Apple today released version 0.2-beta of its X11 for MacOSX, which allows X11-based apps to run side-by-side with native OSX applications while it makes it easier to port X11 apps to the Mac. The new beta adds several enhancements and bug fixes (fixes the Fink library problem among other things). On other Mac-related news, MSN for OSX is nearing release while Internet Explorer 6 is on hold by Microsoft, ThinkSecret reports. Additionally, Apple seeded a new Java 1.4.1 preview to devs.
Apple Updates X11 for Mac OS X
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
It probably didn’t compare well with Safari, and that’s why they put it on hold.
Apple recognizes the importance of their newly ackquired Unix-fancrowd. While I have never been a huge fan of Unix, I find it very useful that I can use applications like gimp or nedit natively in OS X without having to wait for someone to port the whole thing.
> It probably didn’t compare well with Safari, and that’s why they put it on hold.
Hardly. The problem would be that Apple will include Safari by default on the new OSX, so they have no chance on capturing big audiences, so there is no value there for MS.
Better software will always find a way. Don’t tell me Microsoft is a bit worried about someone bundling.
Upon installing X11 0.2 I found that twm is started now instead of quartz-wm, which seems a little odd. I stuck a .xinitrc in my home directory which calls quartz-wm, and that seemed to fix the problem.
The main thing I see needed is hotkey support for starting applications. I hope Apple adds this soon.
Otherwise, good job on Apple’s part packaging XFree86… I hope to see it included per default in the next release of OS X.
> so they have no chance on capturing big audiences, so
> there is no value there for MS
If IE6/Mac turns out well and handles the same substandard websites that only IE6/Windows does, they could actually start charging for it. I know many who would gladly pay and ditch the inevitable-VPC.
twm started up here, so I put a .xinitrc in my home directory with quartz-wm and everything is hunky-dory.
“Better software will always find a way. Don’t tell me Microsoft is a bit worried about someone bundling.”
Huh? Bundling destroyed Netscape. It’s a very powerful weapon. MS are right to abandon IE, it doesn’t really matter, even if it was lots better and Safari were a POS, massively loyal Apple zealots would use Safari because it’s Apple, and normal users (are there any left?) would use it because it’s there.
“even if it was lots better and Safari were a POS, massively loyal Apple zealots would use Safari because it’s Apple, and normal users (are there any left?) would use it because it’s there.”
What a clever slap at Mac users!
You so witty.
IE6 is “on hold”, because IE6 is the basis of the MSN browser.
I uninstalled it once I dled chimera…
Safari is better than IE even as beta and with fewer features, no contest. That’s because Apple writes better software than MS.
I was just thinking about yoyo’s comment, and it’s a valid question: are there any “normal” Mac users left? You know, that lady down the street who just uses it for e-mail? I know that I sure wouldn’t find any on OSNews, but I was wondering: does anybody actually buy a modern Mac (besides schools, of course) without knowing about the underlying UNIX, etc? It seems that the only people who use it are the zealots. Not that it’s bad or anything, I think it’s wonderful, but it seems that the “normal” home user is either defecting to become a geek upon installation of OS X, or for some reason “normal” users just aren’t attracted to the platform. Comments?
Microsoft = bad bundling corporation
Apple = bad bundling corporation w/ a good image
Linux = freedom…
I was quoting from an above post.
You answered your own question.
You wont find any ‘normal’ people posting on OS news.
And yes there plenty of ‘regular’- ie ‘normal’ mac users for email.
You are probably just noticing the increased chatter about Apple on geek sites because of the new operating system.
…obviously has never used IE on MOSX. If we really want to talk about POS software IE 5.2 pretty much takes the cake.
Safari was written because Apple had no choice. Chimera development is just to slow… OmniWeb is not fully compliant… And the rest of the browsers for Mac just plain suck.
Apple has just raised the bar to what they think the browser experience should be. M$ can compete if they want. But they’ll have to actually work on it, this time.
BTW- What does this have to do w/ X11?
the good thing about OSx, is that you dont need to be aware or care that the system is unix based. there is no need to use command line for a regular use. mail, web, word processing, etc. Im sure most people fit in this category of use.
I think these fall into several categories:
— people that have always used a mac and continue to do so out of inertia (many of these are OS 9 people still). these people may be dwindling, or even switching to PC by default and out of ignorance or budget concerns.
