kasei said:
i had this problem. I found it was due to my .mac sync settings being set to automatic. If you put your settings to something other than automatic your RSS feeds should start working again.
Hope it helps.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac OS 10.4.7 Update Soon?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i had this problem. I found it was due to my .mac sync settings being set to automatic. If you put your settings to something other than automatic your RSS feeds should start working again.
Hope it helps.
JW Pepper said:
Speak for yourself. I'm sitting looking at my iPhoto (6 tho I thought the functionality appeared in 5) sidebar which has several folders with various books/slideshows/folders tucked inside each one.
alienyouth211 said:
Mail looks fine.
What I really would like is a vertical display system. Something that along the lines of MS Outlook where you have 3 columns and your able to view a full email on one column. All these new widescreen monitors but Mail keeps using the age old 1 column 2 row look.
That would be a much welcome revision in my book. I'd even pay for it. Which will probably happen in Leopard.
daneoni said:
Same reason the haven't ditched it in the finder I suppose. All new versions are taking on the new look. But lots of apps don't get updated totally until the os does or until iLife does (as you mentioned).
I've hated the brushed metal since day 1.
WMV/AVI/ETC PLUGIN FOR SAFARI AND QT
I cannot emphasize that enough. Release codecs for QT to play that crap, so I don't have to open VLC or some other third party app after trying to download some video clip. Or trying to watch clips on Yahoo Movies, which doesn't detect QT on Intel Macs, or at least mine. Any wmv/avi/etc clip that is integrated into a page and not a downloadable file, you're screwed. Safaris integrated media playing functions blow hardcore. All that stuff has to run under emulation with Safari, clogging up system resources. Can't we get a native wmv/avi/etc codec for intel macs, and have it included in QT/Safari?
I like Safari as a browser, I don't want to have to use IE or Firefox. I haven't had any problems with the pages loading etc., but that's probably due to 2 gigs of ram, Intel Mini or not.
So far, to get any integrated file that's one of those files to play, you have to either boot up safari and plugins under rosetta, or boot up XP with Boot Camp. And the audio bugs in Boot Camp with headphones not cutting off speakers is quite annoying, particularly in a workplace if I want to watch CNN, etc on my break.
Gah!
/rant over
Just frustrating considering the ease of use that accompanies most things on a Mac, only to get a jumble of third party apps etc to run those files on new Macs. If I wanted a plethora of third party apps, I'd use XP all the time
I know AVI isn't the best of formats because it combines the a/v into one stream etc, but there are still many of those files around. The WMV one is what i'd like more for QT. Just something straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak, and not having to go third party. If new switchers buy a mac and boot up safari, only to realize half the files on news sites, yahoo, etc. can't be viewed....needless to say if I was a switcher I'd be a bit confuzzled.
And don't bother with the "well XP doesn't play AVI/Divx natively". XP is a crap OS. OSX should be above that.
I cannot emphasize that enough. Release codecs for QT to play that crap, so I don't have to open VLC or some other third party app after trying to download some video clip. Or trying to watch clips on Yahoo Movies, which doesn't detect QT on Intel Macs, or at least mine. Any wmv/avi/etc clip that is integrated into a page and not a downloadable file, you're screwed. Safaris integrated media playing functions blow hardcore. All that stuff has to run under emulation with Safari, clogging up system resources. Can't we get a native wmv/avi/etc codec for intel macs, and have it included in QT/Safari?
I like Safari as a browser, I don't want to have to use IE or Firefox. I haven't had any problems with the pages loading etc., but that's probably due to 2 gigs of ram, Intel Mini or not.
So far, to get any integrated file that's one of those files to play, you have to either boot up safari and plugins under rosetta, or boot up XP with Boot Camp. And the audio bugs in Boot Camp with headphones not cutting off speakers is quite annoying, particularly in a workplace if I want to watch CNN, etc on my break.
Gah!
/rant over
Just frustrating considering the ease of use that accompanies most things on a Mac, only to get a jumble of third party apps etc to run those files on new Macs. If I wanted a plethora of third party apps, I'd use XP all the time
I know AVI isn't the best of formats because it combines the a/v into one stream etc, but there are still many of those files around. The WMV one is what i'd like more for QT. Just something straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak, and not having to go third party. If new switchers buy a mac and boot up safari, only to realize half the files on news sites, yahoo, etc. can't be viewed....needless to say if I was a switcher I'd be a bit confuzzled.
