OS X 10.2 - Page 5

yes jimmac it is my view, but I see many people think the same. Some just bare with it and others are fed up with it.

Regarding OS 7 and 6, etc (and yes there was 7.5.5, its even freely downloadable from Apple), you have to admit one other thing... there was no competition. Win95 was just out when 7.5.5 was around. Today we have the likes of XP and the various Linux flavors with Gnome and the like. While having the type of fubars we have today in OS X could have been, lets say, acceptable, back in 95, today it means the life and death of a company.

Apple's current situation isnt the bst its ever been through. Hardware, besides the ultra high end, is at a pretty pathetic state (a round of applause to Moto for helping there), we are seeing price increases (yes yes ram tft bla bla), and just to top it off, a glitchy OS.

The combination of all these factors isn't good for Apple.

Go to the PC side then. I am willing to start a pool on how long you'll stay there, though. Any takers?

this is a really cool idea !
Go see that site !

<a href="http://www.wpi.edu/~phoenix/macosx/dock.html" target="_blank">http://www.wpi.edu/~phoenix/macosx/dock.html</a>

Glitchy OS? Have you used Windows XP? OR any Windows for that matter?

Yes, Linux is great if you know what to do with it, but OS X compared to Windows, at least with all my experiences, is by far less buggy and more reliable to get your work done.

XP: "Oops! I crashed! Hehe. Here, I'll just restart automatically so it looks like nothing happened...." <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

Switch to the PC side? Hehe, I have been using PCs for years and currently using a Win2000 Sony Vaio replacement laptop my friend lent to me while my iBook is being repaired (oh what wonderful quality).

Its not a speed demon but for a 2 year old machine its noticably faster than OS X and it only has 128MB ram and a crappy intel 2mb vram. I havent had a single problem with it except that it gets slooooow if you leave it on for 2-3 days. The ram has to be purged or something.

I can switch from one platform to another without problems... just the keyboard shortcuts take a few minutes to readjust to.

If I were forced as some ultimate torture to have to use Winblows for the rest of my life, I would survive. I wouldnt necessarily like it, but I get around just fine with Windoze too.

Fact is, I want to see OS X dominate and truly become the awesome OS it promises to be.

[ 03-22-2002: Message edited by: ZO ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by ZO:
<strong>Regarding OS 7 and 6, etc (and yes there was 7.5.5, its even freely downloadable from Apple), you have to admit one other thing... there was no competition. Win95 was just out when 7.5.5 was around.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, and the combination of Windows 95 and System *crash* 7 *freeze* 5 drove Apple out of business and higher ed quickly and completely.

Systems 7.1 - 7.5.x were so bad that I held on to my LCD II running 7.0.1 for 6 years, waiting with increasing despair for an OS "upgrade" that didn't result in waves of complaints in the comp.sys.mac.* newsgroups and day after day of bad news for the platform, and wondering why Apple was touting and then killing all these random technologies instead of doing the systems engineering that the underlying OS so desperately needed. The day 7.6.1 was released, to a bruised, decimated and retrenched audience, I ordered a $3000 PowerMac (and it arrived 9 months later - I really don't miss the old Apple).

[quote]<strong>Today we have the likes of XP and the various Linux flavors with Gnome and the like. While having the type of fubars we have today in OS X could have been, lets say, acceptable, back in 95, today it means the life and death of a company.</strong><hr></blockquote>

This is 100% wrong. System 7.5 nearly killed Apple in 1995. Literally. I was there. I saw the Macs just... vanish... from the university here (there are still a few pockets in the college of medicine, but that's it). Whatever OS X's flaws, it's leaps and bounds better than the alternatives in the areas that really matter (stability, security, reliability, compatibility), it is significantly more user friendly than OS 9 in a number of ways, and it's held in much higher regard by the same people who got rid of Macs in 1995.

