Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
OS X Businesses Operating Systems Apple

Review of Mac OS X 10.3 843

Posted by michael from the cheap-at-any-price dept.
alphakappa writes "The NY Times has a review of all the new Panther features which states that the 150 odd features added are so good that calling it a 0.1 upgrade is not fair. It finds the new Expose feature and other security features (like being able to encrypt/decrypt the entire home directory on the fly) extremely appealing. Gripes include the $130 price tag and the (somewhat) lack of backward compatibility."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Review of Mac OS X 10.3 More

Review of Mac OS X 10.3

Comments Filter:

  • well then... (Score:5, Funny)

    by xao gypsie ( 641755 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @09:58AM (#7289898)
    . It finds the new Expose feature and other security features
    it also rubs the lotion on its skin....

    xao

  • Testing an os? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Tshombe ( 666084 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:00AM (#7289917)
    Since when do we trust newspapers for a review of an operating system? Sort of:"Look at all the new features!!"

    • Re:Testing an os? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Surlyboi ( 96917 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:13AM (#7290060) Homepage Journal
      Since Pogue has been writing tech books for years [oreillynet.com],
      I'd say he's fairly well qualified to write a review of the OS.

      And for the most part, he's dead on. Expose has changed
      the way I work, that feature alone is worth the upgrade cost for me.

      • Re:Testing an os? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by clontzman ( 325677 )
        Yeah, but, to be fair, Pogue writes books about the operating system [oreilly.com] that he's reviewing. It's in his best financial interest for people to adopt the new OS. I've always found it really dubious that the Times lets him report on the Mac since he's not exactly what you'd call a neutral observer.

        What's next? Harry Knowles writing reviews of Tarantino movies for Entertainment Weekly?

        • Re:Testing an os? (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Surlyboi ( 96917 )
          I dunno, I'd say his familiarity with the OS would
          help. He's one of those Mac users that's fairly
          vocal about what he thinks sucks about the platform.
          I'd rather have him write the review than someone
          who's got either no knowledge of the system and its
          precursors.

          And Harry Knowles shouldn't write reviews of anything
          for anybody.

        • Pogue also writes Windows (Score:5, Insightful)

          by rjung2k ( 576317 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @12:51PM (#7291910) Homepage

          If you checked his bibliography, you'll see that David Pogue has also written several books for Windows, such as The Missing Manual series for Windows XP and Windows Me.

          Pogue might enjoy Macs, but he's hardly a Microsoft-bashing zealot.

          • Surely -- it goes both ways. He shouldn't be reviewing XP either. I'm not accusing him of being anti-Microsoft, just of being unflinchingly pro-Apple (which makes writing an impartial review more of a challenge). Surely there are journalists who can write a reasoned review of a product who aren't also living off of the teat of the product they're reviewing.

  • Attention all OS X Users (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:01AM (#7289925)
    Your yearly Mac Tax is due. Why else would we call it FeeBSD.

  • And for those on linux.. (Score:5, Informative)

    by leming ( 640077 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:02AM (#7289939)
    If you don't already know about this, and your eyes are glittering with the prospect of encrypted home directories.. there is a way to do this in linux also. It's called the cryptoloop. This is a kernel loop extension that uses the CryptoAPI encryption options to create an encrypted loop of a mount for your system. Although I don't think there is anything to make it as automagic as they probably have set up in OSX, this is something that's out there for those of us that are ultra paranoid. You can visit the CryptoAPI site here [kerneli.org] where you can get everything you need, or look into the new 2.6 test kernels that have cryptoloop and the CryptoAPI options as a standard feature.
    • The problem I've had with the crypto loop stuff is that the format and tools keep changing. I have many encrypted files that I now can't access because I have no idea which version of the loop stuff they were encrypted with. Most of the time I only encrypt archived data so often by the time I need it again the whole crypto API has changed. There are too many tiny tools and such needed to make it work. You need a kernel module, plus the loop tools like losetup, and then special mount tools. All of those

  • Is a Clean Install Required? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by aheath ( 628369 ) * <[adam.heath] [at] [comcast.net]> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:02AM (#7289941)
    The New York Times article states that "And as with any major system-software upgrade, you'll encounter the fewest bumps and glitches if you install a fresh copy of the operating system rather than just updating your existing one."

