Well that makes Snow Leopard a no-go for me given that I keep all of my work on an eSATA drive. Both the eSATA Expresscard I use in my MacBook Pro and the eSATA PCIe card I use in my Mac Pro are based around the Sil3132 chipset. Hopefully this is resolved soon...
Yes --
I have 15 1TB external hard drives - in 3 DAT Optic enclosures - and all of them running with a PCIe board that uses SiI3124_2.0.3.
I cannot use 10.6 until there is an eSATA card that will work with it.
Yeah, I had to reinstall Boinc. I was getting a permissions problem, but it seems to be working fine. I'll know more once I've crunched a couple of WU's.
Thanks for the knowledge update. Let me know how it runs after you've finished some WUs. I would like to get SL soon but I'll wait for a BOINC update if need be.
After seeing the Open Cl demo podcast I can't wait for an Open CL BOINC client. It'll rock.
I'm not sure why you are dumbfounded as Apple had clearly stated what the scope of this update is or was. The goal was improvements to the core of the OS with little touched upon with respect to the user interface. This is what they said they would do and it is what we got.
Quote:
DO THEY REALLY THINK THAT ANYONE WHO HAS TROUBLE READING THE FONTS USED FOR MENUS OUGHT TO COMPENSATE BY CHANGING THE SCREEN RESOLUTION?? WHY DO THEY WANT TO PROHIBIT ME FROM DISABLING FONT SMOOTHING FOR FONT SIZES LARGER THAN 12?
As to the issue of reading the screen do understand I understand your plight. I'm at that point in life where every eye exam is bad news. However I'm not sure where some of your expectations come from. Mac OS/X is not Windows and grew out of a totally different development path.
In any event I Suspect that Apple really needed to get the technology in Snow Leopard in place before they started to overhaul Cocao and bring resolution independence to Quartz. I hate to say it but it is likely to be another 18 months before resolution independence hits. That is an if too because I don't know what Apple has planned for the next release.
The only solution Apple has right now is Universal Access which I'm assuming you have looked into. Let's just be kind and say it is a limited solution.
In any event I Suspect that Apple really needed to get the technology in Snow Leopard in place before they started to overhaul Cocao and bring resolution independence to Quartz. I hate to say it but it is likely to be another 18 months before resolution independence hits. That is an if too because I don't know what Apple has planned for the next release.
Hmm.. your post got me thinking. Now that some major core changes have been set in place but have yet to be used at this point, perhaps we?ll actually see the next OS X update sooner than later. One that focuses mostly on the UI. Could they do RI and completely get rid of Carbon in the next 12 months?
Well, I upgraded to Snow Leopard today, but didn't think about one piece of software that might not work -- my Logitech Squeezebox Duet, which sends music from my Mac to the stereo via a nice D/A converter. But only Leopard is supported in their 'Squeezecenter' server software, so now I have to wait for Logitech to make an update available. Attempts at launching Squeezecenter have failed.
***EDIT: I take that back....I've found a beta version on Logitech's site that I think is working.....
This is not true at all. This is what Adobe tells you is the cause of the high price so you direct your anger at the pirates and not at them.
Baloney!
If they have to engineer against stealing it raises the cost as do other activities that deal with theft. Do you think that people these days work for free or that we have reverted to slavery?
Quote:
Piracy is a problem in general that *sometimes* raises costs for manufacturers, but it's a minor effect and definitely not the cause of Adobe's high prices. Adobe's prices are high because they ask for what they know they can get (from you).
Adobe does have high prices, but you are a fool not to believe Adobes anti theft efforts aren't factored into the equation. Their expenses in this area may be partially spread over the entire product line up but that should not surprise anybody.
Quote:
For example, Apple's "piracy problem" with all their software is orders of magnitude higher than Adobe's and yet their software is orders of magnitude *lower* in price. Apple doesn't make software as a "loss leader" and they do make a profit on it.
What does price have to do with the sin/crime of stealing? Is this an attempt to deflect the discussion away from the core issue.
Quote:
Adobe is engaging in a classic monopoly position here and all of their behaviours are "textbook" monopolistic behaviours.
Not in the least. There most be at least a hundred ways to format documents for distribution. They only thing Adobe has going for it is that PDF for one is an accepted standard. Because it has been a well defined standard there are numerous ways to generate PDF files and not even Touch Adobe products.
It is funny that you try to pass Adobe off as a monopoly in a Mac forum as Apple uses PDF extensively.
