Has anyone tried macFUSE? I've been searching for a way to mount my dreamhost account in the finder for a while now. I initially tried doing it using webDAV but for some reason it didn't really work all that well. Besides, webDAV is completely insecure ... or so I'm told. Well macFUSE allows me to easily mount my folders that are hosted on dreamhost in the finder using ssh (by using the sshfs that you can find when you click show all in the featured downloads part on the macFUSE page). And using some of the help that DavidTO gave me earlier, I can even make it mount on login automatically.
Anyhow, now my remote server is incredibly useful. Once Leopard comes out with time machine, I'll even be able to use dreamhost for that - though it may be too slow for that, I don't know.
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
I just downloaded the latest beta to test out. It has been a long time since I have used it and so far it looks good.
One question, does it display favicons with the bookmarks? I see them in the URL and in my Firefox bookmarks, but not there, even after I have loaded the page. I would also like to not display the bookmark icon in my bookmark bar. Any suggestions or is that how it is right now?
Mac vs PC question
Up til now I've been using my laptop to do my photo editing. Luckily, the monitor is decent so the prints come out pretty close to what I see.
I want to upgrade my processing machinery, but I'm not sure which way I should go. The options I'm thinking of are :
A) pc with AMD 64 fx at 2.4 with a gig of ram, a semi high end nvidia video card and a 19" viewsonic LCD monitor
or
An apple imac using an intel Core2 Duo processor 2.16GHz, a gig of ram, and a 20" apple monitor
I don't know jack about imacs....other than I've heard they are better with photo and video processing. No ideer why tho.
I use photoshop on my laptop, but I like the way aperture looks in the stuff I've read about it. Can I use photoshop on an imac? can I use aperture on a pc? I know there are a lot more software choices for pc's, but my primary use of it will be internet and photography, rather than gaming etc. So the software issue isn't my main concern.
Which set up would work better for my photo processing? Any opinions? Thanks for any guidance you can provide.
Up til now I've been using my laptop to do my photo editing. Luckily, the monitor is decent so the prints come out pretty close to what I see.
I want to upgrade my processing machinery, but I'm not sure which way I should go. The options I'm thinking of are :
A) pc with AMD 64 fx at 2.4 with a gig of ram, a semi high end nvidia video card and a 19" viewsonic LCD monitor
or
An apple imac using an intel Core2 Duo processor 2.16GHz, a gig of ram, and a 20" apple monitor
I don't know jack about imacs....other than I've heard they are better with photo and video processing. No ideer why tho.
I use photoshop on my laptop, but I like the way aperture looks in the stuff I've read about it. Can I use photoshop on an imac? can I use aperture on a pc? I know there are a lot more software choices for pc's, but my primary use of it will be internet and photography, rather than gaming etc. So the software issue isn't my main concern.
Which set up would work better for my photo processing? Any opinions? Thanks for any guidance you can provide.
I will start with a confession - I use a MAC.:D ( but I previously used Microsoft for over 20 years )
The iMac will run Photoshop just fine - if it is a windows version of PS, you can run it in Bootcamp on a MAC which allows one to run WIN XP as a virtual machine. You can get a MAC version of Photoshop from Adobe for your copy of Windows Photoshop.
Aperture is not availabe for Windows, and probable won't be in the future.
I rec you get more than 1 Gig of RAM - at least 2 Gigs would be my suggestion whether you use OS X or Windows XP or Vista.
Thx for the info. Any idea why macs are better for photo and video than pc's? Still looking for opinions on the choices I've laid out and which would work better.
Thx for the info. Any idea why macs are better for photo and video than pc's? Still looking for opinions on the choices I've laid out and which would work better.
Well, they aren't. And they are.
For photos, it's a toss-up. You can use Aperture on the Mac only. But that's not a compelling enough reason to get one. I'm a die-hard Mac fan, and I couldn't justify it based on Aperture alone. But I just don't like Aperture.