— average people who have had the benefit of trying out OS X (either from exposure to a friend or relative’s mac) or maybe even falling into an apple store, and realizing how much easier and better designed it is for ordinary people that are not real computer knowledgeable. it’s a complete package of the things they want to do without the stress of figuring out which 3d party card, or 3d party app to pick out of the hundreds available.
while solid numbers are unavailable, it would seem that the number of people in category 2 are increasing. Apple is basically selling the same number of computers and holding steady to slightly increasing its market share even though it’s edu sales are way down and publishers are not buying yet. Part of the difference seems to be increased consumer sales and I believe I have even heard consumer sales are up as a percentage of mac sales.
—
Thousands and thousands and thousands of ‘normal’ people are out there buying and using Macs with OSX. The whole point of OSX is that it doesn’t matter what’s under the hood, because it’s still easy to drive. Mail, web browsing, iLife, Office X, games, graphics… and on and on OSX is just as easy to use as OSes 1-9 were.
Who do you think the swichers are? They are buying eMacs and iMacs and iBooks and they know zero about unix. Graphic designers, video editors, audio professionals, etc. They all can do everything that they need to and never have to learn anything about unix.
I know that this is going to shock a lot of people on geek sites like this, but it’s true.
Yes, if you are a mac hater, the iApps, apple mail, safari, address book, iCal, .mac integration – they are all real bad for your argument. I’ll give you that. Because really that’s Apple’s core strategy and advantage over MS — a package of integrated functions out of the box, for free. No installation, no figuring out what to buy, no conflicts, no radically different interface for each app (compare to similar interface on apple bundled apps). Mac haters can cry and whine all day about how “MS can’t do this.” Guess what, apple can and is and you’re whining isn’t going to stop it. sorry
Yes, I realize that it doesn’t matter, however I find that it doesn’t matter that it doesn’t matter; Mac users seem to like to know about their operating system. I am fully aware that you don’t _need_ to know, which makese it all the more intriguing why most people _do_ know! Maybe it’s just because I don’t know a whole lot of Mac users who are not geeks (in fact, almost all of the Mac users I know are from Slashdot, OSNews, etc.), but it seems that there aren’t many of ’em out there.
stephen s.,
that is some kinda post there dude!
.
“I realize that it doesn’t matter, however I find that it doesn’t matter that it doesn’t matter”
Thats from a Monty Python sketch, right/
Safari was written because Apple had no choice. Chimera development is just to slow… OmniWeb is not fully compliant… And the rest of the browsers for Mac just plain suck.
Safari was written for the same reason iChat was written, for the same reason lots of Apple software is written, that destroys 3rd party solutions. I can’t say for sure what that reason is, but my guess is: Apple gets complete control, and doesn’t see the usefulness in paying for a pre-existing solution.
If Apple was unsatisfied w/the progress of Chimera & OmniWeb, but wanted to encourage their development, they could easily have subsidized their development. I’m not saying Apple is discouraging their development, but they’re certainly not being helpful.
My wife, daughter (3 1/2) brother (who needs to label his cables to know where they go) are all normal users. Most of the computers where I work are Macs and the vast majority of the employees couldn’t find the Terminal and don’t know that it is. Go to any Apple store. Go to any non-geek Mac board. Go to any MUG. There are still publications like MacHome and MacGamer. Like most drivers, most Mac and Windows users have no idea what’s under the hood, they just know it works.
What you’re doing is like looking around an insane asylum and wondering if that means that everyone is crazy.
Jack,
Just think for a minute. The apple software is just better. Christ almighty, this does not take a PhD. iTunes is the most intuitive player there is, iMovie is still the best, iPhoto too was groundbreaking and the PC copies are just appearing. Now a frickin beta browser that is way better – it’s just simpler and gets out of your way. Keynote -version 1 program and all the reviews so far put it ahead of powerpoint in terms of ease of use and looks of your presenation. Even the famed watson – it’s not as polished as Sherlock, even if it has more plugins.
I just used isync over .mac for the first time. I synced my new PB to my desktop mac. I could not believe how easy this was, and how well the reconciling worked. Also, ical was synced on the two machines.
I don’t know what it is, but they are drinking some serious magic juice over at Cupertino. The third party stuff just can’t compare. apple is putting everyone to shame right now.
