Slashdot Mirror
Penguin2Apple
Dark Paladin writes: "What happens when a Linux lover takes the plunge into a Mac for the first time in his life? Turns out he falls in love, to the point of abandoning Linux and taking up OS X full time. Read about the conversion in Penguin2Apple. And pray for mercy on his soul."
They are both Unix.
Best Slashdot Co
It was common for Germans in the 1920s to switch between the Communist and National Socialist parties.
There is a personality type that needs causes.
Lew
"The Constitution, the WHOLE Constitution, and nothing but the CONSTITUTION."
Did this guy have to pay for it?
Do they describe his reaction then?
OS X is better.......you get to use all your favorite CLI tools, all your favorite web and dev tools, all your favorite GUI tools, get to use MS Office (for those who like it) and get a realy smooth, out of the way GUI.
whats the problem....if you used Linux as just an alternative to MS or because you like Unix, and not becaue it was free as in speech.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
And pray for mercy on his soul.
I know this was meant as a joke, but really, whats the big deal here? He tried something else and prefers it to Linux. Good for him. Whatever floats your boat. Live and let live, etc etc.
Just as we accept the fact that we have people moving from other OSes to Linux, we'll also have to accept the fact that there may well be return traffic.
i was looking for a platform to get out of MS-Windows with, and OSX fits the bill. It's a great OS, witha good mix of 'popular' software and support and the unixy goodness that is Darwin. =)
Actually, I've used nothing but Solaris on my Ultra10 at home for years. But, then when I had to move overseas, I sold everything, and bought a laptop. My friend works at Apple, and got me a good deal on an iBook. This things rock.
OSX really is the nicest Unix I've ever used. I can play The Sims and CivII, and with the adddition of Fink, you even get nice things like apt-get! It's great.
So, just for the record, I'm a old-skool-Unix-to-MacOS X boy, and it really does rock my socks. I recommend it to anyone. It's extremely Unix-y, but with a great frontend.
...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
Interesting .. he mentions that after a Windows 2000 crash, the system wouldn't even power up. That sounds a LOT like a hardware issue, rather than a software problem. Windows isn't perfect (or even close), and sure, it crashes (tho Win2k/XP does so less than their predecessors ever did) but I have never had any machine crash on me so badly it wouldn't power up because the OS or some driver messed up. Sounds like he has a stick of bad RAM in his Windows box or something.
Anyway, while his article raises some good points, about 50% seems to be a huge advertisment for MacOS X, with lots of little screenies of all the features he says he's using, or not using. It got boring reading about after a bit.
Also, the site seems to have suffered from the slashdot effect already (web servers, they don't make'em like they used to), so for those of you who haven't read the article yet, here's a quick summary: "Used DOS, used Windows, it crashes all the time, boo hoo, Microsoft sucks, Linux is good but isn't what I want either, I read about MacOS X, love on first sight, MacOS rocks! MacOS rocks! MacOS rocks!, the end". That's about it, really.
Quality, performance, value; you get only two, and you don't always get to pick.
First of all, "Linux" in this case is vastly a misnomer, but bear with it for the moment. Linux is an operating system that is trying to fill many niches in many markets. Developers work hard to give it a wide range of hardware support and a wide range of functionality (everything in the range of a variety of desktops to a variety of servers configurations). However, the overall Linux experience is the result of a tremendous amount of contributions from many directions in a community.
Mac OS X, exclusive to the Macintosh and suitable for limited roles, on the other hand, is different but same. Beneath that stunning, pretty Aqua interface, you have a set of powerful core API's that essentially make up widget sets and abstraction layers. Beneath that however, is a traditional unix architecture (Darwin). When you look at Linux, BSD, Solaris, or whatever versus Darwin, you see pretty much the same thing.
So what's my beef with the comparison? Mac OS X is more appropriately pitted against KDE, GNOME, or [insert favorite desktop environment here]. Apple is focused on offering a user experience which is much different from offering an operating system and a million and one tools to make it useful. Linux offers an operating system and a huge suite of software for doing a lot of things. OS X from the perspective of comparison, is a very well polished UI.
I am certain that if all OSS developers turned their attention to making a Quartz for Linux, it could be done. But, that's not the case because we're dealing with two different offerings altogether. So, it's stupid to run out and say "Mac OS X is going to beat down Linux" or just that "it's better" and people should "move over to it". No. No. NO. NO!
Two completely different animals with their own uses, strengths, and weaknesses. This whole "Penguin2Apple" thing is just stupid. You're moving from an operating system to a machine with a different processor. Pfft.
Why bother.
... for using Linux. If you are using Linux because of an irrational devotion to the "open source - free speech and free beer" ideology, then moving to Mac OS X would be a violation of your principles.
If you are using Linux because you have evaluated the alternatives, and it provides the best bang/buck ratio for the application(s) that you are using or deploying, then using Mac OS X would also be wrong.
But if your goal is to have the power and flexibility of a Unix-like operating system and the device support, smooth, consistent GUI, and application support of a commercial mass-market operating system, then it would be illogical to just discount Mac OS X as a viable option.
Non impediti ratione cogitationis.
Quality, performance, value; you get only two, and you don't always get to pick.
What's there for a UNIX hacker not to love?
OSX just rocks.
From the BSD-ish UNIX underneath, to the amazing display layer and NextStep app framework,
to the commercial app support (can you say "Photoshop"[1]?) it's just super cool.
There's even source for the core OS for you open source freaks.
About the only thing that could be considered a disadvantage is that it only runs on Mac hardware.
(Which, granted, is a lot nicer and more elegant than PC hardware, but that doesn't help those of us that that have tons of PC hardware lying around.)
C-X C-S
[1] I'll reiterate once more: Gimp is nice, but doesn't come close to Photoshop.
Too bad its not free or I might try it.
how much more expensive is mac hardware when compared to pc? 5% , 10% & 50%?
i have some thoughts about buying mac next time i buy new computer. 5-10% more expensive is what i could afford to pay but i'm not willing to pay 50% more.....
-- http://electronicintifada.net --
"The command prompt that all Unix heads are used to. It's the mother's tit, the place where everything starts."
"caught a glimpse of Stacy Baker's 6th grade breasts when she showed them to me"
"She was a hot redhead with large, firm breasts in most of my honors classes."
"I'm 12 years old and about to see a girl's breasts for the first time."
Why do I get the feeling that that the author is still 12 years old and about to see a girl's breasts for the first time?
I went ahead and mirrored the article here since the server is, for all intents, dead.
"She was a hot redhead with large, firm breasts in most of my honors classes."
I think the real story here is about where this girl's breasts were the rest of the day. Did they take different classes? Did they work as a hall monitor?
------
Today's Top Deals
I got a TiBook soon after OS X came out, and was excited to try it. I had previously been using Linux on i386, but I thought - hey - Aqua looks really cool, and it's Unix, what's not to love? Then I actually got it. This was back in the X.0 days, so things may have changed some by now.
First, everything on the file system was put in very strange places - the directories didn't follow any standard convention I'd ever heard of. Next, there was no compiler! (Note - I got OS X from being included with my TiBook, and Apple didn't include the DevTools with that). So my favorite OSS tools were beyond my grasp. At this point in time, there were very few native OS X apps. Not having a compiler made it worse, and knowing that even if I did have a compiler, I couldn't get some of my favorite OSS GUI apps.
So dispite the cool looking Aqua GUI, I threw down the $30 and bought myself Yellow Dog Linux. I haven't looked back since. I have to say, YDL supports practically every device on my TiBook, and I am quite happy with it.
There's even source [apple.com] for the core OS for you open source freaks.
That doesn't help if I'm developing software and my build crashes in the proprietary graphics layer. I can't follow the debugger into proprietary software to see why my app "unexpectedly quit, error 1" (i.e. segfaulted).
Gimp is nice, but doesn't come close to Photoshop.
What is GIMP missing that Photoshop Elements (i.e. Photoshop without CMYK, which web and game artists don't need) has?
Will I retire or break 10K?
I've been in the sysadmin business for about 7 years now, which has brought me into contact with most free OS's (Linux, the BSD family) as well as some non-free (Solaris, BSDI) and of course, things like Windows and Macs (pre-OSX).
Over the years I've had many desktop systems with many OS's, several versions of Windows... most recently a Sparc Ultra10 running Solaris 8 and two different PC's running Redhat Linux. I recently switched to OSX after my Redhat box failed. It was a hardware failure, not a Linux issue. But the PC architecture itself has imploded on me enough times that I'd had it. My Ultra10 wouldn't boot up anymore either, which really torqued me off (that was my backup desktop which had been sitting in a closet).
Anyway, I went to Apple for two reasons: I've been told the hardware is very reliable, and not prone to bizarre crap like IRQ conflicts and such, and second because I've always liked the Mac UI, but until now couldn't really live inside it because the multitasking and memory management weren't good and there was no CLI available. Of course, the memory management, multitasking scheduler, and CLI availability issue are all "fixed" in OSX, and I'm in love. I spent nearly $2500 on the machine and it was worth every penny.
(For those who care this is on a 933MHz G4 tower).
I no longer spend hours every week just making the system happy - I just use it, and it doesn't require any fussing around. I have plenty to do making the systems I'm paid to admin work well; I don't need the added time drain of playing admin on my desktop (which should, IMO, act like an appliance and not a server).
Just my $0.02. My primary server environment is Solaris, and I stand behind it 100%. But on the desktop OSX is where it's at today, IMO.
No *real* Linux users will switch to OSX this early in the game. By *real* users I mean those that use Linux for the features it has as compared to other unix-like operating systems. I work in a place with a mixture of Solaris, Linux, MS-Win, and Macs. OSX makes my life much more difficult than it was. At least I could use appletalk on Linux to give older Macs access to their files.
While OSX DOES have a *nix underneath, you are almost completely shielded from it by the GUI, which greatly reduces the system flexibility.
If you try to change configurations using standard *nix methods (alter config files, run ifconfig, etc) those changes can either break the system or be undone at the next reboot. The GUI admin tools don't seem to be complete.
I'm constantly pestered by OSX-ites who want to file share via NFS but are unwilling to learn how to configure user/group ids...
OSX is a step in the right direction for Apple. It gives them an OS base with at least the same level of sophistication as M$ users, and gives them a GUI for apps which is arguably better.
However, it isn't anywhere NEAR ready to replace Linux as a file server in a heterogeneous network environment.
The window management is so far inferior to anything you'll find in X, it's not funny. About a month ago, one slashdot poster was complaining about how it's difficult to run more than ten programs because it's hard to find the right one in the dock. Excuse me!? You're limiting yourself to two or three programs because you can't find the one you need immediately?
Consider this: OS X comes with an alt-tab action, but it cycles through all windows in a circular list, rather than using a stack like Windows or most X11 window managers. Why does it do this? Is the circular list "more intuitive" than a stack? No, it most certainly is not. There's a reason most window managers use a stack for the alt-tab list. When you use a stack, the most recently-used programs migrate toward the top of the stack. If you have seven programs running and you're continually switching between two of them, a switch takes two keystrokes with a stack, but seven kestrokes with a circular list. With the circular list, you have to actually look to see which program you're switching to. Result? it takes at least one second to switch between two programs on a moderately-loaded system. I am not going to remove my hands from the keyboard just to switch between two programs.
In addition, using the dock or alt-tab to switch applications only switches applications not windows. Look at IE or Terminal.app - these both have their own internal window management and it works differently in each. In Terminal.app, you hit cmd-1 or cmd-2 to switch between running windows, in IE it's something else.
I can hear you saying right now that this isn't a big deal. It is a HUGE deal. In my X system, I can run 15 different applications and (using workspaces and a proper alt-tab) I can get to any application in a few hundred milliseconds. I don't need to take my hands away from the keyboard just to go from typing into my browser to typing into a terminal.
What if I actually want to use OS X as a real unix system? For example, what if I need to add a user? Well, there are a number of ways to do this:
The last two are the only real viable options. In any case, the first time I need to add a user, I have to waste a half hour for this most basic administration task.
So what does it have to make it more enticing than a real unix system? Well, it has all the pretty pictures. It has a decent web browser. It has those "office" applications.
I honestly don't care for the pretty gel pictures. I'll admit that the first time I used OS X, I wasted a good half hour just looking at it (it is quite impressive). However, this gets old quick.
Linux now has some decent browsers (konqueror, mozilla), although this wasn't the case a couple of years ago.
I don't use "office" applications. Word? LaTeX. Excel? Awk and perl. Outlook? Mutt. Powerpoint? You've got to be kidding me. Yes, LaTeX and perl may have a steep "learning curve" but dammit, I can learn. I didn't spend years mastering unix administration and development just to have someone hand-hold me through basic adminstration tasks.
To clearify my statement, lets interpret 'free' as $500 USD, for a machine plus operateing system. $2000 should be changed to $1500 USD above and beyond where we set `free`.
I know that there will be a performance difference.
But anything goes when your mac-bashing.
Or a not-very-good troll... :)
You should have gone for the tornado story, I think that was empty for 4 whole minutes!
This means i can get OS/X and a Power Mac to run it for free through FTP ? Cool!
Duh - I missed the first line and thought I was reading /. comments not the story. Swap the "what the hell are "YOU" doing" with "what the hell was HE/SHE doing".
My bad...
creation science book
NeXTSTEP had a wonderful interface. For its time, it introduced an astounding number of things which we now take for granted (and some we still don't):
What NeXTSTEP's crown jewel was was its development environment. Heck, it introduced the concept of a UI builder, and astonishingly, InterfaceBuilder.app is *still* a better design for large-scale work than the current forms-based crap that is foisted on us by Java and C++ and Delphi etc. NeXTSTEP's API was OOP througout, highly dynamic, and very well thought out. It had a small set of very powerful, elegant classes, rather than (Java-style) a massive array of junk masquerading as a library. Even today it is matched by few as a UI development environment. Apple was damn lucky to get the opportunity to encorporate it into Cocoa.
I completely agree. OS X runs well only on the Mac hardware less than a year old. Anything other than that feels like you bought the machine at the beginning of the cold war. It has an interface that is easy enough for a 4 year old or a 90 year old to use. You can get a wide variety of _mainstream_ games and productivity packages to run on it, as well as decent approximations of the world's greatest development tools.
Linux on the other hand, runs _well_ on anything from a Palm to a DreamCast to an iMac to an iSeries. It has an interface that is easy enough for any competent developer to use. Pretty much anything that allows you to develop code is available for Linux. You can get some great productivity applications as well, but once again these are always rough approximations, not the real thing.
Both are rock-solid in terms of _system_ stability, but leave application stability (the important part) in the hands of the developer (anyone found a way around that yet?) This is about the only similarity, other than the fact that both are trying to fill the niches that Windows already occupies. This is never a good idea. First create your own niche, then use that niche to make other niches obsolete. Or hire someone to silence the competition
Karma: Incomprehensible (Mostly affected by posting at +5, reading at -1, and metamoderating everything unfair.)
Why doesnt slashdot make the whole site use the mac section design, slashdot looks so much better with mac stile images.
