or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple ready with second beta of Mac OS X "Juno"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple ready with second beta of Mac OS X "Juno"

post #1 of 38
Thread Starter 
Users still facing software issues while running the most current version of Mac OS X Leopard may take kindly to word that Mac OS X 10.5.7 is moving swiftly through its development cycle.

Apple as early as this weekend is expected to equip its vast developer community with a new build of the maintenance and security release, according to people familiar with the matter. The target build is said to be Mac OS X 10.5.7 build 9J27 -- again, this could change at any time.

The Cupertino-based Mac maker kept this forthcoming update largely in-house for 21 builds before unleashing build 9J22 to its third-party coders a little over one week ago.

As was reported at the time, that build arrived with nearly six dozen code corrections, a barebones weight of 440 megabytes, and requests that developers focus their testing efforts on over 20 core components, including AirPort, Mail, graphics drivers, and Time Machine.

Those people familiar with the software also mentioned a significant focus on addressing syncing issues that have plagued many of Leopard's standard, forward-facing apps, such as as Mail, AddressBook, and system preferences.

Mac OS X 10.5.7 was also publicly mentioned on Apple's online store as a prerequisite for the ATI Radeon HD 4870 Graphics Upgrade Kit for owners of previous generation Mac Pros. After the blunder was widely reported, Apple changed the page to indicate that the card required 10.5.6, which is actually the case for the just announced Mac Pro, which will ship with a custom milestone of 10.5.6 that includes the appropriate driver support.

However, with standalone orders for the $349 card not expected to ship for another 5-7 weeks, its likely the original requirements on the page were accurate and that Mac OS X 10.5.7 will be released within that same time frame.

On an intriguing note, AppleInsider has also picked up hints that the 10.5.7 "point" release is internally referenced in some circles as "Juno" or project Juno. The precise significance of this code-name is unknown, though cursory checks suggests that OS X 10.5 Leopard point releases may be following naming conventions tied to Roman goddesses or the names of asteroids.

Similarly, earlier point releases from major OS X releases of years past were named after colors, where in one instance during the Mac OS 9 era they were named after red wines.

Saturday update: We're picking up that seed 9J27 was indeed released late Friday. Among the changes were about 10 new bug fixes targeting FileVault, Time Capsule, preference panes for Print & Fax and MobileMe, iCal sync, and more.
post #2 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

On an intriguing note, AppleInsider has also picked up hints that 10.5.7 point release is internally referenced in some circles as "Juno" or project Juno. The precise significance of this code-name is unknown, though cursory checks suggests that OS X 10.5 Leopard point releases may be following naming conventions tied to Roman goddesses or the names of asteroids.

Or pregnant teenagers. 10.5.8 will be code-named Bristol.
post #3 of 38
Award for the stating the obvious - but could Juno be in reference to this being the last update to Leopard before a suspected appearance of Snow Leopard at WWDC in........ you've guessed it..... JUNE!

(Ps Amen to the Bristol thing - Although I feel that Chatham may be a more likely name for 10.5.8)
post #4 of 38
Apple as early as this weekend is expected to equip its vast developer community with a new build of the maintance and security release, according to people familiar with the matter.

Oops.

The build to this release is leaving some people orgasmic. Just like the weatherman talking about the first storm of the season. This news article is as exciting as talking about the weather.
post #5 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyokuro View Post

Apple as early as this weekend is expected to equip its vast developer community with a new build of the maintance and security release, according to people familiar with the matter.

Oops.

The build to this release is leaving some people orgasmic. Just like the weatherman talking about the first storm of the season. This news article is as exciting as talking about the weather.

Or what about "After the bunder was widely reported, Apple changed the page to indicate that the card required 10.5.6,"

I find it very ironic that the article says it was a blunder, and mis-spells the very word. It made me chuckle a little inside.
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #6 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

Or what about "After the bunder was widely reported, Apple changed the page to indicate that the card required 10.5.6,"

I find it very ironic that the article says it was a blunder, and mis-spells the very word. It made me chuckle a little inside.

Yep. Love it when auto-spellcheck just stops working on its own in TextEdit.

