[P]

Originally posted by Simon:
How does Tiger's dyn DNS work? Does Apple run their own DNS server that lets Tiger clients register their current DNS (with some kind of daemon running in Tiger) or did they license some service like dyndns.org?

Think .Mac feature.

[Devin Lane]

Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
It's the new resolution independent GUI...


...haha, I wish. They're just high res graphics Apple gives out for print publishers to use in their magazines. Normal screenshots would look pixelated on paper

Actually, there IS a new resolution independent GUI, but it doesn't make windows and the menu-bar any bigger (or does it???)

[P]

Originally posted by Jasoco:
I really wish it would be released sooner than "Within a year". All these cool features. I really really want it now!

Anyone know how it's gonna run on an iBook G3? (600MHz with no Quartz Extreme.)

Know? Of course not. But I can guess, based on what I've heard so far, that it will run fine provided you have at least 512 MB of RAM in it.

[Jasoco]

I should be fine then. I got 640 thanks to the generous previous owner. I got quite a deal with this one. Can't wait to get Tiger on this baby.. and my iMac too.

The one and only feature making it all worth it for me is SpotLight. I use Command-F about half a dozen times a day to find files. I am a huge pack-rat. I collect files. It'll be great to have SpotLight. I played with the buggy version on the Preview, and it's a start, but the final will kick booty.

[storer]

Ok, may sound noob-ish, but what is Jabber support.

[yaro]

Does the 2-D Quartz acceleration work?

[Superchicken]

All I want is FTP...

Is that to much to ask?

[Jasoco]

I gave up on FTP a long time ago. I just use Transmit 2. It's easier and I'm used to it.

Also, I don't know what the hell Jabber is either.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by Devin Lane:
Actually, there IS a new resolution independent GUI, but it doesn't make windows and the menu-bar any bigger (or does it???)

Yeah, it does. You just have to log out and back in (it's per app, at launch). I've had like a 2" high menubar, for a few secs before it crashed.

[Earth Mk. II]

Originally posted by storer:
Ok, may sound noob-ish, but what is Jabber support.

Jabber is an instant messaging protocol - mostly used inside private networks (though public networks exist as well) because it's an open standard and completely free for any person to implement, use, and adapt to suit their needs.

One notable feature of jabber is the ability to use gateways to allow interoperability between otherwise foreign IM protocols and networks. This accomplished entirely on the server-side and requires no configuration of the client. For example, you can run a jabber server with an AIM gateway to allow jabber clients to talk to people on the AIM network. This opens up the potential for Tiger's iChat to communicate with many protocols, provided it's through a properly configured jabber server with gateways to those protocols. OS X Server (Tiger) will include a jabber server - though, I'm uncertain if it will allow cross protocol communication by default.

Jabber.org for more info.

[OwlBoy]

Originally posted by Earth Mk. II:
Jabber is an instant messaging protocol - mostly used inside private networks (though public networks exist as well) because it's an open standard and completely free for any person to implement, use, and adapt to suit their needs.

One notable feature of jabber is the ability to use gateways to allow interoperability between otherwise foreign IM protocols and networks. This accomplished entirely on the server-side and requires no configuration of the client. For example, you can run a jabber server with an AIM gateway to allow jabber clients to talk to people on the AIM network. This opens up the potential for Tiger's iChat to communicate with many protocols, provided it's through a properly configured jabber server with gateways to those protocols. OS X Server (Tiger) will include a jabber server - though, I'm uncertain if it will allow cross protocol communication by default.

Jabber.org for more info.

Wow, I forgot about the gateways, I bet something will come of that after Tiger is out!

kick ass.

-Owl

[Earth Mk. II]

Yup, much to the dismay of OS X's multi-protocol IM client developers everywhere.

[DeathMan]

A .Mac multiclient jabber server would be a great addition to the .Mac suite. Especially if it were seamless (as I would hope it to be). Using iChat to iChat is a whole different world of IM compared to any other system out there. Pasting screenshots directly into a chat, dragging files through, video, audio, everything.

iChat has soooo much potential, but you always end up getting someone on trillian, who can't get your files, or can't be added to a group chat or something dumb. It would be great if a Jabber service through .Mac could help with this.

One other .Mac question. What would be the end user benefits of dynamic DNS? Run your apache server on dialup? wouldn't that sort of compete with .Mac?

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by DeathMan:
Run your apache server on dialup? wouldn't that sort of compete with .Mac?

Come on! .Mac isn't that bad.

[Jasoco]

Here's one thing I want fixed in Tiger.

When an application updates an image file that is in a older who happens to be open with "Show Icon Previews" turned on, the Finder ALWAYS crashes when I switch to it. That and if I turn on Previews for images on the desktop, it crashes if you try to drag a file. Finder does NOT like Previews on icons. They need to fix this badly.

