VLC Media Player crashes with .avi files
SparkyGuy
have Perian 1.1.3 component installed.
All .avi videos I start playing crash within a few seconds.
Is 0.9.9a really the stable release for PPC & 10.4.11? Or is there a more
recent / stable version? This page gives the basic instructions as to what
version is compatible with what:
<http://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-macosx.html>
The ftp archive of releases is quite baffling with no real descriptions of
what's compatible with what:
<http://download.videolan.org/pub/videolan/vlc>
Any ideas why VLC is crashing on me?
Thanks.
SparkyGuy
I "downgraded" to VLC 0.8.6i and the crashing went away. Fixed the symptom
but the problem is unknown...
gtr
> I'm running VLC 0.9.9a -- the last release for PPC... -- under OS X 10.4.11.
So no one is confused: I'm runnning VLC 1.0.0-rc4 on a PPC under
100.5.7 though. So they didn't abandon PPC, but perhaps they abandoned
10.4.
Incidentally it periodically crashes, something it very rarely did pre 1.0.
--
Thank you and have a nice day.
Ken Maltby
"gtr" <x...@yyy.zzz> wrote in message news:2009062523060416807-xxx@yyyzzz...
Crashes, but how is that so, you have a Mac, not a PC???
Lol;
Ken
ushere
(exit stage right shaking head in disbelief...)
BreadW...@fractious.net
> On 2009-06-25 20:52:38 -0700, SparkyGuy <spar...@mumcrank.ck> said:
> > I'm running VLC 0.9.9a -- the last release for PPC... -- under OS X 10.4.11.
> So no one is confused: I'm runnning VLC 1.0.0-rc4 on a PPC under
"rc" in the version number usually means "release candidate". It's not a
normal public release but rather a kind of beta - normally in an
rc version, no new features will have been added from the previous
test releases, but bugs will have been fixed.
--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
No HTML in E-Mail! -- http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow?
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting
gtr
>>> So no one is confused: I'm runnning VLC 1.0.0-rc4 on a PPC under
>>> 100.5.7 though. So they didn't abandon PPC, but perhaps they abandoned
>>> 10.4.
>>>
>>> Incidentally it periodically crashes, something it very rarely did pre 1.0.
>>
>> Crashes, but how is that so, you have a Mac, not a PC???
>>
> OMG, a mac that crashes?
The mac didn't crash, the program crashed.
Ken Maltby
"gtr" <x...@yyy.zzz> wrote in message news:2009062607302816807-xxx@yyyzzz...
Funny VLC runs fine on my PC.
Warren Oates
"Ken Maltby" <kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Funny VLC runs fine on my PC.
Runs fine on my Mac too (0.9.9a). What's your point?
--
Suddenly he realized that he was alone
with a giant halfwit on a dark deserted street.
-- Chester Himes
Erik Richard Sørensen
No, it did the same here, if I put too many music files in the music
library lists. The newest version 1.0.0rc4 is far more stable and I
haven't had any problems with this build.
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/10921316
cheers, Erik Richard
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Erik Richard Sørensen, Member of ADC, <mac-m...@Mstofanet.dk>
NisusWriter - The Future In Multilingual Text Processing - www.nisus.com
OpenOffice.org - The Modern Productivity Solution - www.openoffice.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
gtr
> In article <v46dne1Q9NqvQ9nX...@giganews.com>,
> "Ken Maltby" <kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Funny VLC runs fine on my PC.
>
> Runs fine on my Mac too (0.9.9a). What's your point?
That PC's totally ROOL, what else? Ooops, I forgot the most important
thing, Apple SUX.
Speling also SUX.
gtr
>> The mac didn't crash, the program crashed.
>
> Funny VLC runs fine on my PC.
That's not funny, that's hilarious.
Ken Maltby
"gtr" <x...@yyy.zzz> wrote in message news:2009062610242875249-xxx@yyyzzz...
I guess you guys must have missed all those Apple commercials,
that claim, that the cool Mac computers don't crash, like those
dull PCs. It must be nice for Apple to be able to put out whatever
propaganda it wishes, knowing there is no "PC" company to pay
for ads to set the record straight.
It also appears that you Fanboys can't stand it if there is anyone
who points out the inconsistency.
Lol,
Ken
gtr
>>>> Funny VLC runs fine on my PC.
>>>
>>> Runs fine on my Mac too (0.9.9a). What's your point?
>>
>> That PC's totally ROOL, what else? Ooops, I forgot the most important
>> thing, Apple SUX.
>>
>> Speling also SUX.
>
> I guess you guys must have missed all those Apple commercials,
> that claim, that the cool Mac computers don't crash, like those
> dull PCs.
No, I saw those. I also own a Mac that crashes maybe once a year, and
a PC that crashes at least once a month if I'm not extra careful.
> It must be nice for Apple to be able to put out whatever
> propaganda it wishes, knowing there is no "PC" company to pay
> for ads to set the record straight.
Oh it's so very very unjust! Can't SOMETHING be done about the
injustice! We should write to our congressman, right?
> It also appears that you Fanboys can't stand it if there is anyone
> who points out the inconsistency.
It's not pointing out the inconsistency, it's "fanboys" interrupting
conversations that have nothing to do with Mac v. PC in order to carp
about Apple advertisements on television. That makes a lot of sense.
Calum
> I guess you guys must have missed all those Apple commercials,
> that claim, that the cool Mac computers don't crash, like those
> dull PCs.
Nobody here said their Mac crashed. Just one bit of software, which
isn't written by Apple. Even Apple can't stop other people from writing
crap software.
At least, when other people's software crashes on a Mac, it doesn't
leave all sorts of random problems that usually end up with you having
to reboot the damn thing.
J. Clarke
> On 2009-06-26 13:03:11 -0700, "Ken Maltby" <kma...@sbcglobal.net>
> said:
>
>>>>> Funny VLC runs fine on my PC.
>>>>
>>>> Runs fine on my Mac too (0.9.9a). What's your point?
>>>
>>> That PC's totally ROOL, what else? Ooops, I forgot the most
>>> important thing, Apple SUX.
>>>
>>> Speling also SUX.
>>
>> I guess you guys must have missed all those Apple commercials,
>> that claim, that the cool Mac computers don't crash, like those
>> dull PCs.
>
> No, I saw those. I also own a Mac that crashes maybe once a year, and
> a PC that crashes at least once a month if I'm not extra careful.
If you find that unacceptable then you should get it fixed That is not
normal behavior for Windows 2K and later. If you find it acceptable then
why do you mention it?
>> It must be nice for Apple to be able to put out whatever
>> propaganda it wishes, knowing there is no "PC" company to pay
>> for ads to set the record straight.
>
> Oh it's so very very unjust! Can't SOMETHING be done about the
> injustice! We should write to our congressman, right?
Personally I just don't buy Apple products. Their "Mac vs PC" ads have so
far cost them the sale of an iPod and an iPhone. It is a style of
advertising that reflects badly on Apple. As a matter of principle I do not
if I have another option buy products from companies whose advertising
consists mostly of bashing the competition. I don't vote for politicians
whose advertising does that either, which in some cases means that neither
major party candidate gets my vote.
J. Clarke
Lemme guess--the last time you actually used Windows was in 1998.
gtr
>> No, I saw those. I also own a Mac that crashes maybe once a year, and
>> a PC that crashes at least once a month if I'm not extra careful.
>
> If you find that unacceptable then you should get it fixed That is not
> normal behavior for Windows 2K and later. If you find it acceptable then
> why do you mention it?
Isn't it obvious? Because you're here, irritated by people who aren't
consuming with their computers failings. For that, go to Windows
discussions. I mention the number of crashes between the two systems
because you interjected that in the middle of another topic in order to
carp about Macs. If you don't like Macs that's fine, why are you here
bellyaching about Apple advertising and "fanboys", by the way?
>>> It must be nice for Apple to be able to put out whatever
>>> propaganda it wishes, knowing there is no "PC" company to pay
>>> for ads to set the record straight.
>>
>> Oh it's so very very unjust! Can't SOMETHING be done about the
>> injustice! We should write to our congressman, right?
>
> Personally I just don't buy Apple products.
Great, but inexplicably you hang around Mac groups carping about their
advertising you primping little troll! Explain that one. Do you hang
out at gay bars complaining about queers too, and proudly telling folks
how heterosexual you are? Sheesh.
Ken Maltby
"gtr" <x...@yyy.zzz> wrote in message news:2009062620472716807-xxx@yyyzzz...
You seem to have a problem keeping straight who said
what in this crossposted thread.
I don't know about "J. Clarke" but I would not "hang around Mac
groups", on a bet - (but if I wanted to find a gay bar, the Apple
crowd would be the place to ask). I am here because the thread
is posted to "rec.video.desktop", as well.
Luck;
Ken
ushere
> You seem to have a problem keeping straight who said what in this
> crossposted thread.
>
> I don't know about "J. Clarke" but I would not "hang around Mac
> groups", on a bet - (but if I wanted to find a gay bar, the Apple
> crowd would be the place to ask). I am here because the thread is
> posted to "rec.video.desktop", as well.
