Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

231 comments

STR (0)

Aranykai (1053846) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430406)

These days, it is nearly impossible to find a computer that doesn't support suspend to ram properly. Do people really shut down their computers so often that this feature would actually be useful? I just don't understand it.

Re:STR (1)

Dynetrekk (1607735) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430428)

I have a macbook pro, and the suspend feature is amazing. I never need to turn it off. I have no idea either why people reboot, outside of core OS updates.. But hey, more features, woot.

Re:STR (1)

Relayman (1068986) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431808)

Chrome ASSUMES that you're going to quit the browser every so often but I just leave it running it all the time. Every two weeks, I check to see if I have the latest version only to find that there's an update but it's been patiently waiting to restart to install the update. Obviously, some people on the Chrome team don't use Macs.

Re:STR (1)

DavidR1991 (1047748) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430468)

In a lot of places this just isn't practical at all, mainly just because of power. I can't justify leaving my machine powered on 24/7 especially since I don't use it every day necessarily. Hence I actually turn it off each evening.

Re:STR (1)

rtaylor (70602) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430634)

Do computers use more than 1 or 2 watt when suspended (mine don't but they top out at about 50watt anyway).

Re:STR (2)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430782)

Suspend to RAM generally brings the power draw down to a few watts, even on extremely high-power machines. After all, it's only powering the RAM, and then only enough for a periodic refresh. Probably just a dozen watts, max.

Suspend to disk is even better - brings power draw to zero. Or at least as close as possible - we shouldn't be counting standby power here, since that's there after a full shutdown, too. And, while not quite as fast to restart as restore from RAM, restore from disk is still usually faster than a full boot sequence.

Re:STR (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431036)

12w is still a considerable power draw. Supposing you used your computer for 4 hours a day and had it suspended for 20; 12*20*365.25 = 85.5kwh per year $NZD0.20 * 85.5 = $NZD17 a year. Actually that's not too bad, I will use suspend from now on :).

Re:STR (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431142)

Suspend to disk is even better - brings power draw to zero.

Provided all the hardware comes back up properly. In my experience, suspend to disk has been less reliable (blank screen, no sound, or X crashing and restarting in low-graphics mode) than suspend to RAM.

Re:STR (1)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431412)

I for one have never had problems with suspend to disk. I've been using it for years on my various laptops, had no such problems.

Re:STR (3, Informative)

billcopc (196330) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431468)

Suspend to disk has nothing to do with hardware, and everything to do with drivers. From the hardware's perspective, resuming from disk is no different than a cold boot. It's up to the OS to reload the memory contents and initialize hardware back to pre-suspend state.

With the right programming, you could use S2D on an ancient 286 PC. There was a popular game cheating TSR that did just that, to provide "save anywhere" functionality in just about any DOS game. On top of memory dump/restore, it also managed state for a few sound cards like the SB16/Pro and GUS. I can't remember if it was Pro Action Replay or another, but it was pretty big back then.

Re:STR (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431578)

Suspend to disk has nothing to do with hardware, and everything to do with drivers.

Which is why suspend "just works" on Macs: fewer driver combinations.

Re:STR (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431650)

Suspend to disk is even better - brings power draw to zero.

Provided all the hardware comes back up properly. In my experience, suspend to disk has been less reliable (blank screen, no sound, or X crashing and restarting in low-graphics mode) than suspend to RAM.

For $30, you can buy an OS that properly comes back up from suspend.

$30 OS with a $1000 dongle (0)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431726)

For $30, you can buy an OS that properly comes back up from suspend.

If you're referring to Mac OS X, then a new MacBook costs $600 more than the laptop I use now. Feel free to convince me though that being able to suspend to disk is worth the extra $600.

Re:$30 OS with a $1000 dongle (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36432230)

Feel free to find a laptop (without a crippled "home" OS) that has the same specs as a MacBook for $600 less than. The hardware price is about the same once you are comparing apples to apples. I just bought a new machine at work... An 8-core, 24GB RAM beast and the mac pro was $50 cheaper than the equivalent Dell.

