New MAC OS

[Lindsey]

"Better" is in the eyes of the beholder. If I really want better, I'll buy a Mac with Leopard.
Leopard?

--Lindsey

[Judy G. Russell]

Leopard?

The new version of the Mac operating system, with neat goodies built in like Time Machine. You can read about its features here (http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/).

[Lindsey]

The new version of the Mac operating system, with neat goodies built in like Time Machine. You can read about its features here (http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/).
Aha! Thanks, I will check it out. I do believe that at this point, I would prefer it to Vista. Or at least, if I have to go through a significant change, why not make the full leap to Mac rather than stopping with Vista?

The most important question: Will it run TMG?

--Lindsey

[Judy G. Russell]

The most important question: Will it run TMG?

Not exactly, or not as a native application, I should say. The new MACs will run both a MAC OS and a Windows OS under a dual boot system.

[Lindsey]

The new MACs will run both a MAC OS and a Windows OS under a dual boot system.
OK; not an ideal situation, but as long as it works reliably, I could live with that.

--Lindsey

[sidney]

OK; not an ideal situation, but as long as it works reliably, I could live with that

It's better than that. With either Parallels Desktop for the Mac (http://parallels.com) or VMWare Fusion (http://vmware.com), both $80 products (Windows OS required and not included, though), you can run Windows programs at native speeds on the Intel Macs on the same desktop as Mac OS. I'm only really familiar with Parallels because they got to market before VMWare's Mac offering was solid and that's what I ended up with, but I hear that they now stay pretty neck and neck. With Parallels at least you have the choice of running Windows in its own window that contains the entire Windows desktop, or having each Windows app run it is own window on the Mac desktop. Either way you get drag and drop between Mac and Windows and access to your Mac disk as network mounted disks in Windows.

You could even run Windows 2000 or XP on the virtual machine without worrying about having a new machine with hardware that isn't supported by W2K or XP drivers, and keep it isolated enough from the outside that viruses and unfixed security holes aren't really a problem after Microsoft stops updating it.

[Judy G. Russell]

You could even run Windows 2000 or XP on the virtual machine without worrying about having a new machine with hardware that isn't supported by W2K or XP drivers, and keep it isolated enough from the outside that viruses and unfixed security holes aren't really a problem after Microsoft stops updating it.I am awfully tempted to make my next computer a Mac... and this just makes it even more tempting.

[fhaber]

I can recommend Parallels also; I've touted it to several happy clients. The speed hit is remarkably small.

This "virtual" execution of several client operating systems on one piece of host hardware has been more or less standard among developers for several years now. It's very beguiling: you don't have to own and run several machines; if you crash a virtual installation badly, you just reimage-restore and you're back in business. Ditto with malware. And you can vet your wares on everything from Win95 to Vista, more or less simultaneously. (Sorry Sidney - I know you wouldn't pollute your machine with such-like.)

Today's multicore CPUs can help with a hardware-assisted "hypervisor" over everything that's even more robust. Virtual servers are taking over this year, for an interesting reason. Web-oriented businesness use many single-purpose servers in a "farm." Many of these wind up loaded to only 5-20%. Server rooms are maxing out their power wiring, and power's not getting any cheaper.

The only "gotchas" come with demanding, peripheral-taxing stuff you probably can name yourself: gaming, video and audio editing studios, machine control, and real-time stuff in general. The video and audio support is kind of generic.

Oh, and buy RAM. 4G is starters.

One magazine rated the MacBook Pro as the fastest general-purpose *Windows* laptop they'd ever tested. (It doesn't game well.) It's a great machine, but do buy the extra 2 years of AppleCare warranty. Remember, Macs are designed by a design-besotted monomaniac genius. Replacing a hard disk compares unfvorably with making a hundred-mile pilgrimage on one's knees.

[Lindsey]

You could even run Windows 2000 or XP on the virtual machine without worrying about having a new machine with hardware that isn't supported by W2K or XP drivers, and keep it isolated enough from the outside that viruses and unfixed security holes aren't really a problem after Microsoft stops updating it.
Interesting -- and very tempting!

--Lindsey

[Lindsey]

I can recommend Parallels also; I've touted it to several happy clients. The speed hit is remarkably small.
Gosh, if it gets the seal of approval from both you and Sidney, that's as close to pure gold as I ever hope to see!

--Lindsey

[Judy G. Russell]

... you just reimage-restore and you're back in businessSpeaking of which, are you familiar with a backup / imaging program called ShadowProtect? I'm doing a trial run on it and so far am very impressed. You can do things like mount a backup image, edit a file in the backup volume, and save it.