>
> Luck; Ken
>
>
seriously, as ken pointed out, if you must cross dress / post, you leave
yourself open to all sorts of abuse...
J. Clarke
> On 2009-06-26 16:40:18 -0700, "J. Clarke" <jclarke...@cox.net>
> said:
>
>>> No, I saw those. I also own a Mac that crashes maybe once a year,
>>> and a PC that crashes at least once a month if I'm not extra
>>> careful.
>>
>> If you find that unacceptable then you should get it fixed That is
>> not normal behavior for Windows 2K and later. If you find it
>> acceptable then why do you mention it?
>
> Isn't it obvious? Because you're here, irritated by people who aren't
> consuming with their computers failings.
I don't know any people whose computers have failings. I used to but I did
my job too well and now they don't need me anymore.
> For that, go to Windows
> discussions. I mention the number of crashes between the two systems
> because you interjected that in the middle of another topic in order
> to carp about Macs.
I did? Care to link the post in which I did that? I believe that you have
me confused withs someone else.
> If you don't like Macs that's fine, why are you
> here bellyaching about Apple advertising and "fanboys", by the way?
Because that's the direction the conversation has taken? However please
provide a link to _any_ post, _anywhere_, in which I have used the term
"fanboys".
>>>> It must be nice for Apple to be able to put out whatever
>>>> propaganda it wishes, knowing there is no "PC" company to pay
>>>> for ads to set the record straight.
>>>
>>> Oh it's so very very unjust! Can't SOMETHING be done about the
>>> injustice! We should write to our congressman, right?
>>
>> Personally I just don't buy Apple products.
>
> Great, but inexplicably you hang around Mac groups carping about their
> advertising you primping little troll! Explain that one. Do you hang
> out at gay bars complaining about queers too, and proudly telling
> folks how heterosexual you are? Sheesh.
Actually, I'm hanging around "rec.video.desktop". If I had noticed the
crosspost I would not have even participated in the discussion. Perhaps if
you Mac people weren't so easily stirred up the trolls wouldn't be
crossposting to your newsgroups.
Warren Oates
"J. Clarke" <jclarke...@cox.net> wrote:
> Personally I just don't buy Apple products. Their "Mac vs PC" ads have so
> far cost them the sale of an iPod and an iPhone. It is a style of
> advertising that reflects badly on Apple. As a matter of principle I do not
> if I have another option buy products from companies whose advertising
> consists mostly of bashing the competition. I don't vote for politicians
> whose advertising does that either, which in some cases means that neither
> major party candidate gets my vote.
Jesus H. Fuckbucket, you must be a real fun guy to be around.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h23ne...@news1.newsguy.com>):
Nah. This morning. WinXP Pro 32.
It crashed. Froze up solid, had to be restarted.
I was performing a test: that machine had been freezing often when Computer
Associate's Internet Security Suite was installed. I'd removed it and put AVG
on instead. Freezes went away for weeks. I deleted AVG, put CA ISS back on,
and it froze again, in the same way as before, within 12 hours. CA ISS is now
gone from that machine, and AVG is back.
I'm currently awaiting a little chat with CA tech non-support. I can't _wait_
to see how they explain this. Anyone what to bet that they try to blame
something, anything, else for the problem?
As Macs don't have any serious malware infestations, the last major malware
to be on the loose being back in 1998, Macs don't have AV packages which can
crash the whole computer...
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
Mike Rosenberg
> As Macs don't have any serious malware infestations, the last major malware
> to be on the loose being back in 1998, Macs don't have AV packages which can
> crash the whole computer...
Let's be fair - there _ARE_ Mac users who, for some reason, choose to
inflict Norton Antivirus for Macintosh on their machines, and that _can_
bring a Mac to its knees.
--
Tribute to Humphrey Bogart <http://bogart-tribute.net>
Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi>
Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi>
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <1j1yqs4.1taaeem40utw8N%mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com>):
> J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
>> As Macs don't have any serious malware infestations, the last major malware
>> to be on the loose being back in 1998, Macs don't have AV packages which can
>> crash the whole computer...
>
> Let's be fair - there _ARE_ Mac users who, for some reason, choose to
> inflict Norton Antivirus for Macintosh on their machines, and that _can_
> bring a Mac to its knees.
>
>
But they don't have to. Anyone who runs a WinBox anywhere near the Internet
and _doesn't_ have AV installed is just begging for the beating he's gonna
get. Mac users don't need AV, so any AV wounds are strictly self-inflicted.
If they gotta have AV, let 'em use ClamXav. It's free, and it doesn't kill
your machine.
And, after my previous experience with Symantec products, Norton anything
will never, ever, again be installed on any machine I'm responsible for, Mac
or Windows.
Arny Krueger
news:h23gou$3dd$1...@reader01.news.esat.net
> Ken Maltby wrote:
>
>> I guess you guys must have missed all those Apple
>> commercials, that claim, that the cool Mac computers
>> don't crash, like those dull PCs.
>
> Nobody here said their Mac crashed. Just one bit of
> software, which isn't written by Apple. Even Apple can't
> stop other people from writing crap software.
The same goes for Microsoft, right?
Nadia Aqui
>> Nobody here said their Mac crashed. Just one bit of
>> software, which isn't written by Apple. Even Apple can't
>> stop other people from writing crap software.
>
> The same goes for Microsoft, right?
As the biggest software company in the whole world, nobody can stop
Microsoft from writing crap software--not Apple, not the federal
government, not Jesus. That one is the most obvious. But I'm pretty
nobody can stop others from writing crap software unless them lock them
in a box or something.
--
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
Flatulent Father Flannigan
This is ridiculous.
Apple can't even make THEIR OWN software run without crashing on THEIR OWN
MACHINES! You guys missed that?
Apples weren't virus targets in the past because NO ONE USED THEM!
A Mac can be infected just as easily as any PC can.
If it weren't for the iPod and the iPhone Apple would have gone the way fo
the Dinosaur.
I have three 8 core macs here and 44 PCs. The only difference between them
is that OSX is more like a Playskool OS and requires a lot more effort to do
simple things. I usually run XP on the macs because OSX is dog slow
comparatively.
One of the reasons third part apps crash is because ever since OSX was
introduced it has been UNFINISHED! So developers have a much tougher task
than you might think.
Richard Crowley
> "Arny Krueger" said:
>>> Nobody here said their Mac crashed. Just one bit of
>>> software, which isn't written by Apple. Even Apple can't
>>> stop other people from writing crap software.
>>
>> The same goes for Microsoft, right?
>
> As the biggest software company in the whole world, nobody can stop
> Microsoft from writing crap software--not Apple, not the federal
> government, not Jesus. That one is the most obvious.
Apparently not as obvious as you seem to think. The software
that crashes most frequently is written by 3rd party sources,
NOT Microsoft. And, of course for every Mac app, there
are 100, maybe 1000 equivalent PC apps. And likewise for
every Mac developer, there are 100 or more PC sources.
> But I'm pretty nobody can stop others from writing crap software unless
> them lock them in a box or something.
Compare to Apple who maintain an exclusive monopoly
on their hardware and OS and still can't keep them from
crashing. You do the math.
Tom Stiller
Father Flannigan's flatulence is in his brain.
--
Tom Stiller
PGP fingerprint = 5108 DDB2 9761 EDE5 E7E3 7BDA 71ED 6496 99C0 C7CF
Richard Crowley
> Father Flannigan's flatulence is in his brain.
Is that the level of debate over there on the mac newsgroups?
Juvenile name-calling? Brilliant!
Tom Stiller
"Richard Crowley" <rcro...@xp7rt.net> wrote:
I called no one a name.
John Varela
This entire thread was crossposted to
Newsgroups:
comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.hardware.video,rec.video.desktop
by the Original Poster, who seems to have abandoned the thread.
If you check back, you'll see that it was Ken who didn't recognize
the difference between an application crash and a system crash and
had to make an ignorant and gratuitous dig at Mac users.
--
John Varela
Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email
John Varela
<xr...@xt8934hgf02945.com> wrote:
> One of the reasons third part apps crash is because ever since OSX was
> introduced it has been UNFINISHED!
Ye Gods! Mac OS X is UNIX, which has been finished for some time
now.
Nadia Aqui
>> As the biggest software company in the whole world, nobody can stop
>> Microsoft from writing crap software--not Apple, not the federal
>> government, not Jesus. That one is the most obvious.
>
> Apparently not as obvious as you seem to think. The software
> that crashes most frequently is written by 3rd party sources,
> NOT Microsoft.
The obvious remains: No one can keep Microsoft from writing large-scale
failures, like Vista. That's big. That's very very big. there are
more frustrated Vista users or Vista experimenters than there are Apple
owners. So it hardly matters that 3rd parties write crash buggies.
> And, of course for every Mac app, there
> are 100, maybe 1000 equivalent PC apps. And likewise for
> every Mac developer, there are 100 or more PC sources.
Oh I get you. So since there's more software for the PC there's more
crap software on PC's. That makes sense. Me, i don't really care about
that so much as the Windows operating system and how hobbled it is. But
the company I work with insists on it so I do things the hard way.
>> But I'm pretty nobody can stop others from writing crap software unless
>> them lock them in a box or something.
