Actually, if you're looking to set up a _software_ RAID, you should consider SCSI or FireWire over IDE. IDE doesn't play as nice with concurrent data streams. At least, I'm pretty sure that's what I read in a recent issue of Macworld. Hardware? Whatever.:-)
He left that image alone, but released a Newer One that is in almost a completely different style- look at the tabs... and "firewal" is now fixed.
That may well be Apple's fault. That makes 3 versions of that window that I've seen now. The other can be found on page 63 of the August issue of Macworld. It's rather like the newer pic but includes port numbers as well.
The other cause is differences in race. Therefore, if we choose a race and eliminate all other (thereby eliminating race as an issue), we can fix that problem.
Now, before anyone goes and claims that the phrase "separation of church and state" is "right there" in the constitution, perhaps a trip to the U.S. Consitution is in order. It doesn't even have the word "church" in it.
Still insistent that we should have separation of church and state? Fine, then stop prosecuting the Catholic priests for molesting children, as that's a violation of the law, and priests are church officials. They should be separate, shouldn't they?
Actually, the support for "really long" file names is provided by OS X. HFS+ has been around since OS 8 --I think, maybe 9-- and like HFS, is only good for 31 characters. (Those who have come across strangely named items on their drives can attest to this.) It's mainly the support for larger drives as well as the smaller block size that distinguish HFS from HFS+.
Well, if it makes you feel any better, Winamp doesn't always run well. I had a suitemate last semester, and when he'd drag a Winamp window around, it would leave a trail behind. The PC users in the group attributed it to the video card, but whatever.
Well, a dual 450 in my case, which IMO, still isn't dated.
Geforce2MX? Hmmm, I have one friend running an usupported Voodoo3. Or was, until he upgraded to an nVidia chipset, which now freezes his computer upon startup. (Out of curiosity, if you don't like the Geforce, which seems to be a de facto standard in the PC world, what do you suggest? ATI?) A suitemate last year was having video problems in the form of artifacts when dragging windows. This was also attributed to the video card, whatever it was. In contrast, my 16 MB ATI card runs fine. Who really needs more than 60 fps in tranquility?
5400 RPM drive. Well, I have never had a Mac hard drive crash. Ever. A different last year's suitemate seemed to think that the OS factored into it. How else could I be using Maxtor hard drives?
Keyboard and mouse? Flimsy? Again, any time our computers get packed up for transport, it's my PC friend who keeps losing pieces off his keyboard.
Finally, if you don't like that stuff, you can upgrade it at the Apple Store. Even the keyboard. Get the Western Spanish version. (Or is that the OS? Oh well.)
*Sigh* Okay, think about this one for a second: the iPod, by default, will sync its playlist with the one on your computer. OF COURSE it's only going to sync with one! What did you want it to do, keep separate lists and separate files for every computer you plug it into?
There is still the option to transfer files manually. It's a preference. You can change it. And you can still use it as just a FireWire hard drive.
Really, don't say something's "crippled" if you haven't thought it through. I doubt the majority of people have more than one computer.
What the hell are you smoking? Having a shorter execution pipeline does not mean it does "less stuff" at once. If anything, it can do more, as it doesn't have to wait for a write back as long in order to read a previous operation's results.
The complexities in performance go way beyond clock speed, cache size, and the pipeline. Want proof? What's the clock speed of a high-end PC? Of a high-end Mac? And Macs are still faster, especially when it comes to graphics.
(BTW, get someone to design a computer with 128 steps in the pipeline. Hey, if 21 is better than 7, 128 must scream! Right?)
Oh, don't worry, we have 40-degree Christmas days. Heck, in the southern US, I'm pretty sure they hit 60 on Christmas. It's just in Fahrenheit, not Celsius.:)
I'm still trying to figure out how people manage to use the Finder on a daily basis in such a way that it seems slow. Curious, I just threw 3000 image files in a folder to see what that would do. They were previously in 10 separate folders, as they were originally on a PowerMac 7100 running System 7.5.5. (66MHz, anyone?) That was slow. Anyway, while copying them, about 300 at a time, I'd get the colored wheel for about a half-second before seeing the translucent files show up. 300 files, half second, not bad.