[Mike]

...backup / imaging program called ShadowProtect
<pulling up chair>

[Judy G. Russell]

<pulling up chair>It's got pluses and minuses. The pluses are that it seems easy to use for full backups, easy to setup to run in the background without using a lot of resources and you can literally mount the backup as if it were a drive and access (and change) files in the backup. The minuses are that the setup for doing an incremental backup isn't intuitive at all and that you apparently do a full or an incremental; there's no setting for a partial (do these files and these folders). And it's expensive, compared to some of the others I've looked at.

[ndebord]

It's got pluses and minuses. The pluses are that it seems easy to use for full backups, easy to setup to run in the background without using a lot of resources and you can literally mount the backup as if it were a drive and access (and change) files in the backup. The minuses are that the setup for doing an incremental backup isn't intuitive at all and that you apparently do a full or an incremental; there's no setting for a partial (do these files and these folders). And it's expensive, compared to some of the others I've looked at.

Judy,

Am interested in those others you've looked at. Don't have one that really clones. A need I've recently decided is invaluable (after my old Compaq Armamda M300 died unexpectedly some time ago now).

[ktinkel]

Interesting -- and very tempting!Gee — go away for a few days and come back to find a parallel universe?

Where did all the original people go? :confused:

[Lindsey]

Gee — go away for a few days and come back to find a parallel universe?

Where did all the original people go? :confused:
LOL!! Yeah, I think I know the feeling.

--Lindsey

[Mike]

It's got pluses and minuses. ... And it's expensive, compared to some of the others I've looked at.
Hmmm... maybe I'll just stick with my batch scripts that use xxcopy.

[Judy G. Russell]

Am interested in those others you've looked at. Don't have one that really clones. A need I've recently decided is invaluable (after my old Compaq Armamda M300 died unexpectedly some time ago now).I don't like Symantec so I didn't bother with Norton Ghost. I tried Acronis True Image 11 and it would never do a complete backup of my C drive (kept crashing the system). Didn't like Paragon Drive Backup 8.5 -- a bit too hard to understand. One thing I really like about Shadowprotect is that you can restore onto a new computer (or a new drive).

[Judy G. Russell]

Hmmm... maybe I'll just stick with my batch scripts that use xxcopy.One big plus to this: you can restore onto a new computer or a new drive. No reinstalling the OS and programs. I'd like to be able to test this, but I don't happen to have a spare new computer!

[ndebord]

I don't like Symantec so I didn't bother with Norton Ghost. I tried Acronis True Image 11 and it would never do a complete backup of my C drive (kept crashing the system). Didn't like Paragon Drive Backup 8.5 -- a bit too hard to understand. One thing I really like about Shadowprotect is that you can restore onto a new computer (or a new drive).

Judy,

I have an ancient copy of Ghost, so ancient that it won't do XP. <sigh> As for Acronis, that was going to be the way I was going to go, but you are the second person now who has encountered problems with it.

Shadowprotect sounds like a plan. I wonder too how to test it out. I guess I could use my usb hard drive for it and then overwrite my Thinkpad C: hard drive. Of course if it doesn't work, I'd be up the creek without a paddle. <double sigh> I too do NOT have a spare hard drive to test this on. I suppose I could buy one for the Thinkpad from Leveno, but then I'd have 3 hard drives. A puzzle for sure!

<weak grin>

[Bill Hirst]

Remember, Macs are designed by a design-besotted monomaniac genius. Replacing a hard disk compares unfvorably with making a hundred-mile pilgrimage on one's knees.

That's the one big showstopper about considering a Mac. I can buy PC hardware lots of places from "big-box" stores to e-bay, and it usually installs with no problem. Once in a while I have to go look for a new driver off the web, but I've never needed knee-pads for the pilgrimage. I've bought/recycled/been given modems, disks, USB devices, serial and parallel port interfaces (including a couple I've soldered up myself).

The prices can be very reasonable: With a little searching, I got a gig of memory last year for half the retail price.

-Bill

[fhaber]

1. ShadowProtect got a rave from Ed Mendelson, a quality guy. I'm giving it a go when I get time. Acronis has been biting me badly lately, too. Very disturbing.

a. Be sure to do a manual remove of all traces of ATI. It and SP do NOT get along.

b. The SP folks are very good about sending you a download link for a full time-limited eval version. Just email them.

c. If you're just backing up files, investigate Microsoft's free commandline Robocopy. It has a lovely /MIR mirroring function that can do a simple sync with delete, has enough options to make you cry uncle, and, best of all, has SPEED, even under Vista. It also handles alternate streams and permissions decently, should you need to worry about such. (Admins must.)