>
> Compare to Apple who maintain an exclusive monopoly
> on their hardware and OS and still can't keep them from
> crashing. You do the math.
I've had a iMac for four years I think maybe it's crashed 3 times. My
Windows box has crashed at lease once a month for 8 years. That's the
math I'm doing.
Nadia Aqui
<xr...@xt8934hgf02945.com> said:
> This is ridiculous.
>
> Apple can't even make THEIR OWN software run without crashing on THEIR OWN
> MACHINES! You guys missed that?
As a Mac user, yes I missed that. VLC (long ago the topic here) is not
an Apple program. Other than that I'm not sure what you're talking
about.
> Apples weren't virus targets in the past because NO ONE USED THEM!
>
> A Mac can be infected just as easily as any PC can.
You should tell your story to National Inquirer, nobody else will
believe it. Certainly no Mac users will believe it.
> One of the reasons third part apps crash is because ever since OSX was
> introduced it has been UNFINISHED! So developers have a much tougher task
> than you might think.
You mean they continue to refine it? You're right. But the Windows box
is finished. Completely and totally finished.
Martin Heffels
<kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> It also appears that you Fanboys can't stand it if there is anyone
>who points out the inconsistency.
Apple is a religion! They are the Jehovah Witnesses among
computer-owners ;-)
-m-
Martin Heffels
<jclarke...@cox.net> wrote:
>Personally I just don't buy Apple products. Their "Mac vs PC" ads have so
>far cost them the sale of an iPod and an iPhone.
I don't buy it, because it breaks down very quickly. Their hardware
might be better if they had a good QA, but that seems to be far
absent. So after a owning a few Apple products which broke down too
soon, no more Apple for me.
cheers
-martin-
Martin Heffels
<try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>As Macs don't have any serious malware infestations, the last major malware
>to be on the loose being back in 1998, Macs don't have AV packages which can
>crash the whole computer...
Well that's your luck for having a not so popular product ;-)
-m-
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>The obvious remains: No one can keep Microsoft from writing large-scale
>failures, like Vista. That's big. That's very very big. there are
>more frustrated Vista users or Vista experimenters than there are Apple
>owners. So it hardly matters that 3rd parties write crash buggies.
People who bought Vista are idiots, because the warning signs have
been out there since it's introduction.
>> And, of course for every Mac app, there
>> are 100, maybe 1000 equivalent PC apps. And likewise for
>> every Mac developer, there are 100 or more PC sources.
>
>Oh I get you. So since there's more software for the PC there's more
>crap software on PC's. That makes sense.
That's right. And because Apple is monpolized, you won't really see
that on Apple computers.
[...]
>I've had a iMac for four years I think maybe it's crashed 3 times. My
>Windows box has crashed at lease once a month for 8 years. That's the
>math I'm doing.
Odd. I had the same in reverse :-)
-martin-
Arny Krueger
news:2009062722454116807-broma@sucostocom
> Oh I get you. So since there's more software for the PC
> there's more crap software on PC's. That makes sense.
Exactly.
It's one reason more people complain about PCs.
Finally, you have to remember that keeping Apple alive and strong gives MS
the best anti-trust argument there ever has - a strong apparent competitor.
> Me, i don't really care about that so much as the Windows
> operating system and how hobbled it is.
It's not hobbled.
> But the company I
> work with insists on it so I do things the hard way.
You've got an attitude problem brought on by excess brainwashing with Apple
propaganda.
> I've had a iMac for four years I think maybe it's crashed
> 3 times.
> My Windows box has crashed at lease once a month
> for 8 years.
Typical Apple bigot grotesquely unfair comparison - they compare an 8
year-old Windows box complete with original OS (Win98ME?) to a relatively
new Macintosh and then blame the fact that the 8 year old machine is slow
and buggy on "Windoze".
Nadia Aqui
>> But the company I
>> work with insists on it so I do things the hard way.
>
> You've got an attitude problem brought on by excess brainwashing with Apple
> propaganda.
It supports my conception to have people tell me that I'm brainwashed
by advertising when the reality is that, unlike 99% of the
Windows-Jihad crew, I actually USE both operting systems everyday of my
life. Believe it or not, despite the great power of the media,
personal experience trumps all the noise that comes out of all the
media conduits. I think Windows is a drag to use and limited and
frustrating in any number of ways. While my mac is not.
Clearly people who use Windows and watch Apple ads on tv would differ.
It only makes sense they believe their Buick is better than anybody
else's Toyota. Particularly since they don't own or use a Toyota.
Nobody is gonna tell you that their mom is a better cook than yours,
that only makes sense.
>> My Windows box has crashed at lease once a month
>> for 8 years.
>
> Typical Apple bigot grotesquely unfair comparison - they compare an 8
> year-old Windows box complete with original OS (Win98ME?) to a relatively
> new Macintosh and then blame the fact that the 8 year old machine is slow
> and buggy on "Windoze".
Nope, an XP that is updated every 2-3 years or so by my company. This
one is less than two years old. It's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, isn't it,
that someone doesn't like your computer? Live with the anguish.
Nadia Aqui
Wrong again. I could not possibly care less whether a Windows person
uses an Apple. I just find it fascinating that they think it's
"religious" to enjoy a Mac over a Windows machine, but not "religious"
to like a Windows over a Mac. Talk about deluded...
Nadia Aqui
Yeah, the 80's were scary for everybody.
Nadia Aqui
It's like hearing a Bush v Democrats debate over the last two years or
(outside the media). Down at my local, no Republican seemed to have
the stomach or passion for defending Bush. They'd just shrug and try
to change the topic to sports.
The Mac v PC thing seemed to go the same route for at least the last 2
years or so. I'm surprised there's enclaves where a decaying platform
is still being championed. I can sympathize. The world changes so
rapidly now that it can be disconcerting, certainly.
Thanks to all for the memories!
Richard Maine
> On 2009-06-28 00:55:54 -0700, Martin Heffels <goo...@flikken.net> said:
>
> > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:03:11 -0500, "Ken Maltby"
> > <kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >> It also appears that you Fanboys can't stand it if there is anyone
> >> who points out the inconsistency.
> >
> > Apple is a religion! They are the Jehovah Witnesses among
> > computer-owners ;-)
>
> Wrong again. I could not possibly care less whether a Windows person
> uses an Apple. I just find it fascinating that they think it's
> "religious" to enjoy a Mac over a Windows machine, but not "religious"
> to like a Windows over a Mac. Talk about deluded...
Indeed. There exist Apple fanboys/fanatics - just like there exist
Windows ones. And there exist people who just use or prefer them without
being fanatics. There even exist people who use both, and for that
matter, other systems.
One completely sure way to identify a religious fanatic in the crowd:
When you see someone hijack an unrelated thread to start spewing Mac
versus Windows flames, and when that someone claims that anyone who uses
a Mac is inherently a fanboy and religious fanatic (and presumably
damned to eternal flames because of being the wrong religion)... Then
you can tell for sure that the someone in question is a fanboy and
religious fanatic.
Probably also insecure about his own choices and feeling the need to
flame others as a cover for his insecurity; there are professionals who
can help one deal with that kind of problem. :-)
--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <ji9e45ts2j3v0li7q...@4ax.com>):
Even when Macs had viruses, they didn't have a/v products which could crash
the whole computer. (A/v products which could eat all your incoming email,
yes; crash the computer, no.)
And, if anyone is interested, CA tech non-support said that the problem was
because of a conflict with another a/v product. They were unable to explain
how this would work given that the other a/v product was not installed until
_after_ CA ISS had been removed.
It also seems that Macs are not supported by CA ISS. As a test, I'd put CA
ISS on a Boot Camp partition, running Vista. It seems that the mere fact that
this was a <gasp! shock! horror!> Mac </gasp! shock! horror!> would be enough
to ensure that CA ISS wouldn't work properly. The fact that it exhibited the
exact same behavior on the Mac as on the WinBox was, to them, beside the
point.
CA ISS is now removed from all my systems. AVG rulez! And it's _free_, too!
Arny Krueger
> On 2009-06-28 04:27:49 -0700, "Arny Krueger"
> <ar...@hotpop.com> said:
>>> But the company I
>>> work with insists on it so I do things the hard way.
>>
>> You've got an attitude problem brought on by excess
>> brainwashing with Apple propaganda.
> It supports my conception to have people tell me that I'm
> brainwashed by advertising when the reality is that,
> unlike 99% of the Windows-Jihad crew, I actually USE both
> operting systems everyday of my life.
With the same workload? I seriously doubt that.
> Believe it or not,
> despite the great power of the media, personal experience
> trumps all the noise that comes out of all the media
> conduits.
I don't know what your *actual* experience is, with all the emotional
propaganda that you are spewing.
> I think Windows is a drag to use and limited
> and frustrating in any number of ways. While my mac is
> not.
That's a choice you get to make. If you were truely confident of your
beliefs you wouldnt need to enage in public window-bashing.
> Clearly people who use Windows and watch Apple ads on tv
> would differ. It only makes sense they believe their
> Buick is better than anybody else's Toyota. Particularly
> since they don't own or use a Toyota. Nobody is gonna
> tell you that their mom is a better cook than yours, that
> only makes sense.
