Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > The official Leopard thread

The official Leopard thread (Page 5)
Thread Tools
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 02:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by alphasubzero949
Embedding Cocoa views into Carbon? WTF. Carbon was supposed to be transitional. How long has OS X been out to the public? 5 years? And beige boxers still haven't moved to Cocoa?
I don't remember Carbon being transitional - I remember Steve announcing that Carbon would be "the basis for all life" on OS X when it was introduced.

I also seem to remember talk a long time ago of them planning to integrate the two so that Cocoa would eventually be running on top of Carbon, and there'd be fewer discrepencies between the two, although I don't know if this goal is still current, since there never seems to be any noticeable progress on this front. The tidbit mentioned on the "secret" feature list, though, could be an indication that they're finally making baby steps toward this.

I agree with the previous posters that you shouldn't hold your breath for the big software houses to port to Cocoa any time soon.

Grammar checker? And I thought Microsoft's implementation was annoying enough.
Great, that's the only thing in your post that I agree with.

Apple couldn't leave good enough alone. Beef up 10.0, clean up the GUI, optimize the system, and eventually remove carbon...errr...the debug code(TM).
Removing Carbon would be insanely stupid, as it would break compatibility with not only all existing Carbon apps, but also all Cocoa apps that use a little Carbon here and there (this includes all of my apps, which are Cocoa but access Carbon). Why on earth would you want to break compatibility with even more apps?! Isn't it bad enough that Apple has already done this insane stupid thing with Classic on the Intel Macs?

Debug code, of course, was just a stupid explanation for 10.0's suckiness that the denizens of MacNN came up with. The "debug code" joke is really worn out, and deserves to die a lot more than Carbon does.

And now they want accounts to be shared?
It sounds like you don't get the idea of shared accounts - this is just an option (which you don't have to use) which allows you to set up accounts that can connect to a share point on your Mac without getting a full account on your machine. So if you want JoeBob at the office to access some particular folder containing project files, but you don't want him to be able to log into your computer, get his own home folder, do whatever the hell he wants, fill up your hard drive by downloading a ton of porn and MP3 files to his home folder, possibly do illegal stuff that would be traced to your IP address, and spill beer all over your keyboard while doing so, you just give him a sharing account instead of a full-blown user account. Also, this would mean you wouldn't have to see JoeBob's name at the login window every time you logged into your Mac.

What is so difficult about setting up a common share point?
The fact that you can't currently do it via the GUI?

How hard is it to set up a sandboxed account for guests?
One that automatically clears out the home folder after they log out? It requires writing some shell scripts and then searching MacOSXHints if you don't remember what the defaults plist key is to make a script a logout hook.

How much of this crap is going to cost in system resources?
If you don't use any of the new (necessary, long overdue) account features, then I'd guess zero.

I'm weeping. No...better yet? I am going to be laughing my head off every time Apple breaks out their metal UNIX logo and tries to market themselves as UNIX-based. Bottom line? They have strayed way the fsck off course. I see a disaster waiting to happen with that shared account implementation. They might as well chmod -R 777 / and go back to the OS 9 way of user privileges while they're at it.
How is giving someone access to just a share point less secure than giving them a full user account to do whatever they want on your computer?

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 02:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS
I don't remember Carbon being transitional
I think in the Rhapsody days the NeXT-people weren't really keen to include Carbon into the OS. At least until they heard that Adobe and Microsoft were not keen to port to Cocoa.
     
OreoCookie  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 03:28 PM
 
Don't forget Quark
One of the reasons Adobe doesn't ship UB yet is that they stuck to Metrowerk's CodeWarrior for as long as they could when Apple was throwing them signs that it might be a `good idea' to use Apple's XCode instead.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
alphasubzero949
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 04:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by blackbird_1.0
I agree. I really like NeXTStep's/OpenStep's GUI. I'd really like the have OpenStep's tabbed Dock.

And I agree about the share point. It'd make the life of my brother and I easier.
YES! And Siracusa would have also been happy with the separated menus/tear-off submenus that actually stayed where you left them. You couldn't get more spatial than that. Can a Finder window still remember its place?
     
Thinine
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 07:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS
I don't remember Carbon being transitional - I remember Steve announcing that Carbon would be "the basis for all life" on OS X when it was introduced.

I also seem to remember talk a long time ago of them planning to integrate the two so that Cocoa would eventually be running on top of Carbon, and there'd be fewer discrepencies between the two, although I don't know if this goal is still current, since there never seems to be any noticeable progress on this front. The tidbit mentioned on the "secret" feature list, though, could be an indication that they're finally making baby steps toward this.

I agree with the previous posters that you shouldn't hold your breath for the big software houses to port to Cocoa any time soon.