    The article does not explain the risks of updating from 10.2 to 10.3 instead of installing a fresh copy of 10.3. It seems to me that a fresh OS install might present an obstacle for some users. Can anyone explain why a fresh OS install is preferable to an update OS install?

    • Re:Is a Clean Install Required? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by oscarmv ( 603165 ) <oscarmv@maCOFFEEc.com minus caffeine> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:07AM (#7289992) Homepage
      As with any complex system, continuous updates will always leave tiny bits and pieces behind that eventually compromise the stability of the whole thing.

      That said, there's a middle ground 'archive and install' option that preserves your users and network preferences while avoiding most if not all of the trouble that might come from updating. It's also faster as it doesn't need to check each and every file for updating and just writes everything while storing the old system folder in another place. Works mightily fine.
    • I don't know why a fresh install is said to be preferable (kinda doesn't make sense if the installer is done correctly), but when I upgraded to Jag"wire" I used the Archive and Install option, which at least saved everything I had installed so I didn't have to backup/recopy music and video folders (the biggest).

      It worked beautifully, and most apps simply regenerated their system folder files so only a few required a reinstall.

    • Re:Is a Clean Install Required? (Score:5, Informative)

      by laird ( 2705 ) <lairdp@gmail.TWAINcom minus author> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:11AM (#7290032) Journal
      Keep in mind that a "fresh install" on a Macintosh doesn't mean the same thing as on, say, Windows. A "clean install" means that the installer renames the previous System directory and writes out a new one, so you don't lose any data, settings, etc. The alternatives are:

      - Upgrade: write the new OS over the old one. This sometimes has side effects, if you had system extensions installed (e.g. third party drivers) that don't work with the new version of the OS.
      - Clean Install, preserve settings: do a Clean Install (as below), but preserves system and user settings, etc. This is the best choice, unless you're really short on disk space.
      - Clean Install: renames the old System, and installs a clean new one. You then have a nice clean system, and can selectively copy third party drivers, application settings, etc., that you know you want.
      - Format: reformat the drive, then do the install. This is for when you're doing an install on a random external drive, or wiping an old machine.

    • Re:Is a Clean Install Required? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by j-turkey ( 187775 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:13AM (#7290064) Homepage
      Can anyone explain why a fresh OS install is preferable to an update OS install?

      Because the update scripts can't always plan for the havoc that a personal computer user has wreaked on the OS. They can't test to see what every little poorly coded application changed, and how it is affected by the update (and more importantly, how it affects the update).

      This doesn't just go for Apple. Given the choice between a fresh install of an OS and a dist upgrade, I'll always take the fresh install (when it's really an option). Why not eliminate the variables? Regardless of the elegance of the OS, PC OS'es are usually made pretty ugly once an end user gets through with it.

      --Turkey

  • expose (Score:4, Insightful)

    by d_i_r_t_y ( 156112 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:03AM (#7289947) Homepage Journal
    much as i hate random GUI improvements being given their own name, the expose concept is damn cool and damn useful. i expect that the KDE folks ought to be able to manage to slip it under the approaching-beta 3.2 release, thanks guys ;-) seriously, this is one feature that apple has really gotten right.

    ps: there's really something to be said about incorporating the rendering power of modern graphics cards for eye candy and lightening the load of the CPU.

    pps: i find the fast user switching animation a bit gratuitous though.

    • Re:expose (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Shenkerian ( 577120 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:26AM (#7290197)
      pps: i find the fast user switching animation a bit gratuitous though.

      If you look at the bottom of this page [apple.com], so does Apple: "Because Quartz and OpenGL can".

      It's too bad Apple changed it, though. It used to read "Because we can," which was much cooler.

