f



Does anyone else not like OSX?

I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
& OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
OS that fights me at every turn.

OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
frustrating experience using it.  

JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 4:00:56 AM
comp.sys.mac 1198 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

113 Replies
622 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 49

On 10/21/04 11:00 PM, in article 211020042100567957%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> 
> I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
> 
> OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.
> 
> JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

No opinion, just fact: you could not pay me to go back to OS 9!

Vague allusions to clunkiness aside, OS X is much more stable, looks better,
and even auto defrags files under 20MB!
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/22/2004 4:02:07 AM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
> 
> OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.  
> 
> JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

I had the same feeling when I first started using OSX.III.III but as
most people say, the stability of the OS is quite a benefit. 

At first I felt all at sea because I had no idea in what to do to solve
problems in OSX.  I knew what to do to solve most of the problems I came
across in Systems 6 - 9. However, a bit of searching Apple's support
forums, the web generally and asking questions on usenet have made me
feel much more comfortable. 

You'll probably find that there are many neat tricks in OSX that you
wished you had before. It's a continuous learning curve, full of
surprises and discoveries. 

Stick with it and I'm sure you'll agree in a couple of months that you'd
never go back to OS9

Peter

-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 4:31:02 AM
In article <BD9DF06F.108F3%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
<behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> No opinion, just fact: you could not pay me to go back to OS 9!
> 
> Vague allusions to clunkiness aside, OS X is much more stable, looks better,
> and even auto defrags files under 20MB!

I have to keep going back to OS 8.6 and my Wall Street if I want to get
any work done.  I don't know about OS 9, I don't use it.  But I have
considered installing it on the G5 and regressing.  I have planned all
along and still do to follow Apple into the future, that's why I bought
the new gear and have been trying so hard to make OSX work for me.

I'm not a power user, but I'm not a newbie, either.  I have struggled
and prospered, mostly prospered, with the Mac and have never used a Pee
Cee.  I'm going to figure out how to make OSX do what I need it to do,
but I have to say that it is a real pain in the interface department.

Yes, more stable.  Yes looks better (on my 23" studio display).  But it
doesn't matter if the computer is faster if the interface keeps the
human from using it faster.

This could not possibly be the product of the programmers who brought
us the easy to use OS's like 7+ through 8.6 (the latest I have).  I
know from following the progress of OSX that it's the brainchild of
Steve Jobs.  I guess that there are some limits even to his genius.

I hope they do better and pretty soon because I have work to do.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 4:48:50 AM
In article <211020042148503079%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
 g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <BD9DF06F.108F3%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
> <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > No opinion, just fact: you could not pay me to go back to OS 9!
> > 
> > Vague allusions to clunkiness aside, OS X is much more stable, looks better,
> > and even auto defrags files under 20MB!
> 
> I have to keep going back to OS 8.6 and my Wall Street if I want to get
> any work done.  I don't know about OS 9, I don't use it.  But I have
> considered installing it on the G5 and regressing.  I have planned all
> along and still do to follow Apple into the future, that's why I bought
> the new gear and have been trying so hard to make OSX work for me.
> 
> I'm not a power user, but I'm not a newbie, either.  I have struggled
> and prospered, mostly prospered, with the Mac and have never used a Pee
> Cee.  I'm going to figure out how to make OSX do what I need it to do,
> but I have to say that it is a real pain in the interface department.
> 
> Yes, more stable.  Yes looks better (on my 23" studio display).  But it
> doesn't matter if the computer is faster if the interface keeps the
> human from using it faster.
> 
> This could not possibly be the product of the programmers who brought
> us the easy to use OS's like 7+ through 8.6 (the latest I have).  I
> know from following the progress of OSX that it's the brainchild of
> Steve Jobs.  I guess that there are some limits even to his genius.
> 
> I hope they do better and pretty soon because I have work to do.

I went to OS X Panther when I bought my G4 iBook in March. I've been 
sing that as my main machine ever since. I think it works great. I have 
now installed Panther on my 350 iMac and on my Wallstreet. I have no 
desire or need to go back to OS 9 or earlier. I still have a few apps 
that I need to run in Classic, but other than that go straight OS X. 

I guess I don't know why you consider it "clunky." I find that it just 
runs and is easy to use.

OS X IS different from earlier versions of the Mac OS, no doubt about 
it. It DOES take some getting used to. But once over that, I have found 
it to be great.

Bill

-- 
To send e-mail, remove .invalid
0
bbcollins5 (20)
10/22/2004 5:40:57 AM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> Yes, more stable.  Yes looks better (on my 23" studio display).  But it
> doesn't matter if the computer is faster if the interface keeps the
> human from using it faster.

What specific problems do you have with the interface?

-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 5:55:41 AM
In article <1gm2aln.1jy73c51sk1xeN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> I had the same feeling when I first started using OSX.III.III but as
> most people say, the stability of the OS is quite a benefit. 

My hope was that I'd get used to it.  But nearly two months later I'm
still having difficulty.  Yes, the stability is nice, but the
occasional restart in OS 8.6 is not as time consuming as all of the
extra keystrokes and head scratching i"m doing in OSX.

> At first I felt all at sea because I had no idea in what to do to solve
> problems in OSX.  I knew what to do to solve most of the problems I came
> across in Systems 6 - 9. However, a bit of searching Apple's support
> forums, the web generally and asking questions on usenet have made me
> feel much more comfortable. 

I have two  books, one a fairly simple introduction and the other a big
thick more tekkie sort of treatment.  I find that I am trying to look
up something that isn't listed because it is called something else. 
Rather disconcerting.

> You'll probably find that there are many neat tricks in OSX that you
> wished you had before. It's a continuous learning curve, full of
> surprises and discoveries. 

It was nice to be able to plug in my digital camera and fairly
effortlessly upload my pics.  But I found iPhoto not to my liking so I
do it in GraphicConverter.  I've been using GraphicConverter for years
and I'm not entirely pleased with the way that OSX presents it to me. 
As far as new tricks are concerned, I'm not a new trick sort of person. 
I want to do specific things and forget whatever else the computer
does.  If I need to do something new, it's because I have a need, not
because the computer entices me to do it.

> Stick with it and I'm sure you'll agree in a couple of months that you'd
> never go back to OS9

Yes, I understand that.  It's been a couple of months now.  Will it be
the next couple of months or the couple of months after that?  When I
upgraded in the past I had no setbacks, just continued working as I had
before.  But OSX is quite different and I'm not all that convinced that
people wanted or needed it that way.  

I wonder if the philosophy was to take the power of the new chips and
unix and bend the user to some new paradigm?  It would be better
instead to make it as simple and elegant as the earlier systems.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 6:32:12 AM
In article <bbcollins-FEB7AB.01405922102004@news1.east.earthlink.net>,
B Collins <bbcollins@earthlink.net.invlaid> wrote:

> I went to OS X Panther when I bought my G4 iBook in March. I've been 
> sing that as my main machine ever since. I think it works great. I have 
> now installed Panther on my 350 iMac and on my Wallstreet. I have no 
> desire or need to go back to OS 9 or earlier. I still have a few apps 
> that I need to run in Classic, but other than that go straight OS X. 
> 
> I guess I don't know why you consider it "clunky." I find that it just 
> runs and is easy to use.
> 
> OS X IS different from earlier versions of the Mac OS, no doubt about 
> it. It DOES take some getting used to. But once over that, I have found 
> it to be great.
> 
> Bill

Clunky.  Little lags and delays in doing routine things like filling
out forms, changing file names, opening files, and like that.  If I
didn't have my wall street with 8.6 right next to the G5 with OSX, then
I probably wouldn't notice the difference.  OSX feels cumbersome.

I just wonder if I'm the only one who isn't entirely happy with this
new OS?  At some point I still intend to leave the classic environment
behind entirely.  It's going to take a lot longer than I'd originally
thought.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 6:39:42 AM
g5blues wrote:
> I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
> 
> OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.  
> 
> JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

The only thing I didn't like about about OSX was the minimize-to-dock 
concept.....but thanks to Windowshade,
http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/wsx
I can now do it the old way.
Otherwise, I think it's super cool cuz now I can learn how to manipulate 
and do things from underneath, i.e. in Unix, and not just in the GUI.
Unix is quite useful for FTP and SCP/SSH stuff that I do.

GW
333mhz G3, 512mb Ram, formerly with OS8.6

0
geoffdubya (301)
10/22/2004 6:46:13 AM
In article <1gm2evi.spwoadpwh0sgN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> What specific problems do you have with the interface?

I'm trying to say that it's clunky, but maybe other descriptors would
be better. It's not as snappy as the earlier OS's.  Geeze, at 2.5 Ghz
you'd think it would run circles around the 233 Mhz Wall street.  Is it
all of the caching and logging that's slowing it down?  Checking for
permissions?  Looking to see if the browser is open so it can prompt me
for an update?  Is it an over-bulky OS already in its first iteration? 
What is causing the lack of snappiness that OS 8.6 has?

And it's just hard to figure out sometimes.  I'm looking in HELP and
the topics and explanations don't seem to match my thought process. 
And it is a Mac thought process because I've been Mac oriented since
1993.  Why would Apple even try to undo what they've had me do for so
long?  Is it because they fired the "ease of use" programmers and hired
instead a bunch of college kids or ex-MS programmers who either don't
give a hoot about ease of use or else are mostly concerned with getting
their bells and whistles into the OS and to heck with the user?

Someone said that this is the OS they'd want their mother to use. 
There's no way I'd subject my mother to OSX  First because I would have
trouble explaining it, and second because I don't want to answer the
obvious question she'd ask: "Where is that nice little black and white
computer that was so easy for me to use?"

I spent the afternoon with two FTP programs.  By dinnertime I was still
struggling with them trying to figure out how to upload and download
and delete.  Neither was drag and drop but required me to browse for
files.  That's stooooopid.  The FETCH program on my black and white
P-200 had a very nice drag and drop both up and down, allowed me to
rename files and move files from one directory to another, had a simple
list of favorites, and didn't take forever to open and close the
directory at the ISP.  OSX being so internet oriented should have such
a simple FTP client available as part of Safari or as a stand-alone
app.

Here's another one.  I installed flipalbum 3 and the preferences won't
open.  So I trashed it.  I tried to install Fly II a flying-type game
and gives me a box that tells me it won't install.  The game is not
supported anymore and apparently the gawds up at Apple decided to do
something to OSX that makes the program obsolete.

Garageband.  I have read the help several times but I'll be darned if I
can make anything with it.  Don't try to tell me, I just don't have
time to screw with it since I have so many other problems trying to
create a productive situation with the computer and OSX.  I mean, I
have stuff to do and all of this reprogramming Apple planned to have me
do is driving me up a wall.  

By the time I'm done messing around trying to get something done or
discovering why I can't do it I'm fatigued and just want to shut down
and walk away.  I rarely had that problem before.  The older OS's
seemed to encourage me to stay at the computer and do one more thing
beyond what I'd planned.  OSX is a hindrance in that regard.  I'm not
getting things done and you'd think that almost two month's working
with OSX would have me zipping through chores and working overtime. 
Not so.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 7:25:41 AM
In article <V02ed.21099$Kl3.21047@twister.socal.rr.com>, Geoff Welsh
<geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> The only thing I didn't like about about OSX was the minimize-to-dock 
> concept.....but thanks to Windowshade,
> http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/wsx
> I can now do it the old way.

I'm not so sure I understand.  But I'll keep my eye out for a
discussion.

Thanks.

> Otherwise, I think it's super cool cuz now I can learn how to manipulate 
> and do things from underneath, i.e. in Unix, and not just in the GUI.
> Unix is quite useful for FTP and SCP/SSH stuff that I do.
> 
> GW
> 333mhz G3, 512mb Ram, formerly with OS8.6

If I not working with the GUI, then I probably shouldn't try to
manipulate things with the more direct approach.  I'm sure, though,
that the occasion will arise.  Your mention of FTP makes peaks my
interest since I'm not going to get much work done or be able to retire
the Wall Street until I can transfer files.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 7:44:57 AM
g5blues wrote:

> Geoff Welsh wrote:
>>The only thing I didn't like about about OSX was the minimize-to-dock 
>>concept.....but thanks to Windowshade,
>>http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/wsx
>>I can now do it the old way.
> 
> I'm not so sure I understand.  But I'll keep my eye out for a
> discussion.
> 
> Thanks.
>  
In the Classic OS, when you click the minimize button on a window, it 
would display the title bar of that window.  I liked that.
In OSX, when you click minimize, the whole pane disappears down to "the 
dock".  I don't like that.  My friends' Microsnot Windows machines do 
that.  By installing the Windowshade program I mentioned, you can now 
minimize in the old way....or a half dozen other customizable 
ways...it's a very cool little tweaker.
GW
0
geoffdubya (301)
10/22/2004 8:05:48 AM
g5blues wrote:

> Geoff Welsh wrote:
>>Unix is quite useful for FTP and SCP/SSH stuff that I do.
>>
>>GW 
> 
> If I not working with the GUI, then I probably shouldn't try to
> manipulate things with the more direct approach.  I'm sure, though,
> that the occasion will arise.  Your mention of FTP makes peaks my
> interest since I'm not going to get much work done or be able to retire
> the Wall Street until I can transfer files.

I used Fetch in classic OS.
Now with OSX, I just, drag the files to the My Name (user) folder.
Then open the Terminal app (which essentially puts you "in Unix" in the 
User directory)

Type "ftp whoever@whatever_you_typedinaGUIftp_app" <return>
Watch for the prompts if it asks for a password or something.
Type "put filename" <return>

That's it....the file goes.
GW
0
geoffdubya (301)
10/22/2004 8:14:55 AM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> In article <1gm2evi.spwoadpwh0sgN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
> McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > What specific problems do you have with the interface?
> 
> I'm trying to say that it's clunky, but maybe other descriptors would
> be better. It's not as snappy as the earlier OS's. 

Snappy hey?

snappy (as in "snappish") adj. : tending to speak irritably; "a snappish
tone of voice"  

snappy (as in "snappy") adj. : smart and fashionable; "snappy
conversation"; "some sharp and whipping lines"  

snappy (as in "crisp") adj. : pleasantly cold and invigorating; "crisp
clear nights and frosty mornings"; "a nipping wind"; "a nippy fall day";
"snappy weather"; (`parky' is a British term)  

snappy (as in "dapper") adj. : marked by smartness in dress and manners;
"a dapper young man"; "a jaunty red hat"  

snappy (as in "brisk") adj. : quick and energetic; "a brisk walk in the
park"; "a lively gait"; "a merry chase"; "traveling at a rattling rate";
"a snappy pace"; "a spanking breeze"  

Which one do you mean?

-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 8:29:16 AM
[Snipped in order to get to the point]

The only things I'd like back are System 6's simple UI (You don't need
throbbing buttons or sheets), System 7's application menu (The triangles
in the Dock are hard to see), and... uhm... I think that's it.

No - wait!  I WANT MY EASTER EGGS BACK!  Almost forgot that one!

Even though I complain about the excess of pinstripes and eye-candy, OS X
has never caused me CDEV/INIT conflicts, kernel panics never show up, the
fonts are rendered majestically, I have X11 running... In essence, there
are more ups than downs.
0
NeoAmsterdam
10/22/2004 10:16:30 AM
Geoff Welsh wrote:

> I used Fetch in classic OS.

Fetch is "COOL"!
-- 
http://homepage.mac.com/mkatzman/
0
notmkatzman (162)
10/22/2004 11:11:44 AM
In article <221020040025416424%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>, g5blues
<g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <1gm2evi.spwoadpwh0sgN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
> McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> I spent the afternoon with two FTP programs.  By dinnertime I was still
> struggling with them trying to figure out how to upload and download
> and delete.  Neither was drag and drop but required me to browse for
> files.  That's stooooopid.  The FETCH program on my black and white
> P-200 had a very nice drag and drop both up and down, allowed me to
> rename files and move files from one directory to another, had a simple
> list of favorites, and didn't take forever to open and close the
> directory at the ISP.  OSX being so internet oriented should have such
> a simple FTP client available as part of Safari or as a stand-alone
> app.

