 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Country Specific / UK Mac Group / May 2008Do Mac owners learn to drive / ride?
Or do they just know it all already ..? ;-) Hi all, Scenario. Our Daughter has just taken her CBT (compulsory basic (motorcycle) training) and is working on her theory test. We wandered into Smiths and bought the official DSA theory practice test CD [1] it says it's only compatible with XP (on the back it actually says 2K, XP, Vista. PII / 256M etc) Question. Had she only had her Mac and not had Parallels / Bootcamp would she be able to run it? If not, (and genuine / serious question here) what are Mac owners supposed to do? Ok, they can buy the paper version but it's no way as interactive or realistic as the computer based tests? There is an online version that may be Mac (Safari?) compatible. http://www.theory-tests.co.uk/home/ She's currently got the CD setup on our XP Tosh laptop that before I picked up the test CD had the Ubuntu hdd in but I didn't even bother to see what that thought of the CD. The thing is, learning to ride / drive isn't a rare / unusual requirement is it and I don't think the DSA are a tiny outfit? http://www.dsa.gov.uk/ <tries some stuff> [2] Yes it also works under Vista. All the best .. T i m [1] http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0115528423/beginmotorcyc-21 FWIW I think much of the CD is Flash based? [2] I just swapped out the XP hdd for the Vista one and Vista first detected the little USB wireless device I've been using with Ubuntu. It couldn't find the drivers locally (Atheros AR50007UG) but luckily I had the (mini <g>) driver CD to hand and it installed automatically from that. As soon as it was on the net the Apple Software Updater wanted to update 'iTunes + Quicktime', 61M of extra goodies for the iPhone and iPod (we have neither) and bug fixes to 'improve stability and performance'? I thought all this Apple stuff was ultimately stable and high performing already (well I did till I read all the issues with Leopard and how 'n' app works more stably / faster / at all now compared with Tiger ...)? > Our Daughter has just taken her CBT (compulsory basic (motorcycle) > training) and is working on her theory test. We wandered into Smiths [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > are Mac owners supposed to do? Ok, they can buy the paper version but > it's no way as interactive or realistic as the computer based tests? And your point is? This is hardly the only application that is not Mac compatible and what about all of those learners who don't have a computer at all? >> Our Daughter has just taken her CBT (compulsory basic (motorcycle) >> training) and is working on her theory test. We wandered into Smiths [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > compatible and what about all of those learners who don't have a > computer at all? Must you bastards continually feed this troll ???  SignatureDavid Kennedy http://www.anindianinexile.com On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 07:53:06 +0000, David Kennedy <davidkennedy@nospamtodaythanksverymuchforthekindofferyoubastard.invalid> wrote: >>> Our Daughter has just taken her CBT (compulsory basic (motorcycle) >>> training) and is working on her theory test. We wandered into Smiths [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Must you bastards continually feed this troll ??? Good to see you are still coming up with your useful and informative replies David. Still no luck finding your own life then? All the best .. T i m >> Our Daughter has just taken her CBT (compulsory basic (motorcycle) >> training) and is working on her theory test. We wandered into Smiths [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >compatible and what about all of those learners who don't have a >computer at all? Well, indeed, they have the book version I guess but I was a bit taken aback that something so basic / 'common' just might not be available for the Mac. That if that's all you had what would you do? So, if as you say "This is hardly the only application that is not Mac compatible" is it just that you all run Parallels / Bootcamp (et al) to get round the problem or simply go without? All the best .. T i m > Well, indeed, they have the book version I guess but I was a bit taken > aback that something so basic / 'common' just might not be available [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > compatible" is it just that you all run Parallels / Bootcamp (et al) > to get round the problem or simply go without? I run both but rarely use them. If it doesn't come in a Mac version then I vote with my wallet and buy something that does. >> Well, indeed, they have the book version I guess but I was a bit taken >> aback that something so basic / 'common' just might not be available [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >I run both but rarely use them. Ok .. > If it doesn't come in a Mac version >then I vote with my wallet and buy something that does. Ok. I guess that's an alternative .. I thought there might be another way .. maybe Leopard supporting some 'Windows' apps directly or summat (like it used to be good at talking to PC formatted drives etc). All the best .. T i m > Ok. I guess that's an alternative .. I thought there might be another > way .. maybe Leopard supporting some 'Windows' apps directly or summat > (like it used to be good at talking to PC formatted drives etc). Er, Still is, is it not? At least the $BIGNUM pc drives I've had in here have proven to be no problem to it, and often read more reliably on Tiger/Leopard than when connected to other PC's - something to do with ignoring the SAM on NTFS-formatted drives and therefore being unfazed by windows' "Security" and "Permissions". We regularly plug dying laptop hdd's into Macs to back them up, via USB caddies. The only ones we can't read are those with screwed controllers, and nothing short of disassembly in a clean room will read those. Besides there's a whole world of difference between reading a filesystem, and executing binaries. Insert clue to continue. Signaturejames dore IT Officer, New College, Oxford http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/ it-support@new.... >> Ok. I guess that's an alternative .. I thought there might be another >> way .. maybe Leopard supporting some 'Windows' apps directly or summat >> (like it used to be good at talking to PC formatted drives etc). > >Er, Still is, is it not? I believe that's what I said? >At least the $BIGNUM pc drives I've had in here >have proven to be no problem to it, and often read more reliably on >Tiger/Leopard than when connected to other PC's - something to do with >ignoring the SAM on NTFS-formatted drives and therefore being unfazed by >windows' "Security" and "Permissions". We regularly plug dying laptop >hdd's into Macs to back them up, via USB caddies. Didn't I read here that when the going really gets's nasty though you have to use PC based Apps to sort your dying drives? > The only ones we can't >read are those with screwed controllers, and nothing short of >disassembly in a clean room will read those. Understood. >Besides there's a whole world of difference between reading a >filesystem, and executing binaries. Insert clue to continue. Eh? I was making a (positive) comparison between the Mac and PC re the Mac's ability to read PC stuff and "I thought there might be another way .. maybe Leopard supporting some 'Windows' apps directly or summat" (which if you look closely is another topic)? I was thinking that Apple could have (but unlikely to etc) something like Parallels embedded within OSX to do what it can with filesystems also with apps. Then, if you did happen to want to run something basic and everyday like some CBT / educational software that happened to be only designed to run on Windows it would just 'run'? All the best .. T i m >>> Ok. I guess that's an alternative .. I thought there might be another >>> way .. maybe Leopard supporting some 'Windows' apps directly or summat [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I believe that's what I said? Your use of the word 'used' implied a past tense, ie something they were good at but no longer are. Jim Signaturehttp://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk NOTBOURNE (n.) In a choice between two or more possible puddings, the one nobody plumps for. >>>> Ok. I guess that's an alternative .. I thought there might be another >>>> way .. maybe Leopard supporting some 'Windows' apps directly or summat [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Your use of the word 'used' implied a past tense, ie something they were >good at but no longer are. Ah, sorry Jim ... didn't consider anyone would pick out that tiny bit when it wasn't really the core topic .. I guess I forgot where I was! ;-) All the best .. T i m > >Besides there's a whole world of difference between reading a > >filesystem, and executing binaries. Insert clue to continue. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > way .. maybe Leopard supporting some 'Windows' apps directly or > summat" (which if you look closely is another topic)? Ok, here's your clue. That's why I drew the distinction between reading a Filesystem and executing Binaries. Reading PC disks (properly, Filesystems, as the disks themselves are the physical units, not the data written on them) is easy - a filesystem is a very tightly defined thing that can be supported in relatively few lines of code, if Supporting "Windows apps dlrectly or summat" (i.e. executing the Binary files that make up applications) requires that the host OS works in the same way as the OS the applications were written for - using RPC Calls instead of sockets, loading DLL's from specific places in the filesystem, working the hardware in many and various different ways etc etc ad nauseam. It's an excruciatingly difficult job to make one OS function in the same way as another (see WINE, below). Indeed If they all worked in the same way there would only /be/ one OS (qv. UNIX, a-ha-ha-ha :-). This is why Virtualisation is such a sh.t-hot topic at the moment. It means you don't have to horribly kludge one OS to run programs for many - you get many disparate OS types running on one piece of hardware. > I was thinking that Apple could have (but unlikely to etc) something > like Parallels embedded within OSX to do what it can with filesystems > also with apps. Then, if you did happen to want to run something basic > and everyday like some CBT / educational software that happened to be > only designed to run on Windows it would just 'run'? Yes, I understood what you meant. Had Apple provided that support, it would have been trumpeted LOUD, as one of the 300 features. However, that kind of support is riddled with problems: - it would massively annoy VMWare and Parallels. - to do so requires virtualisation support to be written in at kernel level, and will still need a guest OS to run the applications properly, - while it is true that systems like WINE are available (which attempt to run Windows apps natively under Linux without virtualising the Windows OS) they're not effective, and certainly not easy to set up. Providing such half-baked support in a consumer OS is rather foolish - imagine the support calls from muppets saying 'My Microsoft Money program doesn't work properly on your Mac OS....' Much better to run applications in their native OS environment, via a VM than try to kludge your host OS into doing something it expressly wasn't designed for. Especially as third parties are providing that kind of functionality verywellthankyouverymuch. Signaturejames dore IT Officer, New College, Oxford http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/ it-support@new.... >> >Besides there's a whole world of difference between reading a >> >filesystem, and executing binaries. Insert clue to continue. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >data written on them) is easy - a filesystem is a very tightly defined >thing that can be supported in relatively few lines of code, if I understand ... >Supporting "Windows apps dlrectly or summat" (i.e. executing the Binary >files that make up applications) requires that the host OS works in the >same way as the OS the applications were written for - using RPC Calls >instead of sockets, loading DLL's from specific places in the >filesystem, working the hardware in many and various different ways etc >etc ad nauseam. I should imagine it would be. >It's an excruciatingly difficult job to make one OS >function in the same way as another (see WINE, below). Indeed If they >all worked in the same way there would only /be/ one OS (qv. UNIX, >a-ha-ha-ha :-). And that would save lots of problems ... ;-) >This is why Virtualisation is such a sh.t-hot topic at >the moment. It means you don't have to horribly kludge one OS to run >programs for many - you get many disparate OS types running on one piece >of hardware. Understood (but not something I've ever had a need to use etc). I have installed Parallels on her Mini but again, only to see what it was all about (so far anyway). >> I was thinking that Apple could have (but unlikely to etc) something >> like Parallels embedded within OSX to do what it can with filesystems [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Yes, I understood what you meant. Had Apple provided that support, it >would have been trumpeted LOUD, as one of the 300 features. Yeah, I guessed that was the case but I was just thinking out loud as in 'wouldn't it be handy' ... >However, >that kind of support is riddled with problems: > >- it would massively annoy VMWare and Parallels. And who would care about that if it earnt Apple more cash? Wouldn't / couldn't they 'buy into / up' the makers of one or the other VM's and incorporate it (didn't IBM do something like that with OS/2 and Win3.1)? >- to do so requires virtualisation support to be written in at kernel >level, and will still need a guest OS to run the applications properly, >- while it is true that systems like WINE are available (which attempt >to run Windows apps natively under Linux without virtualising the >Windows OS) they're not effective, and certainly not easy to set up. Yes, I did hear of WINE via my Ubuntu experiments James but haven't looked any further into it as I was warned it wasn't 'good' ? Also part of my Ubuntu thing was sort of a free experiment into using something other than M$ and I'd have to say for most of the 'everyday' things I've tried (web, mail, music, video) it seems ok. However, as with OSX (without virtualisation) it would be no good if you *needed* to run the DSA CBT? That (for me and many other folk) is the deal breaker and I was just thinking if the ability to run (some) Windows stuff was *built in* to OSX (rather than an add-on) then it would open it up to an even bigger market? >Providing such half-baked support in a consumer OS is rather foolish - >imagine the support calls from muppets saying 'My Microsoft Money >program doesn't work properly on your Mac OS....' Horrific .. >Much better to run applications in their native OS environment, via a VM >than try to kludge your host OS into doing something it expressly wasn't >designed for. Especially as third parties are providing that kind of >functionality verywellthankyouverymuch. Understood and thank you. All the best .. T i m > >It's an excruciatingly difficult job to make one OS > >function in the same way as another (see WINE, below). Indeed If they > >all worked in the same way there would only /be/ one OS (qv. UNIX, > >a-ha-ha-ha :-). > > And that would save lots of problems ... ;-) You'd think so, wouldn't you? Have you seen the UNIX family tree?! http://www.levenez.com/unix/ The original idea is that they were compatible. Guess what happened.... > And who would care about that if it earnt Apple more cash? Wouldn't / > couldn't they 'buy into / up' the makers of one or the other VM's and > incorporate it (didn't IBM do something like that with OS/2 and > Win3.1)? Look what happened to OS/2 :-> The acquisition of virtualisation tech by Apple isn't so far-fetched an idea, although VMWare is making boatloads of cash for SMC at the moment, so they're unlikely to sell, and Parallels do much else besides the Mac desktop software and may be too big for Apple to swallow. One alternative is XEN that runs on Linuxen - which seems to have matured of late into something approaching a useable system. It's also Open Source, mostly, and may not be too much of a chore to recompile for the BSD-based Mac OS. > >- to do so requires virtualisation support to be written in at kernel > >level, and will still need a guest OS to run the applications properly, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Yes, I did hear of WINE via my Ubuntu experiments James but haven't > looked any further into it as I was warned it wasn't 'good' ? Yes, in the way that the Atlantic is 'not small' :-> > Also > part of my Ubuntu thing was sort of a free experiment into using [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > stuff was *built in* to OSX (rather than an add-on) then it would open > it up to an even bigger market? Probably would do - and given time it may yet happen. But by that time, we'll all have mainframes in our pockets, capable of virtualisation in hardware. (Virtulisation is actually Old Tech, from days of Big Iron run by men in white coats, with clipboards and punch-card dandruff). Dell are already selling servers with VMWare virtualisation in hardware, and XEN are moving that way as well. As devices get smaller and more powerful, expect to see that kind of thing move into userland. When that happens, we'll see someone in a Black poloneck and jeans say "... and one more thing...." and show us a completely straightforward way to manage it. Cheers, Signaturejames dore IT Officer, New College, Oxford http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/ it-support@new.... >> >- while it is true that systems like WINE are available (which attempt >> >to run Windows apps natively under Linux without virtualising the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Yes, in the way that the Atlantic is 'not small' :-> To be fair, the WINE folks are getting things working (pretty successfully) while the Crossover Office folks are concentrating on selling a version that is actually usable in an end-user sort of way. Between them they do a remarkably good job. A friend tells me that all the Orange Box contents run on his early 2007 iMac, let alone Office and whatnot. Cheers - Jaimie SignatureIf you own a jackhammer, every problem looks like hours of fun >>> >- while it is true that systems like WINE are available (which attempt >>> >to run Windows apps natively under Linux without virtualising the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >successfully) while the Crossover Office folks are concentrating on >selling a version that is actually usable in an end-user sort of way. So, here's a question than if I may Jaimie, what would the chances of WINE running this 'Windows' based CBT software on Ubuntu? There's bound to be two parts to the answer in any case .. would it work in concept and what would the chances of *me* getting it to work (knowing little about Linux etc)? >Between them they do a remarkably good job. A friend tells me that all >the Orange Box contents run on his early 2007 iMac, let alone Office >and whatnot. Ah, so is this just WINE on BSD Unix / X (or whatever it is before the pedants jump in) rather than 'Linux' (Ubuntu's Gutsy Gibbon in my case) Jaimie? All the best .. T i m > > Well, indeed, they have the book version I guess but I was a bit taken > > aback that something so basic / 'common' just might not be available [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I run both but rarely use them. If it doesn't come in a Mac version > then I vote with my wallet and buy something that does. Unfortunately there isn't any other agency providing driving licences, so if you want the official licence provided by the DSA, then you need to learn the DSA rules. If you want to do that with a CD-ROM then you need to tickle Microsoft's scrotum. Remember, this government is Microsoft's bitch. SignaturePd >> > Well, indeed, they have the book version I guess but I was a bit taken >> > aback that something so basic / 'common' just might not be available [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >to learn the DSA rules. If you want to do that with a CD-ROM then you >need to tickle Microsoft's scrotum. Indeed and I was sorta hoping / expecting someone to come up with a Mac version or a Mac 'alternative' (like iSynch for Nokia PC Suite etc is it?) ? >Remember, this government is Microsoft's bitch. I care less about that .. I just want to be able to buy stuff in a high street shop and know there's a pretty good chance it's compatible with the kit I have at home. Like the 'Hazard Perception' DVD works in my domestic DVD player .... All the best .. T i m > >Remember, this government is Microsoft's bitch. > > I care less about that .. I just want to be able to buy stuff in a > high street shop I have some lovely clothes you might like, very cheap. They're made by eight year old children in a sweat shop in Burma. "I don't do politics" is such a handy disclaimer. SignaturePd >> Well, indeed, they have the book version I guess but I was a bit taken >> aback that something so basic / 'common' just might not be available [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I run both but rarely use them. If it doesn't come in a Mac version >then I vote with my wallet and buy something that does. I was thinking further about that Darren ... so isn't that like buying a nice but left hand drive car for use here in the UK then going hungry because you can't use any of the drive-thru's? I mean, how much effort do Mac users have to sometimes go though just because their chosen platform is slightly out of tilt with the rest of the world (and I'm not digging the Mac or Mac users or saying that M$ is brilliant etc yada yada . ..)? I guess the reason I don't 'get it' is because I don't have any issues with the PC hardware and XP so see no need to make my life more difficult (like with this DSA CD). All the best .. T i m > >> Well, indeed, they have the book version I guess but I was a bit taken > >> aback that something so basic / 'common' just might not be available [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > with the PC hardware and XP so see no need to make my life more > difficult (like with this DSA CD). You're trolling again T i m . Get off it. >> I guess the reason I don't 'get it' is because I don't have any issues >> with the PC hardware and XP so see no need to make my life more >> difficult (like with this DSA CD). > >You're trolling again T i m . Get off it. (in that case) your perpetuating it again Tim, stop it. ;-) Plenty of stuff on here could be seen as trolling if you were in the mind to read it that way and I really don't see how my honest and truthful observations and questions are so bad / off topic that I attract the netcop (that's you that is, I care less about Mrs Kennedy) where other stuff goes unnoticed (unless you don't *really* think I'm trolling of course ..). *I* think part of the problem here is that maybe I hit a small nerve? Just be honest here for a sec. Would you *enjoy* not being able to buy / use say this DSA training CD, just because it wasn't available on your preferred platform? Or would it actually be a bit of the PITA, no matter what the reasons behind said were? The thing is *I* would really really like a genuine alternative to M$, (and why I have been running Ubuntu recently) because contrary to popular belief I don't think M$ are the best thing since sliced bread and generally use alternative applications where I can, where they are better than the MS offing that is. However (for *me*) this OS would have to run on a platform I could easily maintain and run all the regular stuff such as this DSA CD .. our interest here is our daughter taking and passing her bike test and using whatever tools are available to help her achieve that, rather than any interest in the platform / OS etc? I bought her the book version before someone gave us the CD / DVD (they used them successfully to pass themselves) but she prefers the flexibility of the computer based learning / testing (and it's how she will be finally tested in any case). All the best .. T i m > *I* think part of the problem here is that maybe I hit a small nerve? No, if people want to run a Windows application they can do it. You're forgetting that I couldn't run Adobe Reader on Vista without a bit of research; 10.5 has built-in support for PDFs *and* QuickLook. Tim SignatureTim Gowen >> *I* think part of the problem here is that maybe I hit a small nerve? > >No, if people want to run a Windows application they can do it. With the VM thing we said yes .. >You're forgetting that I couldn't run Adobe Reader on Vista without a >bit of research; Sorry Tim, did you tell me .. I'm old remember. I do remember I couldn't run Flash movies on Ubuntu without some faffing about but I'm downloading Acrobat reader on the Vista laptop now and see what happens (not a regular .pdf user) ..... <download / install Acrobat reader> well, 8.1.1 seems to be ok on there now, what didn't work Tim? > 10.5 has built-in support for PDFs *and* QuickLook. Oh I bet (that's good right <g>), and it (probably) does many other things as well if not better than XP / Vista but that wasn't my point. Windows has built in support for windows only progs and support for all of the hardware in this building, something I can't say for OSX or Ubuntu ... (<< not a criticism, merely an observation and not a surprise to me for one). The point was I was surprised that (it turns out) there isn't a Mac version of something so fundamental as the driving test practice materials ... that was all ... ? All the best .. T i m > The point was I was surprised that (it turns out) there isn't a Mac > version of something so fundamental as the driving test practice > materials ... that was all ... ? "So fundamental"? Oh dear, you make it sound like gravity or something. But yes, lots of stuff isn't on the Mac and we put up with it because what remains is compelling. Not for you, obviously. You prefer a petri dish for malware. Cheers, R. >> The point was I was surprised that (it turns out) there isn't a Mac >> version of something so fundamental as the driving test practice >> materials ... that was all ... ? > >"So fundamental"? Oh dear, you make it sound like gravity >or something. It is if you are keen to get 43 out of 50 on your theory test? >But yes, lots of stuff isn't on the Mac and we >put up with it because what remains is compelling. Understood. >Not for >you, obviously. Correct, I don't have to put up with anything. ;-) > You prefer a petri dish for malware. I do .. ? Oh bless, you are getting me confused with one of those numpties (on here and elsewhere) that can't seem to keep a Windows box running smoothly because they aren't competent enough! ;-) All the best .. T i m >>> The point was I was surprised that (it turns out) there isn't a Mac >>> version of something so fundamental as the driving test practice [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > It is if you are keen to get 43 out of 50 on your theory test? I'm not keen. I Passed it first time years ago (no need for any easy PeeCee lemon cheesy materials) and am good to drive until the year dot. So not fundamental for me. And not for lots of people. Gravity is pretty fundamental though. You wouldn't want your PC floating up when you're about to give it a good going over with a traction engine. >> You prefer a petri dish for malware. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > here and elsewhere) that can't seem to keep a Windows box running > smoothly because they aren't competent enough! ;-) How do you know you haven't got any malware? :) The AV stuff you've advocated before has a poor detection rate, btw. >>>> The point was I was surprised that (it turns out) there isn't a Mac >>>> version of something so fundamental as the driving test practice [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >I'm not keen. You are easily satisfied then. ;-) > I Passed it first time years ago (no need for any >easy PeeCee lemon cheesy materials) and am good to drive >until the year dot. Me too .. >So not fundamental for me. Nor me .. > And not for lots >of people. But for lots of other people .. > Gravity is pretty fundamental though. And is even available on the Mac I understand? > You wouldn't >want your PC floating up when you're about to give it a good >going over with a traction engine. With this old full height tower case I wouldn't put money on the traction engine winning! >>> You prefer a petri dish for malware. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >How do you know you haven't got any malware? :) I just know .. it's a sort of force that only those that can keep PC's working could possibly comprehend Rolly. >The AV stuff you've advocated before has a poor detection rate, btw. No matter .. "These aren't the malware you are looking for ... move along .. move along ... " All the best ... T i m > >> *I* think part of the problem here is that maybe I hit a small nerve? > > > >No, if people want to run a Windows application they can do it. > > With the VM thing we said yes .. Well that's the answer, or Bootcamp. > >You're forgetting that I couldn't run Adobe Reader on Vista without a > >bit of research; [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > happens (not a regular .pdf user) ..... <download / install Acrobat > reader> well, 8.1.1 seems to be ok on there now, what didn't work Tim? It just remained in memory but didn't work: http://vistafix.blogspot.com/2006/12/installing-adobe-acrobat-reader-8.h tml > > 10.5 has built-in support for PDFs *and* QuickLook. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > version of something so fundamental as the driving test practice > materials ... that was all ... ? Mac users are apt to be annoyed about such things, but I wouldn't say that it's a major problem in this particular case. The online theory test worked in Firefox when I tried it a year or two ago. Tim SignatureTim Gowen >> >You're forgetting that I couldn't run Adobe Reader on Vista without a >> >bit of research; [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >http://vistafix.blogspot.com/2006/12/installing-adobe-acrobat-reader-8.h >tml Ah, from your link "Update: Adobe has now released Acrobat Reader 8.1 which is Vista compatible" .. so it was Adobe's fault then? >> The point was I was surprised that (it turns out) there isn't a Mac >> version of something so fundamental as the driving test practice >> materials ... that was all ... ? > >Mac users are apt to be annoyed about such things, but I wouldn't say >that it's a major problem in this particular case. Like I said, we said, fine if you have VMware or an access to a real PC .. a bummer if you want to borrow your big brothers CD's and you don't. > The online theory >test worked in Firefox when I tried it a year or two ago. Ok thanks .. and I know it works from FF on XP now but I was more interested to hear if it worked under Safari as not all Mac users will have downloaded / installed FF (or does it come with Tiger / Leper)? All the best Tim .. T i m > Ah, from your link "Update: Adobe has now released Acrobat Reader 8.1 > which is Vista compatible" .. so it was Adobe's fault then? If there was a Windows error that said 'This program is not compatible with this version of Windowa?" I'd be happy. But it just stayed in memory doing nothing. Microsoft could have done that, could have let me know about 'compatibility mode' or could have written an OS that was XP compatible. Tim SignatureTim Gowen >> Ah, from your link "Update: Adobe has now released Acrobat Reader 8.1 >> which is Vista compatible" .. so it was Adobe's fault then? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >know about 'compatibility mode' or could have written an OS that was XP >compatible. I'm not sure M$ should be held responsible for every badly written app though Tim? I have seen as much stuff bouncing on the dock and doing nothing than I have Windows progs that just hang? All the best .. T i m > I'm not sure M$ should be held responsible for every badly written app > though Tim? I have seen as much stuff bouncing on the dock and doing > nothing than I have Windows progs that just hang? Well didn't you make some comment about Windows users who don't know how to set up their machines properly. Acrobat isn't badly written code on XP, so why is it badly written code in Vista? I've not had a single application bounce with no other activity in all my years as a Mac user. Tim SignatureTim Gowen >> I'm not sure M$ should be held responsible for every badly written app >> though Tim? I have seen as much stuff bouncing on the dock and doing [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I've not had a single application bounce with no other activity in all >my years as a Mac user. I have - Entourage. It was actually trying to connect to an Exchange server but failing (visible in Terminal using netstat), and never bothered to display a windows. Entourage is a Microsoft product, you'll notice. Cheers - Jaimie Signature"I believe every human has a finite number of heartbeats. I don't intend to waste any of mine running around doing exercises." - Neil Armstrong >>> I'm not sure M$ should be held responsible for every badly written app >>> though Tim? I have seen as much stuff bouncing on the dock and doing [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Entourage is a Microsoft product, you'll notice. Who said M$ were good .. ? However I have enough problem knowing what app is actually_open_but_not_displaying_a_screen with OSX as it is and that's before anything goes wrong .. :-( All the best .. T i m > I have - Entourage. It was actually trying to connect to an Exchange > server but failing (visible in Terminal using netstat), and never > bothered to display a windows. > > Entourage is a Microsoft product, you'll notice. Versions of Entourage that I've used don't connect to Exchange until they're loaded. Adobe's remarks about Vista compatibility are a lot more equivocal than those re. Leopard. Tim SignatureTim Gowen >> I have - Entourage. It was actually trying to connect to an Exchange >> server but failing (visible in Terminal using netstat), and never [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Versions of Entourage that I've used don't connect to Exchange until > they're loaded. IME Entourage crashes if the network interfaces change when it is starting, so it must be looking at the net pretty early on. Well before any window appears... > Adobe's remarks about Vista compatibility are a lot more equivocal than > those re. Leopard. When's Photoshop Elements coming out again for the Mac? Cheers, Chris >>> I'm not sure M$ should be held responsible for every badly written app >>> though Tim? I have seen as much stuff bouncing on the dock and doing [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > server but failing (visible in Terminal using netstat), and never > bothered to display a windows. Adobe Acrobat bounces after switching to another app. Give it 20 to 30 seconds and bounce bounce bounce. It doesn't