I got an iPod nano 2nd generation when I bought my macbook, and I would really like to put rockbox on it because I have a lot of songs in vorbis format. Unfortunately Apple started encrypting their firmware in so that people can't easily replace them. I believe the same thing is true with most of the new iPods, not just the nanos, so be sure to check the rockbox site to make sure it's compatible before buying an iPod if you're counting on the vorbis compatibility.
If you like Ogg, why don't you sell iPod 2nd generation on eBay by reason of "It doesn't play my favorite format", buy a player which can play natively instead of still using iPod and hacking its firmware?
I keep asking same question to iPhone people too. If you are in need of 3rd party software, why did you buy iPhone at first place? Symbian, WinCE, Linux based smart phones can run 3rd party software down to antivirus/antispam deep level running stuff.
If they don't enable ogg while everything is open and free to implement, they are sending a message. It is up to you and others to respond to that message by not buying it. I use a Quad G5 Mac and various other Macs at home, I have never, ever thought of buying an "iPod" or "iPhone". If there were more people carrying same attitude, things would be different.
I guess that's their response to Google's Knol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knol) Pity to see things heat up between the 'good guys'. For some of us, Google is a Fortune 500 giant and giant holdings aren't automatically "good guys" just because they call themselves so.
I am not essentially a Wikipedia fan, actually stopped visiting there but really, Google will become worse if it keeps being called "good".
A search engine and mail provider, a major backbone to Usenet is NOT a good one if it automatically ignores every single abuse/spam report, especially those ones abusing its own blog etc. services. This is the exact same attitude of AOL back in time while they were indisputable kings, we have all seen what happened later.
What did Netscape do that Mozilla/Firefox did not?
Have collapsible toolbars.
Really, the only thing I miss in Firefox that was in Netscape since 4.something.
Seamonkey has it, though.
I wonder what would happen if only Netscape 7.2 users collectively moved to Seamonkey. Speaking with OS X numbers and just Versiontracker as source, the numbers are impressive (for Mac): Downloads (version 7.2): 84,744 Downloads (all versions): 270,849
AOL should do a favor, should divert those 7.2 users to Seamonkey project with a good sized donation. They should have done it AGES ago. Those evil guys gave the false promise/impression of supporting 7.2 instead of diverting them to Seamonkey project which needs more users to be a better suite.
I use AVG, ZoneAlarm, Spybot and Firefox (on Windows XP) but still run into problems. Mostly, I think, because my kids go to MySpace and YouTube and places like that. After a clean install everything seems fine, but after the kids spend some time on it I start experiencing symptoms like windows hanging when trying to log off an account, or windows hanging when trying to shutdown, etc. That is the hidden cost with any PC, for top performance and security, you must buy commercial stuff which is not currently case for Mac. E.g. you won't be getting attacked by Worms getting their own massive grid and encryption if you are running OS X.
The registry must be cleaned, built in defragmenter for Windows is still cheapware, you need a very good and commercially supported antispyware/antivirus if you want peace of mind...
If I moved to Vista running PC today, here is stuff I would buy for trouble free Windows experience.
So, for the tools average Mac will never need (currently), you pay $120. Not saying they are robbing you or windows sucks, just stating a fact. I have even excluded a decent IP filtering firewall, Zonealarm/Free may work fine.
I am just saying, if they compare those 2 computers side by side, they must also add those tools which is a must for current circus of malware.
If Apple keeps up concentrating to iPhone rather than fixing Leopard problems, I may move to Vista, so watching the PC/Win market too.;)
Safari supports web standards, IE does not. That is a fundamental difference.
As long as you code in Web standards,they will appear fine in Safari, you don't even need the browser to test while it runs under Windows.
To make sure your site is visible to monsters majority (IE) users, you HAVE TO buy Windows and test it with IE. It fails the standards so you either code specifically to "fix" your standards compliant code or you live real life, financial consequences.
That is what Opera demands, standards compliance AND/OR the user given choice what to run as browser.
They don't want MSHTML removed from Windows as a framework, they just don't want "Internet" icon being IE or if it will stay as IE, make the damn thing standards compliant.
They allow you to install pretty much anything you want in a PowerMac/Mac Pro, and it doesn't affect the stability of those machines and seems to cause little fuss.
