Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

mAxximo · Sep 9, 2005, 10:48 AM

How is it that you stay employed if you are not efficient at your job? Or are you self-employed?

Don Pickett · Sep 9, 2005, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by mAxximo

Fixed that for you....

Nope. There will be dual-core G5s shipping within six months, and there's a good chance all of the Intel Powermacs will be dual core. Not so distant.

mAxximo · Sep 9, 2005, 10:51 AM

I was not talking about CPUs, Don....

Don Pickett · Sep 9, 2005, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by mAxximo

I was not talking about CPUs, Don....

Horsepoo! said: We're heading into an era of multi-core CPUs. . .

You said: Screw the Jetsons and all those science-fiction scenarios where my computer. . .

If you weren't replying to that, what were you replying to?

SMacTech · Sep 9, 2005, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by mAxximo

That doesn't answer the question.

Does your boss understand you are using OS X and accepts your own stated inefficiency using your Mac?

mAxximo · Sep 9, 2005, 11:15 AM

I won't feed your lame “It's not OS X, it's you” BS.

SMacTech · Sep 9, 2005, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by mAxximo

I won't feed your lame “It's not OS X, it's you” BS.

Did I say that ?

It is an honest question. You have claimed to be a professional at your work using a Mac. I certainly wouldn't keep someone employed in my business, if they were inefficient. You must be doing something right, something must be working, otherwise any smart employer would fire you.

goMac · Sep 9, 2005, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

The big problem with W-Y is that simply cannot grasp the future that computers are heading into. We're heading into an era of multi-core CPUs that will eventually truly be the digital hub and the center of our digital life. Computers will be streaming a huge library of music to speakers, huge library of video to TVs, and will allow family members to access their computer accounts via terminal screens that will be in constant wireless communication with the multi-core computer...

...and, somehow, cooperative multitasking, spatiality, and the old UI made 1984 are still important to him.

Sadly for any of those tasks you mention Mac OS 9 would fall over and die.

mAxximo · Sep 9, 2005, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by SMacTech

Did I say that ?

It is an honest question. You have claimed to be a professional at your work using a Mac. I certainly wouldn't keep someone employed in my business, if they were inefficient. You must be doing something right, something must be working, otherwise any smart employer would fire you.

As of late Panther/Early Tiger I wouldn't say things don't work. Do they work as expected being that OS X is selling under the “Mac” name? No. Could things in the UI department get noticeably better? Most certainly. Do I manage to get my job done in spite of all the shortcomings and annoyances? Of course. Am I a happy Apple customer? Well....you figure that out by yourself!

SMacTech · Sep 9, 2005, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by mAxximo

As of late Panther/Early Tiger I wouldn't say things don't work. Do they work as expected being that OS X is selling under the “Mac” name? No. Could things in the UI department get noticeably better? Most certainly. Do I manage to get my job done in spite of all the shortcomings and annoyances? Of course. Am I a happy Apple customer? Well....you figure that out by yourself!

Anything can always be better, I agree with you there. The fact that you are not a happy Apple customer does not mean that OS X doesn't work, which is often the point you try to drive home.

Too often that point and how you make it, negates the fact that you ARE productive with OS X and it DOES work for you as a professional. And it will get better.

For a couple of things, Tiger has been worse for me. Launch Services is one which sometimes doesn't know that v1.1 of an application is OLDer than v1.2 and it runs the older version from the Trash.

Apple file-sharing another. It is totally borked with my User account and AFP in 10.4.2. No number of reinstalling has fixed it. However, it works fine with SMB and all my Win XP/2000 servers.

Sure the GUI in OS 9 is snappier, but all the snappiness in the world didn't save my code that I was working on when OS 9 crashed and the time to restart, reload my apps. And OS 9 could certainly be hand-held tightly to make it stable.

smithz4096 · Sep 9, 2005, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

When I say "I miss the UI in OS 9" and people ask "uh are u 4 reel like teh multitasking suxxored!!1" then they missed what I said *completely*.

smithz4096 · Sep 9, 2005, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I could, but there's no point comparing an OS which ran on a 4.77 MHz CPU with an OS which runs on CPU several orders of magnitude faster. There's no point.

Incorrect. Clock speed was 7,16 mhz at first, increasing after that on various CPUs/Boards.
4,77 Mhz was common on Intel 8086/8088 CPUs in the beginning of MS-DOS and clones.

smithz4096 · Sep 9, 2005, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

We're heading into an era of multi-core CPUs that will eventually truly be the digital hub and the center of our digital life. Computers will be streaming a huge library of music to speakers, huge library of video to TVs, and will allow family members to access their computer accounts via terminal screens that will be in constant wireless communication with the multi-core computer....