say anything if the icon is clicked. I guess it just likes the attention. SignatureR >> I'm not sure M$ should be held responsible for every badly written app >> though Tim? I have seen as much stuff bouncing on the dock and doing >> nothing than I have Windows progs that just hang? > >Well didn't you make some comment about Windows users who don't know how >to set up their machines properly. Probably .. > Acrobat isn't badly written code on >XP, so why is it badly written code in Vista? Ask Adobe Tim? >I've not had a single application bounce with no other activity in all >my years as a Mac user. Maybe you have the Apple foce then! ;-) All the best .. T i m > > Acrobat isn't badly written code on > >XP, so why is it badly written code in Vista? > > Ask Adobe Tim? I'm asking them why Contribute Trial won't install on my XP box. XP reinstalled last week, incidentally, when I used Ghost to try and rescue a duff drive which I stupidly added to my machine. Ghost created a temporary partition, called it C, and then refused to load its DOS session or return me to Windows. :-( Tim SignatureTim Gowen >> > Acrobat isn't badly written code on >> >XP, so why is it badly written code in Vista? >> >> Ask Adobe Tim? > >I'm asking them why Contribute Trial won't install on my XP box. Good luck with that then .. > XP >reinstalled last week, incidentally, when I used Ghost to try and rescue >a duff drive which I stupidly added to my machine. Ghost created a >temporary partition, called it C, and then refused to load its DOS >session or return me to Windows. :-( That's not very helpful is it? Were you doing that via BART Tim? All the best .. T i m > > XP > >reinstalled last week, incidentally, when I used Ghost to try and rescue [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > That's not very helpful is it? Were you doing that via BART Tim? I tried to use Bart to fix it! But it was quicker and safer in the long-run to shove in a new drive and rebuild the machine. The disk was so dead that it locked up Ghost, which I have never seen before. Tim SignatureTim Gowen >> > XP >> >reinstalled last week, incidentally, when I used Ghost to try and rescue [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >I tried to use Bart to fix it! Ok .. >But it was quicker and safer in the >long-run to shove in a new drive and rebuild the machine. That's my preferred solution. > The disk was >so dead that it locked up Ghost, which I have never seen before. Nor me. It may be (a) Ghost but it's not a clairvoyant! ;-) All the best .. T i m > >> Well, indeed, they have the book version I guess but I was a bit taken > >> aback that something so basic / 'common' just might not be available [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > buying a nice but left hand drive car for use here in the UK then > going hungry because you can't use any of the drive-thru's? Pardon? Read that again, and tell me it's not a logically useless analogy. Hints: * is anyone going to go hungry because they can't use a drive thru? * might people actually be a bit healthier if they /didn't/ eat at a drive thru? * speaking as someone who drove a RHD car in an LHD country, it's perfectly possible to use drive thrus. If you have the wit. > I mean, how much effort do Mac users have to sometimes go though just > because their chosen platform is slightly out of tilt with the rest of > the world (and I'm not digging the Mac or Mac users or saying that M$ > is brilliant etc yada yada . ..)? Less effort than having to run Windows. > I guess the reason I don't 'get it' is because I don't have any issues > with the PC hardware and XP so see no need to make my life more > difficult (like with this DSA CD). You're in a tiny minority, there. A smaller minority than Mac users, in fact. Cheers, Signaturejames dore IT Officer, New College, Oxford http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/ it-support@new.... >> I was thinking further about that Darren ... so isn't that like >> buying a nice but left hand drive car for use here in the UK then >> going hungry because you can't use any of the drive-thru's? > >Pardon? Read that again, and tell me it's not a logically useless >analogy. Respectfully, it isn't if you allow for a bit of poetic licence (not unknown with analogies)? >Hints: >* is anyone going to go hungry because they can't use a drive thru? No, but I was offering that as an example. >* might people actually be a bit healthier if they /didn't/ eat at a >drive thru? Irrelevant. >* speaking as someone who drove a RHD car in an LHD country, it's >perfectly possible to use drive thrus. If you have the wit. Of course. Like you can run a VM on OSX to support a Windows app but that wasn't the point. It was Darren potentially 'going hungry' (in a CBT sense in this case) because he would prefer to use a Mac than something that supported a fairly specific (to obtaining a driving licence) but otherwise mass supported package?[1] Not learning to skydive or jet ski here remember, just ride / drive on the public highway. >> I mean, how much effort do Mac users have to sometimes go though just >> because their chosen platform is slightly out of tilt with the rest of >> the world (and I'm not digging the Mac or Mac users or saying that M$ >> is brilliant etc yada yada . ..)? > >Less effort than having to run Windows. Not if you keep my OP in mind James. How can 'just running the CD / app' be any easier than *having* to buy / install some VM package to do the same thing because your chosen OS won't support it directly? Of course we are both going to be biased here, you because you prefer Mac/OSX (as a user and/or support person), me because I prefer to be able to do many things easily / compatibly. I'm not suggesting XP is better / worse than OSX for any / every thing, just there are basic differences (ignoring bugs and security issues (in say Leopard <g>) for a moment) and just focusing on mass compatibility with a (currently) very M$ centric world. >> I guess the reason I don't 'get it' is because I don't have any issues >> with the PC hardware and XP so see no need to make my life more >> difficult (like with this DSA CD). > >You're in a tiny minority, there. A smaller minority than Mac users, in >fact. I wonder if there actually could be more new drivers than Mac users in the UK ...? ;-) All the best .. T i m [1] When the guy gave us the CD and DVD there was no conversation re if it would run or not. He must have assumed we had a PC (if he even considered there were alternatives that is) and I didn't ask if it was compatible with "Windows". Had we only got the Mac and didn't have a VM running Windows we would have been familiar with asking 'Do you know if it's Mac compatible (and even then 'what versions') and be used to hearing the 'I don't know' or 'no' replies ... :-( > >> I was thinking further about that Darren ... so isn't that like > >> buying a nice but left hand drive car for use here in the UK then [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Respectfully, it isn't if you allow for a bit of poetic licence (not > unknown with analogies)? Poetic license maybe; illogical nonsense no. > >Hints: > >* is anyone going to go hungry because they can't use a drive thru? > > No, but I was offering that as an example. Ah, the tabloid hyperbole of conflating the inconvenience of not being able to run a piece of software with something life-threatening. Always good for making arguments. > >* might people actually be a bit healthier if they /didn't/ eat at a > >drive thru? > > Irrelevant. Call it a bit of poetic license in the dissection of your analogy. > >> I mean, how much effort do Mac users have to sometimes go though just > >> because their chosen platform is slightly out of tilt with the rest of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > app' be any easier than *having* to buy / install some VM package to > do the same thing because your chosen OS won't support it directly? If that were the question that was asked in the paragraph, I would have answered it. Asking a general question and then saying "Oh, but I meant it in these specific circumstances" is disingenuous at best. > Of > course we are both going to be biased here, you because you prefer > Mac/OSX (as a user and/or support person), me because I prefer to be > able to do many things easily / compatibly. <snort> - you argue as if the two were mutually exclusive; If they were, I would not be using the systems that I am - my job would be impossible. As it is, I have an XP VM for apps that will not work on anything else (currenly ConsoleOne and the VMWare VirtualCentre management console). > I wonder if there actually could be more new drivers than Mac users in > the UK ...? ;-) I'm sure there are but, correct me if I'm wrong, the DVD is not a mandatory piece of software in order to take the test, is it? There's more than one way to learn about driving (speaking as someone undertaking the advanced driver training from the IAM). > [1] When the guy gave us the CD and DVD there was no conversation re > if it would run or not. He must have assumed we had a PC (if he even [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > know if it's Mac compatible (and even then 'what versions') and be > used to hearing the 'I don't know' or 'no' replies ... :-( That's where voting with the wallet comes in, and the fact that There's Always More Than One Way To Do It :-> Signaturejames dore IT Officer, New College, Oxford http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/ it-support@new.... >> >Pardon? Read that again, and tell me it's not a logically useless >> >analogy. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Poetic license maybe; illogical nonsense no. Good, that's what I thought! ;-) <snip> >> course we are both going to be biased here, you because you prefer >> Mac/OSX (as a user and/or support person), me because I prefer to be >> able to do many things easily / compatibly. > ><snort> - you argue as if the two were mutually exclusive; It appears they are in this instance James (them only supplying the CBT for the Windows platform and not having access to that). >If they were, >I would not be using the systems that I am - my job would be impossible. >As it is, I have an XP VM for apps that will not work on anything else >(currenly ConsoleOne and the VMWare VirtualCentre management console). Yep, like I said .. you are running XP because it's the only way you can do your job. >> I wonder if there actually could be more new drivers than Mac users in >> the UK ...? ;-) > >I'm sure there are but, correct me if I'm wrong, the DVD is not a >mandatory piece of software in order to take the test, is it? No, you could just walk into the test centre and give it a crack. > There's >more than one way to learn about driving (speaking as someone >undertaking the advanced driver training from the IAM). (Well done btw) and of course there are 'other ways' but that's my whole point James ... I don't want 'other ways' I want (and can / do) walk into any high street shop, buy the materials produced by the organization who present the real test (often without even checking the compatibility list on the box) and just plonk it in my PC or domestic DVD player (two parts) and have it work, straight off, no batteries needed. It's becoming apparent that the 'Mac way' is to assume 'there must be alternative' because the primary option isn't always open to you?? Apparently you can use iSynch instead of the Nokia PC Suite because they haven't bothered to make a Mac version (no matter that the PC version is crap or otherwise)... but iSync won't work with *my* Nokia phone (without more 'stuff') but it works on my PC ... 'oh, I'd better go out and buy a 'Mac compatible' one then (no, I choose the phone I want and expect my PC to talk to it, and it does, any make phone, any make PC over many versions of Windows .. probably including the iPhone!) ...... :-( >> [1] When the guy gave us the CD and DVD there was no conversation re >> if it would run or not. He must have assumed we had a PC (if he even [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >That's where voting with the wallet comes in, and the fact that There's >Always More Than One Way To Do It :-> Indeed ... and exactly what I do, by being able to buy stuff easily and cheaply .. and if you only have a Mac (and no Win VM) having 'another option' is probably just as well eh! ;-) All the best .. T i m >>> So, if as you say "This is hardly the only application that is not Mac >>> compatible" is it just that you all run Parallels / Bootcamp (et al) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > buying a nice but left hand drive car for use here in the UK then > going hungry because you can't use any of the drive-thru's? That's a stupid analogy. Of course you wouldn't go hungry because MacDonald's is not the only option. You'd either cook at home or go to a proper restaurant. Your implied assumption is that you *must* buy that application regardless of the OS it runs on. You wouldn't buy it if you didn't have a computer, would you? Plenty people pass the test without having to buy the CD-ROM. What Darren and others are saying is that there are other routes to the solution which don't require Windows (or a Mac even). > >>> So, if as you say "This is hardly the only application that is not Mac > >>> compatible" is it just that you all run Parallels / Bootcamp (et al) [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > What Darren and others are saying is that there are other routes to the > solution which don't require Windows (or a Mac even). All of which is what leads people to think you're trolling. >> >>> So, if as you say "This is hardly the only application that is not Mac >> >>> compatible" is it just that you all run Parallels / Bootcamp (et al) [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > >All of which is what leads people to think you're trolling. By people you mean you (so far) Tim and I assume you mean me not Chris here ;-) Ok. I ask a genuine serious question based on my observation that a (potentially) common basic everyday 'thing' (some CBT material for helping people learn to drive / ride as issued by the body that do the testing for such in the UK) isn't available in native Mac (OSX) format? If you can't come up with a better answer to that (as others have managed to do and I know you could do if you tried Tim <g>) other than suggesting I'm trolling or by just agreeing that this is indeed an 'issue' with Mac ownership (I was actually hoping there was a solution to my issue then she could take the CD to college and run it on the Macs on her lunch breaks). If not then she could just run it on one of the many (compatible) PC's they have in the college but that means going to the library and she'd prefer to chill with her group. All the best .. T i m p.s. Did anyone happen to see if the online test would run on (with, under?) Safari please? http://www.theory-tests.co.uk/home/ Free tests for all .. go on, if you dare! <weg> >If you can't come up with a better answer to that (as others have >managed to do and I know you could do if you tried Tim <g>) other than [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >p.s. Did anyone happen to see if the online test would run on (with, >under?) Safari please? Haven't you just answered your own question here? That page, along with the "register to access the free practice tests", gives you a chance to pay £7 to access the *real* practive tests for a month. Alternative found? Or does the Windows software have other things too? Cheers - Jaimie Signature"We all recall that the difference between a computer salesman and a car salesman is that the car salesman *knows* he's lying to you" "... and probably knows how to drive" - F O'Donnell and M Smith, in afs >>p.s. Did anyone happen to see if the online test would run on (with, >>under?) Safari please? > >Haven't you just answered your own question here? Don't think so ... don't have Safari on this PC? > That page, along >with the "register to access the free practice tests", gives you a >chance to pay £7 to access the *real* practive tests for a month. Yes, and we have done so (via the PC pre being given the CD/DVD) but as mentioned elsewhere it's not as flexible online as 'local'. >Alternative found? Don't think so Jamie .. > Or does the Windows software have other things too? Yes (see above, plus deeper analysis of past results etc) All the best .. T i m >>>p.s. Did anyone happen to see if the online test would run on (with, >>>under?) Safari please? >> >>Haven't you just answered your own question here? > >Don't think so ... don't have Safari on this PC? Not that Q, this one: >(I was actually hoping there was a solution >to my issue >> Or does the Windows software have other things too? > >Yes (see above, plus deeper analysis of past results etc) Not really a big deal, IMO. The free web version allows you to see what you got wrong and learn from it, no limitations there (though it is a little dull stepping through, there's no lost information ). You need 43 out of 50 to pass, so if you're not getting that 43+ reliably you simply need more knowledge, all of which is in the highway code. No need for fancy graphs of progress. They're just trying to charge money because they know people will fall for it. The free web version works fine in Safari2 and Firefox2, btw. Cheers - Jaimie SignatureLove is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come. - Nietzsche (via Groening) >>> Or does the Windows software have other things too? >> >>Yes (see above, plus deeper analysis of past results etc) > >Not really a big deal, IMO. And you are entitled to it Jaimie. ;-) >The free web version allows you to see >what you got wrong and learn from it, no limitations there Indeed .. (though it >is a little dull stepping through, there's no lost information ). 