Removing Carbon would be insanely stupid, as it would break compatibility with not only all existing Carbon apps, but also all Cocoa apps that use a little Carbon here and there (this includes all of my apps, which are Cocoa but access Carbon). Why on earth would you want to break compatibility with even more apps?! Isn't it bad enough that Apple has already done this insane stupid thing with Classic on the Intel Macs?
I'm pretty sure making Cocoa embeddable in Carbon applications is last call for Carbon. They've updated the various modern Carbon pieces (HIView, etc.) to be 64-bit and everything, so I don't think we'll be seeing any Carbon progress, aside from bug fixes and perhaps greater Cocoa compatibility. And the only part of Cocoa that uses Carbon is some of the file handling code, specifically the parts that try to deal with OS 9 conventions (resource forks, aliases). None of the rest of Cocoa really inherits directly from Carbon, though they are both based on the same foundation in parts (CoreFoundation, CoreGraphics, etc.). While Apple shouldn't remove Carbon outright, it should be deprecated, or at least publicly stated that it will no longer progress (like the Cocoa-Java bridge).
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 07:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thinine
And the only part of Cocoa that uses Carbon is some of the file handling code, specifically the parts that try to deal with OS 9 conventions (resource forks, aliases).
Doesn't menu-handling still go through Carbon? I admit I haven't really messed around with menus in a while, but I remembered that being the case a while ago and didn't recall it being changed.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Thinine
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 07:27 PM
 
They may share menu code, but the last inheritance charts I saw only had file services inherited.
     
kmkkid
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Brantford, ON. Canada
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 07:34 PM
 
Does the leopard preview come with a leopard skin wallpaper? If so could someone PM me with a link? I love the apple faux fur papers!
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 08:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by kmkkid
Does the leopard preview come with a leopard skin wallpaper? If so could someone PM me with a link? I love the apple faux fur papers!

I don't have one of those, but I do have a wallpaper of a pretty nice sunset with some trees. Would you like that instead?
     
Dark Helmet
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: President Skroob's Office
Status: Offline
Aug 14, 2006, 10:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by kmkkid
Does the leopard preview come with a leopard skin wallpaper? If so could someone PM me with a link? I love the apple faux fur papers!

It doesn't as far as I remember.

"She's gone from suck to blow!"
     
kmkkid
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Brantford, ON. Canada
Status: Offline
Aug 15, 2006, 05:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
I don't have one of those, but I do have a wallpaper of a pretty nice sunset with some trees. Would you like that instead?

No thanks
     
kmkkid
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Brantford, ON. Canada
Status: Offline
Aug 15, 2006, 05:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Dark Helmet
It doesn't as far as I remember.
Ah, ok. I just figured it might, since the CD pictures have a leopard skin print on them.
     
I WAS the One
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Aug 15, 2006, 06:57 AM
 
Hey! I'm worry about what someone told me yesterday... Leopard will be better on an intel machine than a PowerPC one... is that true? he said that a Power PC will not handle Leopard as the intel platform? if that's real, it means that the only people that can use leopard on a PowerPC will be the Quad G5 ones?? somebody explain me this, please!
Enjoy My Mac Comic @ BLAST COMICS
     
OreoCookie  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Aug 15, 2006, 07:17 AM
 
Leopard will run on G3 Macs even. Since newer computers are `better' computers™, Leopard will run better on newer Macs. Since all Macs now run on Intel cpus, Leopard will run better on Intel cpus.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Landos Mustache
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Partying down with the Ewoks, after I nuked the Death Star!
Status: Offline
Aug 15, 2006, 10:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie
Leopard will run on G3 Macs even.
What makes you so sure? Even the developer previews don't run on it and all the fancy stuff hasn't been added yet.

"Hello, what have we here?
     
Landos Mustache
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Partying down with the Ewoks, after I nuked the Death Star!
Status: Offline
Aug 15, 2006, 11:06 AM
 
you want to get your panties in a twist of what's to come?

Try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-HxXAsY92M

"Hello, what have we here?
     
WJMoore
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Status: Offline
Aug 16, 2006, 04:40 AM
 
The Leopard page used to contain this, “From G3 to Xeon, from MacBook to Xserve, there is just one Leopard.” I see no reason why Leopard won't run on G3s. Tiger runs fine on my ageing G3 iBook. Some more discussion on the topic here.
     
Catfish_Man
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Status: Offline
Aug 16, 2006, 07:06 AM
 
The amount of misinformation in this thread is spectacular. Glad to see that the Carbon stuff got cleared up though... getting rid of Carbon would also break every nontrivial Cocoa app (and that's ignoring the issues of breaking Photoshop, iTunes, Office, and the Finder!).
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Aug 16, 2006, 10:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by Catfish_Man
The amount of misinformation in this thread is spectacular
Carbon will be capable of running Windows on a PPC in Leopard. Pass it on.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
alphasubzero949
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status: Offline
Aug 16, 2006, 05:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie
Leopard will run on G3 Macs even.
I don't even want to begin to imagine the performance level.
     
bluesloth
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Aug 16, 2006, 06:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by alphasubzero949
I don't even want to begin to imagine the performance level.
If it's anything like any of the other updates, it will run well. Every update since i bought 10.1 has made my old G3 imac (not my main computer) run a tad bit better. Not to mention, the new features usually make things easier.