Fetch works under OS X:

http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/1126

Or if you are just going to download, you can use the finder.

Rob.
0
simples_it (101)
10/22/2004 12:02:45 PM
g5blues wrote:

> I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
> 
> OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.  
> 
> JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

When I first installed OSX, it was on a B&W G3.  I had nothing but 
trouble and was ready to trash it and go back to OS 9.  Fortunately, we 
figured out it was a problem with the CPU itself.  I swapped over to a 
400MHZ iMac with OS X and I *love* it.  It is completely stable.  No 
crashes or freezes.  My chief complaint is that my UMAX scanner does not 
have OS X drivers, so I have to boot in 9 to make it work, but that's 
really not that big a deal.  All my other pre-OSX apps work well in 
Classic.  I'm not nuts about the way the Finder/Dock works (I really 
liked the Favorite Apps feature of the Apple Menu and the Applications 
Menu), but I'm getting used to it.  Plus, one trick I figured out is 
that if Classic is always on, you can access the old Apple Menu from 
there. I have not found OSX to be particularly slow (in fact it's quite 
the opposite, even on this old machine).  Perhaps you have some settings 
that need to be tweaked?
0
cindym3 (88)
10/22/2004 4:27:56 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
: This could not possibly be the product of the programmers who brought
: us the easy to use OS's like 7+ through 8.6 (the latest I have).  I
: know from following the progress of OSX that it's the brainchild of
: Steve Jobs.  I guess that there are some limits even to his genius.

It is built on top of a BSD like OS, and thus is superior to anything
that came out of Apple or M$ as far as "under the hood" goes.
0
j.ester (20)
10/22/2004 4:44:02 PM
In article <wb3ed.21438$Kl3.14592@twister.socal.rr.com>, Geoff Welsh
<geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> In the Classic OS, when you click the minimize button on a window, it 
> would display the title bar of that window.  I liked that.
> In OSX, when you click minimize, the whole pane disappears down to "the 
> dock".  I don't like that.  My friends' Microsnot Windows machines do 
> that.  By installing the Windowshade program I mentioned, you can now 
> minimize in the old way....or a half dozen other customizable 
> ways...it's a very cool little tweaker.
> GW

That one attribute is a necessary one.  One of the things that I've not
liked is the disappearance into the dock bit, and I'm getting tired of
pulling windows to the side, or all 4 sides sometimes.  Thanks for
telling me of it.  I have it written down.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 10:14:52 PM
In article <3k3ed.21452$jo2.20469@twister.socal.rr.com>, Geoff Welsh
<geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> I used Fetch in classic OS.

Fetch was SOOO neat, and simple, too.  I've used it for years.  They
were part of a suite of programs called Valet long ago, and they are
still being used as passed down from the P-200 to the P-575 and on the
the G3 Wall Street.

> Now with OSX, I just, drag the files to the My Name (user) folder.
> Then open the Terminal app (which essentially puts you "in Unix" in the 
> User directory)
> 
> Type "ftp whoever@whatever_you_typedinaGUIftp_app" <return>
> Watch for the prompts if it asks for a password or something.
> Type "put filename" <return>
> 
> That's it....the file goes.
> GW

Nice.  I'll try it.  How do you delete files from the same directory? 
And does it allow for bulk uploads and simultaneous deletes like Fetch?
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 10:22:15 PM
In article <1gm2lxa.19g19k7e7mw1sN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> Which one do you mean?

snappy (as in "brisk") adj. : quick and energetic
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 10:24:35 PM
In article <pan.2004.10.22.10.16.30.895700@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5>,
NeoAmsterdam <%E2%90%A5@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5> wrote:

> The triangles
> in the Dock are hard to see)

Yes, that's a particular problem I'm having.  I'm weary of having to
click those little things several times to open and close folders. 
Even though the triangles are small in OS8.6, I seem to score more
often with them.  Perhaps the hot spot needs to be made larger. 
There's an idea for someone who writes little utilities.  If the items
in the dock can bet bigger as the pointer approaches, why not those
little triangles.  And it could be turned off (for the purists), or
perhaps the triangles could be enlarged as a system pref. 

> Even though I complain about the excess of pinstripes and eye-candy, OS X
> has never caused me CDEV/INIT conflicts, kernel panics never show up, the
> fonts are rendered majestically, I have X11 running... In essence, there
> are more ups than downs.

My major thrust in this discussion concerning interface is the fact
that I found the older OS's kept the ease of use of previous versions
as they progresses and added new features that made using the Mac OS a
pleasant experience.  But OSX seems to have added some nice features as
well as having some that aren't so nice, and that to me is a
regression.

Yes, I feel as if there are more ups than downs, but I get the feeling
sometimes that the OS is fighting me until I change (lower) my
expectations.

Apple should have its various workgroups dedicate themselves to making
OS-eleven as good as 8.6 and 9 and THEN add improvements.  Apparently,
from reading the magazines and various forums and reviews, Apple had
some trials getting this thing ready for prime time.  I don't think
they're there yet.  

I'm struggling with it while I enjoy what it does.  But then some of
what I like has to be attributed to the 23" studio display which is
absolutely gorgeous and renders graphics in a way that amazes me every
time I use it.

Ups and downs.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 10:44:47 PM
In article <221020041302430766%simples_it@yahoo.it>,
<"simples_it@yahoo.it"> wrote:

> Fetch works under OS X:
> 
> http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/1126
> 
> Or if you are just going to download, you can use the finder.
> 

On my list to buy are Eudors, Fetch, and BBEdit, all programs I am
familiar with and have used for years.  Problem is, I have no credit
cards so that puts me in a spot.  I have to drive to another state to
buy software, and the last time I was there they had none of these. 
Someone said to try the Apple Store, and that's another long drive.
A big problem for me.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 10:57:53 PM
In article <gyaed.171238$He1.6317@attbi_s01>, Cindy Murray
<cindym3@comcast.net> wrote:

> When I first installed OSX, it was on a B&W G3.  I had nothing but 
> trouble and was ready to trash it and go back to OS 9.  Fortunately, we 
> figured out it was a problem with the CPU itself.  I swapped over to a 
> 400MHZ iMac with OS X and I *love* it.  It is completely stable.  No 
> crashes or freezes.  My chief complaint is that my UMAX scanner does not 
> have OS X drivers, so I have to boot in 9 to make it work, but that's 
> really not that big a deal.  All my other pre-OSX apps work well in 
> Classic.  I'm not nuts about the way the Finder/Dock works (I really 
> liked the Favorite Apps feature of the Apple Menu and the Applications 
> Menu), but I'm getting used to it.  Plus, one trick I figured out is 
> that if Classic is always on, you can access the old Apple Menu from 
> there. I have not found OSX to be particularly slow (in fact it's quite 
> the opposite, even on this old machine).  Perhaps you have some settings 
> that need to be tweaked?

Don't get me wrong.  I am committed to OSX.  Part of this is my desire
to leave the old behind and go on with the new.  I just wish I didn't
have these little battles with it all the time.  I'm not saying it
ain't good, just that it's a little more like driving a bus than the OS
8.6 automobile.  To me, anyway.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 11:07:33 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <1gm2lxa.19g19k7e7mw1sN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
> McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > Which one do you mean?
> 
> snappy (as in "brisk") adj. : quick and energetic

Do you mean it's slow to launch programs? If I click (once) on the Word
icon in the dock it takes less than two seconds to load up and have a
blank document in front of me. I don't recall things ever happening that
fast in System 6 to 9.

Peter
-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 11:07:35 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> On my list to buy are Eudors, Fetch, and BBEdit, all programs I am
> familiar with and have used for years.  Problem is, I have no credit
> cards so that puts me in a spot.  

I use a debit card. Works fine.
Peter

-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 11:07:35 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> One of the things that I've not
> liked is the disappearance into the dock bit, and I'm getting tired of
> pulling windows to the side, or all 4 sides sometimes.  

Why not just use expos�?

Peter
-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 11:07:36 PM
In article <mNaed.230636$wV.36046@attbi_s54>, <j.ester@hehxduhmp.org>
wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> : This could not possibly be the product of the programmers who brought
> : us the easy to use OS's like 7+ through 8.6 (the latest I have).  I
> : know from following the progress of OSX that it's the brainchild of
> : Steve Jobs.  I guess that there are some limits even to his genius.
> 
> It is built on top of a BSD like OS, and thus is superior to anything
> that came out of Apple or M$ as far as "under the hood" goes.

Really?  Well, I don't understand the mechanics, so I will take your
word for it.  Then I suppose I can look forward to seeing it improve? 
I sure hope so.  

There seem to be a lot of holdouts who haven't switched yet.  I guess
what I'd tell them is to hold out for as long as you can like I did.  I
switched because I had one pocket full of needs and when the other
pocket filled with cash the two equalized.

I thought it was built on unix.  Oh, well.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 11:15:12 PM
On 10/21/04 11:48 PM, in article 211020042148503079%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <BD9DF06F.108F3%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
> <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>> No opinion, just fact: you could not pay me to go back to OS 9!
>> 
>> Vague allusions to clunkiness aside, OS X is much more stable, looks better,
>> and even auto defrags files under 20MB!
> 
> I have to keep going back to OS 8.6 and my Wall Street if I want to get
> any work done.  I don't know about OS 9, I don't use it.  But I have
> considered installing it on the G5 and regressing.  I have planned all
> along and still do to follow Apple into the future, that's why I bought
> the new gear and have been trying so hard to make OSX work for me.
> 
> I'm not a power user, but I'm not a newbie, either.  I have struggled
> and prospered, mostly prospered, with the Mac and have never used a Pee
> Cee.  I'm going to figure out how to make OSX do what I need it to do,
> but I have to say that it is a real pain in the interface department.
> 
> Yes, more stable.  Yes looks better (on my 23" studio display).  But it
> doesn't matter if the computer is faster if the interface keeps the
> human from using it faster.
> 
> This could not possibly be the product of the programmers who brought
> us the easy to use OS's like 7+ through 8.6 (the latest I have).  I
> know from following the progress of OSX that it's the brainchild of
> Steve Jobs.  I guess that there are some limits even to his genius.
> 
> I hope they do better and pretty soon because I have work to do.

Tell you what. Box up your G5 and send it to me. I'll send you my G4 (dual
1.25 GHZ 1GB RAM, 4 X 120 GB hard drives). It boots into 9.2.2 just fine.
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/22/2004 11:32:24 PM
In article <1gm3qao.12dtmji1pvsdiwN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>,
Peter McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <1gm2lxa.19g19k7e7mw1sN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
> > McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> > 
> > > Which one do you mean?
> > 
> > snappy (as in "brisk") adj. : quick and energetic
> 
> Do you mean it's slow to launch programs? If I click (once) on the Word
> icon in the dock it takes less than two seconds to load up and have a
> blank document in front of me. I don't recall things ever happening that
> fast in System 6 to 9.
> 
> Peter

In that respect, you're right.  But, once it's initialixed, I'm
sometimes confused by what I see.  Both of the FTP programs were that
way.  Garageband is confusing to get going in, I haven't figured out
how do do anything in that one yet and the documentation doesn't do it
for me.

Help takes some time to initialize and subsequently do a search. 
Sometimes when I type into forms the typing stops for two/three/four
seconds before it jumps to show the typing I've done.  

Safari's bar where you type in URL's is finicky (compared with what I
was used to).  And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
where the links are or where it's just text.  And I miss Netscape's
lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was selecting when I moved
the pointer over a linked word, which makes me feel as if I'm working
in the dark.  And I miss View Info, which took a list of links from the
page source and displayed them separately.

Little things like those degrade the experience over OS 8.6.
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 11:34:33 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> In article <mNaed.230636$wV.36046@attbi_s54>, <j.ester@hehxduhmp.org>
> wrote:
> > It is built on top of a BSD like OS, and thus is superior to anything
> > that came out of Apple or M$ as far as "under the hood" goes.
> 
> I thought it was built on unix.  Oh, well.

see http://developer.apple.com/unix/
Mac OS X v10.3 "Panther" and the Power of UNIX 
With its open source core based on FreeBSD 5.0, Mac OS X v10.3 is the
best Mac OS ever for UNIX users.
-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 11:35:38 PM
In article <1gm3qjf.ozioo8148aqhwN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> > One of the things that I've not
> > liked is the disappearance into the dock bit, and I'm getting tired of
> > pulling windows to the side, or all 4 sides sometimes.  
> 
> Why not just use expos�?
> 
> Peter

I haven't discovered it yet.

"Search Results for "expose" in "macintosh HD"

0 items
0
g5blues (46)
10/22/2004 11:38:12 PM
On 10/22/04 6:38 PM, in article 221020041638128469%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <1gm3qjf.ozioo8148aqhwN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
> McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> 
>> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
>>> One of the things that I've not
>>> liked is the disappearance into the dock bit, and I'm getting tired of
>>> pulling windows to the side, or all 4 sides sometimes.
>> 
>> Why not just use expos�?
>> 
>> Peter
> 
> I haven't discovered it yet.
> 
> "Search Results for "expose" in "macintosh HD"
> 
> 0 items


It's a system preference in OS 10.3 and later. Hit "F9" and everything on
the desktop becomes smaller and allows you to see all open windows at once,
allowing you to select the one you want.
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/22/2004 11:38:54 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> In that respect, you're right.  But, once it's initialixed, I'm
> sometimes confused by what I see.  Both of the FTP programs were that
> way.  Garageband is confusing to get going in, I haven't figured out
> how do do anything in that one yet and the documentation doesn't do it
> for me.
 
I've never used garageband but my 10 and 12 year olds seem to have no
problem with it. I have never seen them read a manual for anything yet.
Maybe you are getting old like me. ;-)

> Help takes some time to initialize and subsequently do a search. 
> Sometimes when I type into forms the typing stops for two/three/four
> seconds before it jumps to show the typing I've done.  

Do you have all the latest system updates installed? That was problem
for me with OS10.3.3. You may also want to insert your system disk and
restart and check and repair priviledges. 
 
> Safari's bar where you type in URL's is finicky (compared with what I
> was used to).  

What do you mean? 

I typed the word "finicky" in the url entry bar and came up with a
website called http;//www.finicky.com. That's the same as Explorer.
There's no reason you can't use Explorer or Netscape or some other
browser if you prefer. OSX doesn't insist you use any particular one. I
use four for different purposes, such as to access banks that don't do
their java programming properly.

> And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
> move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
> where the links are or where it's just text.  

It's not a Safari problem but a problem with the page design.

> And I miss Netscape's
> lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was selecting when I moved
> the pointer over a linked word, 

That's exactly what happen's in Safari (version 1.2.3) for me.

> which makes me feel as if I'm working
> in the dark.  And I miss View Info, which took a list of links from the
> page source and displayed them separately.
> 
> Little things like those degrade the experience over OS 8.6.

As I said, you can use Netscape still.

Peter

-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 11:49:36 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <1gm3qjf.ozioo8148aqhwN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
> McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> > > One of the things that I've not
> > > liked is the disappearance into the dock bit, and I'm getting tired of
> > > pulling windows to the side, or all 4 sides sometimes.  
> > 
> > Why not just use expos�?
> > 
> > Peter
> 
> I haven't discovered it yet.
> 
> "Search Results for "expose" in "macintosh HD"
> 
> 0 items

press F9, F10 or F11
-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 11:50:26 PM
Brian Paul Ehni <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
> Tell you what. Box up your G5 and send it to me. I'll send you my G4 (dual
> 1.25 GHZ 1GB RAM, 4 X 120 GB hard drives). It boots into 9.2.2 just fine.

Don't listen to him. I'll send you a Mac Plus running 6.0.8. Far
superior.

-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/22/2004 11:54:11 PM
In article <BD9F02B8.109DD%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
<behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> Tell you what. Box up your G5 and send it to me. I'll send you my G4 (dual
> 1.25 GHZ 1GB RAM, 4 X 120 GB hard drives). It boots into 9.2.2 just fine.

I really like it, and the 23" HD studio monitor is extra nice.  Do I
have to send that along to you with the G5?

Oh, boy, there'd be hell to pay around here if I did that.

Hey, I'm committed to this thing and I sure hope they do better with
the OS next time in order to give new "switchers" (and me) a better
experience.

