creat 2 files with the same file name (foo and Foo) just as it would if i tried to create 2 files with the same case and name (Foo and Foo)
(btw, welcome to entry number 1 on my foes list - have a nice day)
POSIX compliance would be nice. snip Yes, you can use UFS filesystems under Mac OS X, but..will fail to run
FYI, one of the reasons why programs fail is because they aren't expecting case sensitivity. besides, case insisitivy is a good thing(TM)... do a google search
Child: Daddy, there's a monster under my bed!
Father: Nonsence, thats just a 14" flee, your bed is made from radioactive trees too.
brings new meaning to "don't let the bedbugs bite"
The only think [sik] that was good about that movie was the bellyflop the saucer section
oh come on! i couldn't stop laughing at how FAKE that was - in the theatre!
"iced coffee, black."
actualy, it was BHA - rumored to be short for Butt Head Astronomer *rotfl*
and don't forget that Carl Sagen was the code name for the Power Mac 7100. since the 8100 was code named Cold Fusion, the real Sagen got sued!
Apple used SCSI on nearly all of their computers from the late 80s until '97. That included the consumer Performa models.
:)
bzzzzz, i'm so sorry, but Quada/LC/Performa 630 series released in 1994 used an IDE hard drive.
thankyou for playing, as a consolation prize we have a 10 lifetime supply of spam, enjoy
if what you say is true, then why doesn't the automatic fsck that you say happens at boot remove this file?
:)
because the file doesn't get removed until Mac OS 9 has had a clean shut down.
sometimes that file can get currupted, and Mac OS 9 can't delete that file (i've seen it!) then your best bet is to disable the start up check...
Mac OS X completely ignores the presance of that file, and uses the Unix method for determining weather or not the File System is clean. i don't know what that method is, but stux appears to
Mac OS 9 does it's startup check if there is an inviable file on the HD, it delets the iniviable file upon a proper shutdown. classic otoh, doesn't always delete that file (i don't think it has the permisions!) so, OS 9 thinks that it wasn't shut down properly. just do an rm -f /Shutdown\ Check before rebooting into 9 (alternitivly, you can disable the startup check in the General Controls)
and yes, OS X does fsck upon a power failer, pull the plug and watch how much longer it takes to boot (or boot in verbose)
no offence, jack, but your post isn't funny, the parrent otoh, is pretty good, it would at least make the finalists ;)
Who then? Dell? Packard Bell? Micron? Compaq? HP? Gateway?
:D
Toshiba has a new laptop with a cool little LCD embeeded in it's _trakcpad_ (the only thing i didn't like about toshiba's was there lack of a track pad!) showing what'll happen if you tap there
granted the rest of the machine was pretty bland, but if i ever downgrade to a PC, it'll probably be a toshiba...
If I wrote a novel and someone bowdlerized it and then published the result under my name, I'd be pretty peeved.
you must not be a published auther then. verry few works make it to press in there orignal form, most are edited by...the publisher!
hmmm... good point... maybe an rm -f * but even that.... *shudder*
(does anyone know how to format it to "set boot-args to debug=0x100" for getting my kernal panic back too?)
i could see mozilla and chimera etc having a button in there prefs to do this :)
X11 apps use a plethora of ugly widget sets, all of which look and feel completely different from one another and from Aqua. There's no way Apple would endorse or implement such a flagrant pile of different UI's on their carefully-crafted OS. Can you name a single X11 app that comes even close to conforming to the Apple UI guidelines?
:)
have you looked at any java apps on OS X lately? they use aqua, but, as you stated above, they don't follow apples UI guidlines!
i don't have a clue how x-11 is done, but if it is anything like java then apple might be able to aquafy all those x-11 apps, and they'll be just as good^H^H^H^Hbad as java
The availability of X11 native on OS X would discourage developers from making their applications at all Mac-like in appearance or functionality, leading to less mindshare for Apple's way of doing the GUI.
i agree, make those x-11 developers work to make there apps work on OS X, either port it, or include directions and say all over them "this looks nothing like aqau because we are lazy bums - thanks for your money"
Apple is still fighting with application developers to get them to Carbonize their apps. Carbon blows, big time. It's a stopgap solution crafted solely to allow ports from OS 9. (If you are developing a brand-new program for Carbon, allow me to BITCH-SLAP you out of the 80's with the clue stick a few times. ) Apple, and anyone with a brain, knows this. Apple's ultimate plan is to ditch Carbon like a hooker bad case of genital warts. Carbon ties Apple to the Motorola PPC platform which is looking more and more like an evolutionary trichordate (good potential, slow development causes it to be overwhelmed by the competition).
i don't see carbon ever going away, it would be like microsoft killing the 16-bit windows API - it's there so that you can run your older software. not only that, but carbon is used when porting from Windows and (dum dum dum) X-11 apps to Mac OS X, you can't exactly port from windows to cocoa. (though it's been done, Quake III for OS X is a cocoa app! well, it's a BSD app with a cocoa front end) classic otoh is going to be just like WINE, it'll work, if you've got Mac OS 9
Apple surely won't go out of it's way to deny X11 on OS X, but you can bet they won't include it with OS X v10.3 or or OS X v11 or whatever.
that would be insane, apple is now shipping the most widely distributed Unix in the world! why would apple want to piss off the unix switchers? (i'm sure there are more then windows switchers!)
As a side-note, does anyone have a theory on how Apple will name their products in the future once the 10.x numbers run out for them (or they get sick of 10.x)? Mac OS XIV anyone?
i'm sure that they will continue to call it Mac OS X for the next couple of decades, it'll just be Mac OS X 11.0 etc.
and i've seen it on an ATi Rage 128 - on a mac! upon initial reboot from crash, and i get a flash of my old desktop!
i've even seen this on a cold boot!