Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Bites Apple, Apple Bites Back

hype7 writes "The NYT (free reg reqd etc) is running an interesting article on where MS seems to be getting all the ideas for its next big OS release, Longhorn. It's only a quickie, but they look at MS's big news from WinHEC, and their possible sources for inspiration. They also pull out that fantastic Bill Gates quote: 'The one thing Apple's providing now is leadership in colors'; and that Apple execs are now having a laugh of their own over how Longhorn, 'Microsoft's 2005 version of its Windows operating system, apes features that have been in Apple's OS X operating system since 2001.'"

825 comments

  1. Flattery and Imitation by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Imitation is the scincerest form of flattery. Where will flattery take you today?

    I recall, years back, an avi making the rounds with Bill Gates speaking (at a MacWorld?) and sheepishly admitting that the Mac was the best or had the best desktop or something along those lines. As if Win95 didn't cement clearly the view that Microsoft indeed was impressed with, at least the look and feel, we get more of this, "Gee, Apple is visionary, so we'll just copy what they do", from the big innovator. Well, no surprise, but I do wonder whether there's an agreement where Microsoft pays Apple for some of this, or is it just payment 'in-kind' (meaning Microsoft products which run on Macs)?

    "As a matter of fact we do have a Research and Development department, we call it, 'Apple Computer, Inc.'"

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 5, Funny

      but I do wonder whether there's an agreement where Microsoft pays Apple for some of this

      Apple gets to ship IE with their computers ;-)

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    2. Re:Flattery and Imitation by proj_2501 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple in 1997. It was definitely not 25% of Apple shares and I don't think they even had enough to vote on anything.

    3. Re:Flattery and Imitation by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Win95 shell imitates NeXTStep in its appearance far more than it does MacOS, and its behavior is Motif-like. (Or vice-versa depending on who you ask.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Hard_Code · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And this is a blessing or a curse? Once Safari is up to speed, will Apple really need IE?

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    5. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Mononoke · · Score: 5, Informative
      Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple in 1997. It was definitely not 25% of Apple shares and I don't think they even had enough to vote on anything.
      They were non-voting shares, and MS has since disposed of them.

      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    6. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh boy! It was 250 million dollars--at the time Apple was worth 16 billion. Figure out your own percentages. This was in '97 and almost all of the stock was sold off (and in part responsible for) the decline back down into the twenties.

      Jesus, people--you are on the internet--so do some freakin research before blathering on like ignoramuses! Please.

    7. Re:Flattery and Imitation by LoadStar · · Score: 5, Informative
      Well this should be confirmed by someone with up-to-date news but in the late '90, microsoft bought 25% of the shares of apple. Dunno if they still have them but that could explain some of it.

      Ok, this has to be THE worst interpretation of facts I have ever seen in my life. It is SO far from the truth it's not even funny.

      August 6, 1997, Microsoft agreed to purchase $150 million in non-voting Apple preferred stock. This wasn't anywhere close to 25%. Note that it was NON-VOTING stock - so essentially it was just a goodwill investment in Apple. Microsoft was required to hold the stock for at least 3 years before selling. Another clause of this investment was that Microsoft was to continue to produce Macintosh products, including all new versions of the Microsoft Office product.

      Microsoft has since sold all of this stock - at a nice profit, I might add. Additionally, the agreement that required Microsoft to continue to develop Macintosh products has since expired as well.

      I could have just modded this down - but I thought that attempting to correct this ridiculous interpretation of events would be more beneficial.

    8. Re:Flattery and Imitation by blamanj · · Score: 1

      You're off by an order of magnitude. More like 2.5% and they were non-voting shares besides. Not only that, but when MS bought that stock, they also shorted Apple by the same amount to "cover" themselves, according to Wired magazine, so they didn't even make any money when Apple's stock rose along with the rest of the tech sector.

    9. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Lurkingrue · · Score: 4, Informative

      Myth.

      Or, at least heavily in need of editing.

