The OS X port has been slowed by the incomplete port of gcc 2.95 by Apple. Apparently the gcc 3.0 port is better, so that they could at least compile the thing. Now the porters need to catch up on almost a year of development, and make an Aqua frontend.
I personally would be very happy with an X11 frontend, but that somehow does not quite feel the same under OS X.
Microsoft Internet Explorer has - seen from the users point of view - been virtually unchanged in terms of enhancements and new developments since version 4.0, where Netscape 4.x was fully cloned.
I am writing this in IE 5.1 for Mac OS X, where the only facility I have found to be different than 4.0 for Windows, is the ability to track online auctions, which is useless to me.
Mozilla is a refreshing new product, where the new stuff like the tabs, sidebars and navigation bar mean that I can get rid of some of the things that has nagged me the most in both IE and Netscape 4.x.
Since Mozilla is going to be basically everywhere, it seems that this is going to prompt the user interface stuff in the browsers again. With the new facilities now available in both the major browsers like XSLT we should see a surge in new XML-based services, and that the rest of the browsers keep up.
I primarily use reference manuals at the moment, and for those I have in both versions (currently some O'Reilly books and the http://photo.net guide) it is great to look for some topic in the hypertext version and then locate it in the paper version. Much much faster than dealing with indexes.
I would say that the reference material should be printed in a high-durable version (see to O'Reilly again) along with both HTML and PDF versions on the media.
My experience with the Solaris version of Internet Explorer was good for a couple of hours until it started freezing on startup, which it has very consistently done ever since. Rather sad, since it really looks like the Windows version, but right now it performs miserably.
Some time ago Silicon Graphics asked for comments from users regarding what we wanted, and I replied that opensourcing xfs was probably the most relevant thing they could do. Since apparently SGI is moving away from their Irix95, and they have a huge investment in xfs development, this appears to be a natural step towards having xfs on their Linux platform. This is really a good thing, and the only OpenSource initiative SGI has done so far which will actually matter to most users. Now 4dwm would be nice too - that is really a nice window manager.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of the problem apparently was getting the bits of the medium - since the 80's this has been superceeded by the Internet.
Who uses floppies anymore if you can send it by email?
Put the thing on the net, and let people mirror it!
You can remove IE and install Mozilla instead.
Mozilla 1.0 is as usable as IE on OS X
Most people who are not intimately familiar with keyboards do not have very impressive data entry rates.
Wonder what a well-trained person could do with this.
Twenty years ago a 5 Mb harddrive was big and expensive, but not unattainable
Ten years ago a 1 Gb hard drive was the same.
Today a 200 Gb hard drive is the same.
If anything the development has accellerated.
I have heard that ThinkPads are excellent machines.
I write this on an Apple PowerBook (the slick one), and that is also an excellent machine, and it runs Unix natively. 100% supported.
Great if you just need to get work done.
The HotSpot JVM compiles to native code as needed. Therefore the JVM does not fill out the L1 + L2 cache
You might want to read the TeX and MetaFont books, which are what you want as well as being funny (occasionally).
Getting the point across does not imply being dull.
The OS X port has been slowed by the incomplete port of gcc 2.95 by Apple. Apparently the gcc 3.0 port is better, so that they could at least compile the thing. Now the porters need to catch up on almost a year of development, and make an Aqua frontend.
I personally would be very happy with an X11 frontend, but that somehow does not quite feel the same under OS X.
Since apparently the porting process was halted by a deficiency in the Apple version of gcc 2.95, this may take quite a while yet.
I tried compiling gcc 3.0.4 the other day, and it doesn't. All in all, a large amount of patience is appropriate for Mac platforms.
In order to sample anything reliably you need to have at least the double in sampling frequency.
Therefore you need about 17000 bits pr inch, unless you want a _lot_ of error correction.
Microsoft Internet Explorer has - seen from the users point of view - been virtually unchanged in terms of enhancements and new developments since version 4.0, where Netscape 4.x was fully cloned.
I am writing this in IE 5.1 for Mac OS X, where the only facility I have found to be different than 4.0 for Windows, is the ability to track online auctions, which is useless to me.
Mozilla is a refreshing new product, where the new stuff like the tabs, sidebars and navigation bar mean that I can get rid of some of the things that has nagged me the most in both IE and Netscape 4.x.
Since Mozilla is going to be basically everywhere, it seems that this is going to prompt the user interface stuff in the browsers again. With the new facilities now available in both the major browsers like XSLT we should see a surge in new XML-based services, and that the rest of the browsers keep up.
I primarily use reference manuals at the moment, and for those I have in both versions (currently some O'Reilly books and the http://photo.net guide) it is great to look for some topic in the hypertext version and then locate it in the paper version. Much much faster than dealing with indexes.
I would say that the reference material should be printed in a high-durable version (see to O'Reilly again) along with both HTML and PDF versions on the media.
--
My experience with the Solaris version of Internet Explorer was good for a couple of hours until it started freezing on startup, which it has very consistently done ever since. Rather sad, since it really looks like the Windows version, but right now it performs miserably.
--
Solaris is available for the x86 platform,
and have as far as I know good OpenGL support for a limited range of hardware.
You might find it very different to Linux, though.
A personal edition of Solaris is available for a very low price directly from Sun.
--
Some time ago Silicon Graphics asked for comments from users regarding what we wanted, and I replied that opensourcing xfs was probably the most relevant thing they could do. Since apparently SGI is moving away from their Irix95, and they have a huge investment in xfs development, this appears to be a natural step towards having xfs on their Linux platform. This is really a good thing, and the only OpenSource initiative SGI has done so far which will actually matter to most users. Now 4dwm would be nice too - that is really a nice window manager.