Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.os.linux > #41710 > unrolled thread

Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click

Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux

Contents

  Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-29 13:41 -0700
    Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-29 15:07 -0700
    Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2017-01-30 10:10 -0800
      Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 11:41 -0700
        Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2017-01-30 11:01 -0800
          Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-01-30 20:38 +0100
            Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 13:09 -0700
          Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 12:38 -0700
            Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-30 14:15 -0600
              Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 13:23 -0700
              Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 13:53 -0700
                Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2017-01-30 14:19 -0800
                  Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 15:25 -0700
                    Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click [SOLVED!] Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 16:24 -0700
            Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2017-01-30 12:15 -0800
              Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 13:22 -0700
              Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2017-01-30 12:22 -0800
                Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 13:51 -0700
        Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2017-01-30 11:43 -0800
          Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-01-30 13:12 -0700

#41710 — Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click

My wife is now using Mint Cinnamon. Or trying to anyway. Good grief.

The machine is an older Mac. OK. But the backlighting is not what it once
was. On OS X we just set the color profile to have a different gamma and it
was very usable. On Mint Cinnamon -- darks are very dark and hard to use,
even at full brightness.

Then she went to print something from Chrome (the herd will laugh -- oh my
it was a recipe!). Failed. Why? Said the filter failed. Did not even try to
figure out what that means but might later. I tried to print from the text
editor. Worked fine.

So I saved the printout as a PDF to the desktop, opened it with ImageMagic
(the default -- or maybe I set that before? Do not recall... ) and it
printed. Stupid that it did not work from Chrome, but a good work around
would be PDF Services! But, of course, no such thing on her system.

Anyway, when I opened the file in ImageMagic there as no menu. OK, so I
right clicked (well, she has the computer set to be left handed, so really
left click... but contextual menu click). The menu came up.

But as soon as I let go the menu went away. I have to click and HOLD the
menu to get it to stay. This is the type nonsense I noted in some programs
years ago and TomB told me that it was from the mouse driver on my VM. I did
not think that was the case -- worked in most areas -- but took his word.

Turns out, nope, just happens when running Linux.

Anyway, once we printed we realized the printout was only the first page and
the spacing messed up -- spaces between words missing! So completely
unusable. 

She just emailed the URL to herself and then printed from a competing
system. I will fight with her system later, but this is a very hard sale to
make to my wife. She just wants a system that works... the one she has does
not.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#41712

On 1/29/17, 1:41 PM, in article D4B3A192.8C5A2%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com,
"Snit" <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> My wife is now using Mint Cinnamon. Or trying to anyway. Good grief.
> 
> The machine is an older Mac. OK. But the backlighting is not what it once
> was. On OS X we just set the color profile to have a different gamma and it
> was very usable. On Mint Cinnamon -- darks are very dark and hard to use,
> even at full brightness.
> 
> Then she went to print something from Chrome (the herd will laugh -- oh my
> it was a recipe!). Failed. Why? Said the filter failed. Did not even try to
> figure out what that means but might later. I tried to print from the text
> editor. Worked fine.
> 
> So I saved the printout as a PDF to the desktop, opened it with ImageMagic
> (the default -- or maybe I set that before? Do not recall... ) and it
> printed. Stupid that it did not work from Chrome, but a good work around
> would be PDF Services! But, of course, no such thing on her system.
> 
> Anyway, when I opened the file in ImageMagic there as no menu. OK, so I
> right clicked (well, she has the computer set to be left handed, so really
> left click... but contextual menu click). The menu came up.
> 
> But as soon as I let go the menu went away. I have to click and HOLD the
> menu to get it to stay. This is the type nonsense I noted in some programs
> years ago and TomB told me that it was from the mouse driver on my VM. I did
> not think that was the case -- worked in most areas -- but took his word.
> 
> Turns out, nope, just happens when running Linux.
> 
> Anyway, once we printed we realized the printout was only the first page and
> the spacing messed up -- spaces between words missing! So completely
> unusable. 
> 
> She just emailed the URL to herself and then printed from a competing
> system. I will fight with her system later, but this is a very hard sale to
> make to my wife. She just wants a system that works... the one she has does
> not.

