Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES
O x f o r d
Platform of the year in 2008.
http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2008/01/148-2008_technology-2.html
No one is unhappy with Mac OS X Version 10.4, known as Tiger. OS X is
not an application platform (I bristle at using the term "operating
system" for OS X; I explain why below) that needed repair, speeding up,
or exterior renovation. Motivations for major upgrades of competing
system software ‹ roll-ups of an unmanageable number of fixes, because
the calendar says it's time, or because users are perceived to have
version fatigue ‹ don't apply to OS X.
Apple wields no whip to force upgrades because Tiger stands no risk of
being neglected by Apple or third-party developers as long as Leopard
lives. Despite the absence of a stick that drives users into upgrades of
competing OSes, or perhaps because of it, Apple enjoys an extraordinary
rate of voluntary OS X upgrades among desktop and notebook users. Why?
People buy Macs because the platform as a whole is perfect, full stop.
Leopard is a rung above perfection. It's taken as rote that the Mac
blows away PC users' expectations. Leopard blows away Mac users'
expectations, and that's saying a great deal.
-
Apple's secret, which is no secret to Mac users, is that major OS X
releases deliver tangible value far in excess of their asking price,
which in Leopard's case is $129. OS X is, first and foremost, a platform
for integrated, user-facing applications. And to a far greater extent
than previous releases, OS X Leopard itself exploits the facilities that
Apple's developers have used to create the vendor's commercial software.
Apple hasn't reserved any of the Mac platform's goodies for itself, and
users don't need to wait (or spend) for apps that expose the platform's
richness in productive ways.
-
For example, Screen Sharing is now built into OS X, just open the Finder
icon for a remote server and click the Screen Sharing button to grab the
remote system's display and, optionally, its mouse and keyboard. Apple
built Screen Sharing into iChat, and Back to My Mac uses the .Mac
service and Screen Sharing to securely tunnel to files and consoles on
Macs behind firewalls. All of Leopard is like that ‹ every Leopard
feature, even those that would ordinarily be invisible to all but
developers, or reserved for the use of the vendor, is planted throughout
OS X in the places you'd put it.
Freedom in the frameworks
Looking at it from a technical perspective, Leopard's step past
perfection lies in its extensive use of the combination of the Mac
platform's intrinsic integration and Leopard's delivery of hundreds of
additions and enhancements to OS X's frameworks.
Apple supplies a consistent, familiar, and well-documented path for
developers to do any given thing. In contrast, an entire industry has
sprung up around providing developers with proprietary plugs for the
gaps that Microsoft leaves in Windows, often intentionally as an aid to
the third-party development community. The completeness of the Mac
frameworks leaves no room for a marketplace for Mac developer library
enhancements.
What's changed in Leopard is that Apple has invested enormous effort to
expose Mac framework enhancements to users through OS X's built-in
facilities and applications. Leopard's out-of-the-box experience, which
I define as the things that a user can do without spending an extra
dollar on software, eclipses Tiger's, and Tiger was no slouch in this
regard. In the past, third parties have offered freeware and shareware
facilities to extend or even replace Finder, the Mac's answer to
Windows' primitive Explorer. That died out with Tiger, and Leopard makes
such efforts entirely useless. That is not a bad thing.
Congrats to Apple for showing the world how great computing can be!
You can move up to the most Open OS available here:
Wow, now Apple has over 8% of the Market, Windows has dropped below 89%
for the first time in decades... and Linux still is vying for 1%!
What a great world indeed!
You can learn more about the World's largest UNIX platform here!
http://www.apple.com/macosx/techspecs/
And the most respected, scalable, inexpensive UNIX SERVER OS here:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/specs.html
Around 230% less than Linux installs and over 900% less than Microsoft!
Smart people only use OSX, that's for sure!
-
7
corporation:
> N
Linux now distributed at a rate of 1 million+ desktops per month.
Embedded Linux now selling 1 million embedded Linux products PER DAY.
Linux and open source is winning compared to over priced underperforming
second rate appil crap products and marketing.
See for yourself why Linux is superior technology
compared to appil crap.
Go to http://www.youtube.com and search for compiz and beryl
Its all free.
Time you got a decent PC and installed Linux
and enjoyed the power of Linux flowing through your computer.
For speed, performance and bang for buck there is nothing
that beats it.
O x f o r d
> Linux now distributed at a rate of 1 million+ desktops per month.
> Embedded Linux now selling 1 million embedded Linux products PER DAY.
> Linux and open source is winning compared to over priced underperforming
> second rate appil crap products and marketing.
and 96% of them are "updates/patches" to previous distributions. Only
around 2,111 "new" installs with Linux on a day to day basis.
OSX completely dwarfs that number at 19,000 per day in purely "new"
machines being brought online, and just look, over 23,000 PER DAY in the
current 90 days alone.
Linux just can't keep pace with the more robust OSX, you and I both know
that. Linus is fine for dumb servers and terminals, don't get me wrong,
but it never will hold more than .8% of worldwide share on desktops or
laptops. That's a simple FACT.
(Apple's Laptops alone already have 22% worldwide share!, so the Linux
community really must rethink their goals)
> See for yourself why Linux is superior technology
> compared to appil crap.
> Go to http://www.youtube.com and search for compiz and beryl
didn't see anything, could you post a real example?
> Its all free.
> Time you got a decent PC and installed Linux
> and enjoyed the power of Linux flowing through your computer.
> For speed, performance and bang for buck there is nothing
> that beats it.
OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux was
a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
Now OSX is over 19 times the size of Linux when you look at the
"installed base", plus it has REAL profession software, not the hobby,
afterschool projects so often see when downloading Linux software.
Yes, I feel sorry for the poor regions of Europe that still hang on to
Linux even though Linus has moved to a purely Mac City. Linux is
basically dead in the big scheme of things. I'm just the messenger.
-
Tommy Tickler
> 7 <website_...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>
> OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux was
> a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
>
There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and good
to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it. Linux
might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are amateur
hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X
Peter Köhlmann
< snip OxRetard garbage >
> OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux was
> a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
>
Only that Linus did never move to OSX
Sorry to burst your bubble, cretinous typical Mac user OxRetard, but you are
wrong as usual: He is /also/ using a Apple computer. He runs linux PPC on
it
Torvalds: OS X core a “piece of crap”
http://www.geek.com/torvalds-os-x-core-a-piece-of-crap/
Scuttlebutt: Torvalds Thinks OS X Is Crap
http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2001/04/09/mac_dev.html
Torvalds rubbishes core of Apple's OS X
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,2085525,00.htm
Do you need any more links why Linus Torvalds thinks that OSX is garbage,
utter, complete filth? You can have dozens of them. All telling you what
garbage your beloved toy-OS really is
You are really a typical Mac user, OxRetard. Nothing which remotely
resembles "facts" would be found anywhere near you
< snip more typical Mac users idiocy >
--
Avoid reality at all costs.
Pixzl
the advance or progress of )
Not the slang you seem to think it means.
Look up the word asswhipe, oh wait, just look in the mirror.
LOL
"Peter Köhlmann" <peter.k...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:flucbr$kgn$01$1...@news.t-online.com...