Also, why can't I use iSync to sync two computers without god damned .Mac? I want to sync my Bookmarks among other things across my iMac and iBook. Is that too much to ask? And I want to use iSync to do it. But for now it's a useless application. .Mac sucks. Any suggestions for apps I can use for syncing stuff from computer to computer? (Files especially.)

[Macfreak7]

Any new dashboards gadgets? Any updates to "automator"?

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Jasoco:
Also, why can't I use iSync to sync two computers without god damned .Mac? I want to sync my Bookmarks among other things across my iMac and iBook. Is that too much to ask? And I want to use iSync to do it. But for now it's a useless application. .Mac sucks.

No, it doesn't.

It lets you sync bookmarks, calendars, and Address Book (and with Tiger, a bunch of other stuff) between several computers automatically.

That's great.

-s*

[SMacTech]

Originally posted by Jasoco:
Here's one thing I want fixed in Tiger.
Also, why can't I use iSync to sync two computers without god damned .Mac? I want to sync my Bookmarks among other things across my iMac and iBook. Is that too much to ask? And I want to use iSync to do it. But for now it's a useless application. .Mac sucks. Any suggestions for apps I can use for syncing stuff from computer to computer? (Files especially.)

Sorry to hear it is useless for you, as I love it. It syncs my bookmarks and address book to all 4 macs that I use. While I don't rely on my .mac mail address, I use the iPhoto sharing and iBlog everyday. For me, the $75 [amazon discounted] I spend a year on it is well worth it.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by SMacTech:
Sorry to hear it is useless for you, as I love it. It syncs my bookmarks and address book to all 4 macs that I use. While I don't rely on my .mac mail address, I use the iPhoto sharing and iBlog everyday. For me, the $75 [amazon discounted] I spend a year on it is well worth it.

It's odd.

.Mac sucks, yet he finds the functionality so desirable...Make sense?

Not really.

[Jeffois]

Boy, I might be wrong about this..., but as I recall, isn't there a way to FTP from Terminal?

I wouldn't know, I use Fetch, and I'm happy...


On another note, any idea if the new Tiger syncing will allow syncing with PocketPC PDA's? I'm looking at phone/PDA combos, and the Missing Sync doesn't support the one PocketPC model I'm considering.

Thanks all!

[entrox]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
.Mac sucks, yet he finds the functionality so desirable...Make sense?

Yes, it does. Why do I need to pay a yearly fee to synchronise my laptop with my desktop? I can understand paying for the other services like hosting or the e-mail address, but come on: paying for rsync-like functionality, which doesn't even require any internet access seems like a rip-off to me. It would be a lot more reasonable if they only charged for remote synchronising over the net.

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by Jeffois:
Boy, I might be wrong about this..., but as I recall, isn't there a way to FTP from Terminal?

There sure is!

just use the ftp command.

e.g.

Code:
ftp [email protected]

[[APi]TheMan]

Originally posted by SMacTech:
Sorry to hear it is useless for you, as I love it. It syncs my bookmarks and address book to all 4 macs that I use. While I don't rely on my .mac mail address, I use the iPhoto sharing and iBlog everyday. For me, the $75 [amazon discounted] I spend a year on it is well worth it.

Amazon discount? Man, I think I've paid $107 the last two years, and $50 before that... What's this about a discount?! I should get a discount for being a loyal customer (even though I filled up my storage space with pictures about a year ago), all I do is use the e-mail!

Originally posted by entrox:
Yes, it does. Why do I need to pay a yearly fee to synchronise my laptop with my desktop? I can understand paying for the other services like hosting or the e-mail address, but come on: paying for rsync-like functionality, which doesn't even require any internet access seems like a rip-off to me. It would be a lot more reasonable if they only charged for remote synchronising over the net.

You could always set up your own WebDAV server and do syncing locally on your home network?

[entrox]

Originally posted by [APi]TheMan:
You could always set up your own WebDAV server and do syncing locally on your home network?

I could. I also could be running Linux, compiling kernels all day, which I was trying to avoid by switching to Macs in the first place.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by entrox:
I could. I also could be running Linux, compiling kernels all day, which I was trying to avoid by switching to Macs in the first place.

So you PAY for your operating system to avoid that hassle, right?

Why the hell aren't you running your own mail server? For some reason, you seem to think that somebody else providing IMAP and SMTP services could be worth money to someone who wants to avoid setting up the stuff himself (it's why we switched to Macs, right?), but providing WebDAV and RSYNC isn't?

Oddly, it's why I switched to .Mac.

