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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #61672 > unrolled thread

Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-01 20:06 -0700
    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-07-01 20:54 -0700
      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-02 04:19 +0000
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Beli <baiheli.pip@xs4all.nl> - 2014-07-02 08:59 +0200
          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-02 13:23 +0000
    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Beli <baiheli.pip@xs4all.nl> - 2014-07-02 08:56 +0200
      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-07-02 09:54 +0100
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-02 10:25 -0700
          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-07-02 19:10 +0100
            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-02 11:30 -0700
          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-04 08:25 +0200
            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-07-04 15:52 -0400
              Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-04 14:49 -0700
                Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 18:05 -0400
                  Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Beli <baiheli.pip@xs4all.nl> - 2014-07-05 09:35 +0200
                    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-07-05 12:27 -0400
                Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-07-04 18:51 -0700
                  Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:01 -0700
                    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-07-04 19:54 -0700
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 23:07 -0400
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 03:09 +0000
                        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 23:15 -0400
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:20 +0000
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-07-05 02:04 -0400
                  Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 22:14 -0400
                    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-07-04 22:34 -0400
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 02:59 +0000
                        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2014-07-05 02:57 -0400
                          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 07:53 +0000
                            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2014-07-05 20:19 -0400
                          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 07:18 -0700
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 23:07 -0400
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 03:13 +0000
                  Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 02:49 +0000
                    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:02 -0700
                  Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 03:04 +0000
                    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-07-05 02:08 -0400
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-07-05 18:37 +1200
                        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-07-05 03:41 -0400
                          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 15:07 +0000
                            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-07-05 14:15 -0400
                          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-07-06 14:59 +1200
                            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-07-06 02:42 -0400
                              Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-05 23:51 -0700
                              Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-07-06 23:59 +1200
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 07:16 -0700
    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-02 09:01 +0000
      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos billy@MIX.COM - 2014-07-02 15:55 +0000
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-02 09:05 -0700
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-02 18:06 +0000
          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-02 15:11 -0400
            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-02 19:56 +0000
              Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-02 17:37 -0700
                Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-03 05:31 +0000
                  Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 16:06 -0400
                    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-05 09:11 +0000
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-02 22:39 +0000
      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-02 09:04 -0700
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-07-02 12:44 -0400
          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-02 09:53 -0700
            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-07-02 15:16 -0400
              Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-02 12:32 -0700
                Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-02 17:24 -0700
                Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2014-07-02 22:49 -0400
                  Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-02 21:01 -0700
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-02 18:11 +0000
          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-02 15:11 -0400
            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-02 19:57 +0000
              Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-02 22:39 +0000
                Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-03 05:30 +0000
                  Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-03 10:20 -0700
                    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-04 09:23 +0000
                      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 16:06 -0400
                        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-05 09:12 +0000
                          Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-06 21:56 -0400
                            Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-07 22:53 +0000
      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-02 15:10 -0400
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-02 19:54 +0000
      Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-02 22:36 +0000
        Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-07-03 05:22 +0000
    Re: Apple promises 'professional-grade' features in OS X Photos Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-02 22:34 +0000

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

#61879

Okay, so one time? In band camp? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> was all, like: 
 --> 	 Fri, 04 Jul 2014 19:54:03 -0700 <mcmurtrie-30E521.19540304072014@news.sonic.net>
> In article <040720141901060016%michelle@michelle.org>,
>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

>> In article <mcmurtrie-29397D.18515904072014@news.sonic.net>, Kevin
>> McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
>> 
>> > I'm still a software developer in Silicon Valley.  Everyone that I know 
>> > is preparing to to jump to another platform if/when the Apple market 
>> > collapses.
>> 
>> Yup, and if/when the Android market collapses, they'll jump to another
>> platform.

> Android isn't likely to collapse any time within the next 15 years.  
> It's an open Linux system

FSVO open and FSVO of Linux.

Android is Java running on a Linux kernel, which is not actually Linux.
For the vast majority of Android users, it is not at all open in any
way. It is still a "mommy may I?" system where you need carrier
permission (and carrier effort, which nearly never comes) to update your
device.

> that can continue with or without Google.  The 
> same can't be said for MacOS or iOS.  Pretty much anything done on MacOS 
> and iOS now has an equivalent on at least one of Linux and Windows 
> systems at the moment.

