Re: OS 10.3.5 (split to problems attack)

on 15/08/04 14:09, Bruce Johnson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip!] > Hey, this IS the G-list, after all. Not to be nit-picky, but this is actually the "G-BOOKS" list... ;-) -Laurent. -- Laurent Daudelin AIM/iChat: L

Re: OS 10.3.5 (split to problems attack)

On Saturday, August 14, 2004, at 06:08 AM, Mikael Byström wrote: Don, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: This thread would make for an interesting thread in the fields of communications, psychology, philosophy and human relations. Certainly it reveals some of the difficulties that technical people have in co

Re: OS 10.3.5

Thomas, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >I know many people with both Mac's and >PC's and PC's are by far more trouble prone that Mac's are. While that is also my perception, you must realize that depending on the usage focus (with which I mean the combination of hardware like outboard gear, specific vid

Re: OS 10.3.5

I agree... while fairly new to Macs, I find them much less trouble overall than peecee's. When I have problems with my Mac, I figure on maybe an hour or two sorting things out. When one of my peecee's goes down, I make sure the fridge is stocked with cold beverages and write off the weekend! A

Re: OS 10.3.5

I find that the majority of people that feel this way have never used a Mac and are listening to PC propaganda. I know many people with both Mac's and PC's and PC's are by far more trouble prone that Mac's are. In my two High School Computer Labs, the Mac lab just runs on its own and the PC lab ha

Re: OS 10.3.5 (split to problems attack)

Don, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >This thread would make for an interesting thread in >the fields of communications, psychology, philosophy >and human relations. Certainly it reveals some of the >difficulties that technical people have in conveying >what they are trying to say in non-technical terms.

Re: OS 10.3.5

Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >what bothers me is the seeming >attitude by many that the mac is just beset with horrible problems Which I agree is untrue for many users, perhaps a clear majority (which I believe). For some users though Macs *are* "just beset with horrible problems". While that

Re: OS 10.3.5

Laurent, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >I simply try to nitpick your arbitrary figure as >you seem to do from time to time... ;-) There are degrees in hell? -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Chec

Re: OS 10.3.5

Eugene, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >But it's bad form to take >the scholarly way of saying that what you do is not your fault. On the contrary, I take full responsibility for what I do and write. If someone leaves out information in a message, something I do to on occasion, then that message to some

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Timothy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >I don't even know what Sasser does. See what a few months with a Mac does to a guy? That kind of ignorance is wonderful, isn't it? -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drive

Re: OS 10.3.5 (split to problems attack)

This thread would make for an interesting thread in the fields of communications, psychology, philosophy and human relations. Certainly it reveals some of the difficulties that technical people have in conveying what they are trying to say in non-technical terms. :-) The problem may have started b

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

.. Original Message ... On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:57:19 -0700 "Bruce Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >To be truthful, Timothy also said he 'practices safe computing' which >would include keeping your systems up-to-date. Sasser exploited a hole >that had been patched several weeks or m

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 13, 2004, at 9:40 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: On Aug 12, 2004, at 7:47 PM, Laurent Daudelin wrote: on 12/08/04 19:47, Mikael Byström at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: In real life, most people have few problems with OS X. let me guess, "real life" is lives approved by..

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 12, 2004, at 7:47 PM, Laurent Daudelin wrote: on 12/08/04 19:47, Mikael Byström at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: In real life, most people have few problems with OS X. let me guess, "real life" is lives approved by you? How do you find the time for all this app

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 04:47:40PM +0200, Mikael Byström wrote: : : Eugene said: : : >If people report that they have had no problems, it helps to : >downplay the perceived magnitude of the problem and the necessity for : >implementing the solutions. : : I agree, but how the report was presente

Re: OS 10.3.5

On 13/08/04 10:59, "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Laurent, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > >> What make you think that because it occurs in 10%, it is a problem? Or who >> said it was a problem? You? >> >> If it occurs in 9%, is it a problem? If not, then is 8% a problem? Where >> does