You know, I'm one of those stupid Mac users who just doesn't WANT to have to figure out how to roll my own.

Like you.

-s*

[SMacTech]

Originally posted by [APi]TheMan:
Amazon discount? Man, I think I've paid $107 the last two years, and $50 before that... What's this about a discount?! I should get a discount for being a loyal customer (even though I filled up my storage space with pictures about a year ago), all I do is use the e-mail!
You could always set up your own WebDAV server and do syncing locally on your home network?

MacIntouch has a .mac purchase link for $79.99, which is where I purchased it from.

[Lancer409]

Originally posted by manofsteal:

[leperkuhn]

i need right-click->arrange.. does anyone know if a hack or something that puts this in the finder, or if it's making a tiger appearance?

[entrox]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
So you PAY for your operating system to avoid that hassle, right?

Right.

Why the hell aren't you running your own mail server? For some reason, you seem to think that somebody else providing IMAP and SMTP services could be worth money to someone who wants to avoid setting up the stuff himself (it's why we switched to Macs, right?), but providing WebDAV and RSYNC isn't?

IMAP and SMTP have a monthly cost: Apple has to provide the service and bandwidth. It's certainly reasonable to charge for that and similar services. But syncing my desktop and laptop at home doesn't require any of those. Why can't I just plug in my laptop into my home network and have it synchronise some files with my desktop similar to how I keep my mobile phone updated via iSync? I don't need remote synchronising over the internet. I'd pay for it if I deemed it necessary, but why should I have to pay a monthly fee if I only need it locally?

[waffffffle]

Originally posted by entrox:
Yes, it does. Why do I need to pay a yearly fee to synchronise my laptop with my desktop? I can understand paying for the other services like hosting or the e-mail address, but come on: paying for rsync-like functionality, which doesn't even require any internet access seems like a rip-off to me. It would be a lot more reasonable if they only charged for remote synchronising over the net.

.Mac syncing relies on your iDisk to store all of the sync information. The server holds all of the information to sync between clients, so you need to pay for this.

In theory someone else could write a .Mac plugin for some other type of sync (probably will be much easier to do in Tiger) but who knows if anyone will (Spymac probably should). .Mac syncing is the one feature that really makes .Mac well worth the money.

[Brass]

Originally posted by waffffffle:
.Mac syncing relies on your iDisk to store all of the sync information. The server holds all of the information to sync between clients, so you need to pay for this.

In theory someone else could write a .Mac plugin for some other type of sync (probably will be much easier to do in Tiger) but who knows if anyone will (Spymac probably should). .Mac syncing is the one feature that really makes .Mac well worth the money.

Worth it for some people, but not for others. Especially for those who want to sync with a local computer (ie, laptop/desktop at home) and don't want to have to connect to the internet to do it (nor, put up with the slower internet speeds).

Thankfully there are free alternatives out there for synchronising data between machines, and "iDisk" alternatives (eg, FTP/HTTP sites). And the space for the FTP/HTTP internet server is also cheaper than a .Mac "iDisk".

[esXXI]

Originally posted by mdc:
quicktime 6.6 has that new controller over fullscreen. on one of the quicktime preferences screenshots there is an "animate to fullscreen" (or something option)
a. i wonder what this animate looks like?
b. does this mean quicktime 6.6 will have fullscreen or is it only for quicktime 6.6 pro?

I may have gone mad, but QuickTime 6.6 in Tiger has quite a few Pro features, such as copy-pasting sections of movies. I didn't check if it plays full screen, but I remember it wasn't given any indication of it being the Pro version in the About QuickTime window..

Can anyone confirm?

[Twilly Spree]

When Tiger will be released they'll call it QuickTime 7.

[kidatari]

I think everyone is overlooking an important feature, the encrypted swap. Combined with the encrypted home directory feature, OS X's security suite is becoming very robust.

[Webscreamer]

Originally posted by kidatari:
I think everyone is overlooking an important feature, the encrypted swap. Combined with the encrypted home directory feature, OS X's security suite is becoming very robust.

What's encrypted swap? Encrypt file tranfers over a network?

[SS3 GokouX]

The virtual memory swap files. There was a big fuss about how you could find user's passwords in the swap files. I don't even think it's necessary and hope it doesn't bog down my systems.

[DeathMan]

Originally posted by Webscreamer:
What's encrypted swap? Encrypt file tranfers over a network?

Swap is virtual memory. There have been problems in the past about retrieving passwords and other sensitive information from the hard drive's virtual memory sectors. If you open an encrypted file, and let it sit idle for a certain period of time, its contents could be transferred to the hard drive to free up fast memory for more current tasks. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, when you bring that open file back to the foreground, its contents are copied back in to RAM. You close your file, and encrypt it, but the version that was written to swap is still sitting there, unencrypted. This could be bad news, if your computer was stolen, and you have very sensitive files that were recently open.

