|
IUG posted:To use this point: It'll take forever to fill a 128GB SD card with your media but there's no reason to not do it that way. edit: have you thought about a tiny USB 3.0 drive? I have a 64GB one that I use to play music in my car, it's not THAT slow to copy things (I think I can fill it in 25 minutes). One of those little Sandisk Cruze drives that look like the receiver for a wireless mouse. Bob Morales fucked around with this message at 21:46 on May 20, 2016 |
#
?
May 20, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
Bob Morales posted:It'll take forever to fill a 128GB SD card with your media but there's no reason to not do it that way. If you're going to go this route, I'd recommend a Samsung drive like this over a SanDisk one. The SanDisks have a tendency to get quite hot over extended periods of use.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
What? An SD card would work fine in this case. Perfect, even. Get a decent brand and leave it in. They make some now that don't even stick out on a MacBook. These cards are slow, yes, but not so slow that you're going to cause music skips or something, and past the initial download to the card, it won't take that long to add/remove media.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Just get Apple Music 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Just get Apple Music Sorry he said MacBook, not iPhone. AM blows rear end outside of iOS and I'm perilously close to switching back to Spotify. That sweet, sweet Siri integration, tho.....
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Apple Music sucks across all platforms, sorry. If you want to listen to your Apple Music(tm) on your Beats(tm) headphones, be my guest, but that poo poo loving sucks. I'll stick with my NAD HP50s and Spotify. And my personal music library. That I did NOT upload to Apple's servers. For loving out loud, their music service is as terrible as their loving MobileMe and Maps v1 was. I'll say it here and I'll say it loud. You're an idiot if you pay for Apple Music. It's half-baked and a pile of crap and the interface is all wrong. Whatever. You do you.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Pivo posted:Apple Music sucks across all platforms, sorry. If you want to listen to your Apple Music(tm) on your Beats(tm) headphones, be my guest, but that poo poo loving sucks. I'd still be using Spotify if alphabetical sorting worked properly and it would stop forgetting all of the artists I was following. Their customer support has been impossibly unhelpful every time I've ever dealt with it, and the app gets worse every time it's updated. Apple Music could use a lot of attention but basic poo poo like searching for, playing, and organizing music actually loving works so it gets my  .
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Pivo posted:Apple Music sucks across all platforms, sorry. If you want to listen to your Apple Music(tm) on your Beats(tm) headphones, be my guest, but that poo poo loving sucks. Lol ok
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm an incredible iTunes sperg (if me being the OP of that thread doesn't give it away), so I haven't even looked at streaming services, and I'm sure Apple Music would drive me crazy. I was just looking at a cheap way to expand my storage, that wouldn't cause lag between tracks being played.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
You can pry my mp3's from my cold dead SSD. There are places I use my laptop that have lovely or non-existant internet. Half the time I just listen to my music stored on my phone. I paid good money for the 64GB model 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:You can pry my mp3's from my cold dead SSD. There are places I use my laptop that have lovely or non-existant internet. Half the time I just listen to my music stored on my phone. I paid good money for the 64GB model That's what's great about these services since they let you download tracks for offline listening.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:What about 'diskutil list'? Do you know what kind of partition table it has?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
mediaphage posted:That's what's great about these services since they let you pay extra to download tracks for offline listening.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Apple Music doesn't make you pay extra to download tracks offline....?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
japtor posted:G5s might've been hot as poo poo too, or was that just the later ones w/liquid cooling? Oh God, I'm getting PTSD flashbacks from those 'liquid cooled' G5s. Every single one that I ever serviced would leak that lovely green fluid within 3-4 years after they were bought. It got so bad at one point that we found Apple was replacing those sight unseen in extended warranty with first-gen Mac Pros. Also their fans were as loud as jet engines, just working on simple PhotoShop files with only 4-5 layers would set those things off. It was pretty evident even then that we weren't getting 3+ GHz G5s or PowerBook G5s, especially when it was common knowledge that IBM told Jobs directly to give them some more money for the new G5's that would do what he wanted, he told IBM to go suck a dick and moved everything over to Intel.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
IUG posted:Yeah, I'm an incredible iTunes sperg (if me being the OP of that thread doesn't give it away), so I haven't even looked at streaming services, and I'm sure Apple Music would drive me crazy. I was just looking at a cheap way to expand my storage, that wouldn't cause lag between tracks being played. I keep my iTunes library in a usb 2 spinny disk, and it's fine. I suppose an sd card wouldn't be much slower than that.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