I imagine it will be the same with 10.5. No, Leopard won't make it run like a G5, but it shouldn't slow it down much, if at all.
     
Franz
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Aug 16, 2006, 06:31 PM
 
The system requirements for the developer preview do not support G3 and that text was pulled from the Apple site meaning it was most likely a mistake. I would not count on it being a supported system...

http://theplaceforitall.com/105requirements.html
     
alphasubzero949
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status: Offline
Aug 17, 2006, 12:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by bluesloth
If it's anything like any of the other updates, it will run well. Every update since i bought 10.1 has made my old G3 imac (not my main computer) run a tad bit better. Not to mention, the new features usually make things easier.

I imagine it will be the same with 10.5. No, Leopard won't make it run like a G5, but it shouldn't slow it down much, if at all.
Better? Yes. OS X performance did improve with every incremental release. Faster? Doubt it, especially when SJ's promise of OS X being 'optimized' for G3s comes to mind.

On a G4 I watched OS X become progressively faster and more responsive from 4K78. On a clamshell, 600 MHz G3 iBook, and a slot-loading iMac G3 I haven't seen much improvement in speed but a slight increase in responsiveness. However, the age of the machines really show when Dashboard is invoked (obviously with the latter two machines), while watching QuickTime movies, and especially while leaving multiple apps open.

Of course, these machines are all maxxed out in the RAM department.

And if the HDD space requirements hold true for the final release, there won't be much wiggle room either considering that these machines have 6-15 GB HDDs. If you're a laptop owner, you already know that those HDDs are quite difficult and cost-prohibitive to upgrade. If the machines are light-use secondaries, then the space might not be an issue.
     
MartiNZ
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Auckland, NZ
Status: Offline
Aug 18, 2006, 12:04 AM
 
Something that just occurred to me, and after a little research: it looks like they've fixed dock label text clipping in Leopard. I went back to the official videos and found a point in the Spaces one where they run across the dock. "Pages" appears to show the 'g' fully, rather than having the bottom few pixels clipped - in fact it looks like the labels are slightly higher above the dock than we are used to .
     
Dark Helmet
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: President Skroob's Office
Status: Offline
Aug 18, 2006, 11:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by MartiNZ
Something that just occurred to me, and after a little research: it looks like they've fixed dock label text clipping in Leopard. I went back to the official videos and found a point in the Spaces one where they run across the dock. "Pages" appears to show the 'g' fully, rather than having the bottom few pixels clipped - in fact it looks like the labels are slightly higher above the dock than we are used to .

Oh yippie. That is worth the upgrade right there.

"She's gone from suck to blow!"
     
OreoCookie  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Aug 18, 2006, 12:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by alphasubzero949
I don't even want to begin to imagine the performance level.
Well, Tiger on a G3/400 is ok, as long as you don't do any (serious) multitasking, use few new features and don't open too many browser windows at once. But then again, what do you expect from such an old machine?

The fastest G3 (which were sold by Apple) I can think of are the iBooks with 800 MHz G3s. Those are fine for Tiger as long as you have enough RAM.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
ShotgunEd
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2001
Status: Offline
Aug 18, 2006, 02:38 PM
 
According to

Mac OS X Leopard tidbits roundup part 3 - The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)

the read me on the Developer's Preview CD states that Leopard requires a G4 or better.

Which is a pain because I've spent the past few days sourcing parts for this G3 iBook in anticipation for a Leopard upgrade next year.
     
meridio
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 08:55 AM
 
Hello, I'm new! My first post

I'm really excited about Leopard.
The coolest things about the keynote were the Top Secret features (obviously). After googleing for some screenshots I found out the Finder is identical to the previous version! I think this is no coincidence... There has always been an upgrade to the Finder (even between 10 -> 10.1).
That means that one of the top secret features should be an improoved Finder, maybe a completely new Finder.

What do you think?

( here are some screenshots: http://www.macinquirer.net/page0/page0.php )
     
OreoCookie  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 10:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by ShotgunEd
According to

Mac OS X Leopard tidbits roundup part 3 - The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)

the read me on the Developer's Preview CD states that Leopard requires a G4 or better.

