lunarworks
Oct 11, 09:23 AM
At this point I've lost all interest in iPod rumours. Such repetition, and rarely anything right.
"The boy who cried wolf."
It'll show up when Jobs wants it to, and no sooner.
"The boy who cried wolf."
It'll show up when Jobs wants it to, and no sooner.
QCassidy352
Sep 28, 01:05 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Now hopefully these pretty town bureaucrats approve this in short order and then get back to their usual important functions, like telling people what colors they can paint their mailboxes.
It that an iPhone autospell or are they really good looking. :D
The former :o
Now hopefully these pretty town bureaucrats approve this in short order and then get back to their usual important functions, like telling people what colors they can paint their mailboxes.
It that an iPhone autospell or are they really good looking. :D
The former :o
paradox00
Apr 25, 12:54 PM
So that is fine, I dont think people will care if they skip 5. Why are you adamant that they wont skip 5?
Why are you so adamant that they will use 4S instead of 5?
-The 3GS had an identical appearance to the 3G, but with upgraded internals, hence the S.
-A 3.7" iPhone would not have an identical appearance to the iPhone 4 by virtue of the screen size alone, so there would be no reason to simply add an S.
-3G is a feature description, adding an S might make some sense there as it could also be considered a "feature description". 4 is a revision number, why would they add an S to that? 4.5 or 5 would make more sense.
-The iPhone 4 and iOS 4 were launched in the same time frame, it makes sense for the numbers on each to match up. What's next? iPhone 5 and iOS 5 of course. I don't know why they'd stray from matching revision numbers so quickly after finally achieving them.
-If they plan on calling the phone after this 6, why would they skip 5, which sounds like a bigger upgrade than 4S?
As far as I'm concerned, 4S is the least likely name possible for the next iPhone. iPhone 5, 4G (LTE), 4.5 (very unlikely), and plain "iPhone" all have a much greater chance than 4S (with 5 being the most likely). I just spent way to much time on this minor issue though.
Why are you so adamant that they will use 4S instead of 5?
-The 3GS had an identical appearance to the 3G, but with upgraded internals, hence the S.
-A 3.7" iPhone would not have an identical appearance to the iPhone 4 by virtue of the screen size alone, so there would be no reason to simply add an S.
-3G is a feature description, adding an S might make some sense there as it could also be considered a "feature description". 4 is a revision number, why would they add an S to that? 4.5 or 5 would make more sense.
-The iPhone 4 and iOS 4 were launched in the same time frame, it makes sense for the numbers on each to match up. What's next? iPhone 5 and iOS 5 of course. I don't know why they'd stray from matching revision numbers so quickly after finally achieving them.
-If they plan on calling the phone after this 6, why would they skip 5, which sounds like a bigger upgrade than 4S?
As far as I'm concerned, 4S is the least likely name possible for the next iPhone. iPhone 5, 4G (LTE), 4.5 (very unlikely), and plain "iPhone" all have a much greater chance than 4S (with 5 being the most likely). I just spent way to much time on this minor issue though.
Mac.World
Apr 17, 09:47 AM
No one is saying it is, except for you. Nothing is being placed above anything else. There is no order of importance.
Sounds like a lost in translation issue. Reading comments vice talking directly with someone leaves a lot to be desired. Anyway, I read your comments as though you felt that a persons homosexual orientation entitled them to be elevated above another group or person.
Yes indeed. But why we differ is puzzling to me.
Because I am against classifying people by descriptors. The worth of a man or woman should not be defined by labels like black, gay, or what have you. Treat every man or woman equally, as you would wish to be treated, and I see no need for labels. Do you label your friends? i.e. "Hey, I'm going to see black Jim." Or, "I'm going to see Jew Bob."
Sounds like a lost in translation issue. Reading comments vice talking directly with someone leaves a lot to be desired. Anyway, I read your comments as though you felt that a persons homosexual orientation entitled them to be elevated above another group or person.
Yes indeed. But why we differ is puzzling to me.
Because I am against classifying people by descriptors. The worth of a man or woman should not be defined by labels like black, gay, or what have you. Treat every man or woman equally, as you would wish to be treated, and I see no need for labels. Do you label your friends? i.e. "Hey, I'm going to see black Jim." Or, "I'm going to see Jew Bob."
TheAppleDragon
Apr 29, 04:00 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
The iOS scrollbars ALWAYS looked that way to me. Dunno why. XD
I kinda liked the 'old' switch look to the tab selection, but that's just me.