As for video, that's what I do for a living, and there's no better package than Final Cut Studio. You get a great video editor, motion graphics, audio and DVD authoring package all-in-one. Sure, you could get AVID for PC or Mac, and Premiere is on the PC, soon to be back on the Mac (after a long hiatus), but FCP is the app to have, IMO.
If that's too rich for your blood, then Final Cut Express is damn good, as well. And a lot cheaper. But that's just video.
Beneath that, are the built-in apps, iMovie, iDVD and Garage Band. The last one is fun, the first two are actually useful, IMO.
The rest of the story is the OS and the philosophy behind its design. OSX is a better OS. Period. I'll get flamed for saying it. But it's true.
I actually use both PC (at work because I HAVE to) and a Mac a home...I just ordered a new iMac (about 2 hours ago...whoo hoo). I ended up with the 24" iMac with 2.16 processor and 2GB ram, with 500GB HD...I added the Aperture software with the package so it'll be pre-installed for me.
In my opinion, I prefer the ease of use that the Mac offers vs the PC...but that could also be because I've been using Mac for the last 20 years.
I love my Macs...they are really just great machines!!!! Right now I'm using my eMac (love him) and my PowerBook G4 (love him too)...but Hubby said I was slowing them down with all my programs and photos...poor little eMac only has 1GB of Ram and a 1GB processor.
Good luck with your decision, but definitely check out the Mac...you can't go wrong!!!
Up til now I've been using my laptop to do my photo editing. Luckily, the monitor is decent so the prints come out pretty close to what I see.
I want to upgrade my processing machinery, but I'm not sure which way I should go. The options I'm thinking of are :
A) pc with AMD 64 fx at 2.4 with a gig of ram, a semi high end nvidia video card and a 19" viewsonic LCD monitor
or
An apple imac using an intel Core2 Duo processor 2.16GHz, a gig of ram, and a 20" apple monitor
I don't know jack about imacs....other than I've heard they are better with photo and video processing. No ideer why tho.
I use photoshop on my laptop, but I like the way aperture looks in the stuff I've read about it. Can I use photoshop on an imac? can I use aperture on a pc? I know there are a lot more software choices for pc's, but my primary use of it will be internet and photography, rather than gaming etc. So the software issue isn't my main concern.
Which set up would work better for my photo processing? Any opinions? Thanks for any guidance you can provide.
OK, now I strive to keep my life Mac-centered, because yeah I love Macs, but about those platform differences... If you spend all day in image processing and digital asset management apps, you may not even see the OS desktop for hours on end. Once you get into the Adobe universe, for instance, your interaction with the computer is through their interface, not Mac or Windows, and it's the same Adobe interface on both platforms. There is a myth that Windows doesn't have color management, but all the Adobe apps and other pro imaging apps on Windows do. You can calibrate your monitors, etc. just as well on Windows. The Mac used to be unquestionably superior for graphics, but that was a long time ago. Windows is perfectly workable for it.
If I were in your situation, I would budget for at least 2GB RAM regardless of platform. And then try Adobe Lightroom. Lightroom is more like Aperture than any other software out there now, some say it is better, and it is cross-platform. You may be just as happy with Lightroom on a PC as with Aperture on an iMac. At least you can try Lightroom's 30-day trial on your PC, while there is no Windows version of Aperture.
If you feel comfortable with Windows, you know how to keep malware under control, and you haven't reached the level of Windows rage that causes some to switch, then you really don't have to get an iMac to do great image processing. But if you're curious about a Mac, I would say that it is a simpler platform overall to maintain over the long term and more secure by design, and there is plenty of innovative software being written for it.
I just today bought a 13" Macbook and upgraded to 2gb ram right away. I've never used a Mac much, but I'm sold on the OS, the "front Row" software, and lots of the other built in apps. And for me the worldwide extended warranty (for upcoming travels) is a big plus.
The jury is stil out on whether a dedicated video card makes a big difference for photo apps. Video editing, games, etc yes, but not so much for photos. I guess it depends on what else you want to use the 'puter for.
G'luck, and let us know what you got and why, and how it's working out for you.
VI
dgrin.com - making my best shots even better since 2006.
