EVERY Mac user I know does the same thing upon un-boxing their new Macs: They throw out the POS Apple mouse and plug in a REAL mouse with 2+ buttons and a scroll wheel.
Says you. I'm a Mac user myself and know many others and that is not he case except for the Power User crowd.
Since no one bothers to look down alevel I'll reply to my own psot.
Stanley might have existed however, we were not talking about if STanley did or not before then. The fact is Pixar couldn't have come up with the idea after seeing Mouse as they developed it before that.
The people Apple hires for those stores are Mac fanatics!
Mac Genius positions are filled by those who literally would bleed Aqua if it were possible.
So devoted are Mac Geniuses.
Here is the Mac Genius Job descriptor:
[begin quote]
Mac Genius
Ambassador to the local Macintosh community
Do you love Macs and enjoy interacting with other Mac users? Does the thought of working for Apple make you tingle more than those three seconds right after a sneeze? If so, and you enjoy working with people as much as PC's, you might have what it takes to become a Mac Genius.
Millions of users around the world know that when done right, a computer can be much more than a bland box made for the left side of the brain. They know the elegance and power of the Macintosh.
As a Mac Genius, you'll play host to this remarkable community of people. Whether someone wants a casual conversation about Digital Video or needs an emergency Hard Drive replacement, you'll be there. Your fundamental mission: Ensure no Mac User ever again receives inadequate service or second-class treatment.
Now we realize not just anyone has what it takes to be a Mac Genius. That's the point. You have to be the best. Still interested?
Key Features:
Confidently manages other operating systems, but handles a Mac like Yo-Yo-Ma plays the Cello.
Would rather be in the front row of a MacWorld Keynote than have free cable for a year.
Can delicately identify the difference between a misguided User and an unhealthy Macintosh.
Instinctively straightens the Mac software shelves when shopping at the local computer store.
Genuinely enjoys helping others make the most of their Macs.
Comfortably translates "techno-jargon" into laymen's terms.
Skillfully restores ailing Macs back to full health.
Has been able to find Cupertino, CA on a US Map since the age of 12.
Would move to Timbuktu if they required all computers to be Macs.
Always eager to discuss cutting edge technology and why Macs rule.
Job Description:
Lead an interactive environment where people can gather with their Macs to ask questions and learn new things.
Enrich the Apple/Customer relationship by quickly resolving and documenting technical support events.
Provide ongoing technology coaching to a terrific service oriented sales team.
Help snuff out any new and unusual gremlins by quickly notifiying Apple's engineering teams.
Make Apple's Support Site the best in the business by contributing your own tips and tricks.
Keep your store in tip-top shape and give customers what they've always wanted; a little piece of Apple in their own backyard.
Communicate positively with store team members, customers, channel partners, and headquarters. Remember, you represent the Apple brand.
Be responsible and take good care of Apple's assets.
Maintain a fit and healthy Mac mind and oh yeah, have fun. This is Apple after all.
You are thinking violators of copyright or trademarks.
As in someone who copies the Agua look down to the last pixel and is suprised then when Apple sues them. What do they expect?
Now, something like this, (Apple Shrine) would never be sued over.
Apple's history of suing:
* Send cease and desit letters to rumor sites * Send cease and desist letters/sue copycats of either their machines or interface. * Sue unauthorized clones (Franklin Apple ][ clone)
I fail to see how you blow that up into an "Apple sues wantonly ungodly numbers of innocents".
You're right. I was mistaken. The Mach version is 3.0. But I was right about the BSD. It's 4.4 BSD Lite2. IIRC, NeXT used 4.3 BSD. Either way, both are still old code. They don't have the benifet of the nearly one decade of advancements that have happened in kernel design since they were written. Take a look at the papers published by Sun and the Net/FreeBSD VM guys in the last few years. Modern free kernels have implemented these features, XNU hasn't. Is Darwin 6.x better than 4.4 BSD lite-2?
Um the BSD part being old is wrong. Apple borrowed some stuff from FreeBSD. xnu uses an older version of the FreeBSD kernel for the BSD part of the kernel. Further there is no such thing as "4.4 BSD-lites-2". There is the last version that came out of Barlely known as 4.4 BSD-lite but, I have no idea where you get the 2 in that.
Did I say it would be twice as fast as it is now? Get a clue. Don't put words in my mouth. I simply said that there were a number of changes and that it was faster. By your reasoning, everything must be a crtain way to your expectations or there is something wrong with it.
What you don't seem to understand is that Apple (and NeXT) used Mach for porting reasons. Think about it. What happens when Apple switches processor families again, if the code isn't as portable as it could be. To be blunt, the Linux kernel is not that portable and it take a lot of work to do it (PPC users of Linux would understand).
You also wrote:
(instead of apparently just misreading the statements I made) or can point me to the relevent code that contridicts anything I've said, feel free to do so.
That isn't very nice. I quoted exactly what you said. If you didn't mean what you said then you should have written it differently.
Tell me something, just what background do you have? My impression from reading your posts, is someone who thinks they know everything because they ran a test on the kernels (you did make a lot of factual errors).
