MacOS sucks, get UNIX instead
Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia
In article <01bc4548$e4928260$c495...@820140825worldnet.att.net>, "Jack
Straw" <shi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
> Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
> people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus.
Both systems are valid, yet pointy-headed intellectual snobs like yourself
refuse to see this fact. "If it doesn't work the way *I* want it to, then
it is childish and inferior!"
I am in no way a computer ignorant person. That I know a lot about
computers is why I bought a Mac OS system in the first place. Command
lines are limiting, allowing you only to execute a single command at a
time, and forcing you to remember arcane and pointless commands and
pathnames. No one should be forced to put that much effort into using a
*tool*. That's what computers are, tools. To be useful, a tool needs to be
easily understandable. UNIX is not easily understandable, at least, not
Raw UNIX. Most UNIX systems don't run Raw UNIX anymore, tough--they're run
UNIX with (gasp!) a GUI shell over it--which is what NeXTstep was.
UNIX has many powerful features, and perhaps if it, not DOS, had been the
operating system of the IBM PC the world would be different. However, to
foce users to adopt to a set of backward standards and learn a plethora
of unintuitive commands to harness that power is counterproductive.
Sheathing a powerful UNIX kernal beneath an immediately-usable GUI (ala
NeXTstep, IRIX or Rhapsody) allows users to harness and use the power of
the underlying OS in a manner that is easy and familiar.
GUIs are taking over the market. The CLI is dying, and will only live on
as an option, not a default. (However, if it makes you feel any better,
Apple will offer a CLI tool in Rhapsody, though you will have to access it
through the GUI).
>Intelligent people use command prompts!
No, intelligent people use whatever lets them get the work done in the
fastest, easiest, most intuitive way. For 99.9% of the people, that way is
through a GUI.
>Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
> OS like the Coming of God. The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
> says, is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
> coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
> no substance.
Actually, Rhapsody is full of UNIX. So, by your own definition, UNIX is nothing.
Get a life, and get out of our group!
Kirk McPike
--
<http://members.aol.com/fireballkm/>
Mac OS: It does. It will. You can.
==================================
In one week God created the Heavens, the Earth, the waters, the animals and Man. Then he went back and created Woman. The Moral? Quit while you're ahead. ;-)
Jack Straw
Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
people use command prompts! Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
Patrick Steele
Good GOD! Are people STILL raving infantile-like over which
system/os/whatever is better? What's the friggin' point? What works
best for you (and the task you have at hand) is what counts. I guess
your command prompt=intelligence crack harkens back to the days in
junior high when you were the last person picked for kickball.
Gregory Loren Hansen
In article <slrn5kot55...@opus.campus.vt.edu>,
Jn Rndlph <jora...@vt.edu> wrote:
>GUIs are cute to look at, but not the quick way to do things. anyone who
>knows anything about computers knows macs are for people who DON'T know
>anything about computers, and just want to index their recipes and print out
>reports without knowing what they are doing.
I know something about computers. I think Unix is cool. But a GUI has
some undeniable strengths. One of those being, you can *see* more than
one program running at the same time. You can work with one thing while
monitoring the progress of another, overlap windows from different
programs for cut&paste operations, click'n'drag in less time than it takes
to type, well, whatever the command would be to translate a text file with
a uudecoder, save multiple pictures with the default names, and display
them all. I'm sure Unix piping and scripting will let you handle it, but
off-hand I can't think of how to do it. Not with possibly more than one
output file, each with an unknown name. WHICH IS EXACTLY THE POINT.
Of course, ideally you wouldn't have to choose. Ideally you'd just open a
bash window on your desktop and go nuts.
--
"Perhaps not eating people is the first step to making friends."
- Omnipitus
Jn Rndlph
In article <rkirkmcp-090...@kuts15p11.cc.ukans.edu>, Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia wrote:
>I am in no way a computer ignorant person. That I know a lot about
>computers is why I bought a Mac OS system in the first place. Command
>lines are limiting, allowing you only to execute a single command at a
>time, and forcing you to remember arcane and pointless commands and
>pathnames.
obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!
one of the things i love about linux (and this would apply to UNIX in
general) is that i can run multiple programs quickly and with no hassle by
using the shell's job controls, virtual consoles, etc. in no other OS can i
start programs and kill them at my will with such control, while still
maintaining a stable system. i regularly play quake while apache is easily
still able to serve http requests, and other users are also logged in... and
linux remains stable and useful, as freebsd would also.
GUIs are cute to look at, but not the quick way to do things. anyone who
knows anything about computers knows macs are for people who DON'T know
anything about computers, and just want to index their recipes and print out
reports without knowing what they are doing.
--
:: john randolph ::::::::::::::::::::::::: proudly running linux 2.0.x ::
:: finger 'from:' for PGP public key ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
GU d- s++:- a--- C++++ UL++>++++A P E- W+ N++ ?o K w--- O M-- ?V PS+ PE++
Y+ PGP+ t ?5 X !R tv(+) b(+) DI- D+ G e h-- r++ y?
Steve Hix
In article c495...@820140825worldnet.att.net, "Jack Straw" <shi...@mindspring.com> writes:
:Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
:Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
:people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus. Intelligent
:people use command prompts!
Actually, intelligent people use command lines where appropriate, and GUIs
where appropriate.
You seem to see all problems as nails, since you appear to have chosen to use
only a hammer as your sole tool.
Hard on screws and glass objects.
:Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next OS like the Coming of God.
Hardly (at least, not if you had actually been paying attention for more than
a minute or two) that.
:The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
:says, is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
:coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
:no substance.
And your proof for this is...what, exactly?
bvaleria
> is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
> coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and > has no substance.
... sounds a lot like the hype-ads Gates came out with for Windows
Noah Spamm
Your well-reasoned essay is overpowering in its persuasive capabilities.
As a result, I have thrown my Mac into the East River and have bought a
UNIX workstation. Thank you for enlightening us.
BTW, you might want to get your DNA upgraded to full-human status,
monkeyboy.
aaron
In article <01bc4548$e4928260$c495...@820140825worldnet.att.net>, "Jack
Straw" <shi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
> Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
> people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus. Intelligent
> people use command prompts! Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
> OS like the Coming of God. The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
> says, is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
> coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
> no substance.
Nice troll.
Style points negated due to it being a platform troll, tho.
Try a different subject next time.
Robert
Jack Straw wrote:
> Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
> Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
> people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus. Intelligent
> people use command prompts! Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
> OS like the Coming of God. The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
> says, is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
> coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
> no substance.
Wrong! People who use command prompts think they are itelligent because
they use the old school way. They think being a select few with
knowledge of command prompts makes you intelligent. Wrong! The smart way
is the way that is more productive that delivers everything to your feet
like a faithful servent. Saying smart people use UNIX's is like saying
people who use record playes are smarter than people who use CD players,
because not that any prople know how to use record players anymore.
My friend(using the term loosely), the GUI has a whole lot more
substance than a brinking cursor on a black screen.
Robert
mailto:jjai...@minspring.com
John Jensen
Jack Straw <shi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
: Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
: Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
: people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus. Intelligent
: people use command prompts! Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
: OS like the Coming of God. The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
: says, is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
: coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
: no substance.
This looks like a pretty obvious troll to me, but it does give me the
opportunity to propose a new answer to the statement:
Statement: I like UNIX.
Answer: Great, you should buy a Macintosh.
Rhapsody after all equals Mac UI plus UNIX base. Let's try some more:
Statement: I like the Mac UI.
Answer: Great, you should buy a Macintosh.