You tellin' me. Apple.Japan started putting some very-very-very-very crappy Trident videocards into G5 XServers in that time and we had tons of problems with that. The quick solution was to remove the bloody videocard and then SSH to the server.:)
If I were you, I would have contacted IBM about it. IBM got sick about their conspiracies to that great CPU (PPC970) and attacks to its image since Intel switch. World's current Number 9 on top500.org runs PPC970 too I heard from Sun.
I like Apple, I use their products, I understand their need for Intel especially in Portable future (which is already happening) but their waste of G5 really sickens me. Imagine XCode 3 barely started to optimize the code for Altivec/970 and it is not even at Gcc 4.2 yet.
BTW when I hear things like that, I am praying nobody especially in certain places registers a free account at Developer.apple.com and starts looking to XCode/ OS X Driver SDK.
A mini Tower with 2x more space so they won't be bothering with 5400 RPM HD, integrated Gfx card. I am speaking about a bigger Mac Mini.
Hmmm... Not sure it is gonna happen. Apple supports only limited range of hardware to ensure hardware really works stable. Allowing user to add some more hardware, which could be extremely poor -- this situation will dramatically increase phonecalls to Apple and you probably will not be very happy if Apple will turn to be non-responsive company, like Microsoft...
As a Mini G4 1.42 Ghz owner, I understand why Apple has to use Notebook HD and low end GPU (or integrated) on Mac Mini. They have no other choice on such a small device which owner would probably use it at their living room. There shouldn't be fan noise or it should happen if Machine actually does something.
Add 2x more space, add a 7200RPM HD and a "real" Graphics card (G4 1.42 has low end ATI), see how fast it becomes.
I wasn't speaking about an "expandable mini"- I was speaking about a "bigger mini" with high performance parts. Mini user profile doesn't like to add their own parts anyway. Mini is a great small PC or media center device, not something to replace a desktop Mac like iMac.
Hmmm... Not sure it is gonna happen. Apple supports only limited range of hardware to ensure hardware really works stable. Allowing user to add some more hardware, which could be extremely poor -- this situation will dramatically increase phonecalls to Apple and you probably will not be very happy if Apple will turn to be non-responsive company, like Microsoft...
This is bunk. They allow you to install pretty much anything you want in a PowerMac/Mac Pro, and it doesn't affect the stability of those machines and seems to cause little fuss. The only reason Apple doesn't sell an expandable is because they don't want to. Those add on parts are limited thank God for those Taiwanese no-name brands yet can't or won't figure how to boot up XCode , start coding driver for them. All those parts that can be installed to high end Macs are from known brands with decent support and QA.
There are no "Rocket 6000 Nvidia based PCI-X Graphics Card" for Mac since it needs a openfirmware (or Intel variant) compatible Firmware, an highly threaded Unix/Mach driver which will support OpenGL all extensions.
Apple sells expandable machines, they are named "Mac Pro", add anything compatible with the above specs, they will run. The issue here is, only known vendors with pricey but high quality parts exists on Mac scene.
I am not defending the unexplainable, hilarious price difference between branded ATI/NVidia GPU Win version/ Mac version of course. Of course, ATI/Nvidia knows the Mac Pro users are generally professionals who makes that money in a day or hour.
"The proposed move is especially interesting, given that 32-bit Vista and XP cannot access 4 GB of memory."
So they would opt-in for 64bit Vista OEM or XP Pro 64bit edition. Lack of software compatibility? It would take a week, no more for Adobe come with 64bit Flash in case a large manufacturer calls them and tells the situation. Unfortunate but true.
Because OS X Leopard CAN access 4GB of RAM. Let's see if Apple also joins the fray.
Then again, 4GB is way too much, because after all 640KB should be enough for everyone. I got the joke but let me tell one thing for outsiders: OS X , until Leopard could happily access 8GB of RAM already. I mean, 10.2.8 ages since there are no archaic boundaries on Mac. Of course, it was limiting "memory in use by single app" to 4 GB.
On 10.4 Tiger, they introduced 64bit Shell programs capability, that is years ago and basically, those monster scientific,engineering software already uses Unix processes from console.
On Leopard, they say "Use GUI and Cocoa, code 64bit, there is no need for separate Unix threads/detached apps". Interestingly, USER can choose whether to run Application (e.g. XCode) 32bit or 64 bit, via Finder! Yes, that same Finder. I clicked "get info" on XCode.app (IDE) and got shocked. Well, it didn't run "Faster" on my Machine of course since PowerPC was designed to be 64bit in future,from beginning.
You should have just gotten an Apple and you are able to run most any OS that you want Wow, for a minute there you almost had me believing that the only reason I can't do that on any other machine is because of artificial restrictions that Apple enforce.