Mr. "Trolling Online Trash" himself: gmhowell (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36432056)

We all know you're just a piece of online trolling trash per your own admissions thereof here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34543612 [slashdot.org] so please - quit trying to play like you know something about computing scumbag.

Re:STR (3, Insightful)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430552)

It's likely this could be great for Kiosks and a more bare-bones Guest login

Great for my mom (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430744)

I've been looking at snagging a chromebook for my mom, but I hate to not get an apple. And sometimes you want to do a bit more than what a chromebook can do. Sometimes I actually need to use the computer too. But 99.9% of the time everything else gets in my mom's way and confuse the hell out of her. after 20 years she still does not know what it means to "quit" an application. the concept is unlearnable. But she can use a browser and web mail and even write a document.

Now if only it would just boot to chrome then it would the best of all possible worlds.

Re:Great for my mom (3, Interesting)

k2r (255754) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431090)

Sounds like she needs an iPad and an external keyboard.

Been there, aunt is happy.

Re:Great for my mom (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#36432156)

Thought about that. But the lack of flash means whe can't listen to all her favorite gurus. And can you really have an ipad without having any other computer around? I heard IOS5 is supposed to address that but I'm skeptical.

Re:STR (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430642)

A computer uses anywhere from 5W when "turned off". A few W more when STR, maybe 7W. It's from the standby power lead.

At $0.10/kWh, 7W for 18h/day, this works out to about $4.60/year/computer. So if you have 1000 computers, this gets you at least $4600 in savings if you have a policy of a real shutdown of a computer (ie. a switch that cuts power to computer). If you have standby power for computer + monitor(s) and other stuff, like phone, this can easily escalate to $10-$20/workstation.

Spending $100-$200/workstation to cut this wasteful energy usage can be justifiable especially if you can use 20-40kW of power per 1000 employees somewhere else.

Re:STR (2)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430828)

A computer uses anywhere from 5W when "turned off". A few W more when STR, maybe 7W. It's from the standby power lead.

At $0.10/kWh, 7W for 18h/day, this works out to about $4.60/year/computer. So if you have 1000 computers, this gets you at least $4600 in savings if you have a policy of a real shutdown of a computer (ie. a switch that cuts power to computer)

And if you have 1000 iMac computers, you're wasting $50 or more a night as a sysadmin walks around the floor turning them on by hand for system updates, software installs, and virus scans, cursing dumb power policies, and Apple (for not having a real WOL).

Re:STR (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36432280)

(for not having a real WOL).

WOL works fine for me on all of my Macs. (Well, on Ethernet, anyway.)

Re:STR (1)

billcopc (196330) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431560)

I don't know what kind of PC draws 5W when off, but my monster PC doesn't even register a whole watt. It could have to do with your choice of hardware. When everything is suspended, my entire rig snoozes at 8w, including the four 27" displays on standby.

I figure, if I'm going to be afk for less than eight hours, it's better to suspend than shut down, because a cold boot takes about 5 minutes and averages 1000w while everything spins up and POSTs, since the BIOS is too naïve to handle power management by itself.

Really, if you want this Browser-only mode for the power savings, get an iPad. On a full Mac it's just a gimmick, you're still running all that hardware for nothing.

Re:STR (1)

Graff (532189) | more than 3 years ago | (#36432028)

Really, if you want this Browser-only mode for the power savings, get an iPad. On a full Mac it's just a gimmick, you're still running all that hardware for nothing.

You do know that modern computers are able to power down sections of hardware that aren't needed, such as CPU cores & functional units, GPUs, busses, drives, etc? A computer running a full OS can easily draw more power than a version tuned to run on less resources.

Yes, the iPad will probably use even less than a full Mac in Safari-only mode but that doesn't mean it's completely useless to try to save power through that mode.

Re:STR (1)

ctrimm (1955430) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430766)

It would probably use less electricity to boot and run than booting and running the full OS. I would imagine this would lead to longer battery life if you just need to surf the web for a while.

