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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #54788 > unrolled thread

Downloding Mavericks

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

Contents

  Downloding Mavericks David Downing <david.h.downing@gmail.com> - 2014-01-17 06:13 -0800
    Re: Downloding Mavericks me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2014-01-17 14:43 +0000
    Re: Downloding Mavericks David Downing <david.h.downing@gmail.com> - 2014-01-17 06:57 -0800
    Re: Downloding Mavericks Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2014-01-17 10:15 -0600
      Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-17 11:43 -0500
        Re: Downloding Mavericks JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-17 13:29 -0500
          Re: Downloding Mavericks Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 12:15 -0700
            Re: Downloding Mavericks super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> - 2014-01-18 04:55 -0600
              Re: Downloding Mavericks Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-19 09:37 +1300
              Re: Downloding Mavericks J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2014-01-18 15:45 -0500
                Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-18 16:45 -0500
                Re: Downloding Mavericks Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-19 13:30 +1300
          Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-17 14:30 -0500
          Re: Downloding Mavericks "Mr. Strat" <mrstrat@nospam.gmail.com> - 2014-01-18 06:05 -0800
          Re: Downloding Mavericks Barry OGrady <atheist@hotmail.com.au> - 2014-04-12 11:22 +1000
            Re: Downloding Mavericks Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2014-04-12 10:18 -0400
              Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-12 13:55 -0400
                Re: Downloding Mavericks Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2014-04-12 14:50 -0400
                  Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-12 15:13 -0400
                    Re: Downloding Mavericks me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2014-04-12 20:47 +0000
                      Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-12 17:11 -0400
                        Re: Downloding Mavericks Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-04-12 22:25 +0000
                      Re: Downloding Mavericks Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-04-13 01:27 +0000
                      Re: Downloding Mavericks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-04-13 08:21 +0200
                  Re: Downloding Mavericks Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-04-13 01:26 +0000
                    Re: Downloding Mavericks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-04-13 09:44 +0200
                      Re: Downloding Mavericks Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-04-13 21:32 +0000
        Re: Downloding Mavericks Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 11:59 -0700
          Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-17 14:30 -0500
            Re: Downloding Mavericks Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 13:31 -0700
              Re: Downloding Mavericks dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2014-01-18 08:54 +1100
              Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-17 18:39 -0500
              Re: Downloding Mavericks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-18 10:27 +0000
            Re: Downloding Mavericks "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2014-01-20 16:26 -0500
              Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 16:29 -0500
      Re: Downloding Mavericks JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-17 13:23 -0500
        Re: Downloding Mavericks me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2014-01-19 17:19 +0000
          Re: Downloding Mavericks Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-20 09:07 +1300
      Re: Downloding Mavericks Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-18 09:41 +1300
        Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-17 18:39 -0500
          Re: Downloding Mavericks JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-17 19:02 -0500
            Re: Downloding Mavericks Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-01-17 17:12 -0700
            Re: Downloding Mavericks me@home.spamsucks.ca (Kiraly) - 2014-01-18 00:14 +0000
              Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-17 20:02 -0500
              Re: Downloding Mavericks Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-18 10:55 -0500
                Re: Downloding Mavericks Otto Pylot <otto@bogus.address.com> - 2014-01-18 09:19 -0800
                  Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-18 09:32 -0800
                    Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-18 13:12 -0500
                      Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-18 10:22 -0800
                        Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-18 13:53 -0500
                          Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-20 12:33 -0800
                            Re: Downloding Mavericks Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-01-20 13:09 -0800
                              Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 16:28 -0500
                                Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-20 14:00 -0800
                                  Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 18:43 -0500
                                    Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-20 16:45 -0800
                                      Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 21:37 -0500
                                        Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-20 19:44 -0800
                                          Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-21 04:46 -0500
                                            Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-21 06:44 -0800
                                              Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-25 19:49 -0500
                                            Re: Downloding Mavericks David Fritzinger <dfritzin@nospam.mac.com> - 2014-01-21 10:44 -0500
                                              Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-21 08:50 -0800
                                                Re: Downloding Mavericks Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-21 17:16 +0000
                                                Re: Downloding Mavericks Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-22 09:15 +1300
                                  Re: Downloding Mavericks Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-21 02:03 +0000
                            Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 16:28 -0500
                              Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-20 14:02 -0800
                                Re: Downloding Mavericks Joe Wolf Dee <joedid@email.com> - 2014-01-20 17:24 -0500
                                Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 18:43 -0500
                                  Re: Downloding Mavericks Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2014-01-20 16:50 -0800
                                    Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 21:37 -0500
                    Re: Downloding Mavericks dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2014-01-19 08:03 +1100
                  Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-18 13:12 -0500
            Re: Downloding Mavericks nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-17 20:02 -0500