      What really happened is this:
      Microsoft bought $150M in non-voting stock at a rather good price, and promised to continue Mac software development (in specific, the development of their Office suite and Internet Explorer WWW browser).

      Apple, in turn, agreed to bundle IE as the default browser on all OS installation disks, license rights to several of its software products, and support Microsoft's forays into Java virtual machine development.

      The agreement was to last five years, and has since expired. Microsoft made money off the deal, considering the value of Apple stock when it sold it off. Additionally, Apple didn't really need the $150M infusion, as it had billions in cash reserves. A additional reason that MS might have made this move, was that the DoJ investigation into anti-competitive practices might have been countered by actions like this -- Redmond was essentially supporting a competing OS.

      So, no, Microsoft never "bought 25% of the shares of apple" [sic], nor does it/did it really have any say in Apple policy.

    10. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 0, Troll
      Ok, this has to be THE worst interpretation of facts I have ever seen in my life.

      Then you must live under a rock.

      (Lighten up).

      --
      Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
    11. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Beebos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A factor that those who have debunked the idea of Microsoft buying 25% of Apple have forgotten, is that the $150 mil. investment Microsoft made in Apple was part of a deal to settle a lawsuit(s) between the two companies.

    12. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This wasn't exactly a goodwill investment. Do a search of "hand in the cookie jar" in relation to this stock purchase and you'll find where several insiders mention how Microsoft was caught using quite a bit of code directly from the older MacOS codebase in Windows. This isn't Apple advocacy btw (no interest in either platform), it's just one of those facts that no one admits to for obvious reasons.

      Jobs opted for some cash and public Microsoft backing (Office for the MacOS) to make the MacOS look viable for the near future, and Microsoft was given a way out of a lawsuit by Apple for the ripped off code. Apple needed Microsoft a bit more than vice versa, but M$ avoided some bad PR and likely lost $$$ with OS rewrites (hell, maybe even royalties back to Apple).

      Frankly, I don't care if M$ rips off OS X (legally that is). I think OS X is great, but if M$ engages in fair competition then who can really bitch? They'll do what Apple could've done years ago and bring it to hardware that has more options for the end user. Competition can be good..

    13. Re:Flattery and Imitation by ericdano · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Internet Explorer hasn't been updated in like............FOREVER.

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    14. Re:Flattery and Imitation by mbowles · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am glad they ship IE with their systems otherwise how could I have had the pleasure of dragging the IE icon to the trashcan.

    15. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It was $150 million out of a *8 billion* dollar company (at the time) so if you do the math, its way off from 25%

    16. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      The Win95 shell imitates NeXTStep in its appearance far more than it does MacOS

      Funny you should say that, since the OS X dev tools are basically updated versions of NextStep.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    17. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you know what.. i got all the original cd for the NeXTStep OS including the developer ones... i pickup those at my university.. they were left in some old desk.. so now im running that on a digital celebris gl 590 and run fime for web browsing

    18. Re:Flattery and Imitation by DASHSL0T · · Score: 1, Insightful

      -1, Humor Impaired.

      --
      Freedom Is Universal
      Linux-Universe
    19. Re:Flattery and Imitation by blakeh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      good point. Unfortunately most likely YES.
      Unless Safari can imitate IE in name and functionality. It's too bad that Web programmers will write code that only works on IE. (I understand why they do). I think most of these are dedicated Intranet type websites, but I've been to several companies where Netscape or Opera just will not work.

    20. Re:Flattery and Imitation by PetWolverine · · Score: 1

      It's better than that. At the same time that they made that purchase, they sold the same number of shares short, so that the "investment" was purely PR--they never had a stake in Apple.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
    21. Re:Flattery and Imitation by York+the+Mysterious · · Score: 1

      If you wanna see something completely not work then go check out iNotes or even R4 Webmail in Lotus Domino server. It's pretty sad.

      --

      Tim Smith - Ramblings from Nerd Land
    22. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying OS X is copied from Win95??

