Search results

To be clear, GCC 4.x is standard for 10.3.9 or later. 3.3 was used for 10.2 and 10.3, and 2.95 was used for 10.0. So depending on which versions of the OS you want to target with your software, you may have to use a specific version of the compiler. The good news is that XCode 2 allows you to...

I remember those times... and the thing is... 3.3.3 was the devil in diguise for PPC. You would be surprised how many freakin' ICEs I would hit with code, or other very poor behavior. I went to 4.0 on Gentoo simply because 3.3 had so many issues outside of x86. To be blunt, I don't see any...

Other than the link given... there is likely no real hope of using XCode for Windows programming. The issue isn't compilers (for the most part), it is libraries, and file formats. MacOS X uses a different set of libraries which aren't present on Windows, and vice versa. MacOS X uses a different...

Prebinding is just something you turn on... and that is it. OS X will do the work itself the first time your framework is loaded by an application that uses it (for each build). Bring up your project's info, and look under Build -> Linking. There is an option called Prebinding that you can check...

Everything I can see in your logs looks normal. A couple things to point out: - Unix, Linux and MacOS X are based around the concept of services. So the concept of server/client gets a little blurred. A server is a client, and a client is a server. The only difference is what services are...

OS X doesn't neet to take more advantage of the Core Duo. They rewrote their vector acceleration routines to use SSE, so that work is already done. The only 'feature' they have yet to exploit is virtualization. And I would wager that a lot of the intel optimization took place along-side the PPC...

Has anyone else messed around with writing unit tests with OCUnit (now built-in with XCode 2.2 and later)? I personally have started messing around with it, and OCMock, and am very pleasantly surprised a how clean it is. As a member of a Windows-centered programming team messing around with unit...

Ouch, this is not a good thing. The software seems to have burned two sessions onto the disc, one with drivers, and one with the data. The intent is that you can take the CD to any PC and it should read it, but Macs do have oddities dealing with certain kinds of multiple-session discs. Even...

Safe Sleep isn't an equal to Hibernate. It simply does the same routine so that if your machine /does/ lose power, you can restore the system back to where it was before you put it to sleep. It isn't something you activate yourself, just something that 'happens'.

Well, if you can't live without AE, then wait, but Apple's pro apps should all be universal in April (since they said March, I will say April is the time to actually look for the universal versions). Adobe is waiting for the next releases to go universal. Although if you are getting a laptop as...

My order was 2 days after the keynote (had to wait for the hold to clear, since I cancelled my first order, and was ordering a new one under an EPP).. says it won't ship until the 15th.

Well, the Apple EFI lacks support for El Torito and UDF volumes for booting as well once they did start mucking with EFI, along with the CSM... whoops. ;) So that means we would need to extend the EFI that Apple ships by adding UDF or El Torito support, a CSM, and probably FAT32 and NTFS...

I thought I would add just a quick little note: Vista won't boot on these things either. Turns out some of us here at MS thinking about how Apple went ahead and implemented EFI were right: it lacks a CSM module, and because of that, no planned version of Windows will boot on 32-bit Intel Macs...

I can see plenty of reasons to stick with the PB15", but as someone who has a fairly recent iMac G5 (and don't feel like paying again to upgrade it from my August purchase), and is in the market for a laptop that will last awhile after selling my Pismo. The Intel version makes more sense for me...

Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean it in quite that sense. I meant it in a 'ZOMG! It can run Windoze!!!eleventy-one' sense. Without that CSM, dual-booting is an exercise of high-risk until 64-bit chips come out and we can run Vista or XP 64 on those. Drivers would be barrels of fun though, now...

EFI can emulate classic BIOS through a CSM (Compatibility Support Module) that is added to the implementation by the vendor. However, Apple has zero reason to write and include a CSM. Video cards are handled in EFI in a similar manner as OpenFirmware, meaning it makes sense to just make the full...

I guess I can weigh in, since I know a bit about what is going on, at least in Redmond. :) Yes, the new Intel systems use EFI and GPT. Here is the downside: - Windows only supports EFI on 64-bit systems, and this will not change in Vista. Apparently 32-bit EFI support was abandoned as OEMs...

Well, I think there is a grievance if the product scratches too easily. I just think the lawsuit has zero credibility because it is asking for unjust compensation.

The one thing that threw all credibility out of the window for this lawsuit was that they are trying to lay claim to profit. There is no way a percentage of the profits is just restitution for something like scratched screens. Those sort of judgements are given out on something where the...