How about I stick to what I have now so I don't have to buy an overpriced desktop, and then if Apple decide that I'm allowed to run OS X on something they didn't build, I might consider booting it.
Unlikely, though. My overpriced Quad G5 which is 2 years old has 16GB Max memory spec and I actually saw it in use on a Pro DTP Workstation.
When I bought it, it was same price as a Quad Xeon workstation. I was happy with the G5 Technology (unlike G4-Laptop guys) so I opted in for Quad G5.
What Apple lacks are 1) A complete image fix of iMac series. Even if iMac performs 3x faster than a "Black Box Desktop PC", it won't be taken serious. 2) A mini Tower with 2x more space so they won't be bothering with 5400 RPM HD, integrated Gfx card. I am speaking about a bigger Mac Mini.
For generic PC running OS X? Half of OS X'es power comes from Apple knowing their desktop stuff out there and Taiwan no-name card manufacturers can't manage to get into those machines.
Why would notebook makers want to keep memory prices propped up, when those prices increase their costs, and the price of their notebooks they have to sell?
The much more obvious reason is that Vista needs more RAM, as does XP and everything else that inevitably bloats (including Linux).
And even though 32b Vista can't use all the 4GB of RAM, people will want it anyway, because they won't know/understand that the extra RAM isn't helping. And with all the other problems Vista has, the old solution to just throw more RAM at a buggy platform will still be popular. They have ALWAYS needed more RAM, especially Mac Machines out there.
Sometimes people ask me what to buy, I tell them buy anything but Max the memory first.
Feed that Vista some high end Application like Adobe Photoshop CS, give it a 39 Megapixel Pro image, see how it is used. Old times, Photographers would end up doing the final touches at their Desktop "Workstation", now they want to do everything on their laptop. It is same for users too, just remember the 50 GB Blu-Ray or 25GB HD-DVD. They actually work in 1080p standard with insane bandwidth. People buy HD Cameras and want to do everything on their laptops.
On OS X, things get really funny. Even a casual Desktop user will end up using whatever RAM he/she installed since OS X will use every opportunity to get the max out of the RAM installed. At last resort, it will be used as disk cache.
I could never understand why manufacturers ignore the basic rule. Less RAM= More swapping, horrible user experience, hard disk wear out and battery drain. So, the machine will already end up at service center with a completely mad user who promised never to buy that brand again. Saved $100 at production? Think again:)
Since when is "protecting trade secrets" the same as "censorship". I think it's time for/. to abandon the tag feature. I expect same sensitivity from you if any Non-Apple company causes such thing to happen. For example if MS lawyers manage to get betanews.com closed down.
BTW, tags are considered a joke, turn them off via Preferences.
This "community" will make me give up Apple somehow, one day.
The site has been essentially dead for a while now anyways. I haven't seen a single interesting update there in months and what stories they did have were repeated from other sources. Now hopefully AppleInsider can hold out. How can he post breaking news or anything he learned while being in court with a Fortune 500 giant with army of lawyers after him?
Too much for co-incidence. Also, it seems a billion dollar company who has more people to make coffee than Opera+Mozilla developers combined CAN produce a standards compliant browser down to Acid2 test. Why IE 8 and not IE 7? Why now?
Sure. Give me the source code for Opera under a free software license and I'll use it. Until then, no thanks. Yea and let it end up in Redmond. Source code of Opera is a treasure, a pure portable C HTML engine which can run down to Symbian S60 to a Desktop.
The real hidden gem is Konqueror even in KDE 3.x , that thing manages to have better speed and less memory usage than Safari on OS X 10.5.1 which -itself- is not anything but stable. Why those open source fans don't support it I have no clue. Still not "It is not GPL" troll/misinformation I hope.
I for one don't think it makes you a clueless troll.
It just makes you psychotic.
Every OS since way back when already asserts a successful copy before deleting originals, therefore power backup systems are not required. The root of your problem is that you upgraded too early. If you got screwed over the Leopard bug, well, my advice is to wait 4-6 months before upgrading to new major versions; that's my general philosophy for Linux kernels and other 'critical' software, too. There are many, many ways that software can screw up to cause data loss. That doesn't mean you have to be paranoid and psychotic; just allow others to play guinea pig until the software is proven. Simple. I have always updated to latest OS after a week from its release and to this day, I never had such disasters. It was always working faster, better and more stable. It even includes Windows ME.