Seriously though, no changes to Spaces...? :/
The iOS scrollbars ALWAYS looked that way to me. Dunno why. XD
I kinda liked the 'old' switch look to the tab selection, but that's just me.
Seriously though, no changes to Spaces...? :/
Hephaestus
Mar 19, 05:16 PM
http://gifjes.web-log.nl/photos/uncategorized/hahaha.gif
and the way you express yourself practically shows me why people 'diss' all your gadgets.
Here in England thats a pretty common figure of speech that people use all the time. It doesn't mean literally ages. I forgot this was an American forum, but what does that have to do with anything anyway?
and the way you express yourself practically shows me why people 'diss' all your gadgets.
Here in England thats a pretty common figure of speech that people use all the time. It doesn't mean literally ages. I forgot this was an American forum, but what does that have to do with anything anyway?
arn
Oct 2, 05:13 PM
The DMCA would have nothing to do with this. This doesn't remove any copy prevention, it adds it. I just can't see what anyone would want to do with this technology.
Napster/Amazon would want this technology so they could sell their music/movies to anyone with an iPod.
It's not like Napster necessarily choose WMA DRM. They couldn't license Fairplay from Apple.
arn
Napster (and Vongo, never heard of them) couldn't do that. Fairplay doesn't have any time limit. If you buy a song from the iTunes Music Store, it will work forever (or as long as Apple Computer exists). If you have a Napster subscription, and Napster made it possible that you download a song and add the Fairplay DRM to it, then iTunes would play it today and forever.
you may be right about that. subscription services might not be useable at the moment.
arn
Napster/Amazon would want this technology so they could sell their music/movies to anyone with an iPod.
It's not like Napster necessarily choose WMA DRM. They couldn't license Fairplay from Apple.
arn
Napster (and Vongo, never heard of them) couldn't do that. Fairplay doesn't have any time limit. If you buy a song from the iTunes Music Store, it will work forever (or as long as Apple Computer exists). If you have a Napster subscription, and Napster made it possible that you download a song and add the Fairplay DRM to it, then iTunes would play it today and forever.
you may be right about that. subscription services might not be useable at the moment.
arn
takao
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
Make a Custom Class with Ghost, problem solved. Hell, equip that same class with the Strela, and not only will the various Choppers not shoot you, but you can then bring it down so it stops killing your team as well.
well you mean ghost pro ... the normal one is useless against that (i already have that layout ;) )
but seriously getting some of the perks to pro is ridiculously difficult while some others can be pro before hitting level 15
.. i have been trying to get ghost to pro for a while now and ironically i'm stuck on destroying an enemy turrent.. which somehow aren't popular at all jsut liek the tomahawk .. while i killed perhaps 30 guys with it i haven't been killed by a single tomahawk yet despite it being perfect for those "we are losing charlie" moments
another point of advice: don't bother with the top MP: it has only a 20 shot clip (opposed to some other MPs) and annoyingly ejects empty rounds right out of the top
having the mp just one slot below but with increased firerate add on (IMHO the best for taking down assault rifle users on short range) and silencer is the way better gun
in general with this being my first call of duty i have to say that my opinion of killing streaks hasn't changed at all ... it still is an invitation for camping in many, many game situations... and some of the attacks are simply ridiculous if you look at the size of some of the maps or their designs: yay for houses with no roofs/glass roofs
well you mean ghost pro ... the normal one is useless against that (i already have that layout ;) )
but seriously getting some of the perks to pro is ridiculously difficult while some others can be pro before hitting level 15
.. i have been trying to get ghost to pro for a while now and ironically i'm stuck on destroying an enemy turrent.. which somehow aren't popular at all jsut liek the tomahawk .. while i killed perhaps 30 guys with it i haven't been killed by a single tomahawk yet despite it being perfect for those "we are losing charlie" moments
another point of advice: don't bother with the top MP: it has only a 20 shot clip (opposed to some other MPs) and annoyingly ejects empty rounds right out of the top
having the mp just one slot below but with increased firerate add on (IMHO the best for taking down assault rifle users on short range) and silencer is the way better gun
in general with this being my first call of duty i have to say that my opinion of killing streaks hasn't changed at all ... it still is an invitation for camping in many, many game situations... and some of the attacks are simply ridiculous if you look at the size of some of the maps or their designs: yay for houses with no roofs/glass roofs
jrtc27
Apr 30, 12:59 PM
Do you mean you like the change, or the reverse of the change?
You only have to look at the second screen shot to see why the slider was potentially confusing�
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_slider_old_500.jpg)
When there are only two options, the inactive option looks a lot like a depressed button.