      • Re:expose (Score:3, Interesting)

        by elmegil ( 12001 )
        The animation might be gratuitous, but I'd really like to have that feature on the iBook at home, it's a pain to have to log the wife out to do anything since it's primarily her box.

        What I want to know is whether there is an upgrade price that's cheaper than the $130 for the "new release". If not, that's just !@#$ insane on Apple's part. There may be lots of nice new features, but I ain't paying $130 for them, especially if they're labelled as a dot release.

        • Re:expose (Score:5, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 23, 2003 @11:21AM (#7290872)
          There may be lots of nice new features, but I ain't paying $130 for them, especially if they're labelled as a dot release.

          Why do you care how they're labelled? Do you, by any chance, have pointy hair?

        • Re:expose (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Shenkerian ( 577120 )
          Oh, I think the feature is great, and I like the animation myself.

          As for the $129, there are a few ways to look at it: you could not get it, split a family license with friends, or scam an educational copy.

          My favourite, though, is to see if you can get $800 for your iBook, tack on the $129 you would've spent on Panther, then add another $170 to get yourself a G4 iBook. Not too shabby.

          But yeah, I hope the next update is free.

        • Re:expose (Score:4, Insightful)

          by jo_ham ( 604554 ) <joham999 AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @11:34AM (#7291016)
          How many times does it have to be pointed out?

          Ok, so Apple chose an easily misunderstood numbering system, it doesn't mean you can have the OS for free.

          10.2 and 10.3 are akin to Windows 2000 and Windows XP - very similar, but different. I don't see people complaining that Microsoft didn't give away XP free to windows 2000 users (maybe because XP is horrific, but that;s another thread entirely).

          • Re:expose (Score:3, Informative)

            by Politburo ( 640618 )
            10.2 and 10.3 are akin to Windows 2000 and Windows XP - very similar, but different.

            Analogy fails. I have never started my Windows 2000 box and installed a program only to see "REQUIRES WINDOWS XP".

        • Re:expose (Score:4, Insightful)

          by 2starr ( 202647 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @11:35AM (#7291026) Homepage
          especially if they're labelled as a dot release.

          What does that have to do with it? Version numbers are completely arbirary and made up. Shouldn't the release be judged on it's benefits rather than a name?

        • Re:expose (Score:5, Insightful)

          by colmore ( 56499 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @01:02PM (#7292057) Journal
          I love how everyone is jumping on Apple for having a numbering scheme that actually makes sense. Much like how the Linux Kernel is still on 2.x after 13 years of work, Apple recognizes that the first digit should only be for major changes in the basic functionality of the product, and since the BSD core of X is pretty solid, don't expect OS 11 any time soon. There are a lot of apps out there that never really should have left 1.x. Their . releases are like major windows upgrades (at least 95 to 98 scale) However, it would be nice if there were an upgrade priced package.

    • Re:expose (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:28AM (#7290211)
      Is that all Linux desktops are? Dumping grounds for poorly implemented features stolen from other operating systems?

      I'd rather KDE invented its own innovation for a change. Slicker, so far, is the only project I've seen that could be considered in that realm.

      • Re:expose (Score:3, Insightful)

        by d_i_r_t_y ( 156112 )
        don't be so pessimistic... there's no shame in copying what has been shown in the field to be A Good Thing. it is unfortunate for linux that there is a certain amount of catching up to do before major new ground can be broken IMHO. that said, i think KDE does windows even better than windows...

        implementation is as important as innovation.

      • Re:expose (Score:3, Insightful)

        by GauteL ( 29207 )
        I`d rather see my Linux desktop implement useful features from other desktops than trying to reinvent everything itself.

        There is nothing wrong with learning from others. People that refuse to do so are actually rather stupid.

        Sure, innovate yourself, but make sure the innovation is actually a step forward.

        My personal opinion is that Slicker is a confusing mess created by trying to create something new just for the sake of being fresh instead of being useful.

