f



Mountain Lion

<http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>

<http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
-- 

.... do not cover a warm kettle or your stock may sour. -- Julia Child
0
warren.oates (3828)
2/16/2012 2:38:03 PM
comp.sys.mac.system 33446 articles. 2 followers. jfmezei.spamnot (9455) is leader. Post Follow

864 Replies
2279 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 42

In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
 Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>

From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May 
not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans 
out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my 
wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to 
be the OS on my main computer.

-- 
This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in
unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in.  

Theodore Roosevelt
0
timmcn (2339)
2/16/2012 2:58:33 PM
On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>

Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!

While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think 
they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard - 
other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 2:59:08 PM
On 2012-02-16 09:58 , Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>   Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>
>  From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May
> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans
> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to
> be the OS on my main computer.

It's just wrapper and connection/integration.  The OS doesn't change.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 3:06:50 PM
In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
 Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> 
> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>

Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/16/2012 3:35:19 PM
In article <h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
> > <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> 
> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
> 
> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think 
> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard - 
> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.

Since, Leopard to Snow~ was 22 months (Wikipedia), is the approximately 
1 year (we don't know the actual release date yet) between Lion and 
Mountain~ a tacit admission that Lion was half-baked?

-- 
Remember, I'm pullin' for ya.
We're all in this together.
                  --Red Green
0
fmoore (1430)
2/16/2012 3:47:13 PM
Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.

....which is now on life support. 

OS X is dead. iOS for Mac is its successor.

-- 
K.

Lang may your lum reek.
0
me9 (1688)
2/16/2012 3:48:12 PM
In article <fmoore-EAF66D.10471316022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:

> Since, Leopard to Snow~ was 22 months (Wikipedia), is the approximately 
> 1 year (we don't know the actual release date yet) between Lion and 
> Mountain~ a tacit admission that Lion was half-baked?

Apparently, Mountain Lion is merely an addition of various apps and 
interfaces, and not an overhaul of the OS itself, the development time 
wouldn't be as long as for the past few generations of OS upgrades.

BTW, notice that there's no number associated with it?  It's not being 
called Mac OS X 10.8.

Also, a beta version of Messages is available for downloading.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/16/2012 3:54:07 PM
In article <h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
> > <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> 
> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
> 
> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think 
> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard - 
> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.

Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 3:56:08 PM
In article <timmcn-643361.08582816022012@news.iphouse.com>,
 Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> 
> From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May 
> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans 
> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my 
> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to 
> be the OS on my main computer.

Anyone assuming Apple wants to yank Mac OS X out of everyone's hands in 
favor of iOS is being very, very silly, IMO.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 3:57:02 PM
In article <jsKdnZEa8_UXhqDSnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 09:58 , Tim McNamara wrote:
> > In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >   Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >
> >  From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May
> > not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans
> > out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
> > wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to
> > be the OS on my main computer.
> 
> It's just wrapper and connection/integration.  The OS doesn't change.

Of course you don't know anything of the sort. Stop being silly.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 3:57:29 PM
In article <jhj8fr$49h$1@dont-email.me>, me@home.spamsucks.ca (Kir�ly) 
wrote:

> Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> 
> ...which is now on life support. 
> 
> OS X is dead. iOS for Mac is its successor.

Ridiculous.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 3:58:43 PM
Tim McNamara:
> From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May 
> not be a jump I will be willing to make...

That's not an OS jump, it's a leap of your imagination. The Mac OS
remains the Mac OS. That it is getting a few applications to better
enable it to interact with IOS devices doesn't change it into IOS. IOS
will *not* be coming to the Mac.

> iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to be the OS on my main computer.

Are you really that confused, or is that cynical hyperbole? Once again,
IOS isn't going to the OS on anyone's Mac. 

Secondly, as commercial and military pilots, scientists, engineers,
photographers, and people in many other disciplines perform serious,
important work on iPads, I know that they don't consider IOS to be
toy-like at all. And I think that they will welcome the broadened and
improved communications between IOS and Mac OS.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
0
star (3126)
2/16/2012 4:02:04 PM
In article <160220121102043115%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net> 
wrote:

> Tim McNamara:
> > From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May 
> > not be a jump I will be willing to make...
> 
> That's not an OS jump, it's a leap of your imagination. The Mac OS
> remains the Mac OS. That it is getting a few applications to better
> enable it to interact with IOS devices doesn't change it into IOS. IOS
> will *not* be coming to the Mac.

People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS 
seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple 
believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
converge; and they are simply making that happen.

> > iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to be the OS on my main 
> > computer.
> 
> Are you really that confused, or is that cynical hyperbole? Once again,
> IOS isn't going to the OS on anyone's Mac. 
> 
> Secondly, as commercial and military pilots, scientists, engineers,
> photographers, and people in many other disciplines perform serious,
> important work on iPads, I know that they don't consider IOS to be
> toy-like at all. And I think that they will welcome the broadened and
> improved communications between IOS and Mac OS.

I'm an engineer designing highly complicated systems to manage highly 
complex information for a semiconductor maker. We use iPads at work more 
and more as time goes on. They are powerful and simple - a great 
combination. 

I welcome a lot of these new iOS-like Mac OS features. Are there things 
I dislike? Always. Nothing has changed in that regard for the past 30 
years I've used Apple's software and hardware. Does Apple make mistakes? 
Sure. But generally, I like the path they are on.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 4:10:01 PM
Howard S Shubs:
> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.

After years on Usenet I should not be amazed to see people condemning
products they have not seen and know practically nothing about, yet
sometimes I just can't help being amazed.

The answer to your question is, no trouble at all. The same goes for
System 7,  Windows  3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98, Wonderful Windows
Vista, Linux, and CP/M. You can buy a computer with any of those
pre-installed for under $100. Have at it.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
0
star (3126)
2/16/2012 4:13:06 PM
On 2012-02-16 10:47 , Fred Moore wrote:
> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>
>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
>>
>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think
>> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard -
>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
>
> Since, Leopard to Snow~ was 22 months (Wikipedia), is the approximately
> 1 year (we don't know the actual release date yet) between Lion and
> Mountain~ a tacit admission that Lion was half-baked?

We'll see if it's half priced.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 4:24:36 PM
On 2012-02-16 10:48 , Kir=E1ly wrote:
> Howard S Shubs<howard@shubs.net>  wrote:
>> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
>
> ...which is now on life support.
>
> OS X is dead. iOS for Mac is its successor.

Horseshit.


--=20
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).

0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 4:25:01 PM
On 2012-02-16 10:54 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<fmoore-EAF66D.10471316022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>   Fred Moore<fmoore@gcfn.org>  wrote:
>
>> Since, Leopard to Snow~ was 22 months (Wikipedia), is the approximately
>> 1 year (we don't know the actual release date yet) between Lion and
>> Mountain~ a tacit admission that Lion was half-baked?
>
> Apparently, Mountain Lion is merely an addition of various apps and
> interfaces, and not an overhaul of the OS itself, the development time
> wouldn't be as long as for the past few generations of OS upgrades.
>
> BTW, notice that there's no number associated with it?  It's not being
> called Mac OS X 10.8.

I suspect that ML will have some behind the scenes connection to the new 
Apple television

> Also, a beta version of Messages is available for downloading.

Thx.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 4:26:02 PM
On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>
>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
>>
>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think
>> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard -
>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
>
> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.

Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 4:26:33 PM
On 2012-02-16 10:57 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<jsKdnZEa8_UXhqDSnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 09:58 , Tim McNamara wrote:
>>> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>>>    Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>
>>>    From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May
>>> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans
>>> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
>>> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to
>>> be the OS on my main computer.
>>
>> It's just wrapper and connection/integration.  The OS doesn't change.
>
> Of course you don't know anything of the sort. Stop being silly.

Funny how that contradicts your reply to Tim.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 4:27:52 PM
In article <Kamdnf_Q_9sVs6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 10:57 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<jsKdnZEa8_UXhqDSnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 09:58 , Tim McNamara wrote:
> >>> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >>>    Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>>
> >>>    From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May
> >>> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans
> >>> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
> >>> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to
> >>> be the OS on my main computer.
> >>
> >> It's just wrapper and connection/integration.  The OS doesn't change.
> >
> > Of course you don't know anything of the sort. Stop being silly.
> 
> Funny how that contradicts your reply to Tim.

I didn't tell Tim the OS doesn't change. That's a ludicrous statement. 
Not only do you know no such thing, it's extremely likely to be a load 
of shit.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 4:31:28 PM
In article <KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
> >>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>
> >> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
> >>
> >> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think
> >> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard -
> >> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
> >
> > Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
> 
> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.

Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more. 
And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful 
ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 4:32:15 PM
In article <michelle-924328.08540716022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <fmoore-EAF66D.10471316022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
> 
> > Since, Leopard to Snow~ was 22 months (Wikipedia), is the approximately 
> > 1 year (we don't know the actual release date yet) between Lion and 
> > Mountain~ a tacit admission that Lion was half-baked?
> 
> Apparently, Mountain Lion is merely an addition of various apps and 
> interfaces, and not an overhaul of the OS itself, the development time 
> wouldn't be as long as for the past few generations of OS upgrades.
> 
> BTW, notice that there's no number associated with it?  It's not being 
> called Mac OS X 10.8.

Well FWIW, CNET claims it's 10.8.
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-57378751-248/apple-mac-os-x-mountain-l
ion-takes-more-bites-out-of-ios/>
(caption under first picture: Apple's upcoming Mac OS X 10.8, dubbed 
Mountain Lion is coming this summer.)
0
fmoore (1430)
2/16/2012 4:46:42 PM
On 2012-02-16 11:31 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<Kamdnf_Q_9sVs6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 10:57 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<jsKdnZEa8_UXhqDSnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:58 , Tim McNamara wrote:
>>>>> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>>>>>     Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>>>
>>>>>      From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May
>>>>> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans
>>>>> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
>>>>> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to
>>>>> be the OS on my main computer.
>>>>
>>>> It's just wrapper and connection/integration.  The OS doesn't change.
>>>
>>> Of course you don't know anything of the sort. Stop being silly.
>>
>> Funny how that contradicts your reply to Tim.
>
> I didn't tell Tim the OS doesn't change. That's a ludicrous statement.
> Not only do you know no such thing, it's extremely likely to be a load
> of shit.

Reading the ML page it is all wrapper.  Yes the underpinnings are there 
in the required _apps_ to do so, but there is no evidence of big changes 
to the OS proper - unlike Leopard when grand changes such as GCD came 
out or the (completed) evolution to 64 bit.  I read this as increased 
inter-app connectivity/coordination and such done in apps.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 5:08:25 PM
On 2012-02-16 11:32 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>>
>>>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
>>>>
>>>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think
>>>> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard -
>>>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
>>>
>>> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
>>
>> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
>
> Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more.
> And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful
> ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.

Your insistence without basis is pathetic.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 5:08:56 PM
Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:

> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > 
> > <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> 
> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.

Pretty easy since I never left it. :-) Experimented with a copy on a
second partition of my MacBook Pro, but didn't like it and decided I'd
probably skip Lion, even though I fairly quickly jumped on all the
earlier versions. From a quick skim, looks like Mountain Lion has more
of some of the kinds of things I didn't like about Lion.

I already didn't like what appeared to be the iOS-inspired parts. Now
Apple makes the iOS influence quite explicit, highlighting it as a
"feature".

Fortunately this relatively new iMac will probably last me quite a few
more years before I have to think too hard about my next main desktop
and decide whether it will be a Mac at all.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain
0
nospam47 (9747)
2/16/2012 5:11:26 PM
In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
 Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> 
> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>

Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?

How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save 
destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?

10.6 was the OS that helped many Silicon Valley offices adopt 
Macintoshes as a standard computer configuration.  It was easy to use, 
integrated well with other systems, and a great performer on laptops.  
New computers with 10.7 are despised because they're slow, clumsy, and 
buggy.  Another round of dumbing-down will force a switch to Windows and 
Linux.
-- 
I will not see posts from Google because I must filter them as spam
0
mcmurtrie (391)
2/16/2012 5:17:34 PM
In article <4f3d3a2e$0$12020$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
 Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:

> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > 
> > <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> 
> Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?
> 
> How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save 
> destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?
> 
> 10.6 was the OS that helped many Silicon Valley offices adopt 
> Macintoshes as a standard computer configuration.  It was easy to use, 
> integrated well with other systems, and a great performer on laptops.  
> New computers with 10.7 are despised because they're slow, clumsy, and 
> buggy.  Another round of dumbing-down will force a switch to Windows and 
> Linux.

How silly it is to assume that a handful of advertised features are the 
only features that must be part of the update. People who can't be 
bothered to learn more before bitching about shit like this probably 
*should* go ahead and switch to Linux. No loss for the rest of us, or 
Apple.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 5:20:31 PM
In article <mKednQc9cP21paDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 11:32 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
> >>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>>>
> >>>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
> >>>>
> >>>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think
> >>>> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard -
> >>>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
> >>>
> >>> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
> >>
> >> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
> >
> > Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more.
> > And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful
> > ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.
> 
> Your insistence without basis is pathetic.

Go learn something.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 5:22:24 PM
In article <mKednQQ9cP2UpaDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 11:31 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<Kamdnf_Q_9sVs6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 10:57 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<jsKdnZEa8_UXhqDSnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2012-02-16 09:58 , Tim McNamara wrote:
> >>>>> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >>>>>     Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>    wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs. 
> >>>>>       May
> >>>>> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans
> >>>>> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
> >>>>> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to
> >>>>> be the OS on my main computer.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's just wrapper and connection/integration.  The OS doesn't change.
> >>>
> >>> Of course you don't know anything of the sort. Stop being silly.
> >>
> >> Funny how that contradicts your reply to Tim.
> >
> > I didn't tell Tim the OS doesn't change. That's a ludicrous statement.
> > Not only do you know no such thing, it's extremely likely to be a load
> > of shit.
> 
> Reading the ML page it is all wrapper.  Yes the underpinnings are there 
> in the required _apps_ to do so, but there is no evidence of big changes 
> to the OS proper - unlike Leopard when grand changes such as GCD came 
> out or the (completed) evolution to 64 bit.  I read this as increased 
> inter-app connectivity/coordination and such done in apps.

Assuming the ML page tells all would be very silly.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 5:22:56 PM
On 2012-02-16 12:22 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<mKednQQ9cP2UpaDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 11:31 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<Kamdnf_Q_9sVs6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-02-16 10:57 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> In article<jsKdnZEa8_UXhqDSnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:58 , Tim McNamara wrote:
>>>>>>> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>>>>>>>      Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>     wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS f=
or Macs.
>>>>>>>        May
>>>>>>> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it=
 pans
>>>>>>> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with m=
y
>>>>>>> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for =
it to
>>>>>>> be the OS on my main computer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's just wrapper and connection/integration.  The OS doesn't chan=
ge.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course you don't know anything of the sort. Stop being silly.
>>>>
>>>> Funny how that contradicts your reply to Tim.
>>>
>>> I didn't tell Tim the OS doesn't change. That's a ludicrous statement=
=2E
>>> Not only do you know no such thing, it's extremely likely to be a loa=
d
>>> of shit.
>>
>> Reading the ML page it is all wrapper.  Yes the underpinnings are ther=
e
>> in the required _apps_ to do so, but there is no evidence of big chang=
es
>> to the OS proper - unlike Leopard when grand changes such as GCD came
>> out or the (completed) evolution to 64 bit.  I read this as increased
>> inter-app connectivity/coordination and such done in apps.
>
> Assuming the ML page tells all would be very silly.

Assuming that a fa=E7ade change requires an OS change would be even silli=
er.


--=20
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).

0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 5:28:34 PM
In article <Kamdnf3Q_9uHs6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> > Also, a beta version of Messages is available for downloading.
> 
> Thx.

It you install it, it will replace iChat.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/16/2012 5:33:25 PM
In article <howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com>, Howard S
Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:

> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.

quite a bit on any mac you buy going forward. existing macs can still
run it.
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/16/2012 5:46:23 PM
On 2012-02-16 12:22 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<mKednQc9cP21paDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 11:32 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
>>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think
>>>>>> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard -
>>>>>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
>>>>
>>>> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
>>>
>>> Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more.
>>> And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful
>>> ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.
>>
>> Your insistence without basis is pathetic.
>
> Go learn something.

You too.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 5:47:35 PM
On 2012-02-16 12:33 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<Kamdnf3Q_9uHs6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>>> Also, a beta version of Messages is available for downloading.
>>
>> Thx.
>
> It you install it, it will replace iChat.

Absolutely no loss!


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 5:47:53 PM
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:58:33 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote
(in article <timmcn-643361.08582816022012@news.iphouse.com>):

> Playing around with my wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too 
> limited and toy-like for it to be the OS on my main computer. 

This


-- 
Nelson

0
nelson (339)
2/16/2012 5:48:07 PM
On 2012-02-16 12:11 , Richard Maine wrote:
> Howard S Shubs<howard@shubs.net>  wrote:
>
>> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>>   Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>
>>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
>>
>> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
>
> Pretty easy since I never left it. :-) Experimented with a copy on a
> second partition of my MacBook Pro, but didn't like it and decided I'd
> probably skip Lion, even though I fairly quickly jumped on all the
> earlier versions. From a quick skim, looks like Mountain Lion has more
> of some of the kinds of things I didn't like about Lion.
>
> I already didn't like what appeared to be the iOS-inspired parts. Now
> Apple makes the iOS influence quite explicit, highlighting it as a
> "feature".
>
> Fortunately this relatively new iMac will probably last me quite a few
> more years before I have to think too hard about my next main desktop
> and decide whether it will be a Mac at all.

Heretic!   ;-).

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 5:48:54 PM
In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS 
> seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple 
> believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> converge; and they are simply making that happen.

the convergence is what people are complaining about.
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/16/2012 5:51:31 PM
In article <jollyroger-A1230D.10321516022012@news.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > >> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think
> > >> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard -
> > >> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
> > >
> > > Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
> > 
> > Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
> 
> Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more. 
> And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful 
> ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.

you made the claim, you back it up. otherwise, you're just blowing
smoke.
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/16/2012 5:53:18 PM
On 2012-02-16 12:17 , Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>   Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>
>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
>
> Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?
>
> How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save
> destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?
>
> 10.6 was the OS that helped many Silicon Valley offices adopt
> Macintoshes as a standard computer configuration.  It was easy to use,
> integrated well with other systems, and a great performer on laptops.
> New computers with 10.7 are despised because they're slow, clumsy, and
> buggy.  Another round of dumbing-down will force a switch to Windows and
> Linux.

If a computer should look "slow" under Lion v. SL it would be my 2007 
iMac (2.8 GHz dual core and 667 Mhz memory).  Yet there is no 
perceptible change from SL to Lion.

The newer machines would just be quick and nimble.

I suppose I could benchmark on my son's MBP if I update it to Lion.  So 
far he's not interested.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 5:53:43 PM
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:

> Reading the ML page it is all wrapper.  Yes the underpinnings are
> there in the required _apps_ to do so, but there is no evidence of big
> changes to the OS proper - unlike Leopard when grand changes such as
> GCD came out or the (completed) evolution to 64 bit.  I read this as
> increased inter-app connectivity/coordination and such done in apps.

Gatekeeper is clearly deeper than just an app wrapper, and
apparently there are substantial changes to GLKit and extending
64-bit apis for graphics.

(per macnn/electronista)

The bottom line is that we just don't know.  Clearly there
have been some app-level changes, but it's silly to just
assume that there weren't lower level changes to the core
OS as well.

FWIW, I'm still on SL on two of my three machines and this
may be the first time that I end up *two* releases behind -
one of my machines cannot run Lion and I have no plans to
retire it anytime soon.  (And I'm still waiting to see
what Intuit does re: Q2007 as well.  The loss of Rosetta
hasn't had much of an impact on me other than that one,
singular, sadly still essential app)



-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/16/2012 5:54:08 PM
In article <4f3d3a2e$0$12020$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, Kevin McMurtrie
<mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:

> > <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > 
> > <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> 
> Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?
> 
> How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save 
> destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?

they don't think those are broken. apple's famous three words in
response to bug reports, 'works as designed.'
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/16/2012 5:54:25 PM
On 2012-02-16 12:33 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<Kamdnf3Q_9uHs6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>>> Also, a beta version of Messages is available for downloading.
>>
>> Thx.
>
> It you install it, it will replace iChat.

Tried installing but I have to update to 10.7.3 first (I'm still at 10.7.2).

Oh, well, it's lunch time ...

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 5:59:37 PM
In article <hf-dnecBpOk136DSnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> If a computer should look "slow" under Lion v. SL it would be my 2007 
> iMac (2.8 GHz dual core and 667 Mhz memory).  Yet there is no 
> perceptible change from SL to Lion.

Ditto for my late model 2006 iMac (2.16 GHz dual core).  If anything, it's 
slightly faster.

-- Michelle

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/16/2012 6:03:26 PM
In article <zOWdnd527InU3KDSnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> >>> Also, a beta version of Messages is available for downloading.
> >>
> >> Thx.
> >
> > It you install it, it will replace iChat.
> 
> Absolutely no loss!

Agreed.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/16/2012 6:04:12 PM
On 2012-02-16 13:03 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<hf-dnecBpOk136DSnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> If a computer should look "slow" under Lion v. SL it would be my 2007
>> iMac (2.8 GHz dual core and 667 Mhz memory).  Yet there is no
>> perceptible change from SL to Lion.
>
> Ditto for my late model 2006 iMac (2.16 GHz dual core).  If anything, it's
> slightly faster.

That would surprise me - but the update may have "de-crudded" your 
system a bit too.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 6:35:56 PM
Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> 
> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>

Oh great - "inspired by the iPad". That's not what I want to hear at all
:-(
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
0
jamiekg505 (3043)
2/16/2012 6:57:46 PM
In article <160220121253186092%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-A1230D.10321516022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > > >> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I 
> > > >> don't think they've done much under the hood of real interest 
> > > >> since GCD in Leopard 
> > > >> -
> > > >> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
> > > >
> > > > Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
> > > 
> > > Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
> > 
> > Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more. 
> > And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful 
> > ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.
> 
> you made the claim, you back it up. otherwise, you're just blowing
> smoke.

Fine. Here are some - I'm sure there are more:

Snow Leopard:

64-bit kernel and applications
64-bit QuickTime
new file system URL-based APIs
updated compilers (Clang/LLVM, GCC, blocks, etc)
Microsoft Exchange support
numerous performance improvements
Core Location

Lion:

window resizing from all edges
mission control
better sandboxing
automatic reference counting
Core Storage
FileVault whole-disk encryption & recovery keys
Lion recovery partition

You may argue that *for you* none of these are "of real interest" but I 
can assure you a *whole lot* of Mac users do find at least some of these 
features interesting, and a whole lot of developers find them much 
desired - even essential.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 7:09:24 PM
In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS 
> > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple 
> > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> 
> the convergence is what people are complaining about.

Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
have a bridge to sell you.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 7:10:12 PM
In article <0001HW.CB62AB8701186F4DB02919BF@news.astraweb.com>,
 Nelson <nelson@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:58:33 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote
> (in article <timmcn-643361.08582816022012@news.iphouse.com>):
> 
> > Playing around with my wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too 
> > limited and toy-like for it to be the OS on my main computer. 
> 
> This

That

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 7:10:30 PM
In article <zOWdnd927Imq3KDSnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 12:22 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<mKednQc9cP21paDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 11:32 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
> >>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't 
> >>>>>> think
> >>>>>> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard 
> >>>>>> -
> >>>>>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
> >>>>
> >>>> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
> >>>
> >>> Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more.
> >>> And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful
> >>> ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.
> >>
> >> Your insistence without basis is pathetic.
> >
> > Go learn something.
> 
> You too.

No need. I've already educated myself about what changes are in each OS 
release since Mac OS X 10.0, and earlier.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 7:11:14 PM
In article <1LidnVU7PddfoaDSnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 12:22 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<mKednQQ9cP2UpaDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 11:31 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<Kamdnf_Q_9sVs6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2012-02-16 10:57 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>> In article<jsKdnZEa8_UXhqDSnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:58 , Tim McNamara wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >>>>>>>      Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>     wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>        From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for 
> >>>>>>>        Macs.
> >>>>>>>        May
> >>>>>>> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it 
> >>>>>>> pans
> >>>>>>> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
> >>>>>>> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it 
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> be the OS on my main computer.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It's just wrapper and connection/integration.  The OS doesn't change.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Of course you don't know anything of the sort. Stop being silly.
> >>>>
> >>>> Funny how that contradicts your reply to Tim.
> >>>
> >>> I didn't tell Tim the OS doesn't change. That's a ludicrous statement.
> >>> Not only do you know no such thing, it's extremely likely to be a load
> >>> of shit.
> >>
> >> Reading the ML page it is all wrapper.  Yes the underpinnings are there
> >> in the required _apps_ to do so, but there is no evidence of big changes
> >> to the OS proper - unlike Leopard when grand changes such as GCD came
> >> out or the (completed) evolution to 64 bit.  I read this as increased
> >> inter-app connectivity/coordination and such done in apps.
> >
> > Assuming the ML page tells all would be very silly.
> 
> Assuming that a fa�ade change requires an OS change would be even sillier.

Nobody here made such a statement. Nice try though.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 7:11:51 PM
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS
> > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple
> > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> 
> the convergence is what people are complaining about.

Aye, I get that a more iOS-like OSX is what some or even most users
like. But it's not for me. I want a better OSX or at the very least Snow
Leopard as a baseline. I'm not saying Lion and now Mountain Lion are bad
(though not showing scrollbars all the time still strikes me as
monumentally stupid). I'm just saying it's the wrong path for me and
sadly I'll be two OSX versions behind when it's released.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
0
jamiekg505 (3043)
2/16/2012 7:35:07 PM
Nelson <nelson@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:58:33 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote
> (in article <timmcn-643361.08582816022012@news.iphouse.com>):
> 
> > Playing around with my wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too 
> > limited and toy-like for it to be the OS on my main computer. 
> 
> This

I don't think it's fair to call iOS "toy-like" on a portable touchscreen
device - in fact I think it's an excellent solution for that
environment. But it does start to seem somewhat limited and
unnecessarily dumbed down in a desktop or laptop environment.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
0
jamiekg505 (3043)
2/16/2012 7:35:08 PM
Kir�ly <me@home.spamsucks.ca> wrote:

> Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> 
> ...which is now on life support. 
> 
> OS X is dead. iOS for Mac is its successor.

Hardly - there is still widespread third party support for 10.6, and
Apple still supports it with updates. But I grant you the future is not
looking rosy for those of us who saw 10.6 as a high water mark in OSX.
Though I'm still of the opinion that nothing beats System 6 in terms of
usability and intuitiveness. It's all been downhill since then in those
terms...
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
0
jamiekg505 (3043)
2/16/2012 7:35:09 PM
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 12:11 , Richard Maine wrote:
> > Howard S Shubs<howard@shubs.net>  wrote:
> >
> >> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >>   Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>>
> >>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> >>
> >> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> >
> > Pretty easy since I never left it. :-) Experimented with a copy on a
> > second partition of my MacBook Pro, but didn't like it and decided I'd
> > probably skip Lion, even though I fairly quickly jumped on all the
> > earlier versions. From a quick skim, looks like Mountain Lion has more
> > of some of the kinds of things I didn't like about Lion.
> >
> > I already didn't like what appeared to be the iOS-inspired parts. Now
> > Apple makes the iOS influence quite explicit, highlighting it as a
> > "feature".
> >
> > Fortunately this relatively new iMac will probably last me quite a few
> > more years before I have to think too hard about my next main desktop
> > and decide whether it will be a Mac at all.
> 
> Heretic!   ;-).

Heh, damn sensible I say.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
0
jamiekg505 (3043)
2/16/2012 7:35:10 PM
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 13:03 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> > In article<hf-dnecBpOk136DSnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> If a computer should look "slow" under Lion v. SL it would be my 2007
> >> iMac (2.8 GHz dual core and 667 Mhz memory).  Yet there is no
> >> perceptible change from SL to Lion.
> >
> > Ditto for my late model 2006 iMac (2.16 GHz dual core).  If anything, it's
> > slightly faster.
> 
> That would surprise me - but the update may have "de-crudded" your 
> system a bit too.

If a fairly modern Mac is running slower after updating to Lion, I would
strongly suggest a nuke and pave of the HD and a clean (as possible -
only restore prefs you absolutely can't take the time to manually
re-create) reinstall of OSX and your apps. That sorted a slowdown I saw
going from 10.5 to 10.6.

I also have to say after replacing my standard internal HD in my
Mid-2007 24" 2.8GHz iMac with a Western Digital Caviar Black, I'm seeing
noticeable speed improvements when opening files and apps and working
with virtual memory in both OSX and Windows. Granted my old internal HD
was dying, but it makes me wish I'd upgraded my internal HD to a better
model years ago. Now if I could just afford the upgrade from 4GB RAM to
6GB (unsupported, but it does work) that I've been wanting for ages...

It's really hard lately in the current economic situation (at least as
it affects me) to justify upgrading what already works. Perhaps I'll get
lucky and one of my sticks of RAM will fail this year :-D I would wish
that my Mac would fail, but that would really hurt and my GF will kill
me if she ever discovers I said that. But those 27" iMacs are sweet...
*sigh*

Heh, I think I've been talking about being ready to upgrade my Mid-2007
24" 2.8GHz iMac in this group for a couple years now. The fact is the
idea that CPU speed is no longer the major limiting factor has been born
out with my current iMac. It's all about the GPU now (and to a lesser
extent RAM amount, but I've been easily able to live within 4GB), and
now I no longer play Eve Online (I was deeply unimpressed with the move
to The Sims in Space and the general douchebaggery of most players wore
me down) the newest 3D app I play is actually EverQuest 1 (which I'm
loving since the release of time locked progression servers early last
year).

I do play quite a bit of Diablo 2, but it's mainly sprite based and
hardly taxing on the GPU for it's modest needs, so I don't consider it a
'3D' game as such. I used to play Quake III a lot, but the playerbase
has finally diminished to the point where it's no fun - I only ever saw
the same bunch of hard core players playing the same tiny set of maps -
boring.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
0
jamiekg505 (3043)
2/16/2012 7:35:12 PM
On 2012-02-16 12:54 , BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:
> Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  writes:
>
>> Reading the ML page it is all wrapper.  Yes the underpinnings are
>> there in the required _apps_ to do so, but there is no evidence of big
>> changes to the OS proper - unlike Leopard when grand changes such as
>> GCD came out or the (completed) evolution to 64 bit.  I read this as
>> increased inter-app connectivity/coordination and such done in apps.
>
> Gatekeeper is clearly deeper than just an app wrapper, and

If this needs changes to the OS I'd be surprised.  It is little 
different than other 3rd party apps that get between the-user+internet 
and the file system.  (Such as A-V s/w that none (or few) of us use).

> apparently there are substantial changes to GLKit and extending
> 64-bit apis for graphics.

The whole point of hardware API's is that no mods to the OS are needed 
to add or change hardware or add interface features to existing hardware 
after initial releases.  They _isolate_ the OS from these details.

GLKit is an iOS graphics framework.  What it does here (I think) is just 
provide the means for code made for the iPhone/pad to run with minimal 
change on OS X.  It's a bridge, not an OS change.

The only thing that really gets into OS changes is the new address space 
randomization (helps deter some exploits).  Could have been slipped into 
10.5 (intel), 10.6 or 10.7 at any point.

> (per macnn/electronista)
>
> The bottom line is that we just don't know.  Clearly there
> have been some app-level changes, but it's silly to just
> assume that there weren't lower level changes to the core
> OS as well.

Only the memory management that I can see in those references.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 8:30:37 PM
In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS 
> > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple 
> > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > 
> > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> 
> Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
> thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
> have a bridge to sell you.

Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same. They obviously are
not. However, they are converging. It is up to Apple to decide how far
this convergence will go.

People like me who have been using Mac OS X for 10 years (and Mac OS 9
before that) are worried that Apple will go too far and turn Mac OS
into a big brother to iOS, or maybe just make them the same code base. 

They seem to be trying to attract iPhone users at the expense of
long-time Mac OS X users. We are worried that Apple is abandoning us in
their quest for world domination. That is all.

If Mac OS and iOS look and behave the same, does it matter that they
are different?

-- 
Jim Gibson
0
jimsgibson (533)
2/16/2012 8:39:02 PM
On 2012-02-16 11:10 , Jolly Roger wrote:

>> That's not an OS jump, it's a leap of your imagination. The Mac OS
>> remains the Mac OS. That it is getting a few applications to better
>> enable it to interact with IOS devices doesn't change it into IOS. IOS
>> will *not* be coming to the Mac.

Well said.

> People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS
> seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple
> believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to
> converge; and they are simply making that happen.

Well said too.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 8:49:44 PM
On 2012-02-16 12:51 , nospam wrote:

> the convergence is what people are complaining about.

The same people who don't understand that the convergence is not in the 
OS proper but in the look and feel and similar functionality in common 
applications / "social utilities" (messaging, mail, calendars, cloud, 
synchronization, etc.) and the s/w distribution model.

These don't make the OS' "converge" - just their outward appearance and 
behaviour.

I'm sure the new iPad rumoured for this March has a lot to do with the 
Lion announcement now.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 8:57:09 PM
On 2012-02-16 14:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:

> Lion:
>
> window resizing from all edges    - Aqua - not OS
> mission control                   - a launcher - not OS
> better sandboxing                 - OS
> automatic reference counting      - programming issue - not OS
> Core Storage                      - OS
> FileVault whole-disk encryption&  recovery keys  - file system improvement.
> Lion recovery partition           - backup scheme.

.... none of which pertain to ML.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/16/2012 9:07:32 PM
Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> writes:

> In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
> >  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS 
> > > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple 
> > > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > > 
> > > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> > 
> > Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
> > thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
> > have a bridge to sell you.
> 
> Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same. They obviously are
> not. However, they are converging. It is up to Apple to decide how far
> this convergence will go.

I'm not really convinced of this.

It is true that Apple is bringing features from iOS into OS X. 

It seems not to be true that Apple is removing features from OS X.

It also seems not to be true that Apple is bringing features from OS X
into iOS.

So if we can still do what we want in OS X, is it really harmful that
Apple is adding features which were originally developed on iOS?
0
2/16/2012 9:48:53 PM
jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) writes:

> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS
> > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple
> > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > 
> > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> 
> Aye, I get that a more iOS-like OSX is what some or even most users
> like. But it's not for me. I want a better OSX or at the very least Snow
> Leopard as a baseline. I'm not saying Lion and now Mountain Lion are bad
> (though not showing scrollbars all the time still strikes me as
> monumentally stupid).