Statement: I like vi.
Answer: If you say so, you should buy a Macintosh.
I think in the last round of elections they called it the Big Tent
philosophy.
John
Robert
Rndlph wrote:
> GUIs are cute to look at, but not the quick way to do things. anyone who
> knows anything about computers knows macs are for people who DON'T know
> anything about computers, and just want to index their recipes and print out
> reports without knowing what they are doing.
All those new commercials with 3-D video are little recipies made by
people who don't know what they're doing. Most of the award winning web
sites are cranked out by mamc users who don't know what they were doing.
A third of the Internet is being run by people who don't know what they
are doing. Imagine how good things would be if all we stupid mac users
knew what we were doing?
Robert
mailto:jjai...@mindspring.com
MacDaddy
> In article <rkirkmcp-090...@kuts15p11.cc.ukans.edu>, Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia wrote:
> >I am in no way a computer ignorant person. That I know a lot about
> >computers is why I bought a Mac OS system in the first place. Command
> >lines are limiting, allowing you only to execute a single command at a
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >time, and forcing you to remember arcane and pointless commands and
> ^^^^
> >pathnames.
>
> obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!
>
> one of the things i love about linux (and this would apply to UNIX in
> general) is that i can run multiple programs quickly and with no hassle by
> using the shell's job controls, virtual consoles, etc. in no other OS can i
> start programs and kill them at my will with such control, while still
> maintaining a stable system. i regularly play quake while apache is easily
> still able to serve http requests, and other users are also logged in... and
> linux remains stable and useful, as freebsd would also.
>
> GUIs are cute to look at, but not the quick way to do things. anyone who
> knows anything about computers knows macs are for people who DON'T know
> anything about computers, and just want to index their recipes and print out
> reports without knowing what they are doing.
"obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!"
I don't index recipes etc. These are more PC type of things. I see sofar you are using a powerful OS (linux) to play games. Is that more worthy then if some one wanted to index recipes? Here's what I do with my Mac, and this is just at home, not at work.
I record and edit music, both audio and MIDI. I can playback up to 10 16-bit separate audio tracks on a first generation PowerMac (60 MHz 601, no PCI etc.) while at the same time . I also write web pages and do 2D and 3D graphics, using such programs as Photoshop, Alias Sketch, Lightwave, etc.
My five year old does the game playing however! I think Quake for Mac will run just as good as on your system, and in fact the developer says it has feature they couldn't do on the PC version!
MacDaddy
*********************************************************************
You wouldn't see me standing in line at midnight to make my Mac run more like a PC!!!!
³To see tomorrow¹s PC, look at today¹s Macintosh.²
BYTE Magazine, October 1995, © by the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Spamtarget e-mail address-ignore!!
MacDaddy* wrote:
> I don't index recipes etc. These are more PC type of things.
I see sofar you are using a powerful OS (linux) to play games.
Is that more worthy then if some one wanted to index recipes?
Here's what I do with my Mac, and this is just at home, not at work.
> I record and edit music, both audio and MIDI. I can playback up
to 10 16-bit separate audio tracks on a first generation PowerMac
(60 MHz 601, no PCI etc.) while at the same time . I also write web
pages and do 2D and 3D graphics, using such programs as Photoshop,
Alias Sketch, Lightwave, etc.
I'm sure you'd get some benefit from one of the newer Macs!
> My five year old does the game playing however! I think Quake for
Mac will run just as good as on your system, and in fact the developer
says it has feature they couldn't do on the PC version!
Which feature?
> "obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!"
Indeed you don't. While I respect what can be done on a Mac,
and provide support for them every day, UNIX has *far* more
power if you are willing to take the time to learn it.
A UNIX shell is a very different animal than the
clunky old DOS prompt.
It seems as though you do some pretty cool things on the Mac.
Could you do one more for me and concatenate your sentences
with hard returns so I can see your whole post in my lame
Netscape News reader? Your mile wide sentances are
exceedingly dificult for me, and I imagine many other users,
to read.
jeffwynn at intrepid dot net
David Emery
My understanding is that MKLinux replaces MacOS, so you can't run
your games, etc, unless Linux provides a MacOS emulation layer.
One of the major advantages of MachTen is that it runs as a MacOS
application. Thus you can have your Unix and your games, too :-)
dave
--
Note: if email to me bounces, use 'em...@grebyn.com'
fisch
> one of the things i love about linux (and this would apply to UNIX in
> general) is that i can run multiple programs quickly and with no hassle by
> using the shell's job controls, virtual consoles, etc. in no other OS can i
> start programs and kill them at my will with such control, while still
> maintaining a stable system. i regularly play quake while apache is easily
> still able to serve http requests, and other users are also logged in... and
> linux remains stable and useful, as freebsd would also.
When running Linux, can you still run your old Mac Apps, games and
utilities? What I am asking, is Linux just the OS interface, and the apps
still work? or do you have to go out and use Mac applications written and
compiled under Linux.
I'm interested in putting a Linux partition on my hard drive and having a
"rock solid stable OS", but I'm afraid that there might be very little
that I could then do.
TIA
fisch
--
\ / remove the ".XXX"
fisch \ / from the return address
@badger1.net \ __ _ __ / when replying to messages
______________\/__\/(_)\/__\/______________
\__| \___/ |__/
aaron
In article <334E41...@answerme.com>, anothe...@answerme.com wrote:
> MacDaddy* wrote:
[snip]
> > "obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!"
>
> Indeed you don't. While I respect what can be done on a Mac,
> and provide support for them every day, UNIX has *far* more
> power if you are willing to take the time to learn it.
's true. One of the reasons I like the idea of a NeXT-based OS is
because I'd have the option of playing with the shell from time
to time.
It's ironic that users known for shunning command lines are going
to have access to one of the coolest Unix-based environments around.
=)
> A UNIX shell is a very different animal than the
> clunky old DOS prompt.
Yup. Afraid most Mac users think all command lines are alike, tho.
> It seems as though you do some pretty cool things on the Mac.
> Could you do one more for me and concatenate your sentences
> with hard returns so I can see your whole post in my lame
> Netscape News reader? Your mile wide sentances are
> exceedingly dificult for me, and I imagine many other users,
> to read.
Using Netscape to read news? Ewwwwww.....
Richard Ervin
Jack Straw (shi...@mindspring.com) wrote:
: people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus. Intelligent
: people use command prompts! Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
: OS like the Coming of God. The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
There are a number of command line options for Macintoshes. One of them is
Minix. My Mac/GUI hating friends refuse to take the time to install it.
Minix is freely available on the 'Net, though it is not REALLY easy
to find the most current version, and the installation process is ---
well, it's sort of UNIXish - I thinkn you UNIX users out there will understand
what I mean by that!!
Minix is a UNIX-like environment that runs in the MacOS. You can compile
Unix command line programs and run them in there. One guy used Minix
to make a BSD cross-compiler to get BSD working on his laptop (All hail
Daishi!!)
Georg Schwarz
fisch <fi...@badger1.net.XXX> wrote:
> When running Linux, can you still run your old Mac Apps, games and
no.
> utilities? What I am asking, is Linux just the OS interface, and the apps
no, by no means. Linux is an OS, not just the "OS interface".
> still work? or do you have to go out and use Mac applications written and
> compiled under Linux.
"Mac applications" need MacOS to run, they don't work on Linux. (*)
>
> I'm interested in putting a Linux partition on my hard drive and having a
> "rock solid stable OS", but I'm afraid that there might be very little
> that I could then do.
you could do all you could do with Linux on an Intel machine. It that's
what you have in mind is another question.