On my Linux days, I have always used the latest tree. Linux kernel guys are way more conservative to release a major upgrade. When they release something, you really know it is truly stable and enough tested. Who tested Leopard? Torrent leakers? Digg trolls? Macrumours screenshot posting guys? Didn't they hear the fans at least? Even fans tells you something is wrong.
I am paying for a commercial OS and trust to vendor for a stable release when it is packaged and on sale World Wide, I don't know how it makes me psychotic but I have seen many lifeless people showing themselves funny while trying to defend a multi billion company like a cult member instead of customer or fan.
I never moved any file on any OS, I always considered it a risk.
This is hilarious. You should have saved it for the end; you gave away the fact that you're either clueless or a troll in your second paragraph. Why? I didn't have UPS for years, what would happen if power went off middle of operation? What if OS fails in middle of operation? How hard is it to COPY first and DELETE the source files after that operation finished? Easier than looking to mess at destination and source if it gets broken half of operation.
I use a better coded commercial tool named "Path Finder" which is professionally coded to run copy/move operations on a threaded, separate Unix process anyway.
I don't even move files on Symbian S80, if it makes me clueless or troll, you gotta live with it.
There is Thinkfree 3.0 and it is still being maintained. I heard it is a real success in South Korea with massive bandwidth available.
http://www.thinkfree.com/ , I say massive bandwidth but it is only 1 time 20-30 MB Java cache download.
In fact, Thinkfree 1.0 was also a pure "run in Browser" implementation. After MS CONSPIRACIES to Java which was documented by US courts, they stayed away from -in browser- method and on 3.0 when they made sure everyone can install a modern Java to browser, they came back.
I have Thinkfree 2.x "offline" version which is a pure Java OSX.app , it is one of the things works in OS X Leopard without any kind of updates.
Only way to make these things work as alternative to MS Office is to make sure all modern browsers (except IE as usual) does those AJAX etc. tricks. It took weeks for Thinkfree to make it work in Safari for instance.
There are so many bugs to report that we hardly get feedback from Apple when we report issues. We are being still good customers and reporting them and patiently keep BETA TESTING this paid OS. I am personally understanding to the fact that Leopard is more like OS XI (11) , Apple have taken very advanced steps to future especially enterprise/business. It doesn't change the fact that this version of OS is horribly buggy, looks like rushed out of door just to make couple of loudmouth Mac trolls happy.
Nobody is astroturfing, discussions.apple.com does not respond to my IP for weeks, it barely handles the load of feedback/disaster reports.
Also he has taken enough "overrated" beating from those little fascist slashdotter mods IMHO, they couldn't dare to flamebait -1 him since they know overrated is not meta moderated.
OS X Leopard, especially on PowerPC feels like you downloaded a beta torrent by paying $130 (more in my case, family license).
There are inexplainable issues, they simply make no sense and I am not speaking about that "move files" bug, I never moved any file on any OS, I always considered it a risk.
In my case, OpenGL is 40% slower (tested multi, multi tools) than Tiger 10.4.11. As Nvidia says "it is up to Apple" for drivers, I reported to Apple and never heard back except one really redundant and irritating question.
Those people doing a massive job to port thousands of open source tools to OS X have to start over. Developers never had final version before it hit shelves by a childish (I think) reason as "They are leaking them". There is a blame game going on and those tiny Mac fanboy fascists are trying to censor every kind of feedback on web. I am not speaking about posting a security issue to public forums and whine to slashdot when it is deleted.
I am patiently waiting for 10.5.2 update, I will see if it fixes anything or gives slightest hope and if it doesn't, I will do my first OS downgrade since Atari 800XL DOS 3.0 back in 1985.
I don't like to post bugs to public but I have seen some idiots modded down (using overrated censor) some posts making sense here.
Vista? I have used it for 3 days, I haven't seen major issues but it was a professional developer machine.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if adobe didn't do a binary for iphone like they did for symbian - it's in their interest for it to be available for as many platforms as possible (they make the money on the encoding.. the flash developer stuff costs many many $$$). I bet Adobe started coding Flash 9 for iPhone using the "unofficial" stuff on market or their good relations with Apple. Adobe wants Flash to be further accounted with being de-facto standard video container on web.
The last thing they would want would be Real beating them and people using those mobile-optimized codecs on their iPhones. Real has no "image" problem on Mac land as you probably know.
It is same deal with Real Networks, they are currently the most popular and respected media server company for 3G/EDGE networks. They don't want to lose it for sure.
