OS X 10.2 - Page 3

That's funny I heard Gore won the popular vote by about 500,00 votes ( CNN ). The last election was a joke.

Your comments about the dock seem to be very subjective.

OS X is very young still.

Well, I think that takes care of everything.


[ 03-16-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

[quote] Yeah, it was 48% to 48% no sig digits. <hr></blockquote>

It was a few hundred thousand and by then, California didn't vote becasue they thought it was over. Let's not forget the 5,000+ votes for Gore that would've gave him the lead and presidency was diallowed by Republican Catherine Harris who works next door to brother Jeb. mmm, Iran-Contra part ll.....2 precidencies stolen

Well lets get back on topic. Has anyone used 10.2???

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>

It was a few hundred thousand and by then, California didn't vote becasue they thought it was over. Let's not forget the 5,000+ votes for Gore that would've gave him the lead and presidency was diallowed by Republican Catherine Harris who works next door to brother Jeb. mmm, Iran-Contra part ll.....2 precidencies stolen</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually, you want to hear the really ironic part? If either party had gotten their way, for how they originally wanted the votes to be counted, the *OTHER* party's candidate would have won, had they done a full and complete tally in FL.

So let's just chalk it up to fubared voting systems, and move on, shall we?

nVidia claims that the new Geforce 4 fully accelerates the Aqua interface. Perhaps that's why the new Power Macs are such speedos?

Anyone's got more on this? Just marketing?

[quote]Originally posted by macway:
<strong>nVidia claims that the new Geforce 4 fully accelerates the Aqua interface. Perhaps that's why the new Power Macs are such speedos?

Anyone's got more on this? Just marketing?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Where did you read that? A link would be nice.

I think I heard that if anything the GeForce 4 Ti may have some speed ups for Aqua but the GeForce 4 MX are just GeForce 3s so I don't see a reason why they would provide any advantages over that of the GeForce 3.

[quote]Originally posted by Quarem:
<strong>Where did you read that? A link would be nice.</strong><hr></blockquote>It was on nVidia's web page for the GeForce 4 when it was launched. It stirred up a lot of talk in the Mac community at the time. I'll try finding a link...

Found it:

<a href="http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=macintosh" target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=macintosh</a>
[quote]Software Features:
Optimizations for the hottest 3D games and multimedia applications
Full acceleration for Mac® OS X Aqua Interface<hr></blockquote>There you have it.

Rick (from The Omni Group) had this to say: [quote] First off, I wouldn't assume anything about NVidia's claim until we see it in action. For all we know, "Full acceleration of the Mac OS X Aqua interface" means the GeForce4 does exactly the same thing as every other supported graphics chip does under Mac OS X.

See, Mac OS X's 2D graphics are indeed hardware accelerated in some places. Got the Developer Tools installed? Open Quartz Debug, and turn on "Flash screen updates" and "No delay after flash". Then drag a window around, and notice where you see yellow. If your graphics accelerator is supported, you'll get yellow flashing borders, but the window content will remain visible as you drag the window around. Quartz uses your GPU to move the static window content around, but it can't use it for alpha-blending on the window shadow and translucent parts. (Theoretically, a next-generation GPU could have enough horsepower to make , though.)

So, while it'd be nice to believe that Apple is leveraging the GeForce4 for hardware-accelerated alpha blending, I wouldn't count on it just from NVidia's PR claim -- remember, that's marketingspeak. <hr></blockquote>

[ 03-16-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>

That is what i thought for the most part.
Marketing....

