More 10.2 Shots

[mhorn]

Re: Almost all 9 features...

Originally posted by idkew
Looks like we are quite close to OS 9 features. One things still seemingly missing->

Groups!!! I want Groups in the Sharing pane.

I know you can supposedly change groups via the terminal, but i played with the 3 or so files that contain groups and the groups never changed.....

-idkew

Please take a look at SharePoints. It has exposes Group functionality in Mac OS X as well as many other features. Enjoy.

 

[Xapplimatic]

I want location management... Locations are gone since 9 and need to return.. ya ya I know there's a 3rd party program out there that does it.. but what can I say, I'm a cheap skate who doesn't like getting nickle and dimed to death for every 3rd party software needed to bring back some particular feature of 9.. OK, so I gave up and paid the $10 or whatever it was for Window Shade X.. I had to have that right away.

Power Management.. another BIG bone of contention under system X.. It's not even close to being as good as under 9. Under nine, it had different settings for plugged in versus unplugged for lap tops.. It also had settings for decreasing processor speed (1/2 speed) and for processor cycling. All that stuff is missing from power management under X.. and it's all desperately needed..

Something else that would be nice: Ability to ignore closing of the screen on laptops.. sometimes we may want to use our iBooks and PowerBooks for playing DVD's on a friend's TV screen but want to close the laptop so there aren't two displays going which is distracting.. OR you may want to use your laptop in a coffee house to act as a big iPod carrying many times more GB of music than any MP3 player can while you study.. again you don't want the screen open for this.. it's a hazard or a distraction when you don't need the screen open to have to leave it open for the computer to continue to function. How about a setting which just turns the screen off when closed but doesn't put it to sleep! Again, this should be put into Power Management..

 

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by Xapplimatic
Something else that would be nice: Ability to ignore closing of the screen on laptops.. sometimes we may want to use our iBooks and PowerBooks for playing DVD's on a friend's TV screen but want to close the laptop so there aren't two displays going which is distracting.. OR you may want to use your laptop in a coffee house to act as a big iPod carrying many times more GB of music than any MP3 player can while you study.. again you don't want the screen open for this.. it's a hazard or a distraction when you don't need the screen open to have to leave it open for the computer to continue to function. How about a setting which just turns the screen off when closed but doesn't put it to sleep! Again, this should be put into Power Management..

Well you can sort of do this with an external mouse hooked up. Close the lid, let it go to sleep, then move the mouse and wake it up. The documentation for the TiBook specifically says it can be used in closed mode with external input devices. I'm tempted to get a USB keyboard and replace my PC desktop with my TiBook.

 

[Xapplimatic]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU


Well you can sort of do this with an external mouse hooked up. Close the lid, let it go to sleep, then move the mouse and wake it up. The documentation for the TiBook specifically says it can be used in closed mode with external input devices. I'm tempted to get a USB keyboard and replace my PC desktop with my TiBook.

Thanks.. I tried this trick, but it doesn't work on an iBook DV/SE 466. BTW: That's an excellent idea to use the TiBook for your desktop vs a PC desktop.. I use my iBook almost exclusively... it's much easier on the eyes losing the radiation emitting CRT.. no eyestrain! (not to mention what looks better sitting on a desk.. a square plastic brick or a svelt Titanium cased PowerBook w/ a glowing Apple logo! :-D

 

[Xapplimatic]

Grab smab!

Originally posted by Classic
This is fairly minor, but it would be cool if 10.2 fixed this.

Currently, with Grab, you can only capture the entire screen, a selection of the screen, or a timed capture. There is an option which is always grayed out to only capture a specific window.

Unless you need timed screenshots, Grab is a total waste of time.. There is a faster, easier way to do it without waiting for new system software enhancements and w/o paying for commercial software... An old OS 9 feature was brought back into System X in the 10.1 release. If you hold Apple+Shift+3, it will instantly snap a picture of the screen and dump the file onto the desktop. For your specific instance, just to grab a window, use Apple+Shift+4 .. The mouse pointer turns into a cross-hair and you can drag a square over just the part of the screen you want captured and it dumps the selected piece to a file on your desktop. To determine which format it saves the file as (instead of the default which I think is TIFF), Install TinkerTool in your preferences and use it to change the screen shot save format (under its General settings tab).

 

[eyelikeart]

pics...

I downloaded a bunch of the images.....

if anyone wants them let me know...

 

[Rower_CPU]

Copy dialog box

Here's mine:
I've been working on my Mac.com (Go here if you want to check it out) website lately, and every time I dump my new pages onto my iDisk, the Finder asks if I want to replace the existing file for every single file.
All I'm asking for is one button: "Replace All"

PS. eye, go ahead and email me those pics, unless you prefer to do it some other way.

 

[Classic]

Re: Grab smab!