Re:STR (2)

integral-fellow (576851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430974)

These days, it is nearly impossible to find a computer that doesn't support suspend to ram properly. Do people really shut down their computers so often that this feature would actually be useful? I just don't understand it.

Four reasons:
1. Security-- Using whole disk encryption, the machine is well-secured when completely powered off. When on, the key is in RAM and the disk is accessible. This also goes for services that are running.
2. Energy savings-- Why keep a machine using energy, even a few watts, if that adds up to something over the life of the machine?
3. SSD-- My computer boots and halts in about fifteen and five seconds, respectively, only slightly longer than the resume from hibernate.
4. Freshness-- Though rarely an issue, there's nothing like starting with a clean slate each day. No stray processes, memory leaks (FF v4) or conflicts.

No you don't understand... (2)

mario_grgic (515333) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431192)

The point of boot to browser mode is to have simple guest access to computer. Someone wants to check their mail, browse the web etc. you can now do that without allowing local access to guest account, or allowing someone else to use your account/browser with all your saved passwords and porn browsing preferences.

Guest account gets access to a lot more than browser, and this nicely restricts them to only one application (and most useful one at that). Also, none of the browsing history is saved, so nothing survives to the next person getting into the browser mode.

Re:No you don't understand... (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431596)

I see it as useful for basic troubleshooting. Something goes wrong, user profile gets seriously messed up, etc... how do you look something up on the internet? I use another computer, but that may not always be handy. This way, if you can boot this far you can look things up.

Seems like one of those things I'll only use once every few years, but would be really handy when I need it.

Re:No you don't understand... (2)

devphaeton (695736) | more than 3 years ago | (#36432050)

My computer's BIOS has this ability as well. I believe it is called "Splashtop". I can surf the web, watch porn^H^H^H^HYoutube videos, or make skype calls without spinning up any drives. I've used this feature to solve unbootable OSes (namely Ubuntu when GRUB gets hosed... again...)

I think this has been common on a lot of ASUS motherboards since about 2005. Hmm... Doesn't Apple farm their logic board designs out to ASUS?

Re:No you don't understand... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431694)

+mod up - I didn't think of this advantage before reading it in your post - would be a much safer way to let my mother use my machine.

impossible to find a program that doesnt leak (2)

decora (1710862) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431778)

memory.

there are literally hundreds of thousands of lines of code that go into me being able to type a single character on this message box and have it go through the internet and show up on slashdot.

until every system in the entire planet moves to some magical language where nothing ever leaks, on all levels from assembler hardware drivers to the lower level libraries to the UI layer to the drivers for video cards to the 3rd party programs we all use like Chrome or Firefox,
then there will always be memory leaks

Basic OS functionality (0)

John.P.Jones (601028) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430408)

This sort of thing really should be a basic OS function, it should be easy to setup a machine to boot into any application as the 'shell' not just the default catch all UI or one blessed web browser, but if I wanted to setup a machine to boot into Photoshop or my own app it should be just as easy.

Re:Basic OS functionality (-1, Troll)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430448)

Yup. You could do the same thing in Windows by simply changing the Guest account's shell to $browser.exe; in fact, with fast user switching it wouldn't even require a reboot. That this is some kind of exciting new feature is a triumph of Apple marketing.

Re:Basic OS functionality (2)

DavidR1991 (1047748) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430504)

Apple didn't even mention it. At all. It isn't stated anywhere on Lion's feature page and has only been discovered by users testing preview versions. Nice try at a negative spin though.

Re:Basic OS functionality (1)

ZackSchil (560462) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430604)

You are a good person who makes good posts.

Re:Basic OS functionality (0)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430606)

And yet here it is on the Slashdot front page.

Re:Basic OS functionality (1)

RPD9803 (669023) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430644)

It's an AP{PLE marketing PLOT~!

Re:Basic OS functionality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431084)

IT'S A TRAP!

