On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, petard wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:55:08AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
It's astounding to me that that Apple failed to do basic QC on its
major new release.
The problem with the Firewire 800 drives using the Oxford 922 chips is
inexcusable. Did Apple never bother
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 05:59:02PM +, petard wrote:
If software companies were responsible for bugs in hardware that they do not
manufacture, MS would be in much more trouble than it is already.
Apple is both a software *and* a hardware company, however, and they've
pretty much always
At 06:37 PM 11/7/03 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Apple is both a software *and* a hardware company, however, and
they've
pretty much always been negligent about making sure that other vendor's
hardware
worked with theirs and/or their OS.
I thought that was half the point of Apple ---you play
In case you've been using Apple OS X 10.3 (Panther)'s FileVault (Rijndael128
on ~/) there's a yet unfixed bug. Answer no if requested to regain lost disk
space in encrypted directory[1]
Notice that while the screen lock buffer overrun has been fixed, there are
still unresolved issues with it[2]
On Friday, November 7, 2003, at 07:52 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
In case you've been using Apple OS X 10.3 (Panther)'s FileVault
(Rijndael128
on ~/) there's a yet unfixed bug. Answer no if requested to regain
lost disk
space in encrypted directory[1]
Notice that while the screen lock buffer
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:55:08AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
It's astounding to me that that Apple failed to do basic QC on its
major new release.
The problem with the Firewire 800 drives using the Oxford 922 chips is
inexcusable. Did Apple never bother to run the new version of OS X with
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 05:59:02PM +, petard wrote:
If software companies were responsible for bugs in hardware that they do not
manufacture, MS would be in much more trouble than it is already.
Apple is both a software *and* a hardware company, however, and they've
pretty much always
At 06:37 PM 11/7/03 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Apple is both a software *and* a hardware company, however, and
they've
pretty much always been negligent about making sure that other vendor's
hardware
worked with theirs and/or their OS.
I thought that was half the point of Apple ---you play
In case you've been using Apple OS X 10.3 (Panther)'s FileVault (Rijndael128
on ~/) there's a yet unfixed bug. Answer no if requested to regain lost disk
space in encrypted directory[1]
Notice that while the screen lock buffer overrun has been fixed, there are
still unresolved issues with it[2]
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:55:08AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
It's astounding to me that that Apple failed to do basic QC on its
major new release.
The problem with the Firewire 800 drives using the Oxford 922 chips is
inexcusable. Did Apple never bother to run the new version of OS X with
On Friday, November 7, 2003, at 07:52 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
In case you've been using Apple OS X 10.3 (Panther)'s FileVault
(Rijndael128
on ~/) there's a yet unfixed bug. Answer no if requested to regain
lost disk
space in encrypted directory[1]
Notice that while the screen lock buffer
11 matches
Mail list logo