I wouldn't even dare to compare Gnome on Linux to Aqua on OS X. There are very sound reasons why Linux has failed as a client OS (how'd you like to recompile Darwin every time you installed a new driver on your iBook?). As for XP, its turd might be polished while OS X's diamond is still rough, but between MS' bad attitude, the Death By A Thousand Wizards that passes for user friendliness, and constantly decreasing performance and compatibility, OS X looks better to the other side than any Mac OS I can remember since, oh System 6.

[quote]<strong>Apple's current situation isnt the bst its ever been through.</strong><hr></blockquote>

But it's a whole lot better than it was.

[ 03-22-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

[quote]Today we have the likes of XP and the various Linux flavors with Gnome and the like.<hr></blockquote>

XP is definitely a big competitor to OS X, wizards and all, but not Linux. While I admire Linux's speed and versatility, I'm infuriated by its disgustingly poor GUI options. Gnome and Nautilus look nice in some parts, but work horribly. KDE looks horrible and works poorly. Allow me to pronounce Linux dead on the desktop until someone develops the guts to overhaul the whole system.

ZO,

Fortunately when you read the polls and the articles. Look at the sales, many ( when you measure the whole ) means a few.

Those who are hopelessly stuck in the past.

Oh well.

I could tell you what my view is ( and yes I just stated it's my view ) is that in the years to come OS X will become so powerful, so viable, ( and people will be used to it by then ) that this argument will be all but forgotten.

But that's after they declare it reaching maturity.

It makes me wonder what are you comparing OS X to? It's only real competition ( Windows XP ) took years to get to where it's at. As did Mac Classic. Apple's letting you use it now. In order to get your feedback. To make it a better OS. Now you may call that beta but, if so it's the best beta I've ever used.

So if it's too slow for you or buggy, tell Apple!
That's the whole point. Coming here and whining does no good.



[ 03-22-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

Jimmac, Gambit, did you ever see that "OS X Police" article, on OSOpinion or somewhere (yes, OSOpinion, I know, but...)

ZO and I are not whining. We are NOT switching to Windows, either, are we? (ZO, I know you're not Right? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> )

Amorph said:
[quote]
As for XP, its turd might be polished while OS X's diamond is still rough
<hr></blockquote>

Exactly. I know OS X will eventually be the mechanism through which Apple eventually climbs back up to 10-15% market share, and from there, who knows?

MacOS X is what Linux wants (wanted?) to be. Every time I hear crap from a Radio Shack or Staples kid, I have to mention this. It starts out like this: I mention a Mac, and I get some smartass remark like "Macs cause cancer!" Haha. I ask them, what would you RUN on a PC? What would you do with it? Windows? They respond, almost too quickly, "Linux!"

Linux is a server. Maybe a development platform, for a masochist REALBasic and Cocoa sure spank Linux. If you want emacs, or hey, even ed??? Terminal. Inside, I know Windoids who now try justify and defend their PC existence, immediately bark: Linux! Well, besides YDL, PPC Linux, and some other quality distros on PPC, MacOS X absolutely spanks Linux in terms of being a "real" OS. But this isn't saying much, and neither is being better than Windows. Remember that quote "Even if you are on the right track, you can get run over if you just sit there".

Granted, Amorph, Windows does improve in jumps, and the "Critical Updates" for my Win98 seem to do more harm than good (really, security on WinDOwS, why even try anyway?, lol)

Yet, ZO is seeing what many of you refuse to see. Ack! You are at risk of sounding almost as blind as a Windoid. Wait, sorry, that was harsh. But you know what I mean

This discussion is interesting. Besides, I learn a lot from people here, jimmac. And usually it's fun!

Sidenote: Jeez, isn't Bluetooth cool! I am leaning toward BUYING that! Now that it's actually a reality, I am excited! This is the kind of stuff that makes Apple, well, Apple!

AirSluf, I hear you, and I know exactly what you are saying. We are VERY spoiled
But why is the ability to copy a volume in the Finder "&lt;exalted&gt;", exactly?

I never had problems with 7.5.3, on my Color Classic, acually. But I did go 7.6.1 when it came out.

