Linux and Mac are screwed

[movieman]

Wow Apple must really got advanced allocation of those i5's. Shit they must of had them a good 2-3 years before everyone else.

I presume he meant that for the same price as a non-Mac laptop you'd only be able to buy a Mac with specs similar to a four year old non-Mac laptop.

Certainly when I bought my i5 laptop a year or two back I briefly looked at Macs and the closest equivalent cost about twice as much for a slightly faster CPU, smaller hard drive and less RAM. Probably better built, but since I mostly use it on the sofa that's not something that concerns me.

And that wasn't even a Dell or HP, it's a mid-range Toshiba. There was also a cheaper Toshiba with the same disk size and RAM as the Mac but with the same CPU as mine for 20% less. So more than double the cost to buy a Mac in that case.

[Luke_Wolf]

I've been away with other projects, but now back to take you down a notch ninez

first off, ...Blah blah blah..

given that was my first time posting here, and this forum doesn't follow what I'm used to in terms of quoting (and the forum system then proceeded to fight with me posting telling me I'd already posted and such) and otherwise appears to have some quirks to it, that's rather much to be expected.

OS9 multitasked fine (mutlitasking was introduced in system 5) - You obviously never owned a MacOS 9 system, otherwise you would know better.

No I'd reckon my family was one of those middle class types that couldn't afford to pay that much of a premium on such a thing in the first place. I did however get plenty of experience dealing with the Macs at the school, Slow, buggy, and extremely prone to crashing they were.

microsoft didn't come up with preemptive-multitasking either, it pre-dates Microsoft and was a Unix thing (late-60s).

Did I ever say otherwise? No I only commented that before they took advantage of the holes in the BSD license their multitasking sucked. It took NT for Windows to actually really properly do multitasking and even then it's still kinda meh.

your reasoning behind why you think apple uses a global menu is moronic. plain and simple it saves screen real-estate and puts all menu's in one place. Just like Ubuntu's reasoning for moving into a global-menu (not that i use Ubuntu or unity, just saying). you fundementally seem to not understand basic concepts and are delusitional.

So what you're telling me is you'd rather save 10 pixels or so to have to give focus to an application before you're able to use it's menu system? Are you really so depraved of vertical pixels you want to give up real usability?

Microsoft are the kings of aquisitions and mergers. trying to act like Apple is worse for that, is hilarious. Apple doesn't have anywhere near the buying power of MS. Microsoft has tried their best. Bill gates thought there would be only room for one OS, just like he thought no one would ever need more than 64k of memory

I never denied that Microsoft did mergers or bought people out. And just like your beloved Jobs never Actually told people flat out they're holding it wrong, at least as far as I can find. Bill Gates comment wasn't actually that 64K was all anyone would ever need, in full context it was actually about being able to actually handle that much because of limitations of the hardware at the time.

yes, Apple borrowed ideas from Xerox, which was great! - being as Xerox Exec's didn't seethe value in the technology

You realize Jobs himself was taken in by the ooh! Shininess of the GUI and he admits himself he didn't see what was really important that they were showing. Simple fact is the home computer hardware of the time wasn't really ready for a Desktop GUI, it was simply too slow for any real work.

..and if you want to go one about crap like that - microsoft didn't even invent their own OS - they bought what was essentially a derivative of CP/M. Most of the hardwork being done at the time, was actually done by Gary kildall of Digital Research

Microsoft didn't invent it only in the sense that Linus didn't invent *nix, and they actually dropped all outside code by their second version of DOS, and NT to my knowledge is all theirs.

Intel AND Apple developed thunderbolt together, they have a partnership - you are an idiot

That's like saying that IBM and Microsoft developed DOS together, that they had a partnership. It's only true in the sense that IBM or Apple in this case was paying for it.

No, Apple historically has always been into bringing innovation to their platform, they have always been geared towards creative professionals and ease of use.

No they've always been geared at people who shouldn't be allowed near a computer in the first place. Creative professionals only went with Apple after the other proprietary vendors collapsed under market forces because Apple was using PPC and thus RISC which was more suited to what they needed to do. It had absolutely nothing to do with the OS in fact the Amiga was the platform of choice for media professionals before Commodore went out of business.

I ran OS9 for quite a while (years in fact) - no viruses ever. macOSX no viruses ever!

Good for you, I know any number of people who can say the same thing for Windows as well. Doesn't mean the platform was safe.

you can say that Apple takes credit for everyone's work, and i can't totally disagree with that, to be fair.

That was more a remark upon their fanbois actually than upon Apple itself. Of whom I've seen claim basically everything under the sun as having been done by apple first.. what is this Soviet Russia?

also, microsft nor Apple invented the tablet, or even the concept for that matter - i believe conceptually, the Dynabook (Alan Kay/Xerox)

Didn't say that did I? I said they pushed them. I.E. They furthered the development of them not They Invented them.

yes, Mac's aren't as secure as linux - but a Mac can be hardened if that is your goal. that's is a non-issue for anyone who understands what is required in hardening an OS. Windows is an insecure piece of junk. Win7 is the 1st version of windows that actually is working towrads having better security model.