Don Pickett · Sep 9, 2005, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by smithz4096

I already know people who are doing this. Their machine is their DVR, their DVD player, their stereo, etc.

smithz4096 · Sep 9, 2005, 02:56 PM

Originally Posted by Don Pickett

I already know people who are doing this. Their machine is their DVR, their DVD player, their stereo, etc.

You may think i

because i don't believe we have streaming media all over the planet and in our lives. Wrong. I

because of that stereotype rubbish text, sounds like copied from a board of directors powerpoint-presentation.

That reality distortion field is really scary.

Horsepoo!!! · Sep 9, 2005, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by smithz4096

You may think i

because i don't believe we'll have streaming media all over the planet in the future. Wrong. I

because of that stereotype rubbish text, sounds like copied from a board of directors powerpoint-presentation.

That reality distortion field is really scary.

You're right, I did copy and paste it from a board of directors powerpoint-presentation.

smithz4096 · Sep 9, 2005, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

You're right, I did copy and paste it from a board of directors powerpoint-presentation.

Well done, keep on trucking.

mAxximo · Sep 9, 2005, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

You're right, I did copy and paste it from a board of directors powerpoint-presentation.

After reading your thoughts on replacing the spatial desktop metaphor with type-based file browsing I hope that presentation was not anywhere near Cupertino!

goMac · Sep 9, 2005, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by mAxximo

Do they work as expected being that OS X is selling under the “Mac” name?

Guess what. The Mac name has changed. Cry yourself a river, build a bridge, and get over it.

Or go find a platform that does what you want.

OreoCookie · Sep 9, 2005, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by smithz4096

Incorrect. Clock speed was 7,16 mhz at first, increasing after that on various CPUs/Boards.
4,77 Mhz was common on Intel 8086/8088 CPUs in the beginning of MS-DOS and clones.

You're right about the number … but still, comparing an OS on even that cpu to one which os two, three orders of magnitude faster is nonsense.

mAxximo · Sep 9, 2005, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

Guess what. The Mac name has changed. Cry yourself a river, build a bridge, and get over it.

Or go find a platform that does what you want.

Oh, the little people taking personal offense...how cute....

Tyre MacAdmin · Sep 9, 2005, 09:45 PM

I miss OS 9 like I miss a 300mhz G3.

goMac · Sep 9, 2005, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by mAxximo

Oh, the little people taking personal offense...how cute....

What else are you looking for? Really.

We like how the Mac has a user system. We like what OS X brings. If you don't like a multi user system, switch to a system that is not multi user. Simple as that. Why do you switch to an operating system that is multi user and then whine about how it is multi user? It makes no sense.

The Mac is now Mac OS X, no matter what you think of Mac OS X. Plain and simple as that.

Angus_D · Sep 10, 2005, 05:11 AM

Originally Posted by Tyler McAdams

I miss OS 9 like I miss a 300mhz G3.

pliny · Sep 10, 2005, 11:31 AM

X is so superior to 9...don't miss it at all.

mAxximo · Sep 10, 2005, 11:15 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

We like how the Mac has a user system. We like what OS X brings. If you don't like a multi user system, switch to a system that is not multi user. Simple as that. Why do you switch to an operating system that is multi user and then whine about how it is multi user? It makes no sense.

Oh, the old “if you don't like it switch to another OS”. Tells it all.

analogika · Sep 11, 2005, 08:04 AM

it sure beats the "if they don't cater to me, I'm switching to another OS" routine.

How's Winders treatin' ya, mAxx?

Wait - you mean you DIDN'T switch all those times over the last few years when you promised to?

Oh, the humanity! - how is anybody supposed to take you seriously anymore?

Oh wait...

Chuckit · Sep 11, 2005, 12:14 PM

When did mAxximo say he was switching? I don't remember that.

goMac · Sep 11, 2005, 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by mAxximo

Oh, the old “if you don't like it switch to another OS”. Tells it all.

You're wasting our time if you continue to whine about OS X because it has it's primary features. Multiple users is a primary feature of OS X. As I already pointed out, there is software to assist you in creating a multi-user workflow. Otherwise, if you don't like a multi user operating system, don't use a multi user operating system.

Horsepoo!!! · Sep 11, 2005, 02:12 PM

mAxximo, complaining incessantly about OS X on the MacNN forums will do **** all. So please, spare us and point your browser to http://www.apple.com for your complaints. Thanks, bye.

OreoCookie · Sep 11, 2005, 02:30 PM

I think this discussion is over.