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

#54830

On 14-01-17 18:39, nospam wrote:

> not enough to matter, and you can go to where there is better
> connectivity anyway.

I think you greatly underestimate the number of areas of the world that
have insufficient internet access to download such large files.

By insufficient, it can refer to cost (due to low monthly usage limits
and exhorbitant additional per gig charges) and those without reliable
or speedy enough links.

Even in the USA and Canada, there are large areas that do not have
sufficient access. Just because some telco announces you can get 5mbps
service doesn't mean you live near enough the DSLAM to get anything
above 1mbps.

Now, for Apple to know what percentage of installed base is at what
version, it means that it gets that info from Software Update or some
other "call home" mechanism which relies on an internet connection. So
it wouldn't know about computers who truly have no internet connection.

dial up modems do not work over satellite phone links (latency too high
for sound handshake).  In northern communities in Canada, they need to
install not only modem banks in each village, but also special cache
servers in the south that perform one set of ACKs with the server in the
south, and then waits a lot longer for the ACK to come back from user n
remote community due to latency in satellite link to that town. This is
to prevent servers from resending packets they think were lost because
they didn't get the ACK back from users quickly enough.

The decision makers in Cupertino are in a perfect world of their own,
oblivious to all the problems with internet access around the world.

Yes, the number of Apple customers (who can afford Apple products)
without proper insufficient internet access may be REALTIVELY small, but
it doesn't mean that it is that small.

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

#54831

In article <52d9c4ad$0$9147$c3e8da3$9f400e27@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Now, for Apple to know what percentage of installed base is at what
> version, it means that it gets that info from Software Update or some
> other "call home" mechanism which relies on an internet connection. So
> it wouldn't know about computers who truly have no internet connection.

It would know from sales data of the OS, and data about updates.

> The decision makers in Cupertino are in a perfect world of their own,
> oblivious to all the problems with internet access around the world.

No, they're not oblivious; they make decisions on what is economically
feasible, knowing that they can't please everyone.

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

#54832

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> The decision makers in Cupertino are in a perfect world of their own,
> oblivious to all the problems with internet access around the world.
> 
> Yes, the number of Apple customers (who can afford Apple products)
> without proper insufficient internet access may be REALTIVELY small, but
> it doesn't mean that it is that small.

It's small enough to be expendable. Apple simply doesn't care about 
those users, nor do they need to. If they lose them as customers, it's 
just not a big deal.

-- 
K.

Lang may your lum reek.

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

#54839

In article <lbch0t$3ig$1@dont-email.me>, Kiraly <me@home.spamsucks.ca>
wrote:

> > Yes, the number of Apple customers (who can afford Apple products)
> > without proper insufficient internet access may be REALTIVELY small, but
> > it doesn't mean that it is that small.
> 
> It's small enough to be expendable. Apple simply doesn't care about 
> those users, nor do they need to. If they lose them as customers, it's 
> just not a big deal.

they get a lot more customers than they lose, especially since
electronic distribution let them cut the price to $30 and now to $0.

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

#54870

On 2014.01.17, 19:14 , Kiraly wrote:
> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>> The decision makers in Cupertino are in a perfect world of their own,
>> oblivious to all the problems with internet access around the world.
>>
>> Yes, the number of Apple customers (who can afford Apple products)
>> without proper insufficient internet access may be REALTIVELY small, but
>> it doesn't mean that it is that small.
>
> It's small enough to be expendable. Apple simply doesn't care about
> those users, nor do they need to. If they lose them as customers, it's
> just not a big deal.

