# Missing Features in 10.1...



## jove (Sep 25, 2001)

Hello,

I just started using 10.1. I have noticed a few items that I was hopeful or expected to see. Overall I am very happy with this release. Please submit your own items. 

* Energy Saver does not have seperate settings for battery and AC
* Desktop pictures are still not very flexible
* Better default organization of applications
* Video conferencing (Windblows has it built in so Yahoo, and AOL get it for free)
* I liked the battery and airport docklings. They have been replaced with menulings
* Updated dev tools
* Internet applications still do not use the internet sys pref settings!
* Get Info only shows one item at a time. I have wanted multiple calc folder sizes ot once
* Spring loaded something - especially drag item onto folder in dock


----------



## brodie (Sep 25, 2001)

mail still sucks. i tried and tried to get on with it. im moving to Entourage when it's released.

whats wrong with it? 

you can't set a default reply to address

you cant specify the encoding for attachments (no PeeCee friends have been able to open my attachments)

the address book isn't intergrated into the app, another icon to shrink your dock.

also, i just tried to mount a PC formatted zip, would it mount?  
and when i tried to read from a CDR that had a fleck on it, the finder crashed, no errors nothing- just crashed. OK so i could remove the crumb but thats not the point...

im gonna pick'em off one by one...


----------



## Pascal (Sep 25, 2001)

> _Originally posted by jove _
> ** Energy Saver does not have seperate settings for battery and AC*


... and the minimum delay before a sub-system can be turned off is _five_ minutes ! _Five !!!_  (In Mac OS 9, the factory default for the hard drive is to turn off after one minute.) Talk about a great way to waste your precious battery power !


----------



## scruffy (Sep 25, 2001)

You gotta be kidding!  That's terrible - you'd be spinning your HD down every time you stopped to think, and then waiting for it to spin up every time you were finished thinking.

Quite aside from the annoyance of waiting, and all the extra noise, that is terrible for the drive - spinning up and down is the big source of wear and tear on a drive.  If you want to be that extra little bit protected against HD crashes, the best thing is actually probably to have the drive spin down only when the computer is shut off.


----------



## boomw (Sep 25, 2001)

You've got macosx.com practically begging you to upload your copy to their servers. If  you haven't already please (let me beg too!) please do so...yesterday!
Thanks.


----------



## MacSub (Sep 26, 2001)

NO kidding, I don't care what it doesn't have, I want it on my mac!
Please post it on MacOSX.com!  I have a fast DSL connection, I'll download it!


----------



## kon21 (Sep 26, 2001)

if the sysadmin allows me to do it, i'll upload the copy of 10.1 I picked up at Seybold today.


----------



## MacSub (Sep 26, 2001)

Really? Sweet!  Well lets figure out where you can upload it!  Is your copy the true GM?  Is it the same build? doesn't really matter, just find the upload!


----------



## kon21 (Sep 26, 2001)

This is the offical copy they were giving away at the Apple booth at Seybold.
What utility can I use to make the CD into an image file. Disk Copy that comes with OS X seems to only be able to mount images but not make them.


----------



## MacSub (Sep 26, 2001)

Ive emailed the admin so that we can find a way to upload it, don't have a reply yet though.  about creating a disk image....how about Disk Utility?  What does that do beside check the HD?


----------



## free&unmuzzled (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by MacSub _
> *Ive emailed the admin so that we can find a way to upload it, don't have a reply yet though.  about creating a disk image....how about Disk Utility?  What does that do beside check the HD? *



Either use Disk Copy or Shrinkwrap in OS 9, or Disk Copy in 10.1.


----------



## free&unmuzzled (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by jove _
> *I liked the battery and airport docklings. They have been replaced with menulings *



Me too. I copied them back to the Dock Extras folder from a 10.0.4 volume and they still work on 10.1  

I don't like the menuthings at all and I am realy pissed off that they changed the way the menu bar clock works.  You can Command-drag the menuthings off the menu bar. Putting them back requires checking the appropriate checkbox in the appropriate preference pane or elsewhere. Messy. Hate 'em.


----------



## theed (Sep 26, 2001)

my two complaints - DVD only plays on screen with the menu bar
Time no longer becomes date when you click on it.  