  • Lack of backward compatibility (Score:3, Insightful)

    by arvindn ( 542080 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:03AM (#7289949) Homepage Journal
    Hurts linux as well. Too often this is compounded with dependency problems and makes package installation a nagging pain for experienced users and a nightmare for new users. This is one thing that MS has done right. Granted, there's DLL hell on windows as well, but the problem is far smaller than on mac and linux.

    • Re:Lack of backward compatibility (Score:5, Insightful)

      by kfg ( 145172 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @11:36AM (#7291061)
      You're absolutely right about Linux package installation. The idea of building Mplayer from source makes be break out in a sweat and start looking for an afternoon I can clear.

      For the most part installing a DVD player on Windows means popping in the CD and clicking on install.

      However, doing so may mean invoking .dll hell. .dll hell does not refer to the proliferation of libraries and dependencies. It refers to the lack of version awareness in Windows allowing an app to install a different version of a library over and existing version, thus breaking who knows what and making it difficult to even track down the problem, let alone cure it.

      Dependency Hell in Linux is, in fact, the cure for .dll hell.

      Would you like Peche a la Frog, or Frog a la Peche?

      Or I suppose you could have a pomme flavored frog.

      The world is complex. There is no really good answer.

      KFG

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:04AM (#7289952)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • 130 dollars not quite (Score:4, Informative)

    by greentree ( 682982 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:04AM (#7289960)
    It's only 69.99 with the educational discount for those in high school, college, etc. That's how much I paid for it.

    • Re:130 dollars not quite (Score:5, Informative)

      by meta-monkey ( 321000 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:22AM (#7290157) Journal
      Likewise. By the way, if you'd like a nice new G5, don't forget about the Apple Developer Connection [apple.com] Student Membership [apple.com] and the associated Hardware Purchase Program [apple.com]. The membership is $99 for one year, and you get a once-in-a-lifetime 20% discount on Apple hardware. So, that nice new dual 2GHz G5 is only $2400 instead of $3000, for a net savings of $501. The discount applies to any hardware at the Apple store, including Cinema Displays and the like. Is nice...that's how I'm paying for my new G5 & 20" cinema display...

  • About the $130 price tag... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rude Turnip ( 49495 ) <valuation.gmail@com> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:04AM (#7289969)
    Since I heard Apple offers discounts to government employees and my dad works for the state govt, I looked at the "government employee discounted" version of Apple's online store. OS X Panther can be had for $65 bucks by state govt. employees! Hardware discounts are much more modest, however.

    • Re:About the $130 price tag... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Roofus ( 15591 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @11:09AM (#7290711) Homepage
      With the educational discount, it was under $70. The funny part was, on the Apple Store website I clicked on the University Link, selected Temple (I do go there part time), and then was able to order Panther AND Office X without providing any proof I was a student.

      I got MS Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and Entourage, plus OS X 10.3 for $220.

  • Price... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:07AM (#7289993)
    If you're a student or teacher it's only $69. And if you recently renewed your .Mac subscription, you could have chosen a $20 gift certificate to the Apple Store.

    So, $49 is the perfect price for me.

    And if you're still using a Beige box G3, you can't gripe about not being compatible. You should sell it or give it away and buy a new G5 or a G4 on clearance.

  • Well, look on the bright side... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WIAKywbfatw ( 307557 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:08AM (#7290003) Journal
    That $130 cost won't matter to those people whose systems the new version won't run on.

    Seriously though - and I've lost track of the number of times I've said this - if you don't want the new features then you don't have to pay for them. And, if you don't pay for them, you're existing system doesn't become any less productive or user-friendly.

    It really amazes me that people act as if their computing experience has somehow been crippled just because they don't have the very latest thing, even though their own machine hasn't regressed in anyway and is just as useful as it was the day before.

    Watch how this story will generate countless posts that proclaim that Apple has somehow stabbed its users in the back by releasing a significant upgrade packed with both new and improved features and (shock, horror) daring to charge for it.

    Newsflash people: software costs time and money to develop. So either pay up or shut up. Apple is a business, not a charity.

    And to those of you who just fail to qualify for a free upgrade (if there is such a thing), please, get over it. Life is full of upsets, big and small. In the end, it's an upgrade you're missing out on, not a heart-bypass operation.