Originally posted by Xapplimatic


For your specific instance, just to grab a window, use Apple+Shift+4 .. The mouse pointer turns into a cross-hair and you can drag a square over just the part of the screen you want captured and it dumps the selected piece to a file on your desktop.

Xapplimatic, thanks for the info, but I was already aware that you could do this. I am putting together an online portfolio and wanted to grab about 40 screen shots from the web. While your method works, I was hoping to be able to capture just the window with the click of a button rather than having to select the windo and then crop out the occasional extra row or column of pixels here and there. In the meantime, I've worked around with an empty browser frame in a photoshop file with each capture on a different layer. It just would have been quicker and easier to capture the specific window.

Thanks again.

 

[mpiontek]

Re: hope they sort out the "Open with..."

Originally posted by barkmonster
let me see, it's a picture file and mac OS X suggests you open it with BBEdit ?

that needs some work.

Erm, sounds to me like they just have Bare Bones Super Get Info installed. Didn't see these pictures, but the latest version of SGI does exactly that... with BBEdit as a default. You can add whatever apps you want to the menu. Nicely handy, really.

 

[fragiledreams]

"X"

Originally posted by mcrain
Looks better than my Windows 98. Damnit, you people have gotten me to start spelling windows wrong (windose?)

Ha! I'm slowly turning into a mac-o!

... The only problem my friend is that your windows 98 run smoothly even on a Pentium 100mhz while OSX runs nowher perfect even on dual ghz machines.... what we are talkning about is 30-50 times the power of the first pentiums... I mean COME ON!

Did you like the fact that Jobs nearly came out with a spopwatch
and said look! those windows resize nearly instantly!!!
YEAH! Thats good news for the professional out there!! Your new $3,500 machine shows your folders in miliseconds!

Come on guys.... I am fully aware of the fact that Microsoft SUCKS big, but on the other hand YOU were umpaid beta testers with OSX.0 .... This thing was not by any measures a commercial product.... It was something like OSX beta 0.7.....

So until something realy good comes (OSX.2 ????) OS9 will still rule!!!!

P.S Is Cubase, Logic, Pro Tools, DP available for X? No! because this thing still sucks! ( The GUI is also GAY like the new windows XP. For 10 year old kids or something...)

Conclusion: Never buy an operating system with the letter X on it!

 

[Pelorus]

Re: "X"

Originally posted by fragiledreams

Come on guys.... I am fully aware of the fact that Microsoft SUCKS big, but on the other hand YOU were umpaid beta testers with OSX.0 .... This thing was not by any measures a commercial product.... It was something like OSX beta 0.7.....

You're telling us to "Come on" like there was something we weren't admitting. It was Dp4 that I started on, through the Public beta and onto version 1 when it was released.

So until something realy good comes (OSX.2 ????) OS9 will still rule!!!!

OS9? Don't remember it. But then I haven't crashed in MONTHS either.

P.S Is Cubase, Logic, Pro Tools, DP available for X? No! because this thing still sucks! ( The GUI is also GAY like the new windows XP. For 10 year old kids or something...)

Gay? Are you insecure or something?
You'll notice that theres a Developer Kitchen in OSX Audio in Hamburg. Someone thinks that OSX Audio is great - oh yes - the people who know what they are talking about.

 

[fragiledreams]

Re: "X"

Only one thing....
Here are the oficial systems requirements from emagic.de for their new logic 5:

System Requirements Windows

Minimum:

Athlon/Duron or Pentium 300 MHz
Windows 98 SE/Me/2000/XP

System Requirements Mac

Minimal:

604/250 MHz processor
Mac OS 9.1* or higher
* Mac OS X support in development. (note: when????)

Question: why win XP is supported and OSX is not(yet)??
Is it because OSX is a complitely new unix based OS while XP are already based in win2000 (as some would say)... or is it because OSX IS NOT A REALY FINISHED OS WITH PLENTY OF BUGS 0R/AND LIMITATIONS????????

enough said..............

 

[Pelorus]

Re: Re: "X"

Originally posted by fragiledreams
Only one thing....
Here are the oficial systems requirements from emagic.de for their new logic 5:

Question: why win XP is supported and OSX is not(yet)??

I think you know the answer to this.

Is it because OSX is a complitely new unix based OS while XP are already based in win2000 (as some would say)... or is it because OSX IS NOT A REALY FINISHED OS WITH PLENTY OF BUGS 0R/AND LIMITATIONS????????

Migrating the support from windows 2000 to windows XP would have been minimal. XP is Windows 2000 with bug fixes and UI tweaks. Dropping Win95 type support will be somewhat of a godsend.

Migrating support for the Mac OS 9 application to Mac OS X would at least have required a complete rewrite as we're talking about a completely different driver model (direct hardware versus IOKit).

