|
|
||
|
||
Quicklinks: · Power Macs · 'Books · Early Macs · Week's Best Deals · Best Buys · OS Downloads |
Home > Editorial > LEM Mailbag
|
Responding to Extra Tidbit about CF Cards, Peter da Silva writes:
I would guess you know all this, but the exchange in the 6/4 mailbag seems to leave things a little confused:
All IDE drives have a controller on them, that's what "Integrated Drive Electronics" means. An "IDE controller card" is actually little more than a bus extender, bringing a version of the old IBM-PC "AT" bus out to the drive. Meanwhile, PCMCIA is also a bus extender for the IBM-PC bus, and CF is a subset of PCMCIA.
As for IE and AOL, I have no idea how Microsoft's lawyers manage to keep a straight face in the courtroom, the way they keep turning concessions into advantages. I have this image of them saying "Yes sir, we agree to compensate the US for unfairly expanding our monopoly by donating more Windows machines to schools," then stalking out to the restroom and bursting into maniacal laughter. :)
After reading my thoughts on upgrade packages for older Macs in Thinking Too Different: Why Mac Users Are Slow to Adopt OS X, Bill Doty writes:
I have again enjoyed your writing.
I would strongly support your ideas on upgrade packages.
If you could come up with an upgrade for Beige G3 machines that allowed dual booting between OS X and OS 9 and recognized the internal floppy drive and an internal Zip drive, you would sell a lot of them. The Macs that are older non-beige G3 machines probably should be replaced rather than upgraded.
The school Macintoshes should all be made to dual boot. Money for schools is very tight. Schools have a lot of old software and networks of older machines. Also, school boards always want to buy something local. How about more local dealers or a regional sales rep. Some people won't consider Macintosh because there is nobody to fix it when it breaks. (They simply do not believe how reliable Macs are.)
When OS X first came out, it was "not ready for prime time." It was not until 10.2 that Apple got something as reliable as 9.1.
Five years from now, Apple is going to need a partner for its computer business. They are going to be an entertainment company that also makes computers.
The last time they tried licensing, they bungled it and burned some good people (Motorola). If Apple wants to grow market share, it is time for OS X-Wintel. Work over the OS so it will run with any kind of processor in the box. Sell Gateway or Dell a license, include AppleWorks 6, Safari, Mail, iTunes, iLife, or whatever other iThing they come up with next. Restrict licensees from selling to schools and from selling laptops with OS X. The OS X market share would grow, and Apple could get a good marketer for its software.
Daniel Dreibelbis <writes:
I figured that if anyone could take a shot at answering this, you just might.
Over in comp.sys.mac.advocacy on usenet, there's been quite a heated discussion going on about Core Computing's repackaged Mac clones that are based around an actual G4 motherboard in a different case (a couple of guys there have ordered and received their Core systems as kits). Naturally, for legal reasons, Core isn't shipping these computers with an operating system. But that doesn't matter, according to one particular pro-Apple guy, because according to the license agreement that comes with OS X, the consumer can't legally install an Apple OS on a computer unless it's on an Apple-branded machine either.
I'm asking this because I am running Jaguar on a Umax J700 via XPostFacto - which, as you can guess, from the days when Apple officially licensed third-party clone machines, and has no Apple branding on it. By installing OS X on my Umax, does this therefore make me a criminal or open me to possible liabilities actions from Apple for doing so? Or would this be considered the equivalent of tearing off the tag on a mattress or pillow? Somehow I don't relish the thought of getting a C&D letter from Steve Jobs' lawyers (but I would possibly frame it if I did :) )
I hope that this isn't considered a frivolous question, as quite a few people out there run OS X on their clone machines, and it might be a question to consider to anyone considering buying a kit or complete system from Core if there is a legal basis that would prevent them from installing OS X or any Mac OS.
Thanks for any help in answering this question.
On the subject of Mac users migrating to OS X, Leland Jordon writes:
No, not a rant, or disagreement, or anything like that - just another point of view.
I've casually used Macs since maybe 1985 or so. My parents got a grape 266 iMac as their first (and so far only) computer, and not too long after that I got myself one of the then-brand-new original blueberry iBooks. Back in March of this year, I bought a friend's barely-used 800 MHz iBook, and I haven't looked back yet.