George Graves
(in article <VOxgj.74067$c_1....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>):
Just one question. What does one do if one needs actual professional-level
software with which to do real work? Linux is out, that's what happens.
--
How come every time we get a "Major Tax Cut" I get maybe $0.30 more returned
to me, but every time there's a "Minor Tax Increase" it costs me $300.00?
George Graves
(in article <j5ygj.194124$uv7....@fe05.news.easynews.com>):
That's true. Funny thing though, out of the box, a Mac can run just about
anything that Linux can run (as long as you install X11 too).
Little Gorm
> professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and good
> to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it. Linux
> might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are amateur
> hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X
I will admit that many of the apps running in Linux are not as well
polished as those of MS or Apple, but given time they will improve. Apple
and MS spend literally millions in research in fine tuning their GUIs for
the average user, while apps in the Linux community are built by
relavtively small groups who are far more intent on ensuring a stable and
secure core. As Linux distros mature, the interfaces for the apps will also
greatly improve. At the present, you have various distros that appeal to
different sets of users. With MS and Apple you take it the way they want
you to have it.
Christopher Hunter
> No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
> Platform of the year in 2008.
If you have to /buy/ plaudits like this, your product is worthless.
Next month, another "industry" rag will tell the world that MS Vista is the
best OS available - because MS will buy /lots/ of expensive advertising
space.
These silly "awards" are about as reliable a Hi-fi magazine reviews. (Clue:
the company that buys the most advertising space gets the best reviews!)
C.
Hadron
> No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
> Platform of the year in 2008.
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2008/01/148-2008_technology-2.html
Huh? According to l33t MS hacker "Christopher Hunter", Apple have
neither the talent nor the resources to challenge Linux! No wonder
Microsoft fired him - he's clearly barking mad.
Rick
... nothing worth reading.
--
Rick
Rick
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:55:11 -0800, Tommy Tickler wrote (in article
> <j5ygj.194124$uv7....@fe05.news.easynews.com>):
>
>> O x f o r d wrote:
>>> 7 <website_...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux
>>> was a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
>>>
>>>
>> There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
>> professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and
>> good to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it.
>> Linux might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are
>> amateur hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X
>
> That's true. Funny thing though, out of the box, a Mac can run just
> about anything that Linux can run (as long as you install X11 too).
... as long as you install X11 too is not the same as out of the box.
--
Rick
Christopher Hunter
If you knew my *real* name, you'd know why and when I (of my own
volition) /left/ MS.
It was actually quite a lot of fun at the time, but the endless meaningless
meetings, the retarded corporate structure (where a man's level of
*incompetence* determines how high in the company he gets) and the poor pay
(I can get three times as much for shorter hours elsewhere) persuaded me
and many of my collegues to leave. There was a mass migration to FOSS
projects!
As to Apple - they have a fairly competent core team of around eighty
programmers. There is *no* *way* that they have the amount of /resources/
or amount of /talent/ that's available to FOSS.
It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX effort.
There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
install /everything/ that's included with a distro).
C.
Lloyd Parsons
wrote:
Uh, with Leopard, the default install is with X11...
Hadron
> Hadron wrote:
>
>> O x f o r d <iph...@superphone.com> writes:
>>
>>> No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
>>> Platform of the year in 2008.
>>>
>>> http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2008/01/148-2008_technology-2.html
>>
>> Huh? According to l33t MS hacker "Christopher Hunter", Apple have
>> neither the talent nor the resources to challenge Linux! No wonder
>> Microsoft fired him - he's clearly barking mad.
>
> If you knew my *real* name, you'd know why and when I (of my own
> volition) /left/ MS.
I take my hat off to you for picking a nym which so clearly matches your
views.
>
> It was actually quite a lot of fun at the time, but the endless meaningless
> meetings, the retarded corporate structure (where a man's level of
> *incompetence* determines how high in the company he gets) and the
> poor pay
You're misquoting the Peter principle which states that someone is
promoted to their first level of incompetence. I think ....
> (I can get three times as much for shorter hours elsewhere) persuaded me
> and many of my collegues to leave. There was a mass migration to FOSS
> projects!
3 x as much eh? Good to see you're after the cash. Nothing wrong with
that.
>
> As to Apple - they have a fairly competent core team of around eighty
> programmers. There is *no* *way* that they have the amount of /resources/
> or amount of /talent/ that's available to FOSS.
Bullshit.
>
> It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX
> effort.
if you think Beryl determines "quality" then good luck to you. Go and us
OSX or an iPhone to see how a UI should hang together.
> There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
> long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
> install /everything/ that's included with a distro).
Linux IS great WHEN you get to know it. Unfortunately most of the OSS
GUI apps are simply atrocious.
Gimp, and now Amarok are the main exceptions IMO.
Lloyd Parsons
Christopher Hunter <chrise...@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
So you need to know which apps not to install or you have problems?
Linux has always been a fine OS, just not ready for the masses.
Christopher Hunter
> I take my hat off to you for picking a nym which so clearly matches your
> views.
HA!
>> It was actually quite a lot of fun at the time, but the endless
>> meaningless meetings, the retarded corporate structure (where a man's
>> level of *incompetence* determines how high in the company he gets) and
>> the poor pay
>
> You're misquoting the Peter principle which states that someone is
> promoted to their first level of incompetence. I think ....
You're /nearly/ right (that /was/ the Peter Principle), but at MS,
incompetence and sycophancy were the only real ways to progress.
>> (I can get three times as much for shorter hours elsewhere) persuaded me
>> and many of my collegues to leave. There was a mass migration to FOSS
>> projects!
>
> 3 x as much eh? Good to see you're after the cash. Nothing wrong with
> that.
Exactly! I want a comfortable old age, and want to be not too old to enjoy
it!
>> As to Apple - they have a fairly competent core team of around eighty
>> programmers. There is *no* *way* that they have the amount of
>> /resources/ or amount of /talent/ that's available to FOSS.
>
> Bullshit.
Think. The sheer /numbers/ of FOSS developers guarantee that there's /more/
talent! Some mud always sticks to the wall!
>> It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX
>> effort.
>
> if you think Beryl determines "quality" then good luck to you.
When properly configured on modern hardware, it's spectacular - it's the
"gold standard" for desktop offerings.
> Go and use OSX or an iPhone to see how a UI should hang together.
OSX is surprisingly slow - I've got a box next to me. It's pretty, but
inefficient. The iPhone is a poor joke. The software is easily crashed,
they missed out *3G* compatability, the transceiver is appalling (low
output power, poor receive sensitivity), and they're really easily broken!
>> There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
>> long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
>> install /everything/ that's included with a distro).
>
> Linux IS great WHEN you get to know it. Unfortunately most of the OSS
> GUI apps are simply atrocious.
Not any more. That might have been true five years ago, but no longer.
> Gimp, and now Amarok are the main exceptions IMO.
Your opinions are almost right in this instance, but there's a /lot/ more
good software that you might have missed!
C.
Hadron
> Hadron wrote:
>
>>> It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX
>>> effort.
>>
>> if you think Beryl determines "quality" then good luck to you.
>
> When properly configured on modern hardware, it's spectacular - it's the
> "gold standard" for desktop offerings.