FSVO of equivalent that mean "sort kind of sound the same, but clunky
and not as good", at least if you get away from the Google ecosystem.

-- 
and I lift my glass to the Awful Truth / which you can't reveal to the
Ears of Youth / except to say it isn't worth a dime

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

#61885

In article <slrnlrer3k.1b2u.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >> > I'm still a software developer in Silicon Valley.  Everyone that I know 
> >> > is preparing to to jump to another platform if/when the Apple market 
> >> > collapses.
> >> 
> >> Yup, and if/when the Android market collapses, they'll jump to another
> >> platform.
> 
> > Android isn't likely to collapse any time within the next 15 years.  
> > It's an open Linux system
> 
> FSVO open and FSVO of Linux.
> 
> Android is Java running on a Linux kernel, which is not actually Linux.
> For the vast majority of Android users, it is not at all open in any
> way. It is still a "mommy may I?" system where you need carrier
> permission (and carrier effort, which nearly never comes) to update your
> device.

what people think of when they think of android is a system that
includes google services, and to have that requires google's approval
for the device along with licensing fees. 

amazon forked android and has their own ecosystem, without the google
play store or other google services. most apps are available in
amazon's app store but not all. 

there are also a lot of very low end devices in emerging markets that
basically feature phones, without google services.
> 
> > that can continue with or without Google.  The 
> > same can't be said for MacOS or iOS.  Pretty much anything done on MacOS 
> > and iOS now has an equivalent on at least one of Linux and Windows 
> > systems at the moment.
> 
> FSVO of equivalent that mean "sort kind of sound the same, but clunky
> and not as good", at least if you get away from the Google ecosystem.

basically.

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

#61891

On 2014-07-05, Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
> In article <040720141901060016%michelle@michelle.org>,
>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> In article <mcmurtrie-29397D.18515904072014@news.sonic.net>, Kevin
>> McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
>> 
>> > I'm still a software developer in Silicon Valley.  Everyone that I know 
>> > is preparing to to jump to another platform if/when the Apple market 
>> > collapses.
>> 
>> Yup, and if/when the Android market collapses, they'll jump to another
>> platform.
>
> Android isn't likely to collapse any time within the next 15 years.  
> It's an open Linux system that can continue with or without Google.  The 
> same can't be said for MacOS or iOS.  Pretty much anything done on MacOS 
> and iOS now has an equivalent on at least one of Linux and Windows 
> systems at the moment.

That's something that only someone who doesn't know much about Mac OS X
and iOS would dare say. Otherwise, you come off looking rather foolish
to those in the know.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#61938

On 14-07-04 22:54, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:

> Android isn't likely to collapse any time within the next 15 years.  
> It's an open Linux system that can continue with or without Google. 

This is a misconception. Kernel may be based on Linux, but it is a Java
engine, with classes provided by Google. And those classes get updated
by the Google Play store on most phones. (so even of you don't get a new
Android version, you still get some updates under the hood).

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

#61841

In article <mcmurtrie-29397D.18515904072014@news.sonic.net>, Kevin
McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:

> > > If the Adobe market on Macs is still borderline, I could see Apple
> > > giving Adobe a nudge in the right direction by no longer producing
> > > competing software.
> > 
> > The Adobe market on Macs has never been "borderline".
> 
> Apple was _extremely_ close to going out of business around the time 
> MacOS 9 and the junky PPC 603 Performas were their main product.  I was 
> a software developer in Silicon Valley at the time and everybody was 
> talking about Mac development shutting down.  The customer base was 
> falling below 3%, early versions of OS 9 were too buggy, and new PPC 603 
> Performa models were far too slow for modern features. 

things were turning around by mac os 8.1, and certainly by mac os 9.

it was in the 7.5-7.6 days when apple was in trouble and companies were
questioning whether to continue to support them.

> If I remember 
> correctly, Adobe did unofficially abandon Apple development.  

they didn't, but it was a strong consideration.

> The 
> company I worked for unofficially abandoned Apple development too. (BTW, 
> I fixed one of the huge OS 9 bugs that made apps crash.  You're welcome.)
> 
> Microsoft saved Apple's butt to avoid some complicated anti-trust 
> regulations.  Jobs returning was good enough news that some Mac software 
> development eventually returned.

if you mean microsoft's $150m stock purchase, that was an out of court
settlement for infringing on quicktime ip.

