Dreams-Visions
Member
yep, Reeder is just as fantastic on OSX as it is on my iDevices.
Congrats on your Air, Charred.
Congrats on your Air, Charred.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Mac OSX Noob thread of OSX noobs
- Thread starter koam
- Start date
Where exactly does Reeder get its stuff from? I downloaded it yesterday for the first time, and as soon as I started it it asked for a username. So I put one in, even though I didn't know I had one, and it proceeded to download 20,000 stories for me to read on dozens of different web sites. 113MB of data in my Library's Application Support folder.
So apparently it gets this information somewhere. Google Reader? I don't even know what that is. How does this thing work? And how am I supposed to read 20,000 posts?
So apparently it gets this information somewhere. Google Reader? I don't even know what that is. How does this thing work? And how am I supposed to read 20,000 posts?
Dreams-Visions
Member
Google.com/readerJasoco said:
you have to create an account and subscribe to whatever feeds you want.
But I've never subscribed to any feeds. From what I can tell, Google Chrome automatically adds any RSS feeds I come across to my Google account. Because when I launched it and it finished I noticed all kinds of stuff, all sites I've been to, blogs, forums, everything. I assume Chrome does this automatically.Dreams-Visions said:
Thanks. Let me just get the complaints out of the way: I opened the box at night so immediately missed the backlight keyboard and I can hear the fans spinning after 30 seconds of a flash video despite installing the 10.2 beta. Why make this a public beta Adobe :lol ? It's a very nice upgrade over my old 15" MBP and all that's left is the 1080p mkv test. I'm really looking forward to the 13" MBP revision now.Dreams-Visions said:
Dreams-Visions
Member
you can add your own as you see fit.Jasoco said:
press the "add a subscription" button in the upper left of the google.com/reader homepage.
Opera?Charred Greyface said:
video never goes about 75C on my MBP when using Opera. I know the MBA uses a different chipset, but it's worth a try.
Dreams-Visions
Member
1.) go to google.com/readerJasoco said:
2.) mouse-over the subscription you don't want
3.) see the little down-facing arrow on the left of the subscription name? click it.
4.) "Unsubscribe"
that should do it.
This will be a stupid question I know, but I assume copying from my HDD to my new SSD won't really be much faster than copying from HDD to HDD, right? Just wondering how long my restore process is going to go tomorrow. Apparently the drive comes with a nice transfer kit (Which looks like a USB HD case) that I'll be able to boot from if I have to, unless I decide to fresh install. I might possibly do both. Fresh install OS X then clone the User stuff over one folder at a time.
Dreams-Visions
Member
your restore process will be limited by your HDD.Jasoco said:
I restored about 100GB (CarbonCopyCloner) last month in about 45 minutes.
Charred. *in that father voice*Charred Greyface said:
install Opera. and see what you think.
Currently cloning to the new drive. It's only gone 5GB, and hasn't even left the Applications folder yet and has been going for 30 minutes. (5 minutes was pre-clone file counting) There's still about 10GB left to copy of just the OS not to mention the almost 100GB of user. It'll probably be going for a few hours.
I had 140GB of data before, so I moved about 35 off to my Media HD. (My VirtualBox disk images and my archive of application installers and DMG's.
This is why I can't wait to buy a 1.5TB laptop HD so I can have the best of both storage and speed. But for now, I'll take the speed. So I'm crossing my fingers.
Okay. Seems to take about an hour to copy 16GB. How did you copy 100GB in 45 minutes? Do you have a 10,000RPM drive or something? Mine's only 5,400RPM.
I had 140GB of data before, so I moved about 35 off to my Media HD. (My VirtualBox disk images and my archive of application installers and DMG's.
This is why I can't wait to buy a 1.5TB laptop HD so I can have the best of both storage and speed. But for now, I'll take the speed. So I'm crossing my fingers.
Okay. Seems to take about an hour to copy 16GB. How did you copy 100GB in 45 minutes? Do you have a 10,000RPM drive or something? Mine's only 5,400RPM.