Apple has *talent*. iTunes/QuickTime/iStuff vs. WiMP and the copycat M$ stuff, just for example. Once MacOS X becomes polished, I know I'll never look back. But it sure isn't polished, yet. In the past few weeks, I've gotten to like it, but not as much as OS 9, yet.

[quote]Originally posted by Aquatik:
<strong>Yet, ZO is seeing what many of you refuse to see.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That goes both ways.

I understand that some people have legitimate gripes with OS X. I know that there are huge gaps left, and things that are genuinely incomplete and unpolished, which make it unusable for certain applications and maddening for others. That's why I dived right in, but I'm simultaneously watching for an upgrade that I consider totally Mom-proof.

What I object to is the generalization of experience to "Mac users" or to "everyone," or that this is a sign of Apple abandoning content creators(!!!) instead of a necessarily awkward transition. For the purposes of this particular longtime loyal Apple user, OS X has been better than OS 9 since 10.0.0. For the purposes of a sizable number of people, OS X is a leap forward in usability over OS 9 (and from Windows, I need hardly add) right now, gaps and glitches notwithstanding. Look at the attention and praise it's getting outside the Mac presses. The only really serious mistake, IMO, was shipping OS X standard with the modem/PPP bug. But even given that, it's a good thing.

Some of it, I think, is psychological. For example, (just to pick on poor ZO ) ZO said at one point that remembering command-SHIFT-n for "New Folder" was maddening, and at another point that going between Mac and Windows keyboard shortcuts was effortless (I can't remember what all the Windows ways of creating a new folder, but all the ones that come to mind were significantly more painful than remembering to press the SHIFT key). That in and of itself is justification for the new interface - imagine how confusing OS X would be if it looked like OS 9 but had different shortcuts!

[ 03-23-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]

[ 03-23-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

A rehash of what's already been said here in simpler terms: Yes, there are things about OS X that bug me or the " what did it just do " ? But, I realize what's going on here. Like Amorph said it's an " awkward transition ".

I've been through it before when Apple was trying to polish Classic back in the system 7 days. I found some those " upgrades " far more annoying ( like bringing my whole system down ) than this.

Once again I'm much more concerned with the state of the hardware this is running on.
While it still does everything I ask of it fairly well ( and my G4 is a couple of years old now ) I realize to the new buyer out there the Speed gap ( not just the Mhz ) has increased not decreased ( compared to say, a year ago ). This concerns me and it should concern Apple. This is what needs attention and soon.

Of course if a new faster CPU like a G5 or what ever comes along the OS will have to upgraded to accomodate it. This may cause more " awkward transition " problems.

[ 03-26-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

Amorph

My 'effortlessness' at switching between a Mac and PC keyboard is the fruit of 6 years of working with both (and even making a sticker of an apple and putting it on the CTRL buttons of the PC keyboards I used to remember that its basically our equivalent).

Im used to not even thinking of pressing Apple+N for a new folder seeing that I have been using Macs for about 8 years now. I do follow your explanation for WHY they changed it, but it doent make me any happier. I have learned now and thats that, but it still pissed me off.

Im at least happy to say that I got my iBook back after 10days repair... and it hasnt gotten any faster

To be honest it sorta feels like Im using the Vaio still because its about as sluggish... but the Vaio is 2 years old. Oops.

I also have to agree with the arguement one has to make when they mention Macs to PC weenies and Mac haters in general. The always (I mean ALWAYS) instinctively say "oh, Macs suck". I always have a 2 second 'ha-ha' laugh with them and say that I use Macs and love them much more than Windows... and 'did you know that the new MacOS X is based on Unix so you can have a nice DOS-like terminal and hack around with it?' That usually shuts them up a little and they half consider it. I always conclude with saying that it doesnt really matter in the end because, and this is true, its just a matter of habit. I think 90% of all PC users that say Macs suck is because its different and they just dont want to learn a new system. I also think thats about right for Mac users. I used to hate PCs while I didnt even know that much about them. But in time I learned that 'in order to defeat your enemy, you must know him'. And so that is what I have done and now know what I can appreciate and not on both platforms.