Windows has about the best security model you're going to get in terms of a proprietary system, AV and other Anti-malware support was dropped into the hands of third party vendors meaning that instead of having the OS company controlling everything and expected to do security work, you hand it off to a bunch of different companies who can and are competing and so it's less waiting on one person to fix everything. And it's a given in security that all non-closed systems are insecure, and so reaction time, not OS design is what really matters in the end run (not to say that OS design doesn't greatly help, but that it's a given it's going to be broken), which is why Linux is and forever will be King, Microsoft will come in when we finally start counting proprietary OSes and OSX will come in near last because their users are relying upon Apple itself to do the fixes.

About Mesa/Gallium3D - you should learn to read properly - I was talking about Mesa using ATI hardware. I use Nvidia with the "Blob"... ( i have several machines at work and home).. Also, I run ArchLinux(bleeding-edge) and am using THE LATEST BUILT FROM GIT - 4 DAYS AGO! I highly doubt too too much has changed in four days.

The word old and your fascination with Apple implied to me that you stopped using it, Looks like I was wrong however a 5770 works just fine on another machine we have here with Gallium, performance may be slower than the blob and it's not doing powersaving stuff (which had us put it back on the blob), but it was working just fine.

Microsoft DID NOT invent TABS, nor was it apart of the guidelines and specifications..

Clearly you didn't read what I actually said here it is for you again:

While not being the first to design them, they have been the first to do wide scale adoption of tabbed toolbars also known as ribbons

NeXtStep didn't take over Apple, Steve jobs went back to Apple and bought Nextstep

That's all a matter of perspective really, and here's a hint for you of what really happened, which OS are you really running now on your Mac? Mac OS or NeXTSTEP? (hint: It's the latter one)

If you look at the technologies involved in the NextStep project, what was actually developed either by NeXT or were independently on the nextstep platform - they were way ahead of the curve! by almost a decade

Actually their DE looked rather much like a ripoff of Sun's to me personally, and the BSD and Mach code they took they didn't develop themselves.. so that counts out NeXTSTEP itself..

the World Wide Web was designed on NeXTStep, so was the first web-browser.

That's funny I could have sworn I could access Teh Interwebs on my old Commodore 64. Yes yes, it's right here in the manual about the accessories you can get for it.

anyways, educate yourself. it's pretty obvious that you know little to nothing about the history of conputing. maybe you weren't alive then, or maybe you-re just an ignoramous - either way you don't know shit! you keep making claims that microsoft has come up with so many things

Actually I only picked out a few things, you're the one making it out to be MEGA-LIST.

nor did they have proper compositing until Vista

Um sorry but they still don't have proper compositing and I covered this right here:

Also their compositing for multitasking from what I saw is also rather inferior to the KDE versions of the same effects. From a Windows perspective that would be one thing in its favor, but who ever said Aero actually did anything useful?

Proper compositing for me means Useful, not showy effects.

onto Zeepal as he's next in posting line that I want to address before I get back to you ninez

Really this argument is sounding so political, but who cares what politics say, it's what is there that matters and is actually useful.

So wait.. you're going to get onto me about this when I wrote and clearly stated my objections based in points and ranging from supporting to being derisive towards windows and supportive of KDE and Linux, but you're going to let Ninez who posted an angry rant (mine was a rant fine, but it hasn't shown the absolute anger ninez has by comparison) and has been showing off pure Apple Fanboism off the hook on this

now back to ninez

The conversation may be politcial for those two - but for me - i will point out when someone is posting mis-information, whether it is about microsoft, linux MacOSX or whatever - which both Vincent and Luke_wolf are doing in a big way

I will conceed that I am politically opposed to completely proprietary system and this is why I'll never buy an Apple or a console, at least Microsoft allows open hardware and thus can be considered the Lesser of those two great evils.

many of luke's history is incorrect and totally false

Many of your Apple Fanboi defensive reactionary assumptions about what I was saying are incorrect and totally false.

OSX has got ease of use

Covered in a previous post, which your lack of defense in regards to my points indicates your inability to defend against them.

Now back to zeepal

Hey yeah that more directed at V!NCENT and Luke_Wolf, I agree with what you said, and personally have an iPhone 4 (JB) OSX for Multimedia

Oh that explains it!

Okay here's ninez again

you also have shown you don't know much about NT...making such claims as NT was designed to be the best distributed OS - is retarded!

Except for certain things like the Mac GUI few things are not *designed* to be the best at what their target is, doesn't mean they are, just means they were designed with that target in mind.

the Win8 interface is nothing special

Actually it's rather brilliant for tablets, I don't see it working worth a damn on much else though. I do think that Plasma Active should come up soon enough with something that's going to be even better for tablets though.