>
(*) please *don't* start argueing about Executor and similar stuff now.
Thanks.
--
Georg Schwarz sch...@physik.tu-berlin.de, ku...@cs.tu-berlin.de
Institut für Theoretische Physik +49 30 314-24254, FAX -21130
Technische Universität Berlin http://home.pages.de/~schwarz/
Geordie Korper
:In article <rkirkmcp-090...@kuts15p11.cc.ukans.edu>, Lex Luthor,
Ruler of Australia wrote:
:>I am in no way a computer ignorant person. That I know a lot about
:>computers is why I bought a Mac OS system in the first place. Command
:>lines are limiting, allowing you only to execute a single command at a
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:>time, and forcing you to remember arcane and pointless commands and
: ^^^^
:>pathnames.
:
:obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!
:
:one of the things i love about linux (and this would apply to UNIX in
:general) is that i can run multiple programs quickly and with no hassle by
:using the shell's job controls, virtual consoles, etc. in no other OS can i
Although if IIRC a ";" lets you run multiple commands from one command line
it is not something that you would do in very many situations. Unix is
designed to be a linear operating system for the most part. It is true that
job controls and virtual consoles are very useful but they are not as fast
to use as a menu of currently running proccesses.
:start programs and kill them at my will with such control, while still
:maintaining a stable system. i regularly play quake while apache is easily
Well actually command Q works pretty well.
:still able to serve http requests, and other users are also logged in... and
:linux remains stable and useful, as freebsd would also.
Agreed PMT and protected memory work better than shared.
:GUIs are cute to look at, but not the quick way to do things. anyone who
:knows anything about computers knows macs are for people who DON'T know
:anything about computers, and just want to index their recipes and print out
:reports without knowing what they are doing.
I have to admit that I do keep my recipes on my mac. I don't think I was
wrong in thinking that filemaker was a better choice than informix for that
kind of task.
I have 15 years computer experience which is more than "DON'T know anything
about computers" level and most likely signifigantly more than your level
of experience. I have a NeXT and a Mac at my desk and usually have shells
to two or three suns at any one time. I have nfs exported my home
directories on the various servers and have them mounted in my home
directory on the NeXT. I also have my home directory from my NeXT mounted
as an appleshare volume on my mac using nfs to appleshare mapping and my
macs hard drive mounted as an nfs volume on my NeXT using the appleshare to
nfs mapping. This allows me to use what ever tool is best for the specific
job at hand. Usually it is the mac which is why I have all the home
directories availible from there but don't deal with mounting its
filesystem on the suns.
If I need to start editing the middle of a word that is several lines down
from where I am at the moment I find it easier to just click there with the
mouse or if I want to replace the whole word just double click on it to
highlight it and have it replaced by my input. Mice are just better tools
for navigating in two dimensional data arrays.
I find that when writing perl scripts it is easier to use the Edit.App on
my NeXT or usually BBedit on my mac since BBedit's regexp find and replace
is much clearer than sed, awk, or vi. I haven't taken the time to learn
emacs since the learning curve is considered a bit steep. BBedit provides
all of the functions I need and is so intuitve that I could just start
using it right away. Learning emacs seems a bit pointless since I know vi
and can muddle through a task with that if I have to use a unix console.
On the other hand when someone asked on one of the newsgroups whether it
was normal to see the string "Althea & Nigel" occasionally when compressing
files with DropStuff (a program that compresses files when you drag the
files icon to the application (similar to "gzip filename")) it was nice to
be able to type "strings Drop* | grep -i althea" to find out that it was in
the standard DropStuff distribution. I then knew it would not be a waste of
time to search for it on my mac with a resource editor.
--
Geordie Korper geo...@chapman.com
*********************************************************************
* The text above should in no way be construed to represent the *
* opinions of my employer, even if specifically stated to do so. *
*********************************************************************
Dan Gerson
Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
> people use command prompts!
I admire people who defend CLIs. We need some people to hold onto the
history of computers. I look at CLI champions as people who aren't as
concerned as working in the modern era of information as they are
preserving the past.
But for those of us who live and work in that modern world, we have the
Macintosh OS to take us into the next generation.
> You can see it
> coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
> no substance.
The great thing about Rhapsody is that it takes the best advances of
technology and extends them to everyones reach. There is nothing that
Rhapsody doesn't incorporate. It'll be compatible with everything
important, and push the edge of the information envelope.
And you can rejoice. It'll even have a CLI for people like you, who
protect the past, while we move on, into the future.
--
"I Don't Get No Respect" (Rodney Dangerfield)
Once when I was lost.. I saw a policeman and asked him to help me find my
parents. I said to him, "Do you think we'll ever find them?"
He said, "I don't know kid. There are so many places they can hide...
Alex Perel
pho...@opus.campus.vt.edu (Jn Rndlph) wrote:
>:In article <rkirkmcp-090...@kuts15p11.cc.ukans.edu>, Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia wrote:
>:>I am in no way a computer ignorant person. That I know a lot about
>:>computers is why I bought a Mac OS system in the first place. Command
>:>lines are limiting, allowing you only to execute a single command at a
>: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>:>time, and forcing you to remember arcane and pointless commands and
>: ^^^^
>:>pathnames.
>:obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!
>:one of the things i love about linux (and this would apply to UNIX in
>:general) is that i can run multiple programs quickly and with no hassle by
>:using the shell's job controls, virtual consoles, etc. in no other OS can i
>:start programs and kill them at my will with such control, while still
>:maintaining a stable system. i regularly play quake while apache is easily
>:still able to serve http requests, and other users are also logged in... and
>:linux remains stable and useful, as freebsd would also.
Amen!
>:GUIs are cute to look at, but not the quick way to do things. anyone who
>:knows anything about computers knows macs are for people who DON'T know
>:anything about computers, and just want to index their recipes and print out
>:reports without knowing what they are doing.
I couldn't have said it better myself. WhenI try to get something
done, the GUI slows me down more than anything.
Andy
>When running Linux, can you still run your old Mac Apps, games and
>utilities? What I am asking, is Linux just the OS interface, and the apps
>still work? or do you have to go out and use Mac applications written and
>compiled under Linux.
Seems like you don't really understand what's going on here. Linux is
entirely separate from MacOS and will not run the same software.
Linux is also a very difficult OS to run, with no easy GUI or any of
that, and Mac distributions tend to be more difficult to install than
PC, Sparc and Alpha distributions like Red Hat. Linux takes a lot of
work to set up, learn and use, so if you don't have a lot of knowledge
of UNIX, you probably want to stay away from it.
>I'm interested in putting a Linux partition on my hard drive and having a
>"rock solid stable OS", but I'm afraid that there might be very little
>that I could then do.
It's a good OS, but you'll be disappointed by the software
availability. Linux users will tell you you can do anything in Linux
that you can in MacOS, which is true, but it is more difficult and you
can't get most mainstream appliation, graphics and game software for
it. I have a Linux partition and a Win95 partition, and Win95 is so
much more useful to me that I seldom use Linux any more.
-Andy
Andy
>> It seems as though you do some pretty cool things on the Mac.
>> Could you do one more for me and concatenate your sentences
>> with hard returns so I can see your whole post in my lame
>> Netscape News reader? Your mile wide sentances are
>> exceedingly dificult for me, and I imagine many other users,
>> to read.
>
>Using Netscape to read news? Ewwwwww.....