Re: OS 10.3.5

Laurent, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >What make you think that because it occurs in 10%, it is a problem? Or who >said it was a problem? You? > >If it occurs in 9%, is it a problem? If not, then is 8% a problem? Where >does that end? > >I don't agree with your statement that 10% is a problem. Well, t

Re: OS 10.3.5

Eugene, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >If people report that they have had no problems, it helps to >downplay the perceived magnitude of the problem and the necessity for >implementing the solutions. I agree, but how the report was presented, that is in the context of the discussion, more informationa

Re: OS 10.3.5

on 13/08/04 05:25, Mikael Byström at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Eugene, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > >> On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 01:37:56AM +0200, Mikael Byström wrote: >> : >> : macnifico, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >> : >> : >Yesterday I installed the upgrade with no problems. I DIDN'T run >> : >permi

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 11:25:42AM +0200, Mikael Byström wrote: : Eugene said: : >On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 01:37:56AM +0200, Mikael Byström wrote: : >: macnifico said: : >: : >: >Yesterday I installed the upgrade with no problems. I DIDN'T run : >: >permissions, the CD, etc. : >: : >: and your po

Re: OS 10.3.5

I said earlier: >is only >interesting for others in order to find out that the problem isn't >occuring 100%. As that have been established already long time ago >(years) With which I of course meant OS X upgrades in general, not only the 10.3.5. -- G-Books is sponsored by

Re: OS 10.3.5

Laurent, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Since Bruce is a system administrator where he works, I would assume that >when he says "real life", he's probably thinking about the users he has to >support. But that's just wishful thinking from me... I'd expect he's an excellent system administrator, but he's

Re: OS 10.3.5

Eugene, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 01:37:56AM +0200, Mikael Byström wrote: >: >: macnifico, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >: >: >Yesterday I installed the upgrade with no problems. I DIDN'T run >: >permissions, the CD, etc. >: >: and your point is? > >I believe his point is that he

Re: Re.: OS 10.3.5

On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 01:37:56AM +0200, Mikael Byström wrote: : : macnifico, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: : : >Yesterday I installed the upgrade with no problems. I DIDN'T run : >permissions, the CD, etc. : : and your point is? I believe his point is that he installed the 10.3.5 update --- withou

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

I guess the bottom line is, that I really don't feel it is my responsibility to purchase software that I don't need just because others are foolish enough to run an operating system that is a virus magnet. Tom -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronics

Re: OS 10.3.5

on 12/08/04 19:47, Mikael Byström at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > >> In real life, most people have few problems with OS X. > > let me guess, "real life" is lives approved by you? How do you find > the time for all this approval business? > > I have few proble

Re: OS 10.3.5

Mikael, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > >>In real life, most people have few problems with OS X. > >let me guess, "real life" is lives approved by you? How do you find >the time for all this approval business? > >I have few problems with OS X. Is that enough to become

Re: OS 10.3.5

Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >In real life, most people have few problems with OS X. let me guess, "real life" is lives approved by you? How do you find the time for all this approval business? I have few problems with OS X. Is that enough to become approved? -- G-Books is sponsored by

Re: OS 10.3.5

Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Mac OS X just works, and most people just expect it to. Not for everyone. Audio apps working together seem to have some issues to solve. Just check out the Mac OS X Audio sites. I have very few problems so far, since Jaguar. So I have those expectations like above

Re: OS 10.3.5

Laurent, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >I try to keep my systems as clean as possible and I must say that most of >the time, I don't think about running Disk Utility to repair permissions >here and there, before and after upgrades and I haven't had any serious >problem so far. > >So, keep that in mind t

Re: Re.: OS 10.3.5

macnifico, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Yesterday I installed the upgrade with no problems. I DIDN'T run >permissions, the CD, etc. and your point is? -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our

Re: Virus FUD (was Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5)

Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >After 10 years we have finally gotten the majority of our users to >recognize these as the hoaxes they are, but it took a long, long time. Tell me about it. :) -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smal

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 12, 2004, at 1:55 PM, John wrote: Timothy Luoma wrote: On Aug 12, 2004, at 2:38 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: (Note, my disdain of AV software applies ONLY to Macs; it is an absolutely *essential* piece of software on a Windows system.) Only if one uses IE, Outlook (Express) and/or opens files o

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Timothy Luoma wrote: On Aug 12, 2004, at 2:38 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: (Note, my disdain of AV software applies ONLY to Macs; it is an absolutely *essential* piece of software on a Windows system.) Only if one uses IE, Outlook (Express) and/or opens files of dubious origin. Not true at all! My

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 12, 2004, at 2:38 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: (Note, my disdain of AV software applies ONLY to Macs; it is an absolutely *essential* piece of software on a Windows system.) Only if one uses IE, Outlook (Express) and/or opens files of dubious origin. I consider AV a waste of $$ and RAM for my

Re: Virus FUD (was Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5)

On Aug 12, 2004, at 11:18 AM, Mikael Byström wrote: Also, you're forgetting social viruses like hoaxmail. I regard these as human mind viruses and obviously they don't harm computers, but these are still annoying as they come from people you don't want to filter and that should know better. Alas

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 12, 2004, at 9:47 AM, Bill Buckhaults wrote: Can this happen by forwarding[ by Mac] an infected attachment to a pc user?? Bill Possibly. It depends on the person and their mail client on the other end, forwarding the e-mail may make the attachment harder to strip out and execute. But, tha

Re: OS 10.3.5

Timothy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >some default setting that was chosen who knows when by who knows who >for who knows what Well, "by who knows" are the developers of Mac OS X, I'm sure. -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.co

Re: Virus FUD (was Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5)

Luis, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >There is no way you are passing those virus unwillingly. "Unknowingly" there are ways to pass on viruses. One favorite among people I exchange messages with are forwarding of Word files (30+ infected in the last few years) and also other formats, that they for reason

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Looking at the logs of our AV server on the network, I see NO >Word macro viruses found in a long long time. Moreover, modern versions >of Word warn you when a file is opened with macros in it, and offer you >the choice of opening it without them present. Immedia

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Bill, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Can this happen by forwarding[ by Mac] an infected attachment to a pc user?? Obviously. Though a well behaved user would of course try first to make sure they didn't forward it. One way is to "clean" the attachment with a modern word app as Bruce suggested or as I u

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Can this happen by forwarding[ by Mac] an infected attachment to a pc user?? Bill Bruce Johnson wrote: On Aug 11, 2004, at 5:40 PM, B Gardner wrote: I hear you but I just can't seem to justify 100.00 (per year) for a virus program and other stuff I just don't need. I would rather spend 60.00 on a

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 12, 2004, at 5:36 AM, Mikael Byström wrote: Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: There are some folks who will argue that Mac users need to use AV software to protect hapless Windows users you may communicate with, but transmitting a virus like that requires a deliberate act. You can't just do it

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 11, 2004, at 5:40 PM, B Gardner wrote: I hear you but I just can't seem to justify 100.00 (per year) for a virus program and other stuff I just don't need. I would rather spend 60.00 on a single program. I realize that virus on a Mac are the least of my problems but I am getting an amazin

Virus FUD (was Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5)

I hear you but I just can't seem to justify 100.00 (per year) for a virus program and other stuff I just don't need. I would rather spend 60.00 on a single program. I realize that virus on a Mac are the least of my problems but I am getting an amazing number of them through email. I believe I am pa

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 11, 2004, at 5:23 PM, Marcin Wichary wrote: Yeah, I don't know why they get mixed up either, given that OS X is so super-stable and all, but it seems they do. See "Tutorial: Permissions, Accounts, and File Organization" I read i