3. Who are these "original people," Earthing? And what is all this agreement around here, suddenly (g)?

[Jeff]

One big plus to this: you can restore onto a new computer or a new drive. No reinstalling the OS and programs. I'd like to be able to test this, but I don't happen to have a spare new computer!

That is special how? I'm thinking of buying a new HAL R51 as a backup, as total failure with two weeks of replacement delay is not an option. My plan is to run my backup pgm "emergency recovery" CD (a total drive wipeout aka format c:/u) on the new machine which then sets up for a full restore from my WD external hd thus to create a clone machine. Periodic full restores would then keep it current. There's a problem?

- Jeff

[sidney]

It's a great machine, but do buy the extra 2 years of AppleCare warranty. Remember, Macs are designed by a design-besotted monomaniac genius. Replacing a hard disk compares unfvorably with making a hundred-mile pilgrimage on one's knees.

I agree with getting the warranty, but I don't understand what you are saying about replacing the hard disk. Every generation of Mac I've encountered since I worked at Apple ten years ago has been easier to open and play with than the one before. I replaced the 80GB hard disk on my version 1 MacBook with a third party 160GB disk. I did a little research online to find which ones were compatible with a MacBook and which one seemed to have the right set of tradeoffs for me of price, speed, and reliability, had a large choice of places to buy it from, put it in a USB enclosure, cloned the hard disk to it, then swapped old and new disks in a few minutes with nothing but a screwdriver. Now I have 160GB in my MacBook and an 80GB external USB drive.

[sidney]

That's the one big showstopper about considering a Mac. I can buy PC hardware lots of places

Macs have much more standard parts now, especially since switching to Intel. You do have to do the web search to make sure you are getting something that is compatible with the Mac, but the components that you might want to replace generally have available third party versions that are not Mac-only products.

-- sidney

[Judy G. Russell]

a. Be sure to do a manual remove of all traces of ATI. It and SP do NOT get along.Tell me about it. Not only would ATI not do a complete backup of the C drive, its snapman.sys file wasn't deleted with an uninstall and blocked SP from doing one either.

If you're just backing up files, investigate Microsoft's free commandline Robocopy.Will do, thanks!

[Judy G. Russell]

That is special how? ... My plan is to run my backup pgm "emergency recovery" CD ...Not every backup program does it, and until I decide on one of these, I don't have a decent backup program at all!

[Dan in Saint Louis]

I don't like Symantec so I didn't bother with Norton Ghost.Good move. Friends don't let friends use Symantec/Norton, or AOL.

I tried Acronis True Image 11 and it would never do a complete backup of my C drive (kept crashing the system).It appears that a fix for this has been uncovered. It involves a one-line registry edit. With any luck, they will make it part of future installation packages. It is triggered when other resource-intensive programs (like anti-virus watchers) are memory-resident.

One thing I really like about Shadowprotect is that you can restore onto a new computer (or a new drive).So will Acronis -- now that I did that registry edit.

[fhaber]

Take a look at the instructions and pictures for servicing my iBook 12, or a Mac Mini. Not easy.

(sorry, I've lost the links, so the above is cite-less)

[fhaber]

You should have no problems with the Mac Pro (expensive, fast, big tower, and secretly a great workstation for Windows (video, CAD, etc.)).Up to eight cores of Xeon. Yumm. PCIe, but not everything has Mac drivers. The HDs are standard, the memory sort of (5G is starters, expensive from Apple).

The iMacs use laptop components and run hot. No slots. I'm not happy with the failure rate.

The notebooks seem solid after the first run of teething pains. The Macbook Air is starting to show overheating with simple YouTube playback, but it's too thin anyway (g).

[Judy G. Russell]

It appears that a fix for this has been uncovered. It involves a one-line registry edit. With any luck, they will make it part of future installation packages. It is triggered when other resource-intensive programs (like anti-virus watchers) are memory-resident.I might reconsider Acronis once they do that. I do like the options it has available, but the hassles with that snapman.sys were about to drive me to drink!

[ktinkel]

Every generation of Mac I've encountered since I worked at Apple ten years ago has been easier to open and play with than the one before.Having owned a dozen Macs since my first (the original, which was a bear to work on and suffered from Steve Jobs’s resistance to the noise from a fan), I would tend to agree, until recently: late in 2007 I bought an iMac and the prospect of installing a new drive there is daunting. An external drive is no problem, of course.

