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

Mac OS X 10.3.4 Build 7H41

wrldwzrd89 said:
They are still browsable - Apple simply made it so that they mount like any other drive. The reason for having them mount instead of browse-only is that you can create an alias of a mount, which you can't do for a browse-only resource. I've seen quite a few 10.3.2 users on these forums requesting this very feature before 10.3.3 was released.
Click to expand...

right, but the essential reason why apple changed it is because soft-mounting (share browsing) simply didn't work correctly half the time in the first place.
it works fine in other unix-based OSes, so i don't see why apple hasn't gotten it right yet.

in any case, this is not a matter of one method over the other, once/if apple gets soft-mounting working correctly, it is only a matter of adding the preference in the finder to do one or the other. or perhaps having soft-mounting as the default, and having hard-mounting as at least a contextual option, but i think a finder preference would please the most users.
 
In any computer i use now, i have to at least have 1GB of ram. but for what i do and how much stuff i have open at once.... it is needed.

That is my PC of course... i have yet to purchase my iBook so we will see...
 
El Duderino said:
i just checked the AMD website and it says that it is "designed to run all 32-bit x86 operating systems" and ive seen "x86" term used before, so this match up with OSX?
Click to expand...


x86 are Intel/AMD type processors. i think the term came from the 186,286,386,486 processors a long time ago, but i could be wrong. Macs use a different type of processor that is made by IBM and Motorola called the PowerPC. Completely different arcitecture
 
right now it pretty much comes down to me wanting the mac software while still wanting a lot of power for around $1500. my choices come down to a 15" wide e-machine with a mobile AMD64 or going for the bottom of the line 12" powerbook, i wouldnt have a problem with the e-machine accept for the fact that its an e-machine and its almost 2 inches thick and weights 7.6 lbs...its a brick. im stuck right between a rock and a very hard place. o well. i guess it will ultimatly come down to how my dad wants to spend the money...i just wish bestbuy sold apple still than it would be no contest
 
The only thing I want fixed is iChat, and the bug where, if I use it instead of the official AIM client, it kills my DHCP lease from AirPort (rendering me Internet connectionless), and I can't reacquire it without restarting the Base Station,
 
GeeYouEye said:
The only thing I want fixed is iChat, and the bug where, if I use it instead of the official AIM client, it kills my DHCP lease from AirPort (rendering me Internet connectionless), and I can't reacquire it without restarting the Base Station,
Click to expand...

This happens to me all the time, you've found that iChat causes it?? I'll have to do some testing and see what I can come up with.
 
rdowns said:
The Unix subsystems on Mac OS X were originally written for machines that were typically never shut off. Mac OS X inherits this assumption in version 1.x, and has many system maintenance tasks that are scheduled to run between 3 am and 5 am. In addition, there are scripts designed to run weekly on weekends, and once a month in the middle of the night.

If these maintenance tasks are never run (such as on a laptop that is always shut off at night), many log files and system database will grow extremely large or fail to get backed up.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. My TiBook was running like a dog, and I thought it was cos I had installed all sorts of nonsense on it. I ran the maintenance tasks, a repair permissions and a pre-binding, and its lovely and fast. I was actually shocked at the speed up in boot up times. Still could do with a 7200rpm disk and another mem slot....
 
Calebj14 said:
x86 are Intel/AMD type processors. i think the term came from the 186,286,386,486 processors a long time ago, but i could be wrong. Macs use a different type of processor that is made by IBM and Motorola called the PowerPC. Completely different arcitecture
Click to expand...

God you lot are making me feel old... "Do you remember when Intel processors were just a number, like 486". I don't suppose you would recall what a PDP-11 is either. Oh well, I suppose I should just age gracefully. They stopped using numbers, i.e., the original Pentium wasn't called the 586 because they could not trademark a number.

Apropos to El Duderino's original question, Mac OS X can run on other processors and Apple almost certainly tests the latest versions on Intel and AMD machines and has probably ensured that the 64-bit extensions for the G5 also work on AMD's 64-bit processors. The Nexstep legacy of OS X used to run on HP PA-RISC chips, Intel i486, Sun Sparc and Motorolla 68xxx processors and there is no reason why OS X could not as well.