Wrong. My mom was a good meat-and-potatoes cook, but no competition for
people who were really serious about their cooking.
>>> My Windows box has crashed at least once a month
>>> for 8 years.
I don't see any evidence of a big productivity loss here.
>> Typical Apple bigot grotesquely unfair comparison - they
>> compare an 8 year-old Windows box complete with original
>> OS (Win98ME?) to a relatively new Macintosh and then
>> blame the fact that the 8 year old machine is slow and
>> buggy on "Windoze".
> Nope, an XP that is updated every 2-3 years or so by my
> company.
It is still an 8 year old computer. Computers from 8 years ago generally
can't be properly upgraded to meet 2009 needs. They came with 128-256 megs
of RAM and could be upgraded to 512-1024 megs. A new computer in 2009 as 4
GB + RAM.
Also, its a work computer, which has far greater opportunity to receive use
for more hours per day.
> This one is less than two years old. It's
> absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, isn't it, that someone doesn't
> like your computer?
It is not my computer.
> Live with the anguish.
No anguish, just noticing your inability to make an unbiased argument.
Nadia Aqui
>> It supports my conception to have people tell me that I'm
>> brainwashed by advertising when the reality is that,
>> unlike 99% of the Windows-Jihad crew, I actually USE both
>> operting systems everyday of my life.
>
> With the same workload? I seriously doubt that.
That's a convenient approach. You may doubt anything else that may
conflict with your pre-established thinking about others.
>> Believe it or not,
>> despite the great power of the media, personal experience
>> trumps all the noise that comes out of all the media
>> conduits.
>
> I don't know what your *actual* experience is, with all the emotional
> propaganda that you are spewing.
There's nothing emotional about it for me. I'm curious, even
enthralled by the kind of mind that insists everybody should think the
same about any one topic. In all manner of political/culture
quazi-debate, it's inscrutable to me.
>> I think Windows is a drag to use and limited
>> and frustrating in any number of ways. While my mac is
>> not.
>
> That's a choice you get to make. If you were truely confident of your
> beliefs you wouldnt need to enage in public window-bashing.
What perverted logic. I stated my viewpoint, now it's suspect because I
stated it. I dislike working on a PC, and this is "window bashing"? If
you had any belief in your own perspective you wouldn't have to
mischaracterize mine to make a path for yourself.
>> Clearly people who use Windows and watch Apple ads on tv
>> would differ. It only makes sense they believe their
>> Buick is better than anybody else's Toyota. Particularly
>> since they don't own or use a Toyota. Nobody is gonna
>> tell you that their mom is a better cook than yours, that
>> only makes sense.
>
> Wrong. My mom was a good meat-and-potatoes cook, but no competition for
> people who were really serious about their cooking.
Touche! I can see metaphors are wasted. Curious how such faux
discussions end up by discussing your mother.
>>>> My Windows box has crashed at least once a month
>>>> for 8 years.
>
> I don't see any evidence of a big productivity loss here.
Touche again. You're just to tough for me in the logic department.
>>> Typical Apple bigot grotesquely unfair comparison - they
>>> compare an 8 year-old Windows box complete with original
>>> OS (Win98ME?) to a relatively new Macintosh and then
>>> blame the fact that the 8 year old machine is slow and
>>> buggy on "Windoze".
>
>> Nope, an XP that is updated every 2-3 years or so by my
>> company.
>
> It is still an 8 year old computer.
The physical computer itself is 2 years old. If that's inconvenient,
multiply as needed.
>> Live with the anguish.
>
> No anguish, just noticing your inability to make an unbiased argument.
I am truly biased: My opinons about my computer are biased by my usage
of that computer. Wouldn't anything else be impossible? Should I
reserve judgements about my own use of equipment until other people can
weigh in on their view of my use of equipment?
I gotta say, you are absolutely impossible to argue with.
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>On 2009-06-28 01:12:04 -0700, Martin Heffels <goo...@flikken.net> said:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:40:18 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> <jclarke...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Personally I just don't buy Apple products. Their "Mac vs PC" ads have so
>>> far cost them the sale of an iPod and an iPhone.
>>
>> I don't buy it, because it breaks down very quickly. Their hardware
>> might be better if they had a good QA, but that seems to be far
>> absent. So after a owning a few Apple products which broke down too
>> soon, no more Apple for me.
>
>Yeah, the 80's were scary for everybody.
Yeah, the nukes etc, that was a scary period. Not to mention everyone
strating to dress like Michael Jackson and doing "Bad" impersonations
in the dead dark of the night.
But if you were referring to my experiences with Apple, they are from
this century.
-m-
Martin Heffels
<try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>Even when Macs had viruses, they didn't have a/v products which could crash
>the whole computer. (A/v products which could eat all your incoming email,
>yes; crash the computer, no.)
It has been discussed a million times over: Macs have a very limited
variety in hardware, so writing software should be easier.
>And, if anyone is interested, CA tech non-support said that the problem was
>because of a conflict with another a/v product. They were unable to explain
>how this would work given that the other a/v product was not installed until
>_after_ CA ISS had been removed.
CA is rubbish. No PC-user told you that? :-)
>It also seems that Macs are not supported by CA ISS. As a test, I'd put CA
>ISS on a Boot Camp partition, running Vista. It seems that the mere fact that
>this was a <gasp! shock! horror!> Mac </gasp! shock! horror!> would be enough
>to ensure that CA ISS wouldn't work properly. The fact that it exhibited the
>exact same behavior on the Mac as on the WinBox was, to them, beside the
>point.
Nah, not the Mac's fault perse. You said you ran it on Vista. That
should give you to think as well ;-)
>CA ISS is now removed from all my systems. AVG rulez! And it's _free_, too!
Good choice. I got NOD32 and am very pleased about that.
cheers
-martin-
Martin Heffels
wrote:
> I think Windows is a drag to use and limited and
>frustrating in any number of ways. While my mac is not.
And my experience is exactly the opposit. So, your point is?
>Nope, an XP that is updated every 2-3 years or so by my company. This
>one is less than two years old. It's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, isn't it,
>that someone doesn't like your computer? Live with the anguish.
You should get good techies at your company who can manage their
systems properly.
-martin-
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <mOydnYUY2f4mztrX...@giganews.com>):
> Typical Apple bigot grotesquely unfair comparison - they compare an 8
> year-old Windows box complete with original OS (Win98ME?) to a relatively
> new Macintosh and then blame the fact that the 8 year old machine is slow
> and buggy on "Windoze".
I have, right in this room, the following machines:
Apple Power Macintosh G3 (beige), from 1998. That machine is 11 years old.
Still works.
Apple eMac 700, from 2002.
Apple eMac 1.25, from 2004.
Apple iMac G5, from 2006.
Apple iMac Core 2 Duo, from 2008. (Some people may be able to note a trend
here...)
All still operational, including the eMac 700, now 7 years old.
Dell Dimension 4550, from 2003
Dell Optiplex GX270, from 2004
a home-built unit, based on a Pentium 4, from 2005
HP Pavilion a705, from 2006
Toshiba Satellite laptop, from 2008
The Dimension is non-operational, being used for scrap. The Optiplex is out
of action due to a dead hard drive. (Gee, it's a Dell, it's got a dead drive,
what a surprise.) The hand-built machine is still operational, but is
noticeably (as in, noticed by my 76-year-old mother, which is why I've got it
to try to tune it up a little) slower than the eMac 700... despite the eMac
700 having a 700 MHz CPU and only 2 GB RAM to the hand-built's 2.8 GHz unit
and 3 GB RAM. Indeed, the eMac 1.25, despite being five years old, delivers
better performance than the Toshiba, less than one year old. (Except for the
portability factor, that is; the eMac weighs a lot.)
There would be a two-year-old HP in here, too, except that I gave that to my
mother while I play with her machine. She wanted the eMac, but took the HP
because certain applications won't work on the eMac, it's PowerPC and so
can't boot Windows except using Virtual PC, and that's beyond dog-slow. later
today she's going down to the Apple store with the intention of getting a Mac
mini or a iMac. I told her that Apple is supposed to be cutting prices come
July, but she wants a machine _now_ and she ain't buying no damn WinBoxes
again. I might get her to hold off a bit and give her my iMac Intel and get a
new one when Apple cuts prices, if they do, but she's pretty damn pissed
about WinBox behavior right now. (Yes, hers was the machine that had CA ISS
on it. CA non-support not only cost CA a customer, they cost Windows a
customer...)
In any case, m'man, keep on believing that people use Macs 'cause they don't
know Windows. In my experience, people use Macs precisely because of negative
experiences with Windows...
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>On 2009-06-28 00:55:54 -0700, Martin Heffels <goo...@flikken.net> said:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:03:11 -0500, "Ken Maltby"
>> <kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> It also appears that you Fanboys can't stand it if there is anyone
>>> who points out the inconsistency.
>>
>> Apple is a religion! They are the Jehovah Witnesses among
>> computer-owners ;-)
>
>Wrong again. I could not possibly care less whether a Windows person
>uses an Apple. I just find it fascinating that they think it's
>"religious" to enjoy a Mac over a Windows machine, but not "religious"
>to like a Windows over a Mac. Talk about deluded...