> So now back in the year 2014:
> 
> - Apple delivers the "Trash Can" Mac Pro, which is like a very fast 
> sport bike for professionals who asked for a truck.

yet it's selling quite well and only recently caught up with backorders.

> - More iCloud integration, but iCloud storage is 10 years out of date 
> and not compatible with non-Apple devices.

why would they support non-apple devices? apple wants you to buy more
apple products.

> - Controlling software sales and locking out the free market.

all companies do that. just look at microsoft.

> - Both Google and Microsoft are competition.

google definitely is, but microsoft not so much anymore.

> - "Sandboxing" complicates, cripples, and makes some use patterns 
> confusing.

it complicates some things and simplifies others.

> - Not adding support for modern open standards.  Not even Bluetooth File 
> Transfer on iPhones.

bluetooth file transfer is ridiculously slow, which is one of the key
reasons it's not there.

long ago, when phones didn't have wifi, that's all there was, plus the
stuff that was transferred was tiny, typically contact information.

today, files are *much* bigger and file transfer over bluetooth would
be *horrible*.

instead, they have airdrop which uses bluetooth to establish a wifi
connection which is *much* faster.

> - Not documenting graphics systems again.

what part isn't documented?

the documentation isn't as good as it could be but it's there.

> - Last few OS releases are just screwing with the GUI while the core 
> becomes unusably obsolete.

it's not obsolete, unless you mean it's based on unix which is archaic.

> - Apple announces yet another development environment that doesn't work 
> with anything else.

eh? which environment is that?

if you mean swift, that's a *language*, not a development environment,
and it fixes most of what's wrong with objective-c.

> I'm still a software developer in Silicon Valley.  Everyone that I know 
> is preparing to to jump to another platform if/when the Apple market 
> collapses.

then they're going to be sadly disappointed, because it won't.

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

#61849

On 14-07-04 22:14, nospam wrote:

> things were turning around by mac os 8.1, and certainly by mac os 9.

I think the arrival of Jobs stopped the bleeding. But rebirth of
interest in Apple didn't return until OS-X. That is my take.

> why would they support non-apple devices? apple wants you to buy more
> apple products.

For a professional workstation, people don't expect closed architecture
and expect to be able to plug in standard peripherals with some
expansion.  A number of customers may not need that and be happy with
the new macPro because they are in a large shop where the preipherals
are centrally served. but for small office, it becomes a hindrance.

If/when Adobe were to release its suite on Linux, it would more likely
eat into Apple sales than in Windows sales because many shops who need
video/photo processing also want open architectures and not be hindered
by proprietary stuff.


> google definitely is, but microsoft not so much anymore.

The momentum gained by Microsoft with Windows 95 is still generating
hige sales at AMicrosoft even though Microsoft is no longer
"attractive". Note that complaints about Windows 8 resonnate (to a
lesser extend) within OS-X since theyr are akin to the "back to mac"
changes that have happened since Lion.

> bluetooth file transfer is ridiculously slow, which is one of the key
> reasons it's not there.

Nop. file transfer isn't there because Jobs insisted IOS had no file
system. This was likely strenghened by deals with music industry, to
support the removal of DRM on Itunes music since customers couldn't
easily send music to each other.


> 
> it's not obsolete, unless you mean it's based on unix which is archaic.

Apple's GUI is not based on Unix/X. It supports it, but not based on it.
Linux GUI is based on Unix-X and has a more modern toolkit than the
original Motif.

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

#61863

On 2014-07-05, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
> For a professional workstation, people don't expect closed architecture
> and expect to be able to plug in standard peripherals with some
> expansion.  A number of customers may not need that and be happy with
> the new macPro because they are in a large shop where the preipherals
> are centrally served. but for small office, it becomes a hindrance.

I have a small office, and the new Mac Pro would fit perfectly into it
without issue. I am sure I am not alone. Apple seems to be fairly sure
of it too. Clearly professionals are buying them. I'm betting you are in
the minority.

> Nop. file transfer isn't there because Jobs insisted IOS had no file
> system. This was likely strenghened by deals with music industry, to
> support the removal of DRM on Itunes music since customers couldn't
> easily send music to each other.