This is amongst a few peeves I have with Apple (the other being 
packaging computers to make it more difficult for users to service their 
machines).


-- 
“Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face.”
                                                   - Mike Tyson

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

#54884

In article <0t2dnXrC2JFzPkfPnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2014.01.17, 19:14 , Kiraly wrote:
> > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> >> The decision makers in Cupertino are in a perfect world of their own,
> >> oblivious to all the problems with internet access around the world.
> >>
> >> Yes, the number of Apple customers (who can afford Apple products)
> >> without proper insufficient internet access may be REALTIVELY small, but
> >> it doesn't mean that it is that small.
> >
> > It's small enough to be expendable. Apple simply doesn't care about
> > those users, nor do they need to. If they lose them as customers, it's
> > just not a big deal.
> 
> This is amongst a few peeves I have with Apple (the other being 
> packaging computers to make it more difficult for users to service their 
> machines).

On a slightly related track, can Mavericks be downloaded to a
flashdrive and installed on said drive. Then, use that drive to
externally boot my MacBook Air 10.7.5 to "test drive" Mavericks before
installing it on the MBA as the permanent, boot drive?

-- 
Deja Moo: I've seen this bullshit before. Please respond to: scasse@invalid.net
replacing invalid with sonic.

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

#54886

Otto Pylot <otto@bogus.address.com> writes:

> In article <0t2dnXrC2JFzPkfPnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> 
> > On 2014.01.17, 19:14 , Kiraly wrote:
> > > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> > >> The decision makers in Cupertino are in a perfect world of their own,
> > >> oblivious to all the problems with internet access around the world.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, the number of Apple customers (who can afford Apple products)
> > >> without proper insufficient internet access may be REALTIVELY small, but
> > >> it doesn't mean that it is that small.
> > >
> > > It's small enough to be expendable. Apple simply doesn't care about
> > > those users, nor do they need to. If they lose them as customers, it's
> > > just not a big deal.
> > 
> > This is amongst a few peeves I have with Apple (the other being 
> > packaging computers to make it more difficult for users to service their 
> > machines).
> 
> On a slightly related track, can Mavericks be downloaded to a
> flashdrive and installed on said drive. Then, use that drive to
> externally boot my MacBook Air 10.7.5 to "test drive" Mavericks before
> installing it on the MBA as the permanent, boot drive?

I haven't done this, but I believe the answer is yes.

I wonder about what you think you want to "test."  Certainly
because flash drives are slower than disk drives (or SSDs, which is I
suppose what you have on the MacBook air), you will get poor
performance from Mavericks everytime it has to load some component off
of your flash drive.

So if you are testing whether it will work at all, you don't need to
test that - it will.  If you are testing whether it will work well,
then that is going to be a hard thing to evaluate when running it off
a flash drive.

Also, I think the Mavericks OS is about 10GB once installed, so you'll
need to have a flash drive big enough for that.

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

#54890

In article <vaha919oxa.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> > On a slightly related track, can Mavericks be downloaded to a
> > flashdrive and installed on said drive. Then, use that drive to
> > externally boot my MacBook Air 10.7.5 to "test drive" Mavericks before
> > installing it on the MBA as the permanent, boot drive?
> 
> I haven't done this, but I believe the answer is yes.
> 
> I wonder about what you think you want to "test."  Certainly
> because flash drives are slower than disk drives (or SSDs, which is I
> suppose what you have on the MacBook air), you will get poor
> performance from Mavericks everytime it has to load some component off
> of your flash drive.

booting from a flash drive is slow, but after that it's quite usable,
certainly more than adequate for testing. where it's slow is writing
back to it more than it is reading from it.