No. It's the gold standard for useless eye candy. I used it for a while
and got bored with it and removed it. It stopped my dual screen setup
showing full screen video on the second X display. A known bug I
believe.
It IS impressive though. No doubt. But a desktop is not application SW
for real work I am afraid.
>
>> Go and use OSX or an iPhone to see how a UI should hang together.
>
> OSX is surprisingly slow - I've got a box next to me. It's pretty, but
> inefficient. The iPhone is a poor joke. The software is easily crashed,
> they missed out *3G* compatability, the transceiver is appalling (low
> output power, poor receive sensitivity), and they're really easily
> broken!
I am talking about the UI SW. It is excellent.
>
>>> There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
>>> long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
>>> install /everything/ that's included with a distro).
>>
>> Linux IS great WHEN you get to know it. Unfortunately most of the OSS
>> GUI apps are simply atrocious.
>
> Not any more. That might have been true five years ago, but no
> longer.
Rubbish.
>
>> Gimp, and now Amarok are the main exceptions IMO.
>
> Your opinions are almost right in this instance, but there's a /lot/ more
> good software that you might have missed!
Name it. And compare it to the professional Windows equivalents.
O x f o r d
> It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX effort.
> There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
> long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
> install /everything/ that's included with a distro).
not in terms of mass "usability", linux never has a chance.
linux is mainly the purview of the poor, inexperienced and uninformed.
osx is where the winners live, everyone in the unix community agrees
with that.
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/
the big boys never even consider linux at this point in the game.
O x f o r d
> Do you even know what the word "Retard" means? ( to hinder, delay, or slow
> the advance or progress of )
> Not the slang you seem to think it means.
> Look up the word asswhipe, oh wait, just look in the mirror.
> LOL
don't ever "top post", that is the TRUEST definition of "retard"...
posts on USENET go at the bottom so people in the future can read them
correctly.
learn how USENET works, don't be a RETARD.
you are still trying to use:
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
so it shows you are a pure fool.
REPLIES go at the BOTTOM... NEVER at the top.
Learn about how computing works, don't use Microsoft software, it will
make you look like an idiot every time.
-
George Graves
(in article <13o5gaj...@news.supernews.com>):
Well, since it comes with the computer and with each OSX upgrade, I'd say
that it too is "in the box".
George Graves
(in article <lloydparsons-C3BB...@news.individual.net>):
OK.
Tim Murray
>> That's true. Funny thing though, out of the box, a Mac can run just
>> about anything that Linux can run (as long as you install X11 too).
>
> ... as long as you install X11 too is not the same as out of the box.
And in Tiger, it's a 'click', in the box.
George Graves
(in article <Xns9A1EA2EC33...@127.0.0.1>):
>> There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
>> professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and good
>> to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it. Linux
>> might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are amateur
>> hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X
>
> I will admit that many of the apps running in Linux are not as well
> polished as those of MS or Apple, but given time they will improve.
When is that trend gonna start? Because I certainly haven't seen it.
Improvements in open source applications is downright glacial.
> Apple and MS spend literally millions in research in fine tuning their GUIs
for
> the average user, while apps in the Linux community are built by
> relavtively small groups who are far more intent on ensuring a stable and
> secure core.
Yes, those "millions spent" are what make OSX and "shrink wrapped" apps
better.
> As Linux distros mature, the interfaces for the apps will also
> greatly improve. At the present, you have various distros that appeal to
> different sets of users. With MS and Apple you take it the way they want
> you to have it.
And for most users, that's FAR better.
George Graves
(in article <Q6zgj.92632$036....@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>):
Hint: I have written, at one time or another for all of the US mags:
Stereophile, The Absolute Sound, The Audiophile Voice, and I'm here to tell
you that what you said above simply is NOT true here in the USA. No editor
has ever told me what to write in my reviews, nor have they EVER edited my
content or asked me to do so. Often, I choose the equipment that I wish to
review, and I do so without any regard as to whether or not the manufacturer
is an advertiser. It might be different in UK, I don't know, but I always
thought that "Hi-Fi News and Record Review" were straight shooters.
O x f o r d
> > Its all free.
> > Time you got a decent PC and installed Linux
> > and enjoyed the power of Linux flowing through your computer.
> > For speed, performance and bang for buck there is nothing
> > that beats it.
> >
> > http://www.livecdlist.com
> > http://www.distrowatch.com
> >
>
> Just one question. What does one do if one needs actual professional-level
> software with which to do real work? Linux is out, that's what happens.
correct george.
why hasn't there yet been a single professional level app on Linux?
everyone keeps waiting, but nothing even remotely close to high end UNIX
apps like these... are available...
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/index.html
what is the hold up I wonder?
it's like linux users gave up programming against the intense tide of
18,000 OSX apps some 5 years ago.
so sad...
-
Rick
So, X11 is installed on all new Macs now?
--
Rick
Rick
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 16:18:27 -0800, Rick wrote (in article
> <13o5gaj...@news.supernews.com>):
>
>> On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:58:37 -0800, George Graves wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:55:11 -0800, Tommy Tickler wrote (in article
>>> <j5ygj.194124$uv7....@fe05.news.easynews.com>):
>>>
>>>> O x f o r d wrote:
>>>>> 7 <website_...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux
>>>>> was a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
>>>> professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and
>>>> good to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it.
>>>> Linux might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are
>>>> amateur hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X
>>>
>>> That's true. Funny thing though, out of the box, a Mac can run just
>>> about anything that Linux can run (as long as you install X11 too).
>>
>> ... as long as you install X11 too is not the same as out of the box.
>>
>>
>>
> Well, since it comes with the computer and with each OSX upgrade, I'd
> say that it too is "in the box".
That is not what you said, but if all new Macs now come with X11, I guess
that is indeed out of the box
--
Rick
O x f o r d
but apple didn't buy any advertising in InfoWorld, the just reported raw
facts.
Snit
on 1/7/08 7:26 PM:
I believe it is... the Apple site says it is "It is optional but installed
by default on Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard."
<http://developer.apple.com/opensource/tools/X11.html>
--
Teachers open the door but you must walk through it yourself.
Lloyd Parsons
wrote:
Well, I won't say all new macs, but it is on my new mini.
Snit
Xns9A1EA2EC33...@127.0.0.1 on 1/7/08 5:02 PM:
Personally I just prefer to be able to get work done over playing the
distro-dance... but I do see that there are benefits to *some* number of
distros.
--
When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how
to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not
beautiful, I know it is wrong. -- R. Buckminster Fuller
Snit
xnzgj.92633$036....@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk on 1/7/08 5:22 PM:
How is Beryl better when it comes to ease of use?
--
It usually takes me more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu
speech. -- Mark Twain
Rick
> George Graves <gmgr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> > Its all free.
>> > Time you got a decent PC and installed Linux and enjoyed the power of
>> > Linux flowing through your computer. For speed, performance and bang
>> > for buck there is nothing that beats it.
>> >
>> > http://www.livecdlist.com
>> > http://www.distrowatch.com
>> >
>> >
>> Just one question. What does one do if one needs actual
>> professional-level software with which to do real work? Linux is out,
>> that's what happens.
>
> correct george.