That's not what I am on about. Mac users tend to defend their choice
viciously, while Windows users just think "what the heck, it's a
computer, it's working fine, so why all the fuzz".
Have you ever seen the queues in front of Apple stores when they open
a new shop, or launch a new product? It's insane :-) Is it that
difficult to wait for a few days to lay your hands on a new iPhone?
cheers
-martin-
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <e4ef459vfdqdp09js...@4ax.com>):
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:11:52 -0400, J.J. O'Shea
> <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
>> Even when Macs had viruses, they didn't have a/v products which could crash
>> the whole computer. (A/v products which could eat all your incoming email,
>> yes; crash the computer, no.)
>
> It has been discussed a million times over: Macs have a very limited
> variety in hardware, so writing software should be easier.
>
>> And, if anyone is interested, CA tech non-support said that the problem was
>> because of a conflict with another a/v product. They were unable to explain
>> how this would work given that the other a/v product was not installed
>> until
>> _after_ CA ISS had been removed.
>
> CA is rubbish. No PC-user told you that? :-)
It was on my mother's machine. I was just trying to get it running for her.
>
>> It also seems that Macs are not supported by CA ISS. As a test, I'd put CA
>> ISS on a Boot Camp partition, running Vista. It seems that the mere fact
>> that
>> this was a <gasp! shock! horror!> Mac </gasp! shock! horror!> would be
>> enough
>> to ensure that CA ISS wouldn't work properly. The fact that it exhibited
>> the
>> exact same behavior on the Mac as on the WinBox was, to them, beside the
>> point.
>
> Nah, not the Mac's fault perse. You said you ran it on Vista. That
> should give you to think as well ;-)
Vista's not that bad. It's got a way to go before it hits rock-bottom:
Windows ME!
>
>> CA ISS is now removed from all my systems. AVG rulez! And it's _free_, too!
>
> Good choice. I got NOD32 and am very pleased about that.
>
AVG is what I usually use.
> cheers
>
> -martin-
Martin Heffels
Maine) wrote:
>One completely sure way to identify a religious fanatic in the crowd:
>When you see someone hijack an unrelated thread to start spewing Mac
>versus Windows flames, and when that someone claims that anyone who uses
>a Mac is inherently a fanboy and religious fanatic (and presumably
>damned to eternal flames because of being the wrong religion)... Then
>you can tell for sure that the someone in question is a fanboy and
>religious fanatic.
>
>Probably also insecure about his own choices and feeling the need to
>flame others as a cover for his insecurity; there are professionals who
>can help one deal with that kind of problem. :-)
Ah yes, nice try trying to single out me ;-) I use both PC & Mac on a
regular basis. I am a freelance editor, so it's my best choice to be
able to use both systems. But because Final Cut Pro tries to cram so
much stuff in one package, it's so gawd-darned slow, that when I go
back to my trusted Avid-system, I have the feeling that someone in the
mean time secretly upgraded my computer to a Cray XT5.
For myself I have the authority to make a decision on which of both
worlds I like best, based on using Mac's since 1986 and Windows PC's
since 1987 :-) Of course you would not agree with the comments of a
few in r.v.desktop, but we speak from personal experiences of
heavy-duty use of both platforms, so maybe you should take that into
account.
cheers
-martin-
Nadia Aqui
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 10:09:06 -0700, Nadia Aqui <br...@sucosto.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think Windows is a drag to use and limited and
>> frustrating in any number of ways. While my mac is not.
>
> And my experience is exactly the opposit. So, your point is?
My point was my window's experience was frustrating. Isn't that what I said?
Not all tastes are the same, which doesn't make Apple or Windows
inherently "bad" or "good". In my view, Windows is "old", and as a
result has picked up a lot of horseshit in its operation. OSX,
relatively speaking, is "new", and as such hasn't picked up as much
clutter in the code. It too will get top-heavy, weary and screwed-up
just like Windows, and accrue many of the same problems.
>> Nope, an XP that is updated every 2-3 years or so by my company. This
>> one is less than two years old. It's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, isn't it,
>> that someone doesn't like your computer? Live with the anguish.
>
> You should get good techies at your company who can manage their
> systems properly.
Which brings me to one of my biggest complaints about Windows in a
corporate environment: you're always at the mercy of the guys who
purportedly know how to unscramble everything, but can't/don't/won't.
With the Mac I don't have to hire, coddle and schedule downtime with
"Nick Burns" and his ilk. So to defer here to the Windows fanboys:
It's true that my biggest problems with Windows is likely because of
the slackers that don't maintain them at work.
So, Windows might be almost as good as OSX, except that I don't do the
hiring at my company. I say "almost" because there is no Logic or
Final Cut on Windows. (Yeah, I know: there's something gooder than
that...)
Nadia Aqui
BIGOT!
Nadia Aqui
>>> Apple is a religion! They are the Jehovah Witnesses among
>>> computer-owners ;-)
>>
>> Wrong again. I could not possibly care less whether a Windows person
>> uses an Apple. I just find it fascinating that they think it's
>> "religious" to enjoy a Mac over a Windows machine, but not "religious"
>> to like a Windows over a Mac. Talk about deluded...
>
> That's not what I am on about. Mac users tend to defend their choice
> viciously, while Windows users just think "what the heck, it's a
> computer, it's working fine, so why all the fuzz".
Really? I hadn't noticed these "tendiencies". I have noted that short
people tend to smack their lips when they eat and guys name Ned tend to
say "uhhh" in between every phrase.
Sheesh!
> Have you ever seen the queues in front of Apple stores when they open
> a new shop, or launch a new product? It's insane :-) Is it that
> difficult to wait for a few days to lay your hands on a new iPhone?
I don't know. Why don't you tell me what people in a line are
"tending" to think about?
Jamie Kahn Genet
> Calum wrote:
> > Ken Maltby wrote:
> >
> >> I guess you guys must have missed all those Apple commercials,
> >> that claim, that the cool Mac computers don't crash, like those
> >> dull PCs.
> >
> > Nobody here said their Mac crashed. Just one bit of software, which
> > isn't written by Apple. Even Apple can't stop other people from
> > writing crap software.
> >
> > At least, when other people's software crashes on a Mac, it doesn't
> > leave all sorts of random problems that usually end up with you having
> > to reboot the damn thing.
>
> Lemme guess--the last time you actually used Windows was in 1998.
Let me guess - you have no life and can't stand that some other people
don't make the same choices you do, and you attack them in a desperate
need to validate your own choices. God - how pathetic.
*plonks the thread*
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Nadia Aqui
Genet) said:
>>> At least, when other people's software crashes on a Mac, it doesn't
>>> leave all sorts of random problems that usually end up with you having
>>> to reboot the damn thing.
>>
>> Lemme guess--the last time you actually used Windows was in 1998.
>
> Let me guess - you have no life and can't stand that some other people
> don't make the same choices you do...
Let me guess, you shift from discussions of topics to discussions of
participants as quickly as possible.
Ken Maltby
"Richard Maine" <nos...@see.signature> wrote in message
news:1j20oq3.fkp4r5uiwsayN%nos...@see.signature...
Really getting your money's worth for that Psych 101 course, aren't
you? Did they get to "kneejerk reaction", or were you absent that
day? All it took to "hijack" this thread about how the OP's Mac
crashes when trying to play .avi files with VLC Media Player, was
the following one sentence:
"Crashes, but how is that so, you have a Mac, not a PC???"
Might the reaction to that idea not suggest a certian sensitivity
around the issue? Just pointing out that this thread indicates the
Mac isn't totaly crash free, despite the claims otherwise, seems
to elicit a fanatical reaction, in my humble opinion.
Well, as long as I have hijacked this thread, as you say, I noticed
that it has drifted into "Mac vs. Windows" from "Mac vs. PC".
Now I can understand why Apple doesn't want consumers to
notice that the PC isn't restricted to a single proprietary OS and
the limited programs available that run under it. I guess you
fanboys picked up on that as well, so you reframe the issue in
that direction. ( What does your Psych 101 training say about
the dichotomy of PPC (Power PC) /Apple Mac, an intrusion of
some recognition of reality into the Apple world?)
Lol;
Ken
Martin Heffels
<try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>Vista's not that bad. It's got a way to go before it hits rock-bottom:
>Windows ME!
It's up next in the rankings from ME ;-)
-m-
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>On 2009-06-28 11:42:24 -0700, Martin Heffels <goo...@flikken.net> said:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 10:09:06 -0700, Nadia Aqui <br...@sucosto.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think Windows is a drag to use and limited and
>>> frustrating in any number of ways. While my mac is not.
>>
>> And my experience is exactly the opposit. So, your point is?
>
>My point was my window's experience was frustrating. Isn't that what I said?
And so is mine. The grand conclusion is: both platforms suck.
>Not all tastes are the same, which doesn't make Apple or Windows
>inherently "bad" or "good". In my view, Windows is "old", and as a
>result has picked up a lot of horseshit in its operation. OSX,
>relatively speaking, is "new", and as such hasn't picked up as much
>clutter in the code. It too will get top-heavy, weary and screwed-up
>just like Windows, and accrue many of the same problems.
