I tried OmniWeb a few times. Even tried 5.x. Pissed me off. I couldn't believe I would have to pay money for this. OmniWeb will never take off when it costs money to buy. We have to buy enough software, and browsers shouldn't be in that group, period. I will never pay for a browser so long as there is a free one available.
Good software? Boy, that's debatable! Look, I admire Opera for sticking to their guns, and really believing in their product. It is light, and quick. But Opera needs to get its act together, and offer a free browser that can better support standards...I know they're a business, but how can I, as a consumer, sit there, and reasonably pay for a browser, when so many others offer free alternatives? Having sampled all the browsers, I'm not convinced that Opera is so superior that it's worth shelling out the loot.
don't see where the news is. So okay, now there's a MSN client I won't use on OS X, just as there's a MSN client I won't use on Windows. Have a nice day.
I sincerely hope once Safari 1.0 is released, they can dump IE, as the standard shipped browser on new Macs, and have Safari installed. I don't see why Apple wouldn't do this. No reason to hold onto IE. It's available at Mactopia for those who want IE (and sometimes, at least now, need it).
I still have my Apple IIc, which I've had since early 1986, and it's still going. I still use it, mostly for nostalgic purposes. Ahhhh...the external 5.25 floppy drive...made it so easy to copy floppies! Oh, the 128K RAM...I was the RAM envy of my block, although my friend's C64 had all the cool games. The startup sounds....BEEP....DHDHDHDHDHDHDHDHDHD...the good 'ol days!
I concur. I was a former iTools user, and I use.Mac heavily. There is no monthly fee, only annual fees. $99 for my primary mailbox, and a small fee for an e-mail only mailbox.
That's great to hear, that is works well. $8.91 for an entire album is a great deal. I will be using this service in the future. If the service cannot provide an album, my backup is amazon.com, which will tack on additional costs for the CD itself, not to mention shipping and handling costs.
Just a follow up to an earlier post, with some real world evidence. Apple claims the file size is smaller. It isn't. I imported a song off a regular CD, first in AAC format, then in MP3 format, both at 128kpbs, stereo. The song was 4:29 long, and BOTH AAC and MP3 formats left a file size of 4.2MB! Am I missing something, or is the claim of smaller file sizes just not true?
I tried converting an MP3 file on my machine, encoded at 128, to AAC format, just for laughs. Well, the file created was LARGER at 128kbps than the MP3 file. How is this better?
AAC formatted files, converted from MP3, are actually larger than MP3 files. Unless Apple is saying freshly ripped CD files to AAC wind up smaller than ripped to MP3, I have not seen where AAC files are actually smaller, at 128.
Slashdot Mirror
I tried OmniWeb a few times. Even tried 5.x. Pissed me off. I couldn't believe I would have to pay money for this. OmniWeb will never take off when it costs money to buy. We have to buy enough software, and browsers shouldn't be in that group, period. I will never pay for a browser so long as there is a free one available.
Good software? Boy, that's debatable! Look, I admire Opera for sticking to their guns, and really believing in their product. It is light, and quick. But Opera needs to get its act together, and offer a free browser that can better support standards...I know they're a business, but how can I, as a consumer, sit there, and reasonably pay for a browser, when so many others offer free alternatives? Having sampled all the browsers, I'm not convinced that Opera is so superior that it's worth shelling out the loot.
don't see where the news is. So okay, now there's a MSN client I won't use on OS X, just as there's a MSN client I won't use on Windows. Have a nice day.
I sincerely hope once Safari 1.0 is released, they can dump IE, as the standard shipped browser on new Macs, and have Safari installed. I don't see why Apple wouldn't do this. No reason to hold onto IE. It's available at Mactopia for those who want IE (and sometimes, at least now, need it).
I still have my Apple IIc, which I've had since early 1986, and it's still going. I still use it, mostly for nostalgic purposes. Ahhhh...the external 5.25 floppy drive...made it so easy to copy floppies! Oh, the 128K RAM...I was the RAM envy of my block, although my friend's C64 had all the cool games. The startup sounds....BEEP....DHDHDHDHDHDHDHDHDHD...the good 'ol days!
I concur. I was a former iTools user, and I use .Mac heavily. There is no monthly fee, only annual fees. $99 for my primary mailbox, and a small fee for an e-mail only mailbox.
All, I don't want to jack up my OS X installation on my iBook. Can I install this on my iPod and boot from it???
That's great to hear, that is works well. $8.91 for an entire album is a great deal. I will be using this service in the future. If the service cannot provide an album, my backup is amazon.com, which will tack on additional costs for the CD itself, not to mention shipping and handling costs.
Just a follow up to an earlier post, with some real world evidence. Apple claims the file size is smaller. It isn't. I imported a song off a regular CD, first in AAC format, then in MP3 format, both at 128kpbs, stereo. The song was 4:29 long, and BOTH AAC and MP3 formats left a file size of 4.2MB! Am I missing something, or is the claim of smaller file sizes just not true?
I tried converting an MP3 file on my machine, encoded at 128, to AAC format, just for laughs. Well, the file created was LARGER at 128kbps than the MP3 file. How is this better?
AAC formatted files, converted from MP3, are actually larger than MP3 files. Unless Apple is saying freshly ripped CD files to AAC wind up smaller than ripped to MP3, I have not seen where AAC files are actually smaller, at 128.