[kman42]

Spotlight question:

If I have a bunch of files in a folder called Yosemite, but they don't actually reference Yosemite themselves, will they be found in a search for Yosemite? Is there an 'Enclosed in folder' category in Spotlight?

I organize lots of similar files into different folders to keep track of them. I'm sure that lots of other people organize files this way as well and it seems an obvious thing for Spotlight to search for. Priority would be given to files that are within folders with the query in the name, secondary priority would be to files two levels deep, etc.

kman

[mattyd]

i think the folder itself would show up in the search results.

[Superchicken]

To be honest, if I weren't at school behind a proxy, and cheap, and already had e-mail and web space through a site I run I might like the idea of getting .mac.

That said, most of the features of .mac are NOT worth 100 bucks American, or even 80! iCal sharing is a nifty idea but I pay less than $75 American to my host per year, and I get a full gig of storage that I can use as much as i want, mySQL databases, support for as many e-mail addies as I want, and oh right A DOMAIN!

If .mac offered say a gig of hosting, your own mywebsite.mac or something instead of .com that could be useful! But right now all it is, is a few features thrown together at an inflated price. There are some great features, but most of them are not near enough motivation to pay for an upgrade. If they could do something where you had software that seriously benefited from it, and if they made tittles that tied in, for example iSite, an html editor, iDraw which would work with iSite, and iDon'tknowwhatelse, that did other stuff, then it could be worth while. But right now that is not worth 100 bucks per year.

[moonmonkey]

Originally posted by kman42:
Spotlight question:

If I have a bunch of files in a folder called Yosemite, but they don't actually reference Yosemite themselves, will they be found in a search for Yosemite? Is there an 'Enclosed in folder' category in Spotlight?

I organize lots of similar files into different folders to keep track of them. I'm sure that lots of other people organize files this way as well and it seems an obvious thing for Spotlight to search for. Priority would be given to files that are within folders with the query in the name, secondary priority would be to files two levels deep, etc.

kman

No, it finds the folder.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
That said, most of the features of .mac are NOT worth 100 bucks American, or even 80! iCal sharing is a nifty idea but I pay less than $75 American to my host per year, and I get a full gig of storage that I can use as much as i want, mySQL databases, support for as many e-mail addies as I want, and oh right A DOMAIN!

Not that I'm advocating .mac as a good web host, but in general those domains that are provided with a web host are a bad deal. It's better to get one from an independent company so that if you need to change web hosts it can be done easily, without hassle.

[yaro]

Does the 2-D Quartz acceleration work?

[Superchicken]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Not that I'm advocating .mac as a good web host, but in general those domains that are provided with a web host are a bad deal. It's better to get one from an independent company so that if you need to change web hosts it can be done easily, without hassle.

Yes but I'm saying, if Apple offered SOMETHING that resembled a domain it would be better than it is now.

.Mac has a few useful features but there's no way I'd pay yearly to keep them.

[Jasoco]

So anyone think the rumor is true? Tiger in January?

[ManOfSteal]

Originally posted by Jasoco:
So anyone think the rumor is true? Tiger in January?

Sure. Wouldn't be surprised in the least bit...

[SMacTech]

Originally posted by Jasoco:
So anyone think the rumor is true? Tiger in January?

I don't think it will happen. They have not even begun developer seeding beyond what they gave away at WWDC.

Where did this rumor originate from?

[Jasoco]

Originally posted by SMacTech:
I don't think it will happen. They have not even begun developer seeding beyond what they gave away at WWDC.

Where did this rumor originate from?

It's the first story on AtAT.
http://www.appleturns.com/scene/?id=4945

They're basing it on the end date of the current promotion and the fact that a SteveNote is coming.

Take it with a grain of salt, but they're usually good with figuring these things out.

At least I'm keeping my fingers cerossed. It's hard enough having to wait until after Christmas let alone next August which would make it one year.

[LeeG]

All I want is for the damn iPhoto export bug to be fixed.

Are you familiar? Export a photo (shrink the res a little too) to your desktop-

Now watch it CHEW up your processor cycles, and slow down the machine.

Also won't let you trash the file.

At least this has been reproducible for me through several OS/iPhoto revisions, on a 12" aluminum, and an AGP G4/500.

Lee

[SMacTech]

Originally posted by LeeG:
All I want is for the damn iPhoto export bug to be fixed.

Are you familiar? Export a photo (shrink the res a little too) to your desktop-

I do this all the time, and just did it again, using various resolutions with no problem with Finder cpu% taking off or being able to delete the files. v4.0.3 iPhoto.