iSync DOES use SyncML and it always has. I specifically remember Steve Jobs raving on and on about SyncML at the keynote where iSync was introduced (10.2 beta demonstration if I recall)
If there's any specific problem with iSync not working with Nokia mobile phones, I'd wager it would be Nokia's problem, and their nonstandard bluetooth implementations (why use oh, say, the bluetooth headset profile for a bluetooth headset when you can break compatibility with everyone else by running it over the serial profile?)
If I'm wrong about anything in this post, someone please correct me as I don't like to be misinformed...
Offtopic, I know - but with OS X 10.3 you can either use UFS which is case sensitive, but not recommended, or you can use Case sensitive HFS+. The link here tells you how to do it. http://homepage.mac.com/lgw4/iblog/C675550648/E871 090033/ Someone might find this hint useful...
For all I know, ATRAC3 is a better format, but I refuse to be forced to convert it to another lossy format in order to have the "privilege" of listening to it on a portable device. They must be out of their minds.
The thing is, it's not even better. At all - independent, double blind testing has proved otherwise. It's worse than WMA, mp3 and iTunes AAC. It's the worst out of all the lossy codecs currently in use today. So their claim that ATRAC3 at 48kbps is equal to other codecs at around 128kbps is not just PR fluff, it's a complete lie.
On another note, I'm sure the Rio Karma is just lovely but I don't want an mp3 player with optical that has a webserver and plays radio and records and can run KDE and can use GCC 3.5 and has speed stripes and everything but the kitchen sink - I want something simple that is easy and efficient to use, sounds good, and integrates with iTunes. And that's the iPod (which my 1G-upgraded-to-10GB-HD iPod which still gets 8 hours of battery life) does perfectly.
What are you on about, it's not as if they sell any software these days. Everybody knows they are first and foremost a litigation company. This wouldn't affect them in the least.
Since I pirated it (flame on), I'm not under NDA, so I took some screenshots of a feature which interested me. Resolution independant UI.
It's still quite buggy (lots of graphical glitches) but apart from that everything works as expected. The OS X GUI is made up of bitmapped tiff's at 72dpi at the moment, so scaled up it doesn't look too crash hot, but this could easily be changed with a quick revision to quartz, and I expect it will be. Because changes only affect newly opened applications in the present implementation, I was able to make a screenshot with different programs running at different scalefactors.
I'm more excited about being able to scale everything down - yay, more usable space on my 1024x768 12" PowerBook!
Safari 2.0 does indeed work with HTTPS sites, I used it to do my netbanking just 15 minutes ago. And I am using it as a day-to-day OS and have been for the past 2 weeks without any show stoppers.
It's because they are cheapening your memories of Commodore by buying in bulk some crappy OEM'd mp3 players and sticking a commodore logo on them, then playing with your emotions in an attempt to profit from it. Yes my friends, it's okay to cry.
No really, I'm not even that old (21) but I did have an A500, and I find this really disgusting as well. Even if they were selling something worthwhile I still wouldn't buy it out of principle.
I'm an OS 10.3 user and use Mail.app which comes with OS X.
I've used an older build of thunderbird before and it was okay but honestly I wasn't terribly impressed with it. I just use standard POP3 for all my accounts...is there any compelling reason why I should use it on OS X instead of Mail.app?
I can see how it would be preferable over Outlook on Windows with all the viruses going around and the general bloat/suckiness of MS crapware but does it do anything that Apple's Mail doesn't? I'm not trolling or anything, I really want to know. Mail.app used to get really sluggish in previous versions when you had a lot of messages, but that seems to be fixed nowadays.
BeOS's problem was that there was no software. Who's going to port all the old BeOS stuff to X11? Who's going to port all the new KDE/GTK X11 stuff to BeOS "native" X11 (whatever the hell that is)? Why bother? Why use X11 at all in that case? Backwards compatility? No, you just stated we won't be seeing normal X11 programs running in it.
X11 is satisfactory for most things but it's hardly an ideal foundation for the windowing system of a brand new OS.
Pity it will also inherit that inherent ugliness that XFree86 seems to bring with it.
One of the best features of BeOS was that it was practically a Mac (but with multitasking!) on a PC. The Tracker was very much like the Finder, windows were similar (close box on the left, size & shade buttons on the right, grouped scroll thumbs, etc.), applications were well designed UI wise, and simple, never cluttered, used a sane file association system (I think they used MIME types) as opposed to having file extensions hard coded to open in a certain app - you have to remember that at one point BeOS was being engineered specifically to sell to Apple to become their new OS. Needless to say they picked OPENSTEP instead and now we have OS X, but that's another story...