Well, I've tried reading these in Agent and NX, and they both have
this stupid long-line problem. I see this a lot, especially with Mac
users. What program are you people running? Perhaps you're all
running the same client, which has a default setting of not marking
ends of lines. Which might work out for people reading it with the
same client, which probably does an automatic wraparound and allows
you to use your screen width appropriately, but for everybody else
it's a pain in the ass.
-Andy
Andy
>> Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
>> Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
>> people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus. Intelligent
>> people use command prompts! Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
>> OS like the Coming of God. The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
>> says, is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
>> coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
>> no substance.
>
>Wrong! People who use command prompts think they are itelligent because
>they use the old school way. They think being a select few with
>knowledge of command prompts makes you intelligent. Wrong! The smart way
>is the way that is more productive that delivers everything to your feet
>like a faithful servent. Saying smart people use UNIX's is like saying
>people who use record playes are smarter than people who use CD players,
>because not that any prople know how to use record players anymore.
You obviously don't understand command prompts. With a GUI, you run a
program by double-clicking it icon, copy by draging, delete by
dragging to the trash/recycle bin/shredder, etc. With a command
prompt, you can use all of the same functions. To run a program, you
type the name. To copy, you type the copy command, to delete, type
the delete command, etc. If you know the names and locations of your
programs and files, as most command prompt users do, you can get
things done much faster.
Also, the UNIX command prompt has many functions that the Mac and
Windows GUIs do not. For example, pipes. You can specify that a file
be used as input for a program and send that program's output to any
destination, like a file or another program. So if you have a print
command and a file that you want to parse using a particular program,
then print, you simply send the file to the parser and pipe the output
to the printer. This is just an example; there are many uses for
this.
It is not a matter of elitism. It is a matter of functionality.
>My friend(using the term loosely), the GUI has a whole lot more
>substance than a brinking cursor on a black screen.
Untrue. The substance is the same. In some respects, the command
prompt has more substance than the GUI. Do not confuse subatance with
aesthetics: the GUI might look nicer to you, but that does not mean
that it does more.
-Andy
Jailall
So, you have to keep track of the names of evry file and commands. Most
people can't do that or won't.
I think you can do more with a gui. I don't see how you can crank out
good looking graphical documents, award-winnind web pages, multimedia
presentations, phat graphics, and 3-d images with cammand prompts. Is
there a "make it look good command". if ther is, I'll switch over.
if you are using netscape news, there's a command under the view menu(on
a mac) or some other one that says "wrap long lines". Ingeneous, isn't
it?
Robert
jjai...@mindspring.com
MacDaddy
In article <rkirkmcp-090...@kuts15p11.cc.ukans.edu>, rkir...@nkn.net (Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia) wrote:
> UNIX has many powerful features, and perhaps if it, not DOS, had been the
> operating system of the IBM PC the world would be different. However, to
> foce users to adopt to a set of backward standards and learn a plethora
> of unintuitive commands to harness that power is counterproductive.
> Sheathing a powerful UNIX kernal beneath an immediately-usable GUI (ala
> NeXTstep, IRIX or Rhapsody) allows users to harness and use the power of
> the underlying OS in a manner that is easy and familiar.
Just remember IBM did not want the PC to compete with it's mainframes so it purposely made a computer from cheap parts, a slow CPU and a weak OS! And in many ways the PC has not changed much!
MacDaddy
MacDaddy
In article <01bc4548$e4928260$c495...@820140825worldnet.att.net>, "Jack Straw" <shi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
> Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
> people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus. Intelligent
> people use command prompts! Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
> OS like the Coming of God. The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
> says, is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
> coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
> no substance.
You are missing the point about GUI. They say a picture is worth a thousand words. An Icon can hold information about a file on many levels. With one glance I can tell not only what type of file it is (text, JPEG, sound etc.) but also what program created it. Sometimes it's much faster to look in a folder with one hundred files and pick the 30 you want by looking at the icon. Typing in all those file names is not faster unless you are a very fast typist! I'm not! And if you don't know what the file name is you are stuck. Icons for photos can show a thumbnail of the picture, so you can tell what it is. A file called "11254.JPEG" does not give a clue as to what the pictre might be! And using the Macs find file, you can search by many attributes, just as you might wild card a file on a command line.
MacDaddy
MacDaddy
> MacDaddy* wrote:
>
> > I don't index recipes etc. These are more PC type of things.
> I see sofar you are using a powerful OS (linux) to play games.
> Is that more worthy then if some one wanted to index recipes?
> Here's what I do with my Mac, and this is just at home, not at work.
> > I record and edit music, both audio and MIDI. I can playback up
> to 10 16-bit separate audio tracks on a first generation PowerMac
> (60 MHz 601, no PCI etc.) while at the same time . I also write web
> pages and do 2D and 3D graphics, using such programs as Photoshop,
> Alias Sketch, Lightwave, etc.
>
> I'm sure you'd get some benefit from one of the newer Macs!
Sure would! I'm getting either a left over 7600, or a PowerCenter next week! :-) I was showing what an old low power Mac could do though.
> > My five year old does the game playing however! I think Quake for
> Mac will run just as good as on your system, and in fact the developer
> says it has feature they couldn't do on the PC version!
>
> Which feature?
Don't know, the article only said "We try to give the Mac users something
special they don't get in the PC version, and then we optimize performance for the Mac so you get better performance then you would on a PC"
> > "obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!"
>
> Indeed you don't. While I respect what can be done on a Mac,
> and provide support for them every day, UNIX has *far* more
> power if you are willing to take the time to learn it.
> A UNIX shell is a very different animal than the
> clunky old DOS prompt.
As you can see that was a quote from the post I was responding to. I have and do use
UNIX computers (SGI, SunSPAC, and a PS/2 with AIX). UNIX is indeed very powerful, but Photoshop actually runs faster on a high end Mac then a low end SGI Indy, because the Indy does not have the IrisGL graphics acceleration boards the high end SGI's do. And Indy's are still about $5,000! And for an Indy with the GL board and all the expensive fast RAM the Indy needs the price is more like $15,000! Also look at the price of software for these machines! For what I do, the software of choice is Mac based.
> It seems as though you do some pretty cool things on the Mac.
> Could you do one more for me and concatenate your sentences
> with hard returns so I can see your whole post in my lame
> Netscape News reader? Your mile wide sentances are
> exceedingly dificult for me, and I imagine many other users,
> to read.
Yikes! Netscape is a fine browser, but a miserable newsreader! Use something
like NewsWatcher for goodness sake! (How's that, I hit the return key...)
> jeffwynn at intrepid dot net
MacDaddy
Peter Kerr
In article <334C82...@sprynet.com>, kar...@sprynet.com wrote:
> Good GOD! Are people STILL raving infantile-like over which
> system/os/whatever is better? What's the friggin' point? What works
> best for you (and the task you have at hand) is what counts. I guess
> your command prompt=intelligence crack harkens back to the days in
> junior high when you were the last person picked for kickball.
Yeah, man, right-on!
I believe there is solid documentary evidence that a GUI is ergonomically
superior to CLI for desk-top make-work, but if you're a systems developer
then it makes sense to wear a belt full of spanners and screwdrivers.
After 8 years of MacOS, and frequent CLI conversations with the u**x heavy
iron up the street, I have a vision where all OS' converge towards a
unix-like system where extensions are loaded and dumped on the fly as apps
need, which can be command-lined for those who want, or have the GUI of
your choice to protect the innocent from actually seeing the engine.
