Mac people who are generally artists and secretaries and such aren't generally bothered by this, but people that are used to being a little more productive with computers are totally annoyed by this..
People who are used to being productive on other systems that work differently are totally annoyed by this when they start using a Mac. After using it for a few months, they can get used to it, learn how to work around it, etc. Cooperative multitasking is definitely inferior, but it's not as bad as it seems at first, and has improved quite a bit over the last decade.
Basically Apple, upon switching to the method that everyone else has used for years, has all but admitted that they were wrong and stupid for using the less productive method they've used for ever..
I was under the impression they'd basically admitted that years ago, when they started working on Copland, because this was one of the things Copland was supposed to fix. They couldn't make it work, and scrapped the project, at which point they began A) updating classic Mac OS in ways that were actually possible, B) shopping around for a new OS to start over with, because the core of classic Mac OS has gotten ugly and obnoxious and really can't be fixed.
Would somebody please explain to me what the hell this is about? I've heard lots of people say it over the last several years, and I'm beginning to wonder what everybody else means by "multitask", because what I mean by multitask, Mac OS has done since System 5 (or so I've heard - I haven't used 5, but it sounds pretty close to 6, and yes, you need to enable MultiFinder, so yes, multitasking before System 7 is a bit of a hack, but it's there).
Applications can bring your system to a halt for a few seconds, particularly while launching, or while doing something else heavy-duty (such as exporting a movie, or compressing a large JPEG image, etc. On other OSes (including OSX and Windows and Linux) this doesn't happen. I can understand that if you're not used to it, it could bug the hell out of you, and make you think the OS is a piece of crap. If you're used to it, it really rarely bothers you at all, because usually when you're waiting for it, you're waiting for it, not switching to do something else - and (at least with well-behaved apps) if it's gonna take longer than a couple seconds, the app will relenquish control anyway. This is something that apps have gotten much better at over the last 10 years. It is, however, a shortcoming of the operating system, which is why Apple decided to abandon it.
Is that what people are talking about when they say it doesn't multitask? If that's what you mean, I wish you would use a different word; you seem to imply that I can't have a dozen applications running simultaneously and jump back and forth between them, which is something I'm accustomed to doing regularly (when Windows users see me work this way on Windows, they're usually surprised at how much I have open at once).
Well it has been the default OS since the middleish of January so I would say it is seeing "widespread adoption".
The default OS on new machines, yes. Schools tend to buy new computers during the summer, and not necessarily every year. So, since OSX became the default OS in January, schools that buy new Macs this summer will be running OSX this fall. Schools that don't buy new Macs this summer may not switch to OSX until next fall. Of course some have already switched, but most have not, and many schools still use Macs that are too old to run OSX at all (or at least to run it well - a 266MHz Rev B iMac with 64MB RAM technically could run OSX, but it's probably not a great idea).
0.9.9 on Mac OS X, but yes, I'd say the 90% figure is probably close. 90% of Google queries come from Windows. Mozilla and Netscape 6 are classified among "Other", and outnumbered by Netscape 4; MSIE makes up the rest. http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html
Maybe I'm just a bit too skeptical sometimes, but look at the right page -- doesn't it appear blurrier & darker than the left page? Perhaps it's the fault of the scanner...
I'm sure it's the scanner. If Apple did doctor the image, there'd be no difference between the left and right sides - that's not what they'd doctor. If anything was doctored, it would be the stuff shown in "top", and maybe some other things - notice that perl is listed as a running process, but the only open terminal window is running top?
Its a shame the PC makers don't bribe schools to use PC's like Apple bribes schools to use Macs.
It's a shame schools don't bother to configure Macs to be usable machines. They usually have a minimal set of applications installed (only what is required for the classes that are taught on Macs), and some security software (FoolProof or similar) that prevents users from doing things like installing an ssh client. Hopefully once Mac OS X sees widespread adoption, this will begin to change; part of the problem is that classic Mac OS was never designed for a multi-user environment at all.
But hey, maybe you're used to OS9, with it's GNU-style philosophy of 'Software should be free (not as in speech, or beer, but free to write on whatever memory it feels like)'
Damn, that's got to be the funniest thing I've read in awhile. Kinda defeats the purpose of having a specific chunk of memory (set via Get Info) allocated to each application at launch time, doesn't it?