Regarding the PC with the AMD processor, I'd shy away from the FX53 (which is what I was assuming you were looking at since it's the only AMD FX series processor at 2.4GHz) - it's single core and REALLY slow by today's standards as it was released in '04. You'd be much better suited looking at Intel's Core2 Duo processors or even AMD's newer X2 processors, given the recent price cuts - although AMD's processors are currently running with very little headroom and Intel's have quite a bit.
As far as Mac vs. PC - try them both. See what you like from a usability standpoint. Price out equivalent hardware and see what you come up with; I'm a PC guy personally but I do use Macs quite often for work purposes. As a generalization, Macs cost a bit more for a given hardware spec, but you do have the option of running Windows. PCs tend to cost less and are easier to expand later down the road, but (save for OSx86), no Mac interface. Good luck
I will start with a confession - I use a MAC.:D ( but I previously used Microsoft for over 20 years )
The iMac will run Photoshop just fine - if it is a windows version of PS, you can run it in Bootcamp on a MAC which allows one to run WIN XP as a virtual machine. You can get a MAC version of Photoshop from Adobe for your copy of Windows Photoshop.
.
PF will there be a substantial speed diff with running standard mac CS against running CS2 windows version in bootcamp ?
Its hard enough buying a new computer without having to replace software.
You can try googling "photoshop rosetta versus boot camp." In the results is this quick test which makes it look like, on an Intel Mac, it is much faster to run Windows Photoshop CS2 in Boot Camp than non-Intel-native Mac CS2 through Rosetta.
But Adobe has said for about a year that CS3 will ship Spring 2007 (assuming Northern Hemisphere ). That's getting close now. After CS3 ships, or if you play with the public CS3 beta now, Intel Macs should have no performance gap compared to Windows PCs.
And the reports are that if you want to switch your Adobe software license from Windows to Mac or vice versa, Adobe customer service will do it for a very small administrative fee (at least in the USA).
I rec you get more than 1 Gig of RAM - at least 2 Gigs would be my suggestion whether you use OS X or Windows XP or Vista.
This (and those who later agreed with it) is 100% correct. 2GB!
Any idea why macs are better for photo and video than pc's?
They aren't, and no one can honestly say that they are. People can believe iMovie is better than WMM, or that Aperture is better than Lightroom, PSP, Photoshop, etc. - but you can't say that the hardware or OS is natively better in either case. DavidTO points this out well with his video editing example - it's all about the software!
The jury is stil out on whether a dedicated video card makes a big difference for photo apps. Video editing, games, etc yes, but not so much for photos. I guess it depends on what else you want to use the 'puter for.
Neah, it's not really out any more. The "high end video card" the OP mentioned is totally unnecessary. If you take the PC option in the end you'd be better served to upgrade your 19" monitor to a 20" and to buy a 2/4GB usb flash drive that Vista can use as (essentially) extra RAM when you're editing photos.
OK, now I strive to keep my life Mac-centered, because yeah I love Macs, but about those platform differences... If you spend all day in image processing and digital asset management apps, you may not even see the OS desktop for hours on end. Once you get into the Adobe universe, for instance, your interaction with the computer is through their interface, not Mac or Windows, and it's the same Adobe interface on both platforms. There is a myth that Windows doesn't have color management, but all the Adobe apps and other pro imaging apps on Windows do. You can calibrate your monitors, etc. just as well on Windows. The Mac used to be unquestionably superior for graphics, but that was a long time ago. Windows is perfectly workable for it.
If I were in your situation, I would budget for at least 2GB RAM regardless of platform. And then try Adobe Lightroom. Lightroom is more like Aperture than any other software out there now, some say it is better, and it is cross-platform. You may be just as happy with Lightroom on a PC as with Aperture on an iMac. At least you can try Lightroom's 30-day trial on your PC, while there is no Windows version of Aperture.
If you feel comfortable with Windows, you know how to keep malware under control, and you haven't reached the level of Windows rage that causes some to switch, then you really don't have to get an iMac to do great image processing. But if you're curious about a Mac, I would say that it is a simpler platform overall to maintain over the long term and more secure by design, and there is plenty of innovative software being written for it.
