|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Can a single machine use multiple Time Machine destinations? There's kind of a cheat to do it by using an AppleScript that switches in different destinations based on a 2007 prefpane called "Do Something When." Says it works in 10.6, but no idea if it works in Lyon.
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 03:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 17:10 |
|
|
~Coxy posted:Is it possible to turn off the "feature" where inactive apps are shut down but still look open? This might solve it; apps can dynamically declare support for automatic termination, and this overrides the Info.plist value. If the app in question does that, you're out of luck. Oh, and this will probably break some apps, especially if they're code-signed. Hence working on the copy. withak posted:What? Sonic Dude fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Apr 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 04:05
|
|
|
Thanks for that. Just editing TextEdit and Preview ought to be enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 04:17
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:Thanks for that. Just editing TextEdit and Preview ought to be enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 04:24
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Can a single machine use multiple Time Machine destinations? For example, I have my girlfriend trained to plug in her external hard drive every once in a while and Time Machine does its thing. However, I'd also like to get her laptop using my Time Capsule whenever she brings her computer over so we have an extra layer of protection. I imagine it "just works" if I add my Time Capsule as a Time Machine destination, but I want to make sure it'll continue to use her external as well since that ends up with more frequent snapshots. Time Machine will behave. In Lion, you will need to switch the backup disk setting manually. In Mountain Lion, you will be able to set up a list of destinations and Time Machine will deal with the situation automatically: http://www.macworld.com/article/1165496/ten_exciting_system_changes_in_mountain_lion.html Mikey-San fucked around with this message at 11:30 on Apr 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 11:26
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:There's kind of a cheat to do it by using an AppleScript that switches in different destinations based on a 2007 prefpane called "Do Something When." Don't change the Time Machine plist file out from underneath Time Machine. Script tmutil instead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 11:29
|
|
|
Mikey-San posted:Time Machine will behave. In Lion, you will need to switch the backup disk setting manually. In Mountain Lion, you will be able to set up a list of destinations and Time Machine will deal with the situation automatically: On a sort of similar note, is it possible to use a USB share on a NAS as a Time Machine destination? (It shows up fine in Finder, I just can't figure out how to point TM towards it.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 13:30
|
|
|
NM
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 16:07
|
|
|
Mikey-San posted:Time Machine will behave. In Lion, you will need to switch the backup disk setting manually. In Mountain Lion, you will be able to set up a list of destinations and Time Machine will deal with the situation automatically:
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2012 06:25
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Thanks for the info. I'll wait for Mountain Lion to sort it out automatically.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2012 15:04
|
|
|
So, I have a question about Safari. Is there a particular reason it would start to do this on certain (read: most, but the occasional site is fine) webpages?  Everything still scrolls just fine, and it's clickable wherever it is, but, uh... this is weird, I thought Windows was the only OS with an abstract art bug. e: Oh, of course restarting Safari fixes it, I was hoping it was a more exotic thing. Oh well. Challenge mode web browsing is over. 
Celery Jello fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Apr 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 01:08
|
|
|
Well if it repeatedly happens, my first guess would be to go into Font Book in /Applications, select all fonts in the list (command A) and do File menu->Validate Fonts. There might be some funky conflict or corruption.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 01:17
|
|
|
Jolan posted:On a sort of similar note, is it possible to use a USB share on a NAS as a Time Machine destination? (It shows up fine in Finder, I just can't figure out how to point TM towards it.) If it's a NAS that supports AFP and Time Machine, it would be explicitly stated, and Time Machine prefpane would pick it up. I was under the impression that I'd be able to do this with an AEBS through Airport Disk. However, it stops working for one reason or another after a while, and it's impossible to get back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 02:36
|
|
|
To think that Apple almost had ZFS support and then didn't makes me madder than it should.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 11:00
|
|
|
AmbassadorTaxicab posted:If it's a NAS that supports AFP and Time Machine, it would be explicitly stated, and Time Machine prefpane would pick it up. TM and AFP are supported, and I've tried with both HFS+ and FAT32 partitions. Can't figure this out for the life of me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 11:23
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:To think that Apple almost had ZFS support and then didn't makes me madder than it should. Did they ever give a reason for it? "Just store your poo poo in the cloud, plebes"
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 13:33
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Did they ever give a reason for it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 15:30
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Did they ever give a reason for it? Oracle bought Sun and the patents covering ZFS are murky at best. I don't think Apple is finished with the idea of a pooled storage filesystem (CoreStorage in Lion).