[quote]Originally posted by Quarem:
<strong>

It was already mentioned that 10.2 may contain 64-bit code that would give away the impending release of a G5. Therefore Apple's secrecy of 10.2 may be directly related to their hardware secrecy. If this is true I can see why they would do this, otherwise I totally agree with you.</strong><hr></blockquote>


I was wondering if anyone with a build of 10.2 could grep for any mentions of 64 bit code. If anyone has a copy please do this. Althought I believe that 64 bit versions X will arrive somewhere between 10.3 to 10.5 there might be some clues in a developers build of 10.2

[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>No one really cares about Apples groovy base layer of *nix goodness or Quartz--the UI IS THE OS--and when the Aqua fashion show is over there ain't much left that is an improvement over OS9.</strong><hr></blockquote>



when you have a real point to make, like you do, don't destroy your credibility by making such obviously false statements. why go so crazy extreme? you're trying to prove a point, not make yourself look like an idiot, present your side- but don't present it like it is the only side.

[quote]when you have a real point to make, like you do, don't destroy your credibility by making such obviously false statements. why go so crazy extreme? you're trying to prove a point, not make yourself look like an idiot, present your side- but don't present it like it is the only side.<hr></blockquote>
hahh hahh:
1. This is the appleinsider forum where hyperbole is king, and sexual characteristics (mostly JYD penis size) are a close second.
2. Follow the answer-reponse chant, wherein the Dock is UI perfection and all who challenge this assertion shall be smote dead.
3. The OS is NOW the default install on consumer level machines. Note the many many reviews aimed at customers that do NOT mention *nix, etc, but which do mention ease of use.
4. Many people still choose to purchase Macs at a premium--you know the drill, slower machines, higher prices. And from the market share numbers we can posit that a vast majority as ongoing Mac users, for whom the UI is a BIG deal. And its a bigger deal because of the point above.
5. Many graphics pros depend on a certain workflow that is UI facilitated. You've no doubt heard the many tiresome complaints about lack of labels, tabbed folders, spring loaded folders, Finder issues and FUBARed printing. As many pro apps get "nativized" pros will start migrating and the same UI complaints will again be heard.
6. You argue your own side. Thats your job.
7. Your intolerance and lack of humor are tiresome.

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>

I' ve found that the only people having trouble adjusting to OS X are the people who try to bring their OS 9 ideas and workflows into OS X. OS X is not OS 9, so don't try to make it as such. For instance, in OS 9, when you launch an app, you sit there and wait for it to finish before doing other things. In OS X, you launch an app and then do other things while the app is opening. In OS 9, you put an application that is busy rendering or processing something as the front-most app and you wait. In OS X, you put that app in the background and do other things. In OS 9, you use windowshade to hide the windows covering up your hard drive icons and desktop and trash. In OS X, you use the dock to always have access to any of the above features. In OS 9, you again use windowshade to see the window behind the front most one. In OS X, you quickly drag the window out of the way and see what's behind it just as quickly because of the live window feature.

Point is, there are TONS of advantages over OS 9, you just have to change your workflow and use them. Sure, OS X probably doesn't feel as polished to everyone who's been using the 7-9 OS, but remember that it wasn't always like that, and OS X UI is a baby considering what Platinum has gone through. it's getting better and better all the time, you just have to use it the way it was meant to be used.

Some people never learn Gambit.

I actually saw a post in another forum (full of supposedly technically competant people) where one person actually harped on 10.1.3 as being a "beta" and everyone who is using it as a "guinea pig." It's ridiculous. Then there are the people who know even less and say "application x sucks because it's carbon and not cocoa." That one always makes me laugh - albeit in a pittying sort of way.

The bottom line is they're going to get left behind. I say to hell with 'em. If they're so negative and unwilling to use X in the ways it was intended, let them get left behind. I couldn't care less. Meanwhile the rest of us will get on with the business of providing a constant stream of *useful* feedback to Apple, Adobe, and others - with the products getting better and better all the while.

Is the Dock perfect? No. That doesn't mean it is totally useless - it simply needs to be implemented in a more flexible way such that you can have it on when you want, off when you want, any side you want, etc.

Is the Finder perfect. No. There are some basic things missing like the ability to sort column views by type, search for files within the Finder toolbar, etc. But it's still got its good points.

Can Aqua get in the way sometimes with its shiny blue buttons? YES dumbasses - that's what the Graphite theme is for! Use it. (sorry, getting carried away here).


