apple mac info

isofa

That's because it went to sleep rather than shutting down, you can change when it does this in the System Preferences.

Or, of course, change your MSN preferences to show you away after a set amount of activity or minutes

For lots more free software, have a look at: http://macupdate.com

Also the forums at: http://www.macuser.co.uk will have lots of discussions / hints and tips too

toasterman

Thought I'd tag this on the end of my Mac thread...

Two questions..

1. Before I bought a mac, I catalogued my entire cd collection into iTunes on my Windows PC. Now, I'm fine with transferring the whole lot to my Mac, but it got me wondering...
Is there any way to sync my iTunes collection between computers?
I'd quite like it on my windows machine, another copy on my mac, and a third copy on a laptop I take around with me...

Licensing won't be a problem as its cd-imported music, not downloaded.
I've worked out how to share it between computers, but that only works if they are connected at the time - so it wouldn't work to my laptop I'm guessing. I know I can copy the whole music folder, .xml files that store the library data, etc.. but is there any easy way to automate that?
I'd also like to somehow sync video.

The theory is that I've got a Windows system with functionality for recording tv. It'd be cool if I could record tv shows, transfer them to iTunes, and sync them with my laptop - so I could watch stuff at work in my lunch break.

also
2. Anyone tried importing video? When I import a folder, I get maybe 5% of the videos in, as iTunes doesn't seem to support wmv, divx, mpeg2 etc. Any way to change that?
I don't suppose purchasing Quicktime Pro would resolve this? Quicktime seems to play some stuff iTunes doesn't, oddly. Maybe iTunes only supports formats that iPods support?

Any ideas anyone?

isofa

You shouldn't have a problem with the first point.

I use SyncToy from Microsoft to Sync my main Mac's iTunes library onto a PC (over a network), and also to a third external backup drive.

As you mention it's all CD imported, there won't be an issue. If some was DRM purchased from iTunes, you should be able to authorise another computer without a problem too.

No idea re. video, but I suspect QT Pro has more capabilities. The peeps on the forums at MacUser will have more knowledge.

BigBouncyBall

i think you can do video somehow.

if you have it in itunes already, right click and select "convert to AAC (or MP3)" and that will instruct itunes to convert the video to a format that can play on iTunes/iPod.

if it isn't already in iTunes, then instead of choosing "import" try just dragging the video on to the icon (in the dock/on the desktop) and then iTunes should import the video as a correct file format.

not sure if this will work though, i'm just going off memory and instinct.

good luck!

wolfman

BigBouncyBall wrote: »

Macs are (should be) more stable than M$. The OS is built on top of Unix rather than the house built on sand that Microsoft have constructed. In years of using a mac (particularly OS X) i can honestly say i can count on my fingers the number of times it has crashed. The problems come with 3rd party software/drivers that haven't been properly designed for mac os x but ported from a windows build.

It's built on top of the Mach kernel, which comes from the BSD implementation of Unix. This doesn't mean it's perfect, people often us it like a buzz word, but generally yes it's a good platform. Vista doesn't have a bad kernel either. Vista/XP doesn't typically crash, it's the 3rd party apps and drivers that usually are the cause of the problem, which is something OSX can suffer from too.

toasterman wrote: »

I don't get on well with it because there are still things you have to do with the command line

But that's the power of the command line. I can give you a few lines of code to paste into it and you're away, rather than have to describe, scroll down, right click, select the 2nd option, a new window will appear....etc

toasterman wrote: »

the driver support isn't as good as I'd like, and I seem to always get stuck on something silly like monitor resolution. I might work in IT support but I'm very lazy - and editing text files, reading a lot of online help etc is too much like hard work. I'm told this is because ATI drivers are rubbish on Linux. Wireless driver support is also rubbish, but improving all the time.

It's actually much better these days. The only things generally not supported are the latest hardware, or slightly more obscure hardware. OSX usually suffers from the same thing though, as manufacturers typically support Windows first, then the rest second.