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 15:33
|
|
|
If anyone was putting off trying the trial version of iWork '09, it's been removed from Apple's site*. Whether this is an indication of imminent updates is anyone's guess. I hope so, as I've been putting off buying Pages and Numbers basically since I bought my 2011 13" MBA on day one. * I should say, it's been removed from Apple's North American sites. You can still find it here, for example, at least for now. I have the .dmg downloading right now so I can confirm it's working currently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 16:44
|
|
|
John Siracusa spent two episodes of Hypercritical talking about ZFS and Apple (and filesystems and HFS+), I found it very interesting: http://5by5.tv/hypercritical/56 http://5by5.tv/hypercritical/57
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 17:56
|
|
|
Am i just blind or is there no App from Apple for reading the iBooks/ePubs on my Mac?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 19:10
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:To think that Apple almost had ZFS support and then didn't makes me madder than it should. Was this around the time that they discontinued the Xserve and the XsRAID all that? I am irrationally upset at the dropping of ZFS as well Okay here you go, the one you've all been waiting for, swapping our 20+ year old filesystem with bolted on additions for the most amazing new filesyyysssssssaaaaaaaaAAAAAAAAA JUST KIDDING 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 19:14
|
|
|
johnnyXcrane posted:Am i just blind or is there no App from Apple for reading the iBooks/ePubs on my Mac? Nope, there is not. I was actually looking for the same thing this morning. It is a shame too because iBooks is (IMO) so much better than the kindle app. And hunting around for code reference in some programming ebooks I have on my iPad is a pain when I could do it faster/easier on a PC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 19:33
|
|
|
Does anyone know of an app that will monitor firewire bus bandwidth? I currently use an audio interface on my iMac's FW400 port and two 10,000 RPM firewire HD's on my 800 port, but I'd like to upgrade to a new iMac that only has one FW800 port. I'd like to see how much each of these guys is using and whether one 800 port will provide the necessary bandwidth for all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 20:17
|
|
|
Transistor Rhythm posted:Does anyone know of an app that will monitor firewire bus bandwidth? I currently use an audio interface on my iMac's FW400 port and two 10,000 RPM firewire HD's on my 800 port, but I'd like to upgrade to a new iMac that only has one FW800 port. I'd like to see how much each of these guys is using and whether one 800 port will provide the necessary bandwidth for all. I believe the old white iMacs that had both FW400 and FW800 ports actually shared a single Firewire controller... so I'd imagine there wouldn't be much of a difference really.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 20:32
|
|
|
What is an app like Preview (on Windows) for OS X? The actual app Preview is not cutting it. I have to go through screenshots and all kinds of other images, and I want to be able to use the keyboard to go to the next one. Preview apparently doesn't do this. The album cover swap thing built in to finder also won't cut it. I want something that can be pretty close to full screen and really light weight (so it doesn't take 3 minutes to load because it has to render previews of every image on the computer). Any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 22:24
|
|
|
dunkman posted:What is an app like Preview (on Windows) for OS X? The actual app Preview is not cutting it. This might sound stupid, but have you tried just selecting an item in the Finder, and pressing spacebar? It'll pop up an instant preview window and it still lets you navigate the folder view the arrow keys.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
Xee's pretty great. Has lots of neat poo poo you can do with the keyboard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 22:28
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Did they ever give a reason for it? I totally need ZFS as a regular Mac user. It's not like the cloud is giving me any tangible benefits (who cares about being able to access my poo poo across several Macs, iPads and iPhones) when with ZFS my files wouldn't just somehow get stored, but instead get stored better. What exact advantage would ZFS have for an average user? Would it even outweigh cloud storage? I'm interested.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 22:45
|
|
|
A lot. If you want to really dig in, these two episodes of John Siracusa's podcast get into it: http://5by5.tv/hypercritical/56 http://5by5.tv/hypercritical/57 (He's the guy who writes the incredibly gigantic Mac OS X reviews for Ars Technica, for reference)
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 22:51
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:A lot. If you want to really dig in, these two episodes of John Siracusa's podcast get into it: I'll dig in once I've heard about the tangible benefits. Besides, I would like to get an answer around here without having to take a three hour seminar or similar. I can do active research myself if I want to. So far ZFS has been like IPv6 over the years - always the next thing that's going to come out real soon now (I remember first reading that about IPv6 in 1994 and about ZFS since at least 2005). e: I'm trying to look at this from the perspective of an Apple MacBook user, not some guy running a high end datacenter or similar, because that's Apple's main focus. What tangible benefit does Joe Shmoe Macuser get from having ZFS over the Mac OS Extended filesystem? Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Apr 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 23:04
