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 X 10.3.3 (7F24) and Safari 1.2 Seeded
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
bdkennedy1 wrote:
Er, no?
The whole point about the positive/negative votes is that it's just a snapshot of people's reactions. Not a complete dissection of what/where/why/how. I'm not aware I'm under any obligation to post all my innermost thoughts to MacRumors forums.
MacBandit wrote:
I don't know what's in the release. I'm voting on the story. The story says explicitly that there's an on/off option for hyperlinks but doesn't say this for the form elements.
Bad analogy. You can use the latest version of IE (6.0) with Windows 98, or with NT 4: see this link. Yet you can't use the latest version of Safari with an Apple OS released just the other year. That sucks.
Sure, Apple don't have to put resources into maintaining backward compatibility with what was the standard platform until a few months ago. It's up to them: it's a commercial decision. The flip-side of that decision is that they're pissing a lot of their users off. I'm not refusing to upgrade out of spite or poverty: it's because 10.3 doesn't support my CD burner. Simple.
Some people on this board get hyper-sensitive any time you express a reaction to new Apple developments which isn't 100% positive. It was exactly the same with the GarageBand thread... any suggestion that an extra feature would be useful was met with "HEY! This is FREE! Quit moaning, ok?". Come on. Just because it's free doesn't mean it's perfect.
Er, no?
The whole point about the positive/negative votes is that it's just a snapshot of people's reactions. Not a complete dissection of what/where/why/how. I'm not aware I'm under any obligation to post all my innermost thoughts to MacRumors forums.
MacBandit wrote:
I don't know what's in the release. I'm voting on the story. The story says explicitly that there's an on/off option for hyperlinks but doesn't say this for the form elements.
Bad analogy. You can use the latest version of IE (6.0) with Windows 98, or with NT 4: see this link. Yet you can't use the latest version of Safari with an Apple OS released just the other year. That sucks.
Sure, Apple don't have to put resources into maintaining backward compatibility with what was the standard platform until a few months ago. It's up to them: it's a commercial decision. The flip-side of that decision is that they're pissing a lot of their users off. I'm not refusing to upgrade out of spite or poverty: it's because 10.3 doesn't support my CD burner. Simple.
Some people on this board get hyper-sensitive any time you express a reaction to new Apple developments which isn't 100% positive. It was exactly the same with the GarageBand thread... any suggestion that an extra feature would be useful was met with "HEY! This is FREE! Quit moaning, ok?". Come on. Just because it's free doesn't mean it's perfect.
64Bit for Audio...
First of all, the 3GHz proc will most likely still be called a G5 by Apple.
Second, if you read other threads about Mac OS X and 64 bits you would find out the OS doesn't need to be 64 bit, it just needs to be able to handle the larger memory space (Panther already does that) and handle programs that are 64bit.
Not all applications benefit from being recompiled as a 64bit application.
________
I would like the fastest possible os, especially with emagic and tons of virtual synths and altiverb channels...
I've sold off my 9 synths and have gone the virtual route (my g4 is dying, trying to get everything going... and for those that know, I'm freezing the heck out of the tracks to make it work)
P.S. Logic upgrade prices are available on the apple site. NEW ED version Logic 6 Pro $499 WOW
I've paid thousands as have many...
now $499 and the shipping date says 14-15 days.
-mike
First of all, the 3GHz proc will most likely still be called a G5 by Apple.
Second, if you read other threads about Mac OS X and 64 bits you would find out the OS doesn't need to be 64 bit, it just needs to be able to handle the larger memory space (Panther already does that) and handle programs that are 64bit.
Not all applications benefit from being recompiled as a 64bit application.
________
I would like the fastest possible os, especially with emagic and tons of virtual synths and altiverb channels...
I've sold off my 9 synths and have gone the virtual route (my g4 is dying, trying to get everything going... and for those that know, I'm freezing the heck out of the tracks to make it work)
P.S. Logic upgrade prices are available on the apple site. NEW ED version Logic 6 Pro $499 WOW
I've paid thousands as have many...
now $499 and the shipping date says 14-15 days.
-mike
Re: Re: 64 Bit OSX - When?
Apple does not need to re-write OS. They primarily need to make sure that the frameworks are 64-bit safe. Development of OS X started before C99 was released thus Apple can not assure that the various frameworks will handle 64-bit integers safely. Thus Apple needs to re-test every line of code. It is not as big as it seems. From now on, as Apple releases updates and new frameworks they test it now. In addition, they have a team that is checking and testing everything else.
