I suspect the problems stem from installing Konfabulator and a bunch of widgets
Last I checked Konfabulator ran a separate process for each widget, which can cause memory problems real quick. And once OS X starts hitting the disk for vm, especially a slower laptop drive, then you're going to see a real performance hit. Try this; launch 'Applications->Utilities->Activity Monitor'. From the menu bar, select 'Monitor->Dock Icon->Show CPU History'. Now you can watch your CPU usage as you go about your business both with and without Konfabulator running. You can also view individual process usage by bringing up the main window ('Monitor->Show Activity Monitor', or 'Command-1'), and see whats up. I'm currently using an old PB G3 300 w/ 10.3.8 and 320MB, and get respectable performance until vm usage gets heavy. You can check how many swap files are in use via 'Finder->Go->Go To Folder...' and going to "/private/var/vm"
Apple is notorious for not dropping prices on their "old" hardware. They don't keep selling the previous generation when the new one is shipped.
Sure they do. Go to the Apple Store and you'll find a link to sale items on the right side near the bottom. You can pick up a new previous revision 12" PB for $300 off. Got last rev iPods as well. There are links to refurb, promo, and rebate items as well.
When that "third party" is the Press, then the 1st Ammendment applies.
And who or what defines what "the Press" is? Anybody who can create a website? 'Nic dePlume' is only now 19 years old; he started the site when he was 13. What exactly are his credentials? And at what point did it change from a 'rumor' site to a 'news' site?
I run a PowerBook G3 300 as my main machine. Gotta USB-FireWire combo card plugged into the upper PCMCIA slot, and use a USB keyboard and scroll-wheel mouse with it. Right next to it is a Dell PIII 500 with Win2K Pro. I have Office v.X on the one and Office 2000 on the other; both run fine. The Dell is my storage machine, and also my music player. It's generally a bit faster, but when I do anything when the music is playing - scroll, move a window, launch an app - it pops and stutters. Does the Mac slow down with Flash and such? Sure. I'm running 10.3 on unsupported legacy hardware; I expect to have to wait at times. And I also turn off browser-plugins. The only time I get stuttering in Safari is when I'm opening another tab or window behind the current one. I run Activity Monitor with the Dock icon displaying CPU history; I can see at all times what my CPU usage is. I'm picking up a Pismo 500 powerbook soon; it'll be interesting to compare the two then. Of course, thats not to say your experience hasn't been different. But don't tell me Office is unusable on it, 'cause you're quite simply wrong.
No, Quartz Extreme, which makes use of GPU acceleration, arrived with 10.2. Quartz replaced QuickDraw as the graphics API for the Mac OS. Aqua is the name of the actual windowing system. Here's a bit o' info on it.
And as far as viruses, if you think that something that requires active user input and a password to run, then all UNIX-type systems are vulnerable thusly: sudo rm -rf/ Save that with executable permission and send it to your Linux-using buddies, see what happens when they run it. But it ain't a virus.
I thought the iPod locks out the music section and only allows you to use iTunes to transfer files to/from the iPod.
Yes, it does, although I believe that with Windows you can still see the 'hidden' folders. To get around this with OS X, you can: Launch Terminal Type 'ln -s/Volumes/your_iPod_name_here/iPod_Control/Music/F*/* ~/Desktop/My_Temp_Files/'
You now have shortcuts to all the music on your iPod via the 'My_Temp_Files' folder, which is located on your desktop, for convenience.
To copy, again from the Terminal: cp -R/Volumes/your_iPod_name_here/iPod_Control/Music//full_path_to_destination_here
Any operating system being run on another operating system will require emulation.
You can run OS X under Linux without any emulation. It's all virtualization. Emulation, well, emulates hardware. Like Virtual PC. It emulates x86 hardware through software. Mac-On-Linux, for example, allows the virtualized OS to run by giving it access to the underlying system, which must be of an architecture on which it can run natively. Which is why it doesn't work on x86 hardware.
...Apple has a pretty iron-clad case that "John Doe" broke the contractual NDA. They have every legal right to subpoena ThinkSecret for his name...
