osx 10.10

Apple hardware/software and related topics.
Forum rules
Any posts concerning pirated software or offering to buy/sell/trade commercial software are subject to removal.
User avatar
Trippynet
Donor
Donor
Posts: 812
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:22 am
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, UK

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby Trippynet » Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:14 pm

Yeah, my Mac Mini media centre machine (PowerPC) runs Leopard as well, although it did have Tiger on it when I first got it.
Systems in use:
:Indigo2IMP: - Nitrogen: R10000 195MHz CPU, 384MB RAM, SolidIMPACT Graphics, 36GB 15k HDD & 300GB 10k HDD, 100Mb/s NIC, New/quiet fans, IRIX 6.5.22
:Fuel: - Lithium: R14000 600MHz CPU, 4GB RAM, V10 Graphics, 72GB 15k HDD & 300GB 10k HDD, 1Gb/s NIC, New/quiet fans, IRIX 6.5.30
Other system in storage: :O2: R5000 200MHz, 224MB RAM, 72GB 15k HDD, PSU fan mod, IRIX 6.5.30

User avatar
R-ten-K
Posts: 1889
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:36 pm
Location: Nor Cal

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby R-ten-K » Mon Jun 09, 2014 5:59 pm

Old foggies don't like change and are scared by it... News at 11. :P
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"

User avatar
commodorejohn
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:22 pm
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby commodorejohn » Mon Jun 09, 2014 6:46 pm

R-ten-K wrote:Old foggies don't like change and are scared by it... News at 11. :P

Pretentious snots think they're being hip by dismissing any dissenting opinion with "well, you're just afraid of change, granddad!" - film at 11.
Computers: Amiga 1200, DEC VAXStation 4000/60, DEC MicroPDP-11/73
Synthesizers: Roland JX-10/SH-09/HS-80/MT-32/D-50, Yamaha DX7-II/V50/TX7/TG33/FB-01, Korg MS-20 Mini/ARP Odyssey/DW-8000/M1, Ensoniq SQ-80, E-mu Emax HD/Proteus-2, Casio CZ-5000, Moog Satellite, Sequential Circuits Prophet-600

User avatar
foetz
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6592
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2003 4:34 am
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby foetz » Mon Jun 09, 2014 8:50 pm

commodorejohn wrote:
R-ten-K wrote:Old foggies don't like change and are scared by it... News at 11. :P

Pretentious snots think they're being hip by dismissing any dissenting opinion with "well, you're just afraid of change, granddad!" - film at 11.

:lol:

User avatar
guardian452
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3464
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby guardian452 » Tue Jun 10, 2014 7:46 am

R-ten-K wrote:Old foggies don't like change and are scared by it... News at 11. :P



But but this whole website is dedicated to glorifying old stuff, I would expect nothing less ;)

GIJoe
Posts: 898
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 11:44 am
Location: Germany

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby GIJoe » Tue Jun 10, 2014 8:40 am

testing forklift now, thanks for the tip. :idea:

thing is, i'd really have all that functionality natively in the finder. using a filemanager separate from the default OS provided one is not so optimal in my experience.

my MBP (running lion 10.7) will be written off and replaced end of this year, the replacement one will surely run this 10.10. i expect the usual troubles with basic functionality that apple only manages to sort out by the time the last handful system updates roll around and everyone is gearing up for 10.11...

User avatar
ianj
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:43 am
Location: 費府

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby ianj » Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:08 am

There is no such thing as a "reference release" of Mac OS X. You all are crazy.
:Fuel: :Octane: :Octane2: :Indigo2IMP:

User avatar
commodorejohn
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:22 pm
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby commodorejohn » Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:24 am

ianj wrote:There is no such thing as a "reference release" of Mac OS X. You all are crazy.