I also thought that Jaguar seemed slow, until I realized that I still couldn't move my cursor fast enough to get ahead of the interface.
Did it take a while for me to get used to things? Of course. Do the changes, upon reflection, make sense? Well, yeah, I really believe they do. The Dock makes a lot of sense, browsing files with Finder windows seems cleaner than cluttering the desktop with folder windows (as much as I love the nearly-perfect "desktop" metaphor, that was a clumsy side effect), and OS X's ability to run ten or fifteen applications at once is just amazing.
I do miss the ability to add & get rid of small system files & extensions without fear of doing unknown damage, but then again, I haven't had to even attempt anything of the sort in the short time I've been on OS X.
I dig OS X. Thanks to the column, I may pull out the blueberry to revisit 9 for kicks, but it's not going to regain its place as my default OS anytime soon.
After reading my comments in Oh Please, Nicholas Sorensen writes:
Just FYI: To turn off bouncing icons when you launch an application simply uncheck the "Animate Opening Applications" in the Dock preference panel. The 'high' bouncing icons you see when an Application requires your attention cannot be turned off, as far as I know. (The system requires some way of getting your attention I guess - it certainly does that.)
I have been using Mac OS X since the public beta and could not go back, even though I used the classic Mac OS for years. I do not think OS X is necessarily more opaque than OS 9. It is different, and that is the key. Anyone who is a long time Mac OS 9 user is going to have to learn how to do a few things differently. (How is this different than a new user to either the Mac OS 9 or OS X, or Windows for that matter? It isn't: You have to figure out the quirks of each as you go along. The Chooser, for example, is not more or less intuitive than Print Center, and vice versa. It is simply what you're used to. I think those who categorically insist that OS 9 in so much more intuitive than OS X have conveniently forgotten this.)
The fact is, most of us are embarrassingly resistant to change and need a compelling reason to do so. For myself, the software available in OS X - Mail, Safari, Keynote, iLife, X11 - is motivation enough. And the rock-solid stability is so welcome and long-overdue.
What frustrates many "Hard-Niners" is that OS X doesn't behave exactly like OS 9, and they resent the effort required to learn the OS X way of doing things.
That's fine; they should use OS 9 as long as they wish. (No one is "forcing" them to switch. Their older OS 9 machines still happily work - and will much longer than a comparable Windows PC, lest we should all forget.) Of course, Apple is trying hard to make a compelling and attractive case to use OS X. They'd like us to buy a new computer to run the new OS and new software (what computer company wouldn't?). They won't (and shouldn't) expend precious resources on a moribund OS.
My advice to all the "Hard-Niners" is switch to OS X when you buy a new Mac. In the meantime, I wish more of them would remember that OS 9 is the result of over a decade of polishing and refinement. Mac OS X is still a toddler! (Even so, this toddler rocks.)
Responding to BSD and OS 9 better than OS X, Peter da Silva writes:
Funny, I was thinking that they do almost too good a job of hiding the Unix junk. I wonder if the writer of that message would care to elaborate on that: Everything I see on my OS X box is either "in my home directory" or it's the same kind of thing that I see on my OS 9 box - Applications, the System folder (or System Folder), and disk drives. I have to go out of my way to see "var" or "tmp" or "usr" or any of the "Unix junk."
It would be nice if they put Home in the dock by default. I heartily recommend that step for anyone. It's more useful than a hotlink to Apple's website. :P That and an Applications menu...
One thing, though, that Apple really needs to do, and that is clean up the whole automounter mess. The old Unix automount (or amd, Auto Mount Daemon) let you set up almost seamless access to remote systems. "/nfs/system/directory/file" just works, and even Microsoft has copied this when they added "Network Neighborhood" so you didn't have to manually map all your network drives any more.
I can't get Apple's automounter to do this, and setting up connections using Netinfo is almost as bad as configuring MacTCP was.
Oh, and the trick to getting in to NFS shares is that Apple, for some obscure reason, has set their NFS client up to connect from a non-reserved port. While this is politically correct (since connecting from a reserved port doesn't guarantee that you're an approved Administrator and hasn't for over a decade), a lot of servers still assume that NFS connections are from reserved ports and Apple should just do that by default. It doesn't hurt anything to do it, and avoids a lot of frustration.