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Thomas, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >You can't possibly spread them to anyone else unless you physically include >the virus infested attachment when you send you email to a windows machine. Never heard of Word viruses? This is in my circles, a bunch of Mac users at work and in school and with many hav

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Bruce, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >There are some folks who will argue that Mac users need to use AV >software to protect hapless Windows users you may communicate with, but >transmitting a virus like that requires a deliberate act. You can't >just do it 'accidentally'. Word viruses can survive a

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

You can't possibly spread them to anyone else unless you physically include the virus infested attachment when you send you email to a windows machine. Tom -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Ch

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

I hear you but I just can't seem to justify 100.00 (per year) for a virus program and other stuff I just don't need. I would rather spend 60.00 on a single program. I realize that virus on a Mac are the least of my problems but I am getting an amazing number of them through email. I believe I a

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 11, 2004, at 4:50 PM, B Gardner wrote: Aaron, may I borrow some more of your expertise? What would you recommend in the way of Virus software? While I have not seemed to have a problem with my Mac, I do seem to see alot of emails that are carrying viruses around. Sigh. THERE ARE NO MAC VI

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Bryon, To be perfectly honest with you, I don't run anti-virus software on my Mac. I don't find it necessary. I know what to look for. I just delete it when it comes in. None of the current viruses out there effect the Mac platform. They are all Windows viruses. It doesn't mean that someday, someo

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

Aaron, may I borrow some more of your expertise? What would you recommend in the way of Virus software? While I have not seemed to have a problem with my Mac, I do seem to see alot of emails that are carrying viruses around. But in general what do you recommend? Thanks, Byron Gardner On Aug 11,

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 11, 2004, at 2:23 PM, Marcin Wichary wrote: Yeah, I don't know why they get mixed up either, given that OS X is so super-stable and all, but it seems they do. See "Tutorial: Permissions, Accounts, and File Organization" I read i

Re: OS 10.3.5

I am not an expert, but might it have something to do with the file system? (I have some hunches, but best left unwritten.) George WS PDQ 300 MHz, 512 MB, 10.2 (no updates) --- Marcin Wichary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yeah, I don't know why they get mixed up either, > given that OS X is so

Re: OS 10.3.5

Yeah, I don't know why they get mixed up either, given that OS X is so super-stable and all, but it seems they do. See "Tutorial: Permissions, Accounts, and File Organization" I read it, but it stops exactly where my knowledge does; as

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

I use both. I use Techtool Pro, when I want to test hardware. When it comes to repairing the OS, I use Diskwarrior. If you can only afford one know, it's best to start with DiskWarrior. Later on, you can get TechTool Pro. If you have a newer Mac, and you purchased AppleCare, TechTool Pro comes with

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

On 8/10/04 11:56 PM, "Don P." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The quote below raises the query: Which should I buy? > Which is better, DiskWarrior or TechTool Pro? > Are there price breaks for those that purchase one and > want to try the other? You are never too skinny, you never have too much mone

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

TimH wrote: Tidbits () had a very thorough report on current disk utilities a couple of months ago - it'll be archived on their site. Indeed; here it is: (Note link to TTP 4 review at right.) Andrew Main -- G-Books is sponsored by

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 4:52 am -0600, Andrew Main wrote: >>The quote below raises the query: Which should I buy? >>Which is better, DiskWarrior or TechTool Pro? >>Are there price breaks for those that purchase one and >>want to try the other? >>Don > >As I understand it, the two are different in

Re: DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

The quote below raises the query: Which should I buy? Which is better, DiskWarrior or TechTool Pro? Are there price breaks for those that purchase one and want to try the other? Don As I understand it, the two are different in what they do, though I'm not clear exactly how: DW has always been uniq

DW or TTP? fork from Re: OS 10.3.5

The quote below raises the query: Which should I buy? Which is better, DiskWarrior or TechTool Pro? Are there price breaks for those that purchase one and want to try the other? Don " From today's MacFixIt: 1. Make sure your hard drive is in good shape: Boot from the OS X Install CD and run Disk

Re: OS 10.3.5

Marcin Wichary wrote: Repair Permissions is important; do it early and often, but always (if possible) from your boot volume. Could someone kindly explain to me (or point to a website that does so) why Mac OS X needs this procedure from time to time? I am familiar with the concept of Unix permis

Re: OS 10.3.5

Repair Permissions is important; do it early and often, but always (if possible) from your boot volume. Could someone kindly explain to me (or point to a website that does so) why Mac OS X needs this procedure from time to time? I am familiar with the concept of Unix permissions, I just find it

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 12:03:50PM -0700, Aaron Willems wrote: : : I disagree. You should read Macfixit more often. Many people have problems : after installing an OS X update. Better to be safe than sorry. By the way, : the advice I gave comes straight from MACFIXIT. MacFixit is a guide, not a b

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 10, 2004, at 12:48 PM, Andrew Main wrote: I read MacInTouch and MacFixIt every day, and am appalled at how disastrously messy OS X -- which was supposed to solve all the problems we were having with the classic OS -- has turned out to be for many users. You read squeakywheel fests every d

Re: OS 10.3.5

On 10/08/04 15:48, "Andrew Main" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I read MacInTouch and MacFixIt every day, and am appalled at how > disastrously messy OS X -- which was supposed to solve all the > problems we were having with the classic OS -- has turned out to be > for many users. The difference is

Re: Re.: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 10, 2004, at 12:21 PM, macnifico wrote: Hi, Listers! Yesterday I installed the upgrade with no problems. I DIDN'T run permissions, the CD, etc. However, I did run OnyX a few days earlier. The upgrade is stable, but I do not find it faster. There were a number of security fixes in this one,

Re: OS 10.3.5

I read MacInTouch and MacFixIt every day, and am appalled at how disastrously messy OS X -- which was supposed to solve all the problems we were having with the classic OS -- has turned out to be for many users. The difference is that unlike OS 9 (and earlier), when trouble comes to OS X it's o

Re.: OS 10.3.5

Hi, Listers! Yesterday I installed the upgrade with no problems. I DIDN'T run permissions, the CD, etc. However, I did run OnyX a few days earlier. The upgrade is stable, but I do not find it faster. It is running on a Pismo 400 MHz, 256 Mb, 40 Gb HD. Best regards. Hugo Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMA

Re: OS 10.3.5

I disagree. You should read Macfixit more often. Many people have problems after installing an OS X update. Better to be safe than sorry. By the way, the advice I gave comes straight from MACFIXIT. -- Aaron Willems > > OSX isn't that fragile...heck *Windows* isn't that fragile! -- G-Books is

Re: OS 10.3.5

Nothing. Most people, don't feel comfortable using the command line. So my policy, is to avoid it. -- Aaron Willems > > What is the difference between running repair permissions in the > command line and using disk utility to run it?? > > Pat -- G-Books is sponsored by

Re: OS 10.3.5

It's standard policy. Whenever there is an OS update, you should always run disk permissions before you install the update. -- Aaron Willems > Hi, how and why is this upgrade different from the others that we must > do these procedures before the update? Thanks, Jim. > On Aug 9, 2004, at 5:19 PM

Re: OS 10.3.5

That's fine. -- Aaron Willems > My boot CD is only 10.3. Is this going to be a problem? > > Z > > THE BLUETOOTH MASTER -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our web site for refurbished

Re: OS 10.3.5

You have to purchase 10.3, Panther, in order this run this update. Aaron > > Since we are on the subject(somewhat,)can I update > from 10.1.5 directly to panther? Or do I have to have > Jaguar first? > > Michael > -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electro