    23. Re:Flattery and Imitation by RevAaron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Funny you should say that, since the OS X dev tools are basically updated versions of NextStep.

      Not really.

      Mac OS X is derived from OpenStep, not NeXTSTEP. Most of OS X is derived from OpenStep, not just the development tools.

      NeXTSTEP != OpenStep. OpenStep was a rewrite of NeXT's OS done a while back. The idea was to standardize, clean up, and open up the Objective-C API, making it something that other vendors could port/run on other platforms, removing some OS-specific stuff out of the NeXTSTEP API. GNUstep and OpenStep for Solaris and OpenStep for Windows are the fruits of this.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    24. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Kwiik · · Score: 1

      This especially to the important stuff, like pornography.

      --
      Vehicle Stars used car search is my current project
    25. Re:Flattery and Imitation by kwerle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Funny you should say that, since the OS X dev tools are basically updated versions of NextStep.

      Not really.


      Oh, come on.

      Mac OS X is derived from OpenStep, not NeXTSTEP. Most of OS X is derived from OpenStep, not just the development tools.

      Actually, it would probably be more correct to say that Cocoa is derived from OpenStep, and OSX is derived from NeXTSTEP + OpenStep + FreeBSD.

      NeXTSTEP != OpenStep.

      True.

      OpenStep was a rewrite of NeXT's OS done a while back.

      Mostly false. The OS rewrite failed. OpenStep was a rewrite of the appkit APIs. NeXT wanted to rev the OS, but the demand didn't justify it.

      The idea was to standardize, clean up, and open up the Objective-C API, making it something that other vendors could port/run on other platforms, removing some OS-specific stuff out of the NeXTSTEP API.

      The idea was to license it and make more money :-). It ended up not working so well (well, the money part didn't work so well - the APIs kick ass)...

      GNUstep and OpenStep for Solaris and OpenStep for Windows are the fruits of this.

      Not to mention PDO (foundation) on a few more OSs.

      I think of it this way:
      NeXTSTEP 0.x-3.3
      OpenStep was NS v. 4.0
      Rhapsody DR1 was NS v. 5ish
      OSX 10.x is NS v. 6.x ish

      I mean, really. What do you think NSWindow stands for, anyway? How can you say that Cocoa isn't derived from NeXTSTEP?

    26. Re:Flattery and Imitation by cpeterso · · Score: 1


      no, Windows 95 copied Mac OS X.

    27. Re:Flattery and Imitation by cgenman · · Score: 1

      a search for "hand in the cookie jar" and "microsoft" returns 355 pages on everything ranging from Java to BSD, FBI proves and Real Networks.

      I give up. Where is the evidence?

    28. Re:Flattery and Imitation by the+Man+in+Black · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I just had to try it...

      Hey wow, it does! So does this mean we need a new metaphor? How about...

      obvious plagiarism?

      Or even...

      borrows liberally?

    29. Re:Flattery and Imitation by tijnbraun · · Score: 1

      Where does windowmaker fit in this schema?
      You have GNUstep which is derived from Nextstep...etc...
      Or am I mixing things here?
      I use WindowMaker as my window manager everywhere.. but I don't know anything about its heritage..
      Is the dock of OSX a descendant from the dock we use in windowmaker?
      Could somebody please enlighten me (no pun intended) on this subject?

    30. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was not pure PR. It was the payback for Apple's billion dollar lawsuit that Apple would have won.

    31. Re:Flattery and Imitation by kwerle · · Score: 1

      From windowmaker.org homepage:
      "Window Maker is an X11 window manager originally designed to provide integration support for the GNUstep Desktop Environment. In every way possible, it reproduces the elegant look and feel of the NEXTSTEP[tm] user interface. It is fast, feature rich, easy to configure, and easy to use. It is also free software, with contributions being made by programmers from around the world."

      So it sounds like it's a copy of the old NeXTSTEP workspace.
      Yeah, detachable menus (miss that). The dock looks really dressed up... But the idea is the same.