Apple dragging menu things rearranges/removes them, it's decent.
DVD works, pretty well
waaaaaaaaaaaaay faster.  Everything faster.  I heard, I didn't believe ... I now believe
iCab can access https pages again, thank you Apple for fixing URL access

the Mail app is essentially unchanged.  Your default reply to address is your top most listed address in your accounts.  The address book is supposed to be separate, it's a system wide feature that happens to be used by Mail, it's a good thing.  Think OpenDoc instead of M$ Office.

it's all good.


----------



## Pascal (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by scruffy _
> *You gotta be kidding!  That's terrible - you'd be spinning your HD down every time you stopped to think, and then waiting for it to spin up every time you were finished thinking.
> 
> Quite aside from the annoyance of waiting, and all the extra noise, that is terrible for the drive - spinning up and down is the big source of wear and tear on a drive.  If you want to be that extra little bit protected against HD crashes, the best thing is actually probably to have the drive spin down only when the computer is shut off. *


You clearly don't have a portable, do you ? How about saving all that precious energy ? When you are working from a battery, turning off the disk sooner, dimming the screen sooner means being to be able to use the computer much longer without having to plug it in... With Mac OS 9, my iBook has an autonomy of 4.5 hours. With Mac OS X 10.0.4 (I have yet to see with 10.1), my same iBook had an autonomy of a little less than 2 hours. So yes, every little bit counts when it comes to energy saving !

Besides, 1 minute is a heck of a long time... If you are _actually_ using your computer, you never stop typing or what not for more than a minute. If the disk shuts down, my experience in Mac OS 9 shows that the hard drive will remain still for about 10 minutes on average. And that probably means more than 10 minutes of autonomy gained from your battery !

And that wear and tear thing is gone _way_ overboard. I've never had a single hard drive that broke or stopped working because of that _wear and tear_ thing or for any other hardware reason*... and I've got Macs since 1984 (and hard drives since 1989, I think).

The only _wear and tear_ sensitive drives are probably the el cheapo ones. But you usually don't get those in Macs, I guess !
_____
* Of course I've had disk getting corrupt because of a system crash, especially in the System 7 days (some of you might remember that awfully crashy OS...)


----------



## Pascal (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by theed_
> *Time no longer becomes date when you click on it.*


 Simply click-and-hold on the clock/time...


----------



## apb3 (Sep 26, 2001)

If not "wear and tear," then why do HDs fail...

That IS why Hard Drives fail. 

Not just the "el Cheapo" ones.

Why do you think all drives have a mean time between failure rating?

Maybe 1 minute is cool for you, but I think that is way overboard. Buy another battery. If you're not actively using the HD for 1 minute or 5 minutes, it's not going to make that big a difference in terms of power savings. It would waste more power for me to do it that way due to the time waiting for the HD to spin back up...


----------



## jove (Sep 26, 2001)

Hello,

My wife is tanhe enginere, while discussing mileage she said that the energy consumed to reachieve a once constasnt momentum more than expected.

Highway vs City driving. 

So if you take into account the energy loss of gaining the speed back and the user lost time waiting for it - there probably is not much of a difference between 1 and 5 minutes. 5 minutes may even be cheaper. As far as wear and tear - I imagine the constant shift in modes (sleep vs active) wears down a drive a lot faster than just letting it spin.


----------



## theed (Sep 26, 2001)

I'd like the date and time to pop down into a calendar, thatd be ideal.  But yeah, I guess the current behaviour is acceptable.  Thanks for correcting my blind spot.

As for spin down, yeah, like flourescent lights, turning them on and then off  is electrically equivalent to leaving them on for ~7 minutes.  HD's are similar in ratio.  But there are reasons for everything.  Mac X uses VM all the time, se the chance of your HD actually spinning down are a lot less.  With this OS, you should just expect your HD to remain running in my opinion.  

As for the 1 minute option, that was never to save energy.  It was to stop the HD whine in a quiet room ASAP.  It's the only moving part on a laptop, it was nice to stop it.  I couldn't stand the noise it made in a classroom.  Same logic goes for putting a Drive Sleep option in the control strip.  I wish it were still reasonable.  If I were still taking my laptop to class, I'd either boot into 9 or consider a solid state HD option.