It is a preference.  You can set preferences in Lion to always show
scroll bars  (System Preferences -> General).  

So what you seem to be saying is you won't use Lion because it
is possible to _choose_ not showing scrollbars?

There may be perfectly good reasons not to use Lion, but that one
seems crazy to me.




 I'm just saying it's the wrong path for me and
> sadly I'll be two OSX versions behind when it's released.
> -- 
> If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
0
2/16/2012 9:52:50 PM
jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) writes:

> Kir�ly <me@home.spamsucks.ca> wrote:
> 
> > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> > 
> > ...which is now on life support. 
> > 
> > OS X is dead. iOS for Mac is its successor.
> 
> Hardly - there is still widespread third party support for 10.6, and
> Apple still supports it with updates. But I grant you the future is not
> looking rosy for those of us who saw 10.6 as a high water mark in
> OSX.

Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
"worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
0
2/16/2012 9:55:35 PM
In article <yplio2la9m.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> It also seems not to be true that Apple is bringing features from OS X 
> into iOS.

Apple has brought features from OS X into iOS; two examples are the Reader 
and reading list options in Safari.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/16/2012 10:00:24 PM
Jim Gibson: 
> > Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same. They obviously are
> > not. However, they are converging. It is up to Apple to decide how far
> > this convergence will go.

Doug Anderson:
> I'm not really convinced of this.
> 
> It is true that Apple is bringing features from iOS into OS X. 
> 
> It seems not to be true that Apple is removing features from OS X.
> 
> It also seems not to be true that Apple is bringing features from OS X
> into iOS.
> 
> So if we can still do what we want in OS X, is it really harmful that
> Apple is adding features which were originally developed on iOS?

Really! People who didn't freak out when TextEdit replaced SimpleText
or when iChat was added probably don't need to freak out now that
Messages is replacing iChat. One freaker in the NYT comments said this
is the end of the Mac as a pro graphics platform (because IOS doesn't
run Photoshop)! "Convergence." Just what we needed--a new and
egregiously inane buzzword meaning "it will have some new programs
installed."

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
0
star (3126)
2/16/2012 10:08:51 PM
On 2012-02-16 13:55:35 -0800, Doug Anderson said:
> 
> Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?

At the app level, several things.  At the OS level, other than the loss 
of Rosetta, 10.7 is generally better or, at worst, no worse than 10.6.

(Apps which are worse, well, mainly AddressBook).

0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/16/2012 10:12:00 PM
On 2012-02-16 11:35:12 -0800, Jamie Kahn Genet said:

> I also have to say after replacing my standard internal HD in my
> Mid-2007 24" 2.8GHz iMac with a Western Digital Caviar Black, I'm seeing
> noticeable speed improvements when opening files and apps and working
> with virtual memory in both OSX and Windows.

My desktop iMac (iMac4,1 - a 1.83 Ghz Core Duo -- which cannot run Lion 
or even certain 64-bit apps which do run on more modern machines with 
10.6) is on its third internal HD.  The original was an Apple-supplied 
250GB Seagate Barracuda.  When it died, I replaced it with a 1TB 
Barracuda.  When *that* died, I replaced the seagate with a 1TB WD 
Caviar Black, about a year ago.  I think I got about two years out of 
the 1TB Barracuda and I'm hoping I'll get at least that out of the 
Caviar Black.  The machine runs 24/7 and when it's thinking real hard, 
the fans run as noisy as a vacuum cleaner...

When the original drive was dying, the machine worked - but got to
be awful slow.  I was lucky that the drive behaved well enough long 
enough to keep working for a while and even do a pretty last-minute 
refresh of my clone before I finally just rebooted off the external 
clone and ran that way for a couple of weeks until I was able to do the 
internal drive swap.

Time Machine is well and good, and when the second drive died, I 
restored from TM because it was much more up-to-date than my clone, but 
restore from TM on this thing took a *long* time (over USB, which, on 
this machine is quite slow).

>  Granted my old internal HD
> was dying, but it makes me wish I'd upgraded my internal HD to a better
> model years ago. Now if I could just afford the upgrade from 4GB RAM to
> 6GB (unsupported, but it does work) that I've been wanting for ages...

I don't think there's anything I can do about the 2GB limit on my iMac, 
but I've been eyeing that 6GB upgrade for my 2.4 Ghz Core 2 Duo 
MacBookPro3,1.  OWC claims that it works and I just haven't pulled the 
trigger yet.  I'm sure it'll make a huge difference.  Replacing the 
stock drive on that machine with a Seagate Momentus XT "Hybrid" drive 
did not give me the speed boost I'd hoped for.  It's a tiny bit faster 
than the original drive, but not huge.  I'd go all SSD on it, but 
that's *expensive*!  Prices are coming down, but still, even halving my 
drive capacity to 250GB (which would hurt a lot!) would cost something 
on the order of $400.

It's hard to figure out where the cost/benefit curve goes on such an 
old machine.

Anyway - has anyone else out there gone and bumped up a MacBookPro3,1 
to 6GB?  How'd it work out?  Worthwhile?

OWC's got the 4GB module for $88, and a pair (4GB + 2GB) for $120.  
Since I've already got 4GB (2GB+2GB) in the machine, is there any 
reason to get the pair or should one of my existing 2GB modules work 
okay with the new one?

(I suppose I should just ask the folks at OWC - maybe I will...)

> 
> It's really hard lately in the current economic situation (at least as
> it affects me) to justify upgrading what already works. Perhaps I'll get
> lucky and one of my sticks of RAM will fail this year :-D I would wish
> that my Mac would fail, but that would really hurt and my GF will kill
> me if she ever discovers I said that. But those 27" iMacs are sweet...
> *sigh*

I'm this -><- close to just going for one of the current 21.5" iMacs.  
There's likely to be an update soon and the current gen may go on sale 
(and the current gen may be the last ones which can still run SL, too, 
so that may be a consideration).  We have a bottom-of-the-line current 
gen iMac (quad-core i5) at the office and it's just gorgeous and 
honestly about 10x the speed of either of the other machines I use.  
Just checked and Apple's got that same machine (as a refurb) for sale 
at $1000.  Last updated in May '11, so a refresh may be due soon - that 
may be the time to snag one of these.

0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/16/2012 10:34:35 PM
In article <trydnTpxILWI7aDSnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 14:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> 
> > Lion:
> >
> > window resizing from all edges    - Aqua - not OS
> > mission control                   - a launcher - not OS
> > better sandboxing                 - OS
> > automatic reference counting      - programming issue - not OS
> > Core Storage                      - OS
> > FileVault whole-disk encryption&  recovery keys  - file system improvement.
> > Lion recovery partition           - backup scheme.
> 
> ... none of which pertain to ML.

You didn't say only ML, but every release "since Leopard":

In article <h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think 
> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard - 
> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 10:44:17 PM
In article <160220121239026508%jimsgibson@gmail.com>,
 Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
> >  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS 
> > > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple 
> > > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > > 
> > > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> > 
> > Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
> > thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
> > have a bridge to sell you.
> 
> Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same.

While *you* may not be arguing that, others certainly seem to be saying 
just that.

> They obviously are not. However, they are converging. It is up to 
> Apple to decide how far this convergence will go.
> 
> People like me who have been using Mac OS X for 10 years (and Mac OS 9
> before that) are worried that Apple will go too far and turn Mac OS
> into a big brother to iOS, or maybe just make them the same code base. 

I can only speak for myself. The extent to which I'm just a little 
worried about that is far outweighed by optimism and anticipation of all 
of the potential benefits of such convergence.

> They seem to be trying to attract iPhone users at the expense of
> long-time Mac OS X users. We are worried that Apple is abandoning us in
> their quest for world domination. That is all.
> 
> If Mac OS and iOS look and behave the same, does it matter that they
> are different?

I firmly believe Apple's not dumb. They push boundaries and occasionally 
make things uncomfortable for those customers who don't like a lot of 
change, but historically when they go too far, they do tend to correct 
their path.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 10:49:37 PM
In article <yplio2la9m.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
> > >  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS 
> > > > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". 
> > > > > Apple 
> > > > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > > > 
> > > > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> > > 
> > > Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
> > > thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
> > > have a bridge to sell you.
> > 
> > Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same. They obviously are
> > not. However, they are converging. It is up to Apple to decide how far
> > this convergence will go.
> 
> I'm not really convinced of this.
> 
> It is true that Apple is bringing features from iOS into OS X. 
> 
> It seems not to be true that Apple is removing features from OS X.
> 
> It also seems not to be true that Apple is bringing features from OS X
> into iOS.
> 
> So if we can still do what we want in OS X, is it really harmful that
> Apple is adding features which were originally developed on iOS?

That's my general feeling about it as well. Though you have to admit 
some features they have brought into Mac OS from iOS have not been as 
optional as one might hope. The new scroll bars, automatic saves, and 
window restoration come immediately to mind.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 10:51:11 PM
In article <160220121708518564%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net> 
wrote:

> "Convergence." Just what we needed--a new and
> egregiously inane buzzword meaning "it will have some new programs
> installed."

LOL! *applause*

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 10:53:39 PM
Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> writes:

> On 2012-02-16 13:55:35 -0800, Doug Anderson said:
> > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> 
> At the app level, several things.  At the OS level, other than the
> loss of Rosetta, 10.7 is generally better or, at worst, no worse than
> 10.6.
> 
> (Apps which are worse, well, mainly AddressBook).

Yes, at that level of detail there are things I like better and things
I like worse.  AddressBook is really ugly.  The search options in Mail
don't work as well for me either.

BOth are compensated for by being able to resize windows from places
other than the lower right corner.
0
2/16/2012 10:55:02 PM
In article <79adnfeE37rz-qDSnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 12:54 , BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:
> > Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  writes:
> >
> >> Reading the ML page it is all wrapper.  Yes the underpinnings are
> >> there in the required _apps_ to do so, but there is no evidence of big
> >> changes to the OS proper - unlike Leopard when grand changes such as
> >> GCD came out or the (completed) evolution to 64 bit.  I read this as
> >> increased inter-app connectivity/coordination and such done in apps.
> >
> > Gatekeeper is clearly deeper than just an app wrapper, and
> 
> If this needs changes to the OS I'd be surprised.  It is little 
> different than other 3rd party apps that get between the-user+internet 
> and the file system.  (Such as A-V s/w that none (or few) of us use).
> 
> > apparently there are substantial changes to GLKit and extending
> > 64-bit apis for graphics.
> 
> The whole point of hardware API's is that no mods to the OS are needed 
> to add or change hardware or add interface features to existing hardware 
> after initial releases.  They _isolate_ the OS from these details.
> 
> GLKit is an iOS graphics framework.  What it does here (I think) is just 
> provide the means for code made for the iPhone/pad to run with minimal 
> change on OS X.  It's a bridge, not an OS change.
> 
> The only thing that really gets into OS changes is the new address space 
> randomization (helps deter some exploits).  Could have been slipped into 
> 10.5 (intel), 10.6 or 10.7 at any point.
> 
> > (per macnn/electronista)
> >
> > The bottom line is that we just don't know.  Clearly there
> > have been some app-level changes, but it's silly to just
> > assume that there weren't lower level changes to the core
> > OS as well.
> 
> Only the memory management that I can see in those references.

I'm sure you'd love people to just take your word for all of this, 
considering you work for Apple and all, right? Oh, wait.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 10:55:35 PM
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:

> In article <yplio2la9m.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
>  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> writes:
> > 
> > > In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
> > > >  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS 
> > > > > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". 
> > > > > > Apple 
> > > > > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > > > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > > > > 
> > > > > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> > > > 
> > > > Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
> > > > thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
> > > > have a bridge to sell you.
> > > 
> > > Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same. They obviously are
> > > not. However, they are converging. It is up to Apple to decide how far
> > > this convergence will go.
> > 
> > I'm not really convinced of this.
> > 
> > It is true that Apple is bringing features from iOS into OS X. 
> > 
> > It seems not to be true that Apple is removing features from OS X.
> > 
> > It also seems not to be true that Apple is bringing features from OS X
> > into iOS.
> > 
> > So if we can still do what we want in OS X, is it really harmful that
> > Apple is adding features which were originally developed on iOS?
> 
> That's my general feeling about it as well. Though you have to admit 
> some features they have brought into Mac OS from iOS have not been as 
> optional as one might hope. The new scroll bars, automatic saves, and 
> window restoration come immediately to mind.

I haven't played with the automatics saves, but the new scroll bars
are totally optional.  I think the window restoration is too, no?
0
2/16/2012 10:55:58 PM
In article <dly5s24cch.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:
> 
> > In article <yplio2la9m.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> writes:
> > > 
> > > > In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
> > > > >  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by 
> > > > > > > iOS 
> > > > > > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". 
> > > > > > > Apple 
> > > > > > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > > > > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
> > > > > thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
> > > > > have a bridge to sell you.
> > > > 
> > > > Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same. They obviously are
> > > > not. However, they are converging. It is up to Apple to decide how far
> > > > this convergence will go.
> > > 
> > > I'm not really convinced of this.
> > > 
> > > It is true that Apple is bringing features from iOS into OS X. 
> > > 
> > > It seems not to be true that Apple is removing features from OS X.
> > > 
> > > It also seems not to be true that Apple is bringing features from OS X
> > > into iOS.
> > > 
> > > So if we can still do what we want in OS X, is it really harmful that
> > > Apple is adding features which were originally developed on iOS?
> > 
> > That's my general feeling about it as well. Though you have to admit 
> > some features they have brought into Mac OS from iOS have not been as 
> > optional as one might hope. The new scroll bars, automatic saves, and 
> > window restoration come immediately to mind.
> 
> I haven't played with the automatics saves, but the new scroll bars
> are totally optional.  I think the window restoration is too, no?

The new scroll bars are not optional. They no longer have arrow controls 
at either end that let you scroll just a single line/unit up or down at 
a time, and their appearance is much thinner, which may present problems 
for some users.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/16/2012 11:04:40 PM
On 2012-02-16 14:55:02 -0800, Doug Anderson said:

> Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> writes:
> 
>> On 2012-02-16 13:55:35 -0800, Doug Anderson said:
>>> Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
>>> scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
>>> "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
>> 
>> At the app level, several things.  At the OS level, other than the
>> loss of Rosetta, 10.7 is generally better or, at worst, no worse than
>> 10.6.
>> 
>> (Apps which are worse, well, mainly AddressBook).
> 
> Yes, at that level of detail there are things I like better and things
> I like worse.  AddressBook is really ugly.  The search options in Mail
> don't work as well for me either.

Have you tried PostBox?  It came in a software bundle I bought recently 
and I've been using it instead of Apple's Mail.app on one of my 
machines and so far I'm reasonably pleased with it.  Nicer controls 
over whether external images are displayed (may be set on sender by 
sender basis), the search box pops up, if you like, searches restricted 
to any of several fields.
> 
> BOth are compensated for by being able to resize windows from places
> other than the lower right corner.

Yeah - I like that.  (Though I do keep scroll bars visible all the 
time, and have turned scrolling into the old-fashioned direction).

0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/16/2012 11:17:25 PM
In article <jollyroger-2B96C9.16493716022012@news.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> I firmly believe Apple's not dumb. They push boundaries and occasionally 
> make things uncomfortable for those customers who don't like a lot of 
> change, but historically when they go too far, they do tend to correct 
> their path.

People were complaining about horseless carriages replacing horses for 
decades after the automobile became the prevalent means of transportation.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/16/2012 11:17:39 PM
Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> writes:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:

>> That's my general feeling about it as well. Though you have to admit 
>> some features they have brought into Mac OS from iOS have not been as 
>> optional as one might hope. The new scroll bars, automatic saves, and 
>> window restoration come immediately to mind.
>
> I haven't played with the automatics saves, but the new scroll bars
> are totally optional.  I think the window restoration is too, no?

Automatic saves are up to the app developers.  Apple, of course,
has provided the framework for it and has made it (as far as I
can tell) non-optional in *Apple* software (ie. Pages, Numbers)
but it certainly didn't force any other software to start doing
that stuff (ie. Word, Excel).

As far as I'm concerned, the auto-save and Versions features
are still being worked out.  The interface (or lack thereof)
doesn't allow control over things which I think are pretty
important (whether to use the thing at all, where the history
archives are stored, how long before a file is automatically
"locked", etc).  But it's coming along.  I have files that
I keep synced between SL and Lion machines and have to remember
what's going on between them, but I also generally copy and
rename a file before doing any major work on it anyway.

The new scroll bars are not optional - whether to show them
or not is.  I prefer to always have them visible, but they
are not quite as useful as the old ones (narrower, no arrows).



-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/16/2012 11:30:02 PM
In article <yobty2ql5l1.fsf@panix3.panix.com>,
 BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:

> Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> writes:
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:
> 
> >> That's my general feeling about it as well. Though you have to admit 
> >> some features they have brought into Mac OS from iOS have not been as 
> >> optional as one might hope. The new scroll bars, automatic saves, and 
> >> window restoration come immediately to mind.
> >
> > I haven't played with the automatics saves, but the new scroll bars
> > are totally optional.  I think the window restoration is too, no?
> 
> Automatic saves are up to the app developers.  Apple, of course,
> has provided the framework for it and has made it (as far as I
> can tell) non-optional in *Apple* software (ie. Pages, Numbers)
> but it certainly didn't force any other software to start doing
> that stuff (ie. Word, Excel).

ITYM e.g. rather than ie.

> The new scroll bars are not optional - whether to show them
> or not is.  I prefer to always have them visible, but they
> are not quite as useful as the old ones (narrower, no arrows).

As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows 
at all.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689
0
timstreater2 (1190)
2/16/2012 11:44:14 PM
Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> writes:

> On 2012-02-16 14:55:02 -0800, Doug Anderson said:
> 
> > Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> writes:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 13:55:35 -0800, Doug Anderson said:
> >>> Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> >>> scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> >>> "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> >> At the app level, several things.  At the OS level, other than the
> >> loss of Rosetta, 10.7 is generally better or, at worst, no worse than
> >> 10.6.
> >> (Apps which are worse, well, mainly AddressBook).
> > Yes, at that level of detail there are things I like better and
> > things
> > I like worse.  AddressBook is really ugly.  The search options in Mail
> > don't work as well for me either.
> 
> Have you tried PostBox?  It came in a software bundle I bought
> recently and I've been using it instead of Apple's Mail.app on one of
> my machines and so far I'm reasonably pleased with it.  Nicer controls
> over whether external images are displayed (may be set on sender by
> sender basis), the search box pops up, if you like, searches
> restricted to any of several fields.

Sounds nice.  The thing I _do_ like about Mail.app is the way it
indexes mail (so that my comically large Inbox can be searched very
quickly if not very deftly).  Does PostBox do something similar?

> > BOth are compensated for by being able to resize windows from places
> > other than the lower right corner.
> 
> Yeah - I like that.  (Though I do keep scroll bars visible all the
> time, and have turned scrolling into the old-fashioned direction).

After about 45 minutes to get used to it I love so-called "natural"
scrolling.  (In fact, I have a machine that is too old for Lion, and
I've put natural scrolling on that too.)
0
2/17/2012 12:38:15 AM
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:

> In article <dly5s24cch.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
>  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:
> > 
> > > In article <yplio2la9m.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > > In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
> > > > > >  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by 
> > > > > > > > iOS 
> > > > > > > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". 
> > > > > > > > Apple 
> > > > > > > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > > > > > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
> > > > > > thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
> > > > > > have a bridge to sell you.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same. They obviously are
> > > > > not. However, they are converging. It is up to Apple to decide how far
> > > > > this convergence will go.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not really convinced of this.
> > > > 
> > > > It is true that Apple is bringing features from iOS into OS X. 
> > > > 
> > > > It seems not to be true that Apple is removing features from OS X.
> > > > 
> > > > It also seems not to be true that Apple is bringing features from OS X
> > > > into iOS.
> > > > 
> > > > So if we can still do what we want in OS X, is it really harmful that
> > > > Apple is adding features which were originally developed on iOS?
> > > 
> > > That's my general feeling about it as well. Though you have to admit 
> > > some features they have brought into Mac OS from iOS have not been as 
> > > optional as one might hope. The new scroll bars, automatic saves, and 
> > > window restoration come immediately to mind.
> > 
> > I haven't played with the automatics saves, but the new scroll bars
> > are totally optional.  I think the window restoration is too, no?
> 
> The new scroll bars are not optional. They no longer have arrow controls 
> at either end that let you scroll just a single line/unit up or down at 
> a time, and their appearance is much thinner, which may present problems 
> for some users.

Point taken.  I misunderstood.  "No scroll bars" is optional, but
you're right that "new scroll bars" doesn't seem to be - at least not
easily. When I turn on "Show scroll bars always" I see
they might be thinner, and they are certainly lacking arrows.  Both
seem like plusses to me, but I grant that there is plenty of room to
differ about this.
0
2/17/2012 12:51:01 AM
In article <160220121113062786%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net> 
wrote:

> Howard S Shubs:
> > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> 
> After years on Usenet I should not be amazed to see people condemning
> products they have not seen and know practically nothing about, yet
> sometimes I just can't help being amazed.

Davoud, I don't like Lion.  I don't like this direction Apple is taking.  
If ML is more, then I'm not interested.  And we both know it will be.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/17/2012 4:19:24 AM
In article <jhj8fr$49h$1@dont-email.me>, me@home.spamsucks.ca (Kir�ly) 
wrote:

> Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> 
> ...which is now on life support. 
> 
> OS X is dead. iOS for Mac is its successor.

Time to load W7 on my Mac when that happens.  The problem is that, 
according to those articles, W8 will be even worse than ML.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/17/2012 4:19:58 AM
In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?

That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store is 
now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the end.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/17/2012 4:21:14 AM
In article <jhjuvg$ghb$1@reader1.panix.com>,
 Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:

> At the app level, several things.  At the OS level, other than the loss 
> of Rosetta, 10.7 is generally better or, at worst, no worse than 10.6.

The loss of Rosetta is non-trivial.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/17/2012 4:21:42 AM
In article <160220121246231168%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> on any mac you buy going forward.

Key point, that.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/17/2012 4:22:57 AM
In article <1kflo1f.vitev1cj251jN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
 jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> 
> > On 2012-02-16 12:11 , Richard Maine wrote:
> > > Howard S Shubs<howard@shubs.net>  wrote:
> > >
> > >> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> > >>   Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > >>>
> > >>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> > >>
> > >> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> > >
> > > Pretty easy since I never left it. :-) Experimented with a copy on a
> > > second partition of my MacBook Pro, but didn't like it and decided I'd
> > > probably skip Lion, even though I fairly quickly jumped on all the
> > > earlier versions. From a quick skim, looks like Mountain Lion has more
> > > of some of the kinds of things I didn't like about Lion.
> > >
> > > I already didn't like what appeared to be the iOS-inspired parts. Now
> > > Apple makes the iOS influence quite explicit, highlighting it as a
> > > "feature".
> > >
> > > Fortunately this relatively new iMac will probably last me quite a few
> > > more years before I have to think too hard about my next main desktop
> > > and decide whether it will be a Mac at all.
> > 
> > Heretic!   ;-).
> 
> Heh, damn sensible I say.

Yeah, I think he speaks well.  I know that once upon a time, I was a Mac 
fan boi.  I'm not exactly clear when that stopped, but it has been a 
while.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/17/2012 4:24:15 AM
In article <howard-0572BC.21211416022012@news.giganews.com>,
 Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:

> In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
>  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing 
> > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is 
> > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> 
> That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store 
> is now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the 
> end.

To an extent Apple's hardware is becoming little more than the front-end 
to their real retail business...

-- 
This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in
unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in.  

Theodore Roosevelt
0
timmcn (2339)
2/17/2012 4:55:20 AM
In article <yob62f6wtof.fsf@panix1.panix.com>,
 BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:

> FWIW, I'm still on SL on two of my three machines and this
> may be the first time that I end up *two* releases behind -
> one of my machines cannot run Lion and I have no plans to
> retire it anytime soon.  (And I'm still waiting to see
> what Intuit does re: Q2007 as well.  The loss of Rosetta
> hasn't had much of an impact on me other than that one,
> singular, sadly still essential app)

I'm considering loading Windows part-time on my file server.  If I do 
that, I'll get Quicken for Windows.  That'll fix the Q2007 problem.

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/17/2012 5:03:37 AM
Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:

> In article <1kflo1f.vitev1cj251jN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> 
> > Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 2012-02-16 12:11 , Richard Maine wrote:

> > > > Fortunately this relatively new iMac will probably last me quite a few
> > > > more years before I have to think too hard about my next main desktop
> > > > and decide whether it will be a Mac at all.
> > > 
> > > Heretic!   ;-).
> > 
> > Heh, damn sensible I say.
> 
> Yeah, I think he speaks well.  I know that once upon a time, I was a Mac
> fan boi.  I'm not exactly clear when that stopped, but it has been a 
> while.

I've used computers since 1968. I've changed "favorite systems" quite a
few times over those decades. If I hadn't learned to do that, well...
pretty hard to still find those systems I used in '68. You do have to
learn to change in this field. Macs are my current favorite, but I have
never assumed that my move to Macs would necessarily be my last. I'm not
saying that I'm sure to move away - just that it will be time to
reevaluate my choices. Have to do that kind of re-evaluation every few
years.

Yes, in my time I've used Windows systems, and Linux, and more different
operating systems than most people here could probably name. It would
actually take me a while to even make the list, and I'd probably still
forget one or two.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain
0
nospam47 (9747)
2/17/2012 5:09:06 AM
On 02-16-2012 19:51, Doug Anderson wrote:
> easily. When I turn on "Show scroll bars always" I see
> they might be thinner, and they are certainly lacking arrows.  Both
> seem like plusses to me, but I grant that there is plenty of room to
> differ about this.

I've developed over the years (Mac for more than ten; X11 before) the 
habit of using those arrows to go a line or two at a time.

When a document (like some web pages?) is so long that dragging the 
scroll thingy moves the document more than a screenful, it sure would be 
nice to have those arrows.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    “It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it 
goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the 
world.”
                       — Thomas Jefferson

0
news31 (6772)
2/17/2012 5:33:22 AM
On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> at all.

Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast 
and now just use the scroll bar.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    “It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it 
goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the 
world.”
                       — Thomas Jefferson

0
news31 (6772)
2/17/2012 5:35:36 AM
On 02-16-2012 15:57, Alan Browne wrote:
> The same people who don't understand that the convergence is not in the
> OS proper but in the look and feel and similar functionality in common
> applications / "social utilities" (messaging, mail, calendars, cloud,
> synchronization, etc.) and the s/w distribution model.
>
> These don't make the OS' "converge" - just their outward appearance and
> behaviour.

If by "s/w distribution model" you mean Gatekeeper, I don't call that 
mere outward appearance.  I want to become the Keymaster.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    “It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts
     as it goes.  A principle which if acted on would save
     one-half the wars of the world.”
                       — Thomas Jefferson

0
news31 (6772)
2/17/2012 5:39:49 AM
In article <hf-dnecBpOk136DSnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 12:17 , Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> > In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >   Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>
> >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> >
> > Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?
> >
> > How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save
> > destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?
> >
> > 10.6 was the OS that helped many Silicon Valley offices adopt
> > Macintoshes as a standard computer configuration.  It was easy to use,
> > integrated well with other systems, and a great performer on laptops.
> > New computers with 10.7 are despised because they're slow, clumsy, and
> > buggy.  Another round of dumbing-down will force a switch to Windows and
> > Linux.
> 
> If a computer should look "slow" under Lion v. SL it would be my 2007 
> iMac (2.8 GHz dual core and 667 Mhz memory).  Yet there is no 
> perceptible change from SL to Lion.
> 
> The newer machines would just be quick and nimble.
> 
> I suppose I could benchmark on my son's MBP if I update it to Lion.  So 
> far he's not interested.

The difference is under heavy load - lots of disk I/O and using more 
than 4GB of RAM.  SL does this fine on an older dual-core i7 MacBook Pro 
with 8GB RAM.  The same in Lion with a newer quad-core i7 with 8GB RAM 
causes all apps to continuously cycle in and out of beachballing.  Some 
investigation shows Lion's auto-save stalling and abnormal VM behavior 
(active memory swaps out while there are gigabytes of idle and inactive 
memory).
-- 
I will not see posts from Google because I must filter them as spam
0
mcmurtrie (391)
2/17/2012 5:43:51 AM
On 02-16-2012 12:54, nospam wrote:
> they don't think those are broken. apple's famous three words in
> response to bug reports, 'works as designed.'

And what a WAD that is.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    “It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it 
goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the 
world.”
                       — Thomas Jefferson

0
news31 (6772)
2/17/2012 5:48:14 AM
Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:

> In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
>  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> 
> That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store is 
> now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> end.

So just to be clear:

-you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.
-you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.

I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do _you_
not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free not to use)
but you don't want anyone else to have access to them either.

0
2/17/2012 7:00:59 AM
In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
 Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> > As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> > at all.
> 
> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast 
> and now just use the scroll bar.

I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689
0
timstreater2 (1190)
2/17/2012 9:25:06 AM
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:04:12 -0700, Michelle Steiner wrote:

> In article <zOWdnd527InU3KDSnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> 
>> >>> Also, a beta version of Messages is available for downloading.
>> >>
>> >> Thx.
>> >
>> > It you install it, it will replace iChat.
>> 
>> Absolutely no loss!
> 
> Agreed.

First thing that came off my Dock after a new installation.



-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/17/2012 11:11:34 AM
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> When a document (like some web pages?) is so long that dragging the 
> scroll thingy moves the document more than a screenful, it sure would be
> nice to have those arrows.

Why not use the arrow-keys, the PgDwn and PgUp, and the Home and End
keys instead?
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/17/2012 1:18:26 PM
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <zOWdnd527InU3KDSnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> 
> > >>> Also, a beta version of Messages is available for downloading.
> > >>
> > >> Thx.
> > >
> > > It you install it, it will replace iChat.
> > 
> > Absolutely no loss!
> 
> Agreed.

Yes - but this beta version will become unusable when Mountain Lion can
be purchased - or at the end of the year.

What about those of us with a computer running Lion that cannot update
to Mountain Lion?

Like my only 5-year-old MacBook ...
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/17/2012 1:18:29 PM
In article <4f3de917$0$12005$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
 Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:

> In article <hf-dnecBpOk136DSnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> 
> > On 2012-02-16 12:17 , Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> > > In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> > >   Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>  wrote:
> > >
> > >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > >>
> > >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> > >
> > > Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?
> > >
> > > How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save
> > > destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?
> > >
> > > 10.6 was the OS that helped many Silicon Valley offices adopt
> > > Macintoshes as a standard computer configuration.  It was easy to use,
> > > integrated well with other systems, and a great performer on laptops.
> > > New computers with 10.7 are despised because they're slow, clumsy, and
> > > buggy.  Another round of dumbing-down will force a switch to Windows and
> > > Linux.
> > 
> > If a computer should look "slow" under Lion v. SL it would be my 2007 
> > iMac (2.8 GHz dual core and 667 Mhz memory).  Yet there is no 
> > perceptible change from SL to Lion.
> > 
> > The newer machines would just be quick and nimble.
> > 
> > I suppose I could benchmark on my son's MBP if I update it to Lion.  So 
> > far he's not interested.
> 
> The difference is under heavy load - lots of disk I/O and using more 
> than 4GB of RAM.  SL does this fine on an older dual-core i7 MacBook Pro 
> with 8GB RAM.  The same in Lion with a newer quad-core i7 with 8GB RAM 
> causes all apps to continuously cycle in and out of beachballing.  Some 
> investigation shows Lion's auto-save stalling and abnormal VM behavior 
> (active memory swaps out while there are gigabytes of idle and inactive 
> memory).

My eight-core Mac Pro is under heavy load often running Handbrake in the 
background while I work on graphics, compile software and other things, 
and I never experience the symptoms you describe.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 1:20:52 PM
In article <howard-0572BC.21211416022012@news.giganews.com>,
 Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:

> In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
>  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> 
> That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store is 
> now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the end.

s/When/If

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 1:22:29 PM
In article <jhkor3$eb1$1@dont-email.me>,
 Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 02-16-2012 19:51, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > easily. When I turn on "Show scroll bars always" I see
> > they might be thinner, and they are certainly lacking arrows.  Both
> > seem like plusses to me, but I grant that there is plenty of room to
> > differ about this.
> 
> I've developed over the years (Mac for more than ten; X11 before) the 
> habit of using those arrows to go a line or two at a time.
> 
> When a document (like some web pages?) is so long that dragging the 
> scroll thingy moves the document more than a screenful, it sure would be 
> nice to have those arrows.

Agreed. But I'm not tossing out the entire OS just because of that small 
gripe.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 1:25:16 PM
In article <timstreater-5A41A2.23441416022012@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article <yobty2ql5l1.fsf@panix3.panix.com>,
>  BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:
> 
> > Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> writes:
> > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:
> > 
> > >> That's my general feeling about it as well. Though you have to admit 
> > >> some features they have brought into Mac OS from iOS have not been as 
> > >> optional as one might hope. The new scroll bars, automatic saves, and 
> > >> window restoration come immediately to mind.
> > >
> > > I haven't played with the automatics saves, but the new scroll bars
> > > are totally optional.  I think the window restoration is too, no?
> > 
> > Automatic saves are up to the app developers.  Apple, of course,
> > has provided the framework for it and has made it (as far as I
> > can tell) non-optional in *Apple* software (ie. Pages, Numbers)
> > but it certainly didn't force any other software to start doing
> > that stuff (ie. Word, Excel).
> 
> ITYM e.g. rather than ie.
> 
> > The new scroll bars are not optional - whether to show them
> > or not is.  I prefer to always have them visible, but they
> > are not quite as useful as the old ones (narrower, no arrows).
> 
> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows 
> at all.

I have the newer Magic Mouse, and it's very hard to scroll just a 
line/unit at a time with it. I miss the scroll bar arrows at either end 
for this.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 1:26:20 PM
In article <1kflnh9.gwhws719067e6N%per@RQNNE.invalid>,
 per@RQNNE.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:

> Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> 
> > When a document (like some web pages?) is so long that dragging the 
> > scroll thingy moves the document more than a screenful, it sure would be
> > nice to have those arrows.
> 
> Why not use the arrow-keys, the PgDwn and PgUp, and the Home and End
> keys instead?