    32. Re:Flattery and Imitation by tijnbraun · · Score: 1

      But you can detach menus in windowmaker. It is silly easy (or did you mean something else, or do I misunderstand?)

    33. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Ajaxamander · · Score: 1

      Well, the way the arrangement goes, (went, rather) was that Apple would bundle IE with all computers it shipped, until something like 2002, and M$ would continue making the Office Suite for Macintosh. Apple is no longer under this contractual obligation, (since the time has expired,) and from what I can tell, is one of the reasons they are making Safari, to replace it. I'm not sure what this means for Office X in the future, but I haven't heard one way or the other.

    34. Re:Flattery and Imitation by DA_MAN_DA_MYTH · · Score: 1

      I use to agree with this comment and use it often. IE blew away anyone else when it came to dhtml. Now the only thing that I really see IE outdoing is remote scripting, using active connections to the database, but if need to do that, wouldn't you just want a thick client instead? Safari rocks, and at a Beta version, blows IE 5.2 outta the water (Especially now with the addition of tabs).

      --
      "It takes many nails to build a crib, but one screw to fill it."
    35. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IE is a curse. It's a terrible browser. It sucks, it's slow, it doesn't load pages right. I deleted it the second I took this tower out of the box. The sad thing is that it's no better on Windows and people still use it!

      A very small percentage of people are running IE now. I have maybe 1% of visitors to my site running IE. The majority are using Safari, after that is a mozilla, probably camino.

    36. Re:Flattery and Imitation by zonker · · Score: 0

      heheh, though i think it could be safely said that ie on the windows platform hasn't been updated (feature-wise anyway) in forever...

    37. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's just that people who cling to "free" software like to think that - it shores up their private reality.

    38. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What has IE done in recent years then?
      It can't even render PNGs properly, which even the Mac version of IE can.

    39. Re:Flattery and Imitation by broody · · Score: 1

      Right click to open a menu.
      Left click on the menu title bar.
      A little X will appear in the right corner and the menu will lurk until you close it.

      --
      ~~ What's stopping you?
    40. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Ignominious+Cow+Herd · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Will someone PLEASE crack into /. and add more interesting and useful Moderation choices like this one!? ...and I second the motion of the guy who wants to moderate .sigs

      --
      Lump lingered last in line for brains, and the ones she got were sorta rotten and insane.
    41. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A very small percentage of people are running IE now. I have maybe 1% of visitors to my site running IE.

      The reality distortion field is at full power. I really hate to break this to you, but a very large percentage of people that don't care about your site are using IE. These same people are going everywhere else on the internet. So, we can pretty much guess that either your site caters to a very small, irrelevant group, or it just sucks ass. It doesn't really matter which.

    42. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      legitimate business :0!

    43. Re:Flattery and Imitation by rockforever · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I sincerely hope once Safari 1.0 is released, they can dump IE, as the standard shipped browser on new Macs, and have Safari installed. I don't see why Apple wouldn't do this. No reason to hold onto IE. It's available at Mactopia for those who want IE (and sometimes, at least now, need it).

    44. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Oh boy! It was 250 million dollars--at the time Apple was worth 16 billion. Figure out your own percentages. This was in '97 and almost all of the stock was sold off (and in part responsible for) the decline back down into the twenties

      And the continuing decline on down to 12? What was responsible for that?

    45. Re:Flattery and Imitation by jdhouse4 · · Score: 1

      As AC said, the $150 million "investment" made by MS was to settle a lawsuit that Apple had opened up on some QuickTime code issues.

      Both MS and Apple used the same company for some QT work. Problem was that this company was accused by Apple of giving, selling, whatever the code to MS with/without MS' knowledge. That code found its way into MediaPlayer.

      Apparently, months before Jobs returned, Apple's attorneys found some pretty damning evidence during the discovery phase that would have sunk MS' defenses. MS was looking at loosing its MediaPlayer while Apple was looking at dying due to lack of Office.

