>And why would you have to do this? I haven't had to do that on this iMac >in years...........I hear all too often this has to be done on >X.....wonder why?
Well... probably because people can't write decent software. That or because I insist on using free software, which means most of it is forever in beta, and marginally stable (the two the freeze most often are Chimera, and MT Newswatcher). But honestly, if you haven't had to force quit an app on your iMac, or had the crashes that most everyone else has had... then I have to say that you aren't half the power user that some of the rest of us are. I have many many macs here at work that never crash, and never need anything force quit (and thats WITH MS software on them)... simply because the people use 4 programs... Eudora Lite, IE 4.5, MS Word 98 and MS Excel 98... and that's IT (well, the accounting department also uses the worst excuse for an accounting package their is, and it alone is responsible for about all my mac tech support calls here) But MY mac, I must crash two or three times a day on a good day... why... because I do all sorts of things that the normal user may not. The same goes for my home iMac with 10.2.2. And I have to say that with 10.2, my iMac is thousands of more times more stable... despite the fact that I still do things to it that would (and sometimes SHOULD) cause it to crash. I expect crashes so much, that any AppleScripts I write that involve accessing network volumes, I have to make sure I put in code that checks if the share is mounted, and if not, do so... because chances are REALLY REALLY good, I drove down my mac since the last time I connected to the network. And this is on OS 9.0.4. Other people here on Macs have so few crashes (or reboots), that they don't even know their network password to remount shares if they had to (I know, I get called EVERY time someone can't find the file server). It has very very little to do with the OS, and everything to do with the user. >Just wait 'til Apple goes INTEL......no more Macs, for real! >Pathetic...... This is of course wild speculation that it will ever happen. I am sure Apple has an OS X build for intel internally, with the realtive ease of porting it, they would be nuts NOT to have it. But there are many many business reasons why moving to Intel is a bad idea... and only one really that says it is a good idea (disolve the MHz Myth problem). >A lousy PC "shell" OS on crappy cheap hardware. Thanks Steve Jobs you >greedy idiot. Now you can be just like Bill Gates.............. Spoken like a true pc NON user. Thanks, I use the latest PC hardware, and Windows versions... I'll take my "lousy PC 'shell' OS" version of OS X any day. And even IF Apple releases a version of OS X that works on clone intel hardware, I will STILL buy my Apple built Macs... why... because the quality is 100 times better than any PC maker... sure Mac's have their problems, welcome to what happens when the public demands a company not mark up their product any more than they have to. If Apple could still get away with selling $7,000 macs, then every last one off the line would be golden... but as long as they can only make a 20-30% markup, you are going to get some crap... just be thankful they aren't a PC maker who can only make a 2-5% markup... you want to talk about crap coming off the line! >(sorry this ATT thing has got me rippin') Ahh... I see... once again you blame the wrong thing for your problems. AT&T is a dumb-f*ck company, and you want to use an email client that hasn't been supported for many years... and because the two concepts don't get along, suddenly Steve Jobs is an greedy idiot, and OS X sucks ass. Gotcha! -chris <http://www.mythtech.net> ___________________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe send a mail message with a SUBJECT line of "unsubscribe" to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