How can you say: “Safari was written for the same reason iChat was written…”
And in the next sentence say: “I can’t say for sure what that reason is…”
If you’re not sure then how do you know that it was written for the same reason. That seems like a vast non-sequeter to me.
Just think for a minute. The apple software is just better.
This is immaterial. I didn’t say I *disliked* the Apple software; in fact I like iTunes okay, while I detest iPhoto to the point that I routinely remove it from my computer every time the OS update installs it. (The idea of defaulting to showing all photos at once was a terrible idea, maybe they’ve changed it since, but iPhoto doesn’t provide me with enough functionality that I care to wait 2-3 minutes for it to present its screen. Plus I hate brushed metal.) I personally hate iChat, preferring the 3rd party version with the entertaining bird (whose name escapes me). BUT AOL wouldn’t let that guy tie into their servers, while they’ll let Apple tie in. C’est la vie.
Apple probably spent more time & money developing all the software you cite from scratch, than if they had encouraged 3rd party developers, or bought previously existing 3rd party code.
& Apple has a lot more resources to throw at things like this, so of course their in-house software will be “more polished” than (say) Omni Group’s. And IMHO those are resources they should spend instead on fixing fatal bugs in their OS that they claim (pathetically IMHO) don’t exist, or aren’t their fault, &c.
If you’re not sure then how do you know that it was written for the same reason. That seems like a vast non-sequeter to me.
I don’t “know”; I “assert”. I should think that’s obvious from the fact that I go on to state, “I don’t know”. Please tell me I don’t have to qualify every statement with “I think”, “I believe”, “it seems to me”, &c. I’d be the first on the board to do it regularly, if so… 😛
& I hold to my assertion: “I think” my explanation is a lot better than most of them here: ie, “it makes sense to me” that Apple likes to control certain corners of the software market, rather than encourage pre-existing development. I don’t mean “control” in a fascist sense, I mean “control” as in, rather than encourage someone else to do it, who may or may not do it according the preferences of Apple, & may or may not update it as often as Apple likes, they’d rather do it themselves, so they can “control” the development and keep it updated at a pace accountable to them.
It’s no secret that Apple has gobs & gobs of money to throw around, and because of the incredibly small size of the Mac market, a lot of 3rd party developers don’t. If Apple wants to throw their money around putting these people out of business, that’s their affair. Still, “I don’t think” that sort of behavior will encourage small companies or hobbyists to develop for their platform… unless they seriously think Safari is so much better than OmniWeb or Chimera that it will singlehandedly grow their market.
There, happy?
“What you’re doing is like looking around an insane asylum and wondering if that means that everyone is crazy.”
lol, exactamuno.
” It’s no secret that Apple has gobs & gobs of money to throw around, and because of the incredibly small size of the Mac market…”
The posts here are priceless.
In fact, it is the Pro desktops that are not selling. All consumer Macs sell well. All the iApps are for “normal” users.
Well, they defaulted to twm instead of aqua-wm, had to change that over to aqua-wm in the .xinitrc. My windows now actually appear in a usable area (before they kept being rendered off the screen above the menubar but under it).
Im content, it has so far shown less glitches then other X implimentations on os X.
And in MS’s defense… appleworks blows goats and should die, but not until I can buy my educational copy of Office and Filemaker…
I have to respectfully disagree. Apple shouldn’t be funding Chimera or Omniweb. Apple shouldn’t be funding Opera.
Safari will not stunt the growth of third party developers. They simply need to make their browser better than Safari and Mac users will flock (unless they charge an arm and a leg).
I look forward to a final release of Chimera. It’s still my favorite, but until they get the kinks worked out Safari is better.
It’s no secret that Apple has gobs & gobs of money to throw around, and because of the incredibly small size of the Mac market..
The posts here are priceless.
Okay, let’s see: Apple routinely boasts that they are flush with cash. ( http://www.macobserver.com/stockwatch/2001/10/17.3.shtml )
The Apple market is miniscule, & Apple’s profits come largely from hardware. (Hardly a secret.)
I stand by this statement.
Safari will not stunt the growth of third party developers.
Here I have to disagree. See OSNews article http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=2603 where the lead developer of Chimera publicly suggests he may abandon the project.
And here is another, on Opera: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=2669
I am very aware of the financials.