See, the problem with this is that it presumes that ThinkSecret and Nick DePlume (love that alias) know the identity of "John Doe". What if the leak clicked 'Post Anonymously' (or whatever)? There may be no way for Apple to obtain the info it seeks because it is simply unknown.
But not necessarily of my time or her time or his time or their time. Not everyone wants to browse to and navigate a web site, just to download and burn a cd. Not everyone is that comfortable with it.
and costs me a few cents to download
What if I'm using dial-up, and need to use the phone? 1 '.iso' is going to take hours to download, let alone for instance the 7 Debian discs I'm still downloading (and this at ~300kbps in, as opposed to ~4kbps for 56k dial-up). And this presumes that I have an OS already available with which to do the downloading. Kinda hard to get connected without network support. Also, some people have to pay for bandwidth. Not everyone has the luxury of unlimited broadband.
Well, if they're willing to use Linux, then the OS price is the cost of the CDs you burn the image(s) onto, and therefore negligible.
Wrong. How long does it take to download? Time is money, don't think it ain't. That's not to say that the cost isn't far less; just don't pretend that because the software itself is free, that everything else about it is as well. One thing that bothers me about the geek community is that people seem to think that because they can and want to tinker with their computers that everyone else should as well. Well, guess what. You're wrong. Hell, I know how to change the oil, spark plugs, dist. cap, carb, fuel injector, radiator, timing belt/chain, axels, rear differential, starter, alternator, brake pads, shoes and calipers, and quite a few other items on your average vehicle. Does this mean I want to? Hell no! Thats what you pay a professional for. Same thing goes for meat. I could buy a side of beef, cut it into steaks, and freeze it myself. Do I? No, I stop by the butcher dept. of my local grocer. Most people don't want to tinker with their computers. They don't want to open it up and add RAM or a new vid or sound card, or upgrade the proc or mobo. They want to go to work and do a job, and pay someone else to do theirs. So, please, stop comparing Apples to PCs.
FWIW, I'm downloading the Debian ISOs even as I type this- tried Knoppix earlier and I was impressed with the current state of KDE. Seemed very functional. I like Linux. Doesn't mean I want to compile my own kernel, though.
A lot has been said on the topic, and quite a few folks seem to be under the impression that, because OS X has had a rapid upgrade cycle that this is going to continue. I tend to think that the rate of upgrades is going to slow. OS X is getting to be where Apple wants it. They are starting to look real closely at attracting users from Windows, and it's becoming more important to offer a stable-appearing feature set, for both users and developers.
Those who cautioned against buying before a release date for Tiger should also be listened to - that's good advice. Wait a bit, I think there is going to be another upgrade cycle soon (eMacs at least, and possibly 'Books), see what Apple does with Tiger, and buy once they've announced. But while you're waiting, go play around at an Apple Store or CompUSA or somesuch, make sure you really want to make the purchase.
Writing to it isn't. If I can use a specialized low-power chip to compress files to a smaller size before writing, the savings in energy use alone could be significant over time, not to mention higher possible resolutions and the ability to shoot pictures faster. It seems to me that a digital camera is the perfect application for a specialized chip. It does one thing - take pictures. Digital pictures are the future of film - digital cameras began outselling traditional cameras last year<ref>, and that hasn't changed. <ref><ref>
Basically, a self-similar Poincare Hypersurface of a dynamical system that is sensitively dependent on initial conditions in at least one of it's phase space dimensions.
Remove the COMMON DLLS of QuickTime, not the Application and try OSX to see how well Finder works.
Of course it won't work the way it's intended. That's not what I was trying to say. If that's the way I came across, then I apologize. I'll be honest - I don't follow the MS lawsuits real closely, so I could very well be wrong in my understanding of the arguments. I thought that a lot of it had to do with MS libraries playing nice with other peoples libraries, and MS made it hard to replace their apps with others. Perhaps you could post some links.
Which version? Windows 2000 and XP have had GUI stripped version available for years now. Look up Windows Embedded, or even take a look at the architectural model of Windows NT to see that Win32 is the higher level cosmetic interface that sits on the NT kernel.