Just have to point out that Mac OS has a "Sleep" feature that has been working just fine for several years, and on certain newer systems will also write the contents of RAM to the disk and shut down completely. On newer Macs, the power button doubles as a sleep button, since Apple figures you shouldn't ever need to shut down your machine unless you plan to unplug it - and if you need to do that, there's a menu option to shut it down via software.
The only real problem is that, obviously, any active network sessions die. You'll get a warning if you try to put the system to sleep while an AppleShare volume is mounted, but there's no warning for anything else. Since the system can be set to sleep after idle time, this means a large download could be aborted if you walk away for long enough.
Re:I want a version of this...
on
e-Denounce
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I've been using Spamcop for the last year or so, and have been very happy with it. Unfortunately though, although it works great as a spam filter, reporting all my spam has not reduced the quantity of spam I get. It is rather gratifying to get a reply from a sysadmin saying the user has been dealt with, but the spam just keeps coming. The few minutes it takes to report it just doesn't seem worth it anymore.:-(
So I propose that we let them tweak their software with these beta releases. Then when they release a final version we will see the source code. Why do we need to see it now?
Who's "we"? People who read Slashdot? Or people who have devoted countless hours to writing software that Lindows is now using illegally?
Just like "Bob" became "Clippy," I'm sure this thing will re-surface.
Bob became Clippy? I thought Bob was a desktop shell thing, replacing Explorer? Bob was to word processing as MSN Explorer is to e-mail? Something along those lines?
Damn straight. Sure, there are more apps available for Windows, but most Windows-only apps either A) have a Mac-only equivalent that's usually better anyway, or B) suck ass.
About a year ago I downloaded a pirated copy of Norton AntiVirus. The installer sat on my desktop for a week or two as I considered installing it. I threw it in the Trash. I don't need it. Not even if I can have it for free.
What do I need to know about upgrading from 1.3 to 2.0? What's different in the configuration? Any changes in the way the files are laid out by default? Will my existing httpd.conf work without modification? Would that be a stupid thing to try?
I thought I heard somewhere that 2.0 might make it possible to have PHP scripts with per-user permissions, like you can get CGI scripts to do if you use suEXEC to setuid to the appropriate user before executing. This is important for servers with multiple users running their own web sites; even if all your users are trusted not to mess with each other's stuff you can run into icky situations where a PHP script writes to a file that the user then doesn't have FTP access to (so they have to write another PHP script to access it). Did I hear correctly? If so, what's involved in configuring it? If not, does anyone have any workarounds?
Excerpt from new OSHA regulation on computer systems: "....if said motherboard is equipped with an Intel central processing unit, an appropriate warning label bearing the words 'Intel Inside' shall be permanently affixed to the case in a prominent location."
Yes, that happens all the time...not. Why do you think that stuff makes big news? It's extremely rare.
If anyone knows where Ashley Pond or Miranda Gaddis are, the FBI would like to hear from you; they each disappeared on their way to school several miles from my house.
Some people have commented that nobody would buy a Mac jsut so they could use an iPod; that's insane. Consider, though: an iPod costs $400, and that's plenty insane right there. For only twice that much, you can buy a whole computer (500MHz G3 CRT iMac).
I just bought a CD MP3 player for $50 and it suits me just fine. If I had a bit more money lying around, I'd have gotten an iPod instead, to connect to my Mac.
Oh yeah, and when the Democrats ruled, it was all roses and song.
It at least looked better. The Bush administration isn't really even pretending that something besides the interests of large corporations matters to them. The Clinton administration at least pretended.
The legislation I referred to is the Tauzin-Dingell Act. I should have linked to it before, but didn't feel like looking for it.
Haven't you figured it out yet? Or are you still trying to make sure the wrong lizard won't get into Office?
I'll probably vote for Nader again, but I'd feel much more comfortable with the Democrats in power than the Republicans. Please understand, I don't actually like Democrats; they're evil too.
Slashdot Mirror
Mac people who are generally artists and secretaries and such aren't generally bothered by this, but people that are used to being a little more productive with computers are totally annoyed by this..
People who are used to being productive on other systems that work differently are totally annoyed by this when they start using a Mac. After using it for a few months, they can get used to it, learn how to work around it, etc. Cooperative multitasking is definitely inferior, but it's not as bad as it seems at first, and has improved quite a bit over the last decade.
Basically Apple, upon switching to the method that everyone else has used for years, has all but admitted that they were wrong and stupid for using the less productive method they've used for ever..