>
> why hasn't there yet been a single professional level app on Linux?
>
> everyone keeps waiting, but nothing even remotely close to high end UNIX
> apps like these... are available...
>
> http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/index.html
>
Yeah. right. the majority of those are professional apps. Sheesh.
Here Oxford:
http://www.cinepaint.org/
http://www.linuxmovies.org/software.html
Let's see... Mathematica runs on Linux. So does Mathworks. LabView.
> what is the hold up I wonder?
>
> it's like linux users gave up programming against the intense tide of
> 18,000 OSX apps some 5 years ago.
>
How did you get to be such a dishonest idiot?
BTW, how where do the XServes rate on the super computer cluster lists?
--
Rick
O x f o r d
> Only that Linus did never move to OSX
>
> Sorry to burst your bubble, cretinous typical Mac user OxRetard, but you are
> wrong as usual: He is /also/ using a Apple computer. He runs linux PPC on
> it
but all his kids use OSX exclusively, plus he lives in a primarily mac
town. The word, "Linux" is barely known in Oregon.
get out once in a while Peter... have you ever even been to the States?
Linux is a massive joke here, that is... IF you can find somebody that
has even heard of it.
Travel Peter, it will make you less of a fool.
-
Lloyd Parsons
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Yep, you can select 'customize' during the install procedure and uncheck
X11. That's what I did for all but the new mini. It already had
everything installed.
Rick
> Christopher Hunter <chrise...@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX effort.
>> There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way,
>> as long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
>> install /everything/ that's included with a distro).
>
> not in terms of mass "usability", linux never has a chance.
>
> linux is mainly the purview of the poor, inexperienced and uninformed.
...Really? The inexcperienced and uninformed? Like IBM? Or Sony, Disney
or Pixar (although Pixar may have switched platorms since they supported
the Wine project).
>
> osx is where the winners live, everyone in the unix community agrees
> with that.
Disney is not a winner?
>
> http://www.apple.com/macosx/
>
> http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/
>
> the big boys never even consider linux at this point in the game.
What world do you live in?
--
Rick
O x f o r d
> There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
> professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and good
> to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it. Linux
> might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are amateur
> hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X
correct. there isn't a single Linux app that measures up to any OSX app.
the Linux community just doesn't value quality, they just want rough
hacks, they never spend time making an app "work" like every OSX
automatically does.
mainly because Linux doesn't have any foundation, it's a pure kludge in
every sense.
linux programmers need to learn from the masters at Apple:
http://developer.apple.com/macosx/architecture/index.html
until they do, their minuscule market share will continue to shrink.
-
O x f o r d
Little Gorm <littl...@thors-mill.com> wrote:
> I will admit that many of the apps running in Linux are not as well
> polished as those of MS or Apple, but given time they will improve. Apple
> and MS spend literally millions in research in fine tuning their GUIs for
> the average user, while apps in the Linux community are built by
> relavtively small groups who are far more intent on ensuring a stable and
> secure core. As Linux distros mature, the interfaces for the apps will also
> greatly improve. At the present, you have various distros that appeal to
> different sets of users. With MS and Apple you take it the way they want
> you to have it.
millions? certainly not in the case of apple...
OSX relies on Aqua to make all apps consistent without any cost to the
developer. Windows and Linux don't have this type of free foundation so
their apps always seem haphazard compared to OSX apps.
apple/next did most of this work 5-20 years ago, now everyone that
develops for OSX joins in the party.
every Mac app "just works" since Apple did all the hard work years ago...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_(user_interface)
the rest is just gravy... making an OSX app takes less than 4 minutes,
which is shocking compared to Linux or Windows.
so developing on OSX is the easiest of any platform... to get started,
go here:
it's all free, so no wonder OSX has far better apps than Windows and
Linux combined!
http://developer.apple.com/tools/xcode/
it's the world's best development environment bar none.
enjoy!
-
Lloyd Parsons
Tell me, Oxford, do you wear a skirt and wave pom-poms when you do all
this cheerleading?
Alan Baker
O x f o r d <iph...@superphone.com> wrote:
Oxford,
Will you please refrain from changing your posting identity? It will
make it easier for me to keep you killfiled.
Thanks.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Rick
> Peter Köhlmann <peter.k...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>> Only that Linus did never move to OSX
>>
>> Sorry to burst your bubble, cretinous typical Mac user OxRetard, but
>> you are wrong as usual: He is /also/ using a Apple computer. He runs
>> linux PPC on it
>
> but all his kids use OSX exclusively,
... and how do you know this? And AGAIN, Torvalds does NOT use OS X.
> plus he lives in a primarily mac
> town. The word, "Linux" is barely known in Oregon.
So what? It doesn't matter where he lives, he doesn't run OS X. He used
that Mac to develop Linux on PPC, and you keep lying about it.
>
> get out once in a while Peter... have you ever even been to the States?
> Linux is a massive joke here, that is...
You're a lair,
> IF you can find somebody that has even heard of it.
I dare say more people in the US have heard abut Linux than Unix. So what?
>
> Travel Peter, it will make you less of a fool.
>
> -
Why don't you buy some honesty.
--
Rick
Rick
I am thinking that if it came on your mini with a default install, it's
probably on all new Macs. interesting.
--
Rick
Lloyd Parsons
wrote:
I would assume the same thing. I haven't installed any software to this
mini since I bought it. Activated iWork, set up my .mac syncing and
waited a bit and all was good. Because X11 is on my machine and I
didn't do anything to put it there, I assume that all new macs come with
X11 installed.
There is no apps though, or at least I'm not aware of any.
This mac is an all Apple box.
Rick
I can still remember installing X11, gtk and then compiling some of the
apps I used under LinuxPPC so they would run under OS X. A friend of mine
just bid on a pallet of old gumdrop shape iMacs. I might get one and muck
around with X11 on it again.
--
Rick
Lloyd Parsons
wrote:
Heh, heh....
They won't run Leopard!!
Red Henk
> > There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
> > professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and good
> > to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it. Linux
> > might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are amateur
> > hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X
>
> I will admit that many of the apps running in Linux are not as well
> polished as those of MS or Apple, but given time they will improve. Apple
> and MS spend literally millions in research in fine tuning their GUIs for
> the average user, while apps in the Linux community are built by
> relavtively small groups who are far more intent on ensuring a stable and
> secure core. As Linux distros mature, the interfaces for the apps will also
> greatly improve. At the present, you have various distros that appeal to
> different sets of users. With MS and Apple you take it the way they want
> you to have it.
I'm a lurker and only occasionally say anything, because I'm simply a
user of a Mac. I don't have any technical knowledge with computers. I
can see all the sneers by the Mac/Windows/Linux self gurus, please
restrain yourself until you finish reading this note.
As a self-admitted mechanical klutz, the reason I've chosen to use the
Mac is that it's the easiest OS for _me_ to use. I've had some dealings
with Windows, from the time of Win3.1. MS tries to be as elegant as
OSX, both in appearance and usability, and I will say that it's better
better, so it's maybe like 75% toward being as good as a Mac. I don't
I can't wait for the rest of the 25%. So fuck it!