The more eye-candy they will put into it, the more sluggish it will
become. And you have a generation of slack programmers who write
not-so efficient code (read: resource consuming).
>>> Nope, an XP that is updated every 2-3 years or so by my company. This
>>> one is less than two years old. It's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, isn't it,
>>> that someone doesn't like your computer? Live with the anguish.
>>
>> You should get good techies at your company who can manage their
>> systems properly.
>
>Which brings me to one of my biggest complaints about Windows in a
>corporate environment: you're always at the mercy of the guys who
>purportedly know how to unscramble everything, but can't/don't/won't.
That's bad of those guys. They should be kicked out of their jobs.
>With the Mac I don't have to hire, coddle and schedule downtime with
>"Nick Burns" and his ilk. So to defer here to the Windows fanboys:
>It's true that my biggest problems with Windows is likely because of
>the slackers that don't maintain them at work.
>
>So, Windows might be almost as good as OSX, except that I don't do the
>hiring at my company. I say "almost" because there is no Logic or
>Final Cut on Windows. (Yeah, I know: there's something gooder than
>that...)
:-)
-m-
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>On 2009-06-28 11:46:16 -0700, Martin Heffels <goo...@flikken.net> said:
>
>>>> Apple is a religion! They are the Jehovah Witnesses among
>>>> computer-owners ;-)
>>>
>>> Wrong again. I could not possibly care less whether a Windows person
>>> uses an Apple. I just find it fascinating that they think it's
>>> "religious" to enjoy a Mac over a Windows machine, but not "religious"
>>> to like a Windows over a Mac. Talk about deluded...
>>
>> That's not what I am on about. Mac users tend to defend their choice
>> viciously, while Windows users just think "what the heck, it's a
>> computer, it's working fine, so why all the fuzz".
>
>Really? I hadn't noticed these "tendiencies". I have noted that short
>people tend to smack their lips when they eat and guys name Ned tend to
>say "uhhh" in between every phrase.
Uhm, who is Ned? I am missing the point.....
>
>Sheesh!
>
>> Have you ever seen the queues in front of Apple stores when they open
>> a new shop, or launch a new product? It's insane :-) Is it that
>> difficult to wait for a few days to lay your hands on a new iPhone?
>
>I don't know. Why don't you tell me what people in a line are
>"tending" to think about?
That they want to have the coolest gizmo first in their hands? I don't
get the excitement.
-m-
Richard Maine
> All it took to "hijack" this thread about how the OP's Mac
> crashes when trying to play .avi files with VLC Media Player, was
> the following one sentence:
>
> "Crashes, but how is that so, you have a Mac, not a PC???"
Yep, that's a flame. Indeed, all it took to hijack the thread into a
flamefest was to post a flame.
> Just pointing out that this thread indicates the
> Mac isn't totaly crash free, despite the claims otherwise, seems
> to elicit a fanatical reaction, in my humble opinion.
1. Macs aren't totally crash free. Anyone who claims otherwise is an
idiot. Idiots do exist.
2. The behavior in question was not, however, such a crash. The Mac did
not crash; the application did.
3. Go into any group and post a random flame about the subject of that
group. You'll get hostile reaction. This is not exactly Mac specific. Go
try the same on a Windows group. Or, heck, go try it on rec.pets.cats.
Actually, no, don't. Posting flames is obnoxious.
> What does your Psych 101 training say...
Among your other incorrect assumptions is that I have ever taken a psych
course. I was an engineering major and avoided that kind of stuff as far
as I could, which turned out to be pretty far.
I then spent my career using far more different operating systems than
you probably even knew ever existed. It would take me a while to even
count, but it is certainly in the dozens - several dozens if one wants
to make version distinctions such as between Windows 1, 2, 3.0, 3.1, 95,
98, ME, NT, 2000, XP, all of which I have used. I was using computers
for about a decade before either Microsoft or Apple were even founded.
I'm pretty new to Macs in that I couldn't stand them prior to OS X. Yes,
I tried them; didn't like them. The Unix base of OS X brought me in for
another try. I currently have Mac, Windows, and Linux boxes in this room
(my home library). I've used both the Mac and Windows today. The Windows
I used was running in VMWare on the Mac, but I've got some other Windows
boxes as well. I don't use the Linux ones much any more because OS X
handles the Unix stuff I use. My old Apple 2e is in another room (the
overflow library :-)) kept as a keepsake.
I suppose that having someone who currently (yes, I could change again)
likes Macs say that he couldn't stand some of them isn't likely to upset
your prejudices about Mac users.
John Varela
<goo...@flikken.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:45:41 -0700, Nadia Aqui <br...@sucosto.com>
> wrote:
> [...]
> >I've had a iMac for four years I think maybe it's crashed 3 times. My
> >Windows box has crashed at lease once a month for 8 years. That's the
> >math I'm doing.
>
> Odd. I had the same in reverse :-)
>
> -martin-
You're not running Norton Antivirus on your Macs, are you?
--
John Varela
Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email
John Varela
Did you see the hype and hysteria over that wrapper around DOS, Win
95?
clw
"John Varela" <OLDl...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 08:21:13 UTC, Martin Heffels
> <goo...@flikken.net> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:45:41 -0700, Nadia Aqui <br...@sucosto.com>
> > wrote:
> > [...]
> > >I've had a iMac for four years I think maybe it's crashed 3 times. My
> > >Windows box has crashed at lease once a month for 8 years. That's the
> > >math I'm doing.
> >
> > Odd. I had the same in reverse :-)
> >
> > -martin-
>
> You're not running Norton Antivirus on your Macs, are you?
the only thing I have had "crash" using OS X is an occasional
application. And, that can be remedied with a forced quit. I have not
had OS X itself crash necessitating a re-boot.
Maybe I am just lucky.
Nadia Aqui
>>> That's not what I am on about. Mac users tend to defend their choice
>>> viciously, while Windows users just think "what the heck, it's a
>>> computer, it's working fine, so why all the fuzz".
>>
>> Really? I hadn't noticed these "tendiencies". I have noted that short
>> people tend to smack their lips when they eat and guys name Ned tend to
>> say "uhhh" in between every phrase.
>
> Uhm, who is Ned? I am missing the point.....
"Tendencies". I'm talking about people's unerring ability to find
"tendencies" among vast groups of millions and multimillions of people
in which they could not possibly have met or even seen more than about
.001% of them.
>>> Have you ever seen the queues in front of Apple stores when they open
>>> a new shop, or launch a new product? It's insane :-) Is it that
>>> difficult to wait for a few days to lay your hands on a new iPhone?
>>
>> I don't know. Why don't you tell me what people in a line are
>> "tending" to think about?
>
> That they want to have the coolest gizmo first in their hands? I don't
> get the excitement.
Very good. My dog is looking at me funny right now. What is he
thinking? Or what does he "tend" to think, you figure?
Arny Krueger
news:mkkf45ldueuou5bv3...@4ax.com
Agreed.
However, Windows 7 looks better. OTOH, they again changed the details of
audio device drivers, which were just changed massively for Vista. I don't
know what else they screwed up that way.
Arny Krueger
> On 2009-06-28 11:13:07 -0700, "Arny Krueger"
> <ar...@hotpop.com> said:
>>> It supports my conception to have people tell me that
>>> I'm brainwashed by advertising when the reality is that,
>>> unlike 99% of the Windows-Jihad crew, I actually USE
>>> both operting systems everyday of my life.
>>
>> With the same workload? I seriously doubt that.
>
> That's a convenient approach. You may doubt anything
> else that may conflict with your pre-established thinking
> about others.
Note the non-answer, personal attack accusation in place of a straight
answer to a simple question.
>>> Believe it or not,
>>> despite the great power of the media, personal
>>> experience trumps all the noise that comes out of all
>>> the media conduits.
>> I don't know what your *actual* experience is, with all
>> the emotional propaganda that you are spewing.
> There's nothing emotional about it for me. I'm curious,
> even enthralled by the kind of mind that insists
> everybody should think the same about any one topic. In
> all manner of political/culture quazi-debate, it's
> inscrutable to me.
Again, note the non-answer, personal attack accusation in place of a
straight answer to a simple question.
>>> I think Windows is a drag to use and limited
>>> and frustrating in any number of ways. While my mac is
>>> not.
>> That's a choice you get to make. If you were truely
>> confident of your beliefs you wouldnt need to enage in
>> public window-bashing.
> What perverted logic.
No, its how life is. Notice how often most people go to Mac or neutral
forums and bring this issue up.
> I stated my viewpoint, now it's suspect because I stated it.
No, its all about how you stated it, and your inability to respond properly
to simple questions.
>I dislike working on a PC, and this is "window bashing"?
No, its public window bashing. You can bash windows all you want to in
private, and I doubt that very few of us will reply.
> If you had any belief in
> your own perspective you wouldn't have to mischaracterize
> mine to make a path for yourself.
Aagin, note the non-answer, personal attack accusation in place of a
straight answer to a simple question.