So it will not take 5 years, I hope to see it by January 2005 in 10.4.
As far as 10.3.5, the rumors are that Apple will add more cinematic type GUI elements to the OS. Similar to the genie effect, the animated lock, the cube, Expose',etc. I understand that they were planned for the initial release but for some reason, pulled out. Maybe, debugging reasons, maybe they wanted to release them along with the rumored new iMac G5.
Originally posted by beg_ne
I wouldn't count on a 64-bit OS for atleast 5 years IMO. Apple needs to purge all non-64-bit(sub-G5) hardware from their product lineup first, and then probably a few more years of support for people who don't upgrade often.
AFAIK there really isn't any need for the whole OS to be 64-bit as most of what the OS does doesn't come close to needing it, there are currently not very many apps at all(any?) that even need it.
And I wouldn't expect a G6 for a while still either.
Apple does not need to re-write OS. They primarily need to make sure that the frameworks are 64-bit safe. Development of OS X started before C99 was released thus Apple can not assure that the various frameworks will handle 64-bit integers safely. Thus Apple needs to re-test every line of code. It is not as big as it seems. From now on, as Apple releases updates and new frameworks they test it now. In addition, they have a team that is checking and testing everything else.
So it will not take 5 years, I hope to see it by January 2005 in 10.4.
As far as 10.3.5, the rumors are that Apple will add more cinematic type GUI elements to the OS. Similar to the genie effect, the animated lock, the cube, Expose',etc. I understand that they were planned for the initial release but for some reason, pulled out. Maybe, debugging reasons, maybe they wanted to release them along with the rumored new iMac G5.
more important than safari
imho are:
changes to graphics and
changes for opengl games
hope we can see more gfx speed
imho are:
changes to graphics and
changes for opengl games
hope we can see more gfx speed
the day the charge for safari
1. must be the day they also carge for the use of the safari html module other apps can use - else you can code your own browser unter mac os x very fast.
2. must be a day 95%+ of all apple users use safari.
3. must be the day where apple is sure that most of the 95%+ users wont switch back to things like firebird 1.x (which will be out then for sure) (which might be name different then - who knows)
4. cause of reason 2 and 3 must be the day where apple has 10% market share to have a total big dominance of as well more stupid ppl who will play the stupid game with them.
apple will only release commercial apps if there are either no existing onces or the existing onces can be categorized by following criteria or criterias:
1. the app is bad, is old, needs replacement => lack of the supporter
2. the app is mostly polished under windows, and used there much, this is bad for apple
3. the company (apple) or sj got a "personal" problem with the software and they/he want/s to get rid of the dedendencies.
example for 1. = Quark; but Adobe brought an better alternative, so its not a problem apple has to care about
example for 2. = adobe premiere, so they brought us finalcut pro
example for 3. = microsoft office; apple will push into the office market at one time they feel ready to do it, i am VERY sure about that.
the digital Hub is not only a "funny life" thing but also something they want to be for soho and professional use.
things like garageband extend the digital hub system and there is no good alternatives so they can get money for it while they connect apps with each other well (iTunes, iTMS, iPod, Garageband)
just me thoughts...
1. must be the day they also carge for the use of the safari html module other apps can use - else you can code your own browser unter mac os x very fast.
2. must be a day 95%+ of all apple users use safari.
3. must be the day where apple is sure that most of the 95%+ users wont switch back to things like firebird 1.x (which will be out then for sure) (which might be name different then - who knows)
4. cause of reason 2 and 3 must be the day where apple has 10% market share to have a total big dominance of as well more stupid ppl who will play the stupid game with them.
apple will only release commercial apps if there are either no existing onces or the existing onces can be categorized by following criteria or criterias:
1. the app is bad, is old, needs replacement => lack of the supporter
2. the app is mostly polished under windows, and used there much, this is bad for apple
3. the company (apple) or sj got a "personal" problem with the software and they/he want/s to get rid of the dedendencies.
example for 1. = Quark; but Adobe brought an better alternative, so its not a problem apple has to care about
example for 2. = adobe premiere, so they brought us finalcut pro
example for 3. = microsoft office; apple will push into the office market at one time they feel ready to do it, i am VERY sure about that.
the digital Hub is not only a "funny life" thing but also something they want to be for soho and professional use.
things like garageband extend the digital hub system and there is no good alternatives so they can get money for it while they connect apps with each other well (iTunes, iTMS, iPod, Garageband)
just me thoughts...
about 64bit
i think we will see partial support in 10.4 in q1/q2 2005.
i think we will see full support in 10.5 in q2/q3 2006.