There's no divine mandate on the Charlton Heston Ben-Hur, either, but that doesn't make it not the definitive film version.
Computers: Amiga 1200, DEC VAXStation 4000/60, DEC MicroPDP-11/73
Synthesizers: Roland JX-10/SH-09/HS-80/MT-32/D-50, Yamaha DX7-II/V50/TX7/TG33/FB-01, Korg MS-20 Mini/ARP Odyssey/DW-8000/M1, Ensoniq SQ-80, E-mu Emax HD/Proteus-2, Casio CZ-5000, Moog Satellite, Sequential Circuits Prophet-600

User avatar
Cory5412
Posts: 567
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 6:08 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby Cory5412 » Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:25 am

I think Mac OS X 10.10 looks pretty nice. I will probably upgrade my personal system within a few weeks of retail availability, although I've long since learnt my lesson about installing new Mac OS X versions on the first day -- especially even-numbered ones. The whole thing looks like a really classy evolution, finishing the work that 10.9 started, especially given that some of the applications in 10.9 still had what a lot of people call "skeumorphism" -- the choice of materials and certain interface elements still represented Steve Jobs more than it does today's Apple. (Reminders and Photo Booth are good examples of this.)

I don't know if I'd say that flat interface and skeumorphism are directly opposing forces. It's suggested here: http://www.colincornaby.me/2013/05/skeuomorphism/ that Mac OS has been skeumorphic for a very long time, but as Apple mentioned on stage at WWDC, they've definitely changed the "materials" of the OS. I actually think it looks classy, and up through 10.8, Mac OS X definitely looked really cartoony, with velvet and felt and "rich Corinthian leather" all over the place, in stark contrast to the exceedingly classy, minimalist metal and glass hardware.

If I had to pick a least favorite thing about 10.10, and this is a pretty extreme nit-pick, it would be that I question the future of the double-smile Mac face on the Finder. I didn't notice it previously, because it hadn't changed in a few years, but I now wonder if there's not a better way to call and visually represent the concept of a file manager. That face used to represent the platform as a whole, back in the time when Apple's only product was the Mac and they were always about to die, it was a reassuring and comforting friend, almost. These days, Apple has relegated it to the visual representation to a single application on the platform. Helpfully, Finder is probably the least liked application on the Mac.

My favorite thing about it? Almost everything else. It'll be interesting to see how iCloud Drive plays out. It felt very much like Shades of iTools/iDisk and Keynotes Past to me, because of course we've been seeing stuff like this for years. If Apple is correct, the whole experience could be great for those who use it. What I imagine the greatest challenge will be is deploying these "new features" in such a way that they don't bomb out or cause problems, such as when Photo Stream showed up back in iOS 6, and filled my iPod Touch to the brim, prompting me to restore the device and simply not add my iCloud/MobileMe account to it.

On the other hand, if you can easily control the flow of such things, it could end up being a huge boon to those who are using the Mac as their primary desktop. (I am on the Windows side of things, personally, so I use the OneDrive application on my iPhone and my photos get funneled onto my PCs via Microsoft's servers.)

I'm particularly excited about the iPhone/iPad/Mac coherence thing. I have an iPhone and a Mac mini at home and my particular use case for this is that my Mac is in a comfortable spot where I like making phone calls, but I don't get mobile phone signal in that spot. I can put the iPhone up on the top deck of the house and connect it to a charger, say in the kitchen, and make/receive calls and texts from my Mac in the bedroom.

Sidenote about "reference" versions: Because of the network connected nature of most computers these days, running a really old version of Mac OS X without security updates is not a very good idea. One of my favorite OS X versions is 10.3, but just because that's so doesn't mean I'm going to be setting up such a system and attempting to use it as a daily driver -- nor am I going to claim that it's the "reference" release of Mac OS X, as there is not such a thing. There is simply the current version, and then the still-supported previous version. Since moving to a yearly release cadence, Apple seems to have extended support out two versions back (So today we have 10.9, 10.8 and 10.7 eligible for security updates) which is a nice gesture on their part.
I [heart] the Performer Town Demo

User avatar
R-ten-K
Posts: 1889
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:36 pm
Location: Nor Cal

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby R-ten-K » Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:53 am

commodorejohn wrote:
R-ten-K wrote:Old foggies don't like change and are scared by it... News at 11. :P

Pretentious snots think they're being hip by dismissing any dissenting opinion with "well, you're just afraid of change, granddad!" - film at 11.


"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"... so thanks, I guess?