As an ardent WindowMaker user (I couldn't stand the bloat of other desktops), I would say that half of this guy's problems would be solved if he were just to switch to WindowMaker, and learn about the middle mouse button. WindowMaker has a dock, you can collapse app's onto it, launch them from it, and even have neat dock apps. Adding apps to the dock is as simple as dragging their application icon (which is created for any application not already "docked") onto the dock.
I'll admit that the OSX dock is more graphically pleasing. And a little more flexible. But the big points are already there.
I also own an iBook (old clamshell), and wouldn't consider running OSX on it. OSX requires too much of your CPU and memory. WindowMaker under Linux runs as smooth on my iBook as it does on my Athlon.
First thing I used to when I got a new computer was reformat it, put LinuxPPC on it and dual-boot into 9x/8x when I needed to, (games, windoze software etc) but stayed mostly in Linux (cli, gcc you know the list)
Then OS X came out. It is almost everything I wanted out of Linux (besides that price thing of course). I still run a fileserver with Linux out of sheer stuborness and not wanting to abandon it but I'm finding I flip back to it on the laptop less and less as more of fink and others are ported over.
And every once in a while I loose a Linux partion over to OS X for space. I'll still always have/develop for Linux, but my primary has become OS X. It's the best of all worlds. Unix/Mac/Windows.
For those not understanding the windows comments. Virtual PC. It's quite fun having Mac OSX, 9.2 in Classic Mode, X windows (XDarwin rocks), Windows 2000, and Windows 98 ALL running at the same time. Seeing the Gimp on the same screen next to Photoshop rocked my world.
* We dance where angels fear to tread *
And there is a personality type that has no opinion about anything in life.
Oh, but you have an opinion, right? It's knocking people's choices.
You Windows people are hilarious. So stubborn and ignorant...
...and unstylish to top it off!
How many more times can you guys post about someone using Mac OS X instead of linux? I think its up to about half a dozen news post. Please stop. We get it. Some linux users are migrating to Mac OS X. Linux no goody Mac funny ok. bye bye
And pray for mercy on his soul
:)
like... why? is linus keeping a list of bad boys & girls?
I've played around with OSX on my boss's TiBook and I must admit it is very nice and all, but the problem is you are forced to buy Mac hardware. I don't care how good OSX is if I can't run it on a Box that I can build with my own two hands, OSX is useless to me. The great thing about Linux and to a much lesser extent windows is choice. Linux users are not limited to any particular hardware platform where OSX is made specifically to sell a particular hardware platform.
I've been using my MacOS X for two days at work now, and I must say that I am totally in love with it. It allows me to be a Unix admin once I entered the shell. I can run a lot GNU/Unix/X applications on it (there are a lot ports). And it is a very "VERY" userfriendly system for non-computerexperts. I personally think Apple succeeded if they wanted to make a userfriendly Unix. I can only hope that MacOS X will be ported to Intel someday, I "WOULD" buy it for my homecomputers. Thats for sure.
And of course, the design of that new iMAC is
However, I agree that I have only seen OSX for two days so maybe I will change my mind about OSX. I am now going to checkout development on OSX
WRONG. You can't compare OSX to Gnome or KDE. With Mac, you get nthe whole deal. You get all or nothing (including the hardware). The fact that you split things up into these little architectural layers means that you'll
When I set up my new G4 Mac with OS X, I don't recall having to futz with X, or window managers, or desktops. I just got it.
Just try to explain to a reasonably intelligent person the difference between X-Windows, a Window Manager, and KDE/Gnome. It's ridiculous. You need all three things to make a decent desktop appear on the screen. No such bullshit with Mac (or Windows, for that matter).
I totally agree with your assertion that they are two totally different animals with different strengths. Mac is a desktop OS that can be used as a decent unix box now with OS X. Linux is a decent server OS, that SUCKS as a desktop. Will people give up with this linux desktop shit? It is over until someone comes out with a completely unified desktop/window manager package that can be installed with a wizard. It has to be that easy.
apple sucks and so does slashot.
of course, you can't do BIZ with linux!
One big va-software add int the article. /. bookmark disapeared for ever.
Later the
I use OS X at work and at home, and being in IT I work with a lot of Linux and Solaris devotees as well.
One of my interns, in particular, is a big Linux fan - like most undergrads, he has yet to realize that there are shades of grey, and that the "right tool for the job" is actually a workable principle much of the time.
Anyhow, he was haranguing me for not using Linux on my main box (although I have it, along with a lot of other *nix OSen, running on my home network). I told him that using OS X is a lot like using Linux/PPC, with the main difference being that all of my hardware is actually supported properly and the GUI is a bit more polished. The same Unix power is there if you need it, just as it would be under Linux or OpenBSD or Irix or Tru64 or whatever, and the OS is perfectly matched to the hardware. Ought to be, since they're from the same vendor.
--saint
Go home. Turn off your computer, unplug your modem, and stand in a corner for a few years. Please, get the fuck out of here with your bullshit. Nazis are irrelevant to this discussion. Beat it loser.
Thank you,
Anonymous Coward
Frankly, we don't care.
By "we", I'm going just going to assume you mean you. Thanks for talking for all of us. That's why we're reading this article and talking about it, because "we" don't care. OSX has its time and place, and this author makes an excellent case as to why he switched. I didn't know many things about it that he pointed out, and was interested because our backgrounds seem similar. Please troll elsewhere now.
Please subscribe to see the more insightful version of th
It's just bits on a disk, some people like this particular set and others like different sets. Get a grip.
unknown reference "system", replaced with "shell" to continue...
unknown reference "system", replaced with "shell" to continue...
read aborted after multiple annoyances.
What's good about OSX?
What's not so good about OSX?
If OSX were a Linux distribution, people would probably debate endlessly whether it was really ready for the desktop. I think overall OSX is neither better nor worse than Gnome or KDE on Linux. What it lacks in performance and consistency, it makes up in commercial support and simplicity.
The biggest advantages of OSX are that it's supported by a big brand-name. You can get MS Office for it. If a piece of hardware doesn't work, you take it back to the store and say "I plugged it in and it doesn't work; sorry--it says it's MacOS compatible". Presumably, there will be books around for it, and they will all document the one, standard version. And APIs and functionality change less rapidly than on Linux (which can be good or bad).
OSX is an operating system that a UNIX user can live with. I think it's good on a laptop, for PowerPoint presentations, as an iTunes jukebox, or to recommend to one's parents or manager. But it's no Linux killer.
OSX is just so much better than Windows XP. The OSX software architecture is much cleaner and the toolset you get with it is so much better. And the OSX UI is incomparably more consistent and easy to use than what Windows XP has.
Apple needs to address their performance issues (or release dual 2GHz iMacs :-), and they need to communicate a more coherent software strategy.
What the Linux community should do is study Apple's approach carefully and copy the good parts of it. KISS not only saves programming effort, it results in better software as well. A GUI with the simplicity of OSX but without the performance problems and OS9 compatibility would be great, and it would be less work to develop than the feature-laden KDE or Gnome desktops.
So, where I would grudgingly use Windows right now, I will probably now gladly use Macintosh. While OSX is no substitute for Linux, it brings a good, usable version of a UNIX-derivative into the mainstream, and that's good.
"Linux was a lot like a girl named Allison that I used to date."
Since when do Linux geeks go out on dates?
Only kidding,
Steve
Was Jeff Raskin an ex-boyfriend of yours or something?
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
UNIX is a registered trademark of the Open Group.
UNIX is defined by them as follows:
"UNIX ® - the worldwide Single UNIX Specification integrating X/Open Company's XPG4, IEEE's POSIX Standards and ISO C. Through continual evolution, the Single UNIX Specification is the defacto and dejure standard definition for the UNIX system application programming interfaces.
"The majority of commercial vendors have registered UNIX® products, with most at the UNIX 95 level and newer products registering for UNIX 98."
Only products listed on their product registration pages can be branded as UNIX. GNU (GNU's not UNIX) and Linux could, together with particular hardware, become certified UNIX, but first someone would have to pay the Open Group and demonstrate standards compliance.
It would be very easy for Apple to get MacOS certified on Power Macintosh computers, but they have yet to do so according to Open Group.
If an IPOD is the sexiest thing you've ever held in your hand, you *NEED* a life.. My god; I never thought I'd meet someone with less of a life than me! :)
I bet the majority of OSX users think the exact opposite.
Dell Dimension 2100:
Total cost: $1488
Apple iMac:
Total Cost: $1499
So if he didn't want firewire, it'd be more like $1488 to $1499 (Or Free2ElevenDollars, as you put it). If he wanted firewire, add $70 for an Adaptec firewire board. If he wanted a better video card, add $60 for the one included in the iMac. In this case, it'd be $1608 for the PC setup to match the iMac, and the package still isn't as nice
So maybe an even better subject would be "Free2OneHundredNineDollarRebate"
.sig: file not found
its pretty easy to wrap a desktop/windows manager package together with an X server. heck - redhat does it as well as mandrake and most linux distros (provided your hardware is fairly generic). your OSX also has a window manager and an X-like server called Quartz. since apple has limited hardware you dont see it breaking like you would see the linux installers breaking on non standard hardware. You didnt just get it -- it was packaged to work. Windows is the only one with a unified package.
Actually, they don't really want to surpress it, even though it is blatant IP theft.
They have to suppress it, because of the way that IP laws work in the US.
Regardless, what they're doing is pretty shitty, and you know it.
You can be offtopic all you want, by the way... but expect to be moderated down. You should be well aware of how the system works by now, so you shouldn't be suprised.
If you want to go elsewhere, please do. I, for one, have no desire to have to listen to more people spewing noise over signal.
Hmm... does the fact that it can be used by mere mortals count as a 'technical advantage'? (hint: you shouldn't have to learn how to use a shell in order to operate or administrate a computer)
Oh, and did I mention the GUI is ugly? Frankly, we don't care.
Speak for yourself -- I think the GUI is quite nice; certainly better than most of what I've seen in Linux-land, and I am quite interested. If you don't like it, fine, but don't claim to speak for me.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Just because you don't use a certain capability (like CMYK), doesn't mean I don't either.
I understand that people who do print work need CMYK, but I just wanted to point out a lot of people who think they "need Photoshop" and either pay for or pirate the $600 program can make do with either free GIMP, $100 Paint Shop Pro, or $100 PS Elements. (This applies especially to those who use "Photoshop" as a transitive verb.) Most of what gives Photoshop reputation as an "expensive" package lies in features that are 1. patented by companies that demand hefty royalties and 2. not needed by a large enough chunk of the users for alternatives to pop up.
I was also trying to weed out the "GIMP sucks because most of its menus are contextual" bots.
Will I retire or break 10K?
So you're saying then, that if the OSS community created a functional equivalent of Quartz, which they have not, then Linux as a desktop OS would be just as good as Mac OS X. Therefore Linux is just as good as Mac OS X.
Oops! Quartz doesn't exist for Linux. Mac OS X has a one-year jump on it (longer if you count the public beta). Yes it could be done, but it's not there, so if you want Quartz, you have to run Mac OS X. Period!
To the consumer, Darwin is a kernel while Linux / BSD / Solaris are distributions, which include window managers and desktop environments. None of them compare to Mac OS X. Sorry... you can argue paltry little tidbits like multiple desktops and 3-button mouse support....As I look down at my OS X dock I see 31 apps that I use regularly. Plus my Apache web server and ftpd are always running while my laptop is on.
I would like to know: apart from costing less, is there a compelling advantage to running a Pentium/Athlon - based system with Linux versus a PPC system with Mac OS X? With all the benchmarks I see posted, I don't think either hardware platform is trouncing the other in performance. More open-source tools exist for Linux, but Mac OS X is more user-friendly, with more commercial apps. And so far I have seen very little open-source software surpass proprietary software in terms of usability. Don't get me wrong, I wish it could. I want open-source to be the way software as we know it exists. But by the time it does, your hardware (and mine) will be obsolete.
So in the meantime I've got work to do, and I'm not a programmer. This is why I own 3 Mac OS X machines (and two older Macs).
Uhh... I run OS X on a 300 MHz B&W G3, and it runs great. A 3 year old machine. Incidentally, GNOME and KDE runs OK on it (under Linux), but they're even less worth running when OS X is an option. OS X loves RAM- with 256MB of RAM, it runs like a champ.
Linux runs on a number of platforms, but it's far from practical. Sure, you can run it on a Palm, but it's not usable for anything other than the occasional embedded control (e.g. in a robot project).
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
.....some folks DO sound like frothing zealots after you hear "WHY" they use Linux or free software in general. Why? (I'm not singling you out by the way).
Well because at the end of the day its just software, code and computer programs. There really is no need for any one person to choose one side exclusively whether its all proprietary or all open source. The entire issue has been elevated by some to the level of a religious jihad. As if being a proprietary supporter is the same as being a Pro-Lifer and being an open source supporter is the same as being a Pro-Choicer. Software licensing just shouldn't be such a life or death issue for ANYONE.
There's an entire world out there of far more important issues to rally behind and fight for and even live and die for. When you find yourself having an "ideology" behind what kind of friggin software you use all I can think is the person in question has REALLY been sitting in front of their computer for too long and would really benefit from a sabbatical from technology.
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
I've been using win98 and cygwin for a while now. I get to use my favorite CLI tools and dozens of windows software.
-AC-
I agree with you. I tend to get news of OSNews these days. It's like /., but without as much fluff, and most stories (although there are less) are actually interesting.
Don't blame me, I get all my opinions from my Ouija board.
As both a Linux and Mac user (who loves OSX because it's a vast improvement over 7.1-9.0) I don't think changing a window manager will do it.
As a concrete example, there's support for my Graphire pad on my Mac. I can also hot plug/unplug it and it works fine with my GUI, and the mouse is still plugged in. I had to run an installer, but that was about it.
My Epson printer (USB) worked fine from the get-go. No driver installation. I didn't even have to run a setup program. Unfortunately I had to download a 3rd party app to use my HP Scanjet 5300 because of a lack of driver support. Otherwise, all my stuff works great.
With Linux I've been through USB hell with 2.2, LPR hell with RedHat 7.1, X configuration Hell in version 1.0.x - 2.4.2. Even network hell (at various times) depending on the NIC. Switching window managers fixes some ills, but still may require you to edit text files, trade one set of quirks for another, or even have to learn scheme to reall customize it.
What the author does not say outright is that OSX gives you 95-99% of the Unix stuff that's great about Linux. In return for maybe de-unixing somewhat, it gives you simplicity. Sure, my G3-350 isn't as crisp as when it ran OS 8.1, but so what. It's still faster than me (for the most part).
Leave the gun, take the cannoli -- Clemenza, The Godfather
Your information is a bit off on the "OS X runs well" part.
Mac OS X runs well on machinery as old as January 1999. I know--I'm writing this post from my Power Mac G4 Blue-and-White, where OS X is fine. I've also run it on older hardware with fair (but not suitable) results back in its beta days.
OS X, like any other OS, needs RAM. About 128MB is OK if you are NOT running any Classic apps. If you plan on doing Classic, add another 64MB minimum. OS X prefers a decent video card (the RAGE 128 16MB card built-in works fine) which is what causes slowdowns on older G3 hardware such as the Beige G3 desktop/tower and earlier iMacs which haven't great video at all.