The point is, Gambit, it's not even worth responding and trying to reason with these people because they already have their minds made up that OS X sucks because it doesn't do things exactly the way they want. Probably the same people that would quit in the middle of a pick-up basketball game when they were kids, because they were losing and so it just wasn't any fun.

[quote]you just have to use it the way it was meant to be used<hr></blockquote>
No, the whole point of an excellent UI is that is not be noticed and it lets you work how you want to work. The above statement is an MS view of the UI.

[quote]In OS 9, you again use windowshade to see the window behind the front most one. In OS X, you quickly drag the window out of the way and see what's behind it just as quickly because of the live window feature<hr></blockquote>
Bad example. Which is better a double-click, or a click and drag? You might have said minimize, to help your point, but that requires a mouse movement and scrub to find the minimized window, and a click to pop it back up again. Like it or not, windowshading works when you don't have multiple monitors and you are working on revising a design, or revising a paper, and you need to switch quickly between a few different windows.

[quote]Point is, there are TONS of advantages over OS 9, you just have to change your workflow and use them<hr></blockquote>That's not how people who use their computers for a living make $$$. Point is there are advantages to OSX. Love that I can render in the background and still do other work, or that it doesn't usually crash. But these advantages have to be coupled with those already present in the previous version of the OS or you go back a couple of steps and the advantages are negated.

Yes I knows things will get better. We'll see after 10.2.

Don't be a f*ckwit Moogs. How is asking for metadata, or a better organized Dock not providing useful feedback to Apple?

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>

I don't know, Moogs. There still may be hope for the jaded ones. They just need to see the light.

&lt;sarcasm&gt;Yes, make it religious thats a much better way to increase market share.&lt;/sarcasm&gt;

Guess who has a deadline today

[inserted sarcasm tags, though it should be blazingly obvious]

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>No, the whole point of an excellent UI is that is not be noticed and it lets you work how you want to work. The above statement is an MS view of the UI.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually, that's not true. Once you get used to working a certain way, you feel that that's the way everything should work. For instance, after working and establishing a routine in OS 9, you can't just switch to Windows without disrupting your workflow (and productivity) without a transitional period. Same thing applies to OS X. OS X is NOT OS 9 so there will be a transitional period AND a disruption in productivity while you adjust to a new workflow. You just have to use OS X as OS X and accept it like that. To say that the UI has to work FOR YOU without a learning curve or transitional period is crap at best. No matter WHAT UI you use, you have to learn it, one way or another. Did you know the MacOS the SECOND you started using it? No. You adapted a workflow to use what OS 9 gave you. Now you have to do the same with X. There's really no way to get out of that logic. NOTE THAT I'm not saying OS X can't be improved, of course it can; I'm just saying you need to relearn a few things.


[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
[QBBad example. Which is better a double-click, or a click and drag? You might have said minimize, to help your point, but that requires a mouse movement and scrub to find the minimized window, and a click to pop it back up again. Like it or not, windowshading works when you don't have multiple monitors and you are working on revising a design, or revising a paper, and you need to switch quickly between a few different windows.[/QB]<hr></blockquote>

If you select the top of the window and drag it out of the way RRRREAAL FAST, you get to see what's behind it, and then drag the window back. That's ONE mouse click. Minimizing is different. That is for when you REALLY want a window out of the way. I am aware of which point I wanted to make and the drag window out of the way and back is exactly the example I wanted to illustrate. Windowshading made sense in OS 9 because of the lack of live redraw, it doesn't make much sense in X (as for the workflow I've grown accustomed to).