I don't think anyone here is an "Apple advocate"

Oh I'm pretty sure I could name a few...

A mis-informed Apple-hater/windows-fanboy

Just because someone hates Apple doesn't mean that they're a windows fan-boy, just look at the FSF.

If NT was as good for this type of purpose, as you think. NT would be running every super-computer

Being good doesn't mean you're the best. Just as one being the best doesn't automatically mean the rest are utter trash.

and now onto deanjo

Four year old specs eh?

They've only recently moved off of their core 2's that they've been sitting upon for the past forever and a half, so his assertion isn't that off the mark even if it is itself out of date.

and I'll concede on cases for now, although I'm still trying to figure out what exactly is making the macbooks so heavy, which the answer might be held in

And more general to the Appleites
just what is up with the keyboards on the macbooks? couldn't they be bothered to scale the (Rather meh, but then no company makes keyboards like IBM which Lenovo inherited) keyboard? I mean even on the 17" one it's still the same size and still missing some of my most valued keys.. the numpad.
(hopefully I'll fit within the 20000 character limit this time)

[brunokindt]

My first thought with after a few seconds was nice add space. In real life this will be a consumer desktop filled with ads for preinstalled trail versions of software you need to buy. A desktop environment reduced to a webpage with ads.

[ninez]

I've been away with other projects, but now back to take you down a notch ninez

really? i thought this thread was a dead one. you didn't even need to post. i was done what do you need to try to win this argument to feel good about yourself or something.?? lol "i've been away with other projects, now im back to make myelf look even dumber!". what were your other projects, trying to figure out how to use quotes properly.??? lol

good luck, lol. you're barking up the wrong tree.

given that was my first time posting here, and this forum doesn't follow what I'm used to in terms of quoting (and the forum system then proceeded to fight with me posting telling me I'd already posted and such) and otherwise appears to have some quirks to it, that's rather much to be expected.

don't know what you are talking about. Phoronix forum is pretty straightforward. many forums do use the same tags, but many do NOT...(im stating the obvious here!) furthermore, like most forums - YOu CAN PREVIEW YOUR COMMENTS - so i think what you really meant to say (instead blaming the forum) is that you are incompetent...lol.

don't blame the forum - when it's you who were at fault. Phoronix works just fine, and these guys have designed a decent forum, thanks what a lame excuse!

No I'd reckon my family was one of those middle class types that couldn't afford to pay that much of a premium on such a thing in the first place. I did however get plenty of experience dealing with the Macs at the school, Slow, buggy, and extremely prone to crashing they were.

it's probably not that you 'couldn't afford', you just had other priorites. there is a difference - i'm middle-class, i could afford it.

Did I ever say otherwise? No I only commented that before they took advantage of the holes in the BSD license their multitasking sucked. It took NT for Windows to actually really properly do multitasking and even then it's still kinda meh.

they didn't take advantage of 'holes' in BSD licensing - erm, i guess your not familiar with how BSD licensing works.?!?! they wouldn't have to take advantage of holes at all... lol. furthermore - Microsoft's first good implementation of multitasking wasn't even NT - it was OS/2 (unix) and was superior to what windows had at the time - in fact, your above comment is completely N/A

win7 contains a boatload of OS/2 code, because in many ways OS/2 was superior in some core ways than any version of windows. (which was essentially based around DOS being inferior to Unix). again, if you don't understand the technical history of this stuff, you should just shut your mouth and walk away...

So what you're telling me is you'd rather save 10 pixels or so to have to give focus to an application before you're able to use it's menu system? Are you really so depraved of vertical pixels you want to give up real usability?

no, what i am saying is that they wanted to save some screen reale-state, and 10pixels was a much bigger deal in 1981 than now. - you can do the math by comparing screen resolutions from then, and compare them to present resolutions. they would have then continued to use global menu's either A) because they liked the design and felt it was more appropiate or B) to keep the interface consistent for their user-base. you keep whining about having to give an app focus before you can use it's menu, but seriously, this has never been an issue for me at all. you are such a baby, and a total troll.. it is just as valid as doing things another way.. it seems to be long time MS users that whine and bitch about this... that's my perspective anyway. oh and FYI globalmenu in Mac doesn't 'emulate' pre-osx behavior - that is how MacOSX works. do you not even understand the definition of emulation or what??

'give up real usablity' is just your opinion - and also is the same kind of stupid argument made as buttons on the left-side vs. right-side - pointless, small-minded and insignificant.. it is ALL in the eye of the beholder. You may as a MS user find that you personally do not like a globalmeny (because you are used to doing things another way on a day to day basis), but that doesn't mean it is less usable. Millions and Millions of Mac users don't find this to be an issue at all. My idea of usability may be different from yours, which may be different than someone else's (hence why there are many OSes, many DE's and many smaller devices with different interfaces). I personally do not find most interfaces very hard to adjust to, it's really not even a big deal. you are just a baby about it, and quite petty.

it's not rocket science.