--
Peter Kerr bodger
School of Music chandler
University of Auckland NZ neo-Luddite
Geordie Korper
In article <3359400f...@news.fyi.net>, an...@fyi.net (Andy) wrote:
:>> It seems as though you do some pretty cool things on the Mac.
:>> Could you do one more for me and concatenate your sentences
:>> with hard returns so I can see your whole post in my lame
:>> Netscape News reader? Your mile wide sentances are
:>> exceedingly dificult for me, and I imagine many other users,
:>> to read.
:>
:>Using Netscape to read news? Ewwwwww.....
:
:Well, I've tried reading these in Agent and NX, and they both have
:this stupid long-line problem. I see this a lot, especially with Mac
:users. What program are you people running? Perhaps you're all
:running the same client, which has a default setting of not marking
:ends of lines. Which might work out for people reading it with the
:same client, which probably does an automatic wraparound and allows
:you to use your screen width appropriately, but for everybody else
:it's a pain in the ass.
:
:-Andy
Although I set my text to wrap I do it for the same reason as I try to
write software that is idiot proof. I have to make sacrifices in order to
meet peoples needs. The average computer user has an inflexibile program
that will not allow them to take advantage of the increased width that is
availible on larger monitors. Oh well the least common denominator cripples
progress again.
aaron
> >> It seems as though you do some pretty cool things on the Mac.
> >> Could you do one more for me and concatenate your sentences
> >> with hard returns so I can see your whole post in my lame
> >> Netscape News reader? Your mile wide sentances are
> >> exceedingly dificult for me, and I imagine many other users,
> >> to read.
> >
> >Using Netscape to read news? Ewwwwww.....
>
> Well, I've tried reading these in Agent and NX, and they both have
> this stupid long-line problem. I see this a lot, especially with Mac
> users. What program are you people running? Perhaps you're all
> running the same client, which has a default setting of not marking
> ends of lines. Which might work out for people reading it with the
> same client, which probably does an automatic wraparound and allows
> you to use your screen width appropriately, but for everybody else
> it's a pain in the ass.
NewsWatcher or one of it's numerous descendants.
And yes, it auto-wraps depending on how wide the message window is.
Very nice, but can be annoying when you're using a narrow window and
someone's put hard returns in a post.
mumble mumble 80-chars wide sucks mumble
Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia
> >> It seems as though you do some pretty cool things on the Mac.
> >> Could you do one more for me and concatenate your sentences
> >> with hard returns so I can see your whole post in my lame
> >> Netscape News reader? Your mile wide sentances are
> >> exceedingly dificult for me, and I imagine many other users,
> >> to read.
> >
> >Using Netscape to read news? Ewwwwww.....
>
> Well, I've tried reading these in Agent and NX, and they both have
> this stupid long-line problem. I see this a lot, especially with Mac
> users. What program are you people running? Perhaps you're all
> running the same client, which has a default setting of not marking
> ends of lines. Which might work out for people reading it with the
> same client, which probably does an automatic wraparound and allows
> you to use your screen width appropriately, but for everybody else
> it's a pain in the ass.
I don't know about the other Mac users out there, but I'm using one of the
numerous NewsWatcher variants. MT-Newswatcher 2.2.2 to be exact.
Kirk
--
<http://members.aol.com/fireballkm/>
Mac OS: It does. It will. You can.
==================================
"I'm not [a psycopath]. Psycopaths kill for no reason at all. I kill for money."
John Cusack-Grosse Pointe Blank
David Lawson
In article <neneh-ya02408000...@news.cybernex.net>,
ne...@cherry.com (MacDaddy ) wrote:
> Yes, I'm using a NewsWatcher variant also, YA-NewsWatcher. MT (Multi
> Threaded) is cool for reading, but you can't upload binaries. As far as PC
> users not getting their type to wrap automaticly...well almost all text
> viewers should be able to do that! It's a failing of your software, not ours.
I'm using a NewsWatcher variant as well (MT 2.2.2), so I can handle your
long lines. But I think your attitude is elitist and rude. Not everyone
can use the latest text editor, and not everyone *wants* long lines to
wrap automatically for viewing.
It's a matter of simple politeness to use 80-character or shorter lines,
and it's childishly easy to set up NewsWatcher to do so. When you use long
lines, you're reflecting poorly on the entire Macintosh community -- "damn
Mac users, can't even post in 80-character lines that everyone else can
read. Bunch o' snobs!"
David
____________
David Lawson School of Music, University of Washington
d...@u.washington.edu http://weber.u.washington.edu/~dal
MacDaddy
In article <rkirkmcp-140...@kuts7p05.cc.ukans.edu>, rkir...@nkn.net (Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia) wrote:
> In article <3359400f...@news.fyi.net>, an...@fyi.net (Andy) wrote:
>
> > >> It seems as though you do some pretty cool things on the Mac.
> > >> Could you do one more for me and concatenate your sentences
> > >> with hard returns so I can see your whole post in my lame
> > >> Netscape News reader? Your mile wide sentances are
> > >> exceedingly dificult for me, and I imagine many other users,
> > >> to read.
> > >
> > >Using Netscape to read news? Ewwwwww.....
> >
> > Well, I've tried reading these in Agent and NX, and they both have
> > this stupid long-line problem. I see this a lot, especially with Mac
> > users. What program are you people running? Perhaps you're all
> > running the same client, which has a default setting of not marking
> > ends of lines. Which might work out for people reading it with the
> > same client, which probably does an automatic wraparound and allows
> > you to use your screen width appropriately, but for everybody else
> > it's a pain in the ass.
>
> I don't know about the other Mac users out there, but I'm using one of the
> numerous NewsWatcher variants. MT-Newswatcher 2.2.2 to be exact.
>
> Kirk
>
Yes, I'm using a NewsWatcher variant also, YA-NewsWatcher. MT (Multi Threaded) is cool for reading, but you can't upload binaries. As far as PC users not getting their type to wrap automaticly...well almost all text viewers should be able to do that! It's a failing of your software, not ours.
MacDaddy
Gregory Loren Hansen
In article <rkirkmcp-140...@kuts7p05.cc.ukans.edu>,
Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia <rkir...@nkn.net> wrote:
>In article <3359400f...@news.fyi.net>, an...@fyi.net (Andy) wrote:
>> users. What program are you people running? Perhaps you're all
>> running the same client, which has a default setting of not marking
>I don't know about the other Mac users out there, but I'm using one of the
>numerous NewsWatcher variants. MT-Newswatcher 2.2.2 to be exact.
I telnet to a Unix machine and use trn. Shell accounts rule!
--
"Perhaps not eating people is the first step to making friends."
- Omnipitus
Jn Rndlph
In article <dal-150497...@s5-133-44.student.washington.edu>, David Lawson wrote:
>It's a matter of simple politeness to use 80-character or shorter lines,
>and it's childishly easy to set up NewsWatcher to do so. When you use long
>lines, you're reflecting poorly on the entire Macintosh community -- "damn
>Mac users, can't even post in 80-character lines that everyone else can
>read. Bunch o' snobs!"
hell, he can't even get his mac to use ASCII characters properly.
--
:: john randolph ::::::::::::::::::::::::: proudly running Linux 2.0.x ::
:: finger 'from:' for PGP public key ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
GU d- s++:- a--- C++++ UL++>++++A P E- W+ N++ ?o K w--- O M-- ?V PS+ PE++
Y+ PGP+ t ?5 X !R tv(+) b(+) DI- D+ G e h-- r++ y?