>>> Clearly people who use Windows and watch Apple ads on tv
>>> would differ. It only makes sense they believe their
>>> Buick is better than anybody else's Toyota. Particularly
>>> since they don't own or use a Toyota. Nobody is gonna
>>> tell you that their mom is a better cook than yours,
>>> that only makes sense.
>> Wrong. My mom was a good meat-and-potatoes cook, but no
>> competition for people who were really serious about
>> their cooking.
> Touche! I can see metaphors are wasted.
Especially the irrelevant ones.
> Curious how such
> faux discussions end up by discussing your mother.
That's because you started a up discussion of my mother's cooking. I see
that you clearly lack the ability to take responsibility for your own
actions, as if that hasn't been obvious for some time.
>>>>> My Windows box has crashed at least once a month
>>>>> for 8 years.
>>
>> I don't see any evidence of a big productivity loss here.
> Touche again. You're just to tough for me in the logic
> department.
I used to be responsible for large mainframes with 1,000s of concurrent
users and they crashed about once a month. A single user box crashing once a
month is hardly earth-shattering.
>>>> Typical Apple bigot grotesquely unfair comparison -
>>>> they compare an 8 year-old Windows box complete with
>>>> original OS (Win98ME?) to a relatively new Macintosh
>>>> and then blame the fact that the 8 year old machine is
>>>> slow and buggy on "Windoze".
>>> Nope, an XP that is updated every 2-3 years or so by my
>>> company.
>> It is still an 8 year old computer.
> The physical computer itself is 2 years old. If that's
> inconvenient, multiply as needed.
OK, now you are changing your story. What was 8 years old besides your
approach to logic and evidence?
>>> Live with the anguish.
>>
>> No anguish, just noticing your inability to make an
>> unbiased argument.
> I am truly biased: My opinons about my computer are
> biased by my usage of that computer.
Nahh, your back-pedalling and changing your story, bringing in my mother's
cooking, etc tell most people how emotionally involved you are in this whole
thing.
> Wouldn't anything
> else be impossible? Should I reserve judgements about my
> own use of equipment until other people can weigh in on
> their view of my use of equipment?
> I gotta say, you are absolutely impossible to argue with.
Actually, if you would tell a resonable story in a reasonble way, there is
no argument at all. I might even publish my agreement with and support of
your position.
Arny Krueger
news:h28dn...@news3.newsguy.com
> The Dimension is non-operational, being used for scrap.
> The Optiplex is out of action due to a dead hard drive.
> (Gee, it's a Dell, it's got a dead drive, what a
> surprise.)
The surprise is that you don't know that virtually all PC producers use
drives from a very short list of producers.
Nadia Aqui
I think you've analyzed me perfectly. Next!
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 08:21:13 UTC, Martin Heffels
><goo...@flikken.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:45:41 -0700, Nadia Aqui <br...@sucosto.com>
>> wrote:
>> [...]
>> >I've had a iMac for four years I think maybe it's crashed 3 times. My
>> >Windows box has crashed at lease once a month for 8 years. That's the
>> >math I'm doing.
>>
>> Odd. I had the same in reverse :-)
>>
>> -martin-
>
>You're not running Norton Antivirus on your Macs, are you?
No, these were media computers, not connected to the internet or
anything, so no AV.
-m-
Martin Heffels
>the only thing I have had "crash" using OS X is an occasional
>application. And, that can be remedied with a forced quit. I have not
>had OS X itself crash necessitating a re-boot.
>
>Maybe I am just lucky.
Or maybe I am just unlucky. I have FCP freeze frequently, and once in
a while in such a bad state that the whole computer is frozen, which I
consider to be a crash.
-m-
Smarty
Consider me amongst the unlucky ones also Martin, since I also found FCP to
occasionally freeze, always run slowly, and generally add complexity to my
workflow.
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>However, Windows 7 looks better. OTOH, they again changed the details of
>audio device drivers, which were just changed massively for Vista. I don't
>know what else they screwed up that way.
Most of the Vista drivers should work. For instance the Nvidia drivers
for Vista work, but the Windows 7 drivers are better. Obviously, this
won't work for everything. Quite a lot of companis are mum when it
comes to questions about Windows 7 driver development.
-martin-
Arny Krueger
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:50:31 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
>> However, Windows 7 looks better. OTOH, they again
>> changed the details of audio device drivers, which were
>> just changed massively for Vista. I don't know what else
>> they screwed up that way.
> Most of the Vista drivers should work.
I wish!
My Win7 test machine had a current Realtek audio interface. Not exactly
rare. It failed to play with one app, and record with another. Put it on the
shelf for a few weeks. Eventually something that worked showed up
automagically in Windows update.
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>My Win7 test machine had a current Realtek audio interface. Not exactly
>rare. It failed to play with one app, and record with another. Put it on the
>shelf for a few weeks. Eventually something that worked showed up
>automagically in Windows update.
The latest version of the Realtek HD drivers, v227, supports Windows
7. Did you try them?
cheers
-martin-
Arny Krueger
Didn't exist at the time. The last ones I downloaded from RT appear to be
v223.
The working drivers from MS seem to be very different than any I have
downloaded from RT.
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>Didn't exist at the time. The last ones I downloaded from RT appear to be
>v223.
>
>The working drivers from MS seem to be very different than any I have
>downloaded from RT.
Yes. I think they are the basic drivers, without the mixer panel and
all the advanced stuff.
-m-
Martin Heffels
wrote:
>Did you see the hype and hysteria over that wrapper around DOS, Win
>95?
With DOS that was similar to the excitement of Apple II ;-)
Win 95 opened up a whole new world cause it was way more advanced than
Win 3.1 Yes, people where excited about that. Well, thing is, lots
more people get excited about new Apple goodies than PC goodies, and
if they are crazy enough to stand in a queue for 2 days, fine with me
:-) I won't be seen in such a queue, no matter what product would be
released. I simply don't get it.
cheers
-martin-
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <veSdnSMbX4xmS9XX...@giganews.com>):
It's not the drive that's the problem, it's the Dell; Dell boxes, especially
Optiplex GX machines, have poorly designed enclosures which often cause the
hard drives to overheat. I've lost count of the number of dead hard drives
I've replaced in Dell boxes over the years. It vastly outnumbers the dead
drives in boxes built by other vendors, and in most cases the Dell was far
younger than the other machines. Example: my beige G3 still has its original
hard drive installed, 11 years later (and a newer, but still 9 years old,
UltraSCSI drive parked in the slot intended for an Iomega Zip drive, and a
newer, but still 8 years old, DVD burner replacing the CD drive). All the
slots are full, the RAM is maxed, I've replaced the standard video card with
the best card that would work... and still the G3 runs, without overheating,
without killing internal components, and on the original power supply.
Meanwhile the Optiplex is awaiting its _third_ drive (yes, it's already
killed two...), and needs a new power supply, too. One machine was properly
designed and built. One is a piece of crap. One is 11 years old. One is five
years old. Anyone want to do the math on total cost of ownership?
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <5-CdnX9cZdddSdXX...@giganews.com>):
They'd better not have changed the damn printer driver setup... again. I will
be _truly_ pissed if I have to get new printers... again.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <dn8i455evv6qnt4j2...@4ax.com>):
I have never queued for any computer product and never will. I might go so
far as to pre-order it over the Internet... but then I carry on working until
it arrives. And I may wait until the next weekend to install it, depending on
how much free time I have when it shows up. I pre-ordered Leopard, for
example, and didn't get around to actually installing it for over a week
'cause it arrived on a Friday and that particular weekend I had stuff I had
to do, so it waited until the _next_ weekend.
Arny Krueger
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:00:01 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
> (in article
> <veSdnSMbX4xmS9XX...@giganews.com>):
>
>> "J.J. O'Shea" <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote in message
>> news:h28dn...@news3.newsguy.com
>>
>>> The Dimension is non-operational, being used for scrap.
>>> The Optiplex is out of action due to a dead hard drive.
>>> (Gee, it's a Dell, it's got a dead drive, what a
>>> surprise.)
>>
>> The surprise is that you don't know that virtually all
>> PC producers use drives from a very short list of
>> producers.
>>
>>
>>
>
> It's not the drive that's the problem, it's the Dell;
> Dell boxes, especially Optiplex GX machines, have poorly
> designed enclosures which often cause the hard drives to
> overheat.
I'm not to hip about Optiplex machines, I almost always only see Dimensions.
I don't do a lot of large enterprise work. Almost all is small business or
home.
> I've lost count of the number of dead hard
> drives I've replaced in Dell boxes over the years.
I've lost count of the number of Dells that I have seen in use, taken
viruses or spyware off of, or had brought in for repair or upgrade after a
decent number of years of use. I've also seen one or two premature failures.
This echoes the brands of dead hard drives. Don't see a lot of dead IBMs or
Maxtors any more. OOps! They've been out of business for years. Figures.
>It vastly outnumbers the dead drives in boxes built by other
> vendors,
For example, HP and Dell have averaged out to nearly similar market shares
over the past few years. I think HP is currently ahead. Nevertheless I
personally see maybe 5-8 Dells for every HP or Compaq.
John Varela
<try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> Vista's not that bad. It's got a way to go before it hits rock-bottom:
> Windows ME!