I never denied that Microsoft did mergers or bought people out. And just like your beloved Jobs never Actually told people flat out they're holding it wrong, at least as far as I can find. Bill Gates comment wasn't actually that 64K was all anyone would ever need, in full context it was actually about being able to actually handle that much because of limitations of the hardware at the time.

You realize Jobs himself was taken in by the ooh! Shininess of the GUI and he admits himself he didn't see what was really important that they were showing. Simple fact is the home computer hardware of the time wasn't really ready for a Desktop GUI, it was simply too slow for any real work.

about the 64k comment - you do realize in your argument you are quoting bill gates from almost a decade later, when asked about it. (why wait, to clarify?) If you do some reading around - you will soon realize this was may have been an attempt to not seem as short-sided. he had thought 64k was going to be around longer than it was lol. - bill gates like's to try rewrite history to make himself seem smarter than he actually was. (him and steve jobs both do!)..but yes, there is a great deal of folklore around that one. and i probably shouldn't have thrown it into the mix.. it's conjecture.

..and i notice you didn't even touch the OS side of my comment, gee i wonder why not? (because it was ENTIRELY correct).

about MS mergers, etc - you completely avoided tackling, or just didn't understand what i was saying. as far as buying, stealing, technology etc. Apple doesn't even touch MS. - they couldn't even if they tried... they are not big enough, nor do they have the buying power.. hell, MS just lost in court here in toronto for code they had stolen from a local company - they got caught red-handed. crap like this happens much more with MS than Apple - that was my point, which seems to have went right over your head, and totally escaped you.

my 'beloved jobs'?!?!? lol - where do you get this stuff??? I'm neither a huge steve jobs fan (FYI- i think he is pretentious, narcisistic and stuck up duche - just to clarify). Just like i think Bill gates / steve balmer as both cut-throat corporate assholes, who have hindered progress and development over the years, and who are largely responisble for propietary software... you suppose way too much - based in ignorance, by the sound of it... and you totally contradicted yourself. Yes, Steve Jobs may have not saw the full-potential, but he obviously saw enough to realize that GUI's were the future, so he went with it. Also, his comment you are referring to, specifically had to do with many other technologies being developed at Xerox. (as there were many things @ Xerox way ahead of their time).

Microsoft didn't invent it only in the sense that Linus didn't invent *nix, and they actually dropped all outside code by their second version of DOS, and NT to my knowledge is all theirs.

AFAIK - you are completely wrong about MS-DOS removing all CP/M code, straight up! their were bits of CP/M for a long long time...microsoft didn't have to remove the code - Gary Kildall allowed them to use it, from the beginning. Microsoft didn't invent DOS 'in the sense' that they bought QDOS which contained a lot of CP/M code, and then modified it to suit there own needs as it was further developed - this isn't even comparable to Linus / *nix. Linus wanted to develop a Unix-type OS that would be free for people to use and his intention was that students would be able to be unrestricted, where as with Unix - this wasn't really possible at the time. he wanted a free operating system...

so to re-cap microsoft did NOT invent DOS, nor did anyone ever suggest Linus invented *nix - nor are they even comparable, in the way that you are trying to connect them. your statment is bogus...

That's like saying that IBM and Microsoft developed DOS together, that they had a partnership. It's only true in the sense that IBM or Apple in this case was paying for it.

it required R&D on both sides. (for thunderbolt). your comparison is moot - IBM and Microsoft struck a deal with Digital Research, because niether Microsoft nor IBM was in the position of releases MS-DOS, there were legal issues to do with CP/M.. over time MS/IBM adapted and added to the technology - which also requires R&D on both sides (microsoft/IBM). this is not complicated stuff to understand --> it's no different than some of the technology we develop for our customers at work - yes, they pay us, we do most of the development - but it requires both parties to participate to MAKE IT WORK! i guess these kinds of concepts are too hard for you to grasp..?

No they've always been geared at people who shouldn't be allowed near a computer in the first place. Creative professionals only went with Apple after the other proprietary vendors collapsed under market forces because Apple was using PPC and thus RISC which was more suited to what they needed to do. It had absolutely nothing to do with the OS in fact the Amiga was the platform of choice for media professionals before Commodore went out of business.

..'shouldn't be allowed near a computer...bla bla' - hmmm,what is this Nazi Germany??? ridiculous. who do you think you are? really... you just sound dumber and dumber as time goes on..lol using PCC and designing an OS for it - means it had absolutely EVERYTHING to do with the OS. - the choice in Arch-type the code built around it, in your own words - it was better suited! this is true of current MacOSX too - it is better suited for creative professionls, and this is even after Apple switched to Intel - which says a lot! (hopefully, i don't need to spell out for you what i mean).

ya, Amiga was great. i used to write music on one at a friends home studio years ago. 'Commodore went out of business' pretty much says it all. AFAIK Amiga was popular for gaming, demo-music (trackers) and video - however, Apple was much more widely adopted in the Publishing world than Amiga. Amiga was popular in T.V for while, but again the platform died. (aside from hobbyist forks that still exist today).