No, the reason Apple decided to hide the file system from iOS users is
because they realized early on that dealing with file systems on mobile
devices is complicated and problematic for customers. And sure enough,
there are easier and better ways to transfer things on iOS than silly
Bluetooth file transfers. Apple was right.

>> it's not obsolete, unless you mean it's based on unix which is archaic.
>
> Apple's GUI is not based on Unix/X. It supports it, but not based on it.

No, the GUI runs on top of Darwin, and cannot be separated from it. And
besides, I think it's pretty clear the OP was talking about the core OS
rather than the GUI.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#61941

On 2014-07-05 02:59:38 +0000, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> said:

> I have a small office, and the new Mac Pro would fit perfectly into it
> without issue. I am sure I am not alone. Apple seems to be fairly sure
> of it too. Clearly professionals are buying them. I'm betting you are in
> the minority.

Well heeled professionals, maybe.  I have an older Mac Pro at home, and 
I wouldn't even consider buying a new one.  The price tag is 
prohibitive, and I don't have the real estate to start plugging 
peripherals in.

High in price and low in expandability is not a good combination.  
Outside of being faster, they don't appear to offer much else.  It has 
only 4 RAM slots…  More would have been nice.

It's fast. It's gorgeous. But so is a Ferrarri… and I wouldn't want to 
try and sell either one to a small business.
-- 
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI

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

#61951

Okay, so one time? In band camp? FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> was all, like: 
 --> 	 Sat, 5 Jul 2014 02:57:40 -0400 <lp87l4$29s$1@dont-email.me>
> On 2014-07-05 02:59:38 +0000, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> said:

>> I have a small office, and the new Mac Pro would fit perfectly into it
>> without issue. I am sure I am not alone. Apple seems to be fairly sure
>> of it too. Clearly professionals are buying them. I'm betting you are in
>> the minority.

> Well heeled professionals, maybe.  I have an older Mac Pro at home, and 
> I wouldn't even consider buying a new one.  The price tag is 
> prohibitive, and I don't have the real estate to start plugging 
> peripherals in.

> High in price and low in expandability

36 thunderbolt devices and a couple hundred USB3 devices doesn't SEEM
like low in expandability.

<http://www.macworld.com/article/2146360/lab-tested-the-mac-pro-daisy-chain-challenge.html>

> is not a good combination.  

Nor is it accurate.

> Outside of being faster, they don't appear to offer much else.  It has 
> only 4 RAM slots…  More would have been nice.

64GB of RAM is plenty.

> It's fast. It's gorgeous. But so is a Ferrarri… and I wouldn't want to 
> try and sell either one to a small business.

Why would a small business want a Mac Pro? A Mac mini (or three) are the
ideal SOHO machines.

-- 
"Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary
 and is just a natural part of the way the world works. Anything that’s
 invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty- five is new and exciting
 and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it. Anything
 invented after you’re thirty-five is against the natural order of
 things."  -- Douglas Adams

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

#62001

On 2014-07-05 07:53:47 +0000, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> said:

> Okay, so one time? In band camp? FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> was all, like:
>  --> 	 Sat, 5 Jul 2014 02:57:40 -0400 <lp87l4$29s$1@dont-email.me>
>> On 2014-07-05 02:59:38 +0000, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> said:
> 
>>> I have a small office, and the new Mac Pro would fit perfectly into it
>>> without issue. I am sure I am not alone. Apple seems to be fairly sure
>>> of it too. Clearly professionals are buying them. I'm betting you are in
>>> the minority.
> 
>> Well heeled professionals, maybe.  I have an older Mac Pro at home, and
>> I wouldn't even consider buying a new one.  The price tag is
>> prohibitive, and I don't have the real estate to start plugging
>> peripherals in.
> 
>> High in price and low in expandability
> 
> 36 thunderbolt devices and a couple hundred USB3 devices doesn't SEEM
> like low in expandability.
> 
> <http://www.macworld.com/article/2146360/lab-tested-the-mac-pro-daisy-chain-challenge.html>

is 
> 
>> not a good combination.
> 
> Nor is it accurate.

Desk space is usually limited, especially for devices that are hands 
on, like optical drives and scanners.

