"It's a bug with how softwareupdate interacts with its associated services/server/whatever you want to call it. I wish I knew more about the internal process so I could investigate further and provide a useful bug report to Apple."
It's loading XML documents through HTTP. The whole process is documented: http://www.cunap.com/~hardingr/projects/osx/exploi t.html
I never heard of anyone having a problem like that, and SoftwareUpdate has been in use since when it was introduced with Mac OS 9 - back in fall 1999.
You should post your problem at Apple's discussion boards and see if someone is aware of the problem. Or you could use some combination of curl and tcpdump or whatever to manually see what's going on.
Even better is MacUpdate. Why? Because VersionTracker's layout has become extremely cluttered and annoying, whereas MacUpdate continues to be comparably lightweight.
Thanks for the heads-up......but the thing is, this is something Mac OS 9 had years ago, what was so hard about implementing this into Mac OS X? It's just a simple toggle...
Re:199$ Neuros, 20gb HD, FM, FM transmitter Open s
on
iPod Mini Sells Out
·
· Score: 1
Heh, that's funny. I had no idea someone else was going to call it that.
Re:199$ Neuros, 20gb HD, FM, FM transmitter Open s
on
iPod Mini Sells Out
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Butt-ugly, web site is confusing to navigate, cites dimensions and weight that go far beyond the iPod, hard drive seems to be 2.5 inches which makes the whole thing clunky. Button arrangement is needlessly complicated; software said not to work on any Unix on the web site (the iPod works flawlessly even on various free Unixes out there). Doesn't play official successor to MP3, AAC.
The one interesting positive point is that it plays Ogg Vorbis, but I only see such files every few months...
" Even if it wasn't Mac specific (which it is, and HFS specific, and big-endian specific...) it would take a good team a long, long time to get Carbon to work multiplatform."
Um, no, it's not. QuickTime for Windows is, and has always been, pretty much a lightweight but complete Mac OS Toolbox implementation, and Carbon is just a modernized Mac OS Toolbox. That's why iTunes for Windows was so damn easy to port - it's Carbon, and little more.
Writing an app that utilizes QuickTime is hardly different from writing an app that utilizes Carbon.
"Come on, don't hide behind "not ready yet". Just spit it out: "I don't like the Linux desktops". Now, that wasn't too hard, was it? "
That's not what he was trying to say.
An operating system whose premier window server doesn't even have one standardized widget toolkit is simply inferior regarding its GUI when compared to Mac OS X, Windows or even BeOS.
If you know about the concepts of OOP (object-oriented programming), Cocoa / Objective-C aren't all that hard. Buy a book in the $30-50 range and you'll learn it in a few weeks.
If you don't know about them, it'll take you longer and won't be as simple as it looks like.
Re:The killer app. Of course!
on
No Abiword For Mac?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Of course. I agree that a Cocoa interface
1. feels much more native 2. doesn't require an X server 3. is more work than a simple backend port (which already exists)
. That doesn't make this word processing app a killer app at all. Wonderful features, where are thou?
Excuse me? I've given AbiWord a try once. It was fast, really fast. And simple. It had the most important features of those you'd expect from a word processing app. And that is all there is to it. There are no special features. There is no interface consistency to anything - not to Aqua, not to KDE, not to GNOME, not to Windows, or even Motif. No innovation.
It is a simple word processing app, and though a Cocoa interface would have been interesting, it wouldn't have been a miracle. And not a "killer app", either.
Adobe may be mad at Apple for FinalCut Pro, which is in a higher class than Adobe's premiere, yet at a good price point. What might have angered them even more was the one-third-as-expensive FinalCut Express, which does almost all semi-professional stuff - with ease.
They may also be mad at Apple for waiting for Quark, rather than just recommending their InDesign.
In either case, realize the page merely refers to an obscure benchmark test by an author who has shown himself less useful by providing such wonderful articles as "top 10 reasons for a mac - top 10 reasons for windows", ridiculing a mac without providing much insight.
I think enough people already pointed out Adobe's imcapability of understanding our time system...
Apple provides a few tools for implementing mDNS (multicast DNS) on Win32, yes. But even so, I have yet to see any implementation (whether it's from Apple, from SYMANTEC, from MSFT, or anybody else).
What, you mean MSFT ever released a security update in time? The recent "RtlDosPathNameToNtPathName_U" bug was actually discovered in Usenet about two years ago, in NT4.
Security Patches and Bug Fixes are of different priority. Exaggeratedly put, a (hypothetical) issue that can put the whole internet down (through a worm that spreads over multiple platforms) is a much bigger threat than a bug that doesn't read your system clock from the NVRAM properly.
A workaround for your problem, if you have an always-on internet connection, btw, is to just turn network time syncing on.
