15 New Messages
Digest #9415
Messages
Mon Mar 4, 2013 1:56 pm (PST) . Posted by:
"HAL9000" jrswebhome
Since you don't give specs for your machine, I suggest you Max the RAM installed. It isn't iPhoto's fault.
Copy simply copies any photo. Export moves a copy but you are given choices as to send the image, size, new name, export sequentially?
--- In macsupportcentral@yahoogroups.com , "wallegirl62" wrote:
>
> I have stupidly let my iPhoto library grow to just under 21,000 photos and iPhoto has slowed to a crawl. I am now making a concerted effort to edit my collection and trying to do this within iPhoto is driving me nuts.
>
> The alternatives I have considered are
>
> 1. Move sections to Aperture (which I have installed but have not used very much so maybe this would make me explore it) then edit and move back (or not).
> 2. Copy to the desktop / external drive and edit using finder.
> 3. Export to the desktop / external drive and edit using finder.
>
> I have tried googling the difference between export and copy but couldn't easily find anything. My collection is purely personal and the only metadata I care about is the date the photo was taken.
>
> Thoughts and advice would be very gratefully received.
> Thanks in anticipation,
> Sarah.
>
Copy simply copies any photo. Export moves a copy but you are given choices as to send the image, size, new name, export sequentially?
--- In macsupportcentral@
>
> I have stupidly let my iPhoto library grow to just under 21,000 photos and iPhoto has slowed to a crawl. I am now making a concerted effort to edit my collection and trying to do this within iPhoto is driving me nuts.
>
> The alternatives I have considered are
>
> 1. Move sections to Aperture (which I have installed but have not used very much so maybe this would make me explore it) then edit and move back (or not).
> 2. Copy to the desktop / external drive and edit using finder.
> 3. Export to the desktop / external drive and edit using finder.
>
> I have tried googling the difference between export and copy but couldn't easily find anything. My collection is purely personal and the only metadata I care about is the date the photo was taken.
>
> Thoughts and advice would be very gratefully received.
> Thanks in anticipation,
> Sarah.
>
Mon Mar 4, 2013 2:13 pm (PST) . Posted by:
"N.A. Nada"
Now the size requirement makes sense. That would also help to slow people from putting it on a laptop to be stolen from their car. Thereby losing all that private information.
On Mar 3, 2013, at 8:19 PM, James Robertson wrote:
On Mar 3, 2013, at 7:39 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@comcast.net > wrote:
> Jim,
>
> If you are using the client or patient portion of the application, why would you need a 500 Gb drive? If the user app needs that much room, then 98% of users can not use it.
This is for my medical practice. I have no idea why the stated minimum workstation drive sizes are so enormous (for docs, support staff, and the office manager). I suspect it may be an easy way to make certain people don't buy general purpose computers on which they'll be running MS Office and who knows what else, then complain when they run out of disk space and blame it on Epic IT.
All our Epic program data will be stored remotely on the hospital network's servers (with individual practice financial data sandboxed by contract so that it's not readable directly by IT or anyone else without the practice's consent).
Jim Robertson
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
On Mar 3, 2013, at 8:19 PM, James Robertson wrote:
On Mar 3, 2013, at 7:39 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@comcast.
> Jim,
>
> If you are using the client or patient portion of the application, why would you need a 500 Gb drive? If the user app needs that much room, then 98% of users can not use it.
This is for my medical practice. I have no idea why the stated minimum workstation drive sizes are so enormous (for docs, support staff, and the office manager). I suspect it may be an easy way to make certain people don't buy general purpose computers on which they'll be running MS Office and who knows what else, then complain when they run out of disk space and blame it on Epic IT.
All our Epic program data will be stored remotely on the hospital network'
Jim Robertson
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mon Mar 4, 2013 2:39 pm (PST) . Posted by:
"JackieK" jackiek1955
The hospital where I work went "live" with Epic almost a year ago. I'm not sure I understand what you are planning. Is only your personal medical practice going to use Epic, or is the whole hospital going to Epic?