Quote:
Their product is buggy and poorly designed, their "customer" is not the end user but the high end graphics business, both the organisation itself and the software it produces is bloated and over-wrought, and the prices it charges are based on what the market can bear, not on any kind of value/cost proposition.
Isn't that the norm in business, that is charge what the business can bear? The fact is software pricing often has little to do with the cost if production. Let's not get into distribution because we all know what a CD costs. The sad part is that you implied there is no value in software in this paragraph but yet earlier you said more or less the opposite in that Adobe charges what the Market will bear. The implication is that Adobe has valuable software.
One can dance around the issue but piracy is clearly theft. The cost of the software and the size of the company have nothing to do with it.
Hmm.. your post got me thinking. Now that some major core changes have been set in place but have yet to be used at this point, perhaps we?ll actually see the next OS X update sooner than later. One that focuses mostly on the UI. Could they do RI and completely get rid of Carbon in the next 12 months?
A good question but one I can't answer. However speculation is always fun so I'm going to say it might be possible. To do so they would need to completely drop some of the legacy crap (carbon) and focus just on RI. Even then I think it will be tough especially if they incorporate more acceleration into Quartz.
It is interesting that I've heard more than once that Quartz makes mote use of the iPhones GPU than does Mac OS/X. If true it would appear that moving to RI could coincide with a more accelerated graphics environment. Dropping the old APIs in favor of Cocao could make things a lot easier for Apple.
All that being said I'd much prefer update periods between 18 - 24 months. Frankly it can be annoying to go through major updates every year. I just updated SL at the library today along with the iWork & iLife and it took a couple of hours between this and the other things addressed. In other words the whole afternoon shot to hell.
Since when has that ever been legal or moral jusification for theft? Using your logic car hijacking should be legal because he the poor creep can't afford to buy his own. Maybe squaring in your home or apartment should be legal too, after all the scum bag can't afford it because he is to lazy to get a job. After all you just stated that theft based on lack of means is not an issue.
Frankly I'm not sure why Appleinsider doesn't have a policy of banning people that advocate such stupidity. From my point of view it is a grossness society doesn't need.
Dave
He said it didn't drive the cost up for Adobe, not that it was ok to steal. Do you over-react all the time or is this a new approach?
I am using Safari now and if I want to read a window with a bigger font, I just go command and + or I can spread my thumb and forefinger wider on the track pad. Yes, the font size jumps and you don't have a smooth transition. But, the point of this is just to be able to read the page text easier. To go smaller go the opposite with command and - ( minus ) to bring you back to the opening size and if you go too far it will get even smaller than normal. It is working now in the Reply to thread box as I type this.
When it comes to menus and all the fonts that my appear in any app, well maybe Apple is working on this. Have you made any direct suggestions to Apple: http://www.apple.com/feedback/
I use this when I do have an issue that effects me often.
With due respect, the first paragraph you wrote has nothing per se to do with the problem that I described. Please note that I wrote:
"You still have NO CONTROL over the font size used for menus and anything that appears on the screen that is not under the direct control of the application."
The second paragraph you wrote is responsive. But I reiterate: this is a very fundamental problem that Apple should have addressed at least a decade ago. It makes no sense for system fonts appearing on the screen, i.e., menus and system preference screens, etc., to be coupled to the physical screen resolution in the way that they are. This is a horrible, horrible defect, and once again, a defect that Apple is a decade overdue in correcting.
Snow Leopard has added one feature for blind people, only available on notebooks, which turns the track pad into a speak each item tool, but overall Windows has always been a far superior environment for people who have vision problems. I'm assuming you are using the zoom with scroll wheel already.
mstone, I have tried and tried to get people to understand that it is a non-solution to rely on the zoom feature, which is essentially the same thing as setting the screen resolution to something less than its physical resolution, to make up for not being able to adjust the scaling and size of the system font. Other than change the screen resolution, which is a brain-dead way to go about this, there is no way to change the size of the fonts that appear on the menu, or in the system preferences windows, or anywhere else where the font scaling is under the control of the system and not the application. The physical size of these fonts, measured in ordinary units of length, i.e., cm or inches, is determined by the screen resolution, and it is simply absurd that the size of these fonts is coupled in this rigid manner to the screen resolution.
I'm not sure why you are dumbfounded as Apple had clearly stated what the scope of this update is or was. The goal was improvements to the core of the OS with little touched upon with respect to the user interface. This is what they said they would do and it is what we got.
