Switcher Stories Follow Up
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Alex Bangs is sympathetic to the Mac/PC file-transfer conundrum and worked around it with Xamba.
I noticed that Brian [Dear] was complaining about xfring files between Mac and PC and specifically not wanting to fiddle with Samba. I'm sympathetic to this. I ended up giving up on trying to do this through mounting the PC disk on the Mac (given various security layers), and I thought I'd try Samba, but I wasn't up for lots of config file manipulation. Instead, I was able to put the Xamba package on the Mac and get Samba up very quickly. My only caveat: While it has a nice UI for configuration, the version I used (2.6) did no error checking, so you can set it up, let 'er rip, and then have no idea why it isn't working, until you check the logs and see complaints about something in the config files.
Anyway, I haven't read the details on Jaguar, but it sounds like it has more built-in to share files easily. We'll see.
My own story: I've been a Mac user since early 1984, got one of the first Macs to arrive in Indianapolis (I'm in California now). Over time, I've given it up at work (my customers don't use them) and even at home, where my wife was the Mac user but tried Windows 2000. She got tired of that, we got an iMac, and once 10.1 came out, I was hooked on OS X. Got an iBook in part so I can get more time on it without stealing hers. Now if I can just figure out how to have an excuse to use one at work. Despite being the CTO of the company, I still have those pesky customers to deal with. ;-)
Mark Boudreau recommends Emailchemy to help move email over to OS X.
I liked your article about the Mac OS X switching that is going on. I wanted a laptop for Web development work and thought about getting a Thinkpad and installing Linux. Then I saw OS X and bought a PowerBook. I love it. I still use my Windows desktop for games and my old Linux box for fun Linux hacking (running Gentoo), but I've moved my life to the PowerBook. I still have to use Windows at work, but I've been telling everyone about how cool OS X is, and I'm slowly winning them over.
Like Brian Dear, I had years worth of Eudora mail to try and convert and I had a hell of a time doing it. I've moved over 99% of it using Emailchemy. It's 25 bucks, but it's worth it. If you know a lot of people that are having trouble making the switch, have them try a demo of this and hopefully they'll be pleased.
Thanks for all your work in the computing world. Keep up the good work and keep fighting the good fight.
An anonymous tip on how to transfer email:
Brian Dear complained about poor tech support in transferring Eudora for Windows files over to the Apple's Mail app. Here are two ways to do it.
Method 1:
Upgrade to the latest free version of Eudora for Windows (version 5.1). This ensures that the mailboxes are in Unix mbox format.
Install the latest free version of Eudora for Mac (version 5.1) on either Mac OS 9 or X; it doesn't matter.
Locate the Eudora Documents folder on both Win98 and your Mac. It can be in varying places. In this folder, locate the "Mail Folder." Transfer everything in your Win98 "Mail Folder" to your Mac "Mail Folder." (You are basically copying your mailboxes over.) If you start up Eudora on your Mac, you should now be able to see all your old messages in the same mailboxes you created originally in Windows.
Start up the Mail app. Use the Import command to transfer your new Mac Eudora mailboxes.
Method 2 (requires Microsoft Entourage):
Upgrade to the latest free version of Eudora (version 5.1). This ensures that the mailboxes are in Unix mbox format.
Locate the Eudora Documents folder in Win98. It can be in varying places. In this folder, locate the "Mail Folder." Copy only the files in your Win98 "Mail Folder" to your Mac. (It doesn't matter where you put them).
Start up Microsoft Entourage (a program in Microsoft Office v X). Select the Import command under the File menu. Choose Import from Text File. Choose Text File in MBOX format. Select any Eudora mailbox that you copied over to your Mac. Each mail file will now show up as a mail folder in Entourage.
Now that you went through all that hassle, if you still want your files in Mail app, start up the Mail app. Select the Import command. Select Entourage files. You are now importing all your Entourage mail files.
Steven Champeon, a contributor to Unix Power Tools, 3rd Edition writes that OS X is for people who love Unix and the Mac.
I saw your post to IP and didn't figure I was relevant to your survey, until I read your piece on O'Reilly Network. I figured I'd chime in now.
I've been using OS X since the beta period early last year. I'd switched from a Toshiba laptop running Windows 95 back in 1997 to an iMac, as an alternative primary desktop to my ancient Sun IPX, and then to a Pismo G3 laptop when I needed a laptop. I'd had a Mac Centris 610 since 1993, and used both Windows (mostly NT) and Solaris on the job, with Solaris as my primary platform until 1996 or so. When I got my PowerBook in mid-2000, I dual-booted Mac OS 9 and Yellow Dog Linux until the OS X beta came out, when I switched to a triple-boot system. But I found that I never booted into Linux anymore, and hardly booted into OS 9 except to fix things that wouldn't run, or install, properly under Classic. This was even more true under the 10.0 and 10.1 releases of OS X.
I just upgraded to OS 10.2 this weekend, and so far, so good. After a bit of restoration to the things I'd tweaked (such as my Apache config, various preference settings, etc.) and upgrading some primary utilities (such as DragThing, TinkerTool, and the like) it's running nicely.
A bit more detail: I started out as a TRS-80 user (1980), then went to C64s (1983?-) and Macs (1988-), using PCs only for VAX access. I used a Mac SE/30 as well as some old Pluses all during school. When I got out, I landed a job using Sun OS to do SGML document conversion (1993-94).
I bought the Macintosh Centris 610 for home use (1993). I'd worked on a Quadra to support grayscale scanning during 1993-94, and loved it, and I worked on various PCs to handle certain cross-platform stuff such as taking Group 4 TIFFs from the Sun OS systems over to a PC running Hiijak on Win 3.1 to do Deskew operations. My big complaint about the Mac during this time period was that MacTCP sucked. But the Internet apps were so much better that it was all worth it. OpenTransport fixed all that, and so the only thing holding the Mac back was the legacy toolbox.
When I "needed" a laptop at work, I got a Thinkpad running Win95 and only used it for email, Office apps, and Framemaker. (We had more Maker licenses for Windows than for Solaris at the time--this was 1995-96.) That Thinkpad was a brick. You could kill people with it. I'm glad I never had to swing it in anger.
When I moved on (or, more accurately, when the company melted down), I had to get a laptop for work as a consultant, and I bought what was cheap: a Toshiba Satellite with Win95--this was late 1996. Struggling with a Win95 p/100 w/8, then 20, then 36MB RAM wasn't worth it. But that's what I had, so that's what I used. And of course I still had the Mac at home, along with a Sun IPX.
When I joined hesketh.com with my current partner in 1997, I had the Mac at home, a couple of Sun IPXes at work, and a homemade WinNT machine to handle firewall/proxy service to our dialup (the IPXes had lousy serial ports that could only handle 33.6), so I could come back up to speed on NT. Good decision; as it turned out, as we had some ColdFusion work and Netscape server support work, and NT made a decent platform for that. But what a miserable experience overall: we had to reboot it at least once a week. By contrast, our Linux servers have been up for 231 days, nary a problem. We had one machine that was up for over 400 days between reboots before we finally retired it.
When we got offices and hired more employees, we took the NT box down and switched to Linux (RedHat 4.3) for our Internet firewall/proxy service and filesharing. We do our own Web hosting on Linux and have since late 1997. It's still RedHat, though I am becoming much more comfortable with FreeBSD and the other Linux variants and distros such as Debian. Mostly, we chose Linux because it was free, solid, and wasn't Windows NT/IIS. I've been an Apache guy since 0.65, and NCSA httpd before that, and though I've used IIS and ColdFusion (notably at IBM!) and Netscape's servers, I don't see much that we can't do with mod_perl, Tomcat/Jakarta, PHP, and the like. And I don't see much need for expensive server hardware and OSes like Solaris, though we're currently working with a client who is running Solaris, so the prior experience doesn't hurt. It all boils down to the command line in most cases, anyway.