Sorry bout that. There were quite a few errors

K
EIC- AppleInsider.com
Questions and comments to : kasper@appleinsider.com
Reply
EIC- AppleInsider.com
Questions and comments to : kasper@appleinsider.com
Reply
post #7 of 38
it seems the more news there is, the less actual news there is. This might be interesting to... nobody.
post #8 of 38
apple is so creative with their naming system. Only these people spend huge amount of time thinking about what and why things are called the way they are.
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
post #9 of 38
As long as my computer doesn't get knocked up I hope they get it here quickly, and fix remote disk while there at it.
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
post #10 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaostheory7 View Post

(Ps Amen to the Bristol thing - Although I feel that Chatham may be a more likely name for 10.5.8)

Oops. I forgot "Jamie Lynn."
post #11 of 38
I hope 10.5.7 fixes a sleep problem that 10.5.6 brought upon Kona LHe cards in the Mac Pro.
post #12 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post

Or pregnant teenagers. 10.5.8 will be code-named Bristol.

You have to admit it was a good movie. Someone should ask Apple though if they have a policy of naming their system fixed after pregnant teenagers. It would be funny to get the reaction on tape.


Dave
post #13 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

...Someone should ask Apple though if they have a policy of naming their system fixed after pregnant teenagers.
Dave

I actually think they're just homing in on Michael Cera flicks. Juno. "Nick" and "Nora" could be next. Of course, 10.6 will end up being "Superbad".http://forums.appleinsider.com/image...ies/1oyvey.gif
post #14 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaostheory7 View Post

Award for the stating the obvious - but could Juno be in reference to this being the last update to Leopard before a suspected appearance of Snow Leopard at WWDC in........ you've guessed it..... JUNE!

(Ps Amen to the Bristol thing - Although I feel that Chatham may be a more likely name for 10.5.8)

You're probably right. Doesn't seem there'd be enough time to come out with 10.5.8 before WWDC and there wouldn't be any compelling hardware release to warrant it. A security release most likely but not a point release.

OSX 10.5 will only reach 10.5.9 and that one will come out around the same time Snow Leopard is released.
post #15 of 38
In my experience with Leopard, it is the least stable OS released by Apple in quite some time.

Frankly, I do not expect Apple to fix it. With the impending release of Snow Leopard the resources necessary to fix it are unlikely to be devoted to the project.

But for some Leopard only apps I often wish I had remained with Tiger.
post #16 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Someone should ask Apple though if they have a policy of naming their system fixed after pregnant teenagers.

"fixed", "pregnant teenagers"... eewwww...

I can see Apple Marketing formulating their ad campaign even now...

Free 'Spay or Neuter' of your teenager with a Apple OS X System Up-Grade Fix!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #17 of 38
didn't know minor mac os releases had names also...

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #18 of 38
Please fix so it in the Finder is possible to search a volume shared from Mac OS X 10.4.11 Server!
This broke in the 10.5.6 update...
post #19 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

In my experience with Leopard, it is the least stable OS released by Apple in quite some time.

Frankly, I do not expect Apple to fix it. With the impending release of Snow Leopard the resources necessary to fix it are unlikely to be devoted to the project.

But for some Leopard only apps I often wish I had remained with Tiger.

I often see people saying this but I can't for the life of me figure out how they are doing that comparison. Tiger was never wholly stable for me even up to 10.4.10.

Most of the issues I've encountered with Leopard have been 3rd party bad programming (hopefully grand central will solve some of this) & driver issues (NVIDIA has a horrible track record for stable drivers).
post #20 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by a Martin View Post

Please fix so it's in the Finder is possible to search a volume shared from Mac OS X 10.4.11 Server!
This broke in the 10.5.6 update...

I will agree that 10.5.6 seemed to have some bad eggs to it.
post #21 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezekiahb View Post

I often see people saying this but I can't for the life of me figure out how they are doing that comparison. Tiger was never wholly stable for me even up to 10.4.10.

Most of the issues I've encountered with Leopard have been 3rd party bad programming (hopefully grand central will solve some of this) & driver issues (NVIDIA has a horrible track record for stable drivers).

As with all such observations, they are a matter of personal experience, which can be different for different people using different hardware, applications and so on. That said, OS 10.4.11 on several different Macs, including a 500 MHz G3 iMac, has proven to be "rock solid". It simply has been trouble free and has tolerated one user almost completely filling a hard drive without "blowing up" which left me simply amazed (and impressed). Yes, there were some issues with the earlier dot versions of Tiger.