The ATI drivers are ok too. Have been fine for years in fact. You may struggle if you have a very recent card, but why you'd be running a £250+ card in a Linux box I don't know. ATI have lacked in a few areas, but their recent drivers support AIGLX and virtually every card.

toasterman wrote: »

Openoffice on Linux is slower than on Windows. Linux took longer to start up, longer to shut down - it certainly wasn't easier to use. Quite likely more secure, but I've never been hacked on Windows.

Nooo, OpenOffice is much slower in Windows. Maybe you had JRE disabled. That speeds it up whatever the OS.

Linux depending on how you have it setup it usually boots slightly slower if not around the same time. XP can boot pretty quickly (when it's fresh). Linux is much faster at shutting down I find.


I like Vista. I think it's very aesthetically pleasing, nice sounds, interaction etc... And it naturally has all the apps I've ever needed available to it.

I use Linux though. I feel I have more control, choice etc... it's free, easily downloadable, and the repo model is excellent for installing/updating apps. Plus I like tinkering with it, and no anti-virus, spyware stuff etc... Just feels like a cleaner experience.

alphawoo

I love os aswell.
GO APPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quaint1

Toasterman

It networks to my old windows pc easy enough, when I looked up how to do it

Could you possibly point me to where you found out how to do that please? I've had a Mac for a while (only an old one, but I'm having great fun with it) and it's set up to access the internet via it's Airport card and my wireless router, but I can't for the life of me work out how to get it to see the two PC's and a laptop I also have connected and vice versa!
Au Res.,
Paul (holding off getting Leopard for the moment...)

toasterman

Hi Quaint,

On mine, I go into the finder, click "go", "connect to server",
type: "smb://<ip address of pc>/" (without the quotes)
and click "connect"
It should ask you for a username and password and ask you which share you want to connect to.

If it's on the same workgroup, I think you can put the name of the pc in there instead of the ip address, much like how on Windows pcs you can do start, run, "\\<pcname>" to access networked machines.

toasterman

wolfman wrote: »

But that's the power of the command line. I can give you a few lines of code to paste into it and you're away, rather than have to describe, scroll down, right click, select the 2nd option, a new window will appear....etc

You can, but thats the biggest weakness of Linux. You give me a load of command lines to type and I've got no idea what it does.
Worse, because there aren't any prompts, tests, etc, in between, Joe Average user can really screw something up doing it.

wolfman wrote: »

It's actually much better these days. The only things generally not supported are the latest hardware, or slightly more obscure hardware. OSX usually suffers from the same thing though, as manufacturers typically support Windows first, then the rest second.

I'm sorry. That just isn't true. I bought a HP laptop. Extremely common. I tried Ubuntu and Mandriva on it, and far from the wireless or video drivers being a problem - I couldn't even get the mouse working without running command lines and editing text files.
The fix for getting the mouse working according to Ubuntu's forums, caused an issue which stopped the onboard wireless picking up an ip address, and there was no resolution for that, other than using a static address. It's not a particularly good workaround.

I guess the difference is with osx, is because you don't buy it on its own - it only really needs to support Apple hardware - which it does. Other than that, only things I connect to my computers is ext hard drives, a printer (which i made sure when i bought it - was supported under linux, os x and windows), and my mobile (i also made sure it was supported).
That's not to say Llnux driver support isn't good. It's probably better than os x's is, in number of things it supports, and it supports a lot more than i expected. But its not like any windows pc you buy could be used for linux easily.

wolfman wrote: »

The ATI drivers are ok too. Have been fine for years in fact. You may struggle if you have a very recent card, but why you'd be running a £250+ card in a Linux box I don't know. ATI have lacked in a few areas, but their recent drivers support AIGLX and virtually every card.

It was a good couple of years old. It didn't support the 3d. Also I couldn't set refresh rates for my crt monitor higher than 60hz in ubuntu, but could in kubuntu - oddly. I did fix it eventually, but only by running command line scripts I didn't understand, and hoping it might resolve it.

wolfman wrote: »

Nooo, OpenOffice is much slower in Windows. Maybe you had JRE disabled. That speeds it up whatever the OS.