IUG posted:My iTunes library will be outgrowing my SSD in my MBPr soon. Since I can't upgrade the hard drive, I've been thinking about offloading the library somewhere. Would a 128/256GB SD card be a good choice for this task? I just want to make sure stuff syncs and streams without a problem off of the card. However, it would also be nice if Time Machine could back this up too, so I don't lose anything. Has anyone tried this, or have a better solution? Back it up once, sign up for Apple Music, let it match & upload everything, nuke it and enjoy the space. Quantum of Phallus posted:Just get Apple Music Yeah. mediaphage posted:Sorry he said MacBook, not iPhone. iTunes with Apple Music is just as bad/good as iTunes without Apple Music, except that any music you want you just click "+" and you have it. I hope they overhaul iTunes and have the UI make some more sense like everyone else, but being able to have all my downloaded stuff from Bandcamp, personal demos, live stuff, etc alongside whatever the gently caress I feel like streaming, from anywhere is kind of magical. Pivo posted:Apple Music sucks across all platforms, sorry. If you want to listen to your Apple Music(tm) on your Beats(tm) headphones, be my guest, but that poo poo loving sucks. Nah.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
Yeah uploading all your music to apple music is a great idea, I really like how it matched a bunch of live recordings i'd downloaded to studio versions, or replaced tracks on obscure/indie music with stuff by completely different artists Look I use apple music every day but do not delete your local library unless you listen exclusively to stuff that's on apple music
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
I love Apple Music but il admit I was super pissed off when it somehow decided that the 1hr version of Dopesmoker I have on my Mac was actually a 3 minute edit from some film. I was able to fix this by changing some of the Metadata in the "sort by" options in iTunes (handy hint for people who's stuff is being replaced) and reuploading the track. Google Play music seems to have a better matching algorithm BUT I've had cases with that too where it replaced songs with clean versions which was super annoying. I remember one guy in the iOS thread maybe said that for his music he set up his own server and used Plex premium I think but for me anyway that sounds very energy inefficient and overkill but to each their own! There's no correct way for doing this ! I love having all the music on my Mac accessible everywhere with Apple Music , something I wouldn't be able to do even with the largest capacity iPhones and definitely not with any of the MacBook airs and you can still download music for offline play BUT like I said, nothing's perfect.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 09:57
|
|
|
babydonthurtme posted:I really think this is just people being used to big, drastic jumps in power coming from computer upgrades. I know it personally hasn't really sunk in for me yet that the difference between a 2-yr old CPU and a current one is negligible enough to make the question of upgrading from, say, a 2-yr old MBP to one of the new gen models coming this year a wash. People will likely want them more for the new form factors than for whatever spec bump they get, and that still feels seriously weird to me. Since Apple went closed box, I switched to linux. My macs are four years old, so they will probably be put out to pasture by apple in a few years. It will be interesting to see when "PC" manufacturers tap into the linux market. I would imagine it would drive up quality given the target audience/sys requirements (since linux needs fa compute power, you could sell a 'nicer' computer (for more money) knowing they wont need one for 3-4 years).
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 13:17
|
|
|
The Biscuit posted:Since Apple went closed box, I switched to linux. My macs are four years old, so they will probably be put out to pasture by apple in a few years. Keep dreaming. The year of "Linux on the desktop" was proclaimed by everyone, every year, for over a decade. We've got UNIX on the desktop. It's Mac OS X. But no one buys desktops anymore anyway except enthusiasts and professionals. I know plenty of people who have completely ditched their general-purpose computers for iPads and the like. They still have one, they just never use it.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 13:21
|
|
|
The Biscuit posted:Since Apple went closed box, I switched to linux. My macs are four years old, so they will probably be put out to pasture by apple in a few years. I have no idea what "since Apple went closed box" even means in the context of the operating system. Linux-on-the-desktop users vastly overestimate how much of the desktop market they represent. Hell, Dell *tried* to offer Linux as an alt OS for desktop and select laptops at one point. The demand was so minuscule, they couldn't justify the costs of including a royalty-free OS. That's how insignificant the market is to the commodity PC makers. OS X is certified UNIX. Just about every Linux/BSD tool you'd want is available on the Mac. Every UNIX-head I know (myself included), uses a Mac. I do some lightweight devops with Python for network automation. Every program I write runs with zero modification on our RHEL servers. UNIX on the desktop has been here for over a decade. It's called OS X.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
You don't do much serious development if you're developing on OSX and then deploying the same thing to Linux and everything just works. When you do start having problems (and you will) try out virtualization instead. Local OSX development is still too much of a clusterfuck to be good for anything more complicated than a website for your local mexican restaurant.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