Re:Basic OS functionality (3, Insightful)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430740)

The fact that Apple and/or its faithful manage to make a big deal out of every 20 year old idea is not "negative spin". Whether it's Apple itself knowing how to drum up good PR or just insufferable fanboys preaching the word, it makes the Mac community a painful one to be around.

I've "switched to Mac" three times in my life and switched back again within a couple of years, each time leaving with a bad taste in my mouth: the first was with a Mac Plus, as the alternatives had already played and won catch-up; the second time with a PowerMac 8600 and G3 Wallstreet, as I seemed to have got in with the most religious thick-headed user group I've ever had the misfortune to encounter; the last time was with a white iMac C2D (the "educational" edition with the awesomely powerful GMA950), which managed to enter partly unsupported status before I'd even reached my third year of AppleCare and which by the last 6 months I was mostly only using in Windows 7 - everything I wanted to do in OS X I could do on Windows 7, and then I can do so much more.

I bet I'll try Mac a fourth time though, given another half decade of rest and recovery. And I still love my Mac Plus.

I must be some sort of masochist.

Re:Basic OS functionality (0)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430888)

Mod parent (-1, criticises both Apple and its fanboy culture)

Re:Basic OS functionality (3, Interesting)

Stupendoussteve (891822) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431214)

When I originally read about this, it was mentioned that this feature was in fact a honeypot to encourage a thief to plug the machine into the internet. After all, for many people all they want to do is get online anyway. Thief plugs it in, the Find My Mac stuff is able to connect and send information back to the owner who can contact the authorities. Farther evidence of this was that it's a guest account, you're not able to enable it for your own user account (I haven't personally used it, so I can't confirm).

It was also mentioned that this browser would throw out realistic looking errors for some sites, even if the site was actually fine.

Re:Basic OS functionality (1)

Stupendoussteve (891822) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431246)

And now that I've read TFA, they stated the same thing... surprised nobody mentioned that angle in the comments.

Re:Basic OS functionality (1)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430526)

Good luck getting the non-blessed browser idea past Steve.

Re:Basic OS functionality (0)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430798)

It could turn out to be an 'over Steve's Dead Body' kind of thing. IOW, wait a little while now.

Re:Basic OS functionality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431018)

That's cold.

Re:Basic OS functionality (3, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430994)

You can still directly into any X app if you want.

I just checked and ">console" login still works on Snow Leopard.
1) Edit login options to display the login window as "Name and password"
2) Logout of all accounts and login with the username ">console"
3) Enjoy your Darwin shell.

It's not much different at all than the Linux shell. If you install Gnome, XFCE, KDE, etc. You can launch them with startx. If you want to boot straight into another application edit your startx scripts (.xinitrc, etc).

I'm sure you can compile Chrome, Firefox, and the like to not use Aqua and just the X11 libraries.

who -r (1)

s4ltyd0g (452701) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430718)

run-levels on a UNIX like system will do the trick.

Re:Basic OS functionality (0)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 3 years ago | (#36432158)

This sort of thing really should be a basic OS function

"Boot to browser" may well become the Mac OS of the future.

What better way to keep users walled up? Captive consumption is the name of the game.

why is windows still in business? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430412)

I don't understand.

Re:why is windows still in business? (0, Flamebait)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430452)

vendor lock-in, fud, and stupidity

Re:why is windows still in business? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430590)

vendor lock-in, fud, and stupidity

No, we're talking about MS, not Apple. Wait... which is which again?

don't forget kickbacks, bribery, threats, (2)

decora (1710862) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431820)

intimidation, political maneuvering, invasion of the k-12 school system, and soon, predatory litigtation (especially patent litigation)

Re:why is windows still in business? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430508)

Because 90% of the world is heterosexual.

Re:why is windows still in business? (1, Insightful)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430520)

Because it's by far the most functional, open, well-supported, cost-effective desktop computing environment in the world. While other offerings have some of these features in greater measure (Linux - openness would be the obvious one), no other choice has an adequate measure of them all.

Re:why is windows still in business? (2)

node 3 (115640) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431308)

Because it's by far the most functional, open, well-supported, cost-effective desktop computing environment in the world. While other offerings have some of these features in greater measure (Linux - openness would be the obvious one), no other choice has an adequate measure of them all.