:wow:wow:wow Wow, I'm shocked. A well-reasoned, balanced reply from a Mac user. You give hope.
As a PC user, I completely agree with colourbox's post. PC or Mac, either one works equally well for image processing. The Mac advantage is long-past history and is now simply a myth; I did use a Mac in the days the advantage was a reality--it vanished a long time ago and is now mostly wishful thinking and inertia on the part of Apple and their fans. Today it's really a matter of preference, like pretty much any brand debate. Pick the one that you're happier with.
Both sets of specs will work, and the same general advice applies: get the most RAM you can stuff in the box, and get as much storage as you can.
Just to clear up a thing or two, so others will stop slamming me about it...
I would never have bought a puter for photo processing without having at least 2gb ram. My comparison request was more about the pc vs mac issue rather than the details of the builds. I just grabbed a couple of sample builds off the web for a comparison. The AMD processor I am looking at is a 64 bit dual core. Thank you all for your input tho. It gave me alot of food for thought.
I've pretty much concluded that as long as you have plenty of ram and HD space, and a decent monitor that allows you to calibrate it properly, you should be able to fine tune photos equally as well whether you use a mac or a pc. I think I'm gonna have a puter built for me. I have real fears about buying a branded desktop. I'll buy another HP laptop when the time comes, but with desktops (IMO) they are better if you have one built to your specs.
One question, does it display favicons with the bookmarks? I see them in the URL and in my Firefox bookmarks, but not there, even after I have loaded the page. I would also like to not display the bookmark icon in my bookmark bar. Any suggestions or is that how it is right now?
One question, does it display favicons with the bookmarks?
Yes. Both in the bookmark bar and in the menu.
I see them in the URL and in my Firefox bookmarks, but not there, even after I have loaded the page.
As near as I can tell, Camino loads favicons asynchronously from the page. One thing I have noticed, is that if I have bookmarked a page that has a page specific favicon it does NOT honor it. So if in the html head there is:
then in the bookmark bar it will show it, but in the url bar it will show the server's /favicon.ico instead. (my internal project server has a single default favicon, that is overridden for each project I deploy on it to deliver that project's specific favicon... in Camino they all have the same icon in the url bar, but get their own unique icon in the bookmark bar/menu. Very confusing at times.)
I would also like to not display the bookmark icon in my bookmark bar. Any suggestions or is that how it is right now?
This is where you lost me... do you want favicon's for your bookmark bar or not? (as you can see in the screen scrape above, I live by them. Actually, that's my out of date Camino set....)
To get rid of them, bring up about:config, search for favicons, this should show you browser.chrome.favicons.... double click it to change it to false, quit and restart. This *used* to work for me in both firefox and camino. I just tried it and it doesn't seem to do anything anymore. <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/ne_nau.gif" border="0" alt="" >
SmugMug Sorcerer - Engineering Team Champion for Commerce, Finance, Security, and Data Support http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
Ever wish that you could remap the enter key? I don't have any use for it and I'm always hitting it when I reach for the cmd or arrow keys. DoubleCommand will let you map it (and lots of other keys).
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
Thanks, your answers were what I needed, even if my questions were not super clear.
Camino is only displaying the default favicon icon, not the correct one for the websites on my computer. In FF they do not display in my bookmarks bar, but they do show up in the URL and in my bookmark folders. So I can either try to fix it or just live with it in Camino. I want to not display them in the bookmark bar to save space.
Ever wish that you could remap the enter key? I don't have any use for it and I'm always hitting it when I reach for the cmd or arrow keys. DoubleCommand will let you map it (and lots of other keys).
I like this, thanks Mike. I'm a gonna make me a forward delete key. I hate the fctn-delete deal.
Regarding the PC with the AMD processor, I'd shy away from the FX53 (which is what I was assuming you were looking at since it's the only AMD FX series processor at 2.4GHz) - it's single core and REALLY slow by today's standards as it was released in '04. You'd be much better suited looking at Intel's Core2 Duo processors or even AMD's newer X2 processors, given the recent price cuts - although AMD's processors are currently running with very little headroom and Intel's have quite a bit.