Linux on the other hand, I wish that there was a version of open source
operating system that approached the user-friendliness of the Mac with
OSX. Every so often I look at Linux and each time I find myself in a
software jungle with no sign posts. It seems to me that Linux acolytes
are into tinkering with the hardware and the software, as opposed to
being productive. And there is nothing wrong with that, but it's not to
my taste.
Here's the thing -- If I want to make toast, I get a toaster. I get to
do the task do it quickly without any problems. That's my feeling about
the Mac. On the other hand Linux promises me the dream of open source
toasting, but in the meantime I have to build the toaster, choose the
version of power that I need, etc. Hey I'm impressed with all I that I
could potentially do, but all I want is have a toast.
I really, really want there to be a useful Linux, for me, but again I'm
tired of waiting. When you Linux guys finally come out with a distro
that's ready for showtime, I'll be right there checking it out!
NoStop
And when is Google going to move its 450,000 servers off of Linux and over
to OSX?
Cheers.
--
Boot It Up!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-kql8cWqiv8
O x f o r d
> >>> Just one question. What does one do if one needs actual
> >>> professional-level software with which to do real work? Linux is out,
> >>> that's what happens.
> >>
> >> correct george.
> >>
> >> why hasn't there yet been a single professional level app on Linux?
> >>
> >> everyone keeps waiting, but nothing even remotely close to high end UNIX
> >> apps like these... are available...
> >>
> >> http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/index.html
> >
> > Yeah. right. the majority of those are professional apps. Sheesh.
> >
> > Here Oxford:
> > http://www.cinepaint.org/
cinepaint is for hobbyist compared to this...
> > http://www.linuxmovies.org/software.html
what a dumb link, nobody uses Linux for movie making.
look at the real deal here:
http://www.apple.com/pro/profiles/
> > Let's see... Mathematica runs on Linux. So does Mathworks. LabView.
> >
> >
> >> what is the hold up I wonder?
> >>
> >> it's like linux users gave up programming against the intense tide of
> >> 18,000 OSX apps some 5 years ago.
> >>
> > How did you get to be such a dishonest idiot?
> >
> > BTW, how where do the XServes rate on the super computer cluster lists?
> >
> And when is Google going to move its 450,000 servers off of Linux and over
> to OSX?
why would anyone use high end OSX Servers for such mundane tasks?
apple is better than that.
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/
-
O x f o r d
Good post Red, you see the bigger picture, not lost in the details like
Peter and so many Linux users are. Linux really has no "focus", thus
it's never going to be successful... the same reasons Windows will never
be successful.
Only Apple and OSX "gets it"... they are extreme perfectionists, and
won't stop until the user's experience is ideal.
I feel sorry for Linux and Windows, they just can't compete, and don't
seem to be wanting to learn from the biggest fish in the pond.
-
LoSebal
> Oxford,
>
> Will you please refrain from changing your posting identity? It will
> make it easier for me to keep you killfiled.
>
> Thanks.
What???
Alan, you love my posts, and so should be supportive of honest, frank
info. If you killfile the truth, you aren't a good Mac Advocate.
Please learn to keep the truth in your sights, or I'll make hell for you.
I can't stand cheaters!
Oxford
-
Christopher Hunter
> the big boys never even consider linux at this point in the game.
My *big* server won't "run" OSX (or Windows, come to that). It can
pre-installed with Red Hat Linux (or AIX as an alternative). The *BIG*
boys all run *proper* operating systems, rather than the silly cartoon game
that you profess to support.
C.
O x f o r d
> Tell me, Oxford, do you wear a skirt and wave pom-poms when you do all
> this cheerleading?
Not sure what you mean?
Why do you dislike honesty?
Oxford
-
Snit
iphone-239C62....@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net on 1/7/08 11:34 PM:
If it is ideal then why do you think there are those who are complaining
that Leopard, for *them*, started having severe problems with CD burning,
keyboard's generating characters, caps locks getting messed up, batteries no
longer working, Time Machine backups not working, and on and on...
--
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)
O x f o r d
> My *big* server won't "run" OSX (or Windows, come to that). It can
> pre-installed with Red Hat Linux (or AIX as an alternative). The *BIG*
> boys all run *proper* operating systems, rather than the silly cartoon game
> that you profess to support.
sure it will, you just don't know how.
osx server is high end BSD UNIX, linux is only a "Pseudo Unix" built and
maintained by teenagers.
it's time for you to grow up...
http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html
Rick
Of course "Linux" has no focus. It is a kernel.
Red HAt has a focus. Novell Has a focus.
>
> Only Apple and OSX "gets it"... they are extreme perfectionists, and
> won't stop until the user's experience is ideal.
>
> I feel sorry for Linux and Windows, they just can't compete, and don't
> seem to be wanting to learn from the biggest fish in the pond.
>
> http://www.apple.com/macosx/
>
> -
Microsoft can't compete? It has 90%+ of the market.
--
Rick
Rick
> NoStop <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> >>> Just one question. What does one do if one needs actual
>> >>> professional-level software with which to do real work? Linux is
>> >>> out, that's what happens.
>> >>
>> >> correct george.
>> >>
>> >> why hasn't there yet been a single professional level app on Linux?
>> >>
>> >> everyone keeps waiting, but nothing even remotely close to high end
>> >> UNIX apps like these... are available...
>> >>
>> >> http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/index.html
>> >
>> > Yeah. right. the majority of those are professional apps. Sheesh.
>> >
>> > Here Oxford:
>> > http://www.cinepaint.org/
>
> cinepaint is for hobbyist compared to this...
>
> http://www.apple.com/shake/
>
>> > http://www.linuxmovies.org/software.html
>
> what a dumb link, nobody uses Linux for movie making.
Users of Cinepaint:
* Amalgamated Pixels
Elf, Looney Tunes
* Computer Cafe
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
* Flash Film Works
Duplex, The Last Samurai
* Hammerhead
Showtime, Blue Crush, 2 Fast, 2 Furious
* Rhythm & Hues
Harry Potter, Cats & Dogs, Dr. Dolittle 2, Little Nicky, Grinch, Sixth
Day, Stuart Little, Planet of the Apes
* Sony Pictures Imageworks
Stuart Little II, Spider-Man
>
> look at the real deal here:
>
> http://www.apple.com/pro/profiles/
>
>> > Let's see... Mathematica runs on Linux. So does Mathworks. LabView.
>> >
>> >
>> >> what is the hold up I wonder?
>> >>
>> >> it's like linux users gave up programming against the intense tide
>> >> of 18,000 OSX apps some 5 years ago.
>> >>
>> > How did you get to be such a dishonest idiot?
>> >
>> > BTW, how where do the XServes rate on the super computer cluster
>> > lists?
>> >
>> And when is Google going to move its 450,000 servers off of Linux and
>> over to OSX?
>
> why would anyone use high end OSX Servers for such mundane tasks?
You really are an idiot.
>
> apple is better than that.
>
> http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/
>
> -
--
Rick
7
Corporation:
> George Graves <gmgr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> > Its all free.
>> > Time you got a decent PC and installed Linux
>> > and enjoyed the power of Linux flowing through your computer.
>> > For speed, performance and bang for buck there is nothing
>> > that beats it.