Which of the things listed does the Mac *not* have in "adequate measure"? And it's far from clear that Windows is "by far" ahead of the Mac across those areas you listed.

Windows is "still in business" because it established itself as the default choice almost two decades ago. The PC and Windows were *much* better suited for business use at the time, and business decisions drove the market. People wanted to have the same system at home as they had at the office.

For the past 5 years, Mac growth has outpaced PC growth. Increasingly, consumers, and even businesses, are more and more buying Macs. There are really only two things holding Mac sales back today: higher than average entry-level price (specifically, that Apple doesn't cater to the low end), and inertia.

Apple is overcoming Windows' inertia just fine. Clearly, people aren't as in agreement with your assessment as you seem to think they are.

Re:why is windows still in business? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431564)

Cost, applications and development support for business. Go find me a Mac notebook that has alternatives for all the business software I'm using - from PCB design to accounting to label printing to what you not that would run on a core i7 CPU with 4gigs of ram and 300 GB harddisk and cost under $700. There's a ton of them available with windows7.

Re:why is windows still in business? (1)

node 3 (115640) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431660)

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say here. There isn't business software, PCB design software, label printing software for the Mac? That's quite a bold set of claims, and easily shown to be false.

Or are you just echoing what I wrote, that the entry price point for Macs is higher than for PCs?

Perhaps you could elaborate?

Re:Windows ... well supported... (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431804)

Because of about 7 years of brutally aggressive corporate strategy, it will never be an even contest. Every platform will have to measure against the incumbent Windows paradigm like it or not.

Mac or Lnux - Mac has some money behind it and by using BSD they escape some some obscure trolling situations.

Re:why is windows still in business? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431896)

Which of the things listed does the Mac *not* have in "adequate measure"?

Penis size?
Oh, that wasn't in the list... nevermind.

Re:why is windows still in business? (1)

vga_init (589198) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431370)

Well I've been tracking this issue for more years than I'd like to remember. What really keeps Windows in the dominate position is not the merit or quality of Windows itself, but rather market forces. Microsoft had been taking advantage of market forces in order to attempt to monopolize the software industry to varying levels of success. The only serious competition Windows had so far has come from free operating systems and software because they exist and develop independently from the market. That is to say, they are out of Microsoft's reach, as Microsoft would take steps to crush them if they somehow developed within a capitalist framework. For example, Mac OS X exists because of BSD/Mach, which uses GNU heavily (whether they like it or not), and nearly everything beyond that is an incarnation of GNU/Linux. Even non-OS commercial software relies heavily on open source technologies, whether it's development tools, linked libraries, or otherwise.

Microsoft is simply more fluent in the methods and languages of the sociological constructs that govern us personally and communally; they have the most capital, the most power. They use their power to maintain power. Let's face it, computer software is not easily understood by most members of society. Microsoft made a good business adapting software to be plugged into our existing social functions and organization, where we pay money for products and services. They wormed their way into cracks an crevices in our social fabric that are nearly impossible to pry them out of, but it'll happen eventually.

There is nothing that Windows is technically capable of that other operating systems can't be capable of. The issue of support you mentioned is just an issue of social reorganization, which is really the main problem.

Re:why is windows still in business? (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 3 years ago | (#36432142)

There is nothing that Windows is technically capable of that other operating systems can't be capable of. The issue of support you mentioned is just an issue of social reorganization, which is really the main problem.M

Well, kinda sorta, Microsoft's OSs are capable of ONE thing that other OSs aren't, or at least aren't great at, and that is implementations of Microsoft's proprietary protocols. This creates a massive amount of lock-in, which is furthered by the fact that Microsoft has refused to implement a large number of open protocols.....

Where I work we are almost exclusively a Mac/Linux shop, and you know what? We have had 0 problems getting those machines to communicate(share files, do single sign on, remote login etc). However with Windows we have had nothing but problems trying to integrate them into the Mac/Linux environment. The reason is simple, Microsoft is abusing it's market position to ensure that using non-Windows systems is as difficult as possible.