Sorry -- tried to stop this message before it was sent... though I had. See
my other thread for a video with more details.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41726

Snit wrote:
> My wife is now using Mint Cinnamon.

> The machine is an older Mac.

Bad idea to try linuxes on Mac hardware.  I would stick with whatever 
version of Mac OS works on that old Mac hardware.

I would use linuxes on old Win hardware, not Macs.


-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41727

On 1/30/17, 11:10 AM, in article ef9dsaFmqttU1@mid.individual.net, "Mike
Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>> My wife is now using Mint Cinnamon.
> 
>> The machine is an older Mac.
> 
> Bad idea to try linuxes on Mac hardware.  I would stick with whatever
> version of Mac OS works on that old Mac hardware.
> 
> I would use linuxes on old Win hardware, not Macs.
> 
Should work on either. I think the biggest issue is the 1.1 USB port. Might
swap out the hard drive and that would help. If I do that, though, can spend
$20 and get the older version of OS X that will work with it (foolishly
tossed the DVD about a month before the drive died!).

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41728

Snit wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> Snit wrote:
>>> My wife is now using Mint Cinnamon.
>>
>>> The machine is an older Mac.
>>
>> Bad idea to try linuxes on Mac hardware. I would stick with
>> whatever version of Mac OS works on that old Mac hardware.
>>
>> I would use linuxes on old Win hardware, not Macs.
>>
> Should work on either.

Not necessarily.  The harmony between linux and mac hardware is very 
dependent on WHICH Mac, which you have never stated yet.

There is only a small minority of linux users who mess with it on Mac 
hardware.  When you read discussions by that small cadre you find that 
sometimes there is fair compatibility and sometimes not.

You might compare it to people who like to 'build'/rebuild cars out of 
other car parts, such as different engine, different tranny, different 
rear end.  If you work with compatible pieces to the 'original', then it 
is pretty easy.  When you start mixing 'breeds', you have to be a pretty 
talented cross-breed assembler.

You aren't so adept at using linux that you can take on a complicated 
project and make it work satisfactorily, and your wife isn't even here. 
Since you haven't even addressed the situation of whether or not the 
particular unnamed Mac hardware is expected to be compatible or 
incompatible with the linux kernel in question, I expect to hear a lot 
of whining and not much useful information.

> I think the biggest issue is the 1.1 USB port. Might swap out the
> hard drive and that would help. If I do that, though, can spend $20
> and get the older version of OS X that will work with it (foolishly
> tossed the DVD about a month before the drive died!).

There are a lot of discussions to be found about both the ease and 
difficulties of having a satisfactory linux on mac.  Start with defining 
the Mac we are talking about here.


-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41729

Mike Easter wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>> My wife is now using Mint Cinnamon.
>>>
>>>> The machine is an older Mac.
>>>
>>> Bad idea to try linuxes on Mac hardware. I would stick with
>>> whatever version of Mac OS works on that old Mac hardware.
>>>
>>> I would use linuxes on old Win hardware, not Macs.
>>>
>> Should work on either.
> 
> Not necessarily.  The harmony between linux and mac hardware is very
> dependent on WHICH Mac, which you have never stated yet.
> 
> There is only a small minority of linux users who mess with it on Mac
> hardware.  When you read discussions by that small cadre you find that
> sometimes there is fair compatibility and sometimes not.
> 
> You might compare it to people who like to 'build'/rebuild cars out of
> other car parts, such as different engine, different tranny, different
> rear end.  If you work with compatible pieces to the 'original', then it
> is pretty easy.  When you start mixing 'breeds', you have to be a pretty
> talented cross-breed assembler.
> 
> You aren't so adept at using linux that you can take on a complicated
> project and make it work satisfactorily, and your wife isn't even here.
> Since you haven't even addressed the situation of whether or not the
> particular unnamed Mac hardware is expected to be compatible or
> incompatible with the linux kernel in question, I expect to hear a lot
> of whining and not much useful information.
> 
>> I think the biggest issue is the 1.1 USB port. Might swap out the
>> hard drive and that would help. If I do that, though, can spend $20
>> and get the older version of OS X that will work with it (foolishly
>> tossed the DVD about a month before the drive died!).
> 
> There are a lot of discussions to be found about both the ease and
> difficulties of having a satisfactory linux on mac.  Start with defining
> the Mac we are talking about here.
> 