Unless they've gutted XFree86 I can see this just becoming another stock standrd, bloated (BeOS was a perfectly usable OS + a multitude of applications in under 200MB) distro but with a BeOS skin. Which is NOT the same thing.
All the apps will still use GTK or KDE because nobody will be bothered redoing the GUI in BlueEyedOS's native toolkit (why bother when it works okay using whatever we're using now but just looks a bit out of place). Even Apple couldn't make X11 acceptable with their implementation and look at how anal they are about OS X's GUI being perfect and consistent. It just looks like some generic linux distro with a bad aqua skin slapped on top.
I won't say this will be a failure, because by definition it is nigh impossible for any open source project to be a failure. I'm sure there are people out there who will love it (and as long as at least one person still uses it and appreciates it, that's all that matters), but I will say that I think this will be a failure as a new BeOS.
But it lacks a lot of things like oh, say, multiuser, PRINTING, multiple API's, a decent TCP/IP stack, USB support, backwards compatibility for anything.
Sure, you could fit it on a zip disk, but System 7.5 will boot in 10-15 seconds on a PPC 604/120 too, and even has printing functionality! (and more driver support, and a decent TCP/IP stack {yes, open transport was a decent TCP/IP stack})
You can't really compare something like BeOS to a modern OS. The functionality difference alone is staggering. BeOS is nice and lightweight but it's hardly useful as a full-fledged OS (unless you like watching spinning OpenGL teapots all day and don't care for an actual productivity application or a usable web browser)
*waits for Gobe productive plug and Mozilla 1.3d352673 build works fine on BeOS and other various flames*
More digging indicates that these are a cache for the thumbnail images in the Desktop Pictures system preference. However the part about the desktop picture being stored on the GPU as a texture is still valid, as is the part about a 50MP image being no slower than a 50x50px GIF.
I routinely set large (50MB, layers) photoshop files as my backdrop out of pure laziness and experience no slowdowns whatsoever as a result. (on a 1ghz 12" powerbook, 768mb RAM)
It doesn't matter; everything is double buffered & cached. Quartz will scale the image once and cache it as a bitmap, in the unlikely event it gets paged out, (~/Library/Caches/Desktop/) and then it's stored in the video card's VRAM as a texture and all com-posited on the GPU anyhow.
You could put a 50MP file as the backdrop and after the initial decompression it would be no slower than having a 50x50 GIF.
Slashdot Mirror
If there's any specific problem with iSync not working with Nokia mobile phones, I'd wager it would be Nokia's problem, and their nonstandard bluetooth implementations (why use oh, say, the bluetooth headset profile for a bluetooth headset when you can break compatibility with everyone else by running it over the serial profile?)
If I'm wrong about anything in this post, someone please correct me as I don't like to be misinformed...
FYI: QuickTime Player in 10.4 is re-written in Cocoa.
Offtopic, I know - but with OS X 10.3 you can either use UFS which is case sensitive, but not recommended, or you can use Case sensitive HFS+. The link here tells you how to do it. http://homepage.mac.com/lgw4/iblog/C675550648/E871 090033/ Someone might find this hint useful...
The thing is, it's not even better. At all - independent, double blind testing has proved otherwise. It's worse than WMA, mp3 and iTunes AAC. It's the worst out of all the lossy codecs currently in use today. So their claim that ATRAC3 at 48kbps is equal to other codecs at around 128kbps is not just PR fluff, it's a complete lie.
On another note, I'm sure the Rio Karma is just lovely but I don't want an mp3 player with optical that has a webserver and plays radio and records and can run KDE and can use GCC 3.5 and has speed stripes and everything but the kitchen sink - I want something simple that is easy and efficient to use, sounds good, and integrates with iTunes. And that's the iPod (which my 1G-upgraded-to-10GB-HD iPod which still gets 8 hours of battery life) does perfectly.
I have a sinking feeling that this post was not supposed to be funny ;)
I don't know about windows, but Mac OS 9 was the first version to include Software Update, and it was released on October 23, 1999.
What are you on about, it's not as if they sell any software these days. Everybody knows they are first and foremost a litigation company. This wouldn't affect them in the least.
I'm sure my pocket lint would really appreciate a colour screen.
Works for me. I have a screenshot if you want. What build are you using?
It's still quite buggy (lots of graphical glitches) but apart from that everything works as expected. The OS X GUI is made up of bitmapped tiff's at 72dpi at the moment, so scaled up it doesn't look too crash hot, but this could easily be changed with a quick revision to quartz, and I expect it will be. Because changes only affect newly opened applications in the present implementation, I was able to make a screenshot with different programs running at different scalefactors.