One thing I didn't anticipate was the efficiency of the dual 2.5
cooling ststem.  The aluminum tower is cool to the touch, but it heats
up the room instead!  I have to keep a window open even though I'm not
heating the place yet.  I think I'll have to get a bigger air
conditioner by next summer.  

I ain't beefin' the computer for that, though, it's the OS that has me
working overtime.  The equipment is gorgeous.  Sorry, you can't have
it.  Get your own, buddy!  :-)
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 12:04:24 AM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> Problem is, I have no credit cards so that puts me in a spot.  I have to
> drive to another state to buy software, and the last time I was there they
> had none of these.

OK, my trollmeter is now getting into the red zone. 

0
10/23/2004 12:08:32 AM
On 10/22/04 6:49 PM, in article
1gm3s1j.7sbewxvw7bjeN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au, "Peter McCallum"
<p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>> And I miss Netscape's
>> lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was selecting when I moved
>> the pointer over a linked word,
> 
> That's exactly what happen's in Safari (version 1.2.3) for me.


As long as you have selected "Status Bar" in the "View" menu!

-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/23/2004 12:48:44 AM
On 10/22/04 6:54 PM, in article
1gm3sre.w68l4616arxgqN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au, "Peter McCallum"
<p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> Brian Paul Ehni <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Tell you what. Box up your G5 and send it to me. I'll send you my G4 (dual
>> 1.25 GHZ 1GB RAM, 4 X 120 GB hard drives). It boots into 9.2.2 just fine.
> 
> Don't listen to him. I'll send you a Mac Plus running 6.0.8. Far
> superior.

I can do that, too, and throw in a Color Classic with OS 7.5.3
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/23/2004 12:49:45 AM
On 10/22/04 7:04 PM, in article 221020041704243264%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <BD9F02B8.109DD%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
> <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>> Tell you what. Box up your G5 and send it to me. I'll send you my G4 (dual
>> 1.25 GHZ 1GB RAM, 4 X 120 GB hard drives). It boots into 9.2.2 just fine.
> 
> I really like it, and the 23" HD studio monitor is extra nice.  Do I
> have to send that along to you with the G5?
> 
> Oh, boy, there'd be hell to pay around here if I did that.
> 
> Hey, I'm committed to this thing and I sure hope they do better with
> the OS next time in order to give new "switchers" (and me) a better
> experience.
> 
> One thing I didn't anticipate was the efficiency of the dual 2.5
> cooling ststem.  The aluminum tower is cool to the touch, but it heats
> up the room instead!  I have to keep a window open even though I'm not
> heating the place yet.  I think I'll have to get a bigger air
> conditioner by next summer.
> 
> I ain't beefin' the computer for that, though, it's the OS that has me
> working overtime.  The equipment is gorgeous.  Sorry, you can't have
> it.  Get your own, buddy!  :-)

Keep the 23"; I've got twin 22"s. (And my dual 2.5 is on order).
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/23/2004 12:50:44 AM
In article <1gm3rwz.zunfvh1nary9sN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> > In article <mNaed.230636$wV.36046@attbi_s54>, <j.ester@hehxduhmp.org>
> > wrote:
> > > It is built on top of a BSD like OS, and thus is superior to anything
> > > that came out of Apple or M$ as far as "under the hood" goes.
> > 
> > I thought it was built on unix.  Oh, well.
> 
> see http://developer.apple.com/unix/
> Mac OS X v10.3 "Panther" and the Power of UNIX 
> With its open source core based on FreeBSD 5.0, Mac OS X v10.3 is the
> best Mac OS ever for UNIX users.

Even though I have had Macs for a dozen years, what's underneath or
behind the OS has never been of concern to me.  I have always liked the
interface because it lets me get stuff done rather elegantly, despite
things like the occasional freeze, without having to worry about code. 
But OSX has me struggling a little and I'm a bit disherartened because
I reckoned it'd be a leap forward without some of the drawbacks I've
experienced.  JMO, anyway.  I hope something comes down the pike that
smoothes out some of the bumps.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 1:27:22 AM
9In article <BD9F043E.109E2%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
<behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> It's a system preference in OS 10.3 and later. Hit "F9" and everything on
> the desktop becomes smaller and allows you to see all open windows at once,
> allowing you to select the one you want.

WHOA, NELLIE!  That's a neat trick.  And if I push the same key again
everything goes back the way it was.  Neato jet!  Thanks.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 1:30:06 AM
In article <1gm3s1j.7sbewxvw7bjeN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> I've never used garageband but my 10 and 12 year olds seem to have no
> problem with it. I have never seen them read a manual for anything yet.
> Maybe you are getting old like me. ;-)

Yep.  No more hang gliding for me.

> > Help takes some time to initialize and subsequently do a search. 
> > Sometimes when I type into forms the typing stops for two/three/four
> > seconds before it jumps to show the typing I've done.  
 
> Do you have all the latest system updates installed? That was problem
> for me with OS10.3.3. You may also want to insert your system disk and
> restart and check and repair priviledges. 

I had stopped using help before the latest update.  Now I have 10.3.5
and the help works better.  I just typed in "garageband" and it came up
"No matching help topics were found."  But it came up slicker than
snot.
 
> > Safari's bar where you type in URL's is finicky (compared with what I
> > was used to).  
 
> What do you mean? 

It's too sensitive.  I often copy and paste URL's, or change URL's to
access diferent sites or to access different parts of the same site. 
When I do, I find it has something else in mind due to the trick
involved with the selection of text.  It's a kind of pain compared with
what I have been used to over the years.  If I try to select and wind
up dragging the entire URL, then I can wind up where I don't want to be
and waste time doing it over again to get back or else going to history
for a selection.

> > And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
> > move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
> > where the links are or where it's just text.  

> It's not a Safari problem but a problem with the page design.

I never had that problem with Netscape.  A link is a link.  If the
right tags are there, then whatever was designated as the link should
be underlined.

> > And I miss Netscape's
> > lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was selecting when I moved
> > the pointer over a linked word, 

> That's exactly what happen's in Safari (version 1.2.3) for me.

Where does the URL show?  It's not anyplace that I can see.

> > which makes me feel as if I'm working
> > in the dark.  And I miss View Info, which took a list of links from the
> > page source and displayed them separately.

> > Little things like those degrade the experience over OS 8.6.

> As I said, you can use Netscape still.
 
I installed it and it repeatedly tried to register me (I don't register
anything).  Then I noticed that the browser window had advertising --
coming from Netscape's own site, presumably.  So I trashed the whole
business.  Goodbye Netscape, nice knowin' yuh!
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 1:46:43 AM
In article <1gm3sre.w68l4616arxgqN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> Brian Paul Ehni <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Tell you what. Box up your G5 and send it to me. I'll send you my G4 (dual
> > 1.25 GHZ 1GB RAM, 4 X 120 GB hard drives). It boots into 9.2.2 just fine.
> 
> Don't listen to him. I'll send you a Mac Plus running 6.0.8. Far
> superior.

What I have is great and getting better as I wring out summa dem probs. 
But thanks.  It's a real tempting offer (wink).

Don't anyone offer me an Apple II.  I already have one.  Funny thing,
someone gave it to me.  I couldn't get it to work, so I took it to
someone who is an Apple II guru.  He had Apple II stuff all over his
basement and garage.  he hooked it up and it worked great.  I took it
home and it exuded copious amounts of darkness.  Go figure.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 1:53:13 AM
In article <1gm2kqd.s4p67f9zn0cbN%neillmassello@earthlink.net>, Neill
Massello <neillmassello@earthlink.net> wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > Problem is, I have no credit cards so that puts me in a spot.  I have to
> > drive to another state to buy software, and the last time I was there they
> > had none of these.
> 
> OK, my trollmeter is now getting into the red zone. 

What, 'cause I have no credit cards?  Because I don't register my
hardware and software?  I don't have or do these things because I'm a
private person and don't give my data to anyone.  BTW, I get no spam or
junk mail.  I also have no telephone, so telemarketers and politicians
are not pestering me.  And I'm not registered to vote.

BTW, I don't mind being called a troll.  I'm not a regular here or
anyplace else in the newsgroups, and I change my nic every time I visit
someplace.  I've been here before.  

I came in to find out if there were others who were struggling with
OSX.  Instead I got a lot of helpful tips from people and at some point
y'all will find some other topic to explore.  I appreciate the help I'm
getting, and I hope it's one of the purposes of the group.  I haven't
read the FAQ, so I have only my intuition to go on.

It's a good group, tho.  Some other groups would have tagged me as a
troll long before you did.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 2:07:38 AM
In article <BD9F149C.10A03%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
<behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 10/22/04 6:49 PM, in article
> 1gm3s1j.7sbewxvw7bjeN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au, "Peter McCallum"
> <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> 
> >> And I miss Netscape's
> >> lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was selecting when I moved
> >> the pointer over a linked word,
> > 
> > That's exactly what happen's in Safari (version 1.2.3) for me.
> 
> 
> As long as you have selected "Status Bar" in the "View" menu!

Holy catfish, Batman!  Boy, is that going to make my life a lot easier. 
Thanks.  What an improvement that's going to make.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 2:11:29 AM
In article <BD9F14D9.10A04%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
<behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 10/22/04 6:54 PM, in article
> 1gm3sre.w68l4616arxgqN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au, "Peter McCallum"
> <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > Brian Paul Ehni <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Tell you what. Box up your G5 and send it to me. I'll send you my G4 (dual
> >> 1.25 GHZ 1GB RAM, 4 X 120 GB hard drives). It boots into 9.2.2 just fine.
> > 
> > Don't listen to him. I'll send you a Mac Plus running 6.0.8. Far
> > superior.
> 
> I can do that, too, and throw in a Color Classic with OS 7.5.3

And World Series tickets?  Will anyone throw in a wife?  Nah, not a
wife, I'm already owned by a cat.  How about Ace Combat 5 for OSX?
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 2:18:19 AM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> on Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:44:47 -0700 in
<221020041544475019%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>:

> In article <pan.2004.10.22.10.16.30.895700@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5>,
> NeoAmsterdam <%E2%90%A5@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5> wrote:
> 
>> The triangles
>> in the Dock are hard to see)
> 
> Yes, that's a particular problem I'm having.  I'm weary of having to
> click those little things several times to open and close folders. 
> Even though the triangles are small in OS8.6, I seem to score more
> often with them.  Perhaps the hot spot needs to be made larger. 
> There's an idea for someone who writes little utilities.  If the items
> in the dock can bet bigger as the pointer approaches, why not those
> little triangles.  And it could be turned off (for the purists), or
> perhaps the triangles could be enlarged as a system pref. 

Once upon a time (OS Public Beta) one could change the color of the
triangle using a ``defaults write com.apple.dock
something="something.something"''.  I liked the applications menu better...

0
NeoAmsterdam
10/23/2004 3:30:39 AM
Brian Paul Ehni <behni@comcast.net> on Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:49:45 -0500 in
<BD9F14D9.10A04%behni@comcast.net>:

> On 10/22/04 6:54 PM, in article
> 1gm3sre.w68l4616arxgqN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au, "Peter McCallum"
> <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> 
>> Brian Paul Ehni <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> Tell you what. Box up your G5 and send it to me. I'll send you my G4 (dual
>>> 1.25 GHZ 1GB RAM, 4 X 120 GB hard drives). It boots into 9.2.2 just fine.
>> 
>> Don't listen to him. I'll send you a Mac Plus running 6.0.8. Far
>> superior.
> 
> I can do that, too, and throw in a Color Classic with OS 7.5.3

I want both! Gimmie! Gimmie! Gimmie!
0
NeoAmsterdam
10/23/2004 3:33:44 AM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> writes:

> My major thrust in this discussion concerning interface is the fact
> that I found the older OS's kept the ease of use of previous versions
> as they progresses and added new features that made using the Mac OS a
> pleasant experience.  But OSX seems to have added some nice features as
> well as having some that aren't so nice, and that to me is a
> regression.

I too was disapointed by the new GUI.  I don't run OSX (they haven't
released it yet for the LC III), but I checked it out at CompUSA, and
I much prefer the GUI in OS7.1 that I use.  IMHO, they shouldn't have
thrown that part away.  They should have grafted an OS8ish GUI on top
of BSD.

BTW: Does anybody know why they didn't build their gui on top of X11,
or was it just NIH syndrome.

-- 
Dowe Keller				dgk@igalaxy.net

	  Please disregard the following crud.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
0
dgk1 (14)
10/23/2004 4:14:21 AM
g5blues wrote:

>  Geoff Welsh wrote:
>>Now with OSX, I just, drag the files to the My Name (user) folder.
>>Then open the Terminal app (which essentially puts you "in Unix" in the 
>>User directory)
>>
>>Type "ftp whoever@whatever_you_typedinaGUIftp_app" <return>
>>Watch for the prompts if it asks for a password or something.
>>Type "put filename" <return>
>>
>>That's it....the file goes.
>>GW
> 
> 
> Nice.  I'll try it.  How do you delete files from the same directory? 
> And does it allow for bulk uploads and simultaneous deletes like Fetch?

hmmmm.  Not quite sure of all that yet.  My Unix is quite limited.
GW
0
geoffdubya (301)
10/23/2004 4:36:30 AM
g5blues wrote:

> In article <pan.2004.10.22.10.16.30.895700@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5>,
> NeoAmsterdam <%E2%90%A5@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5> wrote:
> 
> 
>>The triangles
>>in the Dock are hard to see)
> 
> 
> Yes, that's a particular problem I'm having.  I'm weary of having to
> click those little things several times to open and close folders. 
> Even though the triangles are small in OS8.6, I seem to score more
> often with them.  Perhaps the hot spot needs to be made larger. 
> There's an idea for someone who writes little utilities.  If the items
> in the dock can bet bigger as the pointer approaches, why not those
> little triangles.  And it could be turned off (for the purists), or
> perhaps the triangles could be enlarged as a system pref. 

Triangles?   What?
In my dock I click anywhere on any icon and it launches.
GW
0
geoffdubya (301)
10/23/2004 4:38:41 AM
In article <86sm86f4v6.fsf@my.domain>, Dowe G. Keller <dgk@my.domain>
wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> writes:
> 
> > My major thrust in this discussion concerning interface is the fact
> > that I found the older OS's kept the ease of use of previous versions
> > as they progresses and added new features that made using the Mac OS a
> > pleasant experience.  But OSX seems to have added some nice features as
> > well as having some that aren't so nice, and that to me is a
> > regression.
> 
> I too was disapointed by the new GUI.  I don't run OSX (they haven't
> released it yet for the LC III), but I checked it out at CompUSA, and
> I much prefer the GUI in OS7.1 that I use.  IMHO, they shouldn't have
> thrown that part away.  They should have grafted an OS8ish GUI on top
> of BSD.


I knew it.  I knew there had to be at least one like-minded person here.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 5:15:29 AM
In article <lfled.25914$jo2.21630@twister.socal.rr.com>, Geoff Welsh
<geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> g5blues wrote:
> 
> > In article <pan.2004.10.22.10.16.30.895700@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5>,
> > NeoAmsterdam <%E2%90%A5@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>The triangles
> >>in the Dock are hard to see)
> > 
> > 
> > Yes, that's a particular problem I'm having.  I'm weary of having to
> > click those little things several times to open and close folders. 
> > Even though the triangles are small in OS8.6, I seem to score more
> > often with them.  Perhaps the hot spot needs to be made larger. 
> > There's an idea for someone who writes little utilities.  If the items
> > in the dock can bet bigger as the pointer approaches, why not those
> > little triangles.  And it could be turned off (for the purists), or
> > perhaps the triangles could be enlarged as a system pref. 
> 
> Triangles?   What?
> In my dock I click anywhere on any icon and it launches.
> GW

We're talking about different triangles.  The ones I'm referring to are
the ones that open folders.  The triangles in the dock are hard to see
because I have the dock shrunk very small.  What happens when you click
on one?  I'd try it, but I'm back using the Wall Street 8.6 until I can
find a nice newsreader like ya newswatcher.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 5:20:03 AM
Peter McCallum wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
>>And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
>>move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
>>where the links are or where it's just text.  
> 
> 
> It's not a Safari problem but a problem with the page design.
> 
That's not a problem at all.  That's the way a page was written to 
display itself.
If you want a page to display how YOU want it, instead of how the site 
designer intended, you should be able to change some Preferences to 
always underline HypertextReferences (HREF) a.k.a. "links".