If some of you consider the stylistic changes in 10.10 unacceptable, then inform Apple by either not buying their products or contact their organization and tell them directly. Bitching about it ad infinitum on a random internet forum with little to no traffic is a waste of time and effort IMO, but I assume some of you prefer to commiserate with perfect strangers about it. Horses for courses...
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a
pyramid with thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"

User avatar
commodorejohn
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:22 pm
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby commodorejohn » Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:11 am

R-ten-K wrote:If some of you consider the stylistic changes in 10.10 unacceptable, then inform Apple by either not buying their products or contact their organization and tell them directly. Bitching about it ad infinitum on a random internet forum with little to no traffic is a waste of time and effort IMO, but I assume some of you prefer to commiserate with perfect strangers about it. Horses for courses...

We are communicating it by not buying, but I'll never understand this notion that that's the only allowed form of disapproval and nobody should ever say bad things about something they don't like. Even if we completely discount the bad-word-of-mouth factor (probably a safe bet in OSX's case, but it certainly made a difference for Vista and Win8,) we can at least still commiserate over it. It makes us feel better - who cares if some other random stranger on the Internet thinks it's a waste of time?
Computers: Amiga 1200, DEC VAXStation 4000/60, DEC MicroPDP-11/73
Synthesizers: Roland JX-10/SH-09/HS-80/MT-32/D-50, Yamaha DX7-II/V50/TX7/TG33/FB-01, Korg MS-20 Mini/ARP Odyssey/DW-8000/M1, Ensoniq SQ-80, E-mu Emax HD/Proteus-2, Casio CZ-5000, Moog Satellite, Sequential Circuits Prophet-600

calvin
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:44 am
Location: /dev/wd0b
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby calvin » Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:24 am

I like the new look. The inconsistency of previous releases with old leftovers and all were ugly, especially the gradients. I don't like the headerbars, but otherwise, it looks very nice.

Stop being reactionaries - change can be good.
No SGIs here.

User avatar
Cory5412
Posts: 567
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 6:08 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby Cory5412 » Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:59 am

The saddest part of Windows Vista and 8 is that they're each actually really technically competent operating systems, and Windows Vista is honestly what I'd consider the first acceptable version of Windows. (To the point where I am almost exclusively using Windows now, after having been vehemently against the idea eight to ten years ago.)

Of course, Vista was helped along significantly by the fact that HP, then most prolific PC OEM, was (and really continues to be, although at a lower grade) terrible at the whole "PC" thing.

Windows 8 is a big change, and a whole lot of that is improved underpinnings that have, in my experience, made an old Core2 PC with Windows 8 even faster and more efficient than a newish Mac mini (Sandy Bridge i5) with 8 gigs of ram. There was also that point after Windows Vista was released and between Creative Suite 3 and 4 (and it may actually have happened earlier) where Adobe's products were universally faster and more stable on Windows.

So, it's actually really unfortunate that the unwashed masses put such a reliance on the tech press. Of course what with Joanna Stern leading the tech press in proclaiming the MacBook Air as the best laptop (which, it arguably is) there's a possibility that people will at least end the harmful practice of moving toward older versions of Windows, and replace it with moving toward Mac OS.

The tech press' response to Windows 8 and the Surface family of PCs has started a really interesting iteration cycle within Microsoft, who is becoming way more attentive to what consumers want out of their devices. Penny Arcade had a neat article about the Surface Pro 3, and as it turns out, media and prominent reviewers of that nature have direct contacts within Microsoft.

Some new technology has its pitfalls as does anything else, but a lot of what I see here is outright dismissal that anything other than the technology of a certain era could have any merit whatsoever. No acknowledgement of things becoming more stable, easier to use, more accessible, more affordable, and any commentary about increased performance is often met with comments about why anybody would ever need a fast computer(1) to begin with.

In terms of commiseration on the Internet -- it's not productive because what often happens is somebody (for example, commodorejohn) will express a sentiment, such as "Windows XP is the absolute pinnacle of all computing and there will never be anything better" and co-incidentally, demand that Microsoft re-add old functionality and in essence, make the current version of Windows look and work as closely to Windows 95 as possible. (Incidentally, people who grew up with Windows 3.1 seem to be quiet on the Windows 8 front, so maybe there's a really thin band of "young fogeys" that are moderately technical but feel an entitlement to their particular era of computing, and are therefore reasonably capable of being loud about it on the Internet.)