That's often what I resort to doing. It's just now we have one less way 
of doing it, which is a shame. Like I said, though, I'm not throwing the 
whole OS out just because of it. Apparently I can adapt to these small 
changes much more easily than some here seem to be able to adapt.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 1:31:41 PM
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:17:34 -0800, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:

> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>> 
>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> 
> Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?
> 
> How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save
> destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?
> 
> 10.6 was the OS that helped many Silicon Valley offices adopt
> Macintoshes as a standard computer configuration.  It was easy to use,
> integrated well with other systems, and a great performer on laptops.
> New computers with 10.7 are despised because they're slow, clumsy, and
> buggy.  Another round of dumbing-down will force a switch to Windows and
> Linux.

I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but folks are already complaining 
about the direction that Windows 8 and Ubuntu are taking...

Ubuntu and at least one derivative already have the "Where the hell is 
the scrollbar?" feature.

-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/17/2012 2:01:26 PM
Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:

> In article <160220121246231168%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > on any mac you buy going forward.
> 
> Key point, that.

Well, there is the iCloud question.

I've got an 11-year-old G4/867 now running Leopard with a 1.6 GHz
double-kernel CPU. It can use the iCloud mail facilities, and through
BusyCal the calendars.

But sync of the Address Book can no longer take place, unless a third
party application will make that possible.

I guess that iCloud sync will eventually be dropped for other
applications in Lion ... as it did with MobileMe sync.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/17/2012 2:29:49 PM
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> I have the newer Magic Mouse, and it's very hard to scroll just a 
> line/unit at a time with it.

I have tried a Magic Mouse (on someone else's Mac) and I don't like it
either.

I'm using a Kensington Expert Mouse + an Apple Magic Trackpad instead.
They are both connected to my MacBook at home (together with external
keyboard and 24" display).

At school, I only use the Mac + Magic Trackpad. I'm simply unable to
type on the MacBook without touching the internal trackpad - which I
have disabled when a mouse or external trackpad is connected.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/17/2012 2:29:50 PM
In article <1kfm7sp.2mrt76wcoy68N%per@RQNNE.invalid>,
 per@RQNNE.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:

> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > I have the newer Magic Mouse, and it's very hard to scroll just a 
> > line/unit at a time with it.
> 
> I have tried a Magic Mouse (on someone else's Mac) and I don't like it
> either.

I didn't say I didn't like the Magic Mouse. I love it. It's way better 
than any other Apple muse, IMO.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 2:33:33 PM
In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> 
> > On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> > > As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> > > at all.
> > 
> > Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast 
> > and now just use the scroll bar.
> 
> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.

Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they 
eyesight ain't what it used to be.

Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of 
trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)

Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
0
2/17/2012 2:36:51 PM


On 2/16/12 8:58 AM, in article
timmcn-643361.08582816022012@news.iphouse.com, "Tim McNamara"
<timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> 
> From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May
> not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans
> out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
> wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to
> be the OS on my main computer.

What he said!

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 2:56:10 PM


On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
<howard@shubs.net> wrote:

> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>> 
>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> 
> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.

Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take up
Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to that.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 3:00:45 PM
In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
> howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
> <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> 
> > In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >> 
> >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> > 
> > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> 
> Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take up
> Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to that.

Why forced?  

I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they 
close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other 
versions of OSX just fine.

Most of what they have changed going to iCloud is of little value to me 
and the one thing I valued beyond email was the keychain sync which has 
gone away.
0
2/17/2012 3:05:24 PM


On 2/16/12 11:17 AM, in article 4f3d3a2e$0$12020$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net,
"Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:

> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>> 
>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> 
> Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?
> 
> How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save
> destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?
> 
> 10.6 was the OS that helped many Silicon Valley offices adopt
> Macintoshes as a standard computer configuration.  It was easy to use,
> integrated well with other systems, and a great performer on laptops.
> New computers with 10.7 are despised because they're slow, clumsy, and
> buggy.  Another round of dumbing-down will force a switch to Windows and
> Linux.

Got a point there...

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 3:06:02 PM


On 2/16/12 11:22 AM, in article
jollyroger-F7AF98.11222316022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <mKednQc9cP21paDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> 
>> On 2012-02-16 11:32 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
>>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I don't think
>>>>>> they've done much under the hood of real interest since GCD in Leopard -
>>>>>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
>>>> 
>>>> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
>>> 
>>> Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more.
>>> And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful
>>> ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.
>> 
>> Your insistence without basis is pathetic.
> 
> Go learn something.

Got up on the wrong side of the bed, eh?

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 3:07:52 PM


On 2/16/12 4:49 PM, in article
jollyroger-2B96C9.16493716022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <160220121239026508%jimsgibson@gmail.com>,
>  Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>>>  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
>>>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS
>>>>> seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple
>>>>> believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to
>>>>> converge; and they are simply making that happen.
>>>> 
>>>> the convergence is what people are complaining about.
>>> 
>>> Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same
>>> thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I
>>> have a bridge to sell you.
>> 
>> Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same.
> 
> While *you* may not be arguing that, others certainly seem to be saying
> just that.
> 
>> They obviously are not. However, they are converging. It is up to
>> Apple to decide how far this convergence will go.
>> 
>> People like me who have been using Mac OS X for 10 years (and Mac OS 9
>> before that) are worried that Apple will go too far and turn Mac OS
>> into a big brother to iOS, or maybe just make them the same code base.
> 
> I can only speak for myself. The extent to which I'm just a little
> worried about that is far outweighed by optimism and anticipation of all
> of the potential benefits of such convergence.
> 
>> They seem to be trying to attract iPhone users at the expense of
>> long-time Mac OS X users. We are worried that Apple is abandoning us in
>> their quest for world domination. That is all.
>> 
>> If Mac OS and iOS look and behave the same, does it matter that they
>> are different?
> 
> I firmly believe Apple's not dumb. They push boundaries and occasionally
> make things uncomfortable for those customers who don't like a lot of
> change, but historically when they go too far, they do tend to correct
> their path.

Final Cut Pro comes to mind...

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 3:16:05 PM


On 2/16/12 11:03 PM, in article
howard-914ABF.22033716022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
<howard@shubs.net> wrote:

> In article <yob62f6wtof.fsf@panix1.panix.com>,
>  BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:
> 
>> FWIW, I'm still on SL on two of my three machines and this
>> may be the first time that I end up *two* releases behind -
>> one of my machines cannot run Lion and I have no plans to
>> retire it anytime soon.  (And I'm still waiting to see
>> what Intuit does re: Q2007 as well.  The loss of Rosetta
>> hasn't had much of an impact on me other than that one,
>> singular, sadly still essential app)
> 
> I'm considering loading Windows part-time on my file server.  If I do
> that, I'll get Quicken for Windows.  That'll fix the Q2007 problem.

Supposedly Intuit is coming out with a non-Rosetta Mac version anytime now.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 3:29:55 PM


On 2/16/12 11:09 PM, in article 1kfkt68.68gz9af0v0agN%nospam@see.signature,
"Richard Maine" <nospam@see.signature> wrote:

> Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> 
>> In article <1kflo1f.vitev1cj251jN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
>> 
>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2012-02-16 12:11 , Richard Maine wrote:
> 
>>>>> Fortunately this relatively new iMac will probably last me quite a few
>>>>> more years before I have to think too hard about my next main desktop
>>>>> and decide whether it will be a Mac at all.
>>>> 
>>>> Heretic!   ;-).
>>> 
>>> Heh, damn sensible I say.
>> 
>> Yeah, I think he speaks well.  I know that once upon a time, I was a Mac
>> fan boi.  I'm not exactly clear when that stopped, but it has been a
>> while.
> 
> I've used computers since 1968.

Ahh, the old "punch tape" in high school lab comes to mind there!

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 3:31:27 PM
In article 
<lloydparsons-7D5ECF.09052417022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
> > howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
> > <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> > >  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > >> 
> > >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> > > 
> > > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> > 
> > Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take up
> > Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to that.
> 
> Why forced?  
> 
> I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they 
> close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other 
> versions of OSX just fine.
> 
> Most of what they have changed going to iCloud is of little value to me 
> and the one thing I valued beyond email was the keychain sync which has 
> gone away.

Yeah, that kind of rots, doesn't it?
0
dfritzin6 (334)
2/17/2012 3:35:01 PM


On 2/17/12 8:33 AM, in article
jollyroger-CB4A58.08333317022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <1kfm7sp.2mrt76wcoy68N%per@RQNNE.invalid>,
>  per@RQNNE.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:
> 
>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I have the newer Magic Mouse, and it's very hard to scroll just a
>>> line/unit at a time with it.
>> 
>> I have tried a Magic Mouse (on someone else's Mac) and I don't like it
>> either.
> 
> I didn't say I didn't like the Magic Mouse. I love it. It's way better
> than any other Apple muse, IMO.

Agreed that.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 3:37:29 PM
On 2012-02-16 20:21:14 -0800, Howard S Shubs said:

> In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
>  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
>> scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
>> "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> 
> That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store is
> now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the end.

Apple hopefully knows that if the App Store is mandatory, the platform 
is dead.  Nevertheless, there are signs that while not making it 
mandatory, Apple is pushing hard to get everyone into it (which at this 
point also means that apps can't do a lot of things).

This was a somewhat disturbing article:

http://www.slashgear.com/developers-cautiously-convinced-by-apple-gatekeeper-17214027/ 


Apparently, under ML, apps which are not distributed through the App 
Store, even if they are "signed" with an official developer ID, do not 
get access to a couple of major headline features of ML -- iCloud and 
Notification Center.

Of course, at this point, those might not be major losses - there are 
alternatives which are already widely in use and getting better and 
better -- DropBox and Growl.  And DropBox isn't limited to Macs, either.

0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 3:38:12 PM


On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
<lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
>>>> at all.
>>> 
>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
>> 
>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> 
> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> 
> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> 
> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!

What balls?!?

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 3:38:29 PM
On 2012-02-16 20:21:42 -0800, Howard S Shubs said:

> In article <jhjuvg$ghb$1@reader1.panix.com>,
>  Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:
> 
>> At the app level, several things.  At the OS level, other than the loss
>> of Rosetta, 10.7 is generally better or, at worst, no worse than 10.6.
> 
> The loss of Rosetta is non-trivial.

No - it was a major *improvement*.  Unfortunately, we suffer because 
bad *developers* aren't keeping up.

It's not Apple's fault that Intuit screwed us over.

And it's not Apple's responsibility to keep their OS backwards 
compatible with hardware they haven't made in more than half a decade.

Make no mistake - the loss of Rosetta is a major pain in the ass for me 
as well as for lots of other people.  But I firmly believe that in the 
long run, it's a *good* think for OS X.

0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 3:41:24 PM
In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> >  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> >>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> >>>> at all.
> >>> 
> >>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
> >>> and now just use the scroll bar.
> >> 
> >> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> > 
> > Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> > eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> > 
> > Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> > trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> > 
> > Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
> 
> What balls?!?

The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you 
work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are 
definitely tiny.

I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers 
and relatively poor close up eyesight.
0
2/17/2012 3:41:46 PM
George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/16/12 11:09 PM, in article 1kfkt68.68gz9af0v0agN%nospam@see.signature,
> "Richard Maine" <nospam@see.signature> wrote:
> 
> > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> In article <1kflo1f.vitev1cj251jN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> >>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> On 2012-02-16 12:11 , Richard Maine wrote:
> > 
> >>>>> Fortunately this relatively new iMac will probably last me quite a few
> >>>>> more years before I have to think too hard about my next main desktop
> >>>>> and decide whether it will be a Mac at all.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Heretic!   ;-).
> >>> 
> >>> Heh, damn sensible I say.
> >> 
> >> Yeah, I think he speaks well.  I know that once upon a time, I was a Mac
> >> fan boi.  I'm not exactly clear when that stopped, but it has been a
> >> while.
> > 
> > I've used computers since 1968.
> 
> Ahh, the old "punch tape" in high school lab comes to mind there!

My high school didn't have anything vaguely like a computer lab; it was
a bit before such things were common in high schools. I did use punch
tape for some GE system that I accessed via teletype from University of
Virginia while in my senior year at high school. (I took a math course
at UVa that year because my high school didn't offer calculus that
particular year). Also used a Burroughs system at UVa, but that was via
punched cards and line-printer output.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain
0
nospam47 (9747)
2/17/2012 3:42:13 PM
In article <jollyroger-672CD1.07262017022012@news.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows 
> > at all.
> 
> I have the newer Magic Mouse, and it's very hard to scroll just a 
> line/unit at a time with it. I miss the scroll bar arrows at either end 
> for this.

About the only times I use the scroll bars is to go from one end of a long 
document to the other end.  Even with previous versions of the OS, I rarely 
had to use the arrows to scroll one line at a time.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/17/2012 3:42:31 PM
In article <dfritzin-9F7D02.10350117022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article 
> <lloydparsons-7D5ECF.09052417022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
> > > howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
> > > <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> > > >  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > > >> 
> > > >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> > > > 
> > > > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> > > 
> > > Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take up
> > > Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to that.
> > 
> > Why forced?  
> > 
> > I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they 
> > close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other 
> > versions of OSX just fine.
> > 
> > Most of what they have changed going to iCloud is of little value to me 
> > and the one thing I valued beyond email was the keychain sync which has 
> > gone away.
> 
> Yeah, that kind of rots, doesn't it?

It sure does!!  For me, iCloud is a step backward.
0
2/17/2012 3:42:49 PM
In article <1kfm4zd.h5pyuf1pfbf3iN%per@RQNNE.invalid>,
 per@RQNNE.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:

> Yes - but this beta version will become unusable when Mountain Lion can
> be purchased - or at the end of the year.
> 
> What about those of us with a computer running Lion that cannot update
> to Mountain Lion?

It has an uninstall feature built into it, accessible from the application 
menu.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/17/2012 3:44:40 PM
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 02-16-2012 12:54, nospam wrote:
> > they don't think those are broken. apple's famous three words in
> > response to bug reports, 'works as designed.'
> 
> And what a WAD that is.

I'm more familliar with the acronym BAD, for "broken as designed". (And
I heard that one well before Apple was even formed).

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain
0
nospam47 (9747)
2/17/2012 3:47:03 PM
On 2012-02-17 15:42:31 +0000, Michelle Steiner said:

> In article <jollyroger-672CD1.07262017022012@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
>>> at all.
>> 
>> I have the newer Magic Mouse, and it's very hard to scroll just a
>> line/unit at a time with it. I miss the scroll bar arrows at either end
>> for this.
> 
> About the only times I use the scroll bars is to go from one end of a long
> document to the other end.  Even with previous versions of the OS, I rarely
> had to use the arrows to scroll one line at a time.

With my Magic Trackpad scrolling upward or downward just a line is easy 
and intuitive. Although I have a Magic Mouse I never use it now, 
preferring instead to use the Magic Trackpad.

-- 
James Leo Ryan - Austin, Texas

0
2/17/2012 3:51:33 PM
In article <jhls94$3k5$1@reader1.panix.com>,
 Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:

> Apple hopefully knows that if the App Store is mandatory, the platform 
> is dead.  Nevertheless, there are signs that while not making it 
> mandatory, Apple is pushing hard to get everyone into it (which at this 
> point also means that apps can't do a lot of things).

The Mac App Store is good for the environment.  No boxes, CDs/DVDs, paper, 
plastic, etc. to be made or clutter up landfills, and no fuel expended or 
pollutants generated in transporting them.

-- Michelle

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/17/2012 4:05:43 PM
On 2012-02-17 07:05:24 -0800, Lloyd said:

> In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
>> howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
>> <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take up
>> Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to that.
> 
> Why forced?
> 
> I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they
> close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other
> versions of OSX just fine.

My big loss will be address book sync.

0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 4:11:22 PM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:42:13 -0800, Richard Maine wrote:

> George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Ahh, the old "punch tape" in high school lab comes to mind there!
> 
> My high school didn't have anything vaguely like a computer lab; it was
> a bit before such things were common in high schools. I did use punch
> tape for some GE system that I accessed via teletype from University of
> Virginia while in my senior year at high school. (I took a math course
> at UVa that year because my high school didn't offer calculus that
> particular year). Also used a Burroughs system at UVa, but that was via
> punched cards and line-printer output.

My school, which I left in 1973, didn't have a computer lab either.  
There was a large computer in bits which someone had kindly donated, but 
apparently it was going to cost too much to put back together, so just 
sat there doing nothing.

-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/17/2012 4:45:30 PM
In article <michelle-DE464D.08423117022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-672CD1.07262017022012@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > > As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows 
> > > at all.
> > 
> > I have the newer Magic Mouse, and it's very hard to scroll just a 
> > line/unit at a time with it. I miss the scroll bar arrows at either end 
> > for this.
> 
> About the only times I use the scroll bars is to go from one end of a long 
> document to the other end.  Even with previous versions of the OS, I rarely 
> had to use the arrows to scroll one line at a time.

Same here - now. I used to though.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 5:08:17 PM
In article <CB63CB55.80FF1%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/16/12 4:49 PM, in article
> jollyroger-2B96C9.16493716022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <160220121239026508%jimsgibson@gmail.com>,
> >  Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
> >> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
> >>>  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> >>>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by iOS
> >>>>> seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". Apple
> >>>>> believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to
> >>>>> converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> >>>> 
> >>>> the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> >>> 
> >>> Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same
> >>> thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I
> >>> have a bridge to sell you.
> >> 
> >> Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same.
> > 
> > While *you* may not be arguing that, others certainly seem to be saying
> > just that.
> > 
> >> They obviously are not. However, they are converging. It is up to
> >> Apple to decide how far this convergence will go.
> >> 
> >> People like me who have been using Mac OS X for 10 years (and Mac OS 9
> >> before that) are worried that Apple will go too far and turn Mac OS
> >> into a big brother to iOS, or maybe just make them the same code base.
> > 
> > I can only speak for myself. The extent to which I'm just a little
> > worried about that is far outweighed by optimism and anticipation of all
> > of the potential benefits of such convergence.
> > 
> >> They seem to be trying to attract iPhone users at the expense of
> >> long-time Mac OS X users. We are worried that Apple is abandoning us in
> >> their quest for world domination. That is all.
> >> 
> >> If Mac OS and iOS look and behave the same, does it matter that they
> >> are different?
> > 
> > I firmly believe Apple's not dumb. They push boundaries and occasionally
> > make things uncomfortable for those customers who don't like a lot of
> > change, but historically when they go too far, they do tend to correct
> > their path.
> 
> Final Cut Pro comes to mind...

Right. They are correcting that mistake now.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 5:11:19 PM
In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article 
> howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs" 
> <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> 
> > In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >> 
> >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> > 
> > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> 
> Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to 
> take up Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking 
> forward to that.

One of the reasons I have resolutely avoided cloud computing.  I am 
cynical enough to realize that the benefits of cloud computing for me 
are accidental at best; the real benefits of cloud computing are for the 
providers.  Why the hell would I want my files out there on some server 
over which I have no control?  Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb IMHO.

-- 
This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in
unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in.  

Theodore Roosevelt
0
timmcn (2339)
2/17/2012 5:12:12 PM
In article <CB63C968.80FF0%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/16/12 11:22 AM, in article
> jollyroger-F7AF98.11222316022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <mKednQc9cP21paDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2012-02-16 11:32 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
> >>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I 
> >>>>>> don't think they've done much under the hood of real interest 
> >>>>>> since GCD in Leopard 
> >>>>>> -
> >>>>>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
> >>> 
> >>> Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more.
> >>> And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful
> >>> ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.
> >> 
> >> Your insistence without basis is pathetic.
> > 
> > Go learn something.
> 
> Got up on the wrong side of the bed, eh?

Not really. I just don't like bullshit statements like the one he made. 
The fact is Apple has done some really good work improving the OS over 
the past few years. And just because he wants to ignore all that good 
work doesn't make it nonexistent.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 5:12:48 PM
George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/16/12 8:58 AM, in article
> timmcn-643361.08582816022012@news.iphouse.com, "Tim McNamara"
> <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
> 
> > In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> >  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > 
> > From the classic Mac OS to OS X and now from OS X to iOS for Macs.  May
> > not be a jump I will be willing to make, we'll have to see how it pans
> > out as more information becomes available.  Playing around with my
> > wife's iPad and iPhone, iOS is just too limited and toy-like for it to
> > be the OS on my main computer.
> 
> What he said!

Yes, the iPad is a good supplement - not a replacement.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/17/2012 5:14:48 PM
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <1kfm4zd.h5pyuf1pfbf3iN%per@RQNNE.invalid>,
>  per@RQNNE.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:
> 
> > Yes - but this beta version will become unusable when Mountain Lion can
> > be purchased - or at the end of the year.
> > 
> > What about those of us with a computer running Lion that cannot update
> > to Mountain Lion?
> 
> It has an uninstall feature built into it, accessible from the application
> menu.

OK.

And someone at the Danish mac newsgroup suggested that it might become
available in the Mac App Store for those not running Mountain Lion.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/17/2012 5:14:48 PM
Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they 
> close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other 
> versions of OSX just fine.

Not really. Mail without Address Book sync is a handicapped Mail system.

Om my old G4/867 running Leopard Server, i have access to mails.
Furthermore, I have sync through BusyCal. But no sync of the Address
Book ;-(.

Of course, it is just a programming feature. Just make a tool that will
sync between iCloud and the Address Book, and run in the background. On
MacOS X systems older than the Lion.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/17/2012 5:14:48 PM
In article 
<lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
> > In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> >  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> > > > As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> > > > at all.
> > > 
> > > Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast 
> > > and now just use the scroll bar.
> > 
> > I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> 
> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they 
> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> 
> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of 
> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)

While I am officially a doddering old fossil, no discernible shake yet.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689
0
timstreater2 (1190)
2/17/2012 5:19:28 PM
In article <jhls94$3k5$1@reader1.panix.com>,
 Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:

> This was a somewhat disturbing article:
> 
> http://www.slashgear.com/developers-cautiously-convinced-by-apple-gatekeeper-1
> 7214027/ 

Linked to that:

http://www.slashgear.com/meet-apple-os-x-mountain-lion-16213730/

"Seven months ago Apple launched OS X Lion; now, 19m copies later, it�s 
ready to preview OS X Mountain Lion. The next update for Mac isn�t 
expected to hit the Mac App Store for download until this summer, but 
SlashGear caught up with Apple to find out the top ten � or in fact 
eleven � headline features of Mountain Lion, as well as get our hands on 
early version of the developer preview. iMessage jumps to OS X, along 
with Game Center and Notifications, and plenty more, as Apple narrows 
the gap between iPad and Mac."

Unfortunately it looks like- from the thumbnail sketches available thus 
far- that the plan for narrowing the gap is to dumb down Macs rather 
than improve iPads and iOS.

-- 
This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in
unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in.  

Theodore Roosevelt
0
timmcn (2339)
2/17/2012 5:19:31 PM
In article 
<lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
> > lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> > <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> > >  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > > 
> > >> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> > >>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> > >> 
> > >>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> > >>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> > >>>> at all.
> > >>> 
> > >>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
> > >>> and now just use the scroll bar.
> > >> 
> > >> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> > > 
> > > Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> > > eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> > > 
> > > Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> > > trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> > > 
> > > Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
> > 
> > What balls?!?
> 
> The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you 
> work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are 
> definitely tiny.

Small roller wheels.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689
0
timstreater2 (1190)
2/17/2012 5:20:03 PM
In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> 
> > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > 
> > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store is 
> > now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> > end.
> 
> So just to be clear:
> 
> -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.
> -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.
> 
> I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do _you_
> not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free not to use)
> but you don't want anyone else to have access to them either.
> 

Not what he wrote, at least as I read it.

For the scrollbars, he's objecting to the reduced functionality even
when they are shown (loss of scroll arrows) and the narrower (harder to
hit) thumb. He also seems to be annoyed that the "lesser" behavior is
the default.

For the App Store, he specifically wrote that he objected to how it is
rapidly getting closer to becoming mandatory, which is the situation to
which he specifically fears (as stated in the above quote).

The following is written by someone who has been described by friends
and family as an Apple fan(atic) and, at least so far, would rather use
a Mac than any other platform I've ever seen or heard of (including my
iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch).

As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the
1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation
with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a
provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to
be created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those
of us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess,
have concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we
did, by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing
it with friends.

I still remember the 1984 commercial and it now is bringing to mind the
Walter Kelly quote from Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us." At
the time of the commercial, Big Blue was so dominant that it tried to
control everything (similarly AT&T in telecomm), then Microsoft got so
huge that it tried to broaden its control, now Apple is started down
the same road.

-- 
Spenser
0
dogbreath (1151)
2/17/2012 5:20:55 PM
In article <jhlu7a$rgq$1@reader1.panix.com>,
 Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:

> On 2012-02-17 07:05:24 -0800, Lloyd said:
> 
> > In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
> >> howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
> >> <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take up
> >> Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to that.
> > 
> > Why forced?
> > 
> > I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they
> > close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other
> > versions of OSX just fine.
> 
> My big loss will be address book sync.

I just checked on the Apple website. Address Book sync appears to be 
there.

http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/calendar-mail-contacts.html
0
dfritzin6 (334)
2/17/2012 5:22:06 PM
On 2012-02-16 17:34 , Bread wrote:

> I don't think there's anything I can do about the 2GB limit on my iMac,
> but I've been eyeing that 6GB upgrade for my 2.4 Ghz Core 2 Duo
> MacBookPro3,1. OWC claims that it works and I just haven't pulled the
> trigger yet.

I updated a mid 2007 iMac that was officially limited to 4 GB to 6 GB 
(per a website).  Works like a charm.  Page swaps are small and rare. 
Unfortunately can't go to 8.

Next machine will make this one look like a dog I 'spect.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 5:24:21 PM
In article 
<lloydparsons-550722.09424917022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <dfritzin-9F7D02.10350117022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article 
> > <lloydparsons-7D5ECF.09052417022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >  Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> > >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
> > > > howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
> > > > <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> > > > >  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> > > > 
> > > > Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take 
> > > > up
> > > > Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to that.
> > > 
> > > Why forced?  
> > > 
> > > I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they 
> > > close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other 
> > > versions of OSX just fine.
> > > 
> > > Most of what they have changed going to iCloud is of little value to me 
> > > and the one thing I valued beyond email was the keychain sync which has 
> > > gone away.
> > 
> > Yeah, that kind of rots, doesn't it?
> 
> It sure does!!  For me, iCloud is a step backward.

I agree. Less space available as well. Throw in that you can't use it to 
store documents (non-iWork) and make them available to others is another 
thing I don't like about iCloud.
0
dfritzin6 (334)
2/17/2012 5:25:00 PM
In article <1kfm7sp.2mrt76wcoy68N%per@RQNNE.invalid>, Per R�nne
<per@RQNNE.invalid> wrote:

> At school, I only use the Mac + Magic Trackpad. I'm simply unable to
> type on the MacBook without touching the internal trackpad - which I
> have disabled when a mouse or external trackpad is connected.

At least, I'm not alone with this problem :) Rather than a Magic
Trackpad, though, I have a small Logitech trackball (the same one as
the ones on my PowerMac and iMacs). I have the same problem with
trackpads on my wife's Dell and our daughter's HP, so this isn't an
Apple problem, but an industrial design problem :) At least, Apple's
provided a solution to the problem that is easier than what is
available on Windows.

-- 
Spenser
0
dogbreath (1151)
2/17/2012 5:27:22 PM
In article <170220120920553641%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>,
 sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:

> As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the 
> 1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation 
> with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a 
> provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to be 
> created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those of 
> us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess, have 
> concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we did, 
> by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing it with 
> friends.

As I understand it, Gatekeeper is for only those applications that are 
downloaded.  If they are purchased and installed from a CD, DVD, or thumb 
drive�or are compiled on your own computer�Gatekeeper will not be involved.

-- Michelle

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/17/2012 5:27:26 PM


On 2/17/12 9:05 AM, in article
lloydparsons-7D5ECF.09052417022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
<lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
>> howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
>> <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>>>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>> 
>>>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
>>> 
>>> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
>> 
>> Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take up
>> Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to that.
> 
> Why forced?  
> 
> I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they
> close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other
> versions of OSX just fine.
> 
> Most of what they have changed going to iCloud is of little value to me
> and the one thing I valued beyond email was the keychain sync which has
> gone away.

Well, among other things is sync of my bookmarks, contacts and calendars to
name a few off the top of my head right now. I will adapt, I suppose...

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 5:45:15 PM
On 2012-02-16 17:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<trydnTpxILWI7aDSnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 14:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>
>>> Lion:
>>>
>>> window resizing from all edges    - Aqua - not OS
>>> mission control                   - a launcher - not OS
>>> better sandboxing                 - OS
>>> automatic reference counting      - programming issue - not OS
>>> Core Storage                      - OS
>>> FileVault whole-disk encryption&   recovery keys  - file system improvement.
>>> Lion recovery partition           - backup scheme.
>>
>> ... none of which pertain to ML.
>
> You didn't say only ML, but every release "since Leopard":

True - but those changes are not earth shattering at all.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 5:47:28 PM
In article <dly5s24cch.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:
> 
> > In article <yplio2la9m.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> writes:
> > > 
> > > > In article <jollyroger-7DC30C.13101216022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > In article <160220121251319684%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
> > > > >  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > In article <jollyroger-1F772D.10100116022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > People worrying and complaining that Mac OS is being replaced by 
> > > > > > > iOS 
> > > > > > > seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the word "convergence". 
> > > > > > > Apple 
> > > > > > > believes the mobile, laptop, and desktop worlds are destined to 
> > > > > > > converge; and they are simply making that happen.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > the convergence is what people are complaining about.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Converging certain popular iOS features into Mac OS is not the same 
> > > > > thing as replacing Mac OS with iOS. If you think they are the same, I 
> > > > > have a bridge to sell you.
> > > > 
> > > > Nobody is arguing that Mac OS and iOS are the same. They obviously are
> > > > not. However, they are converging. It is up to Apple to decide how far
> > > > this convergence will go.
> > > 
> > > I'm not really convinced of this.
> > > 
> > > It is true that Apple is bringing features from iOS into OS X. 
> > > 
> > > It seems not to be true that Apple is removing features from OS X.
> > > 
> > > It also seems not to be true that Apple is bringing features from OS X
> > > into iOS.
> > > 
> > > So if we can still do what we want in OS X, is it really harmful that
> > > Apple is adding features which were originally developed on iOS?
> > 
> > That's my general feeling about it as well. Though you have to admit 
> > some features they have brought into Mac OS from iOS have not been as 
> > optional as one might hope. The new scroll bars, automatic saves, and 
> > window restoration come immediately to mind.
> 
> I haven't played with the automatics saves, but the new scroll bars
> are totally optional.  I think the window restoration is too, no?

Yes to all of the above. Personally, I rather like window and app 
restore, since I sometimes have to boot into SL to use a couple PPC apps 
(Quicken 2006 and Canvas), and it is nice being able to reboot into Lion 
and immediately have all my windows restored.
0
dfritzin6 (334)
2/17/2012 5:49:55 PM


On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
<lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
>> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
>>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
>>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
>>>>>> at all.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
>>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
>>>> 
>>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
>>> 
>>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
>>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
>>> 
>>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
>>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
>>> 
>>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
>> 
>> What balls?!?
> 
> The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
> work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
> definitely tiny.
> 
> I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
> and relatively poor close up eyesight.

I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 5:52:29 PM
In article <CB63EFFD.81097%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
> lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
> >> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> >> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> >>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> >>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> >>>>>> at all.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
> >>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> >>> 
> >>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> >>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> >>> 
> >>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> >>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> >>> 
> >>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
> >> 
> >> What balls?!?
> > 
> > The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
> > work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
> > definitely tiny.
> > 
> > I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
> > and relatively poor close up eyesight.
> 
> I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
> The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.

We're talking about the Mighty Mouse in this sub-thread.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 5:55:04 PM
In article <dfritzin-ADF4FD.12495517022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:

> Personally, I rather like window and app 
> restore, since I sometimes have to boot into SL to use a couple PPC apps 
> (Quicken 2006 and Canvas), and it is nice being able to reboot into Lion 
> and immediately have all my windows restored.

I find sometimes it's nice, but other times it's downright annoying.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 5:55:54 PM


On 2/17/12 9:42 AM, in article 1kflmfw.1h8qhca1a617k0N%nospam@see.signature,
"Richard Maine" <nospam@see.signature> wrote:

> George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/16/12 11:09 PM, in article 1kfkt68.68gz9af0v0agN%nospam@see.signature,
>> "Richard Maine" <nospam@see.signature> wrote:
>> 
>>> Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In article <1kflo1f.vitev1cj251jN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
>>>>  jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2012-02-16 12:11 , Richard Maine wrote:
>>> 
>>>>>>> Fortunately this relatively new iMac will probably last me quite a few
>>>>>>> more years before I have to think too hard about my next main desktop
>>>>>>> and decide whether it will be a Mac at all.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Heretic!   ;-).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Heh, damn sensible I say.
>>>> 
>>>> Yeah, I think he speaks well.  I know that once upon a time, I was a Mac
>>>> fan boi.  I'm not exactly clear when that stopped, but it has been a
>>>> while.
>>> 
>>> I've used computers since 1968.
>> 
>> Ahh, the old "punch tape" in high school lab comes to mind there!
> 
> My high school didn't have anything vaguely like a computer lab; it was
> a bit before such things were common in high schools. I did use punch
> tape for some GE system that I accessed via teletype from University of
> Virginia while in my senior year at high school. (I took a math course
> at UVa that year because my high school didn't offer calculus that
> particular year). Also used a Burroughs system at UVa, but that was via
> punched cards and line-printer output.

Physics 101 at TAMU in the early sevenies. Twent five or so punch cards to
express the area of a circle, as I recall.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 5:56:01 PM
In article <hqudncXt6qwtD6PSnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-16 17:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<trydnTpxILWI7aDSnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 14:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>
> >>> Lion:
> >>>
> >>> window resizing from all edges    - Aqua - not OS
> >>> mission control                   - a launcher - not OS
> >>> better sandboxing                 - OS
> >>> automatic reference counting      - programming issue - not OS
> >>> Core Storage                      - OS
> >>> FileVault whole-disk encryption&   recovery keys  - file system 
> >>> improvement.
> >>> Lion recovery partition           - backup scheme.
> >>
> >> ... none of which pertain to ML.
> >
> > You didn't say only ML, but every release "since Leopard":
> 
> True - but those changes are not earth shattering at all.