To me, a workstation is one of our many, individual computers, which are connected to servers run by our hospital IT department. I'm pretty sure they don't have 500GB drives, but when I get back to work tomorrow I'm going to check it out.
Jackie
--- In macsupportcentral@yahoogroups.com , "N.A. Nada" wrote:
>
> Now the size requirement makes sense. That would also help to slow people from putting it on a laptop to be stolen from their car. Thereby losing all that private information.
>
>
> On Mar 3, 2013, at 8:19 PM, James Robertson wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 3, 2013, at 7:39 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@...> wrote:
>
> > Jim,
> >
> > If you are using the client or patient portion of the application, why would you need a 500 Gb drive? If the user app needs that much room, then 98% of users can not use it.
>
> This is for my medical practice. I have no idea why the stated minimum workstation drive sizes are so enormous (for docs, support staff, and the office manager). I suspect it may be an easy way to make certain people don't buy general purpose computers on which they'll be running MS Office and who knows what else, then complain when they run out of disk space and blame it on Epic IT.
>
> All our Epic program data will be stored remotely on the hospital network's servers (with individual practice financial data sandboxed by contract so that it's not readable directly by IT or anyone else without the practice's consent).
>
> Jim Robertson
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
To me, a workstation is one of our many, individual computers, which are connected to servers run by our hospital IT department. I'm pretty sure they don't have 500GB drives, but when I get back to work tomorrow I'm going to check it out.
Jackie
--- In macsupportcentral@
>
> Now the size requirement makes sense. That would also help to slow people from putting it on a laptop to be stolen from their car. Thereby losing all that private information.
>
>
> On Mar 3, 2013, at 8:19 PM, James Robertson wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 3, 2013, at 7:39 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@...
>
> > Jim,
> >
> > If you are using the client or patient portion of the application, why would you need a 500 Gb drive? If the user app needs that much room, then 98% of users can not use it.
>
> This is for my medical practice. I have no idea why the stated minimum workstation drive sizes are so enormous (for docs, support staff, and the office manager). I suspect it may be an easy way to make certain people don't buy general purpose computers on which they'll be running MS Office and who knows what else, then complain when they run out of disk space and blame it on Epic IT.
>
> All our Epic program data will be stored remotely on the hospital network'
>
> Jim Robertson
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Mon Mar 4, 2013 2:58 pm (PST) . Posted by:
"Jim Saklad" jimdoc01
>> SSD prices *have* come down, but that's still a lot IMO, especially if it's
>> being done just to run one Windows app.
>> Otto
>
> Of course, that "one Windows app" will soon be running 4-8 hours per day (the portion of my workday that's usually spent physically in my office).
> Jim Robertson
>
> (who went to an Apple Retail Store yesterday to inquire about this; at first I was impressed; the sales associate I spoke with immediately suggested using an external SSD in a Thunderbolt enclosure, or, failing that, a USB enclosure, and populating it with my current internal (boot drive) SSD contents via Carbon Copy Cloner. However, then she proceeded to try to sell me a string of external rotating platter drives, each of which she CLAIMED was an SSD).
Apple is NOT where I would go to get an external drive, either SSD or classic.
You can choose your enclosure, connection type, and drive maker from a 3rd-party seller like OWC or NewEgg.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
>> being done just to run one Windows app.
>> Otto
>
> Of course, that "one Windows app" will soon be running 4-8 hours per day (the portion of my workday that's usually spent physically in my office).
> Jim Robertson
>
> (who went to an Apple Retail Store yesterday to inquire about this; at first I was impressed; the sales associate I spoke with immediately suggested using an external SSD in a Thunderbolt enclosure, or, failing that, a USB enclosure, and populating it with my current internal (boot drive) SSD contents via Carbon Copy Cloner. However, then she proceeded to try to sell me a string of external rotating platter drives, each of which she CLAIMED was an SSD).
Apple is NOT where I would go to get an external drive, either SSD or classic.
You can choose your enclosure, connection type, and drive maker from a 3rd-party seller like OWC or NewEgg.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
Tue Mar 5, 2013 6:01 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Charles Carroll" charlesmarkcarroll
Jim S is right on this one. Reading reviews of the solid state drives
Apple Store sells they have reliability issues.