> 
>> Outside of being faster, they don't appear to offer much else.  It has
>> only 4 RAM slots…  More would have been nice.
> 
> 64GB of RAM is plenty.

64 GB would be usable…  More would be better.

> 
>> It's fast. It's gorgeous. But so is a Ferrarri… and I wouldn't want to
>> try and sell either one to a small business.
> 
> Why would a small business want a Mac Pro? A Mac mini (or three) are the
> ideal SOHO machines.

We bought 2 new iMacs.  My betters thought that was a better use of 
their budget.  Normally, we would have gone with the Pro.


-- 
Never wrestle with a pig.  You both get dirty... and the pig LIKES it.

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

#61970

In article <lp87l4$29s$1@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote:

> It's fast. It's gorgeous. But so is a FerrarriŠ and I wouldn't want to 
> try and sell either one to a small business.

A small business doesn't need it unless the business of the business
needs it.

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

#61873

In article <53b76430$0$17166$c3e8da3$dd9697d2@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> > things were turning around by mac os 8.1, and certainly by mac os 9.
> 
> I think the arrival of Jobs stopped the bleeding. 

he definitely did.

> But rebirth of
> interest in Apple didn't return until OS-X. That is my take.

if anything, it was the ipod and the ipod halo effect.

> > why would they support non-apple devices? apple wants you to buy more
> > apple products.
> 
> For a professional workstation, people don't expect closed architecture
> and expect to be able to plug in standard peripherals with some
> expansion. 

standard peripherals work just fine on macs and have for decades.

> A number of customers may not need that and be happy with
> the new macPro because they are in a large shop where the preipherals
> are centrally served. but for small office, it becomes a hindrance.

mac pros have standard interfaces, including usb 3, thunderbolt, hdmi,
ethernet, wifi and bluetooth.

> If/when Adobe were to release its suite on Linux, it would more likely
> eat into Apple sales than in Windows sales because many shops who need
> video/photo processing also want open architectures and not be hindered
> by proprietary stuff.

adobe has *no* interest whatsoever in bothering with linux. it's a
complete waste of time because there are too few linux users to justify
it.

they once offered photoshop on unix about 20 years ago and it was a
disaster.

> > google definitely is, but microsoft not so much anymore.
> 
> The momentum gained by Microsoft with Windows 95 is still generating
> hige sales at AMicrosoft even though Microsoft is no longer
> "attractive". Note that complaints about Windows 8 resonnate (to a
> lesser extend) within OS-X since theyr are akin to the "back to mac"
> changes that have happened since Lion.

windows 8 is a market failure and windows phone is struggling with low
single digit market share. 

the future is mobile, with apple and google in the lead and microsoft a
very, very distant third.

> > bluetooth file transfer is ridiculously slow, which is one of the key
> > reasons it's not there.
> 
> Nop. file transfer isn't there because Jobs insisted IOS had no file
> system. This was likely strenghened by deals with music industry, to
> support the removal of DRM on Itunes music since customers couldn't
> easily send music to each other.

nope. bluetooth file transfer isn't there because bluetooth is far too
slow to be useful for transferring much of anything bigger than
contacts.

> > it's not obsolete, unless you mean it's based on unix which is archaic.
> 
> Apple's GUI is not based on Unix/X. It supports it, but not based on it.
> Linux GUI is based on Unix-X and has a more modern toolkit than the
> original Motif.

the gui isn't obsolete. however, unix is horribly primitive.

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

#61882

Okay, so one time? In band camp? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> was all, like: 
 --> 	 Fri, 04 Jul 2014 22:34:23 -0400 <53b76430$0$17166$c3e8da3$dd9697d2@news.astraweb.com>
> On 14-07-04 22:14, nospam wrote:

>> things were turning around by mac os 8.1, and certainly by mac os 9.

> I think the arrival of Jobs stopped the bleeding. But rebirth of
> interest in Apple didn't return until OS-X. That is my take.

You are an lying sack of shit, and you know it.

-- 
Some people are like a Slinky toy - not really good for anything, but
you still can't help but smile when you shove them down the stairs.

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

#61859

On 2014-07-05, Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
> Microsoft saved Apple's butt to avoid some complicated anti-trust 
> regulations.