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

#54893

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> writes:

> In article <vaha919oxa.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > On a slightly related track, can Mavericks be downloaded to a
> > > flashdrive and installed on said drive. Then, use that drive to
> > > externally boot my MacBook Air 10.7.5 to "test drive" Mavericks before
> > > installing it on the MBA as the permanent, boot drive?
> > 
> > I haven't done this, but I believe the answer is yes.
> > 
> > I wonder about what you think you want to "test."  Certainly
> > because flash drives are slower than disk drives (or SSDs, which is I
> > suppose what you have on the MacBook air), you will get poor
> > performance from Mavericks everytime it has to load some component off
> > of your flash drive.
> 
> booting from a flash drive is slow, but after that it's quite usable,
> certainly more than adequate for testing. where it's slow is writing
> back to it more than it is reading from it.

No it is slow at both.  

But as I wrote, adequate for testing what exactly?  For testing if
Mavericks works on his machine, he doesn't need to do that.  For
testing how _well_ it works, he'll get a distorted picture.

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

#54894

In article <6861ph9mlg.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > On a slightly related track, can Mavericks be downloaded to a
> > > > flashdrive and installed on said drive. Then, use that drive to
> > > > externally boot my MacBook Air 10.7.5 to "test drive" Mavericks before
> > > > installing it on the MBA as the permanent, boot drive?
> > > 
> > > I haven't done this, but I believe the answer is yes.
> > > 
> > > I wonder about what you think you want to "test."  Certainly
> > > because flash drives are slower than disk drives (or SSDs, which is I
> > > suppose what you have on the MacBook air), you will get poor
> > > performance from Mavericks everytime it has to load some component off
> > > of your flash drive.
> > 
> > booting from a flash drive is slow, but after that it's quite usable,
> > certainly more than adequate for testing. where it's slow is writing
> > back to it more than it is reading from it.
> 
> No it is slow at both.  

it's slow to boot, but entirely usable once booted. i have two usb
sticks i use from time to time for various purposes, including testing
versions of os x.

it wouldn't be advisable to run a disk intensive app off a usb stick,
but for testing, it's more than adequate.

> But as I wrote, adequate for testing what exactly?  For testing if
> Mavericks works on his machine, he doesn't need to do that.  For
> testing how _well_ it works, he'll get a distorted picture.

to see if the changes are acceptable. for some people, they are not.
speed isn't the issue, it's whether the missing features or the changed
features matter.

it's also still fairly buggy, notably apple mail. that might be a show
stopper right there.

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

#55071

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> writes:

> In article <6861ph9mlg.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > > On a slightly related track, can Mavericks be downloaded to a
> > > > > flashdrive and installed on said drive. Then, use that drive to
> > > > > externally boot my MacBook Air 10.7.5 to "test drive" Mavericks before
> > > > > installing it on the MBA as the permanent, boot drive?
> > > > 
> > > > I haven't done this, but I believe the answer is yes.
> > > > 
> > > > I wonder about what you think you want to "test."  Certainly
> > > > because flash drives are slower than disk drives (or SSDs, which is I
> > > > suppose what you have on the MacBook air), you will get poor
> > > > performance from Mavericks everytime it has to load some component off
> > > > of your flash drive.
> > > 
> > > booting from a flash drive is slow, but after that it's quite usable,
> > > certainly more than adequate for testing. where it's slow is writing
> > > back to it more than it is reading from it.
> > 
> > No it is slow at both.  
> 
> it's slow to boot, but entirely usable once booted. i have two usb
> sticks i use from time to time for various purposes, including testing
> versions of os x.
> 
> it wouldn't be advisable to run a disk intensive app off a usb stick,
> but for testing, it's more than adequate.
> 
> > But as I wrote, adequate for testing what exactly?  For testing if
> > Mavericks works on his machine, he doesn't need to do that.  For
> > testing how _well_ it works, he'll get a distorted picture.
> 
> to see if the changes are acceptable. for some people, they are not.
> speed isn't the issue, it's whether the missing features or the changed
> features matter.

I see.  Maybe.  But of course many of the changes can be adjusted in
preferences.  What are the "missing features" to which you refer?

> it's also still fairly buggy, notably apple mail. that might be a show
> stopper right there.