I'm more excited about being able to scale everything down - yay, more usable space on my 1024x768 12" PowerBook!
quartzdebug.png
applications.png
Safari 2.0 does indeed work with HTTPS sites, I used it to do my netbanking just 15 minutes ago. And I am using it as a day-to-day OS and have been for the past 2 weeks without any show stoppers.
You've obviously never had to use Windows Media Player or MSN Messenger for OS X. Awful software.
No really, I'm not even that old (21) but I did have an A500, and I find this really disgusting as well. Even if they were selling something worthwhile I still wouldn't buy it out of principle.
Yeah, GeForceFX Go 5200 - real hard up for specs there...c'mon, my outdated 1 ghz 12" powerbook (read, low-end) has this.
I've used an older build of thunderbird before and it was okay but honestly I wasn't terribly impressed with it. I just use standard POP3 for all my accounts...is there any compelling reason why I should use it on OS X instead of Mail.app?
I can see how it would be preferable over Outlook on Windows with all the viruses going around and the general bloat/suckiness of MS crapware but does it do anything that Apple's Mail doesn't? I'm not trolling or anything, I really want to know. Mail.app used to get really sluggish in previous versions when you had a lot of messages, but that seems to be fixed nowadays.
600kbps is about 75KB/sec.
Uhh, wrong menu option guys...
BeOS's problem was that there was no software. Who's going to port all the old BeOS stuff to X11? Who's going to port all the new KDE/GTK X11 stuff to BeOS "native" X11 (whatever the hell that is)? Why bother? Why use X11 at all in that case? Backwards compatility? No, you just stated we won't be seeing normal X11 programs running in it.
X11 is satisfactory for most things but it's hardly an ideal foundation for the windowing system of a brand new OS.
One of the best features of BeOS was that it was practically a Mac (but with multitasking!) on a PC. The Tracker was very much like the Finder, windows were similar (close box on the left, size & shade buttons on the right, grouped scroll thumbs, etc.), applications were well designed UI wise, and simple, never cluttered, used a sane file association system (I think they used MIME types) as opposed to having file extensions hard coded to open in a certain app - you have to remember that at one point BeOS was being engineered specifically to sell to Apple to become their new OS. Needless to say they picked OPENSTEP instead and now we have OS X, but that's another story...
Unless they've gutted XFree86 I can see this just becoming another stock standrd, bloated (BeOS was a perfectly usable OS + a multitude of applications in under 200MB) distro but with a BeOS skin. Which is NOT the same thing.
All the apps will still use GTK or KDE because nobody will be bothered redoing the GUI in BlueEyedOS's native toolkit (why bother when it works okay using whatever we're using now but just looks a bit out of place). Even Apple couldn't make X11 acceptable with their implementation and look at how anal they are about OS X's GUI being perfect and consistent. It just looks like some generic linux distro with a bad aqua skin slapped on top.
I won't say this will be a failure, because by definition it is nigh impossible for any open source project to be a failure. I'm sure there are people out there who will love it (and as long as at least one person still uses it and appreciates it, that's all that matters), but I will say that I think this will be a failure as a new BeOS.
All very well to wave your nokia phone around to show a text message, but to watch TV? You could maybe view a commercial before your arm got tired.
But it lacks a lot of things like oh, say, multiuser, PRINTING, multiple API's, a decent TCP/IP stack, USB support, backwards compatibility for anything.
Sure, you could fit it on a zip disk, but System 7.5 will boot in 10-15 seconds on a PPC 604/120 too, and even has printing functionality! (and more driver support, and a decent TCP/IP stack {yes, open transport was a decent TCP/IP stack})
You can't really compare something like BeOS to a modern OS. The functionality difference alone is staggering. BeOS is nice and lightweight but it's hardly useful as a full-fledged OS (unless you like watching spinning OpenGL teapots all day and don't care for an actual productivity application or a usable web browser)
*waits for Gobe productive plug and Mozilla 1.3d352673 build works fine on BeOS and other various flames*
More digging indicates that these are a cache for the thumbnail images in the Desktop Pictures system preference. However the part about the desktop picture being stored on the GPU as a texture is still valid, as is the part about a 50MP image being no slower than a 50x50px GIF.
I routinely set large (50MB, layers) photoshop files as my backdrop out of pure laziness and experience no slowdowns whatsoever as a result. (on a 1ghz 12" powerbook, 768mb RAM)
You could put a 50MP file as the backdrop and after the initial decompression it would be no slower than having a 50x50 GIF.
Yes, it means unlearned.
IGNORANT DOES NOT MEAN RUDE. Bloody ignorant stuck up twats!
Please be nice, I'm only on 384kbps up :/ *cringes*