(just my estimates)
partial support can either be tested but not official marketed frameworks that can be used for 64bit stuff, or can be the kernel itself that is recoded for 64bit in areas where it makes sense.
i think they wont make a big announcement about partial 64bit os integration because of following two reasons:
1. they like the big bang
2. they want to keep the customers think not about 64bit at all - they got a 64bit MAC so its 64bit - what the heck? my os isnt 64bit? my machine isnt 64bit? so my impression is just wrong?
they cant do that.
so they will go for a big bang, and they will only go for it if there are also mayor performance increases (either really by the usage of 64bit, or by the usage of ibm's compiler for critical components at least, or by a new cpu revision, as long as it is marketed as ONE thing, it isnt important where the speedbumps come from)
greetings :-]
i think we will see partial support in 10.4 in q1/q2 2005.
i think we will see full support in 10.5 in q2/q3 2006.
(just my estimates)
partial support can either be tested but not official marketed frameworks that can be used for 64bit stuff, or can be the kernel itself that is recoded for 64bit in areas where it makes sense.
i think they wont make a big announcement about partial 64bit os integration because of following two reasons:
1. they like the big bang
2. they want to keep the customers think not about 64bit at all - they got a 64bit MAC so its 64bit - what the heck? my os isnt 64bit? my machine isnt 64bit? so my impression is just wrong?
they cant do that.
so they will go for a big bang, and they will only go for it if there are also mayor performance increases (either really by the usage of 64bit, or by the usage of ibm's compiler for critical components at least, or by a new cpu revision, as long as it is marketed as ONE thing, it isnt important where the speedbumps come from)
greetings :-]
Originally posted by greenstork
Yay, finally a good rumor.
It's been a long drought
Safari improvements look cool. I am especially excited about opening links from other apps in current window, in new tab. I have a big monitor and every window in its place. When a new safari window opens, it messes with my mojo. Tabs are great, good stuff!
You can do this currently as stated several times whithin this thread.
What you need to do is...............
a) have tabbed browsing turned on
b) go to Safari prefs and general option chose open links in the current window.
You know, I'll bet Enderle and the others like him will try to count this as a Wintel sale!Originally posted by Fuchal
Heh, I don't care if he did that... just one more sale for Apple on a dual g5.
When you buy a CD that has both Windows and Mac versions on it, then it usually gets counted as a Windows s/w sale (read this a couple of places last year, can't remember where). This is only one reason why I don't pay attention to market share numbers.
debug menu in safari
pascalpp and others
I may have missed a previous post for this but You don't need to install safari inhancer to get the debug menu
1- gointo terminal
2- TYPE: defaults write com.apple.Safari IncludeDebugMenu 1
Now, if anyone knows a way to cycle through all my tabs, without the mouse, I'd appreciate that. Kind of an Alt-Tab for just Safari tabs?
cheers
m
pascalpp and others
I may have missed a previous post for this but You don't need to install safari inhancer to get the debug menu
1- gointo terminal
2- TYPE: defaults write com.apple.Safari IncludeDebugMenu 1
Now, if anyone knows a way to cycle through all my tabs, without the mouse, I'd appreciate that. Kind of an Alt-Tab for just Safari tabs?
cheers
m
Re: debug menu in safari
command+shift+arrows for tabs, command+` to go between windows
Originally posted by mattroberts
Now, if anyone knows a way to cycle through all my tabs, without the mouse, I'd appreciate that. Kind of an Alt-Tab for just Safari tabs?
cheers
m
command+shift+arrows for tabs, command+` to go between windows
Re: Re: Safari
This does not emulate IE. It sets the user-agent string to IE, which means the browser is identifying itself as IE (or whichever browser is selected). This will garner different results if the issue is caused by the site only allowing certain browsers access (usually due to security concerns). However, if it is due to the site using proprietary calls or code which the browser used does not understand, the user is still stranded.
