Jump to content
Welcome to InsanelyMac Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Neilis

  • Rank
    InsanelyMac Protégé
  • Birthday 10/11/1981

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    South Carolina, USA
  1. Hey guys - just looking for suggestions here. I've got an iPod Touch 2nd Gen. About a week ago I decided to upgrade it up to iOS 4. Just like my original upgrade to 3, it wasn't a smooth process. After the regular update screwed up my device (failed and it would only come back up in restore mode), I had to do a complete restore on it. Not sure why both have failed - it's stock setup. No jailbreaks or anything. Anyways, after a restore I have my iPod up and going again, but the battery is draining FAST now. Used to be that if I left it on the home screen without playing music or the like it would go for days at a time with the battery just fine. I picked it up yesterday (Monday) morning, having charged it up Friday evening and having not used it, and the battery was down near 15%. Used it yesterday, but charged it back to full again, and when I pick it up this morning it's drained down to about 60-70% overnight just sitting there. I know some people have said that the new multitasking features are doing this, but AFAIK the iTouch 2nd gen doesn't even support those features. Anybody have any ideas? Thanks.
  2. Against Apple

    I kinda see your point, but remember: FreeBSD (which IIRC they never expressed took actual code from) is licensed under the BSD license, which allows companies to take code and do with as they will. There is no requirement to give it back or the like. Linux's GPL license doesn't allow that - if you use GPL code you are required to give the code changes back to the community. Apparently keeping their code was important so they chose an approriate license. You can't really complain too much there as that's within the spirit of the BSD license. FWIW, when the did take the GPL'd HTML rendering engine to make Webkit for Safari, they have actually been rather good about giving back that code to the communirty, and as a result there are now several Webkit based browsers available for Linux. In regards to the GUI, Linux is a victim of just being entrenched in X11. X11 is a good remote usage system. It's a terrible local usage system. However, virtually all the current Linux applications are made for X11. Pretty much all the graphics drivers are made for X11. Nearly all the programmers understand how to develop for X11. And for better or for worse, open source is controlled by the developers and the users. There is no authorative body like in Apple's case of ditching OS9 where they can just say "You know what, we're scraping the old system so adapt and get used to it.". X11 works. It's clunky, slow, and outdated, but it does WORK. That simple truth IMHO will keep it going just because everybody sees replacing somethign so critical that's already functional as a waste of time. Still, if you're curious the DirectFB project is basically hoping to do something similar to this. They're up to around 8 years in age now though and nobody has really picked it up for much other than demos. The only thing that I see possibily changing this is Google's ChromeOS. They're basing it on a Linux kernel, but I get the impression that that's about all that they're taking from Linux (much like Apple used minor parts of FreeBSD). The rest of the system (though they'll be providing little more than a browser, but with open source all you really need is a good framework OS - the community can provide the applications) will all be from scratch, but they have already stated that the system will be free, and it will be open source. Google also has the industry pull get get the major hardware makers to provide drivers for whatever they put out. I truly see Google possibly creating a base system that rivals OS X in capability, and it will be avaialble for installation anywhere with the maker's consent. No jumping through hoops to make it work on hardware that they've actively tried to make the system not run on.
  3. Windows 7, an OS X and Linux killer?

    I've got Windows 7 on my Windows desktop, and truthfully - my opinion is MEH. Now the thing is still not released yet so it may be unfair to judge a release candidate, but to me it looks like a dressed up Vista, and not even in a good way. The way they implemented the new taskbar just feels clunky on a Windows system. The search is now atrocious - by default (and it's a default that I had to search for the better part of an hour on how to change it) it only searches indexed locations. There is no advanced dialog like in Vista to just search non-indexed as an option. My system also has had serious problems with it. For instance the .NET Runtime Optimizer service was getting tangled up with something and was normally eating 90-95% of the system RAM, making the system nearly unuseable. I finally disabled that service and it's came back under control, but it was aggravating until I tracked down the issue. IF they'd finally gotten WinFS working then I'd probably change my mind, but they haven't (really, I think a database/metadata-driven filesystem is the next big thing waiting to happen - I see lots of possibilities with it). Truthfully, I view it as a minor step DOWN from Vista (which in turn I viewed as a minor step down from XP). For people who like Windows, it's more Windows. For most people who like OS X or Linux, it doesn't really offer anything new. Naturally it has it's strengths too - namely the GUI is snappier than Linux's and playing back media/video files I've always found to be fastest and most convenient on a Windows system (VLC on Mac is good, but still doesn't compare to Media Player Classic on Windows). Still though, after a month or two of fiddling with Windows 7 I'm back to mostly using my Hackintosh for my day to day tasks. When Linux improves it's GUI speed (DirectFB shows promise there) and gets iTunes (hey I can dream) then I'd likely look at switching to it instead. PS: Not sure how many developers we have here, but the new Visual Studio 2010 (that is sort of a companion piece to Windows 7, given that most software for 7 will be developed with it) is TERRIBLE. Not from a UI design standpoint - there it actually shines, but they tried to redo their interface in Silverlight or something and it's just gotten so slow, buggy, and clunky that I can barely use it. I was playing around with 1 C# project just to test the waters a bit and after 3 weeks of working on it i eventually abandoned the whole project to avoid the pain of the development environment. Not being much of a fan of Xcode, I'm actually now just looking into using Simultron + wxWidgets on my Mac to try out some cross-platform development.
  4. Network problem after update

