On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Mark Sokolovsky wrote:
> I've noticed something. The government keeps us out of all of their
> little secrets. 64-bit is not ever close to being new. The standard
> computer out there today in best buy is 64-bit, while back in the
> 1960's the world's first 64-bit
I've noticed something. The government keeps us out of all of their
little secrets. 64-bit is not ever close to being new. The standard
computer out there today in best buy is 64-bit, while back in the
1960's the world's first 64-bit computer was overly protected by the
government and was operated
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 11:43 PM, ah...clem wrote:
> how can you tell if it's booting the 32-bit kernel or 64-bit kernel?
I look at what is listed in the System Profiler under "Software"
The image below is from the article at the 2'nd link.
http://macperformanceguide.com/images-SnowLeopard/Verif
At 4:47 PM -0700 6/18/2010, ah...clem wrote:
i've just been informed by a reliable source that OSX is a 32-bit
operating system,
Mac OS X has provided a 64-bit application environment for quite some
time, on hardware that could support it. Parts were there in Tiger,
then more in Leopard. Bu
how can you tell if it's booting the 32-bit kernel or 64-bit kernel?
btw, i am not a complete idiot. i wrote code 40+y ago, in fortran G
and IBM Turbo assembler (one step above 1s and 0s). at the time, i
had a moderate understanding of system level computing. but i haven't
done anything like th
Adapters do exist that convert PATA to SATA, but they are quite large
and designed for use in desktops. I don' t think it would even be
possible to fit such an adapter in a PowerBook, unless you did serious
internal modifications to make space for the adapter.
Vic Mabus wrote:
http://www.tomsh
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Nova-32GB-SSD-Rebate-Netbook,10697.html#xtor=RSS-181
I saw this bargain on Tom's Hardware, but I haven't found any adapter
that would allow me to put one of these in an old PowerBook with PATA
(or is it PITA?) interface. It would have to be quite slim.
Has an
On Jun 18, 2010, at 6:35 PM, iJohn wrote:
Perhaps his complaint is related to the fact that many of the Intel
Macs are currently still booting the 32-bit kernel rather than the
64-bit kernel.
Most likely.
My Product Hs boot Snow in 64-bit mode, and they work fine that way.
The only time I h
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 8:15 PM, ah...clem wrote:
> ok, well this *clueless wanker* is Dr. Warren Hehre, developer of
> Spartan and numerous other scientific computing apps, who has been
> writing apps for MacOS for the past 20 years.
Oh, great. At first I thought he was just an idiot, but it now
On Jun 18, 2010, at 5:20 PM, Daniel Stewart wrote:
I should probably mention that it says on the Software Restore disks
that it is compatible with OS 10.1.2 and OS 9.22. Should that give me
problems with 104.11?
Just do straight 10.4 and the the updates to 10.4.11. you can skip
all the
I should probably mention that it says on the Software Restore disks
that it is compatible with OS 10.1.2 and OS 9.22. Should that give me
problems with 104.11?
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 6:59 PM, JOHN CARMONNE wrote:
>
> On Jun 18, 2010, at 4:56 PM, Scotty wrote:
>
>> This may fit under the headin
ok, well this *clueless wanker* is Dr. Warren Hehre, developer of
Spartan and numerous other scientific computing apps, who has been
writing apps for MacOS for the past 20 years. i have a spiffy new 3.3
GHz 2010 Mac that came with SL 10.6.3 factory installed, and i also
have the latest version of
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 7:47 PM, ah...clem wrote:
> i've just been informed by a reliable source that OSX is a 32-bit
> operating system, and because of that, no application can address more
> than 2GB of RAM.
Well, no. Your reliable source is apparently not so reliable. The
complete answer is ..
And for "The Insomniac Mac," look here:
http://www.macworld.com/article/48345/2005/12/nonightnight.html
Al Poulin
--
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for
those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at htt
Oops, sorry forgot to remove the spam marker our server put on that.
--
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs
--
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for
those
On Jun 18, 2010, at 4:47 PM, ah...clem wrote:
> i've just been informed by a reliable source that OSX is a 32-bit
s/reliable source/clueless wanker/
There, fixed it for yah.
In actuality it is both. up through 10.5 OS X was 32-bit (with 64 bit parts on
some systems, notably the G5's)
10.6 is
On Jun 18, 2010, at 4:56 PM, Scotty wrote:
This may fit under the heading of stupid newbie questions so please be
patient with me. My Mac may be 8 years old, but I am really new to
the platform.