But look on the bright side, Windows is dying a slow death. Every year the % of people using that toy of an "OS" is dropping, and it couldn't come too soon. Viva everyone but Microsoft!

Re:why is windows still in business? (4, Informative)

bsharp8256 (1372285) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430598)

I didn't realize Windows was a business.

The answer to the question "why is Microsoft still in business?" is because Apple doesn't license its operating system to OEMs. Apple is a hardware company, and they want you to buy their stuff. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, because it's the reason Macs have the reputation of just working. Restrict the hardware you have to support to a very limited range and you can work out all the bugs.

Microsoft, however, allows any Joe Dirt to buy OEM licenses and install on any homebuilt computer. And so we have the great trade-off: Monopoly on hardware and higher unit prices, but fewer bugs vs. Competition from different manufacturers and lower prices, but more bugs and security issues.

Most people go for the lower priced computer.

Disclaimer: I own a MacBook Pro and various home-built desktops

Re:why is windows still in business? (3, Interesting)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430796)

My homebuilt Windows 7 machine has been a far smoother experience than my store-built iMac. The latter was pretty smooth on Tiger, to be sure, but Leopard onward was glitchy. I'm really not sure that Apple do too much testing on their previous generation hardware.

And I'd rather have 14 years of reasonable support - thank you, XP - than 2-3 years of slightly better.

Retail for using, OEM for selling (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431286)

Microsoft, however, allows any Joe Dirt to buy OEM licenses and install on any homebuilt computer.

Only when building a computer to sell, not to use. (Source [microsoft.com] )

Re:why is windows still in business? (2, Insightful)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430878)

I don't understand.

because not everyone is stupid enough to see executing the browser instead of the shell as a great new feature

you can load it on any x86 hardware! (0)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430946)

mac os is much more locked down there is a hack to open it to more hardware but even then still way less divers then windows.

The cheapest mac (new) is at $699.00 for only a 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo with 2GB memory and only a 320GB HDD 5400 RPM also need to add a keyboard and mouse.

A quick look at the windows stores shows a HP Pavilion Slimline s5731f for $549.00 with AMD Phenom II 511 Dual Core 3.40 GHz with 4 GB DDR3 SDRAM + Front panel 6-in-1 memory card reader supports xD, MMC, Secure Digital (SD, SDHC), Memory Stick, Memory Stick Pro, MMC+ and 750 GB SATA 7200 RPM

newegg has a Acer Aspire AM3400-U4132 for $559.99 with Phenom II X4 955(3.2GHz) 6GB DDR3 1TB HDD and AMD Radeon HD 6570 (way better then apples on board video in the mini)

There are also lot's pc's at $300 and up.

Preloads (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36432044)

Because most people don't build their computers (*). If you buy a computer, you're Yet Another Microsoft customer, unless you go out of your way and pay extra, in which case you're Yet Another Apple customer.

(*) assuming your computer is called a computer. If your computer is called a TV or a phone or a PVR, then the situation is different.

Next post: how to jailbreak it. (2)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430416)

If the restart isn't instantaneous (i.e., if there isn't an instant-on-to-browser mode built in) then this would seem to be a means of sandboxing a machine, as for use as a public kiosk type of terminal.

In which case the question is of course how to get back to a fully-functional shell, if, say, you lose your keys, or sump'n like dat.

Lion will be in the online Mac App Store ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430514)

So a machine with no OS, or needing an update, would need some way of getting online and possibly getting to the App Store.

discussed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430532)

This was talked about. It is Apples new way to offer online tech support to a system that has crashed.

Oh no! It's a Kiosk mode!! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430560)

So you can set it up to run as a Kiosk....

Some news.

Re:Oh no! It's a Kiosk mode!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431028)

Awesome, after years of improving CPUs with cores and threads to allow running multiple applications at the time. Apple has release the new and innovative mode that only allows you to run ONE application: the browser.