Dave
Not to equate AppleInsider with Apple, but there were multiple articles on this web site for one that stated in a rather unambiguous way that "resolution independence" was one of the principal "under the hood" goals of Snow Leopard. By what rationale does make sense to exclude, from "core OS", something as basic and fundamental as the rendering of graphics to the monitor? If you want to define "core of the OS" as the legacy BSD kernel, then sure, rendering of system fonts to the screen would not qualify as "core of the OS". But then, with that definition, there is virtually nothing that would qualify as "core of the OS". More obviously, if you simply take a look at the stuff that Apple is touting as improvements in this version of the OS, virtually none of it is as "core of the OS" as the rendering of system fonts to the screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
As to the issue of reading the screen do understand I understand your plight. I'm at that point in life where every eye exam is bad news. However I'm not sure where some of your expectations come from. Mac OS/X is not Windows and grew out of a totally different development path.
Dave
I am well aware of the path from which Apple's OS has arrived. I was programming in C on 16-bit versions of Bell Labs UNIX in the late '70s, and I have a reasonably good understanding of the history of UNIX. It is not the least but unreasonable to use Windows as a yardstick for this purpose and ask why, given that MS recognized and addressed this problem at least a decade ago, probably more like two decades, that Apple still has done nothing about it. But the ultimate reason that it is reasonable to expect that Apple should have long since addressed this shortcoming, is simply that it is a very real shortcoming that desperately needs to be addressed and for which there simply is no discernible excuse for them not to address it except that there is just something amiss with their sense of priorities. This should have been given the highest priority back when they first switched over to the BSD platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
In any event I Suspect that Apple really needed to get the technology in Snow Leopard in place before they started to overhaul Cocao and bring resolution independence to Quartz.
Dave
I doubt very seriously if there is any objective, factual basis for this opinion. There isn't any additional technology per se that needs to be "in place" in order for system fonts to made scalable according to user configuration. The basic ability to scale fonts is clearly in place and clearly has been for a long time. It is just a matter of Apple applying this capability to the system fonts. They just need to be persuaded to do it, and it does not serve the needs of the user community for anyone to make excuses on behalf of Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I hate to say it but it is likely to be another 18 months before resolution independence hits. That is an if too because I don't know what Apple has planned for the next release.
The only solution Apple has right now is Universal Access which I'm assuming you have looked into. Let's just be kind and say it is a limited solution.
Dave
This is probably a good place for me to add something to what I wrote earlier. It is now apparent to me that the problem goes beyond Apple not doing things that they should have done. Rather, they actually have broken the previous capability to disable font smudging, uh, I mean font smoothing, for font sizes 12 and smaller. The system preferences screen looks like you should still be able to do that, and it also gives the impression that you should be able to turn off font smudging entirely. But not only does the check box where you should be able to fully disable font smudging have no effect whatsoever, in addition, the other part now does not work. Prior to this "upgrade", you could set that to 12, and font smudging would be disabled for font sizes 12 and smaller, and this applied to the system fonts. This no longer works. I did run into one place where I saw this have an effect, i.e., where font smudging was applied when it was set to 4 but then the smudging was removed from the font when it was set to 12. I'm not sure where I saw this, but one thing is certain, it does not apply to the fonts that appear in the top of the screen, or the system preferences windows, etc. I am absolutely certain that I previously was able to disable font smudging for the fonts used in the menu bar, which are size 12 or smaller, and ditto for the fonts appearing the system preferences window and so on. But not any more. They have broken it. They have taken a step backwards. The system fonts are still just as tiny as they used to be, but in addition, they are now smudgy.
This article about the improvements in Snow Leopard security makes for interesting reading. As an Apple supporter and fan, I always tell my friends/colleagues that OSX is safer than MS operating systems, but always knew that I could never use the words completely safe.
:mad as Hell at Epson and here's why, "Epson is fully committed to supporting Macintosh OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard and we are working on providing Snow Leopard drivers for as many Epson products as possible. The Epson model you selected does not currently have a Snow Leopard driver available. We invite you to periodically check this page for new Snow Leopard drivers."
Ah Hello the software has been available to software developers for nearly a year. Oh not like I'm running an ancient printer from Epson just its new Artisan 800 model. Oh you want network capability, well they have a blah blah blah statement about they know about the network issue.