Good for you, I know any number of people who can say the same thing for Windows as well. Doesn't mean the platform was safe.

Well, i know from 9 years professionally working in the IT Industry and having my MCITP, and for years and years before that providing servicing to multiple platforms / computers locally - i know far fewer windows users who can claim that, than Apple users. And i bet i could find WAAAYYY more people than you can who would verify what i am saying...

furthermore statistically, the shear amount of malware developed for MS platform, completely VOIDS what you are saying, and shows this is just an opinion, and not fact... try using logic and common-sense, it might help you argue your points better.

what you are saying is short-sided, obtuse, BS...

That was more a remark upon their fanbois actually than upon Apple itself. Of whom I've seen claim basically everything under the sun as having been done by apple first.. what is this Soviet Russia?

lol. that's funny. I never claimed that Apple did everything first - i know better than that. Nor am i a fanboy... however, there are many markets that microsoft has tried to get into (even b4 Apple sometimes) and they conintously fail. how popular was the zune? how popular has Ms smartphones been? how popular are MS-tabets?

do current statistics and trends show that microsoft will dominate any of these markets over Linux or Apple?? hell no.

Didn't say that did I? I said they pushed them. I.E. They furthered the development of them not They Invented them.

sure, MS has furthered tablet technology here and there, but OEMs and research groups, in reality - have probably contributed much more - MS have had little to no success on the platform. they have made many failed attempts, and will continue to do so.

... cont'd

[ninez]

Part 2

Windows has about the best security model you're going to get in terms of a proprietary system, AV and other Anti-malware support was dropped into the hands of third party vendors meaning that instead of having the OS company controlling everything and expected to do security work, you hand it off to a bunch of different companies who can and are competing and so it's less waiting on one person to fix everything. And it's a given in security that all non-closed systems are insecure, and so reaction time, not OS design is what really matters in the end run (not to say that OS design doesn't greatly help, but that it's a given it's going to be broken), which is why Linux is and forever will be King, Microsoft will come in when we finally start counting proprietary OSes and OSX will come in near last because their users are relying upon Apple itself to do the fixes.

actually, there a proprietary *nix systems which have better security than Windows....of course security will be broken at some point, that is how it becomes better - but historically (and even presently) Microsoft does a horrible job, and probably always will...it's also NOT a given in security that open-systems are less secure - you are way off the mark on that. Have you actually any professional experience working in IT infrastructure, at all???? (im guessing probably not).

MacOSX security isn't that bad, the issue is the defaults, and some 'default' design choices that Apple has decided to go with. I do believe this should be a higher priority for Apple, but hopefully in a few years i will be using Gnu/Linux systems only, so i could care less, and thus far has been a non-issue... MS has bad karma, people are far less interested in developing malware fo Linux, Unix or MacOSX, but they seem to love attacking Microsoft...

The word old and your fascination with Apple implied to me that you stopped using it, Looks like I was wrong however a 5770 works just fine on another machine we have here with Gallium, performance may be slower than the blob and it's not doing powersaving stuff (which had us put it back on the blob), but it was working just fine.

i never implied that i wasn't using gallium3d - i said that my old-laptop (referring to age) has no choice but to use Gallium3d ever since around 2.6.33, when Kernel-mode-setting was introduced and i said that the performance was crap. (back then and currently).

it may work 'fine' - but that isn't 'relative' to the blob... any benchmarks will show you mesa/gallium3d is 2-3 times SLOWER and as you mention does not even do power-saving stuff. support of OpenGL3.0 won't go mainline for atleast six months - and the driver will still be extremely slow. so, it's not a question of 'maybe' slower, it is SIGNICANTLY SLOWER! - and can't even match MacOSX's performance, by a long shot. - that was my point.

was that too hard to understand???? i thought it was fairly straightforward?

That's all a matter of perspective really, and here's a hint for you of what really happened, which OS are you really running now on your Mac? Mac OS or NeXTSTEP? (hint: It's the latter one)

nope, what you have written above is 'a matter of your own perspective'. Apple bought NeXTSTEP because they wanted the technology.. i'm well aware that OpenSTEP is a big part of MacOSX. But that does not change the fact that Apple bought NeXTSTEP - not the other way around! use your brain, it's common sense, well documented and FACTUAL... unlike your above comment... FYI MacOSX in the early days (up until 10.4, or maybe leopard) fully supported running MacOS apps, as in it conatined the APIs/frameworks from MacOS (adapted to run in OSX) to allow it to do so... - not only that NeXTSTEP isn't MacOSX - they do share significant code, but OSX was developed not 'only' around NeXTSTEP (actually as i said above it was more the OpenStep code-base than NeXTSTEP, which is chonologically came later) - but also integrates technology from SUN, BSD, GNU and BeOS development - there is all sorts of evidence of this right in OSX code/APIs/etc. (right down to how various bits of code are named!) .. anyone who followed it's development will tell you that! BSD kernel runs much like a service to Mach, BSD-like user-space (in part), NeXT binary formats and many other APIs, SUN developers were hired and worked on Carbon, and other core parts of both Darwin and OSX - the list goes on and on. MacOSX is the combined effort of many projects - not just NeXT.