And oh yeah, HD's fail, catastrophically, they all do.  If you've never had one fail, your lucky, and probably a lightweight user.  I have lots of machines eand even more drives.  I've had 2 drives fail catastrophically this year alone.  1 was on my server and boy did that one make a mess of things before it went away.  Drives are not reliable, we all need RAID5. whichi is, by the way, sorely lacking in the raid setup.  It's a cool toy, but without RAID5, I consider the option nearly useless.  The last thing I want is to make my HD access faster by making my data LESS safe.  yikes.

Well, that's my story and I'm sticking with it.


----------



## Pascal (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by apb3 _
> *If you're not actively using the HD for 1 minute or 5 minutes, it's not going to make that big a difference in terms of power savings.*


Let us say that we agree to disagree.

Apparently, contrary to your argument, it does make a difference, because the iBook's battery lasts a lot less longer in Mac OS X than it does in Mac OS 9. (As I said in a previous post) And mind you, it is the same iBook with the same hardware characteristics (see below) !

By the way, I must say that I never shut down my desktop Macs, because I want to have access to internet or my docs when I want them. I have set my disk's drivers to shut down after a while, though, so as to save energy and decibels when my Mac sits idle. My Mac II si worked like that for 7 years, and its hard drive, a 285 MB from LaCie, worked like a charm until I retired my old computer. I would probably still be using this hard drive if it wasn't of its size : 285 MB is the size of a glorified diskette nowadays (barely enough for a Word document or two !  ) ! So, 7 years of start-stop-start-stop as needed : that sounds like a pretty good stress test to me. And not a single hardware related failure !

Chances are, you are going to upgrade your disk drive to something bigger before it fails !  Unless you buy that el cheapo drive, that is !!!


----------



## Pascal (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by theed _
> *I'd like the date and time to pop down into a calendar, thatd be ideal.*


Yep, I agree that would be a wonderful idea : I think I'll send that as a feedback to Apple !


----------



## Pascal (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by theed _
> *As for spin down, yeah, like fluorescent lights, turning them on and then off  is electrically equivalent to leaving them on for ~7 minutes.*


This also means that if you plan on walking away from the lighted room for more that 7 minutes, you'd be better off turning those fluorescent lights off ! Same thing for HD, I guess ! 

Man : I totally agree with myself ! Now isn't that great ???


----------



## free&unmuzzled (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Pascal _
> * Simply click-and-hold on the clock/time...  *



Which pulls down a menu with the date, *greyed out*. I much prefer the previous behaviour under 10.0.x and previous MacOS.

So as to not appear totally negative, here's some things I really do like:

+ The speed
+ The volume and monitor brightness "overlays". Beautiful.
+ DVD playback
+ CD burning
+ Custom HD icons
+ Scale effect for Dock
+ SMB/NFS networking support
+ Applescript
+ Finder improvments
+ Airport Admin Utility

Things I don't like:

- Dock Extras have been deleted
- Menu Bar Clock behaviour
- No random desktop background
- No seperate sleep settings for battery/ac
- Image Capture no longer recognises my Fuji 6800Z
- Still can't link text to a URL in Mail
- No keyboard shortcut for Window->Bring All to Front


----------



## Arin (Sep 26, 2001)

> Mail app still sucks...



Try Netscape 6.1

I haven't been a big fan of NS for quite a while, but it seems to have the most comprehensive mail app out there for OS X at present....


----------



## Pascal (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by free&unmuzzled_
> *Which pulls down a menu with the date, greyed out. I much prefer the previous behaviour under 10.0.x and previous MacOS.*


While I whole heartedly agree with most of your pro and con list, I fail to see the problem with the fact that the date is a greyed out menu... Isn't it how a non selectable menu item should look like ???


----------



## theed (Sep 26, 2001)

it's a little hard to read.  While corret and consistent from a user interface point of view that it tells you it's not selectable, and if it were selectable - what would that mean?  It's something you want to be able to read quickly and completely.  The exact opposite of what its coloring does now.