And don't bother with the "well XP doesn't play AVI/Divx natively". XP is a crap OS. OSX should be above that.
kinless said:No OS X series has ever ended on the same number
10.0.4
10.1.5
10.2.8
10.3.9
10.4.7?
Either stop here or press on to 10.4.10.
10.4.10 is silly. that's like 10.4.1 almost. it'll be 10.4.9.1 if it goes past 10.4.9
Lot of applications go over x.10 (SAPGUI 6.40 release 4), I know of a few errors in the java implimentation of the intel macs, hopefully they fix that.
Quicktime 7.1.1 is available now so 10.4.7 should follow it out VERY soon. They usually send out Quicktime first!
longofest said:
Tell me about it. Somehow, the NFS automounter broke in 10.4.3 and hasn't been fixed as of yet. As a result, all my users are staying at 10.3.9 or (in a few cases) 10.4.2.
I've had more issues with Tiger than any other version of OS X, except perhaps for the public beta. It's almost as if someone at Apple is intent on cramming more and more into the OS and testing it less and less.
thogs_cave said:
It wouldnt really make sense to do that because in a way they are updating it with 10.5. What would that be called? Back updating? Its a contradiction?!
DSL Steve said:
Not true. From Wikipedia:
The most common software versioning scheme is a scheme in which different major releases of the software each receive a unique numerical identifier. This is typically expressed as three numbers, separated by periods, such as version 2.4.13. One very commonly followed structure for these numbers is:
major.minor[.revision[.build]]
To fully understand what's going on, check this out, paying particular attention to the section titled: "The Perforce Reference Life-Cycle Model". I'm not suggesting that Apple uses their product, or that their model is only, or best, model. But it does provide a clear description of what the version numbers represent.
I'm looking forward to the new video drivers, apparently they're a substantial improvement. Hopefully International Prefs has been fixed too, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.
Logical, but I think it's really free for all, as Apple has not made a choice yet. I see no problem with 10.4.11, and I even think this is the only "correct" way of doing it.DSL Steve said:
Apple should just change 10.4.7 to 10.4.10 to end this silly debate.
They've got a long time before 10.5.x is ready, so they could be at 10.4.23 by the time they have a replacement.
I just hope that 10.4.7 cleans up and speeds up things.
They've got a long time before 10.5.x is ready, so they could be at 10.4.23 by the time they have a replacement.
I just hope that 10.4.7 cleans up and speeds up things.
I agree it would be nice to not have this debate every time there is a point upgrade to Mac OS X.bousozoku said:
So just to say this once more. The version number isn't a decimal number. Who has heard of a decimal number with two periods? Those are three integers separated by periods.
If Apple can fix the following, I would not be offended:
1. iPhoto. Whenever I open iPhoto, everything on my PB comes to a standstill. I know it uses a lot of RAM but c'mon, does every single app thats open have to beachball for 2 min until iPhoto is done loading my measly 1,700 photos? I'm sick. Sick and tired.
2. Safari. There has been enough said about it, support for media is very poor, even with the stupid Flip4Mac plug in.
3. iTunes (4.9) intergration with address book, iPhoto, etc. Takes forever to update on iPod.
1. iPhoto. Whenever I open iPhoto, everything on my PB comes to a standstill. I know it uses a lot of RAM but c'mon, does every single app thats open have to beachball for 2 min until iPhoto is done loading my measly 1,700 photos? I'm sick. Sick and tired.
2. Safari. There has been enough said about it, support for media is very poor, even with the stupid Flip4Mac plug in.
3. iTunes (4.9) intergration with address book, iPhoto, etc. Takes forever to update on iPod.
sam10685 said:
You are interpeting the "dot" as a decimal point. It is not the case because there are TWO dots in the version number. In this case we Americans should read the dot as a if it were a comma. Those in Europe, I asume would prefer to see the "dot" as they use a comma as a decimal place. We could use dashes but then someone, I'm sure would complian that 10-4-7 is a negative number
If I were to invent a system. I'd use a combination of roman numerals, Arabic numberal, and mixed case Latin alphabitic leters and then change the system eery couple years. So we'd have
Mac OS Xiv2a
Mac OS XB3iii
Max OS XIb3
and so on. This would insure that sites like this would have importent things to talk about for years to come
For those that missed the joke. Do you remember how UNIX version were named? Not unlike the above.