No, please don't. The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser will see that as a 
invitation to yet another endless Snit circus.
He constantly claims that he knwos so much more about linux than real linux 
users. So let him fail miserably like he does always in technical things

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41732

On 1/30/17, 12:38 PM, in article o6o4kc$orp$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Mike Easter wrote:
> 
>> Snit wrote:
>>> Mike Easter wrote:
>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>>> My wife is now using Mint Cinnamon.
>>>> 
>>>>> The machine is an older Mac.
>>>> 
>>>> Bad idea to try linuxes on Mac hardware. I would stick with
>>>> whatever version of Mac OS works on that old Mac hardware.
>>>> 
>>>> I would use linuxes on old Win hardware, not Macs.
>>>> 
>>> Should work on either.
>> 
>> Not necessarily.  The harmony between linux and mac hardware is very
>> dependent on WHICH Mac, which you have never stated yet.
>> 
>> There is only a small minority of linux users who mess with it on Mac
>> hardware.  When you read discussions by that small cadre you find that
>> sometimes there is fair compatibility and sometimes not.
>> 
>> You might compare it to people who like to 'build'/rebuild cars out of
>> other car parts, such as different engine, different tranny, different
>> rear end.  If you work with compatible pieces to the 'original', then it
>> is pretty easy.  When you start mixing 'breeds', you have to be a pretty
>> talented cross-breed assembler.
>> 
>> You aren't so adept at using linux that you can take on a complicated
>> project and make it work satisfactorily, and your wife isn't even here.
>> Since you haven't even addressed the situation of whether or not the
>> particular unnamed Mac hardware is expected to be compatible or
>> incompatible with the linux kernel in question, I expect to hear a lot
>> of whining and not much useful information.
>> 
>>> I think the biggest issue is the 1.1 USB port. Might swap out the
>>> hard drive and that would help. If I do that, though, can spend $20
>>> and get the older version of OS X that will work with it (foolishly
>>> tossed the DVD about a month before the drive died!).
>> 
>> There are a lot of discussions to be found about both the ease and
>> difficulties of having a satisfactory linux on mac.  Start with defining
>> the Mac we are talking about here.
>> 
> 
> No, please don't. The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser will see that as a
> invitation to yet another endless Snit circus.
> He constantly claims that he knwos so much more about linux than real linux
> users. So let him fail miserably like he does always in technical things
> 
My .sig is right again!

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41730

On 1/30/17, 12:01 PM, in article ef9gt8Fnh10U1@mid.individual.net, "Mike
Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>> My wife is now using Mint Cinnamon.
>>> 
>>>> The machine is an older Mac.
>>> 
>>> Bad idea to try linuxes on Mac hardware. I would stick with
>>> whatever version of Mac OS works on that old Mac hardware.
>>> 
>>> I would use linuxes on old Win hardware, not Macs.
>>> 
>> Should work on either.
> 
> Not necessarily.  The harmony between linux and mac hardware is very
> dependent on WHICH Mac, which you have never stated yet.

20 inch 2007 iMac with 4 GB RAM. Has a Core 2 Duo at, I think, 2.4 GHz.

> There is only a small minority of linux users who mess with it on Mac
> hardware.  When you read discussions by that small cadre you find that
> sometimes there is fair compatibility and sometimes not.
> 
> You might compare it to people who like to 'build'/rebuild cars out of
> other car parts, such as different engine, different tranny, different
> rear end.  If you work with compatible pieces to the 'original', then it
> is pretty easy.  When you start mixing 'breeds', you have to be a pretty
> talented cross-breed assembler.
> 
> You aren't so adept at using linux that you can take on a complicated
> project and make it work satisfactorily, and your wife isn't even here.
> Since you haven't even addressed the situation of whether or not the
> particular unnamed Mac hardware is expected to be compatible or
> incompatible with the linux kernel in question, I expect to hear a lot
> of whining and not much useful information.