I was under the impression they'd basically admitted that years ago, when they started working on Copland, because this was one of the things Copland was supposed to fix. They couldn't make it work, and scrapped the project, at which point they began A) updating classic Mac OS in ways that were actually possible, B) shopping around for a new OS to start over with, because the core of classic Mac OS has gotten ugly and obnoxious and really can't be fixed.
sure pre OS X macos's don't multitask..
Would somebody please explain to me what the hell this is about? I've heard lots of people say it over the last several years, and I'm beginning to wonder what everybody else means by "multitask", because what I mean by multitask, Mac OS has done since System 5 (or so I've heard - I haven't used 5, but it sounds pretty close to 6, and yes, you need to enable MultiFinder, so yes, multitasking before System 7 is a bit of a hack, but it's there).
Applications can bring your system to a halt for a few seconds, particularly while launching, or while doing something else heavy-duty (such as exporting a movie, or compressing a large JPEG image, etc. On other OSes (including OSX and Windows and Linux) this doesn't happen. I can understand that if you're not used to it, it could bug the hell out of you, and make you think the OS is a piece of crap. If you're used to it, it really rarely bothers you at all, because usually when you're waiting for it, you're waiting for it, not switching to do something else - and (at least with well-behaved apps) if it's gonna take longer than a couple seconds, the app will relenquish control anyway. This is something that apps have gotten much better at over the last 10 years. It is, however, a shortcoming of the operating system, which is why Apple decided to abandon it.
Is that what people are talking about when they say it doesn't multitask? If that's what you mean, I wish you would use a different word; you seem to imply that I can't have a dozen applications running simultaneously and jump back and forth between them, which is something I'm accustomed to doing regularly (when Windows users see me work this way on Windows, they're usually surprised at how much I have open at once).
Well it has been the default OS since the middleish of January so I would say it is seeing "widespread adoption".
The default OS on new machines, yes. Schools tend to buy new computers during the summer, and not necessarily every year. So, since OSX became the default OS in January, schools that buy new Macs this summer will be running OSX this fall. Schools that don't buy new Macs this summer may not switch to OSX until next fall. Of course some have already switched, but most have not, and many schools still use Macs that are too old to run OSX at all (or at least to run it well - a 266MHz Rev B iMac with 64MB RAM technically could run OSX, but it's probably not a great idea).
Upgrade your RAM; that'll probably fix it. How much swap is Mozilla using?
0.9.9 on Mac OS X, but yes, I'd say the 90% figure is probably close. 90% of Google queries come from Windows. Mozilla and Netscape 6 are classified among "Other", and outnumbered by Netscape 4; MSIE makes up the rest. http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html
You have been eaten by a grue.
Yeah but, unless you hire an 'expensive expert' you can't write off the investment in apache. Thats the problem with free software.
Is anyone looking to write off an investment? I can be expensive if necessary!
you're almost going to have to re-do a serious web application from scratch when you change platforms.
Well then, that answers that question - switching to Apache is not an option, to many companies.
Maybe I'm just a bit too skeptical sometimes, but look at the right page -- doesn't it appear blurrier & darker than the left page? Perhaps it's the fault of the scanner...
I'm sure it's the scanner. If Apple did doctor the image, there'd be no difference between the left and right sides - that's not what they'd doctor. If anything was doctored, it would be the stuff shown in "top", and maybe some other things - notice that perl is listed as a running process, but the only open terminal window is running top?
Its a shame the PC makers don't bribe schools to use PC's like Apple bribes schools to use Macs.
It's a shame schools don't bother to configure Macs to be usable machines. They usually have a minimal set of applications installed (only what is required for the classes that are taught on Macs), and some security software (FoolProof or similar) that prevents users from doing things like installing an ssh client. Hopefully once Mac OS X sees widespread adoption, this will begin to change; part of the problem is that classic Mac OS was never designed for a multi-user environment at all.
But hey, maybe you're used to OS9, with it's GNU-style philosophy of 'Software should be free (not as in speech, or beer, but free to write on whatever memory it feels like)'
Damn, that's got to be the funniest thing I've read in awhile. Kinda defeats the purpose of having a specific chunk of memory (set via Get Info) allocated to each application at launch time, doesn't it?
Just have to point out that Mac OS has a "Sleep" feature that has been working just fine for several years, and on certain newer systems will also write the contents of RAM to the disk and shut down completely. On newer Macs, the power button doubles as a sleep button, since Apple figures you shouldn't ever need to shut down your machine unless you plan to unplug it - and if you need to do that, there's a menu option to shut it down via software.