I kept the Win95 laptop through my time onsite at IBM's PC company, mostly running HomeSite and Netscape and a Telnet/SSH app so I could check my mail on the Linux server. While onsite, I had to use Notes, which made me appreciate Microsoft more, oddly enough. Eventually, I stopped running Notes and made everyone I was working with contact me through my work email address rather than through Notes. I was mostly working on ColdFusion apps (via the Win95 laptop and a PC desktop) and on Perl CGI and Domino Go on AIX, so it really didn't matter much to me what I used for a desktop, as long as I had FTP and SSH, and the target system had Emacs. ;)
I got the PowerBook to replace the old Win95 laptop (and the IPX on my desktop, as well as to supplement the iMac I'd bought a few years earlier) in mid-2000, and have been running OS X in various configurations on that laptop since early 2001. So, now I'm an OS X user full-time and have been since early 2001, and I love it.
I was never really a Linux desktop user. My Solaris, Mac, and Win95/NT experience overlapped our use of Linux on the server side, but I never really wanted to go back to X Windows after I finally shut down the IPX.
I'm a fan of the Mac desktop and have been since 1988, if not earlier, and my experiences with Unix made it difficult to enjoy Windows of any stripe. This is true even now: I've used WinXP and Win2K, and it seems the simplest things are even more clunky (if prettier) now than ever.
I've always felt that Windows stood in the way of me doing what I wanted to do. Maybe I just did different things from one system to another, but I've done sysadmin on all manner of Unix systems, Mac systems, and Windows boxen, so I don't think it's just ignorance of which GUI I should be using at a given time that made Windows so awful. Mostly, it's a mismatch between what I think needs to be done and how the Windows OS has presented it to me. Even MacTCP was better; besides, I learned a lot about pre-CIDR netmasks from that UI. And don't get me started on how I had to rebuild our internal DNS from RCS files after someone plugged in a Win2K box on our network. (Groan.)
It's so very nice to have a solid Unix system on my desktop with the seamless Mac desktop experience to boot. I think this saying sums it up nicely:
BSD is for people who love Unix.
Linux is for people who hate Microsoft.Now, OS X is for people who love Unix and the Mac. Windows doesn't even come into it, except when I have to boot VirtualPC to run some annoying Windows-only Palm conduit or test Web sites under Windows IE or Netscape Navigator, etc. Or, like now, when I need to run a Windows-only VPN client to work with one of our clients. I haven't tried out the OS X VPN yet, but I have hope that it'll do what we need it to do. I'm whittling away.
And with the promised seamless filesharing implementation OS X 10.2 claims to provide, I can't think of any reason to run Windows at all on the desktop, except where there is no alternative, as mentioned above, or if you simply prefer the apps that only run on Windows, such as HomeSite.
So, although most of our internal desktops here are Dell Win98/XP/2K boxen, primarily because the production folks love HomeSite, we do have a few iMacs and a G4 (for the test labs and designer's desktop, respectively), our internal filesharing is done via Linux, our firewall is Linux, our hosting is on Linux, and when the economy picks up, I'm going to seriously consider going to an all-OS X filesharing setup with the XServe.
From there, we'll likely continue to run Linux for the firewall -- we used an old P75 with 16MB RAM for a ten-person shop for four years, until the mobo gave out and we had to upgrade (to an old, EOL'd P233, which is incredible overkill considering the things we need it to do). The upshot is that we won't have to upgrade the firewall for a few years yet. Linux has been great for making use of older, EOL'd boxen as servers, though I suppose BSD would have worked as well, and the only real motivation for change has been a need for more disk space, not speed or RAM, for the most part. We ran our hosting service (fifty-plus Web sites running a variety of core Apache, PHP, mod_perl, and Java apps) on a p166 with 128MB RAM for three years, with almost zero downtime.
But if I could, I'd get everyone here to switch to OS X, and leave the Windows boxen to the test lab and maybe one of our production/test folks. OS X has restored choice to the desktop.
That seems like a nice note to end on. "OS X has restored choice to the desktop." So tell us about your choice. . . .
Tim O'Reilly is the founder and CEO of O'Reilly Media, Inc., thought by many to be the best computer book publisher in the world. In addition to Foo Camps ("Friends of O'Reilly" Camps, which gave rise to the "un-conference" movement), O'Reilly Media also hosts conferences on technology topics, including the Web 2.0 Summit, the Web 2.0 Expo, the O'Reilly Open Source Convention, the Gov 2.0 Summit, and the Gov 2.0 Expo. Tim's blog, the O'Reilly Radar, "watches the alpha geeks" to determine emerging technology trends, and serves as a platform for advocacy about issues of importance to the technical community. Tim's long-term vision for his company is to change the world by spreading the knowledge of innovators. In addition to O'Reilly Media, Tim is a founder of Safari Books Online, a pioneering subscription service for accessing books online, and O'Reilly AlphaTech Ventures, an early-stage venture firm.
Read more Switching to Mac OS X columns.
Return to the Mac DevCenter.
You must be logged in to the O'Reilly Network to post a talkback.
Showing messages 1 through 49 of 49.
-
mac osx.2 to win with lin?
2003-09-08 22:46:48 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Although I'm glad that there is more and more information available for people switching from Windows to Mac, I have the misfortune of switching from Mac to Windows. This may be a disaster, or a good learning experience, depending upon whether I can run linux (with samba?) on the windows machine and get my old mac mail emails into windows. Can anyone suggest a site with good information on this process? Thanks
-
win to lin to mac
2003-01-31 20:30:23 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
i started with win 3.0 (anyone else know that dog?) and ran the whole set till 98SE. SE was one too many "promises not delivered" for this sucker. i went linux. linux made computing more fun. suddenly it was a joy to sit at a screen again. but to little of it worked, and what did was hard to get to work. i found the comments about "what a shame it was to have people leave just when linux was getting good" laughable. 4 years i was on that horse and not for free. i gave money to projects and distros. you know what i got for that money? broken supermount, and a KDE desktop that is a secondhand knock off of aqua, and still no support for my scanner or printer. neat.
and that was with the new KDE that guy was hyping. used it already. when i say i switched i mean one week ago. recently converted.
oh i still use linux. it makes a hell of a server. i just moved files to and from a moment ago. good diskspace and gateway on the wireless here. but OS X is what i was always promised in a linux desktop, but never got.
let me share a story that will help explain. when mac users say "it just works" they don't mean what windows/linux users mean. windows users mean "i plugged in the (fill in device here) and it ran awhile, then a wizard started, then i answered some questions, then i gave it the CD then rebooted and it just worked." i plugged my printer into my new ibook and waited for something to happen alla windows/linux setup wizard. nothing. i thought i broke it. it never occurred to me that it would simply be there on the print menu ready and waiting. just works. no extra BS needed.
the good news is linux does make a good server. i won't upgrade the hardware on my desktop again, and it will likely run great for years. meanwhile i have switched to mac laptops. no more desktops needed, no more wires, no more configuration by hand, and no more sitting in front of the screen trying to make it work rather than doing work on it. -
win to lin to mac
2003-11-22 17:48:41 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
I couldn't agree more. As JWZ so aptly said - "linux is free only if your time is worthless", and this certainly applies to using linux as a desktop/workstation. I still use linux as file and web servers, but I too got fed up with linux and xp and have just switched (2 weeks) to a 17" powerbook.
-
20-year WinTel User Pleased with Switch...