"iWorks", if more than just a rumor, would probably consist of 1. a word processing app (TextEdit isn't truly powerful - what about initials and footnotes?), 2. (possibly) a publishing app (even if it's just for greeting cards and nasty boss letters), 3. a spreadsheet app, 4. a simple database app (most likely based on a FileMaker backend) and 5. a presentation app (Keynote, of course)
iLife was just released. iTunes will be upgraded (it's the oldest of the four, right now) soon, though.
There won't be that much benefit from a Cocoa rewrite. If you want a Cocoa Finder, give PathFinder a try; my experience with that one is that it has a few nice features, but is often way too slow (which reminds me of most other Cocoa apps, unfortunately).
New version of Safari? 1.0 isn't even out yet. Surely the 10.3 release will be the latest date they can offer the final; otherwise, it wouldn't make sense to me.
Video conferencing in iChat is quite likely - check its bundle for some unused icons;-)
Multiple Customizable Docks - I doubt this. I hope they come up with a way to make the Dock a lot more useful, or, at least, fully replacable by third parties.
Now let's come to the less likely things:
- Metadata (Database FS)
As you said, they hired BeOS's file system engineer, who supposedly implemented journaling in HFS+. It would be very nice if he helped work on a metadata implementation.
My idea of it would be to work similarly as iTunes' Smart Playlists do, but even more transparently. Per default, the Metadata Finder won't show you the hierarchical file structure, but the semantical one. There could be such a topic as "downloads", which would show your recent downloads. It would consist of sections like "music" and "shareware". Each download would have information like "downloaded at" and "downloaded from" attached to it.
More interesting would be a topic like "e-mail", split up between your various e-mail folders. It would provide information like "date received", "subject", etc. Opening an e-mail letter would launch Mail.app with that specifict mail, of course. BeOS actually could do such a thing already, and that was half a decade ago.
Another topic is Aqua2: a resolution-independent approach. The Dock shows the benefit of (almost) perfectly resizable icons: No matter how good or bad your eyes are, you'll always be able to have the icons in your optimum size. But what about the rest of the GUI? Any of the text labels are already resizable, in theory. They're vector-based. Widgets, aren't, though.
I think one of the plans of Apple is to wait until we have very-high-resolution displays (closer to 300 dpi, instead of the currently typical 96 dpi) and then automatically scale any object on the GUI to fit best.
Rendezvous: I really hope Apple will offer a Rendezvous implementation for Windows. Some parts of it are there, already, but I have yet to see a working implementation example.
Slashdot Mirror
"It's a bug with how softwareupdate interacts with its associated services/server/whatever you want to call it. I wish I knew more about the internal process so I could investigate further and provide a useful bug report to Apple."
i t.html
It's loading XML documents through HTTP. The whole process is documented: http://www.cunap.com/~hardingr/projects/osx/explo
I never heard of anyone having a problem like that, and SoftwareUpdate has been in use since when it was introduced with Mac OS 9 - back in fall 1999.
You should post your problem at Apple's discussion boards and see if someone is aware of the problem. Or you could use some combination of curl and tcpdump or whatever to manually see what's going on.
Dude.
There IS no bug. What's most likely happening is that your DNS Server is acting up for some reason, or maybe one of theirs is, although I doubt that.
Can't find it, no. Couldn't find sources for it on the web either; only an OpenBSD CVS tree - any chance I could give it a try on OS X?
Even better is MacUpdate. Why? Because VersionTracker's layout has become extremely cluttered and annoying, whereas MacUpdate continues to be comparably lightweight.
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/13052
Thanks for the heads-up... ...but the thing is, this is something Mac OS 9 had years ago, what was so hard about implementing this into Mac OS X? It's just a simple toggle...
Heh, that's funny. I had no idea someone else was going to call it that.
Butt-ugly, web site is confusing to navigate, cites dimensions and weight that go far beyond the iPod, hard drive seems to be 2.5 inches which makes the whole thing clunky. Button arrangement is needlessly complicated; software said not to work on any Unix on the web site (the iPod works flawlessly even on various free Unixes out there). Doesn't play official successor to MP3, AAC.
The one interesting positive point is that it plays Ogg Vorbis, but I only see such files every few months...
You mean FLAC.
FAAC is another AAC codec.
Safari is not open source. The backend is. OMNIweb, based off the same backend, features sessions.
" Even if it wasn't Mac specific (which it is, and HFS specific, and big-endian specific...) it would take a good team a long, long time to get Carbon to work multiplatform."
Um, no, it's not. QuickTime for Windows is, and has always been, pretty much a lightweight but complete Mac OS Toolbox implementation, and Carbon is just a modernized Mac OS Toolbox. That's why iTunes for Windows was so damn easy to port - it's Carbon, and little more.
Writing an app that utilizes QuickTime is hardly different from writing an app that utilizes Carbon.
"Come on, don't hide behind "not ready yet". Just spit it out: "I don't like the Linux desktops". Now, that wasn't too hard, was it? "
That's not what he was trying to say.
An operating system whose premier window server doesn't even have one standardized widget toolkit is simply inferior regarding its GUI when compared to Mac OS X, Windows or even BeOS.