However they have not released OS X for Intel/AMD as a commercial product and all the Carbon apps would be tricky to port, though the Cocoa ones wouldn't be too bad. The OS is probably there but bringing all the 3rd party software along as well would take a lot of time and money.

Oh and you couldn't make a decent 1" notebook with one of those processors either.
 
davecuse said:
This happens to me all the time, you've found that iChat causes it?? I'll have to do some testing and see what I can come up with.
Click to expand...
I've tried just about everything: reinstalling the OS, reinstalling the application, deleting preferences (which, in combination with reinstalling the app, worked for a while), but now nothing seems to work.
 
To do the 'routine maintainence' open terminal and type

sudo periodic daily
sudo periodic weekly
sudo periodic monthly

with a return between each line. Wait before the last one finishes before continuing.

to update the prebinding (linking of programs) open the terminal and type

sudo update_prebinding -root / -force

You don't need those programs like macjanitor or anything ... all they do is open terminal and type these in for you.

-ko
 
Calebj14 said:
I wonder if this will finally satisfy the panther naysayers?? :rolleyes: I guess that depends if all the bugs are fixed. I love Panther... it's soooo much IMHO better than Jaguar, but it seems less stable and I get more kernal panics. Hopefully these are just bugs and they will be fixed soon!
Click to expand...

I have not gotten one kernal panic with Panther. I have 3 machines and all are super stable.
 
ssamani said:
God you lot are making me feel old... "Do you remember when Intel processors were just a number, like 486". I don't suppose you would recall what a PDP-11 is either. Oh well, I suppose I should just age gracefully. They stopped using numbers, i.e., the original Pentium wasn't called the 586 because they could not trademark a number.

Apropos to El Duderino's original question, Mac OS X can run on other processors and Apple almost certainly tests the latest versions on Intel and AMD machines and has probably ensured that the 64-bit extensions for the G5 also work on AMD's 64-bit processors. The Nexstep legacy of OS X used to run on HP PA-RISC chips, Intel i486, Sun Sparc and Motorolla 68xxx processors and there is no reason why OS X could not as well.

However they have not released OS X for Intel/AMD as a commercial product and all the Carbon apps would be tricky to port, though the Cocoa ones wouldn't be too bad. The OS is probably there but bringing all the 3rd party software along as well would take a lot of time and money.

Oh and you couldn't make a decent 1" notebook with one of those processors either.
Click to expand...


actually im only 14 and i only know about those because i read a lot and once someone gave me a 486.... LOL i still dont think that OS X can run on ANY x86 processors. Its coded for PPC. Sys 7 had an emulator cuz it was the first to run on PPC and so there were still some 68k apps.
 
Calebj14 said:
actually im only 14 and i only know about those because i read a lot and once someone gave me a 486.... LOL i still dont think that OS X can run on ANY x86 processors. Its coded for PPC. Sys 7 had an emulator cuz it was the first to run on PPC and so there were still some 68k apps.
Click to expand...


Historically, UNIX, from which Mac OS X is derived, could run on most any processor with only a very small amount of assembly code (fewer than 7000 lines, I believe) required to be converted to the target processor. Everything else was written in C.

You will find that Mac OS X follows this method very closely but adds Objective-C to the mix of high level languages used. The only thing that would be non-compliant would be Carbon applications built with resources instead of Nib files.

It's no big deal to get the operating system itself running on x86, UltraSPARC, MIPS, or any other architecture. It's only the applications that are a problem.

By the way, you missed the 8086 in your list of x86 major steps. :) I heard about it when someone named IBM was putting in something called the Displaywriter. :D Hmm, and ssamani thought that he was old.
 
Does OSX Update while sleeping?

rdowns said:
Absolutely. Found this on a quick Google search for Mac OS X maintenance:

MacJanitor is designed to be used on a periodic basis by Mac OS X users who don't leave their computer on (and awake) 24 hours a day. MacJanitor is provided as freeware as a service to laptop and energy-conscious home users.

The Unix subsystems on Mac OS X were originally written for machines that were typically never shut off. Mac OS X inherits this assumption in version 1.x, and has many system maintenance tasks that are scheduled to run between 3 am and 5 am. In addition, there are scripts designed to run weekly on weekends, and once a month in the middle of the night.
Click to expand...