    Anyone else think that upgrade envy is becoming way too common, on computing platforms and elsewhere in life?
    • The larger pattern this fits into is one that's seen lots of research [nature.com] recently: we don't like other people getting what we perceive to be "better" deals, even if their deals come at no marginal cost to us. The social disapproval at these "cheaters" who don't "pay their share" is pretty strong.

      So consumers get pissed when Amazon tries differential pricing [kdnuggets.com], and people will moan about how they should have bought a Powerbook this month, and not last month. Combine this with the "all MP3s and software shoul

    • it's not that simple (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sacrilicious ( 316896 ) <qbgfynfu.opt@recursor.net> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:39AM (#7290315) Homepage
      if you don't want the new features then you don't have to pay for them. And, if you don't pay for them, you're existing system doesn't become any less productive

      This view can only be supported by having a very static view of how software is used. I was using OSX 10.1 when 10.2 was released. I suddenly began running into many commercial and open source products that required 10.2. For example, virtually everything on osxgnu.org now requires 10.2, and this is not because these projects are using 10.2 specific features; they're binary compatibility requirements. Fink is another example, and they already note on their page that 10.3 will require a new install from them. I also encountered this in a substantial number of commercial apps and drivers. Apple itself removed the 10.1 dev tools from their page by the time I went to get them.

      For some people, myself included, software is a living, dynamic thing. I don't want 10.3 because of whatever assortment of new features it has; I want it because I'm afraid of being cut off from a bunch of things on which I depend. And if I get it, it's going to force some painful transition choices on me by breaking some 10.2-dependent stuff. In some ways the transitions between these 10.x versions is more jarring than that from 9.x to osx; at least when 9.x was left behind, dual boot and emulation support was provided.

      • Fink is another example, and they already note on their page that 10.3 will require a new install from them.

        Although your point is still valid, Fink is a terrible example of it--like many tools out there, fink will have a new version of the software for 10.3, but will (presumably, since they do it now) continue to offer the 10.1 and 10.2 versions for download. Granted, not all the packages will stay available forever, but there's no reason you can't back up the working versions of all the 10.2 packages

      • Re:it's not that simple (Score:4, Interesting)

        by keytoe ( 91531 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @03:44PM (#7294074) Homepage

        this is not because these projects are using 10.2 specific features; they're binary compatibility requirements
        Apple initially released a binary API in 10.0 that would allow as much compatibility as possible with existing tools (mostly the stuff they grabbed from NeXT), but they had every intention of moving to the new one as soon as they could. With the release of 10.2, they made that change.

        Sure, this broke the old apps, but they needed to do it, and wanted to do it as soon as possible so that other application developers wouldn't be hit so hard by it. Would you rather have had them wait until this revision to make the change? The amount of third party applications out there right now is significantly larger than it was when they released 10.2.

        You are assuming that Apple will change the API again - which is not the case at all. They had to make a change, and they did it as soon as they could. Given the (relatively) seamless transition from OS 9 to OS X as a whole, I can forgive them this single issue.

        Finally, this is hardly an Apple only issue. Anybody remember having to bump glibc versions? By hand? With some legacy apps that didn't like the new version? On a live system? I sure do...

  • Ordered the Family Pack (Score:3, Interesting)

    by OS24Ever ( 245667 ) * <trekkie@nomorestars.com> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:10AM (#7290020) Homepage Journal
    I ordered the Family Upgrade kit to update my 12" Powerbook and my wife's iMac.

    To me the update seems worth it, but then in my previous life I bought Windows 95, Windows 98, and then Windows XP. What were they but new features and no bug fixes?

    I also bought RH Linux 6.2, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 8.0 and 9.0. I thought I'd support the distro I used and then they go and quit selling it. Don't see myself buying the Enterprise versions anytime soon.

    Haven't got it yet so I can't comment on the review, it was a general decent review and didn't pick too many nits like some of the 'tech' reviews do. They get obsessed about one thing and miss everything else.