Jeeez, I really want 10.2 to come out soon... the slowness of this OS is making me go nuts.

[quote]Originally posted by ZO:
<strong> I think 90% of all PC users that say Macs suck is because its different and they just dont want to learn a new system. I also think thats about right for Mac users. I used to hate PCs while I didnt even know that much about them. But in time I learned that 'in order to defeat your enemy, you must know him'. And so that is what I have done and now know what I can appreciate and not on both platforms</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, I think 90% of all OS 9 users who complain about X say X sucks because it's different and they don't want to learn a new system.

What I think you should do is rethink the way you approach OS X. I think you should learn that in order to defeat your enemy, you should get to know them first. That way, you might actually appreciate all X has to offer, both good and bad.

I think I'm done.

I don't like Windows because it's not laid out as well ( the way Windows Explorer works ). Also I don't like the way the GUI was " innovated " ( ripped off ). This process is still going on. Pretty good for a company who's already been found guilty of illegal practices. That's why I don't have any problem with Windows elements in OS X.

The concept of NET makes me want to gag.

When PC advocates start spouting nonsense I just take them down memory lane.

" Didn't Apple do the same to Xerox " no, they bought the GUI from Xerox. Xerox knew what they where doing and they didn't want it. Apple on the other hand was tricked into letting MS use the GUI and later tried to sue but, it was too late.

The whole tradition that Windows is based on is wrong and they shouldn't be allowed to get get away with it. As with many things in this strange new world we live in they probably will. Just like OJ and anyone else who has enough power and money. But, that still doesn't make it right.

If you support Windows you are supporting a future that insures we will have a lot less control over not just computer products but almost every kind of media.

Microsoft will be happy to control it for you.

Where do you want to go today?

Sorry for the rant but, when I hear those kind of questions that's one of the first things to come to mind.

[ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

so that's what happened to my web server...

[quote]Originally posted by Gambit:
<strong>

Well, I think 90% of all OS 9 users who complain about X say X sucks because it's different and they don't want to learn a new system.

What I think you should do is rethink the way you approach OS X. I think you should learn that in order to defeat your enemy, you should get to know them first. That way, you might actually appreciate all X has to offer, both good and bad.

I think I'm done.</strong><hr></blockquote>

ehh, I disagree. Most OS 9 users that dislike OS X have usually used OS X for at least a short period of time.

Now, I'm sure one could argue that one needs to use OS X for an extended period of time in order to fully appreciate this operating system. However OS X has a TON of usability problems, and those do not take extended weeks to show. You see them right away.

As a professional web developer and interface designer I tend to run in to 2 different types of people. anyone that I know though geekie development work typically loves OS X and its Next Step genes. However, they'll spend half there time looking at the TCSH command line.

Anyone that I work with in the design industry is typically not too exited about OS X right now. These poor folks run into a lot of road blocks that don't interfere with developers that much. First off, OS X is usually slower then OS 9. It benches slower then OS 9 in both OpenGL and 2D performance. OS X also lacks support for 2D hardware acceleration... and this becomes VERY apparent in professional design apps when one is dealing with a large project. Scrolling is saaaalllooooooow....and I have a Dual g4 system.

Aqua is also a huge hinderance. White and grey lines, no solid window boarders, gradients galore, and menus at 90% opacity do not make a UI functional. Anyone that has tried to layout a big project in OS X, with light colors and tons of open windows, probably wants to kill themselfs. It's a pain. I've been using OS X since DP4 and I can still navigate OS 9 and Windows faster in professional design apps. These OSs have neutral UIs that have been tested by PSYCHOLOGISTS and put in front of FOCUS GROUPS.

Err... but I guess my machine has never been more stable.

Gambit is trying to make the point that the OS 9 users that are complaining about OS X aren't approaching it as a new operating system. It's a lot different than Mac OS 9, and it's not a traditional upgrade, it's a brand new OS. Approach it with an open mind, and you'll adapt easier. I hated OS X for the first month I spent using it, but now I'll never go back to 9.