Back when I didn't work at a Microsoft shop, I'd just mount a VM over sshfs and develop locally, then run builds/tests/etc on the VM, over SSH. But if I wanted, I could have gotten our environment running on OS X. It was just highly distributed so it would involve installing a shitload of servers and databases so it wasn't worth the hassle. Our product at the time I believe was over 900 VMs in production. On Windows you have to use cygwin and it's all janky as gently caress. But web-dev, like any of the big PHP or Python frameworks, or Java EE, works just fine on OS X. I worked for a company where we deployed JBoss AS to Windows Server (I know right? CEO's son used to work for MSFT...) and I could run our environment 100% on OS X with no issue. With Python, PHP, Ruby, whatever it is you cool kids are using these days, the environment literally does not matter. Even with C/C++ code, you can pretty easily make it portable if it's POSIX-compliant and doesn't use OS-specific libs (and the libs you do use are available on your target OSes). I've compiled projects on OS X and Windows that later ran on AIX... The thing is, OS X is very flexible for the developer, and that's why we love it.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:You don't do much serious development if you're developing on OSX and then deploying the same thing to Linux and everything just works. When you do start having problems (and you will) try out virtualization instead. Local OSX development is still too much of a clusterfuck to be good for anything more complicated than a website for your local mexican restaurant. That's why I said "lightweight". So far using Anaconda and packaging everything up nice and neat for deployment hasn't caused any issues. And I'm not making websites? (not sure where that came from) I do network automation for poo poo I'd rather not waste my time on doing manually. What is it about python on OS X that feels "clusterfuck" to you? Anaconda + PyCharm seems to do the trick. Windows is more a clusterfuck to me. I've run across Python libraries that won't work in Windows, but so far everything I've used in Linux works fine on OS X Python-wise. Regardless, that's not the point. The point was, Linux for desktop is dead and was never really alive to begin with. Nerds that think "any day now" are deluding themselves that anyone outside of their small circle (relatively speaking) cares.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
flosofl posted:I have no idea what "since Apple went closed box" even means in the context of the operating system. I was not willing to pay the extraordinary BTO config that apple charges. Since you can't install OS X easily on non-apple hardware, that would prevent me using it. To be honest, I haven't checked apple prices in a few years. I see they ship with 16gb of ram now, but cost 4k! I was skimming this thread to see what new stuff people were talking about I got my 15" 2012 macbook for $1800, and put extra ram in for 200. I was willing to pay that because a) resale value if I changed my mind, and b) battery-life. I'm not paying $4k though. Anyway, I was commenting more on computer build quality not OS X. I didn't say it, but I was thinking more of linux snaring windows-users not mac users. Mac is slicker and looks more sexy, if you are willing to hand over the cash, you probably wont switch to linux. btw, why wouldn't python work on mac and linux? It is really a non-issue. Especially when you are using anaconda. Pivo posted:no one buys desktops anymore anyway except enthusiasts and professionals. I know plenty of people who have completely ditched their general-purpose computers for iPads and the like. They still have one, they just never use it. Wow, I couldn't imagine life without a desktop, but you are right people are superseding their desktops (or at least the first article I clicked-on said so)! Btw, idgaf what OS other people use. My other post wasn't declaring war, it was suggesting a market that might raise build quality of non-apple computers (something like a non-wanker alienware variant). edit: $AUD The Biscuit fucked around with this message at 02:11 on May 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
I dunno about $4k. Are you looking at Mac Pros? I bought the top of the line non-BTO rMBP 15" and it was $2800 CAD approximately after tax. And it's waaaaaaaaay more than capable for anything I need to do. If I was a VFX artist or whatever, I'd have my media on NAS and a render farm of servers, presumably work would be paying for the whole setup. But the rMBP would be fine enough for the actual work. For a developer, psh, it's a desktop replacement in a light & thin package with a great battery life. Totally worth $2800. Mine's actually worth $3800 to me, since I spilled water on my first one and had to pay a $1000 deductible to my insurance.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
Yeah, that was a reactionary post on my part. I assumed you were a drive-by holy-warrior dropping an "Your OS sucks" bomb. I don't really give a gently caress either, but I work with a Linux zealot and that really tints my perception of normally innocent comments. Sorry. Sadly, even if the large computer companies did start bundling Linux as an option, I don't see it affecting the quality. I mentioned Dell before, and it was same poo poo computer at the same poo poo price. Dell claimed that because of their licensing agreement with MS, they still charged MS tax on every computer whether windows was installed or not. I mostly believe that, but I also believe that they'll squeeze as much margin out their stuff as they can, so I wouldn't expect a) quality to go up very much and b)the price really being impacted. There are boutique vendors that make Linux desktops/laptops, and there are some that make quality machines with high quality components. But as you start increasing the quality, you start approaching Apple prices. And at that point, most people who are looking for a "Not Windows but quality" experience are usually going to just go with Mac. And I do feel your irritation with "openess" of the machine itself. One the one hand, I really hate that I'm locked into whatever memory I buy it with, and there's really no good option for upgrading the internal storage these days. But on the other hand, the weight, durability, and the best-in-class power management is more important to me. At this point in time, those are worth the trade-off.