One of the best bang for buck AMD chips you can get a hold of right now is the AMD64 4000+ (90mn/HT2G) It is a single core chip that beats alot of the multicore's out there. It also costs a whopping $79 bucks. It's and older chip, but it can still hold it's own against machines 2 years younger in most cases. Family constraints have me buying my hardware on that curve, but my rig is as fast or faster then most big-brand boxes 2 or 3 years younger.
As for the Mac or PC battle, as a 15 year IT vet with Mac, PC, Unix, Linux, and some rather obscure platforms under my belt, I can say this: The Intel Macs + OSX Tiger are some of the most stable and troublefree platforms out there. Defiately fire and forget systems. You can't frakle them up like you can Wintel boxes, but they are the tools that I reach for when I want to get it done without worry of interruption. Not flamebait - I love both platforms for different reasons - but just my experience. Evanglism in Technology is just silly... they are tools. Some folks are better with a dremel then a cope saw.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymous
I am seriously considering a move to Mac (the trojans/adware & viruses are just getting too hard to fight anymore)
Comments
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20070217052629138
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Anyhow, now my remote server is incredibly useful. Once Leopard comes out with time machine, I'll even be able to use dreamhost for that - though it may be too slow for that, I don't know.
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
I just downloaded the latest beta to test out. It has been a long time since I have used it and so far it looks good.
One question, does it display favicons with the bookmarks? I see them in the URL and in my Firefox bookmarks, but not there, even after I have loaded the page. I would also like to not display the bookmark icon in my bookmark bar. Any suggestions or is that how it is right now?
Up til now I've been using my laptop to do my photo editing. Luckily, the monitor is decent so the prints come out pretty close to what I see.
I want to upgrade my processing machinery, but I'm not sure which way I should go. The options I'm thinking of are :
A) pc with AMD 64 fx at 2.4 with a gig of ram, a semi high end nvidia video card and a 19" viewsonic LCD monitor
or
I don't know jack about imacs....other than I've heard they are better with photo and video processing. No ideer why tho.
I use photoshop on my laptop, but I like the way aperture looks in the stuff I've read about it. Can I use photoshop on an imac? can I use aperture on a pc? I know there are a lot more software choices for pc's, but my primary use of it will be internet and photography, rather than gaming etc. So the software issue isn't my main concern.
Which set up would work better for my photo processing? Any opinions? Thanks for any guidance you can provide.
www.portraitwhisperer.com
I will start with a confession - I use a MAC.:D ( but I previously used Microsoft for over 20 years )
The iMac will run Photoshop just fine - if it is a windows version of PS, you can run it in Bootcamp on a MAC which allows one to run WIN XP as a virtual machine. You can get a MAC version of Photoshop from Adobe for your copy of Windows Photoshop.
Aperture is not availabe for Windows, and probable won't be in the future.
I rec you get more than 1 Gig of RAM - at least 2 Gigs would be my suggestion whether you use OS X or Windows XP or Vista.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
www.portraitwhisperer.com
Well, they aren't. And they are.
For photos, it's a toss-up. You can use Aperture on the Mac only. But that's not a compelling enough reason to get one. I'm a die-hard Mac fan, and I couldn't justify it based on Aperture alone. But I just don't like Aperture.
As for video, that's what I do for a living, and there's no better package than Final Cut Studio. You get a great video editor, motion graphics, audio and DVD authoring package all-in-one. Sure, you could get AVID for PC or Mac, and Premiere is on the PC, soon to be back on the Mac (after a long hiatus), but FCP is the app to have, IMO.
If that's too rich for your blood, then Final Cut Express is damn good, as well. And a lot cheaper. But that's just video.
Beneath that, are the built-in apps, iMovie, iDVD and Garage Band. The last one is fun, the first two are actually useful, IMO.