The issue is: Content BELONGS to BBC And the BBC BELONGS to their licence payers in the UK in an arrangement enforced by law through the UK elected parliament. This means the service is being paid for by residents of the UK. and we would pay 2x price if it was offered to foreigners with "geo IP" technology rather than watching someone's sub optimized divx ripped from TV broadcast.
They are lagging the real thing on purpose just to claim the multi platform changes were not needed. How hard is it to setup "World" site same time with added price?
He seems as an advanced user/developer and yet uses the "Feedback" form. Than posts to public forums ignoring their policies punishing those non techie.Mac users.
Here is the complete open Mozilla project security issue reporting guideline "IMPORTANT: Anyone who believes they have found a Mozilla-related security vulnerability can and should report it by sending email to the address (removed) @mozilla.org. For more information read the rest of this document."
It doesn't say "Post it using feedback form, if you don't get any response, use mozillazine forums to post it to public and when it is deleted, post it to slashdot":)
Slashdot Mirror
I got an iPod nano 2nd generation when I bought my macbook, and I would really like to put rockbox on it because I have a lot of songs in vorbis format. Unfortunately Apple started encrypting their firmware in so that people can't easily replace them. I believe the same thing is true with most of the new iPods, not just the nanos, so be sure to check the rockbox site to make sure it's compatible before buying an iPod if you're counting on the vorbis compatibility.
If you like Ogg, why don't you sell iPod 2nd generation on eBay by reason of "It doesn't play my favorite format", buy a player which can play natively instead of still using iPod and hacking its firmware?I keep asking same question to iPhone people too. If you are in need of 3rd party software, why did you buy iPhone at first place? Symbian, WinCE, Linux based smart phones can run 3rd party software down to antivirus/antispam deep level running stuff.
If they don't enable ogg while everything is open and free to implement, they are sending a message. It is up to you and others to respond to that message by not buying it. I use a Quad G5 Mac and various other Macs at home, I have never, ever thought of buying an "iPod" or "iPhone". If there were more people carrying same attitude, things would be different.
I am not essentially a Wikipedia fan, actually stopped visiting there but really, Google will become worse if it keeps being called "good".
A search engine and mail provider, a major backbone to Usenet is NOT a good one if it automatically ignores every single abuse/spam report, especially those ones abusing its own blog etc. services. This is the exact same attitude of AOL back in time while they were indisputable kings, we have all seen what happened later.
I better back up the installer. Seamonkey upgrade which is EXACTLY the same thing you use just with like thousands of bugfixes is way to go.
You can even use your Netscape 7 theme with it.
http://www.seamonkey-project.org/
Stop using OS X Netscape 7.2- Use Seamonkey, if AOL guys have a tiny respect to their users, they should write it to their webpage.
Have collapsible toolbars.
Really, the only thing I miss in Firefox that was in Netscape since 4.something.
I wonder what would happen if only Netscape 7.2 users collectively moved to Seamonkey. Speaking with OS X numbers and just Versiontracker as source, the numbers are impressive (for Mac):Seamonkey has it, though.
Downloads (version 7.2): 84,744
Downloads (all versions): 270,849
AOL should do a favor, should divert those 7.2 users to Seamonkey project with a good sized donation. They should have done it AGES ago. Those evil guys gave the false promise/impression of supporting 7.2 instead of diverting them to Seamonkey project which needs more users to be a better suite.
The registry must be cleaned, built in defragmenter for Windows is still cheapware, you need a very good and commercially supported antispyware/antivirus if you want peace of mind...
If I moved to Vista running PC today, here is stuff I would buy for trouble free Windows experience.
1) Kaspersky Antivirus, $40 http://www.kaspersky.com/kaspersky_anti-virus
2) Ad-Aware Plus 20 Euros (roughly another $40) http://lavasoft.com/products/ad_aware_plus.php
3) A good rated Windows/registry etc. maintenance tool like Ashampoo, $50 http://www.download.com/Ashampoo-PowerUp/3000-2086_4-10028404.html
So, for the tools average Mac will never need (currently), you pay $120. Not saying they are robbing you or windows sucks, just stating a fact. I have even excluded a decent IP filtering firewall, Zonealarm/Free may work fine.
I am just saying, if they compare those 2 computers side by side, they must also add those tools which is a must for current circus of malware.
If Apple keeps up concentrating to iPhone rather than fixing Leopard problems, I may move to Vista, so watching the PC/Win market too.