    It's the hackintosh listed in my sig: ECS 945GZT-M, Intel E2160 Dual Core 1.8Ghz, 2GB DDR2, 160GB SATA Seagate Hard drive, MSI Geforce 8600GTS I was originally using the onboard ethernet just fine. I've discovered something VERY strange now though. The cable that I was using fine before the reboot? Doesn't work in either card. Plug it into my Linux box though and it works. HOWEVER, when I took the cable from my Linux box and plugged it into that 2nd 3c905 the system picked it up and worked. The same cable plugged into the onboard card still doesn't work though. So I got 2 cables going to a router. Both work connected to 1 system. Another works in 1 card of the hackintosh but not the other. The second works in neither hackintosh card. This don't make any sense to me now, but at least I do have network access with the 2nd cable connected to the PCI card.
  5. Ok, I got a little issue. I have been running Kalyway 10.5.4 for quite a while now, and it's been generally working fine. I decided though that I'd like o try and update to 10.5.8. I installed Chameleon 2 RC2 first to get the EFI boot loader installed, and after a reboot everthing still worked fine, so I then started the regular Apple 10.5.8 updater. It seemed to go ok - downloaded and installed as expected. After a reboot everything seemed to come up fine, but I didn't have any network access. I went into the Network config dialog and it says that the cable isn't connected. The card is showing up, it's just not registering the cable. I tried going into my Time Machine backup and copying out the old IONetworkingFamily.kext to the drive. Didn't seem to help. Tried taking an old 3com 3c905 card I had lying around and put it in the system - same thing. Card is recognized but cable shows as unplugged. Other than this everything else appears to be working fine. Any ideas? Thanks.
  6. It's no better or worse than a real Mac with equivalent specs. OS updates/upgrades have the potential to mess up the system, but with that exception if you keep the computer under the desk you'll literally not be able to tell the difference. Specifically, on that hardware you should be fine. The desktop I run OSx86 on is a little slower on most everything with the exception of video card, and it literally screams. Much faster than Linux on equivalent hardware (though I think this will eventually change - OSS is a good development model and if we can EVER kick X11 out the door then I see Linux becoming an eventual GUI speed-demon - I'm hoping DirectFB might catch on eventually).
  7. Archaic? Linux was first released in 1991. Windows first came out in 1985 and MacOS in 1984. None of them bear much resemblance to their initial versions, but Linux is indeed the youngest of the three. As to "designed for obsolete hardware" - Dell sells brand new systems running Linux flawlessly, as do virtually all netbook manufacturers. It also runs flawlessly on virtually any system Apple currently produces. And as you point out, it's used heavily on servers, many of which are top of the line new machines. Are ALL these machines "obsolete"? The simple fact of the matter is that Linux supports a far wider variety of hardware than Mac OS X does, and when going into non-x86 environments, beats Windows in that regard too. Is it without faults? No, but the same holds for ANY OS sold these days. Most people simply aren't familiar with it. As to comparing to Windows 3.1? Please. Linux has full multi-user capability, security, journaling filesystem, protected memory support, 3d graphics acceleration implemented for both game and desktop use, a full networking stack + firewall (heck Trumpet WinSOCK was an ADDON for Windows 3.1), and tons of other features that leave Windows 3.1 looking like the outdated hack it was. Technically, visually, and functionally, Linux is every bit the modern OS that Windows or MacOS is.
  8. Linux Program Lists