I have now moved to Xfce. It is working better... though it still will not
let me change the default app for opening PDFs. I suspect I will have to
manually edit some config file. The joy. :)

>> I think the biggest issue is the 1.1 USB port. Might swap out the
>> hard drive and that would help. If I do that, though, can spend $20
>> and get the older version of OS X that will work with it (foolishly
>> tossed the DVD about a month before the drive died!).
> 
> There are a lot of discussions to be found about both the ease and
> difficulties of having a satisfactory linux on mac.  Start with defining
> the Mac we are talking about here.




-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41734

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 12:38:22 -0700, Snit wrote:

> I have now moved to Xfce. It is working better... though it still will not
> let me change the default app for opening PDFs. I suspect I will have to
> manually edit some config file. The joy. :)

Open Thunar, browse to a pdf, right-click and select
Properties.  Under the 'Open With' drop-down box,
select Other Application...  Find the application
you want and click OK.  Done.  No need to manually
edit anything.

-- 
<Wildman> GNU/Linux user #557453
The cow died so I don't need your bull!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41738

On 1/30/17, 1:15 PM, in article
_q6dnefOkeRYAxLFnZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com, "Wildman"
<best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 12:38:22 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> I have now moved to Xfce. It is working better... though it still will not
>> let me change the default app for opening PDFs. I suspect I will have to
>> manually edit some config file. The joy. :)
> 
> Open Thunar, browse to a pdf, right-click and select
> Properties.  Under the 'Open With' drop-down box,
> select Other Application...  Find the application
> you want and click OK.  Done.  No need to manually
> edit anything.

Does not work. I select the program I want and it does not change. Can make
a video of it if needed.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41740

On 1/30/17, 1:15 PM, in article
_q6dnefOkeRYAxLFnZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com, "Wildman"
<best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 12:38:22 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> I have now moved to Xfce. It is working better... though it still will not
>> let me change the default app for opening PDFs. I suspect I will have to
>> manually edit some config file. The joy. :)
> 
> Open Thunar, browse to a pdf, right-click and select
> Properties.  Under the 'Open With' drop-down box,
> select Other Application...  Find the application
> you want and click OK.  Done.  No need to manually
> edit anything.

I know there are many times users SAY they have done something and have
not... so here is a video: <https://youtu.be/pW4b5oemBMw>.

As noted in the video, it does work for .mp4 files, but not PDF. Odd.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41741

Snit wrote:
> Wildman wrote:
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>> it still will not
>>> let me change the default app for opening PDFs.

I don't like to look at vids.  I glanced and saw something about 
ImageMagick.  IM is good for gfx files, not .pdf/s.

>> Open Thunar, browse to a pdf, right-click and select
>> Properties.  Under the 'Open With' drop-down box,
>> select Other Application...  Find the application
>> you want and click OK.  Done.  No need to manually
>> edit anything.
>
> I know there are many times users SAY they have done something and have
> not... so here is a video: <https://youtu.be/pW4b5oemBMw>.
>
> As noted in the video, it does work for .mp4 files, but not PDF. Odd.

The default .pdf viewer for xfce4 Mint18 is called 'document viewer' or 
xreader.  You can find it in the xfce menu by using the All 
(applications) function and finding it alphabetically as document viewer 
or starting it from the commandline with xreader.


-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41742

On 1/30/17, 3:19 PM, in article ef9sghFpsv6U1@mid.individual.net, "Mike
Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>> Wildman wrote:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>> 
>>>> it still will not
>>>> let me change the default app for opening PDFs.
> 
> I don't like to look at vids.  I glanced and saw something about
> ImageMagick.  IM is good for gfx files, not .pdf/s.

Right... which is why it is a poor choice for opening the PDFs. When it
does, though, it also messes up font spacing which is odd (in addition to
understandably making things less clear).