Again, some links, please. How do I install it on my legacy hardware? What CLI apps are available? Can I install an X-windows type system, if I decide I do want a GUI?
Not sure why you think it is hard, or impossible.
What do I think is hard or impossible? What I meant was that whether or not one can easily replace windows explorer or ie or wmp, MS wants us to think that it's very difficult.
You won't find many XWindows users from the old days that would say that replacing an OS shell is something special.
I'm not saying that replacing an OS shell is special. I'm saying that, from my perspective and experience, replacing Apples apps with third-party offerings is easier on OS X than Win9x/NT systems.
You are saying that Windows XP cannot operate idependently of Microsoft Office.
Where, exactly? What I said was
With MS, the apps are portrayed as being necessary to the operation of the OS.
I went ahead and added some emphasis to help with your confusion, since you apparently have 'special needs'. Do I sound a bit prickish? Maybe it's your
You are a moron.
comment. Is this where I'm supposed to say "I'm made of rubber, You're made of glue..."? It's been a while since I engaged in schoolyard diatribe.
Remove all of QuickTime off of your precious OSX and see how well finder does QuickTime previews, and other apps like adobe Photoshop or EVEN iMovie import or export QuickTime formats.
Buzz... It will NOT work, just like if you removed Windows Media Codecs and DLLs off your Windows machine. They are SHARED Core libraries that EVEN THE GUI of the OS uses. And yes, even on your precious OSX.>
Deleteing Quicktime.app doesn't remove any of the codecs. I can drag it to the trash and empty it, no problem. Finder still previews just fine, thank you. As I understand it, WMP isn't quite so easily removed. And as long as we're talking about the Finder, I could decide to trash it and port Konquerer, use it as my file browser instead. Or Safari. Or even IE. Now wouldn't that be ironic.
Even NT can run without ANY of these installed on them. NT could run with NO WINDOWS GUI, in fact it does.
I can download the source and binaries for OS Xs kernel. I can install and run it without any GUI layer at all. Could you please point to directions on how one installs NT without the GUI layer?
Explorer can EASILY be replaced in Windows. It has been easy to replace for YEARS AND YEARS.
Which is why I said 'portrayed' as inseparable. MS seems to want everyone to believe that their apps can't be removed without hampering core functionality. I'm not saying it's true. I understand that the apps are (or should be) nothing more than front-ends.
It is amazing when its Apple but evil when its Microsoft?
It's a question of scale. Apple doesn't truly integrate its apps; rather, it creates separate apps that work well together and can easily trade info back and forth, yet no single app is required at all. You could replace every Apple app on your OS X system, and the core OS would still operate fine. Even the Finder. With MS, the apps are portrayed as being necessary to the operation of the OS.
Slashdot Mirror
And here Apple just released a security update, and this only one month since the last.
(tig)
Last I checked Konfabulator ran a separate process for each widget, which can cause memory problems real quick. And once OS X starts hitting the disk for vm, especially a slower laptop drive, then you're going to see a real performance hit. Try this; launch 'Applications->Utilities->Activity Monitor'. From the menu bar, select 'Monitor->Dock Icon->Show CPU History'. Now you can watch your CPU usage as you go about your business both with and without Konfabulator running. You can also view individual process usage by bringing up the main window ('Monitor->Show Activity Monitor', or 'Command-1'), and see whats up. I'm currently using an old PB G3 300 w/ 10.3.8 and 320MB, and get respectable performance until vm usage gets heavy. You can check how many swap files are in use via 'Finder->Go->Go To Folder...' and going to "/private/var/vm"
(tig)
Sure they do. Go to the Apple Store and you'll find a link to sale items on the right side near the bottom. You can pick up a new previous revision 12" PB for $300 off. Got last rev iPods as well. There are links to refurb, promo, and rebate items as well.
(tig)
And who or what defines what "the Press" is? Anybody who can create a website? 'Nic dePlume' is only now 19 years old; he started the site when he was 13. What exactly are his credentials? And at what point did it change from a 'rumor' site to a 'news' site?
(tig)
Troll.