Geordie Korper
In article <slrn5la6gg...@opus.campus.vt.edu>, jora...@vt.edu wrote:
:In article <dal-150497...@s5-133-44.student.washington.edu>, David
Lawson wrote:
:>It's a matter of simple politeness to use 80-character or shorter lines,
:>and it's childishly easy to set up NewsWatcher to do so. When you use long
:>lines, you're reflecting poorly on the entire Macintosh community -- "damn
:>Mac users, can't even post in 80-character lines that everyone else can
:>read. Bunch o' snobs!"
:
:hell, he can't even get his mac to use ASCII characters properly.
:
I believe you will find mac as one of the words in all the group name to
which it was posted. Therefore it would make sense to use the full byte
instead of only the first nybble to represent characters.
Sam Friedman
>In article <dal-150497...@s5-133-44.student.washington.edu>, David
Lawson wrote:
>>It's a matter of simple politeness to use 80-character or shorter lines,
>>and it's childishly easy to set up NewsWatcher to do so. When you use long
>>lines, you're reflecting poorly on the entire Macintosh community -- "damn
>>Mac users, can't even post in 80-character lines that everyone else can
>>read. Bunch o' snobs!"
>
>hell, he can't even get his mac to use ASCII characters properly.
>
>--
>:: john randolph ::::::::::::::::::::::::: proudly running Linux 2.0.x ::
>:: finger 'from:' for PGP public key ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
>GU d- s++:- a--- C++++ UL++>++++A P E- W+ N++ ?o K w--- O M-- ?V PS+ PE++
>Y+ PGP+ t ?5 X !R tv(+) b(+) DI- D+ G e h-- r++ y?
Hmm, what's your point? Maybe you can't get your Linux use ASCII properly :-)
I'm having no problems reading ANY posts on this list. And MT NewsWatcher isn't
that demanding..I believe it runs on any MAC and so maybe it's time for you to
change for better?
--
Sam Friedman
Helsinki, Finland
sha...@clinet.fi
HTTP://WWW.CLINET.FI/~SHAIMAA ( Under-Con. )
ROBOKOS JOHN
Me too. I still use lynx. Who needs all them fancy graphics, anyway?
Georg Schwarz
Jn Rndlph <pho...@opus.campus.vt.edu> wrote:
>
> hell, he can't even get his mac to use ASCII characters properly.
your previous poster wasn't using ASCII but ISO-8859-1, just as
correctly specified in his header.
Jn Rndlph
In article <shaimaa-1604...@shaimaa.clinet.fi>, Sam Friedman wrote:
>Hmm, what's your point? Maybe you can't get your Linux use ASCII properly :-)
bzzt, wrong. we all use the same ASCII value for an apostrophe, except for
macdaddy.
--
:: john randolph ::::::::::::::::::::::::: proudly running linux 2.0.x ::
Mike
>
> > Yes, I'm using a NewsWatcher variant also, YA-NewsWatcher. MT (Multi
> > Threaded) is cool for reading, but you can't upload binaries. As far as PC
> > users not getting their type to wrap automaticly...well almost all text
> > viewers should be able to do that! It's a failing of your software, not ours.
>
> long lines. But I think your attitude is elitist and rude. Not everyone
> can use the latest text editor, and not everyone *wants* long lines to
> wrap automatically for viewing.
>
> and it's childishly easy to set up NewsWatcher to do so. When you use long
> lines, you're reflecting poorly on the entire Macintosh community -- "damn
> Mac users, can't even post in 80-character lines that everyone else can
> read. Bunch o' snobs!"
>
I have a power mac and agree with you. As far as I know my text is
wrapping. If it is not please tell me. Thanks.
Kevin D. Holden
In article <dal-150497...@s5-133-44.student.washington.edu>,
d...@u.washington.edu (David Lawson) wrote:
>In article <neneh-ya02408000...@news.cybernex.net>,
>ne...@cherry.com (MacDaddy ) wrote:
>
>> Yes, I'm using a NewsWatcher variant also, YA-NewsWatcher. MT (Multi
>> Threaded) is cool for reading, but you can't upload binaries. As far as PC
>> users not getting their type to wrap automaticly...well almost all text
>> viewers should be able to do that! It's a failing of your software, not
ours.
>
>I'm using a NewsWatcher variant as well (MT 2.2.2), so I can handle your
>long lines. But I think your attitude is elitist and rude. Not everyone
>can use the latest text editor, and not everyone *wants* long lines to
>wrap automatically for viewing.
>
>It's a matter of simple politeness to use 80-character or shorter lines,
>and it's childishly easy to set up NewsWatcher to do so. When you use long
>lines, you're reflecting poorly on the entire Macintosh community -- "damn
>Mac users, can't even post in 80-character lines that everyone else can
>read. Bunch o' snobs!"
While I do acknowledge the non-wrap you refer to as being annoying, a true
Mac user like me would never be the wiser to your problem. I am not a snob,
nor would I intend on inconveniencing you. The beauty of my Mac is that it
naturally completes those simple tasks. I never have to question it nor
would I ever know you had a problem. The truth is ...I'm lazy. I like
things to look after themselves rather than me having to make extra
efforts. I bought a puter to make my life easier and my Mac does, ....even
if it is just to do word-wrapping. I would only have noticed if my puter
did what yours does.
--
To get random signatures put text files into a folder called ³Random
Signatures² into your Preferences folder.
Alex Perel
ROBOKOS JOHN <jr1...@csc.albany.edu> wrote:
>:> I telnet to a Unix machine and use trn. Shell accounts rule!
I do all my EMail with Pine.
>:> "Perhaps not eating people is the first step to making friends."
>:> - Omnipitus
>:>
>:>
>:Me too. I still use lynx. Who needs all them fancy graphics, anyway?
My 486/33 w/ 4 MB of RAM does NOT run Netscape very well. I prefer
going on the web at T3 speed with Lynx.
Gunslinger
>While I do acknowledge the non-wrap you refer to as being annoying, a true
>Mac user like me would never be the wiser to your problem. I am not a snob,
>nor would I intend on inconveniencing you. The beauty of my Mac is that it
>naturally completes those simple tasks. I never have to question it nor
>would I ever know you had a problem. The truth is ...I'm lazy. I like
>things to look after themselves rather than me having to make extra
>efforts. I bought a puter to make my life easier and my Mac does, ....even
>if it is just to do word-wrapping. I would only have noticed if my puter
>did what yours does.
Don't give credit out to the mac. Credit goes to the programmers of
the program you are using.
Gunslinger
The Supermodel Dossier
http://www.toptown.com/dorms/grendel
travis
In article <335b42fb...@news.fyi.net>
an...@fyi.net (Andy) writes:
>
> >> Regarding Robert's comments about command prompts being the past, and the
> >> Mac GUI being the future. Mac style GUIs are only for computer ignorant
> >> people who think you need exact change to get on a PCI bus. Intelligent
> >> people use command prompts! Furthermore, all of you talk about Mac's next
> >> OS like the Coming of God. The Next Mac OS, and everything else Apple
> >> says, is like a hot air balloon coming over the horizion. You can see it
> >> coming, and it looks impressive, but it is really full of nothing, and has
> >> no substance.
> >
> -Andy
Normally, I stay as far away from the OS Holy (shit) wars as possible,
but like a moth drawn to the flame...
I just thought I would relate a little tale. We're a very Mac biased
company for really no other reason that that is what we all knew first.