Always read reviews before buying but generally the drives Apple sells in
their store are not reliable over long periods of time.
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Jim Saklad jimdoc@icloud.com > wrote:
> **
>
>
> >> SSD prices *have* come down, but that's still a lot IMO, especially if
> it's
> >> being done just to run one Windows app.
> >> Otto
> >
> > Of course, that "one Windows app" will soon be running 4-8 hours per day
> (the portion of my workday that's usually spent physically in my office).
> > Jim Robertson
> >
> > (who went to an Apple Retail Store yesterday to inquire about this; at
> first I was impressed; the sales associate I spoke with immediately
> suggested using an external SSD in a Thunderbolt enclosure, or, failing
> that, a USB enclosure, and populating it with my current internal (boot
> drive) SSD contents via Carbon Copy Cloner. However, then she proceeded to
> try to sell me a string of external rotating platter drives, each of which
> she CLAIMED was an SSD).
>
> Apple is NOT where I would go to get an external drive, either SSD or
> classic.
>
> You can choose your enclosure, connection type, and drive maker from a
> 3rd-party seller like OWC or NewEgg.
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Apple Store sells they have reliability issues.
Always read reviews before buying but generally the drives Apple sells in
their store are not reliable over long periods of time.
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Jim Saklad jimdoc@icloud.
> **
>
>
> >> SSD prices *have* come down, but that's still a lot IMO, especially if
> it's
> >> being done just to run one Windows app.
> >> Otto
> >
> > Of course, that "one Windows app" will soon be running 4-8 hours per day
> (the portion of my workday that's usually spent physically in my office).
> > Jim Robertson
> >
> > (who went to an Apple Retail Store yesterday to inquire about this; at
> first I was impressed; the sales associate I spoke with immediately
> suggested using an external SSD in a Thunderbolt enclosure, or, failing
> that, a USB enclosure, and populating it with my current internal (boot
> drive) SSD contents via Carbon Copy Cloner. However, then she proceeded to
> try to sell me a string of external rotating platter drives, each of which
> she CLAIMED was an SSD).
>
> Apple is NOT where I would go to get an external drive, either SSD or
> classic.
>
> You can choose your enclosure, connection type, and drive maker from a
> 3rd-party seller like OWC or NewEgg.
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tue Mar 5, 2013 9:44 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Otto Nikolaus" nikyzf
And they typically cost a *lot* more than those from other suppliers.
Otto
On 5 March 2013 14:01, Charles Carroll 911@learnasp.com > wrote:
> Jim S is right on this one. Reading reviews of the solid state drives
> Apple Store sells they have reliability issues.
>
> Always read reviews before buying but generally the drives Apple sells in
> their store are not reliable over long periods of time.
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Otto
On 5 March 2013 14:01, Charles Carroll 911@learnasp.
> Jim S is right on this one. Reading reviews of the solid state drives
> Apple Store sells they have reliability issues.
>
> Always read reviews before buying but generally the drives Apple sells in
> their store are not reliable over long periods of time.
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mon Mar 4, 2013 2:49 pm (PST) . Posted by:
"Jim Saklad" jimdoc01
> As you say above, the Mac is a smaller target and not as attractive to hackers.
The MAJOR fallacy here is that the target associated with the most glory in the hacker community is the platform that has never before been successfully infected.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
The MAJOR fallacy here is that the target associated with the most glory in the hacker community is the platform that has never before been successfully infected.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
Mon Mar 4, 2013 3:14 pm (PST) . Posted by:
"N.A. Nada"
In the absolute, "security through obscurity" is a fool's dream, but in practice, currently, it is not too bad, IF you practice good computing habits.
Yes, there has been malware for the Mac OS over the years, but most has been fairly harmless. That is changing now a days. Now we keep our credit card info on our computers, because we make purchases and pay bills from our computers. In the late 90's, few of us paid for anything over the internet. Today, almost all of us pay for something over the internet.