>>> Open Thunar, browse to a pdf, right-click and select
>>> Properties.  Under the 'Open With' drop-down box,
>>> select Other Application...  Find the application
>>> you want and click OK.  Done.  No need to manually
>>> edit anything.
>> 
>> I know there are many times users SAY they have done something and have
>> not... so here is a video: <https://youtu.be/pW4b5oemBMw>.
>> 
>> As noted in the video, it does work for .mp4 files, but not PDF. Odd.
> 
> The default .pdf viewer for xfce4 Mint18 is called 'document viewer' or
> xreader.  You can find it in the xfce menu by using the All
> (applications) function and finding it alphabetically as document viewer
> or starting it from the commandline with xreader.

Right... or right-clicking on the PDF and selecting Open With >

But the problem is when I go to properties it does not let me change the
default. It should. I know you said you do not like videos, but here is a 41
second one that shows the exact problem: <https://youtu.be/pW4b5oemBMw>.
That way it is clear it is not user error (or if it is user error that
should be clear, too!)

Exact same thing works for .mp4 files.


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41745 — Re: Mint Cinnamon: Printing, Monitor Settings, and right click [SOLVED!]

On 1/30/17, 3:25 PM, in article D4B50B69.8C8B9%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com,
"Snit" <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> On 1/30/17, 3:19 PM, in article ef9sghFpsv6U1@mid.individual.net, "Mike
> Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit wrote:
>>> Wildman wrote:
>>>> Snit wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> it still will not
>>>>> let me change the default app for opening PDFs.
>> 
>> I don't like to look at vids.  I glanced and saw something about
>> ImageMagick.  IM is good for gfx files, not .pdf/s.
> 
> Right... which is why it is a poor choice for opening the PDFs. When it
> does, though, it also messes up font spacing which is odd (in addition to
> understandably making things less clear).
> 
>>>> Open Thunar, browse to a pdf, right-click and select
>>>> Properties.  Under the 'Open With' drop-down box,
>>>> select Other Application...  Find the application
>>>> you want and click OK.  Done.  No need to manually
>>>> edit anything.
>>> 
>>> I know there are many times users SAY they have done something and have
>>> not... so here is a video: <https://youtu.be/pW4b5oemBMw>.
>>> 
>>> As noted in the video, it does work for .mp4 files, but not PDF. Odd.
>> 
>> The default .pdf viewer for xfce4 Mint18 is called 'document viewer' or
>> xreader.  You can find it in the xfce menu by using the All
>> (applications) function and finding it alphabetically as document viewer
>> or starting it from the commandline with xreader.
> 
> Right... or right-clicking on the PDF and selecting Open With >
> 
> But the problem is when I go to properties it does not let me change the
> default. It should. I know you said you do not like videos, but here is a 41
> second one that shows the exact problem: <https://youtu.be/pW4b5oemBMw>.
> That way it is clear it is not user error (or if it is user error that
> should be clear, too!)
> 
> Exact same thing works for .mp4 files.
> 

Problem solved. I went to /usr/share/applications and deleted the
ImageMagick desktop configuration files. The association now works
correctly.

Thanks all who offered support.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41735

Snit wrote:
> 20 inch 2007 iMac with 4 GB RAM. Has a Core 2 Duo at, I think, 2.4 GHz.

I believe all of the iMacs back to and including the 'polycarbonates' 
had USB2.  Apple never used usb1.0, only 1.1 which was called 1.

The imac G3 was usb1, which was powerpc.  The imac G4 was powerpc and 
started the imacs with USB2.  G5 also PPC and USB2.

All of the Intel iMacs were USB2.

-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41736

On 1/30/17, 1:15 PM, in article ef9l7fFoe3oU1@mid.individual.net, "Mike
Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>> 20 inch 2007 iMac with 4 GB RAM. Has a Core 2 Duo at, I think, 2.4 GHz.
> 
> I believe all of the iMacs back to and including the 'polycarbonates'
> had USB2.  Apple never used usb1.0, only 1.1 which was called 1.