    All in all, a decent wet the appitite type of review. Hopefully it'll show up before the weekend so I can see what happens when I try an upgrade my two machines. I'm interested to see how badly it trashes Norton Systemworks on the iMac. biggest mistake of my life to buy that.

  • $10?? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Mr_Silver ( 213637 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:12AM (#7290055)
    It also comes with iTunes, which can convert your CD's into MP3 files (a job that requires a $10 add-on in Windows XP's Media Player).

    Or get CDex [n3.net] for free.

  • Mail.App improvements ... ? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by altp ( 108775 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:15AM (#7290085)
    So, does mail.app actually check ALL imap folders now and not just the inbox? If you use procmail to move messages around server side, mail.app never seems to find new messages.

    Even just a subcribed list of folders would help the situation.
    • Please, please, please, someone answer this!!!!

      I've got one IMAP account, and 25 folders with Mailfilter+Courier IMAP+Maildrop on my Linux box at home... I usually don't see new subfolder mail unless I click "Go Offline" then click "Go Online". It only does that check when making the initial connection :-/
    • I just did a little experiment with Mail on 10.3, and it looks like the answer is "no".

      I shelled into our mail server and moved an unread message from my inbox to a folder. Then in Mail, I clicked the "Get Mail" button in the toolbar. No unread messages appeared in the folder.

  • Further temptation I could do without (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nicky_d ( 92174 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:18AM (#7290112) Homepage
    Seems like a fair review to me; it highlights the new security features and places them in the context of recent events, oohs and aahs a little over Expose, and raises questions about the cost and compatibility issues for the end user. This is not a good time for me to be presented with Panther, since I've vowed to pay off my iBook this month, but I know full well that as soon as I see it sitting on a shelf on Saturday, it's going to get bought...

    The cost is a tricky issue; it's clear a lot of work has gone into Panther,and the results certainly look good to me. I've got no problem shelling out for the new features - if I didn't like doing that, I'd use Linux exclusively - but I think an upgrade path for existing users (short of buying a new machine) would be nice. Panther is 100 in the UK; 70 would seem like a reasonable price point for those who paid for 10.2. Still, I know people who still scrabble after cracked copies of XP Pro because they can't afford to buy a copy at 250 RRP; Panther is a bargain by comparison...

  • How about 10.4 (Score:5, Funny)

    by verloren ( 523497 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:18AM (#7290113)
    So it's too good for a 0.1 release, but not good enough for $130. Hmm...

    How about a 0.2 release, and $99? Or we could leave the price, and bump the numbering up to 10.5 - that would be worth $130 of anyone's money!

    Cheers, Paul

  • Encrypted home directories? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Realistic_Dragon ( 655151 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:22AM (#7290150) Homepage
    Where do they keep the key?

    2048 bit encryption is useless if the key is protected by a short, english passphrase - you may as well just have the short english passphrase as the key. You have to separate key and data to make it worthwhile.

    Unless the keys can be held on removable USB pen drives or similar then a simple brute force attack against the passphrase will give you the <many many bit> key required to decrypt the data.

    This is the problem with many CD encryption programms - sure the disc is encrypted, but the encryption/decryption algorythm is on the disk as well, and so is the key - just obfusicated a little using a simple function that is keyed with a short passphrase that can easily (at least compared to finding the long key) be found.

    However using the key that is held on your Mac to encrypt data that is on your iPad would be cool, as then it really can only be read where they key is available (home & work & wherever else).

    • Keys and Passphrases are not stored / not hackable (Score:5, Informative)

      by Corpus_Callosum ( 617295 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @11:35AM (#7291024) Homepage
      I posted this elsewhere, in a deeper comment, but I think it is worthwhile to address this to your original comment to stop the confusion that your comment might have caused.