Years ago I bought my wife a new, cheap HP computer with Me on it.
She only used it for email and the web, and never had a problem.
It's now in the basement used only occasionally as the hardwired
connection to the wi-fi router. But I did use it with a SCSI card
to run a Sony UY-S90 commercial scanner when I was converting my
slides and APS cartridges. Never had a problem doing that either.
The only knock is that I've never gotten it to integrate on the
local network with our Macs so I had to use CD net to move the scans
to the iMac.
Our experience with WinMe may explain others' happy experience with
Vista. It runs fine as long as you don't do much with it.
John Varela
<kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Really getting your money's worth for that Psych 101 course, aren't
> you? Did they get to "kneejerk reaction", or were you absent that
> day? All it took to "hijack" this thread about how the OP's Mac
> crashes when trying to play .avi files with VLC Media Player, was
> the following one sentence:
>
> "Crashes, but how is that so, you have a Mac, not a PC???"
Still don't know the difference between an app crash and a system
crash, do you?
John Varela
We can agree on that.
Ken Maltby
"John Varela" <OLDl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:dxizd0mOwXzR-pn2-ujj11hIMdrQX@localhost...
Well, the difference certainly isn't in the use of the term "crash".
Nor is the distinction made, for Apple's ad claims or the fanboy's
description of the Mac as being "crash free".
UNIX and therefor the current Mac OS, handles application
failure better than Windows, but if the application crashes, that
is still a crash.
So, is it that you are saying that your Mac doesn't crash, just
that some of the few programs that can run on it do?
Might the bottom line be that the OP can't watch his .avi
files using VLC on his Mac, (because of the crashing of the
program); where as I can watch all kinds of .avi files using
VLC on my PC. (Without it crashing in any fashion.)
Ironic, isn't it considering the Apple Ads?
Lol;
Ken
ushere
> Might the bottom line be that the OP can't watch his .avi files using
> VLC on his Mac, (because of the crashing of the program); where as I
> can watch all kinds of .avi files using VLC on my PC. (Without it
> crashing in any fashion.)
>
> Ironic, isn't it considering the Apple Ads?
>
> Lol; Ken
>
dvd, winavi, etc., not to mention a number of free apps like vlc.
i have two mac's here, they're basically for testing web / video on, but
i have to say that in comparison to the plethora of programs available
on windows, they're a pretty limited affair - mind you they don't crash
(often), but they're (relatively) slow, and cost more than i wanted to pay.
and as for all you linux heads, i'd love to use linux - once they can
sort their audio drivers out and can offer something other than a joke for
video editing.
Martin Heffels
<vil...@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
>But it's not the same as Microsoft's BSOD. That's an OS kernel "panic".
>The system is down _hard_ and has to be reset or power-cycled. When
>MacOS X does this, it's usually because there's a hardware problem (bad
>RAM or flaky USB/Firewire connector.
That's the only thing in which OS-X excels for me.
-m-
Ken Maltby
"Michael Vilain" <vil...@NOspamcop.net> wrote in message
news:vilain-C0156C....@individual.net...
> In article <oZ6dnbm5ue3eCNTX...@giganews.com>,
> really happening if you look at ~/Library/Logs/CrashReporter). You just
> restart the program. The OS keeps running.
>
> But it's not the same as Microsoft's BSOD. That's an OS kernel "panic".
> The system is down _hard_ and has to be reset or power-cycled. When
> MacOS X does this, it's usually because there's a hardware problem (bad
> RAM or flaky USB/Firewire connector.
>
> the most recent builds which don't run on PPC. I can usually watch the
> video clip on VLC if the Quicktime player won't open or play it.
>
You don't see a "Blue Screen Of Death" error page on a healthy PC.
I can't remember when I last saw one, they are quite rare now a days.
I don't think I ever saw one during normal operation. The only times
they used to appear were when working with prototype or bad
hardware and/or drivers. In fact, I'm sure not with any healthy PC
running Windows OS versions that would be contemporaneous with
the MacOS X. (But I don't do Vista, so you may see them again with
that now.)
I suspose I could start talking about "Permissions Issues" with the
Mac OS, but it was never my intent to argue the relative merits of the
various OS. The nature of a crash and the quality of the error handling
have no real bearing on my initial comment. (What some seem to
consider a flame.)
Luck;
Ken
Arny Krueger
news:vilain-C0156C....@individual.net
> An application can fail or "crash" or "segfault" or
> core-dump (what's really happening if you look at
> ~/Library/Logs/CrashReporter). You just restart the
> program. The OS keeps running.
In the case of Windows, the outcome is very similar. Win32 since NT 3.1 has
relied on page system storage management to restrict the impact of
application crashes which is very effective. Applications can't overlay
each other or the OS. This leaves the issues of validation of OS calls and
recovery of resources after an application crash, which again Win32 since NT
has always done a potentially effective job of, but one that needed
improvement and has improved greatly in succeeding releases.
In the near future many Windows users are going to be in a world where a lot
of 32 bit applications are running in 32 bit dedicated address spaces on a
64 bit system. This further isolates the applications from each other and
the OS. It also has some very favorable performance benefits.
> But it's not the same as Microsoft's BSOD. That's an OS
> kernel "panic". The system is down _hard_ and has to be
> reset or power-cycled.
To clarify, this is not an application crash of XP. This is usually because
of a hardware problem or a device driver problem. One of XP's built-in
*problems* is that there are probabaly at least 100 different device drivers
or releases of device drivers for every one that exists for the Mac OS. With
such extreme diversity comes a significantly greater exposure to device
driver faults.
> When MacOS X does this, it's
> usually because there's a hardware problem (bad RAM or
> flaky USB/Firewire connector.
I've never seen a flaky USB or Firewire connection take XP down. I'm not
saying that it is impossible, but I have a lot of years and devices worth of
experience with them under XP.
I see a lot of reboots of XP that are user choices. Many people don't know
how to diagnose an application crash and recover from it with minimal
impact. For example a lot of people don't know that logging the single user
off of XP gets you many of the benefits of a full cold boot.
Martin Heffels
<kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> You don't see a "Blue Screen Of Death" error page on a healthy PC.
>I can't remember when I last saw one, they are quite rare now a days.
>I don't think I ever saw one during normal operation. The only times
>they used to appear were when working with prototype or bad
>hardware and/or drivers.
I had one the other day since aaaagggeeeessss when helping someone to
install a DVB-T stick on Vista 64. Turned out to be the software
(Hypermedia) which created a BSOD when exiting. When the stick was
used in Windows Media Centre, all was good.
> In fact, I'm sure not with any healthy PC
>running Windows OS versions that would be contemporaneous with
>the MacOS X. (But I don't do Vista, so you may see them again with
>that now.)
BSOD's are a seldom thing nowadays, but virus-threats are more of a
worry for PC's.
> I suspose I could start talking about "Permissions Issues" with the
>Mac OS, but it was never my intent to argue the relative merits of the
>various OS. The nature of a crash and the quality of the error handling
>have no real bearing on my initial comment. (What some seem to
>consider a flame.)
Ahhhh, "Repair the Permissions". That's such a joke that one has to do
that once in a while. The same kind of joke as being a good idea to
reinstall Windows if you twiddle around lots with software.
cheers
-martin-
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <VP-dnfg5xM_7KNTX...@giganews.com>):
I see them all the time... on Dells. Usually when the hard drive has just
died. "Boot volume unavailable" or some such message. It usually means that
the hard drive is fried, time to get a new drive. At least if the drive is
replaced the system gets past the BSOD and you can reinstall the OS, while
the old drive shows as being dead if attached to another system.
> I can't remember when I last saw one, they are quite rare now a days.
You obviously don't work with Dell Optiplex GX series machines.
> I don't think I ever saw one during normal operation. The only times
> they used to appear were when working with prototype or bad
> hardware and/or drivers. In fact, I'm sure not with any healthy PC
> running Windows OS versions that would be contemporaneous with
> the MacOS X. (But I don't do Vista, so you may see them again with
> that now.)
The Dells I see have NT4, W2K, and XP on them. Usually with paltry amounts
(128 MB or less!) of RAM 'cause Accounting would rather pay me to
troubleshoot problems which would not exist if they were running XP with at
least 512 MB RAM. Idiots, but they pay their bills. (Yes, I'm serious about
the NT4. Have you tried to find printer drivers for relatively new printers
which will work in NT4?)
>
> I suspose I could start talking about "Permissions Issues" with the
> Mac OS, but it was never my intent to argue the relative merits of the
> various OS. The nature of a crash and the quality of the error handling
> have no real bearing on my initial comment. (What some seem to
> consider a flame.)
>
> Luck;
> Ken
>
>
>
>
--
Walter Bushell
mike...@TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
> J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
> > As Macs don't have any serious malware infestations, the last major malware
> > to be on the loose being back in 1998, Macs don't have AV packages which can
> > crash the whole computer...
>
> Let's be fair - there _ARE_ Mac users who, for some reason, choose to
> inflict Norton Antivirus for Macintosh on their machines, and that _can_
> bring a Mac to its knees.
Employer may require it. Corporate standards, you know.