I would also argue that any one who doesn't think it's a little harder to read than it should be probably has their monitor settings way too bright.  I work in a properly color compensated environment at ~7000K.  It's easy on the eyes, generally nice, and greyed out items fade nicely into the background.

I'd like click to change the menu item to the date like it used to, and keep it like that for 5 seconds, even if it does bring down a menu.  the options in there are super seldom used.  We could deal with there being only the option to open the control panel.  How often do you change your preference between analog and digital... really?  And then there could be a graphical calendar thingy with a notch in the corner for opening the control panel, maybe it could offer a tear away option a la X server 99?

It only rubs me the wrong way because they seem to have decreased usability, increased clutter, and not actually added anything useful.  If I knew how I'd begin coding a replacement right now.  I'm walking through the vermont recipes as we "speak."  I'm whining about this, I know, it's far from being a show stopper.  But if you think that the clock is currently great, then you don't know the difference between good and great.  I've seldom been one to be content with mediocrity.  That's why I use what I use.  

Oh, and the fact that the control panel doesn't even open when I select it from the menu ... wtf?  the only item in the menu worth a damn ... isn't.


----------



## MacSub (Sep 26, 2001)

I agree, read my post "so is 5G64 GM?".

I don't like the new clock!  I hate it!

Oh, by the way... when I select the systemprefs in the menu, it works just fine for me...Sorry your having trouble.


----------



## Pascal (Sep 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by theed _
> *Oh, and the fact that the control panel doesn't even open when I select it from the menu ... wtf?  the only item in the menu worth a damn ... isn't.*


It didn't work here either, until I first opened the preference panel that is. Since then, the shortcut works (even after a restart).


----------



## c.i.t (Sep 26, 2001)

I have the dock extras, if you want them, I can send them to you.


----------



## theed (Sep 27, 2001)

So my install isn't right in a number of tiny little ways.  This was the general fear I had anyway, that because I have a tendency to mess with things that Apple doesn't expect me to mess with that I might get stuck doing a clean install ... grrr.

Well, I guess I'll start copying over my user stuff to a new location.  Boy, you should have seen the hosing I gave X Server1.0 when I tried to move it to 1.2 ... unbootable machine.  Yeah.  That was a bad install day.  I keep a virtual duplicate of the machine and on that one everything went so smooth, I had no idea... some days I'm just technologically challenged.  Maybe it's my processors fighting each other?  ;-)


----------



## simX (Sep 27, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Pascal _
> *Apparently, contrary to your argument, it does make a difference, because the iBook's battery lasts a lot less longer in Mac OS X than it does in Mac OS 9. (As I said in a previous post) And mind you, it is the same iBook with the same hardware characteristics (see below) !
> *



Apparently, contrary to your argument, you have overlooked a very minor detail.  That's that Mac OS X itself is the energy-drainer, because it uses so much more system processor power, and that's why the energy savings is a lot less.  That's also why an Energy Star compliant Mac is not Energy Star compliant when running Mac OS X 10.0.4.

It is this that is causing the power drain, not your spinning the HD down only every 5 minutes.  The other arguments that have been made drive the point home that setting it to 5 minutes is usually better than 1 minute.


----------



## MacSub (Sep 27, 2001)

Here's my list:

Ok, well the Clock should be a single click= date; a click and hold = menu.
Thats what it should be!  Perhaps with a menu-calender if they insist on keeping a click-menu; so that its easy to read.

BOUNCING....if you haven't experienced it, just wait!  (and no, im not talking about the first opening an app bounce, Im talking about a double the hight bounce that wont stop until you select that app, like an error bounce).

Menulings...
They missed one, there should be a menuling for the mail app that displays the #of messages, similar to the dock however it should work without the app open, or with the app open but not seen in the dock.
A menu should appear when clicking the Mail app menuling, that displays the separate accounts and shows who has mail.  From there it would be easy to select the mail we would want to read.  We could do all this from a menuling, and not another Dock-dependent app.  That would be a great menuling!

Tell Apple!  Please Tell Apple, Find the Feedback Page!