So they want us to run Rosetta. 64 bit OS and I have to run an emulator?! I sent some nasty emails to Epson and there sorry Helpless desk support. No excuses for this sorry customer support. Oh but they have Windows 7 beta drivers available now. Did I say Snow Leopard is sweet?!!
Finally you PC lovers out there here an early indication of people tired of Microsoft. The Fed Ex packaging center in Alexandria told me today they have been really busy delivering the Snow Leopard boxes to our area and thank me for my patience. Take a note Epson
1 Gremlin
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Coinciding with today's release of Apple's latest operating system upgrade, Snow Leopard, support documents, printer drivers, and a list of incompatible software have been made available to ease the transition.
The new official support documents on Apple's Web site provide info on Finder and the desktop, printing, and known incompatible software.
Incompatible software
By default, Snow Leopard disables some software that is known to be incompatible with the new operating system. Upon installation, the OS will move the problematic applications to a folder named "Incompatible Software" on the user's hard drive. In addition, Snow Leopard prevents users from opening that software.
The following applications are moved to the "Incompatible Software" folder by default upon installation:
In addition, the following software is restricted from opening within Snow Leopard:
Parallels Desktop ver. 3.0
VirusBarrier X4 ver. 10.4.4 and earlier
SPSS 17 ver. 17.1
Director MX 2004 ver. 10.2
EyeTV ver. 3.0.0 to 3.1.0
Ratatouille ver. 1.1
Aperture ver. 2.1.1 and earlier
Keynote ver. 2.0.2 and earlier
AirPort Admin Utility for Graphite and Snow ver. 4.2.5
New printer drivers
Apple states that printing with Snow Leopard is "easier and better than ever." The following new features have been added to the operating system's printing capabilities:
Apple's Software Update will automatically provide you with third-party printer software and updates.
"Nearby Printers" is a list of available printers that will appear right inside your printer dialog box. Adding a nearby printer is just a selection away.
You can simply connect a USB printer and the print queue will be automatically created.
You can create a PDF document from any application and have an automated workflow process it.
Apple's support downloads page has a list of driver downloads for a number of different printers. Made available this week were drivers for Xerox, Lexmark, Canon, FujiXerox, Epson, HP, Lanier, Gestetner, Gutenprint, Ricoh, Brother, Samsung, NRG, Infotec, and Savin.
More help with Snow Leopard, including downloads, manuals and tutorials, is available at the official Mac OS X 10.6 support page.
Snow Leopard doesn't seem to like mirrored RAID sets created in Leopard.
Drives used: WD MyBook Essential 1TB, Fantom 1TB. Might be just a drive issue (but both??) and (more likely) an SL issue.
So back up your data on your Leopard-created RAID sets and then re-create them in SL.
IF SL hangs, freezes, or otherwise requires you to reboot because it does not recognize your Leopard-created RAID set, DO NOT delete the set in SL. It will destroy all partition and directory info on the drives. Your data might still be there but you might need Data Rescue II or a similar utility to recover it.
Install or re-install Leopard, back up your RAID set, and proceed.
Most people really don't use a RAID configuration in OS X, especially when it comes to notebooks and home-use iMacs (I assume), but for the few that do, it looks like (at least in my case) SL did not like RAID sets created in Leopard.
It's either that, or I failed to note that you should back up RAID sets before doing a clean install of a new OS, and then re-create the set in the new OS. I'm a RAID noob anyway, but I assumed OS X would recognize RAID drives created in earlier versions.
Some are now non-existent for SL (at least for my P2015.)
Even if they do work (in Leoaprd), quite a few of them do not allow for full high-dpi output, although the option is selectable. You want 1200x1200 (ProRes) dpi, and you select it, yet the output is 600x600. Lame. I don't expect the situation to improve in SL.
I've switched to Brother. Fully supported. All options available. Great reliability.
UPDATE it in software update to 3.1.2 BEFORE upgrading to Snow Leopard. They only provide this upgrade inside the software with the built in updater.... then you'll be fine using it in Snow Leopard.
If you do like me and didn't check, and upgraded to Snow Leopard and now cannot launch the program to even do an update, you have to go download the 3.1.3 Beta version and run that, no way to manually get 3.1.2
I read another post explaining how to boot into the 64-bit kernel but after doing the above I can't figure out how to verify I am running in 64-bit mode. Does anyone know how we confirm the above boot technique works? And can anyone point me to where I can read all about 64-bit mode vs 32-bit mode booting? thanks
Comments
Well that makes Snow Leopard a no-go for me given that I keep all of my work on an eSATA drive. Both the eSATA Expresscard I use in my MacBook Pro and the eSATA PCIe card I use in my Mac Pro are based around the Sil3132 chipset. Hopefully this is resolved soon...