[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>That's not how people who use their computers for a living make $$$. Point is there are advantages to OSX. Love that I can render in the background and still do other work, or that it doesn't usually crash. But these advantages have to be coupled with those already present in the previous version of the OS or you go back a couple of steps and the advantages are negated.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Listen, I'm not some 12 year old kid posting the benefits of X because I'm bored. I KNOW how people work and I know how people make money. I work in the IT department for a major bio-med company and it is IMPERATIVE that we keep our machines up as we're in Stage Three of FDA approval for a drug we're putting out next year. Given that, uptime and improved workflow is key, hence why we're moving to OS X. I'm just trying to say that you shouldn't write off OS X the way you've been doing it because the UI and workflow hasn't been completely polished yet. That's all.

As far as making it a religious thing, THAT was a joke. Sorry you didn't take it as such. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: Gambit ]</p>

[quote]I'm just saying you need to relearn a few things<hr></blockquote>
There's actually very little to be relearned in OSX. The Dock is very intuitive as and apps launcher and switcher. For all other things that Apple wishes it to do, it falls on its face. Most sys prefs are pretty transparent [moving over from OS9] and printing and network browsing are a wash--thank god there is no Chooser, but WTF is up with Print Center and Apple-K. The point is that it is absolutely maddening that Apple could spend so much time on the "appearance" of the OS and gloss over obvious useability issues (some of which were fixed in 10.1 and hopefully more will be fixed in 10.2).

I can drag a window out of the way real fasssst in OS9 too. Never really had the urge to, except when I'm baked. The biggest UI upgrade since 10.1 has been the purchase of a two-button scroll mouse.

I'm in OSX and OS9 half and half. We have legacy hardware (printers w/ software RIPS) and for some things, like font management, informal project management and versioning, OS9 works better (stupid things like tabbed folders and labels). The other thing that is killing us is the spotty quality of many carbon ports.

Okay I think this thread has been hijacked enough. Anyone know if Darwin bugtracker has or will be fixed? Or has it been "steved" for leaking too much info. Also any info on synching Darwin with BSD4--will they synch BSD 4.4 or 4.5?

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>

Cowerd,

The thing about you is that you list all these SUBJECTIVE things, mix them with half truths, and then expect everyone to think that way.

Not all business professionals need to not notice the UI.

Not everyone likes Window shade ( as matter of fact 2 clicks instead one seems like more work ).

I've heard a lot of fanatics complain about Labels ( I thought they were kind neat back in '93 but didn't use them ).

Spring loaded folders now here is something useful although I didn't use them that much ( browser view kind of deminishes their usefulness ).

Lastly staring at a bland UI all day would drive me crazy ( I know I use Windows at work ). I do think they should impliment themes again because this is subjective ( at least I admit it ).

See, subjective.

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

[quote]
Not everyone likes Window shade ( as matter of fact 2 clicks instead one seems like more work ). <hr></blockquote>

you mean click, move mouse cursor down to location in the dock which moves depending on items in te dock then click again then go back up to the window. for just wanting to see what's behind for a moment that is a lot more work and unintuitive. if it ain't broke don't fix it. there was no reason to remove window shade. it could easily coexist with minimize

[quote]
I've heard a lot of fanatics complain about Labels ( I thought they were kind neat back in '93 but didn't use them ).<hr></blockquote>

so many people did. A major arguement of yours is that you don't use things but you must realize people do use them. you did the same thing with the DVD Player and 10.0. Only difference is you pushed the fact that you could restart into 9 to play movies. why not push the fact that you can restart into 9 for labels

[quote]
Spring loaded folders now here is something useful although I didn't use them that much ( browser view kind of deminishes their usefulness ).<hr></blockquote>

actually browser view enhances their usefullness several times over. imagine dragging an item on a folder and the hierarchy keeps sliding over in browser view as you dig deeper with the spring loaded folders.

[quote]Lastly staring at a bland UI all day would drive me crazy ( I know I use Windows at work ). I do think they should impliment themes again because this is subjective ( at least I admit it ).<hr></blockquote>

OS 9 drove you crazy?

Why does OS X not have a real Energy Saver?

