10.1 ran nicely on my 300Mhz blueberry iBook. Not as fast as OS 9, but certainly not 10 times slower. Haven't toyed with Jaguar yet since my HDD died on me (Long story involving water, beer and electricity) but if the reports of it's speed improvements are anything to consider, it sure as hell isn't 10 times slower.
10 times less apps
I have never been at a loss for aplications. Perhaps you could elighten me as to which apps you can not get (or replace) under X.
10 times the number of hacks apple has gone through to make a unix like OS to run mac things
As opposed to how many hacks the linux community has instituted to get Windows things to run under linux?
you people think that anything commercial that takes unix serioulsy must be god sent
Usualy it is. Commecrial support for *NIX is a good thing. It provides a sense of seriousness that give *NIX the immage it needs to be taken seriously in other places.
you run your silly linux dist and talk to a bunch of other losers who run their stupid linux shit
Now I know that Linux is challenging to get up and running, but it's not nice to call names just because other people are smarter than you and have had more success. Go back to running your Windows 95 box and finish your homework. Recess is starting soon.
Most of the games, provided they do not need to directly access the hardware, will run quite nicely. And again, nothing is going to stop your current Mac (which I assume you bought those games for, I hope you didn't go by a bunch of classic games in preperation to by a new mac) will still run and boot the same as always in 2003. No magical spy chip is going to deactivate your old mac.
We're abusive because we often have to correct people that don't use common sense. It's like trying to explain to your boss why it's not a good idea to open "clickme.exe" from babylovesya@sexmail.com After correcting and explaining 4 or 5 times (The parent poste could have found all his information in the posts above) it gets annoying and repetative.
Case in point on taking a while to phase out old hardware amd such in the PC market, how many people do you know who still have ISA slots in their computer. Would you all scream bloody murder if M$ killed ISA support or would you realize that the horse is dead, it's time to move on?
But why would you want to? Do you install windows 95 on your new PC becasue you can't get program XWZ to run under XP or 2k? No, you either run it on your old machine (Which many mac users keep their old machines) or you find a replacement.
This is perfectly reasonable. Apple wants to move forward, you can't move forward if you are anchored in the past. It's the same thing as M$ killing native DOS support. It just had to be done.
The main difference that I see between the PC and the Mac worlds on this issue is that the OS 9 users aren't being told go jump in a lake, they're being told they need to start switching or they will be left behind. However, even for those die hard mac users who still have an old 68k mac laying about. There is hope of running their favorite programs on their new machines. Check out www.emulation.net for classic emulators, 68k emulators, DOS emulators, C64 emulators and everything else under the sun. Oh and it's all mac too.
There's plenty of choice here. Your options are very clear. Stick with your current machine and use OS 9, and if you desire more speed, upgrade; or buy a new machine and kiss OS 9 (except in the classic layer) good bye. Plain and simple. Why should Apple support a dead system? To hear PC users complain (and some mac users), you would think OS 9 was a horribly bloated, completely unstable crash every 5 minutes OS. SO why are you complaining that Apple is pushing something better? Do you really want the option to choose pain?
To be fair, OS X has been arround for quite some time now. Apple wants to move to X faster than it took to go from 68k to PPC. Espesialy with some places dragging their feet with OS X support, Apple is telling them to get a move on. And it's not like all their current computers will magicaly stop booting into OS 9, just the new ones that they buy.
just because they have a working version does not make it ready for prime time. Case in point Mac OS X. Apple released the Beta to the public becasue people were screaming for a release. It was working and functional, but it was in no way shape or form ready for prime time.
You're next argument might be, well if they release this as a beta, people will understand that there will be bugs. Sorry, that's just not true, check out any of the discussion forums for OS X Beta. There are always people bitching about how certain things don't work right and what a rip off and how Apple was so evil for distributing a broken OS. All of that despite the box saying BETA
Actualy, this is a gripe I've had with a lot of games. The space requirements are getting outrageous. Does it really absolutely require 1.5 gigs (the size of my OS) to insall a good game? I think more often then not, game programmers are focusing on getting more blood pixels in than keeping the space reasonable.
Most of my mac games that have PC counterparts are better than the PC versions of games. Lots of bugs in the sound a graphics are often fixed. The features that get added after the windows version is shipped that windows users have to download ususaly come on the disk. I haven't toyed arround with Linux ports, but I would immagine it should be the same. It only makes sense
If I left any machine just sitting idle botted into the system, it would run all weekend without errors too. The parent was talking about playing 3d FPSs and getting errors. That's very believable.