      2048 bit encryption is useless if the key is protected by a short, english passphrase - you may as well just have the short english passphrase as the key. You have to separate key and data to make it worthwhile. [newline] Unless the keys can be held on removable USB pen drives or similar then a simple brute force attack against the passphrase will give you the key required to decrypt the data. [newline] This is the problem with many CD encryption programms - sure the disc is encrypted, but the encryption/decryption algorythm is on the disk as well, and so is the key - just obfusicated a little using a simple function that is keyed with a short passphrase that can easily (at least compared to finding the long key) be found.

      You are making a common mistake that many people not involved in crypto/security make regarding passwords and encryption. You believe that the AES key is stored somewhere, unlocked by a passphrase. It is not. The AES key is algorithmically derived from the passphrase.

      When you enter your passphrase, that passphrase essentially acts as a source for a strong cryptographic hash function. The result of the cryptographic hash is the encryption key. There is never a time that your passphrase, your key or anything related to either is ever stored on the hard-drive.

      Brute force against such hash functions with variable-length passphrases is VERY VERY HARD. In fact, there are very few techniques that provide better key retrieval security.

  • Decency? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by pulazzo ( 231488 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:25AM (#7290188)
    Microsoft, at least, has the decency to wait a few years between upgrades.

    I know lame comments like these are essential to journalism and aren't meant to be taken seriously, but I'll bite --

    What is indecent about releasing a major upgrade to your operating system after a year?
    Should Apple sit on these changes for 2 more years?

    If you don't want to buy the upgrade, don't. If you want to wait 2 more years, you'll likely get 10.5 with many more changes. You pay a premium to be a geek with the latest gadgets.

    When the new iPod was released, I didn't expect Apple to give me a new one just because mine was only 6 months old. I sold mine on eBay and paid a substantial upgrade fee.

    Cars are "upgraded" every year and most people don't drive the latest release because it's too expensive for them to upgrade. In fact, sometimes they only involve very minor cosmetic changes! And often they raise the price! Unbelievable!

    Oh, but this is software and no physical manufacturing analogies apply.

    • Re:Decency? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Angostura ( 703910 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:48AM (#7290426)
      The big problem with Apple's OS upgrade policy, and where MS is actually better inolves the whole 'end of life' saga.

      Microsoft sets out very clearly how long an OS will be supported after they stop selling it, so for example you know that critical security isues will be patched in Windows 98 until a particular date (early next year, I think?).

      Apple, by contrast seems to lack this formal policy. 10.1 is essentially unsupported now (no upgrade to patch the SSH bug, for example), but this has never formally be end-of-lifed.

      The question is, once 10.3 comes out how long will Apple patch security holes in Jaguar? next month? next week? No-one knows.

  • X11 Support? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by peterdaly ( 123554 ) <{petedaly} {at} {ix.netcom.com}> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:28AM (#7290207)
    I have heard that Panther has X11 support built in. Does this mean (for example) run OpenOffice without having to first start up X11?

    That would make running "ported/recompiled" X11 apps much simpler.

    Can someone with the developer version comment on how this works?

    -Pete

  • I've found a few bugs with it (Score:5, Informative)

    by Raleel ( 30913 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:29AM (#7290216)
    Overall, I'm quite happy with it, but I've found a few bugs. yes, I've reported at least one to apple

    1) iChatAV and a AD account - If I try to opena video chat to a person, and I am logged in via my Active directory account (i.e. authenticated to the AD domain), the video connection fails. Audio is fine, jsut video

    2) If I open a chat to one particular friend, it causes my cpu to pegged. Fortunately the process is niced (iChat, that is) and so it's not particularly disruptive, but it's a very ahrd problem to diagnose (it's only him, other people with the same setup work fine)

    3) using Mail.app to access an exchange server with an exchange mail account (i.e. you select "exchange account" when you set up your mail, different than the imap one), you cannot make rules that filter to subdirectories of Inbox. Very odd.

    Otherwise, I'm pretty happy. You can't encrypt home directories of "network accounts" (read: AD accounts), even if you tell it to create a local home directory, but the home directory encryption is pretty slick. Expose, of course, is unique, and I've still not used it extensively. The asking for a password when coming back from sleep is a much needed repair.