In the meantime, in Netinfo or fstab, use the "-P" option. Or to tweak the other end so you can connect from Finder, see this web page:
http://sial.org/howto/osx/automount/
Note that they say that the reason that Finder mounts aren't privileged is because the Finder doesn't run as root. That's irrelevant - no matter what the Finder runs as, the component that performs the mount has to run as root to handle the local part of setting up the mount. There's no reason that Apple couldn't have it connect from a reserved port as well, or, for that matter, remove the reserved port restriction for the Finder. I've done similar kernel hacks, and Apple's got people a lot smarter than me.
And in any case, if they'd stuck to the traditional Unix automount or amd this would never have come up.
Tom Ruppel writes:
I'm only an occasional user OS X, on other people's machines as my own (9500, 7600, 7100) are too venerable to run it at a useable pace. But the lack of Chooser has caught me out on the few occasions I've dipped in.
Jaguar has an Apple menu, so why don't Apple create a Menu item called something like "Looking for the Chooser"? When clicked, this would launch a dialog explaining where the functions that used to be controlled from the Chooser can be found in the new operating system (along with links to any relevant Control Panels). The dialog would also have a checkbox along the lines of "Remove from Apple menu and don't show me this again" to avoid annoying people who know what they're doing in OS X.
There's no need to rewrite Jaguar/Panther, all that's required is a little thought about how to help Classic Mac OS users get going as quickly as possible.
Love the site and your high editorial standards (I'm also an editor - of books in the UK).
Oh Please: OS X and Choosing a Printer
Matt Olson writes:
Dr. Ballo wrote:
I am using a Beige G3/233 with 768 MB of RAM, a Radeon 7000 Mac Edition video card, and Sonnet Tempo Trio with two hard drives (a 10 gig drive with a 7.5 gig partition for OS 10.2.6 and a 20 gig drive with my original OS 9.2.2 install and programs on it). I have connected my LaserWriter Select 360 to the computer through my ethernet hub with a Farallon Serial-to-Ethernet adaptor.
When I went to install the printer, I couldn't figure it out, so I tried the Help function. I could find all kinds of references to the "Print Center" there, but I could not find [the Print Center] anywhere in the menu bar or in System Preferences. Help never offered to open the Print Center for me.
I finally just opened AppleWorks and tried to print something, thus invoking Print Center with the print dialog. As you can imagine, this tried my patience. No, the Chooser wasn't intuitive, but if you went to Help in OS 9 (maybe in the others, too, I'm not sure) and asked about setting up a printer, it would offer to open the Chooser for you.
It never occurred to me that there wasn't just a "printer" setting in the System Preferences section somewhere. Now, of course, I'm willing to admit that I was not looking in the right place. But Macs are supposed to be easy for everyone, even former OS 9 users.
BTW, I switched because of iTunes 4. I wanted access to the Store on my computer (so Apple's strategy on not updating certain software as a "carrot" does work). I also liked Safari when I used it on my daughter's G4. My home computer is used pretty much to surf the Internet with a DSL connection and to write the occasional letter. Because of that, the slowness issue so many have mentioned regarding OS X and the Beige G3 hasn't bothered me.
Besides, my office computer is an SE/30 networked to a IIsi and a LaserWriter 600/PS. The G3, even in OS X, seems very quick in comparison. I have changed the energy saver settings so my computer never sleeps, since the one time it did go to sleep it woke up with a screen full of hash and I was forced to reboot. Other than that it is perfectly stable.
Now if I could just speed up the start-up (it takes forever to count 768 megs of RAM). Annoying, but livable. Oh, and it would be nice to have the screen show up before the computer is over half-way through the start up process. Weird, but livable.
Anyway, in defense of your wife's experience, I didn't have much luck with setting up a printer in OS X either. It took a lot more time to do than it should have, in my opinion. Thanks again for a great website; have a good day.
Matt Olson, M. Div., Calvin Theological Seminary (attended Calvin for a few semesters as well, to make up for all those classes I didn't take when I was earning my undergraduate degree at another college)
A reader writes:
I found your article, "Thinking Too Different: Why Mac Users Are Slow to Adopt OS X", both interesting and, in a way, a bit amusing.
I switched to the Mac just late last year, so my perspective is that of a long-time Windows user who was introduced to the Mac by way of Jaguar. Recently I snagged an old indigo iBook off of Mac Of All Trades for some Linux experimentation and got my first look at System 9.