Yes --
I have 15 1TB external hard drives - in 3 DAT Optic enclosures - and all of them running with a PCIe board that uses SiI3124_2.0.3.
I cannot use 10.6 until there is an eSATA card that will work with it.
Dick
http://www.wilderness-studio.com
Yeah, I had to reinstall Boinc. I was getting a permissions problem, but it seems to be working fine. I'll know more once I've crunched a couple of WU's.
Thanks for the knowledge update. Let me know how it runs after you've finished some WUs. I would like to get SL soon but I'll wait for a BOINC update if need be.
After seeing the Open Cl demo podcast I can't wait for an Open CL BOINC client. It'll rock.
I'm going to have to make an exception in the case of Snow Leopard.
For starters, it is way snappier!
I am dumbfounded.
I'm not sure why you are dumbfounded as Apple had clearly stated what the scope of this update is or was. The goal was improvements to the core of the OS with little touched upon with respect to the user interface. This is what they said they would do and it is what we got.
DO THEY REALLY THINK THAT ANYONE WHO HAS TROUBLE READING THE FONTS USED FOR MENUS OUGHT TO COMPENSATE BY CHANGING THE SCREEN RESOLUTION?? WHY DO THEY WANT TO PROHIBIT ME FROM DISABLING FONT SMOOTHING FOR FONT SIZES LARGER THAN 12?
As to the issue of reading the screen do understand I understand your plight. I'm at that point in life where every eye exam is bad news. However I'm not sure where some of your expectations come from. Mac OS/X is not Windows and grew out of a totally different development path.
In any event I Suspect that Apple really needed to get the technology in Snow Leopard in place before they started to overhaul Cocao and bring resolution independence to Quartz. I hate to say it but it is likely to be another 18 months before resolution independence hits. That is an if too because I don't know what Apple has planned for the next release.
The only solution Apple has right now is Universal Access which I'm assuming you have looked into. Let's just be kind and say it is a limited solution.
Dave
In any event I Suspect that Apple really needed to get the technology in Snow Leopard in place before they started to overhaul Cocao and bring resolution independence to Quartz. I hate to say it but it is likely to be another 18 months before resolution independence hits. That is an if too because I don't know what Apple has planned for the next release.
Hmm.. your post got me thinking. Now that some major core changes have been set in place but have yet to be used at this point, perhaps we?ll actually see the next OS X update sooner than later. One that focuses mostly on the UI. Could they do RI and completely get rid of Carbon in the next 12 months?
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2009/08...owleopard.html
***EDIT: I take that back....I've found a beta version on Logitech's site that I think is working.....
This is not true at all. This is what Adobe tells you is the cause of the high price so you direct your anger at the pirates and not at them.
Baloney!
If they have to engineer against stealing it raises the cost as do other activities that deal with theft. Do you think that people these days work for free or that we have reverted to slavery?
Piracy is a problem in general that *sometimes* raises costs for manufacturers, but it's a minor effect and definitely not the cause of Adobe's high prices. Adobe's prices are high because they ask for what they know they can get (from you).
Adobe does have high prices, but you are a fool not to believe Adobes anti theft efforts aren't factored into the equation. Their expenses in this area may be partially spread over the entire product line up but that should not surprise anybody.
For example, Apple's "piracy problem" with all their software is orders of magnitude higher than Adobe's and yet their software is orders of magnitude *lower* in price. Apple doesn't make software as a "loss leader" and they do make a profit on it.
What does price have to do with the sin/crime of stealing? Is this an attempt to deflect the discussion away from the core issue.
Adobe is engaging in a classic monopoly position here and all of their behaviours are "textbook" monopolistic behaviours.
Not in the least. There most be at least a hundred ways to format documents for distribution. They only thing Adobe has going for it is that PDF for one is an accepted standard. Because it has been a well defined standard there are numerous ways to generate PDF files and not even Touch Adobe products.
It is funny that you try to pass Adobe off as a monopoly in a Mac forum as Apple uses PDF extensively.
Their product is buggy and poorly designed, their "customer" is not the end user but the high end graphics business, both the organisation itself and the software it produces is bloated and over-wrought, and the prices it charges are based on what the market can bear, not on any kind of value/cost proposition.