I myself rarely use Safari.....I'm a Mozilla man.  That's the 
non-commercial super customizable better-than-version of Netscape.

BTW, HTML is a lot of fun to know, if you ever care to look into it.
GW
0
geoffdubya (301)
10/23/2004 5:35:03 AM
g5blues wrote:


> I never had that problem with Netscape.  A link is a link.  If the
> right tags are there, then whatever was designated as the link should
> be underlined.
> 
> 
That's a ludicrous statement.  If you anything about HTML and CSS you 
would know that a page designer can have any link show up anyway he 
wants.  He can make the text double in size, turn to italics, or change 
color on mouseover if he wants to, and it does not need to be underlined.
You are living in 1998 if you haven't noticed otherwise yet.

GW
0
geoffdubya (301)
10/23/2004 5:40:13 AM
Geoff Welsh <geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> Peter McCallum wrote:
> 
> > g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
> >>move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
> >>where the links are or where it's just text.  
> > 
> > 
> > It's not a Safari problem but a problem with the page design.
> > 
> That's not a problem at all.  That's the way a page was written to 
> display itself.

agreed. sloppy english on my part.

-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/23/2004 8:50:05 AM
In article <221020040044576180%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
 g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> If I not working with the GUI, then I probably shouldn't try to
> manipulate things with the more direct approach.  I'm sure, though,
> that the occasion will arise.  Your mention of FTP makes peaks my
> interest since I'm not going to get much work done or be able to retire
> the Wall Street until I can transfer files.

If you do decide to start learning about the non-GUI side of OS X, there 
is a certain amount of help available within the Terminal application.  
Since I only got a Mac after 10.3 came out, details may be different in 
earlier versions of OS X.

Command ? brings up the normal Help Viewer with Terminal Help ready to 
view. This covers 10 or 11 topics relating to using Terminal.

Within Terminal, you are actually using the Bash shell (which you could 
think of as a Finder for the command line - there are also several other 
shells you could use).  Typing the word  help  (and Return) lists the 
commands in the Bash shell. So typing  help help  tells you about using 
Help in Bash.  You should note that most commands are case sensitive, so 
you need to do this in lower case.

There are a heap of Applications hidden away that can be used from 
Terminal.  You can get a list by typing Esc ? (that is, esc shift? )  On 
my PB this asks if I want to see all 998 possibilities (some are not 
actually Applications).  q gets you out of the list of possibilities 
(and also out of most of the other things listed below).

If you are searching for a particular program in Terminal you can try 
using the word apropos  or  whatis  followed by a keyword.  If this 
works for you (it may depend on having the developers software 
installed) then it may give you clues about what particular applications 
may be of use.  For example, apropos zic tells me that zic is the time 
zone compiler, perhaps for adapting a Mac to a different (perhaps 
unsupported) time zone (like Eucla W.A., which isn't on the regular time 
zone list).

Having found a suitable application, you can try looking at the manual, 
by typing   man followed by the name of the program.  So   man man  will 
tell you how to use the man pages.   If you want to find where a program 
is stored, try  which   followed by the name of the program, so  which 
man  tells you the man program is stored in /usr/bin/man

Turning to ftp,  apropos tells you there are a heap of ftp programs, but 
ftp is the one you want for say sending files to a web server.   man ftp  
tells you how to use ftp (well, OK, to be honest, it tells you in geek 
talk how to use it).  If you just start ftp  you will  get a command 
line prompt like ftp>  from ftp.  Just type help or ? to get a list of 
commands, and then help command to get a little more about using them.  
The ones you want for updating web pages are  cd and lcd (to change 
folders),  ascii or binary (to set the type of file correctly - it 
usually gets things right automatically), then put (for a single file) 
or mput (and a wildcard) for multiple files (get and mget are for 
getting files).  While it probably sounds hard in this description, it 
is actually very easy (after the first time).  Oh yes, quit gets you out 
of ftp.

I guess you can figure from this note that I really like OS X.  While 
I've hardly ever had any reason to have to use Terminal, it is nice to 
know that all that old Unix style stuff (that I'm showing my age by 
remembering) is available, as well as all the nice GUI applications that 
came with the system.
0
10/23/2004 10:09:20 AM
In article <221020041634335325%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
 g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> way.  Garageband is confusing to get going in, I haven't figured out
> how do do anything in that one yet and the documentation doesn't do it
> for me.

Given Garage Band is a pretty full on application, maybe you need a 
manual.  David Pogue's Garage band, The Missing Manual, from O'Reilly, 
seem to cover doing musical projects pretty well. Even includes tips on 
reading music for non-musicians.

>> Help takes some time to initialize and subsequently do a search. 

I thought the performance of the Help Viewer was pretty pathetic, and 
needs a revamp for speed and stability.

> Safari's bar where you type in URL's is finicky (compared with what I
> was used to).  And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
> move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
> where the links are or where it's just text.  

Whether something is underlined or in a different colour is suggested by 
the person writing the web page.  Have you tried using Option Tab to 
show which items are links?

>And I miss Netscape's
> lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was selecting when I moved
> the pointer over a linked word, which makes me feel as if I'm working
> in the dark.  

Well, you could always use Netscape.

However in Safari, have you used View -> Status Bar to turn on the 
status bar, which will think show you the destination of each link the 
pointer is over?

>And I miss View Info, which took a list of links from the
> page source and displayed them separately.

Why not turn on Window -> Activity, which will show a list of all 
downloaded links within each page you load?
 
> Little things like those degrade the experience over OS 8.6.

I had the same reaction to Mac OS X when I first moved from Windows.  
Took a couple of months before I felt at home with it.  Now if I have a 
problem with OS X, the first thing I try to think about is whether I am 
trying to look for a complicated solution, rather than the easy one that 
is probably in there somewhere.
0
10/23/2004 10:33:26 AM
In article <19med.26228$jo2.17764@twister.socal.rr.com>,
 Geoff Welsh <geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> g5blues wrote:
> 
> 
> > I never had that problem with Netscape.  A link is a link.  If the
> > right tags are there, then whatever was designated as the link should
> > be underlined.
> > 
> > 
> That's a ludicrous statement.  If you anything about HTML and CSS you 
> would know that a page designer can have any link show up anyway he 
> wants.  He can make the text double in size, turn to italics, or change 
> color on mouseover if he wants to, and it does not need to be underlined.
> You are living in 1998 if you haven't noticed otherwise yet.

I wonder if it is possible that g5blues was actually using a very 
ancient version of netscape.  The real old versions (say 4) were unable 
to cope with external style sheets, and therefore would not have obeyed 
the CSS set by a web site.  Therefore links would have shown up as blue 
and underlined.

One possibility with Safari therefore is to use your own style sheet to 
make web pages appear the way that you like.  This is done in Safari 
Preferences -> Advanced   You can't override existing style sheets (the 
way you can in Opera) but unless the web site is working at hiding 
links, your own style sheet should be able to have the last word on how 
links appear.
0
10/23/2004 10:47:37 AM
On 10/22/04 10:30 PM, in article
pan.2004.10.23.03.30.41.903331@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5, "NeoAmsterdam"
<%E2%90%A5@%E2%90%A5.%E2%90%A5> wrote:


> 
> Once upon a time (OS Public Beta) one could change the color of the
> triangle using a ``defaults write com.apple.dock
> something="something.something"''.  I liked the applications menu better...
> 


And Transparent Dock (available at freerangemac.com) still does.
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/23/2004 1:01:27 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
: I thought it was built on unix.  Oh, well.

BSD is a sort of Unix.  It isn't 100% BSD, a bit more complicated then
that, but it is BSD-derived.
0
j.ester (20)
10/23/2004 7:15:55 PM
In article <b4med.26200$jo2.12367@twister.socal.rr.com>, Geoff Welsh
<geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> > And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
> > move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
> > >where the links are or where it's just text.  

> > It's not a Safari problem but a problem with the page design.

> That's not a problem at all.  That's the way a page was written to 
> display itself.
> If you want a page to display how YOU want it, instead of how the site 
> designer intended, you should be able to change some Preferences to 
> always underline HypertextReferences (HREF) a.k.a. "links".

I don't see any prefs for that except for an option to display links
when I press the "tab" key.  So I'll give that a try.
 
> I myself rarely use Safari.....I'm
> a Mozilla man.  That's the 
> non-commercial super customizable
> better-than-version of Netscape.

I'm most worried about someone getting my email address or other data. 
That's why I have always used a stand-alone mail proggy (Eudora).  So
far that strategy has kept me from being spammed, at least I think it's
played a part.  So has turning off scripting in the browser.  And the
use of a proxy that adds a layer of anonymity.
 
> BTW, HTML is a lot of fun to know, if you ever care to look into it.
> GW

And it's easy, too.  I like to make web pages.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 8:49:35 PM
In article <19med.26228$jo2.17764@twister.socal.rr.com>, Geoff Welsh
<geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> g5blues wrote:
> 
> 
> > I never had that problem with Netscape.  A link is a link.  If the
> > right tags are there, then whatever was designated as the link should
> > be underlined.
> > 
> > 
> That's a ludicrous statement.  If you anything about HTML and CSS you 
> would know that a page designer can have any link show up anyway he 
> wants.  He can make the text double in size, turn to italics, or change 
> color on mouseover if he wants to, and it does not need to be underlined.
> You are living in 1998 if you haven't noticed otherwise yet.
> 
> GW

Okay, I said "should be" and "if."  I wouldn't dream of putting a link
on a page that wasn't obvious.  I do quite a bit of html, but it's
mostly html 3.2 (with an occasional dip into the html 4 lexicon), so
yes, 1998 would be just about right.  HTML-wise, that is, because
otherwise I'm still living in the 1960's!
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 8:56:10 PM
In article
<NOSPAMjune2004-934CCC.20091923102004@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Eric
Lindsay <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> In article <221020040044576180%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
>  g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > Your mention of FTP makes peaks my
> > interest 
> 
> If you do decide to start learning about the non-GUI side of OS X,

Yes, I do.  And more so after your explanation of some of it.  I have
always just done what I needed to do and not explored all of the
capabilities of the computer, the Mac OS, or the broad array of
programs available.  It's always been like the kitchen to me.  I don't
need to know how to use everything in it to fry an egg.  I'm not going
to make too many things in the cookbook, either.  But it's all there
for me to discover.

I didn't abandon 8.6 for OSX until someone said that a person could do
just about everything and never have to access the command line.  Heck,
I've never used the function keys, either, until I just learned about
F9, F10, and F11.
In all of the years of using Macs I have never used a game beyond
Tetris, Monopoly, bridge, and chess.  In other words, no action games. 
I'm now looking around for a game that uses all of the power of the
dual 2.5, maybe something flying-related like Homeworld 2 (a review of
I saw in Macworld's Game Room).

So, I guess the point is the command line seems like a little bonus,
maybe a different way of working and thinking about tasks and I plan to
look into it.

Thanks.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 9:20:40 PM
In article
<NOSPAMjune2004-CF5857.20332623102004@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Eric
Lindsay <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> Given Garage Band is a pretty full on application, maybe you need a 
> manual.  David Pogue's Garage band, The Missing Manual, from O'Reilly, 
> seem to cover doing musical projects pretty well. Even includes tips on 
> reading music for non-musicians.

The Missing Manual.  That's just about the size of it.

> >> Help takes some time to initialize and subsequently do a search. 
> 
> I thought the performance of the Help Viewer was pretty pathetic, and 
> needs a revamp for speed and stability.

It seems to be better with the recent update to 10.3.5.  Faster, anyway.
 
> > Safari's bar where you type in URL's is finicky (compared with what I
> > was used to).  And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
> > move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
> > where the links are or where it's just text.  
> 
> Whether something is underlined or in a different colour is suggested by 
> the person writing the web page.  Have you tried using Option Tab to 
> show which items are links?

Option Tab doesn't do much of anything.  But just Tab toggles from one
link to another.  I'd like to see all of the links at once.

> in Safari, have you used View -> Status Bar to turn on the 
> status bar, which will think show you the destination of each link the 
> pointer is over?

Okay, I just found out about that one last night and it works great. 
Actually changes my mind about Safari.

> >And I miss View Info, which took a list of links from the
> > page source and displayed them separately.
> 
> Why not turn on Window -> Activity, which will show a list of all 
> downloaded links within each page you load?

Yes.  YES.  That's what I needed.  I use it a lot in Netscape as View -
Page Info.  It's a little more elegant in Netscape because it gives a
little preview if it's a graphic, but Window-Activity will be okay. 
Thanks.
  
> > Little things like those degrade the experience over OS 8.6.

> I had the same reaction to Mac OS X when I first moved from Windows.  
> Took a couple of months before I felt at home with it.  Now if I have a 
> problem with OS X, the first thing I try to think about is whether I am 
> trying to look for a complicated solution, rather than the easy one that 
> is probably in there somewhere.

I feel as if I've been looking for solutions that don't exist.  But it
turns out that they're there, but I would have had to do a lot more
research and it was simpler to go back to the Wall Street where I felt
more at home.  I suppose it's like someone who is learning English as a
second language.  I'm still thinking in my first language and what I
need to do is start thinking in OSX rather than filtering things
through my original OS-think.

Someday, I have no doubt, there will be a preference that asks what OS
I'm most familiar with and then the computer will adapt to me and the
way I have been used to working.  Then, at some point, it will allow me
to incorporate more and more elements of the new OS (or any other OS,
for that matter).  But, alas, that will be the day when I will be able
to tune into every radio or television broadcast on the planet, and it
doesn't look like I'll live long enough for either to happen.

Sorry, I'm just killing time until the world series begins.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 9:54:15 PM
In article
<NOSPAMjune2004-940AAF.20473823102004@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Eric
Lindsay <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> In article <19med.26228$jo2.17764@twister.socal.rr.com>,
>  Geoff Welsh <geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> > g5blues wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > I never had that problem with Netscape.  A link is a link.  If the
> > > right tags are there, then whatever was designated as the link should
> > > be underlined.
> > > 
> > > 
> > That's a ludicrous statement.  If you anything about HTML and CSS you 
> > would know that a page designer can have any link show up anyway he 
> > wants.  He can make the text double in size, turn to italics, or change 
> > color on mouseover if he wants to, and it does not need to be underlined.
> > You are living in 1998 if you haven't noticed otherwise yet.
> 
> I wonder if it is possible that g5blues was actually using a very 
> ancient version of netscape.  The real old versions (say 4) were unable 
> to cope with external style sheets, and therefore would not have obeyed 
> the CSS set by a web site.  Therefore links would have shown up as blue 
> and underlined.

Yes, that's right.  I've been using Netscape 4.0.5.
> 
> One possibility with Safari therefore is to use your own style sheet to 
> make web pages appear the way that you like.  This is done in Safari 
> Preferences -> Advanced   You can't override existing style sheets (the 
> way you can in Opera) but unless the web site is working at hiding 
> links, your own style sheet should be able to have the last word on how 
> links appear.

I see that preference.  It's something I'll look into.  Not today,
probably not tomorrow, but maybe sometime soon.  Thanks.
0
g5blues (46)
10/23/2004 10:02:52 PM
g5blues wrote:

(in regards to an ongoing thread)
> 
> Okay, I said "should be" and "if."  I wouldn't dream of putting a link
> on a page that wasn't obvious.  I do quite a bit of html, but it's
> mostly html 3.2 (with an occasional dip into the html 4 lexicon), so
> yes, 1998 would be just about right.  HTML-wise, that is, because
> otherwise I'm still living in the 1960's!

LOL.
So is the gas 20 cents a gallon there?
GW
0
geoffdubya (301)
10/23/2004 11:19:43 PM
Eric Lindsay wrote:
> 
> I wonder if it is possible that g5blues was actually using a very 
> ancient version of netscape.  The real old versions (say 4) were unable 
> to cope with external style sheets, and therefore would not have obeyed 
> the CSS set by a web site.  Therefore links would have shown up as blue 
> and underlined.