My experience with Leopard has been a bumpy ride. Apple have not, in my opinion devoted adequate resources and attention to testing before releasing Leopard to retail and many of the dot releases since. One update even killed the ability to reinstall a combo updater which is "chicken soup for the Mac" if something odd is happening. There were permissions issues with the initial installations (and repairing permissions took forever). There have been runaway processes which could render the Mac almost unusable until they released sufficient CPU resources for other things to run. There are still problems with some processes. For example, "PubSubAgent" continues to crash on multiple machines. WindowServer and several common processes are getting better about not demanding inordinate resources, but are still an issue some times.

One thing that I can not specifically identify, but suspect is an OS problem is the entire machine locking up (not a KP). It could be an issue with one particular application, but the OS is not supposed to allow an application to do that.

Probably the most troublesome is the habit of various and sundry applications hanging. Force quitting is the only way out of this situation. This issue was reported to Apple by many people very early in Leopard's deployment and persists to this day. Almost everything from Safari to Word are affected.

I very much hope, but am doubtful, that Apple will devote adequate resources to bring Leopard up to standard before abandoning it to its fate as there are a great many Macs which will, I think, be end of life with Leopard.

Cheers
post #22 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

As with all such observations, they are a matter of personal experience, which can be different for different people using different hardware, applications and so on.

You must be new to the Internet. If you experience any problems, whatsoever, you are supposed to assume that they are universally experienced by everyone. Further, you must belittle anyone who does not agree. Popular phrases include "if you had more modern hardware" and "if all you do is surf the web and check e-mail."

Seriously, though, I've found 10.5.6 to be rock-solid on my Mac Mini and my Mac Pro. As a Windows to OS X convert, I'm thrilled with the stability and performance, though I do get annoyed at some aspects of OS X and hope that Apple addresses those annoyances.

I don't want maximized windows to move around. A slightly clumsy click should not cause a maximized window to detach from the status bar or move a few pixels off of the screen. I'd also like a bit of a snap-to as windows reach the edge of a display.

One aspect that I would love to see handled with preferences is whether an application closes when its sole open window is closed. I don't need textedit hanging around indefinitely if I open a text file and then close the window. Same with many other apps. The really surprising thing about this is the inconsistency. Some apps close and some stay open.

Spaces and Expose are seriously cool -- until you go to dual monitors. If you line up the monitors side-by-side, then you have to traverse monitors to hit the screen corners. You can't tell OS X to treat them as separate displays, each with its own dock bar, but you can assign different wallpaper to each (so are they separate displays or one big virtual display?).

And why can't I request a return receipt in mail or compose an HTML e-mail? Really annoying is the fact that an image dragged to mail results in a gargantuan TIFF file that most mail readers can't display. Why can't I set it to use JPG or PNG?

All gripes aside, it is the best OS that I've had the pleasure of using -- and I've been using computers since the 1970s.
post #23 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by fmaxwell View Post

You must be new to the Internet. If you experience any problems, whatsoever, you are supposed to assume that they are universally experienced by everyone. Further, you must belittle anyone who does not agree. Popular phrases include "if you had more modern hardware" and "if all you do is surf the web and check e-mail."

Seriously, though, I've found 10.5.6 to be rock-solid on my Mac Mini and my Mac Pro. As a Windows to OS X convert, I'm thrilled with the stability and performance, though I do get annoyed at some aspects of OS X and hope that Apple addresses those annoyances.

I don't want maximized windows to move around. A slightly clumsy click should not cause a maximized window to detach from the status bar or move a few pixels off of the screen. I'd also like a bit of a snap-to as windows reach the edge of a display.

One aspect that I would love to see handled with preferences is whether an application closes when its sole open window is closed. I don't need textedit hanging around indefinitely if I open a text file and then close the window. Same with many other apps. The really surprising thing about this is the inconsistency. Some apps close and some stay open.

Spaces and Expose are seriously cool -- until you go to dual monitors. If you line up the monitors side-by-side, then you have to traverse monitors to hit the screen corners. You can't tell OS X to treat them as separate displays, each with its own dock bar, but you can assign different wallpaper to each (so are they separate displays or one big virtual display?).

And why can't I request a return receipt in mail or compose an HTML e-mail? Really annoying is the fact that an image dragged to mail results in a gargantuan TIFF file that most mail readers can't display. Why can't I set it to use JPG or PNG?