"feature freeze [for 10.3]is about a week away"
Your source being?
If you know about the concepts of OOP (object-oriented programming), Cocoa / Objective-C aren't all that hard. Buy a book in the $30-50 range and you'll learn it in a few weeks.
If you don't know about them, it'll take you longer and won't be as simple as it looks like.
Of course. I agree that a Cocoa interface
1. feels much more native
2. doesn't require an X server
3. is more work than a simple backend port (which already exists)
. That doesn't make this word processing app a killer app at all. Wonderful features, where are thou?
Excuse me? I've given AbiWord a try once. It was fast, really fast. And simple. It had the most important features of those you'd expect from a word processing app. And that is all there is to it. There are no special features. There is no interface consistency to anything - not to Aqua, not to KDE, not to GNOME, not to Windows, or even Motif. No innovation.
It is a simple word processing app, and though a Cocoa interface would have been interesting, it wouldn't have been a miracle. And not a "killer app", either.
Where's that GTK+ (and GTK+2?) theme from?
Graphic designers and desktop publishers at WWDC? It's not a MacWorld-style expo, y'know...
Adobe may be mad at Apple for FinalCut Pro, which is in a higher class than Adobe's premiere, yet at a good price point. What might have angered them even more was the one-third-as-expensive FinalCut Express, which does almost all semi-professional stuff - with ease.
They may also be mad at Apple for waiting for Quark, rather than just recommending their InDesign.
In either case, realize the page merely refers to an obscure benchmark test by an author who has shown himself less useful by providing such wonderful articles as "top 10 reasons for a mac - top 10 reasons for windows", ridiculing a mac without providing much insight.
I think enough people already pointed out Adobe's imcapability of understanding our time system...
Apple provides a few tools for implementing mDNS (multicast DNS) on Win32, yes. But even so, I have yet to see any implementation (whether it's from Apple, from SYMANTEC, from MSFT, or anybody else).
What, you mean MSFT ever released a security update in time? The recent "RtlDosPathNameToNtPathName_U" bug was actually discovered in Usenet about two years ago, in NT4.
Security Patches and Bug Fixes are of different priority. Exaggeratedly put, a (hypothetical) issue that can put the whole internet down (through a worm that spreads over multiple platforms) is a much bigger threat than a bug that doesn't read your system clock from the NVRAM properly.
A workaround for your problem, if you have an always-on internet connection, btw, is to just turn network time syncing on.
"iWorks", if more than just a rumor, would probably consist of 1. a word processing app (TextEdit isn't truly powerful - what about initials and footnotes?), 2. (possibly) a publishing app (even if it's just for greeting cards and nasty boss letters), 3. a spreadsheet app, 4. a simple database app (most likely based on a FileMaker backend) and 5. a presentation app (Keynote, of course)
;-)
iLife was just released. iTunes will be upgraded (it's the oldest of the four, right now) soon, though.
There won't be that much benefit from a Cocoa rewrite. If you want a Cocoa Finder, give PathFinder a try; my experience with that one is that it has a few nice features, but is often way too slow (which reminds me of most other Cocoa apps, unfortunately).
New version of Safari? 1.0 isn't even out yet. Surely the 10.3 release will be the latest date they can offer the final; otherwise, it wouldn't make sense to me.
Video conferencing in iChat is quite likely - check its bundle for some unused icons
Multiple Customizable Docks - I doubt this. I hope they come up with a way to make the Dock a lot more useful, or, at least, fully replacable by third parties.
Now let's come to the less likely things:
- Metadata (Database FS)
As you said, they hired BeOS's file system engineer, who supposedly implemented journaling in HFS+. It would be very nice if he helped work on a metadata implementation.
My idea of it would be to work similarly as iTunes' Smart Playlists do, but even more transparently. Per default, the Metadata Finder won't show you the hierarchical file structure, but the semantical one. There could be such a topic as "downloads", which would show your recent downloads. It would consist of sections like "music" and "shareware". Each download would have information like "downloaded at" and "downloaded from" attached to it.
More interesting would be a topic like "e-mail", split up between your various e-mail folders. It would provide information like "date received", "subject", etc. Opening an e-mail letter would launch Mail.app with that specifict mail, of course. BeOS actually could do such a thing already, and that was half a decade ago.
Another topic is Aqua2: a resolution-independent approach. The Dock shows the benefit of (almost) perfectly resizable icons: No matter how good or bad your eyes are, you'll always be able to have the icons in your optimum size. But what about the rest of the GUI? Any of the text labels are already resizable, in theory. They're vector-based. Widgets, aren't, though.
I think one of the plans of Apple is to wait until we have very-high-resolution displays (closer to 300 dpi, instead of the currently typical 96 dpi) and then automatically scale any object on the GUI to fit best.
Rendezvous: I really hope Apple will offer a Rendezvous implementation for Windows. Some parts of it are there, already, but I have yet to see a working implementation example.