MacOS X now has Force Feedback!

The recent release of MacOS X 10.2.3 brings Force Feedback to the Mac. http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0212/20.f1.php There is a patch available for F1-2000 out now to take advantage of it. Enjoy! -Larry

Macintosh were a few years behind with colordisplays, then it was multitasking, and now forcefeedback. and in 10years they will get windows xp :/ :( btw. i still have my apple upgraded fully out to 10MB, and fpu :) plays starwars, and dark castle pretty nice. Too bad ive lost my deja vu discs :( "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MjJM9.28657$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> The recent release of MacOS X 10.2.3 brings Force Feedback to the Mac. > > http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0212/20.f1.php > > There is a patch available for F1-2000 out now to take advantage of it. > > Enjoy! > > -Larry > >

Hi, In article <RV2N9.2409$[email hidden]>, Andreas Nystrom <[email hidden]> wrote: > Macintosh were a few years behind with colordisplays, Pardon me? Macs had 640x480 with 8 bits per pixel when the PC folks thought that EGA graphics were great. Well, it was long time ago ... 8^) Herwig

yes, but when the amiga could display 4096colors, and the Atari ST 512 colors, the Macintosh were still limited to black and white :/ when i had a Mac II, it had colorgraphics just like you said. The only problem was that the graphics were slow as ****. So it wasnt any good except for slowmoving games, or just graphics-editing which didnt need so much power. But i love the dual monitor support they had :) and it was great for soundediting.. not to mention that every macintosh in the II era looked awesome on the desk. not to mention the Quadras .. mmm *wet dreams * :D "Herwig Henseler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:221220021054213154%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Hi, > > In article <RV2N9.2409$[email hidden]>, Andreas Nystrom > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > Macintosh were a few years behind with colordisplays, > > Pardon me? Macs had 640x480 with 8 bits per pixel when the PC folks > thought that EGA graphics were great. Well, it was long time ago ... > 8^) > > Herwig

> and in 10years they will get windows xp :/ :( Hahahahaha! Awesome! :) Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com "Andreas Nystrom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RV2N9.2409$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (26 lines)

> Macintosh were a few years behind with colordisplays, > then it was multitasking, and now forcefeedback. > > > btw. i still have my apple upgraded fully out to 10MB, and fpu :) plays > starwars, and dark castle pretty nice. > > Too bad ive lost my deja vu discs :( > > > > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:MjJM9.28657$[email hidden]... > > The recent release of MacOS X 10.2.3 brings Force Feedback to the Mac. > > > > http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0212/20.f1.php > > > > There is a patch available for F1-2000 out now to take advantage of it. > > > > Enjoy! > > > > -Larry > > > > > >

> yes, but when the amiga could display 4096colors, and the Atari ST 512 > colors, the Macintosh were still limited to black and white :/ Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and now it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years.

Andrew Williams wrote: > Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and now > it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years. Except in usability ;) Regards, Ruud (Owner of a Mac, PC, Amiga, ST, ZX81, PET 2001, VAX, PDP-11, VIC20, Epson HX-20, MSX, QL, BBC, SGI Indy, Lisa, P2000, C128, IIGS, IBM 5150 PC, RS/6000 etc etc etc... so yes, I guess I can actually compare ;)

"Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:au8cb2$u7$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Andrew Williams wrote: > > Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and now > > it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years. > > Except in usability ;) > > Regards, Ruud > > (Owner of a Mac, PC, Amiga, ST, ZX81, PET 2001, VAX, PDP-11, VIC20, > Epson HX-20, MSX, QL, BBC, SGI Indy, Lisa, P2000, C128, IIGS, IBM 5150 > PC, RS/6000 etc etc etc... so yes, I guess I can actually compare ;)

If OSX ever makes it to the PC I'm on it! - Dave

> > Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days andnow > > it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years. > > Except in usability ;) ....at the extreme expense of flexibility ;)

Dave Cook wrote:

Quoted text (21 lines)

>"Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:au8cb2$u7$[email hidden]... > >>Andrew Williams wrote: >> >>>Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and now >>>it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years. >>> >>Except in usability ;) >> >>Regards, Ruud >> >>(Owner of a Mac, PC, Amiga, ST, ZX81, PET 2001, VAX, PDP-11, VIC20, >>Epson HX-20, MSX, QL, BBC, SGI Indy, Lisa, P2000, C128, IIGS, IBM 5150 >>PC, RS/6000 etc etc etc... so yes, I guess I can actually compare ;) >> > >If OSX ever makes it to the PC I'm on it! > >- Dave >