The challenge is that people who are unwilling to use the two mainstream options, Mac OS X and modern/secure versions of Windows, are also unwilling to learn how to use other secure options, such as configuring a Linux/BSD/Solaris distribution, or paying for a commercial UNIX system.

(1) Although, that sort of leads to an interesting double standard where, why on earth would it matter how fast your computer is if you want to browse the web and launch Word, but of course, they need the fastest IIfx or Amiga 3000/4000 in order to achieve any given task on a retro computer faster.
I [heart] the Performer Town Demo

User avatar
ianj
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:43 am
Location: 費府

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby ianj » Tue Jun 10, 2014 11:13 am

If you have conservative tastes in computing environments and want to be able to use a given UI with a reasonable expectation that it won't change with version bumps, proprietary Unix and BSD are waiting with open arms. People being disappointed about something together on the internet happens all the time, but when it gets to be about topics like this, there tends to be an implication lurking in the shadows that Windows and Mac OS X (maybe Ubuntu if the young fogey in question is feeling particularly adventurous) are the only options, which is not only false, but would be hilarious on a forum of this nature.
:Fuel: :Octane: :Octane2: :Indigo2IMP:

User avatar
commodorejohn
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:22 pm
Contact:

Re: osx 10.10

Unread postby commodorejohn » Tue Jun 10, 2014 11:52 am

Cory5412 wrote:In terms of commiseration on the Internet -- it's not productive because what often happens is somebody (for example, commodorejohn) will express a sentiment, such as "Windows XP is the absolute pinnacle of all computing and there will never be anything better" and co-incidentally, demand that Microsoft re-add old functionality and in essence, make the current version of Windows look and work as closely to Windows 95 as possible. (Incidentally, people who grew up with Windows 3.1 seem to be quiet on the Windows 8 front, so maybe there's a really thin band of "young fogeys" that are moderately technical but feel an entitlement to their particular era of computing, and are therefore reasonably capable of being loud about it on the Internet.)

Man, I never said XP was the pinnacle of anything. XP was good in its day, but it still had its share of issues and with the massive numbers of patches that have had to be made to it over the years it's more than a little balky lately. What it is is a usably modern version of Windows that still has the sensible UI of the 95 series - yes, it does its own stupid things, but it lets you turn them off. If Microsoft were to bring that most basic, reasonable compromise to their technically-superior newer OSes, I'd switch over in a heartbeat. (Or, at the very least, when I got around to buying a new laptop.)

ianj wrote:If you have conservative tastes in computing environments and want to be able to use a given UI with a reasonable expectation that it won't change with version bumps, proprietary Unix and BSD are waiting with open arms.

Yeah, and that's great, if you like Unix. Honestly, I've investigated and continue to periodically investigate alternatives - I just had a play around with BSD a couple weeks back, I'm messing around with Solaris this very afternoon, and I've been keeping a close eye on Haiku for years. It's just that none of these seem to be "there" yet - I admire BSD for being a saner, less schizophrenic, and less political cousin to Linux, but unfortunately it still relies on OSS-community software for most of its library, and so it still suffers a lot of the same issues with inconsistent or just outright bad UI, commercial Unix also suffers from this to a lesser extent and it seems like half of the commercial Unices have been converted into Linux distros anyway, and Haiku is beautiful but still missing some important stuff and has very little software. I'd love to be able to move to something less dependent on the whims of one company with departments who need to look busy to justify their budget, but I just don't see a good alternative yet.
Computers: Amiga 1200, DEC VAXStation 4000/60, DEC MicroPDP-11/73
Synthesizers: Roland JX-10/SH-09/HS-80/MT-32/D-50, Yamaha DX7-II/V50/TX7/TG33/FB-01, Korg MS-20 Mini/ARP Odyssey/DW-8000/M1, Ensoniq SQ-80, E-mu Emax HD/Proteus-2, Casio CZ-5000, Moog Satellite, Sequential Circuits Prophet-600


Return to “Apple”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest