Apple's "New" GUI  

725 members have voted

  1. 1. Yay or Nay?

    • Kicks Ass!
      294
    • Meh, Who Cares?
      249
    • Utter Piece of Garbage
      182


Recommended Posts

Has anyone brought up the fact the SHADOWS ARE HUGE on windows now?

In the keynote, when Jobs opened a keynote presentation and the loading box came up with this huge shadow, the whole audience went quiet as if to ask him "Okay, Jobs. Make a subtle crack about the shadows." But he never did.

post-22927-1182494349_thumb.jpg

Personally, OS X has always had large shadows and they've always just worked (unlike Vista's shadows which look ... weird ), but these -- watch out if you have a bright background.

^ The drop shadows don't seem nearly as dark when actually running Mac OS X Leopard as they are on that shot you posted.

Does this mean the Time Machine image can be used as its own screen saver? That'd be awesome, I love having space-themed screen savers.

Haven't tried it, but it might.

Booting a restored Mac OS X Install DVD from your iPod isn't really recommended. The iPod gets extremely hot and in some cases it will just cease to function until it cooled down again. It's better to use a normal external HD or burn it to a DVD (DL) like others suggested.

^ The drop shadows don't seem nearly as dark when actually running Mac OS X Leopard as they are on that shot you posted.

Haven't tried it, but it might.

Booting a restored Mac OS X Install DVD from your iPod isn't really recommended. The iPod gets extremely hot and in some cases it will just cease to function until it cooled down again. It's better to use a normal external HD or burn it to a DVD (DL) like others suggested.

The main issue here is that both my external HDD use USB, I've no FireWire cable or FireWire compatible drives.

I'm not sure if you ever noticed, but you can sort of have a breadcrumb bar in Finder as well (I never noticed it till the other day myself). Customize the toolbar and add the Path widget.

Already have that.

What you see is multiple solid square boxes changing size.

http://lloydyweb.com/vintage/first_look_at.../macosx_dp3.jpg

So is each square a separate window then?

Edit: and guys, mind what you're saying ;)

The urban legend is that Intel Macs can boot from USB hard drives. Although I have never tried this as I'm afraid of the Firewire Ghost being very, very angry. That, and not having a USB hard drive.

Can a Core Image file be ported to XAML?

I have my Hard Drive backed up to an external USB HD, and I am able to boot from it on my MBP.

From the first time I sat down infront of a Mac through to the present day I have always thought and found the UI to be cold, unappealing and sterile, with limited customisation. It has never been something I've wanted to work infront of.

Having been consistent in my views over this, in effect I'd rather not work infront of something that brings on a hefty dose of S.A.D.

QuickTime and iTunes on Win32 are the same.

Personal Opinion.

How does one remove Xcode from a Mac OS X disc image? I wanted to know this for quite some time now.

I copied this from a post I saw elsewhere:

How to install Tiger with only single layer DVD media

OK, I have just created a bootable copy of the Tiger install DVD using the following method:

1. Open the Tiger installation DVD using Disk Utility.

2. Using the Disk Utility, create a new dual layer (8.5GB) sparse image called Tiger (actual filename will be Tiger.sparseimage) and mount it.

3. Restore the Tiger installation DVD to the mounted Tiger.sparseimage (not the image file.)

4. Open the mounted Tiger.sparseimage with Finder, and delete the XCodeTools directory.

5. Unmount the mounted Tiger.sparseimage.

6. Using the Disk Utility, create a new single layer (4.4GB) spare image called boot (actual filename will be boot.sparseimage) and mount it.

7. Restore the Tiger.sparseimage image file to the mounted boot.sparseimage (not the image file.)

8. Unmount the mounted boot.sparseimage.

9. Burn the boot.sparseimage to your single layer DVD media.

Booting from this DVD works, but takes a long time.

How long would it take to boot the entire Leopard OS from the iPod? Would it be like running Linux from a Live CD?

An iPod is far faster than a CD drive. It is, after all, a hard drive.

Don't don't don't don't don't boot an OS from your iPod. The hard drives aren't meant to take that kind of strain, and doing it for any extended period of time is bad for it.

That is utter BS. The hard drive in an iPod is no different than any other hard drive, other than being a slightly smaller format than a laptop hard drive. The type of hard drive that it uses was originally intended for use in ultra-portable laptops.

It's most likely because at the moment, the majority of people with the torrent are leeching, few have the complete copy and are seeding. But with each passing day, the ratio will improve. I say give it a week, and the torrents will be very fast, with hundreds of seeders.

Actually, I think it's more a problem of people who have decent upstream connections dropping off quickly after finishing their download. I'll see spikes every once in a while where the download speed goes up to 200KB+ and then it drops back down to around 60KB within a few minutes.