I run a PowerBook G3 300 as my main machine. Gotta USB-FireWire combo card plugged into the upper PCMCIA slot, and use a USB keyboard and scroll-wheel mouse with it. Right next to it is a Dell PIII 500 with Win2K Pro. I have Office v.X on the one and Office 2000 on the other; both run fine. The Dell is my storage machine, and also my music player. It's generally a bit faster, but when I do anything when the music is playing - scroll, move a window, launch an app - it pops and stutters. Does the Mac slow down with Flash and such? Sure. I'm running 10.3 on unsupported legacy hardware; I expect to have to wait at times. And I also turn off browser-plugins. The only time I get stuttering in Safari is when I'm opening another tab or window behind the current one. I run Activity Monitor with the Dock icon displaying CPU history; I can see at all times what my CPU usage is.
I'm picking up a Pismo 500 powerbook soon; it'll be interesting to compare the two then.
Of course, thats not to say your experience hasn't been different. But don't tell me Office is unusable on it, 'cause you're quite simply wrong.
(tig)
Thanks for the clarification.
(tig)
My bad.
(tig)
No, Quartz Extreme, which makes use of GPU acceleration, arrived with 10.2. Quartz replaced QuickDraw as the graphics API for the Mac OS. Aqua is the name of the actual windowing system. Here's a bit o' info on it.
(tig)
You sure 'bout that?
And as far as viruses, if you think that something that requires active user input and a password to run, then all UNIX-type systems are vulnerable thusly:
sudo rm -rf
Save that with executable permission and send it to your Linux-using buddies, see what happens when they run it. But it ain't a virus.
(tig)
Yes, it does, although I believe that with Windows you can still see the 'hidden' folders. To get around this with OS X, you can:
Launch Terminal
Type 'ln -s
You now have shortcuts to all the music on your iPod via the 'My_Temp_Files' folder, which is located on your desktop, for convenience.
To copy, again from the Terminal:
cp -R
(tig)
You can run OS X under Linux without any emulation. It's all virtualization. Emulation, well, emulates hardware. Like Virtual PC. It emulates x86 hardware through software. Mac-On-Linux, for example, allows the virtualized OS to run by giving it access to the underlying system, which must be of an architecture on which it can run natively. Which is why it doesn't work on x86 hardware.
If I am misinformed, please correct me.
(tig)
See, the problem with this is that it presumes that ThinkSecret and Nick DePlume (love that alias) know the identity of "John Doe". What if the leak clicked 'Post Anonymously' (or whatever)? There may be no way for Apple to obtain the info it seeks because it is simply unknown.
(tig)
That's cheap. From where?
(tig)
Point conceded. This is a relevant distinction.
But not necessarily of my time or her time or his time or their time. Not everyone wants to browse to and navigate a web site, just to download and burn a cd. Not everyone is that comfortable with it.
What if I'm using dial-up, and need to use the phone? 1 '.iso' is going to take hours to download, let alone for instance the 7 Debian discs I'm still downloading (and this at ~300kbps in, as opposed to ~4kbps for 56k dial-up). And this presumes that I have an OS already available with which to do the downloading. Kinda hard to get connected without network support. Also, some people have to pay for bandwidth. Not everyone has the luxury of unlimited broadband.
(tig)
Wrong. How long does it take to download? Time is money, don't think it ain't. That's not to say that the cost isn't far less; just don't pretend that because the software itself is free, that everything else about it is as well.
One thing that bothers me about the geek community is that people seem to think that because they can and want to tinker with their computers that everyone else should as well. Well, guess what. You're wrong. Hell, I know how to change the oil, spark plugs, dist. cap, carb, fuel injector, radiator, timing belt/chain, axels, rear differential, starter, alternator, brake pads, shoes and calipers, and quite a few other items on your average vehicle. Does this mean I want to? Hell no! Thats what you pay a professional for. Same thing goes for meat. I could buy a side of beef, cut it into steaks, and freeze it myself. Do I? No, I stop by the butcher dept. of my local grocer. Most people don't want to tinker with their computers. They don't want to open it up and add RAM or a new vid or sound card, or upgrade the proc or mobo. They want to go to work and do a job, and pay someone else to do theirs. So, please, stop comparing Apples to PCs.