I was amused by the wording of your post –
‘ Apple has gobs & gobs of money to throw around, and because of the incredibly small size of the Mac market.. ‘
That is all.
you will find…if you take a telephone poll at noon that everyone in the US is Either a house spouce or unemployed.
just as you will find that if you take a poll on a geek site everyone in the World is a geek who likes technology and programming.
see the problems with your assertion?
It’s obvious that an operating system provides a basic UI and platform from which to run applications. Lest say you set out to accomplish that task and do it with some level of success. No what? well you tweak it. Where do you go from there? You raise the bar and the number of functions that the operating system serves. Browsing, printing, word processing, photo editing, CD/DVD burning, multi media etc. This is a natural process seen with every operating system, starting with the most common apps working outword. It’s stress on third party developers of common applications but it’s also one way of apple insuring a good product for the money. I think (there, I said it) Apple is thinking ahead here.
You are obviously ill informed. If you read the very next entry in the Chimera developer’s blog, he admits that the idea of abandoning Chimera was foolish and that he has no intention of leaving.
Opera is a poor example because their Mac browser never worked in the first place. In perpetual beta, it never even lived up to IE 5.2 fo Mac OS X. Now, I’m not an Opera hater (I use it regularly on Windows), but that is just unacceptable. When you can’t beat out the awful IE 5.2, you deserve to get kicked off of the platform.
I might also direct you to the recent interview on this site with the director of the OmniGroup. Rather than being disheartened by the release of Safari, they see this as a great chance for them to raise the bar on what a “high-end” browser should be.
People made similar comments to yours when iTunes was released, saying it would kill the MP3 player market. However, checking VersionTracker today, I count no less than 17 MP3 players for Mac OS X, not including iTunes.
People also were in an uproar over Sherlock 3 and how it was going to kill Watson. Looking at the Sherlock 3 page, it has not been updated and no new services have been released since it’s initial launch. However, if I check the Warson homepage, I see that a new version has come out as well 3 new user-developed services. You tell me which one seems dead.
iChat was heralded as the doom of 3rd party IM clients. Yet of the 3 clients that were around before iChat, only one has dropped out. The other two are still actively developed.
iChat is actually a poor one to make an example of. 3rd party solutions were doomed to at least only mediocre success almost from the outset: AOL tries quite hard to prevent them from accessing the full functionality of the network. Only a corporation like Apple could pull off the licensing necessary to create a truly functional client. I was a loyal user of Fire, but its continued problems accessing the network and its complete lack of file transfer support meant that I was always getting a sub-standard experience.
All in all, I would not say Apple has damaged its developer market by making iApps. iApps provide a standard that other Macintosh developers aspire to to achieve and/or surpass. I happen to be working on a program for it right now, and one of my primary goals is to make it as easy to use or easier than the most comparable iApp.
Dang. Totally ruined my own point. In the last paragraph it should say “Apple hasn’t damaged” instead of “Apple has damaged”. Typing too fast for my own good.
Okay, last weekend, completly fed up with how much Think Free Office’s wordprocessing sucks, I took a $50 gamble and bought bsdmall’s Office Applications for Mac OS X.
It came with a flavor of X windows. I was worried about how well it would work and would I have to configure, etc etc etc.
Nope. I put in the disk, double clicked, and now I have X windows and it and runs like a dream, although the copy and paste between aqua and X is a little awkward.
I hear that Apple’s X windows is even slicker. Cool beans.
—
OS X. Unix for the rest of us.
Download the previous version of X11. I was disappointed that keyboard mapping for foreign charactures wasn’t part of the system. Any word on when this might be available as a feature for us non-geek unix users?
No, I doubt Microsoft placed IE6 on hold simply because of Safari (my respect for Microsoft falls if that’s the case), but simply because of MSN 8. Unless you haven’t noticed, Microsoft have been placing more money on MSN.
Heck, if you read Microsoft rumour sites (like winsupersite), you would see that they are pretty much focusing more on MSN than on IE. In fact, accroading to windowsxp.nu, they may be ditching IE for MSN in Windows. So you see why Microsoft placed IE on hold.
Another reason is that the Mac BU is preparing for the next release of Office, and want to release IE at the same time. Office v. X, IMHO, while rather good, in comparison with Office 98 and Office 2001, is not all that good. The major feature is that it runs on OS X (and that’s why they are blaming its failure on Apple’s lack of marketing OS X to OS 9 users).