This is almost as annoying as no Spring Loaded Folders, WindowShades (I have Window Shade X finally, and it is COOl! Apple, hire these people from Unsanity! Duh!), Labels, REAL control over the Appearance (c'mon, Steve, get over it, some people just friggin' DON'T like Aqua, so how what if I want to Think Different???)

Xounds, Winshades X, Fruit Menu, should all be folded into X.2. Plus, how about a REAL Energy Saver? I was blown away at how CRAPPY MacOS X still is. I mean, Apple has had a LONG time to work on this. And, I am in computer programming, and I know and respect how much work the employees are doing. I don't think it is their fault, I am guessing most of these issues of customization are one person's fault...

I'm getting suspicious about labels.

Labels are metadata. And we know that Apple is backing away from the old MacOS way of handling metadata.

OS X is currently so completely devoid of any such thing - setting pictures as folder backgrounds seems to be the beginning and end of the solution for now - that I have to wonder if Apple is even sure how to handle the problem. I can't believe that they intend to drop metadata altogether. That's a completely nonsensical approach in a modern operating system, and it seems to me that both the NeXT and MacOS veterans within Apple would be deeply concerned at the lack.

I'm aware that Apple has hired a bunch of people recently with UI credentials, and of course they folded their OS 9 development team into the OS X team as well. I'm beginning to think - actually, hope would be a better word - that they're really trying to hammer this out. Resource forks are out, since they're not portable. Packages are strictly portable, in the sense that they consist of folders and flat files, but they still have to be recognized by the host OS, and that's currently a problem.

Until the issues involved in the larger project of designing and/or integrating a subsystem to store metadata are resolved, any attempt to store information like the label of a folder will be a hack. (In fact, the definition of "label" they use might also be a hack - a more robust and flexible design than OS 9's is certainly possible, given Quartz.) If Apple ships a hack and then settles on an incompatible metadata implementation, they've just compromised the integrity of the OS they're hoping will last them for the next 15 years or so. If they have any sense, they're moving very carefully in this space.

I'm not so worried about the obvious flakiness and inconsistency, such as between Carbon and Cocoa open/save dialogs. Carbon and Cocoa are both still converging, and I'm confident that Apple will iron those issues out as a matter of course. What I'm interested in are the major architectural decisions they have left to make, and to refine. Metadata is definitely up near the top of that list.

[edited for clarity]

[ 03-18-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

Amen, brother Amorph!

I too earnestly hope that metadata is a hot issue within the compound at 1 Infinite Loop. I've preached this topic a hundred times; so, I'll shut up about it this time.

[quote]I'm not so worried about the obvious flakiness and inconsistency, such as between Carbon and Cocoa open/save dialogs<hr></blockquote>
Its not that, but the fact that Open/Save has reverted back to pre-Nav Services levels of useability. Ideally Open/Save should be as transparent as the Finder--it should be the Finder, hopefully helping to eliminate "where did I save that file" issues.

Its all really part of File Management architecture that needs to be addressed. More apps are now doing file management tasks, from iApps to Go Live/Dreamweaver, and now even Photoshop. How does the Finder fit in, and how do these apps interface with the Finder.

All I can say, is I finally started using OS X yesterday, 10.1.3 and 9.2.2 with Office X. I was THOROUGHLY unimpressed. OS X sucks.

I couldn't find ANYTHING. I realized how screwed up the directory structure was from UNIX when I tried to import my Entourage 2k1 data into Entourage X. I had to find a data file. Sounded simple. I got lost wading through the System 9 folder and the Documents folder (now there are seemingly millions of folders called Documents! Friggin' A! I had things VERY organized in 9)

AND where the HELL is the Energy Saver? No sets for battery and power adapter, Apple, are you KIDDING ME?

OS X deserves a MacAddict BLECH!

Stability, UNIXy coolness/tweakability is COOL but I want friggin' OS 9 UI & customizability back!

Why is this so ridiculous to ask?