I've heard rumors that Apple has had OS X running on a P4 machine for quite some time. Jim

"The Carvalho Family" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Dave Cook wrote: > > > >If OSX ever makes it to the PC I'm on it! > > > > I've heard rumors that Apple has had OS X running on a P4 machine for > quite some time. > Jim

Yeah, on their choice of PC hardware I'm sure it works quite nicely. Enter the all the various hardware configurations of the Intel world and it becomes much more complicated. Mac OS X would be another Linux - a beautiful OS with Unix roots and a fairly limited supply of device drivers to run all the hardware. It could work - but Jobs wouldn't have such a bragging right for "ease of use" as he does today... - Dave

Yes, but it can still be a damned nice fiddle :) -Larry "Andrew Williams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:au83k8$599fg$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > yes, but when the amiga could display 4096colors, and the Atari ST 512 > > colors, the Macintosh were still limited to black and white :/ > > Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and now > it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years. > >

MacOS X gets it's roots from NextStep/OpenStep, which was an x86 operating system. The rest should be easy to figure out. -Larry "The Carvalho Family" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Dave Cook wrote: > > >"Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:au8cb2$u7$[email hidden]... > > > >>Andrew Williams wrote: > >> > >>>Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and

now

Quoted text (21 lines)

> >>>it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years. > >>> > >>Except in usability ;) > >> > >>Regards, Ruud > >> > >>(Owner of a Mac, PC, Amiga, ST, ZX81, PET 2001, VAX, PDP-11, VIC20, > >>Epson HX-20, MSX, QL, BBC, SGI Indy, Lisa, P2000, C128, IIGS, IBM 5150 > >>PC, RS/6000 etc etc etc... so yes, I guess I can actually compare ;) > >> > > > >If OSX ever makes it to the PC I'm on it! > > > >- Dave > > > > I've heard rumors that Apple has had OS X running on a P4 machine for > quite some time. > Jim > >

Most humiliating thing for Macintosh owners was that a Amiga with its 68000 7.14MHz CPU emulating a Macintosh was faster then a real Macintosh with a 68000. Thats just showed how fast the graphics etc in a real macintosh were :) "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Up%N9.56258$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Yes, but it can still be a damned nice fiddle :) > > -Larry > > "Andrew Williams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:au83k8$599fg$[email hidden]... > > > yes, but when the amiga could display 4096colors, and the Atari ST 512 > > > colors, the Macintosh were still limited to black and white :/ > > > > Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and

now > > it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years. > > > > > >

"Andreas Nystrom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Rq4O9.3039$[email hidden]... > Most humiliating thing for Macintosh owners was that a Amiga with its68000 > 7.14MHz CPU emulating a Macintosh was faster then a real Macintosh with a > 68000. > Thats just showed how fast the graphics etc in a real macintosh were :) > You cannot believe how shocked I was when I finally bought PC port title for my Amiga. My little A500 had screamingly fast graphics, until I tried a PC port. Gawd was it slow...I couldn't understand how the Pysgnosis guys could put out really fast paced high framerate titles and a major PC title would just BOG everything down. dave henrie --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.431 / Virus Database: 242 - Release Date: 12/17/02

Blackbeard wrote: >>Except in usability ;) > > > Really? How long you been running GPL on it? I would call GPL a lot of things, but 'usable' isn't one of them ;) Regards, Ruud

Larry wrote: > MacOS X gets it's roots from NextStep/OpenStep, which was an x86 operating > system. Err, NO - it was a 68k OS, originally. 68030 on Cube... (I've only got a NeXT 'Slab', but with its 68040 it's faster though ;) Regards, Ruud PS. Yes, Apple will have OS X running on a Pentium somewhere, but it's highly doubtful they'd ever use it for anything than insurance - "hand us some faster CPUs pronto or we can always go to a little company called Intel!" >>I've heard rumors that Apple has had OS X running on a P4 machine for >>quite some time. >>Jim