Apple's always fiddling with this. You have to wonder why they didn't just stick with the old tabbed interface, which is arguably the most instantly recognisable way of switching window views. I guess there's a bit more flexibility in buttons, in terms of their placement� or maybe they're just trying to think different.
I mean I like the change away from the slider. The slider was confusing (I'm a techie, and I was confused at first when I saw videos and screenshots), and the squarer buttons look better than the old style in Snow Leopard, especially with the two shades of grey - they are much more modern and much subtler.
You only have to look at the second screen shot to see why the slider was potentially confusing�
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_slider_old_500.jpg)
When there are only two options, the inactive option looks a lot like a depressed button.
Apple's always fiddling with this. You have to wonder why they didn't just stick with the old tabbed interface, which is arguably the most instantly recognisable way of switching window views. I guess there's a bit more flexibility in buttons, in terms of their placement� or maybe they're just trying to think different.
I mean I like the change away from the slider. The slider was confusing (I'm a techie, and I was confused at first when I saw videos and screenshots), and the squarer buttons look better than the old style in Snow Leopard, especially with the two shades of grey - they are much more modern and much subtler.
flopticalcube
Nov 24, 09:10 PM
Order review is back.
"Not yet shipped" ..... sigh:(
"Not yet shipped" ..... sigh:(
Buschmaster
Oct 3, 05:07 PM
Steve Jobs.... retiring?:eek:
I would honestly cry. And that makes me sound pathetic.
I would honestly cry. And that makes me sound pathetic.
snberk103
Apr 13, 09:48 AM
The 9/11 hijackers did not bring anything on the plane that was banned. No amount of groping or searching by airport security would've prevented 9/11.
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
Box cutters were banned in response to 9/11. As always, airline security is reactive. Bush sold us a bill of goods while increasing the size and cost of government.
The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not a failure of airport security.
I thought box cutters were banned? Can you provide a link to support your statement?
Box cutters were banned in response to 9/11. As always, airline security is reactive. Bush sold us a bill of goods while increasing the size and cost of government.
The OP was ambiguous ... I read it that the weapons used on 9/11 were still not banned. As opposed to not banned at the time.
Hasn't anyone noticed that not a single US plane has been hijacked in the past 10 years? A quick look at Wikipedia shows 7 US planes hijacked in the 1970s, several in the 80s and 90s. Four planes were hijacked in 2001 (all on the same day....) - and then not a single US, European, Japanese plane has been hijacked.
Something is working.....
MOFS
Mar 13, 12:18 PM
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
For me, I do see the iPad (and actually the App Store) as a change in computing. By removing the complex processes that we go through in a computer (eg instead of downloading an app, moving it into a folder, deleting the dmg its a simple case of downloading the app), the iPad is changing our computer experience by simplifying it to the extent that it's only the part we want to use rather than need to use. The iPad and the App Store process have the potential to kickstart and similarly drastic change in computing as moving from a line based OS to a GUI. In this case, "input is not input": a GUI opened up computers to more than just programmers, and the simplified OSs of the iPad (and, as we can see, creeping into Mac OS Lion) will only help people using these actually really quite complex devices. It will happen, as we can see it happening as Apple and Google look to move the "computer" into phones and televisions. Some people will want different devices (servers etc) but increasingly I think the computer is moving away from the idea of a desktop PC.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
For me, I do see the iPad (and actually the App Store) as a change in computing. By removing the complex processes that we go through in a computer (eg instead of downloading an app, moving it into a folder, deleting the dmg its a simple case of downloading the app), the iPad is changing our computer experience by simplifying it to the extent that it's only the part we want to use rather than need to use. The iPad and the App Store process have the potential to kickstart and similarly drastic change in computing as moving from a line based OS to a GUI. In this case, "input is not input": a GUI opened up computers to more than just programmers, and the simplified OSs of the iPad (and, as we can see, creeping into Mac OS Lion) will only help people using these actually really quite complex devices. It will happen, as we can see it happening as Apple and Google look to move the "computer" into phones and televisions. Some people will want different devices (servers etc) but increasingly I think the computer is moving away from the idea of a desktop PC.
milo
Oct 3, 11:13 AM
The moment you've got a life to lose if you're sued and you have your hds full of pirated movies, music and stuff would be a good point to start being worried. About that life of yours if you're having a job and a family and things like that. Could get nasty if you're having a criminal record and things like that, you know.
And how exactly would they know to sue you in the first place?