2002-11-18 11:36:27 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Since I am probably more representative of the "everyman" switcher (and because I can't restrain myself from spouting off whenever there is a story like this one) I wanted to relay my "switcher" story.
You can stop reading now, and shred if you've read enough of these.
I was a PC guy from the get-go. in 1983, I was a medical student starting to prepare introductory letters on the bank of PCs upstairs at the library. At the time, I couldn't get past the A:> prompt, and had to ask for help every single time.
Then I discovered "Mailmerge" and the fact that this tool would allow me to explore 100 residency programs in the time I would have taken to type 10 letters. This was a tool I needed to learn how to use. So I went out and started pricing computers. It soom became obvious that I WANTED a Macintosh, but I could barely afford a used Eagle Spirit II luggable PC.
So I went out and purchased an introductory book on DOS
(pre-"Dummies") and became a "PC-guy" for the next 20 years, give or take. As the capabilities of the PC grew, so did its involvement in my life. Soon, my hobby of photography found it's way into my PC. Then, with the advent of the Internet, my passion of political activism became the center of my PC existance. (All the while, my business involvement in PCs was growing even faster - but that's boring.)
Then my daughter was born, and so was my new hobby of videography.
My first real "Poweruser" PC with video capability was a PII-400 Dell, and I was able to use it with my scanner and my DV500 video card without trouble. But as the archetecture continued to develop and the clock speeds exceeded 1.2 GHz (I generally had required a tripling of clock speed before I would move to a new machine) I decided I wanted some of that.
By this time, I had graduated to building my own machines, using the best components I could find. I went through building three new machines (two Athlon 1.2s and a P4-1.4) utilizing 5 different motherboard configurations, and I could not find (or hack) a single machine that would run both a SCSI card and the DV500 video capture card. It was one or the other. The obvious choice was to have one machine for video, and one for graphics, but space and usage patterns made that an unacceptable solution.
About that time, OSX was rumored to be near release, so I shut down my hobbies, and waited. (And my three new PC's ultimately became two excellent enterprise servers at my office, and one excellent workstation at my desk.)
Finally, just under a year ago, I purchased a Dual 1GHz Mac running OS-x, and the rest was history.
Even in its early iteration, the OSX machine handled the SCSI card and digital video capture without a hitch. Now I am running Jaguar, PhotoShop 7 with the same Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 and the OSX version of SilverFast. I've moved from Adobe Primiere to Apple Final Cut Pro, which took a little getting used to, but I am VERY pleased now. And I am able to burn DVD's with all the bells and whistles using Apple DVD Studio Pro.
I would never have been able to afford to move from high-end PC setup with all the software to a high-end Apple with an equal or better setup if it wasn't for Apple's generous academic discount program. As a faculty member at UCLA, many of the most expensive software packages were 70% off.
So while cost was rendered a marginal concern by the discount program, the learning curve for the software is still ongoing.
A year after the switch at home, I am about where I was on the PC before the switch, skills-wise. Which means I still have a long way to go before I am satisfied. But at least the learning process hasn't completely shut down my "productivity". After being almost two years behind on my scanning and video editing, I am now only about 6 months behind.
I love the Mac. I wish OSX had been available 10 years ago - I might be running a Mac office right now. I would never have gone to Mac 9 - I would have gone to two PC's first. (learning Linux was just out of the question - my computer involvement (nuts and bolts/network support etc.) is being scaled back, because doing it right requires as much effort at keeping up as being a doctor does. No way could I do both much longer.) But OS-X is a robust "Business" operating system. It may not be quite enterprise level yet, I don't know - but I sure do think it is heading that direction.
Geez, I have so much more to say, but now I'm rambling, so I'm going to cut it off. If you got this far, you are one amazing dude. Thanks!
-
Re: Dan Barthel, Digital Photography
2002-10-27 16:56:27 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
While not making my whole living from digital photography, I work in the industry and a substantial proportion of my income is derived from digital photography. I use a Nikon D1x and Epson peripherals. I have no need for RAW files, using TIFFs. I mave nothing but praise for the way OSX works with the camera. The Epson software for my 1290 printer, while not perfect, is 95% there. The download site states explicitly that the software is a work in progress, so you can't really complain. The major fault I have found is with their scanning software, where is you save a scan directly as a JPEG (only done for quick positionals) InDesign will not recognise them. If you reopen and resave the problem is solved. Jaguar has .pkg files specifically for Epson printers which, in my experience has sorted out the teething problems I was having with 10.2.5.
-
Linux to Mac OS X
2002-10-25 23:04:05 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
I'm a long time hardware hacker and programmer, and have used (and programmed for) many systems: TRS-80 (color and B&W models), Apple II, Atari-400/800, numerous custom hardware platforms, original IBM PC (MS-DOS, most versions), PC clones from 8088 through latest Pentiums, Sun Sparc 5/10, Sun UltraSparc II, Coherent, OS9, OS/2, Linux (Slackware, Redhat, Mandrake, Debian), Windows 3.0/3.1/95/95/NT/XP -- I know I'm missing some here; these are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. I am a real computer junky with at least a dozen computers strewn about the home.
I have always loathed Apple's Mac computers. I always found them to be "dumbed down" machines with no compelling technological advantages.
After extensively looking into OS X (and buying an 800MHz, 1GB, 17" iMac w/superdrive) I have been won over. I was running Debian GNU/Linux as my primary desktop, but now the iMac has assumed that role.
Beyond just oogling the pretty applications on the iMac, I have really used it. I learned both the Carbon and Cocoa programming models and learned Objective-C. I researched the G4's CISC architecture and assembly language instruction set. I use the iMac every day for my work, which covers an extensive range of programming/development tasks. While Mac OS X has it's flaws, and the Mac hardware is a little pricy, it is by far the best desktop environment I have ever used or seen. While I still prefer Debian Linux for a server environment, Mac OS X provides a superb desktop environment.
To those who use GNU/Linux for its free aspects -- you are a bit misguided. I'm completely behind free software, but [IMHO] the Linux kernel is a dead-end road. Please support the HURD kernel, instead. The HURD is a far superior architecture and is also an idealogically better choice with regards to free software.
My two cents.
-
Moving files Win98 ---> OS X
2002-10-24 14:40:33 cozmacray [Reply | View]
Anybody got a good solution for moving files from
Win98 PC to iMac. I have tried Lavasoft PC-Mac-Net FileShare but it didn't work with cross over ethernet cable and it's a file at a time operation and files need to be moved in/out of Shared folder.
PC has floppy but iMac don't
iMac has CD but PC doesn't have CDRW
Would like to network files over.
Any solutions?
-
I didn't switch
2002-10-21 03:31:35 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
My PeeCee and Powerbook sit side by side on my desk. I never got around to using the Mac pre-OS X. It just didn't have any attraction in my IT environments. Two days spent with OS X, however, and my Mac is now an indispensible part of my wide array of tools for attacking problems in a highly complex computing environment.
We have AIX, Solaris, OS/400, NT, embedded DOS, WinCE and Linux all chugging away 24/7 doing those things that are most appropriate for them to do. We do a good bit of distributed processing using a variety of tools and languages.
I could never do without my PeeCee and NT/2000. There are just too many of them in business spaces and I need the money they pay me to program them. And the PeeCee has a wider variety of cheap software to interact with the Big Iron.
But for the many things where my PeeCee is fussy and closed, the BSD underpinnings of my Mac compensate. The Mac, in short, plays nicer with the other kids in the sandbox than does NT/2000.
If you're a serious computerist, i.e., your groceries depend on it, you understand that there is a convergence coming. OS X is a preview of that convergence, as is Linux. We'll be back around to the day where the best product wins instead of the best marketeer.