Putting it in CAPITALS doesn't make it true. Now, I'd never say that Mac OS X is perfect - anything perfect would never need a *.1 or a *.1.3 - but you are misrepresenting Mac OS X hugely here. Some of us are using lowly 233 and 400 MHz G3s and the system runs okay on them. Not amazingly fast but the stability sure makes up for the comparitive lack of speed. OS9 on a 233MHz iMac is no speed demon. Certainly comparable. My personal machine (G3 Powerbook at a speedy 400MHz) is STILL faster than me - using Mac OS X I get the feeling that my Mac is waiting for me to catch up whereas with Mac OS 9 I was always waiting for it to finish what it was doing and pay attention.

enough said..............

There's one thing that is plain, Mac OS X is offering more for musicians (via Core Audio and System MIDI) than any other operating system on the market. That's the absolute truth.

We don't need to wait for 10.2 to have a great OS. It's here with 10.1.

 

[fragiledreams]

Re: Re: Re: "X"

Originally posted by Pelorus


There's one thing that is plain, Mac OS X is offering more for musicians (via Core Audio and System MIDI) than any other operating system on the market. That's the absolute truth.

We don't need to wait for 10.2 to have a great OS. It's here with 10.1.

This may become reality..... Ok... you may be right about the capabilities of OSX..... Certainly, either we want it or not, OSX is the future and 9 is the past.
What rely annoys me is that every new MAC today comes with 10 as standard but there is still no sequenser for it... Let's say that want to buy a new power mac today. Why on earth should i:
a) Boot from 9 for music and X for everything else, and
b) Buy an OS9 version of the software while i'll have to pay extra in 6 months or so to get the X update.....

What I want to say is that there's a great uncertainty in the air...
This may be because we are in a transition period, but I don't like it anyway.... Don't get me wrong but I just want ONE OS (or at least compatible OS's) for all of my software....

peace

 

[Pelorus]

Re: Re: Re: Re: "X"

Originally posted by fragiledreams


This may become reality..... Ok... you may be right about the capabilities of OSX..... Certainly, either we want it or not, OSX is the future and 9 is the past.

There's no "may" about it. OSX is the future and - frankly- the present as well.

What rely annoys me is that every new MAC today comes with 10 as standard but there is still no sequenser for it... Let's say that want to buy a new power mac today. Why on earth should i:
a) Boot from 9 for music and X for everything else, and
b) Buy an OS9 version of the software while i'll have to pay extra in 6 months or so to get the X update.....

Talk to your vendor. there's also an option C which is to wait for 6 months and just get the X version. Certainly that's what I did. I'm never buying any more OS9/Classic software. The last I bought was Wipeout 2097 and that's only because the rat bastards lied about the OSX compatibility.

but if you need it now and the software only runs on OS9 now - at least you have the choice and as long as Classic is supported you will always have the choice. A good friend of mine is almost migrated to X and the audio stuff is the only reason he has Classic on his hard disk. As soon as that is ready then he's wiping it off.

But then he's a pro at the audio stuff. He needed Digital Performer to do his work so he bought the non-Carbon DP3.

What I want to say is that there's a great uncertainty in the air...
This may be because we are in a transition period, but I don't like it anyway.... Don't get me wrong but I just want ONE OS (or at least compatible OS's) for all of my software....

What happened to the bravado and the "come on, Os9 rullezzz" bollox you were coming out with earlier?

 

[fragiledreams]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "X"

Originally posted by Pelorus

What happened to the bravado and the "come on, Os9 rullezzz" bollox you were coming out with earlier?

I realy think we are running in a circle here....

It rules because, for the moment, it is the only MacOS that runs the software I want the computer for. And it's quick. (however unstable I must admit)

 

[Hemingray]

"Here's a big **** YOU to whoever distributed this link. ***HOLE."

LOL!! I love it! I have absolutely no pity for that person.

Hey buddy, if you should ever read this, here's a big **** YOU TOO for being so naive as to think this wouldn't get attention!

 

[3G4N]

OH, the Humanity!!

(i know i posted this under a diff thread too, but it seems
an appropriate rant here too)

When will they stop with the senseless eyecandy, bells, and whistles,
and add some old tried-and-true UI elements that we NEED!!?!

I NEED UI MEAT AND POTATOES!! NOT FLUFFY CANDY!!!

I don't want to have to pay extra $$ for shareware hacks that
mimic functionality that should be there from the beginning!!?!

I want windowshading native in OSX! I don't like having to move
my mouse from the top of the screen, to the bottom, REPEATEDLY,
just to temporarily minimize and maximizing windows!

I still can't navigate lists of files using my keyboard!!!
(like typing an "s" to get to files that begin with "s")

Would Steve and others at Apple, please dust off that BIBLE
that is/was the "**Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines**",
and friggin USE IT!?!?!

 

[Hemingray]

Re: OH, the Humanity!!

Originally posted by 3G4N
I still can't navigate lists of files using my keyboard!!!
(like typing an "s" to get to files that begin with "s")

That's odd, I just tried it in the Finder under list view and it worked just fine??