That is also not what you said - you said Apple did nothing "of real 
interest" with regard to the operating system, which is bullshit. 
Strictly from a non-developer standpoint, Microsoft Exchange support, 
window resizing from all edges, mission control, FileVault, Lion 
recovery are of real interest to a whole lot of Mac users. And a whole 
lot of improvements and additions were made that are of much real 
interest to Mac developers.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 5:58:54 PM


On 2/17/12 11:12 AM, in article
jollyroger-4E3275.11124817022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63C968.80FF0%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/16/12 11:22 AM, in article
>> jollyroger-F7AF98.11222316022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
>> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <mKednQc9cP21paDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2012-02-16 11:32 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> In article<KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>>>> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I
>>>>>>>> don't think they've done much under the hood of real interest
>>>>>>>> since GCD in Leopard
>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more.
>>>>> And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful
>>>>> ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.
>>>> 
>>>> Your insistence without basis is pathetic.
>>> 
>>> Go learn something.
>> 
>> Got up on the wrong side of the bed, eh?
> 
> Not really. I just don't like bullshit statements like the one he made.
> The fact is Apple has done some really good work improving the OS over
> the past few years. And just because he wants to ignore all that good
> work doesn't make it nonexistent.

He is rather bull-headed I have come to realize over the years.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 6:04:25 PM
In article <CB63F2C9.8109A%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/17/12 11:12 AM, in article
> jollyroger-4E3275.11124817022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <CB63C968.80FF0%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2/16/12 11:22 AM, in article
> >> jollyroger-F7AF98.11222316022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
> >> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> In article <mKednQc9cP21paDSnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> On 2012-02-16 11:32 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>> In article<KamdnfzQ_9uks6DSnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> On 2012-02-16 10:56 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article<h_udnZZ6eZcghKDSnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> On 2012-02-16 09:38 , Warren Oates wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Sheesh.  Leave it alone already!
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> While Apple seem to be making the wrapper do more and more I
> >>>>>>>> don't think they've done much under the hood of real interest
> >>>>>>>> since GCD in Leopard
> >>>>>>>> -
> >>>>>>>> other than stripping out Rosetta - and that was not a good thing.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Then you haven't been paying attention. Your loss.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Enlighten me.  And don't bother mentioning the cloud.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Not my job. Pay better attention in the future if you want to know more.
> >>>>> And if you don't want to know more, you are practicing willful
> >>>>> ignorance, which is quite the pathetic trait.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Your insistence without basis is pathetic.
> >>> 
> >>> Go learn something.
> >> 
> >> Got up on the wrong side of the bed, eh?
> > 
> > Not really. I just don't like bullshit statements like the one he made.
> > The fact is Apple has done some really good work improving the OS over
> > the past few years. And just because he wants to ignore all that good
> > work doesn't make it nonexistent.
> 
> He is rather bull-headed I have come to realize over the years.

Well so am I. I don't hold that against anyone. : )

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 6:06:08 PM
Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
>  BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:

>> retire it anytime soon.  (And I'm still waiting to see
>> what Intuit does re: Q2007 as well.  The loss of Rosetta
>> hasn't had much of an impact on me other than that one,
>> singular, sadly still essential app)
>
> I'm considering loading Windows part-time on my file server.  If I do 
> that, I'll get Quicken for Windows.  That'll fix the Q2007 problem.

I've considered that, but the problem is that you *still* have
to go through the same export/import as you'd have if you
moved from Quicken2007 to something else entirely (like MoneyDance).

Q for Windows does *not* import or read directly from a Q2007Mac
file - it requires you to export to QIF and then import -- which
is exactly what mangles the transition to so many of the other
programs.

My thoughts were that if I have to go through that aggravation,
it won't be in order to move to another Intuit product.

That said, I haven't made the move at all.  Every time I start
the process (a) I just don't "get" the other program - I've
been using Q/Mac for so long that this is going to be *hard*;
and (b) it seriously mangles the import and there's going to
be a hell of a lot of work cleaning it up.

-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 6:06:14 PM
George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> writes:

> Supposedly Intuit is coming out with a non-Rosetta Mac version anytime now.

I'm hoping.  At a minimum, it'll buy me more time before I 
make the move to software from a company which isn't going
to cause such trouble for me in the future.

-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 6:07:03 PM
On 2012-02-17 00:39 , Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 02-16-2012 15:57, Alan Browne wrote:
>> The same people who don't understand that the convergence is not in the
>> OS proper but in the look and feel and similar functionality in common
>> applications / "social utilities" (messaging, mail, calendars, cloud,
>> synchronization, etc.) and the s/w distribution model.
>>
>> These don't make the OS' "converge" - just their outward appearance and
>> behaviour.
>
> If by "s/w distribution model" you mean Gatekeeper, I don't call that
> mere outward appearance. I want to become the Keymaster.

It doesn't seem to have much more "power" over the current admin 
authorized s/w installation. It just adds more qualification and the 
ability to override those qualifications - and a pretty wrapper, of course.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 6:09:55 PM
Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> writes:
> Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> writes:

>> Have you tried PostBox?  It came in a software bundle I bought
>> recently and I've been using it instead of Apple's Mail.app on one of
>> my machines and so far I'm reasonably pleased with it.  Nicer controls

> Sounds nice.  The thing I _do_ like about Mail.app is the way it
> indexes mail (so that my comically large Inbox can be searched very
> quickly if not very deftly).  Does PostBox do something similar?

It maintains its own indexing.

<http://support.postbox-inc.com/entries/260823-how-to-index-your-messages-for-search>

My experience yesterday searching for something buried deep in my vast
collection of messages in my mail system (not all in inbox - I keep
inbox relatively clean, but Archive is "comically large") - was that
it found what I was looking for almost immediately while Mail.app
(on a different, slower machine, but nonetheless) took a couple of
minutes to find the same thing.  Whether that was due to how busy
the machines were, how slow the machine was, or how much better or
worse the indexing was, I do not know.

>> Yeah - I like that.  (Though I do keep scroll bars visible all the
>> time, and have turned scrolling into the old-fashioned direction).
>
> After about 45 minutes to get used to it I love so-called "natural"
> scrolling.  (In fact, I have a machine that is too old for Lion, and
> I've put natural scrolling on that too.)

I don't want to get used to it until I can have it on all my
machines.  That won't be for a while.  Switching back and
forth is quite annoying.

-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 6:12:07 PM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 09:27:22 -0800, sbt wrote:

> In article <1kfm7sp.2mrt76wcoy68N%per@RQNNE.invalid>, Per Rønne
> <per@RQNNE.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> At school, I only use the Mac + Magic Trackpad. I'm simply unable to
>> type on the MacBook without touching the internal trackpad - which I
>> have disabled when a mouse or external trackpad is connected.
> 
> At least, I'm not alone with this problem :) Rather than a Magic
> Trackpad, though, I have a small Logitech trackball (the same one as the
> ones on my PowerMac and iMacs). I have the same problem with trackpads
> on my wife's Dell and our daughter's HP, so this isn't an Apple problem,
> but an industrial design problem :) At least, Apple's provided a
> solution to the problem that is easier than what is available on
> Windows.

While I still have some good old DEC/Compaq ball driven mice which seem 
to last forever, they have PS/2 connectors.  For USB mice I've been using 
cheap (< 10 USD) noname optical mice  for the last few years without 
problems.  But they'd doubled the price last time I looked so I spent the 
extra couple of bucks on a Logitech optical mouse, which also works well 
on a variety of surfaces.

-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/17/2012 6:16:31 PM
In article <CB63EFFD.81097%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
> lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
> >> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> >> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> >>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> >>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> >>>>>> at all.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
> >>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> >>> 
> >>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> >>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> >>> 
> >>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> >>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> >>> 
> >>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
> >> 
> >> What balls?!?
> > 
> > The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
> > work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
> > definitely tiny.
> > 
> > I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
> > and relatively poor close up eyesight.
> 
> I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
> The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.

The disassembly, clean, reassembly was talking about the Mighty Mouse.

You're right, the Magic Mouse doesn't take any real maintenance other 
than cleaning occasionally.

But the Magic Trackpad is so much better that my Magic Mouse sits in a 
drawer unused.   The previous Mighty Mouse has long been in the trash!
0
2/17/2012 6:19:22 PM
In article <dfritzin-965492.12250017022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article 
> <lloydparsons-550722.09424917022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <dfritzin-9F7D02.10350117022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >  David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article 
> > > <lloydparsons-7D5ECF.09052417022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > >  Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> > > >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
> > > > > howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
> > > > > <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
> > > > > >  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to 
> > > > > take 
> > > > > up
> > > > > Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to 
> > > > > that.
> > > > 
> > > > Why forced?  
> > > > 
> > > > I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they 
> > > > close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other 
> > > > versions of OSX just fine.
> > > > 
> > > > Most of what they have changed going to iCloud is of little value to me 
> > > > and the one thing I valued beyond email was the keychain sync which has 
> > > > gone away.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, that kind of rots, doesn't it?
> > 
> > It sure does!!  For me, iCloud is a step backward.
> 
> I agree. Less space available as well. Throw in that you can't use it to 
> store documents (non-iWork) and make them available to others is another 
> thing I don't like about iCloud.

Yep, I'd rather pay for what MobileMe had than have iCloud for free.  I 
have exactly zero needs for the music stuff it offers.

So now I'm still using MobileMe iDisk for a backup (one of many 
different backups) and syncing what it does sync these days.  But I'm 
using Microsoft's Mesh Drive for keychains, important docs and other 
files.  Fortunately for me, my space needs aren't much these days.
0
2/17/2012 6:22:24 PM
In article <timstreater-BDE9A8.17200317022012@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article 
> <lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
> > > lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> > > <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> > > >  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> > > >>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> > > >> 
> > > >>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> > > >>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the 
> > > >>>> arrows
> > > >>>> at all.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
> > > >>> and now just use the scroll bar.
> > > >> 
> > > >> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, 
> > > >> tops.
> > > > 
> > > > Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> > > > eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> > > > 
> > > > Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> > > > trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> > > > 
> > > > Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
> > > 
> > > What balls?!?
> > 
> > The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you 
> > work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are 
> > definitely tiny.
> 
> Small roller wheels.

'small' is not even close to describing them!!  :)
0
2/17/2012 6:23:11 PM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:12:48 -0600, Jolly Roger wrote:

> The fact is Apple has done some really good work improving the OS over
> the past few years.

The other side of the coin from some of the remarks in this thread is 
that a friend of mine hadn't used an Apple system since Leopard days, but 
has had an iPhone and later an iPad.  He fell in love with Lion when a 
colleague showed him it late last year and promptly went out and bought a 
nicely specced MacBook Air.  He's delighted with it.


-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/17/2012 6:23:26 PM
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> writes:

> In article <jhls94$3k5$1@reader1.panix.com>,
>  Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:
>
>> Apple hopefully knows that if the App Store is mandatory, the platform 
>> is dead.  Nevertheless, there are signs that while not making it 
>> mandatory, Apple is pushing hard to get everyone into it (which at this 
>> point also means that apps can't do a lot of things).
>
> The Mac App Store is good for the environment.  No boxes, CDs/DVDs, paper, 
> plastic, etc. to be made or clutter up landfills, and no fuel expended or 
> pollutants generated in transporting them.

That's an absurd argument.  Software has been distributed via
download - no boxes, CDs, DVDs, etc - since long before the
App Store.

The App Store was a way to take an existing system -
downloadable software - and (a) streamline it (good); (b) allow
Apple to set a lot of requirements for software distributed
that way (mixed blessing - apps and installations have certain
limits which makes some software impossible to distribute this
way).

Arguing that the App Store broke any ground in getting rid of
packaging undermines the actual arguments - both for and against -
what the App Store actually did.


-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 6:25:48 PM
In article <timstreater-9ECF45.17192817022012@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article 
> <lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> >  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> > >  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> > > > > As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> > > > > at all.
> > > > 
> > > > Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast 
> > > > and now just use the scroll bar.
> > > 
> > > I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> > 
> > Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they 
> > eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> > 
> > Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of 
> > trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> 
> While I am officially a doddering old fossil, no discernible shake yet.

You're lucky.

I'm in the middle of a project to change out the 43 console bulbs on my 
behemoth of a Lowrey organ.  Those younger and more agile, with good 
eyes are able to do an unofficial job of it from the front.

Me?  I've got to do it the official way because of my limitations.  That 
means moving the 450lb beast and removing some boards with lots of 
unmarked connectors to get to the light strips to change the bulbs.

I could get an organ tech, but that's $300 to walk in the door, plus 
about 3 hours of work @$100.  All for about $30 worth of light bulbs!  :(
0
2/17/2012 6:25:57 PM
In article <aqc219-d6d.ln1@news.sture.ch>, Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> 
wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:42:13 -0800, Richard Maine wrote:
> 
> > George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> Ahh, the old "punch tape" in high school lab comes to mind there!
> > 
> > My high school didn't have anything vaguely like a computer lab; it was
> > a bit before such things were common in high schools. I did use punch
> > tape for some GE system that I accessed via teletype from University of
> > Virginia while in my senior year at high school. (I took a math course
> > at UVa that year because my high school didn't offer calculus that
> > particular year). Also used a Burroughs system at UVa, but that was via
> > punched cards and line-printer output.
> 
> My school, which I left in 1973, didn't have a computer lab either.  
> There was a large computer in bits which someone had kindly donated, but 
> apparently it was going to cost too much to put back together, so just 
> sat there doing nothing.

My high school, which I graduated from in 1961 didn't even mention the 
word 'computer'!!!  :)
0
2/17/2012 6:26:43 PM
David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> writes:
>  Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:
>> On 2012-02-17 07:05:24 -0800, Lloyd said:

>> > I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they
>> > close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other
>> > versions of OSX just fine.
>> 
>> My big loss will be address book sync.
>
> I just checked on the Apple website. Address Book sync appears to be 
> there.
>
> http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/calendar-mail-contacts.html

Because not all of my machines can be upgraded to Lion, if
I switch to iCloud, I lose addressbook sync on some of my
machines.  And since MobileMe is going away, if I don't
switch to iCloud, I lose it on all of my machines.  A loss
either way.

-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 6:30:06 PM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:27:26 -0700, Michelle Steiner wrote:

> As I understand it, Gatekeeper is for only those applications that are
> downloaded.  If they are purchased and installed from a CD, DVD, or
> thumb drive‹or are compiled on your own computer‹Gatekeeper will not 
> be involved.

If the following is true, then yes Gatekeeper will only apply to 
downloaded apps:

<http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2153331/sophos-rubbishes-
gatekeeper-mac-108-mountain-lion>

---
Chester Wisniewski, a senior security advisor at Sophos said, "This 
sounds like a pretty good idea to me, but unfortunately the 
implementation is flawed. The first problem is that Apple is relying on 
the Lsquarantine technology used in their rudimentary integrated anti-
virus known as Xprotect."

"This means Gatekeeper is essentially a whitelisting technology bolted 
onto the blacklisting technology it introduced two versions ago," he 
added.
---

He then goes on to say that this only applies to executables, not evilly 
crafted JPG, PDF etc files.

There is of course still plenty of time for Apple to change this before 
the final release.

-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/17/2012 6:31:46 PM


On 2/17/12 11:55 AM, in article
jollyroger-78CAB7.11550417022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63EFFD.81097%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
>> lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>>>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
>>>> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>>>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
>>>>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
>>>>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
>>>>>>>> at all.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
>>>>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
>>>>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
>>>>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
>>>> 
>>>> What balls?!?
>>> 
>>> The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
>>> work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
>>> definitely tiny.
>>> 
>>> I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
>>> and relatively poor close up eyesight.
>> 
>> I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
>> The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.
> 
> We're talking about the Mighty Mouse in this sub-thread.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0>

My bad!

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 6:40:57 PM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:12:12 -0600, Tim McNamara wrote:

> In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
>> howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
>> <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
>> 
>> > In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>> >  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> >> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>> >> 
>> >> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
>> > 
>> > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
>> 
>> Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to take
>> up Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to
>> that.
> 
> One of the reasons I have resolutely avoided cloud computing.  I am
> cynical enough to realize that the benefits of cloud computing for me
> are accidental at best; the real benefits of cloud computing are for the
> providers.  Why the hell would I want my files out there on some server
> over which I have no control?  Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb IMHO.

I'm using a sort of private cloud.  I started off with a private website 
hosted elsewhere so that I could access it and add notes and attachments 
from anywhere I can get internet access, but I am currently moving 
towards an rsync and/or git based solution spread between my home and 
office systems.  The system hosted elsewhere is of course backed up onto 
my systems so even if that ISP disappeared overnight my notes would still 
be available.

I don't think that ISP is likely to disappear overnight; I put some 
effort into seeing what kind of outfit they were before signing up, but 
in these days of site takedowns at the whim of Big Content, it's a 
possibility I have to bear in mind.

-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/17/2012 6:45:07 PM


On 2/17/12 12:19 PM, in article
lloydparsons-37788C.12192217022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
<lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63EFFD.81097%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
>> lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>>>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
>>>> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>>>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
>>>>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
>>>>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
>>>>>>>> at all.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
>>>>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
>>>>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
>>>>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
>>>> 
>>>> What balls?!?
>>> 
>>> The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
>>> work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
>>> definitely tiny.
>>> 
>>> I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
>>> and relatively poor close up eyesight.
>> 
>> I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
>> The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.
> 
> The disassembly, clean, reassembly was talking about the Mighty Mouse.
> 
> You're right, the Magic Mouse doesn't take any real maintenance other
> than cleaning occasionally.
> 
> But the Magic Trackpad is so much better that my Magic Mouse sits in a
> drawer unused.   The previous Mighty Mouse has long been in the trash!

Huh? I was talking about Minnie.

Seriously, I had a senior moment there, sorry!

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 6:45:09 PM


On 2/17/12 12:22 PM, in article
lloydparsons-0E2D04.12222417022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
<lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> In article <dfritzin-965492.12250017022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> In article 
>> <lloydparsons-550722.09424917022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>  Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <dfritzin-9F7D02.10350117022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>  David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In article 
>>>> <lloydparsons-7D5ECF.09052417022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>  Lloyd <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <CB63C7BD.80FEE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>>>>>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2/16/12 9:35 AM, in article
>>>>>> howard-B49DB3.08351816022012@news.giganews.com, "Howard S Shubs"
>>>>>> <howard@shubs.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In article <4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>>>>>>>  Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Most are still there, I would imagine. Come June I'll be forced to
>>>>>> take 
>>>>>> up
>>>>>> Lion when my MobileMe account closes. I am NOT looking forward to
>>>>>> that.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Why forced?  
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they
>>>>> close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other
>>>>> versions of OSX just fine.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Most of what they have changed going to iCloud is of little value to me
>>>>> and the one thing I valued beyond email was the keychain sync which has
>>>>> gone away.
>>>> 
>>>> Yeah, that kind of rots, doesn't it?
>>> 
>>> It sure does!!  For me, iCloud is a step backward.
>> 
>> I agree. Less space available as well. Throw in that you can't use it to
>> store documents (non-iWork) and make them available to others is another
>> thing I don't like about iCloud.
> 
> Yep, I'd rather pay for what MobileMe had than have iCloud for free.  I
> have exactly zero needs for the music stuff it offers.
> 
> So now I'm still using MobileMe iDisk for a backup (one of many
> different backups) and syncing what it does sync these days.  But I'm
> using Microsoft's Mesh Drive for keychains, important docs and other
> files.  Fortunately for me, my space needs aren't much these days.

I might be looking into expanding my DropBox account.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 6:47:08 PM
In article <CB63FB59.810C9%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0>

: D

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 6:52:32 PM
In article <i1j219-d6d.ln1@news.sture.ch>, Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> 
wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:27:26 -0700, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> 
> > As I understand it, Gatekeeper is for only those applications that are
> > downloaded.  If they are purchased and installed from a CD, DVD, or
> > thumb drive�or are compiled on your own computer�Gatekeeper will not 
> > be involved.
> 
> If the following is true, then yes Gatekeeper will only apply to 
> downloaded apps:
> 
> <http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2153331/sophos-rubbishes-
> gatekeeper-mac-108-mountain-lion>
> 
> ---
> Chester Wisniewski, a senior security advisor at Sophos said, "This 
> sounds like a pretty good idea to me, but unfortunately the 
> implementation is flawed. The first problem is that Apple is relying on 
> the Lsquarantine technology used in their rudimentary integrated anti-
> virus known as Xprotect."
> 
> "This means Gatekeeper is essentially a whitelisting technology bolted 
> onto the blacklisting technology it introduced two versions ago," he 
> added.
> ---
> 
> He then goes on to say that this only applies to executables, not evilly 
> crafted JPG, PDF etc files.
> 
> There is of course still plenty of time for Apple to change this before 
> the final release.

My understanding is Gatekeeper is supplemental to the malware protection 
already built into OS X.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 6:54:02 PM
In article <yobmx8hwc43.fsf@panix2.panix.com>, BreadWithSpam@fractious.net 
wrote:

> > The Mac App Store is good for the environment.  No boxes, CDs/DVDs, 
> > paper, plastic, etc. to be made or clutter up landfills, and no fuel 
> > expended or pollutants generated in transporting them.
> 
> That's an absurd argument.  Software has been distributed via download - 
> no boxes, CDs, DVDs, etc - since long before the App Store.

I didn't say that only the Mac App Store did it.  But there are lots of 
apps that are now sold only through the App Store that previously was sold 
boxed.

> Arguing that the App Store broke any ground in getting rid of
> packaging undermines the actual arguments - both for and against -
> what the App Store actually did.

I didn't say that it broke any ground.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/17/2012 7:00:43 PM
George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> writes:
> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

>> So now I'm still using MobileMe iDisk for a backup (one of many
>> different backups) and syncing what it does sync these days.  But I'm
>> using Microsoft's Mesh Drive for keychains, important docs and other
>> files.  Fortunately for me, my space needs aren't much these days.

> I might be looking into expanding my DropBox account.

I use DropBox extensively.  Paid for additional storage long ago and
never regretted it.  The increasing integration into apps (both
desktop and iOS) makes it get better and better.

I also use Wuala, though.  They have a different security model
and certain content that I have higher security concerns for
go into there.

If I could get my Address Book and iCal sync to work via DropBox,
there'd be nothing whatsoever that I'd miss from MobileMe.
(DropBox, btw, has very nice photo gallery features, too - a
nice replacement for the going-away gallery.me.com).

Apps which are explicitly built with DropBox awareness really
shine.  1Password, for example.

PostBox, btw, has a slick little (optional) Dropbox integration -
if you have a file in your DropBox folder and you drag and
drop it into a message to send via PostBox, you can send a
link to it rather than the file itself.  Very slick if you
need to send a large file.  Not sure about the security
implications - it appears you can send files this way which
are not in your Public folder.  Hrm.



-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 7:07:01 PM
In article <CB63EFFD.81097%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
 George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
> lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
> >> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> >> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> >>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> >>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> >>>>>> at all.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
> >>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> >>> 
> >>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> >>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> >>> 
> >>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> >>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> >>> 
> >>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
> >> 
> >> What balls?!?
> > 
> > The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
> > work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
> > definitely tiny.
> > 
> > I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
> > and relatively poor close up eyesight.
> 
> I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
> The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.

I think Lloyd meant to say Mighty Mouse (now, Apple Mouse, IIRC).
0
dfritzin6 (334)
2/17/2012 7:15:12 PM
<BreadWithSpam@fractious.net> wrote:

> George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> writes:
> > <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:

> > I might be looking into expanding my DropBox account.
> 
> I use DropBox extensively
.....
> Apps which are explicitly built with DropBox awareness really
> shine.  1Password, for example.

Yep. And the interoperability of DropBox and multiple operating systems
is a major, major, major feature. Did I remember to mention that it is
major?

It really doesn't matter how great a job Apple might do of some
replacement functionality. If it doesn't also run on Windows machines,
then it simply is of no interest to me. It isn't even a matter of my own
machines. I have acquaintances who have Windows machines, and that isn't
likely to change. I regularly use DropBox to send things to them.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain
0
nospam47 (9747)
2/17/2012 7:16:14 PM
In article <yobipj5wbwx.fsf@panix2.panix.com>,
 BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:

> David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> writes:
> >  Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:
> >> On 2012-02-17 07:05:24 -0800, Lloyd said:
> 
> >> > I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they
> >> > close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other
> >> > versions of OSX just fine.
> >> 
> >> My big loss will be address book sync.
> >
> > I just checked on the Apple website. Address Book sync appears to be 
> > there.
> >
> > http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/calendar-mail-contacts.html
> 
> Because not all of my machines can be upgraded to Lion, if
> I switch to iCloud, I lose addressbook sync on some of my
> machines.  And since MobileMe is going away, if I don't
> switch to iCloud, I lose it on all of my machines.  A loss
> either way.

OK, my mistake.
0
dfritzin6 (334)
2/17/2012 7:18:38 PM
In article <1kfm7sp.2mrt76wcoy68N%per@RQNNE.invalid>,
 per@RQNNE.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:

> I'm simply unable to
> type on the MacBook without touching the internal trackpad - which I
> have disabled when a mouse or external trackpad is connected.

How do you do this disabling?

-- 
dorayme
0
dorayme (2141)
2/17/2012 7:34:42 PM
Howard S Shubs:
> > > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.

Davoud:
> > After years on Usenet I should not be amazed to see people condemning
> > products they have not seen and know practically nothing about, yet
> > sometimes I just can't help being amazed.

Howard S Shubs:
> Davoud, I don't like Lion.  I don't like this direction Apple is taking.  
> If ML is more, then I'm not interested.  And we both know it will be.

Fair enough. Different strokes and all that. But I'm not sure that I
know what you mean by "this direction." Do you mean that adding
software to the Mac OS, the use of which software is optional, and
which software you never even have to see, somehow alters the
fundamental nature, or direction, of the OS? I don't believe that. My
Mac OS with Adobe Creative Suite and Apple's Final Cut Pro is still my
Mac OS. It's just software that I choose to use. I find that the things
people complain about in Lion are are options as much as the media
software that I named is optional. Some complaints are based on
ignorance. I don't care much about Launchpad, e.g., but it's not worth
complaining about because it just sits in my Dock doing no harm and I
use it once in a long while. I haven't found a use for Spaces in my
work style, so I am unaware of it. People complain that TextEdit can't
"Save As" anymore, but that's nonsense. The feature has been renamed
"Duplicate." The 30 seconds it took for me to learn that when Lion was
new has paid for itself again and again via the auto-save feature. For
me there is no workflow difference between Snow Leopard and Lion. Lion
is, perhaps, a bit more robust, better at so-called "heavy lifting"
when I'm rendering video while working on a 250MB Photoshop image, but
I think that's a plus, not a minus.

My point is that if you think that OS X and IOS are "converging" (I
hate that buzzword as much as I hate "ecosystem" to mean "product
line") just because OS X is getting applications to make it easier to
interact with the mobile devices that are overwhelmingly popular, then
you are mistaken. And it would be a grave mistake for Apple to fail to
add communications software to the Mac OS to enable it to more easily
exchange data with IOS (indeed, Mac and IOS users have been demanding
this). I want the data on my five Macs and six IOS thingies integrated.
I want my media in iCloud, accessible to every device everywhere. Like
the *vast* majority of IOS users I don't give a rat's furry little
kneecaps that the IOS file system is not accessible. IOS permits me to
move files where I need to. If for any reason a user of Mountain Lion
does not wish to take advantage of this added software s/he will not be
obliged to do so and will incur no penalties (except possibly a loss of
convenience if that person is an IOS user). At current prices the
additional software will probably eat a nickel's worth of HD space, and
software that isn't running generally uses zero RAM. Apple won't
inflate the cost of the OS for the extra software, either.

If there are a hundred million Mac users out there, there are a hundred
million different ways to work with a Mac. What's the problem with
Apple accommodating as many users as possible--especially when so many
have made their wants known on IOS-Mac OS communication? Apple does not
add only features and capabilities that it has dreamed up. It responds
to customer desires. It would be bad for business Apple to say "If you
don't like Application XX, don't use it; it came free with the OS, so
stop complaining." but that's what it comes down to. "And if you don't
like the OS at all, switch to another one." Fortunately, that doesn't
need saying; it's implicit. And consumers are responding to Apple, as
well, voting with their purses. The growth in sales of Macintosh
computers has outpaced the industry by a wide margin for *six* *years*
running. *Somebody* thinks that Apple is doing the right thing with the
Mac OS.

You will eventually find yourself years behind the rest of the
computing world, and you will have essentially three choices: Limit
your activities by using outdated software; limit your activities by
using Unix (which you already have) by giving up a great deal of
software, or turning to Windows, an OS that will not annoy you in any
way. It seems to me like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face
just because the Mac will in future come with "Messages" instead of
iChat. I just can't think of anything more inane than "I haven't seen
it, but I've heard rumors that it comes with software that I don't want
to use, so I don't like it and I won't buy it."

BTW, I downloaded the "Messages" beta yesterday. Love it. I don't
generally turn my iPhone on when I'm at home, and I have already found
the ability to exchange texts with my wife and friends who are on the
road with their iThingies without having to use anything but the Mac
that is in front of me to be quite utile. YMMV.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
0
star (3126)
2/17/2012 7:35:24 PM
In article <michelle-0A99C7.10272617022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <170220120920553641%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>,
>  sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the 
> > 1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation 
> > with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a 
> > provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to be 
> > created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those of 
> > us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess, have 
> > concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we did, 
> > by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing it with 
> > friends.
> 
> As I understand it, Gatekeeper is for only those applications that are 
> downloaded.  If they are purchased and installed from a CD, DVD, or thumb 
> drive�or are compiled on your own computer�Gatekeeper will not be involved.
> 

Michelle,

That's so far. As the differentiation between the platforms lessens,
the fear of some (and I have some concern on this score as well) is
that the Mac will join the iOS devices as a completely closed
ecosystem. While that might be what's needed for a completely
consumer-appliance market, it does mark a change in that the hobbyist
or tinkerer is excluded.

Parallels may be drawn with automobiles, where there is an aftermarket
for people who like to tinker.

-- 
Spenser
0
dogbreath (1151)
2/17/2012 8:00:47 PM
sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:

> In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > 
> > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > > > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > > > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > 
> > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store is 
> > > now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> > > end.
> > 
> > So just to be clear:
> > 
> > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.
> > -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.
> > 
> > I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do _you_
> > not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free not to use)
> > but you don't want anyone else to have access to them either.
> > 
> 
> Not what he wrote, at least as I read it.
> 
> For the scrollbars, he's objecting to the reduced functionality even
> when they are shown (loss of scroll arrows) and the narrower (harder to
> hit) thumb. He also seems to be annoyed that the "lesser" behavior is
> the default.

You got an awful lot out of the single word "That" which he wrote in
response to my "Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of
not showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,
what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?"
 
> For the App Store, he specifically wrote that he objected to how it is
> rapidly getting closer to becoming mandatory, which is the situation to
> which he specifically fears (as stated in the above quote).

I suppose you could argue that since the App Store exists, it is
closer to mandatory than if it didn't exist.   Beyond that I'm
confused about how one can assert it is closing in on mandatory.
 
> The following is written by someone who has been described by friends
> and family as an Apple fan(atic) and, at least so far, would rather use
> a Mac than any other platform I've ever seen or heard of (including my
> iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch).
> 
> As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the
> 1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation
> with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a
> provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to
> be created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those
> of us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess,
> have concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we
> did, by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing
> it with friends.

Maybe I'm missing something.  I'm experience zero difficult, say,
downloading and installing Chrome.  Without the App Store.  In fact
installing Chrome on Lion seems to me to be an identical experience to
installing Chrome on Leopard.

Likewise for other applications I install.  Now it is true that there
must also be some applications I've installed from the App Store,
where that was the only way to install them, but the fact that the App
Store gives _another_ way for developers to share and/or sell their
applications doesn't seem like a _bad_ thing to me.  Developers who
don't want to use the App Store don't have to.

> I still remember the 1984 commercial and it now is bringing to mind the
> Walter Kelly quote from Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us." At
> the time of the commercial, Big Blue was so dominant that it tried to
> control everything (similarly AT&T in telecomm), then Microsoft got so
> huge that it tried to broaden its control, now Apple is started down
> the same road.

Only if you interpret "supplying the user with additional options" as
"trying to control everything."  Which seems crazy to me.
0
2/17/2012 8:12:00 PM
George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> writes:

> On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
> lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
> >> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> >> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> >>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> >>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
> >>>>>> at all.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
> >>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
> >>> 
> >>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> >>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> >>> 
> >>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> >>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> >>> 
> >>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
> >> 
> >> What balls?!?
> > 
> > The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
> > work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
> > definitely tiny.
> > 
> > I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
> > and relatively poor close up eyesight.
> 
> I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
> The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.

That's why it is so hard to clean those sub-atomic roller wheels!
0
2/17/2012 8:13:18 PM
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:
> On 2012-02-16 17:34 , Bread wrote:

>> but I've been eyeing that 6GB upgrade for my 2.4 Ghz Core 2 Duo
>> MacBookPro3,1. OWC claims that it works

> I updated a mid 2007 iMac that was officially limited to 4 GB to 6 GB
> (per a website).  Works like a charm.  Page swaps are small and

Put the order in a little while ago.  Thanks for the feedback.



-- 
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks.  The rest gets trashed.
0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/17/2012 8:20:50 PM
sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:

(snip)

> Michelle,
> 
> That's so far. As the differentiation between the platforms lessens,
> the fear of some (and I have some concern on this score as well) is
> that the Mac will join the iOS devices as a completely closed
> ecosystem. While that might be what's needed for a completely
> consumer-appliance market, it does mark a change in that the hobbyist
> or tinkerer is excluded.

OK - so we're criticizing Apple not for anything they've done, but for
something they _might_ do.
0
2/17/2012 8:21:33 PM
On 2012-02-17 00:43 , Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> In article<hf-dnecBpOk136DSnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 12:17 , Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
>>> In article<4f3d14cb$0$2936$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>,
>>>    Warren Oates<warren.oates@gmail.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/>
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400311,00.asp>
>>>
>>> Twitter, iCould, Messages, Game Center... WTF?
>>>
>>> How about fixing Frankenstein's GUI, broken Spaces, auto-save
>>> destruction, memory bloat, and virtual memory thrashing?
>>>
>>> 10.6 was the OS that helped many Silicon Valley offices adopt
>>> Macintoshes as a standard computer configuration.  It was easy to use,
>>> integrated well with other systems, and a great performer on laptops.
>>> New computers with 10.7 are despised because they're slow, clumsy, and
>>> buggy.  Another round of dumbing-down will force a switch to Windows and
>>> Linux.
>>
>> If a computer should look "slow" under Lion v. SL it would be my 2007
>> iMac (2.8 GHz dual core and 667 Mhz memory).  Yet there is no
>> perceptible change from SL to Lion.
>>
>> The newer machines would just be quick and nimble.
>>
>> I suppose I could benchmark on my son's MBP if I update it to Lion.  So
>> far he's not interested.
>
> The difference is under heavy load - lots of disk I/O and using more
> than 4GB of RAM.  SL does this fine on an older dual-core i7 MacBook Pro
> with 8GB RAM.  The same in Lion with a newer quad-core i7 with 8GB RAM
> causes all apps to continuously cycle in and out of beachballing.  Some
> investigation shows Lion's auto-save stalling and abnormal VM behavior
> (active memory swaps out while there are gigabytes of idle and inactive
> memory).

