I would pay for 10.2 if...



  • Reply 21 of 34
    synsyn Posts: 329member
    Apple is definitely working something up for the FS.

    A while ago there was a job offering for an FS engineer with experience with journaling FSs.

    Guess who took that job?

    <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/24648.html"; target="_blank">Dominic Giampaolo</a>

    Mr BFS.

    And progress has already shown, the HFS+ driver was updated in 10.1.4, and Sherlock searches have become *significantly* better since.

    There is hope. I don't think XFS is the way to go.
  • Reply 22 of 34
    ricrocketricrocket Posts: 142member
    &lt;Feeling Ignorant&gt;Um...what's SMB Browsing?&lt;/Feeling Ignorant&gt;

  • Reply 23 of 34
    kedakeda Posts: 722member
    It means that you can see PCs on the network just like AppleTalk shares.

    Rightnow, you have to know the path to the machine.
  • Reply 24 of 34
    thegeldingthegelding Posts: 3,230member
    i would pay if 10.2 comes with:

    iDVD 2.1 (let me freakin control the menu volume please)

    iMovie 3 (more transitions, titles, effects)

    iPhoto update (some minor editing features please)

    window shading

    a way to personalize the spinning multicolored pizza of death...so you can pick from: the tradional multicolored disk, maybe a spinning goats head or the head of that freaky little dog from zoolander, maybe a rotating extended middle finger, maybe a bill clinton or george w head spinning round and round, or maybe your country's flag patriotically rotating round and round for you to salute faithfully as your computer wonders what the hell you just asked it to do....

    this will give me something fun to watch when my computer gets confused and befuddled with my requests.....

  • Reply 25 of 34
    I would pay for 10.2 if...

    apple promised to use some of the money to hire and train tech ppl that actually knew the difference between toilet paper and their ass.

    and, with the leftover 50 cents from the budget, can i get some folder labels?

    (see, we girls dont ask for all that much. ha!)
  • Reply 26 of 34
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    [quote]Originally posted by stimuli:

    <strong>But implementing a different filesystem, while not necessarily EASY, isn't that hard either. It's all in the kernel, plus a few user space utilities already written by SGI.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Then you get to figure out what to do with all those applications that ask for a resource fork and/or type and creator codes.

    Apple could probably move XFS over without too much trouble. I doubt that's the problem. The problem is not breaking a hell of a lot of applications.

    [quote]<strong>BTW, Have any of you (Starfleet?) OSX cats tried recompiling the Mach kernel? Is recompiling a microkernel even worth doing?</strong><hr></blockquote>

    There is no microkernel in OS X. Darwin is monolithic.

    I'd be surprised if there were any benefits to recompiling the kernel if you weren't a Darwin developer rolling in new code. Darwin is not Linux. Similarly, I can't imagine what recompiling Mach in (say) MkLinux would buy you.

    mac's girl: I hear you, but good support seems to be a matter of luck, not money.

    [ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
  • Reply 27 of 34
    fuzz_ballfuzz_ball Posts: 390member
    I honestly can't say what magic combination of features would make me pay, but to put it simply, I would have to be impressed. If I wasn't impressed, but there were some good improvements, then I would pay up to $30. If I was thoroughly impressed, then I would pay $100.
  • Reply 28 of 34
    [quote]Originally posted by stimuli:

    <strong>BTW, Have any of you (Starfleet?) OSX cats tried recompiling the Mach kernel?</strong><hr></blockquote>This ain't Linux!

    As Amorph said, there's no need to do that unless you're doing some mad programming in the kernel itself.
  • Reply 29 of 34
    stimulistimuli Posts: 564member
    Darwin's got a monolithic kernel?! I thought it had a mach microkernel, and there was talk of performance trade-offs because of that?
  • Reply 30 of 34
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Amorph: XFS supports extended attributes on files, so it would be easy to store the resource fork and other stuff in extended attributes. Dominic knows all about this stuff.
  • Reply 31 of 34
    synsyn Posts: 329member
    Dominic can make his own FS, much better than XFS, and without the GPL hassle. the HFS+ driver was updated in 10.1.4, and it gave us a *significant* speed boost in Sherlock. Just give him some time.

    [quote]Darwin's got a monolithic kernel?! I thought it had a mach microkernel, and there was talk of performance trade-offs because of that?<hr></blockquote>

    Initially, Mach was a very academic micro-kernel. Xnu however, OSX's kernel, has moved on to a more hybrid architecture, specifically to adress those IPC concerns inherent to micro-kernels.
  • Reply 32 of 34
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member
    There's one single thing I would pay for: a fast interface. Right now, everything is just so slow. The finder makes molasses look like quicksilver. Even more annoying, the typing lag when I am working in Word is unbearable.

  • Reply 33 of 34
    zozo Posts: 3,115member
    for the love of god, give me speeeeeed

    I am very close to selling my BRAND new iBook 14inch w/384ram becuase OS X so far just sucks too damn much.
  • Reply 34 of 34
    kaboomkaboom Posts: 286member
    I would pay for 10.2 if....

    I hadn't already paid for what turned out to be just an advanced beta OS.

    I would pay for 10.2 if....

    They finally took the debug code out

    I would pay for 10.2 if....

    The Finder was finally as functional as the OS9 finder.

    I would pay for 10.2 if....

    it was a reasonable price. I'd say $20 to $50 tops.

    I would pay for 10.2 if....

    Someone gave me the money.
Sign In or Register to comment.