I reluctantly installed it... and Opera 11 has tree-style tabs by default :lol . The browser itself actually has more (user friendly?) customizable options than Firefox. I have yet to discover a decent skin or replacements for most of my firefox extensions (hyperwords, adblock, flashblock, greasemonkey, better greader, flashgot etc). Good looking on the Opera recommendation.Dreams-Visions said:
Didn't see this mentioned yet:
Save big with new Mac software bundles MacPromo
One of the apps offered in the MacPromo bundle is Personal Backup. Is anyone familiar with it? SuperDuper crapped out on when I was setting up my new computer (the problem was solvable but I didn't want to wait for a support email so I went with my TimeMachine backup instead). I'm switching to CarbonCopyCloner but Personal Backup offers more... if it works...
All those backup utilities are just wrappers for rsync. I use CCC because it's free by default and has NEVER let me down. I even donated to Bombich because of how many times it's saved my ass. And he even STILL offers the Terminal code for creating a working rsync backup right on his website so you don't need to use CCC.
I <3 CCC
Personal Backup looks like bloatware created by a security company that's virtually unnecessary in the Mac world. I wouldn't touch it even if it were free.
But that's just me.
I <3 CCC
Personal Backup looks like bloatware created by a security company that's virtually unnecessary in the Mac world. I wouldn't touch it even if it were free.
But that's just me.
i'm a huge fan of Backuplist+
it's another wrapper for rsync that offers to clone your disk, but offers a bit more flexibility and a lot more options.
http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/21413/backuplist+
it's another wrapper for rsync that offers to clone your disk, but offers a bit more flexibility and a lot more options.
http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/21413/backuplist+
Tonight I've had like four lockups where I'm able to move the mouse pointer but nothing else. Can't click on the dock to launch apps, can't click on the menubar, can't move windows, etc. I have to press the power button on the back of my iMac.
Any ideas on what the hell is going on? The only apps I had open were Chromium, Adium, Tweetie, and Text Edit (all of which were giving me no problems before).
Any ideas on what the hell is going on? The only apps I had open were Chromium, Adium, Tweetie, and Text Edit (all of which were giving me no problems before).
Thanks for the tip! That looks like the tool I've been looking for. I've been using CCC but it's not ideal because it needs the target volume mounted (which happens to be on a WD ShareSpace which can only be mounted manually). Also CCC copies to a disk image :-( Backuplist+ will use rsync (no mounting problem), will backup on wake (daily) and will copy file for file (no disk image).scorcho said:
(I had hacked together my own thing with rsync and a thing called sleep watcher or something but it was fragile and just stopped working one day)
Jasoco said:
OK, I'd ignored the "Remote Macintosh" target because, you know, the remote isn't a Mac. But looking at it, and from what you're saying, it'll basically take any ssh target?
Yes, the backup when the schedule is missed is nice.
Edit: OK, no, reading the docs CCC requires that the target of a file-by-file backup be a HFS+ filesystem. That rules out the ShareSpace.
It's effectively a restricted Linux box and SMB is one of the services it provides. It also has NFS, FTP, SSH, some media protocols (iTunes and the windows one) and a bunch of other stuff (a friend uses his to do all his torrenting).Jasoco said:
So really I'm back to CCC not being ideal for a couple of reasons
Yeah, no biggie. There's a lot of cloning apps out there. Use the one you like best.
Anyway, the SSD is all cloned, installed and booted up and HOLY FUCKING HELL IS IT FAST!?
The videos you see on YouTube do not lie. PhotoShop loads in 2-3 seconds. iTunes loads in less than 1. Mail loads before you can blink. iPhoto only takes about 2. Chrome also loads even faster than before. Once the desktop loads, all my menu applications, FaceBook Notifications, Plex Media Server, DragThing, PTH Pasteboard, are all loaded instantly. It used to take up to 30 seconds for them all to finish with DragThing finishing last. Now it's a fucking instant! The boot time is pretty good, nowhere near Air speeds but booting isn't the big deal. Everything else is, and even then booting is still super fast. (Once I set the startup disk to the SSD and it stopped searching for the old HDD before defaulting.)