Yes Applenut,

OS 9 was too bland for my taste so I used Kaliedoscope a lot. I must stress ( lest this be turned into something else ) the appearance of OS 9 was bland and old fashioned looking to me. I liked the usabilty despite the " house of cards " it's foundation was based on.

The thing about Labels is that when I first heard this argument I went around asking to see if my viewpoint was unusual. Everyone I asked said the same thing " huh "? So there are many people out there who didn't use them.

I imagine when Apple weighs what is important ( when to include these features ) the priority is probably based on popularity.

Once again this is all subjective and will probably mean little in the coming years as OS X becomes more and more mature.

[ 03-19-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

Labels != metadata. That's just the OS9 kludge. Think of iTunes, iPhoto. Without metadata they would be useless. Just hoping for Apple to consider that sort of capability in the Finder After all given the increasing number of files and file types, the hierarchical folder sequence as organizing tool is getting to be more cumbersome than useful.

Next version of Windows hooks the filesystem to an SQL database. Kinda overkill, but a step in the right direction, though Apple was there first [conceptually at least] with OpenDoc.

[ 03-19-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>

So has anyone taken a peak at the Energy Saver?? :eek:

Also, why did Apple move the control strip up into the menu bar? less choice is BAD.

The main focus of my dislike of OS X is the lack of choice. CHOICE = POWER. UNIX sure has lots of choices, but that is not what I am talking about. Comand lines are too kludgy for most people, and even though I've warmed up to UNIX (top is useful, and the concept of piping is definitely powerful, but vi makes me want to laugh), the GUI is faster and simpler for most things.

Why is Apple throwing all their MONEY and TIME spent on research away? Their research was money well spent, and the Platinum interface is for the most part, the best interface in the world. This is why we use Macs. Windows, for me anyway, is a waste of time, because it doesn't let me get things done the way I want to, in the amount of time I want.

One other thing: SPEED. Now, I now it's been re-hashed a million times, but I JUST bought a new iBook Combo (Circuit City ). Why, oh WHY, does mousing around in the Dock put the CPU monitor up to 100%? Is there anyone here technically oriented enough to explain why OS X is so slow, and if it will ever speed up? (Programmer?) After all, I thought OS X was supposed to be FASTER, what with all that 68k code out, and the nice high-performance UNIX plumbing? Is Mach monolithic?

Here's to 10.2.

If they screw that up, I'm going back to Classic. Crashes and all (which I don't have much of, G FINDER in the Open Firmware is much more effective than Force Quit in OS 9)

Aquatik: figure this:

OS X is a dynamic OS. It uses the power it needs when it needs it. It automatically assigns ram and processing power dynamically. You think that maybe there's no battery/plugged in setting in Energy Saver because the OS already KNOWS when to add more juice and when to conserve power? Think about it.

Actually, I just read the rest of your last post. .... Forget everything I said and DON'T think about it. We wouldn't want you to hurt yourself. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

[ 03-19-2002: Message edited by: Gambit ]</p>

Why are there so many headlines about OS X sucking power??? I haven't tested this with my iBook, I will tonight.

Anyway, OS X isn't the adept OS some suggest. Earlier today I used the Modem control strip (the menu bar thingy) to connect while booting. The Dock froze. If I moved an icon, that icon would stay huge. I had to REBOOT. This is opposite to what OS X is made out (supposed to) be.

10.2 will be much better, I'm sure. I hope.
It's not like I said Windows XP is better

Gambit, how does OS X using 100% of a 500mhz G3 (nothing to sneeze at, we are getting jaded in this day and age) just to expand an icon in the Dock "dynamically conserve power" etc?

Also, on a sidenote, Apple was nice in making front-ends to utilities like top... A utility for a GUI frontend to nice, like Renice, which I'm looking at downloading, would go far to appease impatient people (like me ). Maybe Apple should hire the Northern Softworks people too!