I'm constantly working on large projects in OS X. My company is currently managing about a dozen clients' projects, and I'm intimately involved with about seven of them on my machine. The largest is for the State of California, we're doing a lot of interactive and server side work for them. It involves me having to work in a handful of applications at any given time. It's a huge project, but I've found that it is actually much easier for me to deal with it in X than in 9. I don't find the speed to be that much of an issue. I really don't care how long it takes to close a thousand windows, but it's just about good enough for me right now. I also run two SGI displays at 1600x1024, so I don't have a problem displaying large amounts of information. I don't see how you can have a problem managing a large project in OS X...

Aqua is a lot easier on the eyes, and it doesn't break a lot of the UI rules to which you might be referring. I've been doing human interface design for close to eight years, and I've yet to use an operating system that was more pleasant than OS X. I'll never go back to 9. Ever.

<a href="http://www.asktog.com/columns/034OSX-FirstLook.html" target="_blank">http://www.asktog.com/columns/034OSX-FirstLook.html</a>

I don't see a lot of off-base stuff in that article, but it is old and it has been talked about before.

[quote]Do we really need to get back into what a bitter and irrelevant old man TOG has become?<hr></blockquote>

It seems you do...

Has anyone heard if the 10.2 will be released with a new Java sdk? Perhaps version 1.4? It's not uncommon to update Java when the system is updated. This might also explain some delays since the two are usually sequentially released with a few days of each other. 10.1.3 was released and then a java update a week later for example...

This is a strange post from someone with the handle Aqua OS X...

[quote]Originally posted by Aqua OS X:
<strong>
Aqua is also a huge hinderance. White and grey lines, no solid window boarders, gradients galore, and menus at 90% opacity do not make a UI functional. Anyone that has tried to layout a big project in OS X, with light colors and tons of open windows, probably wants to kill themselfs. It's a pain. I've been using OS X since DP4 and I can still navigate OS 9 and Windows faster in professional design apps. These OSs have neutral UIs that have been tested by PSYCHOLOGISTS and put in front of FOCUS GROUPS.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't think Platinum was ever tested by psychologists. It was part of the whole, doomed "Business Mac" initiative, and a nod to the doomed Copland project.

The original Macintosh UI was tested by psychologists, however. It was white, at a saturation level, partly to conjure paper, which people were familiar with, and partly (in conjunction with the Mac's later use of pastels) because bright colors cheer people up, and Apple was keenly interested in doing that (c.f. the "Happy Mac" that appears at bootup).

The intention was never to offer neutral colors, which are (allegedly) psychologically neutral as well as color-neutral - and which I, for one, find dehumanizing and depressing.

[ 04-08-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

Given what Amorph just said, there IS something inherently 'happy' about Aqua. There's definitely energy there, and it's almost a joy to work with. The other OS interfaces just look and feel so BLAH in comparison. Neutral gray is SO last century. heh

"Yeah, I'm familiar with it. Windows is a wonky OS with a wonky virtual memory system. "

Ya don't say. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

People talked about it's memory features for years. They're crap.

Aqua is a shiny jewel.

Platinum totalitarian grey(!)is so 1990s.

What is it with people and grey interfaces?

The best interfaces I've seen had colour. Kai and Aqua included.

Lemon Bon Bon

Face it, Aqua X is great and it's gonna get better!

With faster chips and more updates and more memory...in a years time we'll talking about something else...

[quote]The best interfaces I've seen had colour. Kai and Aqua included.<hr></blockquote>You didn't just say Kai was a good interface, did you?
Either retract that statement or from here on out be laughed at and derided. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

Let's bring this back to the topic on hand:

According to Railhead Design (NOT a rumor site, but a fact site; the owner of said site does not post rumors he's not sure about):

Another 10.2 Seed Released
Another seed of Apples next major OS upgrade has been made available to select premiere developers. This latest seed sports drastic Finder revisions and major tune-ups in performance, sorting, auto-scrolling, spring-loaded folder action, contextual menu handling and the new print foundation (CUPS) is also being thoroughly pushed, jammed, and slammed into place by developers.