Is it a first sign of a new device? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430626)

I have to wonder if Apple is planning to come out with their own netbook. That would make heads explode in the industry after everyone largely abandoned them. It would be amusing to see everyone do a 180 trying to mimic Apple.

Apple finally admits it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36430702)

Considering that you can't really do anything useful with Mac OS, might as well implement this mode and skip any pretense of presenting itself as a proper OS.

Was Mentioned By Apple (4, Informative)

friedmud (512466) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430778)

Actually... Apple did mention as part of "Find My Mac":

http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/07/os-x-lion-developer-preview-4-adds-find-my-mac/ [macrumors.com]

The idea has three purposes:

1. Guest Access (as has been pointed out here)
2. Recovery. If you hose up your HD it may be possible to troubleshoot using this browser. It actually boots from a "recovery partition"... so your actual OSX installation doesn't even need to work.
3. Finding a stolen / lost machine. The idea is that if someone picks up your machine and tries to use it.... they might use this browser mode for a while allowing "Find my Mac" to phone home and show the coordinates of the machine.

That last one seems dodgy to me.... but that's the rumor going around the Mac sites.

Personally, I think Guest Access is a great idea. If I know I'm going to have people over to my house all evening (maybe to watch football)... I can leave a laptop around in this mode for anyone to use all evening... without fear that they are getting into my personal stuff.

One final note: This is only enabled after downloading the iCloud installer to go with Lion preview.... just in case anyone else out there is trying to figure out how to use it.

Re:Was Mentioned By Apple (1)

friedmud (512466) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430802)

Another thing about "Recovery". Since Lion is going to be electronic distribution only.... some people are thinking that this browser mode might allow you to reinstall the OS somehow.... either by saving the Lion image to a USB Key or doing some sort of direct install.

I don't know about that one personally.... but I guess it is possible.

Re:Was Mentioned By Apple (1)

fusiongyro (55524) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431538)

It's not electronic-only. It's electronic additionally. They're still making DVDs for it. It's an OS after all...

Re:Was Mentioned By Apple (1)

am 2k (217885) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431638)

It's not electronic-only. It's electronic additionally. They're still making DVDs for it. It's an OS after all...

No, GP was correct. There will be no DVDs for this one.

Re:Was Mentioned By Apple (2)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 3 years ago | (#36430988)

That last one seems dodgy to me.... but that's the rumor going around the Mac sites.

It's not just a rumor; click the link you posted and look at the first image.

While it won't stop professional thief who knows to take apart the computer, pull the battery, wipe the PRAM and hard drive before ever turning the thing on, the vast majority of computer thieves are fortunately not IT experts. Computers that boot to a hidden partition, connect to the nearest unsecured wifi and scream "Here I Am!" will definitely help owners and police in tracking them down.

Re:Was Mentioned By Apple (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431644)

That last one seems dodgy to me.... but that's the rumor going around the Mac sites.

It's not just a rumor; click the link you posted and look at the first image.

If you RTFA, you lose the Game.

Think anyone takes U seriously, troll? No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36432084)

We all know you're just a piece of online trolling trash per your own admissions thereof here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34543612 [slashdot.org]

Re:Was Mentioned By Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431122)

This just seems like "Kiosk Mode" to me...

Re:Was Mentioned By Apple (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431630)

Bah, I was able to do this on my Mac Classic, and the image was in ROM, not on a 'recovery partition'. Command-option x-o

You can't "impress" troll, simply because (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36432040)

We all know you're just a piece of online trolling trash per your own admissions thereof here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34543612 [slashdot.org]

Re:You can't "impress" troll, simply because (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36432352)

Dude, just buy a penis enlarger already ...

Re:Was Mentioned By Apple (1)

Coppit (2441) | more than 3 years ago | (#36432138)

Personally, I think Guest Access is a great idea. If I know I'm going to have people over to my house all evening (maybe to watch football)... I can leave a laptop around in this mode for anyone to use all evening... without fear that they are getting into my personal stuff.