That's an interesting assertion.  I haven't noticed Apple Mail bugs
myself, though the searching doesn't seem quite as snappy to me
(haven't tested if I'm noticing a real difference though).

What sort of Apple Mail bugs have you been seeing?

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

#55083

In article <5stxcy5r6h.fsf@ethel.the.log>,
 Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> writes:
> 
> > In article <6861ph9mlg.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> > <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > > > > On a slightly related track, can Mavericks be downloaded to a
> > > > > > flashdrive and installed on said drive. Then, use that drive to
> > > > > > externally boot my MacBook Air 10.7.5 to "test drive" Mavericks 
> > > > > > before
> > > > > > installing it on the MBA as the permanent, boot drive?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I haven't done this, but I believe the answer is yes.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I wonder about what you think you want to "test."  Certainly
> > > > > because flash drives are slower than disk drives (or SSDs, which is I
> > > > > suppose what you have on the MacBook air), you will get poor
> > > > > performance from Mavericks everytime it has to load some component 
> > > > > off
> > > > > of your flash drive.
> > > > 
> > > > booting from a flash drive is slow, but after that it's quite usable,
> > > > certainly more than adequate for testing. where it's slow is writing
> > > > back to it more than it is reading from it.
> > > 
> > > No it is slow at both.  
> > 
> > it's slow to boot, but entirely usable once booted. i have two usb
> > sticks i use from time to time for various purposes, including testing
> > versions of os x.
> > 
> > it wouldn't be advisable to run a disk intensive app off a usb stick,
> > but for testing, it's more than adequate.
> > 
> > > But as I wrote, adequate for testing what exactly?  For testing if
> > > Mavericks works on his machine, he doesn't need to do that.  For
> > > testing how _well_ it works, he'll get a distorted picture.
> > 
> > to see if the changes are acceptable. for some people, they are not.
> > speed isn't the issue, it's whether the missing features or the changed
> > features matter.
> 
> I see.  Maybe.  But of course many of the changes can be adjusted in
> preferences.  What are the "missing features" to which you refer?
> 
> > it's also still fairly buggy, notably apple mail. that might be a show
> > stopper right there.
> 
> That's an interesting assertion.  I haven't noticed Apple Mail bugs
> myself, though the searching doesn't seem quite as snappy to me
> (haven't tested if I'm noticing a real difference though).
> 
> What sort of Apple Mail bugs have you been seeing?

I think he was referring to the features he doesn't like.  Lots of 
people call those bugs, even though the program is working the way it's 
supposed to.

I 2nd the recommendation for buying a cheap drive and attaching it to 
your system for installing Maverick.  I do this all the time when hoping 
from one version to the next.  It's why I'm usually a year behind 
everyone else and all the stuff I use works or I've found replacements.

-- 
DeeDee, don't press that button!  DeeDee!  NO!  Dee...
[I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]

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

#55089

In article <vilain-CB079E.13093320012014@news.individual.net>, Michael
Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:

> > > it's also still fairly buggy, notably apple mail. that might be a show
> > > stopper right there.
> > 
> > That's an interesting assertion.  I haven't noticed Apple Mail bugs
> > myself, though the searching doesn't seem quite as snappy to me
> > (haven't tested if I'm noticing a real difference though).
> > 
> > What sort of Apple Mail bugs have you been seeing?
> 
> I think he was referring to the features he doesn't like.  Lots of 
> people call those bugs, even though the program is working the way it's 
> supposed to.

no, i'm referring to actual bugs. ask anyone who uses it with gmail
just how well it works.

> I 2nd the recommendation for buying a cheap drive and attaching it to 
> your system for installing Maverick.  I do this all the time when hoping 
> from one version to the next.  It's why I'm usually a year behind 
> everyone else and all the stuff I use works or I've found replacements.

a usb stick is much cheaper. it's not suitable for day to day use, but
for testing it's more than adequate. 16 gig is big enough for an
install and cheap enough that they give them out like candybars.