-
* Re: Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users
2002-10-11 19:28:26 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Are you quite sure about that? I did a quick google search on remapping X-window keyboards and remapped my iBook keyboard to a dvorak layout without any real trouble; switching the caps lock and ctrl keys shouldn't be any different. I can't remember exactly what steps I took as this was months ago now, but it certainly _is_ possible to remap Apple's laptop keyboards...
-
Re: Switcher stories
2002-10-07 14:04:07 cbmackay [Reply | View]
Hi Tim,
In your follow-up article on the 19th (http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2002/09/17/switcher.html) you state in part:
"Customers are doing the marketing for Apple, which is a really good sign. Most really great products catch on by word of mouth. All professional marketing can do is to help add fuel to the fire."
I don't disagree, but as a long-time Mac user, I can't help remembering that this has long been the case with Apple. Their marketing, especially in the inter-Jobs periods (Spindler, Amelio, et al), has been abysmal. Those of us in the trenches (who are, rightly or wrongly, regarded as "Apple fanatics" by those who know us socially or professionally) have been dying for something exactly like the Switch campaign for a long time.
But I wonder... did we ever really make a difference? I'd like to think we did, but I also like to think that I'm not delusional. You see more people out there in the real world than I do, though. Is it really different now?
-
PgUp/PgDn in Terminal?
2002-10-06 17:41:58 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
How do I send PgUp and PgDn characters to the
programs I'm running in Terminal???? If you're
going to inhale some of my valuable keystrokes,
at least give me some menu options so I can still
send the character codes through to the programs
which need to use them! Or, even better, allow
me to rebind it back to what it should be.
I think Apple needs some Unix power users among
their developers...or at least their beta testers.
This is pretty unacceptable.
I love OS X compared to OS 9. I am lukewarm about
OS X compared to what I'm used to on other
versions of Unix.
IMHO,
Michael
-
Re: Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users
2002-10-02 20:52:11 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Jeez. I'll say it once more:
Get yourself a japanese Keyboard. Here the CTRL key is next to the A. And yes, it's got roman alphabet letters on the keys (just ignore the small hiragana on the keys, in case you need to watch what you're typing). The rest of the layout is a slightly modified US layout, so should be happy with it.
-
Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users
2002-09-28 22:02:18 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Apple laptops are effectively unusable for unix users.
I am a long-time Unix user. That means I need to have the Ctrl key to the left of the A key. This is a genuine need, not merely a want; it is based upon ergonomics.
The Ctrl key is heavily used in unix, and it must be easily accessable. It cannot be off in the lower left corner of the keyboard where it is difficult to get at, and where it distorts the position of your left hand such that you can't easily type other keys while holding the Ctrl key down.
Apple desktop keyboards are now all USB. They are all OK. The CapsLock key can be re-mapped into a Ctrl key.
Unfortunately, even in this modern age, all Apple laptops have built-in ADB keyboards. The ADB keyboard is broken-by-design. It is, in
general, not possible to remap the CapsLock key into a Ctrl key.
There are some exceptions, but they are horrible kludges. They are
horrible kludges because the original design of the ADB keyboard was a horrible
kludge. The correct solution would be for Apple to re-design their laptop motherboards to use built-in USB keyboards. This hasn't happened yet. If you run Linux, use Debian's solution. For Mac OS X users, uControl works. There are no solutions (that I know of) for either NetBSD or OpenBSD. Please note once again that the "solutions" above are in fact kludges, because of the original bad design of the ADB keyboard.
Apple is (currently) ignoring Unix users! This is not merely speculation on my part. In an on-going email exchange I am having with an Apple employee (whom I won't name) in their marketing department, the Apple marketing person directly stated to me that Apple was catering to their historic Mac customers, and is purposely ignoring the Unix market. He also claimed that Apple would soon start paying more attention to the Unix market. I won't hold my breath. Apple has been ignoring Unix users for more than 12 years. I expect that trend to continue. (Also note that my Apple contact indicated that Macs would never ship with a 3-button mouse, even though Apple intended to port almost all X-window software and deliver it either on a CD/DVD or installed directly on each Mac's hard drive. How Unix friendly is a 1-button mouse with X programs that often require 3 buttons?)
Apple has now lost two opportunities to sell me hardware. I really wanted an Apple laptop for their superior battery life, and for the PowerPC with Altivec CPU. (The Altivec is vastly superior to the
x86 line for DSP.) Because I can't live with the broken-by-design built-in ADB keyboard in all Apple laptops, Sony and IBM sold me laptops instead. If Apple fixes this problem, they will sell me a PowerBook next year; if they don't, I'll still be running OpenBSD on
x86 hardware, and wishing I could use a Mac.
-
Linux and BSDs are about freedom
2002-09-25 08:11:38 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
While OS X is indeed a nice GUI to a *nix core, you are still getting vendor lock-in which is no better than running windows, AIX, Solaris, etc. At least with the BSD's and Linux, you have your choice of which hardware you want to run it on. I would rather work with this community and be free than get something that "works" right now and be locked-in.
-
Re: Re: Re: I switched from Linux to OS X
2002-09-25 07:29:19 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
<QUOTE>
OK. I missed it by $400... Nonetheless, a similarly configured Dell Inspiron 8200 comes in just over $1900 and well shy of $2000.
</QUOTE>
I call bullshit. Similarly configured to what? A PowerBook 5300? If you add the following to the Dell system you get a more accurate comparison, and price:
Upgrade RAM to 512 MB
Upgrade to CD-R/DVD combo drive
Upgrade HD to 40 GB
Upgrade to XP Pro
(I subtracted the floppy drive)
Add TrueMobile Wi-Fi card
---------------
TOTAL for the Dell - $3263
TOTAL for the TiBook - $3199
What you don't get with the Dell:
15" Wide Aspect Screen
DVI
Rendezvous
iTunes
iPhoto
iMovie
iChat
iCal
iSync (soon)
Sherlock3
Unix foundation
FREE developer tools
What you do get with the Dell:
MS Office XP Small Business
more configuration options
I'm speaking from experience. I bought two Dell Inspiron's for employees at my office. They are fairly nice machines, but they can't hold a candle to the TiBooks I've bought for three other users. The bottom line is: for similarly outfitted machines they cost roughly the same.
-
Re: Re: I switched from Linux to OS X
2002-09-21 19:03:52 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
OK. I missed it by $400... Nonetheless, a similarly configured Dell Inspiron 8200 comes in just over $1900 and well shy of $2000. It's got s-video (which I don't need) or gigabit ethernet (which I don't need for the internet, at home or at work). And I've no need for lashing another monitor to it. Oh, and the paint's chipping off my lovely Ti case.
That's great if you need or want some or all of the above. At the end of the day it's all about the system and if you can get work done with it, not what it's packaged. S-video, digital audio, and the other stuff has nothing to do with the elegance of OS X. Heck, I've got a VCR with S-video out and it's certainly not worth 3K!
When it came time to buy my own Mac, I opted for one of the new dual G4 867's. I opted for that over the 17" imac because I want function, not form.
So, I put my money where my mouth is, I paid a premium to run OS X at home and work. That doesn't mean I've got to like the price inflation caused by tossing in stuff I really don't care about and would be happy to purchase as a add-on if I did.
-
Switcher from W2K/Linux
2002-09-19 12:30:18 riverawynter [Reply | View]
I just got my new DP867 with 768 RAM. I have to say that I am not that much impressed with speed, but as far as the whole OS X experience am syched! I really fell fresh after using Windows (since it looked like DOS), and Linux (early 90's, I remember f&*#% up my monitor trying to set up the X server) for over a decade. It feels like putting on those brand new briefs from grandma during christmas... AAAHHHH!