The differences between a G3 and G4 chip are subtle. What makes the speed is the same as on a PC motherboard--RAM, video, bus, and processor. Sure, OS X screams on G4 iron, but you don't -have- to go there.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
The Unix multiuser model is ancient and loathesome. It is beneficial to NO ONE save for the admins of multiuser machines, who represent a miniscule minority of all users in aggregate. A system that confers upon ordinary users, or single users who do not share their machines, the benefits of a single user model (less complexity, more freedom) is far superior, and, sadly, still waiting to be developed. Apple _COULD'VE_ worked on it, but they dropped the ball.
;), encumbered by licensing issues, and incapable of easily achieving certain effects taken for granted today. Furthermore, it was never accellerated with hardware, and any unique features it might have held, e.g. a vector-based UI, were never exploited. (indeed, this is still true -- Aqua is raster-based) Widgets made to look 3d through a tromp l'oeil effect are of dubious worth, (look at what an eyesore Win95 et al are!) but also were present since System 1 on the Mac.
Naturally you'd want to tie it into a security model that was superior to that of Unix as well. In this day and age, with the prevalence of worms and trojans, it's inexcusable to permit such malware to wipe out a user's entire space. That the remainder of the system is fine is small comfort. WinNT has a more granular, but still not amazing security system. I'm more interested in a pervasive capabilities security model myself. One in which a user is allowed to delete files, but certain of his programs, e.g. malware that naturally lacks permission to do so, cannot.
Regarding the second item, they are not contradictory. The Mac was designed as, above all else, a humanistic computer. A computer intended to work with human beings as it found them, with as little imposition upon them as possible. The degree to which this can be achieved would naturally increase over time. It hasn't. Instead we're beginning to see backsliding, as technical concerns override usability concerns. This should _never_ happen. If compromises must be made, it is a necessary evil, and should be rectified as quickly as possible. This process of rectification is advancement in UI design. Apple isn't even doing good design (again, I'm not _just_ talking about GUIs and skins here) anymore.
As noted above, clunk, clunk. I have a NeXT Cube, I've used it quite a lot, the fact that it has an overblown reputation doesn't prevent it from being as lousy as it is.
The graphics model was intolerably slow (check out Doom on black hardware sometime
Miller columns, incidentally, have been around since the 70's -- they were used in conjunction with SmallTalk at PARC.
As for dev tools, I'm not arguing about that. I'm not claiming that they're bad -- but users who would never ever need or want them likely constitute 99.44% of the computer using population. While I'd like to see more people program, the last thing I would ever do would be to design an UI that was geared for such a tiny minority... it ensures that only they would ever use it, and not even that, for programmers follow users around. (and are users themselves a lot of the time)
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Apple Laptop Keyboards are Unacceptable to Unix Users
Apple designs horrible keyboards. ADB keyboards (which are still used on all of Apple's laptops) are unusable to unix users who need a Ctrl key to the left of the 'A'.
Proper Keyboard Design
- When a key is pressed, the keyboard sends a keyPress
event.
- When a key is released, the keyboard sends a keyRelease
event.
- Each key is assigned a different keycode.
Nothing more, nothing less.ADB Keyboard Mis-design
- When the key to the left of the 'A' (CapsLock) is
pressed, the ADB keyboard sends both a keyPress event
and a keyRelease event.
- When the CapsLock key is then released, the ADB keyboard
sends NO events.
- When the CapsLock key is next pressed, the ADB keyboard
sends NO events.
- When the CapsLock key is then released, the ADB keyboard
sends both a keyPress event and a keyRelease
event.
- The above cycle repeats over and over.
This is WRONG ! Apple's ADB keyboards are broken by design.Unix Users Cannot Use Apple's ADB Keyboards
What this means is that unix users who need the key to the left of the 'A' to be a Ctrl key cannot use Apple ADB keyboards. You can easily reprogram the CapsLock key to be a Ctrl key and get rid of the badness of the CapsLock key, but you can't get the required goodness of the Ctrl key to the left of the 'A'.
Apple Loses Sales to Unix Users
All Apple laptops have the horrible broken-by-design ADB keyboards which are unusable to unix users. I want to buy an Apple laptop, but I cannot and will not until Apple builds input devices usable by unix users.
I've planned to buy a Mac several times and every time, after making a list of what I need it to do I've bought a Beige Box and spent the change on a pile of RAM or HD space.
So, the OS is irrelevent to me and many others; until the price comes down or I need to do professional DTP I ain't switching.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
I'm not entirely sure how you manage to find Linux software management easier than drag'n'drop or run-the-installer, in fact, a Mac friend of mine who recently tried Linux (OS X performance was killing his old iMac) found the software management was THE thing that switched him off. The whole: X needs Y needs Z needs X mess, the fact that he couldn't even upgrade Mozilla (mandrakes urpmi wouldn't let him uninstall the older one cos gnome needed it) really was offputting. And I share his sentiments.
Now, I've said elsewhere in this story how I think the large amount of code reuse on Linux is a good thing, and it is. But software management is one of the biggest things stopped me recommending it to my non-technical friends. Perhaps GNUpdate will help solve this dilemma?
What's that I see...could it be horrible generalizations? Since when does a GUI system have to be easy to use? I use Linux everyday and don't have a problem with X or whichever Window Manager I'm using at the time. You know why? Because I read the documentation and it wasn't so hard either. Just because X is graphical doesn't mean it has to be trivial to use, I mean it's there so that you can do stuff that can't be represented (easily or at all) in text.
I also find it somewhat incorrect that you claim that Linux "SUCKS" on the desktop...if it does everything that many people want (which it clearly does) then who are you to say that it isn't useful as a desktop OS? Don't confuse your opinion with everyone else's reality.
"Will people give up this linux desktop shit?", hmmm...no. It isn't over until no one is using it and that is unlikely to happen...sorry to disapoint you. I think the world would be better if you just stayed in your little land of pretty operating systems and let people who know what they're doing use real operating systems. If you want to use OS X then good for you, but don't expect others to care when you start on completely childish "I'm stupid and can't use Linux" rant.
Only the first paragrpah should be in italics...typo.
http://www.krex.com/products_detail_print.asp?Item Code=927
See, I have OPTIONS in PC world, I can match parts I want, build it myself for half of the price or be lazy and order it at Dell.
Not is the Apple world - either you take the deal they offer or you don't.
Man, you're getting a dell, hahahahaha.
Seriosuly though, with $1500 I can get a lot more than what the Apple or the Dell delivers. PeeSees are cheap these days. Support the independant vendors, you know, they use the same stuff as dell or gateway.
:. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
rpm -e package
i stopped reading the article once i read that the author, in his time of using redhat linux, could not figure out how to uninstall an rpm file.. man rpm anyone? i think maybe this destroys all credability.
not to mention the countless times he objectifies women..
Hmmm....I have been eyeballing the Mac G4s for about a year. I think it maybe time to take the plunge.
Although I could wait and buy a dual AMD Hammer mb with CPUs and a gig of RAM for about 1/2 the price. And build a clear case...
But the iMac sure looks cool. And they are only $2k. Too bad they are 4-6 weeks behind.
I wish GNUStep was "there"
It already is there, but a few of the more advanced GUI features aren't, and Display GhostScript is still a bit slow. If you want more, put your money where your mouth is.
Will I retire or break 10K?
It's too bad they made up all that wierd junk instead of using normal utilities, but that's just the suck of propriatory software for you. You know, goofey little aps that you have to learn again every two years. Think about how many different "assholes in the middle" you have to pay just to easily make a freaking home movie. If you can't figure out how to do this with free tools, you have to:
1. Buy some sucky OS, comes with a new computer that costs about $1000 too much.
2. Buy some kind of card or other device to capture the video.
3. Buy some software to make movies that replaces the software that came with the device that did not work.
4. Buy some CD's (which the RIAA/MPAA want to tax).
5. Go through parts of this or all of it every two years.
Or you could buy a Mac and use it for what it's advertised for. It will change too, and they have their own little upgrade train, but it's not so bad unless you make the mistake of putting that "office" stuff from Microsoft on it.
Yep, the software makers have bullied hardware vendors into bizarre, ever changing interfaces. All attempts at standardization and sanity are firmly smacked down. So there you have it. Enjoy your Mac. It's not a real unix, but it will see devices.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Geez, for an article written by someone who claims to be a techie, he sure spends a lot of time obsessing about breasts. I count no less than four references. I thought he was supposed to be talking about operating systems? (There's another comment that I'd like to make about people from Utah, but it'd get modded way down so I shall refrain.)
From this we can conclude that he is visually oriented, so it's no wonder he's fallen in love with the gorgeous looks of Mac OS X. Good for him. This doesn't make OS X inherently better than Linux, and someone else's choice doesn't make Linux inherently better than Mac OS X. It's his choice, and he shouldn't try to paint it as the only correct choice. The only wrong choice is Windows.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
"Linux was a lot like a girl named Allison that I used to date. She was a hot redhead with large, firm breasts in most of my honors classes. She was smart, she was cute - and she was totally crazy. I could only deal with her strange behavior for so long, no matter how much I loved the rest of her. "
--
i do have a thing for women like this... i think i might be giving up osx for linux!
OK, OK, hold on...it is true that you can't sit down at any of the *BSDs and bang out a shell script if your only unix experience is a few minutes of clicking around the Mac desktop. Even if you write a shell script that works for Solaris, depending on what files you touch you might have to re-write parts of it for Linux...and possibly re-write other parts as your Linux distribution moves toward LSB compliance.
Where the old commercial Unix vendors failed to deliver on the concept of Open, much of the current stuff is so open it's forcing the remaining propriatory Unix and Windows vendors to react. Every major OS has Posix support included or easily available. More graphics and widget sets are portable to nearly every OS. Virtual machines and other runtimes are abundant.
Yet, unix is Unix. Even if not by name. Even with the distribution snobbery, cliques, and infighting. Code is largely portable from unix to unix and machine to machine. Recursive acronyms aside, and no matter what your feelings are about the FSF, the GNU toolset is generally accepted Unix and acts as the core of the translation system.
IBM is mostly right when they claim 'Linux is lingua franca of the enterprise'. It's not just Linux, but any unix. Standardizing on Linux can be benificial, but Linux is still Unix...and in general Unix works so well, it's not impossible to switch to...another unix.
With that, I propose that if you want more Unix users -- for your flavor of unix or not -- make Windows as Unix-like as possible. They have the monster sized chunk of the market, and if one Unix system ends up replacing another, we may as well include Windows in that group.
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
Now, I'm a Linux user and I used to be a DOS user (liked PC-DOS best), an Amiga Workbench/Amiga DOS user, but Linux is the best I've found yet. If I write some long opinion-filled "article" and submit it to Slashdot will it get posted?
Maybe it only works the other way...can someone send me a nice new Mac (for free, I lack money) with OS X loaded onto it so that I can write a "me too" article for all the Apple zealots?
I just went to Sony, and pricing out thier bottom end Desktop (RX640), It is $1,254.58. That is:
* 1.30 GHz Intel ® Celeron ® Processor
* 256 MB PC-133 SDRAM (expandable to 512 MB)
* 400 MHz Front Side Bus
* 60 GB Ultra ATA/100 hard drive
* 16X max. DVD-ROM/40X max. CD-ROM
* 16X10X40X max. CD-RW Drive
* High-speed Internet ready with 10Base-T/100Base-TX Fast Ethernet
* Front and rear accessible i.LINK ® (IEEE 1394) interfaces and USB connections 1
* Programmable VAIO Smart (TM) Keyboard
* V.90 compatible data/fax modem
* Wheel mouse
* External Stereo Speakers
And SDM M51 Flat Panel.
Faster Processor, Larger HDD, and Two Drives. Yeah the speakers are not as good, but the difference will not be that great on a set of small stereo speakers. So you have Firewire in the Vaio which is not in the Dell and expandibility in the Sony which is just not there in the iMac. At a couple hundred dollars, you start to wonder. And the price differential starts to add up when you compare one of the OS-less PCs from Walmart or if you build your own.
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
There is no possible way that either is true UNIX. All seasoned veterans know that true UNIX has CDE. Now, why Apple chose the proprietary system they did for Mac OS X rather than subjecting their users to the torture of CDE is unknown to me...
I'm not sure why I'm writing this, since it will undoubtedly get flamed. I've run desktop linux since about 1998? Or so.. Back then, linux was a toy and I used NT for work. Linux was moving so fast, I had lots of time to develop and tweak code then - in university - and life was good. I was lucky in that when I graduated, I could run linux desktops at work for the most part, and I enjoyed it. I still use linux daily for compiling applications and in server roles. Solaris is another work companion, running high-end design tools for analog electronics. I also use Win2k daily as many of the prototyping boards I use for FPGA work are win-only, along with other embedded tools.
However, 8 months ago, one of the guys I worked with got a new toy - a Apple Titanium Powerbook. This thing is the sexiest piece of hardware I've ever seen. Hell, real live women have complimented me on it. Imagine that. I needed to get a notebook, looked around, and got a Tibook myself. At the time, I had every intention of blowing linux away and installing Yellow Dog linux. Honest! However, I decided I'd give OSX a fair shake, and I wanted to learn the OS anyhow. Learnign new things is never a bad thing from techie perspective, anyhow. I give it the quick test - is there a terminal? I'll be damned. "Hey, this thing is based on BSD", I think to myself. So I type in the magic two letter command that's inspired more flame wars than Bill Gates and Osama Bin Laden put together: "vi". F*ck me. It's there.
So, I start poking around on the Apple web site, and it's the best-organized thing I've ever seen. "why can't redhat do this", I ask myself. I click on developer, and gosh-be-damned, there's links to all this open source code I'm framiliar with - even a port of my ever-so-framilar BASH. So, I go looking for some developer tools and documentation, and get the shock of my life - not only are the APIs clearly documented, but there's example code for everying from Cocoa to Firewire right there - AND, there's a free IDE to tie all the development tools together. F*ck me. This jobs guy seems to be on to something, I think. 30 minutes after being exposed to this OS, I have OpenGL example programs compiling and running, hardware accellerated even. Wow.
Fast forward to six months later. I'm amazed every day at how well the mac works. It's has never crashed on me.. the GUI can be a little sluggish, but that doesn't bother me too much, as I'm a console monkey myself. Loads of developer support. I can plug in my perhiprials - digital camera, rio mp3 player, JVC DV camcorder - and not only do they work with NADA fiddling around, but I'm greeted by a well thought out application that is ready to talk to the device with no drama whatsoever. Here's to thoughtful GUI design. Microsoft Office for OSX was another surprise - I'm amazed they haven't killed it yet, because unlike it's windows cousin, it's uncluttered and efficient. Office X has, however, crashed on me a few times. No shocking revalations there.
However, what OS X made me do was assess how much work I was accomplishing relative to how much tinkering and configuring I was doing running linux on the desktop. As I get older, my time is more valuable, and I don't have a whole day to reconfigure things anymore. I don't have to reconfigure anything with OS X. It just works. Gnome and KDE have come a long way here, but they're not there yet. I imagine they will be in the future - but this is now. There is a sacrifice in terms of the hardware available, but what's available works very well. Games aren't there, but there are more than were there for Linux - including the Canary, Mac-only games. I solved that problem long ago with a games-only PC anyhow - apply the best tool to each task.