>> >
>> > http://www.livecdlist.com
>> > http://www.distrowatch.com
>> >
>>
>> Just one question. What does one do if one needs actual
>> professional-level software with which to do real work? Linux is out,
>> that's what happens.
>
> correct george.
>
> why hasn't there yet been a single professional level app on Linux?
There are lots of professional applications - from Open Office to
Pro-Engineer that run supported on Linux.
> everyone keeps waiting, but nothing even remotely close to high end UNIX
> apps like these... are available...
Pro-Engineer is high end. So are most of the world's
major supercomputers that use Linux as the preferred OS.
So is Apache, PHP, MySQL, PostgreSQL,.. what is that you
tried to do that you claim coudn't be done with Linux?
And you sure others are not doing it already and perhaps
doing it better than your knowlege and abilities?
> h <snip>
>
> what is the hold up I wonder?
It must be you not looking hard enough?
http://www.livecdlist.com
http://www.distrowatch.com
> it's like linux users gave up programming against the intense tide of
> 18,000 OSX apps some 5 years ago.
Doubt it, there are 20,000+ Open source applications
And in any case, it is being deployed at the rate
of 1 million embedded Linux applications PER DAY.
> so sad...
Incredibly sad day for Appil Corporaton Asstroturfers and their
Asstroturfing means to market crappy over priced products.
George Graves
(in article <hflam-D9DC36....@news.telus.net>):
Well said, typos and all :-)
--
How come every time we get a "Major Tax Cut" I get maybe $0.30 more returned
to me, but every time there's a "Minor Tax Increase" it costs me $300.00?
George Graves
(in article <iphone-239C62....@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net>):
To be fair, Windows doesn't have to "get it". They are king of the hill, top
of the heap. As long as there are cadres of IT "professionals" who know
nothing else but Windows, and more so, COUNT on Windows being lousy for their
very livelihoods, Microsoft isn't about to improve it in the manner we Mac
users would like to see it improved. You gotta know that an OS is overly
complex and poorly designed when they have to make half a dozen or so
different versions just cover all the bases.
George Graves
(in article <dgEgj.25817$EA5.18365@pd7urf2no>):
I hope never. Linux is a GREAT server OS, nobody here has ever said otherwise
AFAIR. Why would someone like Google want to trade a FREE OS that doesn't
need a GUI (for what they use it for) in favor of an OS that costs money and
the only advantage of which (in that application) is that it has a better GUI
and more apps (that Google's servers will never be asked to run)? At the
server level, any OS is just a platform for running something like Apache
(I'm not saying that Google runs Apache on their servers, I don't know what
their server application is. But, the point here is that regardless of what
they run, they'd have to run something similar under any OS they chose).
Apache runs on Linux and it runs on Macs. What's the difference?
chrisv
>Little Gorm wrote
>>
>> With MS and Apple you take it the way they want you to have it.
>
>And for most users, that's FAR better.
Maybe it is best for you Mac Morons, "digital music expert" George
Graves.
However, if I were you, I would not be so proud of my limited mental
capacity.
George Graves
(in article <ulKgj.74203$c_1....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>):
You are aware that embedded applications are irrelevant to this discussion
are you not? DVRs, smart refrigerators, cable boxes, home security systems,
environmental control systems, and other single-purpose devices, are simply
not the same thing as a desktop computer.
George Graves
(in article <oWEgj.154691$cJ3....@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>):
Linux is great for servers. Nobody is denying that. Servers don't need much
of a user interface. For that, Linux is perfect on a number of levels. For a
desktop, though, that "cartoon game" that you referred to above, beats the
pants off of Linux seven ways to sundown.
--
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Good point... the net is loaded with people complaining about problems
they are having running Leopard. I won't put it on my mission critical
hardware yet.
--
--
Steve C
Steve Carroll
Lloyd Parsons <lloydp...@mac.com> wrote:
> In article <iphone-6F0BD0....@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net>,
> O x f o r d <iph...@superphone.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <Xns9A1EA2EC33...@127.0.0.1>,
> > Little Gorm <littl...@thors-mill.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I will admit that many of the apps running in Linux are not as well
> > > polished as those of MS or Apple, but given time they will improve. Apple
> > > and MS spend literally millions in research in fine tuning their GUIs for
> > > the average user, while apps in the Linux community are built by
> > > relavtively small groups who are far more intent on ensuring a stable and
> > > secure core. As Linux distros mature, the interfaces for the apps will
> > > also
> > > greatly improve. At the present, you have various distros that appeal to
> > > different sets of users. With MS and Apple you take it the way they want
> > > you to have it.
> >
> > millions? certainly not in the case of apple...
> >
> > OSX relies on Aqua to make all apps consistent without any cost to the
> > developer. Windows and Linux don't have this type of free foundation so
> > their apps always seem haphazard compared to OSX apps.
> >
> > apple/next did most of this work 5-20 years ago, now everyone that
> > develops for OSX joins in the party.
> >
> > every Mac app "just works" since Apple did all the hard work years ago...
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_(user_interface)
> >
> > the rest is just gravy... making an OSX app takes less than 4 minutes,
> > which is shocking compared to Linux or Windows.
> >
> > so developing on OSX is the easiest of any platform... to get started,
> > go here:
> >
> > it's all free, so no wonder OSX has far better apps than Windows and
> > Linux combined!
> >
> > http://developer.apple.com/tools/xcode/
> >
> > it's the world's best development environment bar none.
> >
> > http://developer.apple.com/
> >
> > enjoy!
> >
> > -
>
> Tell me, Oxford, do you wear a skirt and wave pom-poms when you do all
> this cheerleading?
LOL! He probably even wears 'em on the way to the bank to cash those
Apple checks
--
--
Steve C
Steve Carroll
chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Said the guy who kf's any view contrary to his own.
--
--
Steve C
chrisv
> chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> George Graves wrote:
>>
>> >Little Gorm wrote
>> >>
>> >> With MS and Apple you take it the way they want you to have it.
>> >
>> >And for most users, that's FAR better.
>>
>> Maybe it is best for you Mac Morons, "digital music expert" George
>> Graves.
>>
>> However, if I were you, I would not be so proud of my limited mental
>> capacity.
>
>Said the guy who kf's any view contrary to his own.
Is that why you were KF'ed for a long time, Steve? Or was it because
you are a Shit-feeder?
I KF obvious trolls. I KF nym-shifters. I KF liars and assholes.
Sometimes I KF troll-feeders, like you. I do not KF for "contrary
views".
I enjoy a good argument, but not with a dishonest asshole whose goal
it is to be a snide, snotty prick at every opportunity. Like Hadron
Quark or DFS. Nor will I entertain worthless, trolling idiots. Like
raylopez or Oxtard. Same with mentally-ill, attention-starved
fsckwits like Shit or K-man.
-hh
> Steve Carroll wrote:
> >
> >Said the guy who kf's any view contrary to his own.
>
> Sometimes I KF troll-feeders, like you. I do not KF for "contrary
> views".
Gosh, that's a lot of Killfiling. After all of those filters,
there's probably a good five or six people left on all of USENET for
you to talk to :-)
> I enjoy a good argument, but not with a dishonest asshole whose
> goal it is to be a snide, snotty prick at every opportunity.
