Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Seeds Mac OS X 10.6.2 Build 10C527f to Developers

jkmassel said:
iTunes 9 has always been 64 bit. They'll do 64-bit for the rest in iLife '10
Click to expand...

Sorry to tell you:


/Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/MacOS/iTunes: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures
/Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/MacOS/iTunes (for architecture ppc): Mach-O executable ppc
/Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/MacOS/iTunes (for architecture i386): Mach-O executable i386
 
MorphingDragon said:
Didn't bill gates say that people wouldn't need more than 680k of Ram?
Click to expand...

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates:

* 640K ought to be enough for anybody.
o Often attributed to Gates in 1981. Gates considered the IBM PC's 640kB program memory a significant breakthrough over 8-bit systems that were typically limited to 64kB, but he has denied making this remark.

I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time … I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640K of memory is enough. There's never a citation; the quotation just floats like a rumor, repeated again and again.

* Gates (19 January 1996), "Career Opportunities in Computing—and More". Bloomberg Business News

Do you realize the pain the industry went through while the IBM PC was limited to 640K? The machine was going to be 512K at one point, and we kept pushing it up. I never said that statement — I said the opposite of that.

* "Gates talks" (20 August 2001) U.S. News & World Report
Click to expand...
 
Eric S. said:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates:
Click to expand...

For those who aren't aware, the 640K limit is really Intel's fault, if it belongs to anybody. The 8086 could only address 1MB of physical memory. IBM had to decide how much of that address space to reserve for hardware add-in boards, such as the video adapter, sound cards, disk controllers, etc. 384K was the amount decided, leaving 640K maximum for the software, of which DOS took the first chunk.

It isn't like it was really even a design mistake... This happened 3 to 4 years BEFORE Apple shipped the first Mac with only 128K of RAM.
 
Amdahl said:
For those who aren't aware, the 640K limit is really Intel's fault, if it belongs to anybody. The 8086 could only address 1MB of physical memory. IBM had to decide how much of that address space to reserve for hardware add-in boards, such as the video adapter, sound cards, disk controllers, etc. 384K was the amount decided, leaving 640K maximum for the software, of which DOS took the first chunk.

It isn't like it was really even a design mistake... This happened 3 to 4 years BEFORE Apple shipped the first Mac with only 128K of RAM.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that only prove how much more efficient System was? It had a GUI and it only had 128k to work with.
 
Eric S. said:
Well, as long as you didn't mind things like no memory protection, a "flat" filesystem, and no multitasking.
Click to expand...

True for the first things but.

DOS had multitasking? What parallel universe did you come from?

But thats not the most important thing, its what the Macintosh represented is the important thing. A new era in computing.
 
Stuipdboy1000 said:
This will have to be here by next week some time, as the new Magic Mouse manual refers to updating to 10.6.2.
Click to expand...


EHH I can not wait any longer, I want to do download 3rd party applications but I have not downloaded them yet because this update fixes some of the issues. Especially OpenCL crashes GOD thats annoying.
 
apfhex said:
What about poor Preview.app? :( It's really, really buggy when opening groups of images and a lot less stable than it was in Leopard.
Click to expand...

Yes! I've been having problems with this. I've even encountered a bug twice now where NOTHING opened with preview shows up as anything, but rather just a blank window opens. Also, multiply selected items don't always all open. Sometimes only the first one opens.

Is anyone else having these issues?

I didn't see this bug listed as one that 10.6.2 will fix. Did I just miss it?
 
Stuipdboy1000 said:
This will have to be here by next week some time, as the new Magic Mouse manual refers to updating to 10.6.2.
Click to expand...

The requirements for the Magic Mouse also say that Wireless Mouse Software Update 1.0 will enable the mouse to work on Leopard as well (Mac OS X 10.5.8 to 10.6.1).

It could be that Apple intended 10.6.2 to be out by now but since it isn't, a separate update was required to support the mouse.
 
Eric S. said:
The requirements for the Magic Mouse also say that Wireless Mouse Software Update 1.0 will enable the mouse to work on Leopard as well (Mac OS X 10.5.8 to 10.6.1).

It could be that Apple intended 10.6.2 to be out by now but since it isn't, a separate update was required to support the mouse.
Click to expand...

Actually it's 10.6.2. It has some "new" stuff in it.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back