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

#55092

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> writes:

> In article <vilain-CB079E.13093320012014@news.individual.net>, Michael
> Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> 
> > > > it's also still fairly buggy, notably apple mail. that might be a show
> > > > stopper right there.
> > > 
> > > That's an interesting assertion.  I haven't noticed Apple Mail bugs
> > > myself, though the searching doesn't seem quite as snappy to me
> > > (haven't tested if I'm noticing a real difference though).
> > > 
> > > What sort of Apple Mail bugs have you been seeing?
> > 
> > I think he was referring to the features he doesn't like.  Lots of 
> > people call those bugs, even though the program is working the way it's 
> > supposed to.
> 
> no, i'm referring to actual bugs. ask anyone who uses it with gmail
> just how well it works.

Well, that would include me.  And my answer would be "just fine."

So I'm still interested in knowing what bugs you know about.

As far as "features I don't like" I'm using "classic view" which makes
Mail look (for me) the way it looked in Lion and before, which I
prefer over the new look introduced in Mountain Lion.

But that is a pretty easy preference to choose.

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

#55105

In article <wawqhuz531.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > What sort of Apple Mail bugs have you been seeing?
> > > 
> > > I think he was referring to the features he doesn't like.  Lots of 
> > > people call those bugs, even though the program is working the way it's 
> > > supposed to.
> > 
> > no, i'm referring to actual bugs. ask anyone who uses it with gmail
> > just how well it works.
> 
> Well, that would include me.  And my answer would be "just fine."

then you're in a small minority of users.

> So I'm still interested in knowing what bugs you know about.
> 
> As far as "features I don't like" I'm using "classic view" which makes
> Mail look (for me) the way it looked in Lion and before, which I
> prefer over the new look introduced in Mountain Lion.
> 
> But that is a pretty easy preference to choose.

that's not a bug.

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

#55118

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> writes:

> In article <wawqhuz531.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > > What sort of Apple Mail bugs have you been seeing?
> > > > 
> > > > I think he was referring to the features he doesn't like.  Lots of 
> > > > people call those bugs, even though the program is working the way it's 
> > > > supposed to.
> > > 
> > > no, i'm referring to actual bugs. ask anyone who uses it with gmail
> > > just how well it works.
> > 
> > Well, that would include me.  And my answer would be "just fine."
> 
> then you're in a small minority of users.

Could be.

Though I'd think in that case you wouldn't have quite so much trouble
coming with examples of these bugs.

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

#55126

In article <nrzjmqupq8.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > What sort of Apple Mail bugs have you been seeing?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think he was referring to the features he doesn't like.  Lots of 
> > > > > people call those bugs, even though the program is working the way
> > > > > it's supposed to.
> > > > 
> > > > no, i'm referring to actual bugs. ask anyone who uses it with gmail
> > > > just how well it works.
> > > 
> > > Well, that would include me.  And my answer would be "just fine."
> > 
> > then you're in a small minority of users.
> 
> Could be.

not could. is.

> Though I'd think in that case you wouldn't have quite so much trouble
> coming with examples of these bugs.

this is a very good summary of the various issues with mavericks mail:
<http://tidbits.com/article/14219>

the badge count sync is not just with gmail either. it happens on
non-gmail mail systems, but probably for different reasons.

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

#55134

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> writes:

> In article <nrzjmqupq8.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > > > > What sort of Apple Mail bugs have you been seeing?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I think he was referring to the features he doesn't like.  Lots of 
> > > > > > people call those bugs, even though the program is working the way
> > > > > > it's supposed to.
> > > > > 
> > > > > no, i'm referring to actual bugs. ask anyone who uses it with gmail
> > > > > just how well it works.
> > > > 
> > > > Well, that would include me.  And my answer would be "just fine."
> > > 
> > > then you're in a small minority of users.
> > 
> > Could be.
> 
> not could. is.
> 
> > Though I'd think in that case you wouldn't have quite so much trouble
> > coming with examples of these bugs.
> 
> this is a very good summary of the various issues with mavericks mail:
> <http://tidbits.com/article/14219>
> 
> the badge count sync is not just with gmail either. it happens on
> non-gmail mail systems, but probably for different reasons.