While fewer businesses, research institutes and government contractors use Mac OS than Windows, they have used various Mac OSes for years. In another post, Earle mentions SRI's (International, it broke off from Stanford years ago), use of Mac OS. And I have seen it used at both SRI International and a military contractor in the 90's, pre-OS X.
For simple financial theft, Windows is more prevalent, and which would a crook prefer to go after, a piggy bank or a bank? Why hack a single personal computer, when the rewards are bigger if you hack a retailer for thousands of credit card info.
When a Mac owner says they were hacked, I think you will find that they mean they were either socially engineered or one of their internet accounts was hacked. They do not mean someone has remotely gained access to their Mac, surreptitiously.
We should have always been cautious and practiced good computing habits, avoided sharing too much personal information on-line (social media and otherwise), and used good password practices (to which I include not allowing auto-fill, besides strong passwords).
The day is approaching, fast, when Mac users will need to use an AV app. Apple is trying to keep it further out into the future, with garden walls and sandboxing, but it is still approaching.
Brent
- I was never a Boy Scout, but I like being prepared. I'm not mildly paranoid, just cautious.
On Mar 4, 2013, at 7:29 AM, Jim Saklad wrote:
>> Does that not make your Mac susceptible to all the Windows viruses? And then don't you have to have Norton (or similar) on your Mac?
>
> It is important to understand that it is not the operating system (Mac, Windows, Linux) per se that makes one vulnerable. Current OS's are all technically vulnerable to attack. The real issue is whether you are a target.
You're going to advocate the classic "security through obscurity" fallacy again?
Really?
> Mac users are generally not targets. The main reason Mac OS is "safe" is simply that it has not historically been a hacker target. There are still FAR fewer Macs...
The ratio of Windows computers to Mac computers does NOT, however, seem to relate in any way to the ratio of Windows malware to MacOS X malware.
> Attackers have far fewer tools and much lower incentive to attack Macs, and so they generally don't.
So why has there NEVER been even ONE *virus* in the wild that attacks MacOS X?
EVER, in 12+ years?
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yes, there has been malware for the Mac OS over the years, but most has been fairly harmless. That is changing now a days. Now we keep our credit card info on our computers, because we make purchases and pay bills from our computers. In the late 90's, few of us paid for anything over the internet. Today, almost all of us pay for something over the internet.
While fewer businesses, research institutes and government contractors use Mac OS than Windows, they have used various Mac OSes for years. In another post, Earle mentions SRI's (International, it broke off from Stanford years ago), use of Mac OS. And I have seen it used at both SRI International and a military contractor in the 90's, pre-OS X.
For simple financial theft, Windows is more prevalent, and which would a crook prefer to go after, a piggy bank or a bank? Why hack a single personal computer, when the rewards are bigger if you hack a retailer for thousands of credit card info.
When a Mac owner says they were hacked, I think you will find that they mean they were either socially engineered or one of their internet accounts was hacked. They do not mean someone has remotely gained access to their Mac, surreptitiously.
We should have always been cautious and practiced good computing habits, avoided sharing too much personal information on-line (social media and otherwise), and used good password practices (to which I include not allowing auto-fill, besides strong passwords).
The day is approaching, fast, when Mac users will need to use an AV app. Apple is trying to keep it further out into the future, with garden walls and sandboxing, but it is still approaching.
Brent
- I was never a Boy Scout, but I like being prepared. I'm not mildly paranoid, just cautious.
On Mar 4, 2013, at 7:29 AM, Jim Saklad wrote:
>> Does that not make your Mac susceptible to all the Windows viruses? And then don't you have to have Norton (or similar) on your Mac?
>
> It is important to understand that it is not the operating system (Mac, Windows, Linux) per se that makes one vulnerable. Current OS's are all technically vulnerable to attack. The real issue is whether you are a target.
You're going to advocate the classic "security through obscurity" fallacy again?
Really?
> Mac users are generally not targets. The main reason Mac OS is "safe" is simply that it has not historically been a hacker target. There are still FAR fewer Macs...
The ratio of Windows computers to Mac computers does NOT, however, seem to relate in any way to the ratio of Windows malware to MacOS X malware.