Quick question, I leave my Mac on 24/7, but at night it is sleeping. Will the system maintenance run while the computer is sleeping, or wake it up and do these tasks? Either way, it would be easiest if there wasn't any real need to get a MacJanitor program.
 
eroyce said:
Quick question, I leave my Mac on 24/7, but at night it is sleeping. Will the system maintenance run while the computer is sleeping, or wake it up and do these tasks? Either way, it would be easiest if there wasn't any real need to get a MacJanitor program.
Click to expand...

No, those tasks will not run while the computer is sleeping.
 
Calebj14 said:
actually im only 14 and i only know about those because i read a lot and once someone gave me a 486.... LOL i still dont think that OS X can run on ANY x86 processors. Its coded for PPC. Sys 7 had an emulator cuz it was the first to run on PPC and so there were still some 68k apps.
Click to expand...

Correct Caleb! Mac OS X is coded for PPC processors only. A PPC processor and an x86 processor are 2 totally different processors. For example the PPC processor is a RISC processor and the x86 processor is a CISC processor. Also I would think it would need the Apple Boot ROM chip that is in all Macs.

There was talk that Apple was developing an x86 version of OS X at one point last year, but those rumors have all but disappeared. I do believe that Apple does in fact have an x86 version of Mac OS X made of some kind. It may not be an up-to-date version, but its one that works. Apple would never admit to having such a thing, nor would they ever use it.
 
eroyce said:
Quick question, I leave my Mac on 24/7, but at night it is sleeping. Will the system maintenance run while the computer is sleeping, or wake it up and do these tasks? Either way, it would be easiest if there wasn't any real need to get a MacJanitor program.
Click to expand...

They will not run if the computer is sleeping. You can run the tasks (cron jobs) from the Terminal if you wish. MacJanitor just gives you a pretty UI (well, not so pretty) to do these. Besides, it's freeware.
 
mklos said:
Correct Caleb! Mac OS X is coded for PPC processors only.
...

I do believe that Apple does in fact have an x86 version of Mac OS X made of some kind.
Click to expand...

Either that is a contradiction or the x86 version is running on PPC hardware. ;) :D
 
GeeYouEye said:
The only thing I want fixed is iChat, and the bug where, if I use it instead of the official AIM client, it kills my DHCP lease from AirPort (rendering me Internet connectionless), and I can't reacquire it without restarting the Base Station,
Click to expand...

I was having that problem too, but found that to fix it you just turn off Rendezvous Chat in the iChat preferences.
 
El Duderino said:
right now it pretty much comes down to me wanting the mac software while still wanting a lot of power for around $1500.
Click to expand...

Welcome to this world of the wanters, then. See, the problem a lot of PC people have when they switch over is that they're used to buying in a market with enormous competition and resources driving the costs of production downwards. It just doesn't work that way over here.

my choices come down to a 15" wide e-machine with a mobile AMD64 or going for the bottom of the line 12" powerbook, i wouldnt have a problem with the e-machine accept for the fact that its an e-machine and its almost 2 inches thick and weights 7.6 lbs...its a brick.
Click to expand...

A couple of things you really ought to think about:
1) It's an Athlon64. Kiss your battery life goodbye.
2) It's an eMachines. Don't expect it to last, or even hold together particularly well.
3) If you're paying the same for a manufactured laptop that you would for the parts, beware.
4) Ouch. Eight pounds?

im stuck right between a rock and a very hard place. o well. i guess it will ultimatly come down to how my dad wants to spend the money...i just wish bestbuy sold apple still than it would be no contest
Click to expand...

CompUSA sells macs, actually. I'm trying to talk the local one into hiring me as an Apple specialist on the general sales staff.
 
Calebj14 said:
i still dont think that OS X can run on ANY x86 processors. Its coded for PPC.
Click to expand...

you are correct - the osx (the macintosh gui) doesn't run on any other platform than ppc, but darwin (the os beneath) runs on x86 nicely.

apple probably has internal osx r&d version running on x86 hardware, they just don't see the point in releasing it to public. it's kind of an insurance - you know - when they are well prepared to change the cpu architechture, they most probably never have to.
 
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