You can still do that, I mean, you can still set Mozilla to display 
links as underlined regardless of the CSS just like you could in 
Netscape 4.7.   It's under preferences/appearance/colors

GW
(who obviously uses Mozilla, cuz he used to use Netscape 4.7 until he 
discovered the wonderful world of CSS)

0
geoffdubya (301)
10/24/2004 2:21:10 AM
g5blues wrote:

<snipped>

> Safari's bar where you type in URL's is finicky (compared with what I
> was used to).  And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
> move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
> where the links are or where it's just text. 

That is more likely a page design issue.  Send an email to the webmaster.

> And I miss Netscape's lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was selecting when I moved
> the pointer over a linked word, which makes me feel as if I'm working
> in the dark. 

View Menu : Status Bar  (Took me a while to figure that one out, too.)

> And I miss View Info, which took a list of links from the
> page source and displayed them separately.

If you're really sold on a Netscapish browser, try Mozilla. 
http://www.mozilla.org/products/mozilla1.x/  I love it.  I was stuck on 
Netscape 4.7.9 right up to the point where I upgraded to OS X, and I 
really hated some things about Mail and Safari.  Mozilla has all the 
features I loved about Netscape, plus a few additions that make it even 
better.  It even has the View : Page Info as well as one *I* really 
missed --  File : Send Page.
> 
> Little things like those degrade the experience over OS 8.6.
0
cindym3 (88)
10/24/2004 4:36:19 PM
g5blues wrote:

> In article <1gm3qjf.ozioo8148aqhwN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
> McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> 
> 
>>g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
>>
>>>One of the things that I've not
>>>liked is the disappearance into the dock bit, and I'm getting tired of
>>>pulling windows to the side, or all 4 sides sometimes.  
>>
>>Why not just use expos�?
>>
>>Peter
> 
> 
> I haven't discovered it yet.
> 
> "Search Results for "expose" in "macintosh HD"
> 
> 0 items

System Preferences : Expos�

"Expos� allows you to temporarily see all of your open windows at once, 
so you can easily click on any window to bring it to the front."

You can set up the function keys to do specific things.  In mine, I have 
  the following:

F9:  All windows -- this "shrinks" all open windows so they are all 
visible on the desktop.  You can then click on the desired window to 
bring it to the front.

F10:  Application windows -- this "shrinks" all the windows in the 
current application so that they are all visible on the desktop.  Other 
windows from other applications are "greyed out" and are not clickable.

F11:  Desktop -- this removes all windows from the desktop and "hides" 
them above and to the sides of the viewable area of the screen.


Hope this helps!
0
cindym3 (88)
10/24/2004 4:56:14 PM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
> 
> OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.  
> 
> JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

I'm all for old school. There are many features in MacOS X that are rip 
offs of M$ Windows and I don't like any of them...

On the other hand, MacOS X is more stable than any previous MacOS, and 
I've been using them since the beginning. I still remember the joy I 
felt the first time I could put a folder inside a folder...

Macintosh 128K                    Macintosh Plus
Macintosh LC II                   Power Macintosh 8100
PowerBook 5300                    Power Macintosh 6500
PowerBook G3 (Bronze Keyboard)    Power Macintosh G4 Cube
iMac G5
0
postmaster12 (569)
10/24/2004 9:49:01 PM
On 10/24/04 4:49 PM, in article
postmaster-A44E85.17485424102004@news1.east.earthlink.net, "Daniel T."
<postmaster@earthlink.net> wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
>> I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
>> people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
>> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
>> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
>> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
>> OS that fights me at every turn.
>> 
>> OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
>> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
>> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
>> frustrating experience using it.
>> 
>> JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.
> 
> I'm all for old school. There are many features in MacOS X that are rip
> offs of M$ Windows and I don't like any of them...
> 
> On the other hand, MacOS X is more stable than any previous MacOS, and
> I've been using them since the beginning. I still remember the joy I
> felt the first time I could put a folder inside a folder...
> 
> Macintosh 128K                    Macintosh Plus
> Macintosh LC II                   Power Macintosh 8100
> PowerBook 5300                    Power Macintosh 6500
> PowerBook G3 (Bronze Keyboard)    Power Macintosh G4 Cube
> iMac G5

This raises a question: how many different models Macs have you owned?

Here's my list (some I've had several of):

Mac Plus *                  Mac SE *
Mac II                      Mac Iisi *
Mac IIcx *                  Mac Iici *
Mac IIvx *                  Performa 550
Performa 630                Performa 6100
Performa 6200               Performa 5400
Performa 6400               PowerMac 6500 *
PowerMac 6100 *             Quadra 660
Color Classic **            PowerMac 7100
PowerMac 8100               WorkgroupServer 8150
PowerMac 8500               Power Mac 9500 *
PowerMac 8600               Power Mac 9600
G3 minitower *              G3 desktop *
G3 Blue & White *           G4 AGP *
G4 Digital Audio            G4 Dual Mirror Door **
PowerBook 170               PowerBook 180
PowerBook 1400              iBook (Blueberry)
PowerBook G3 (Wallstreet)   PowerBook G3 (Pismo)
PowerBook G4 (DVI) **

Other oddballs I've owned:

Motorola StarMax 4000
Radius 81/110
Outbound (laptop) *

* Computer I still have
** Computers I use daily
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/25/2004 1:46:18 AM
In article <231020041454157075%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
 g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> Option Tab doesn't do much of anything.  But just Tab toggles from one
> link to another.  I'd like to see all of the links at once.

Whether Option Tab or just plain Tab jumps from link to link is set by 
one of the Safari preferences.  You have your one set one way, I have it 
the other way.

I'm not sure how you would see all the links at once.  One obvious 
approach to this would be an Applescript that throws up another 
(browser) window containing all the links found in any specific page.  
It wouldn't surprise me to find someone has already written one.
0
10/25/2004 3:31:38 AM
In article <231020041420405417%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
 g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> So, I guess the point is the command line seems like a little bonus,
> maybe a different way of working and thinking about tasks and I plan to
> look into it.

A GUI is a wonderfully easy way to do things the first time.  However if 
you have some task that you have to do multiple times (like updating a 
web site every week or so), then after you have done it a dozen times 
you are probably wasting a fair bit of time still sticking with a GUI.  
At this stage you probably should start thinking about scripting, and/or 
a command line.  You are not making your life any easier by memorising 
and repeating a complicated command line, but saving a complicated 
command for repeated use can be easier than writing a script that will 
work with a GUI.

Let me give a couple of examples.  There is a nice application called 
Little Snitch, that can tell you whether various applications are 
connected to the Internet (a situation that can have security 
implications - especially if you have a Windows PC!)  As a bit of an ad 
hoc substitute for Little Snitch, you can use a Terminal program called 
netstat, however it tells you more than you need to know.  You can use 
other Terminal programs to extract just what you need for all the 
material netstat gives you.  But then the command gets complicated, so 
once you have worked it out, you save it in a file that you can just 
start like any other applications.  Hence a file you might call snitch 
might contain:
netstat -p tcp  | awk '!/localhost|Recv/ { print $4,$5 }'

which gives a result that looks like this:
10.0.1.2.49254 news-server.bigp.nntp
10.0.1.2.51374 mail.mac.com.imap
which says news and mail are doing internet stuff, but not much else is.

In sending files to my web page, I want to ensure that I never 
accidentally use file names that mix UPPER and lower case.  This is 
because web sites are case sensitive, and I always want to use lower 
case file names.  So you might use a little file (called lower) that 
contains this:
#!/bin/bash
for file in *
do newfile=`echo $file | tr [A-Z] [a-z]`
 echo "Moving $file to $newfile"
 mv $file $newfile
 echo Done
done

This just changes filenames in a folder from whatever they are named to 
lowercase equivalents.  As a result, I don't have to look at files in 
Finder and manually change each of my web pages to lower case if I 
happened to get them wrong when creating them.

There are lots of examples of files like that floating around, intended 
to do small tasks that you might find yourself otherwise repeating in a 
GUI.  It doesn't mean command lines are good and GUIs are bad, nor the 
reverse.  It just means you may work more efficiently by using each one 
when its strengths are appropriate.
0
10/25/2004 4:02:56 AM
In article <jGBed.24610$Kl3.22669@twister.socal.rr.com>, Geoff Welsh
<geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> g5blues wrote:
> 
> (in regards to an ongoing thread)
> > 
> > Okay, I said "should be" and "if."  I wouldn't dream of putting a link
> > on a page that wasn't obvious.  I do quite a bit of html, but it's
> > mostly html 3.2 (with an occasional dip into the html 4 lexicon), so
> > yes, 1998 would be just about right.  HTML-wise, that is, because
> > otherwise I'm still living in the 1960's!
> 
> LOL.
> So is the gas 20 cents a gallon there?
> GW

I pumped 20-cent gas back then when I was in high school.  There were
frequent gas wars and sometimes the price got as low as 5 cents.  In
the big city the gas wars got so good sometimes that competing gas
stations on opposite corners actually gave away gas.  I never got any,
but these events always made it to the newspapers.

To answer your question; yes, gasoline is still 20 cents.  The dollar
bought 10 times as much then, and gas is $2.00/gallon, so it's really
the same price in inflation adjusted dollars, right?
0
g5blues (46)
10/25/2004 4:18:50 AM
In article <7SQed.237$HA.34@attbi_s01>, Cindy Murray
<cindym3@comcast.net> wrote:

> > Safari's bar where you type in URL's is finicky (compared with what I
> > was used to).  And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
> > move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
> > where the links are or where it's just text. 
> 
> That is more likely a page design issue.  Send an email to the webmaster.

I would, but he'd have my email addy and would likely spam me for my
trouble.  Tell me it hasn't happened.

> > And I miss Netscape's lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was
> > selecting when I moved
> > the pointer over a linked word, which makes me feel as if I'm working
> > in the dark. 
> 
> View Menu : Status Bar  (Took me a while to figure that one out, too.)

Got it.  I'm happy on that account.
 
> > And I miss View Info, which took a list of links from the
> > page source and displayed them separately.
> 
> If you're really sold on a Netscapish browser, try Mozilla. 
> http://www.mozilla.org/products/mozilla1.x/  I love it.  I was stuck on 
> Netscape 4.7.9 right up to the point where I upgraded to OS X, and I 
> really hated some things about Mail and Safari.  Mozilla has all the 
> features I loved about Netscape, plus a few additions that make it even 
> better.  It even has the View : Page Info as well as one *I* really 
> missed --  File : Send Page.

I'm happier with Safari now, a lot happier.  I'll likely pick up
stand-alone programs for mail (Eudora, since I've used it forever) and
news (Hogwasher, if it's made for OSX).

Thanks.
0
g5blues (46)
10/25/2004 4:27:13 AM
In article <O8Red.240707$wV.119746@attbi_s54>, Cindy Murray
<cindym3@comcast.net> wrote:

> > "Search Results for "expose" in "macintosh HD"
> > 
> > 0 items
> 
> System Preferences : Expos�
> 
> "Expos� allows you to temporarily see all of your open windows at once, 
> so you can easily click on any window to bring it to the front."
> 
> You can set up the function keys to do specific things.  In mine, I have 
>   the following:
> 
> F9:  All windows -- this "shrinks" all open windows so they are all 
> visible on the desktop.  You can then click on the desired window to 
> bring it to the front.
> 
> F10:  Application windows -- this "shrinks" all the windows in the 
> current application so that they are all visible on the desktop.  Other 
> windows from other applications are "greyed out" and are not clickable.
> 
> F11:  Desktop -- this removes all windows from the desktop and "hides" 
> them above and to the sides of the viewable area of the screen.
> 
> 
> Hope this helps!

Yes.  Expose is not Expos� in a search, so I missed it.  But someone
else clued me about the function keys you mentioned and I've
incorporated them into my routine.  Thanks.
0
g5blues (46)
10/25/2004 4:30:06 AM
In article <postmaster-A44E85.17485424102004@news1.east.earthlink.net>,
Daniel T. <postmaster@earthlink.net> wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> > people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> > & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> > update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> > make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> > OS that fights me at every turn.
> > 
> > OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> > recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> > been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> > frustrating experience using it.  
> > 
> > JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.
> 
> I'm all for old school. There are many features in MacOS X that are rip 
> offs of M$ Windows and I don't like any of them...
> 
> On the other hand, MacOS X is more stable than any previous MacOS, and 
> I've been using them since the beginning. I still remember the joy I 
> felt the first time I could put a folder inside a folder...
> 
> Macintosh 128K                    Macintosh Plus
> Macintosh LC II                   Power Macintosh 8100
> PowerBook 5300                    Power Macintosh 6500
> PowerBook G3 (Bronze Keyboard)    Power Macintosh G4 Cube
> iMac G5

I hear you.  I'm determined to get used to OSX.  One thing I'd like to
do is play a game, and action game, instead of the board/card games
I've always played on earlier Macs.  Maybe the new Star Wars game.  Or
Homeworld 2 that reviewed in Macworld in the recent issue.  Heve any
suggestions?  I have a joystick (Logitech) that I bought to play Fly 2,
but the game won't install and apparently it isn't supported in
Panther.
0
g5blues (46)
10/25/2004 4:42:32 AM
In article <NOSPAMjune2004-749951.13312825102004@news.bigpond.com>,
Eric Lindsay <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> In article <231020041454157075%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
>  g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > Option Tab doesn't do much of anything.  But just Tab toggles from one
> > link to another.  I'd like to see all of the links at once.
> 
> Whether Option Tab or just plain Tab jumps from link to link is set by 
> one of the Safari preferences.  You have your one set one way, I have it 
> the other way.
> 
> I'm not sure how you would see all the links at once.  One obvious 
> approach to this would be an Applescript that throws up another 
> (browser) window containing all the links found in any specific page.  
> It wouldn't surprise me to find someone has already written one.

I haven't run across the tags that allow one to de-underline the text
that represents a link.  I thought it was an anomaly in the browser --
for instance, perhaps the space that one line has overlaps the next and
covers the underlined part of the link.  Sumpin' like dat.  I have my
text enlarged for easy reading (old eyes), so that might make lines
over;lap slightly.  If it's coded, then I'd like to know what tags do
it 'cause I'd like to do it once in a while.  Next time I see it I plan
to download the source code and find the appropriate tags.
0
g5blues (46)
10/25/2004 4:51:46 AM
In article
<NOSPAMjune2004-02906C.14025725102004@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Eric
Lindsay <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> once you have worked it out, you save it in a file that you can just 
> start like any other applications.  Hence a file you might call snitch 
> might contain:
> netstat -p tcp  | awk '!/localhost|Recv/ { print $4,$5 }'
> 
> which gives a result that looks like this:
> 10.0.1.2.49254 news-server.bigp.nntp
> 10.0.1.2.51374 mail.mac.com.imap
> which says news and mail are doing internet stuff, but not much else is.
> 
> In sending files to my web page, I want to ensure that I never 
> accidentally use file names that mix UPPER and lower case.  This is 
> because web sites are case sensitive, and I always want to use lower 
> case file names.  So you might use a little file (called lower) that 
> contains this:
> #!/bin/bash
> for file in *
> do newfile=`echo $file | tr [A-Z] [a-z]`
>  echo "Moving $file to $newfile"
>  mv $file $newfile
>  echo Done
> done
> 
> This just changes filenames in a folder from whatever they are named to 
> lowercase equivalents.  As a result, I don't have to look at files in 
> Finder and manually change each of my web pages to lower case if I 
> happened to get them wrong when creating them.
> 
> There are lots of examples of files like that floating around, intended 
> to do small tasks that you might find yourself otherwise repeating in a 
> GUI.  It doesn't mean command lines are good and GUIs are bad, nor the 
> reverse.  It just means you may work more efficiently by using each one 
> when its strengths are appropriate.

