Mac OS X 10.6 Brings Serious Performance Gains

[Qaridarium]

Hahaha. But it's nice, two totally different debates take place simultaneously in the same thread. Nice to have a lot of smart guys around, unlike the "other" forums (not kidding)

Yes Phoronix is an very nice place to be :-)

Phoronix users Realy Care abaut it! realy..

macos10.6 realy 25€ if that was a full version working on my AMD workstation i realy care baut it to buy and play a little wit it.

but it isn't a full version and do not work on my pc.

you see? Phoronix has a lot of people and they care abaut all the stuff ..

but phoronix users also love the true and the choice and peace.

[kraftman]

Other then serving a political agenda there is no reason why not too.

MS, Apple, Sun do this.

No the GPL prohibits me from using the code as I see fit if it is not my own. I don't have this issue with PD. Good code is good code and there is no sane reason why everybody shouldn't benefit from it.

Proprietary prohibits me from the same or there's just no good code? :P The point is why my (in example) good code should serve other people, companies which don't serve me?

However, some other people replied before and I probably know what you meant.

@Qwerty

But, IMHO, the question about "if and how" this site should review deeply proprietary and locked-in products (like EVERY Apple product is), it's not so trivial, and i don't see any Michael reply about this topic.

They just advertise Apples products in my opinion. Title says a lot and like someone mentioned previous OS X could be just a mess and that's why current release seems to be faster. Real world benchmarks would show the truth ; D

[qwerty]

Yes Phoronix is an very nice place to be :-)

macos10.6 realy 25€ if that was a full version working on my AMD workstation i realy care baut it to buy and play a little wit it.

but it isn't a full version and do not work on my pc.

you see? Phoronix has a lot of people and they care abaut all the stuff ..
but phoronix users also love the true and the choice and peace.

I agree 100%.

And NOT A SINGLE WORD on the article explained that FUNDAMENTAL stuff, pity

Really incoherent, IMHO. If you read the about page on PhoronixMedia:

Phoronix Media has become the leading provider of Linux hardware reviews and other free software news.

It's clear that now Phoronix become leading provider also for PROPRIETARY Locked-in OSs (like OsX is) reviews.

This might sound odd coming from a corporate guy, but I think Stallman will go down in history as one of the more important philosophers of the 20th century, and I think FSF has done a fantastic job of building an environment where developers can volunteer their efforts and feel confident that the results will be used in a way that pleases them.

I agree with you.

And beyond the License war flame, smart people today understand that the *perfect* license, simply, do not exist. *Every* license has a restriction or limitation, so it's important to only choose the *right* license for their needs, period.

They just advertise Apples products in my opinion. Title says a lot and like someone mentioned previous OS X could be just a mess and that's why current release seems to be faster. Real world benchmarks would show the truth ; D

If this was a payed advertising for Apple, rather then a impartial review, i think it's really really bad.

I don't know others, but I don't like to read lies.

[nanonyme]

Proprietary prohibits me from the same or there's just no good code? :P The point is why my (in example) good code should serve other people, companies which don't serve me?

Same in reverse: why should the resources of other companies that you don't serve, serve you. Thus we end up in a situation where they keep theirs, we keep ours. It's all about Intellectual Property, no matter whether you're dealing with megacorporations or FSF.

[nanonyme]

And NOT A SINGLE WORD on the article explained that FUNDAMENTAL stuff, pity

If this was a payed advertising for Apple, rather then a impartial review, i think it's really really bad.

Could you be a bit more precise? Your claims sounded interesting.

[qwerty]

Could you be a bit more precise? Your claims sounded interesting.

Michael itself can be more precise than me on this topic.

I don't know if you guys like to read faulty and absurd statement like this one "Osx it's an only 25$ MUST BUY".

On a Linux and FOSS addicted site like this one should be, IMHO it sounds a little bit *strange*.

[nanonyme]

Michael itself can be more precise than me on this topic.

I don't know if you guys like to read faulty and absurd statement like this one "Osx it's an only 25$ MUST BUY".

On a Linux and FOSS addicted site like this one should be, IMHO it sounds a little bit *strange*.

Ah, might be just me skipping review conclusion pages because they're generally just speculation anyway. :3
ps. Your quote is invalid and the context was that if you already have OSX, it's a good idea to upgrade because the newer one will be faster. Not that you should be buying OSX in the first place.

[Apopas]

A better analogy would be that you are allowed to copy "normal beef" but you can't copy the special brand of extra-tender extra-juicy Kobe beef I spent 20 years and $100M developing. Nobody goes hungry, but you pay extra for the premium stuff.

That's exactly what the companies say to judge the fact that they patent their software. This kind of thinking leads to unacceptable actions, so something is going wrong don't you think?

Just curious, why not download and install OpenOffice on your friends PCs instead ?

Of course I install OpenOffice in my friend's PCs. OpenOffice respects my rights much more than the proprietary programs. That example with MS Office was just an... example. I used the first proprietary software that came to mind. Why everyone here looks each word of any example instead of the meaning that really matters? If I had said that my friend John did this and that then you would say but not everyone has a friend with the name John???

[Apopas]

So what you're saying is that it's fine to copy others work as long as they follow the conditions you've set up, but not if they try to set conditions of their own. Frankly, that sounds a little hypocritical to me.

As long as the conditions I set up respect the freedom and human rights, while the other's don't then I am correct. Whatever you do and how well you justify it is wrong if the result doesn't respect you as human being.

As for your meat example, I would argue that there's a pretty big difference between someone starving to death and someone being forced to visit the library or a friends house in order to view a document. If you really want to help them out that much, why don't you buy another copy of the software for them? Instead, it seems like you put the onus on the company that developed the code rather than taking responsibility yourself for helping your friend.

The Chinese say if you see someone starving you can give him a fish. But real good you do only if you give him a fishing rod.
In other words it's good to buy the software for your friends as well but this is half the solution. The matter is no one to have to rely on his friend for help because he can't afford money.
Also who says that I can afford the money as well to buy the software for a friend? That way of thinking created the third world you know, because they can't afford money for nothing.

[nanonyme]

This whole conversation has culminated into a kind of an operating system racism? As in, does Phoronix also have the right to have articles about proprietary systems. Personally don't see anything wrong with that if opensource systems will remain in a focus. Bring in RHEL and Sun's Solaris!