I am not able to understand how a 3.7GB install image can later fit into a 650MB recovery HD partition (and if it somehow could through some compression magic, then why not compress it even before to only give me 650MB to download from the app store)?
My total guess would be that the 650MB image just provides you a mechanism to download Lion again. Or perhaps it's a machine-specific rev? My instinct says the former.
Yup, your guess is right. Lion will be downloaded again if you install from the recovery partition.
This is Hacker News, where it is generally understood that most people will have a fairly technical background (it's not called "Hacker News" for nothing). And the review is on Ars Technica, which also targets a technical audience. John Siracusa's reviews of new versions of Mac OS X are famous, as they provide all of the technical details that most other reviewers don't. I understand that's not what you are looking f…
That's fine. My main point being the entire "Internals" section of the review could have been skipped and no one would have thought any less of it.
Stuff like the internals section is why I read his reviews.
They didn't want to make a new file system for a while, when they were going after ZFS, but that has fallen through. And anyway, all he saying is that they definitely could make their own, which is true.
Apple's interest in ZFS started in 2006. He'd already been at Apple for 4 years by then.
True but they probably had other fish to fry when he started. As I recall, he worked a lot on Mac OS X's expanding use of metadata search and extended file attributes.
Childhood phone numbers - if your parents still live in your childhood home and haven't changed phone number (not that unusual) then it's just their phone number. First teacher - actually I can't remember mine (I was only there for a single term) but, again, I know enough people who have contacts they've had since very early school days, so will share that answer. Honestly, I'm yet to come across a 'security' questio…
The best solution I've found: I lie on all my security questions. Give your father's middle name instead of your mother's maiden name, or something. As long as you're consistent in your lies, it's not hard to keep track of.
But I like the Ubuntu scrollbars better. There is at least a small line showing there is more content. The reviewer is also surprised to see he is "missing" some programs (scrollbar is missing). I think this is a bad UI decision.
What his screenshot doesn't show is that Finder does show the scrollbar for a couple seconds to indicate to the user that he/she can scroll to see more.
So why not show it all the time then? This is a great example of putting design above usability.
Childhood phone numbers - if your parents still live in your childhood home and haven't changed phone number (not that unusual) then it's just their phone number. First teacher - actually I can't remember mine (I was only there for a single term) but, again, I know enough people who have contacts they've had since very early school days, so will share that answer. Honestly, I'm yet to come across a 'security' questio…
We spent some time working on this for the security survey at SocialSci during signup -- since we don't associate your email to your account; its the only way for our participants to recover their password. We did a lot of research and came up with a list of 20 security questions, tiered by quality and applicability. We present users the questions, and allow them to skip to a more desirable one. Some highlights: Who…
"Who taught you how to drive?"
So that's 60% of your users with the security answer: "Dad"
Well, India's the exception, not the rule, when it comes to exceedingly poor infrastructure. And considering Apple's upscale target demographic, India probably isn't a huge concern for them.
Is there some other reason why you think the idea I suggested is incorrect, or not worth it? Because it seems to me that claims like India "isn't a huge concern" might hold some water, but I've read of people complaining of flaky connections even in countries with better infrastructure. Does Apple really want to waste bandwidth on re-uploading data that has already been uploaded? Lion isn't the only multi-gigabyte ap…
I can only comment on America and Japan, but I'm fairly sure that if it were that simple to implement resumable downloads, Apple would have already done so. Who knows - maybe they already have. After all, you admitted to actually restarting the download from a different IP, which means that the issue may be something completely different.
The one point (OK, one of the points) which I think will be VERY confusing to the power user is that the "Automatic Termination" function will remove programs from the application switcher. Given that they're still existing as a process, what's the point of this? The whole point is that launching and quitting apps should be transparent. Why remove it from the application switcher - which will now be the only way to s…
The entire point is that you shouldn't be concerned with what applications are running - the article discusses this idea.
When I read the section on dropping support for PowerPC-application support altogether on this version of Mac OS X, I couldn't help but think of the video of someone upgrading from Windows 1.0 all the way to Windows 7, and many of the features/applications still working. Why did Mac throw out a feature they had working? Couldn't they have retained it, just not upgraded it anymore? (Or given it to the community?)
Full Disclosure: I'm a Microsoft employee. These views are my own, but I am supporting our product.
OS X has always had its own window management protocols, different from full-screen alt-tab but arguably just as good. In Leopard it was all-windows-Expose, activated via mouse flicks to the screen hotcorners. It was great, really natural. Unfortunately they crippled the feature in Snow Leapard (grid based rather than spatial layout) and did away with it entirely in Lion in favor of Mission Control.
What?! Exposé is still there. It’s just not called Exposé.
It's really not still there though. Mission Control always groups by app. No way to get an immediate spread of all open windows. Instead you have to explore the bundles of windows grouped by app.