I tried WXP and went back to W2K. It was not worth it... Linux might be a great server platform, but as far as the desktop, it is a HACK, nothing but a HACK!
Anyway, that's my opinion so far...
-
Turbo XML, IntelliJ, other "Java" Apps..
2002-09-19 09:03:58 cothomps [Reply | View]
Just to make a quick comment from one of the stories that involved "switching" applications:
---
"For example, what Apple could do is put together a Web application for a new OS X user to enter the Windows software that they would like to switch to Mac software .... But the process of trying to contact all the companies individually to see if they'll let me switch the Mac versions is time-consuming and unreliable enough that I doubt if many would do it. "
---
In a fortunate circumstance, many of the day to day development tools I use on a daily basis are Java-based. Specifically, Turbo XML, IntelliJ IDEA, Perforce and BEA Weblogic, do not require different licenses or versions, just enter your license key. (Be sure to follow the stipulations...)
As far as me the developer, moving from developing on the Windows/Linux combination, Mac OS X has saved me a *lot* of time and headache.
- Chad
-
let me upgrade to OSX
2002-09-19 09:03:10 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Found myself nodding as I read the story, especially the part about trading windows licenses for mac. For me, it's the only thing keeping me from working from a mac platform.
I will buy a g4 of some flavor the very day I can exchange my windows Macromedia Studio licenses for mac MM Studio licenses. I'll eat the other costs associated with hardware and the rest of my software.
If I could switch licenses during the next upgrade of Studio, I'd make the switch then. I've had it with the XP world and Linux never got to the "just works" point for me.
Apple, you listening? I really hope so.
-
Mouse focus
2002-09-18 18:18:48 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
The shame about this complaint is that there were two features in NEXTSTEP that partially addressed the issue, as well as a full blown fix for the determined. And Apple, in it's "wisdom" decided to nuke them all as part of their "kill the handiest features in NEXTSTEP" campaign.
First, the NEXTSTEP Terminal application had a preferences option called "steal keys" that would make all terminal windows become move to focus instead of click to focus. As long as the mouse was over the window, typing would go into the Terminal window.
This was especially handy for controlling command line debuggers when working on a GUI app. Sometimes you don't want to switch out of the app because it disturbs what you're trying to debug.
If Apple would bring that feature back to Terminal, it would cover many of the cases where people want move to focus, without disturbing the GUI consistency for the non-power user. (How many grandmas are going to turn on an obscure preference in an app they probably never run?) Since it seems most people who want move to focus are heavy Terminal users anyway, this would be one small bone Apple could throw their way.
Under NEXTSTEP, back when we had Display Postscript, there was even a super short hack to the windowserver's PostScript code (only a few lines) that would actually change the whole system to move to focus. Everything, not just Terminal. You didn't have to be terribly adventurous to install it, but now that we have Quartz, instead of DPS, such a hack is sadly no longer possible (at least, nowhere near as easy -- the window server on NEXTSTEP was plain text interpreted PostScript, open and ripe for hacking).
The other really nice feature that NEXTSTEP had was with special window ordering keystrokes. You could use the command (Apple) key in conjunction with the up and down arrows to cycle through the windows (bring them forward one by one) without changing which window was focused. You can't imagine how handy this can be!
Even more handy was the ability to command click a window's title bar to send it to the back, again without changing focus. So you could get a particular window to be focused, send it to the back, and keep typing while looking at what's in the other windows. Again, very handy, and a shame we lost it!
What kills me is that this stuff was all optional, and not likely to be found by the casual user. So having it there hurts nobody, but does offer handy features to the power users. Having things that the wouldn't confuse the normal user simply because they aren't going to use them. So why on earth did Apple feel it had take out the option? Do they not realize that some of us find these sorts of features to be remarkably useful?
Of course, until more people request these features, they won't be put back in. So if you like these sort of nice touches, pester Apple to put the options back in. I don't care if they're even disabled by default, as long as there's a way I can turn them on. But I would really like to have the options back!
-
heavy hitter
2002-09-18 16:30:01 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
I think i'm a " heavy hitter " (Norminated for five Pulitzer and winner of one, NPPA winner, LA Press Club winner, 25 year press photog, etc.) and I love OS X. Canon problem writting software is not OS X's problem. D60 JPEG look great and I don't have time (deadlines) to deal with RAW. If one is look for the finest prints one is not using any digital camera, inkjet printer or a cheap scanner. Let digital photography be what it is.
Larry Davis
Seattle
-
Re: I switched from Linux to OS X
2002-09-18 16:18:45 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Sorry, I couldn't work out how to reply to the original comment.... but,
Just wanted to comment on the TiBook being a $1.5K laptop sold at $3K. Personally, I don't get people who say stuff like this.
If I itemise the functionality thus:
S-Video.
Monitor Spanning.
Gigabit ethernet.
1-inch thick.
15 inch screen.
Firewire.
Titanium case.
High-end CPU.
Slot-loading CD burner.
...I get a laptop that I can _only_ buy from Apple.
The only way I can get a $1.5K value is if I say: TiBook is $3000 dollars. For $3000 dollars I can get a laptop from another dealer with twice the processor MHz. Therefore - the TiBook should be half the price. Which equals $1.5K.
Obviously most rational people can see the absurdity of the above logic. It doesn't take into account the MHz myth for one thing, but the other features are covered by a variety of laptops, but no single manufacturer has all these features... and many have the same $3K price. (No other laptop I know of has Gigabit ethernet (for any price), or slot loading CD - of course I'm waiting for someone to prove me wrong)
Just though I would add my thoughts to the mix.
-
I hope this whole thing only gets bigger
2002-09-18 11:11:14 astromac [Reply | View]
After reading this message board, I can't help but smile.
I remember when my first computer was a TRS-80 Color Computer 2. My friends had Ataris (man, those were great computers in their day) and Commodores. We typed programs in from magazines and marveled at the advantages my friends machines had all while demonstrating our own machines capabilities. Computing was constantly changing, innovative and fun.
Fast forward to the mid-90's. Most everybody was running Windows and those that weren't were running Macs. Yes, there were Unix machines out there but you only saw them at Universities or off in the corner of some server room if you were lucky. Apple was really sick and it looked like there would only be one kind of computer in the world. Computing was boring, stagnant and was Windows.
Fast forward to today. People are beginning to hear about Linux and Unix. The Mac has garnered more respect and admiration than it has in its entire history. Grumblings can now be heard from the Windows-using masses. I think we may be witnessing the beginning of a return to a previous era - back to the fun, diverse and innovative days of computing. Look at how many platforms were mentioned in this article and the messages posted - Linux, Solaris, BSD, Windows, OS X. If Windows should cede marketshare in the next few years, well watch out! I think innovation and computing in general will catch on fire again.
Here's to hoping the switching continues. Viva la resistance!
-
Reason for no Focus Follows Mouse
2002-09-18 10:18:56 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
With the menu bar on the top of the screen, it would be impossible to access your application's menus if the focus followed the mouse. As soon as the mouse left the application window, the menus would switch to the Finder or some other app.
I discovered this when playing with KDE, which allows you to select both Focus Follows Mouse and Put Menu Bars On Top of Screen. It just doesn't work at all. I've since trained myself to use Click To Focus and menus at the top of the screen, and I don't really miss the other way too much.