Which is a pain because I've spent the past few days sourcing parts for this G3 iBook in anticipation for a Leopard upgrade next year.
Yes, the Developer Preview requires a G4. However, Steve promised it would run on a G3 -- a promise has been removed from Apple's Leopard website.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 12:37 PM
 
When did he promise that? I don't recall him ever mentioning the requirements of Leopard.
Vandelay Industries
     
Philip J. Fry
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Planet Express
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 01:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay
When did he promise that? I don't recall him ever mentioning the requirements of Leopard.
Probably the same time he announced email for life (I know, it's worn out but I wanted to say it)
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 01:49 PM
 
That he actually did say when iTools was announced. But there hasn't been any promises of Leopard running on a G3. The only related promise is that Apple would support PowerPC for several more years.
Vandelay Industries
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 03:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie
Yes, the Developer Preview requires a G4. However, Steve promised it would run on a G3 -- a promise has been removed from Apple's Leopard website.
I don't recall Steve himself saying that. Some hapless marketing monkey put that on Apple's Web site, though, and is probably crying in a ditch somewhere now.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
OreoCookie  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 08:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit
I don't recall Steve himself saying that. Some hapless marketing monkey put that on Apple's Web site, though, and is probably crying in a ditch somewhere now.
You seem to be right, I thought Jobs repeated the `G3 to Xeon' mantra during his presentation. Now that they have changed it, I guess we won't know until January.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
roosta
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: las vegas
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 09:35 PM
 


a riddle, of sorts: what's missing from this picture?
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 09:39 PM
 
Nothing. If you're referring to Classic, then Tiger already omitted it if you didn't have Classic installed.
Vandelay Industries
     
roosta
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: las vegas
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 11:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay
Nothing. If you're referring to Classic, then Tiger already omitted it if you didn't have Classic installed.
y'know, i nwver noticed it was missing from tiger. here i am thinking there's no support for classic in 10.5 and then,......
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 11:23 PM
 
Intel-Macs don't support Classic.
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Aug 19, 2006, 11:26 PM
 
True, but that has nothing to do with Leopard or Tiger for that matter.
Vandelay Industries
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 05:11 AM
 
ThinkSecret's got some new screenshots:

Think Secret - Gallery: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
blackbird_1.0
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Aiken, South Carolina, USA
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 06:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by roosta


a riddle, of sorts: what's missing from this picture?
Anyone think that look ugly?
Apple II GS | Powerbook 165 | iMac Rev. A 96mb RAM| iBook G3 500mhz, 128mb RAM | Power Macintosh G5 1.6ghz, 2.25gb RAM | Black MacBook 2ghz, 2gb RAM | iPhone Rev. A 8gb HD
     
WJMoore
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 07:28 AM
 
Classic is missing and yes it looks ugly, way too dark.
     
blackbird_1.0
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Aiken, South Carolina, USA
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 07:58 AM
 
I hope it's just a placeholder for something better. If that's possible.
Apple II GS | Powerbook 165 | iMac Rev. A 96mb RAM| iBook G3 500mhz, 128mb RAM | Power Macintosh G5 1.6ghz, 2.25gb RAM | Black MacBook 2ghz, 2gb RAM | iPhone Rev. A 8gb HD
     
cybergoober
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Newport News, VA USA
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 09:17 AM
 
System Preferences on the machine I saw runing Leopard was not that dark.

Classic preference pane was missing, with an OS 9 System Folder present. So it looks like Classic is in fact finally dead (unless subsequent builds change something.)
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 10:01 AM
 
Isn't it that thing that when you search it turns stuff dark and highlights what you're looking for. Maybe this guy deleted his search query and everything stayed dark for a while...
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 10:07 AM
 
I think it's themed. The System Preferences in the Thinksecret screenshots look normal.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 01:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by cybergoober
System Preferences on the machine I saw runing Leopard was not that dark.

Classic preference pane was missing, with an OS 9 System Folder present. So it looks like Classic is in fact finally dead (unless subsequent builds change something.)
It had better not be. If it is, there's a really good chance I'll just stick with 10.4.x until I eventually have to get an Intel Mac.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Aug 21, 2006, 02:03 PM
 
Out of curiosity, do you use Classic very much, Charles? Because I honestly don't. I don't like the idea of getting rid of it, but I avoid using it as much as possible and can do without it.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Landos Mustache
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Partying down with the Ewoks, after I nuked the Death Star!
Status: Offline
Aug 22, 2006, 11:36 AM
 
Geez the only time I have to use classic to to save a Quark 5 file and that happens maybe once a year.

If classic was gone for good I could care less.

"Hello, what have we here?
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Aug 22, 2006, 02:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit
Out of curiosity, do you use Classic very much, Charles? Because I honestly don't. I don't like the idea of getting rid of it, but I avoid using it as much as possible and can do without it.
I use it often enough that the Classic menu extra has a permanent space in my menu bar. For both my parents, as well, the Classic environment is pretty much always running.

Taking it out is frankly unacceptable, and IMO would be sufficient reason to switch to Windows if the latter weren't so godawful.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:52 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,