A few Apple people are also hinting that Apple will be showcasing the new additions coming to OS X 10.2 on their website within the next six weeks but Im still trying to get more solid information, though this makes (obvious) sense if we are to expect 10.2 to be released in July. But again, well have to see


Sounds groovy, huh? Time to start scouring the underbelly of the internet!

I saw that as well. Very encouraging. The guy at Railhead is legit, I agree....

The only thing I disagree with (in theory) is the release date. MWNY would be too late for the educational buying season as far as most major universities and such are concerned. WWDC seems much more likely given both the amount of time that's past since 10.1, and the audience and timing of that event. On that count I hope I'm right and not him, but who knows with Apple. None of their timing seems particularly logical anymore....

[quote]The only thing I disagree with (in theory) is the release date. MWNY would be too late for the educational buying season as far as most major universities and such are concerned.<hr></blockquote>
Demo at WWDC, and further hype for many months after until MWNY. Though it could be released earlier if Q&A goes smoothly.

Ed buying is a tediously long process [for depts and labs], and paperwork takes months to go through, and then you have to find time for tech support to set up everything. Fastest I've seen a purchase go through the system is one month. Timing can work.

moogs: I'd agree but I recieved an email from Apple stating that the next major revision of the OS will be previewed at WWDC. Presumably, it's because they want developers to test their apps on the new OS X version for incompatiblities..... that means that Apple has most likely changed certain APIs, cleaned up some code, and removed the debugging code that has clogged OS X for a year (that last part was a joke), so I'd say MacWorld NY would be the release date of OS X, because it would give developers time to fix anything that was broken.

[ 04-11-2002: Message edited by: Gambit ]</p>

Presumably developers like Adobe *already* have access to the new APIs and such though...if anyone is kept current on those kinds of issues it would be them. Thus I think the WWDC session (I got the same email) in question is more of a feature overview than anything. Who knows what will go on in all the different developer sessions afterwards that week.

In any event I would hope Apple releases 10.2 by June 1 and that the subsequent application recompiles and dot releases arrive during the remainder of the summer. Which brings up an interesting point; I wonder to what extent developers will recomile their existing apps with gcc 3.1 (given that Apple is doing it with the OS) vs. releasing a downloadable update. I guess if they recompile, they'd have to charge everyone for a CD and shipment, wouldn't they?

Probably the next versions (after the ones we're just now getting) from Adobe and others will be recompiled, but just patched until then?

[ 04-11-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>

moogs: Adobe and Microsoft will have access, but no one else. There are a lot more companies out there developing than just Microsoft and Adobe.

Of course, but those two companies single-handedly make ours a viable platform. As long as they're content with what's going on with Apple's engineering plans, I'm content with it....

One thing I have noticed is the Control Strip in the Menu Bar. I LIKE IT! Can MP3 Strip and other applets work here?

Also, what happened to Space? I won't install it, because it seems to have stopped development almost a year ago! Maybe Apple is going to FINALLY incorporate Virtual Desktops as a feature!? Off by default, quickly available to pros. Hopefully Apple will keep up with the rest of the *NIX community. WWDC looks killer. M$ Killer! :cool:

Something I just thought of / noted in the software forum:

"Users of Office v. X will be glad to hear that an update, SR-1, will be available for free at the end of May or early June. The update contains 1000 changes, bug fixes and performance improvements; contains full support for anti-aliasing text; ODBC support; and the ability for Office talk to FileMaker servers. "

The above was from a MacCental article yesterday, as noted by Kevin Browne no less. I think this, as much as anything we've seen, is a good indication 10.2 will released during the same time period. Surely MS wouldn't release a huge update like this without knowing it works well on the system we'll all be using for the next 8-12 months....

:cool:

[ 04-11-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>