-
fed up with 10.2 pricing complaints
2002-09-18 10:03:35 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
in clase anyone has taken the time to notice WindowsXP is just the windows 5.1 Kernal ( win2k is 5.0) and i dont hear anyone complaing about the 100 or so dollars you pay to UPGRADE to XP so Apple tells you the actual version number big deal it seems that all anyone cares about is the 129 dollars so what ... at least apple gave people who recently bought a computer from them a ~20$ upgrade. and if you don't like paying for it wait for the next upgrade ... i bet you it'll be a free one.
-
Open Mind
2002-09-18 09:08:36 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
I switched from Windows to the Mac in 1993, but have kept limited Windows capability around since then.
While Apple was getting OS X ready, I was trying various brands of Linux, settling on Mandrake.
I like the ideals of free software and open source, but there are still too many little things in Linux that don't work right. Mac OS X gives me fewer headaches.
So I still have Windows and Linux available, but I find myself using the Mac 99% of the time. It just works better for most of the stuff I do.
-=s=-
-
It's not about the OS
2002-09-18 08:11:06 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Macs are still hundreds of dollars more expensive than a comparable Intel computer. OSX/Jaguar/(or whatever the next generation is) can trumpet its Unix-ish until the cows come home, but I can get more Intel computer for $1000 than I can get Mac for $1500. Enough said.
-
I made the switch.
2002-09-18 04:57:19 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
But last May just after OS 10.0 first came out. Went to take my mother's iMac in for repair, and left with that and a shiny new Ti 500.
I started life on a TRS-80 III with cassette in elementary school, graduated in the 5th grade to a C64, then an Amiga 1000 in High School. Got a Kaypro 286 just before heading off to college, then second year realized I still loved Amiga and upgraded to the A2000. Then once more to a A3000 a year later. A brief lull (working for peanuts/no cash) and bought a 486/66. Then a rapid series (working in computers now) P90/P166/P300/Dual P300/P400/AMD 766/AMD 900. I currently have a Dual AMD 1800+ and 1.1ghz machine.
Since the release of 10.1, the 1.1 has been nothing but a glorified gateway, and the dual a W2k game machine. I have used Linux for servers and desktops since 1.1.75 when we started an ISP using it as the base, and range from RH to Debian to SuSE. OS X is just a breath of fresh air.
I see a lot of ACs here complaining about this or that. /etc/hosts? Now checked before NetInfo by preference in 10.2, and wasn't that difficult to use in the first place. Ctrl to the left of A? That must surely be the silliest Luddite argument I've heard. Yep, it's a great car, but the shift is on the steering wheel column rather than the floor, if they changed that I'd buy in a heartbeat.
We Unix folk have a tendency to leave our favorite poison (Linux/BSD/Whatever) and want (unreasonably) for whatever we try to work exactly the same. A bit of research, and a little reading of some of the documentation that Apple has made available will really help out understanding how this Mach based BSD clothes wearing Mac OS works.
http://developer.apple.com/macosx/architecture/index.html
Find out how system services start (Hint: It's really very elegant, now if only I could get a Linux version with it). Where to put files (OS X's version of the LSB).
To close as the commercials do..
My name is Andrew Hobbs, and I'm a security and IT consultant.
-
Re: Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users
2002-09-18 04:44:29 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Rumor has it that the Japanese keyboard has CTRL in the right place. It's english, but has kanji (?) on it too. Just a thought.
-
Re: Switch? Forget it!!
2002-09-18 04:16:35 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
>It's too bad that Tim O'Reilly and others are "Switch"ing just when KDE 3.0 and Gnome 2.0 are bringing some great desktop applications into focus.
Absoutely. Not only that, but things are starting to look really shiny too ;-)
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/contrib/texstar/screenshots/redhat03.jpg
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/contrib/texstar/screenshots/redhat06.jpg
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/contrib/texstar/screenshots/redhat07.jpg
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/contrib/texstar/screenshots/redhat13.jpg
http://www.rhythmbox.org/files/shots/v0.3-shot3.png
Next year is going to be really exciting!
-
Hate Microsoft?
2002-09-18 03:25:10 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Linux is for people who hate Microsoft?
I think he forgot this generalization:
Macs are for stupid people.
Linux is for people who value freedom.
Does Apple's DVD player restrict you to one region? Does Apple's DVD player allow you to take screenshots of all DVDs? When is apple going to release iTunes for DVDs? With 320GB HDs and MPEG4 storage is not a problem.
Microsoft with their DRM is Satan, and Apple without DRM is God? Please. Apple is already selling DRM. Some people obviously haven't noticed because they're too busy drooling over Aqua.
Let's not forget this generalization:
BSD lovers hate Linux because it has bigger market share and better marketing.
-
D60 RAW Image Converter works in Classic
2002-09-18 02:13:11 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
In Response to the D60 user: I am using Canon's RAW Image Converter in Classic Mode on MacOS X. It is not necessary to reboot into OS 9.
-
Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix Users
2002-09-18 01:34:15 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
Apple laptops are effectively unusable for unix users.
I am a long-time Unix user. That means I need to have the Ctrl key to the left of the A key. This is a genuine need, not merely a want; it is based upon ergonomics.
The Ctrl key is heavily used in unix, and it must be easily accessable. It cannot be off in the lower left corner of the keyboard where it is difficult to get at, and where it distorts the position of your left hand such that you can't easily type other keys while holding the Ctrl key down.
Apple desktop keyboards are now all USB. They are all OK. The CapsLock key can be re-mapped into a Ctrl key.
Unfortunately, even in this modern age, all Apple laptops have built-in ADB keyboards. The ADB keyboard is broken-by-design. It is, in
general, not possible to remap the CapsLock key into a Ctrl key.
There are some exceptions, but they are horrible kludges. They are
horrible kludges because the original design of the ADB keyboard was a horrible
kludge. The correct solution would be for Apple to re-design their laptop motherboards to use built-in USB keyboards. This hasn't happened yet. If you run Linux, use Debian's solution. For Mac OS X users, uControl works. There are no solutions (that I know of) for either NetBSD or OpenBSD. Please
note once again that the "solutions" above are in fact kludges, because of the
original bad design of the ADB keyboard.
Apple is (currently) ignoring Unix users! This is not merely speculation on my part. In an on-going email exchange I am having with an Apple employee (whom I won't name) in their marketing department, the Apple marketing person directly stated to me that Apple was catering to their historic Mac customers, and is purposely ignoring the Unix market. He also claimed that Apple would soon start paying more attention to the Unix market. I won't hold my breath. Apple has been ignoring Unix users for more than 10 years. I expect that trend to continue. (Also note that my Apple contact indicated that Macs would never ship with a 3-button mouse, even though Apple intended to port almost all X-window software and deliver it either on a CD/DVD or installed directly on each Mac's hard drive. How Unix friendly is a 1-button mouse with X programs that often require 3 buttons?)
Apple has now lost two opportunities to sell me hardware. I really wanted an Apple laptop for their superior battery life, and for the PowerPC with Altivec CPU. (The Altivec is vastly superior to the
x86 line for DSP.) Because I can't live with the broken-by-design built-in ADB keyboard in all Apple laptops, Sony and IBM sold me laptops instead. If Apple fixes this problem, they will sell me a PowerBook next year; if they don't, I'll still be running OpenBSD on
x86 hardware, and wishing I could use a Mac.
-
I've used many systems
2002-09-17 22:30:41 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
In order of purchase:
1. Texas Instrument expandable desktop (forget name). Proprietary OS, command line.
2. Atari 800XL (same thing as a Commodore 64). Proprietary OS, command line.
3. Atari ST 4BM (like an Amiga). TOS/GEM GUI OS (very Macintosh like).
4. 468 Clone. DOS/Win31, OS/2 Warp, Linux (pre 1.0 kernel), Win95.