Safari supports web standards, IE does not. That is a fundamental difference.
As long as you code in Web standards,they will appear fine in Safari, you don't even need the browser to test while it runs under Windows.
To make sure your site is visible to monsters majority (IE) users, you HAVE TO buy Windows and test it with IE. It fails the standards so you either code specifically to "fix" your standards compliant code or you live real life, financial consequences.
That is what Opera demands, standards compliance AND/OR the user given choice what to run as browser.
They don't want MSHTML removed from Windows as a framework, they just don't want "Internet" icon being IE or if it will stay as IE, make the damn thing standards compliant.
You tellin' me. Apple.Japan started putting some very-very-very-very crappy Trident videocards into G5 XServers in that time and we had tons of problems with that. The quick solution was to remove the bloody videocard and then SSH to the server. :)
If I were you, I would have contacted IBM about it. IBM got sick about their conspiracies to that great CPU (PPC970) and attacks to its image since Intel switch. World's current Number 9 on top500.org runs PPC970 too I heard from Sun.I like Apple, I use their products, I understand their need for Intel especially in Portable future (which is already happening) but their waste of G5 really sickens me. Imagine XCode 3 barely started to optimize the code for Altivec/970 and it is not even at Gcc 4.2 yet.
BTW when I hear things like that, I am praying nobody especially in certain places registers a free account at Developer.apple.com and starts looking to XCode/ OS X Driver SDK.
Hmmm... Not sure it is gonna happen. Apple supports only limited range of hardware to ensure hardware really works stable. Allowing user to add some more hardware, which could be extremely poor -- this situation will dramatically increase phonecalls to Apple and you probably will not be very happy if Apple will turn to be non-responsive company, like Microsoft...
As a Mini G4 1.42 Ghz owner, I understand why Apple has to use Notebook HD and low end GPU (or integrated) on Mac Mini. They have no other choice on such a small device which owner would probably use it at their living room. There shouldn't be fan noise or it should happen if Machine actually does something.Add 2x more space, add a 7200RPM HD and a "real" Graphics card (G4 1.42 has low end ATI), see how fast it becomes.
I wasn't speaking about an "expandable mini"- I was speaking about a "bigger mini" with high performance parts. Mini user profile doesn't like to add their own parts anyway. Mini is a great small PC or media center device, not something to replace a desktop Mac like iMac.
This is bunk. They allow you to install pretty much anything you want in a PowerMac/Mac Pro, and it doesn't affect the stability of those machines and seems to cause little fuss. The only reason Apple doesn't sell an expandable is because they don't want to. Those add on parts are limited thank God for those Taiwanese no-name brands yet can't or won't figure how to boot up XCode , start coding driver for them. All those parts that can be installed to high end Macs are from known brands with decent support and QA.
There are no "Rocket 6000 Nvidia based PCI-X Graphics Card" for Mac since it needs a openfirmware (or Intel variant) compatible Firmware, an highly threaded Unix/Mach driver which will support OpenGL all extensions.
Apple sells expandable machines, they are named "Mac Pro", add anything compatible with the above specs, they will run. The issue here is, only known vendors with pricey but high quality parts exists on Mac scene.
I am not defending the unexplainable, hilarious price difference between branded ATI/NVidia GPU Win version/ Mac version of course. Of course, ATI/Nvidia knows the Mac Pro users are generally professionals who makes that money in a day or hour.
"The proposed move is especially interesting, given that 32-bit Vista and XP cannot access 4 GB of memory."
So they would opt-in for 64bit Vista OEM or XP Pro 64bit edition. Lack of software compatibility? It would take a week, no more for Adobe come with 64bit Flash in case a large manufacturer calls them and tells the situation. Unfortunate but true.
Let's see if Apple also joins the fray.
Then again, 4GB is way too much, because after all 640KB should be enough for everyone. I got the joke but let me tell one thing for outsiders: OS X , until Leopard could happily access 8GB of RAM already. I mean, 10.2.8 ages since there are no archaic boundaries on Mac. Of course, it was limiting "memory in use by single app" to 4 GB.
On 10.4 Tiger, they introduced 64bit Shell programs capability, that is years ago and basically, those monster scientific,engineering software already uses Unix processes from console.
