use Perl

• And... (Score:2)

  by Matts (1087)

  The rest of us are just wannabees.
  
  I *seriously* want an OSX box of some sort (laptop maybe). I just don't have the funds yet - maybe I can persuade work to stump for one...
• Funny (Score:1)

  by pudge (1)

  I'm the Mac user here and I still use Mac OS, with no plans to upgrade to Mac OS X. WHAT'S WITH YOU PEOPLE?
  
  Maybe after I read Mac OS X: The Missing Manual [oreilly.com] I'll be won over. ;-)
  • Re:Funny (Score:2)

    by hfb (74)

    :) I still mainly boot into OS9 too as the applications I have haven't reached critical mass on the OSX side yet. Classic mode sucks worse than Wine. Almost all of the OS X people I know are recent converts to the platform with little or no investment in OS9 apps. It's a time consuming PITA to migrate as well.
    • Re:Funny (Score:1)

      by pudge (1)

      Yeah, that's really the main thing. It is a lot easier to migrate from *nix to Mac OS X than it is to migrate from Mac OS 9, in many cases.
      
      Although it'd almost be tolerable if it weren't for two things: the very big performance hit (on my G3 boxes, anyway), and those damned paned file dialogs. I hate those things. The Mac OS 8/9 Navigation Services are so much better, I really can't stand it. :) It takes forever to drill down into deep directories, keyboard shortcuts mostly don't work at all, or work
    • Re:Funny (Score:2)

      by Elian (119)

      Yep, I'm almost entirely OS X native, so it's not a big deal. (Though classic mode seems fine to me--little odd, but fine)
      
      Pity it's so clunky compared to OS 9. Better than Windows or any of the Unix desktops, but that's not exactly a stunning recommendation.
      • Re:Funny (Score:1)

        by pudge (1)

        Pity it's so clunky compared to OS 9
        
        

        I do have confidence it will improve. But I can't use it full-time until it does. :-)
• What Mail Clients Do They Use? (Score:1)

  by Theory (10)

  I'm a TiBook G4 user myself, but I run Yellow Dog Linux. I've thought about switching, but have stopped on 3 issues:

  1. What's a good mail client to use? I don't think I could switch to OE.
  2. I use GNU Emacs under X. Can I do that? And if so, what kind of resources would I suck up running X over OS X's hoggish UI?
  3. libapreq doesn't work under OS X quite yet (though they're working on it, is see!).

  Regards, David
  • Re:What Mail Clients Do They Use? (Score:1)

    by pjm (639)

    1. All sorts of things; mutt of course, or pine if you must. Entourage (part of OfficeX) if you're into that sort of thing: OK, so I am (educational status helps there!). Plenty of others available: Mulberry, particularly if you're a big IMAP fan, has a native OSX client.
    
    2. Sure. Xfree runs really well either rooted or rootless in OS X. Resource implications? very little; XDarwin chugs away at about a couple of percent CPU usage, spiking to around 10% as I gimp around a bit. The OS X window manager gets a
  • Re:What Mail Clients Do They Use? (Score:2)

    by ask (83)

    I don't really know because I only use my laptop for movies, Terminal.app and a browser, but I saw a patch on the libapreq list recently for fixing Mac OS X stuff.
    
    For mail client, mutt should work fine.
    
    I use emacs without X everywhere anyway, and it works great on X too. (hah, parse that).

    --
    

    -- ask bjoern hansen [askbjoernhansen.com], !try; do();
• I haven't!!! (Score:1)

  by jdavidb (1361)

  My main Macintosh still runs MacOS 9. My new ibook that I got two weeks ago runs Debian.

  Eventually I'm sure I will sample X.

  --
  J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
• OS X Good (Score:1)

  by jhi (318)

  About the only gripe I have is that the Terminal application sucks raw eggs as a terminal application. I haven't looked closely at what it thinks it's trying to do but it's not what I got used to-- 15 years ago on true VT100s and lookalikes. As a UNIX interface nothing beats a good text terminal, and the Terminal isn't (hopefully "isn't yet").

  Note that I may be barking at the wrong tree: maybe it's the combination of Terminal and the shell that is sucky. But whatever it is, things like suspending your
  • Re:OS X Good (Score:1)

    by pjm (639)

    Yep, the terminal is seriously screwed up. Some little things seem related to the fact that it doesn't run setuid (so that closing a window through the GUI means you get a ghost entry in the output from "who", as Terminal.app lacks permission to write to the log file. )
    
    Another observation: if you have your preferences set to "use this shell: " instead of "use default login for this user" the terminal seems incapable of changing the ownership of the device file! That is, if /dev/ttyp6, for example, is own