I don't often have a solid CPU load, but I do often have a heavy I/O 
load to several disks at one (internal and 3 external (2 USB, 1 FW)) as 
I move project files in and out and make multiple copies.  This while 
also running/using a heavy editor (Photoshop CS5) and the MS Office 
(Word and Excel) open.  Plus mail, browser and so on.  So a pretty mixed 
bag of "stuff" that should cause an OS to balk down somewhere - but it 
doesn't seem any worse or slower now than with SL.  Even with WinXP 
running (not doing much to be sure) under Fusion (itself not very 
efficient) there's no 'lag'.  This is with memory used in the 5 GB 
region (of 6).

I do see beachballs from time to time - they typically live for 5 - 20 
seconds and are gone.  Other apps remain responsive while the 
beachballed app hangs a bit.  This is not often.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 8:29:40 PM
On 2012-02-17 15:20 , BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:
> Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  writes:
>> On 2012-02-16 17:34 , Bread wrote:
>
>>> but I've been eyeing that 6GB upgrade for my 2.4 Ghz Core 2 Duo
>>> MacBookPro3,1. OWC claims that it works
>
>> I updated a mid 2007 iMac that was officially limited to 4 GB to 6 GB
>> (per a website).  Works like a charm.  Page swaps are small and
>
> Put the order in a little while ago.  Thanks for the feedback.

W.  I've seen many mentions of people doing the oddball 6 GB upgrade - 
no issues.  (I'm sure you checked that your particular hardware would 
work at 6).


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 8:30:44 PM
On 2012-02-17 09:01 , Paul Sture wrote:

> Ubuntu and at least one derivative already have the "Where the hell is
> the scrollbar?" feature.

The "scrollbar" issue is a red herring issue.  If you can't live without 
it you turn it on in the system settings.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 8:34:23 PM
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:

> On 2012-02-17 09:01 , Paul Sture wrote:
> 
> > Ubuntu and at least one derivative already have the "Where the hell is
> > the scrollbar?" feature.
> 
> The "scrollbar" issue is a red herring issue.  If you can't live
> without it you turn it on in the system settings.

That's what I thought too, but it turns out that some people view the
narrowness of the Lion scrollbar, together with the absence of arrows
as being a fundamental ease-of-use issue (or maybe as a sign of the
impending apocalypse).  So the big issue isn't the absence of the
scrollbar, but that it is different from what they want, though then
those things seem to get conflated.

I don't see it myself, but I do understand that different people need
different things.
0
2/17/2012 8:55:14 PM
In article <sq4nup5ien.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> 
> > In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson 
> > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > > 
> > > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not 
> > > > > showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need 
> > > > > them,  what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > > 
> > > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App 
> > > > Store is now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, 
> > > > that's the end.
> > > 
> > > So just to be clear:
> > > 
> > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing 
> > > scrollbars. -you object to the user having the _option_ of using 
> > > the App store.
> > > 
> > > I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do 
> > > _you_ not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free 
> > > not to use) but you don't want anyone else to have access to them 
> > > either.
> > > 
> > 
> > Not what he wrote, at least as I read it.
> > 
> > For the scrollbars, he's objecting to the reduced functionality 
> > even when they are shown (loss of scroll arrows) and the narrower 
> > (harder to hit) thumb. He also seems to be annoyed that the 
> > "lesser" behavior is the default.
> 
> You got an awful lot out of the single word "That" which he wrote in 
> response to my "Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of 
> not showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need them, 
> what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?"
>  
> > For the App Store, he specifically wrote that he objected to how it 
> > is rapidly getting closer to becoming mandatory, which is the 
> > situation to which he specifically fears (as stated in the above 
> > quote).
> 
> I suppose you could argue that since the App Store exists, it is 
> closer to mandatory than if it didn't exist.   Beyond that I'm 
> confused about how one can assert it is closing in on mandatory.

I think that the issue there is "Gatekeeper."

<http://www.slashgear.com/developers-cautiously-convinced-by-apple-gateke
eper-17214027/>

Note the screenshot which can allow (apparently) the computer to be set 
to only allow applications to be run that are obtained through the App 
Store.  It would be conceivable that Apple *could* make the App Store 
the only source of downloads (although that'd be downright stupid and 
Apple is not downright stupid, so I think this is a tempest in a teacup).

-- 
This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in
unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in.  

Theodore Roosevelt
0
timmcn (2339)
2/17/2012 8:56:17 PM
In article <8csji943ea.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> 
> (snip)
> 
> > Michelle,
> > 
> > That's so far. As the differentiation between the platforms 
> > lessens, the fear of some (and I have some concern on this score as 
> > well) is that the Mac will join the iOS devices as a completely 
> > closed ecosystem. While that might be what's needed for a 
> > completely consumer-appliance market, it does mark a change in that 
> > the hobbyist or tinkerer is excluded.
> 
> OK - so we're criticizing Apple not for anything they've done, but 
> for something they _might_ do.

A time-honored tradition in Usenet that is frequently applied to Apple, 
Microsoft, Adobe, Google, Barack Obama, Democrats and the GOP in 
particular.

-- 
This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in
unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in.  

Theodore Roosevelt
0
timmcn (2339)
2/17/2012 8:57:37 PM
Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> writes:

> In article <sq4nup5ien.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
>  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> > 
> > > In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson 
> > > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > > > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not 
> > > > > > showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need 
> > > > > > them,  what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > > > 
> > > > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App 
> > > > > Store is now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, 
> > > > > that's the end.
> > > > 
> > > > So just to be clear:
> > > > 
> > > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing 
> > > > scrollbars. -you object to the user having the _option_ of using 
> > > > the App store.
> > > > 
> > > > I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do 
> > > > _you_ not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free 
> > > > not to use) but you don't want anyone else to have access to them 
> > > > either.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Not what he wrote, at least as I read it.
> > > 
> > > For the scrollbars, he's objecting to the reduced functionality 
> > > even when they are shown (loss of scroll arrows) and the narrower 
> > > (harder to hit) thumb. He also seems to be annoyed that the 
> > > "lesser" behavior is the default.
> > 
> > You got an awful lot out of the single word "That" which he wrote in 
> > response to my "Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of 
> > not showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need them, 
> > what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?"
> >  
> > > For the App Store, he specifically wrote that he objected to how it 
> > > is rapidly getting closer to becoming mandatory, which is the 
> > > situation to which he specifically fears (as stated in the above 
> > > quote).
> > 
> > I suppose you could argue that since the App Store exists, it is 
> > closer to mandatory than if it didn't exist.   Beyond that I'm 
> > confused about how one can assert it is closing in on mandatory.
> 
> I think that the issue there is "Gatekeeper."
> 
> <http://www.slashgear.com/developers-cautiously-convinced-by-apple-gateke
> eper-17214027/>
> 
> Note the screenshot which can allow (apparently) the computer to be set 
> to only allow applications to be run that are obtained through the App 
> Store.  It would be conceivable that Apple *could* make the App Store 
> the only source of downloads (although that'd be downright stupid and 
> Apple is not downright stupid, so I think this is a tempest in a
> teacup).

I suppose.  But Gatekeeper seems like a good idea, and critizing Apple
because they could theoretically in the future choose to do something
bad with it seems daft to me.

They _could_ do anything in the future, including a whole raft of bad
things.  No doubt they will do some things - some good, some bad.  But
it makes more sense to criticize the things they _do_ rather than
preemptively criticizing things they _might_ do.
0
2/17/2012 9:07:47 PM
On 2012-02-17 15:55 , Doug Anderson wrote:
> Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  writes:
>
>> On 2012-02-17 09:01 , Paul Sture wrote:
>>
>>> Ubuntu and at least one derivative already have the "Where the hell is
>>> the scrollbar?" feature.
>>
>> The "scrollbar" issue is a red herring issue.  If you can't live
>> without it you turn it on in the system settings.
>
> That's what I thought too, but it turns out that some people view the
> narrowness of the Lion scrollbar, together with the absence of arrows
> as being a fundamental ease-of-use issue (or maybe as a sign of the
> impending apocalypse).  So the big issue isn't the absence of the
> scrollbar, but that it is different from what they want, though then
> those things seem to get conflated.
>
> I don't see it myself, but I do understand that different people need
> different things.

They are a little on the narrow side - with the trackpad and a high 
speed setting (tracking) they're a bit hard to grab.  OTOH, with the 
trackpad I don't need the scrollbars at all - I just swipe the pad with 
2 fingers - when I do that the scrollbar appears showing me where I am 
in the document.  With a mouse the scrollbar seems easier to grab. 
Apple could offer to make these variable width or offer 2 or 3 standard 
widths.  (and while there, throw in some colour).  But that probably 
wouldn't fit the window framework (Aqua?) that appears to be more and 
more shared with iOS.

I still think it's more RH than real issue.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 9:12:09 PM
In article <170220121200478225%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>,
 sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:

> In article <michelle-0A99C7.10272617022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
> > In article <170220120920553641%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>,
> >  sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:
> > 
> > > As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the 
> > > 1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation 
> > > with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a 
> > > provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to be 
> > > created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those of 
> > > us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess, have 
> > > concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we did, 
> > > by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing it with 
> > > friends.
> > 
> > As I understand it, Gatekeeper is for only those applications that are 
> > downloaded.  If they are purchased and installed from a CD, DVD, or thumb 
> > drive�or are compiled on your own computer�Gatekeeper will not be involved.
> > 
> 
> Michelle,
> 
> That's so far. As the differentiation between the platforms lessens,
> the fear of some (and I have some concern on this score as well) is
> that the Mac will join the iOS devices as a completely closed
> ecosystem. While that might be what's needed for a completely
> consumer-appliance market, it does mark a change in that the hobbyist
> or tinkerer is excluded.
> 
> Parallels may be drawn with automobiles, where there is an aftermarket
> for people who like to tinker.

That fear is unfounded. There is no evidence Apple is going down that 
road with OS X.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 9:13:20 PM
In article <8csji943ea.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> 
> (snip)
> 
> > Michelle,
> > 
> > That's so far. As the differentiation between the platforms lessens,
> > the fear of some (and I have some concern on this score as well) is
> > that the Mac will join the iOS devices as a completely closed
> > ecosystem. While that might be what's needed for a completely
> > consumer-appliance market, it does mark a change in that the hobbyist
> > or tinkerer is excluded.
> 
> OK - so we're criticizing Apple not for anything they've done, but for
> something they _might_ do.

Apparently. Pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 9:13:38 PM
In article <170220121435249281%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net> 
wrote:

> Howard S Shubs:
> > > > Hm, I wonder how much trouble it'd be to go back to Snow Leopard.
> 
> Davoud:
> > > After years on Usenet I should not be amazed to see people condemning
> > > products they have not seen and know practically nothing about, yet
> > > sometimes I just can't help being amazed.
> 
> Howard S Shubs:
> > Davoud, I don't like Lion.  I don't like this direction Apple is taking.  
> > If ML is more, then I'm not interested.  And we both know it will be.
> 
> Fair enough. Different strokes and all that. But I'm not sure that I
> know what you mean by "this direction." Do you mean that adding
> software to the Mac OS, the use of which software is optional, and
> which software you never even have to see, somehow alters the
> fundamental nature, or direction, of the OS? I don't believe that. 

To be fair, there are some features brought from iOS that are not 
optional.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 9:16:15 PM
In article <sq4nup5ien.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> 
> > In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > > 
> > > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > > > > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > > > > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > > 
> > > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store
> > > > is 
> > > > now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> > > > end.
> > > 
> > > So just to be clear:
> > > 
> > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.
> > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.
> > > 
> > > I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do _you_
> > > not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free not to use)
> > > but you don't want anyone else to have access to them either.
> > > 
> > 
> > Not what he wrote, at least as I read it.
> > 
> > For the scrollbars, he's objecting to the reduced functionality even
> > when they are shown (loss of scroll arrows) and the narrower (harder to
> > hit) thumb. He also seems to be annoyed that the "lesser" behavior is
> > the default.
> 
> You got an awful lot out of the single word "That" which he wrote in
> response to my "Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of
> not showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,
> what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?"
>  
> > For the App Store, he specifically wrote that he objected to how it is
> > rapidly getting closer to becoming mandatory, which is the situation to
> > which he specifically fears (as stated in the above quote).
> 
> I suppose you could argue that since the App Store exists, it is
> closer to mandatory than if it didn't exist.   Beyond that I'm
> confused about how one can assert it is closing in on mandatory.
>  
> > The following is written by someone who has been described by friends
> > and family as an Apple fan(atic) and, at least so far, would rather use
> > a Mac than any other platform I've ever seen or heard of (including my
> > iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch).
> > 
> > As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the
> > 1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation
> > with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a
> > provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to
> > be created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those
> > of us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess,
> > have concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we
> > did, by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing
> > it with friends.
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something.  I'm experience zero difficult, say,
> downloading and installing Chrome.  Without the App Store.  In fact
> installing Chrome on Lion seems to me to be an identical experience to
> installing Chrome on Leopard.

The issue is that, in 10.8, Gatekeeper becomes involved with the
default being "App Store and signed applications only." It is true that
you can, supposedly, disable Gatekeeper and allow free rein, but that
isn't the case with iOS and the transition is very definitely heading
in the direction of making the experience the same on the two
platforms. I'm not arguing that this will take place, just that the
fear is a reasonable one for people to have.

> 
> Likewise for other applications I install.  Now it is true that there
> must also be some applications I've installed from the App Store,
> where that was the only way to install them, but the fact that the App
> Store gives _another_ way for developers to share and/or sell their
> applications doesn't seem like a _bad_ thing to me.  Developers who
> don't want to use the App Store don't have to.
> 
> > I still remember the 1984 commercial and it now is bringing to mind the
> > Walter Kelly quote from Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us." At
> > the time of the commercial, Big Blue was so dominant that it tried to
> > control everything (similarly AT&T in telecomm), then Microsoft got so
> > huge that it tried to broaden its control, now Apple is started down
> > the same road.
> 
> Only if you interpret "supplying the user with additional options" as
> "trying to control everything."  Which seems crazy to me.

No, first it is an option, and then the option disappears. For example,
no scroll arrows. Those of us who find trackpads very difficult to use
are still wedded to our mice and trackballs, and this makes scrolling
one line at a time difficult ... yes, use the keyboard and press the
down-arrow, but that also moves the insertion point as well.

Again, the point isn't that we've reached a problem, but that we look
to be trending toward a problem. More an issue of incrementalism than a
sea change. Camel's nose under the tent flap and all that.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get
you :)

-- 
Spenser
0
dogbreath (1151)
2/17/2012 9:21:14 PM
In article <1hmx8h41u5.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> writes:
> 
> > On 2012-02-17 09:01 , Paul Sture wrote:
> > 
> > > Ubuntu and at least one derivative already have the "Where the hell is
> > > the scrollbar?" feature.
> > 
> > The "scrollbar" issue is a red herring issue.  If you can't live
> > without it you turn it on in the system settings.
> 
> That's what I thought too, but it turns out that some people view the
> narrowness of the Lion scrollbar, together with the absence of arrows
> as being a fundamental ease-of-use issue (or maybe as a sign of the
> impending apocalypse).  So the big issue isn't the absence of the
> scrollbar, but that it is different from what they want, though then
> those things seem to get conflated.
> 
> I don't see it myself, but I do understand that different people need
> different things.

The one part of the scroll bars I miss is the arrows at either end that 
allowed you to easily scroll a single line/unit at a time. As others 
have said, there are other ways to skin that cat. So it's not the end of 
the world, and I don't think I've ever mentioned it to anyone before 
this thread. It's just not a huge issue for me. That said, I can see how 
the new scroll bar appearance may inconvenience someone else. And I do 
believe hiding the scroll bars is a bad idea on devices that are not 
touch-based, like Macs.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 9:23:24 PM
In article <170220121321147838%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>,
 sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:

> In article <sq4nup5ien.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> > 
> > > I still remember the 1984 commercial and it now is bringing to mind the
> > > Walter Kelly quote from Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us." At
> > > the time of the commercial, Big Blue was so dominant that it tried to
> > > control everything (similarly AT&T in telecomm), then Microsoft got so
> > > huge that it tried to broaden its control, now Apple is started down
> > > the same road.
> > 
> > Only if you interpret "supplying the user with additional options" as
> > "trying to control everything."  Which seems crazy to me.
> 
> No, first it is an option, and then the option disappears. For example,
> no scroll arrows. 

Scroll arrows were never optional as far as I recall. They were there 
pre-Lion and were removed for Lion.

> Those of us who find trackpads very difficult to use
> are still wedded to our mice and trackballs, and this makes scrolling
> one line at a time difficult ... yes, use the keyboard and press the
> down-arrow, but that also moves the insertion point as well.

While I agree, it's a minor inconvenience, IMO.

> Again, the point isn't that we've reached a problem, but that we look
> to be trending toward a problem. More an issue of incrementalism than a
> sea change. Camel's nose under the tent flap and all that.

You can find plenty of similar examples throughout Apple's history with 
user interfaces. Historically, Apple tends to find a balance to these 
things. Don't panic. ; )

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 9:26:47 PM
sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:

> In article <sq4nup5ien.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> > 
> > > In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> > > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > > > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > > > > > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > > > > > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > > > 
> > > > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store
> > > > > is 
> > > > > now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> > > > > end.
> > > > 
> > > > So just to be clear:
> > > > 
> > > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.
> > > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.
> > > > 
> > > > I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do _you_
> > > > not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free not to use)
> > > > but you don't want anyone else to have access to them either.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Not what he wrote, at least as I read it.
> > > 
> > > For the scrollbars, he's objecting to the reduced functionality even
> > > when they are shown (loss of scroll arrows) and the narrower (harder to
> > > hit) thumb. He also seems to be annoyed that the "lesser" behavior is
> > > the default.
> > 
> > You got an awful lot out of the single word "That" which he wrote in
> > response to my "Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of
> > not showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,
> > what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?"
> >  
> > > For the App Store, he specifically wrote that he objected to how it is
> > > rapidly getting closer to becoming mandatory, which is the situation to
> > > which he specifically fears (as stated in the above quote).
> > 
> > I suppose you could argue that since the App Store exists, it is
> > closer to mandatory than if it didn't exist.   Beyond that I'm
> > confused about how one can assert it is closing in on mandatory.
> >  
> > > The following is written by someone who has been described by friends
> > > and family as an Apple fan(atic) and, at least so far, would rather use
> > > a Mac than any other platform I've ever seen or heard of (including my
> > > iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch).
> > > 
> > > As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the
> > > 1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation
> > > with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a
> > > provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to
> > > be created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those
> > > of us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess,
> > > have concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we
> > > did, by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing
> > > it with friends.
> > 
> > Maybe I'm missing something.  I'm experience zero difficult, say,
> > downloading and installing Chrome.  Without the App Store.  In fact
> > installing Chrome on Lion seems to me to be an identical experience to
> > installing Chrome on Leopard.
> 
> The issue is that, in 10.8, Gatekeeper becomes involved with the
> default being "App Store and signed applications only." It is true that
> you can, supposedly, disable Gatekeeper and allow free rein, but that
> isn't the case with iOS and the transition is very definitely heading
> in the direction of making the experience the same on the two
> platforms. I'm not arguing that this will take place, just that the
> fear is a reasonable one for people to have.
> 
> > 
> > Likewise for other applications I install.  Now it is true that there
> > must also be some applications I've installed from the App Store,
> > where that was the only way to install them, but the fact that the App
> > Store gives _another_ way for developers to share and/or sell their
> > applications doesn't seem like a _bad_ thing to me.  Developers who
> > don't want to use the App Store don't have to.
> > 
> > > I still remember the 1984 commercial and it now is bringing to mind the
> > > Walter Kelly quote from Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us." At
> > > the time of the commercial, Big Blue was so dominant that it tried to
> > > control everything (similarly AT&T in telecomm), then Microsoft got so
> > > huge that it tried to broaden its control, now Apple is started down
> > > the same road.
> > 
> > Only if you interpret "supplying the user with additional options" as
> > "trying to control everything."  Which seems crazy to me.
> 
> No, first it is an option, and then the option disappears. For example,
> no scroll arrows. Those of us who find trackpads very difficult to use
> are still wedded to our mice and trackballs, and this makes scrolling
> one line at a time difficult ... yes, use the keyboard and press the
> down-arrow, but that also moves the insertion point as well.

For me to buy the analogy, you have to explain where first there was a
"no scroll arrow" option followed by them disappearing.

What actually happened with scroll arrows (so far the only example of
something that disappeared in Lion that some people seem to care
about) was that Apple just took them away.

That is consistent with Apple's frequent methodology of deciding that
something is better and just changing it.

> Again, the point isn't that we've reached a problem, but that we look
> to be trending toward a problem. More an issue of incrementalism than a
> sea change. Camel's nose under the tent flap and all that.

I'm missing the incrementalism and the Camel's nose.

Instead it seems like what we have is the possibility that Apple could
decide to create a problem.  Which we always have.

> Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get
> you :)

True.
0
2/17/2012 9:36:26 PM


On 2/17/12 1:07 PM, in article yobbooxwa7e.fsf_-_@panix2.panix.com,
"BreadWithSpam@fractious.net" <BreadWithSpam@fractious.net> wrote:

> George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> writes:
>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> 
>>> So now I'm still using MobileMe iDisk for a backup (one of many
>>> different backups) and syncing what it does sync these days.  But I'm
>>> using Microsoft's Mesh Drive for keychains, important docs and other
>>> files.  Fortunately for me, my space needs aren't much these days.
> 
>> I might be looking into expanding my DropBox account.
> 
> I use DropBox extensively.  Paid for additional storage long ago and
> never regretted it.  The increasing integration into apps (both
> desktop and iOS) makes it get better and better.
> 
> I also use Wuala, though.  They have a different security model
> and certain content that I have higher security concerns for
> go into there.
> 
> If I could get my Address Book and iCal sync to work via DropBox,
> there'd be nothing whatsoever that I'd miss from MobileMe.
> (DropBox, btw, has very nice photo gallery features, too - a
> nice replacement for the going-away gallery.me.com).
> 
> Apps which are explicitly built with DropBox awareness really
> shine.  1Password, for example.
> 
> PostBox, btw, has a slick little (optional) Dropbox integration -
> if you have a file in your DropBox folder and you drag and
> drop it into a message to send via PostBox, you can send a
> link to it rather than the file itself.  Very slick if you
> need to send a large file.  Not sure about the security
> implications - it appears you can send files this way which
> are not in your Public folder.  Hrm.
> 

Interesting. Thanks for the info, I will be exploring those this weekend.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 10:22:45 PM


On 2/17/12 1:15 PM, in article
dfritzin-B13090.14151217022012@news.eternal-september.org, "David
Fritzinger" <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63EFFD.81097%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
>> lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>>>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
>>>> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>>>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
>>>>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
>>>>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
>>>>>>>> at all.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
>>>>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
>>>>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
>>>>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
>>>> 
>>>> What balls?!?
>>> 
>>> The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
>>> work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
>>> definitely tiny.
>>> 
>>> I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
>>> and relatively poor close up eyesight.
>> 
>> I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
>> The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.
> 
> I think Lloyd meant to say Mighty Mouse (now, Apple Mouse, IIRC).

He did say it. I wasn't listening tho.

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 10:24:00 PM


On 2/17/12 12:52 PM, in article
jollyroger-F92A66.12523217022012@news.individual.net, "Jolly Roger"
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <CB63FB59.810C9%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0>
> 
> : D

I miss her a lot...

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 10:24:26 PM


On 2/17/12 2:13 PM, in article yry5s143s1.fsf@ethel.the.log, "Doug Anderson"
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
>> lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
>>>  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
>>>> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
>>>> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
>>>>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
>>>>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
>>>>>>>> at all.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
>>>>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
>>>>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
>>>>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
>>>> 
>>>> What balls?!?
>>> 
>>> The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
>>> work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
>>> definitely tiny.
>>> 
>>> I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
>>> and relatively poor close up eyesight.
>> 
>> I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
>> The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.
> 
> That's why it is so hard to clean those sub-atomic roller wheels!

Making a Scanning Electron Microscope absolutely necessary!

0
ghost_topper (2157)
2/17/2012 10:28:15 PM
Bread wrote:

> Make no mistake - the loss of Rosetta is a major pain in the ass for me 
> as well as for lots of other people.  But I firmly believe that in the 
> long run, it's a *good* think for OS X.


Had Apple made a one time translator of PPC images to x86, then the loss
of Rosetta wouldn't have been so bad because people coul have converted
their legacy applications to run on x86 and linked to whatever current
libraries.

The .APP files may have been bloated and run slowly, but at least
customers that absolutely need to apps would have been able to upgrade
to Lion and beyond.

In my case, I am staying with Snow Leopard as long as possible. I
realise that I won't be able to upgrade Apple software sich as iWork and
eventually even itunes may not long be upgradable, but by then, I
suspect that Apple will have spliled the real beans on it true plans for
the desktop.


For those who need computers, I suspect that there will be pressure on
adobe  to port its software to Linux.
0
2/17/2012 10:31:50 PM
Lloyd wrote:

> The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you 
> work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are 
> definitely tiny.


Those tiny rollers were not only very tiny, but also magnetic, so if thy
got too close to another one, that other one that you had carefully
placed on its tiny cradle would move out of it and you had to start all
over again.

And to that person who only had to fix the mouse once a year, you were
really lucky. I had to replace the mouse once a year after fixing it
many times.

So for me, the magic mouse was really a "must" because the mighty mouse
just didn't work for me. But I did prefer its ergonomics to that of the
mightmouse. (more precise).

0
2/17/2012 10:34:09 PM
TWould it be correct to state that this iMessage application
functionally replaces Growl (avaialble separately from 3rd party) ?

Or is iMessage far more complex with some network hooks into the apple
servers etc ?
0
2/17/2012 10:39:01 PM
In article <170220121321147838%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>,
 sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:

> Those of us who find trackpads very difficult to use are still wedded to 
> our mice and trackballs, and this makes scrolling one line at a time 
> difficult ... yes, use the keyboard and press the down-arrow, but that 
> also moves the insertion point as well.

I find that I have no trouble scrolling one line with the magic trackpad.  
Not a little trouble, but no trouble.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/17/2012 10:46:43 PM
In article <yry5s143s1.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On 2/17/12 9:41 AM, in article
> > lloydparsons-94C02C.09414617022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> > <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <CB63D095.80FF5%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>,
> > >  George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > >> On 2/17/12 8:36 AM, in article
> > >> lloydparsons-606244.08365017022012@news.eternal-september.org, "Lloyd"
> > >> <lloydparsons@me.com> wrote:
> > >> 
> > >>> In article <timstreater-7E3C25.09250617022012@news.individual.net>,
> > >>>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > >>> 
> > >>>> In article <jhkov8$eb1$2@dont-email.me>,
> > >>>>  Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> > >>>> 
> > >>>>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> > >>>>>> As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the 
> > >>>>>> arrows
> > >>>>>> at all.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Right.  I have one of those too.  I got tired of unclogging the beast
> > >>>>> and now just use the scroll bar.
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, 
> > >>>> tops.
> > >>> 
> > >>> Wait til you get a little older and the hands shake a little and they
> > >>> eyesight ain't what it used to be.
> > >>> 
> > >>> Then it is dismantly, clean and throw away after a frustrating hour of
> > >>> trying to remantle those tiny damned balls!!  :)
> > >>> 
> > >>> Switched to a Magic Trackpad and haven't looked back!
> > >> 
> > >> What balls?!?
> > > 
> > > The little tiny ones inside the mouse that the slightly larger one you
> > > work with rotates on.  I guess they are not actually balls, but they are
> > > definitely tiny.
> > > 
> > > I found that reassembly was beyond my slightly shaky hands, fat fingers
> > > and relatively poor close up eyesight.
> > 
> > I don't understand what you're talking about. The Magic Mouse is optical.
> > The lens may need to be cleaned every once in awhile, but is no biggie.
> 
> That's why it is so hard to clean those sub-atomic roller wheels!

:-)

Yes. When I do it I prepare properly, though. Brightly lit area, white 
towel, dish of water with a couple of drops of washing up liquid, 
tissues, tweezers, small container to put the bits in, set of 
watchmaker's screwdrivers ...

Not quite a fucking operating theatre, but not far off.

I could wish that they'd designed it with that cleaning in mind, though.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689
0
timstreater2 (1190)
2/17/2012 10:47:04 PM
Michelle Steiner wrote:

> As I understand it, Gatekeeper is for only those applications that are 
> downloaded.  If they are purchased and installed from a CD, DVD, or thumb 
> drive�or are compiled on your own computer�Gatekeeper will not be involved.


The purpose of signed applications is so that they cannot be "hacked"
(patched/modified) once installed. This is why some phones take forever
to boot because the CPU spends much time verifying signatures.

Since there are rumours that Gatekeeper will grant/deny access to
certain new OS features based on type of application, it is likely that
it will be invoked everytime an application is launched, whether the
application was donwloaded via a browser, the app store, CD or whatnot.
0
2/17/2012 10:47:10 PM
On 2012-02-17 17:39 , JF Mezei wrote:
> TWould it be correct to state that this iMessage application
> functionally replaces Growl (avaialble separately from 3rd party) ?

http://growl.info/

So - no.

> Or is iMessage far more complex with some network hooks into the apple
> servers etc ?

Message (not iMessage) is a "chat" application.  It replaces iChat and 
functions in a manner similar to the "Messages" app on the iPhone.  It 
does depend on Apple servers just as Messages does when in iMessage mode.

It also can't send text to non Apple devices over chat.  I tried.  Maybe 
this will be improved when the release version comes out.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 10:49:00 PM
Davoud wrote:

> My point is that if you think that OS X and IOS are "converging" (I
> hate that buzzword as much as I hate "ecosystem" to mean "product
> line") just because OS X is getting applications to make it easier to
> interact with the mobile devices that are overwhelmingly popular, then
> you are mistaken. 


Did you watch the "Back to Mac" keynote of last year ? Apple made it
very clear that IOS was now in the driver's seat and that OSX was meant
to follow in the back seat. They were not to be on different cars and
different roads.

The fact that mountain lion continues on the path of making OS-X more
like IOS seems to support the fact that Apple really meant it when they
made that "Back to Mac" presentation.
0
2/17/2012 11:00:08 PM
On 2012-02-17 12:58 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<hqudncXt6qwtD6PSnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-16 17:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<trydnTpxILWI7aDSnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-02-16 14:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lion:
>>>>>
>>>>> window resizing from all edges    - Aqua - not OS
>>>>> mission control                   - a launcher - not OS
>>>>> better sandboxing                 - OS
>>>>> automatic reference counting      - programming issue - not OS
>>>>> Core Storage                      - OS
>>>>> FileVault whole-disk encryption&    recovery keys  - file system
>>>>> improvement.
>>>>> Lion recovery partition           - backup scheme.
>>>>
>>>> ... none of which pertain to ML.
>>>
>>> You didn't say only ML, but every release "since Leopard":
>>
>> True - but those changes are not earth shattering at all.
>
> That is also not what you said - you said Apple did nothing "of real
> interest" with regard to the operating system, which is bullshit.
> Strictly from a non-developer standpoint, Microsoft Exchange support,
> window resizing from all edges, mission control, FileVault, Lion

Resizing from edges?  Are you FUCKING serious?  They finally caught up 
to fucking Windows (20 years later) on a minor display issue that should 
have been in there from the start of OS X/Aqua, and you're proud of it? 
  My fucking God - Shoot Me Now!  (That's an Aqua improvement, BTW, not 
an OS improvement).

Mission Control is a launcher - any third party could have done that 
(and probably did).  It is not an OS improvement - It's "middleware"

> recovery are of real interest to a whole lot of Mac users. And a whole
> lot of improvements and additions were made that are of much real
> interest to Mac developers.

All but a few of the improvements could have been done incrementally. 
They are not ground breaking no matter how desirable they are.  One you 
mentioned (automatic reference counting) just seems like a correction to 
bad implementation in the first place - or worse - compensating for lazy 
programmers.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 11:01:52 PM
Doug Anderson wrote:

> OK - so we're criticizing Apple not for anything they've done, but for
> something they _might_ do.

Apple made it quite clear what the new direction of OS-X was to be. And
with now 2 versions of OS-X that implement that direction,  then those
who dislike that direction are fully justified in critizing Apple
because it is now very very very clear that OS-X is to remain in this
direction.

0
2/17/2012 11:05:45 PM
On 2012-02-17 10:41 , Bread wrote:
> On 2012-02-16 20:21:42 -0800, Howard S Shubs said:
>
>> In article <jhjuvg$ghb$1@reader1.panix.com>,
>> Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:
>>
>>> At the app level, several things. At the OS level, other than the loss
>>> of Rosetta, 10.7 is generally better or, at worst, no worse than 10.6.
>>
>> The loss of Rosetta is non-trivial.
>
> No - it was a major *improvement*. Unfortunately, we suffer because bad
> *developers* aren't keeping up.
>
> It's not Apple's fault that Intuit screwed us over.
>
> And it's not Apple's responsibility to keep their OS backwards
> compatible with hardware they haven't made in more than half a decade.
>
> Make no mistake - the loss of Rosetta is a major pain in the ass for me
> as well as for lots of other people. But I firmly believe that in the
> long run, it's a *good* think for OS X.

Long term, yes.  But perhaps its release came a bit too soon.  If I have 
to re-install MS Office 2008, I'm not sure I'd be able to do it anymore. 
  I installed it on 3 machines under L/SL and then upgraded them (2 of 
them) to Lion.  Not sure I'd be able to install them (the apps are 
intel, but the installer is PPC).

I suspect that Mac OS X will be coming out in a Macbook Air (the Macbook 
Pro line will disappear into Air or v.v.) with a 6 or 8 core ARM 
processor (Apple A8 or whatever).  Rosetta-II will translate intel code 
for the ARM.... for a few years anyway.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/17/2012 11:07:20 PM
Tim McNamara wrote:

> Note the screenshot which can allow (apparently) the computer to be set 
> to only allow applications to be run that are obtained through the App 
> Store.  It would be conceivable that Apple *could* make the App Store 
> the only source of downloads (although that'd be downright stupid and 
> Apple is not downright stupid, so I think this is a tempest in a teacup).