The SSD came with a nice plastic portable case to put my old HDD in. I'll be using it for a while as a third portable clone just in case, but hopefully I won't need it.
I decided to not clone my cache folders (The ones in Library) or the /private/var/folders/ folder because that's more caches too. (OS X runs fine without them. It just recreates them.) I know OS X just makes them again, but it did save some time backing up by not including them. And unlike my HDD, removing them didn't slow down my system. If only OS X could just not make them on SSD's. It seems unnecessary now. But whatever.
I am blown away. I took a lot of video, I am going to look over it now and do some timing tests and maybe throw something on YouTube in the next few days to show off. But I just want to say, once I have gone SSD, I don't see myself going back to HDD for my OS install. Now just bring on the 1.5TB laptop HDD's so I can get this puppy to the ultimate level.
HOLY SHIT. I hope this honeymoon never ends.
Anyway, the SSD is all cloned, installed and booted up and HOLY FUCKING HELL IS IT FAST!?
The videos you see on YouTube do not lie. PhotoShop loads in 2-3 seconds. iTunes loads in less than 1. Mail loads before you can blink. iPhoto only takes about 2. Chrome also loads even faster than before. Once the desktop loads, all my menu applications, FaceBook Notifications, Plex Media Server, DragThing, PTH Pasteboard, are all loaded instantly. It used to take up to 30 seconds for them all to finish with DragThing finishing last. Now it's a fucking instant! The boot time is pretty good, nowhere near Air speeds but booting isn't the big deal. Everything else is, and even then booting is still super fast. (Once I set the startup disk to the SSD and it stopped searching for the old HDD before defaulting.)
The SSD came with a nice plastic portable case to put my old HDD in. I'll be using it for a while as a third portable clone just in case, but hopefully I won't need it.
I decided to not clone my cache folders (The ones in Library) or the /private/var/folders/ folder because that's more caches too. (OS X runs fine without them. It just recreates them.) I know OS X just makes them again, but it did save some time backing up by not including them. And unlike my HDD, removing them didn't slow down my system. If only OS X could just not make them on SSD's. It seems unnecessary now. But whatever.
I am blown away. I took a lot of video, I am going to look over it now and do some timing tests and maybe throw something on YouTube in the next few days to show off. But I just want to say, once I have gone SSD, I don't see myself going back to HDD for my OS install. Now just bring on the 1.5TB laptop HDD's so I can get this puppy to the ultimate level.
HOLY SHIT. I hope this honeymoon never ends.
Jasoco said:
I haven't gotten one yet (still waiting on the refund from returning the Envy). I think I'm gonna go with the maxed out Air and my portable has ~153 GB on it, so I could theoretically copy it all over to the Mac, reformat the HD and copy it back...
edit: Actually, maybe not. I have a Seagate FreeAgent Go which apparently is only Windows Compatible according to Seagate's website.
Yeah. That would keep you from HAVING to get a second drive. I on the other hand like having two HD's for duplicate backups just because it has actually come in handy on one occasion. (Both one of my backups and my internal HD died the same day within hours. If I had only had one backup, I'd have been screwed.)Bowser said:
Tony Rocky Horror
Member
So I've just bought an external monitor and I'm wondering if there are any applications I should look into to optimize my dual-screen experience.
I was originally considering the maxed out 13" MBA, but now I'm really intrigued by going with a base MBP and ordering an SSD and swapping out the optical drive myself. I'd end up with better battery life, a backlit keyboard, a slightly faster processor, built-in ethernet, and comparable storage for just about $1450 ($1100 for the MBP after student discount, ~$250 for a 120 GB SSD, and tax) while only sacrificing ultra portability (the 13" MBP is pretty damn portable in its own right) and better screen resolution as opposed to getting a 13" MBA for ~$1850 (with tax after student discount)...decisions, decisions.
I wouldn't even have to worry about cloning my user folder since I'd get it all at the same time, wipe the MBP HDD and install OSX on the SSD before copying over my music and what not. Only thing I'm worried about is actually installing the SSD itself, the only experience I have is installing a 1GB stick of RAM into my 4.5 year old IBM ThinkPad :lol But man, I am really thinking of going the MBP with SSD route now.