Isn't that the norm in business, that is charge what the business can bear? The fact is software pricing often has little to do with the cost if production. Let's not get into distribution because we all know what a CD costs. The sad part is that you implied there is no value in software in this paragraph but yet earlier you said more or less the opposite in that Adobe charges what the Market will bear. The implication is that Adobe has valuable software.
One can dance around the issue but piracy is clearly theft. The cost of the software and the size of the company have nothing to do with it.
Dave
Hmm.. your post got me thinking. Now that some major core changes have been set in place but have yet to be used at this point, perhaps we?ll actually see the next OS X update sooner than later. One that focuses mostly on the UI. Could they do RI and completely get rid of Carbon in the next 12 months?
A good question but one I can't answer. However speculation is always fun so I'm going to say it might be possible. To do so they would need to completely drop some of the legacy crap (carbon) and focus just on RI. Even then I think it will be tough especially if they incorporate more acceleration into Quartz.
It is interesting that I've heard more than once that Quartz makes mote use of the iPhones GPU than does Mac OS/X. If true it would appear that moving to RI could coincide with a more accelerated graphics environment. Dropping the old APIs in favor of Cocao could make things a lot easier for Apple.
All that being said I'd much prefer update periods between 18 - 24 months. Frankly it can be annoying to go through major updates every year. I just updated SL at the library today along with the iWork & iLife and it took a couple of hours between this and the other things addressed. In other words the whole afternoon shot to hell.
Dave
Since when has that ever been legal or moral jusification for theft? Using your logic car hijacking should be legal because he the poor creep can't afford to buy his own. Maybe squaring in your home or apartment should be legal too, after all the scum bag can't afford it because he is to lazy to get a job. After all you just stated that theft based on lack of means is not an issue.
Frankly I'm not sure why Appleinsider doesn't have a policy of banning people that advocate such stupidity. From my point of view it is a grossness society doesn't need.
Dave
He said it didn't drive the cost up for Adobe, not that it was ok to steal. Do you over-react all the time or is this a new approach?
When it comes to menus and all the fonts that my appear in any app, well maybe Apple is working on this. Have you made any direct suggestions to Apple: http://www.apple.com/feedback/
I use this when I do have an issue that effects me often.
With due respect, the first paragraph you wrote has nothing per se to do with the problem that I described. Please note that I wrote:
"You still have NO CONTROL over the font size used for menus and anything that appears on the screen that is not under the direct control of the application."
The second paragraph you wrote is responsive. But I reiterate: this is a very fundamental problem that Apple should have addressed at least a decade ago. It makes no sense for system fonts appearing on the screen, i.e., menus and system preference screens, etc., to be coupled to the physical screen resolution in the way that they are. This is a horrible, horrible defect, and once again, a defect that Apple is a decade overdue in correcting.
Snow Leopard has added one feature for blind people, only available on notebooks, which turns the track pad into a speak each item tool, but overall Windows has always been a far superior environment for people who have vision problems. I'm assuming you are using the zoom with scroll wheel already.
mstone, I have tried and tried to get people to understand that it is a non-solution to rely on the zoom feature, which is essentially the same thing as setting the screen resolution to something less than its physical resolution, to make up for not being able to adjust the scaling and size of the system font. Other than change the screen resolution, which is a brain-dead way to go about this, there is no way to change the size of the fonts that appear on the menu, or in the system preferences windows, or anywhere else where the font scaling is under the control of the system and not the application. The physical size of these fonts, measured in ordinary units of length, i.e., cm or inches, is determined by the screen resolution, and it is simply absurd that the size of these fonts is coupled in this rigid manner to the screen resolution.
I'm not sure why you are dumbfounded as Apple had clearly stated what the scope of this update is or was. The goal was improvements to the core of the OS with little touched upon with respect to the user interface. This is what they said they would do and it is what we got.
Dave
Not to equate AppleInsider with Apple, but there were multiple articles on this web site for one that stated in a rather unambiguous way that "resolution independence" was one of the principal "under the hood" goals of Snow Leopard. By what rationale does make sense to exclude, from "core OS", something as basic and fundamental as the rendering of graphics to the monitor? If you want to define "core of the OS" as the legacy BSD kernel, then sure, rendering of system fonts to the screen would not qualify as "core of the OS". But then, with that definition, there is virtually nothing that would qualify as "core of the OS". More obviously, if you simply take a look at the stuff that Apple is touting as improvements in this version of the OS, virtually none of it is as "core of the OS" as the rendering of system fonts to the screen.