Sometimes, I think to myself - The motto for this OS should be "It Works". Because it does just that, with a minimum of drama. Something, after being involved with computers since I was 8, I find refreshingly new. Apple has done what Redhat should have done, take a solid open source core, make sure it's consistant and useable, put a reputation and corporation behind it's maintenance and support, AND do so without alienating the community of users that spawned it. Support from large projects like Mozilla have resulted in a great communications platform for OSX, and hopefully the upcoming OpenOffice will find it's way to OS X in a similar way as well.
Hats off to Apple, and I invite everyone here to try it. It's not all things to all people, but it's solved my general purpose computing needs in a way that nothing previous has, and brought back some of the excitement about a hardware platform that I felt in the Amiga days. The combination of an exciting OS with suprior hardware engineering is a real winner in my opinion. "To each, their own".
..don't panic
in OS X. I do campus level support for a few hundred Macintoshes. I have a G4 running OS X at work and use a Linux/Win machine at home. Using this OS in a mixed OS (various Win varients, VMS, legacy Mac OS, Solaris, etc) is problematic.
The first (and for me, biggest) problem is connections to NT servers. While simple access to the file servers is pretty straightforward, any attempt to copy files or otherwise manipulate them will crash the finder. I spent a week working with a software engineer from Apple and, to be fair, he was unaware of this bug. After I demonstrated this to him he got on the phone to his home office immediately. Maybe future versions will correct this problem.
The second issue: The desktop version of OS X is supposed to be a client version of the operating system. It isn't yet. Using the server version of 10 only allows you to remotely administer 9.x machines. This is frustrating after convincing the suits to kick down big bucks for an unlimited connection license of the server OS.
It disturbs me that I cannot read "Insightful" comments. I'll make to dumb down all of my comments to make sure they're visible to the unwashed masses. All grousing aside - this doesn't really compel one to do much posting.
your = it belongs to you. you're = a contraction of you and are. Got it now?
Apple advocates don't think that way.
Who is the 'Industrial Designer' if you buy a clone at a screwdriver shop? And where's the full color advertising? I won't even go into the matter of the color brochure that is the first thing you find when you open up the full color carton...
I played a little Dungeons and Dragons with my friends (until my parents, certain I would become a Satan worshiping pervert, brought an end to that one. Ha! Jokes on them - I became a Satan worshipper anyway.)
and he blames Linux for problems that hardware makers have created for His CTO, Bill Gates. Calling Linux hard to get close to while also talking about tits. What a strange... what is it? Ah yes, a perversion! That's it channeling your urges to inaproprate places.
It is right that you suffer, for your sins are great. Your punishment shall be to make my ATI video board work with my Soyo Dragon. It never did work right under windows 98. You may use the 30 pieces of silver, paid to write that article, if you would hire a real programer to do the work.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
The best example I have witnessed of a multi-user model pared down cleanly and appropriately was BeOS. It had all that Posix-y goodness but it didn't have all the UID/GID crap getting in the way.
Multi-user OSes are dinosaurs, except for a few specific server functions. There is NO REASON why a desktop machine should be tied down with all that antique croft. That's really the biggest thing wrong with Linux.
NeXT, and it's OS failed because of market and pricing issues, not technical or ascetic ones
I thought 'ascetic' issues would only concern those still using the command line 8-)
Hmm... does the fact that it can be used by mere mortals count as a 'technical advantage'? (hint: you shouldn't have to learn how to use a shell in order to operate or administrate a computer)
True story: My little brother's Mac and/or cable modem was acting up. He had been running OSX since the 'test drive'. I pulled up a console to check something and he asked "What's that?" I laughed at first but then it hit me; Apple has done such a damn good job on it's front end that the typical end user never had to worry about the chewy UNIXish creamy center.
Very very impressive job on Apple's part, and it can only get better..
(side note, the problem was with the cable modem, not his Mac or the OS)
Trolling is a art,
Alt-tab - switches between running applications
Alt-tilde - switches between open windows in an app
Theres no magic different keystroke to switch windows whether it be Terminal or IE. Alt-tilde always works.
GUI supporters would argue that switching apps in the dock does not take longer - but it is hard to prove.
As far as remote administration - Timbuktu. Wonderful little program, though I doubt its been ported to your precious FreeBSD. I know there's at least a Windows and Mac client for it though...
Timbuktu + That little GUI tool for making users in System Preferences has to take around a minute, though you could continue your 1/2 hr method using ssh or the perl scripts... i suggest Timbuktu.
The Mac does indeed have some nice web browsers (you didn't mention that anti-aliasing Omniweb), and Office apps (well, Office, I guess is fine), but it also has some very nice content creation apps. Be it, say Photoshop 7, GoLive 6, Final Cut Pro 3, or even little things like iDVD or iMovie - there's something there for a lot of creative people or a lot of people that like to be creative once in a while.
For a person who complains so much about time wasted while attempting things the hard way - you sure don't seem to mind the learning time you spent for LaTeX and Awk/perl.
With less of a learning curve - the mac apps are easier to pick up and use, as well as attempt more advanced things - quicker.
I prefer GNUstep + Debian, Mac's are too expensive for my taste.
If more developers get involved, GNUstep
would evolve much faster (obviously), and once it fully conforms to the OpenStep specification, then everyone could focus on all the stuff that Apple added.
Some GNUstep applications have been successfully ported to OSX, like GNUMail with little changes, but full source compability isn't quite there yet, and ObjectiveC++ is still missing in gcc.
However, if I had the money, I would run to the nearest reseller and get myself an iMac right away.
With Frontpage (tm), this wouldn?t have happened. As it is a wysywig tool, you?d have seen with one glance where the italicized text stopped, without having to balance <em>?s and </em>?s. Seems you too are too stoopid for text-oriented stuff such as HTML... With Front page, on the other hand, everybody would admire your smarts with each apostrophe that you typed!
And pray for mercy on his soul.
Sheesh I thought us mac users were supposed to be the cult.
He switched from one Unix to another! Drivers that need GCC in order to install, no programs that look and feel alike. If it weren't for StarOffice and GIMP, most folks wouldn't waste their time. I guess he got tired of messing with the chaos which is Linux. Welcome Aboard Brother! :)
Uhh...Same setup here, only with 384 MB of RAM, and I question your definition of "great". Also, you seemed to miss my point about _supporting_ the subject, which is that you can't make a valid comparison. Now to address your definition of the word "great":
Great too me means never having to wait for the interface to catch up to the speed at which I think, and I'm not even close to the fastest thinker in the world. I'll even go as far as to say that OS X is actually "snappy" in most respects on my machine. Unless I want to, say, listen to an MP3. Or minimize a terminal window while there is text scrolling in it. Or use XDarwin rootless. Or resize a window with more than 5 controls in it.
As far as running Linux on a Palm, what do you expect? A full fledged office suite or photo-editing program? You can't get that with the _native_ OS! Well, you can, but using it with a stylus and Grafiti is painful at best. At least with Linux it can become more than an overpriced organizer/gameboy.
Karma: Incomprehensible (Mostly affected by posting at +5, reading at -1, and metamoderating everything unfair.)
I don't know if you are confusing GNUstep with WindowMaker, or if you just forgot to mention what GNUstep is, for those that don't, read all about it here.
Lowest
/. and config this and tweak that. You'll say rude things like RTFM, man this, grep that.
.ppt file their friends make. They never ever want to upgrade anything, ever. They simply expect their computer to work. They want to reboot when it doesn't. They never ever want to su root, or God forbid sudo.
/. and pissed and moaned about what an idiot he is.
/., are the minority. Mr & Mrs AOL in Middle America are the Majority. Mr & Mrs Church Newsletter have waaay more disposable cash than you and all your CS majors combined, right now. You should be furthering your cause, not fragmenting even further.
/. can do about it.
Common
Denominator
Simply put let me say that Dark Porkrind is a power user. He's a guru to the uniformed masses that actually USE computers. They don't compile kernals, they don't script anything, they dont ever configure, make, install. They'll be damned if AIM isn't available. Dark Raman is _their_ guy. There are a lot of Dark Paradigms in the world. Some of them are benevolent and some "know enough to be dangerous."
I give Dark Andstormynight the benifit of the doubt. I think he's a good guy. (Although he did go from Apple striaght to DOS without any AMIGA.. but I digress.) For the unwashed heathens who don't know what a regex is or how to setup mulitple IPs on their NIC card, he's who they listen to.
Now, why don't they listen to you? You know everything it is true. You really do. You can give them a million reasons to use Blah-Blah Linux over OS X. You won't though. You'll read
They don't care about any of that. They just want to chat with their friends and get their mail and open funny
So while Dork Hardon writes an article about how he broke free from the MS "monopoly" you sat here on
We, you,
OS X is never going to fragment. It may change entirely but it won't fragment. No one has to worry about Larry, or Miguel, or Linus, or anyone but Steve. OS X makes sense for a lot of poeple.
It's pretty.
It's fast enough.
It has advertising.
It has Office.
If Linux was OS X in 1996 we'd all be giggling about XP and OS X right now. But it wasn't/isn't.
Dark Paladin is right. He's hitting Linux with his +5 Mace Of OS Smiting and there isn't a damn thing you or your
Is there?
This
oh boy oh boy oh boy.
/boot? The power of linux lies in the fact that you can whether or not you have to.
:o)
Newsflash : self proclaimed "Open Source junkie" too stupid to uninstall an rpm[1] loves Mac OS.
Lets try to deconstruct this article in order.
I played text based games (most of them were never finished as I couldn't get the game to accept commands like "put egg in lake" or "drop egg in lake" or "slam egg into the damn lake you stupid computer!"
Try removing the preposition - drop egg should work if it's possible to do so.
And close your brackets.
Whenever I clicked on Wordperfect, the same DOS program filled the entire screen
In 386 enhanced mode, you can run DOS in a window.
I'm personally convinced that Microsoft never ported DirectX 5.0 to NT 4.0 just to get people to upgrade to Windows 2000
It requires a new kernel and drivers for all hardware. That's why.
the idea of recompiling a kernel is a terrifying idea to me
What's so terrifying about make menuconfig && make bzImage && cp arch/i386/bzImage
there were still things that just didn't work right. Like the Java plug in. I tried to install that so many times, and it just wouldn't work
And yet so many people can. Is this not a case of not RTFMing? I even have the java plugin on my ppc mozilla[3] even though Sun only produce an i386 version.
But the worst, the truly worst part, was cut 'n paste
Left click to select, middle button to paste. What's bad about that? It even works on a tty or a virtual console. And it's consistent throughout the entire system.
Linux was a lot like a girl named Allison that I used to date. She was a hot redhead with large, firm breasts in most of my honors classes. She was smart, she was cute - and she was totally crazy. I could only deal with her strange behavior for so long, no matter how much I loved the rest of her.
I'm really not qualified to say anything about this...
of its inability to handle virtual memory
Mac OS does handle virtual memory. It just makes it possible to disable it. (Now that is one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard).
even smarter than what I was used to in the Linux command line
The default shell in Mac OSX is tcsh, which has a different command completion behavior than bash by default. The behaviour you see in tcsh can easily be set in bash, and zsh does so by default too. It is not, however, smarter.
Example : you have both a directory and a file in your current working directory, named so that the file comes before the directory (eg after unpacking somefile.tar.gz you have a directory called somefile). To change to the directory you try cd some* to go into the directory. tcsh will find the file first, then complain, whereas bash will do the right thing.
Both bash and tcsh are available for linux, so the comparison is irrelevant anyway.
Right upon taking it out of the box, it just seemed so...pretty
This is why most people buy Macs. Mostly people (like my boss) who think that case is actually relevant to the design of the system.
I've never understood the big deal about "anti-aliasing"
And yet you seem qualified to write an objective comparison of it? Sure some of default linux fonts have terrible hinting, but get a copy of gdkpixbuf and the windows truetype fonts and you're laughing. Have you seen what cleartype looks like? Sub-pixel rendering is sweet. By comparison OSX just looks... blurry.
Running programs have a small black triangle underneath them, so it's easy to tell what's running and what's not
The key word here is "small". It's not easy to tell what's running and what's not. Both long time Mac users and new converts have a lot of pet hates about the Dock. I won't reiterate them here.
When I first went to install Microsoft Office X, there was something that surprised me about the installation procedure. Basically, it was "copy this folder into your Applications directory". Or Omniweb, a competing web browser. It's just one file
ls -l shows it as a directory called somefile.app. So which is it? That's the problem - the gui and prompt are inconsistent; changing any files name to somefile.app will make it always appear as application (with the file extension hidden) and it can't be fixed from the finder[2]. So installation is easy. For some programs. Others have their own installers, which variously put random files anywhere (eg Lightware) to nuking other partitions (iTunes 2) to crashing simply because you've moved an older version of the app.
And there's no uninstallation routine. No way to cleanly get rid of all files, system resources and preferences.
Compare this to linux. cast appname will install appname and all required dependencies from source, while dispel appname will remove it and all applications which depend on it.[3]
Compare also to Windows. msiexec appname.msi will install appname, repeated invocations will give options to modify repair or remove appname. Or you can get the same effect by clicking on appname.msi.
I've never figured out how to uninstall a RPM file
See again note [1]. Please now tell me how to uninstall apache from Mac OSX, because I don't need a web server. What do you mean I can't?
No messages about "I can't shut down the program" like you'd see in Windows
You mean "Unable to terminate process. Access denied"? This is no different from trying to kill another users process in any unix. You can't kill other peoples processes. This is natural. This is right.
Copying programs is much like Windows - select a file, and either drag it to another directory, or select Edit->Copy
Copying files by Edit/Copy didn't exist until Mac OSX. Maybe because they realised how useless the finder[2] was.
Since OS X does a great job with memory management
I sincerely doubt you have evidence to back this up. Better than Mac OS, certainly, but better than any other unix? No. Considering how the ui allocates stupid chunks of memory for any window which makes it take days to resize a window (due to its dynamic de- and re- allocation of roughly a gig per window).
It would be nice to have a setting like "if all windows are closed, end the program".
Don't even hope. This is Jobs' idea of usability, and it will not change.
Then there's the whole Metadata thing
Yes, that sucks. We're in agreement on something.
Every tried to cut and paste text from the Windows 2000 telnet program? Somebody decided to change all the cut and paste keys to piss of the users, I'm sure
So you've skipped back to something you mentioned earlier. Yes I have tried to cut and paste from Windows 2000 telnet. Left button to select, enter to copy, right button to paste. Almost identical to linux. This is needed since console programs have a habit of interrupting when they are sent a Ctrl-C
It's like running a DOS program in Windows XP. Only...it actually works.