And how exactly would they know to sue you in the first place?
iJohnHenry
Apr 16, 04:59 PM
Yikes, another one that doesn't understand the meaning of the word.
Is your dictionary still in print, and how would I order one?
Is your dictionary still in print, and how would I order one?
tempusfugit
Oct 6, 07:58 PM
ATT is unbelievably good in Minneapolis, but my long drives to and from chicago are marked by a whole lot of EDGE which sucks!
xVeinx
Apr 29, 01:58 PM
These naysayers have been moaning and groaning about iOS forever. They will continue to do so forever. In the meantime the rest of the world will get on with using some great software (many of it free) and getting a lot of things done.
I'm glad Apple is pushing things forward. The last thing I want to see is OS X stagnate. Since we are now in the post-PC era, ideas from iOS are precisely what need to be explored. It won't be too many more years from now when the majority of consumer-level computing devices will be tablets running iOS-type gestures. It will be the expected thing to be able to support finger gestures to do common tasks. Any OS that cannot handle this will be considered old-fashioned.
Apple is doing the right thing by getting the future into OS X. They don't want to be left behind.
In another sense, the direction of the consumer PC/tablet/etc. will be where Apple takes it. They can play off of their successes with the iPad and iPhone and use that to shift the market to devices where Apple has a substantial amount of IP, experience, and expertise. It's one thing to be an alternative, as opposed to a shift where everything else becomes a (less desirable) alternative. That's where Apple is trying to go. Obviously not everyone agrees, but they have thus far made substantial inroads. Apple is increasingly a consumer-focussed company, so the utility of an interface in OS X, for instance, may suffer in it's usability for the "power user." It's hard to say though how much compromise will be made, as the dramatic changes in Final Cut Pro's upcoming release indicate a continued commitment to at least one sub-group of power users.
I'm glad Apple is pushing things forward. The last thing I want to see is OS X stagnate. Since we are now in the post-PC era, ideas from iOS are precisely what need to be explored. It won't be too many more years from now when the majority of consumer-level computing devices will be tablets running iOS-type gestures. It will be the expected thing to be able to support finger gestures to do common tasks. Any OS that cannot handle this will be considered old-fashioned.
Apple is doing the right thing by getting the future into OS X. They don't want to be left behind.
In another sense, the direction of the consumer PC/tablet/etc. will be where Apple takes it. They can play off of their successes with the iPad and iPhone and use that to shift the market to devices where Apple has a substantial amount of IP, experience, and expertise. It's one thing to be an alternative, as opposed to a shift where everything else becomes a (less desirable) alternative. That's where Apple is trying to go. Obviously not everyone agrees, but they have thus far made substantial inroads. Apple is increasingly a consumer-focussed company, so the utility of an interface in OS X, for instance, may suffer in it's usability for the "power user." It's hard to say though how much compromise will be made, as the dramatic changes in Final Cut Pro's upcoming release indicate a continued commitment to at least one sub-group of power users.
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 04:20 PM
Damn, man, I'd hate to see your tax bill when you finally sell!
Anyway, share-dropping is not very gentlemanly, so I'll keep my figures to myself...but at this point I too have to hold back from selling simply to avoid the huge tax hit. Would be nice if Apple issued dividends though, especially now that they're flush. Make some cash without divesting of the principal.
Are you calling me a cad, you cur? :)
Dividends, yes that would be a good idea, what with $10 billion in cash on hand. Microsoft finally decided that their cash horde was becoming a bit of an embarrassment and declared one.
Anyway, share-dropping is not very gentlemanly, so I'll keep my figures to myself...but at this point I too have to hold back from selling simply to avoid the huge tax hit. Would be nice if Apple issued dividends though, especially now that they're flush. Make some cash without divesting of the principal.
Are you calling me a cad, you cur? :)
Dividends, yes that would be a good idea, what with $10 billion in cash on hand. Microsoft finally decided that their cash horde was becoming a bit of an embarrassment and declared one.
billystlyes
May 2, 11:47 AM
"Bugs". That's so funny. Like it wasn't something indented by Big Brother, make that Apple. We truly do have a new evil empire now.
paradox00
May 3, 03:23 PM
Shocking that carriers would take steps to stop people from stealing service from them.
You did not pay for tethering data. That is a separate charge. By circumventing the system you are stealing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.
It is not a gray area.. it is black and white. The contracts specifically say the data you pay for does not include tethering. Tethering costs extra.
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
You did not pay for tethering data. That is a separate charge. By circumventing the system you are stealing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.
It is not a gray area.. it is black and white. The contracts specifically say the data you pay for does not include tethering. Tethering costs extra.