It definitely opens faster in windows than it does on Ubuntu, out-of-the-box for both of them.
Maybe I'm an exception to the rule.

wolfman wrote: »

Linux depending on how you have it setup it usually boots slightly slower if not around the same time. XP can boot pretty quickly (when it's fresh). Linux is much faster at shutting down I find.

XP when I first installed it took 45 seconds to boot. It now takes a couple of minutes and I've no idea why - but I can't be bothered to reinstall it.
Shutting down takes an age on xp - but I'll give you - ubuntu did shut down faster than xp.
Vista is far too slow at both - I've tried brand new high spec laptops with 1gb+ memory recently, and found 90-120 seconds to be about average. And the default shutdown is to go to sleep. That's the only way it manages to "shutdown" in 3-4 seconds.

wolfman wrote: »

I like Vista. I think it's very aesthetically pleasing, nice sounds, interaction etc... And it naturally has all the apps I've ever needed available to it.

None of my adobe software was supported on it (worked but vista gave constant warnings that it wouldn't work), trillian screwed up aero, and the over-the-top effects on every window, mouse movement, etc, made me feel slightly sick. I found the whole thing a bit too over the top to be as classy as I'd hoped.
That's what got me looking at os x...the realisation that eventually I'd have to use vista on a daily basis...

wolfman

toasterman wrote: »

You can, but thats the biggest weakness of Linux. You give me a load of command lines to type and I've got no idea what it does.

True, but I could tell you to click a load of places, or install something with the same effect. The command line isn't perfect, but it is very powerful. That's why it's still around despite GUI's being about.

toasterman wrote: »

I'm sorry. That just isn't true. I bought a HP laptop. Extremely common. I tried Ubuntu and Mandriva on it, and far from the wireless or video drivers being a problem - I couldn't even get the mouse working without running command lines and editing text files.
The fix for getting the mouse working according to Ubuntu's forums, caused an issue which stopped the onboard wireless picking up an ip address, and there was no resolution for that, other than using a static address. It's not a particularly good workaround.

Woah, it may have just been that model of laptop, and I did say "generally". I've not seen a laptop yet where the mouse doesn't work. What model was it?

I definitely struggle to see how the mouse effected DHCP. Especially as static support via something typical like NetworkManager is actually harder to get working.

Wireless support isn't the best with Linux, most will work (you may need to run through a tutorial to do so), some even work out of the box better than in Windows (thank you Netgear).

toasterman wrote: »

It was a good couple of years old. It didn't support the 3d. Also I couldn't set refresh rates for my crt monitor higher than 60hz in ubuntu, but could in kubuntu - oddly. I did fix it eventually, but only by running command line scripts I didn't understand, and hoping it might resolve it.

Yeah, Linux can be funny about things such as widescreen displays, but again that's getting better. The latest release of Ubuntu for example works ok once you install the appropriate graphics card drivers (if needed).

toasterman wrote: »

XP when I first installed it took 45 seconds to boot. It now takes a couple of minutes and I've no idea why - but I can't be bothered to reinstall it.
Shutting down takes an age on xp - but I'll give you - ubuntu did shut down faster than xp.
Vista is far too slow at both - I've tried brand new high spec laptops with 1gb+ memory recently, and found 90-120 seconds to be about average. And the default shutdown is to go to sleep. That's the only way it manages to "shutdown" in 3-4 seconds.

Xp just gets bogged down after a while. It's like that with most versions of Windows.

I've found Vista to be quite quick at booting. Not much slower than XP in fact. My pc is quite powerful though so boots virtually anything quickly. It shuts down ok too for me. I tend to strip out a lot though, and cut down the auto-starts etc...

toasterman wrote: »

None of my adobe software was supported on it (worked but vista gave constant warnings that it wouldn't work), trillian screwed up aero, and the over-the-top effects on every window, mouse movement, etc, made me feel slightly sick. I found the whole thing a bit too over the top to be as classy as I'd hoped.
That's what got me looking at os x...the realisation that eventually I'd have to use vista on a daily basis...

I use VirtualBox in Linux for running Windows XP and Vista for any Visual Studio work I need to do etc... Runs just fine. Not great getting the sound to work though. And it's not better than actually being in Windows. But it means I get to stay in Linux and not faff around with dual booting.