Does this include snide posters who seem to be very quick to use
derrogatory labels such as "Moron"? Would this already be included
in your KF criteria above (for example, under "asshole"), or do they
fall under a different category that simply hasn't yet been
specifically mentioned?
I'm curious as to just how far you actually go in shutting out others
to see if its even worth bothering to start any dialog with you.
Heaven forbid that you've already made up your mind even though we two
have never had any dialog history.
-hh
nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu
>
> If you knew my *real* name, you'd know why and when I (of my own
> volition) /left/ MS.
>
> It was actually quite a lot of fun at the time, but the endless meaningless
> meetings, the retarded corporate structure (where a man's level of
> *incompetence* determines how high in the company he gets) and the poor pay
> (I can get three times as much for shorter hours elsewhere) persuaded me
> and many of my collegues to leave. There was a mass migration to FOSS
> projects!
Were you at Microsoft when all the Vista DRM was under development?
Did you have a role in it?
If so, I'd be interested in hearing your perspective.
Based on what I've read about Vista DRM, it sounds incredibly ugly
just from a technical standpoint, and not much fun to work on. But
I'd like to hear an inside opinion.
Rick
For many, many people, all you do is put in the CD, and start the
computer. Hit enter a few times, and your OS and lots of software are
installed.
--
Rick
Peter Köhlmann
< snip >
> Here's the thing -- If I want to make toast, I get a toaster. I get to
> do the task do it quickly without any problems. That's my feeling about
> the Mac. On the other hand Linux promises me the dream of open source
> toasting, but in the meantime I have to build the toaster, choose the
> version of power that I need, etc. Hey I'm impressed with all I that I
> could potentially do, but all I want is have a toast.
>
> I really, really want there to be a useful Linux, for me, but again I'm
> tired of waiting. When you Linux guys finally come out with a distro
> that's ready for showtime, I'll be right there checking it out!
You mean you are unable to insert a CD or DVD and press a mouse button a few
times?
You are a Mac user, right?
--
Just out of curiosity does this actually mean something or have some
of the few remaining bits of your brain just evaporated?
Snit
9157o3pdno26b6l3k...@4ax.com on 1/8/08 8:50 AM:
> Steve Carroll wrote:
>
>> chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> George Graves wrote:
>>>
>>>> Little Gorm wrote
>>>>>
>>>>> With MS and Apple you take it the way they want you to have it.
>>>>
>>>> And for most users, that's FAR better.
>>>
>>> Maybe it is best for you Mac Morons, "digital music expert" George
>>> Graves.
>>>
>>> However, if I were you, I would not be so proud of my limited mental
>>> capacity.
>>
>> Said the guy who kf's any view contrary to his own.
>
> Is that why you were KF'ed for a long time, Steve? Or was it because
> you are a Shit-feeder?
>
> I KF obvious trolls. I KF nym-shifters. I KF liars and assholes.
> Sometimes I KF troll-feeders, like you. I do not KF for "contrary
> views".
Carroll is also a nym-shifter... from just the last couple of months:
Steve Carroll <troll...@TK.com>
Steve C <fret...@comcast.net>
Steve Carroll <no...@nowhere.net>
Steve Carroll <stevec...@nowhere.com>
Steve Carrroll <no...@nowhere.net>
And those are just the ones that are identifiable as him. I have little
doubt he uses other names as well.
--
Teachers open the door but you must walk through it yourself.
TomB
> I bristle at using the term "operating
> system" for OS X
To bad it's short for Operating (O) System (S) Ten (X) then...
Anyway, who cares. I'm a devoted Linux user, but I might buy a MacBook
somewhere soon, because I kind of like OSX, and once I have one it will
run OSX in dual boot with Debian.
7
They are relevant - you are waving numbers around and
trying to inject fog to mask the real power of Linux and the empire that
it covers. If you look at the Neuros OSD for example, they
not only offer excellent hardware, but the circuit diagrams
and source code to do anything Linux does anywhere else.
The sky is your limit for imagination over what you want to do next.
With appil crap products, DRM is the limit where
you can go and then pay through your nose for the priviledge.
People get conned by the likes of Appil Corpartion and Micoshaft
Corporation. Linux on the other hand offers value and features
and function not had elsewhere and at a lower cost. And what
it does is growing month by month.
Snit
on 1/8/08 10:47 AM:
Well, that is after you have done the research to figure out what distro
will serve your needs (no less serve them well) and then deal with the
programs that are designed for ultimate configurability and not ease of use.
Linux has come a long way and is getting better all the time - but it still
has a *long* way to go to catch up to the Mac in terms of just being usable
by the average Joe.
--
BU__SH__
Snit
fm0d78$pq9$00$1...@news.t-online.com on 1/8/08 10:51 AM:
> Red Henk wrote:
>
> < snip >
>
>> Here's the thing -- If I want to make toast, I get a toaster. I get to
>> do the task do it quickly without any problems. That's my feeling about
>> the Mac. On the other hand Linux promises me the dream of open source
>> toasting, but in the meantime I have to build the toaster, choose the
>> version of power that I need, etc. Hey I'm impressed with all I that I
>> could potentially do, but all I want is have a toast.
>>
>> I really, really want there to be a useful Linux, for me, but again I'm
>> tired of waiting. When you Linux guys finally come out with a distro
>> that's ready for showtime, I'll be right there checking it out!
>
> You mean you are unable to insert a CD or DVD and press a mouse button a few
> times?
Not at all what he said or - clearly - meant.
> You are a Mac user, right?
Gee, you figured that out all on your own. Well done! :)
--
"If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
- Anatole France
Snit
e93dd5e3-fac5-4a37...@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com on 1/8/08
9:14 AM:
I know with me I rarely use kill filters at all - I do have a system which
color codes messages which are likely to be more (or less) interesting to
me... and sometimes I add people's online names to that (in either
direction).
--
The answer to the water shortage is to dilute it.
Snit
lloydparsons-D9D7...@news.individual.net on 1/7/08 7:47 PM:
>>> So, X11 is installed on all new Macs now?
>>
>> I believe it is... the Apple site says it is "It is optional but installed
>> by default on Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard."
>>
>> <http://developer.apple.com/opensource/tools/X11.html>
>
> Yep, you can select 'customize' during the install procedure and uncheck
> X11. That's what I did for all but the new mini. It already had
> everything installed.
Do you use Time Machine and other Leopard-only goodies? I know I have been
- and found a lot to like.
* quick view (especially with freeware viewers)
* better iCal (though I do not like how the editing works)
* Safari is much improved
* the new sidebar
* Time Machine - been *excellent* for me
* Spaces... a bit rough still but OK. Most will likely not use it.
* Tabbed terminal - I do not use it much but it comes in handy
* New text services (spelling improvements and grammar)
* Spotlight improvements - makes a *big* difference
* better networking
* better organized contextual menus
* better iChat
On and on... Leopard to me has been a great update.
--
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments
that take our breath away.
Thufir
> ... as long as you install X11 too is not the same as out of the box.
Thank you for pointing out the obvious. Why does the obvious have to
pointed out to Oxford? Who knows.