As to the issue of reading the screen do understand I understand your plight. I'm at that point in life where every eye exam is bad news. However I'm not sure where some of your expectations come from. Mac OS/X is not Windows and grew out of a totally different development path.
Dave
I am well aware of the path from which Apple's OS has arrived. I was programming in C on 16-bit versions of Bell Labs UNIX in the late '70s, and I have a reasonably good understanding of the history of UNIX. It is not the least but unreasonable to use Windows as a yardstick for this purpose and ask why, given that MS recognized and addressed this problem at least a decade ago, probably more like two decades, that Apple still has done nothing about it. But the ultimate reason that it is reasonable to expect that Apple should have long since addressed this shortcoming, is simply that it is a very real shortcoming that desperately needs to be addressed and for which there simply is no discernible excuse for them not to address it except that there is just something amiss with their sense of priorities. This should have been given the highest priority back when they first switched over to the BSD platform.
In any event I Suspect that Apple really needed to get the technology in Snow Leopard in place before they started to overhaul Cocao and bring resolution independence to Quartz.
Dave
I doubt very seriously if there is any objective, factual basis for this opinion. There isn't any additional technology per se that needs to be "in place" in order for system fonts to made scalable according to user configuration. The basic ability to scale fonts is clearly in place and clearly has been for a long time. It is just a matter of Apple applying this capability to the system fonts. They just need to be persuaded to do it, and it does not serve the needs of the user community for anyone to make excuses on behalf of Apple.
I hate to say it but it is likely to be another 18 months before resolution independence hits. That is an if too because I don't know what Apple has planned for the next release.
The only solution Apple has right now is Universal Access which I'm assuming you have looked into. Let's just be kind and say it is a limited solution.
Dave
This is probably a good place for me to add something to what I wrote earlier. It is now apparent to me that the problem goes beyond Apple not doing things that they should have done. Rather, they actually have broken the previous capability to disable font smudging, uh, I mean font smoothing, for font sizes 12 and smaller. The system preferences screen looks like you should still be able to do that, and it also gives the impression that you should be able to turn off font smudging entirely. But not only does the check box where you should be able to fully disable font smudging have no effect whatsoever, in addition, the other part now does not work. Prior to this "upgrade", you could set that to 12, and font smudging would be disabled for font sizes 12 and smaller, and this applied to the system fonts. This no longer works. I did run into one place where I saw this have an effect, i.e., where font smudging was applied when it was set to 4 but then the smudging was removed from the font when it was set to 12. I'm not sure where I saw this, but one thing is certain, it does not apply to the fonts that appear in the top of the screen, or the system preferences windows, etc. I am absolutely certain that I previously was able to disable font smudging for the fonts used in the menu bar, which are size 12 or smaller, and ditto for the fonts appearing the system preferences window and so on. But not any more. They have broken it. They have taken a step backwards. The system fonts are still just as tiny as they used to be, but in addition, they are now smudgy.
I've tried deleted my keychain preferences, Airport in the Network preferences (and restarting), and nothing seems to make it work.
I was poking around Google, but I've found nothing concrete, but similar issues with Airport not turning on, but nothing else related to SL.
This article about the improvements in Snow Leopard security makes for interesting reading. As an Apple supporter and fan, I always tell my friends/colleagues that OSX is safer than MS operating systems, but always knew that I could never use the words completely safe.
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200...pard_security/
Seer what you think.
Soul
Ah Hello the software has been available to software developers for nearly a year. Oh not like I'm running an ancient printer from Epson just its new Artisan 800 model. Oh you want network capability, well they have a blah blah blah statement about they know about the network issue.
So they want us to run Rosetta. 64 bit OS and I have to run an emulator?! I sent some nasty emails to Epson and there sorry Helpless desk support. No excuses for this sorry customer support. Oh but they have Windows 7 beta drivers available now. Did I say Snow Leopard is sweet?!!
Finally you PC lovers out there here an early indication of people tired of Microsoft. The Fed Ex packaging center in Alexandria told me today they have been really busy delivering the Snow Leopard boxes to our area and thank me for my patience. Take a note Epson
1 Gremlin
Coinciding with today's release of Apple's latest operating system upgrade, Snow Leopard, support documents, printer drivers, and a list of incompatible software have been made available to ease the transition.
The new official support documents on Apple's Web site provide info on Finder and the desktop, printing, and known incompatible software.