'a little dull' get's translated into 'a f#in pain' if you are a modern 'everything instantly' 17 year old I'm afraid Jaimie. :-( >You need 43 out of 50 to pass, so if you're not getting that 43+ >reliably you simply need more knowledge, all of which is in the >highway code. Well 'she' has passed the 10 out of 12 goes. >No need for fancy graphs of progress. She thinks otherwise. For example it showed that se was weak on 'Documentation' so was able to get the package to compile an entire test made up of documentation. >They're just trying to charge money because they know people will fall >for it. No comment (you are an Apple user remember), been there, paid_through_the_nose_for_that .. ;-) >The free web version works fine in Safari2 and Firefox2, btw. Ah, thanks, that's what I wanted to know. All the best .. T i m >>>> So, if as you say "This is hardly the only application that is not Mac >>>> compatible" is it just that you all run Parallels / Bootcamp (et al) [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >That's a stupid analogy. You think so, I think not. >Of course you wouldn't go hungry because MacDonald's is not the only >option. You'd either cook at home or go to a proper restaurant. Of course, unless you *wanted* a drive thru .. >Your implied assumption is that you *must* buy that application >regardless of the OS it runs on. Well, in case we agree and I just don't understand summat along the way, 'if you *want* to run a program that is designed for Windows and you don't have any other way of running that without Windows' .. I didn't mean *must* (and don't think I even eluded to such). > You wouldn't buy it if you didn't have >a computer, would you? No, but I do and it happens to be one of the more common ones. > Plenty people pass the test without having to buy >the CD-ROM. Of course and I never suggested anything else just you seem to think I was? I was (am) saying that if I want to make use of some learning media that is produced by a key provider for that function (Driving Standards) then I would be 'frustrated' that I couldn't simply walk into any high street store (not an Apple store) and buy something suitable. Same with much 'educational' software it seems (from the requests posted here in the past). >What Darren and others are saying is that there are other routes to the >solution which don't require Windows (or a Mac even). Of course there are Chris and I don't understand why you (and others) have to distract from the spirit of my point / question or would need to say such. I can drive into any tyre place and get tyres for my current (old) car, something I would have considered before I bought it and wouldn't have if it was something that could be an issue for something I see as a very basic prerequisite? (I am in the 'Mac position' <less compatible> with my kitcar because that requires tyres that are no longer made in the format (M&S) that I require. Yes I can get round it by using something else (basic 'road' tyres) but I would prefer not to have to?). I would want to run the CBT not read the book. All the best .. T i m >> Of course you wouldn't go hungry because MacDonald's is not the only >> option. You'd either cook at home or go to a proper restaurant. > > Of course, unless you *wanted* a drive thru .. That's your problem, though, isn't it? You *want* a Windows CD-ROM to work on a non-Windows system. That ain't gonna happen unless you use some sort of emulation or virtualisation. That's a fact of life: everything doesn't work with everything else. Deal with it or sell the Mac. It's the same as complaining that your DVDs don't work in your CD player or that your petrol car won't run on diesel or that your serial mouse doesn't work in your PS/2 only PC or etc. >> You wouldn't buy it if you didn't have >> a computer, would you? > No, but I do and it happens to be one of the more common ones. Oh, is it a Dell? ;) >> What Darren and others are saying is that there are other routes to the >> solution which don't require Windows (or a Mac even). > > Of course there are Chris and I don't understand why you (and others) > have to distract from the spirit of my point / question or would need > to say such. No-one is distracting from the question apart from you... Your question was (and I quote): "what are Mac owners supposed to do [for practice theory tests]?" The answer is simple: buy/use something that works on a Mac. As you said in your OP there is an alternative online version, which should work on any system and is probably cheaper too. However, you seemed to have morphed the question into: "I want to buy this Windows-only application. Why won't it work on a Mac?" You know the answer, but are refusing to accept it. > I can drive into any tyre place and get tyres for my current (old) > car, something I would have considered before I bought it and wouldn't > have if it was something that could be an issue for something I see as > a very basic prerequisite? Indeed. But you're asking, "Why can I not put these F1 tyres on my mini?" > I would want to run the CBT not read the book. Then complain to the producers of the CD that it isn't compatible with the Mac. >>> Of course you wouldn't go hungry because MacDonald's is not the only >>> option. You'd either cook at home or go to a proper restaurant. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >That's your problem, though, isn't it? You *want* a Windows CD-ROM to >work on a non-Windows system. No, because I have a PC? I was asking if there wasn't *another* way it could be run on a Mac (ie there may have been a Mac version I didn't know about or something very similar etc) how were potential drivers and Mac owners supposed to join in? >That ain't gonna happen unless you use >some sort of emulation or virtualisation. That's a fact of life: Ok, well I was hoping they may have been another way but know I know there isn't (but thanks). >everything doesn't work with everything else. Indeed, most things work with the PC though. >Deal with it or sell the Mac. Don't need to .. she *might* need it sometime ... >It's the same as complaining that your DVDs don't work in your CD player >or that your petrol car won't run on diesel or that your serial mouse >doesn't work in your PS/2 only PC or etc. Well possibly, but I think it's more like finding what you thought was a 'DVD' is in fact a blue-ray disk? Ok, try this. Punter walks into WH Smiths and see's the pucker DSA CBT CD/DVD collection and buys it for their nephew because 1) They know he is going to get a car / bike soon and 2) because they had a 'computer'. Kid get's kit as a (birthday?) surprise and finds it isn't compatible with his eMac. Why wouldn't something like that be compatible with both platforms? The DVD works in the Mac just as it would in the PC or domestic player of course. Ironically, all of the lads mates can run the software ok .... >>> You wouldn't buy it if you didn't have >>> a computer, would you? >> No, but I do and it happens to be one of the more common ones. > >Oh, is it a Dell? ;) Nooo, home built here every time .. ;-) >>> What Darren and others are saying is that there are other routes to the >>> solution which don't require Windows (or a Mac even). [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >No-one is distracting from the question apart from you... Quite probably .. you lot confuse me sometimes .... >Your question was (and I quote): >"what are Mac owners supposed to do [for practice theory tests]?" > >The answer is simple: buy/use something that works on a Mac. Ah, good, and that is ...? > As you said >in your OP there is an alternative online version, which should work on >any system and is probably cheaper too. (Anyone tried it yet please). It's actually £7/month for the online tests and we were given the CD/DVD's. And with the online tests you have to step though all the questions to review the ones you got wrong whereas on the local one you can jump straight to it .. plus you have to be 'online' of course ... >However, you seemed to have morphed the question into: "I want to buy >this Windows-only application. Why won't it work on a Mac?" > >You know the answer, but are refusing to accept it. Down't fink so .. I know how you can run (some) Windows progs on a Mac (we have Parallels on our daughters Mac) but I was thinking out loud .. 