Oh, you mean that Apple have done a better job at retaining backwards compatibility than Microsoft? Is that why, when they decided to use a new processor, all programs had to be shipped in two versions ("fat binaries", and they're still in use today)? Is that also why, in their new all-powerful operating system most programs won't run unless you have the older operating system installed alongside? Don't even mention how Classic allows "almost full speed" or "running natively" until you explain why Apple ditched a well used and well understood API in order to deliberately break compatibility. If Carbon can run OS9 programs properly under OSX, why not keep the entire API consistent. This is what Microsoft has done. The DOS API still exists. The Win16 API still exists. The OS2 and posix APIs still exist. The Win32 API has been continuously updated for the last seven years without breaking backwards compatibility. Why didn't Apple do the same?
I've noticed that 3D acceleration doesn't quite work for Classic programs running under OS X
If they had kept the API, this would not have been a problem.
Not only did all of my Unix programs install just fine under OS X and run like they've always done, but the OS X developers crowd have even ported many of them over just for OS X
Which begs the question, why build a gui on top of Unix if it is completely incompatible with X Windows? XDarwin is a stopgap solution. Any BSD program or one which uses configure correcly should work on Mac OSX, if it weren't for deliberately introduced incompatibilities.
I don't have to worry "can I get hardware X to work?" I never have to hear "oh, just recompile your kernel, or edit the configure script before you compile".
And why didn't you actually ever follow that advice?
If there was a way to edit this key combination (or if someone could tell me how to change those keys), I'd be a little happier
Sorry again. Jobs' idea of usability.
What do I fucking have to kill to get someone to make an OS X program that will let me mount some Novell volumes on my machine here?
Steve Jobs, I think...
ATI - personally, I think your cards are the bomb. I love my ATI TV-Wonder, and I've been eyeing those 8500 All-in-Wonder DV cards. So why aren't you spreading the OS X love? You have a TV USB device for Mac, but there's no OS X drivers. And where are the All-in-Wonder cards? You'd think that was a no-brainer on the Mac. I want that screen-capturing, straight to Quicktime movie ability that I know you can give me.
Now this bitching is directed at the wrong entity. ATIs hands are tied. Apple decided there would be a minimum level of hardware support, and all machines which are supported will work the same. Which means that features of more expensive cards such as the ATIs TV-out, will not be available because it is not available in lower-end machines. This is also the (stupid, stupid, stupid) reason why the nVidia cards don't do hardware T&L, of which they are more than capable (and indeed is their selling point).
I like OS X a lot, and I'm now a fully converted Mac user. It has all the power I remember in Linux, but it's easier to use, and far prettier
I got so sick of the OSX gui I installed Yellow Dog so I could go back to Gnome - and yes, I can apply themes!
It has all of the editing abilities of my Windows machine, without all of the crashes.
My Windows 2000 machine doesn't crash. The Windows 2000 machine I installed at work the day after starting (almost a year ago now) doesn't crash. In an office full of Macs, that (aside from my Yellow Dog box) is the only machine which doesn't crash. I guess your milage may vary, but the only reason for a Windows 2000 machine to crash is a hardware problem.
And if the other vendors can just get off their asses and realize that OS X is the future of Apple, and maybe they should be writing their drivers and apps to that system, then I wouldn't have anything to gripe about.
That's what they said about copeland and pink and taligent. Adobe didn't buy into it, and so those systems never took off. It's only because Photoshop now looks crap in their deliberately crippled "Classic" mode that they are producing a Carbon version.
Where the hell am I going with this? I don't know. I just hate it when people evangelise Apple, when they should know better, or in this case, clearly don't. But who am I to argue? A clueless user who can't RTFM on RPM using an Apple? They were made for each other.
[1]clue rpm -e. Try also rpm --help or man rpm. Or even rpmdrake.
[2] ever notice how the "finder" can't find anything? For that you need a completely separate app called "sherlock". Now, I ask you, is that intuitive?
[3]I am in the process of porting Sorcerer (mentioned on Slashdot a couple of times) to powerpc, because quite frankly, rpm sucks.
"I think he was truly surprised at how little I cared about how big a market the Mac had" - Linus on Jobs
ADB? What are you talking about? .. and I've learned to adapt to any keyboard I'm sitting at in a few minutes anyway.
You mean like old Apple Desktop Bus Keyboards? You sure are HTML-enhanced-bitchy for an AC that's clueless. ADB!! ABD!!!! It's terrible!!
What the keyboard does is a driver layer issue anyway.
Go play with your Dell.
...using OS X is a lot like using Linux/PPC, with the main difference being that all of my hardware is actually supported properly and the GUI is a bit more polished. The same Unix power is there if you need it, just as it would be under Linux or OpenBSD or Irix or Tru64 or whatever...
In my own experience, many Linux users (a group of which I include myself) have this notion that if an end user isn't forced to deal with a particular mechanism of the OS, that mechanism isn't there. Hence `use Debian, unlike Red Hat it allows you to get into the guts of the OS' or
`use gentoo, you can simply compile all your apps once you learn how the packaging system works'. These featurs are obviouisl;y avaliable in every Linux, but for some reason a lot of people (generally the IRC advocacy types) swear Red Hat doesn't have a modules.conf because it automatically detects hardware.
Damn, forgot to hit the preview button, that should read:
"for those that don't know what it is, read all about it here."
And I would also like to point out that I love WindowMaker too, I only wish it would intergrate better with GNUstep, sure the WINGs library is light and fast, wich makes sense if you want to use WindowMaker as a standalone window manager, but I wouldn't mind a ObjC GNUstep fork. If only I had the programming skills required, I would happily do it myself.
Well, let me clarify in that there are definately times when multiuser systems are useful! I have no problems with them becoming more common... the MS document describing a sort of distributed computing environment (minus the monopolistic evil) would rock. But anyone who sits down at a computer and logs into their account should never notice that they're on a multiuser system unless they have to admin it for some reason.
This just isn't the case at present.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I question this entire post based on this statement:
"I know--I'm writing this post from my Power Mac G4 Blue-and-White"
G4's were never put in Blue and Whites. Take the rest with a grain of salt.
``Thank you, Stephen.''
Dark Paladin suggests that the key to loving MacOS X may be not knowing MacOS 9 and below. Maybe he's right. I've been watching MacOS X mature for years, but I still haven't quite been pursuaded to switch.
Mac OS 9 is just too good.
Do I know what I'm missing? Sure I do. I have an awesome dual-screen Athlon running Red Hat at work, and am no stranger to Windows. My roommate runs OS X. It looks very pretty.
I'm still not switching. Mac OS 9 is too good.
My tower also boots into MacOS 8 (as well as Linux). That was a fine system, too. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
What do I stand to gain from OS X?
Memory protection -- I don't have problems with rogue apps in MacOS 9. My MacOS 9 system is very stable. Memory protection is overrated.
Multitasking -- Cooperative multitasking actually works very well. It is often more responsive than my X-windows desktop, despite having a CPU half as fast. Preemptive multitasking is overrated.
Unix -- Oh joy, I can run thousands of nonintuitive CLI utilities and inconsistent, mentally taxing X programs. Does this program use alt or control for its accelerator keys? Can I paste with the mouse, or do I have to use a menu? Can I copy from this window and paste into that one? Only under some conditions! Yeah, gimme some more of that Unix lovin'.
Aqua -- I really need my desktop picture to bleed through my windows. Give me a break, I only have a 400-MHz G3 and 256 MB of RAM. I don't have enough resources to run Aqua. Funny how OS 9 runs fine on it, though.
Broken HI guidelines -- Some things in Classic MacOS are just better thought out than their OS X counterparts. A photograph of a hard drive mechanism to represent a volume of storage? Sure, I know what it means, but my mom doesn't. Nor does she want to. Go back to school, propellerheads. Learn the difference between "we can" and "we should".
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I'll stop using Mac OS 9 when it no longer meets my needs. And not a day sooner.
Try a "built to order" dual PC in a Lian-Li case, AMD 1900+ CPUs, 1.5 gigs of RAM (DDR. ECC Registered), 80 GB hard drive, 20 GB hard drive, 24x CDRW, CD-Rom, floppy, ELSA/Gloria 64MB video card, 10/100 ethernet card $2500. Want Firewire? Boost the price up a little bit. Want to be able to write DVDs? drop $50 (CD-ROM) and add $400. You're getting close to the price of the Apple but that doesn't matter, you've still got significantly more horsepower.
"comparable" G4 (with significantly fewer options)Dual 1-GHz PowerPC G4 256K L2 cache & 2MB L3 cache/processor 512MB SDRAM memory 80GB Ultra ATA drive SuperDrive NVIDIA GeForce4 MX (For graphics geeks: slightly disabled version of the GeForce 4) 56K internal modem
Dude, I don't *WANT* a Dell. Or an Apple for that matter.
-Sara
hahaha 3 people took the bait and wasted their moderator points on that post. Morons. Mod good comments up, don't mod bad ones down.
Oh, btw.. for you misinformed folk who think the Mac gui somehow makes it the only *nix accessible to "ordinary non-tech people," may I suggest that you check out KDE. I've yet to meet someone who was incapable of immediately using it after being familiar with Mac or Windows interfaces.
I think you are right. Much better to have to download source, tweak it until it works, and compile it to install under linux.
Or install something for windows and have a ton of registry entries and files all over the place.
I apologize for Apple confusing you when you try to drap and drop and install program. It is very confusing.
Of course the problem is that when you say something completely foolish like that, people forget about anything else you have written.
Id rather buy on Pricewatch or ebay, ubid or my favorite Computer Geeks
Ive see complete systems for 500 bux, or Imacs for 600. Add some ram and a new video card, very very useable. Hell, I bought some e-computers for some people for 400 bux with rebate, (no msn rebate, straight cash). Picked up a monitor for 99 bux at a local Computer Stop and they where set.
It helps to know what and where the deals are, Dell, Gateway, etc are NOT good deals. They are average deals. Side note, Want sticker shock? Check out PC's for hardcore gamers, AlienWare or Falcon NorthWest
GeForce4 MX (For graphics geeks: slightly disabled version of the GeForce 4)
4 /g eforce4-08.html
Actually the GeForce4 MX is a totally different chipset than the Geforce4 TI. The Geforce 4 MX is based on the NV17 chipset where as the Geforce4 TI is based on the NV25.
What does this all mean? The MX version is much slower than the TI version. The TI version is almost 3 times faster.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q1/02030
In actuallity, the Geforce4 MX is slightly below a Geforce 2 Ultra in terms of speed.
Casual Games/Downloads
Whistles of Mac OS are same proprietary as M$win. Don't try to remind me about BSD in the core of Mac OS X. OpenVMS is in the heart of WinNT - does it make any differenece?
First off, everyone has DIFFERENT needs when it comes to a computer so few of us can say someone is WRONG to use a certain computer or configuration.
:-)
I have been a Mac user and lover for over a decade and as the owner of a graphics firm I have probably purchased more Macs in that time than most individuals. So it is not without a great familiarity and a large investment that I say the Mac has a number of hurdles to get past before it can get back to where is needs to be.
You can argue the sky is not blue if you like, but it does not get you anywhere. The Mac has slow and expensive hardware and is trying to make its way from an old OS to a new one. A NEW one....I repeat for clarity..ah-hem! I have every belief and hope and wish that OSX becomes everything promised of it, but to say it is there now is just not dealing with reality. As all of you know OS's take a long time to mature, and as it does we should treat it like the high potential project it is, and not the child to protect from verbal arrows many Mac addicts treat it like.
My concern from a professional point of view is that the hardware is truly not as reliable as it used to be. Our shop and many others have had dead mobo's and other items. This is in large part due to Apple's continuous technology shifting, so just when they get something working it is trashed for something new. At the same time the "other guys" have finally been showing a really good track record with their hardware after a few too many flaky years.
An OS not ready for prime time (debatable), and certainly not time tested (not debatable), hardware that needs a lot of work, and of course all of this for 150 to 200% price tag of the other guys. Hmmmm...hard sell, but I was still hanging in there until this past MacWorld SF...
I sat very expectantly waiting for Mr. Jobs to tell we professionals what he has in store for us. But it never came. I heard his vision for the consumer, but it has been almost two years since I have seen any effort on Apples part for the professional. I have friends with 1.5 yr old dual machines still waiting to see them become what was promised, others with 2 year old machines that are no longer supported for OSX (they were promised it would be at the purchase time), others that can't put a second HD in their "workstation G3s" (Rev A SCSI chips that Apple refused to remedy), others...you get the idea. This would all be bearable IF you did not have to pay such a premium for something that is right now as I write this--not a finished and reliable system. PC boxes have their problems, but the competition keeps the players in line and if something breaks it is often better supported today. And if you have to replace it yourself, gee, even a top of the line motherboard is only $175.
I will continue to love my G4 and to use it for some time to come. I am not however reaching down into the company pockets to buy 6 new Mac (we just bought 6 new PC's however) until I see a usable OS, reasonably competitive speed hardware, and the notion that further spending on the Mac platform is warranted for a professional outfit.
All of that said and done, when I want to buy a computer for surfing the web at my vacation house as a CONSUMER, there is no question I will enjoy the Mac experience. But how many US citizens are ready to plop down $1300+ on a family iMac computer today when so much can be had for less? We will see. A shame they couldn't keep at least one config under $1,000.
Regards
Here's a little secret for you. You don't actually save time with word.
In fact, the only advantage to using word is the learning curve for simple tasks. For LaTeX, even something simple requires learning. Not so for Word.
However, try to write a Ph.D. thesis in Word. ahahahahah... I never tried, but you can be sure that you'll waste *plenty* of time. A lot more than LaTeX.
And it looks like you have some problems with apostrophes...
get a life
> Naturally you'd want to tie it into a security model that was superior to that of Unix as well. In this day and age, with the prevalence of worms and trojans, it's inexcusable to permit such malware to wipe out a user's entire space. That the remainder of the system is fine is small comfort. WinNT has a more granular, but still not amazing security system. I'm more interested in a pervasive capabilities security model myself. One in which a user is allowed to delete files, but certain of his programs, e.g. malware that naturally lacks permission to do so, cannot.
Do you have *any* idea how hard it would be to sell such a pervasive security model to the casual end users you're talking about? Linux/UNIX's user/group model causes enough grief as is; any more and folks will simply turn it all off, just as so many folks would run as root if they could.
OS X's disabling default root access was not an oversight, it was a deliberate design choice. OS X folks use sudo or go through a simple, but deliberate, series of steps to re-enable root.
You can't have pervasive security mechanisms without those mechanisms being mostly invisible to the casual end-user, or said user will turn them off.
How is text-editting the format of your output saving time? Where I work we use standard document templates, where you select the appropriate style per section. We use a lot of tables, and embedded spreadsheets and charts. I can't imagine any scenario where (essentially) programming the format I want saves me time. Point - click-macro are much easier.
As much as I love OpenSource many of the office tools are open-sores. Star office is good enough for me to use day to day. I can open my co-workers MS documents and I can save in MS format. This is the way most companies work because it's fast and efficient.
When I'm done with a document, BTW, that gets published, I don't send it out. It goes to a technical writer that formats it in (sometimes in Quark). This technical writer would have to learn LaTeX instead of a point-and-click program.
I use gcc, Makefiles and Emacs, because it's easier to code on Unix for Unix. But I don't have any illusions that VC++ isn't a faster development environment, just as I don't believe LaTeX could possibly be faster than word. If you use a GUI front end to LaTeX, then you're in the same boat as Word, and less stable.