oh, and before you go off on some moronic rant about how they just bought the technology from Sun/Be/BSD or something. Same goes - it required R&D, and working together and they were hired at Apple, not just technology licensed or some crap...

So, MacOSX while closely related to NeXTSTEP - AFAIK - is NOT 'just' NeXTSTEP, but yes they are related! So, you saying it's 'MacOS or NeXTSTEP' - just shows your own lack of technical understanding, you are grapsing at straws - at the VERY best...

you don't have a clue about it's design, or internals or the history.. it's pretty obvious.

Actually their DE looked rather much like a ripoff of Sun's to me personally, and the BSD and Mach code they took they didn't develop themselves.. so that counts out NeXTSTEP itself..

...again, to you 'personally' = your personal opinion and doesn't really mean much. Pretty much all *nix workstations of that era, had somewhat similar interfaces (being built on X11 and all). however, that being said - NeXTSTEP introduced 'new' standards with were then transfered in every other OS - including sunOS/solaris, Linux, Windows...and many key projects are the basis of many modern technologies widely used.

...and like many technologies Mach was a research project. Everyone back in the day, was trying to use Mach kernel to some degree or another, as microkernel's were all the hype... and NT kernel is based around many of its key concepts (in fact, it's head developer has hired by MS for research, back in the early 90's).

I actually appreciate the Fact, that Apple took a look around at existing technologies and picked the best of what was available to them, and built something new. - and make no mistake, MacOSX isn't BSD or NeXTSTEP. it is it's own beast.
just as OSX isn't only Darwin - darwin is a part of it's core, with many missing technologies found only in MacOSX. (ie: carbon, coreaudio, etc.)...

As most programmer's will tell you - why try to re-create software/code that already exists, when it is far more sensible/productive to either re-cycle or adapt exisiting code to service your project's needs....? (as in don't try to re-invent the wheel).

I guess you don't understand software development either.

That's funny I could have sworn I could access Teh Interwebs on my old Commodore 64. Yes yes, it's right here in the manual about the accessories you can get for it.

you do realize the world wide web is not the internet right?? lol. how dumb.
yup, commodore 64 can surf the web and has more than one web-browser. but you also know that c64 had several re-releases over the years???

if you actually knew the time-line and your history - you would know better, than to make an argument as stupid as this one. what a joke! - the world wide web, was designed on NeXTSTEP, much of the work was done at CERN, same with hypertext.. they had the FIRST web-browser, and many modern common tehcnologies found in all modern OSes, and that make up what became the internet (minus darpa)...

Proper compositing for me means Useful, not showy effects.

agreed. i guess that means Win7 still didn't get it right. As both Mac and Linux compositors have far more functionality that is useful (as well as more bling!)

I will conceed that I am politically opposed to completely proprietary system and this is why I'll never buy an Apple or a console, at least Microsoft allows open hardware and thus can be considered the Lesser of those two great evils.

microsoft for years and years pretty much had a monopoly of OEMs - that isn't open hardware, that's a dictatorship and arguably has hindered development and progress for years and years. - Microsoft intended to be the only OS, run all web-standards and did everything in there power to make that a reality, we have a rich-web experience and the open-standards we do in part because of Mozilla - Microsoft didn't want that to be the case AT ALL!! - so don't bother saying they are about 'open' anything - that is pure FUD, ignorance or stupidity <-- one or all of the above... Windows is proprietary - just like Apple, not ANY less.

i also prefer open standards which is why i prefer Gnu/Linux...and yet, it's pretty obvious that Linux has suffered because of MS's monopoly, enforcing their own standards on the public and contracts with OEMs. FYI Apple contributes for more code to open-source projects than MS. they are maintaining point releases in xorg 1.10, maintain CUPS and other things as well. I think if you are going to go one about MS .vs Apple and open-standards - you might want to checkout all the FUD Microsoft put out in the industry about the GPL, and open-source software in general. I tend to think Apple is the lesser evil of the two, if that is how one chooses to look at it. but ya, i don't think that Apple contributes nearly enough...

on top of that - MacOSX is a Unix-like OS much more closely related to Gnu/Linux. which means if you're a power-user in Linux or BSD - the skills are easily transferable, they are the same family of OS - and many of the same companies and developers have worked on both...i like this. although, Ms is certainly 'Galiath', they are definetly the odd-man-out when it comes to OSes -> and i much prefer *nix systems.