Another reason is that they possibly couldn’t see any reason to stay in the Mac browser market. The market is already small, and with Apple bundling Safari, there isn’t much room for IE. In other words, the rest of the Safari-less Mac market is too small for them to bother.
Some of you might find this is sticking resemblance with Netscape and IE on Windows, but Netscape lost its market share because it didn’t have proper management and they pushed for a rewrite at the wrong time and the rewrite due to lack of management took 4 years to complete. Netscape can pretty much keep a market for its own if Real could.
I think you are mistaken. Many third party solutions die off on Mac when Apple makes a iApp replacement (or buys one of their competitors) simply because the Mac market is so small. There isn’t much room to compete against Apple *in* the Mac market. So for example you are a competitor to iMovie, chances are you may not find profitability on Apple simply because it is a small market.
Now, I think for now Apple is in the right in making iApps, Sherlock 3, Safari, Keynote etc, (esp. Keynote since it is not bundled with the OS nor would it) simply because, again, the market is too small. It would be a big change if Apple decides to go for bigger markets (invloves at least 2 years of inprofitability, and a big blow to their hardware).
But however Apple must (I’m sure they do) know where to draw the line. They must not eliminate third parties altogether, especially on the consumer market. They should only write replacement software for larger niches where Apple as a company is in (video editing, for example), but try not to target small tiny weeny niches. In other words, Apple needs to thread carefully.
@Owen Anderson
If you read the very next entry in the Chimera developer’s blog, he admits that the idea of abandoning Chimera was foolish and that he has no intention of leaving.
He never uses the word “foolish”, nor even implies it. He does write, apparently in reference to his public discouragement, I guess the damage has already been done.
So long as Apple wasn’t maintaining their own browser, other browsers could imagine (rightly or not) that they had a chance to displace IE on the desktop. But if Apple maintains their own in-house browser, that reason for development is effectively dashed, and as Mike Pinkerton writes, the reason to develop now is that “it’s fun”.
Opera isn’t such a bad example — why should they bother developing their browser for Mac, when they haven’t had “on the desktop” access for years? A browser has to pay for itself.
Yes I had read the interview with the CEO of OmniGroup, and I found his to be a very (refreshingly) mature position to take. Still, 1 out of 3 (okay 1 1/2 out of 3 if you consider Mike Pinkerton’s recovery from depression) ain’t such good numbers.
Finally, in terms of software complexity, I’m willing to bet the difference between a web browser and an MP3 player is a factor of at least 10.
You do have a point with Watson… let’s see how long it lasts before we judge, eh? 🙂
I don’t use iTunes on my mac to play music. It is sluggish and uses more cpu cycles than it needs. Right now im using Mac AMP Lite X (its the first alternative program i found.) It uses less cpu usage, and less screen space. I like choice, but it’s true that the Majority of people will use what APPLE makes because they love apple, or because its THERE. I HATE M$ pretty much, and IE MORE, but whenever im on a PC i seem drawn to the damn blue e icon…because its there.. (DAMN ME)
(i still use iTunes to rip cds…anyone know a good alternative?)
No intention to start a flamewar. I am just new to OS X (but a longtime Windows & Unix user). But I am wondering why nobody talks about Mozilla for the Macintosh. Is there a reason to avoid it? Or just no one knows about it?
Ok,
This is going to be like 30 messages off before anyone reads it, as this thread is already becoming long. However, that being said, I felt I needed to interject here and say a couple things.
There are plenty of “Normal” Mac users. My cousin and his fiancee are one couple. They bought an iMac back when 9.0 was still the big thing and everyone was afraid of Mac OS X. They have since upgraded and are now running Jaguar, and don’t know or care anything about UNIX. They just like that they can make mix CD’s of all their favorites, and edit pictures easier now.
My brothers, they are another set of “Normal” Mac users. Neither of them know very much about computers, and when they had a PC were calling me on what seemed a daily basis to ask me why Windows kept doing things to their files that they didn’t understand. A nice used Mac later, running OS X, and they still don’t know anything about computers but they can do what they want to do now.