5. 586 P90. Win95, OS/2, Linux, NT
6. 686 P400. NT, Win2k, Linux
7. Sony P IV 1.2Ghz, WinME (yuk!), WinXP.
8. Sun Blade 100 (it was cheap and educational)
9. PowerBook G4 550Mhz. Mac OS 10.1.5, Jaguar 10.2 (in love again).
10. PowerMac G4 Dual 1Ghz & Jaguar 10.2 (off spring of love affair).
I've used many other systems. I haven't really enjoyed any of them since the Atari ST. Linux is great and allowed me to tinker to my hearts content but I found that's just about all I was doing, tinkering.
Never would have bought a Mac until Mac OS X came about. Always drooled over NeXT systems. Mac OS X allows you to tinker but it also allows you to get real work done. I am much more productive now , things really do just work.
Right now, I've got iTunes humming way, Mozilla 1.1 for this website, Mail.app, iCal.app, Blender Publisher on the second monitor, A Word outline composing my thoughts, X-Windows connection running under ssh to the Sun box which runs my JBoss app server, Corel Draw displaying some early web graphic designs, Vim with some Java code, Project Builder with a Cocoa ObjC application I am working on, OmniGraffle with a diagram of my Cocoa apps classes, Calculator with some quick calculations on the tape, and even a Windows Remote Desktop window so I can test some webpage renderings.
I haven't rebooted since the Jaguar shipdate, just place my thumb to the Apple flatscreen power indicator and it goes to sleep instantly and wakes just as quick.
I use the PowerBook for travel and hacking while on the couch.
Linux is great, open source/free software is great, but my God, Mac OS X is sweet! It works and works very very well. Sure it's not bug-free , but what is? Looking forward to 10.2.1 to fix a few things but nothing major so far!
Waiting for my Adobe In Design shipment (free rebate with the PowerMacG4). Hopefully, I will be able to generate some decent documentation with it. We'll see.
-
open rocks!
2002-09-17 21:30:32 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
The integration to the Terminal is awesome... people have mentioned "open /path/to/app" already, but:
"open ." to open the current dir as a finder window.
"cd " then drag a folder from the finder into the Terminal window, it puts the full path in for you.
drag n drop text from one Terminal window to another, or from the Terminal to the finder, or from the Terminal to Mail.app, or from just about any app to Terminal...
I won't be giving up on Linux entirely, it's still my preferred server platform, but OS X for all it's sluggishness is still the best OS for my needs.
-
Switch? Forget it!!
2002-09-17 21:15:34 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
As a 20 year Apple/Mac person (I have a 2 G3s and a G4 in the house) and a 10 year Unix person with Amiga and Windows boxes for seasoning I thought I would add my datapoint.
I'm surprised at how people declare OSX to have such great Unix capabilities. I find its command line to be very thin in what's available even with Fink installed.
It is unquestionably Unix but compared to the fabulous riches available in any Linux distribution I don't find it to be at all compelling (I use Debian so I'm particularily spoiled).
It's too bad that Tim O'Reilly and others are "Switch"ing just when KDE 3.0 and Gnome 2.0 are bringing some great desktop applications into focus. Add Gstreamer, Xine, Quake 3 and wine-based CounterStrike into the mix and Linux has a very compelling desktop.
To be blunt... these Unix people are leaving for the land of closed-source mystery meat shareware and commercial applications on proprietary expensive hardware.
The KDE and Gnome people have worked really hard to deliver great opensource desktops. Listening to people casually dismiss all their great work by saying "just not there yet" is pretty sickening. Especially when Linux is my 10 hour a day desktop environment. Oh well.
I'm really pleased that I made the full-time switch to Linux, I find OSX and Windows to be completely uncompelling nowadays. With the wide variety of powerful flexible tools, fast beautiful desktop apps and an OS thats runs on any machine on the planet, I'd be a fool to go back to those worlds.
-
ktrace
2002-09-17 19:40:09 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
To hysterion (since I can't figure out how to
post to the existing ktrace thread): the ktrace
command was shipped I think at least from the
public beta onwards, but the kernel support was
not present until Jaguar. In earlier versions,
if you ran ktrace, you got a message telling you
to recompile the kernel with ktrace enabled. It
wasn't enabled by default because even enabled,
it was broken. :-) Apple fixed it for 10.2.
Cheers,
--
Ben
-
ktrace
2002-09-18 13:27:20 hysterion [Reply | View]
That sounds about right :-) Thanks. The issue used to be tracked in this Darwin bug report. But this link is broken now, in fact I'm not sure where this bug database went. (Anyone know?)
-
I switched from Linux to OS X
2002-09-17 19:31:57 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
I've been a Mac basher for a very long time. My very early analogy was using a Mac was like using PFS:Write instead of WordStar--sooner or later all that user-friendliness was revealed to be hiding serious limitations that couldn't be overcome.
I went from TRS-DOS to CP/M to DOS to Windows (technical beta tester for 3.1, 95, NT 3.1, 3.5 and 4) to Linux. For the last couple of years I've been using various versions of Mandrake on my desktop in a very Windows-centric organization. It's been a struggle.
Then OS X came out and was followed by positive feedback from Unix/Linux users that had given it a shot. So I bought a Ti G4 and found OS X very much to my liking. I'm now on Jaguar and like it even more. I even went so far as to purchase one of the new dual G4 towers for my home.
Much as I like OS X, I have mixed emotions about the hardware. I understand Apple's a hardware shop and I understand that delivering the hardware and the OS is a substantial part of the reason it all works together so well. But I really hated parting with $3K of the company's money for what is essentially a $1.5K laptop. Even my dual 867mhz G4 was a bit of a reach when I consider what the same amount of money would have got me in an Intel/AMD box. I'll take a box full of commodity components over strong industrial design any day.
I'm a bit conflicted over OS X vs everything else but I'll stick with it. Apple's in it for the long haul and I'm comfortable being on the edge for a while. I will be truely happy if the day ever comes when I have Aqua on one of my many PC clones that are currently running various versions of Linux. If only G4 Cube's were available for more rational prices.....
-
I just added a G4 to the mix here...
2002-09-17 18:26:21 malor [Reply | View]
I haven't had that much time to tinker yet, so take this with a grain of salt. I am running Mandrake Linux 8.2, Windows, and OpenBSD here, and I manage about a hundred Debian Linux boxes at work from my Mandrake workstation. (I don't run Debian on any desktops, so I will limit my comments to the Mandrake distribution.) I have a pretty wide exposure to a lot of different things. The G4 is a new addition, but I'm not totally ignorant on the BSD underpinnings.
My impression is that the G4 is really gorgeous, but not very well-integrated into its Unix guts. Some examples:
A) The Mac filesystem (HFS) isn't case sensitive, and this causes some very strange problems from the command line. Case-inensitivity is undoubtedly better from a people perspective (I remember what a hard time I with case issues coming to Unix from DOS), but trying to remove case sensitivity from Unix is a Herculean task, and probably impossible. You don't casually change an underlying assumption that has thirty years' worth of software written on top.
B) You can't, from what I can see, launch a command-line program from the Finder, and you can't launch a Carbon/Cocoa app from the command line. That's exceptionally poor integration. Even the 1985 Amiga did this better.
C) Getting external Unix programs to work well is a lot harder than it is on Unix. Vim is an example... I run that on all my servers. It runs the same way on every variant of Linux I've used in the last two years. But the Mac version doesn't recognize pageup/pagedown keys (possibly because the Terminal is remapping them, not sure), and seems to be stuck in some older emulation mode that I haven't figured out how to switch away from. It still works, but it is painful... it reminds me VERY much of the early Linux days. This sort of thing was extremely common way back when. (note that this is possibly an issue with Fink instead of with VIM itself; I haven't tried downloading and compiling the package myself.)