That myth was wrong decades ago, and it's still just as wrong today:

<http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/stop-the-lies-the-day-that-microsoft-saved-apple/7036>

>  Jobs returning was good enough news that some Mac software 
> development eventually returned.

No, what turned developers around was the clear roadmap that came after
the NeXT acquisition. Before that, Apple's roadmap was flopping around
like a fish out of water for years, which is what drove developers away
to begin with. Jobs just happened to be instrumental in that NeXT
acquisition.

> So now back in the year 2014:
>
> - Apple delivers the "Trash Can" Mac Pro, which is like a very fast 
> sport bike for professionals who asked for a truck.

That's your opinion, and is not reflective of *all* professionals. Some
of us professionals actually like the new Mac Pro - yes, even
developers.

> - More iCloud integration, but iCloud storage is 10 years out of date 
> and not compatible with non-Apple devices.

It's not mandatory by any means. Hardly a problem.

> - Controlling software sales and locking out the free market.

Now you're starting to sound like a Free Software zealot. The rest of us
don't mind Apple's control over this terrific platform. And clearly the
market shows customers don't mind so much either.

> - Both Google and Microsoft are competition.

There has always been competition.

> - "Sandboxing" complicates, cripples, and makes some use patterns 
> confusing.

Yet somehow developers still love it. That could have something to do
with the fact that it enhances security significantly, and protects
customer privacy, among other things.

> - Not adding support for modern open standards.  Not even Bluetooth File 
> Transfer on iPhones.

iOS users don't access the file system directly, so that's not needed,
and there are easier and better ways to transfer things in iOS anyway.

> - Not documenting graphics systems again.

Which would those be?

> - Last few OS releases are just screwing with the GUI while the core 
> becomes unusably obsolete.

That's a flat-out lie. Any developer who has paid attention knows Apple
has been making *significant* changes under the hood in iOS on a regular
basis.

> - Apple announces yet another development environment that doesn't work 
> with anything else.

You're upset because Apple doesn't target your preferred platforms?
Your Free Software slip is showing again.

> I'm still a software developer in Silicon Valley.  Everyone that I know 
> is preparing to to jump to another platform if/when the Apple market 
> collapses.

I think that says something about your social circle of professional
friends. ; )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#61865

In article <c1p7eiF1g06U1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > - Controlling software sales and locking out the free market.
> 
> Now you're starting to sound like a Free Software zealot. The rest of us
> don't mind Apple's control over this terrific platform. And clearly the
> market shows customers don't mind so much either.

Furthermore, Apple doesn't control software sales, nor does it lock out
any market.  Apple does control software sales through the Mac App
store, but there's nothing preventing software vendors from selling
outside of that store.

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

#61866

Okay, so one time? In band camp? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> was all, like: 
 --> 	 Fri, 04 Jul 2014 18:51:59 -0700 <mcmurtrie-29397D.18515904072014@news.sonic.net>
> In article <2014070414493678818-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>  Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>> On 2014-07-04 19:52:28 +0000, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> said:
>> 
>> > Comment on the whole issue:
>> > 
>> > Adobe switched to subscription paradigm I have no idea how well that is
>> > working out for them.
>> 
>> Not too bad, Not too bad at all.
>> 
>> > At one point, Adobe had to be "convinced" to continue to produce for the
>> > Mac ecosystem. Its focus had switched to Windows marketplace. Not sure
>> > how much the success of OS-X in recent years has caused Adobe to refocus
>> > on the Mac.  People buying laptops may not be the ones who buy the full
>> > suite of Adobe products.
>> 
>> I have never seen any move away from the Mac environment by Adobe, and 
>> i have been a PS user on Macs since PS7. I currently use PS CC 2014 + 
>> LR5 on this Mac.
>> I can see some of the CC Suite being used on laptops, but not 
>> necessarily the entire Suite.
>> 
>> > If the Adobe market on Macs is still borderline, I could see Apple
>> > giving Adobe a nudge in the right direction by no longer producing
>> > competing software.
>> 
>> The Adobe market on Macs has never been "borderline".

> Apple was _extremely_ close to going out of business around the time 
> MacOS 9 and the junky PPC 603 Performas were their main product.  I was 
> a software developer in Silicon Valley at the time and everybody was 
> talking about Mac development shutting down.  The customer base was 
> falling below 3%, early versions of OS 9 were too buggy, and new PPC 603 
> Performa models were far too slow for modern features.  If I remember 
> correctly, Adobe did unofficially abandon Apple development.  The 
> company I worked for unofficially abandoned Apple development too. (BTW, 
> I fixed one of the huge OS 9 bugs that made apps crash.  You're welcome.)