On Leopard, they say "Use GUI and Cocoa, code 64bit, there is no need for separate Unix threads/detached apps". Interestingly, USER can choose whether to run Application (e.g. XCode) 32bit or 64 bit, via Finder! Yes, that same Finder. I clicked "get info" on XCode.app (IDE) and got shocked. Well, it didn't run "Faster" on my Machine of course since PowerPC was designed to be 64bit in future,from beginning.
How about I stick to what I have now so I don't have to buy an overpriced desktop, and then if Apple decide that I'm allowed to run OS X on something they didn't build, I might consider booting it.
Unlikely, though. My overpriced Quad G5 which is 2 years old has 16GB Max memory spec and I actually saw it in use on a Pro DTP Workstation.
When I bought it, it was same price as a Quad Xeon workstation. I was happy with the G5 Technology (unlike G4-Laptop guys) so I opted in for Quad G5.
What Apple lacks are
1) A complete image fix of iMac series. Even if iMac performs 3x faster than a "Black Box Desktop PC", it won't be taken serious.
2) A mini Tower with 2x more space so they won't be bothering with 5400 RPM HD, integrated Gfx card. I am speaking about a bigger Mac Mini.
For generic PC running OS X? Half of OS X'es power comes from Apple knowing their desktop stuff out there and Taiwan no-name card manufacturers can't manage to get into those machines.
The much more obvious reason is that Vista needs more RAM, as does XP and everything else that inevitably bloats (including Linux).
And even though 32b Vista can't use all the 4GB of RAM, people will want it anyway, because they won't know/understand that the extra RAM isn't helping. And with all the other problems Vista has, the old solution to just throw more RAM at a buggy platform will still be popular. They have ALWAYS needed more RAM, especially Mac Machines out there.
Sometimes people ask me what to buy, I tell them buy anything but Max the memory first.
Feed that Vista some high end Application like Adobe Photoshop CS, give it a 39 Megapixel Pro image, see how it is used. Old times, Photographers would end up doing the final touches at their Desktop "Workstation", now they want to do everything on their laptop. It is same for users too, just remember the 50 GB Blu-Ray or 25GB HD-DVD. They actually work in 1080p standard with insane bandwidth. People buy HD Cameras and want to do everything on their laptops.
On OS X, things get really funny. Even a casual Desktop user will end up using whatever RAM he/she installed since OS X will use every opportunity to get the max out of the RAM installed. At last resort, it will be used as disk cache.
I could never understand why manufacturers ignore the basic rule. Less RAM= More swapping, horrible user experience, hard disk wear out and battery drain. So, the machine will already end up at service center with a completely mad user who promised never to buy that brand again. Saved $100 at production? Think again
BTW, tags are considered a joke, turn them off via Preferences.
This "community" will make me give up Apple somehow, one day.
Opera sues MS mainly for Standards compliance just a week ago and this "We pass Acid test" story comes out.
http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2007/12/13/
Too much for co-incidence. Also, it seems a billion dollar company who has more people to make coffee than Opera+Mozilla developers combined CAN produce a standards compliant browser down to Acid2 test. Why IE 8 and not IE 7? Why now?
The real hidden gem is Konqueror even in KDE 3.x , that thing manages to have better speed and less memory usage than Safari on OS X 10.5.1 which -itself- is not anything but stable. Why those open source fans don't support it I have no clue. Still not "It is not GPL" troll/misinformation I hope.
It just makes you psychotic.
Every OS since way back when already asserts a successful copy before deleting originals, therefore power backup systems are not required. The root of your problem is that you upgraded too early. If you got screwed over the Leopard bug, well, my advice is to wait 4-6 months before upgrading to new major versions; that's my general philosophy for Linux kernels and other 'critical' software, too. There are many, many ways that software can screw up to cause data loss. That doesn't mean you have to be paranoid and psychotic; just allow others to play guinea pig until the software is proven. Simple. I have always updated to latest OS after a week from its release and to this day, I never had such disasters. It was always working faster, better and more stable. It even includes Windows ME.
On my Linux days, I have always used the latest tree. Linux kernel guys are way more conservative to release a major upgrade. When they release something, you really know it is truly stable and enough tested. Who tested Leopard? Torrent leakers? Digg trolls? Macrumours screenshot posting guys? Didn't they hear the fans at least? Even fans tells you something is wrong.
I am paying for a commercial OS and trust to vendor for a stable release when it is packaged and on sale World Wide, I don't know how it makes me psychotic but I have seen many lifeless people showing themselves funny while trying to defend a multi billion company like a cult member instead of customer or fan.