All gripes aside, it is the best OS that I've had the pleasure of using -- and I've been using computers since the 1970s.

Welcome aboard!

You might drop Apple a suggestion about the monitors.

I can't comment about Mail (I don't use it). You might ask here.

Cheers
post #24 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

As with all such observations, they are a matter of personal experience, which can be different for different people using different hardware, applications and so on. That said, OS 10.4.11 on several different Macs, including a 500 MHz G3 iMac, has proven to be "rock solid". It simply has been trouble free and has tolerated one user almost completely filling a hard drive without "blowing up" which left me simply amazed (and impressed). Yes, there were some issues with the earlier dot versions of Tiger.

I understand, but that is just my point. That is a comparison of the final version of Tiger, which Leopard is still 5 revisions from a 10.5.11. I just don't think the comparisons have been wholly fair.

All that being said though, I will agree that (especially at time of release) it seems as though PPC got the shaft on a lot of the patches. Our PPC Mac Pro we had running Leopard Server was completely useless to us until 10.5.3 & never really got stable enough for us to put it into production until 10.5.4
post #25 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

You have to admit it was a good movie. Someone should ask Apple though if they have a policy of naming their system fixed after pregnant teenagers. It would be funny to get the reaction on tape.
Dave

Cox Newspapers might be willing volunteer for this.
post #26 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by fmaxwell View Post

I don't want maximized windows to move around. A slightly clumsy click should not cause a maximized window to detach from the status bar or move a few pixels off of the screen. I'd also like a bit of a snap-to as windows reach the edge of a display.

One aspect that I would love to see handled with preferences is whether an application closes when its sole open window is closed. I don't need textedit hanging around indefinitely if I open a text file and then close the window. Same with many other apps. The really surprising thing about this is the inconsistency. Some apps close and some stay open.

As a fellow convert, let me speak to these points in particular, if I may. I have thought about this a lot. Switching requires us to unlearn some things that Windows does. Remember, the Windows GUI is a copy of the MacOS GUI with some modifications. I surmise that some of these modifications were intended to keep MS from getting sued, and some modifications were put there to help people and apps transition from the DOS past when apps took up the whole screen.

On the Mac, windows are never maximized. If you think about it, many applications never need the whole screen. I have found that people tend to use maximize to focus their attention on one particular app and block out the others, or the cluttered desktop. Another reason to maximize an app is keep it from moving by accident. I include myself in this. I still use and administer a Windows environment at work. I have come to believe, as Apple does presumably, that the advantages are not significant and can be more of crutch than anything else. The whole reason for putting apps in windows is so you can use and interact with more than one of them at a time. I like your idea about snapping to the edge of the screen though.

About apps continuing to run while all of its windows are closed, this behavior is controlled by the author of the app. For some things it makes sense to quit the program with the window. Single-window apps that don't do anything when the window is closed come to mind, such as System Preferences. IPhoto is another one that quits. Not only does it not do anything without a window, it uses a good amount of system resources.

Apps like TextEdit, Pages, Word, Photoshop, etc. are used differently. We use them to edit individual documents each in their own window. It might seem inefficient to keep something like TextEdit or Preview running, but those things use almost no resources. It makes sense to keep Word and Photoshop running because they starting and quitting them takes time and uses a lot of resources. Often the user closes one document and opens another. You don't need to unload and load the whole app.

On the Mac there is no multi-document interface with a parent window and child windows. The red X does not mean quit. It means close window. Sometimes, it also quits, but not usually. But don't worry about it. Let the author of the program decide if it makes sense to quit the program. It you want to quit TextEdit, simply hit cmd-Q or TextEdit --> Quit. On Windows, the red X could mean close window or quit, depending on the context. I don't think that's any more consistent or intuitive.
post #27 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by fmaxwell View Post

One aspect that I would love to see handled with preferences is whether an application closes when its sole open window is closed. I don't need textedit hanging around indefinitely if I open a text file and then close the window. Same with many other apps. The really surprising thing about this is the inconsistency. Some apps close and some stay open.

Actually it is pretty consistent, only applications which can only have one window open (System Preferences, Aperture, cannot think of any other right now) quit upon closing that sole window. But even more importantly, other than taking up space in Dock, there is no harm in having a lot of applications open. Don't worry too much about memory footprint, the OS will pare down the memory usage of unused apps to single MB levels automatically if needed. I actually start up about 20 apps after I login, most with no actual windows open. I always hide System Preferences, I never quit it, I'd prefer if using the close window did not quit the app.