Leave the gun, take the cannoli -- Clemenza, The Godfather
Well, you are right, you cant compare OSX GUI to XWindow (and not XWindows as in many other posts!). Why? Because X has support for more than 500 video cards and OSX supports only some ati and nvidia cards.
Dont forget that when designing their OS, Apple knew on what hardware it will run or at least the architecture of the box. They were sure it would be a G4 I think... X supports a wide variety a hardware platforms and video cards so its normal that you have to tweak it a bit...
Anyway, if you are a lamer, and you cant type "xf86config", then get a distro like Mandrake, it will autodetect your hardware for you, and you wont have to do it yourself.
Btw Linux on the desktop is NOT dead. If you are a NETaddict programer like me, then Linux is the ideal choice I think.
And yes I ve tried OSX. But I only own a G3 with 1G of RAM and unfortunately the performance of OSX wasnt that good at all! My bp6 with celeron 333 and 512 RAM runs Debian just so smoooooothly.
Anyway, this comparison is so stupid...
Running programs have a small black triangle underneath them
I'm just waiting for the first joke going something like "my girlfriend has a small black triangle too"...
What? Is that sentence supposed to have meaning? You make this long, ill-considered, poorly reasoned post, you then sum it all up with a nonsensical sentence, and that's an insightful post??
Wow - what the hell are you doing on that computer? What kind of 'development' are you doing? I've had a system with W2k on it in use daily for a year with probably 20 reboots, mostly to swap to Linux for some reason. Less than 10 were due to hanging/crashing issues.
Honestly, what are you doing?
Im am sortof tired of people gushing about the stability of W2K. If you use a few client apps and dont install too much, or limit yourself to High level (VB) programming, yea sure itll be stable.
Do anything inteseting such as sending malformed UDP packets onto the ethernet, run IIS, play quciktime movies, any serious development, have the exchange server crash, install software with less than admin privledges, etc, and you may find it less stable than you imagine.
I use Windown 2000 for network programming, building/debugging embedded platforms, creating GUI appliciations, client apps, using differing hardware platforms an so on. I am unimpressed with its stability nor security. (sometimes itll go for a few weeks without freezing. sometimes it crashes several times a day. certain network traffic will always trash it. sometimes thing start acting flakey until a reboot. Contrast this to Unix, where reboots generally dont change anything, and they certainly arent recommended for fixing problems)
... unfortunately it reflects what most people are going to think about the whole darn thing.
I've subscribed to the linuxppc list (debian) and have read from time to time, a post saying more or less: "thanks and so long for the fish. I am moving to OS X."
That usually comes from people who have installed Linux to look cool and brag about it ("Hey dude! I run Linux"). So it's not a real waste to have these people moving to OS X. These guys are the ones bitching about Linux without even moving the little finger and contribute to anything: "Sound doesn't work on my iBook. whathehell?!?" I mean, one doesn't have to be an expert to even write an HTML describing some experience and post it. But these people, just nothing, nada. Only bitching.
So it's not surprising that they are moving to OS X. After all, you get support and SJ is in charge of the UI, so nothing can be wrong. Of course, some of them come back and ask on the same linux list, where is the openoffice for OS X !!! Because as soon as they made the move to OS X, well, they realize the meaning of the word "Free" (not the meaning that Stallman would like you to understand though.) I am talking about what you get for your money. On OS X, iTune and iPhoto, and maybe AppleWorks depending of your inclinaison to deal with shitty software.
For me, it works a little bit differently. Now I am on OS X, using IE (yuk!) and surfing the web. iBook goes to sleep and wake, then Airport is useless. I need to force quit IE. What do I do? Call M$? No, because they probably won't care. I use Mail.app and bitch at the moronic design of this email. Who do I complain to? To SJ? No, he designed the whole stupid app.
I go to Linux, problem with Evolution. Go to IRC and chat with people. Problem resolved in 2 minutes watch in hand. Conclusion: Apple support sucks! Apple community=zero. Where is eWorld when you need it? Linux on the support side just rock. But you got to RTFM and use your brains. Something certainely that many people won't like to do.
PPA, the girl next door.
-- I feel better now. Thanks for asking.
When are they gonna have the video drivers for the G3's???????
Xnu is actually the name of the kernel itself. Darwin is actually the name of Operating System from Apple (and the core of Mac OS X). I vaguely remember some talk from mailing lists that X-Windows may eventually become bundled with Darwin.
All editorial writers ever do is come down from the hill after the battle is over and shoot the wounded.
Why? Because a BSD based solution does better than Linux?
(*grumbles about linux bigots*)
Now, if you are requesting mercy because you are supporting a company Steve Jobs is running, then yes, you need all the mercy you can get, cuz you are gonna get steved.
Just like you have problems with recognising sarcasm and a short enough attention span to not read a five line post.
Linux is like a 12-year old's breasts, OSX is like a high-schooler's... What are Windows' breasts like?
Boy is this topic going to waste a lot of good electrons. I am a Linux user and Win2k user, just for the record.
... which is saying a lot. So this topic you just know is going to generate more heat than light. Nothing is going to be actually resolved ... just a lot of mud-slinging.
... because I have the source of everything Window Managers, Utilities, apps every-bloody-thing. But with OSX, zip ... nada ... nothing. Doesn't sound very interesting. Talking of Window Managers (which I can switch between) in Linux, with OSX do I just get Aqua and more Aqua or can I do the equivalent of switching between Window Managers ? And do I have the source so I can see how they do it ?
Everyone knows that Mac zealots are even worse than Linux zealots
I haven't used OSX. But being based on BSD (Darwin) I'm sure its a fine core. And it has a nice Window Man^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H GUI. Yeah it has Office and IE (good browser, but honestly I'm really starting to prefer Konq / Moz). But we only have the source for the core don't we ? Well lemme see. Why did I go from Windows to Linux ? It was because it was MORE FUN! Thats it. So why is Linux more fun
I'm sure I'd really like a Mac if I had one. But for how long. Windows 2000 became boring after a few days. How long for OSX ? Sure 95% (or more) of users would disagree with me. That's fine. However, I suspect the future of Linux is that the market will evolve into 2 kinds of desktop OS. One, for the masses (who just want to use it for apps). And one for real power users. Linux fits the latter and will continue happily in that direction (as does Win2K in a sense). Apple if it has any sense will target the first as does MSFT with XP.
Bitter and proud of it.
LOL. Funniest, statement... EVER!
lol...
ha
I love how stable Word is. Man, it's great.
Ummm no they don't use the same stuff as Dell or who ever. In fact I know the companies are the same but the quality of the engineering is forced higher due to Dell having very particular requirements on the people making them. It may say MSI, ASUS etc on the motherboard but it isn't the same board your going to find in the whitebox.
Silly Rabbit...Sig's are for kids.
amiga had more for less.
You, sir, are the most bitter Macintosh user I have ever met.
i never liked gimp, crap interface made by engineers not graphics artists
mozzila is shit slow, slower than NS2 on a 486
nautilus is slow/ram hungry too
When was the last time you honestly had to do this? Five years ago? Seriously... who doesn't use the package tools these days? Granted, you have to learn apt-get or dselect or RPM or RedCarpet, but software installs on linux are really easy these days when you overcome this (relatively simple) initial hurdle. It might not be "double click to install" but it's nearly as easy, and very clean to uninstall.
About the only time you would have to compile and tweak source is if you do a CVS pull of an app, which you wouldn't really be able to do at all given the Windows/Mac cultures. Sure, I love to be able to do a CVS pull of unreleased software, but it's by no means required for my day to day software management. Plus I can always package up the source myself and keep it friendly within the package manager. Say what you will about software installs in linux, but it's not really that hard any more.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
Suuuuuuuuuuuuuure it's not.
When I originally posted this, I was thinking that GNUStep would have aggregately fit the bill of everything that he wanted. However, I ended up just talking about WMaker, as it really has the key interface issues that he discussed. GNUStep would be the "whole environment" with the OpenStep compatibility, etc.
MacOS is based on FreeBSD, which makes FreeBSD
the largest shipping Unix(tm) version today,
outshipping all other versions, including all
other *linux Unix(tm) wannabes, combined.
Ok, I could mod you down as the flamebait you are for this comment, but I'd rather respond instead.
A devotion to Free Software and free speech is far from irrational for many of us. I've told my story before, and it applies specifically to the Macintosh, so you might be interested.
I was a major Mac zealot for many a year. I believed, and still do, that the Mac was the best OS out there for a lot of reasons, most of them the reasons you state. I didn't have to mess with registries or himem or config.sys or anything of that sort, I was just able to get my work done. Granted, I was a student and not doing anything very heavy duty, but I was able to get on the internet, get my hardware working, play lots of games, and write documents all very easily. Yes, the Mac was fantastic and I could do a lot with it and was far more productive on it that my friends with PC's.
But then the dark times came. You see, back around '95-'98 or so, Apple really looked bad. Copland was nowhere to be seen and we were stuck with our crashy old OS (mine was pretty stable, but I had to work very very hard at it) with shitty multitasking. I was still very productive, but that was because I really knew what I was doing.
But in many ways that was the least of our problems.
Software vendors were disappearing in droves. I saw Mac software drop and drop from the shelves, and only-Mac stores either start selling PC products or shut down entirely. Microsoft's last Office product was crap (they later made amends with Office 98) and the games were also disappearing right out from under us. You could almost sense a deep-seated depression in the community as our apps dwindled down to those peddled by Adobe and Macromedia.
So where do I come in to this one? Well, I didn't use Adobe or Macromedia products. My copy of ClarisWorks didn't work well on friends' Office docs, I couldn't buy new games, and I couldn't afford much beyond the basic items to begin programming software.
Yes, this last was a big deal for me, because I really wanted to help. I wanted to contribute, to help heal the community by providing missing pieces. I'd seen great technologies like OpenDoc and QuickDrawGX float away, and I wanted to provide something, some way of helping. But I couldn't. The books in the store were expensive, limited, and I couldn't afford many anyway. The Apple developer docs were hundreds upon hundreds of dollars (although I later got a full CD of them for $100, but this was still very pricey) and I could only afford the cheapest tools out there. I couldn't possibly understand why Apple wasn't helping me... didn't they want people to write for their system?
So I finally broke down and tried this Linux thing my friend had been telling me about for a few years. I switched to the PC because I was sick of my crashy MP3 player and lack of searching tools (Sherlock wasn't going to help me download music!) and a complete lack of games like Quake II and Starcraft, which have since come out on the Mac. But i mainly bought a PC to try out Linux. I didn't know about Free Software when I did it, and I didn't know that all the source code was there, all I knew was that anything was better than Windows, and I was deeply disgruntled with my Mac.
This probably sounds a little absurd to you too, but think of it this way. What if the company that you depend on for all your computing needs, a company that you have invested thousands of dollars in software and documentation and time in to learning suddenly abandoned you? What then? All your practicality of "best bang/buck ratio" has suddenly gone down the drain because the system becomes a lot less useful. I could only watch as my platform became more and more inferior, first with Office, then with gaming, then with Web browsing, then with MP3 searching and playing. What next, when would my platform become totally useless?
Now, Apple is doing very very well now, and I applaud everything they've done since Jobs came back on board. But that feeling still lingers on me. What happens if they abandon me? How far in to insignificance do I want to slide? A devotion to Linux and Free Software means that I can help myself, that the community can and will help itself. We may be a step or two behind Microsoft or Apple in some areas, but we're self-reliant, and we're not slaves to anyone else. This is the rationale behind Free Software. This is why a devotion to it is both useful and practical. And this is why I'll stick with Linux despite Apple's wonderful product and Microsoft's overwhelming support. I never want to be helpless again.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
When I'm done with a document, BTW, that gets published, I don't send it out. It goes to a technical writer that formats it in (sometimes in Quark). This technical writer would have to learn LaTeX instead of a point-and-click program.
Depends on your audience. If you're publishing in a scientific journal, which is my situation, chances are about 95% that LaTeX is the first choice for recieving submissions. Chances are also pretty good that they won't accept any formats other than TeX.
I have a positive modifier on Troll. When I mod someone Troll their karma should go UP!
I'm not entirely certain that this is true...
For a lot of tasks, I think it can be safely assumed that users would never notice the limits imposed by such a security model (which, agreed, could be turned off).
I mean, how often do people run executables from within Outlook that are intentionally supposed to have permission to delete all of your files? The main trick, as I see it, is to somehow protect and identify commands given from the console as opposed to those which programs attempt to run on their own. (e.g. allow a user to open files with this app, don't allow the app to make the request w/o user intervention)
I'm not saying it's easy to develop this. But dammit, Apple made a name for itself by doing _hard_ things that had big payoffs.
Anyway, there's some details on such a system called EROS on the net. (which is experimental, but then Mach wasn't too far out of the labs when NeXT picked it up) There may be others as well.
I do agree with your general contention though. I'm just all for making those mechanisms invisible.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Duh -- I know most of the non-Mac world considers Macs to be "closed" from a hardware expansion perspective, but it simply isn't so. Neither of my Macs has anything original remaining inside but the motherboards, and upgrading those is not impossible (merely nonsensical on a cost basis compared to replacing the machines). My PowerMac 7500 started life with a 100 MHz 601 PPC, and now sports a 466 MHz G3. A G4 (or even dual G4s) is certainly possible on this unit, so I fail to see what's so incredible about a G4 B&W unit.
cost of building it yourself:
I don't know about that, the last time I built an x86 box with all of the latest and greatest, I think that I saved about $50 over buying a system, not including my time for assembly and OS installations.
And yes, I scavenged for best part prices online, local parts(cases/hd) because of shipping costs & rebates at the time.
Bottom line, x86 hardware is pretty flakey v. most recent macs. Contrary to an earlier post, Apple seems to have slowed radical motherboard re-designs in favor of more evolutionary changes. e.g. the last several iterations of G4 are VERY similar, ibook/G3/imac powerbook motherboards. If anything Apple is moving to a standard modularized motherboard design to be used across the entire product spectrum rather than a mishmash of half tested components & motherboards. So long driver and dependency hell.
As anecdotal evidence, I find a 733M G4 too have similar day-to-day/Quake3 capability as a 1G Athlon system that I built and tweaked the hell out of. OSX tends to have fewer problems for me than win2k pro, being more on the linux/*BSD reliability level.
I know nothing about LaTex, and I'm not trolling, just curious. How is LaTeX easier than Word, even for big documents? You have to use a bunch of formatting tags to do everything, correct? Is it unlike HTML? What does tag based formatting do for you that a couple clicks in Word doesn't? How do you get better formatted documents from using tags? I really would like to know.
Are you aware that you can run all that software on MacOS X? Yes, even Gnome, which makes sense if you run XDarwin in rooted mode. And you can run XDarwin full-screen so you will feel like working in a Linux or BSD box. As with any Un*x box, you can also have several simultaneous X-Window sessions using Xvnc for MacOS X (which is different from OSXvnc, which instead allows you to use the native Quartz display remotely).
So, you can set up a perfect Linux/BSD-like environment, use all the tools you like, and still have access to the Apple "whistles" without without rebooting your Mac.