That is utter BS. The hard drive in an iPod is no different than any other hard drive, other than being a slightly smaller format than a laptop hard drive. The type of hard drive that it uses was originally intended for use in ultra-portable laptops.

The difference is that that little hard drive is packed in extremely tightly with the rest of the iPod. And there's practically zero ventilation and no fans. It's fine for the iPod itself, because the hard drive is accessed fairly sparingly. But when you've got an entire OS on there that's thrashing the hell out of it, heat builds up very quickly in that small space. The actual read/write durability could have changed in the past couple years, nobody can say for sure - but that doesn't change the fact that the heat buildup is bad for your iPod. Someone else already posted about it.

Also, thanks Engadget:

Before we get started, we should warn you that doing this can and will use your iPod in a way it was not intended and may severely shorten the life of your iPod. The reason is that the little iPod hard drive wasn't meant to be a full-time operating system drive. It's okay to boot from it from time to time, but the little drives are rated to about 20,000 hours while desktop drives are usually rated to 750,000 hours or more. But, even with that said - the biggest reason thus will eventually kill your iPod is - the heat that will be generated inside the iPod from this much use isn't what the iPod was designed for, so at some point you can and will fry your iPod.
The difference is that that little hard drive is packed in extremely tightly with the rest of the iPod. And there's practically zero ventilation and no fans. It's fine for the iPod itself, because the hard drive is accessed fairly sparingly. But when you've got an entire OS on there that's thrashing the hell out of it, heat builds up very quickly in that small space. The actual read/write durability could have changed in the past couple years, nobody can say for sure - but that doesn't change the fact that the heat buildup is bad for your iPod. Someone else already posted about it.

While you may be somewhat right about the heat build up, it still is no different than any other slim external hard drive. Most of the ones I've used that were based on a 2.5" laptop drive get very hot as well. I'm just trying to make the point that an iPod, contrary to what anyone may want to claim, is still just an external hard drive that happens to also have a screen and function as a media player.

I have my Hard Drive backed up to an external USB HD, and I am able to boot from it on my MBP.

Good to finally have it confirmed. :)

I copied this from a post I saw elsewhere:

Thanks! I'll give it a whirl.

While you may be somewhat right about the heat build up, it still is no different than any other slim external hard drive. Most of the ones I've used that were based on a 2.5" laptop drive get very hot as well. I'm just trying to make the point that an iPod, contrary to what anyone may want to claim, is still just an external hard drive that happens to also have a screen and function as a media player.

While the HD is nothing special, the iPod itself is extremely compact and packs a lot of extra hardware for the additional functionality it offers compared to a slim external HD. Overal the iPod's casing isn't very good at dissipating heat quickly enough and I've seen multiple instances where the iPod would just complete freeze under heavy strain, like during the installation of Mac OS X.

Anyone else think the fontsize in the sidebar is a bit small? I guess I'm just used to having a larger font in both Mail and Finder. Which they borked in Leopard.

Yeah I thought that too. It's almost becoming Windows cleartype style. Thats not meant to come across in a bad way, just I find Windows font smoothing causes me to concentrate more on the text as it's that thin. I don't like that feeling. As I am so use to the thickness of OS X.

Seems just fine to me...

Of course, you would. :)

Yeah I thought that too. It's almost becoming Windows cleartype style. Thats not meant to come across in a bad way, just I find Windows font smoothing causes me to concentrate more on the text as it's that thin. I don't like that feeling. As I am so use to the thickness of OS X.

Not sure what the font size has to do with the font rendering technique?

Of course, you would. :)

What's that supposed to mean? :)

Note though I'm using an eMac with 17" CRT screen with a max resolution of 1280x960. So to me the fonts are still fairly thick. I have no idea what it looks like on a high res LCD panel.

Edit:

Hm they are a bit on the small side yeah. Bit weird they didn't use the exact specs of the iTunes Sidebar.

Edited by .Neo

Does anyone else here find the overal performance of the current build a bit disappointing? It feels slower than Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger and it beach balls a lot. The OS does recover from a beach ball after a few minutes, but the lags are pretty annoying.

The Mac OS X Tiger betas seemed a lot more stable at this stage. :/

^^ Your missing out big time ;)

Need yourself a new iMac

hahaha I know all too well. :laugh:

My college is in the progress of renewing their contracts with Apple, which means I currently can't get a 10% discount. So I definitely have to wait for them to sort things out. :/

I have my Hard Drive backed up to an external USB HD, and I am able to boot from it on my MBP.

So I could theoretically install Leopard to an external hard drive and boot from it (even though it'd be very slow?) This is good to hear, since I'm not big on FireWire.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      459
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!