Oh, and my brand new firewire-cdrw no longer works in OSX.  Go figure!  Its like I downgraded, or sidegraded made some trade offs, at least I could use toast to burn cd's before in 10.0.4, now its not even recognized, not from the finder or toast.


----------



## Pascal (Sep 27, 2001)

> _Originally posted by simX _
> *Apparently, contrary to your argument, you have overlooked a very minor detail.  That's that Mac OS X itself is the energy-drainer, because it uses so much more system processor power, and that's why the energy savings is a lot less.  That's also why an Energy Star compliant Mac is not Energy Star compliant when running Mac OS X 10.0.4.*


You seem to forget that elements like the one I emphasized in my very first message (disk turn off time and screen dimming/shut off time) are the very thing that cause Mac OS X not to be Energy Star compliant. Why else should Mac OS X be such an _energy-drainer_ ? Do you think Apple added a line on code in Mac OS X that reads something like
	
	



```
IF user moves mouse THEN (burn a lot of energy AND move cursor)
```
I've got the feeling it isn't so ! The real thing is that Mac OS X is not Energy Star compliant because it is not energy optimized (as of 10.0.4, at least... I have not used 10.1 enough yet to know for sure about 10.1, but I have my doubts... you still can't turn on processor cycling either.)


> *It is this that is causing the power drain, not your spinning the HD down only every 5 minutes.  The other arguments that have been made drive the point home that setting it to 5 minutes is usually better than 1 minute.*


Funny though : Apple's very own factory setting for the _Energy saving_ Control Panel are set so that the HD should spin down after 1 minute when running the portable from the battery.

I guess your points have not been correctly driven...


----------



## Pascal (Sep 27, 2001)

> _Originally posted by theed _
> *some days I'm just technologically challenged.*


No you aren't : you are simply adventurous ! Hey ! That's part of your charm !


----------



## AdmiralAK (Sep 27, 2001)

My list:

* NO GREEK
* NO HARDWARE DVD
* NO SCSI CD-RW


----------



## Pascal (Sep 27, 2001)

No file sync beween 2 folders
 No USB Printer server
 No labels in the Finder
 No importing of comments from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X
 So we can all be reassured : there _will_ be a Mac OS 10.2 !!! 

Gentlemen : to your *feedback* page !.. Ready ? Fire !!!


----------



## MacSub (Sep 27, 2001)

great!  Now don't forget to read my post above...I need that stuff changed badly...and I like the menuling mail idea too.


----------



## LordOphidian (Sep 27, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Pascal _
> *
> No labels in the Finder
> No importing of comments from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X
> ...



Oh good god, let the labels die in peace. 

It would be nice however to see the finder look for both the old style comments and the new OS X comments and put them both in the comments field of the Inspector.


----------



## Pascal (Sep 27, 2001)

> _Originally posted by LordOphidian_
> *Oh good god, let the labels die in peace.*


The fact that you don't use them doesn't mean no one uses them...


----------



## theed (Sep 27, 2001)

1 Energ Star Compliant?  Where are the stats for compliance?  My computer shuts off the monitor, goes to sleep, etc just like it's supposed to when idle.  Last time I checked that was Energy Star Compliant.  Please enlighten me.

2 HD spin down: protected memory and pervasive VM combined with self maintenance scripts means the HD gets hit a LOT more.  It's the very nature of a modern OS.  I'll refrain from further detail, but expecting X to save the HD like 9 is insane, even if 1min spin down did make sense in 9.

3 processor cycling was pervasive in 9, and it was battery sweet.  X does not have the same kind of support, and probably never will, even though it will improve.  The hardware and OS disagree about how things should be managed.  Until new hardware, don't expect processor cycling or other dynamic power options to really return.  X actually does burn energy similar to the line of pseudocode you wrote.

4 Labels weren't used by enough people to justify their continued existence.  If you want to uniquely identify something now you could add text to the filename, or make the owner or group something specific.  There are a large number of options which can supplant labels.  This OS was a return to simplicity.  More is not better.

5 The bouncy deal, although obnoxious, does get your attention while letting you do other useful work.  I think it could have been a bit more subtle, like the app raises its hand or something, but it's functionally correct, and works when the dock autohides.