> Attackers have far fewer tools and much lower incentive to attack Macs, and so they generally don't.
So why has there NEVER been even ONE *virus* in the wild that attacks MacOS X?
EVER, in 12+ years?
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@icloud.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mon Mar 4, 2013 3:27 pm (PST) . Posted by:
"Dane Reugger" dar2112
Antivirus on the desktop is not a lot better than nothing and is your LAST
line of defense. Most companies defend at the gateway device. Unfortunately
for most home users it's the only defense. OS X and good security practice
is good enough for me. But nothing is full proof and Java is a risk on any
OS.
Apple and Microsoft hacked -
http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/19/apple-cyber-security-breach/
http://www.informationweek.com/security/attacks/microsoft-hacked-joins-apple-facebook-tw/240149323
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/23/us-microsoft-hack-idUSBRE91L19A20130223
-Dane
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:14 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@comcast.net > wrote:
> ing to keep it further out into the future, with garden walls and
> sandboxing, but it is still approaching.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
line of defense. Most companies defend at the gateway device. Unfortunately
for most home users it's the only defense. OS X and good security practice
is good enough for me. But nothing is full proof and Java is a risk on any
OS.
Apple and Microsoft hacked -
http://www.engadget
http://www.informat
http://www.reuters.
-Dane
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:14 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@comcast.
> ing to keep it further out into the future, with garden walls and
> sandboxing, but it is still approaching.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mon Mar 4, 2013 5:03 pm (PST) . Posted by:
"Earle Jones" earlejones501
On Mar 4, 13, at 3:14 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@comcast.
> In the absolute, "security through obscurity" is a fool's dream, but in practice, currently, it is not too bad, IF you practice good computing habits.
>
> Yes, there has been malware for the Mac OS over the years, but most has been fairly harmless. That is changing now a days. Now we keep our credit card info on our computers, because we make purchases and pay bills from our computers. In the late 90's, few of us paid for anything over the internet. Today, almost all of us pay for something over the internet.
>
> While fewer businesses, research institutes and government contractors use Mac OS than Windows, they have used various Mac OSes for years. In another post, Earle mentions SRI's (International, it broke off from Stanford years ago), use of Mac OS. And I have seen it used at both SRI International and a military contractor in the 90's, pre-OS X.
>
> For simple financial theft, Windows is more prevalent, and which would a crook prefer to go after, a piggy bank or a bank? Why hack a single personal computer, when the rewards are bigger if you hack a retailer for thousands of credit card info.
>
> When a Mac owner says they were hacked, I think you will find that they mean they were either socially engineered or one of their internet accounts was hacked. They do not mean someone has remotely gained access to their Mac, surreptitiously.
>
> We should have always been cautious and practiced good computing habits, avoided sharing too much personal information on-line (social media and otherwise), and used good password practices (to which I include not allowing auto-fill, besides strong passwords).
>
> The day is approaching, fast, when Mac users will need to use an AV app. Apple is trying to keep it further out into the future, with garden walls and sandboxing, but it is still approaching.
>
> Brent
>
> - I was never a Boy Scout, but I like being prepared. I'm not mildly paranoid, just cautious.
*
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you!
earle
*
____________
Earle Jones
501 Portola Road #8008
Portola Valley CA 94028
Home: 650-424-4362
Cell: 650-269-0035
earle.jones@
Tue Mar 5, 2013 1:09 am (PST) . Posted by:
"N.A. Nada"
Yeap! I try not to be the lowest hanging fruit.
On Mar 4, 2013, at 5:03 PM, Earle Jones wrote:
On Mar 4, 13, at 3:14 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@comcast.net > wrote:
> Brent
>
> - I was never a Boy Scout, but I like being prepared. I'm not mildly paranoid, just cautious.
*
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you!
earle
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
On Mar 4, 2013, at 5:03 PM, Earle Jones wrote:
On Mar 4, 13, at 3:14 PM, N.A. Nada whodo678@comcast.
> Brent
>
> - I was never a Boy Scout, but I like being prepared. I'm not mildly paranoid, just cautious.