Your timeline/recollection is a bit off. When Jobs returned to Apple,
System 7.7 was in beta test. He renamed it Mac OS 8 to get out of the
licensing deals. Mac OS 9 wasn't out until late 1999 (October 23).

> Microsoft saved Apple's butt

No, that is not at all correct.

[rest deleted, because it's crap]

-- 
'Is it heroic to die like this?' said Conina. 'I think it is,' he said,
'and when it comes to dying, there's only one opinion that matters.'

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

#61939

On 14-07-04 23:04, Lewis wrote:

> Your timeline/recollection is a bit off. When Jobs returned to Apple,
> System 7.7 was in beta test. He renamed it Mac OS 8 to get out of the
> licensing deals. Mac OS 9 wasn't out until late 1999 (October 23).

Is there a timeline for when Jobs returned part time to Apple, when
Apple purchased Next and Apple announced it would ditch Mac OS and go
with OS-X ?

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

#61940

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 14-07-04 23:04, Lewis wrote:
> 
> > Your timeline/recollection is a bit off. When Jobs returned to Apple,
> > System 7.7 was in beta test. He renamed it Mac OS 8 to get out of the
> > licensing deals. Mac OS 9 wasn't out until late 1999 (October 23).
> 
> Is there a timeline for when Jobs returned part time to Apple, when
> Apple purchased Next and Apple announced it would ditch Mac OS and go
> with OS-X ?

The bits relating to NeXT and the return of Jobs are mentioned here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Apple_Inc.#1996:_Return_of_Steve_Jobs

NeXT was bought in December 1996 and Jobs was interim CEO from July
1997.

The timeline of Mac OS and Mac models can be gleaned from many sources,
e.g. here is a selected summary from MacTracker (it doesn't list the day
of the month).

Jan 1997        Mac OS 7.6
Jul 1997        Mac OS 8.0
Jan 1998        Mac OS 8.1
May 1998        iMac announced
Aug 1998        iMac available
Oct 1998        Mac OS 8.5
Mar 1999        Mac OS X Server 1.0 (based on NeXT-like UI)
May 1999        Mac OS 8.6
Oct 1999        Mac OS 9.0
Sep 2000        Mac OS X Public Beta (with Aqua UI)
Jan 2001        Mac OS 9.1
Mar 2001        Mac OS X 10.0
Jun 2001        Mac OS 9.2
Aug 2001        Mac OS 9.2.1
Sep 2001        Mac OS X 10.1
Dec 2001        Mac OS 9.2.2 (final version)
Aug 2002        Mac OS X 10.2

I was a member of AAPDA from about 1996 and was getting Rhapsody
developer releases.

Looking through my email archives, the oldest message I can find
mentioning Rhapsody (before it was called "Mac OS X") was an article
from Matt Deatherage published via TidBits (#363), which I got in late
January 1997, leading me to think the announcement was probably in the
January 1997 MacWorld Expo keynote. That's about a month after Apple
bought NeXT.

There was a lot more info about Rhapsody after WWDC in May 1997.

Therefore the entire lifetime of Mac OS 8 was in the shadow of the
upcoming release of OS X, and Mac OS 9 overlapped the release of early
versions.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

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

#61945

On 14-07-05 02:37, David Empson wrote:

> Therefore the entire lifetime of Mac OS 8 was in the shadow of the
> upcoming release of OS X, and Mac OS 9 overlapped the release of early
> versions.

Thanks. I was under the impression that it was only 9 that overlapped
OS-X (since it introduced cocoa which would also be on OS-X)

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

#61972

On 2014-07-05, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 14-07-05 02:37, David Empson wrote:
>
>> Therefore the entire lifetime of Mac OS 8 was in the shadow of the
>> upcoming release of OS X, and Mac OS 9 overlapped the release of early
>> versions.
>
> Thanks. I was under the impression that it was only 9 that overlapped
> OS-X (since it introduced cocoa which would also be on OS-X)

Were you not around back then, or something?

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web