Word is a "stable" yes I agree
It¦is¦most¦unfortunate,¦but¦it¦seems¦that¦in¦your¦ rejection¦you¦have¦supported¦the¦original¦argument .¦As¦you¦said,¦with¦Mac¦OS¦X¦"You¦get¦all¦or¦nothi ng."¦But¦is¦this¦not¦a¦viable¦argument¦for¦desktop ¦Linux?
e ¦c onsidered.¦Though¦I¦support¦Linux,¦I¦believe¦many¦ Linux¦desktop¦supporters¦are¦arguing¦for¦the¦wrong ¦type¦of¦desktop.¦Linux¦was¦never,¦and¦will¦most¦p robably¦never¦be,¦an¦operating¦system¦for¦normal¦u sers.¦Most¦people¦would¦never¦want¦to¦use¦any¦type ¦of¦GNU/Linux¦as¦a¦desktop,¦for¦the¦reasons¦that¦y ou¦have¦described¦quite¦aptly.
e ¦o perating¦systems,¦differ¦from¦most¦other¦desktop¦o perating¦systems¦in¦one¦major¦respect:¦Linux¦has¦n othing¦set.¦A¦user¦does¦not¦have¦anything¦given¦to ¦him/her,¦instead,¦the¦user¦has¦an¦incredible¦amou nt¦of¦choices.¦Take¦graphical¦desktops¦for¦example .¦Windows,¦Mac¦OS,¦and¦Mac¦OS¦X¦all¦have¦relativel y¦set¦desktops.¦On¦the¦other¦hand,¦GNU/Linux¦can¦h ave¦100s¦of¦distinct¦graphical¦desktops,¦especiall y¦since¦the¦Window¦Manager,¦Desktop,¦and¦Graphics¦ Interface¦are¦all¦for¦the¦most¦part¦independent.
t s. ¦The¦average¦user¦wants¦something¦given¦to¦him/her ,¦while¦GNU/Linux,¦OpenBSD,¦GNU/Hurd,¦et¦cetera¦us ers¦usually,¦at¦least¦in¦my¦opinion,¦want¦choices. ¦I¦prefer¦my¦desktop¦to¦be¦mostly¦controllable¦via ¦the¦keyboard,¦and¦with¦close¦buttons¦for¦windows¦ on¦the¦left,¦and¦everything¦else,¦which¦MUST¦inclu de¦Minimize¦AND¦Shade,¦on¦the¦right¦side,¦to¦preve nt¦catastrophic¦accidental¦mouse¦clicks.¦But¦is¦th is¦what¦a¦normal¦user¦wants¦to¦think¦about?
¦ is ¦not¦comparable¦to¦Mac¦OS¦X¦or¦Windows,¦or¦for¦tha t¦matter¦any¦other¦type¦of¦normal¦user¦operating¦s ystem.¦The¦actual¦extent¦of¦these¦choices¦of¦cours e¦goes¦far¦beyond¦just¦a¦GUI¦interface¦of¦course,¦ but¦it¦is¦easily¦apparent¦that¦this¦is¦the¦¦case.¦ An¦Open¦Source¦OS,¦therefore,¦is¦usually¦suitable¦ for¦a¦user¦who¦wants¦the¦maximum¦efficiency,¦and¦a ¦system¦that¦may¦be¦brought¦to¦a¦state¦which¦the¦u ser¦prefers.¦
First,¦the¦definition¦of¦"desktop¦Linux"¦must¦b
The¦problem¦is,¦GNU/Linux,¦and¦other¦Open¦Sourc
This¦is¦certainly¦not¦what¦the¦average¦user¦wan
I¦propose¦this¦as¦the¦true¦reason¦why¦GNU/Linux
C
Depends on your audience. If you're publishing in a scientific journal, which is my situation, chances are about 95% that LaTeX is the first choice for recieving submissions. Chances are also pretty good that they won't accept any formats other than TeX.
No insult towards LaTeX, but at least in chemistry journals (where I submit to), there is absolutely no way that they would accept TeX only
Warning: Some ideologies on the Net are smaller than they appear.
We should REALLY try to figure out how to put the "drag and middle-click" magic in the docs so that every newbie can find it. Maybe we should make a tip window containing all these things show when the user start Gnome or Kde or whatever window manager (of course the last tip should be "how to turn tips off").
A linux lover for years that don't know how to cut 'n' paste between Emacs and Mozilla! Guess how un-newbie-friendly the system is. In fact, I learned such a trick just by accident, after a whole year of experience.
So stop laughing at how Windows put Windows-key tricks and the Shift-restart trick in obscure places. Often linux UI people do worse.
But considering the following quote (from the summary):
"Read about the conversion in Penguin2Apple. And pray for mercy on his soul."
How the heck can this be considered neutral in any way? Moving from Linux to BSD, and he has to worry about his soul!!!??? Is it just me or are we (/.) assigning a _little too much_ importace on OSS when it's compared to a human soul?!
Even MS's FUD doesn't delve into the level of corrupting your SOUL! Christ, I was made to say something positive about MS because OS freaks finally went way too far.
'Tis a sad day.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
I have no need whatsoever for Photoshop. GIMP is more than adequate for any graphics stuff I do.
I use Debian not because it allows me to do things that Red Hat doesn't, but because it *doesn't* try to do things that Red Hat does.
In my experience all of these 'easy-to-use' layers tend to have the effect of making it more difficult to see what is actually happening, as you're never sure what certain installation tasks or daemons are doing.
(Of course, Windows takes this attitude to the extreme -- if the box starts screwing up, are you going to look through the registry and see if you can fix it, or are you going to re-install?)
deus does not exist but if he does
http://radsoft.net/resources/linux/rhd
Totally irrelevant - but worse, totally uninteresting. Someone is promoting themselves here. Excuse my French - but what a pathetic asshole.
I guess I am on a little rant here. but it seams to mean that linux is more about the greater socal, political and technological[sic] issues.
I don't use linux because its better then windows or mac. but because of the socal implications that linux presents.
I keep seeing articals telling linux people to move over to OS-X becuase it is what linux is realy about. That is false. Moveing to OS-X would be leaving behind everything linux has done and everything it will do.
To to become RMS(hope thats right) Linux is a mindset, religon, way of life, (Put yous in here) not simplay and OS. If it was just an OS I don't think their would be so many developers and I don't think its popularaty would be so grand.
Why would I move from my Open/Free OS to OS-X and apple.(CPU's not be acounted for, I would like a G4 if I could buy a motherboard for one from ABIT, I wish I could.) Which is everyhting microsoft wants to be(just on a larger scale) and everything linux is not.
Apple contorlls their hardware and software. Have been compleat basterd about source code and specs for the last 15 years. And to top it all off raped BSD(BSD people like being raped, Thats the reason for BSD) To be redundent thay are the most propriatary company on the market today. The exact oposet of Linux.
Apple is not the dominat computer ompany becaue thay shot their self in the foot when thay did away with the clones (Just imagen where apple would be if thay had the power of Microsft and intel)
These are botched comparisons. It's obvious simply by the lack of there being any kind of sound card listed for the Dell, when there's obviously going to be one. Embedded or not, the sound processor is still there. And Dell computers are never the least expensive way to go. The most expensive parts of those computers are the DVD/CDRW combo drive and the LCD, but this still doesn't even the playing field enough. Look at the amount of usability that you could get out of a Mac, then look at the same amount of usability you could get out of a Windows-equipped PC. I don't support Microsoft in the least, but unfortunately, nearly 90% of software is written solely for Windows PCs. If you can get away with a computer that only has 10% of what's available, good for you, and feel free to go for it. For everyone else, it just doesn't cut it. Besides, the SB Audigy and Extigy come with an IEEE1394 port, essentially killing two birds with one stone. (I won't be surprised to start seeing mobos with integrated IEEE1394 soon -- it IS a damn good technology.)
There is one thing, and only one thing, that Apple computers are better at doing, and that is graphics. Why Apple doesn't just start selling computers that don't run things backwards is beyond my comprehension. Honestly, they can keep OSX and all the rest -- in fact, if they did that, even *I* might be enthused to go out and buy a Mac -- or at least OSX. Maybe.
[insert witty comment here]
LaTeX produces better formatted documents because (1) the underlying typesetting engine (TeX) is better, and (2) LaTeX markup is structural, rather than physical, so it allows the computer a lot of freedom in making layout decisions. TeX formats a paragraph at a time, rather than a line at a time, and does a terrific job balancing paragraphs without using excessive hyphenation (compare, e.g., troff, which hyphenates too much, or most word processors, which don't hyphenate at all). LaTeX makes sure that the various elements of your document are placed in such a way as to look good. For example, if you use figures (graphs, tables, pictures), LaTeX will choose places for them that allow sections of the text to end in logical places (especially at the end of the page, so new sections start on a new page). You don't have to mess with the physical formatting of the document at all.
As to ease of use, that is subjective. Since LaTeX markup is generally structural (or logical) versus physical, you really never have to worry about what the document will look like while you are editing it (unlike with a word processor, where secretaries frequently insert extra newlines to push material to the next page, for example). However, if you come from an exclusively pointy-clicky world, there would be an adjustment period. Personally, I cannot stand using word processors after having used LaTeX for a couple of years.
Os X is way cool, but its really just a cool gui on top of a unpopular unix... with only 5% marketshare and a handful of apps. Lets face it, linux rules when it comes to unix, and the future - so why isnt there a os-x on linux project out there? Nautilus was ok, but I really wish my redhat 7.2 had a window-manager that looked like a aqua. We know apple doesnt mess around when it comes to lawsuits, but I thought the apple vs microsoft lawsuits proved that you cant copyright a interface? If Winblows can do it to Mac... Maybe the guys over at 2600 can help us out here... This is the final war in the linux-desktop battle, lets win in quickly and move on to better things!
... Break free from the 'cycle'. A little more investigation into Mac OS X would have revealed this.
-B...
In Terminal.app, you can also use Command- and Command- to cycle between windows. In Explorer, it's Command-~ and Command-Shift-~ for window cycling. I agree that it's a shame the application developers did not follow a standard. C'est la vie.
-B...
From my point of view, there are two major advantages to using LaTeX:
Whether or not LaTeX's "structure" makes large documents easier to work with is kind of subjective. I think the two above points are really the "killer" features of LaTeX; if you have no need of them, you're probably okay just sticking with Word.
OS X ships with awk & perl. So you'll be right at home.
You can also get LaTeX and mutt. You can even compile them yourself, if that's how you like to spend your time.
-B...
Well, I got an iBook with OS X on it. A few seconds after starting to use it, I hated it beyond belief. It's slow, crashes WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY too much (ever tried Classic?), has a piss-poor window manager, and a thoroughly half-assed, thoroughly bastardized UNIX backend. In all, it reminds me of Microsoft Windows NT. (And yes, I upgraded its memory to 320 MB. It was still slow beyond words.)
So I trashed it and installed Linux on it, and installed MacOS 9 in Mac-on-Linux for the occasion when I needed it.
My complaints (or, rather, those that I can think of at the moment) about OS X are:
- It uses the circular alt-tab thing like someone else mentioned.
- It doesn't have a nice, clean, compact menu for switching windows, like the one in the top-right corner in MacOS 9 or the GNOME panel. The dock is thoroughly unsatisfactory for this need, because it's nothing but clutter, clutter, clutter. Optimally, the window switcher would be like the one in GNOME, which switches between windows, and not applications. (Yes, this is intended to imply that the switcher in MacOS 9 is somewhat deficient. GNOME forever.)
- All of the applications are slow. Even the terminal is slow!!! The GNOME terminal is much better.
- The standard-issue Web browser is Internet Explorer. I don't think I need to spell out why this is a problem.
- Classic is slow, slow, slow, and crashes a lot. Kids, don't use this at home.
- If something bad were to happen, and the UI froze up (which it did quite often, because everything is so slow), it's a little hard to start killing processes, because there is no Ctrl-Alt-F1 or similar to get to a console. (Linux rules.)
- Tcsh. 'Nuff said. (Yes, I'm bashing *BSD, which, in my opinion, is no better. Probably half of OS X's problems stem from it being derived from *BSD.)
- You can't open the terminal and run a GUI binary by typing in something like
/Applications/SomethingOrAnother.app. You can do this without a hitch on both X and Windows.
- When I tried to switch back to MacOS 9 on bootup, it did something strange to my disk and I had to reinstall everything from the CDs that came with the machine.
- Installing a patch from Apple's Web site left me with a broken OpenSSH that can't talk SSH2. Trying to connect to an SSH2 server with it will cause it to crash.
- Their Java virtual machine is broken -- for some reason, jEdit does not exit cleanly if Cmd-Q is used (and yes, the jEdit developers looked into this problem, and were unable to come up with a solution other than not using Cmd-Q).
- Software Update goes through windowsupdate.microsoft.com. And it didn't work.
- No apt-get. See above.
- Apple has the gall to charge me money for an upgrade to OS X 10.1 to fix all of these and other problems that shouldn't have been there to begin with. Reminds me way too much of Windows, where M$ charges for bugfixes. I won't pay M$ for bugfixes, and I sure as hell won't pay Apple for bugfixes.
- Did I mention it's slow and crashes a lot?
In short, trying to use OS X was like trying to use Windows NT for me. I'll keep Linux, thanks.By the way, the first time I took the plunge into the Mac was back in the days of System 7.1. I actually liked it. I like MacOS 9, too, though I wouldn't run it on bare metal because of the lack of memory protection (which isn't a problem -- I run it in MOL instead).
The only way the typical /.er can pick up a chick is with a forklift. -- AC
He had 2.5 years working with Linux. While that's not being an expert, it's basically considered having a clue.
In other words, he's your typical Linux user.
That's because extended sustenance on "protien bars" can cause brain damage.
I agree. The key to the troll is that someone somewhere, might actually believe it and start a sympathetic thread. Steven King has been so overused in this troll that when the guy DOES die for real I won't believe it. I second the motion that this troll put some damn effort into his work. I mean dammit! I think that trolls start some sort of union or quality control group or something. Give us some sort of variety here people. You know, like Elizabeth Taylor, Mister T, Pat Robertson, Elvis Costello... mix it up a little. It's pretty sad when trolls don't offend or amuse, they just bore. That's sad. There should be some sort of course you have to take, like Hunter Safety for Slashdot.
Professor Scooby, Dean of the Slashdot Troll Academy
You either have a G4, or a Blue-and-White, unless you managed to upgrade your Blue-and-White G3 to a G4 (how? I don't even see how to remove the CPU - I run Linux on one at work).
Just me picking nits...
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
"I used to use operating system X and now I'm an OS X freak" articles and it gets posted on some sort of nerd news site (Slashdot, OSNews, etc.). It generally seems to be the same thing...
In my book, that says a lot about Mac OS X.
Now, I'm a Linux user and I used to be a DOS user (liked PC-DOS best), an Amiga Workbench/Amiga DOS user, but Linux is the best I've found yet. If I write some long opinion-filled "article" and submit it to Slashdot will it get posted?