      Instead of a protracted fight, Jobs and Gates agreed that MS would invest $150 million in non-voting Apple stock that was to be held for a certain time, though I don't know how long, but was on the order of 2-3 years. Also, MS would ship Office and Apple would pre-install IE til 2002. Apple and MS signed an agreement to open their kimonos for 2-3 years. There were other provisions I don't recall. I would imagine the kimono opening is where MS learned to do some of the things they are doing in Longhorn.

      I hope the Apple execs don't laugh too much. They laughed at IBM PC, Win 3.1, Win 95, and Palm. Getting cocky when you're 3.whatever % of marketshare is stupid.

      As a U Texas grad, it sucks that MS is using our symbol (Hook 'em Horns, Longhorn Country, etc.) to promote their "new" OS.

      --
      Let us go to the stars, dream new dreams, and renew the embers of hope that have long since grown cold.
    46. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Ffakr · · Score: 1
      several insiders mention how Microsoft was caught using quite a bit of code directly from the older MacOS codebase in Windows.

      almost correct.

      Actually, Video for Windows was found to have a significant ammount of Quicktime for Windows code in it. Apple was able to demonstrate thousands of lines of code that were identical. They were also able to show that Video for Windows ran significantly slower without Apple's code.

      As far as I know, it was never proven that Microsoft knowingly stole that code. Microsoft outsourced some work to a development company that Apple just happened to use for Quicktime for Windows. Maybe the company cut corners by stealing Apple's code, maybe M$ got them to do it... it never got that far. The issue was dropped (along with other IP contentions) when the deal came through.

      ..... ffakr
      --

      I'm not feeling witty so bite me

    47. Re:Flattery and Imitation by pfguy · · Score: 1

      I'm not the greatest at that whole... you know... telling time thing, but didn't Win95 come out before MacOS X?

    48. Re:Flattery and Imitation by TheMidget · · Score: 1
      It's too bad that Web programmers will write code that only works on IE. (I understand why they do).

      I don't understand why anybody would do that. Maybe a handsome bribe? But even then, I think a site like this will hardly do anything to improve Micro$oft's reputation. I dunno about you, but when I visited it, my first reaction was "What a bunch of self-righteous pricks! If at least they knew how to spell!". The whole thing is so silly, that they even made national news as flop site of the week. That was mid April, and strangley enough their site didn't change even after that nomination.

      I think most of these are dedicated Intranet type websites,

      Example above is visible from the public internet...

      but I've been to several companies where Netscape or Opera just will not work.

      Indeed... My reaction to that is to put a nice <form><input type ie sucks></form> on my own pages ;-) hehe ;-) Turnaround is fair-play!

    49. Re:Flattery and Imitation by kubrick · · Score: 1

      It's too bad that Web programmers will write code that only works on IE. (I understand why they do).

      However, those people who only test in IE will likely only test in Windows IE. Although I'm using Linux here, people in the office use Mac IE and come across quite a few sites where the authors have been pretty slack with their JavaScript... Mac IE and Windows IE are compiled from different codebases by different teams, so it's not surprising that they behave slightly differently (and more than slightly when it comes to CSS for, say IE 5 Mac vs IE 5 PC).

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
    50. Re:Flattery and Imitation by darien · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why anybody would do that. Maybe a handsome bribe?

      Well, kind of. Speaking as a contract web designer, my employers almost never care about minority web browsers. They're happy for me to make a site that works with browsers other than IE, but they won't pay any extra for it. So the bribe is that I can do the job more quickly and simply for the same money if I only test my pages in IE.

      If at least they knew how to spell!

      Give them a break - they are in Luxembourg! And anyway, they do make an offer I've never seen before:

      "if this seems unbearable to you, we will of course send you our files and scripts in order to allow you to set up a version of our site running under linux/netscape/opera/etc."

    51. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, I downloaded a new bugfix for it yesterday afternoon.

      For the record I use Phoenix/Firebird, Windows Update just alerts me to when IE needs fixing....