OK, now you've mentioned exactly one Mavericks Mail bug, but it is one
that appears to be unrelated to Gmail.

In the meantime, several responses from Mavericks Gmail users who
aren't noticing any problems, while you continue to assert that this
means we aren't really using it seriously.

Burnishing your reputation as an accurate and incisive USENET
correspondent.

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

#55153

In article <tsr482ati2.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
<ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Though I'd think in that case you wouldn't have quite so much trouble
> > > coming with examples of these bugs.
> > 
> > this is a very good summary of the various issues with mavericks mail:
> > <http://tidbits.com/article/14219>
> > 
> > the badge count sync is not just with gmail either. it happens on
> > non-gmail mail systems, but probably for different reasons.
> 
> OK, now you've mentioned exactly one Mavericks Mail bug, but it is one
> that appears to be unrelated to Gmail.

one bug? you obviously didn't read the link.

he lists a slew of problems specifically with gmail, some of which are
rather serious.

the badge count does happen with more than just gmail, but not
necessarily for the same reason. the bugs he lists with gmail includes
a syncing bug, which would explain the badge count problem. other mail
systems don't have a syncing problem, so the badge count issue there
would likely be due to a *different* reason. 

> In the meantime, several responses from Mavericks Gmail users who
> aren't noticing any problems, while you continue to assert that this
> means we aren't really using it seriously.

meanwhile, 85% of respondents to a poll say otherwise. 

how do you explain such a huge discrepancy?

and how do you explain apple's hasty patch to fix some (but not all) of
the gmail issues?

obviously, there's a problem. 

> Burnishing your reputation as an accurate and incisive USENET
> correspondent.

more accurately, you will refuse to believe any facts. your mind is
made up.

by the way, there's yet *another* source of facebook users migrating to
other services. but you won't believe any of it anyway.

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

#55160

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> writes:

> In article <tsr482ati2.fsf@ethel.the.log>, Doug Anderson
> <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > Though I'd think in that case you wouldn't have quite so much trouble
> > > > coming with examples of these bugs.
> > > 
> > > this is a very good summary of the various issues with mavericks mail:
> > > <http://tidbits.com/article/14219>
> > > 
> > > the badge count sync is not just with gmail either. it happens on
> > > non-gmail mail systems, but probably for different reasons.
> > 
> > OK, now you've mentioned exactly one Mavericks Mail bug, but it is one
> > that appears to be unrelated to Gmail.
> 
> one bug? you obviously didn't read the link.

As I said, _you_ gave an example of one bug.

You also gave a linka to one unhappy camper. This doesnt support your
contention that there is some universal Mavericks / gmail problem.

> 
> he lists a slew of problems specifically with gmail, some of which are
> rather serious.
> 
> the badge count does happen with more than just gmail, but not
> necessarily for the same reason. the bugs he lists with gmail includes
> a syncing bug, which would explain the badge count problem. other mail
> systems don't have a syncing problem, so the badge count issue there
> would likely be due to a *different* reason. 
> 
> > In the meantime, several responses from Mavericks Gmail users who
> > aren't noticing any problems, while you continue to assert that this
> > means we aren't really using it seriously.
> 
> meanwhile, 85% of respondents to a poll say otherwise. 

No, that is a poll of people who already claimed to have Mavericks /
gmail problems.. So what we've learned is that in a volunteer poll of
people claiming to have Mavericks / gmail problems, 85% of them claim
to have such problems.  Why it isnt 100% is a mystery to me. You only
find that poll if you are ggogling for Mavericks / gmail problems.

> how do you explain such a huge discrepancy?
> 
> and how do you explain apple's hasty patch to fix some (but not all) of
> the gmail issues?
> 
> obviously, there's a problem. 

I'm not asserting that there is no problem. I am asserting that I and
many other users experience no problem.

You, on the other hand are asserting that Mavericks doesn't work eith
gmail, but are unable to provide a single example of a universal (or
even majority user) problem, except the badge problem, which is an
Apple Mail bug that appears unrelated to Gmail.

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

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

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

csiph-web