FWIW, I'm downloading the Debian ISOs even as I type this- tried Knoppix earlier and I was impressed with the current state of KDE. Seemed very functional. I like Linux. Doesn't mean I want to compile my own kernel, though.
(tig)
A lot has been said on the topic, and quite a few folks seem to be under the impression that, because OS X has had a rapid upgrade cycle that this is going to continue. I tend to think that the rate of upgrades is going to slow. OS X is getting to be where Apple wants it. They are starting to look real closely at attracting users from Windows, and it's becoming more important to offer a stable-appearing feature set, for both users and developers.
Those who cautioned against buying before a release date for Tiger should also be listened to - that's good advice. Wait a bit, I think there is going to be another upgrade cycle soon (eMacs at least, and possibly 'Books), see what Apple does with Tiger, and buy once they've announced. But while you're waiting, go play around at an Apple Store or CompUSA or somesuch, make sure you really want to make the purchase.
(tig)
Mac is short for Macintosh. You know, like the apple.
:-)
Time to fire the research dept, maybe?
(tig)
Writing to it isn't. If I can use a specialized low-power chip to compress files to a smaller size before writing, the savings in energy use alone could be significant over time, not to mention higher possible resolutions and the ability to shoot pictures faster.
It seems to me that a digital camera is the perfect application for a specialized chip. It does one thing - take pictures. Digital pictures are the future of film - digital cameras began outselling traditional cameras last year<ref>, and that hasn't changed.
<ref> <ref>
(tig)
Well, that clears things up nicely...
(tig)
Of course it won't work the way it's intended. That's not what I was trying to say. If that's the way I came across, then I apologize. I'll be honest - I don't follow the MS lawsuits real closely, so I could very well be wrong in my understanding of the arguments. I thought that a lot of it had to do with MS libraries playing nice with other peoples libraries, and MS made it hard to replace their apps with others. Perhaps you could post some links.
Again, some links, please. How do I install it on my legacy hardware? What CLI apps are available? Can I install an X-windows type system, if I decide I do want a GUI?
What do I think is hard or impossible? What I meant was that whether or not one can easily replace windows explorer or ie or wmp, MS wants us to think that it's very difficult.
I'm not saying that replacing an OS shell is special. I'm saying that, from my perspective and experience, replacing Apples apps with third-party offerings is easier on OS X than Win9x/NT systems.
(tig)
Where, exactly? What I said was
I went ahead and added some emphasis to help with your confusion, since you apparently have 'special needs'. Do I sound a bit prickish? Maybe it's your
comment. Is this where I'm supposed to say "I'm made of rubber, You're made of glue..."? It's been a while since I engaged in schoolyard diatribe.
(tig)
Deleteing Quicktime.app doesn't remove any of the codecs. I can drag it to the trash and empty it, no problem. Finder still previews just fine, thank you. As I understand it, WMP isn't quite so easily removed.
And as long as we're talking about the Finder, I could decide to trash it and port Konquerer, use it as my file browser instead. Or Safari. Or even IE. Now wouldn't that be ironic.
I can download the source and binaries for OS Xs kernel. I can install and run it without any GUI layer at all. Could you please point to directions on how one installs NT without the GUI layer?
Which is why I said 'portrayed' as inseparable. MS seems to want everyone to believe that their apps can't be removed without hampering core functionality. I'm not saying it's true. I understand that the apps are (or should be) nothing more than front-ends.
(tig)
Go here...,
then here.
Enjoy!
(tig)
It's a question of scale. Apple doesn't truly integrate its apps; rather, it creates separate apps that work well together and can easily trade info back and forth, yet no single app is required at all. You could replace every Apple app on your OS X system, and the core OS would still operate fine. Even the Finder.
With MS, the apps are portrayed as being necessary to the operation of the OS.
(tig)
No, in fact, we won't. Didn't bother with 'Clone', ain't gonna bother with this. Waste of time, waste of money.
And Lucas most certainly can do whatever he wants with his ideas. I'd prefer he shove 'em, since they're all crap anyways.
(tig)