You know, I might actually try to figure scripting out someday.  I'll
bet a guy could get himself into real trouble if he wrote the wrong
thing.  What I need is to take a class.
0
g5blues (46)
10/25/2004 5:04:23 AM
g5blues wrote:

> I haven't run across the tags that allow one to de-underline the text
> that represents a link.  I thought it was an anomaly in the browser --
> for instance, perhaps the space that one line has overlaps the next and
> covers the underlined part of the link.  Sumpin' like dat.  I have my
> text enlarged for easy reading (old eyes), so that might make lines
> over;lap slightly.  If it's coded, then I'd like to know what tags do
> it 'cause I'd like to do it once in a while.  Next time I see it I plan
> to download the source code and find the appropriate tags.

There are no html tags that remove or alter the underlining at all. 
What you are seeing are the results of Cascading Style Sheets (CSS).  In 
your old browser, CSS support was non-existent.  CSS separates document 
look from document structure.  For an excellent illustration of what I 
am probably poorly describing, go look at http://www.csszengarden.com . 
  Every page on CSS Zen Garden uses EXACTLY the same html.  What differs 
from page to page is the CSS style sheet.  Do a google search using 
"css" and "tutorial" for the basics of CSS if you care to use it from 
time to time.

P.S. To directly answer your question about how to make underlinings 
disappear, you would use the following CSS markup in your style sheet:

a {
	text-decoration: none;
}

This tells the browser that everywhere it sees an <a>somelink</a>, it 
should be rendered without the underlining.  Google around on "css" like 
I said to learn the many things that you can do with CSS.
0
MC
10/25/2004 6:09:11 AM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
> 
> OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.  
> 
> JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

So what's your verdict on OSX now? It seems to me that you had some
problems with applications rather than the OS and some problems with not
being aware of features of the OS.

Hope you are feeling a lot more comfortable after these few days of
questions and answers.

Peter
-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/25/2004 7:11:47 AM
MC wrote:

> g5blues wrote:
> 
>> I haven't run across the tags that allow one to de-underline the text
>> that represents a link.  I thought it was an anomaly in the browser --
>> for instance, perhaps the space that one line has overlaps the next and
>> covers the underlined part of the link.  Sumpin' like dat.  I have my
>> text enlarged for easy reading (old eyes), so that might make lines
>> over;lap slightly.  If it's coded, then I'd like to know what tags do
>> it 'cause I'd like to do it once in a while.  Next time I see it I plan
>> to download the source code and find the appropriate tags.
> 
> 
> There are no html tags that remove or alter the underlining at all. What 
> you are seeing are the results of Cascading Style Sheets (CSS).  In your 
> old browser, CSS support was non-existent.  CSS separates document look 
> from document structure.  For an excellent illustration of what I am 
> probably poorly describing, go look at http://www.csszengarden.com . 
>  Every page on CSS Zen Garden uses EXACTLY the same html.  What differs 
> from page to page is the CSS style sheet. 

That's an incredibly cool example of the power and purpose of CSS.
Good post.
GW
0
geoffdubya (301)
10/25/2004 8:20:27 AM
In article <211020042100567957%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> g5blues,
g5blues@logihdkufgh.com writes:
>I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
>people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
>& OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
>update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
>make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
>OS that fights me at every turn.
>
>OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
>recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
>been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
>frustrating experience using it.  
>
>JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

Check this out: http://www.macminute.com/2004/10/22/raskin/
0
nospam207 (13)
10/25/2004 11:42:32 PM
In article <Ebgfd.315509$3l3.63130@attbi_s03>,
 Darknight <nospam@nospam.null> wrote:

>In article <211020042100567957%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> g5blues,
>g5blues@logihdkufgh.com writes:
>>I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
>>people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
>>& OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
>>update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
>>make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
>>OS that fights me at every turn.
>>
>>OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
>>recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
>>been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
>>frustrating experience using it.  
>>
>>JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.
>
>Check this out: http://www.macminute.com/2004/10/22/raskin/

What? You're nuts. Having spent all my time on OSX since it came out, 
and developing for it, I loath OS9 and earlier. I really wish all our 
customers would move to OSX so I wouldn't have to support the old crappy 
stuff like short file names.

-- 
Steve Mills
Mac geek, drummer
0
sjmills (11)
10/25/2004 11:54:11 PM
On 10/24/04 11:27 PM, in article 241020042127138666%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <7SQed.237$HA.34@attbi_s01>, Cindy Murray
> <cindym3@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>>> Safari's bar where you type in URL's is finicky (compared with what I
>>> was used to).  And many links do not show as links (underlined) until I
>>> move the pointer over, so I can't glance at a page and get an idea
>>> where the links are or where it's just text.
>> 
>> That is more likely a page design issue.  Send an email to the webmaster.
> 
> I would, but he'd have my email addy and would likely spam me for my
> trouble.  Tell me it hasn't happened.
> 
>>> And I miss Netscape's lower bar that showed me the actual URL I was
>>> selecting when I moved
>>> the pointer over a linked word, which makes me feel as if I'm working
>>> in the dark. 
>> 
>> View Menu : Status Bar  (Took me a while to figure that one out, too.)
> 
> Got it.  I'm happy on that account.
>  
>>> And I miss View Info, which took a list of links from the
>>> page source and displayed them separately.
>> 
>> If you're really sold on a Netscapish browser, try Mozilla.
>> http://www.mozilla.org/products/mozilla1.x/  I love it.  I was stuck on
>> Netscape 4.7.9 right up to the point where I upgraded to OS X, and I
>> really hated some things about Mail and Safari.  Mozilla has all the
>> features I loved about Netscape, plus a few additions that make it even
>> better.  It even has the View : Page Info as well as one *I* really
>> missed --  File : Send Page.
> 
> I'm happier with Safari now, a lot happier.  I'll likely pick up
> stand-alone programs for mail (Eudora, since I've used it forever) and
> news (Hogwasher, if it's made for OSX).
> 
> Thanks.

-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/26/2004 12:54:25 AM
On 10/24/04 11:27 PM, in article 241020042127138666%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
\
> 
> I'm happier with Safari now, a lot happier.  I'll likely pick up
> stand-alone programs for mail (Eudora, since I've used it forever) and
> news (Hogwasher, if it's made for OSX).
> 
> Thanks.

Try MT-Newswatcher for news; I like it, anyway.
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/26/2004 12:54:56 AM
On 10/24/04 11:42 PM, in article 241020042142324308%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:


> 
> I hear you.  I'm determined to get used to OSX.  One thing I'd like to
> do is play a game, and action game, instead of the board/card games
> I've always played on earlier Macs.  Maybe the new Star Wars game.  Or
> Homeworld 2 that reviewed in Macworld in the recent issue.  Heve any
> suggestions?  I have a joystick (Logitech) that I bought to play Fly 2,
> but the game won't install and apparently it isn't supported in
> Panther.

I've been playing Quake 3 (yes, it's old) and Unreal Tournament 2003 a LOT
lately.
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/26/2004 12:56:07 AM
>On 10/24/04 11:42 PM, in article 241020042142324308%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
>"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
>
>> I hear you.  I'm determined to get used to OSX.  One thing I'd like to
>> do is play a game, and action game, instead of the board/card games
>> I've always played on earlier Macs.  Maybe the new Star Wars game.  Or
>> Homeworld 2 that reviewed in Macworld in the recent issue.  Heve any
>> suggestions?  I have a joystick (Logitech) that I bought to play Fly 2,
>> but the game won't install and apparently it isn't supported in
>> Panther.

X-Plane is a fantastic flight sim. Battlefield 1942 is a bunch of fun. 
The Medal of Honor series is fairly good. Ghost Recon was fun. Splinter 
Cell is incredible. Rainbox Six 3 - Raven Shield was also fun.

-- 
Steve Mills
Mac geek, drummer
0
sjmills (11)
10/26/2004 2:09:27 AM
In article <V02ed.21099$Kl3.21047@twister.socal.rr.com>,
 Geoff Welsh <geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:


> The only thing I didn't like about about OSX was the minimize-to-dock 
> concept.....but thanks to Windowshade,
> http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/wsx
> I can now do it the old way.
> Otherwise, I think it's super cool cuz now I can learn how to manipulate 
> and do things from underneath, i.e. in Unix, and not just in the GUI.
> Unix is quite useful for FTP and SCP/SSH stuff that I do.

Thanks for the tip.  Downloaded and a happy camper!

-- 
Memory was given to mortals so that they might
have roses in December.
....unknown
0
kati_e (6)
10/26/2004 2:09:34 AM
In article <211020042100567957%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
 g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
> 
> OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.  
> 
> JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

Saying OS X is clunky is pointless. What exactly do you mean by "clunky?"
0
srhi (290)
10/26/2004 3:58:19 AM
In article <241020042204233296%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
 g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> You know, I might actually try to figure scripting out someday.  I'll
> bet a guy could get himself into real trouble if he wrote the wrong
> thing.  What I need is to take a class.

One nice thing about the separation of Administrator and User accounts 
is that you can have multiple User accounts to experiment within.  Make 
yourself a couple of User accounts (you can use Fast User Switching to 
get to them).  These User accounts should have no special powers.  

Then use these accounts for testing and developing scripts or program 
experiments.  Because the operating system prevents an ordinary User 
from destroying anything important, you can freely experiment without 
damaging your system.  That is one of the reasons for the separation of 
Administrator and User accounts.
0
10/26/2004 7:53:06 AM
In article <241020042151467636%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
 g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> I haven't run across the tags that allow one to de-underline the text
> that represents a link. 

These days it is more likely to be coded into a style sheet.  This may 
be part of the HTML web page, but is more likely to be an external style 
sheet with a .css extension

To do an underline you might do something like
A: { 
        text-decoration: underline;
        }

or you might cut it out like
A: { 
        text-decoration: none;
        }

and maybe add something only when the mouse was hovering

A:hover { background: white;
        text-decoration: underline;
        }

Have a look at www.w3.org/Style/CSS for descriptions and pointers to 
learning more about this.
0
10/26/2004 8:07:10 AM
On 10/26/04 2:53 AM, in article
NOSPAMjune2004-13F2A3.17530826102004@news-server.bigpond.net.au, "Eric
Lindsay" <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> In article <241020042204233296%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
>  g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
>> You know, I might actually try to figure scripting out someday.  I'll
>> bet a guy could get himself into real trouble if he wrote the wrong
>> thing.  What I need is to take a class.
> 
> One nice thing about the separation of Administrator and User accounts
> is that you can have multiple User accounts to experiment within.  Make
> yourself a couple of User accounts (you can use Fast User Switching to
> get to them).  These User accounts should have no special powers.
> 
> Then use these accounts for testing and developing scripts or program
> experiments.  Because the operating system prevents an ordinary User
> from destroying anything important, you can freely experiment without
> damaging your system.  That is one of the reasons for the separation of
> Administrator and User accounts.


I wish the admin account was more PC-like in that the Admin (Owner, whatever
you want to call it) should have easy access to all files in the user
directory. Being told I have no access to a user folder I created, while
logged in under the Admin account, sucks.
-- 
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

0
behni (160)
10/26/2004 11:09:05 PM
Brian Paul Ehni wrote:
> On 10/26/04 2:53 AM, in article
> NOSPAMjune2004-13F2A3.17530826102004@news-server.bigpond.net.au, "Eric
> Lindsay" <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>In article <241020042204233296%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
>> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You know, I might actually try to figure scripting out someday.  I'll
>>>bet a guy could get himself into real trouble if he wrote the wrong
>>>thing.  What I need is to take a class.
>>
>>One nice thing about the separation of Administrator and User accounts
>>is that you can have multiple User accounts to experiment within.  Make
>>yourself a couple of User accounts (you can use Fast User Switching to
>>get to them).  These User accounts should have no special powers.
>>
>>Then use these accounts for testing and developing scripts or program
>>experiments.  Because the operating system prevents an ordinary User
>>from destroying anything important, you can freely experiment without
>>damaging your system.  That is one of the reasons for the separation of
>>Administrator and User accounts.
> 
> 
> 
> I wish the admin account was more PC-like in that the Admin (Owner, whatever
> you want to call it) should have easy access to all files in the user
> directory. Being told I have no access to a user folder I created, while
> logged in under the Admin account, sucks.

I agree.  The computer owner/admin should have access to ALL FILES.
0
cindym3 (88)
10/27/2004 4:08:41 PM
In article <dKPfd.321976$3l3.269742@attbi_s03>,
 Cindy Murray <cindym3@comcast.net> wrote:

> Brian Paul Ehni wrote:
> > I wish the admin account was more PC-like in that the Admin (Owner, whatever
> > you want to call it) should have easy access to all files in the user
> > directory. Being told I have no access to a user folder I created, while
> > logged in under the Admin account, sucks.
> 
> I agree.  The computer owner/admin should have access to ALL FILES.

The owner of the computer does have access to all files, since the owner 
can always install root access.  That this is left obscure in OS X is 
probably a good idea, rather than a bad idea.  It certainly doesn't seem 
to be something where the designers simply decided to make life harder 
for Macintosh owners (although I agree that it can appear that way).

Historically, this apparently reasonable idea that the user can and 
should be able to do anything has not been such a great approach in 
terms of stability, reliability and security.  Many (although not all) 
of the virus and worm problems in MS Windows propagate more easily 
because users have in general been able to do anything. 

It is easy to run a secure computer.  You simply keep it under guard in 
a locked room, never install new programs or new data, and never connect 
it to a network, and certainly never connect it to the Internet.  In the 
early days of computing I guess it was assumed that everyone who had 
access to a computer could be trusted to be both honest and know 
precisely what they were doing.  Now that all computer users tend to 
connect to the internet, so that anyone else on the internet can attempt 
to access your computer, can we still assume everyone else on the 
internet is honest and would never do anything nasty?  News reports 
(even allowing for the self serving FUD from anti-virus companies) would 
seem to indicate this is not the case.

If you look at your firewall logs, you will probably find hundreds or 
even thousands of probes per hour, especially if your ISP or network 
support isn't proactive about blocking.  This doesn't mean that most of 
your neighbours are trying to crack your computer.  However it does mean 
that substantial numbers of computers have been taken over (usually 
without the consent or knowledge of their owners) by outside crackers.

Were the results of these takeovers confined to the computers belonging 
to the victims, I wouldn't care.  However these captured computers are 
also the ones filling network connections with probes and attacks, and 
are also increasingly the ones being used to send spam.

If you believe that you are responsible enough to completely control 
your own computer, are you then also responsible enough to install and 
configure decent firewalls, update all security patches, check logs for 
attacks, and generally do a pretty full on job of network 
administration?  Personally, I got my Macintosh to have fun with it, and 
get some work done on the side.  I don't want to spend my time checking 
TCP/IP configuration details, and reading log files.  Running without 
root access, without being an Admin user, without using sudo, just as an 
ordinary user whenever I connect to the internet makes me less 
vulnerable to crackers.  This means that I'm unlikely to cause the sorts 
of problems that numerous MS Windows users are innocently causing on the 
Internet.

<argument>I'd think a reasonable case could be made that no-one should 
be able to connect to the Internet as anything except an ordinary user 
unless they can show they have the sort of knowledge needed to be a 
system administrator.</argument>
0
10/28/2004 4:43:17 AM
In article <bM0fd.6551$KJ6.4204@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, MC
<noaddress@n0email.c0m> wrote:

> g5blues wrote:
> 
> > I haven't run across the tags that allow one to de-underline the text
> > that represents a link.  I thought it was an anomaly in the browser --
> > for instance, perhaps the space that one line has overlaps the next and
> > covers the underlined part of the link.  Sumpin' like dat.  I have my
> > text enlarged for easy reading (old eyes), so that might make lines
> > over;lap slightly.  If it's coded, then I'd like to know what tags do
> > it 'cause I'd like to do it once in a while.  Next time I see it I plan
> > to download the source code and find the appropriate tags.
> 
> There are no html tags that remove or alter the underlining at all. 
> What you are seeing are the results of Cascading Style Sheets (CSS).  In 
> your old browser, CSS support was non-existent.  CSS separates document 
> look from document structure.  For an excellent illustration of what I 
> am probably poorly describing, go look at http://www.csszengarden.com .

Yes, very interesting.  As long as links are a different color than the
prevailing text, then it should be obvious that they're links.  This
was confusing to me to start with because I'm migrating from 'scape 4,
so I thought it was a Safari anomaly.
 