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
G4DP
Jan 15, 04:57 PM
Can somebody tell me why there was no update or price drop on ACD? Why is the PRO market left to the most critical point and then updated? Mac Pro is the best example. Its a brilliant machine now but 2 weeks ago? Some of the parts were 2 years old and they still charged the same amount of money for it. Dell, HP etc. are releasing new and updated displays whilst Apple ...........sleeps?
It's not just the displays. The MacPro was still left a little short. Don't get me wrong, they are brilliant machines, my 2.8x8 is brilliant, but only 2GB RAM is a kick in the teeth for a Pro workstation.
Especially when this MacBookFart comes with 2GB as standard. Having said that Steve priority is purely creating products for the Disney store now.
Shame really.
It's not just the displays. The MacPro was still left a little short. Don't get me wrong, they are brilliant machines, my 2.8x8 is brilliant, but only 2GB RAM is a kick in the teeth for a Pro workstation.
Especially when this MacBookFart comes with 2GB as standard. Having said that Steve priority is purely creating products for the Disney store now.
Shame really.
TZRaceR6
Aug 8, 01:47 PM
Electric cars (that are able to fully charge in under 20 minutes) subsidized by a solar panel roof is the future. Don't think a 300 mile range would be out of the question (within a few years) and would def work even in large countries like the U.S.
If you look here, they are talking 5 minutes for 70% charge of the car, even though it is currently only a short range vehicle.
Link: http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/07/05/new-quick-charger-for-electric-cars-is-really-quick/
If you look here, they are talking 5 minutes for 70% charge of the car, even though it is currently only a short range vehicle.
Link: http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/07/05/new-quick-charger-for-electric-cars-is-really-quick/
holmesf
Mar 24, 06:20 PM
I have been using Mac OS X since the first public beta. I still have screenshots around from the public beta, 10.0, 10.1, and 10.2.
I feel like this one best exemplifies the time during which Mac OS X originated: the Matrix was incredibly popular, as was Quake III. But most popular of all were PC and Mac users trolling each other about which operating system was best, the so called MHz myth, etc. I was 14 years old when I took this screenshot, and oh boy was I an Apple evangelist reaching absurd proportions.
Really I think most of us were still very worried that Apple would go under, and despite being "really cool", OS X had serious problems that wouldn't necessarily make you optimistic. It was slow. Window resizing was really painful, and 3D games tended to run much slower in OS X than in OS9. There was a dearth of software and even much of Apple's own software was not yet compatible.
On the other hand it was really stable, right from the start. Running OS 9, the expectation was that it wasn't "if" your computer froze, but rather "when" it froze. Without protected memory (applications could corrupt eachother) and without pre-emptive multitasking (applications could go into infinite loops refusing to give back control to the OS) the operating system was just really unstable, and frankly it was getting archaic compared to Windows. OS X and its unix underpinnings with a modern pre-emptive multitasking scheduler and protected memory not only brought stability, but also finally allowed Apple's dual processor systems to actually take advantage of the 2nd processor without requiring special application support.
Here's to you, Mac OS X!
http://futrellsoftware.com/pbeta.jpg
I feel like this one best exemplifies the time during which Mac OS X originated: the Matrix was incredibly popular, as was Quake III. But most popular of all were PC and Mac users trolling each other about which operating system was best, the so called MHz myth, etc. I was 14 years old when I took this screenshot, and oh boy was I an Apple evangelist reaching absurd proportions.
Really I think most of us were still very worried that Apple would go under, and despite being "really cool", OS X had serious problems that wouldn't necessarily make you optimistic. It was slow. Window resizing was really painful, and 3D games tended to run much slower in OS X than in OS9. There was a dearth of software and even much of Apple's own software was not yet compatible.
On the other hand it was really stable, right from the start. Running OS 9, the expectation was that it wasn't "if" your computer froze, but rather "when" it froze. Without protected memory (applications could corrupt eachother) and without pre-emptive multitasking (applications could go into infinite loops refusing to give back control to the OS) the operating system was just really unstable, and frankly it was getting archaic compared to Windows. OS X and its unix underpinnings with a modern pre-emptive multitasking scheduler and protected memory not only brought stability, but also finally allowed Apple's dual processor systems to actually take advantage of the 2nd processor without requiring special application support.
Here's to you, Mac OS X!
http://futrellsoftware.com/pbeta.jpg
rkahl
Mar 17, 01:14 PM
You should call and thank your parent's for raising such a LOSER!
No comments:
Post a Comment