While Apple has existed the business market and I don't expect them to
cater to business needs, that "gatekeeper" would have been a perfect
technolgy for an office in order to prevent employee installed osftware
and only allow software installed through the company's own private "app
store".



0
2/17/2012 11:08:12 PM
In article <_7CdnayBl9XBRKPSnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-17 17:39 , JF Mezei wrote:
> > TWould it be correct to state that this iMessage application
> > functionally replaces Growl (avaialble separately from 3rd party) ?
> 
> http://growl.info/
> 
> So - no.
> 
> > Or is iMessage far more complex with some network hooks into the apple
> > servers etc ?
> 
> Message (not iMessage) is a "chat" application.  It replaces iChat and 
> functions in a manner similar to the "Messages" app on the iPhone.  It 
> does depend on Apple servers just as Messages does when in iMessage mode.
> 
> It also can't send text to non Apple devices over chat.  I tried.  Maybe 
> this will be improved when the release version comes out.

But the new Notification Manager might replace Growl.

-- 
PRAY, v.  To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf
of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy. -- Ambrose Bierce
0
tom_stiller (1288)
2/17/2012 11:18:54 PM
In article <4f3ed559$0$1760$c3e8da3$50776f34@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Bread wrote:
> 
> > Make no mistake - the loss of Rosetta is a major pain in the ass for me 
> > as well as for lots of other people.  But I firmly believe that in the 
> > long run, it's a *good* think for OS X.
> 
> 
> Had Apple made a one time translator of PPC images to x86, then the loss
> of Rosetta wouldn't have been so bad because people coul have converted
> their legacy applications to run on x86 and linked to whatever current
> libraries.
> 
> The .APP files may have been bloated and run slowly, but at least
> customers that absolutely need to apps would have been able to upgrade
> to Lion and beyond.
> 
Code conversion isn't the only requirement. There is also the issue of 
APIs and the functionality that lies behind them. My guess is that there 
was too much legacy cruft to carry forward.

-- 
PRAY, v.  To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf
of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy. -- Ambrose Bierce
0
tom_stiller (1288)
2/17/2012 11:21:58 PM
In article <QsednRyWD_j8QaPSnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-17 12:58 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<hqudncXt6qwtD6PSnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-16 17:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<trydnTpxILWI7aDSnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2012-02-16 14:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Snow Leopard:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 64-bit kernel and applications
> >>>>> 64-bit QuickTime
> >>>>> new file system URL-based APIs
> >>>>> updated compilers (Clang/LLVM, GCC, blocks, etc)
> >>>>> Microsoft Exchange support
> >>>>> numerous performance improvements
> >>>>> Core Location
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Lion:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> window resizing from all edges
> >>>>> mission control
> >>>>> better sandboxing
> >>>>> automatic reference counting
> >>>>> Core Storage
> >>>>> FileVault whole-disk encryption & recovery keys
> >>>>> Lion recovery partition
> >>>>
> >>>> ... none of which pertain to ML.
> >>>
> >>> You didn't say only ML, but every release "since Leopard":
> >>
> >> True - but those changes are not earth shattering at all.
> >
> > That is also not what you said - you said Apple did nothing "of real
> > interest" with regard to the operating system, which is bullshit.
> > Strictly from a non-developer standpoint, Microsoft Exchange support,
> > window resizing from all edges, mission control, FileVault, Lion
> 
> Resizing from edges?  Are you FUCKING serious?  They finally caught up 
> to fucking Windows (20 years later) on a minor display issue that should 
> have been in there from the start of OS X/Aqua, and you're proud of it? 

You really need to stop smoking whatever it is you are smoking, because 
that's also not what you said. Again, you didn't say anything about 
Apple not offering features one might feel proud of. What you said, 
again, is that Apple did nothing "of real interest" with regard to the 
operating system in the past few years, which is complete bullshit, as I 
have already illustrated to you. You're just simply wrong about that. 
The fact is lots of Mac users find many of the numerous improvements 
Apple has made to OS X both interesting and useful. If you can't or 
won't accept that, you've got denial problem that I frankly have no 
interest in helping you with. See a therapist. I'm done repeating myself.

>   My fucking God - Shoot Me Now!  (That's an Aqua improvement, BTW, not 
> an OS improvement).

You're a fool if you think Aqua isn't part of OS X. Next you'll try to 
convince me Aqua is a user land application.

> Mission Control is a launcher - any third party could have done that 
> (and probably did).  It is not an OS improvement - It's "middleware"

Your lack of knowledge regarding software and operating system 
development is showing.

> > recovery are of real interest to a whole lot of Mac users. And a whole
> > lot of improvements and additions were made that are of much real
> > interest to Mac developers.
> 
> All but a few of the improvements could have been done incrementally. 
> They are not ground breaking no matter how desirable they are.

Again, you didn't say they had to be ground breaking - only that they 
are "of real interest". I guarantee you all of the features I mentioned 
are of real interest to lots of Mac users.

> One you 
> mentioned (automatic reference counting) just seems like a correction to 
> bad implementation in the first place - or worse - compensating for lazy 
> programmers.

....which would mean that this particular feature is indeed of real 
interest to Mac developers. 

I'm afraid there is no more reason to continue this discussion, as 
you've decided to abandon reasonable communication on this issue.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 11:25:26 PM
In article <michelle-E7D1B7.15464317022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <170220121321147838%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>,
>  sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > Those of us who find trackpads very difficult to use are still wedded to 
> > our mice and trackballs, and this makes scrolling one line at a time 
> > difficult ... yes, use the keyboard and press the down-arrow, but that 
> > also moves the insertion point as well.
> 
> I find that I have no trouble scrolling one line with the magic trackpad.  
> Not a little trouble, but no trouble.

Depends on the application.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/17/2012 11:26:45 PM
In article <michelle-E7D1B7.15464317022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <170220121321147838%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>,
>  sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > Those of us who find trackpads very difficult to use are still wedded to 
> > our mice and trackballs, and this makes scrolling one line at a time 
> > difficult ... yes, use the keyboard and press the down-arrow, but that 
> > also moves the insertion point as well.
> 
> I find that I have no trouble scrolling one line with the magic trackpad.  
> Not a little trouble, but no trouble.

For me the granularity of scroll depends on the application and how tall 
the window is. Full height windows drawn by some applications (e.g. 
MT-Newswatcher) tend to scroll two, or more, lines at a time.

-- 
PRAY, v.  To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf
of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy. -- Ambrose Bierce
0
tom_stiller (1288)
2/17/2012 11:27:42 PM
In article <4f3edd4b$0$1569$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> > OK - so we're criticizing Apple not for anything they've done, but for 
> > something they _might_ do.
> 
> Apple made it quite clear what the new direction of OS-X was to be.

Apple did?

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/17/2012 11:56:10 PM
In article <4f3edbfc$0$2065$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Did you watch the "Back to Mac" keynote of last year ?

Yes.

> Apple made it very clear that IOS was now in the driver's seat and that 
> OSX was meant to follow in the back seat.

No, they didn't.  They made it clear that there were some features of iOS 
that would work well with a touch interface (e.g., Magic Trackpad and Magic 
Mouse) on the Mac.  And they've ported some features of Mac OS X to iOS.

Yes, there is a confluence of ideas where things play well on both 
platforms, but each platform will still play to its own strengths.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/18/2012 12:00:46 AM
Davoud:
> > My point is that if you think that OS X and IOS are "converging" (I
> > hate that buzzword as much as I hate "ecosystem" to mean "product
> > line") just because OS X is getting applications to make it easier to
> > interact with the mobile devices that are overwhelmingly popular, then
> > you are mistaken. 

JF Mezei:
> Did you watch the "Back to Mac" keynote of last year ? Apple made it
> very clear that IOS was now in the driver's seat and that OSX was meant
> to follow in the back seat. They were not to be on different cars and
> different roads.

Financially, IOS devices are largely driving Apple's growth. I don't
know what you mean by "follow in the back seat." I see Macs--especially
MBs and MBP's going out of the local Apple store in a rapid and
unending parade. Each of those Macs is loaded Mac OS -- BSD Unix with a
unique GUI that remains what it had been. None has IOS installed, and
Apple are not planning to switch the Mac to IOS. I didn't run around
crying doom when TextEdit replaced SimpleText and I'm not panicking
because Messages is replacing iChat. (iChat is useless for video
conferencing, anyway; who knows, /maybe/ Messages will work right!)

> The fact that mountain lion continues on the path of making OS-X more
> like IOS seems to support the fact that Apple really meant it when they
> made that "Back to Mac" presentation.

Nonsense. Hyperbole. Garageband didn't turn my Mac into a piano and IOS
compatibility apps--demanded by Mac and IOS users, by the way--won't
turn my Mac into an iPod.

Independent researchers have claimed that Mac users are smarter than
the average bear. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. How could the
researchers have missed the fact that a sizable minority of Mac users
are also raving paranoids. Y'all sound like a town crier in Pompeii!

If everybody here who is threatening to jump ship does so, the CSMS rat
population will certainly be reduced when Mountain Lion comes out! I
have a suspicion that that won't reduce the lines at the Apple Store,
however.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
0
star (3126)
2/18/2012 12:03:45 AM
In article <99mx8hgn1h.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> 
> > In article <sq4nup5ien.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> > > 
> > > > In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> > > > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > > > > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > > > > > > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > > > > > > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App
> > > > > > Store
> > > > > > is 
> > > > > > now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> > > > > > end.
> > > > > 
> > > > > So just to be clear:
> > > > > 
> > > > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.
> > > > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do _you_
> > > > > not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free not to use)
> > > > > but you don't want anyone else to have access to them either.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Not what he wrote, at least as I read it.
> > > > 
> > > > For the scrollbars, he's objecting to the reduced functionality even
> > > > when they are shown (loss of scroll arrows) and the narrower (harder to
> > > > hit) thumb. He also seems to be annoyed that the "lesser" behavior is
> > > > the default.
> > > 
> > > You got an awful lot out of the single word "That" which he wrote in
> > > response to my "Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of
> > > not showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,
> > > what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?"
> > >  
> > > > For the App Store, he specifically wrote that he objected to how it is
> > > > rapidly getting closer to becoming mandatory, which is the situation to
> > > > which he specifically fears (as stated in the above quote).
> > > 
> > > I suppose you could argue that since the App Store exists, it is
> > > closer to mandatory than if it didn't exist.   Beyond that I'm
> > > confused about how one can assert it is closing in on mandatory.
> > >  
> > > > The following is written by someone who has been described by friends
> > > > and family as an Apple fan(atic) and, at least so far, would rather use
> > > > a Mac than any other platform I've ever seen or heard of (including my
> > > > iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch).
> > > > 
> > > > As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the
> > > > 1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation
> > > > with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a
> > > > provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to
> > > > be created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those
> > > > of us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess,
> > > > have concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we
> > > > did, by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing
> > > > it with friends.
> > > 
> > > Maybe I'm missing something.  I'm experience zero difficult, say,
> > > downloading and installing Chrome.  Without the App Store.  In fact
> > > installing Chrome on Lion seems to me to be an identical experience to
> > > installing Chrome on Leopard.
> > 
> > The issue is that, in 10.8, Gatekeeper becomes involved with the
> > default being "App Store and signed applications only." It is true that
> > you can, supposedly, disable Gatekeeper and allow free rein, but that
> > isn't the case with iOS and the transition is very definitely heading
> > in the direction of making the experience the same on the two
> > platforms. I'm not arguing that this will take place, just that the
> > fear is a reasonable one for people to have.
> > 
> > > 
> > > Likewise for other applications I install.  Now it is true that there
> > > must also be some applications I've installed from the App Store,
> > > where that was the only way to install them, but the fact that the App
> > > Store gives _another_ way for developers to share and/or sell their
> > > applications doesn't seem like a _bad_ thing to me.  Developers who
> > > don't want to use the App Store don't have to.
> > > 
> > > > I still remember the 1984 commercial and it now is bringing to mind the
> > > > Walter Kelly quote from Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us." At
> > > > the time of the commercial, Big Blue was so dominant that it tried to
> > > > control everything (similarly AT&T in telecomm), then Microsoft got so
> > > > huge that it tried to broaden its control, now Apple is started down
> > > > the same road.
> > > 
> > > Only if you interpret "supplying the user with additional options" as
> > > "trying to control everything."  Which seems crazy to me.
> > 
> > No, first it is an option, and then the option disappears. For example,
> > no scroll arrows. Those of us who find trackpads very difficult to use
> > are still wedded to our mice and trackballs, and this makes scrolling
> > one line at a time difficult ... yes, use the keyboard and press the
> > down-arrow, but that also moves the insertion point as well.
> 
> For me to buy the analogy, you have to explain where first there was a
> "no scroll arrow" option followed by them disappearing.
> 
> What actually happened with scroll arrows (so far the only example of
> something that disappeared in Lion that some people seem to care
> about) was that Apple just took them away.
> 
> That is consistent with Apple's frequent methodology of deciding that
> something is better and just changing it.
> 
> > Again, the point isn't that we've reached a problem, but that we look
> > to be trending toward a problem. More an issue of incrementalism than a
> > sea change. Camel's nose under the tent flap and all that.
> 
> I'm missing the incrementalism and the Camel's nose.
> 
> Instead it seems like what we have is the possibility that Apple could
> decide to create a problem.  Which we always have.
> 
> > Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get
> > you :)
> 
> True.

I don't know why you're arguing with me here, as we seem to be (mostly)
in agreement that there is no urgency at this time. The point I tried
to make is that trepidation on the part of some at least had something
feeding it, rightly or wrongly.

On the matter of scrolling...the scrollbars became optional at the same
time that something (the arrows) went away. BTW, scroll arrows have
been tinkered with before, when Apple started placing them together at
the top, while leaving the option to revert to traditional placement.
Most users, once they found they could revert them, did so.

There's an old expression about something starting slowly and then
gathering momentum which referenced "the camel's nose under the tent
flap" as the beginning of the intrusion/decline. You can Google the
expression for more details, but it usually is applied to governmental
action that starts the slippery slope where established rights,
privileges, or practices end.

If you don't see the incrementalism, I can only say that when a new
feature is put in play as a default and requires positive action for
people to get back to "normal", it is such an increment. For example,
the introduction of the App Store on Mac was done right...it was
available for those who wanted to take advantage in Snow Leopard. For
Lion, it became somewhat more of an issue because, initially, that was
the only way to obtain Lion and almost all other Apple-branded
applications now are exclusively via the App Store (which, frankly is a
problem for some people in areas where broadband isn't pervasive).
Apple pushes the envelope, and that is good, but sometimes it is also
painful for a portion of their customer base.

My first bad taste was when they removed DVD Studio Pro from the
product line-up, bundling it into (the very expensive) Final Cut Studio
product. Then, they rather abruptly eliminated Final Cut Studio,
leaving no decent optical disk authoring tool available (iDVD is not a
solution if you want to do anything non-vanilla). Since my DVD Studio
Pro installation won't work under Lion, I now have to keep the old Dual
G5 up and taking space when I want to author DVDs for friends and
family. Incremental change on way to abandonment. Additionally, I no
longer have a "good" video editing tool with the elimination of both
Final Cut Pro and Final Cut Express (Final Cut Pro X, which I consider
more of an iMovie Pro product has a huge learning curve for people
coming from a traditional video background...the Final Cut Express and
Studio products provided a consistency of workflow and paradigm).

-- 
Spenser
0
dogbreath (1151)
2/18/2012 12:03:51 AM
In article <4f3ed8f1$0$24359$c3e8da3$12bcf670@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Since there are rumours that Gatekeeper will grant/deny access to 
> certain new OS features based on type of application, it is likely that 
> it will be invoked everytime an application is launched, whether the 
> application was donwloaded via a browser, the app store, CD or whatnot.

Oh, I think I understand now; whatever ideas you come up with become likely 
or certain to be implemented, and whatever hypotheses you dream becomes 
"Apple made it clear".

Curious, though, how few of your prognostications have come true.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/18/2012 12:03:59 AM
On 2012-02-17 18:18 , Tom Stiller wrote:
> In article<_7CdnayBl9XBRKPSnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-17 17:39 , JF Mezei wrote:
>>> TWould it be correct to state that this iMessage application
>>> functionally replaces Growl (avaialble separately from 3rd party) ?
>>
>> http://growl.info/
>>
>> So - no.
>>
>>> Or is iMessage far more complex with some network hooks into the apple
>>> servers etc ?
>>
>> Message (not iMessage) is a "chat" application.  It replaces iChat and
>> functions in a manner similar to the "Messages" app on the iPhone.  It
>> does depend on Apple servers just as Messages does when in iMessage mode.
>>
>> It also can't send text to non Apple devices over chat.  I tried.  Maybe
>> this will be improved when the release version comes out.
>
> But the new Notification Manager might replace Growl.

Color me having missed that, er, implication.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 12:56:16 AM
In article <michelle-46314F.16561017022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <4f3edd4b$0$1569$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>,
>  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> 
> > > OK - so we're criticizing Apple not for anything they've done, but for 
> > > something they _might_ do.
> > 
> > Apple made it quite clear what the new direction of OS-X was to be.
> 
> Apple did?

Yes, they did. 

Remember how Lion was introduced with the "Back to the Mac" slogan?
Some of us optimistically thought that Apple was going to re-focus on
the Mac platform and introduce new features like the ZFS file system
and Blu-Ray disk drives. But it turned out they meant taking some
features from iOS and porting them "back" to Mac OS.

With Mountain Lion, they say "See how innovations from iPad inspire new
features for the Mac."

So Apple is making it quite clear that they are trying to make Mac OS
and iOS look and behave similarly, presumably to make it easier for
people to switch back and forth between the two, and to attract iOS
users to the Mac platform.

-- 
Jim Gibson
0
jimsgibson (533)
2/18/2012 12:59:05 AM
Jim Gibson:
> Remember how Lion was introduced with the "Back to the Mac" slogan?
> Some of us optimistically thought that Apple was going to re-focus on
> the Mac platform and introduce new features like the ZFS file system
> and Blu-Ray disk drives.

To be fair, you should point out that many people think that Blu-Ray
was obsolete from day 1. Apple didn't bring Blu-Ray drives to the Mac
because the demand isn't there. A few complainers on Usenet are not
representative of the Mac community.

> But it turned out they meant taking some
> features from iOS and porting them "back" to Mac OS.

"Features" meaning applications. Applications that you don't have to
use, that you may even delete if you wish. And OS X will still be OS X.

"Back?" Don't give too much weight to every little word in advertising
hype. Hype is meant to be swallowed whole and doesn't stand up to
dissection and close examination.

> With Mountain Lion, they say "See how innovations from iPad inspire new
> features for the Mac."

"Features" meaning applications. Applications that you don't have to
use, that you may even delete if you wish. And OS X will still be OS X.

> So Apple is making it quite clear that they are trying to make Mac OS
> and iOS look and behave similarly,

"Behave similarly" meaning adding applications to improve data sharing
between IOS devices and the Mac OS. Unlike Blu-Ray, Mac users want
that.

> presumably to make it easier for
> people to switch back and forth between the two, and to attract iOS
> users to the Mac platform.

Working. Looked at sales of Macintosh computers lately?

FUD notwithstanding, the sky is not falling on the Mac OS.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
0
star (3126)
2/18/2012 1:16:01 AM
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> writes:

> Doug Anderson wrote:
> 
> > OK - so we're criticizing Apple not for anything they've done, but for
> > something they _might_ do.
> 
> Apple made it quite clear what the new direction of OS-X was to be. And
> with now 2 versions of OS-X that implement that direction,  then those
> who dislike that direction are fully justified in critizing Apple
> because it is now very very very clear that OS-X is to remain in this
> direction.

The direction being:  Apple will add features they think might be
useful to OS X, some of which may come from iOS?

Scary.
0
2/18/2012 1:20:05 AM
Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> writes:

> In article <michelle-46314F.16561017022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
> > In article <4f3edd4b$0$1569$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>,
> >  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > > > OK - so we're criticizing Apple not for anything they've done, but for 
> > > > something they _might_ do.
> > > 
> > > Apple made it quite clear what the new direction of OS-X was to be.
> > 
> > Apple did?
> 
> Yes, they did. 
> 
> Remember how Lion was introduced with the "Back to the Mac" slogan?
> Some of us optimistically thought that Apple was going to re-focus on
> the Mac platform and introduce new features like the ZFS file system
> and Blu-Ray disk drives. But it turned out they meant taking some
> features from iOS and porting them "back" to Mac OS.
> 
> With Mountain Lion, they say "See how innovations from iPad inspire new
> features for the Mac."
> 
> So Apple is making it quite clear that they are trying to make Mac OS
> and iOS look and behave similarly, presumably to make it easier for
> people to switch back and forth between the two, and to attract iOS
> users to the Mac platform.

No, Apple isn't making that clear.  That's your perception.

Mine is that Apple is a leader on a new platform (smart phones and
tablets) and that they are taking advantage of the discoveries they've
made developing for those platforms to bring new ideas to the desktop.

It would be crazy for them _not_ to do that.
0
2/18/2012 1:24:36 AM
Davoud wrote:

> To be fair, you should point out that many people think that Blu-Ray
> was obsolete from day 1. Apple didn't bring Blu-Ray drives to the Mac
> because the demand isn't there.


Until Itunes reliably can supply 1080p with original sound, thee remains
a demand for bluray.

Most of itunes doesn't even give out dolby 5.1 on dvd quality media when
real DVDs do.

Netflix also has much content that is marked as "HD" but in 1960s stereo
instead of original soundtrack (Star Trek 2009 is perhaps the best example)


Blueray is a competitor to Apple. And instead of giving us Bluerauy
players on our Macs, we have to buy Sony blue ray players which give us
access to Sony's internet connected services which compete against Itunes.


And the Apple choir boys/gal need to realise is that a company such as
Apple have catered to many types of users. Apple's recent moves on OS-X
are narrowing the target audience and leaving certain types of formally
loyal users out in the cold.

Apple may have decided that the users theu are ditching are not numerous
enough to affect the share value of AAPL. But you, the choir guys/gal
must at least accept that those moves cause legitimate complaints from
the very people Apple no longer wishes to serve.
0
2/18/2012 1:30:21 AM
In article <jollyroger-E0EC36.17252617022012@news.individual.net>, Jolly
Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> In article <QsednRyWD_j8QaPSnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@giganews.com>,
>  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> 
[SNIP]
> 
> > Mission Control is a launcher - any third party could have done that 
> > (and probably did).  It is not an OS improvement - It's "middleware"
> 
> Your lack of knowledge regarding software and operating system 
> development is showing.

Probably confusing Mission Control with Launch Pad. 

Launch Pad is of course an ancient idea (long before iOS existed) that was
basically available way back in the "Classic" versions of Mac OS via
Button View and Simple Finder. There have also been a few third-party
applications over the years that use a similar approach.

Helpful Harry
0
2/18/2012 1:33:22 AM
sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:

> In article <99mx8hgn1h.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> > 
> > > In article <sq4nup5ien.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> > > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > sbt <dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > > In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> > > > > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > > > > > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > > > > > > > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > > > > > > > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App
> > > > > > > Store
> > > > > > > is 
> > > > > > > now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> > > > > > > end.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > So just to be clear:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.
> > > > > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I assume this is some sort of religious thing where not only do _you_
> > > > > > not want to use this features of Lion (which you are free not to use)
> > > > > > but you don't want anyone else to have access to them either.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Not what he wrote, at least as I read it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > For the scrollbars, he's objecting to the reduced functionality even
> > > > > when they are shown (loss of scroll arrows) and the narrower (harder to
> > > > > hit) thumb. He also seems to be annoyed that the "lesser" behavior is
> > > > > the default.
> > > > 
> > > > You got an awful lot out of the single word "That" which he wrote in
> > > > response to my "Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of
> > > > not showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,
> > > > what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?"
> > > >  
> > > > > For the App Store, he specifically wrote that he objected to how it is
> > > > > rapidly getting closer to becoming mandatory, which is the situation to
> > > > > which he specifically fears (as stated in the above quote).
> > > > 
> > > > I suppose you could argue that since the App Store exists, it is
> > > > closer to mandatory than if it didn't exist.   Beyond that I'm
> > > > confused about how one can assert it is closing in on mandatory.
> > > >  
> > > > > The following is written by someone who has been described by friends
> > > > > and family as an Apple fan(atic) and, at least so far, would rather use
> > > > > a Mac than any other platform I've ever seen or heard of (including my
> > > > > iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch).
> > > > > 
> > > > > As someone who has developed software for Apple platforms since the
> > > > > 1970s and for the Mac since its inception, I also have some trepidation
> > > > > with respect to the App Store. For example, there doesn't seem to be a
> > > > > provision with the move to Gatekeeper for "homegrown" applications to
> > > > > be created and run (unless you get a developer license and key). Those
> > > > > of us who have been involved in the industry for 30+ years, I guess,
> > > > > have concerns that newcomers won't have the opportunity to start as we
> > > > > did, by experimenting and creating our own software, and then sharing
> > > > > it with friends.
> > > > 
> > > > Maybe I'm missing something.  I'm experience zero difficult, say,
> > > > downloading and installing Chrome.  Without the App Store.  In fact
> > > > installing Chrome on Lion seems to me to be an identical experience to
> > > > installing Chrome on Leopard.
> > > 
> > > The issue is that, in 10.8, Gatekeeper becomes involved with the
> > > default being "App Store and signed applications only." It is true that
> > > you can, supposedly, disable Gatekeeper and allow free rein, but that
> > > isn't the case with iOS and the transition is very definitely heading
> > > in the direction of making the experience the same on the two
> > > platforms. I'm not arguing that this will take place, just that the
> > > fear is a reasonable one for people to have.
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Likewise for other applications I install.  Now it is true that there
> > > > must also be some applications I've installed from the App Store,
> > > > where that was the only way to install them, but the fact that the App
> > > > Store gives _another_ way for developers to share and/or sell their
> > > > applications doesn't seem like a _bad_ thing to me.  Developers who
> > > > don't want to use the App Store don't have to.
> > > > 
> > > > > I still remember the 1984 commercial and it now is bringing to mind the
> > > > > Walter Kelly quote from Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us." At
> > > > > the time of the commercial, Big Blue was so dominant that it tried to
> > > > > control everything (similarly AT&T in telecomm), then Microsoft got so
> > > > > huge that it tried to broaden its control, now Apple is started down
> > > > > the same road.
> > > > 
> > > > Only if you interpret "supplying the user with additional options" as
> > > > "trying to control everything."  Which seems crazy to me.
> > > 
> > > No, first it is an option, and then the option disappears. For example,
> > > no scroll arrows. Those of us who find trackpads very difficult to use
> > > are still wedded to our mice and trackballs, and this makes scrolling
> > > one line at a time difficult ... yes, use the keyboard and press the
> > > down-arrow, but that also moves the insertion point as well.
> > 
> > For me to buy the analogy, you have to explain where first there was a
> > "no scroll arrow" option followed by them disappearing.
> > 
> > What actually happened with scroll arrows (so far the only example of
> > something that disappeared in Lion that some people seem to care
> > about) was that Apple just took them away.
> > 
> > That is consistent with Apple's frequent methodology of deciding that
> > something is better and just changing it.
> > 
> > > Again, the point isn't that we've reached a problem, but that we look
> > > to be trending toward a problem. More an issue of incrementalism than a
> > > sea change. Camel's nose under the tent flap and all that.
> > 
> > I'm missing the incrementalism and the Camel's nose.
> > 
> > Instead it seems like what we have is the possibility that Apple could
> > decide to create a problem.  Which we always have.
> > 
> > > Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get
> > > you :)
> > 
> > True.
> 
> I don't know why you're arguing with me here, as we seem to be (mostly)
> in agreement that there is no urgency at this time. The point I tried
> to make is that trepidation on the part of some at least had something
> feeding it, rightly or wrongly.

Maybe I misunderstand what you are writing.  When you write about
"incrementalism" and "Camel's nose under the tent" (_really_ not a
phrase I need wikipedia to understand!), I read that as saying that 
you see bad things _happening_, not that you see a
_potential_ for bad things to happen.

There is _always_ a potential for bad things to happen, so to me it
makes no sense to criticize a company for things it hasn't done.

Apple introduced the iPod ten years ago, as a walled garden.  So the
"camel's nose" has been at the edge of the tent for a decade in your
sense.  But the camel, nose and all, remains firmly outside.

I still can download and install any software I want to onto my
Mac, and Apple has given no sign that they are going to change
that.  I might like a way to prevent my _kids_ from downloading and
installing any software they want to onto my Mac though - that
seems like a good idea!  

(rest of post snipped)
0
2/18/2012 1:34:15 AM
Doug Anderson wrote:

> Mine is that Apple is a leader on a new platform (smart phones and
> tablets) and that they are taking advantage of the discoveries they've
> made developing for those platforms to bring new ideas to the desktop.
> 
> It would be crazy for them _not_ to do that.

They are crazy when you consider that they are the ones who argued that
each platform needed its own UI because they were used differently.


Recall when Steve Jobs announced the iPad and said how the notebook
paradign made "etbooks" too compromised and how the user interface had
to be adapted to a small device. And note that even here, the choirboys
and gal made the argument that you couldn't necessarily apply the IOS
user interface to a desktop (such as touch screen which is not well
suited to a desktop). Yet, they will defend Apple when Apple does that
very thing and brings IOS UI features to OSX.


If Apple really had wanted to fix the UI on OS-X they would have moved
the menu bar to each window/application to acknowledge the fact that a
large number of desktops now have multiple screens. (those who don't
need multiple screen can use laptops).


Scroll bars may not be well suited to an ipHone where the finger is too
large to fit inside a scroll bar. But on a desktop, I really don,t
understand why Apple insisted on removing scroll bars and arrows by
default. (and not keep arrows when you tell it to still use scroll bars).

In what wat do scroll bars reduce usability ? And if they doN,t reduce
usability, why remove them ? The only reason is that they want to turn
OSX into IOS.
0
2/18/2012 1:36:23 AM
In article <4f3eff30$0$26099$c3e8da3$c14f6927@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Davoud wrote:
> 
> > To be fair, you should point out that many people think that Blu-Ray
> > was obsolete from day 1. Apple didn't bring Blu-Ray drives to the Mac
> > because the demand isn't there.

[snip]

> Apple may have decided that the users theu are ditching are not numerous
> enough to affect the share value of AAPL. But you, the choir guys/gal
> must at least accept that those moves cause legitimate complaints from
> the very people Apple no longer wishes to serve.

Mac users enjoy BlueRay players in their Macs every day:

<http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/blu-ray>

So Mac users are hardly "ditched". It's no big deal that BlueRay isn't a 
BTO option from Apple.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 1:40:32 AM
On 02-17-2012 08:18, Per Rønne wrote:
> Wes Groleau<Groleau+news@FreeShell.org>  wrote:
>
>> When a document (like some web pages?) is so long that dragging the
>> scroll thingy moves the document more than a screenful, it sure would be
>> nice to have those arrows.
>
> Why not use the arrow-keys, the PgDwn and PgUp, and the Home and End
> keys instead?

Habit.  Also, they don't always do what you want.

Sometimes, when the cursor is on the bottom line, one tap of the arrow 
makes that line jump to the middle.  I suppose the theory is "Oh, he 
wants to look at that line, let's put it in the middle so he can see the 
context."

But the reality is you jerked the context out from under me, and now I 
have to move my eyes up and figure out where I was before.

-- 
Wes Groleau

Answer not a fool according to his folly,
    lest thou also be like unto him.
Answer a fool according to his folly,
    lest he be wise according to his own conceit.
                         — Solomon
Are you saying there's no good way to answer a fool?
                         — Groleau

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 1:46:47 AM
On 02-17-2012 08:25, Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<jhkor3$eb1$1@dont-email.me>,
>   Wes Groleau<Groleau+news@FreeShell.org>  wrote:
>
>> On 02-16-2012 19:51, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>> easily. When I turn on "Show scroll bars always" I see
>>> they might be thinner, and they are certainly lacking arrows.  Both
>>> seem like plusses to me, but I grant that there is plenty of room to
>>> differ about this.
>>
>> I've developed over the years (Mac for more than ten; X11 before) the
>> habit of using those arrows to go a line or two at a time.
>>
>> When a document (like some web pages?) is so long that dragging the
>> scroll thingy moves the document more than a screenful, it sure would be
>> nice to have those arrows.
>
> Agreed. But I'm not tossing out the entire OS just because of that small
> gripe.

Neither am I.  But the large quantity of these "small gripes" means my 
former M.O. of taking all free upgrades and many paid upgrades without 
hesitation is over with.

-- 
Wes Groleau

   “Isn't embarrassing to quote something you didn't read
    and then attack what it didn't say?”

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 1:49:21 AM
On 02-17-2012 04:25, Tim Streater wrote:
> Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>
>> On 02-16-2012 18:44, Tim Streater wrote:
>> > As I have a Mighty Mouse with a scroll pea, I've not missed the arrows
>> > at all.
>>
>> Right. I have one of those too. I got tired of unclogging the beast
>> and now just use the scroll bar.
>
> I dismantle, clean, and remantle mine about once a year. 30 mins, tops.

Work in a clean room?  My experience says that if I were to adopt that 
schedule, mine would work one month out of every twelve.

-- 
Wes Groleau

     ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 1:51:02 AM
On 2012-02-16 15:44:14 -0800, Tim Streater said:
> 
>  BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:
>> 
>> Automatic saves are up to the app developers.  Apple, of course,
>> has provided the framework for it and has made it (as far as I
>> can tell) non-optional in *Apple* software (ie. Pages, Numbers)
>> but it certainly didn't force any other software to start doing
>> that stuff (ie. Word, Excel).
> 
> ITYM e.g. rather than ie.

Apparently, I do.  (i.e. <http://theoatmeal.com/comics/ie>)


0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/18/2012 1:52:14 AM
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> writes:

> Doug Anderson wrote:
> 
> > Mine is that Apple is a leader on a new platform (smart phones and
> > tablets) and that they are taking advantage of the discoveries they've
> > made developing for those platforms to bring new ideas to the desktop.
> > 
> > It would be crazy for them _not_ to do that.
> 
> They are crazy when you consider that they are the ones who argued that
> each platform needed its own UI because they were used differently.

Which was correct and is still correct.  But things are not static.
As hardware changes and as developers learn more, things change.  So
although iPhones and Macs have _very_ different UIs,  Apple would have
to be a stupid company to refuse to apply lessons learned in one UI to
the other when appropriate.