I'm not going to comment further as I'm getting tired of trying to correct someone who thinks they know everything.
FYI, I'm not a kernel developer (and neither are you) but, I get my info from the developers themselves which, you didn't
No it isn't that version of Mach. Apple switched versions of Mach (3.0 OSF I think it was). The BSD code is much newer than what NeXT used.
You also wrote:
10.1.5. Not 10.2, as mac-heads say when I point it out, but if you'd read the changelogs, you'd realize that the GUI was the focus of 10.2 development, not the kernel.
They did make significant changes to the kernel. I'm on the Darwin list.
Finally you wrote:
Doesn't change the fact that the layering involves a layer of redundency and abstraction that hurts performance.
Yes it does. having the BSD kernel in the same file, the same address space, etc, DOES increase performance.
I will say this again, so it gets through your Linux biased skull, that the version of Mach is not 2.5 (the version NeXT used). Hell it isn't even the CMU version anymore.
I've used Win 3.1, Win95, Win98, Win98SE, WinNT, Win2000, System 7.1, System 7.5.x, System 7.6, MacOS 8, MacOS 8.1, MacOS 8.5.x, MacOS 8.6, MacOS 9.0.x, MacOS 9.1, MacOS 9.2.x, MacOS X DP4 (no commenti), MacOS X Public Beta, MacoS X 10.0.x, MacOS X 10.1.x, MacOS X 10.2.x, Read Hat Linux 7.2, mkLinux, and Darwin.
MacoZS x 10.2.x is not slow (even compared with all the others).
Slashdot Mirror
It works fine on my system so, I think your system is a bit messed up.
Does fsck find anything in single user mode?
If not, check your paths.
Another poster mentioned a problem with Fink. I personally, don't use Fink, I prefer to get separate packages or archives. Still, it is worth a look.
You wrote:
I'm afraid to tell you this but, the majority of Mac users use single button mice. It is the power user that uses two button mice.
I have used XFee86 on Darwin (not rootless) and there is a simulated keybinding for the other mouse button that you can turn on.
I'm not at that machine right now so, I don't remember what the command line arguments were that turned it on.
You wrote:
Says you. I'm a Mac user myself and know many others and that is not he case except for the Power User crowd.
I think you are thinking of AMD and Intel. Now there is a hot chip for you.
Since no one bothers to look down alevel I'll reply to my own psot.
Stanley might have existed however, we were not talking about if STanley did or not before then. The fact is Pixar couldn't have come up with the idea after seeing Mouse as they developed it before that.
Besides, Stanley is a mouse.
True enough.
Never said Disney didn't have distribution rights.
A couple of point:
That isn't bullshit as its true.
Two, I'm not a guy.
:groans:
Note to self: check spelling first. I meant "six" not "sex".
I know that but, that term has gone out of fashion as the Apple logo isn't sex colored anymore.
You did notice my other post right? It was under the one you replied to.
6FPS was a typo and I meant 60 FPS.
You must have unusually good eyes then to tell the difference. I certainly can't but, then I have poor eyesight.
Sounds bogus.
Pixar had to have been producing the film before Sept 2000 as the sample on the Toy Story 2 DVD was on there.
Second, why did he wait so long? So, he can grab a huge sum of cash? Judges get suspicious when people wait so long to sue and with good reason.
FYI, Disney didn't make the move. It was all Pixar's doing.
What do you expect?
The people Apple hires for those stores are Mac fanatics!
Mac Genius positions are filled by those who literally would bleed Aqua if it were possible.
So devoted are Mac Geniuses.
Here is the Mac Genius Job descriptor:
[begin quote]
Mac Genius
Ambassador to the local Macintosh community
Do you love Macs and enjoy interacting with other Mac users? Does the thought of working for Apple make you tingle more than those three seconds right after a sneeze? If so, and you enjoy working with people as much as PC's, you might have what it takes to become a Mac Genius.
Millions of users around the world know that when done right, a computer can be much more than a bland box made for the
left side of the brain. They know the elegance and power of the Macintosh.
As a Mac Genius, you'll play host to this remarkable community of people. Whether someone wants a casual conversation about Digital Video or needs an emergency Hard Drive replacement, you'll be there. Your fundamental mission: Ensure no Mac User ever again receives inadequate service or second-class treatment.
Now we realize not just anyone has what it takes to be a Mac Genius. That's the point. You have to be the best. Still interested?
Key Features:
Confidently manages other operating systems, but handles a Mac like Yo-Yo-Ma plays the Cello.
Would rather be in the front row of a MacWorld Keynote than have free cable for a year.
Can delicately identify the difference between a misguided User and an unhealthy Macintosh.
Instinctively straightens the Mac software shelves when shopping at the local computer store.
Genuinely enjoys helping others make the most of their Macs.
Comfortably translates "techno-jargon" into laymen's terms.
Skillfully restores ailing Macs back to full health.
Has been able to find Cupertino, CA on a US Map since the age of 12.
Would move to Timbuktu if they required all computers to be Macs.
Always eager to discuss cutting edge technology and why Macs rule.
Job Description:
Lead an interactive environment where people can gather with their Macs to ask questions and learn new things.