Andreas Nystrom wrote: > Most humiliating thing for Macintosh owners was that a Amiga with its 68000 > 7.14MHz CPU emulating a Macintosh was faster then a real Macintosh with a > 68000. > Thats just showed how fast the graphics etc in a real macintosh were :) True, I ran Shapeshifter on a 68060 Amiga rig during testing, it was faster than any real 68k Mac anywhere, at the time. The humiliating part for the Amiga came when the lowly Mac surpassed its (originally superior) hardware in the end with the PPC etc etc, when Commodore was driven into the ground and it's successors amounted to virtually nothing 8( (It's a real sad story.. I lived right through it... Pray that your favorite computer never meets a horrid fate like the poor Amiga had.) Papy's Indy 500 on a lowly Amiga 1000 with 512 Kb was *amazing* though, and *smooth* too ;) Regards, Ruud

Dave Henrie wrote: > You cannot believe how shocked I was when I finally bought PC port title > for my Amiga. My little A500 had screamingly fast graphics, until I tried a > PC port. Gawd was it slow...I couldn't understand how the Pysgnosis guys > could put out really fast paced high framerate titles and a major PC title > would just BOG everything down. Well, it's not *that* surprising when you retroactively realize the Ami had video acceleration and smooth scrolling *and* great multitasking *and* a great sound card when most pc's were only just able to display EGA/VGA images and make white noise thru a tinny speaker. Animation and video acceleration came later to the pc, partly 'inspired' by what the Amiga could do. It wasn't the last time an "obscure and expen$ive but superior" system was used to build a cool game - DOOM and Quake were later developed on a NeXT (as was the WWW). Stunt Car Racer was darn cool on the Amiga, too. Regards, Ruud

I ASSURE you Apple had NextStep/OpenStep available for x86. I was a member of Apple's Developer Services at one time, and I still (somewhere) have the x86 versions of Rhapsody lying around somewhere. Larry "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:aubeog$l1k$[email hidden]... > Larry wrote: > > MacOS X gets it's roots from NextStep/OpenStep, which was an x86operating

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > system. > > Err, NO - it was a 68k OS, originally. 68030 on Cube... (I've only > got a NeXT 'Slab', but with its 68040 it's faster though ;) > > Regards, Ruud > > PS. Yes, Apple will have OS X running on a Pentium somewhere, but it's > highly doubtful they'd ever use it for anything than insurance - "hand > us some faster CPUs pronto or we can always go to a little company > called Intel!" > > >>I've heard rumors that Apple has had OS X running on a P4 machine for > >>quite some time. > >>Jim >

I never felt humiliated, especially since Amiga's are all but forgotten. Larry "Andreas Nystrom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Rq4O9.3039$[email hidden]... > Most humiliating thing for Macintosh owners was that a Amiga with its68000

Quoted text (14 lines)

> 7.14MHz CPU emulating a Macintosh was faster then a real Macintosh with a > 68000. > Thats just showed how fast the graphics etc in a real macintosh were :) > > > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Up%N9.56258$[email hidden]... > > Yes, but it can still be a damned nice fiddle :) > > > > -Larry > > > > "Andrew Williams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:au83k8$599fg$[email hidden]... > > > > yes, but when the amiga could display 4096colors, and the Atari ST

512

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > > colors, the Macintosh were still limited to black and white :/ > > > > > > Yeah, the Mac played second fiddle to the Amiga in the early days and > now > > > it's been playing second fiddle to the PC for about 10 years. > > > > > > > > > > > >

Larry wrote: > I ASSURE you Apple had NextStep/OpenStep available for x86. Larry - do read the last word in my first sentence (again), repeated hereunder ;) I know it had a x86 version later on. Regards, Ruud >>>MacOS X gets it's roots from NextStep/OpenStep, which was an x86 operating >>>system. >> >>Err, NO - it was a 68k OS, originally.

Ok, so long as you admit it :) Larry "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:auoqrv$4tq$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Larry wrote: > > I ASSURE you Apple had NextStep/OpenStep available for x86. > > Larry - do read the last word in my first sentence (again), repeated > hereunder ;) > > I know it had a x86 version later on. > > Regards, Ruud > > >>>MacOS X gets it's roots from NextStep/OpenStep, which was an x86

operating > >>>system. > >> > >>Err, NO - it was a 68k OS, originally. >