D) There are no Mac drivers for my Lexmark Z51. This is a fairly common printer and isn't that old. Z52s are supported, but Z51s are not. For an operating system that claims 'it just works', this was a major failure from my perspective. It was the ONLY piece of external hardware I wanted it to drive, and it failed utterly.
And the mid-level stuff is all wonky on the Mac. Instead of rc scripts, they use this strange utility called SystemStarter. SystemStarter isn't very well-documented, and I have had very intermittent results getting things to run. There's a file called /etc/hostconfig that will supposedly let you turn on additional services. It claims that there are graphical utilities to adjust it, but I couldn't find any. I'm wondering if those tools are only included with OS X Server. I didn't have much luck getting services to run by manually adjusting it... in a couple of cases I had to create duplicate startup scripts that ran the appropriate utilities without checking that file. Definitely a hack.
SystemStarter itself looks like a good idea, and it's probably more extensible than System V runlevels; it'll make it much easier to ship new custom services and expect them to work on every OS X installation in existence. That would be really hard to do with rc scripts or System V runlevels. Improved or not, I'm suspicious it has some bugs still. I haven't yet spent enough time with it to be sure.
It feels like maybe Apple is trying to lock down Unix and make it proprietary so that they can charge extra for some bits of it. That is a strategy doomed to backfire, I believe.
I think maybe people aren't giving Linux enough credit for how far it has come. Mandrake is an incredibly polished distribution. It's not as pretty as Cocoa; it's not even in the same league. KDE, after looking at Aqua, is ugly. But while the surface is rough, the stuff *underneath* is extremely polished and well-put-together. Everything *just works* from an administrative perspective. It took about three minutes to set up my Z51 on Mandrake. (For a long time, in fact, Mandrake had better Z51 drivers than the official Windows ones provided by Lexmark! ) Ssh-agent is all set up properly ahead of time so that all you have to do is type ssh-add ONCE instead of a zillion times. (I had done this manually myself a few releases back.. it's not that hard but it's nice to see it integrated right into the default setup.) They need work on their GUI, but the polish on their utility layer is impressive.
Maybe Linux is being fixed from the bottom up instead of the top down. The G4 is gorgeous and has a great undercarriage and comfortable seats, but the controls are rudimentary and sometimes just don't work at all. As long as you want to drive on Apple-approved streets, it's easy and beautiful, but beware venturing off the well-paved roads.
Mandrake appears ill-built by comparison, but the undercarriage is equally solid, the mid-level stuff is well thought-through, and the interface is usable. Using the car analogy, it's sorta dirty and ugly when you sit down, the seats don't quite fit and you have to spend awhile adjusting them.... but once you get used to it, the 8-cylinder engine with the 4 wheel drive will let you go ANYWHERE. You DON'T spend all your time fighting it, like you always did with the older versions of Linux. The Mandrake team is doing an amazing job.
What I would really like is something with Mandrake's polish underneath and Aqua on top of that. I imagine I'll get it in another couple of years.
Right now, from a functional perspective, I'd have to give Mandrake the nod at the moment. I'm sure both will steadily improve, but if you are primarily a Unix user, and don't have a huge raft of Mac apps you need to run, OS X isn't quite there yet. It's fun to play with, and it is just amazingly lovely, but it is way behind Mandrake in terms of actual Unix functionality. Tread carefully.
-
I just added a G4 to the mix here...
2002-09-17 20:25:37 guyrand [Reply | View]
"Right now, from a functional perspective, I'd have to give Mandrake the nod at the moment. I'm sure both will steadily improve, but if you are primarily a Unix user, and don't have a huge raft of Mac apps you need to run, OS X isn't quite there yet. It's fun to play with, and it is just amazingly lovely, but it is way behind Mandrake in terms of actual Unix functionality. Tread carefully. "
This echos my feelings exactly. I'm a hard-core Linux and Unix fan, and I recently bought an iBook so I could do my hacking wherever I liked. First off, I love the hardware. I bought an extra battery for the thing, but I rarely have the need for it -- the battery life is amazing. And the glowing apple is cool, too. :-)
But "in terms of actual Unix functionality" it can be rather aggravating. After installing fink and bash it became somewhat usable, but there's *still* no Java 1.4. And I'm still used to using F-10 to get the menu in emacs (which now crashes consistency on Jaguar), I haven't had to use Esc-` for years.
Compiling PostgreSql was a real chore, requiring (a now seemingly simple) patch that I did myself. And I can't tell you how annoyed I was to learn that I can't update /etc/hosts without issuing an niload command, although I guess you can say I've since made peace.
By far the worst is the lack of OpenOffice. Sure it has a new rootless X build available, but it crashes on Jaguar.... It still requires X, which is dog slow running atop Aqua. The Mac office crashes regularly when importing rtf files, leaving me with only the ever humble Abiword to edit files.... (No Microsoft Office here, uh, ever. :-)
All that said, as soon as I get word there's support for the radeon mobility card in X, I'm switching back to Debian at the drop of a hat. The Mac is nice and all, but I need some more of that four-wheel drive power to get my work done. And I sorely miss WindowMaker. :-)
-
I just added a G4 to the mix here...
2002-09-17 19:50:59 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
B) You can't, from what I can see, launch a command-line program from the Finder, and you can't launch a Carbon/Cocoa app from the command line. That's exceptionally poor integration. Even the 1985 Amiga did this better. Do your homework better, first. One error has already been corrected. And here's how to launch shell scripts from the Finder. -
I just added a G4 to the mix here...
2002-09-17 20:39:54 malor [Reply | View]
That's a pretty lame way to do it... renaming anything you want to run from the Finder as ".command"? That's really a kludge. I can't believe you'd consider this a good solution. What if you want to call a system binary? You could probably make a symbolic link or a short script wrapper, but that's still way kludgy.
The Finder has the 'file' utility available from Unix. It should just call that utility or integrate the code... if it realizes that this is an executable file, it should open it automatically, possibly firing up Terminal to do so. Obviously I don't have access to the Finder code, but I just can't imagine that this would be difficult to do.
The 'open' command, on the other hand, is pretty slick, I appreciate the other poster mentioning it. It seems like an 'open .' alias will be really useful; cd into an app directory, poke around, and then maybe 'run' to launch it.
I stand behind my premise that Aqua and the Finder are not well-integrated with Unix. I have heard nothing but praise for NeXTStep, so I'm assuming the reason the marriage here is so bad is because of legacy Mac compatibility issues.
I think OSX would be a BIG deal for a Mac user who wants to run existing apps on a real OS, but for a Unix geek... it's just not that hot. Yet.
-
I just added a G4 to the mix here...
2002-09-17 18:45:13 hysterion [Reply | View]
> you can't launch a Carbon/Cocoa app from the
> command line. That's exceptionally poor
> integration.
open is your friend.






After switching I was curious whether my old drum scanner and old printer and input devices (tablets etc...) would still work. They all had serial connectors that did not match the MAC.
I bought USB connectors for each and plugged them in. With a two pieces of software (shareware) VuScan and USB software
I was able to get them working in less then 10 minutes!!! TEN MINUTES!!!!!
Even though my scanner was not officially supported by VuScan, another manufacturer's driver works like a charm-- in fact the scanner has never performed better. I am absolutely blown away.
Is this what you guys are taking about when you say "it just works?" WOW! My only question is "why did it take so long for someone to develop an almost perfect OS?"
Oh ya, and did I mention that I have not had to reboot for over a month now?