Under the Apple menu at the top left of the screen are System
Preferences where Software Update lurks. It looks like this:
http://img.skitch.com/20080213-dfa5me44p1b1bb98mds1nfkme5.jpg
Makes it quite easy to keep up with things.
I find that most updates fix or add things that I had no idea were
broken, or that I needed. Usually they're some fix for a connection
to a device I've never heard of.
I'm pretty much the same way with computers as I am with cars or
cameras--I just want to turn them on and have them work as expected
and reliably. I'm not into auto repair, computer fiddling or camera
mechanics. They're all just tools, and I try to buy the tools that
work the best. Right now I'm typing on a 5 1/5 year-old Apple iBook
that has never spent a day in the shop. My car is a Honda and has
never needed anything but routine maintenance. I own a variety of
cameras which have been relatively maintenance-free except for the
abuse I tend to subject them to.
btw, for anyone interested in a nifty little Mac application (sorry,
Windozers) check out www.skitch.com It takes making screenshots to a
different level. I used it to capture and post the above image link
in about 4 clicks.
Cheers,
Rich
On Feb 13, 2008, at 12:59 AM, karl shah-jenner wrote:
Rich Mason writes:
: What's your point? Most of those updates overwrite existing files.
: They don't increase space consumed on the disk. I imagine they
would
: be a challenge for people with a dial-up connection., but for those
: with a high speed connection they're a matter of clicking to install
: and then restarting. Very little time involved, and even less
hassle.
:
: Rich
2 points
1 - update time for apple users who don't keep abreast of things.
I supposed not all users are immediately aware of updates as they
come to hand..
2 - it's a lot of fixes for an OS that claims to be a straight out
of the box OS. Not that I'm a fan of Windoze, certainly not the
latter OS's, but the MS fixes for the same period and comparable
repairs to the OS totalled 13.9MB for XP - also largely
overwrites. I found it a huge surprise.. not having looked
closely of late at what Mac has been doing.
On a different note and more along the lines of the Vista post,
does anyone have any idea how Apple is handling 2D these days?
Discovering that 2D was rendered, nay, emulated by a 3D engine
makes me very curious about what other operating systems are
doing.. specifically apple
for 2D to be so miserably handled makes Vista look like a total
*no* for image handling..
karl