This is hilarious. You should have saved it for the end; you gave away the fact that you're either clueless or a troll in your second paragraph. Why? I didn't have UPS for years, what would happen if power went off middle of operation? What if OS fails in middle of operation? How hard is it to COPY first and DELETE the source files after that operation finished? Easier than looking to mess at destination and source if it gets broken half of operation.
I use a better coded commercial tool named "Path Finder" which is professionally coded to run copy/move operations on a threaded, separate Unix process anyway.
I don't even move files on Symbian S80, if it makes me clueless or troll, you gotta live with it.
There is Thinkfree 3.0 and it is still being maintained. I heard it is a real success in South Korea with massive bandwidth available.
.app , it is one of the things works in OS X Leopard without any kind of updates.
http://www.thinkfree.com/ , I say massive bandwidth but it is only 1 time 20-30 MB Java cache download.
In fact, Thinkfree 1.0 was also a pure "run in Browser" implementation. After MS CONSPIRACIES to Java which was documented by US courts, they stayed away from -in browser- method and on 3.0 when they made sure everyone can install a modern Java to browser, they came back.
I have Thinkfree 2.x "offline" version which is a pure Java OSX
Only way to make these things work as alternative to MS Office is to make sure all modern browsers (except IE as usual) does those AJAX etc. tricks. It took weeks for Thinkfree to make it work in Safari for instance.
Unless there is a massive MS conspiracy, these people have used Leopard and they are posting it to a Mac only website:
http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=2007121710540526
There are so many bugs to report that we hardly get feedback from Apple when we report issues. We are being still good customers and reporting them and patiently keep BETA TESTING this paid OS. I am personally understanding to the fact that Leopard is more like OS XI (11) , Apple have taken very advanced steps to future especially enterprise/business. It doesn't change the fact that this version of OS is horribly buggy, looks like rushed out of door just to make couple of loudmouth Mac trolls happy.
Nobody is astroturfing, discussions.apple.com does not respond to my IP for weeks, it barely handles the load of feedback/disaster reports.
Also he has taken enough "overrated" beating from those little fascist slashdotter mods IMHO, they couldn't dare to flamebait -1 him since they know overrated is not meta moderated.
It doesn't fix Leopard issues though.
OS X Leopard, especially on PowerPC feels like you downloaded a beta torrent by paying $130 (more in my case, family license).
There are inexplainable issues, they simply make no sense and I am not speaking about that "move files" bug, I never moved any file on any OS, I always considered it a risk.
In my case, OpenGL is 40% slower (tested multi, multi tools) than Tiger 10.4.11. As Nvidia says "it is up to Apple" for drivers, I reported to Apple and never heard back except one really redundant and irritating question.
Those people doing a massive job to port thousands of open source tools to OS X have to start over. Developers never had final version before it hit shelves by a childish (I think) reason as "They are leaking them". There is a blame game going on and those tiny Mac fanboy fascists are trying to censor every kind of feedback on web. I am not speaking about posting a security issue to public forums and whine to slashdot when it is deleted.
I am patiently waiting for 10.5.2 update, I will see if it fixes anything or gives slightest hope and if it doesn't, I will do my first OS downgrade since Atari 800XL DOS 3.0 back in 1985.
I don't like to post bugs to public but I have seen some idiots modded down (using overrated censor) some posts making sense here.
Vista? I have used it for 3 days, I haven't seen major issues but it was a professional developer machine.
The last thing they would want would be Real beating them and people using those mobile-optimized codecs on their iPhones. Real has no "image" problem on Mac land as you probably know.
It is same deal with Real Networks, they are currently the most popular and respected media server company for 3G/EDGE networks. They don't want to lose it for sure.
They are lagging the real thing on purpose just to claim the multi platform changes were not needed. How hard is it to setup "World" site same time with added price?
"Feedback" form is for people who (like me) to say "Leopard is awful, you shipped it too early". :)
.Mac users.
:)
Actual thing is http://bugreporter.apple.com/ , "New Problem" "Security" from drop down menu.
He seems as an advanced user/developer and yet uses the "Feedback" form. Than posts to public forums ignoring their policies punishing those non techie
Here is the complete open Mozilla project security issue reporting guideline
"IMPORTANT: Anyone who believes they have found a Mozilla-related security vulnerability can and should report it by sending email to the address (removed) @mozilla.org. For more information read the rest of this document."
It doesn't say "Post it using feedback form, if you don't get any response, use mozillazine forums to post it to public and when it is deleted, post it to slashdot"