I am admitedly a 'Mac biggot' - you can have mine when you pry my cold,
dead fingers off of it, but business is business and we have lots of
Macs and more than a few Windows 95 boxes and one or two with NT on
them by now. We also have one running Linux, an ftp and mail server by
function. Yes, I readily admit it does those two things better than I
can get one of my beloved Macs to do - God knows I've tried.
It's costing a fortune because there isn't an FTP server that will
handle any real volume of traffic (we're talking 100 concurent
downloads at peak. Hefty, but not awe inspiring) Mail doesn't seem to
be that bad off, but I feel the need to leave the Linux box doing
something else just to justify its existance a little more.
Why is it costing a fortune you ask when the OS is free and the
hardware it runs on cheaper?
Because of all the machines it's the only one that takes its very own
full-time dedicated support staff to curse blindly at it and rebuild
the kernel again and again to get this and that working right, to scan
logs and read CERT advisories, and my favorite, to kick it - no I'm not
joking - when it really just doesn't want to behave. Free and cheap
costs a hell of a lot when it comes down to it.
Yep, I'm a big fan. You bet. I'm sold. Those cryptic, learning curve
like a cliff, I got a command prompt woooo woooo OS's are the shit. You
bet if you've been using them since 1974 you can do everything you ever
wanted to do so much faster than you could with a wimpy little mouse, I
mean, what kind of real geek uses a mouse anyway? And you can bet
you've got job security, too.
In my spare time, which I find is an oxymoron, I manage to administer
all the administering 10 Macs ever need. Ah, maybe 20 minutes a _week_,
and the people using them always manage to get more done than the
people doing the same thing with Windows, and of course the guy
laughing maniacly in front of the Linux box reveling in his job
security never gets anything done that doesn't involve lots of strange
words like bind, host, kernel, config, rape, me, in, ongoing, costs,
etc.
I'm sold.
Now does anyone know of a decent ftp server for Mac? I should stay away
from these discusions, I know. Sometimes it's just hard to resist...
-- Travis Anton, BoxTop Software, Inc. <http://www.boxtopsoft.com>
GIFmation, PhotoGIF, ProJPEG, and The PlugPage
GIFmation 2.0 is the ultimate in GIF animation software. Advanced
features including browser compatibility checks, a download speed
compensating preview, onion skinning, advanced color reduction
capability including super palettes, and the best transparency
tools around make GIFmation 2.0 the right tool for the job. A
fully functional demo is available, so give it a try!
Chris Jones
Its quite simple : Macos frontend UNIX Backend - you sad gits are confusing Clients & Servers - they do very diferent things!!!
You moan about LINNX - buy a bleeding Sun box ???
************************************************
Chris Jones
E-mail : chr...@cakewalk.demon.co.uk
************************************************
kno...@yo.do
> Don't give credit out to the mac. Credit goes to the programmers of
> the program you are using.
> Gunslinger
> The Supermodel Dossier
> http://www.toptown.com/dorms/grendel
Hey shitslinger,
try walking and chewing gum at the same time.
What a fucking moron.
Gunslinger
>
>Hey shitslinger,
>try walking and chewing gum at the same time.
>
>What a fucking moron.
Well hey, it's our old friend theLurkingFUD coming back with his
useless posts again. What's the matter? The people at Neosoft told
you to change your name?
Why don't you post some worthwhile posts instead of trying to start
shit with people, you fucking moron?
Andy
>Normally, I stay as far away from the OS Holy (shit) wars as possible,
>but like a moth drawn to the flame...
>
>I just thought I would relate a little tale. We're a very Mac biased
>company for really no other reason that that is what we all knew first.
>I am admitedly a 'Mac biggot' - you can have mine when you pry my cold,
>dead fingers off of it, but business is business and we have lots of
>Macs and more than a few Windows 95 boxes and one or two with NT on
>them by now. We also have one running Linux, an ftp and mail server by
>function. Yes, I readily admit it does those two things better than I
>can get one of my beloved Macs to do - God knows I've tried.
There you go. Running Linux at a business. Get a commercial UNIX,
you'll be better off. SolarisX86 is a good one. Even a commercial
Linux is good. Linux is meant more for small-time users who do their
own stuff. It is ideal for a computer expert to run on a PC (it's the
fastest commonly-used OS out there) but it is not a good server OS.
It's just not reliable enough.
>Why is it costing a fortune you ask when the OS is free and the
>hardware it runs on cheaper?
>
>Because of all the machines it's the only one that takes its very own
>full-time dedicated support staff to curse blindly at it and rebuild
>the kernel again and again to get this and that working right, to scan
>logs and read CERT advisories, and my favorite, to kick it - no I'm not
>joking - when it really just doesn't want to behave. Free and cheap
>costs a hell of a lot when it comes down to it.
Kicking a computer is never a good thing. That could be one of your
problems. And if you've got an actual support staff for the thing,
you've got no business running Linux and then complaining about it.
It is not the best unix implementation. For your server, you should
be using a Sun or DEC box. You get what you pay for.
>Yep, I'm a big fan. You bet. I'm sold. Those cryptic, learning curve
>like a cliff, I got a command prompt woooo woooo OS's are the shit. You
>bet if you've been using them since 1974 you can do everything you ever
>wanted to do so much faster than you could with a wimpy little mouse, I
>mean, what kind of real geek uses a mouse anyway? And you can bet
>you've got job security, too.
Have you ever seen a well-implemented unix environment? Ever used a
seamlessly-networked X system? The networking capabilities alone make
unix a damn good OS. Add to that the speed advantages and
administrative capabilities. (note that I said capabilities, not ease
of use)
>In my spare time, which I find is an oxymoron, I manage to administer
>all the administering 10 Macs ever need. Ah, maybe 20 minutes a _week_,
>and the people using them always manage to get more done than the
>people doing the same thing with Windows, and of course the guy
>laughing maniacly in front of the Linux box reveling in his job
>security never gets anything done that doesn't involve lots of strange
>words like bind, host, kernel, config, rape, me, in, ongoing, costs,
>etc.
Ummmm... I can see bind, host and kernel... if you don't know what
those are, you have no business administrating a toilet. The rest is
crap.
As far as administration time, sure Macs will take less time, but they
are not sufficient for use as servers. A decent networked environment
requires both clients and servers, and for a server you'll need unix
or NT. Seriously, get a Sun.
>I'm sold.
You're an idiot. Are you actually a manager or the owner of this
company? You said you have to justify keeping the Linux box around,
which seems to indicate you have some authority over it.
>Now does anyone know of a decent ftp server for Mac? I should stay away
>from these discusions, I know. Sometimes it's just hard to resist...
If you can't find simple Mac software on your own...
-Andy
Jerome Chan
> > "obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!"
>
> Indeed you don't. While I respect what can be done on a Mac,
> and provide support for them every day, UNIX has *far* more
> power if you are willing to take the time to learn it.
> A UNIX shell is a very different animal than the
> clunky old DOS prompt.
Rhapsody has BSD Unix. So what's the problem now?
aaron
In article <erase.this.jchan...@as4-26.apk.net>,
erase.th...@apk.net.remove.this (Jerome Chan) wrote:
It's not out yet. :(
dig...@neosoft.com
> Why don't you post some worthwhile posts instead of trying to start
> shit with people, you fucking moron?
Hey,
It can read a header!
Maybe if rub two Mac bashers heads together we can get
one coherent post.
Worthwhile posts?
You're a fucking idiot.
Why don't you scurry back to your own newsgroups instead
of slamming a computer you know nothing about.