[quote]Originally posted by Gambit:
<strong>Aquatik: figure this:

OS X is a dynamic OS. It uses the power it needs when it needs it. It automatically assigns ram and processing power dynamically. You think that maybe there's no battery/plugged in setting in Energy Saver because the OS already KNOWS when to add more juice and when to conserve power? Think about it.
[ 03-19-2002: Message edited by: Gambit ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

that's bullshit. battery life in OS X is considerably less than in 9 and you do not have any of the energy saving options that 9 does.

So your saying OS X knows when I want to downclock the processor without me telling it or it knows what kind of sleep and display sleep timings I want for plugs and batteries without me telling it?

[quote]Originally posted by Aquatik:
<strong>Why are there so many headlines about OS X sucking power??? I haven't tested this with my iBook, I will tonight.

Anyway, OS X isn't the adept OS some suggest. Earlier today I used the Modem control strip (the menu bar thingy) to connect while booting. The Dock froze. If I moved an icon, that icon would stay huge. I had to REBOOT. This is opposite to what OS X is made out (supposed to) be.

10.2 will be much better, I'm sure. I hope.
It's not like I said Windows XP is better </strong><hr></blockquote>

Or you could have launched terminal or process viewer and killed the dock process.

AJ

if I didnt know better I would say Aquatik is a clone of me... I just bought a 600Mhz iBook w/384 MB ram and am mostly unimpressed with OS X. I have to be with Aq on this, if 10.2 doesnt CONSIDERABLY improve my OS X experience, its off to selling my iBook at a good price while I still can, buy a lowend iBook (just to have a Mac) and then buying a 1700+AMD with DDR ram for about 500$ to be anble to actually do some WORK and GAME. PS is ok in OS 9 and other graphics apps... but I want OS X, not 9... and right now, while OS X is definetly a great step in the right direction, I can only give it a luke warm recomendation and will possibly think of using OS X in a year or two when Apple gets its damn act together and not some second dibs compared to Winblows.

I hate Winblows, but OS X isnt really doing it for me. hah... 2400$ for a 600Mhz portable... wtf was I thinking...

[quote]Originally posted by robo:
<strong>Or maybe they've halted all development work on OS X..

Steve: "WHAT DO YOU MEAN IT ISN'T INSANELY GREAT ALREADY?!?! YOU'RE FIRED!"



-robo</strong><hr></blockquote>

hehehe LOL...

Steve's Insane...

------------------------------------

© FERRO 2001-2002

Amen, brother ZO!

I got the 500 Combo from Circuit City for 850! I am tempted to overclock it, but even @ 600 / 100 with more RAM than me, OS X is slow?
Ouch. There is no excuse for this. As I have said, we are becoming jaded. A 500mhz G3 is nothing to sneeze at. My Blue and White 300 with 512 RAM rocks in OS 9.1.

Mr A J, even as familiar as I am with dipping into UNIX every now and then, the average user would be irate, and I am annoyed that I have to tweak Terminal settings, for anything!

UNIX sucks, in terms of user friendliness. I have long thought one of the coolest things Apple could do would be to make "aliases" to all the frequently used UNIX commands, in ENGLISH language. For example, why can't I find??? I have to "grep". That sounds like something the cat puked up. For everyone who's already memorized these shorter old commands, they're still their. But I am not looking forfward to memorizing the obscure syntax of utilities like fsck, nice, blah blah. Just look at vi for an example of how things are done in the Terminal. Ew!

Applenut, do you think Apple will offer the old Energy Saver in 10.2? If I clock my iBook (now there's an operative, if) to be at 600/350, I could get even more battery. So far, I have gotten almost 5 hours of battery out of regular use. At 350 this would go up, I imagine. Anyone know a good place to buy a soldering iron? Seriously, last time I touched one of these was way back in Shop, so I'm a bit nervous :eek:

There are some VERY good suggestions on this board. I hope Apple looks here! Or I'll have some mailing to do


[quote]
hey have work to do in a number of areas. Above all, they need to stop it from behaving in a quirky way. Quirky OS's are not desirable.