Incompatible software
By default, Snow Leopard disables some software that is known to be incompatible with the new operating system. Upon installation, the OS will move the problematic applications to a folder named "Incompatible Software" on the user's hard drive. In addition, Snow Leopard prevents users from opening that software.
The following applications are moved to the "Incompatible Software" folder by default upon installation:
Parallels Desktop, ver. 2.5 and earlier
McAfee VirusScan, ver. 8.6
Norton AntiVirus ver. 11.0
Internet Cleanup 5 ver. 5.0.4
Application Enhancer ver. 2.0.1 and earlier
Unsanity
AT&T Laptop Connect Card ver. 1.0.4, 1.0.5, 1.10.0
launch2net ver, 2.13.0
iWOW plug-in for iTunes ver. 2.0
Missing Sync for Palm Sony CLIE Driver ver. 6.0.4
TonePort UX8 Driver ver. 4.1.0
ioHD Driver ver. 6.0.3
Silicon Image SiI3132 Drivers ver. 1.5.16.0
In addition, the following software is restricted from opening within Snow Leopard:
Parallels Desktop ver. 3.0
VirusBarrier X4 ver. 10.4.4 and earlier
SPSS 17 ver. 17.1
Director MX 2004 ver. 10.2
EyeTV ver. 3.0.0 to 3.1.0
Ratatouille ver. 1.1
Aperture ver. 2.1.1 and earlier
Keynote ver. 2.0.2 and earlier
AirPort Admin Utility for Graphite and Snow ver. 4.2.5
New printer drivers
Apple states that printing with Snow Leopard is "easier and better than ever." The following new features have been added to the operating system's printing capabilities:
Apple's Software Update will automatically provide you with third-party printer software and updates.
"Nearby Printers" is a list of available printers that will appear right inside your printer dialog box. Adding a nearby printer is just a selection away.
You can simply connect a USB printer and the print queue will be automatically created.
You can create a PDF document from any application and have an automated workflow process it.
Apple's support downloads page has a list of driver downloads for a number of different printers. Made available this week were drivers for Xerox, Lexmark, Canon, FujiXerox, Epson, HP, Lanier, Gestetner, Gutenprint, Ricoh, Brother, Samsung, NRG, Infotec, and Savin.
More help with Snow Leopard, including downloads, manuals and tutorials, is available at the official Mac OS X 10.6 support page.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Drives used: WD MyBook Essential 1TB, Fantom 1TB. Might be just a drive issue (but both??) and (more likely) an SL issue.
So back up your data on your Leopard-created RAID sets and then re-create them in SL.
IF SL hangs, freezes, or otherwise requires you to reboot because it does not recognize your Leopard-created RAID set, DO NOT delete the set in SL. It will destroy all partition and directory info on the drives. Your data might still be there but you might need Data Rescue II or a similar utility to recover it.
Install or re-install Leopard, back up your RAID set, and proceed.
Most people really don't use a RAID configuration in OS X, especially when it comes to notebooks and home-use iMacs (I assume), but for the few that do, it looks like (at least in my case) SL did not like RAID sets created in Leopard.
It's either that, or I failed to note that you should back up RAID sets before doing a clean install of a new OS, and then re-create the set in the new OS. I'm a RAID noob anyway, but I assumed OS X would recognize RAID drives created in earlier versions.
Got all my data back, though.
Some are now non-existent for SL (at least for my P2015.)
Even if they do work (in Leoaprd), quite a few of them do not allow for full high-dpi output, although the option is selectable. You want 1200x1200 (ProRes) dpi, and you select it, yet the output is 600x600. Lame. I don't expect the situation to improve in SL.
I've switched to Brother. Fully supported. All options available. Great reliability.
HP quality has plummeted in recent years, anyway.
UPDATE it in software update to 3.1.2 BEFORE upgrading to Snow Leopard. They only provide this upgrade inside the software with the built in updater.... then you'll be fine using it in Snow Leopard.
If you do like me and didn't check, and upgraded to Snow Leopard and now cannot launch the program to even do an update, you have to go download the 3.1.3 Beta version and run that, no way to manually get 3.1.2
Are you using the 64-bit or the 32-bit kernel?
I read another post explaining how to boot into the 64-bit kernel but after doing the above I can't figure out how to verify I am running in 64-bit mode. Does anyone know how we confirm the above boot technique works? And can anyone point me to where I can read all about 64-bit mode vs 32-bit mode booting?