I wouldn't even have to worry about cloning my user folder since I'd get it all at the same time, wipe the MBP HDD and install OSX on the SSD before copying over my music and what not. Only thing I'm worried about is actually installing the SSD itself, the only experience I have is installing a 1GB stick of RAM into my 4.5 year old IBM ThinkPad :lol But man, I am really thinking of going the MBP with SSD route now.
Dreams-Visions
Member
there are several apps you can install that will give you read/write access to NTFS.Bowser said:
Dreams-Visions
Member
I've been using that app for 6 months. flawless.AlexMogil said:
Easier than cake. And I am betting much easier than your ThinkPad.Bowser said:
10 screws off the bottom plate and you're in. Two screws lets the HD loose and that's it. Then you'd just take the little notch screws out of the current HD and place them in the new one (They keep it in place. But they're torq. I just use pliers and squeeze and twist.) and pop it in the way it was before. RAM is even easier not even requiring more than the first 10 screws. I got a screwdriver off Crucial when I bought my RAM that works perfectly on the MBP's screws. If I didn't have it, I'd have had problems with the screwdrivers I have. It was cheap and I just threw it in the cart with my RAM.
8GB RAM and a 128GB SSD. It's bliss....
Dreams-Visions
Member
can't say I've heard much bad about the Momentus XT. but I've not followed them too well.AlexMogil said:
This will make me look like the biggest computer noob, but please, don't poke fun
How can I tell if one graphics card is better than another in my Macs? Like...I know my MacBooks is better than my iMacs since it's a year and a half newer, but going by the name of them I'd have no clue.
How can I tell if one graphics card is better than another in my Macs? Like...I know my MacBooks is better than my iMacs since it's a year and a half newer, but going by the name of them I'd have no clue.
wolfmat
Confirmed Asshole
So if you start out with names, there's benchmark scores on the net which give you a scoring for your card in relation to some standard scoring system, there's consumer-oriented ranking on the web for specific cards, there's reviews and stuff, you can get a lot of info out of the production date etc. So research.
If you're technically inclined, there's also the hard specs of the cards, meaning clocking, chipsets, wattage and whatnot. That's maybe a bit much though.
If you've already got the card in your machine, the best way to assess its power is to use it and observe performance, preferably in some manner that operates with numerical data.
What I always do to get a baseline assumption of a card's power is I do a frames-per-second test for some OpenGL scene (I have custom code, so I have a bit of an advantage there since I can directly associate a card's behavior to my shit (more specifically, debug and do some data gathering)).
Anyway, if you've got a game that can show a frames-per-second counter, that's a good starting point. Just remember to turn VSYNC off.
The more interesting stuff is how exactly the fps behave when you do some particular thing, like use this-and-that GLSL shader to alter vertices, or fragments on a 3D surface. For that kind of thing, the HL2 built-in benchmark isn't too bad. It does some specific effects that are good enough for general assumptions about performance.
Maybe there's some Mac-specific graphics card benchmarks out there, I don't know. But that would also be helpful, I think. Depends on the benchmark though.
If you're technically inclined, there's also the hard specs of the cards, meaning clocking, chipsets, wattage and whatnot. That's maybe a bit much though.
If you've already got the card in your machine, the best way to assess its power is to use it and observe performance, preferably in some manner that operates with numerical data.
What I always do to get a baseline assumption of a card's power is I do a frames-per-second test for some OpenGL scene (I have custom code, so I have a bit of an advantage there since I can directly associate a card's behavior to my shit (more specifically, debug and do some data gathering)).
Anyway, if you've got a game that can show a frames-per-second counter, that's a good starting point. Just remember to turn VSYNC off.
The more interesting stuff is how exactly the fps behave when you do some particular thing, like use this-and-that GLSL shader to alter vertices, or fragments on a 3D surface. For that kind of thing, the HL2 built-in benchmark isn't too bad. It does some specific effects that are good enough for general assumptions about performance.
Maybe there's some Mac-specific graphics card benchmarks out there, I don't know. But that would also be helpful, I think. Depends on the benchmark though.