As far as the "things change," I've long preferred my MacBook trackpad
to a mouse, so when the Magic TrackPad came out, I bought one.  Now I
rarely use a mouse.  So my UI needs have shifted as a result.

> Recall when Steve Jobs announced the iPad and said how the notebook
> paradign made "etbooks" too compromised and how the user interface had
> to be adapted to a small device. And note that even here, the choirboys
> and gal made the argument that you couldn't necessarily apply the IOS
> user interface to a desktop (such as touch screen which is not well
> suited to a desktop). Yet, they will defend Apple when Apple does that
> very thing and brings IOS UI features to OSX.

You wish we lived in a world where people didn't learn and adapt from
experience?  Or do you only wish to live in a world where Apple
doesn't learn and adapt from experience?  

I don't get it.
 
> If Apple really had wanted to fix the UI on OS-X they would have moved
> the menu bar to each window/application to acknowledge the fact that a
> large number of desktops now have multiple screens. (those who don't
> need multiple screen can use laptops).

I disagree completely.  I think the menu bar should remain at the top
of the screen, but it should be at the top of all screens (or at least
that should be an option).  So yes,  Apple should do that.  They
should also do the things they are doing (e.g. making scroll bars
optional in OS X).

> Scroll bars may not be well suited to an ipHone where the finger is too
> large to fit inside a scroll bar. But on a desktop, I really don,t
> understand why Apple insisted on removing scroll bars and arrows by
> default. (and not keep arrows when you tell it to still use scroll
> bars).

So put the scroll bars back if you don't like the default.  I like the
default, but it takes all of 10 seconds to put the scroll bars back
permanently. 

> In what wat do scroll bars reduce usability ?

1)  If like me, you don't use them, it is easy to hit them
accidentally when clicking around and do something unintentional.

2) They occupy screen space, which matters on my laptop, though not on
my desktop

I think that's all I've got, but it's enough for me.

> if they doN,t reduce
> usability, why remove them ? The only reason is that they want to turn
> OSX into IOS.

a) they didn't remove them.

b) you're wrong.
0
2/18/2012 2:02:35 AM
On 02-17-2012 13:54, Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<i1j219-d6d.ln1@news.sture.ch>, Paul Sture<paul@sture.ch>
> quoted:
>
>> Chester Wisniewski, a senior security advisor at Sophos said, "....
>> This means Gatekeeper is essentially a whitelisting technology bolted
>> onto the blacklisting technology it introduced two versions ago," he
>> added.
>
> My understanding is Gatekeeper is supplemental to the malware protection
> already built into OS X.

My understanding is that's what Wisniewski said.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    A UNIX signature isn't a return address, it's the ASCII equivalent
    of a black velvet clown painting.  It's a rectangle of carets
    surrounding a quote from a literary giant of weeniedom like
    Heinlein or Dr. Who.
                                 — Chris Maeda
    Ha, ha, Dr. ..... Who's Chris Maeda?
                                 — Wes Groleau

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 2:04:49 AM
On 2012-02-17 15:21:58 -0800, Tom Stiller said:
> 
>  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>> 
>> Had Apple made a one time translator of PPC images to x86, then the loss
>> of Rosetta wouldn't have been so bad because people coul have converted
>> their legacy applications to run on x86 and linked to whatever current
>> libraries.
>> 
> Code conversion isn't the only requirement. There is also the issue of
> APIs and the functionality that lies behind them. My guess is that there
> was too much legacy cruft to carry forward.

I think in the case of Quicken 2007, the issue is as you say - it's not 
just the translation of PPC, but also the use of outdated Carbon APIs.  
According to one of the website, 10.8 will get rid of the last remnants 
of Carbon, but starting with 10.5, apparently, bits and pieces of it 
were being broken.  Adobe finally rewrote Photoshop to be carbon-less 
in '10.  Intuit at about the same time decided not to bother.

As I said, the loss of Rosetta is a pain, but it looks like it was 
helping hide some of the ongoing backwards compatibility cruft which 
can't possibly be an efficient way for the OS to go forward.

Those of us not ready to change software (huge pain) will have to deal 
with legacy OS (and soon, when Apple stops shipping SL compatible 
hardware, legacy hardware) for as long as we can.

Hopefully Intuit will do as they promised and at least buy me another 
few years.  Much as I'd hate to give them more business, even if it's a 
paid upgrade to get a Q2007 which is Lion (and future) compatible, I'd 
pay it (assuming it's reasonable).  I certainly understand that 
recoding isn't free for them and would love to see a whole new Q2012 -- 
if, unlike QEM, it was an actual upgrade rather than a switch to a 
crippled toy product.

0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/18/2012 2:05:36 AM
On 2012-02-17 15:07:20 -0800, Alan Browne said:

> On 2012-02-17 10:41 , Bread wrote:
[re: loss of Rosetta]
>> No - it was a major *improvement*. Unfortunately, we suffer because bad
>> *developers* aren't keeping up.
>> ...
>> long run, it's a *good* think for OS X.
> 
> Long term, yes.  But perhaps its release came a bit too soon.  If I 
> have to re-install MS Office 2008, I'm not sure I'd be able to do it 
> anymore.

Software publishers have had *years* to get up to speed.  Microsoft did 
- the current generation of Office, whether you like it or not, (a) 
exists and (b) installs and runs just fine on SL, Lion, no Rosetta.

Intuit chose not to.  They had *years* and decided to use the time to 
write a piece of crap instead.  To be fair, I think they originally 
intended to write a real honest-to-goodness upgrade and replacement and 
found that it was just too big a task and so shipped the stripped down 
bits and pieces that they'd managed to get finished.  That doesn't 
really excuse them - they should at least have provided us with an 
honest and clean migration (if I'd had to, I'd have moved to their 
Windows product -- but that suffers from the same export/import 
migration problems as moving to any of Intuit's competitors' products). 
 Clearly they know how to read in their own raw data files (witness QEM 
being able to read Q2007 files directly).
> 
> I suspect that Mac OS X will be coming out in a Macbook Air (the 
> Macbook Pro line will disappear into Air or v.v.) with a 6 or 8 core 
> ARM processor (Apple A8 or whatever).  Rosetta-II will translate intel 
> code for the ARM.... for a few years anyway.

I don't think I'd make that bet.  But speculating about processor 
changes is beyond my interest here.

The issue re: Quicken, at least, appears to be more than just the 
processor change - if it were just that, it would seem that Intuit 
could have simply recompiled.  It appears that it was also the use of 
outdated APIs.  Once Apple is completely rid of the remnants of Carbon, 
hopefully we won't have such major API changes again for a long time.





0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/18/2012 2:12:21 AM
On 02-17-2012 20:34, Doug Anderson wrote:
> that.  I might like a way to prevent my_kids_  from downloading and
> installing any software they want to onto my Mac though - that
> seems like a good idea!

We've had that for years without an app store or getekeeper.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    In any formula, constants (especially those obtained
    from handbooks) are to be treated as variables.

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 2:15:47 AM
On 02-17-2012 13:26, Lloyd wrote:
> My high school, which I graduated from in 1961 didn't even mention the
> word 'computer'!!!:)

My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a 
slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out 
of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71

She seemed to be genuinely amazed.

-- 
Wes Groleau

Change is inevitable.
Liberals need to learn that “inevitable" is not a synonym for “good."
Conservatives should learn that “inevitable" is not a synonym for “bad.”

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 2:25:15 AM
On 02-17-2012 14:07, BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:
> If I could get my Address Book and iCal sync to work via DropBox,
> there'd be nothing whatsoever that I'd miss from MobileMe.

If I could get my free five Gig iCloud to work like my free two Gig 
DropBox, I would be happy.  I maintain a couple of websites, one of 
which includes lots of photos.  Thanks to DropBox, I have the 
maintenance copy of both entire sites on any machine I'm on.  Also my 
..newsrc file, and a few other such things.  But because DropBox is only 
two Gig, the original version of each image is not there.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    “Would the prodigal have gone home if
     the elder brother was running the farm?”
                       — James Jordan

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 2:31:21 AM
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> writes:

> On 02-17-2012 20:34, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > that.  I might like a way to prevent my_kids_  from downloading and
> > installing any software they want to onto my Mac though - that
> > seems like a good idea!
> 
> We've had that for years without an app store or getekeeper.

We haven't had what I need for years.  My kids have normal, non-admin
accounts.  And I have no way (besides telling them not to, which
mostly works) to keep them from installing BitTorrent on their Desktop 
and running it.  (Yes, I could lock down their accounts more, but I
don't want to do that.  And I could simply not give them accounts, but
I don't want to do that either.)

If I understand Gatekeeper correctly,  it will more or less allow me
to do that.  But maybe I misunderstand it. And no doubt a developer
will find a way to get around any obstruction Gatekeeper offers.
  
0
2/18/2012 2:32:30 AM
On 02-17-2012 12:14, Per Rønne wrote:
> Not really. Mail without Address Book sync is a handicapped Mail system.

Until recently, I had no Address Book sync because I had no Address 
Book.  And Mail didn't seem to be handicapped to me.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    Trying to be happy is like trying to build a machine for which
    the only specification is that it should run noiselessly.
                               — unknown

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 2:33:51 AM
On 02-17-2012 09:01, Paul Sture wrote:
> I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but folks are already complaining
> about the direction that Windows 8 and Ubuntu are taking...

The very first time I heard about Windows 8, I thought.  Wow, not only 
is Microsoft copying Apple, they're copying the very thing that some 
Apple fans are getting upset about!

-- 
Wes Groleau

    From the cowardice that shrinks from new truth,
    From the laziness that is content with half-truths,
    From the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
    O God of Truth, deliver us.
                 --Leslie Dixon Weatherhead
                 --Rabbi Mordechai M. Kaplan
                 --ancient prayer
                 --unknown
                 --(no attempt at attribution)
(a thousand thanks to someone who can tell me who
  really wrote it AND persuade me they're not making it up!)

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 2:37:21 AM
On 02-17-2012 21:32, Doug Anderson wrote:
> We haven't had what I need for years.  My kids have normal, non-admin
> accounts.  And I have no way (besides telling them not to, which
> mostly works) to keep them from installing BitTorrent on their Desktop
> and running it.  (Yes, I could lock down their accounts more, but I
> don't want to do that.  And I could simply not give them accounts, but
> I don't want to do that either.)

If telling them not to doesn't work, I make sure they can't.
If telling them works, then I don't need GateKeeper or managed accounts 
or At-Ease or ....

And once Apple provided Unix features, if I had particularly determined 
resistance, I could control anything with chmod, chgrp, and rm.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    After the christening of his baby brother in church, Jason sobbed
    all the way home in the back seat of the car.  His father asked him
    three times what was wrong.  Finally, the boy replied, “That preacher
    said he wanted us brought up in a Christian home, and I wanted to
    stay with you guys."

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 3:04:51 AM
In article <jhn26b$duf$6@dont-email.me>,
 Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a 
> slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out 
> of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71
> 
> She seemed to be genuinely amazed.

You can still buy one.
<http://www.fatbraintoys.com/toy_companies/thinkgeek/slide_rule.cfm>

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/18/2012 3:05:47 AM
Bread:
> Intuit chose not to.  They had *years* and decided to use the time to 
> write a piece of crap instead.  To be fair, I think they originally 
> intended to write a real honest-to-goodness upgrade and replacement and 
> found that it was just too big a task...

I know of several one-man shops that produce specialized scientific
software that is far more complex than Quicken, and they have managed
to produce real honest-to-goodness updates to stay current with Mac OS. 
Further, some work at very low margins in tiny niche markets and others
work for free.

Intuit either lacks the talent or the will to properly support the Mac.
I suspect it is the latter.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
0
star (3126)
2/18/2012 3:13:51 AM
In article <jhn11g$r9j$1@reader1.panix.com>,
 Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:

> Hopefully Intuit will do as they promised and at least buy me another 
> few years.  Much as I'd hate to give them more business, even if it's a 
> paid upgrade to get a Q2007 which is Lion (and future) compatible, I'd 
> pay it (assuming it's reasonable).  I certainly understand that recoding 
> isn't free for them and would love to see a whole new Q2012 -- if, 
> unlike QEM, it was an actual upgrade rather than a switch to a crippled 
> toy product.

I had been using Q2006, which I got for free with my Mac in January 2006.  
When I knew that I was going to upgrade the OS to Lion, I checked just 
about every checkbook app available for the Mac, and settled on QEM.  I use 
it strictly to keep track of my checking and credit-card accounts, and it 
is more than adequate for that task.

One nice thing about it that's absent from Q2006 is that I can download the 
data from the various banks directly into Quicken with one triple-keystroke 
(Command-Shift-U).  With Q2006, I had to download the data files from the 
web sites of each bank into a QFX file, and then import them into Quicken.  
I didn't bother doing that for the credit cards because of all the effort.

-- Michelle

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/18/2012 3:14:32 AM
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> writes:

> On 02-17-2012 21:32, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > We haven't had what I need for years.  My kids have normal, non-admin
> > accounts.  And I have no way (besides telling them not to, which
> > mostly works) to keep them from installing BitTorrent on their Desktop
> > and running it.  (Yes, I could lock down their accounts more, but I
> > don't want to do that.  And I could simply not give them accounts, but
> > I don't want to do that either.)
> 
> If telling them not to doesn't work, I make sure they can't.
> If telling them works, then I don't need GateKeeper or managed
> accounts or At-Ease or ....

Yes, so you're of the "misbehave once and I wallop you" school of
parenting.  Which is just fine with me if that works for you.

But my point remains,  Gatekeeper adds a capability we didn't have.
 
> And once Apple provided Unix features, if I had particularly
> determined resistance, I could control anything with chmod, chgrp, and
> rm.

Sure.  So people who want more finely grained control of their
computers could learn unix shell commands.  Now they can have some of
that control without learning unix shell commands.  Who needs
TimeMachine or iCloud or DropBox when we have rsync and ssh?

Software that allows ordinary users to do things easily that
used to be hard is an addition in functionality. You might not like
that people have that functionality without leanring their way around
the filesystem and the shell.  But there it is:  like it or not.

Why make calculators when we had slide rules?  Why make computers when
we had pencils and paper and telegraphs and slide rules?
0
2/18/2012 3:35:40 AM
On 02-17-2012 22:35, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Wes Groleau<Groleau+news@FreeShell.org>  writes:
>> On 02-17-2012 21:32, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>> We haven't had what I need for years.  My kids have normal, non-admin
>>> accounts.  And I have no way (besides telling them not to, which
>>> mostly works) to keep them from installing BitTorrent on their Desktop
>>> and running it.  (Yes, I could lock down their accounts more, but I
>>> don't want to do that.  And I could simply not give them accounts, but
>>> I don't want to do that either.)
>>
>> If telling them not to doesn't work, I make sure they can't.
>> If telling them works, then I don't need GateKeeper or managed
>> accounts or At-Ease or ....
>
> Yes, so you're of the "misbehave once and I wallop you" school of
> parenting.  Which is just fine with me if that works for you.

I believe that neither "once" nor "wallop" appeared anywhere in my post.
However, since "doesn't work" is apparently ambiguous, let's try:
When my kids (when I had them) were unable to control themselves, it was 
my job to control them.  When they were able to control themselves,
I let them do so.

> But my point remains,  Gatekeeper adds a capability we didn't have.

Gatekeeper makes a slight variation on capabilities that have been there 
a long time.  And, like those others, I don't need it.  But when I did, 
the others worked fine.

> Why make calculators when we had slide rules?  Why make computers when
> we had pencils and paper and telegraphs and slide rules?

-- 
Wes Groleau

    “If it wasn't for that blasted back-hoe,
     a hundred of us could be working with shovels”
    “Yeah, and if it weren't for our shovels,
     a thousand of us could be working with spoons."

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 3:56:12 AM
On 02-17-2012 22:05, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<jhn26b$duf$6@dont-email.me>,
>   Wes Groleau<Groleau+news@FreeShell.org>  wrote:
>
>> My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a
>> slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out
>> of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71
>>
>> She seemed to be genuinely amazed.
>
> You can still buy one.
> <http://www.fatbraintoys.com/toy_companies/thinkgeek/slide_rule.cfm>

Bought mine, an originally rather expensive K&E, at a garage sale for 
five dollars.


-- 
Wes Groleau

    After the christening of his baby brother in church, Jason sobbed
    all the way home in the back seat of the car.  His father asked him
    three times what was wrong.  Finally, the boy replied, “That preacher
    said he wanted us brought up in a Christian home, and I wanted to
    stay with you guys."

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 4:01:21 AM
In article <6ek43k95kj.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> writes:
> 
> > On 02-17-2012 21:32, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > We haven't had what I need for years.  My kids have normal, non-admin
> > > accounts.  And I have no way (besides telling them not to, which
> > > mostly works) to keep them from installing BitTorrent on their Desktop
> > > and running it.  (Yes, I could lock down their accounts more, but I
> > > don't want to do that.  And I could simply not give them accounts, but
> > > I don't want to do that either.)
> > 
> > If telling them not to doesn't work, I make sure they can't.
> > If telling them works, then I don't need GateKeeper or managed
> > accounts or At-Ease or ....
> 
> Yes, so you're of the "misbehave once and I wallop you" school of
> parenting.  Which is just fine with me if that works for you.
> 
> But my point remains,  Gatekeeper adds a capability we didn't have.
>  
> > And once Apple provided Unix features, if I had particularly
> > determined resistance, I could control anything with chmod, chgrp, and
> > rm.
> 
> Sure.  So people who want more finely grained control of their
> computers could learn unix shell commands.  Now they can have some of
> that control without learning unix shell commands.  Who needs
> TimeMachine or iCloud or DropBox when we have rsync and ssh?
> 
> Software that allows ordinary users to do things easily that
> used to be hard is an addition in functionality. You might not like
> that people have that functionality without leanring their way around
> the filesystem and the shell.  But there it is:  like it or not.
> 
> Why make calculators when we had slide rules?  Why make computers when
> we had pencils and paper and telegraphs and slide rules?

I think that the issue here is one of how/when things are done, more
than whether they should be done (or should have been done).

One can say that Apple tends to operate at the "leading edge" (or
"bleeding edge"). Alternatively, one can use a Jobsian quote and say
that Apple "skates to where the puck is going."

Examples include: elimination of standard floppy drives,
orphaning/eliminating DVD authoring tools (iDVD hasn't been updated in
almost 5 years and DVD Studio Pro is gone), eliminating built-in
dial-up capabilities (and even their own external modem doesn't work
with Lion since they didn't update the driver, elimination of Rosetta
support (we got warning when Classic was going away), and more.

All of these actions were to the good in the long run. Some of them
came abruptly and occasioned gnashing of teeth and short-term
inconvenience and could have been handled better. The cumulative effect
though, is that various people tend to be inconvenienced more than
others and, if you're one of them (especially if inconvenienced more
than once) you might start to develop some paranoia. I think that's
what's being seen here.

Some unlikely scenarios have been presented, even very unlikely;
however, that is not the same as "couldn't happen." I posited that
moving beyond Gatekeeper to an iOS model would be a concern, but it is
unlikely. Nevertheless, if the issue isn't brought up, then the
possibility of occurrence is increased since there's no sense in the
beancounters that it would be objectionable to a share of Apple's
market. Unfortunately, not everyone making decisions in any large
venture, including Apple, is tech-savvy or even cognizant of the
breadth of their market.

-- 
Spenser
0
dogbreath (1151)
2/18/2012 4:05:43 AM
In article <jhn26b$duf$6@dont-email.me>,
 Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 02-17-2012 13:26, Lloyd wrote:
> > My high school, which I graduated from in 1961 didn't even mention the
> > word 'computer'!!!:)
> 
> My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a 
> slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out 
> of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71
> 
> She seemed to be genuinely amazed.

I don't doubt!!  :)

I didn't start using a slide rule much until I was in Aviation 
Electronics school in the Navy.
0
2/18/2012 4:06:19 AM
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 02-17-2012 13:26, Lloyd wrote:
> > My high school, which I graduated from in 1961 didn't even mention the
> > word 'computer'!!!:)
> 
> My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a
> slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out
> of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71

I graduated from high school in 1969. I don't recall any class at the
high school relating to slide rules, but I definitely used one. It was
when my nice Pickett slide rule "disappeared" one day at Purdue that I
got my first personal electronic device. I went to the bookstore to get
a new Pickett, looked at the $60 or so to get a new one of the kind I
was used to, and looked at the HP 35 right next to it for $395. The HP
was a lot more expensive, but I figured I'd end up getting one later
anyway, so I decided to "save" by not getting the Pickett.

That HP 35 later became the engagement gift for my wife. Yes, I have
enough of a nerd for a wife that she loved it. In fact, when we first
met, she noticed the HP and that's what got conversation going, so it
had a bit of special sentimental value. And we still have it, though it
doesn't really get used any more.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain
0
nospam47 (9747)
2/18/2012 4:29:38 AM
On 2012-02-18 04:01:21 +0000, Wes Groleau said:

[speaking in regards to sliderules]

> Bought mine, an originally rather expensive K&E, at a garage sale for 
> five dollars.

I can remember when some of the classrooms in my high school had giant 
slide rule in the front of the room above the blackboard. And when I 
was in high school, and this was in the late 1940s, if you took physics 
you were expected to have a slide rule.

When I was a freshman at the University of Michigan in 1951 I purchased 
a K & E slide rule for something like $20, quite a sum in those days. I 
still have it and it works just as good today as it did when I got it.

Somehow I think that the slide rule is an excellent tool for teaching 
some of the aspects of mathematics and consider it a shame that it has 
faded away.

-- 
James Leo Ryan - Austin, Texas

0
2/18/2012 4:29:48 AM
On 02-17-2012 23:29, TaliesinSoft wrote:
> I can remember when some of the classrooms in my high school had giant
> slide rule in the front of the room above the blackboard. And when I was
> in high school, and this was in the late 1940s, if you took physics you
> were expected to have a slide rule.

Yep, we had one of those.

The first X-Windows system I was on had "xcalc"--an early version of one 
of those on-screen calculators.  Being a bit of a weird-o, I read the 
man page and got several minutes of entertainment out of

xcalc -analog

which put a slide rule on screen and let me drag the slide and the 
reticule with the mouse.

-- 
Wes Groleau

   Nutrition for Blokes: Re-engineering your diet for life
   http://www.phlaunt.com/quentin

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 4:42:14 AM
In article <9q8npsFnmpU1@mid.individual.net>, TaliesinSoft
<taliesinsoft@me.com> wrote:

> On 2012-02-18 04:01:21 +0000, Wes Groleau said:
> 
> [speaking in regards to sliderules]
> 
> > Bought mine, an originally rather expensive K&E, at a garage sale for 
> > five dollars.
> 
> I can remember when some of the classrooms in my high school had giant 
> slide rule in the front of the room above the blackboard. And when I 
> was in high school, and this was in the late 1940s, if you took physics 
> you were expected to have a slide rule.
> 
> When I was a freshman at the University of Michigan in 1951 I purchased 
> a K & E slide rule for something like $20, quite a sum in those days. I 
> still have it and it works just as good today as it did when I got it.
> 
> Somehow I think that the slide rule is an excellent tool for teaching 
> some of the aspects of mathematics and consider it a shame that it has 
> faded away.

Ditto...

I have two K&Es. One is a beautiful wooden model made in the 1940s (my
grandfather bought it for me when I was born). The other is a circular
model that I purchased in the UCLA Student Store in 1967, but I don't
recall what it set me back -- I know it was less than $100, because I
still had money left from my winnings in a card game in "the Coop."

My first programmable calculator was an HP-67 that cost almost $500 at
the time (1976). One of the first programs I wrote for it was to
computer masterpoint awards at ACBL Bridge tournaments. When the other
directors had to get out their reference books and start looking
through the charts, I just keyed in three numbers and let it run for a
second or two :)

-- 
Spenser
0
dogbreath (1151)
2/18/2012 4:42:47 AM
In article <jhn26b$duf$6@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau
<Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> 
> My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a 
> slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out 
> of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71
> 
> She seemed to be genuinely amazed.

Genuinely amazed that it took you fives times as long as using a
calculator, and genuinely amazed that you got the answer wrong (or in
engineer-speak "close enough").  ;o)

Helpful Harry  :o)
0
2/18/2012 5:23:46 AM
In article <170220122042472228%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>, sbt
<dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote:
> In article <9q8npsFnmpU1@mid.individual.net>, TaliesinSoft
> <taliesinsoft@me.com> wrote:
> > On 2012-02-18 04:01:21 +0000, Wes Groleau said:
> > 
> > [speaking in regards to sliderules]
> > 
> > > Bought mine, an originally rather expensive K&E, at a garage sale for 
> > > five dollars.
> > 
> > I can remember when some of the classrooms in my high school had giant 
> > slide rule in the front of the room above the blackboard. And when I 
> > was in high school, and this was in the late 1940s, if you took physics 
> > you were expected to have a slide rule.
> > 
> > When I was a freshman at the University of Michigan in 1951 I purchased 
> > a K & E slide rule for something like $20, quite a sum in those days. I 
> > still have it and it works just as good today as it did when I got it.
> > 
> > Somehow I think that the slide rule is an excellent tool for teaching 
> > some of the aspects of mathematics and consider it a shame that it has 
> > faded away.
> 
> Ditto...
> 
> I have two K&Es. One is a beautiful wooden model made in the 1940s (my
> grandfather bought it for me when I was born). The other is a circular
> model that I purchased in the UCLA Student Store in 1967, but I don't
> recall what it set me back -- I know it was less than $100, because I
> still had money left from my winnings in a card game in "the Coop."

I've got two slide rules sitting in the drawer - a "normal" ruler length
(about 30cm) wooden one too, and the a mini-one only about 10cm long. I'm
not sure how old they are, but they were first bought and used by my
father. There also used to be a circular one, but I can't remember seeing
that recently.
 


> My first programmable calculator was an HP-67 that cost almost $500 at
> the time (1976). One of the first programs I wrote for it was to
> computer masterpoint awards at ACBL Bridge tournaments. When the other
> directors had to get out their reference books and start looking
> through the charts, I just keyed in three numbers and let it run for a
> second or two :)

I've still got an HP-15c programmable calculator along with the protective
sleeve and two thick manuals it came with. I rarely use it though and it's
in basically "as new" condition - in fact, it may even still have the
original batteries in it (I remove them after each use before putting it
back in the drawer).

Helpful Harry  :o)
0
2/18/2012 5:37:30 AM
On 02-18-2012 00:23, Helpful Harry wrote:
> In article<jhn26b$duf$6@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau
> <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org>  wrote:
>>
>> My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a
>> slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out
>> of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71
>>
>> She seemed to be genuinely amazed.
>
> Genuinely amazed that it took you fives times as long as using a

Genuinely amazed as in never having seen such a thing before.
And I've never timed slide rule use, but I doubt that ten (or more) 
keystrokes on a calculator can be done five times faster than two 
positionings on a slide rule.  Faster, yes, but not even close to
five times faster.

> calculator, and genuinely amazed that you got the answer wrong (or in
> engineer-speak "close enough").  ;o)

I'm also quite certain that she has no clue whether the answer is right 
or wrong, since she was carrying neither paper nor calculator nor abacus.

-- 
Wes Groleau

    Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/rulings/pants-fire/

0
news31 (6772)
2/18/2012 6:23:50 AM
Wes Groleau wrote:
>
> The first X-Windows system I was on had "xcalc"--an early version of one 
> of those on-screen calculators.  Being a bit of a weird-o, I read the 
> man page and got several minutes of entertainment out of
> 
> xcalc -analog


Well, I'll have to file an official complaint to Apple. While xcalc is
present on OS-X (SL), it does not support the -analog switch. :-( :-( :-(
0
2/18/2012 6:41:22 AM
In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> 
> > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > 
> > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store is 
> > now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> > end.
> 
> So just to be clear:
> 
> -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.

Not quite.  I object to the new cheap-looking scroll bars which don't 
work like scroll bars have since 1984.

> -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.

I object to the user NOT having the option to NOT use the App store.  
Get it straight. :-D

-- 
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Love the theist, hate the dogma. - Numist
0
howard578 (2138)
2/18/2012 7:34:41 AM
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> writes:

> On 02-17-2012 22:35, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Wes Groleau<Groleau+news@FreeShell.org>  writes:
> >> On 02-17-2012 21:32, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >>> We haven't had what I need for years.  My kids have normal, non-admin
> >>> accounts.  And I have no way (besides telling them not to, which
> >>> mostly works) to keep them from installing BitTorrent on their Desktop
> >>> and running it.  (Yes, I could lock down their accounts more, but I
> >>> don't want to do that.  And I could simply not give them accounts, but
> >>> I don't want to do that either.)
> >>
> >> If telling them not to doesn't work, I make sure they can't.
> >> If telling them works, then I don't need GateKeeper or managed
> >> accounts or At-Ease or ....
> >
> > Yes, so you're of the "misbehave once and I wallop you" school of
> > parenting.  Which is just fine with me if that works for you.
> 
> I believe that neither "once" nor "wallop" appeared anywhere in my post.
> However, since "doesn't work" is apparently ambiguous, let's try:
> When my kids (when I had them) were unable to control themselves, it
> was my job to control them.  When they were able to control themselves,
> I let them do so.

And one of your tools might be Gatekeeper if you had kids at home now.

Unless your contention is that everyone should be doing this through
shell commands, which is not a contention I understand.
0
2/18/2012 7:42:53 AM
Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:

> In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
>  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > 
> > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not showing
> > > > scrollbars  except when the system things you need them,  what is
> > > > "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > 
> > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App Store is 
> > > now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, that's the
> > > end.
> > 
> > So just to be clear:
> > 
> > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing scrollbars.
> 
> Not quite.  I object to the new cheap-looking scroll bars which don't 
> work like scroll bars have since 1984.

That I can understand, though I happen to disagree.
 
> > -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App store.
> 
> I object to the user NOT having the option to NOT use the App store.  
> Get it straight. :-D

That I cannot understand.  Both because your sentence makes no sense,
and because the user _does_ have the option to not use the App store.

Now it is true that if a developer writes a piece of software and
decides that the App store is the best way to distribute it, and you
want that software, you may have no choice.  But developers have
always been able to distributed software in various idiosyncratic
ways, and I fail to see why this one is more objectionable than the
alternatives.   It sure beats Stuffit archives...
0
2/18/2012 7:48:12 AM
Doug Anderson wrote:

> That I cannot understand.  Both because your sentence makes no sense,
> and because the user _does_ have the option to not use the App store.

You are forced to use it for certain products, namely those coming from
Apple.

And while we are not yet forced to use it for vast majority fo
applications, if the rumours are true that in the futire, only apps
distributed through the app store will have access to key features of
the OS, then there is an implication that we'll be forced to use the app
store for anything current.

So, there will likely be some "jailbreaking" involved to allow unsigned
applications to use features of the OS that Apple doesn't want us to use
uless the apps were bought from the app store.


Maybe Apple will ot go that far. Maybe it will. It has opened the door
to this. It would't have opened the door if it had had no intention of
going there.
0
2/18/2012 8:55:13 AM
dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> In article <1kfm7sp.2mrt76wcoy68N%per@RQNNE.invalid>,
>  per@RQNNE.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:
> 
> > I'm simply unable to type on the MacBook without touching the internal
> > trackpad - which I have disabled when a mouse or external trackpad is
> > connected.
> 
> How do you do this disabling?

I had been doing it for years when I was using Leopard. With Snow
Leopard the facility seemed gone.

Until I was recently told how to do it.

In the System Settings select Universal Access.

Select the Mouse and Pad pane.

Select the Touch Pad Settings key in the bottom.

Select �Ignore built-in touch pad when a mouse or cordless Touch Pad is
connected�.

Since I'm running Lion 10.7.3 in Danish, the actual words used may be
different. I have just tried to translate the Danish words.

And since it is easier to have a Magic TouchPad than a mouse in the
knapsack together with the MacBook, that is the one I use.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/18/2012 10:49:12 AM
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 02-17-2012 12:14, Per R�nne wrote:
> > Not really. Mail without Address Book sync is a handicapped Mail system.
> 
> Until recently, I had no Address Book sync because I had no Address 
> Book.  And Mail didn't seem to be handicapped to me.

Then you will have to write down each receiver's mail address when you
want to mail them.

With Address Book (synced to your other devices) you just write each
receiver's name - it will give you suggestions while you type.

And if you use groups in Address Book, you can use group mail. Like
group mailing to your old Sixth Form class for a class reunion ... or
your current project group at college with a group message.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/18/2012 10:49:12 AM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 17:31:50 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:

> In my case, I am staying with Snow Leopard as long as possible. I
> realise that I won't be able to upgrade Apple software sich as iWork and
> eventually even itunes may not long be upgradable, but by then, I
> suspect that Apple will have spliled the real beans on it true plans for
> the desktop.

I'm still getting iTunes updates for Leopard.  It's a money earner for 
them, so they haven't dropped older systems yet.
 
> 
> For those who need computers, I suspect that there will be pressure on
> adobe  to port its software to Linux.

I doubt that Adobe will listen. They dropped Linux as a platform for 
Adobe Air some time ago.

-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/18/2012 10:51:48 AM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:13:51 -0500, Davoud wrote:

> Bread:
>> Intuit chose not to.  They had *years* and decided to use the time to
>> write a piece of crap instead.  To be fair, I think they originally
>> intended to write a real honest-to-goodness upgrade and replacement and
>> found that it was just too big a task...
> 
> I know of several one-man shops that produce specialized scientific
> software that is far more complex than Quicken, and they have managed to
> produce real honest-to-goodness updates to stay current with Mac OS.
> Further, some work at very low margins in tiny niche markets and others
> work for free.
> 
> Intuit either lacks the talent or the will to properly support the Mac.
> I suspect it is the latter.

My experience of Intuit as far back as 1997 suggests the latter.  When 
the help files for QuickBooks didn't work on NT4, Intuit just stuck their 
fingers in the ears and said "We only support Windows 3.1 and 95".

(In fact if could have been bothered, reloading Windows 3.1 and 
installing QuickBooks on that would have produced the correct format of 
help files, but it would have taken me many hours.)

It was apparently a simple test within their installation procedure which 
didn't recognise NT4 correctly. They could have fixed it easily but 
refused to do so.



-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/18/2012 11:01:47 AM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 21:25:15 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:

> On 02-17-2012 13:26, Lloyd wrote:
>> My high school, which I graduated from in 1961 didn't even mention the
>> word 'computer'!!!:)
> 
> My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a
> slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out
> of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71
> 
> She seemed to be genuinely amazed.