Just turn on the guest account. That way you can still stream from your iTunes library on your personal account, upload photos to Flickr, or do the 100 other things background processes enable.

Not alternative to guest, if it requires a restart (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431026)

This is supposedly meant as an alternative to guest accounts, but it's virtually useless. It makes no sense to decide that you want access to a browser "the next time you boot". It would make a lot more sense to have a "web browser" button on the login screen (so anyone could instantly use your computer as a web browser, without the need to have a user profile), or even have a web browser built into the EFI BIOS (but I guess that's patented by Phoenix - it was the reason why Firefox had to change its name).

Maybe they're adding this just as a backup so Macs infected with viruses can still connect to Apple to download patches (and not as a practical alternative to a guest account)?

This is AWESOME news!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431244)

Do you know what this means??? You can use your Mac to browse the web without fear of getting any virus or trojan!! It's a completely isolated web browsing experience. No rogue web-site can damage your OS or personal files. Browser-only mode is an ingenious idea. (I actually thought of this years ago) but, yeah, I'm happy to know this and will be downloading Lion from the Mac App Store!

Re:This is AWESOME news!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431362)

Shut up, infidel! Everyone knows Macs are immune to viruses. Witch! Witch! Burn the witch!

Nonsense (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431432)

Websites don't have access to your file system; the only way a website can do any damage to your system is if it exploits some bug in the browser (and that will still be there in "browser only mode") or if it manages to convince the users to install and run some trojan.

If that was the reason, they could simply disable file system access within Safari (call it "safe browsing mode" or whatever). But no sane person is going to reboot their system every time they need to check a web page, in the middle of a day's work.

Chrome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431282)

Can I change that to Chrome browser, kthnx. Actually this is rather useless, I havent shut down my MacBook in months.

I guess... (1)

motang (1266566) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431452)

I guess this could be useful, if you are in a hurry and want to check something out fast, but then again if you have your notebook on suspend it defeats the purpose of restarting into Safari.

Windows should have similar feature (3, Insightful)

chappel (1069900) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431540)

I've thought for years that windows should have a 'boot to Outlook' feature for executives; allow the entire available space of the drive to be used for indexed email storage to avoid having to decide which emails to delete, and load office programs by clicking on attachments, but don't confuse them with any other interface than just Outlook.

And optionally support rebooting by holding it upside down and shaking.

ch

$2000 web browser (0)

jbplou (732414) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431576)

So now I can turn a high end MacBook into a $2000 web browser, what a great idea.

Re:$2000 web browser (1)

dogmatixpsych (786818) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431752)

You could do it with a low end Mac and have a browser that costs only $600. ;)

Re:$2000 web browser (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431826)

Or you could just get a Penguin Wee for $249 and be 30x better.... lol Sometimes people are so dumb.

Re:$2000 web browser (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36431888)

or a low end PC which costs 150 usd.

Please, argue how a computer that will be "browser only" benefits from those extra 500 usd. I'm listening.

Re:$2000 web browser (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36432080)

Cheaper than a 3G iPad.

why would you name anything after a lion (-1, Offtopic)

decora (1710862) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431798)

lions, from what i have read, are the laziest creature on the planet.

they sit around 23 hours a day, mostly sleeping. then when they wake up once in a while, they go scavenge dead bodies of animals other animals killed, or picking some slow ass zebra and eating it.

then the male lions not only kill each other, they kill each others children. why? they are lions. thats why.

oh, lions also kill people. i mean not to defend their turf or children or whatever like elephans or bears.

they just like killing stuff. they are like big house cats, and everyone knows that house cats are sociopathic mass murderers. just ask the birds.

the last thing you want to name your product is 'lion'. thats like naming it 'lazy scavenging sociopathic killer'

Re:why would you name anything after a lion (3, Informative)

yarnosh (2055818) | more than 3 years ago | (#36431976)

They sit around for 23 hours a day because they CAN. They cover all of their survival needs in 1 hour a day. That's not lazy. That's efficient. U jelly.

My Mac eats small children too. OS X Lion is fitting.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...