The reason no one ever hears from “Normal” Mac users, and the “Zealots” are in the spot light is actually because of the very nature of “zealotry” in the first place. Look at Linux. Plenty of places are using it on the sly, and a replacement for other things, but it’s the “Zealots” everyone keeps hearing, because they feel driven to promote their favorite platform.
The “Normal” users don’t feel any such need. All they know is their computer works. Whether it’s running OS X or RedHat 8, they log in, get to work, finish and ….. wait for it because this is very important ….. *get on with their LIFE* “Normal” computer users do other things besides spend 90% of their time trying to figure out how to get their machine to push one more bit a minute.
My cousin for instance runs gaming tournaments every weekend. He loves the fact he can get on his iMac, set up the grid map for the next week, print it off, and go on about his business.
While my female friend running XP still calls daily to complain about not being able to play Java games, or the fact it can’t readily see her printer, or that she didn’t realize that some of her daughter’s games wouldn’t work under it.
The Mac is wonderful for those of us that have to support “Normal” users. It’s long been a joke in the industry that we support Microsoft products because it means job security. Personally, I prefer what happens when I put a Mac on some one’s desk. …… The phone stops ringing.
Anyway, that’s just my two cents. And as always, here’s the standard disclaimer.
[Disclaimer – Any and all views, opinions, outlooks, philosophies, words of wisdom, words of brash stupidity, and principles outlined in this post are the belief of the Reverend Eddie W. Booher, Jr. and are not necessarily synonymous with the views of his employer or religion.]
[OT] “Normal” Mac users
By Stephen Smith
I was just thinking about yoyo’s comment, and it’s a valid question: are there any “normal” Mac users left? You know, that lady down the street who just uses it for e-mail? I know that I sure wouldn’t find any on OSNews, but I was wondering: does anybody actually buy a modern Mac (besides schools, of course) without knowing about the underlying UNIX, etc? It seems that the only people who use it are the zealots. Not that it’s bad or anything, I think it’s wonderful, but it seems that the “normal” home user is either defecting to become a geek upon installation of OS X, or for some reason “normal” users just aren’t attracted to the platform. Comments?
But I am wondering why nobody talks about Mozilla for the Macintosh. Is there a reason to avoid it? Or just no one knows about it?
I use Mozilla for email, but not for browsing. I use Chimera for browsing; it seems to me to be much faster, & it’s from the same rendering engine code.
& when I do use Mozilla, I use the skin that ties directly into the Aqua GUI, which is the only thing that keeps it from being intolerably slow on my iBook.
yes I agree apple needs to tread carefully. but I think Apple is rightly being less timid and PC when it comes to dealing with developers. There are many great small developers. Don’t get me wrong. The Omni Group for instance (which is big and openminded enough to approve of what apple is doing with bundled apps). However, for too long “Third Party Developers” , at least the big ones that matter, have failed apple. I’ve said this before – they are too slow to implement Apple technologies, undercutting Apple’s niche as a forward-looking innovator. They are too busy making their big crossplatform app that works “equally” well on windows – meaning it doesn’t implement the apple tech because it doesn’t exist on windows. Look at Keynote – Apple was clearly frustrated that MS would not take advantage of the graphics capabilities in OS X in powerpoint. why would they? do show how much better the mac is on graphics?
Your quotes from Pinkerton’s blog are a perfect example of false journalism. His saying “The damage has already been done” was in reference to his pessimistic outburst in his previous entry, which got a lot of media coverage. Now, you read the following paragraph and you tell me if he doesn’t imply the idea of dropping Chimera was foolish:
OK, Chimera will never be an app used by the masses, and possibly not even by the masses of Mac users. Still, choice is good, and choices of several apps that suck less is even better.
You know, he’s exactly right. It’s all about motivations. Why did we even start Chimera in the first place? Because we wanted to make something that sucked less. Safari aside, it stands on its own as a solid product with a good UI that is pretty damn bug-free for an 0.6 release. It’s easy to get sidetracked on the “woe is me, we lost again” tangent (especially if you’ve been at Netscape for 5+ years), but it’s time to get back to why we’re doing this at all: because we enjoy it. It’s fun making a product that more than seven people use. I wish that was 7 million, but I guess we have to set our expectations appropriately. Chimera’s not going anywhere, regardless of whatever I post on this blog.
Once again, kindly reread his post. As he puts it, the motivation for him is to make something that “sucks less”, which he is convinced Chimera already achieves.