The rest of the story is the OS and the philosophy behind its design. OSX is a better OS. Period. I'll get flamed for saying it. But it's true.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Hi CarnalSigh,
I actually use both PC (at work because I HAVE to) and a Mac a home...I just ordered a new iMac (about 2 hours ago...whoo hoo). I ended up with the 24" iMac with 2.16 processor and 2GB ram, with 500GB HD...I added the Aperture software with the package so it'll be pre-installed for me.
In my opinion, I prefer the ease of use that the Mac offers vs the PC...but that could also be because I've been using Mac for the last 20 years.
I love my Macs...they are really just great machines!!!! Right now I'm using my eMac (love him) and my PowerBook G4 (love him too)...but Hubby said I was slowing them down with all my programs and photos...poor little eMac only has 1GB of Ram and a 1GB processor.
Good luck with your decision, but definitely check out the Mac...you can't go wrong!!!
MUTTography - Modern and Fun Lifestyle Pet Photography
MUTTography | My SmugMug | Facebook | Google+
If I were in your situation, I would budget for at least 2GB RAM regardless of platform. And then try Adobe Lightroom. Lightroom is more like Aperture than any other software out there now, some say it is better, and it is cross-platform. You may be just as happy with Lightroom on a PC as with Aperture on an iMac. At least you can try Lightroom's 30-day trial on your PC, while there is no Windows version of Aperture.
If you feel comfortable with Windows, you know how to keep malware under control, and you haven't reached the level of Windows rage that causes some to switch, then you really don't have to get an iMac to do great image processing. But if you're curious about a Mac, I would say that it is a simpler platform overall to maintain over the long term and more secure by design, and there is plenty of innovative software being written for it.
www.portraitwhisperer.com
I just today bought a 13" Macbook and upgraded to 2gb ram right away. I've never used a Mac much, but I'm sold on the OS, the "front Row" software, and lots of the other built in apps. And for me the worldwide extended warranty (for upcoming travels) is a big plus.
The jury is stil out on whether a dedicated video card makes a big difference for photo apps. Video editing, games, etc yes, but not so much for photos. I guess it depends on what else you want to use the 'puter for.
G'luck, and let us know what you got and why, and how it's working out for you.
VI
As far as Mac vs. PC - try them both. See what you like from a usability standpoint. Price out equivalent hardware and see what you come up with; I'm a PC guy personally but I do use Macs quite often for work purposes. As a generalization, Macs cost a bit more for a given hardware spec, but you do have the option of running Windows. PCs tend to cost less and are easier to expand later down the road, but (save for OSx86), no Mac interface. Good luck
PF will there be a substantial speed diff with running standard mac CS against running CS2 windows version in bootcamp ?
Its hard enough buying a new computer without having to replace software.
But Adobe has said for about a year that CS3 will ship Spring 2007 (assuming Northern Hemisphere
And the reports are that if you want to switch your Adobe software license from Windows to Mac or vice versa, Adobe customer service will do it for a very small administrative fee (at least in the USA).
This (and those who later agreed with it) is 100% correct. 2GB!
They aren't, and no one can honestly say that they are. People can believe iMovie is better than WMM, or that Aperture is better than Lightroom, PSP, Photoshop, etc. - but you can't say that the hardware or OS is natively better in either case. DavidTO points this out well with his video editing example - it's all about the software!
Flame bait gets flamed. Period.
Neah, it's not really out any more. The "high end video card" the OP mentioned is totally unnecessary. If you take the PC option in the end you'd be better served to upgrade your 19" monitor to a 20" and to buy a 2/4GB usb flash drive that Vista can use as (essentially) extra RAM when you're editing photos.
Ditto. Intel has finally caught and passed AMD. AMD will come back - but if you're buying a processor right now, go Intel.
:wow:wow:wow Wow, I'm shocked. A well-reasoned, balanced reply from a Mac user. You give hope.
As a PC user, I completely agree with colourbox's post. PC or Mac, either one works equally well for image processing. The Mac advantage is long-past history and is now simply a myth; I did use a Mac in the days the advantage was a reality--it vanished a long time ago and is now mostly wishful thinking and inertia on the part of Apple and their fans. Today it's really a matter of preference, like pretty much any brand debate. Pick the one that you're happier with.