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Meanwhile, in actual loving MAC HARDWARE NEWS, INCIDENTALLY WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT, OWC has added Boot Camp compatibility to all their Aura SSDs with a special enabler: http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/05/19/owcs-expands-boot-camp-compatibility-to-all-ssds-eases-storage-upgrade-path-for-mac A big boon for folks who don't mind paying the OWC tax for SSDs that aren't quite as good as Apples but are willing to settle as they're cheaper than throwing money at unknown sources for Apple OEMs. Also everyone get back to fantasizing about what will show up in 3 weeks at WWDC. I'm 99 and 44/100ths of a percent sure there ain't going to be no new Mac Pro according to what I heard from people coming back from NAB.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
The Biscuit posted:I was not willing to pay the extraordinary BTO config that apple charges. Since you can't install OS X easily on non-apple hardware, that would prevent me using it. What MBP did you see that costs $4k? Is it one with, like, 2TB of Flash storage or something ridiculous like that? Or are you looking at the Mac Pro, as though it wasn't always at that price point? Also- don't pay for Apple's extra RAM on desktops. The chips are soldered on for the notebooks and low-spec desktops but nothing's stopping you from buying a 27" iMac or Mac Pro with the base layout and cramming it with your own.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
You can spec the Mac Pros out to about $10K
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Tech Support Question: I have an old mid-2010 Mac Mini that I upgraded from Snow Leopard to El Capitan. Once I booted into the new OS, my ethernet no longer worked. Literally nothing else was moved or changed. I've tried deleting the network preferences, rebooting in safe mode, doing the NVRAM reset dance, etc. Nothing seems to help. Any ideas? (PS: This is unrelated to the February incident in which Apple broke everyone's ethernet, though that news story has completely hosed up all my Google attempts at solving this problem.)
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Electric Bugaloo posted:What MBP did you see that costs $4k? Is it one with, like, 2TB of Flash storage or something ridiculous like that? As a reference - the most expensive MBP will cost ~$3300 , and that's with a 1TB SSD and the (overpriced) higher processor. The most expensive iMac will exceed $4000, but that includes 32GB of RAM, a higher processor, a 1TB SSD, a better video card, and a Magic Mouse + Magic Trackpad.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Siguy posted:Tech Support Question: Do you actually see the interface or is it gone as well? Can you see it in System Report? Running 'ifconfig' with no options in Terminal should list all interfaces. I'd say at this point, back up your data and do a clean install.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
flosofl posted:Wireless or Wired? Wired ethernet. It's still there in Network Preferences but says "Cable unplugged." The interface shows up properly in System Report and ifconfig. I'm going to take your advice and do a wipe and clean install, but I'm feeling pessimistic. This feels to me like Apple bungled the driver for my old Broadcom chip somewhere in the last six years. 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Siguy posted:Wired ethernet. I'd try a clean install. I had issues when I set up networking profiles w the thunderbolt adapter and had to wipe out the adapter and re-add a couple times before it started registering a cable. I actually stopped using the thunderbolt adapter and use the one I link below now. http://www.amazon.com/Anker-Unibody-Aluminum-Ethernet-Supporting/dp/B00PC0H9IE/ I have one of these in my bag, and it's come in handy from time to time. It works out of the box and it says it's backward compatible with USB 2. You won't get gigE with USB2, but it should work. Proteus Jones fucked around with this message at 19:47 on May 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Unbelievable. I did a clean install, it still wasn't working, and then I realized that the ethernet port on my wall had somehow gone dead and that was the problem the whole time. I switched offices and the ethernet works fine. So bizarre that I could have used that ethernet port for a full day with no problems, including to download El Capitan, then I install an OS update and it decides to die during the install process. God drat gremlins.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
Siguy posted:So bizarre that I could have used that ethernet port for a full day with no problems, including to download El Capitan, then I install an OS update and it decides to die during the install process. God drat gremlins. ....or mice.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
flosofl posted:UNIX on the desktop has been here for over a decade. It's called OS X. Pivo posted:On Windows you have to use cygwin and it's all janky as gently caress. Microsoft added or is adding Unix stuff to Windows 10. Probably won't work perfectly, though. I don't know any more details beyond the headline.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
Triglav posted:Microsoft added or is adding Unix stuff to Windows 10. Probably won't work perfectly, though. I don't know any more details beyond the headline. Windows actually used to have a component that was certified to use the UNIX name.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX So there was a point in time that Windows was certified UNIX but Linux was not.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 04:37
|
|