I guess it just goes to show how deeply computing habits can become ingrained, because to my eyes, OS 9.2 was not simple or particularly friendly or at all comfortable. It didn't make sense to me why I should have to look in two different places for what programs I could quick-launch vs. what was actually running. Used to the Windows taskbar and even more pleased with the Dock, this seemed an odd split of functions that should be tied together.
The Control Strip took up too much space, but hiding it also hid several things I needed, like the strength of my AirPort signal, so I was forced to leave it open. I couldn't figure out just by poking around on my own how to get rid of the parts I didn't want to see, either.
And the Control Panels! There were so many, and at least three of them looked at first glance like they might have something to do with what I needed to configure. That long list was more confusing than even the Windows Control Panel, and much more so than OS X's clearly categorized and simply laid out System Preferences. What's more, on that purely subjective level of personal preference, I found Platinum to be so blocky and clunky-looking that it actively annoyed me each time I looked at it.
Your example of the Save dialog was particularly apt to describe the differences prior computing habits can make. In my eyes, the System 9 save dialog just doesn't present enough information. Yes, I can see what folder I'm in, but where is that folder in relation to the rest of the filesystem? It's just too easy to misplace things that way. I like being able to twitch that scroll bar right or left in OS X's extended Save dialog and see exactly where I'm putting that puppy, entire path and all, and switch to different directories without having to navigate one level at a time.
My point here isn't that System 9 sucks or that OS X is inherently better. It's just that, well, it's funny what a person gets used to, isn't it? It would be as much time and trouble for me to learn to be productive in System 9 as it would be for some System 9 users to migrate to OS X. I now have some inkling of how they feel.
Apple has taken a bit of a gamble here, changing things around on their most loyal users. I wasn't completely aware of how much of a gamble that was until I read your article! But from Apple's view, I guess the old-paradigm Mac OS was no longer truly expanding the user base.
Only time will tell if the new technologies and cross-platform compatiblity that OS X brings to the Mac will pay off for Apple by winning over enough consumer and enterprise customers to make it worth angering their established users.
Other stuff: I've been reading your site for quite a while now on a daily basis, and I'd like to support it. Given that I'm making a policy of staying away from PayPal and your subscription option isn't available, I'd like to donate you a copy of Panther, when it's released. How would we go about this? I'd like to just buy and ship you one, if you're okay with that.
Also, if/when they do ever make the 15" Aluminum PowerBook, I'm strongly considering trading in my TiBook 667 DVI. I believe that you've said that this is the model you were considering updating to if you had the finances. Perhaps, should all those rumors bear fruit, you might be interested in mine? I'm really not looking forward to the time and trouble of going the online-classifieds route.
I know it'll be awhile before either of those things become do-able, but hey, it never hurts to ask. :)
Last but not least, I'd like to be anonymous if you publish this letter, as I always try not to have my name and email associated anywhere public if I can help it.
Thanks for a great site!
-a dedicated reader

Our advertising is handled by BackBeat Media. For detailed price quotes and advertising information, please contactat BackBeat Media (646-546-5194). This number is for advertising only.
Entire Low End Mac website copyright
©1997-2008 by Cobweb
Publishing, Inc., unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved.
Advice presented in good faith, but what works for one may not work
for all. Please report errors to
.
LINKS: We allow and encourage
links to any public page as long as the linked page does not appear
within a frame that prevents bookmarking it.
Access our RSS news feed at http://lowendmac.com/feed.xml.
Email may be published at our discretion; email addresses
will not be published without permission, and we will encrypt them
in hopes of avoiding spammers. If you prefer your
message not be published, mark it "not for publication." Letters
may be edited for length, context, and to match house style.
PRIVACY: We don't collect
personal information unless you explicitly provide it. For more
details, see our Terms of Use.
Low End Mac is an independent
publication and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise
approved by Apple Inc. Apple, the Apple logo, Macintosh,
iBook, iMac, eMac, iPod, iPhone, PowerBook, MacBook, MagSafe, Mac
Pro, Apple TV, and AirPort are registered trademarks of
Apple Inc. Additional company and product names may
be trademarks or registered trademarks and are hereby acknowledged.