I have a G4 933 mhz Quicksilver. When I bought it had a clean
install of OSX 10.5 on it, but no
I don't know for sure, but up until recently there has been so few 64
bit applications out there to make it largely irrelevant until fairly
recently.
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 6:47 PM, ah...clem wrote:
> i've just been informed by a reliable source that OSX is a 32-bit
> operating system, and becau
This may fit under the heading of stupid newbie questions so please be
patient with me. My Mac may be 8 years old, but I am really new to
the platform.
I have a G4 933 mhz Quicksilver. When I bought it had a clean
install of OSX 10.5 on it, but no 10.5 disk was included with it.
Anyway. The so
i've just been informed by a reliable source that OSX is a 32-bit
operating system, and because of that, no application can address more
than 2GB of RAM. if this is true, i am shocked. WTF is going on at
apple?? hyping 64-bit hardware for the past seven years and loading
it with a 32-bit OS???
On Jun 18, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Dan wrote:
At 1:11 AM -0700 6/18/2010, Ed Grey wrote:
test
Unless you're the list administrator, there is NEVER a need to send
a test message to an entire mailing list. Be considerate. There
are people on the lists with slow and/or metered connections. Don
At 1:02 AM -0700 6/18/2010, Ed Grey wrote:
My understanding is that Apple is not releasing any more security
updates for Tiger.
"My understanding". Yea, a lot of people suddenly understand that --
but there has been no announcement from Apple. So it's just a guess.
There are still some up
On Jun 18, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> I have never really felt insecure running a Mac wide open on the internet
> since the OS 8 days. The only virus infection I've EVER gotten on any of my
> Macs was the WDEF virus. I've taken precaustions with
The life of a sysadmin is interr
On Jun 18, 2010, at 1:05 AM, Ed Grey wrote:
>
> That leads to the question I was going to ask before I saw this thread
> - without new security updates, is there any reason to worry about
> using Tiger on the Internet?
Almost all of the security updates involve either local privilege escalation
Many suggestions on xlr8yourmac.com
--
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for
those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette
guide is at http://www
Gratz on the 1.44! I've been looking for one in nice shape. The NOISE
problem is a biggun, but a good way is to get some sheets of foam and
cut/tape them so that they are attached to the sides of the computer. It
dampens noise. No joke, my 747-esque SPARCSTATION has a 2-inch thick
styrofoam wall, a
On 18 Jun 2010, at 07:59:18 PDT, JIM RAPER wrote:
2nd ? I will tackle the NOISE problem next. It is solvable, isn't it?
-
Buy some long cables and put in another room! It sure is quiet in
my family room when the MDD shuts down!
Ken
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7gt1w/stackomacs
-
Hi, Got the above mentioned computer Wed. Couple of, hopefully, simple
questions. I have loads of bookmarks on my old Sawtooth. Is there an easy
way to transfer them over into FireFox Bookmarks? I have been able to save
them to a Flash drive and they are live when I open up the flash in my MDD.
2n
The only difference in an "upgrade" disc and a full installer is that
there is a "CheckForOSX" file that checks for a previous OS X version
on the HD and blocks you if it isn't there. You need to remove this
"CheckForOSX" file. Here are instructions:
Here's the method for a Leopard upgrade
I discovered that I have a set of 10.3 Panther CD's, but even though
they're the black retail-looking ones, the first disc (of 3) says
"Upgrade" on it. I know there was a way to use a Leopard upgrade disc
to a blank drive, but that trick involved Time Machine, which didn't
exist with 10.3.
So - is
test
On Jun 18, 3:05 am, Ed Grey wrote:
> On Jun 16, 3:44 am, Kris Tilford wrote:
>
> > Apple hasn't yet issued a security update for Tiger, so perhaps it's
> > truly abandoned forever now?
>
> My understanding is that Apple is not releasing any more security
> updates for Tiger. There are still
On Jun 16, 3:44 am, Kris Tilford wrote:
> Apple hasn't yet issued a security update for Tiger, so perhaps it's
> truly abandoned forever now?
>
My understanding is that Apple is not releasing any more security
updates for Tiger. There are still some updates for apps that run in
Tiger, but even
My understanding is that Apple is not releasing any more security
updates for Tiger. There are still some updates for apps that run in
Tiger, but even Firefox is discontinuing support after version 3.6.
--
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for
those using G3,
33 matches
Mail list logo