    As a whole I find that it's quite a lot faster than the previous version, and all the subtle tweaks are a good add. I didn't know about the command-tab switching. I use that a lot in windows.

    Probably worth the $130

  • Biggest imporvement (Score:5, Interesting)

    by iJed ( 594606 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @10:43AM (#7290353) Homepage
    The biggest improvement in Panther is simply the speed. On an oldish G3 or G4 the performance increase in doing everything is incredible. After this Expose has to be next best improvement. This really makes managing windows a whole magnitude easier. I've simply never seen a nicer way of doing this. I've set it to activate on the click of mouse button 4.

  • OS 9/Panther (Score:5, Informative)

    by UnixRevolution ( 597440 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @11:02AM (#7290628) Homepage Journal
    I would just like to note for the sake of doing so that if you install Panther over a Mac that can boot into OS 9 (alongside jaguar or something), you can still boot into OS 9 afterwards.

    Also, the fast user switching is awesome!

  • Funny about that $130 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by YouHaveSnail ( 202852 ) on Thursday October 23, 2003 @11:56AM (#7291292)
    It's funny (strange) that Mr. Pogue makes such a big deal ("Now the big one:...") about the $130 upgrade price. I'm willing to bet that his copy of Panther didn't cost him even $0.01. He probably got a "review copy" or a "not for resale copy" or somesuch.

    If you're the kind of guy who wants to get a lot of free stuff - books, gadgets, hardware, etc. - you can hardly do better than to become an author and reviewer. Write one or two books, and suddenly every other author in that field wants your name and a quote on the back of their book. I believe Dave Barry has written on this subject, and he's a lot funnier than I am, so I'll leave it to him.

    Anyway, the upshot is that you should pretty much ignore anything that any hardware or software reviewer says about money, because they likely haven't spent any of theirs on hardware or software in quite a while.

  • Congrats NYTimes (Score:4, Informative)

    by CptChipJew ( 301983 ) * <michaelmiller@gmail . c om> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @02:06PM (#7292830) Journal
    The article states that the 10.1 upgrade was $130.

    The 10.1 upgrade was free. If you made an image of the CD, then removed one particular file of the image, and reburned the disc, you had a bonafide 10.1 full install.

    But the discs were free. You could even get more than one if you asked nicely enough at the Apple store.

  • The Macintosh is the most compatible platform (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PghFox ( 453313 ) <afoxson&pobox,com> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @07:33PM (#7296130) Homepage
    This response was e-mailed to David Pogue in reply to his New York Times article":

    > "..that far more software is available for Windows (true; "only"
    > 6,500 programs are available for Mac OS X).."

    I'm afraid I'm going to have to take exception to the above statement. While it's true that there are more native Windows applications, I think that this is a misleading metric.

    The Macintosh is by far the most compatible platform. It runs Classic applications, Mac OS X applications, BSD applications, Linux applications, and X11 applications. As surely you know, the Mac will even run Windows applications via Virtual PC.

    This being the case, it's a reasonable conclusion that "far more software is available for Windows" is a false statement. I thank you kindly for an otherwise excellent article.

  • Beware the FileVault (Score:3, Informative)

    by evand ( 2571 ) <esd AT cmu DOT edu> on Thursday October 23, 2003 @07:40PM (#7296169) Homepage

    I've been using the release build of Panther for a while, now, and, while I think it's a worthwhile upgrade, I strongly recommend not enabling FileVault [apple.com] .

    I enabled it on my new 15" Aluminum PowerBook on Sunday and was seeing serious corruption of my files [sucksrightnow.org] by Tuesday. My keychain was corrupted, my iTunes library metadata file was corrupted, my preferences were corrupted, and some of my Data Structures and Algorithms Java source files were corrupted. Beyond that, I stopped counting, backed up to my iPod, and reinstalled.

    To be fair, this isn't a build I obtained from Apple or a retail store, so it's possible that it's not what's in the box (although the about box indicates build 7B85, and, from what I can tell, that's GM). It might be worth letting other early adopters check out the retail version of FileVault, however, before doing so yourself.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close