|
|
|
flavor posted:I'll dig in once I've heard about the tangible benefits. Besides, I would like to get an answer around here without having to take a three hour seminar or similar. I can do active research myself if I want to. Here's one. HFS+ is prone to silent corruption over time. This is true of most filesystems but it's particularly bad with HFS+. ZFS has end-to-end error checking all the time so that sort of thing is impossible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 23:24
|
|
|
There are very few end-user "WOW" features that don't boil down to "better data integrity". Where ZFS would shine would be in an OSX Server environment. At that point you can basically point to any ZFS whitepaper to get a rundown of what makes it so great. In the end it wouldn't have killed them to migrate to ZFS. The average MacBook user probably doesn't know what his filesystem is and doesn't care as long as he can double-click "Macintosh HD" and see files. some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Apr 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 23:35
|
|
|
gregday posted:Here's one. HFS+ is prone to silent corruption over time. This is true of most filesystems but it's particularly bad with HFS+. ZFS has end-to-end error checking all the time so that sort of thing is impossible. Sounds good though I have to say that at least for me hardware corruption of the hard disk has always set in before file system corruption. Martytoof posted:There are very few end-user "WOW" features that boil down to "better data integrity". Where ZFS would shine would be in an OSX Server environment. Right, so that'll help the 0.5% users (don't know what the real number is) of OS X who run the server version (which I'm doing on an iMac by the way and I think the admin interface is utter trash, but that's just me). My problem wasn't so much with ZFS per se but with the condescending attitude that it's somehow more important than having cloud storage. I feel reminded of the early "the iPad needs a USB port" discussions from 2010. It's a feature that sounds good from a nerdy feature-oriented standpoint but has no tangible value for most users. I agree of course that ZFS would be nice to have. Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Apr 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 23:54
|
|
|
ZFS couldn't take anything away from a design standpoint like a USB port on iPad would.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 00:09
|
|
|
It is a lot more than just nice to have, and it's certainly not a USB port. Even if there is no user-visible file structure, OS X and iOS will still need a more modern, reliable file system. There is a section from Siracusa's Lion review that is literally titled What's Wrong With HFS+. The list of problems and shortcomings it faces is quite lengthy, and replacing HFS+ with something newer and better would do nothing but good for every single user of an Apple device. You should read up on it instead of assuming it's just a bunch of silly nerd complaints that don't matter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:A lot. If you want to really dig in, these two episodes of John Siracusa's podcast get into it: I love Hypercritical. The whole format is "hey John here's a mic why don't you spend 90 minutes talking about why Tivo sucks in incredible detail." And he delivers 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
flavor posted:Sounds good though I have to say that at least for me hardware corruption of the hard disk has always set in before file system corruption. Actually, the guy who was working on it at Apple left and started his own company based off the community ZFS on OS X project. I can understand the complication and relative hesitation for shipping and subsequently having to support ZFS, but HFS+ is getting way too old to handle some of the stuff Apple wants to do with it. I'd really like to see ZFS everywhere in OS X land, but it's unlikely to happen any time soon, as it has few user-facing features to put on a product page.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 00:27
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:You should read up on it instead of assuming it's just a bunch of silly nerd complaints that don't matter. Number of times me and other Mac users that I know have lost files/data in mysterious ways that wouldn't have happened on ZFS: 0. Number of times me and other Mac users that I know have benefited from cloud storage: too high to count. So maybe I can be forgiven not to value ZFS higher than cloud storage (it's a false and silly dichotomy anyway, because one doesn't preclude the other). I get what ZFS is. I'm fully behind it. No need to portray me as an idiot. All I'm saying is that between it and cloud storage (again, no need to choose because both can coexist), cloud storage has more tangible benefits and therefore, if there is a need to focus on one of the two, cloud storage is it. Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Apr 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 17:10 |
|
|
It's completely apples and oranges. There are all sorts of storage scenarios where cloud storage makes no sense at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 04:06
|
|