    My "near daily" list: Firefox - web browsing Handbrake - DVD rips (not daily, but "a lot") Avidemux - video file editing (same frequency as Handbrake) Transmission - torrent client VLC - media player OpenOffice.org - general productivity stuff PenguinTV - podcasts and such rxvt - Terminal emacs/nano - text editors (normally I'll use nano for config files, and emacs when I'm programming) gcc - compiler Less frequent but do use: GIMP - image editing Brasero - CD/DVD burning Depending on what I'm tinkering with as far as programming goes, I'll also use MySQL or PgSQL and their associated utilities quite a bit too. Then there's naturally things that get used, but not in a direct manner (such as rsync which I have syncing out certain directories daily to my SAN units).
  9. Show your nix Oct desktop

    Getting in a bit late here, but I'm running Linux Mint 6 (Felecia). Been playing with it for a while and I really like it. It's based off of Ubuntu/Debian, but feels much more polished IMHO.
  10. Guess we interpreted thier statement differently. I read it as basically just "You'll know when we know.".
  11. iWork '09 trojan beware!

    People are free to express whatever opinions they wish about a company. Microsoft released their first stuff back in the late 1970's - think that stops anyone from bashing them?
  12. Pystar is annoying, but I would like to see Apple release a version of OS X to licensed vendors. Before everyone chimes in with "ZOMG Apple makes most of it's money from teh hardwarez!!!111", think about it for a minute: Lets assume the Apple does make most of it's money from it's hardware sales. Now, lets assume that OS X is licensed out. We have basically two possible outcomes: a) People really were buying Apple for their hardware, and hence will continue to buy Apple hardware regardless. or If Apple's hardware sales drop, then that means that OS X was what they were really after anyways, in which case we've effectively proven that people really didn't want Apple's hardware anyways, and hence OS X should sell well enough to support them just fine (and possibly boost revenue). In any event, I can't believe that no one recognizes the oddball nature of combining these two premises: "Apple is a hardware company, not a software company." and "Licensing OS X would kill Apple's hardware business.". Whenever you're banking on selling the side of your products that people want LEAST then you've got some issues. Apple is just using it's (very good) OS to prop up it's overpriced hardware. It'd be like a place opening down the street selling trendy looking, but cheaply made glass plates for $50 each but they just happen to include some of the best sushi in the world on them for free. Doesn't matter if they're making money a smart business would figure out how to leverage that good sushi and charge for it since it's what people want, rather than still selling the goofy little plates.
  13. I don't think Microsoft is the issue here. Microsoft is pretty much software only unless we delve into game consoles. Most of what people are complaining about was the hardware (or lack thereof) announcements at the show. In that case don't look to Microsoft, look to Dell. And Dell comes out with new products so often it's amazing. Want a Core i7? Dell has those. Want a Blu Ray Drive? Got them. Want a Blu Ray *burner*? Dell has those. Want a basic little no frills computer? Dell has those for $300. And it comes with twice as much RAM and 4.5 times the hard drive space as the mini. A $60 processor upgrade gets you a faster processor than that mini too. Not to mention that the Dell system is pretty small too, yet still large enough to take upgrades so that the system doesn't go obsolete so fast. They also have "normal" laptops starting at $480 instead of $1000 (and Dell has netbooks even cheaper). Apple just needs to step it up on the hardware front a bit. They dont' need to clone Dell, but their absolute cheapest system being a $600 outdated slug that doesn't compare to competing machines costing HALF as much is just bad. The basic Mini needs another 1.5" to 2" of height to accomodate an expansion slot, a processor upgrade, double the ram (and default config should be ONE stick not two to allow for ugprades without wasting your existing ram), bigger hard drive, and it needs to be less than $500.
  14. Running mac apps under linux

    If you're referring to Wine then it does tend to work for things a lot more complex than that - a lot of people play World of Warcraft via Wine and it works fine. That said, as of now if you want something similar to Wine for running Mac apps then you're pretty much SOL. It could be done in the same way that Wine was done (effectively, you'd have to reverse engineer and duplicate the Carbon, Cocoa, and likely a few other API's), but hasn't been yet. One could certainly start such and endeavour, but honestly, Wine has taken dozens of programmers the YEARS (possibly past a decade now) to get to the point that it's at. It's not really a simple process.
  15. I'm pretty much of the same feelings as most here: the keynote announcements were incredibly uninspiring. Aside from OS X itself, I just don't care about Apple's software products (truth be told I wouldn't care about their hardware either if it weren't for them being the legit and simple way to run OS X). That Mac Mini update I was pretty much banking on. Another friend of mine who still has one of the original G4 mini's and wants to upgrade was waiting on the news too. Alas, no update to the Mini. Like I mentioned on another thread, the Mini has gone so long without an update that it's embarrassing. It's almost time to just drop it completely if they're not going to update it.