'how were Mac users supposed to do it' (sorta thing). I don't know Mac's very well so there may have been an alternative / similar solution (there often is when I have asked before). >> I can drive into any tyre place and get tyres for my current (old) >> car, something I would have considered before I bought it and wouldn't >> have if it was something that could be an issue for something I see as >> a very basic prerequisite? > >Indeed. But you're asking, "Why can I not put these F1 tyres on my mini?" Ok then ..'is there a way to fit F1 tyres on a Mini as it seems you can't buy mini sized tyres'? >> I would want to run the CBT not read the book. > >Then complain to the producers of the CD that it isn't compatible with >the Mac. You can if you like Chris .. I'm happily compatible thanks and passed my bike and car tests years ago. ;-) All the best .. T i m >Ok then ..'is there a way to fit F1 tyres on a Mini as it seems you >can't buy mini sized tyres'? £7 off the website, innit. Cheers - Jaimie Signature"Jesus died for our sins. Let us not cheapen his sacrifice by failing to commit any of them." >>Ok then ..'is there a way to fit F1 tyres on a Mini as it seems you >>can't buy mini sized tyres'? > >£7 off the website, innit. Ah, but what if you don't just want virtual tyres and want to run the tests offline? All the best .. T i m >>>Ok then ..'is there a way to fit F1 tyres on a Mini as it seems you >>>can't buy mini sized tyres'? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Ah, but what if you don't just want virtual tyres and want to run the >tests offline? I thought you said she was doing them at college? Anyway. To summarize: No, it won't install on an OSX machine directly. This would be because OSX is not Windows, which is a design *feature*, not a flaw. Yes, you can run it on OSX for free using WINE and some effort (mostly googling). Yes, you can run it on OSX for pay using Crossover Office and three clicks. Yes, you can run it on Windows on a Mac under Virtual PC, Parallels, VMware or Bootcamp. Bootcamp is free if you already have a Windows license kicking around, the others are pay. Yesish, you can get 80% of it for £7 off the website, or ~60% for free off the website. Yes, you can get all the knowledge out of the paper highway code for free (since you already have that). I'm sure at least one of those solutions is available for consideration. None of them are particularly limiting or onerous, either in time or money. All of the payware solutions are generically useful for all Windows problems, so total cost reduces as you use them. To complete: stop making mountains out of molehills. Cheers - Jaimie SignatureA: Think about it. Come on, you can figure it out. A:>> When half the group posts top and the other half posts bottom. Q:>>> What's even more annoying than topposting? Q:> Why would that be annoying? >>>>Ok then ..'is there a way to fit F1 tyres on a Mini as it seems you >>>>can't buy mini sized tyres'? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >I thought you said she was doing them at college? " ..don't just want .." (so have the choice of both online and local Jaimie). >Anyway. To summarize: > >No, it won't install on an OSX machine directly. This would be because >OSX is not Windows, which is a design *feature*, not a flaw. Say some .. ;-) >Yes, you can run it on OSX for free using WINE and some effort (mostly >googling). Ok, and thanks. I would be more interested in running WINE on Ubuntu as we have Parallels / Bootcamp on the Mini (or had the last time it was used .. did Bootcamp 'expire' or was that only if you 'upgrade' <weg> to Leper?). >Yes, you can run it on OSX for pay using Crossover Office and three >clicks. Not come across that yet .. I'll Google ..(again, not really interested in OSX for myself). >Yes, you can run it on Windows on a Mac under Virtual PC, Parallels, >VMware or Bootcamp. Bootcamp is free if you already have a Windows >license kicking around, the others are pay. Understood (and re the above on Bootcamp). >Yesish, you can get 80% of it for £7 off the website, or ~60% for free >off the website. Ok (and we have been there, paid the £7 and prefer the local version). >Yes, you can get all the knowledge out of the paper highway code for >free (since you already have that). The latest 2007 version and I'm not sure it's all in there Jaimie (I've not read it myself yet but have skimmed it with Jenny. I did do the test late last night and scored 47). Or if it is it isn't necessarily presented in the same way as the CB test, throwing in many bogus (but often very plausible if this is all new to you and sometimes if it isn't) answers to throw you off track. As I'm sure you will acknowledge, the 'tests' are generally just hoops we have to jump through before we start to learn for real. >I'm sure at least one of those solutions is available for >consideration. None of them are particularly limiting or onerous, >either in time or money. All of the payware solutions are generically >useful for all Windows problems, so total cost reduces as you use >them. Indeed. The minimum cost for me of course is to continue using and enjoying (because of the compatibility at least) the benefits (to me) of XP on the home built PC platform. >To complete: stop making mountains out of molehills. I asked my question once. I didn't type the 26+ replies from other people (5 of those were from your good self), some of which took my simple question / observation to heart / too literally (as usual). All the best .. T i m >> That ain't gonna happen unless you use >> some sort of emulation or virtualisation. That's a fact of life: > > Ok, well I was hoping they may have been another way but know I know > there isn't (but thanks). So let me get this right. You ask a question, get an appropriate answer, but then you want *another* answer? Maybe you need to learn to do things for yourself once in a while. Are you this annoying in real life or are just a troll on usenet? >> everything doesn't work with everything else. > > Indeed, most things work with the PC though. 'Most' isn't everything though is it? >> Deal with it or sell the Mac. > > Don't need to .. she *might* need it sometime ... Of course you do. Clearly it does not fit in with your mentality. Clearly 'she' can manage fine without it. Or is it just an excuse to post here for 'fun'? >> It's the same as complaining that your DVDs don't work in your CD player >> or that your petrol car won't run on diesel or that your serial mouse >> doesn't work in your PS/2 only PC or etc. > > Well possibly, but I think it's more like finding what you thought was > a 'DVD' is in fact a blue-ray disk? That's exactly what I mean. You can't expect two incompatible systems to work together. Just because a Mac and a PC are both computers doesn't mean they are interchangeable. They never have been and, more than likely, never will be. You couldn't run Sinclair games on a BBC Micro so why should it be any different now? > Why wouldn't something like that be compatible with > both platforms? The DVD works in the Mac just as it would in the PC or > domestic player of course. FFS, for an engineer you ask some really stupid questions! DVDs, CDs, etc are produced to a non-proprietary standard (ever heard of ISO?) and will work on any system which supports that standard. A CD-ROM is usually created to ISO9660 (unless you use the default settings in Vista, allegedly) and therefore can be 'read' by any compliant system. The software provided on the CD is not normally written to a standard, but to work with a proprietary system. Thus it will only work with the system the software is designed for. That's why open standards are important with any consumer product. You wouldn't want to be stuck buying only Dell routers, printers, monitors etc. to work with your Dell computer. Or Sony videos, DVDs, freeview box to work with your Sony TV? With open standards you can pick and chose the best manufacturer of the product you want, drive competition and get better quality overall. And you can forget about building your own computer if it weren't for standard components - unless you want to get your soldering iron and circuit boards out. With MS's illegal monopoly there is very little competition and few (Windows) standards, thus MS can afford to sell poor quality products at inflated prices, which do not interoperate (by design) with other products. Although this is slowly changing with the growth of Mac and Linux usage, plus the EU commission breathing down it's neck with a great big stick :) >>> No, but I do and it happens to be one of the more common ones. >> Oh, is it a Dell? ;) > > Nooo, home built here every time .. ;-) So how's that common? Almost no-one builds their own PCs. > I don't know Mac's very well That's painfully clear. I've only had a Mac (my first one ever) a few months (a bit less than you in fact) and I know more about them than you. I'm not even an IT /engineer/! >> Indeed. But you're asking, "Why can I not put these F1 tyres on my mini?" > > Ok then ..'is there a way to fit F1 tyres on a Mini as it seems you > can't buy mini sized tyres'? There you go changing the question again to suit your point of view. >>> I |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message