Looking at MacTracker is says "USB 3 - 480 MBit/s".

At first I thought it wa claiming USB 3... which I *know* is not correct
(and I know is faster than that). But it has 3 ports at 480 MBit/s... which
makes it USB 2.0.

I stand corrected. My apologizes for the bad info.

> The imac G3 was usb1, which was powerpc.  The imac G4 was powerpc and
> started the imacs with USB2.  G5 also PPC and USB2.
> 
> All of the Intel iMacs were USB2.

Thank you. My mistake.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41737

Mike Easter wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>> 20 inch 2007 iMac with 4 GB RAM. Has a Core 2 Duo at, I think, 2.4 GHz.
>
> I believe all of the iMacs back to and including the 'polycarbonates'
> had USB2.

> All of the Intel iMacs were USB2.

Also, the intel imacs do OK with linux; and if you have that much cpu 
and ram, you should do OK.  I think I would boot it to run in ram using 
toram in the boot parameter, and I like the idea of XFCE over Cinnamon.


-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41739

On 1/30/17, 1:22 PM, in article ef9lkkFogmbU1@mid.individual.net, "Mike
Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:

> Mike Easter wrote:
>> Snit wrote:
>>> 20 inch 2007 iMac with 4 GB RAM. Has a Core 2 Duo at, I think, 2.4 GHz.
>> 
>> I believe all of the iMacs back to and including the 'polycarbonates'
>> had USB2.
> 
>> All of the Intel iMacs were USB2.
> 
> Also, the intel imacs do OK with linux; and if you have that much cpu
> and ram, you should do OK.  I think I would boot it to run in ram using
> toram in the boot parameter, and I like the idea of XFCE over Cinnamon.
> 
Thank you... will try setting toram. Good idea.

If I recall correctly there should be an option in the boot menu... can look
it up later myself if you do not know details off hand.


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41731

Snit wrote:
> I think the biggest issue is the 1.1 USB port. Might swap out the
> hard drive and that would help. If I do that, though, can spend $20
> and get the older version of OS X that will work with it (foolishly
> tossed the DVD about a month before the drive died!).

I'm trying to put together the clues to the hardware.  I can't 'compute' 
any version of OS X and USB 1.1. usb1.1 was released '98. USB2 in 2000. 
OS X in 2001 Mar.  Before OS X were the class Mac OS System numbers up 
to the 9s.

It seems to me that this hardware is too 'old'/retro to be spending any 
money on; however, if you could get some old hardware somewhere free or 
cheaply enough, as well as a replacement DVD for the OS, it would be 
useful as an old Mac OS.  I don't know about as a linux yet.

-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41733

On 1/30/17, 12:43 PM, in article ef9jbgFo1ftU1@mid.individual.net, "Mike
Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:

> Snit wrote:
>> I think the biggest issue is the 1.1 USB port. Might swap out the
>> hard drive and that would help. If I do that, though, can spend $20
>> and get the older version of OS X that will work with it (foolishly
>> tossed the DVD about a month before the drive died!).
> 
> I'm trying to put together the clues to the hardware.  I can't 'compute'
> any version of OS X and USB 1.1. usb1.1 was released '98. USB2 in 2000.
> OS X in 2001 Mar.  Before OS X were the class Mac OS System numbers up
> to the 9s.
> 
> It seems to me that this hardware is too 'old'/retro to be spending any
> money on; however, if you could get some old hardware somewhere free or
> cheaply enough, as well as a replacement DVD for the OS, it would be
> useful as an old Mac OS.  I don't know about as a linux yet.

Agreed that I do not want to spend money on it -- which is why I went with
Linux. Would go with an external hard drive but the only fast port is, I
think, Firewire which is obsolete now. Not going to get one that has that.

At some point I likely will get a new Mac for myself -- though if Apple does
not update their iMacs maybe not. That is a whole other and unrelated
frustration. :)

Anyway, assuming I get a new iMac my wife will get the one I am working on
and she will likely go back to macOS (she is using it now as a separate user
on one of the kids machines, but also uses her machine with Linux).


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux

csiph-web