Quote:
And why can't I request a return receipt in mail or compose an HTML e-mail? Really annoying is the fact that an image dragged to mail results in a gargantuan TIFF file that most mail readers can't display. Why can't I set it to use JPG or PNG?

Because you started of dragging a TIFF, the generated e-mail will attach this TIFF. But once it is inside the message, at the bottom left corner of the new message window, there is a drop-down menu with Small, Medium, Large, which allows you to convert to a jpeg and re-size it at the same time.
post #28 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezekiahb View Post

I understand, but that is just my point. That is a comparison of the final version of Tiger, which Leopard is still 5 revisions from a 10.5.11. I just don't think the comparisons have been wholly fair.

All that being said though, I will agree that (especially at time of release) it seems as though PPC got the shaft on a lot of the patches. Our PPC Mac Pro we had running Leopard Server was completely useless to us until 10.5.3 & never really got stable enough for us to put it into production until 10.5.4

Perhaps it is unfair, but I expect an OS to build upon and improve that which has gone before it.

I agree that 10.5.4 was a big step up. Perhaps we will see more improvements, but I, for one, was disappointed in Leopard even though I normally do not install an OS until at least dot two.

Cheers

P.S. My Macs are PPC machines also.
post #29 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

Actually it is pretty consistent, only applications which can only have one window open (System Preferences, Aperture, cannot think of any other right now) quit upon closing that sole window.

iTunes continues to run. This makes sense though because you can let the music play without having to deal with the window. Also, you might want to go back to it and it takes a little while to load and unload.

Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

But even more importantly, other than taking up space in Dock, there is no harm in having a lot of applications open. Don't worry too much about memory footprint, the OS will pare down the memory usage of unused apps to single MB levels automatically if needed.

Good point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

I actually start up about 20 apps after I login, most with no actual windows open. I always hide System Preferences, I never quit it, I'd prefer if using the close window did not quit the app.

Now this is going overboard.
post #30 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by funkfeend View Post

iTunes continues to run.

And this is consistent since you can open the different sections in the source pane (incl. playlists) as separate windows:
Separate windows = closing windows does not quit application

Quote:
Now this is going overboard.

My aim is to open any app only once per login, and then better get it over with right away. And to login only once per restart. And to restart at most once per month (system updates put an upper limit on this).
post #31 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

And this is consistent since you can open the different sections in the source pane (incl. playlists) as separate windows:
Separate windows = closing windows does not quit application


My aim is to open any app only once per login, and then better get it over with right away. And to login only once per restart. And to restart at most once per month (system updates put an upper limit on this).

Only restarting once a month, while possible, is not really advisable. Even if you run some maintenance utilities to clear caches, there are some things that are better taken care of with a restart of the system.

I am assuming that you have installed a lot of RAM if you want to keep that many applications open. If you are not actually using a number of applications on a continuing basis, try closing some of them. Most just do not take that long to launch as needed. (I know that I am "guilty" of keeping a number of applications open, but 20 is rather a lot.)
post #32 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

Only restarting once a month, while possible, is not really advisable. Even if you run some maintenance utilities to clear caches, there are some things that are better taken care of with a restart of the system.

I'm not sure that's necessarily true... I may be wrong, but I didn't think there was anything wrong with leaving the machine running for ages.

My G5 has been running for 12 days now (just checked uptime), but that was due to a software upgrade. I'm currently running 24 apps. I do have plenty of RAM though: 5.5 GB.

Amorya
post #33 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

Only restarting once a month, while possible, is not really advisable. Even if you run some maintenance utilities to clear caches, there are some things that are better taken care of with a restart of the system.

I am assuming that you have installed a lot of RAM if you want to keep that many applications open. If you are not actually using a number of applications on a continuing basis, try closing some of them. Most just do not take that long to launch as needed. (I know that I am "guilty" of keeping a number of applications open, but 20 is rather a lot.)

Closing apps and restarting is defeatism, any well designed computer system should need neither. Sure, nothing is perfect, that is why I occasionally need to restart [the OS or applications]. And these 20 apps are just my starting point, usually this swells to 30 after using the computer for a while.