6 mail menuling.  Agreed, that'd be cool, but I'd rather a 3rd party do it.  Apple is displacing too many other companies by not leaving room for improvement in its bundled apps.  Somebody port e-mailer and make a menuling for it, I'd pay $60


----------



## iPenguin (Sep 27, 2001)

Are there spring loaded folders yet??


----------



## Pascal (Sep 27, 2001)

> _Originally posted by iPenguin _
> *Are there spring loaded folders yet?? *


There won't be since some people seem to believe that more is not better. It also appear that if the biggest posters in this forum don't use an option, well in means that option shouldn't exist. All this to say, pal, that you should draw a big red cross over that feature... The biggest posters don't use it, you see...


----------



## theed (Sep 27, 2001)

nope.  Not there.  I think they should be refined a little before they are re-introduced.  They were a little disconcerting when they opened up despite your desires.  Maybe holding down a key while hovering a dragged item over a folder.

Oh, and swapping an app to the foreground via speech doesn't bring about the default window behaviour like clicking on it does.  But speech generally kicks ass, even on my 233 G3.

Oh, and since they stole the soundjam developers and chained them to iTunes, perhaps iTunes could grow a friggin EQ?!?  Soundjam for X was better in it's first beta a year ago than iTunes is now for playing mp3's.  I would make my mother use iTunes, but I want soundjam back.  The damned thing worked and they time limited the beta and never released another for X.  Squashed.  That's the kind of 3rd party killing that Apple has done.  They used to be better at licensing instead of assimilating.  I'd like them to go back to that model.  Then I'd still have soundjam, and so would a bunch of other people.

File synch would be nice, I'd like it to work intelligently across a network as a backup solution, which makes me think it's a 3rd party type of product.

Comments mover seems like a utility that someone who knows the filesystem should write.  I've given up on them, I don't have the motivation or the experience.  I'd rather make a clock, or a RAID5 kExt.


----------



## MacCheetah3 (Sep 27, 2001)

Hi
I don't have 10.1 yet so I will post my full report next week.  Now........

I could probably agree on the clock thing.
A hard drive does get it's butt kicked if you do that.  I didn't know that right away with my PowerBook but I got a nice crash once and the ? disk icon and now my hard drive is noticeably louder.  Plus it does take more energay to spin it up and down.  It would do you more good to just turn the brightness down.   I have a PowerBook G3 Lombard.
Dock Extras I could care less.
The Energy Control stuff maybe kind of half way care.  OS X is pretty good with power usage now.
The Inspector (Get Info) is no biggy.  It kind of stinks but easy work around is use your brains memory 
The background thing is just eh not that big of a deal if any.
As of right now none of the other issues really matter.

And the Mail reply address.  You ever hear of preferences?  Try 'em sometime you'll be amazed.

Plus these features way out those big time........

DVD playback and recording
CD recording
SPEED!
Updated system components.
Airport
New Aqua features.

I am probably forgetting things but you get the point.

I can't wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## theed (Sep 27, 2001)

Are you poking fun at me?  You're a bigger poster than I am.  ;-)

Perhaps Labels could return, but I really don't think they serve a good purpose any more.  I stand by my theory that it's good to trim the fat once in a while.  If you miss them, my condolences.  But I think you'll be among a small crowd at the wake.

And I do apologize if I come off as bitchy.  In general, I love you guys, and this OS generally speaking kicks butt.  And I'm not about to switch to anything else for my main box.  It's just that I have all this pent up energy and aggression, and as long as I can't get my hands on some slimy terrorist with no respect for life and freedom, I'll just continue to be a bit edgy.


----------



## Pascal (Sep 27, 2001)

> _Originally posted by theed _
> *Are you poking fun at me?  You're a bigger poster than I am.  ;-)*


Too bad you don't see me rolling on the floor ! I do have my opinions, but I don't hate others when they don't have the same opinion than me. Except you, of course. 


