|
by Entropy Stew 01/25/2006, 11:23am PST |
|
 |
|
 |
|
corax wrote:
Wow, so it only took three people to port GIMP 2 and Freetype? Did you even own a Mac back then?
Anyone who wanted to do anything in OS X for the first year or two was stuck dual-booting to do trivial tasks such as checking their email (Mail 1.0 was buggy and incomplete) or writing a letter (printing from Classic was nearly impossible). Even for the non-hackers, being told to revert to OS 9 after laying down $130 for OS X was not much fun. OS X was clearly beta software when it was first released, with far poorer backwards compatability than previously advertised.
I know, I know. Had to go for the NT zinger, though. A graphics guy I was working with at the time was consrtantly booting into Classic or crashing PS. Even if I hadn't gotten scared away by the patented Win98 stability, I still would have hated it because Aqua is for faggoting queers and I don't suck that many dicks.
Which brings us to the Intel Macs: once again, major apps only run under emulation, Rosetta in this case. There are two main differences this time, however: it's hardware emulation, so it's probably even slower (relatively) than Classic, and there is no OS 9-like fallback if something just refuses to work. If paying for beta software is bad, paying for beta hardware is even worse.
Then make like a prudent IT department and wait. I intend to duck any flying shit and, counterintuitively, stand pat until Vista* comes out and I can dual boot.
-/ES/-
* I feel queer even saying the OS name. Well played, MS |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Mac users loyal not to Apple, but to past by I need clarification 01/24/2006, 12:19am PST 
Buh? by Motherhead 01/24/2006, 1:23am PST 
Re: Buh? by corax 01/24/2006, 2:49am PST 
Re: Buh? by Motherhead 01/24/2006, 3:10am PST 
Re: Buh? by corax 01/24/2006, 11:24am PST 
Re: Buh? by Motherhead 01/24/2006, 12:29pm PST 
Re: Buh? by corax 01/24/2006, 7:01pm PST 
All 4 OSX 10.0 image processing hackers: snubbed NT by Entropy Stew 01/24/2006, 8:08pm PST 
Re: All 4 OSX 10.0 image processing hackers: snubbed by corax 01/25/2006, 7:06am PST 
Re: All 4 OSX 10.0 image processing hackers: snubbed by Entropy Stew 01/25/2006, 11:23am PST 
Re: All 4 OSX 10.0 image processing hackers: snubbed by Motherhead 01/25/2006, 11:45am PST 
With that said... by Motherhead 01/25/2006, 12:14pm PST 
Update on Adobe Updates by corax 02/02/2006, 4:28pm PST 
Re: Update on Adobe Updates by Motherhead 02/02/2006, 8:48pm PST 
Re: Buh? by co2 01/24/2006, 9:53am PST 
Re: Buh? by Entropy Stew 01/24/2006, 11:21am PST 
Re: Buh? by Ice Cream Jonsey 01/24/2006, 11:27am PST 
It's like I don't even know you NT by Entropy Stew 01/24/2006, 11:48am PST 
Re: Buh? by McMoo the Anti-Drug Cow 01/24/2006, 11:54am PST 
Creative's newer ones are much better than my old model by Entropy Stew 01/24/2006, 12:24pm PST 
*raising my hand* I like Office 2003. It's pretty good. NT by laudablepuss 01/24/2006, 1:52pm PST 
Re: Buh? by Motherhead 01/24/2006, 1:38pm PST 
Re: Buh? by Quentin Beck 01/24/2006, 3:51pm PST 
Re: Buh? by Co2 01/24/2006, 3:55pm PST 
Haha, someone was "annoyed" and you were like "fuck the attitude". NT by Fussbett 01/24/2006, 4:48pm PST 
ow, not so much teeth, fussbet NT by dick of Steve Jobs 01/24/2006, 5:00pm PST 
Yeah, you nailed it. I'm a huge Apple fan. NT by Fussbett 01/24/2006, 5:12pm PST 
embarassed, that's how the guy should have been and probably secretly was by co2 01/24/2006, 6:14pm PST 
Re: Buh? by Entropy Stew 01/24/2006, 8:01pm PST 
Re: Buh? by Motherhead 01/24/2006, 9:22pm PST 
Re: don't be messin w/ jouney by co2 01/24/2006, 9:35pm PST 
co2, if they EVER hurts you by Steve Perry 01/24/2006, 9:50pm PST 
"hurt" you, i mean. aw fuck it NT by Steve Perry 01/24/2006, 9:50pm PST 
hahah fag NT by neil schonn 01/24/2006, 9:50pm PST 
An unfunny reply by mark 01/25/2006, 4:17pm PST 
|
|