Both sets of specs will work, and the same general advice applies: get the most RAM you can stuff in the box, and get as much storage as you can.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
I would never have bought a puter for photo processing without having at least 2gb ram. My comparison request was more about the pc vs mac issue rather than the details of the builds. I just grabbed a couple of sample builds off the web for a comparison. The AMD processor I am looking at is a 64 bit dual core. Thank you all for your input tho. It gave me alot of food for thought.
I've pretty much concluded that as long as you have plenty of ram and HD space, and a decent monitor that allows you to calibrate it properly, you should be able to fine tune photos equally as well whether you use a mac or a pc. I think I'm gonna have a puter built for me. I have real fears about buying a branded desktop. I'll buy another HP laptop when the time comes, but with desktops (IMO) they are better if you have one built to your specs.
www.portraitwhisperer.com
<img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/headscratch.gif" border="0" alt="" > I think you lost me on that.
Yes. Both in the bookmark bar and in the menu.
As near as I can tell, Camino loads favicons asynchronously from the page. One thing I have noticed, is that if I have bookmarked a page that has a page specific favicon it does NOT honor it. So if in the html head there is:
[PHP]<link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="page_special.png">[/PHP]
then in the bookmark bar it will show it, but in the url bar it will show the server's /favicon.ico instead. (my internal project server has a single default favicon, that is overridden for each project I deploy on it to deliver that project's specific favicon... in Camino they all have the same icon in the url bar, but get their own unique icon in the bookmark bar/menu. Very confusing at times.)
This is where you lost me... do you want favicon's for your bookmark bar or not? (as you can see in the screen scrape above, I live by them. Actually, that's my out of date Camino set....)
To get rid of them, bring up about:config, search for favicons, this should show you browser.chrome.favicons.... double click it to change it to false, quit and restart. This *used* to work for me in both firefox and camino. I just tried it and it doesn't seem to do anything anymore. <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/ne_nau.gif" border="0" alt="" >
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
Thanks, your answers were what I needed, even if my questions were not super clear.
Camino is only displaying the default favicon icon, not the correct one for the websites on my computer. In FF they do not display in my bookmarks bar, but they do show up in the URL and in my bookmark folders. So I can either try to fix it or just live with it in Camino. I want to not display them in the bookmark bar to save space.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
One of the best bang for buck AMD chips you can get a hold of right now is the AMD64 4000+ (90mn/HT2G) It is a single core chip that beats alot of the multicore's out there. It also costs a whopping $79 bucks. It's and older chip, but it can still hold it's own against machines 2 years younger in most cases. Family constraints have me buying my hardware on that curve, but my rig is as fast or faster then most big-brand boxes 2 or 3 years younger.
As for the Mac or PC battle, as a 15 year IT vet with Mac, PC, Unix, Linux, and some rather obscure platforms under my belt, I can say this: The Intel Macs + OSX Tiger are some of the most stable and troublefree platforms out there. Defiately fire and forget systems. You can't frakle them up like you can Wintel boxes, but they are the tools that I reach for when I want to get it done without worry of interruption. Not flamebait - I love both platforms for different reasons - but just my experience. Evanglism in Technology is just silly... they are tools. Some folks are better with a dremel then a cope saw.
Stay tuned....
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Gus??
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
Plasq's app Comic Life came bundled on my MBP, and it's a nice little app, too.
I don't know how to do fancy digg buttons like Andy does, but I digged it, here.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
It will be when it's released. Check out the video on the sight. It's not the greatest vid, but the features are awesome.
When you're capturing a selection, guides pop out from your cursor to go all the way across or down your screen.
You can resize in Skitch: no need to open PS.
You can annotate your screencaptures with words, arrows, drawings: again, no need for PS.
When you drag your screencapture the window you're working in (Skitch window) shrinks to get out of your way.
I think it'll be great for writing tutes, pointing out design ideas, and possibly even photo critiques.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Or a Sawzall®
-Fleetwood Mac