(1) They need the Unix layer to behave like a Unix layer, not like The Unix That Apple Built. It's not standard enough.

* 1a. Darwin needs a good package manager. If nothing, a solid and current version of FreeBSD ports.

* 1b. Things need to compile without people having to beat them severely. This means bundling things like ncurses and not using libcurses, having a working pthreads, fixing that whole thing with cpp-precomp, and the rest.

* 1c. Hook it up with some stuff from FreeBSD 4.x (or even the 5.x tree, at this point...). FreeBSD 3.2 is too old as a base.

* 1d. Use bash for /bin/sh. Install /usr/bin/gcc symlinks to /usr/bin/cc and the rest. Make users' lives easier.

* 1e. Keep on top of the bundled software. If you bundled it, maintain it, and release frequent updates. Where's PHP 4.1.2? Where's SSH 3.0.2? If for no other reason, should be there for security.

(2) Fix these weird bugs. They're obvious. They stick out like a sore thumb. Get on top of them. That PPP bug has taken *WAY* too long. It's one thing if you hit up against a weird, obscure bug, but bugs that people have to deal with dozens of times a day are bugs that shouldn't have been shipped.

(3) Speed. There's gotta be some way to coax more speed out of it. For hardware, they're stuck with Moto, who generally does things right but does 'em slow. Find a way around it. I'm looking forward to seeing how much faster 10.2 is, since I get the impression that the speedup in 10.1 was largely based on fixing blatant inefficiencies rather than optimizing the code itself.

(4) Finder. Why is this so messed up? Fix it.

(5) Where are all these features from OS 9? Fine, I dig the Dock, but some people need USB Printer Sharing, file encryption (you can use openssl for this and just make it another frontend to an existing Unix app. Flexibility, power, open source. Fits right in there!), and the rest. I like the whole spring-loaded folder thing I saw, looks good. Hopefully there'll be some more of that.

However, I'm not pessimistic. It took me around ten minutes to think of all those things to fix, which suggests to me (since Apple's engineers aren't idiots) that it's more a matter of needing time to code these things rather than a matter of starting on them in the first place.

This CUPS thing could turn out very well. There needs to be more of that.

Also, it seems that there are more pressing issues that need to be tended to rather than setting some engineer the task of engineering this seemingly useless and bizarre minimized window behavior in 10.2. And yes, I KNOW there are different engineers for different tasks. But surely there are other things within an arena even as limited as the Dock that are more relevant? Lifting that 5 folder hierarchical limit? More customization? Who knows? Maybe you need one less engineer working on the Dock.

...
<hr></blockquote>

Now that was an example of a good post! *claps loudly, whistles a little*

I am aware speed will be resolved, it's just too damn obvious, especially when accompanied by the Megahurts stigma that seems so important to Joe Sixpack. But it is starting to seem as if Apple just doesn't CARE!? 10.1 was big, but come on, that was really 10.0. Just by READING about 10.0, I knew it was a joke. One of those ones where you are embarassed for the person telling it. Gorgonzola was very right it seeing optimism in the CUPS thing. If Apple really tackles this open source thing aggressively it could have dramatic repercussions, simply from the good will of all the open source programmers out there. My hat tips to them.

We're still ahead of Windows, at least !
For now...

"Even if you are on the right track, if you sit there long enough, you can still get run over..."
Or so the saying goes, I think!

Applenut, you are right! It is odd that OS X is slower, not faster??? And torifile is right on the necessary evil of planned obsolescence for businesses. Geez, guys, get a new computer. Oh, wait, I'm on one. And we all know how MacOS X 10.1.3 is on a piece of junk iBook 500 *wry smile* Really, I love this machine! I just want the best for it! *sob*

It's good to be back at AI

[ 03-19-2002: Message edited by: Aquatik ]</p>

If Apple looks here they will have a good laugh.

[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>If Apple looks here they will have a good laugh. </strong><hr></blockquote>

way to show your intelligence. keep posting rolleyes. really impressive.

grow up