There's this wonderful little button on our keyboard that ejects CDs. Hell of a lot quicker than reaching up to hit the eject button on the case (or reaching under the desk in the case of most PCs)
Next time someone asks you for a calculator, hand them a TI-83 and see what they do. It does the same things the same way any other calculator with the same button presses, but people look at it and go google eyed and don't seem to know what to do. Why do you think most calculator programs (like the ones on palm pilots and on your computer) come default in basic mode? So as not to confuse people.
And so you're welcome to you're opinion. I just think personaly a mac feels better than a PC. Maybe it's because I grew up on them. But I use both, and I always feel more at ease with a mac. It's a feeling of personality and understanding. It sounds lame I know, but I see it all the time, and you see it even with PC users and their computers. The computer just doesn't perform the same for anyone else except the owner. I don't know how to describe it or why, but I feel it more with a mac than with a PC. And in honesty, I've never felt deprived by a lack of games on the mac.
How about OS X? That seems like a nice reason to buy a mac. Pluse the machines look nice. And I don't have to deal with microsoft, or intel. And I don't have to worry about drivers breaking. And I prefer the system? I use both macs and PCs, and when I have the chance, I rather use a mac.
The difference of course being, the screen shot apple used was to demonstrate the errors present in many dialouges into one picture, where as your example is just blatent lying.
It was used as an example, as no windows dialouge has all those problems in one shot. It saved space on the document. And to top it off, they couldn't use an exact screen shot, that would violate copyrights. Ad into it that the mac screen shot provided does not exist as a real screen and you see it was all to exemplify a point.
And where as in the windows community your program would most likely be used because in actuality it isn't much worse than some apps out there, in the mac community it would fall flat on it's face.
You can put whatever fucking drive you want in your mac. Period. The onyl difference is, the eject button will not work to remove a disk. Why? Because unlike windows, Mac OS automaticaly mounts a disk when you put it in. ANd in order to eject a disk, you need to un mount it. It doesn't become un mounted just because you closed the window. So go buy your nice cheap hAcme Drive and put it in your mac. It will work. Have fun.
Slashdot Mirror
(-1 Troll)
X as in 10 times slower
10.1 ran nicely on my 300Mhz blueberry iBook. Not as fast as OS 9, but certainly not 10 times slower. Haven't toyed with Jaguar yet since my HDD died on me (Long story involving water, beer and electricity) but if the reports of it's speed improvements are anything to consider, it sure as hell isn't 10 times slower.
10 times less apps
I have never been at a loss for aplications. Perhaps you could elighten me as to which apps you can not get (or replace) under X.
10 times the number of hacks apple has gone through to make a unix like OS to run mac things
As opposed to how many hacks the linux community has instituted to get Windows things to run under linux?
you people think that anything commercial that takes unix serioulsy must be god sent
Usualy it is. Commecrial support for *NIX is a good thing. It provides a sense of seriousness that give *NIX the immage it needs to be taken seriously in other places.
you run your silly linux dist and talk to a bunch of other losers who run their stupid linux shit
Now I know that Linux is challenging to get up and running, but it's not nice to call names just because other people are smarter than you and have had more success. Go back to running your Windows 95 box and finish your homework. Recess is starting soon.
OS X sucks
Prove it.
Most of the games, provided they do not need to directly access the hardware, will run quite nicely. And again, nothing is going to stop your current Mac (which I assume you bought those games for, I hope you didn't go by a bunch of classic games in preperation to by a new mac) will still run and boot the same as always in 2003. No magical spy chip is going to deactivate your old mac.
We're abusive because we often have to correct people that don't use common sense. It's like trying to explain to your boss why it's not a good idea to open "clickme.exe" from babylovesya@sexmail.com After correcting and explaining 4 or 5 times (The parent poste could have found all his information in the posts above) it gets annoying and repetative.
Case in point on taking a while to phase out old hardware amd such in the PC market, how many people do you know who still have ISA slots in their computer. Would you all scream bloody murder if M$ killed ISA support or would you realize that the horse is dead, it's time to move on?
But why would you want to? Do you install windows 95 on your new PC becasue you can't get program XWZ to run under XP or 2k? No, you either run it on your old machine (Which many mac users keep their old machines) or you find a replacement.
This is perfectly reasonable. Apple wants to move forward, you can't move forward if you are anchored in the past. It's the same thing as M$ killing native DOS support. It just had to be done.
The main difference that I see between the PC and the Mac worlds on this issue is that the OS 9 users aren't being told go jump in a lake, they're being told they need to start switching or they will be left behind. However, even for those die hard mac users who still have an old 68k mac laying about. There is hope of running their favorite programs on their new machines. Check out www.emulation.net for classic emulators, 68k emulators, DOS emulators, C64 emulators and everything else under the sun. Oh and it's all mac too.