The only real problem is that, obviously, any active network sessions die. You'll get a warning if you try to put the system to sleep while an AppleShare volume is mounted, but there's no warning for anything else. Since the system can be set to sleep after idle time, this means a large download could be aborted if you walk away for long enough.
I've been using Spamcop for the last year or so, and have been very happy with it. Unfortunately though, although it works great as a spam filter, reporting all my spam has not reduced the quantity of spam I get. It is rather gratifying to get a reply from a sysadmin saying the user has been dealt with, but the spam just keeps coming. The few minutes it takes to report it just doesn't seem worth it anymore. :-(
Star Wars 4 (was 1)- The New Hope
It was "Episode IV: A New Hope" when it was originally released, even though it was only one movie and was marketed simply as "Star Wars".
So I propose that we let them tweak their software with these beta releases. Then when they release a final version we will see the source code. Why do we need to see it now?
Who's "we"? People who read Slashdot? Or people who have devoted countless hours to writing software that Lindows is now using illegally?
Take a look at these two bits of code from http://www.slickhosting.com/contact.shtml :
O ver="window.status='mailto:hostingsli ckhosting.com';return true;"c khosting.com</A>
<A HREF="mailto:hosting%40slickhosting.com"
onMouse
onMouseOut="window.status='';">hostingsli
<!-- Spam trap
abuse@ (your domain) HREF="mailto:abuse@ (your domain) "
root@ (your domain) HREF="mailto:root@ (your domain) "
postmaster@ (your domain) HREF="mailto:postmaster@ (your domain) "
uce@ftc.gov HREF="mailto:uce@ftc.gov"
-->
Just like "Bob" became "Clippy," I'm sure this thing will re-surface.
Bob became Clippy? I thought Bob was a desktop shell thing, replacing Explorer? Bob was to word processing as MSN Explorer is to e-mail? Something along those lines?
Damn straight. Sure, there are more apps available for Windows, but most Windows-only apps either A) have a Mac-only equivalent that's usually better anyway, or B) suck ass.
About a year ago I downloaded a pirated copy of Norton AntiVirus. The installer sat on my desktop for a week or two as I considered installing it. I threw it in the Trash. I don't need it. Not even if I can have it for free.
Memory prices have doubled in six months. What decline?
The decline that ended 6 months ago?
It was a sweet decline while it lasted. 256MB RAM cost me far less than 128MB had a few months earlier.
What do I need to know about upgrading from 1.3 to 2.0? What's different in the configuration? Any changes in the way the files are laid out by default? Will my existing httpd.conf work without modification? Would that be a stupid thing to try?
I thought I heard somewhere that 2.0 might make it possible to have PHP scripts with per-user permissions, like you can get CGI scripts to do if you use suEXEC to setuid to the appropriate user before executing. This is important for servers with multiple users running their own web sites; even if all your users are trusted not to mess with each other's stuff you can run into icky situations where a PHP script writes to a file that the user then doesn't have FTP access to (so they have to write another PHP script to access it). Did I hear correctly? If so, what's involved in configuring it? If not, does anyone have any workarounds?
I suggested a similar idea.
Excerpt from new OSHA regulation on computer systems: "....if said motherboard is equipped with an Intel central processing unit, an appropriate warning label bearing the words 'Intel Inside' shall be permanently affixed to the case in a prominent location."
- Bruce Murphy
Yes, that happens all the time...not. Why do you think that stuff makes big news? It's extremely rare.
If anyone knows where Ashley Pond or Miranda Gaddis are, the FBI would like to hear from you; they each disappeared on their way to school several miles from my house.
Some people have commented that nobody would buy a Mac jsut so they could use an iPod; that's insane. Consider, though: an iPod costs $400, and that's plenty insane right there. For only twice that much, you can buy a whole computer (500MHz G3 CRT iMac).
I just bought a CD MP3 player for $50 and it suits me just fine. If I had a bit more money lying around, I'd have gotten an iPod instead, to connect to my Mac.
Oh yeah, and when the Democrats ruled, it was all roses and song.
It at least looked better. The Bush administration isn't really even pretending that something besides the interests of large corporations matters to them. The Clinton administration at least pretended.
The legislation I referred to is the Tauzin-Dingell Act. I should have linked to it before, but didn't feel like looking for it.
Haven't you figured it out yet? Or are you still trying to make sure the wrong lizard won't get into Office?
I'll probably vote for Nader again, but I'd feel much more comfortable with the Democrats in power than the Republicans. Please understand, I don't actually like Democrats; they're evil too.