But I bought it as a two- or three-year Mac; I would typically have got the Mac Pro tower (have done well by those ever since my Mac II), but it was just too expensive — everything was à la carte. So I decided to bide my time with the iMac just before the current one (the shiny screen was too scary).

But other than RAM, guess I would not try to replace its innards.

Still, I have owned 11 Macs (and 1 PC laptop, and two Apple @s). Few complaints, and only one disaster (the used Mac II I got needed a new logic board; cost about $200, and was perfect ever after. Did lose a week’s use, though).

[sidney]

I bought an iMac and the prospect of installing a new drive there is daunting

Oh, yes, I wasn't thinking about that line of products which are not meant to be opened or upgraded. My kids have old eMacs which are the same way. Perhaps there was an evolution of eMac -> iMac -> MacMini -> iPod or something like that :-)

[Mike]

...about to drive me to drink!
<koff>

[Mike]

...you can restore onto a new computer or a new drive. No reinstalling the OS and programs.
Several people with whom I've had conversations with this have said it only works if the hardware for the replacement computer is exactly like the original computer. Otherwise, the drivers from the "restored" machine may not match the hardware in use!

[Judy G. Russell]

Several people with whom I've had conversations with this have said it only works if the hardware for the replacement computer is exactly like the original computer. Otherwise, the drivers from the "restored" machine may not match the hardware in use!For the most part that would just mean getting new drivers though, no? Not reinstalling all your software?

[Dan in Saint Louis]

Several people with whom I've had conversations with this have said it only works if the hardware for the replacement computer is exactly like the original computer. Otherwise, the drivers from the "restored" machine may not match the hardware in use!
Mike, many of the sysops on the PCIS WinDoze forum are claiming success anyway. If the hardware changes are not totally dramatic, it looks like Windows will at least limp along well enough to find new drivers. Their reports indicate that doing it that way beats the snot out of a total re-installation of everything.

[Judy G. Russell]

Their reports indicate that doing it that way beats the snot out of a total re-installation of everything.That's what I was hoping for. Thanks for the report, Dan!

[Mike]

If the hardware changes are not totally dramatic, it looks like Windows will at least limp along well enough to find new drivers.
That's good to hear!

Our System Admin at work won't just restore as described in this thread, citing the concern about trying to support a machine that may have incompatible drivers that may not be detected (but can lead to instability). OTOH, he's responsible for reinstalling all the company-approved applications, so it's not my problem. <g>

[Judy G. Russell]

Our System Admin at work won't just restore as described in this thread, citing the concern about trying to support a machine that may have incompatible drivers that may not be detected (but can lead to instability).It wouldn't be my first choice, either, but it's sure nice to know it'd work if I had to do it that way!

[Mike]

It wouldn't be my first choice, either, but it's sure nice to know it'd work if I had to do it that way!
I just wish I wasn't so dependent on having a working computer!

[Judy G. Russell]

I just wish I wasn't so dependent on having a working computer!When I go to Africa in June, I may very well not take my computer. Let's see if I can survive that for a week or two!

[Mike]

Let's see if I can survive that for a week or two!
I've gone through a week with no problem. However, so much of my regular chores and work require a computer, even if not every night. <sigh>

[Judy G. Russell]

I've gone through a week with no problem. However, so much of my regular chores and work require a computer, even if not every night. <sigh>Not to mention the fact that my favorite GAMES are on my computer...

[sidney]

Kind of relevant to this thread, I just received a notice from my department IT that all staff and PhD students who are in line for a new computer now have the option of choosing a Mac configured to triple-boot into Mac OS, Linux, and Windows, or alternatively with Parallels installed on the Mac desktop with virtual Windows and Linux machines. I think that the three year old PPC iMac on my desk at school is due for replacement by June. It will be nice to finally have a machine there that is more advanced than my personal laptop.

[Mike]

...option of choosing a Mac configured to triple-boot into Mac OS, Linux, and Windows, or alternatively with Parallels installed on the Mac desktop with virtual Windows and Linux machines.
Cool! Which are you going to choose?

[sidney]

Cool! Which are you going to choose?

Definitely Parallels. I have that on my MacBook and it runs smoothly. Much handier than having to reboot and run only one of the environments at a time.

[Mike]

Definitely Parallels. Much handier than having to reboot and run only one of the environments at a time.
Good point! I wonder if I could get the same for my next work computer. Probably not... the company is a Windows shop for desktops (we have servers in Windows, Linux, and OpenVMS flavors).

You might appreciate this WSJ interview (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120578961450043169.html?mod=technology_featured_ stories_hs). I wish we had such a CIO. (We don't even have a CIO!).