ninez says:

OSX has got ease of use

Luke says:

Covered in a previous post, which your lack of defense in regards to my points indicates your inability to defend against them.

lack defense? (an assumption). your 'previous post' covering this was nothing more than opinion. You failed to show anything substantial, or technical to support your "opinions". you obviously hate Apple's interface. but that doesn't mean it is less usable... none of your points proved that. futhermore, you made assumptions like the best/only way to close an app would be to do so via the global menu, which is often NOT the fastest or most efficent way to do that. you clearly don't know how to use a mac ~ which is funny. I know grandmas and non-technology people who can use a Mac, easier than windows! The only thing you have proven - is that you are either inflexible in your thinking, you don't adapt easily and can't use the interface properly. - but the onus is on you - not Apple. many people use the interface just fine...

i can get things done just as quickly on a Mac, as i can in Windows or Linux

ninez says to ViNCENT;

you also have shown you don't know much about NT...making such claims as NT was designed to be the best distributed OS - is retarded!

Luke pipes in;

Except for certain things like the Mac GUI few things are not *designed* to be the best at what their target is, doesn't mean they are, just means they were designed with that target in mind.

NT was NOT originally designed with a proper networking stack OR TCP/IP - this means it was not designed with distributed computing in mind AT ALL! ~ do your home work if your going to make comments like this, you look incredibly stupid making such claims. you commented with a similar comment, on my other post with ViNCENT - but clearly you must have not read what ViNCENT had said...

to quote ViNCENT;

Microsoft Windows since NT has been build from the gound up for networking microkernels, in other words: distributed computing. It shows in file systems, rights, everything.

this is BS. also, win7/2008 server were the 1st versions of Windows to start to get permissions, etc correct.

Actually it's rather brilliant for tablets, I don't see it working worth a damn on much else though. I do think that Plasma Active should come up soon enough with something that's going to be even better for tablets though.

it beats using the classic windows interface on a tablet, that's for sure. (which i have used - winXP + tablet).

Just because someone hates Apple doesn't mean that they're a windows fan-boy, just look at the FSF.

correct. but particularily in ViNCENT's case - it's more than obvious that is what he is... he was making WILD claims about apple's service, hardware, etc ~ that was simply bull!@#! - intentionally spreading lies - that makes him a hater! almost by definition. he is hating on their success and spreading FUD... he also was making claims about Microsoft that was not factual by any stretch of the imagination...

you are pretty much the same way, except less FUD. and i do consider you a winfanboy - after a week or so, when everyone else had moved on and forgotten about this thread, here you come again - in true MS defender fanboy, apple-hater fashion - swinging your fists like a whiny, attention deprived child wanting to get there way..lol

anyway, im done.

i think you should probably just give it up. you're not putting any one "in their place" or "laying the smack down". - that is just ridiculously comical...

if i have forgotten to reply to something - take that as me not giving a @#$%

happy times

[energyman]

I have beachballed a mac a few weeks ago trying to add some pics to an office document. So much about 'stability'.

Also funny: trash can that can not be emptied. Undeletable files

Not so funny: Apple's abysmal securtiy.

Macs suck.

[ninez]

I have beachballed a mac a few weeks ago trying to add some pics to an office document. So much about 'stability'.

i have seen that before. a friend of mine had that problem. it turned out there was something funky going on with the images, he was trying to use. (something funny in the formatting, most likely). i quickly converted the image. problem solved. - it was an odd quirk, never really figured out why it happened, but again, it wasn't hard to fix.

Also funny: trash can that can not be emptied. Undeletable files

that's really funny, undetelable files. AFAIK files are always deteleable. you were doing something wrong ~ it was most likely as easy as changing the permissions on the file. I've seen this happen on Mac and Linux and Win7, and it takes a few seconds to fix the problem. literally!

don't believe me???? try using google! (type 'can't empty trash' + win7' (or linux or Mac)

Not so funny: Apple's abysmal securtiy.

easy to fix, if you're really really concerned, there are many many solutions. it's called setup your firewall, get an app like 'littlesnitch', tighten up security of the file system... google - 'how to harden a mac' - there are many resources available and wikipages on the subject. it takes 5 to 10 minutes to do (no longer than downloading and installing anti-virus software for Windows... AFAIK any OS shouldn't be considered hardened or secure unless the user has taken steps to make it so, after installation - this includes win7, and even Linux to a lesser degree.

Macs suck.