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 10, 2004, at 7:30 AM, Andrew Main wrote: I do maintenance usually in the following order: DiskWarrior (starting from the DW 3.x CD), then Repair Disk (starting from the Panther CD, or via Single User Mode), then Repair Permissions (starting from my normal boot volume). I also have the Mac

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 10, 2004, at 5:12 AM, Pat Heidingsfelder wrote: What is the difference between running repair permissions in the command line and using disk utility to run it?? Nothing. -- Bruce Johnson This is the sig who says 'Ni!' -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Ele

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 9, 2004, at 5:16 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: Since we are on the subject(somewhat,)can I update from 10.1.5 directly to panther? Or do I have to have Jaguar first? No. You can go right to 10.3. all paid upgrades are like that, they don't require the intervening paid upgrades. -- Bruce J

Re: OS 10.3.5

Aaron Willems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Be sure to boot off your Panther CD first, and repair the Boot Disk, followed by repairing disk permissions. DO THIS BEFORE YOU INSTALL THE UPDATE! After you install the update, be sure to boot off the CD one more time, and run disk permissions once again. S

Re: OS 10.3.5

Jim, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Hi, how and why is this upgrade different from the others that we must >do these procedures before the update? I'm not sure, but this advice about repairing permissions is old and still stands up as good preparation before any update or application installation. It

Re: OS 10.3.5

Aaron, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Excellent advice. For those people who don't feel comfortable in using the >terminal, following my advice will work just fine. Yes, but it's actually even better to do what you suggest with Disk Utlity while booted from the incrementally updated system as the Permi

Re: OS 10.3.5

Pat, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >What is the difference between running repair permissions in the >command line and using disk utility to run it?? I think nothing really, but unless Disk Utility is run with superuser status, it may not be able to affect all folders. I do think it have this capabili

Re: OS 10.3.5

> Be sure to boot off your Panther CD first, and repair the Boot Disk, >followed by repairing disk permissions. If the suggestions I have seen proffered time and again at other sites like MacFixIt, etc., are accurate, you should *not* repair permissions using disk utility *while* booted up on

Re: OS 10.3.5

What is the difference between running repair permissions in the command line and using disk utility to run it?? Pat -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our web site for refurbished PowerBooks

Re: OS 10.3.5

Hi, how and why is this upgrade different from the others that we must do these procedures before the update? Thanks, Jim. On Aug 9, 2004, at 5:19 PM, Zoltan Batiz wrote: On Aug 9, 2004, at 4:52 PM, Aaron Willems wrote: I just installed OS 10.3.5. I've been running it for 2 hours now with no pr

Re: OS 10.3.5

On Aug 9, 2004, at 4:52 PM, Aaron Willems wrote: I just installed OS 10.3.5. I've been running it for 2 hours now with no problems. I give this advice to anyone who's planning on installing it. Be sure to boot off your Panther CD first, and repair the Boot Disk, followed by repairing disk permis

Re: OS 10.3.5

Since we are on the subject(somewhat,)can I update from 10.1.5 directly to panther? Or do I have to have Jaguar first? Michael --- Aaron Willems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Excellent advice. For those people who don't feel > comfortable in using the > terminal, following my advice will work just

Re: OS 10.3.5

Excellent advice. For those people who don't feel comfortable in using the terminal, following my advice will work just fine. -- Aaron Willems Network Administrator Lieberman Productions & Philo Television > One could do this from the command line like so: > > sudo diskutil repairPermissions /

Re: OS 10.3.5

Aaron, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >I just installed OS 10.3.5. I've been running it for 2 hours now with no >problems. I give this advice to anyone who's planning on installing it. Be >sure to boot off your Panther CD first, and repair the Boot Disk, followed >by repairing disk permissions. DO THIS B

Re: OS 10.3.5

Thanks for the Advise. --- Aaron Willems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just installed OS 10.3.5. I've been running it for > 2 hours now with no > problems. I give this advice to anyone who's > planning on installing it. Be > sure to boot off your Panther CD first, and repair > the Boot Disk, fo