Lessee, how 'bout comp.sys.macbasher's.mouth.affixed.tohis.sphincter,
comp.sys.pcuser.backslapping.gladhanding, or comp.sys. pcusers.blowing
smoke.up.their.asses....
Oh, when I use a different name, it's a play on words.
It's meant as fun, not to conceal my identity.
HELLO.
Now, let's examine yours....
Gunslinger?
The Supermodel Dossier?
That's supposed to be a joke,right?
Just how old are you,anyway?
Does your Dad know you're using his account to harass people?
Karl Jacobs
As soon as I can get all the software that is available on the mac for
Unix instead, I'll get a Unix box. Until then....
--
KJ
Michael Peck
Karl Jacobs wrote:
> > > Indeed you don't. While I respect what can be done on a Mac,
> > > and provide support for them every day, UNIX has *far* more
> > > power if you are willing to take the time to learn it.
> > > A UNIX shell is a very different animal than the
> > > clunky old DOS prompt.
> >
> > Rhapsody has BSD Unix. So what's the problem now?
>
> As soon as I can get all the software that is available on the mac for
> Unix instead, I'll get a Unix box. Until then....
Yes, but would you consider trading? Using ImageMagick, for instance,
in stead of GraphicConverter? Or vi/(X)Emacs in stead of SimpleText?
How about just using the same software? Ghostview in place of, oh,
Ghostview? Or POVray in place of, yes, POVray. Or Netscape? Or
WordPerfect? Doom? Quake? Tcl/Tk? Perl?
Would you consider switching on the basis of software you can't
get on the Mac? Like servers? Web, NetWare, SMB, NFS, etc.? Like
development tools? Like databases? I'm not a NeXT-head, so I
haven't begun to scratch the surface.
--
Michael J. Peck
Hewlett-Packard, Convex Division
mjp...@convex.com
Opinions expressed above are not necessarily those of my employer.
David Lawson
In article <336A18...@convex.hp.com>, Michael Peck
<mjp...@convex.hp.com> wrote:
> Yes, but would you consider trading? Using ImageMagick, for instance,
> in stead of GraphicConverter? Or vi/(X)Emacs in stead of SimpleText?
One word: BBEdit. Both vi and emacs, X or no, are arcane and difficult to
use. BBEdit combines the power of these tools with the ease of use of
SimpleText.
Also, it's an unfortunate fact of life that in my work I have to read
Microsquish Office files. So if I ran Unix, I would have to maintain a
separate Mac or 'doze machine to read and work with them.
Andy
>One word: BBEdit. Both vi and emacs, X or no, are arcane and difficult to
>use. BBEdit combines the power of these tools with the ease of use of
>SimpleText.
X Emacs is plenty easy. It's even menu-based. Not to mention that
with LISP plugins it can literally do anything. I have a friend who
is using it for text, word processing, email, news and web browsing.
It is the mother of all text editors.
>Also, it's an unfortunate fact of life that in my work I have to read
>Microsquish Office files. So if I ran Unix, I would have to maintain a
>separate Mac or 'doze machine to read and work with them.
You can get freeware converters for those. Not to mention, MS Office
can save files in so many formats, you're bound to be able to find a
usable one.
-Andy
sun...@pacbell.net
Watching what you guys write is a lot of fun, I'm laughing right now.
MAC/UNIX/IRIX/NT/WIN95 OWNER.
cau...@127.0.0.1
k...@rothko.aero.org (Karl Jacobs) wrote:
>In article <erase.this.jchan...@as4-26.apk.net>,
>erase.th...@apk.net.remove.this (Jerome Chan) wrote:
>> In article <334E41...@answerme.com>, anothe...@answerme.com wrote:
>>
>> > > "obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!"
>> >
>> > Indeed you don't. While I respect what can be done on a Mac,
>> > and provide support for them every day, UNIX has *far* more
>> > power if you are willing to take the time to learn it.
>> > A UNIX shell is a very different animal than the
>> > clunky old DOS prompt.
>>
>> Rhapsody has BSD Unix. So what's the problem now?
>As soon as I can get all the software that is available on the mac for
>Unix instead, I'll get a Unix box. Until then....
get a mac emulator for unix, then you'll be able to run all 10 of the
good mac programs under unix (plus win95, dos, os/2, whatever else)
____________________
Caustic Soda
Catabolic Software Incorporated
fun guy
--------------E314C64F32E2ACD0982CAF39
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cau...@127.0.0.1 wrote:
with ABSOLUTELY NO speed. so, in reality, you won't be able to run
anything due to the lack of speed of the emulator cards provided for pc
support (even with the pentium 120 card).
--
________________________________
__http://www.lancnews.infi.net/~def1379_
_______Dave Feltenberger___________
_____d...@lancnews.infi.net______
________________________________
(remove DAVE from my address to
mail me)
--------------E314C64F32E2ACD0982CAF39
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><BODY>
cau...@127.0.0.1 wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>k...@rothko.aero.org (Karl Jacobs) wrote:
<BR>
<BR><I>>In article <erase.this.jchan...@as4-26.apk.net>,</I>
<BR><I>>erase.th...@apk.net.remove.this (Jerome Chan) wrote:</I>
<BR>
<BR><I>>> In article <334E41...@answerme.com>, anothe...@answerme.com
wrote:</I>
<BR><I>>></I>
<BR><I>>> > > "obviously you have no idea what you are talking about!"</I>
<BR><I>>> ></I>
<BR><I>>> > Indeed you don't. While I respect what can be done on a Mac,</I>
<BR><I>>> > and provide support for them every day, UNIX has *far* more</I>
<BR><I>>> > power if you are willing to take the time to learn it.</I>
<BR><I>>> > A UNIX shell is a very different animal than the</I>
<BR><I>>> > clunky old DOS prompt.</I>
<BR><I>>></I>
<BR><I>>> Rhapsody has BSD Unix. So what's the problem now?</I>
<BR>
<BR><I>>As soon as I can get all the software that is available on the mac
for</I>
<BR><I>>Unix instead, I'll get a Unix box. Until then....</I>
<BR>
<BR>get a mac emulator for unix, then you'll be able to run all 10 of the
<BR>good mac programs under unix (plus win95, dos, os/2, whatever else)
<BR> ____________________
<BR>Caustic Soda
<BR>Catabolic Software Incorporated
</BLOCKQUOTE>
with ABSOLUTELY NO speed. so, in reality, you won't be able
to run anything due to the lack of speed of the emulator cards provided
for pc support (even with the pentium 120 card).
<BR>
<BR>--
<BR>________________________________
<BR>__<A HREF="http://www.lancnews.infi.net/~def1379_">http://www.lancnews.infi.net/~def1379_</A>
<BR>_______Dave Feltenberger___________
<BR>_____d...@lancnews.infi.net______
<BR>________________________________
<BR>(remove DAVE from my address to
<BR>mail me)
</BODY>
</HTML>
--------------E314C64F32E2ACD0982CAF39--
Philth
>> get a mac emulator for unix, then you'll be able to run all 10 of
>> the
>> good mac programs under unix (plus win95, dos, os/2, whatever else)
>> ____________________
>> Caustic Soda
>> Catabolic Software Incorporated
>
> with ABSOLUTELY NO speed. so, in reality, you won't be able to run
>anything due to the lack of speed of the emulator cards provided for pc
>support (even with the pentium 120 card).
oh, i dunno, Lemmings plays fairly well.
Markus Mehlau
what about the other way round: throw away your unix-machine, buy a
cheap powermac and run mklinux? imagine the performance of lemmings...