*
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you!
earle
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tue Mar 5, 2013 5:19 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Randy B. Singer" randybrucesinger
On Mar 4, 2013, at 8:56 AM, OBrien wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 10:18:40 -0500, T Hopkins wrote:
> > The main reason Mac OS is "safe" is simply that it has not
> > historically been a hacker target. There are still FAR fewer Macs�..
>
> I'm no expert on this subject, but I don't think this is correct. As I understand, the Mac OS +is+ inherently more secure.
I think that the application of just a bit of facts and logic makes the argument that there are too few Macs in existence to have been a target for hackers seem extremely silly.
In 2010 there were about 94 MILLION Mac users according to
industry sources:
http://www.numberof
There are likely to be many more now, as the Mac has had record sales each fiscal quarter since.
That doesn't sound like an insignificant number to me. If there were going to be a bunch of viruses for OS X based on proliferation of the Mac, they would already be here by now.
Several respected Macintosh authorities have repudiated this myth:
Viruses and Operating Systems
by David Pogue (originally published in the New York Times)
http://pogue.
Broken Windows
http://daringfireba
So Witty (followup to Broken Windows)
http://daringfireba
The fact is that the Macintosh is inherently more secure than Windows. See:
Is Windows inherently more vulnerable to malware attacks than OS X?
http://weblog.
or
http://is.gd/
Microsoft Windows: Insecure by Design
http://ensign.
____________
Randy B. Singer
Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)
Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
http://www.macattor
____________
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tue Mar 5, 2013 7:37 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Dave C" davec2468
After reinstalling the OS I had to -- naturally -- re-enter each of my mail accounts' passwords.
I must have made a mistake and I can't access one account.
How can I force Mail forget one password so I can re-enter it?
Thanks,
Dave
Mail 4.6
Snow Leopard
I must have made a mistake and I can't access one account.
How can I force Mail forget one password so I can re-enter it?
Thanks,
Dave
Mail 4.6
Snow Leopard
Tue Mar 5, 2013 8:54 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Pat Taylor" pat412255
Have you checked in the Preferences section of your email client?
On Mar 4, 2013, at 9:25 PM, Dave C davec2468@yahoo.com > wrote:
> After reinstalling the OS I had to -- naturally -- re-enter each of my mail accounts' passwords.
>
> I must have made a mistake and I can't access one account.
>
> How can I force Mail forget one password so I can re-enter it?
>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
> Mail 4.6
> Snow Leopard
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
On Mar 4, 2013, at 9:25 PM, Dave C davec2468@yahoo.
> After reinstalling the OS I had to -- naturally -- re-enter each of my mail accounts' passwords.
>
> I must have made a mistake and I can't access one account.
>
> How can I force Mail forget one password so I can re-enter it?
>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
> Mail 4.6
> Snow Leopard
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tue Mar 5, 2013 7:52 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Jim Smith" jimmacsmith
On Feb 25, 2013, at 11:09 PM, Randy B. Singer wrote:
>
> On Feb 25, 2013, at 7:01 PM, N.A. Nada wrote:
>
>> Timely and simple article explaining the current state and including instructions for removing both Apple and third party Java versions.
>>
>> http://www.macworld
>
> I think that Rich Mogull tends to be overly alarmist.
>
> Simply turning off Java in your browser(s) is sufficient. There have been no exploits for the Macintosh that effect Java-based applications outside of your browser.
>
> Thomas Reed agrees:
>
> "This is a major issue, and it cannot be stressed often enough: if you haven≠t done it already, it≠s time to disable Java in your web browser!
> ...Second, uninstalling Java completely, as some experts have recommended recently, is absolutely unnecessary!
>
> http://www.thesafem
>
> ____________
> Randy B. Singer
> Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)
>
> Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
> http://www.macattor
> ____________
>
To add fuel to the fire, I just received a new Mac Mini Server a couple of days ago and it does NOT have the folder which the above Macworld recommends be removed.
Jim Smith
www.rvcarelogbook.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
GROUP FOOTER MESSAGE