Enrich the Apple/Customer relationship by quickly resolving and documenting technical support events.
Provide ongoing technology coaching to a terrific service oriented sales team.
Help snuff out any new and unusual gremlins by quickly notifiying Apple's engineering teams.
Make Apple's Support Site the best in the business by contributing your own tips and tricks.
Keep your store in tip-top shape and give customers what they've always wanted; a little piece of Apple in their own backyard.
Communicate positively with store team members, customers, channel partners, and headquarters. Remember, you represent the Apple brand.
Be responsible and take good care of Apple's assets.
Maintain a fit and healthy Mac mind and oh yeah, have fun. This is Apple after all.
[end quote]
That is from Apple's own job search.
Not like that.
You are thinking violators of copyright or trademarks.
As in someone who copies the Agua look down to the last pixel and is suprised then when Apple sues them. What do they expect?
Now, something like this, (Apple Shrine) would never be sued over.
Apple's history of suing:
* Send cease and desit letters to rumor sites
* Send cease and desist letters/sue copycats of either their machines or interface.
* Sue unauthorized clones (Franklin Apple ][ clone)
I fail to see how you blow that up into an "Apple sues wantonly ungodly numbers of innocents".
Yeah if you can live with yourself afterwards.
There are ethics still out there.
I have no respect for those who have no ethics.
You wrote:
That is quite ironic as Sun's OS used to be a BSD at one time.
That was supposed to be 60 FPS not 6 FPS. Oops.
True but, anything over 6 FPS isn;'t noticable by the human eye.
My vision is poor however, someone with 20/20 vision wouldn't notice a differnce to speak of if the frame rates were all above 60 FPS.
You wrote:
Um the BSD part being old is wrong. Apple borrowed some stuff from FreeBSD. xnu uses an older version of the FreeBSD kernel for the BSD part of the kernel. Further there is no such thing as "4.4 BSD-lites-2". There is the last version that came out of Barlely known as 4.4 BSD-lite but, I have no idea where you get the 2 in that.
Did I say it would be twice as fast as it is now? Get a clue. Don't put words in my mouth. I simply said that there were a number of changes and that it was faster. By your reasoning, everything must be a crtain way to your expectations or there is something wrong with it.
What you don't seem to understand is that Apple (and NeXT) used Mach for porting reasons. Think about it. What happens when Apple switches processor families again, if the code isn't as portable as it could be. To be blunt, the Linux kernel is not that portable and it take a lot of work to do it (PPC users of Linux would understand).
You also wrote:
That isn't very nice. I quoted exactly what you said. If you didn't mean what you said then you should have written it differently.
Tell me something, just what background do you have? My impression from reading your posts, is someone who thinks they know everything because they ran a test on the kernels (you did make a lot of factual errors).
I'm not going to comment further as I'm getting tired of trying to correct someone who thinks they know everything.
FYI, I'm not a kernel developer (and neither are you) but, I get my info from the developers themselves which, you didn't
:rolls eyes:
How did this clueless post get modded up?
Anyway you said:
No it isn't that version of Mach. Apple switched versions of Mach (3.0 OSF I think it was). The BSD code is much newer than what NeXT used.
You also wrote:
They did make significant changes to the kernel. I'm on the Darwin list.
Finally you wrote:
Yes it does. having the BSD kernel in the same file, the same address space, etc, DOES increase performance.
I will say this again, so it gets through your Linux biased skull, that the version of Mach is not 2.5 (the version NeXT used). Hell it isn't even the CMU version anymore.
Not if the frame rate in both cases is so high you can't tell the difference.
YDL might be.
,speed is kind of subjective.
On the other hand Darwin runs just as fast as YDL without the GUI, or at least that is what it appears to be.
If there is any slowness it is probably in the graphics layer somewhere.
Although
I wonder what you admin.
10.2.x is fast enough. Just add more RAM.
I've used Win 3.1, Win95, Win98, Win98SE, WinNT, Win2000, System 7.1, System 7.5.x, System 7.6, MacOS 8, MacOS 8.1, MacOS 8.5.x, MacOS 8.6, MacOS 9.0.x, MacOS 9.1, MacOS 9.2.x, MacOS X DP4 (no commenti), MacOS X Public Beta, MacoS X 10.0.x, MacOS X 10.1.x, MacOS X 10.2.x, Read Hat Linux 7.2, mkLinux, and Darwin.
MacoZS x 10.2.x is not slow (even compared with all the others).
When will people learn here? :sigh:
It isn't old code.
Second the BSD kernel is in the same address space as Mach and is compiled into the same file.
xnu (the Darwin kernel) is a hybrid, it is NOT a true microkernel. Get that through your heads.
The only thing microkernelish about xnu is that the code is broken up in a microkernel manner for easy porting.
Further, what version of xnu you were you guys testing with? xnu has gone through a massive amount of development.
In other words, I will not believe any such bench mark until you tell me how it was done and with which kernels and their respective versions.
I will say it again, xnu is a hybrid kenrel that for all practical purposes is monolithic.
A Mac is the hardware but, from users point of view a Mac isn't a Mac without MacOS.