...for people who can't quickly google a issue or two that they don't understand how to fix.

it's pretty common practice in any OS to run into the odd bump, whether that be Windows, MacOSX, Linux, BSD, whatever...

all three of your issues, were easily addressed, and VERY easy to fix! if you had taken a few minutes to look.

i would compare this to someone tries to start their car in the morning, but it doesn't start - so they call a mechanic - tell them it's broken. they then tow the car to the mechanic - the mechanic finds there is no gasoline in the car, hence why it wouldn't start.

it's pretty much the driver's fault for not even checking the gas gauge. - what, do you then say your car sucks, because you didn't bother to filll it up???

i think you might want to work on your problem solving skills, none of these issues are challenging, or unsolvable.

[energyman]

there was nothing funny with the images. The images were plain standard jpegs without any funny stuff going on.

And don't act like I am stupid!

First I tried to empty the trash several times. I got the process bar which moved like a process bar should, then vanished.

Nothing was deleted.

I checked the logs (which is really hard on a Mac). Nothing

I opened a shell, tried removing files. Some files were deleted.

Most files were not deleted.

I did a chmod -R 777 on the whole trashcan.

A lot more files were deletable afterwards but:

some gigabytes worth of files were still there.

And of course no error messages.

MACS SUCK ASS.

That simple.

And don't come with that idiotic firewall stuff. A firewall will help you NOTHING if you run Apple's broken by design software? You don't believe me? USE GOOGLE.

Security experts (except 'apple experts) yell it at the tops of their lungs: MacOSX has more holes than swiss cheese and is easier to crack than a fortune cookie. Just think about this for a moment:

whenever their is a pwn-to-own event Apple products are the first to be cracked. Not because the people put the most effort into it. Nope, because it is so god damn easy.

You should stop praying to Jobs pictures and start informing yourself.

[ninez]

there was nothing funny with the images. The images were plain standard jpegs without any funny stuff going on.

And don't act like I am stupid!

i never said you were stupid. try saving them / converting them into a different format that office accepts. - ...and where did the jpegs come from??? (this also may or may not be very telling). I run into several similar issues with employee's at work several times a year - in both WinXP and win7 in MsOffice, and likewise have seen it in OSX.. unrelated, but i also run into similar problems with the various formats of .wav files in all sorts of audio apps, in any OS.

First I tried to empty the trash several times. I got the process bar which moved like a process bar should, then vanished.

Nothing was deleted.

I checked the logs (which is really hard on a Mac). Nothing

I opened a shell, tried removing files. Some files were deleted.

Most files were not deleted.

I did a chmod -R 777 on the whole trashcan.

A lot more files were deletable afterwards but:

some gigabytes worth of files were still there.

And of course no error messages.

well, it sounds like you were on the right track, then . but obviously you have missed something... One way or another you CAN delete those files. they are NOT impossible to delete, straight up...also, i was pointing out that as this being a logical reason for why mac's suck is silly, becuase it happens on ALL operating systems that have proper file permissions. - did you not get the memo???

MACS SUCK ASS.

That simple.

in your opinion, mac suck. that doesn't make it factual. by the same token if i was to say Windows sucked, that would only be my opinion. in some ways, and different ways - all OSes suck. it's common sense and ...THAT SIMPLE!

And don't come with that idiotic firewall stuff. A firewall will help you NOTHING if you run Apple's broken by design software? You don't believe me? USE GOOGLE.

..and yet, that was ONLY 1 VERY LITTLE part of options mentioned in fixing security issues / hardening a Mac... And if you are so good at hacking / pen-testing maybe you should harden a MacOSX and see how is easy it is to hack into, after... - it's harder than you think. (or do you just read articles online, and think you are a hacking genius???)

Security experts (except 'apple experts) yell it at the tops of their lungs: MacOSX has more holes than swiss cheese and is easier to crack than a fortune cookie. Just think about this for a moment:

whenever their is a pwn-to-own event Apple products are the first to be cracked. Not because the people put the most effort into it. Nope, because it is so god damn easy.

correct, however it is important to note, that in almost all cases - the system hasn't been hardened at all..(in any of the contests i have seen) and i think that is a very important detail, often overlooked. Mac's are fairly wide-open if the user doesn't take any precautions - that is a problem Apple should fix. and i can totally agree on that, as i mentioned to Luke, it is something they should be addressing, but haven't.

also, if it is soooo god damn easy - how many mac's have you actually hacked into??? because if it is that easy - you should be able to hack into ANY mac, hardened or not - right now. but, if you can't, well then that says a lot...

You should stop praying to Jobs pictures and start informing yourself.

grow up. i'm not really a steve jobs fan, as i pointed out to Luke - i think he is pretentious, narcissistic and a duche bag.

i'm fairly well-informed. Every two 2 years i have to do courses paid for by my employer, specific to ethical hacking / pen-testing...it is required to maintain our networks..

[energyman]

I checked permissions and ownership of the files. From every point they should have been deletable.

They weren't.

But this is not surprising at all. MacOSX sometimes just 'forgets' files too - just ask the guy who does Vexxar he wrote (and filmed) about it extensively.

The images were fine. WinXP with Office 2003 and Office 2007 had no problems with them. Just MacOSX.