This does not emulate IE. It sets the user-agent string to IE, which means the browser is identifying itself as IE (or whichever browser is selected). This will garner different results if the issue is caused by the site only allowing certain browsers access (usually due to security concerns). However, if it is due to the site using proprietary calls or code which the browser used does not understand, the user is still stranded.
I totally agree with you. But keep in mind that the Korean news sites are only optimised for IE 6.0
Surely it is no wonder why the sites are very slow on Mac and other minor OS based browsers as well.
Anyhow, good to see there is a person who actually knows how to read Korean. (Or maybe you are a Korean. Who knows?
)
Re: 64 Bit OSX - When?
Why do you want a true 64 bit OS? What do you think it will do you good.
It will not double the speed or anything of all programs if that's what you think. Most programs will run exactly the same whether they are calculating with 32 bit integers or with 64 bit integers.
64 bit computing is good for some tasks, and Apple has rebuilt the modules of OS X in Panther where it makes a difference. I'm sure there are still some left, but I'm also sure they have changed the most important ones (that will allow larger memory space for processes for example).
And 3rd party programs are free to do as much 64 bit computing as they want, so you're really not missing out on anything.
Why do you want a true 64 bit OS? What do you think it will do you good.
It will not double the speed or anything of all programs if that's what you think. Most programs will run exactly the same whether they are calculating with 32 bit integers or with 64 bit integers.
64 bit computing is good for some tasks, and Apple has rebuilt the modules of OS X in Panther where it makes a difference. I'm sure there are still some left, but I'm also sure they have changed the most important ones (that will allow larger memory space for processes for example).
And 3rd party programs are free to do as much 64 bit computing as they want, so you're really not missing out on anything.
Originally posted by yoonsik99
I totally agree with you. But keep in mind that the Korean news sites are only optimised for IE 6.0
Surely it is no wonder why the sites are very slow on Mac and other minor OS based browsers as well.
Anyhow, good to see there is a person who actually knows how to read Korean. (Or maybe you are a Korean. Who knows?
Perhaps.
Yeah, I'm Korean. But my parents read the Korean news more than me. So for their sake, Safari needs a good speed boost.
Fixes are always good, but I'm forced to agree with the complaint that Safari isn't being updated for 10.2 (or heck, even earlier).
There are lots of browsers out there, and the Mac compatible ones but Safari run under 10.2. On one hand, this means that there are certainly plenty of viable alternatives (and I might add Camino runs extremely well under Jaguar), so it's not like 10.2 users are left out in the cold when it comes to the web. Heck, Apple didn't even make a browser until last year, so you could even pretend they never did.
On the other hand, it's sort of embarassing when the only browser not being updated for 10.2 is the one made by Apple. Furthermore, the more indespensible Safari becomes to the Mac user (due to Hyatt's hard work making it cool), the more it hurts to be stuck at an earlier version just because you're not ready for an OS upgrade yet.
And yes, there are logical reasons for it--Apple is using a bunch of features that are new in Panther to make Safari run smoother, but really, shouldn't they be making it a light, transparent tool that runs almost anywhere, rather than going the MS route (even more so now that MS isn't updating the non-MSN version of IE except with major OS upgrades, either?).
All that said, really I just hope Hyatt figures a way to work around not being able to italicize text in fonts that don't have an explicit italic version. That and some fixes for the kludge that is network browsing under 10.3.
There are lots of browsers out there, and the Mac compatible ones but Safari run under 10.2. On one hand, this means that there are certainly plenty of viable alternatives (and I might add Camino runs extremely well under Jaguar), so it's not like 10.2 users are left out in the cold when it comes to the web. Heck, Apple didn't even make a browser until last year, so you could even pretend they never did.
On the other hand, it's sort of embarassing when the only browser not being updated for 10.2 is the one made by Apple. Furthermore, the more indespensible Safari becomes to the Mac user (due to Hyatt's hard work making it cool), the more it hurts to be stuck at an earlier version just because you're not ready for an OS upgrade yet.
And yes, there are logical reasons for it--Apple is using a bunch of features that are new in Panther to make Safari run smoother, but really, shouldn't they be making it a light, transparent tool that runs almost anywhere, rather than going the MS route (even more so now that MS isn't updating the non-MSN version of IE except with major OS upgrades, either?).
All that said, really I just hope Hyatt figures a way to work around not being able to italicize text in fonts that don't have an explicit italic version. That and some fixes for the kludge that is network browsing under 10.3.