-Thufir
Snit
90Qgj.29957$uV6.5909@pd7urf1no on 1/8/08 12:18 PM:
X11 is installed by default.
--
When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how
to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not
beautiful, I know it is wrong. -- R. Buckminster Fuller
Christopher Hunter
> The word, "Linux" is barely known in Oregon.
Just like the word "culture" is assumed to mean "yoghurt" in the USA.
> Linux is a massive joke here, that is... IF you can find somebody that
> has even heard of it.
America and Americans are a massive joke over here in Europe! On my last
trip to Seattle, I saw /lots/ of Linux in use, but strangely *no* *OSX*
- /real/ computer users just laugh at that silly cartoon OS.
C.
Christopher Hunter
> 18,000 OSX apps
HAHAHAHA! A quick Google finds less than 90 OSX applications available to
the general OSX Loser! Oxtwat must have written 17,910 applications!
C.
Christopher Hunter
nobody uses Linux for movie making.
Only Disney, Pixar, and every other major movie making company.
They /might/ design their posters on OSX, but it's unlikely.
C.
Christopher Hunter
> osx server is high end BSD UNIX
More stolen BSD code, eh? We'll have to see that wanker Jobs in court over
that!
"OSX Server" is a joke. I've seen the results of some evaluation of it -
it's as insecure as Windoze, it's *not* scalable, it has no proper
groupware apps, so it's *useless* as a business OS. It /might/ be OK as a
home music server for all the DRM-ridden crap you download from iTunes...
> linux is only a "Pseudo Unix"
Actually Linux is *more* Unix compliant than OSX could ever hope to be.
Get a clue.
C.
Christopher Hunter
> Good point... the net is loaded with people complaining about problems
> they are having running Leopard. I won't put it on my mission critical
> hardware yet.
Believe me, you won't /ever/ use it for /anything/ serious!
C.
Peter Köhlmann
Even *if* OxRetards claim were true, it is a small drop compared to the
number of linux apps.
But naturally, OxRetard, that typical Mac user, simply lied
--
A fool-proof method for sculpting an elephant:
first, get a huge block of marble; then you chip
away everything that doesn't look like an elephant.
Alan Baker
Christopher Hunter <chrise...@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> O x f o o l wrote:
>
> > osx server is high end BSD UNIX
>
> More stolen BSD code, eh? We'll have to see that wanker Jobs in court over
> that!
How could he have "stolen" BSD code?
>
> "OSX Server" is a joke. I've seen the results of some evaluation of it -
> it's as insecure as Windoze, it's *not* scalable, it has no proper
> groupware apps, so it's *useless* as a business OS. It /might/ be OK as a
> home music server for all the DRM-ridden crap you download from iTunes...
Funny. I know businesses that use it quite well.
>
> > linux is only a "Pseudo Unix"
>
> Actually Linux is *more* Unix compliant than OSX could ever hope to be.
>
> Get a clue.
>
> C.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Snit
1nQgj.157937$cJ3....@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk on 1/8/08 12:42 PM:
LOL!
--
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)
Peter Köhlmann
Weta used linux for "Lord of the Rings"
All special effects were *designed* and rendered on linux machines
Linux machines also ran "Massive", a control program to control massive
amounts of digital creatures and their behaviour
ILM uses linux, too
The Star Wars Episodes 1,2 and 3 were done using linux
So again, OxRetard shows off two things:
1) He is a Mac user
2) He has no clue whatsoever
--
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
Snit
> Christopher Hunter wrote:
>
>> O x f o o l wrote:
>>
>> nobody uses Linux for movie making.
>>
>> Only Disney, Pixar, and every other major movie making company.
>> They /might/ design their posters on OSX, but it's unlikely.
>>
>
> Weta used linux for "Lord of the Rings"
> All special effects were *designed* and rendered on linux machines
>
> Linux machines also ran "Massive", a control program to control massive
> amounts of digital creatures and their behaviour
>
> ILM uses linux, too
> The Star Wars Episodes 1,2 and 3 were done using linux
Impossible! Not only does Star Wars take place in a galaxy far, far away
but it happened long ago - and Linux is quite new.
You Linux folks just want to take credit for everything - no matter how easy
it is to prove you wrong.
:)
>
> So again, OxRetard shows off two things:
> 1) He is a Mac user
> 2) He has no clue whatsoever
--
Is Swiss cheese made out of hole milk?
Christopher Hunter
> Do you use Time Machine and other Leopard-only goodies? I know I have
> been - and found a lot to like.
>
> * quick view (especially with freeware viewers)
Agreed - they finally got it working properly in this version.
> * better iCal (though I do not like how the editing works)
Agreed, but there appear to be some unresolved bugs.
> * Safari is much improved
Crashed the first time I used it! Doesn't handle no-compliant sites well.
> * the new sidebar
Gets in the way!
> * Time Machine - been *excellent* for me
You're lucky. Check some of the Apple forums for the complaints!
> * Spaces... a bit rough still but OK. Most will likely not use it.
> * Tabbed terminal - I do not use it much but it comes in handy
> * New text services (spelling improvements and grammar)
Can't say I've been much bothered by these.
> * Spotlight improvements - makes a *big* difference
Not /that/ big, but an improvement.
> * better networking
Not really - it's (perhaps) slightly easier to configure, but it's much the
same as it ever was.
> * better organized contextual menus
Not really.
> * better iChat
Didn't bother trying it.
Apple have got many things mostly right, but I can still get better
performance, better security, higher reliability, run on any old hardware
if I use Linux.
C.
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Gee, in over a decade of my posting you managed to find me using 5
different handles (mainly based on spam avoiding mail addresses) 3 of
which can be attributed to MTNewswatcher problems recently... due to my
having installed Leopard. Apparently, along with all its other problems,
Leopard took out quite a few Mac apps. This... as opposed to a list that
Ebot once compiled of you in a 1 year period that had 15 different
shifts (not to mention your many sock puppets and forged posts you've
been busted over and admitted to).
> And those are just the ones that are identifiable as him. I have little
> doubt he uses other names as well.
Feel free to prove it any time you'd like, you know... the way Ebot did
with your nymshifting.
--
--
Steve C
Steve Carroll
Christopher Hunter <chrise...@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Oh, I dunno... someday I might run my A/V apps on it... but until they
fix the problems it stays out of the studios.
--
--
Steve C
Lloyd Parsons
<trollkiller-08A7...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Steve Carroll <troll...@TK.com> wrote:
Steve, there is a new MT-Newswatcher out there. Go to versiontracker.
I'm running 3.5.3b2 and it hasn't given me any problems.
Snit
LOL! Steve is now blaming Leopard for his nym-shifting. That is too damned
funny.
[I have been busted] using 5 different handles... 3 of which
can be attributed to MTNewswatcher problems recently... due
to my having installed Leopard.
Is there anything Steve is not blaming Leopard for?
Steve Carroll
Lloyd Parsons <lloydp...@mac.com> wrote:
Yeah... I got it the other day... but thanks for posting the info.
--
--
Steve C
Steve Carroll
Snit <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
... watching Snit run from the reality pointed out about Snit's
nymshifting as Snit tries to shine the light away from it? Yes, I am...
and so is anyone else reading.
--
--
Steve C