There's plenty of choice here. Your options are very clear. Stick with your current machine and use OS 9, and if you desire more speed, upgrade; or buy a new machine and kiss OS 9 (except in the classic layer) good bye. Plain and simple. Why should Apple support a dead system? To hear PC users complain (and some mac users), you would think OS 9 was a horribly bloated, completely unstable crash every 5 minutes OS. SO why are you complaining that Apple is pushing something better? Do you really want the option to choose pain?
To be fair, OS X has been arround for quite some time now. Apple wants to move to X faster than it took to go from 68k to PPC. Espesialy with some places dragging their feet with OS X support, Apple is telling them to get a move on. And it's not like all their current computers will magicaly stop booting into OS 9, just the new ones that they buy.
just because they have a working version does not make it ready for prime time. Case in point Mac OS X. Apple released the Beta to the public becasue people were screaming for a release. It was working and functional, but it was in no way shape or form ready for prime time.
You're next argument might be, well if they release this as a beta, people will understand that there will be bugs. Sorry, that's just not true, check out any of the discussion forums for OS X Beta. There are always people bitching about how certain things don't work right and what a rip off and how Apple was so evil for distributing a broken OS. All of that despite the box saying BETA
Actualy, this is a gripe I've had with a lot of games. The space requirements are getting outrageous. Does it really absolutely require 1.5 gigs (the size of my OS) to insall a good game? I think more often then not, game programmers are focusing on getting more blood pixels in than keeping the space reasonable.
Isn't that what qickdraw was supposed to be?
It's *NIX not Lin *
Most of my mac games that have PC counterparts are better than the PC versions of games. Lots of bugs in the sound a graphics are often fixed. The features that get added after the windows version is shipped that windows users have to download ususaly come on the disk. I haven't toyed arround with Linux ports, but I would immagine it should be the same. It only makes sense
LOL RTFA AFAIK UT2k3 == Unreal Tournament 2003 ..... Oh wait, you didn't want abrv. guess u'll have to look someplace other than /. for that, :(
[to moderators, the above was a joke, no persons or things were intened to be offended]
If I left any machine just sitting idle botted into the system, it would run all weekend without errors too. The parent was talking about playing 3d FPSs and getting errors. That's very believable.
There's this wonderful little button on our keyboard that ejects CDs. Hell of a lot quicker than reaching up to hit the eject button on the case (or reaching under the desk in the case of most PCs)
Next time someone asks you for a calculator, hand them a TI-83 and see what they do. It does the same things the same way any other calculator with the same button presses, but people look at it and go google eyed and don't seem to know what to do. Why do you think most calculator programs (like the ones on palm pilots and on your computer) come default in basic mode? So as not to confuse people.
And so you're welcome to you're opinion. I just think personaly a mac feels better than a PC. Maybe it's because I grew up on them. But I use both, and I always feel more at ease with a mac. It's a feeling of personality and understanding. It sounds lame I know, but I see it all the time, and you see it even with PC users and their computers. The computer just doesn't perform the same for anyone else except the owner. I don't know how to describe it or why, but I feel it more with a mac than with a PC. And in honesty, I've never felt deprived by a lack of games on the mac.
How about OS X? That seems like a nice reason to buy a mac. Pluse the machines look nice. And I don't have to deal with microsoft, or intel. And I don't have to worry about drivers breaking. And I prefer the system? I use both macs and PCs, and when I have the chance, I rather use a mac.
But the parent post was informative? Right...
The difference of course being, the screen shot apple used was to demonstrate the errors present in many dialouges into one picture, where as your example is just blatent lying.
It was used as an example, as no windows dialouge has all those problems in one shot. It saved space on the document. And to top it off, they couldn't use an exact screen shot, that would violate copyrights. Ad into it that the mac screen shot provided does not exist as a real screen and you see it was all to exemplify a point.
And where as in the windows community your program would most likely be used because in actuality it isn't much worse than some apps out there, in the mac community it would fall flat on it's face.
Note however that most webpages have begun to conform.
1 [optional]) Cover Page, consisting of a clickable graphic or flash animation
2) Main page, with general new announcements and news in the center.
3) Across the top of the mainpage lies a basic tool bar for providing options
4) Along the left side of the page is navigation capabilites
5) Ads and misc objects on the right.
You can put whatever fucking drive you want in your mac. Period. The onyl difference is, the eject button will not work to remove a disk. Why? Because unlike windows, Mac OS automaticaly mounts a disk when you put it in. ANd in order to eject a disk, you need to un mount it. It doesn't become un mounted just because you closed the window. So go buy your nice cheap hAcme Drive and put it in your mac. It will work. Have fun.