I have no idea what you’re even talking about with Opera. What do you mean by “on the desktop access”? Opera is never bundled with Windows, yet they do a much better job for that platform. Why in the world would Apple want to bundle a non-functional browser with their OS? And in case you haven’t used it, Opera for OS X really is unusable.
I’d say it’s 2 out of 2 and 1/2. OmniWeb will definitely continue. Mike had his whining fit, but is now committed to continuing Chimera. Opera was never committed to Mac development in the first place. I recall there being a 9 month delay between their first and second beta releases of a version that was already behind the Windows one. I don’t call that development: I call it a gesture. They want to claim they support lots of platforms, so they make a vague attempt to make a Mac version.
It doesn’t matter the complexity of the software. The MP3 player market was and still is a thriving shareware market for the Macintosh. It’s higher quality shareware now, because each player has to have a way to claim that they’re better than the free iTunes.
It’s been about 6 months already. Were you planing to wait till OS X 10.3 before you judge?
“The damage has already been done” was in reference to his pessimistic outburst in his previous entry…
What on earth do you think I was talking about when I referenced “his discouragement”? That “pessimistic outburst” (as you put it) is a direct result of “his discouragement” (as I put it). My claiming that, is not false journalism.
What he states explicitly (& does not imply) is that he has had to revise his expectations, & bring some into line with new realities, & remember why he got involved with Chimera in the first place. Personally, I hardly think he believes those expectations were foolish to start with. You seem to believe he does. Only Mike can say for sure.
Opera is never bundled with Windows, yet they do a much better job for that platform.
For me, this is clearly justified by that market’s larger economies, hence the greater income they get from it. That’s reality, there.
It’s been about 6 months already. Were you planing to wait till OS X 10.3 before you judge?
What are you talking about here?
OK, I’m not going to continue to debate about what Pinkerton may or may not have meant. You’re misunderstanding what I say, and I get the feeling that I’m misinterpreting your comments as well.
That may be justifiable on the Windows market. But then again, the Windows version actually works. I don’t they have any claim that they should be bundled with the OS when their browser doesn’t work.
The last comment was in reference to the Watson/Sherlock issue. Sherlock 3 came out with Jaguar, which was announced in July and available in August. It has been approximately 6 months since then. OS X 10.3 is anticipated to be about 6 months away (set for a summer release).
You’re misunderstanding what I say, and I get the feeling that I’m misinterpreting your comments as well.
Yeah, that’s possible; I thought about it after my last post, & thinking, “I may be applying ‘foolish’ to something he doesn’t mean to be applying it to.” Apologies if so.
Pls let me clarify the others:
I don’t they have any claim that they should be bundled with the OS when their browser doesn’t work.
I don’t think that, either. (I must’ve stated something wrong since this is the second time someone’s said that.) But (until Safari) there was always the possibility that Apple would look for a 3rd party replacement, & encourage (through contract or otherwise) the development of such. Now there is zero possbility.
The last comment was in reference to the Watson/Sherlock issue.
I don’t use either, which is why I haven’t commented on it at all.
…there was always the possibility that Apple would look for a 3rd party replacement, & encourage (through contract or otherwise) the development of such. Now there is zero possbility…
Yes, there was alway a possiblility, but again I can see why Apple did what they did. NOBODY came up to bat. I would not claim that any of the IE alternatives (Chimera, Omni-Web, Opera, iCab) are better than IE. They all have the potential to be better than IE, but non of them come out with a stable, fast, and compatible browser.
If Apple were to ‘assist’ one of these browsers then they would have to ‘assist’ all of them. Can you imagine the rant if say, Apple decided to further along Opera’s development and not OmniWeb or Chimeras? Please.
By creating WebCore, Apple has essentially ‘assisted’ every browser vendor. It’s their choice to use the technology. Safari is a bare-bones browser. Chimera and Omni-Web will both “out” feature it. I don’t even know if iCab is still around and I couldn’t care less about Opera (they can stick their contempt where the sun don’t shine).
The single bit of truth in this is that until Safari was released web browsing on the Mac was sub-par at best.
the link to the aqua GUI theme for mozilla is
http://www.kmgerich.com/pinstripe/pinstripe.html
i hope you enjoy it, cause i can’t, don’t have osx, just debian on ppc.