I think what's significant is:
1. Few expected Apple could actually make Unix user friendly
2. Few expected Apple could make an OS that Linux users would like
3. Mac OS X is very new, people are still learning about it
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
The /etc/hosts file is a different matter, but I've never seemed to have had too much of a problem with that one regarding nidump and niload. The only issue comes about when I have to delete entries. In that case I do need to use niutil.
I wholeheartedly agree that MacOS X will probably not replace most other Unixes in a server capacity or any of a dozen others I haven't thought of. That said, I think it's the best Unix workstation OS going right now, which probably isn't saying very much, but it beats many of the alternatives. At least Objective-C is mildly pleasant.
I am confused how anyone that has used os 8 or 9 on a mac could pony up and try again with os10-My Imac DV is little more then a cute box that can browser the web-Apples big claim to fame is that they have a stable operating system-christ! I have had os 9 crash soo many times that now a days i simple boot up while holding the shift key-win2000 never crashes on me and I run tons of crap on it-I think most of the people here havent used a pc since win95. I have a friend that bought a new g4 (in Palo Alto so it is very fashonable to buy apple)-this piece of crap has killed 2 hard drives in 5 weeks -now she cant even get a replacement for another 3 weeks-the people at the apple store (palo alto again) think it is a privilage to over pay to own an apple computer-RIP-losers.
Anyone notice he's using IE? 2.5 years my @$$
Gosh, thanks! I'll remember that next time I'm writing a Ph.D thesis!
I have run Linux since the early days of kernel 1.0.9 and the SLS distribution. I switched over from windows 3.1, and have never run Windows 9x. Now I have a dual processor Linux SMP application server, a firewall connected to my cable modem, a name server, and an Irix SGI O2, which I tend to use as my primary disktop. All systems, except for the O2 are running Linux. I find that I can get a lot more real work done using the multiple desktops on Linux and IRIX, but for the "enjoyment" of computing, the iMac is stunning.
My iMac is my living room computer. It is connected to my network via an 80211b airport. The only cable that extends from the computer is the power cord. The screen is sharp, and the fonts are clear,.
see... http://homepage.mac.com/wjulien/
This computer is just a pleasure to use for web browsing, music, DVDs, photos. It is the sysem I use to relax, and just have fun.
---- perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(
Other posters have basically covered the main points, but one thing I wanted to touch on...
On a 600MHz G3 iMac running OSX 10.1.2, applications are annoyingly sluggish
I think you'll find this is a much difference experience when using a G4-based Mac at equal or possibly even lower clock rate. Quartz uses AltiVec.
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
I learned my craft on many computer systems over the years, and am amazed by anoyone who would think their "OS of choice" is the only tool for everything.
I've used most commercial flavors of UNIX on everthing from a 286 to a Cray Super, and they all have their advantages. Several of the other non-UNIX Operating Systems I've used in my career have impressed me too.
The thing I've learned over there years is that no OS is "king", and that each has it strong points.
I have only one problem with OS X ... it only runs on Apple hardware. I'll wait until Jobs figures out Apple should really be a software company (like he did with NeXT), and turn out OS X for other hardware platforms.
There is no single OS that can meet all of my needs, so I'll stick with running the various flavors of commercial and free UNIX I do now, plus Win2k for games and software unavailable for ANY of my UNIX boxes.
BTW, I don't know why that guy was complaining about Win2k crashing all the time (unless he just likes to run junk hardware, or he is an OS config idiot), since mine has been surprisingly reliable for something coming out of Redmond.
For those looking for a bargain in computing power/OS I would suggest you look at an UltrasparcIII for under 1k. I just ordered one to take the 4th spot on my home KVM switch.
It's getting the space OS X could have if it ran on something besides Apple hardware.
"If the automobile had followed the same development cycle as the computer, a Rolls-Royce would today cost $100, get one million miles to the gallon, and explode once a year, killing everyone inside." Robert X Cringely
No, that would be RMS, not Linus.
Do not forget that OSX is available only for Apple's hardware.
It is true that OSX is a great product. I was amazed at OSX while using some Mac at my laboratory; Great interface, beatiful screen including the font aliasing, easy-to-setup i18n, and finally, it's Unix.
However, I need to buy an Apple's hardware to run OSX. Nowadays, Macs are not so expensive compared to PC. If I build one myself, I am sure that I can save at least $200. But I'd rather buy Apple than a Dell, Compaq, or HP.
It's okay if I just switch it. But think about where the Linux operating system comes to be important. It's PC market. Here in x86 world, Microsoft is the monopolist that exploits its market power. Linux is the closest alternative that can compete with Microsoft. Moreover, the way open source works, a totally new invention of the collaboration of people working voluntarily to build a great software product, is very important. Linux showed a new potential and it is certain that open source works. However, in order for this innovative open source to be truly successful, it has to go though the competition, refining itself again and again.
In my opinion, Apple's decision not to port OSX to intel hardware is good for Linux. Linux still needs to develop itself as a great desktop operating system. If OSX, or at least its Aqua interface, were ported to Linux, Linux would have to adopt it.
There is still a lot of potential for KDE and Gnome. It's okay to pay attention to OSX and it's okay to switch to Mac. However, we still need to focus on Linux desktops because they are the only potential rescues that can replace Windows.
Not trying to troll here, just giving my honest opinions/thoughts...
I use Mac OS X, and have had lots of experience with the "old" Mac OS and a bit with Linux. I like having the Terminal and *nix tools available but don't know a whole lot about them, so I think it's nice to have the Mac GUI on top of it when I don't feel like dealing with those things. The impression that I get from your post is that this means I am not a 'real' computer user.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like you're saying there are essentially two sides to the computer world: AOL/MS Office users and Linux geeks. Anyone who doesn't live in the Linux command line, compile thier own kernel, or know every detail about the inner working of a *nix OS, gets thrown in the pile with the clueless AOL users.
Also, you say that there's no point in having a non X11 GUI on *nix. I don't get it... why do you say this? To me that sounds like the equivalent of saying there's no point in running anything other than Windows if you're going to have x86 hardware.
Can't we all just use what we like without being so critical of other people's preferences, knowledge, or whatever else?
The OSX shell isn't really that different to a Linux shell. It was just that the default shell is csh which defaults to trying to be helpful and clever. Personally I can't stand this - I guess I've just come to rely on the dumb consistency of bash.
Rats, I just used up all my moderator points elsewhere.
I had been using linux in many of it's forms.
My first install was Redhat 4.2 (great system but something was missing)
Then I went to Mandrake when it first came out. I loved that. I thought there can not be a better linux. I was wrong.
I had heard about Debian and thought I gotta try this. The install kept sputtering on me and I thought oh well back to Mandrake. But no I found Corel and when that went out I found Progeny and when the went away I went back to debian. It install ok but I still felt there was something better. Then for my birthday last year my dad got me a g4 tower with os X on it. Not a lot of Ram 256 but enough to run at blazing speed. Then I got fink so I have and apt-get-alike for os X. Now I wonder what I need Linux for?
I got stuff done faster on mac than Linux and I get to play games and code in python and perl.
The bad point seems to be no gcc and no stable midnight commander.
Elephant: a mouse built to government specs
Don't have a family no? Not a whole family of users who want their own setup and programs installed? Just as an example. There is also labs etc...
What will happen to Mac OS? Mac OS has changed alot, will it lose support of its lovers? I think OS X is great for a beginning, but people should tread lightly.
Probably you'd want to download Keyboard Maestro -- this gives you tab'ing using a stack rather than a cyclic list.
You can't really expect every little bit of the default installation to work exactly as you'd prefer, sometimes you have to tweak the settings yourself or download utilities that add the missing functionality -- I'd assume the same is the case for unix...
REMEMBER: THE OS IS A MEANS TO AN END, NOT THE END ITSELF. This OS X sounds good, but so did Linux before I tried it, and I don't want to try that again: It didn't recognise pnp modem. Installed Linux on 2nd HDD on better PC. Tried popular driver for Lucent Winmodem. It complained about the kernel being compiled for Symmetric Multiprocessing and didn't work. Installed Intel HaM quasi-soft modem. Was delighted to find drivers for it on web. Unfortunately they were only compiled for newer kernels. Tried to install it anyway. It too complained about SMP. The bottom line is I do not want to spend weeks in front of the screen configuring an OS which is supposed to be transparent and let me get on with other things. To me, LINUX is GARBAGE. They say Mandrake 8.1 installation is easy, but you can bet there'll be something wrong with that too. So that's the crux with linux: There'll always be something else wrong. Think about it: Linux has not yet been able to offer a straightforward installation, something which Windows has been doing since around 1995! And yes, I know Win was lacking sorely in several areas, but MS are currently moving towards a solution very quickly; whereas Linux is trying to ignore its problem.
Apple users, it would seem, are by and large kooks.
If only us Apple users could be as calm, rational, and utterly normal as ESR or RMS. That would certainly be something to shoot for.
--saint
This is exactly the point, it's not like this with unix.
Another example: I use shell and vi regularly, and I want my control key where God intended it to be. That is, I want my control key where Apple thinks the useless capslock key should be.
How do you solve this? You download some other utility (some cheap "shareware" thing). How does this utility work? It's a kernel module. Yes, you cannot remap your keyboard in any non-trivial way without running a kernel module (specifically, a mach server which hacks Apple's keyboard driver, which is the basically the same thing).
Why is this a problem? Kernel modules are hard to write. Even in a microkernel architecture like mach, if you make any tiny mistake, your whole system is hosed. This makes for difficult development. Writing kernel modules and regular user programs is very different, trust me.
I hear that Apple may now have a hack that allows you to remap control and capslock. Irrelevant. Now I want to swap command and alt so that I can use emacs properly. And then I want to swap tilde and escape so I can use vi properly. I'm not happy until OS X has a method by which I can completely describe all keyboard mappings, just like I can do with xmodmap.
Perhaps all the little user-interface goof-ups can be fixed with third party utilities as well. Maybe I can even replace Apple's window manager altogether. Guess what, Apple makes this very difficult. This is of course possible, but the window manager has to interface with undocumented APIs in Core Graphics services. In the developer documentation, Apple makes it clear that the window manager does a lot of undocumented things.
Now I'm not a Free Software evangelizer - this problem would not exist if I had the source to Core Graphics services, but there are other ways to fix these things. I've done a lot of work with Solaris. Solaris has some undocumented APIs, but most of the APIs are well documented. Writing a window manager involves reading docs for Xlib and some other things (I've written a window manager, it's not too hard). The only undocumented API I've seen in Solaris is libproc.a. Did this impede me when I needed to write a custom debugger? No, I just bypassed libproc.a and used the /proc interface directly (/proc is well-documented, just do man proc). Sun does the right thing, which is it makes absolutely no assumptions about how you're going to use your system. Apple, on the other hand, assumes that nobody would ever rip out and replace a large portion of their OS (the window manager). Apple makes a lot of other assumptions as well, and these assumptions are not valid ones for a unix junkie like me; the things you can assume about a "regular" user and the things you can assume about me are very different, so OS X is not for me.
My whole point is that OS X is not for everyone. Some people have noted that it's not really meant to replace traditional unix servers, but almost every comment I've seen says that it can replace unix workstations. Not for me. I'm very happy with my FreeBSD laptop and my Ultra workstation, and trying to replace these with OS X is very frustrating.
As anecdotal evidence, I find that my work machine (G4 800 with ATI 128 + OSX) sucks at wolfenstein. I mean _seriously_ sucks. 640x480x256x5fps sucks.
I don't care whether or not this is a problem with the configuration - it (allegedly) just works. In contrast, my home machine (AMD 1.1GHz with GeForce 3 + win2k) runs at 1024x768x32x100+fps.
What can we Conclude from this? That anecdotal evidence isn't worth the pie in the sky it's printed on.
The author is (unfortunally) either confused or lying
.
(even if it is the make a better picture of linux).
"purchased the Linux version of Quake, and Quake II, and other games."
There have never being AFAIK, a retail version of quake I and
quake II for Linux.
just the binaries were downloadable from ftp.idsoftware.com
At a local Coder-Party I had the opportunity to show my System around. One of the mainaspects of that party was "no windows", so a lot of Macfreaks, Amigafreaks and Unixfreaks showed up. My System was a SuSE7.3, Thunderbird-800, 512MB-PC133, Geforce1-DDR, I didnt put too much effort into personalizing it, because I got SuSE7.3 only some days earlier.
:-)
And guess what...
The Macfreaks said "its basically the same but comes with more software bundled" and got red heads when I told em what I paid for this old junkyard.
the Amigafreaks where puzzled by the fact that they found nothing my system couldnt do better than an Amiga,
the BSD-Freaks still thought "X is a way to display several Shells at once, twm is enough for anyone" but had to recognise that SuSE7.3 looks damned sexy, but maybe it was just my Fay Valentine wallpaper
and several of the Debian- and RedHat-Crowd quickly changed to KDE.
"Life is short and in most cases it ends with death." Sir Sinclair
Since you seem to want a Sun style keyboard, why don't you just order a Sun USB keyboard (which they have had for at least a year for the Blade 100 workstations).
That has to be the most long, boring, self-indulgent OS review I've ever only read part of. Jesus christ! I have shit to do.. Someone needs to put a brevity filter on this guy!
.
You need to look at what Apple is giving you today. Today, you have a machine & OS that can run proprietary OS X software, Windows software, it can run much of the free software that can be compiled for FreeBSD, and it can even run Aqua utilites that control command-line apps to make them easy and quick to use. (I say quick, because I believe I can configure an ipfw with Brickhouse faster than you can on the command line. ;) )
I like open source for the same reason you do: nobody can ever take it away from you. Guess what? Nobody can ever take it away from you on OS X either. And if Apple tanked? Dump your Mac on eBay, move your code to FreeBSD or Linux on Intel, and get back to work. Or even load a Linux distro on your Mac (there are several). You can write your software to be fairly portable, so there's no worry there. Therefore, your investment in a new Mac is automatically protected. For the first time in a long time, there is no real reason NOT to try a Mac, especially if most of your day is spent working on UNIX class systems.
I think the next few years will be a very exciting time, as people learn exactly what Apple has done. It will start with the technically proficient, and steadily move to the masses, since they generally follow the advice of the local tech guru anyway. Anything that breaks up the Windows stranglehold is a good thing for the computer industry, whether you like Apple or not. Competition is good.
If nothing else, you have to admit Apple makes some kick-ass portables.
ATI 128? Ewwwwwwwww.
You're comparing that to a GeForce3? How?
It's like comparing the speed of someone walking to the speed of a Ferrari on the Autobahn.
Now that we cleared that up, your point is?
by updating all that, wouldn't it break POSIX compliance, and a great deal of *Nix apps that already work on it?
It sounds nice on paper, but all of a sudden...
/., saying how OS X treats the user like a baby, it gets in the way of work, it's worse than a Windows wizard, etc.
"Waah, Apple won't let me run my Applescripts that save me time reorganizing my home folders, wiping out old logfiles. Stupid OS, treating everyone like a newbie..."
It'll just break too much functionality. There have been examples, and they all flopped. Here's a hypothetical one: Every time you type in "rm" in the terminal, a dialog box pops up "Are you sure? This will permanently erase the file." I guarantee that you'll see hundreds of flames on