>   Every page on CSS Zen Garden uses EXACTLY the same html.  What differs 
> from page to page is the CSS style sheet.  Do a google search using 
> "css" and "tutorial" for the basics of CSS if you care to use it from 
> time to time.
> 
> P.S. To directly answer your question about how to make underlinings 
> disappear, you would use the following CSS markup in your style sheet:
> 
> a {
>         text-decoration: none;
> }
> 
> This tells the browser that everywhere it sees an <a>somelink</a>, it 
> should be rendered without the underlining.  Google around on "css" like 
> I said to learn the many things that you can do with CSS.

Now that I have support for CSS, perhaps it merits a second look.

Thanks for your thoughtful and informative answer.
0
g5blues (46)
10/28/2004 11:51:52 PM
In article <1gm82am.1tfxcg29tl4lcN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> > people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> > & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> > update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> > make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> > OS that fights me at every turn.
> > 
> > OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> > recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> > been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> > frustrating experience using it.  
> > 
> > JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.
> 
> So what's your verdict on OSX now? It seems to me that you had some
> problems with applications rather than the OS and some problems with not
> being aware of features of the OS.
> 
> Hope you are feeling a lot more comfortable after these few days of
> questions and answers.
> 
> Peter

I feel a lot better about it.  Even when I first registered my
reservations about OSX, I was committed to making the switch.  I'd not
had such a time of adapting to an OS upgrade before, so it was a bit of
a test of my patience.  But I know where to come now to ask questions. 
Lots of people here willing to help.

I wonder if they should have a feature where there is a more elementary
version of the OS for first-time users, then after a while a person can
move to a more advanced level with added capabilities.  They might even
say "If you used System 8.6, then use this version of OSX to begin
with."  And have other versions with higher levels of difficulty, if
difficulty is the right word (which it was for me).
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:00:34 AM
In article <Ebgfd.315509$3l3.63130@attbi_s03>, Darknight
<nospam@nospam.null> wrote:

> In article <211020042100567957%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> g5blues,
> g5blues@logihdkufgh.com writes:
> >I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> >people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> >& OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> >update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> >make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> >OS that fights me at every turn.
> >
> >OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> >recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> >been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> >frustrating experience using it.  
> >
> >JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.
> 
> Check this out: http://www.macminute.com/2004/10/22/raskin/

I had run across this and quite a few posted comments about it on
another site, insanely-great.com or thinksecret.com.  I don't see it
there now, but the impression I got was that he has been a vocal critic
of the direction the Mac has taken.  My concern was only that OSX is
not quite as intuitive as the earlier OS's, at least to me.  The
difference is I'm committed to adapting to it, but it's going to take
longer that I thought or wished.
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:14:49 AM
In article <sjmills-E91B4D.18541025102004@netnews.comcast.net>, Steve
Mills <sjmills@nospam.mac.com> wrote:

> In article <Ebgfd.315509$3l3.63130@attbi_s03>,
>  Darknight <nospam@nospam.null> wrote:
> 
> >In article <211020042100567957%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> g5blues,
> >g5blues@logihdkufgh.com writes:
> >>I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> >>people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> >>& OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> >>update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> >>make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> >>OS that fights me at every turn.
> >>
> >>OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> >>recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> >>been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> >>frustrating experience using it.  
> >>
> >>JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.
> >
> >Check this out: http://www.macminute.com/2004/10/22/raskin/
> 
> What? You're nuts. Having spent all my time on OSX since it came out, 
> and developing for it, I loath OS9 and earlier. I really wish all our 
> customers would move to OSX so I wouldn't have to support the old crappy 
> stuff like short file names.

I understand that and appreciate it.  This hasn't been easy for me. 
Had it been any different, then I and many others, perhaps the whole
community, would be using OSX by now.  I held out for a long time, all
the while reading Macworld every month looking for some conjunction of
USX and equipment enticing enough to make me switch.  I have done it,
but the adaptation has been somewhat of a trial for me.  Fortunately,
there seem to be plenty of people who are willing to help, a
circumstance I am thankful for.

Now that I'm OSX, I hope you get your wish :-)  I'm doing my part.
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:21:00 AM
In article <BDA30A90.10FEE%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
<behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 10/24/04 11:27 PM, in article 241020042127138666%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
> "g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> \
> > 
> > I'm happier with Safari now, a lot happier.  I'll likely pick up
> > stand-alone programs for mail (Eudora, since I've used it forever) and
> > news (Hogwasher, if it's made for OSX).
> > 
> > Thanks.
> 
> Try MT-Newswatcher for news; I like it, anyway.

It's on my list.  News and mail will have to wait until I work on other
issues I'm working on, like some specific chores I need to incorporate
into my routine involving DV.

Thanks.
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:25:07 AM
In article <BDA30AD7.10FEF%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
<behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 10/24/04 11:42 PM, in article 241020042142324308%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
> "g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > I hear you.  I'm determined to get used to OSX.  One thing I'd like to
> > do is play a game, and action game, instead of the board/card games
> > I've always played on earlier Macs.  Maybe the new Star Wars game.  Or
> > Homeworld 2 that reviewed in Macworld in the recent issue.  Heve any
> > suggestions?  I have a joystick (Logitech) that I bought to play Fly 2,
> > but the game won't install and apparently it isn't supported in
> > Panther.
> 
> I've been playing Quake 3 (yes, it's old) and Unreal Tournament 2003 a LOT
> lately.

I just oreered Homeworld 2 and Star Wars: KOTOR.  I plan to buy a game
every couple of months.
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:39:22 AM
In article <sjmills-B47E78.21092625102004@netnews.comcast.net>, Steve
Mills <sjmills@nospam.mac.com> wrote:

> >On 10/24/04 11:42 PM, in article 241020042142324308%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
> >"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I hear you.  I'm determined to get used to OSX.  One thing I'd like to
> >> do is play a game, and action game, instead of the board/card games
> >> I've always played on earlier Macs.  Maybe the new Star Wars game.  Or
> >> Homeworld 2 that reviewed in Macworld in the recent issue.  Heve any
> >> suggestions?  I have a joystick (Logitech) that I bought to play Fly 2,
> >> but the game won't install and apparently it isn't supported in
> >> Panther.
> 
> X-Plane is a fantastic flight sim. Battlefield 1942 is a bunch of fun. 
> The Medal of Honor series is fairly good. Ghost Recon was fun. Splinter 
> Cell is incredible. Rainbox Six 3 - Raven Shield was also fun.

X-plane is on my list for sure.  I saw Battlefield 1942 at a store and
will get it next time I'm there.  Thanks for the suggestions.
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:43:06 AM
In article <srhi-BEE870.23581925102004@news-40.giganews.com>, Shawn
Hearn <srhi@comcast.net> wrote:

> In article <211020042100567957%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
>  g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > I can't believe it.  OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> > people who brought us previous Mac OS's.  I used OS7.something through
> > & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> > update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> > make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> > OS that fights me at every turn.
> > 
> > OSX is clunky.  I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> > recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness.  As long as OSX has
> > been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> > frustrating experience using it.  
> > 
> > JMHO, okay?  But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.
> 
> Saying OS X is clunky is pointless. What exactly do you mean by "clunky?"

I explained this earlier in the thread.  Basically, it seemed sluggish
and tedious.  I can still get work done more quickly on the Wall Street
with 8.6, but times are changing and I expect to make OSX work for me
and just use the notebook on the road for mail and other minor chores.
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:51:00 AM
In article
<NOSPAMjune2004-13F2A3.17530826102004@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Eric
Lindsay <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> In article <241020042204233296%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
>  g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > You know, I might actually try to figure scripting out someday.  I'll
> > bet a guy could get himself into real trouble if he wrote the wrong
> > thing.  What I need is to take a class.
> 
> One nice thing about the separation of Administrator and User accounts 
> is that you can have multiple User accounts to experiment within.  Make 
> yourself a couple of User accounts (you can use Fast User Switching to 
> get to them).  These User accounts should have no special powers.  
> 
Now, there's a great idea!

Thanks.
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:52:41 AM
In article
<NOSPAMjune2004-5E095D.18071226102004@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Eric
Lindsay <NOSPAMjune2004@ericlindsay.com> wrote:

> In article <241020042151467636%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
>  g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> 
> > I haven't run across the tags that allow one to de-underline the text
> > that represents a link. 
> 
> These days it is more likely to be coded into a style sheet.  This may 
> be part of the HTML web page, but is more likely to be an external style 
> sheet with a .css extension
> 
> To do an underline you might do something like
> A: { 
>         text-decoration: underline;
>         }
> 
> or you might cut it out like
> A: { 
>         text-decoration: none;
>         }
> 
> and maybe add something only when the mouse was hovering
> 
> A:hover { background: white;
>         text-decoration: underline;
>         }
> 
> Have a look at www.w3.org/Style/CSS for descriptions and pointers to 
> learning more about this.

Bookmarked for future research along with resources suggested by others.

Thank you.
0
g5blues (46)
10/29/2004 12:56:32 AM
I hereby declare this thread done and over, at least as far as my part
in it is concerned.

I want to thank everyone for their help.

This is an excellent group.

Best wishes,

G5blues (no longer)
0
10/29/2004 1:09:00 AM
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <1gm82am.1tfxcg29tl4lcN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
> McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> > So what's your verdict on OSX now? It seems to me that you had some
> > problems with applications rather than the OS and some problems with not
> > being aware of features of the OS.
> > 
> > Hope you are feeling a lot more comfortable after these few days of
> > questions and answers.
> > 
> > Peter
> 
> I feel a lot better about it.  Even when I first registered my
> reservations about OSX, I was committed to making the switch.  I'd not
> had such a time of adapting to an OS upgrade before, so it was a bit of
> a test of my patience.  But I know where to come now to ask questions.
> Lots of people here willing to help.
> 
> I wonder if they should have a feature where there is a more elementary
> version of the OS for first-time users, then after a while a person can
> move to a more advanced level with added capabilities.  They might even
> say "If you used System 8.6, then use this version of OSX to begin
> with."  And have other versions with higher levels of difficulty, if
> difficulty is the right word (which it was for me).

Well, just when you thought you were safe the latest news is:

Tiger release will be biggest in Mac history
"Of the next iteration of the operating system he said: 'The good news:
It has by far the most features and capabilities than any other release.
The bad news: There's a lot to learn, so it's going to take some time to
get familiar with it.'"

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=723

Peter
-- 
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
0
10/31/2004 9:59:32 PM
In article <1gmkbgz.wymwxqbgeiq0N%p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> > I wonder if they should have a feature where there is a more elementary
> > version of the OS for first-time users, then after a while a person can
> > move to a more advanced level with added capabilities.  They might even
> > say "If you used System 8.6, then use this version of OSX to begin
> > with."  And have other versions with higher levels of difficulty, if
> > difficulty is the right word (which it was for me).
> 
> Well, just when you thought you were safe the latest news is:
> 
> Tiger release will be biggest in Mac history
> "Of the next iteration of the operating system he said: 'The good news:
> It has by far the most features and capabilities than any other release.
> The bad news: There's a lot to learn, so it's going to take some time to
> get familiar with it.'"
> 
> http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=723
> 
> Peter

Okay, this was a statement made to developers.  The bad news message
you refer to wasn't intended for consumers, right?  If Apple made the
OS any more complicated for the user, then I would have to wonder about
the future of the company unless they became far more diversified.

Maybe that's _why_ the company is becoming more diversified (iPod, and
other consumer electronics gizmos to come).  Is it possible they see
that the best OS they made from the standpoint of user frendliness and
simplicity was somewhere around OS8.something, and instead of improving
elements like stability within the existing framework of user
frendliness, that they have gained stability and power at the expense
of simplicity and intuitiveness?

I'll say what might have helped me a lot.  If the computer had come
with a DVD containing segments with someone actually doing some of the
things I toiled with in this thread (which many of you have kindly
helped me with, thank you very much).  What would it cost to produce a
DVD that someone could watch and maybe interact with?  Perhaps one DVD
intended for first-time users, and another one for the professional
user who wants to quickly master the OS and get to work (that is,
someone who has used earlier versions of the OS in a productive way and
who wants to master OSX and get productive again as quickly as
possible).

My opinion.  Everyone else's mileage may differ.

vatic
(wuz g5blues, which has trended toward g5skybluepink :-)
0
vatic (2)
11/1/2004 8:37:29 PM
> I *love* it.  

As a switcher from PC to eMac, I really enjoy OSX - it is much smoother, 
faster and user friendly than what I was used to.  Everything is easy to 
get to and to find.  

jn
0
yospam499 (15)
11/2/2004 2:01:47 AM
In article <1099360957.kNDb6lGLwURzfLfqOI8ocA@teranews>,
 just askin' <yospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> > I *love* it.  
> 
> As a switcher from PC to eMac, I really enjoy OSX - it is much smoother, 
> faster and user friendly than what I was used to.  Everything is easy to 
> get to and to find.  
> 
> jn

Well I Have used Macs since os 7 and 10 was a major change for me.  It 
was more stable than  even 9.0 but it felt really different at first. My 
Macs don't  crash at all really and I Get more  used to it every da�.
0
osxdude (6)
11/4/2004 9:55:26 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

anyone with experience with NAS and Mac OS9 or OSX
any info would be appreciated - pros and/or cons ...

TeX for Mac OSX: TeXShop or Lyx or something else?
I am looking for a TeX package for the mac osx. Free or near free, so something like Textures is not an option. Lurking on mac ng's I saw names like TeXShop and LyX. Is anybody here in the position to compare these two or recommend something he/she consider even better? Thnx. In article <121220031604386421%ajanta@no.email>, Ajanta <ajanta@no.email> wrote: > I am looking for a TeX package for the mac osx. Free or near free, so > something like Textures is not an option. Lurking on mac ng's I saw > names like TeXShop and LyX. Is anybody here in the position to compare > these two or recommend something he/she consider even better? Thnx. I can't compare LyX, but I used to use Textures under OS 9 (and older) and am now happy to be using TeXShop instead. The interface isn't quite as whizzy (preview and edit views don't synchronize to the same page) but on the other hand the rendering engine is less idiosyncratic so there's much less chance of someone on a different platform sending me files that don't work on the Mac. -- David Eppstein http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/ Univ. of California, Irvine, School of Information & Computer Science David Eppstein <eppstein@ics.uci.edu> writes: > In article <121220031604386421%ajanta@no.email>, > Ajanta <ajanta@no.email> wrote: > > > I am looking for a TeX package for the mac osx. Free or near free, so > > someth...

Anyone else feel like C++ is getting too complicated?
I know I'm going to get flamed here, but I really feel like C++ is just getting way too complicated to be as practical as I feel it should (and could) be. Before you start, I've been doing C++ professionally for probably 12 years, it's easily my strongest language, and I consider myself a "C++ programmer", not a programmer of some other language. I'm pretty comfortable with probably 90% of what's in C++98, and have played around quite a bit (and actually rather enjoy) things such as template metaprogramming and other more advanced applications of C++. But looki...

Agent 3-like Usenet client for Mac OSX Tiger
Having been a long-time Agent user while I was using PCs, I really came to appreciate Agent 3's many features, especially it's true Boolean Views Editor. I have been diligently searching the Web for a reasonable facimile of Agent 3 for my new G5, or an OSX Usenet client which is actually usable. I have found several clients (Unison, which Mac users rave about (I really don't know why), MT-NewsWatcher in several versions, NewsWatcher, Thunderbird, and several others. NONE of them would be a decent Usenet client if they were released in Windows versions, and in OSX, they ar...

Mac-like app like Swishmax?
I was told today about Swishmax, a PC app that can create flash anims easier than using Flash. Is there any open source OSX apps like this? Or even shareware / freeware / other ? I have Flash but want a faster alternative cheers Matt ...

I like Wizardry. What else will I like?
I only ever played two RPGs - Wizardry 7 & 8 and enjoyed them both very much. Without starting a flame war, what other RPGs will I like? Hmm, what did I like about those? Exploration, more than battle (and perhaps magic rather than simple strength/dexterity/etc - if well done (as it seemed to be in Wizardry)). A bit of puzzle solving wouldn't hurt. Character advancement, with truly distinctive character traits. Single player, something to keep me busy for a while and it must hold my interest, so not just repetitive, ho-hum, same old-same old battles. Good auto-mapping. Anything set...

Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, MacDrive 7.0.10, Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel, Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID, Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac, FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac, Roxio P
Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, MacDrive 7.0.10, Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel, Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID, Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac, FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac, Roxio Popcorn 3 for Mac, MapleSoft Maple 11.01.303882 Pro for Mac, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/10/15, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/ MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' please send e-mail to : ola 'AT' mail 'DOT' gr , ola3 'AT' mailbox 'DOT' gr ...

Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, MacDrive 7.0.10, Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel, Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID, Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac, FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac, Roxio Popcorn
Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, MacDrive 7.0.10, Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel, Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID, Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac, FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac, Roxio Popcorn 3 for Mac, MapleSoft Maple 11.01.303882 Pro for Mac, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/10/15, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/ MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' please send e-mail to : ola 'AT' mail 'DOT' gr , ola3 'AT' mailbox 'DOT' gr , www 'DOT' 20000plusdvdsandcds 'DOT' tk , ( please substitute 'AT' with '@' , and 'DOT' with '.' ) , ola@mail.gr, ola3@mailbox.gr, www.20000plusdvdsandcds.tk --------------------------------------- 2007-10-15 MacDrive 7.0.10 Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac (1 cd) 2007-10-02 MakeMusic Finale 2008 for Mac (3 cd) 2007/10/02 Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID 1DVD 2007-10-05 Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 1.2 for Mac ------------------------------------------------------- 2007/09/29 Autodesk Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac (1 dvd) 2007/09/25 FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac (1 dvd) 2007/09/14 Sorenson Squeeze Compression Suite 4.5.3 for Mac 2007/09/09 Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel (1 dvd) MapleSoft Maple 11.01.303882 Pro for Mac (1 cd) Roxio Popcorn 3 for Mac (1 cd) Vertus Fluid Mask 3.0.1 for Mac -------------------------------...

Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, MacDrive 7.0.10, Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel, Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID, Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac, FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac, Roxio P #2
Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, MacDrive 7.0.10, Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel, Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID, Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac, FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac, Roxio Popcorn 3 for Mac, MapleSoft Maple 11.01.303882 Pro for Mac, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/10/15, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/ MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' please send e-mail to : ola 'AT' mail 'DOT' gr , ola3 'AT' mailbox 'DOT' gr , www 'DOT' 20000plusdvdsandcds 'DOT' tk , ( please substitute 'AT' with '@' , and 'DOT' with '.' ) , ola@mail.gr, ola3@mailbox.gr, www.20000plusdvdsandcds.tk --------------------------------------- 2007-10-15 MacDrive 7.0.10 Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac (1 cd) 2007-10-02 MakeMusic Finale 2008 for Mac (3 cd) 2007/10/02 Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID 1DVD 2007-10-05 Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 1.2 for Mac ------------------------------------------------------- 2007/09/29 Autodesk Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac (1 dvd) 2007/09/25 FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac (1 dvd) 2007/09/14 Sorenson Squeeze Compression Suite 4.5.3 for Mac 2007/09/09 Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel (1 dvd) MapleSoft Maple 11.01.303882 Pro for Mac (1 cd) Roxio Popcorn 3 for Mac (1 cd) Vertus Fluid Mask 3.0.1 for Mac -------------------------------...

2006/02/04 VectorWorks.V12.MAC.OSX 3CDs, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 04/Feb/2006, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTI
2006/02/04 VectorWorks.V12.MAC.OSX 3CDs, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 04/Feb/2006, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' GARAGE SALES, buy, risk-free purchase, working, tested, fully functional, very cheap discounted price, low cost, quality OEM software, -------------------------------------------------------- Abvent Artlantis v4.5 Mac 1CD Abvent.PhotoCAD.v1.0.MacOSX ACD.Systems.Canvas.X.0.2.925.MacOSX Adobe.Acrobat.7.0.Pro.for.Mac.OS 1CD Adobe Acrobat 6.0.0 Professional Mac OSX 1CD Adobe Acrobat Distiller v6.0 for MAC OSX 1CD Adobe After Effects v6.0 Professional Mac OSX 1CD Adobe.After.Effects.Professional.6.5.OSX 1CD Adobe.Creative.Suite.2.Volume.Edition.MAC.OSX 5CD Adobe.Creative.Suite.2.Premium.MAC.OSX 6CD Adobe Creative Suite Premium Max OSX 2CD Adobe CreativeSuite 2004 MacOSX 2CD Adobe Font Folio 9.0 MAC 1CD Adobe.Font.Folio.Open.Type.Edition.Hybrid 1CD Adobe Golive v6.0 for Mac OSX 1CD Adobe.InCopy.CS2.MAC.OSX 1CD Adobe Indesign v2.0 for Mac OSX 1CD Adobe Indesign v2.0.2 retail for Mac OSX 1CD Adobe.InDesign.CS.v3.0.MAC.OSX Adobe LiveMotion v2.0 for Mac OSX 1CD Adobe.Pagemaker.V7.0.1.OSX 1CD Adobe.PageMaker.Plug-in.Pack.v1.0.for.InDesign.CS Adobe Photoshop v7.0.Mac 1CD Adobe.Photoshop.CS Mac1CD Adobe.Photoshop.Elements.v2.0.for.OSX 1CD Adobe Premiere v6.5 Mac OSX 1CD Adobe.After.Effects.Production.Bundle.v5.5.fo...

2006/02/04 VectorWorks.V12.MAC.OSX 3CDs, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 04/Feb/2006, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTI #2
2006/02/04 VectorWorks.V12.MAC.OSX 3CDs, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 04/Feb/2006, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' GARAGE SALES, buy, risk-free purchase, working, tested, fully functional, very cheap discounted price, low cost, quality OEM software, -------------------------------------------------------- Abvent Artlantis v4.5 Mac 1CD Abvent.PhotoCAD.v1.0.MacOSX ACD.Systems.Canvas.X.0.2.925.MacOSX Adobe.Acrobat.7.0.Pro.for.Mac.OS 1C...

Adobe.CS3.Web.Premium.Vol.MAC.OSX 1DVD, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/April/28, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULT #2
Adobe.CS3.Web.Premium.Vol.MAC.OSX 1DVD, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/April/28, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' -------------------------------------------------------- DFT Super Bundle for Apple Final Cut Pro, 4 CDs The DFT Super Bundle includes full versions of: 55mm, Digital Film Lab, Composite Suite, and zMatte. DFT Filter Bundle for Apple Final Cut Pro, 1 CD The DFT Filter Bundle includes full versions of: 55mm and ...

Adobe.CS3.Web.Premium.Vol.MAC.OSX 1DVD, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/April/28, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS',
Adobe.CS3.Web.Premium.Vol.MAC.OSX 1DVD, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/April/28, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' -------------------------------------------------------- DFT Super Bundle for Apple Final Cut Pro, 4 CDs The DFT Super Bundle includes full versions of: 55mm, Digital Film Lab, Composite Suite, and zMatte. DFT Filter Bundle for Apple Final Cut Pro, 1 CD The DFT Filter Bundle includes full versions of: 55mm and ...

2006/02/04 VectorWorks.V12.MAC.OSX 3CDs, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 04/Feb/2006, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', '
2006/02/04 VectorWorks.V12.MAC.OSX 3CDs, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 04/Feb/2006, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' GARAGE SALES, buy, risk-free purchase, working, tested, fully functional, very cheap discounted price, low cost, quality OEM software, -------------------------------------------------------- Abvent Artlantis v4.5 Mac 1CD Abvent.PhotoCAD.v1.0.MacOSX ACD.Systems.Canvas.X.0.2.925.MacOSX Adobe.Acrobat.7.0.Pro....

2006/02/04 VectorWorks.V12.MAC.OSX 3CDs, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 04/Feb/2006, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', '
2006/02/04 VectorWorks.V12.MAC.OSX 3CDs, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 04/Feb/2006, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' GARAGE SALES, buy, risk-free purchase, working, tested, fully functional, very cheap discounted price, low cost, quality OEM software, -------------------------------------------------------- Abvent Artlantis v4.5 Mac 1CD Abvent.PhotoCAD.v1.0.MacOSX ACD.Systems.Canvas.X.0.2.925.MacOSX Adobe.Acrobat.7.0.Pro....

Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, MacDrive 7.0.10, Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel, VIENNA INSTRUMENTS VIENNA SYMPHONIC LIBRARIES, Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID, Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac
Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, MacDrive 7.0.10, Apple Mac OSX Tiger 10.4.10 for Mac Intel, VIENNA INSTRUMENTS VIENNA SYMPHONIC LIBRARIES, Propellerheads.Reason.v4.0.HYBRID, Maya Unlimited 2008 for Mac, FXpansion GURU 1.1.280 for Mac, Roxio Popcorn 3 for Mac, MapleSoft Maple 11.01.303882 Pro for Mac, other Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/10/15, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' please send e-mail to : ola 'AT' mail 'DOT...

Does anyone know if anyone makes anything like this? I been searching all
Does anyone know if anyone makes anything like this? I been searching all night and its seems like such a good idea but haven't been able to find one. May have to carry both on my keycchain. If there isn't one going get:to get both and carry these but would rather have one tool but if I need to carry two I will.: I did a bunch of research and it seems these are good along with quite small and they get good review, just want it all in one....so I don't have 2 alarm size keypads on my keys if I can, plus I don't need very must storage on the jump drive would rather have...

files from old mac delete when on new osx mac
Hi, I recentlt transferred some files from my old mac os9 to my new imac osx via firewire. Everything was ok until i moved a folder containing some photos into the iphoto folder, an error appeared, which i can't remember and the folder vanished! i restarted and searched for it but it appears to have just deleted itself! can anyone help?? I've worked on macs for years and have never seen this happen. Cheers, Reg * posted via http://www.mymac.ws * please report abuse to http://xinbox.com/mymac In article <u1116937321@aknode.invalid>, reggy.rocket@virgin-dot-net.no-spam.invalid ...

Pine 4.63 on Mac OSX with .Mac email
I am having a bit of difficulty configuring PINE on my iBook to work with my .Mac IMAP email account - difficulty in part due to my general clueless and in part to the fact that this is the first time I've fired up PINE since 1992. I've gotten InBox, send and my .Mac email folders all working more or less correctly. That is, I can send and receive mail and access my other folders on the .Mac servers. HOWEVER, I don't think any of this is secure. If I put in /ssl or /tls or anything like that it doesn't work and I have to put in /NoValidate-Cert. How can I make the transactions secure? And how do I configure PINE to store my drafts and sent mail in their respective folders on .Mac? I searched the web long and hard for a "PINE and .Mac for Dummies" - figuring there had to be such a thing - but I couldn't find it... ...

Adobe.CS3.Master.Collection.MAC.OSX.UB 4DVD, Adobe.Premiere.Pro.CS3.MAC 1DVD, QuarkXPress.7.3.Passport.MAC 1CD,
Adobe.CS3.Master.Collection.MAC.OSX.UB 4DVD, Adobe.Premiere.Pro.CS3.MAC 1DVD, QuarkXPress.7.3.Passport.MAC 1CD, Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/August/17, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' please send e-mail loa210@mail.gr , loa210@mailbox.gr , -------------------------------------------------------- DFT Super Bundle for Apple Final Cut Pro, 4 CDs The DFT Super Bundle includes full versions of: 55mm, Digital Film Lab, Composite Suite,...

do-while vs. if..else if...if...else..if...else if.....
Hello all, I've been working on a program, and I've come across a problem that's inherent in using if..else for program logic, and a possible solution. I don't think the solution is new, but I'd like pros, cons, and opinions from seasoned programmers. The problem: Complex if...else structures clutter up the editor, making program flow indiscernible at a glance, and can cause needless repetition. A small pseudo-code example : // a global message string // no news is *good* news... String message = ""; int Func(void *somePtr) { if (somePtr == NULL) { m...

Adobe.CS3.Master.Collection.MAC.OSX.UB 4DVD, Adobe.Premiere.Pro.CS3.MAC 1DVD, QuarkXPress.7.3.Passport.MAC 1CD,
Adobe.CS3.Master.Collection.MAC.OSX.UB 4DVD, Adobe.Premiere.Pro.CS3.MAC 1DVD, QuarkXPress.7.3.Passport.MAC 1CD, Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/August/17, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' please send e-mail loa210@mail.gr , loa210@mailbox.gr , -------------------------------------------------------- DFT Super Bundle for Apple Final Cut Pro, 4 CDs The DFT Super Bundle includes full versions of: 55mm, Digital Film Lab, Composite Suite,...

Adobe.CS3.Master.Collection.MAC.OSX.UB 4DVD, Adobe.Premiere.Pro.CS3.MAC 1DVD, QuarkXPress.7.3.Passport.MAC 1CD,
Adobe.CS3.Master.Collection.MAC.OSX.UB 4DVD, Adobe.Premiere.Pro.CS3.MAC 1DVD, QuarkXPress.7.3.Passport.MAC 1CD, Mac Stuff CDs, A to Z, updated 2007/August/17, and Win & Mac programs, 'WinMac', 'PC/MaC', 'Win-Mac', 'Multi', 'Multi-Platform', 'MultiFormat', 'MULTIOS', 'HYBRID' please send e-mail loa210@mail.gr , loa210@mailbox.gr , -------------------------------------------------------- DFT Super Bundle for Apple Final Cut Pro, 4 CDs The DFT Super Bundle includes full versions of: 55mm, Digital Film Lab, Com...

Mac OSX
Hi, I'm looking for speech to text voice recognition software for the Mac (Panther). Does anyone have expeirience with Via Voice and Panther? Does anyone know of any other software? Thanks. Skababy, > I'm looking for speech to text voice recognition software for the Mac > (Panther). Does anyone have expeirience with Via Voice and Panther? > Does anyone know of any other software? iListen. Martin Markoe, eMicrophones, Inc. See us at: http://www.emicrophones.com Hi Should check Acapela , think they have a Mac version Chris "Martin Markoe" <martin@emicrophones...

Web resources about - Does anyone else not like OSX? - comp.sys.mac

Facebook’s Safety Check feature fails after deadly bombing in Pakistan
Less than a week after the deadly bombings in Belgium , a new terror attack took the lives of at least 70 people, wounding 340 others in a suicide ...

North Carolina Fills Last Final Four Spot After Defeating Notre Dame
Top-seeded North Carolina advanced to the Final Four Sunday evening, defeating conference rival Notre Dame 88-74 to advance to its 19th Final ...

Sad Affleck Batman v Superman video makes us feel sorry for Ben Affleck
Ben Affleck is the unwitting star of a video joke that has gone viral, but he may yet end up having the last laugh.

Experts rush to ancient Palmyra after regime ousts IS
Archaeologists were rushing to the ancient city of Palmyra on Monday to assess the damage wreaked by the Islamic State group, after it was ousted ...

The Walking Dead Recap: Season 6, Episode 15, “East”
Essentially, the episode 15 recap of season 6 of The Walking Dead exists as a bridge between the events leading up to it, and a way to place ...

Democrats and Republicans Finally Agree on Something: 40000 Sign Petition to Have Guns at GOP Convention ...
New York Magazine Democrats and Republicans Finally Agree on Something: 40000 Sign Petition to Have Guns at GOP Convention New York Magazine ...

STATE: Fight building over $15 minimum wage
Fox News Latino STATE: Fight building over $15 minimum wage Press-Enterprise Workers hold a rally in support of the Los Angeles County Board ...

Chicago Mayor to Introduce New Interim Police Superintendent
Mayor Rahm Emanuel is set to introduce a new interim superintendent of the Chicago Police Department

India to hand over DNA samples of Pathankot attackers to Pak. team
India will hand over the DNA samples of the four terrorists killed in the Pathankot airbase to Pakistan’s Joint Investigation Team, which arrived ...

Mike Adams noticed that the Tribeca Film Festival has yanked Andrew Wakefield’s antivaccine film. Hilarity ...
I knew it wouldn’t take long. I just knew it. The moment I learned that Robert De Niro had reversed himself and decided to pull Andrew Wakefield’s ...

Resources last updated: 3/28/2016 11:17:59 AM