> *Perhaps Labels could return, but I really don't think they serve a good purpose any more.  I stand by my theory that it's good to trim the fat once in a while.  If you miss them, my condolences.  But I think you'll be among a small crowd at the wake.*


The beauty of Mac OS 9 is that it caters to many different needs without ever forcing anyone to "get in the line". You can work, and the OS works for you. Mac OS X is getting better at this (the public beta released one year ago was terrible in this respect), but it hasn't yet achieved the flexibility of Mac OS 9. (By the way, that doesn't mean that Mac OS X is a _bad_ OS, just that it is not _mature_ yet.)

As for labels... nobody ever forced me to use them. And I can survive without them, of course. But I am a natural _color coder_ : in my office, in my filing cabinet, everywhere around the house and at work, I use color to group things together so as to find them easily and quickly when I need them. My Mac is no different (it's mine, after all !)

_At least _, in Mac OS X 10.1, we can move the applications in sub-folders without breaking down the OS ! See, there _is_ hope : Mac OS X will get more usable with time... Maybe 10.2 will see "the return of the Label".

Your favorite terrorist...


----------



## Pascal (Sep 27, 2001)

By the way, Apple itself said that Mac OS X 10.0.4 is not Energy Star compliant, not me ! (I have yet to see anything on 10.1) Straight from the horse's mouth :

*À propos de la norme ENERGY STAR*

Les informations relatives à ENERGY STAR figurant dans le manuel de votre ordinateur s'appliquent aux configurations standard de l'ordinateur sous le système d'exploitation Mac OS 9. 

_Rough translation_ : 

*About the ENERGY STAR standard*

Informations pertaining to ENERGY STAR in your computer's manual apply to the standard configurations of the computer running the Mac OS 9 operating system. 

_Source_ : iBook Mac OS X addendum leaflet (À lire avant de commencer), F033-1779-A, Apple Computer, 2001.


----------



## MacSub (Sep 28, 2001)

oooooohhhhhh, bad word!

by the way do they still NOT allow G4's into nations like Iran?

...UM, what was I going to post...

Oh, I never used Lableing in OS9, but I knew people that did..quite a bit, and I could see a use for them in OSX;  IT's really all about how well WE can configure our macs to identify US.  That is, how can we use them the way we like them...THIS was my first major complaint about OSX, no user configurability.  Even though we had the dock, we lost on Pop-up windows in conjunction with 'View as Buttons' to use as a launcher, as well as a very efficent 'Controll Strip'; these things weren't as fancy as the Dock, but they worked well and they worked when WE needed them, and they never got in the way (like the Dock seems to at times).  Overall, I love OSX and have gotten used to its features, and I use it everyday, never do I use OS9 unless I have to.

Im sure as time comes we will see a more complete and configurable OSX that will extend far greater than OS9 could ever be.


----------



## ulrik (Sep 28, 2001)

I liked the labels!!! Sure, one might say just drop the files into a folder if you want to categorize them, but I think it was a cool thing, for example when I made images of CDs to burn, I exactly knew:
Red = VCD
Blue = SVCD
Green = DivX

I could have dropped them into a VCD folder of course...but I didn't because the option of the labes was there. 

Wanna know what would be a cool thing in OS X.2 in my opinion? Privilege bound labels! You know, if you label a file as "private", it automaticaly adjusts the privileges so only the current user can open and read/write them. If you labed something as "Project 1", it is immiditealy shared with Users that are part of project 1 (you could configure this in the User tab for example). That would be cool, if you ask me, and would help in offices, for example. Label something with "Important" and when you try to log out, a window tells you which files are still labeled as "Important"...


----------



## profx (Oct 10, 2001)

one of the most annoying things is that OS X.1 
cant put itself to sleep, 
                        or wakeup, 
                        or shutdown, 
                        or startup automatically anymore? 
 Os 9 had it.  These are particularly useful as i use my mac as an alarm clock in the morning.


----------



## Pascal (Oct 12, 2001)

> _Originally posted by profx _
> *one of the most annoying things is that OS X.1
> cant put itself to sleep,
> or wakeup,
> ...


I think the reason is that since Mac OS X is so stable, _*nobody wants*_ to shutdown their Macs anymore ! Imagine : should you do such a thing, you wouldn't be able to *brag about your Mac's uptime !* (The horror ! The _hor-ror_ !)


----------