Once I had 3000 files in a folder, I opened the folder. It took no more than 5 seconds. Five seconds, you say?!?! Yep. Once it was open, scrolling went fast enough, and even faster if scrolling to a point I'd already been at. Apparently Finder caches what it's doing (as is obvious when you're browsing through folders and the hard drive spins up when you go somewhere you haven't been before).
Also of note, that sickening column view was slow even before I copied them all, dealing with only 300 files.
Now I imagine your average user doesn't have 3000 hentai images of Sailor Moon on his computer, which begs the question, "Who would want to put 3000 files in the same folder and why?" It seems like the popular answer is MP3s. To which my answer is this:
Use iTunes. I suspect most of us are doing this. When you encode files with iTunes, it puts them into folders, first by artist, then by album. You add these to your library and there's your file dump. iTunes is more useful in this regard anyway, thanks to its playlists and the live search.
If the complaint is with scrolling, not opening, then you shouldn't really be scrolling. Just type in the first few letters of the file you want and go straight to it.
As long as everyone's comparing Apples and non-Apples, however, I'll just point out that the thing I've never liked about Windows is that in list view (or whatever it's called there), your files are arranged both down and across, instead of just down, and that you don't seem to be able to display anything but the icon and name. At least, that's all I've ever seen. It also really bugs me that to get info on something requires a right-click and picking "properties" from the pop-up menu. Is there a keyboard shortcut for that, like Cmd-I for Mac?
Well, if iTunes's CPU usage really upsets you, I remember reading somewhere of a command line app that'll play MP3's for a lot less overhead. I'm sure a little looking could find it for you.
As for Terminal, I usually load it at startup and just leave it open. Maybe 10.2 will change that; maybe not.
Actually, if they're really doing 17 and 19, my guess would be they'd discontinue the 15. Apple usually doesn't have too many variations within the same product line, and 15, 17, and 19, seems in my opinion to strech the options they're willing to offer.
In all likeliness, they'll make the 17 inch model the new low-end iMac and release it at a price point just about or slightly below the current low-end iMac G4.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, if you're looking to set up a _software_ RAID, you should consider SCSI or FireWire over IDE. IDE doesn't play as nice with concurrent data streams. At least, I'm pretty sure that's what I read in a recent issue of Macworld. Hardware? Whatever. :-)
Eh, as long as I can still use the keyboard to switch.
He left that image alone, but released a Newer One that is in almost a completely different style- look at the tabs... and "firewal" is now fixed.
That may well be Apple's fault. That makes 3 versions of that window that I've seen now. The other can be found on page 63 of the August issue of Macworld. It's rather like the newer pic but includes port numbers as well.
What's that?
Well, judging by the speed at which comments are being added to this topic, one would think that this is "Stuff that matters", anyway.
The other cause is differences in race. Therefore, if we choose a race and eliminate all other (thereby eliminating race as an issue), we can fix that problem.
Oh wait, that was the Holocaust.
Now, before anyone goes and claims that the phrase "separation of church and state" is "right there" in the constitution, perhaps a trip to the U.S. Consitution is in order. It doesn't even have the word "church" in it.
Still insistent that we should have separation of church and state? Fine, then stop prosecuting the Catholic priests for molesting children, as that's a violation of the law, and priests are church officials. They should be separate, shouldn't they?
Actually, the support for "really long" file names is provided by OS X. HFS+ has been around since OS 8 --I think, maybe 9-- and like HFS, is only good for 31 characters. (Those who have come across strangely named items on their drives can attest to this.) It's mainly the support for larger drives as well as the smaller block size that distinguish HFS from HFS+.
Well, if it makes you feel any better, Winamp doesn't always run well. I had a suitemate last semester, and when he'd drag a Winamp window around, it would leave a trail behind. The PC users in the group attributed it to the video card, but whatever.
Well, a dual 450 in my case, which IMO, still isn't dated.
Geforce2MX? Hmmm, I have one friend running an usupported Voodoo3. Or was, until he upgraded to an nVidia chipset, which now freezes his computer upon startup. (Out of curiosity, if you don't like the Geforce, which seems to be a de facto standard in the PC world, what do you suggest? ATI?) A suitemate last year was having video problems in the form of artifacts when dragging windows. This was also attributed to the video card, whatever it was. In contrast, my 16 MB ATI card runs fine. Who really needs more than 60 fps in tranquility?