Chuckle.  The main problem I had with a slide rule was the one chemistry 
teacher who insisted that slide rules weren't accurate enough and we 
should use log tables.  One lucky lad had a circular slide rule, accurate 
to an extra decimal place, so was allowed to use it-

Chemistry teacher: "Oh look! Smith has finished the exercise first again. 
Congratulations Smith!"

Us (under our breath) "Grr!"



-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/18/2012 11:36:10 AM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 20:29:38 -0800, Richard Maine wrote:

> I graduated from high school in 1969. I don't recall any class at the
> high school relating to slide rules, but I definitely used one. It was
> when my nice Pickett slide rule "disappeared" one day at Purdue that I
> got my first personal electronic device. I went to the bookstore to get
> a new Pickett, looked at the $60 or so to get a new one of the kind I
> was used to, and looked at the HP 35 right next to it for $395. The HP
> was a lot more expensive, but I figured I'd end up getting one later
> anyway, so I decided to "save" by not getting the Pickett.

I believe we were introduced to slide rules at age 11 or 12. I'm pretty 
sure we did log tables from 11.

A fellow student in my first year at university had a simple add, 
subtract, divide, multiply calculator which cost 34 pounds, about what I 
could earn in two weeks in a manual student holiday job at the time.  The 
university hadn't settled on a calculator policy yet, and allowed him to 
use his in the first set of exams, which upset the rest of us who 
couldn't afford such luxuries (well truth be told, we spent more than 
that kind of money on hifi systems and attending concerts - our 
priorities were somewhat different).

I can't remember how much our stats lecturer in the second year paid for 
his HP calculator, but he did things like tossing coins for an hour or so 
with it to demonstrate what happens if you don't get a 50/50 split in the 
results.  We all knew we couldn't afford such a luxury.

-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/18/2012 11:47:35 AM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 23:42:14 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:

> On 02-17-2012 23:29, TaliesinSoft wrote:
>> I can remember when some of the classrooms in my high school had giant
>> slide rule in the front of the room above the blackboard. And when I
>> was in high school, and this was in the late 1940s, if you took physics
>> you were expected to have a slide rule.
> 
> Yep, we had one of those.
> 
> The first X-Windows system I was on had "xcalc"--an early version of one
> of those on-screen calculators.  Being a bit of a weird-o, I read the
> man page and got several minutes of entertainment out of
> 
> xcalc -analog
> 
> which put a slide rule on screen and let me drag the slide and the
> reticule with the mouse.

Had to try that on my Mac.

xcalc: unknown options: -analog

Ah well...

-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/18/2012 11:55:30 AM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:34:23 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:

> On 2012-02-17 09:01 , Paul Sture wrote:
> 
>> Ubuntu and at least one derivative already have the "Where the hell is
>> the scrollbar?" feature.
> 
> The "scrollbar" issue is a red herring issue.  If you can't live without
> it you turn it on in the system settings.

You missed the point.  I'd say that the direction Ubuntu is going in is 
worse than the complaints about Lion's behaviour I've seen here.

In the Ubuntu implementation there is an indicator that a scroll bar is 
available but it's a very thin blue line on my system and hard to see. 

Although they similarly claim that you can "change the settings", I 
couldn't find where to do that.



-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/18/2012 12:03:23 PM
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 21:37:21 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:

> On 02-17-2012 09:01, Paul Sture wrote:
>> I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but folks are already complaining
>> about the direction that Windows 8 and Ubuntu are taking...
> 
> The very first time I heard about Windows 8, I thought.  Wow, not only
> is Microsoft copying Apple, they're copying the very thing that some
> Apple fans are getting upset about!

Yep, same here.  I'm also mystified by them dropping the Start button. 
Under Win7 it's a lot faster to hit "Start" then type in "Windows Update" 
or "services.msc" than to navigate to those items via the menus, and I've 
got used to it.

Also I couldn't find a way to shut Windows 8 except for opening up a 
command line box.  I'm sure it's not the intention that your normal 
Windows user has to do that :-)



-- 
Paul Sture
0
paul303 (1379)
2/18/2012 12:08:17 PM
Per R�nne <per@RQNNE.invalid> wrote:

> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
> > In article <1kfm4zd.h5pyuf1pfbf3iN%per@RQNNE.invalid>,
> >  per@RQNNE.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:
> > 
> > > Yes - but this beta version will become unusable when Mountain Lion can
> > > be purchased - or at the end of the year.
> > > 
> > > What about those of us with a computer running Lion that cannot update
> > > to Mountain Lion?
> > 
> > It has an uninstall feature built into it, accessible from the application
> > menu.
> 
> OK.
> 
> And someone at the Danish mac newsgroup suggested that it might become
> available in the Mac App Store for those not running Mountain Lion.

Like FaceTime, which is included with Lion, but is available on the App
Store for Snow Leopard.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz
0
dempson (3825)
2/18/2012 1:01:41 PM
In article <a2f419-63k.ln1@news.sture.ch>, Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> 
wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 21:25:15 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:
> 
> > On 02-17-2012 13:26, Lloyd wrote:
> >> My high school, which I graduated from in 1961 didn't even mention the
> >> word 'computer'!!!:)
> > 
> > My high school, which I graduated from in 1972 made us learn to use a
> > slide rule.  A co-worker last week asked what it was, so I took it out
> > of the case and showed her how to multiply 2.36 times 5.71
> > 
> > She seemed to be genuinely amazed.
> 
> Chuckle.  The main problem I had with a slide rule was the one chemistry 
> teacher who insisted that slide rules weren't accurate enough and we 
> should use log tables.  One lucky lad had a circular slide rule, accurate 
> to an extra decimal place, so was allowed to use it-

The only thing that could increase the accuracy of a slide rule is extra 
effective length. A typical engineer's slide rule has a scale length of 
10". A 6" circular slide rule would have greater effective length on the 
outer scales but about equivalent on the innermost scales.

-- 
PRAY, v.  To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf
of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy. -- Ambrose Bierce
0
tom_stiller (1288)
2/18/2012 1:52:37 PM
On 2012-02-17 21:12 , Bread wrote:
> On 2012-02-17 15:07:20 -0800, Alan Browne said:
>
>> On 2012-02-17 10:41 , Bread wrote:
> [re: loss of Rosetta]
>>> No - it was a major *improvement*. Unfortunately, we suffer because bad
>>> *developers* aren't keeping up.
>>> ...
>>> long run, it's a *good* think for OS X.
>>
>> Long term, yes. But perhaps its release came a bit too soon. If I have
>> to re-install MS Office 2008, I'm not sure I'd be able to do it anymore.
>
> Software publishers have had *years* to get up to speed. Microsoft did -
> the current generation of Office, whether you like it or not, (a) exists
> and (b) installs and runs just fine on SL, Lion, no Rosetta.

Dude - 2008 is not ages old.  I'll be forced to purchase Office again. 
On my Windows machine I kept 1 version of Office going for over 10 
years.  Like I said the _app_ is intel, just not the _installer_.

Yes, MS should have moved up on that, but there was no real reason for 
Apple to abandon Rosetta yet.  (Yes, I know the refrain).

I've also been hit on other s/w, less critical or replaced.

> Intuit chose not to. They had *years* and decided to use the time to
> write a piece of crap instead. To be fair, I think they originally
> intended to write a real honest-to-goodness upgrade and replacement and
> found that it was just too big a task and so shipped the stripped down
> bits and pieces that they'd managed to get finished. That doesn't really
> excuse them - they should at least have provided us with an honest and
> clean migration (if I'd had to, I'd have moved to their Windows product
> -- but that suffers from the same export/import migration problems as
> moving to any of Intuit's competitors' products). Clearly they know how
> to read in their own raw data files (witness QEM being able to read
> Q2007 files directly).
>>
>> I suspect that Mac OS X will be coming out in a Macbook Air (the
>> Macbook Pro line will disappear into Air or v.v.) with a 6 or 8 core
>> ARM processor (Apple A8 or whatever). Rosetta-II will translate intel
>> code for the ARM.... for a few years anyway.
>
> I don't think I'd make that bet. But speculating about processor changes
> is beyond my interest here.

It's always fun.

>
> The issue re: Quicken, at least, appears to be more than just the
> processor change - if it were just that, it would seem that Intuit could
> have simply recompiled. It appears that it was also the use of outdated
> APIs. Once Apple is completely rid of the remnants of Carbon, hopefully
> we won't have such major API changes again for a long time.

Until Apple come up with the next great thing.  In a sense using all the 
iOS "Aqua" in OS X is part of "the next great thing".


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 2:39:01 PM
In article <nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet

More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for 
removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons 
were "real" as you say.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 3:09:45 PM
On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
>
> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for
> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
> were "real" as you say.

And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.

The sole reasons Apple would remove Rosetta are to lower OS support 
costs in the near term.  Given their stellar, growing sales of Macs I 
can't believe that it was a budget issue.

IOW they are not facing _real_ cost issues in supporting Rosetta.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 3:31:49 PM
In article <f7GdnSvHFOn4WaLSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> >
> > More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for
> > removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
> > were "real" as you say.
> 
> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.

You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that 
fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for removing 
Rosetta support. 

> The sole reasons Apple would remove Rosetta are to lower OS support 
> costs in the near term.  Given their stellar, growing sales of Macs I 
> can't believe that it was a budget issue.
> 
> IOW they are not facing _real_ cost issues in supporting Rosetta.

Your opinion is nothing more than pure conjecture.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 3:44:06 PM
In article <5vd39ctweb.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> 
> > In article <h4pqdeoses.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:
> > > 
> > > > In article <dzaa4il9yg.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
> > > >  Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Besides the fact that 10.7 gives you the _option_ of not 
> > > > > showing scrollbars  except when the system things you need 
> > > > > them,  what is "worse" about 10.7 than 10.6?
> > > > 
> > > > That.  And any number of little things, such as the way the App 
> > > > Store is now spreading to the Mac.  When it becomes mandatory, 
> > > > that's the end.
> > > 
> > > So just to be clear:
> > > 
> > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of not showing 
> > > scrollbars.
> > 
> > Not quite.  I object to the new cheap-looking scroll bars which 
> > don't work like scroll bars have since 1984.
> 
> That I can understand, though I happen to disagree.
>  
> > > -you object to the user having the _option_ of using the App 
> > > store.
> > 
> > I object to the user NOT having the option to NOT use the App 
> > store.  Get it straight. :-D
> 
> That I cannot understand.  Both because your sentence makes no sense, 

Deliberately.

> and because the user _does_ have the option to not use the App store.

He was making a bit of a joke, son.

-- 
This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in
unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live in.  

Theodore Roosevelt
0
timmcn (2339)
2/18/2012 4:36:11 PM
On 2012-02-18 10:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<f7GdnSvHFOn4WaLSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
>>>
>>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for
>>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
>>> were "real" as you say.
>>
>> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
>
> You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
> fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for removing
> Rosetta support.

Then, why, O great sage?

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 5:16:05 PM
In article <vqGdnZlK7qNIQaLSnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-18 10:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<f7GdnSvHFOn4WaLSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> >>>
> >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for
> >>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
> >>> were "real" as you say.
> >>
> >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> >
> > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
> > fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for removing
> > Rosetta support.
> 
> Then, why, O great sage?

I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 5:20:17 PM
On 2012-02-18 12:20 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<vqGdnZlK7qNIQaLSnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-18 10:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<f7GdnSvHFOn4WaLSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
>>>>>
>>>>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for
>>>>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
>>>>> were "real" as you say.
>>>>
>>>> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
>>>
>>> You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
>>> fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for removing
>>> Rosetta support.
>>
>> Then, why, O great sage?
>
> I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.

The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove 
Rosetta.  None.  Zero.  Nada.  It all comes down to support costs. 
That's a business decision which Apple is of course allowed to make. 
Doesn't mean people will accept it.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 5:35:20 PM
In article <5O6dnRmc2dXFfKLSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-18 12:20 , Jolly Roger wrote:

> > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> 
> The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove 
> Rosetta.  None.  Zero.  Nada.  It all comes down to support costs. 

As I expect you are aware, Rosetta is not just an executable or single 
file that can be removed and that's that. All the frameworks, APIs, and 
libraries had to be duplicated to provide PowerPC versions and Intel 
versions. That's a lot of stuff to have to test to ensure it works the 
same way in both architectures.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689
0
timstreater2 (1190)
2/18/2012 5:50:35 PM
In article <5O6dnRmc2dXFfKLSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-18 12:20 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<vqGdnZlK7qNIQaLSnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-18 10:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<f7GdnSvHFOn4WaLSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>> In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> >>>>>
> >>>>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for
> >>>>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
> >>>>> were "real" as you say.
> >>>>
> >>>> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> >>>
> >>> You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
> >>> fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for removing
> >>> Rosetta support.
> >>
> >> Then, why, O great sage?
> >
> > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> 
> The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove 
> Rosetta.

If that's a fact, then prove it.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 6:00:50 PM
In article <yobipj5wbwx.fsf@panix2.panix.com>,
 BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:

> David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospamtome.hotmail.com> writes:
> >  Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> wrote:
> >> On 2012-02-17 07:05:24 -0800, Lloyd said:
> 
> >> > I'm using Lion, but the only thing I will use iCloud for after they
> >> > close down MobileMe is email and that will still work with other
> >> > versions of OSX just fine.
> >> 
> >> My big loss will be address book sync.
> >
> > I just checked on the Apple website. Address Book sync appears to be 
> > there.
> >
> > http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/calendar-mail-contacts.html
> 
> Because not all of my machines can be upgraded to Lion, if
> I switch to iCloud, I lose addressbook sync on some of my
> machines.  And since MobileMe is going away, if I don't
> switch to iCloud, I lose it on all of my machines.  A loss
> either way.

Backward compatibility is a key concern for many, including me. So, is a 
DropBox link the way to go for Address Book (and other) simultaneous 
remote usage compatibility? I have a DropBox account, but haven't even 
begun to explore all its features.
0
fmoore (1430)
2/18/2012 6:02:56 PM
In article <jollyroger-02A306.11201718022012@news.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > >>>
> > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for
> > >>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
> > >>> were "real" as you say.
> > >>
> > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > >
> > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
> > > fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for removing
> > > Rosetta support.
> > 
> > Then, why, O great sage?
> 
> I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.

you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you
are blowing hot air.
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/18/2012 6:05:33 PM
On 2012-02-18 13:00 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<5O6dnRmc2dXFfKLSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-18 12:20 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<vqGdnZlK7qNIQaLSnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-02-18 10:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> In article<f7GdnSvHFOn4WaLSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>>>> In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>      Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>     wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were for
>>>>>>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
>>>>>>> were "real" as you say.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
>>>>> fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for removing
>>>>> Rosetta support.
>>>>
>>>> Then, why, O great sage?
>>>
>>> I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
>>
>> The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove
>> Rosetta.
>
> If that's a fact, then prove it.

Prove me wrong.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 6:06:04 PM
In article <timstreater-C73DC4.17503518022012@news.individual.net>, Tim
Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> > > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> > 
> > The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove 
> > Rosetta.  None.  Zero.  Nada.  It all comes down to support costs. 
> 
> As I expect you are aware, Rosetta is not just an executable or single 
> file that can be removed and that's that. All the frameworks, APIs, and 
> libraries had to be duplicated to provide PowerPC versions and Intel 
> versions. That's a lot of stuff to have to test to ensure it works the 
> same way in both architectures.

it already was tested and working. it's one thing if it stops working
on newer hardware, like classic did for intel. that's a reason to start
to drop support. we've seen this with core duo support going away,
certain gpus, etc. it's an entirely different matter when a fully
functional feature is removed because someone decided to have it
removed.
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/18/2012 6:08:17 PM
In article <timstreater-C73DC4.17503518022012@news.individual.net>,
 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> > The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove 
> > Rosetta.  None.  Zero.  Nada.  It all comes down to support costs. 
> 
> As I expect you are aware, Rosetta is not just an executable or single 
> file that can be removed and that's that. All the frameworks, APIs, and 
> libraries had to be duplicated to provide PowerPC versions and Intel 
> versions. That's a lot of stuff to have to test to ensure it works the 
> same way in both architectures.

Not taking sides, but that supports Alan's contention that it's a support 
issue and not a technical reason.

I don't know whether it's a technical issue or not; however, it *may* be 
that some later versions of the CPU don't support Rosetta, so Apple chose 
to remove it from Lion completely instead of having Lion have Rosetta on 
some machines, but not others.

I'm offering this as a hypothesis for a technical reason, and have 
absolutely no idea whether this is the case or not.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/18/2012 6:09:25 PM
On 2012-02-18 12:50 , Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <5O6dnRmc2dXFfKLSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-18 12:20 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
>>
>> The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove
>> Rosetta. None. Zero. Nada. It all comes down to support costs.
>
> As I expect you are aware, Rosetta is not just an executable or single
> file that can be removed and that's that. All the frameworks, APIs, and
> libraries had to be duplicated to provide PowerPC versions and Intel
> versions. That's a lot of stuff to have to test to ensure it works the
> same way in both architectures.

I never said different - and what you describe wrt to test is directly 
related to engineering costs.  Not that a company with current Mac sales 
on the order of $26B/yr can't afford that.

Make no mistake, however, Apple have the very best tools to gen and 
check code.  Rosetta is not that difficult for them.  This is all just 
part of shedding legacy costs and it also causes me a mild case of CPU 
change-to-come-again anxiety.

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 6:10:28 PM
In article <yobbooxwa7e.fsf_-_@panix2.panix.com>,
 BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:

> If I could get my Address Book and iCal sync to work via DropBox,

What kind of snags have you run into? I'm most interested in Address 
Book across several older Macs.
0
fmoore (1430)
2/18/2012 6:12:04 PM
In article <r9qdnWz61akIdKLSnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-18 12:50 , Tim Streater wrote:
> > In article <5O6dnRmc2dXFfKLSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-18 12:20 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >
> >> > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> >>
> >> The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove
> >> Rosetta. None. Zero. Nada. It all comes down to support costs.
> >
> > As I expect you are aware, Rosetta is not just an executable or single
> > file that can be removed and that's that. All the frameworks, APIs, and
> > libraries had to be duplicated to provide PowerPC versions and Intel
> > versions. That's a lot of stuff to have to test to ensure it works the
> > same way in both architectures.
> 
> I never said different - and what you describe wrt to test is directly 
> related to engineering costs.  Not that a company with current Mac sales 
> on the order of $26B/yr can't afford that.
> 
> Make no mistake, however, Apple have the very best tools to gen and 
> check code.  Rosetta is not that difficult for them.  This is all just 
> part of shedding legacy costs and it also causes me a mild case of CPU 
> change-to-come-again anxiety.

:-)

Well, I don't disagree. And who knows, perhaps we (and wintel users) 
will all have to go through it again if there's a sudden shift to ARM 
CPUs.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689
0
timstreater2 (1190)
2/18/2012 6:15:07 PM
On 2012-02-18 18:02:56 +0000, Fred Moore said:
> 
>  BreadWithSpam@fractious.net wrote:
>> 
>> Because not all of my machines can be upgraded to Lion, if
>> I switch to iCloud, I lose addressbook sync on some of my
>> machines.  And since MobileMe is going away, if I don't
>> switch to iCloud, I lose it on all of my machines.  A loss
>> either way.
> 
> Backward compatibility is a key concern for many, including me. So, is a
> DropBox link the way to go for Address Book (and other) simultaneous
> remote usage compatibility? I have a DropBox account, but haven't even
> begun to explore all its features.

I don't know of a way to sync address books via DropBox.

There is a support article posted 3 years ago on the DropBox site 
indicating that someone there synced his address books across macs via 
DropBox by moving the Application Support files into his DropBox folder 
and then setting up soft links (like aliases) so that Address Book 
found them.

That's kind of half-assed, in my opinion, and it's not clear that it 
would work across different generations of Address Book.

If there's an alternative to iCloud, I'd like to know of it.

If I didn't care about the desktop machines, I think something could be 
done via Google, but (a) I want proper and seamless desktop management, 
and (b) I don't want all my address book data on Google.

Anyone else out there figure something out?

I don't see why a third party app couldn't sit there on a regular basis 
reading and syncing my local Address Book app's database to a file 
which lives on DropBox.  There are certainly good APIs for local 
access/management of the Address Book database.  Maybe such an app 
already exists - if anyone knows, please let us all know!

0
BreadWithSpam (1707)
2/18/2012 6:15:27 PM
In article <michelle-EF1A40.11092518022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <timstreater-C73DC4.17503518022012@news.individual.net>,
>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
> > > The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove 
> > > Rosetta.  None.  Zero.  Nada.  It all comes down to support costs. 
> > 
> > As I expect you are aware, Rosetta is not just an executable or single 
> > file that can be removed and that's that. All the frameworks, APIs, and 
> > libraries had to be duplicated to provide PowerPC versions and Intel 
> > versions. That's a lot of stuff to have to test to ensure it works the 
> > same way in both architectures.
> 
> Not taking sides, but that supports Alan's contention that it's a support 
> issue and not a technical reason.
> 
> I don't know whether it's a technical issue or not; however, it *may* be 
> that some later versions of the CPU don't support Rosetta, so Apple chose 
> to remove it from Lion completely instead of having Lion have Rosetta on 
> some machines, but not others.
> 
> I'm offering this as a hypothesis for a technical reason, and have 
> absolutely no idea whether this is the case or not.

Well put. It's always a pleasure to meet someone who knows the 
difference between a hypothesis and a theory.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689
0
timstreater2 (1190)
2/18/2012 6:16:12 PM
In article <FOqdnTfzfYARdaLSnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2012-02-18 13:00 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article<5O6dnRmc2dXFfKLSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2012-02-18 12:20 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> In article<vqGdnZlK7qNIQaLSnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2012-02-18 10:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>> In article<f7GdnSvHFOn4WaLSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>>>>>      Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>     wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were 
> >>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
> >>>>>>> were "real" as you say.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
> >>>>> fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for 
> >>>>> removing
> >>>>> Rosetta support.
> >>>>
> >>>> Then, why, O great sage?
> >>>
> >>> I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> >>
> >> The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove
> >> Rosetta.
> >
> > If that's a fact, then prove it.
> 
> Prove me wrong.

Nope. You're the one asserting it, so you get to prove it. Otherwise, I 
call bullshit.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 6:21:24 PM
In article <180220121305338671%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > >>>
> > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons 
> > > >>> were for removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of 
> > > >>> those reasons were "real" as you say.
> > > >>
> > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > >
> > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change 
> > > > that fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons 
> > > > for removing Rosetta support.
> > > 
> > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > 
> > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> 
> you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you 
> are blowing hot air.

Huh?  He's saying that Alan doesn't know the reason, so he's blowing hot 
air by saying that he does know the reason.  JR never claimed to know the 
reason, so how is he blowing hot air?

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
michelle14 (19004)
2/18/2012 6:21:41 PM
In article <180220121305338671%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-02A306.11201718022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > >>>
> > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were 
> > > >>> for
> > > >>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
> > > >>> were "real" as you say.
> > > >>
> > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > >
> > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
> > > > fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for 
> > > > removing
> > > > Rosetta support.
> > > 
> > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > 
> > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> 
> you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you
> are blowing hot air.

Nope. I'm not claiming to know why they nixed it. He is. And he hasn't 
offered any proof showing what he claims is true.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 6:22:01 PM
<BreadWithSpam@fractious.net> wrote:

> If I could get my Address Book and iCal sync to work via DropBox,
> there'd be nothing whatsoever that I'd miss from MobileMe.

You can use BusyCal ('iCal Pro') instead of iCal. You can set it up to
sync directly with iCloud, even on a Leopard.

It supports OS X 10.5 and later.

<http://busymac.com/busycal/index.html>

And I just find this solution for syncing [Snow] Leopard Address Book
and iCal with iCloud:

<http://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/29832/can-you-sync-address-boo
k-to-icloud-on-snow-leopard>
-- 
Per Erik R�nne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe
0
per (496)
2/18/2012 6:22:02 PM
In article <michelle-D0FA33.11214118022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <180220121305338671%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons 
> > > > >>> were for removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of 
> > > > >>> those reasons were "real" as you say.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change 
> > > > > that fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons 
> > > > > for removing Rosetta support.
> > > > 
> > > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > > 
> > > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> > 
> > you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you 
> > are blowing hot air.
> 
> Huh?  He's saying that Alan doesn't know the reason, so he's blowing hot 
> air by saying that he does know the reason.  JR never claimed to know the 
> reason, so how is he blowing hot air?

Don't expect nospam to admit he is wrong here. That's his M.O.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 6:25:15 PM
In article <michelle-D0FA33.11214118022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons 
> > > > >>> were for removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of 
> > > > >>> those reasons were "real" as you say.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change 
> > > > > that fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons 
> > > > > for removing Rosetta support.
> > > > 
> > > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > > 
> > > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> > 
> > you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you 
> > are blowing hot air.
> 
> Huh?  He's saying that Alan doesn't know the reason, so he's blowing hot 
> air by saying that he does know the reason.  JR never claimed to know the 
> reason, so how is he blowing hot air?

jr claims that alan is spewing hot air. unless jr knows why, he *can't*
know if alan is right or wrong, thus can't know if he is spewing hot
air or not.
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/18/2012 6:26:59 PM
In article <jollyroger-62800F.12251518022012@news.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > > > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons 
> > > > > >>> were for removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of 
> > > > > >>> those reasons were "real" as you say.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change 
> > > > > > that fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons 
> > > > > > for removing Rosetta support.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> > > 
> > > you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you 
> > > are blowing hot air.
> > 
> > Huh?  He's saying that Alan doesn't know the reason, so he's blowing hot 
> > air by saying that he does know the reason.  JR never claimed to know the 
> > reason, so how is he blowing hot air?
> 
> Don't expect nospam to admit he is wrong here. That's his M.O.

point out where i'm wrong or f.o.
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/18/2012 6:27:21 PM
In article <jollyroger-CB2C23.12220118022012@news.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were 
> > > > >>> for
> > > > >>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
> > > > >>> were "real" as you say.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
> > > > > fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for 
> > > > > removing Rosetta support.
> > > > 
> > > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > > 
> > > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> > 
> > you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you
> > are blowing hot air.
> 
> Nope. I'm not claiming to know why they nixed it. He is. And he hasn't 
> offered any proof showing what he claims is true.

you claimed it was hot air, or in other words, false. in order to know
if what he said was false, you would have to know what the real reason
is. you don't.
0
nospam59 (11088)
2/18/2012 6:28:36 PM
In article <180220121328361691%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-CB2C23.12220118022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons 
> > > > > >>> were 
> > > > > >>> for
> > > > > >>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those 
> > > > > >>> reasons
> > > > > >>> were "real" as you say.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change 
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for 
> > > > > > removing Rosetta support.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> > > 
> > > you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you
> > > are blowing hot air.
> > 
> > Nope. I'm not claiming to know why they nixed it. He is. And he hasn't 
> > offered any proof showing what he claims is true.
> 
> you claimed it was hot air, or in other words, false.

I claimed it was conjecture. My use of the term "hot air" was referring 
to his talking without substance (proof). I never claimed his statement 
was false, as you say. I only claimed his statement was speculatory.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 6:40:33 PM
In article <180220121327217187%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-62800F.12251518022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons 
> > > > > > >>> were for removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of 
> > > > > > >>> those reasons were "real" as you say.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change 
> > > > > > > that fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons 
> > > > > > > for removing Rosetta support.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> > > > 
> > > > you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you 
> > > > are blowing hot air.
> > > 
> > > Huh?  He's saying that Alan doesn't know the reason, so he's blowing hot 
> > > air by saying that he does know the reason.  JR never claimed to know the 
> > > reason, so how is he blowing hot air?
> > 
> > Don't expect nospam to admit he is wrong here. That's his M.O.
> 
> point out where i'm wrong or f.o.

No need. You are clearly wrong.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 6:40:50 PM
In article <180220121326595820%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <michelle-D0FA33.11214118022012@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
> > > > > >>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons 
> > > > > >>> were for removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of 
> > > > > >>> those reasons were "real" as you say.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change 
> > > > > > that fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons 
> > > > > > for removing Rosetta support.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Then, why, O great sage?
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
> > > 
> > > you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you 
> > > are blowing hot air.
> > 
> > Huh?  He's saying that Alan doesn't know the reason, so he's blowing hot 
> > air by saying that he does know the reason.  JR never claimed to know the 
> > reason, so how is he blowing hot air?
> 
> jr claims that alan is spewing hot air. unless jr knows why, he *can't*
> know if alan is right or wrong, thus can't know if he is spewing hot
> air or not.

Fail. Hot air doesn't necessarily equate to lies. Hot air is talk 
without substance (proof).

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 6:42:32 PM
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-CB2C23.12220118022012@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 

> > Nope. I'm not claiming to know why they nixed it. He is. And he hasn't
> > offered any proof showing what he claims is true.
> 
> you claimed it was hot air, or in other words, false.

No, that's not what the idiom "hot air" means. If you want to randomly
make up "other words" that you claim are the same thing as someone else
said, you can "prove" pretty much anything. I might as well say that "in
other words, you claimed that 2+2 was 5".

"Blowing hot air" refers to making claims without support. The claims
might or might not be true. The truth is not at issue - just the lack of
support.

-- 
Richard Maine                    | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle           |  -- Mark Twain
0
nospam47 (9747)
2/18/2012 6:42:33 PM
In article <1kfnphe.101wxgkzzmzmkN%nospam@see.signature>,
 nospam@see.signature (Richard Maine) wrote:

> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > In article <jollyroger-CB2C23.12220118022012@news.individual.net>,
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Nope. I'm not claiming to know why they nixed it. He is. And he hasn't
> > > offered any proof showing what he claims is true.
> > 
> > you claimed it was hot air, or in other words, false.
> 
> No, that's not what the idiom "hot air" means. If you want to randomly
> make up "other words" that you claim are the same thing as someone else
> said, you can "prove" pretty much anything. I might as well say that "in
> other words, you claimed that 2+2 was 5".
> 
> "Blowing hot air" refers to making claims without support. The claims
> might or might not be true. The truth is not at issue - just the lack of
> support.

Yep. And I predict nospam won't admit he is wrong about this either. It 
is his modus operandi.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
jollyroger (11010)
2/18/2012 6:45:50 PM
On 2012-02-18 13:09 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<timstreater-C73DC4.17503518022012@news.individual.net>,
>   Tim Streater<timstreater@greenbee.net>  wrote:
>
>>> The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove
>>> Rosetta.  None.  Zero.  Nada.  It all comes down to support costs.
>>
>> As I expect you are aware, Rosetta is not just an executable or single
>> file that can be removed and that's that. All the frameworks, APIs, and
>> libraries had to be duplicated to provide PowerPC versions and Intel
>> versions. That's a lot of stuff to have to test to ensure it works the
>> same way in both architectures.
>
> Not taking sides, but that supports Alan's contention that it's a support
> issue and not a technical reason.
>
> I don't know whether it's a technical issue or not; however, it *may* be
> that some later versions of the CPU don't support Rosetta, so Apple chose
> to remove it from Lion completely instead of having Lion have Rosetta on
> some machines, but not others.

[1] code_read-translate-execute (emulate).  This is low level stuff. 
"Easy" to test and validate as a single instruction (op-code and 
immediate data for it) is very narrow in scope.

[2] translate (re-format registers and stack) system calls to the intel 
OS X format.  Execute the call.  This is less easy to test and validate 
- there are a lot of coders out there doing the unexpected in their 
calls, esp. if they coded in assembler.

In the first case [1] that is a pretty compact and efficient piece of 
code (esp. considering it is on the fly).  There is nothing about the 
latest x86 that is not backward compatible through the intel "core" line 
(indeed back to the original 8086).  And there shouldn't be in the future.

In the second [2] the older OS X (intel) system calls do not change at 
all when going from L to SL to Lion.  That's why almost all x86 code for 
Leop/SLeop (and earlier) runs unchanged under Lion[3] .  New system 
calls that come with Lion may be *preferred* for some operations over 
older calls - generally you use those when writing new stuff.

Apple would have the choice of leaving the old calls in place or 
changing to the new calls.  To avoid test costs - leave it alone.

Translating system calls is not efficient to be sure - but as CPU's are 
always getting faster and memory is always getting large, not supporting 
Rosetta for a few more years is petty IMO.

[3] Some apps may need a re-release after a version change of the OS. 
This is usually due to a bug in the prior version that didn't cause any 
harm but in a later OS v. pops out.  (There is no such thing as a 100% 
bug free App).

-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 6:49:17 PM
On 2012-02-18 13:21 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article<FOqdnTfzfYARdaLSnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>  wrote:
>
>> On 2012-02-18 13:00 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> In article<5O6dnRmc2dXFfKLSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-02-18 12:20 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> In article<vqGdnZlK7qNIQaLSnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>     Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2012-02-18 10:44 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>>>> In article<f7GdnSvHFOn4WaLSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>      Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>     wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2012-02-18 10:09 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article<nu-dnfYaut-YJaLSnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>>>       Alan Browne<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>      wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons were
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of those reasons
>>>>>>>>> were "real" as you say.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change that
>>>>>>> fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons for
>>>>>>> removing
>>>>>>> Rosetta support.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then, why, O great sage?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
>>>>
>>>> The _plain_ fact is that there was no technical reason to remove
>>>> Rosetta.
>>>
>>> If that's a fact, then prove it.
>>
>> Prove me wrong.
>
> Nope. You're the one asserting it, so you get to prove it. Otherwise, I
> call bullshit.

Can't prove a negative. Show your cards.


-- 
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
Douglas Adams - (Could have been a GPS engineer).
0
alan.browne (4546)
2/18/2012 6:49:56 PM
On 2012-02-18 13:21 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<180220121305338671%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>   nospam<nospam@nospam.invalid>  wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> there was no real reason for Apple to abandon Rosetta yet
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More hot air. You have absolutely no idea what Apple's reasons
>>>>>>> were for removing Rosetta support, and therefore whether any of
>>>>>>> those reasons were "real" as you say.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And as usual your retort is an open ended nothing full of vacuum.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can call it "full of vacuum all you want, but it won't change
>>>>> that fact. I am 100% correct that you don't know Apple's reasons
>>>>> for removing Rosetta support.
>>>>
>>>> Then, why, O great sage?
>>>
>>> I'm not blowing the hot air. It's all coming from you.
>>
>> you don't know why they nixed it any more than anyone else, so yes you
>> are blowing hot air.
>
> Huh?  He's saying that Alan doesn't know the reason, so he's blowing hot
> air by saying that he does know the reason.  JR never claimed to know the
> reason, so how is he blowing hot air?

JR said: "I am 100% correct that you do