I know, Windows users are conditioned to close apps, partly because closing the last window also closes the app, partly because Windows is not quite as efficient in managing a large number of open apps (or was in the past and old habits still persist). But most people I come to that have been using Macs for a while do have a lot of applications open.
post #34 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

As was reported at the time, that build arrived with nearly six dozen code corrections, a barebones weight of 440 megabytes, and requests that developers focus their testing efforts on over 20 core components, including AirPort, Mail, graphics drivers, and Time Machine.

What is with the half-gigabyte updates? Is that really necessary? I wish Apple could find a way to reduce the size of these trivial updates. It won't do much for me, and will be a big bandwidth hog.
post #35 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by wealthychef View Post

What is with the half-gigabyte updates? Is that really necessary? I wish Apple could find a way to reduce the size of these trivial updates. It won't do much for me, and will be a big bandwidth hog.

I agree. I wish they had an updater that was smarter so the updates didn't have to be so big.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #36 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

Because you started of dragging a TIFF, the generated e-mail will attach this TIFF. But once it is inside the message, at the bottom left corner of the new message window, there is a drop-down menu with Small, Medium, Large, which allows you to convert to a jpeg and re-size it at the same time.

Actually, no, I started by dragging a JPG from a web site. I believe I was using Firefox. It was a truly odd behavior, like it grabbed that region of the screen and made it into a TIFF. But I verified that what you told me was the more typical behavior.

But that's a really cool feature about being able to convert to jpeg
post #37 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by funkfeend View Post

On the Mac, windows are never maximized. If you think about it, many applications never need the whole screen.

Others, however, benefit from having a whole screen. Examples might be programs that display graphics. Sometimes, maximizing a web browser screen allows you to see a lot more with a lot less scrolling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by funkfeend View Post

I have found that people tend to use maximize to focus their attention on one particular app and block out the others, or the cluttered desktop. Another reason to maximize an app is keep it from moving by accident.

Another reason is to avoid "missing" with the mouse and clicking something in another windows overlapped by the first.

I have two 24" monitors and I use spaces/expose. I like being able to wander between virtual desktops more than I enjoy playing find-the-background-window. I have assigned certain apps to open in certain virtual desktops/screens (I have 9 in a 3x3 array). I want my web browser to open in the center one and be maximized. I don't want it to wander around if I'm not rock-solid while clicking the tabs (Safari 4 beta -- who thought it would be clever to allow the entire app to be dragged around by any random tab?).

Quote:
Originally Posted by funkfeend View Post

The whole reason for putting apps in windows is so you can use and interact with more than one of them at a time.

If I so choose. Sometimes I just want to do one thing. Sometimes I just want to edit an image file or look at a web site.

Quote:
Originally Posted by funkfeend View Post

I like your idea about snapping to the edge of the screen though.

Thanks. It's not that original, but maybe Apple will take note.

Quote:
Originally Posted by funkfeend View Post

About apps continuing to run while all of its windows are closed, this behavior is controlled by the author of the app. For some things it makes sense to quit the program with the window.

It's something that should be configurable in each app. The dock grows larger and looking at it does not tell you whether you are currently using an application or just have used it in the past. For example, I glance down and see textedit lit up. Do I have a document in some other virtual desktop that I need to save before shutdown -- or is it still running because I looked at a text document an hour ago?

Just as an experiment, I started Firefox 3.0.x and opened a bunch of tabs. I then closed the Firefox browser window. That left Firefox using almost 100MB of RAM, over a GB of virtual memory, and with 9 threads running. So I click on the Firefox icon on the dock and it reopens a browser window and downloads my set homepage. So you can't click on the dock to see if there is an open window -- because it opens one. Then, there was no one-click close for the app. I had to go to the Firefox menu and quit the app -- or move mouse to keyboard for a quit "shortcut."

Note that OS X is still the best OS that I've had the pleasure of using, but I think that it still needs work.

Next change: Green + window button -- why just in the vertical direction? Either make it so that it cycles between "large" and "small" as set by the user or between small and maximized.
post #38 of 38
How do i convert the 3d character models from a kh2 disk into 3d max format? need help as im making a kingdom hearts movie and i will mention your name in the credits, please help me ive already got the models i just need to convert them into a 3dmax file format
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple ready with second beta of Mac OS X "Juno"