5400 RPM drive. Well, I have never had a Mac hard drive crash. Ever. A different last year's suitemate seemed to think that the OS factored into it. How else could I be using Maxtor hard drives?
Keyboard and mouse? Flimsy? Again, any time our computers get packed up for transport, it's my PC friend who keeps losing pieces off his keyboard.
Finally, if you don't like that stuff, you can upgrade it at the Apple Store. Even the keyboard. Get the Western Spanish version. (Or is that the OS? Oh well.)
Then don't use an Imac. [sic] Get a G4.
Don't forget: apple.slashdot.org must also be a biased Mac site, and AtariAmarok, having posted on apple.slashdot.org, must also be a Mac fanboy.
*Sigh* Okay, think about this one for a second: the iPod, by default, will sync its playlist with the one on your computer. OF COURSE it's only going to sync with one! What did you want it to do, keep separate lists and separate files for every computer you plug it into?
There is still the option to transfer files manually. It's a preference. You can change it. And you can still use it as just a FireWire hard drive.
Really, don't say something's "crippled" if you haven't thought it through. I doubt the majority of people have more than one computer.
What the hell are you smoking? Having a shorter execution pipeline does not mean it does "less stuff" at once. If anything, it can do more, as it doesn't have to wait for a write back as long in order to read a previous operation's results.
The complexities in performance go way beyond clock speed, cache size, and the pipeline. Want proof? What's the clock speed of a high-end PC? Of a high-end Mac? And Macs are still faster, especially when it comes to graphics.
(BTW, get someone to design a computer with 128 steps in the pipeline. Hey, if 21 is better than 7, 128 must scream! Right?)
Oh, don't worry, we have 40-degree Christmas days. Heck, in the southern US, I'm pretty sure they hit 60 on Christmas. It's just in Fahrenheit, not Celsius. :)
:)
Obligatory on-topic content: Macs rule!
I'm still trying to figure out how people manage to use the Finder on a daily basis in such a way that it seems slow. Curious, I just threw 3000 image files in a folder to see what that would do. They were previously in 10 separate folders, as they were originally on a PowerMac 7100 running System 7.5.5. (66MHz, anyone?) That was slow. Anyway, while copying them, about 300 at a time, I'd get the colored wheel for about a half-second before seeing the translucent files show up. 300 files, half second, not bad.
Once I had 3000 files in a folder, I opened the folder. It took no more than 5 seconds. Five seconds, you say?!?! Yep. Once it was open, scrolling went fast enough, and even faster if scrolling to a point I'd already been at. Apparently Finder caches what it's doing (as is obvious when you're browsing through folders and the hard drive spins up when you go somewhere you haven't been before).
Also of note, that sickening column view was slow even before I copied them all, dealing with only 300 files.
Now I imagine your average user doesn't have 3000 hentai images of Sailor Moon on his computer, which begs the question, "Who would want to put 3000 files in the same folder and why?" It seems like the popular answer is MP3s. To which my answer is this:
As long as everyone's comparing Apples and non-Apples, however, I'll just point out that the thing I've never liked about Windows is that in list view (or whatever it's called there), your files are arranged both down and across, instead of just down, and that you don't seem to be able to display anything but the icon and name. At least, that's all I've ever seen. It also really bugs me that to get info on something requires a right-click and picking "properties" from the pop-up menu. Is there a keyboard shortcut for that, like Cmd-I for Mac?
Well, if iTunes's CPU usage really upsets you, I remember reading somewhere of a command line app that'll play MP3's for a lot less overhead. I'm sure a little looking could find it for you. As for Terminal, I usually load it at startup and just leave it open. Maybe 10.2 will change that; maybe not.
That wasn't so much a troll as its parent. If anyone has a link to a download page of a Mac Trillian, by all means, post that one.
Actually, if they're really doing 17 and 19, my guess would be they'd discontinue the 15. Apple usually doesn't have too many variations within the same product line, and 15, 17, and 19, seems in my opinion to strech the options they're willing to offer.
In all likeliness, they'll make the 17 inch model the new low-end iMac and release it at a price point just about or slightly below the current low-end iMac G4.