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    52. Re:Flattery and Imitation by ericdano · · Score: 1

      We were talking about for the Macintosh. Hello!?!?!

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    53. Re:Flattery and Imitation by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I realized right as I hit the submit button....

      Oops

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    54. Re:Flattery and Imitation by cruppel · · Score: 1

      I prefer

    55. Re:Flattery and Imitation by cruppel · · Score: 1

      Have you noticed some of the comments made when Safari was unvieled? things like "Safari is way faster than IE" were just blatantly called out by Jobs himself. If they don't switch over to their own product then they might as well load XP onto the harddrives when they ship from cali.

    56. Re:Flattery and Imitation by gig · · Score: 1

      As of 10.2.6, if you don't have IE on your system (because you trashed it), then Safari creates an alias of itself named "Internet Explorer" in the Applications folder. Some ISP software just runs "Internet Explorer" rather than going through the system to get the default browser.

      It's like IE can't ever really die. It's like a stink you can't get off all the way.

    57. Re:Flattery and Imitation by gig · · Score: 1

      > The Win95 shell imitates NeXTStep in its appearance
      > far more than it does MacOS, and its behavior is
      > Motif-like. (Or vice-versa depending on who you ask.)

      Yeah, but NeXTSTEP (1989) also imitates Mac OS (1984).

      Files as little pages, directories as folders, drag-and-drop, icons, overlapping windows, self-contained applications, a trash to drop things you don't want anymore, a pervasive menu you drill down in to get at stuff. These are all Mac things and were mostly invented at Apple for Lisa and Macintosh.

  2. The both copy each other... by ajiva · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple copies Microsoft, and Microsoft copies Apple.
    Apple coppied the WinXP feature that lets users switch who's logged in without losing state. And Microsoft copies features from Apple. Its the Kettle calling the Pot black...

    1. Re:The both copy each other... by BJZQ8 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Jobs and Gates are two immovable objects that are colliding with irresistable force...and these are the results. They just sort of merge together. Apple becomes DRM-loving Microsoft, and Microsoft becomes touchy-feely-hippie-interfaced Apple. No surprise to me.

    2. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And everybody get's better systems because of it.

    3. Re:The both copy each other... by Twanfox · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm missing something, but with OS X, isn't the difference between "Saved State" for the GUI and backgrounding all applications (since it is a unix-based OS) pretty minimal? And, how was the timing of these two releases/feature inclusions?

      Not that I'm defending Apple, MS just has a tendancy to do some pretty disreputable stuff.

    4. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naw, nothing good comes from microsoft. That crap they make would spoil a whole barrel of Apples in 1 hour. Apple borrows NOTHING. Nothing I say.

    5. Re:The both copy each other... by H9000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I'm not wrong both copied the su command from "Unix" ...

      CU
      H9000

    6. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everybody but linux users, of course; who still cant cut and paste in a standard way.

    7. Re:The both copy each other... by feldsteins · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sure Bill & Co. would love to be able to present themselves as free-wheeling hipsters when it suited them (and Apple would love to be able to present themselves as the no-nonsense, utilitarian Corporate Approved Vendor.) But no, there are still meaningful differences between the two companies philosophical approaches.

      The idea that Steve copies Bill as much as Bill copies Steve is ludicrous on it's face. Microsoft copies Apple tons more, always has. Listen, I'm not saying that makes them evil. They're not breaking the law here. Let them copy away! It's good for everyone. I'm merely pointing out that they're not the "innovation powerhouse" that they make themselves out to be. Calling a spade a spade.

      And Apple has been the most consistently anti-DRM company you can name besides the P2P companies themselves. Their current nod to DRM in the iTunes Music Store is an amazing achievement in that they somehow convinced the RIAA that we all might actually buy the music if it wasn't DRM'd to death (see PressPlay, for example). Apple has been as pro-consumer as a company can get in the whole digital music thing. Tossing them in the same bin as Microsoft isn't accurate or fair.

      --
      You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
    8. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux is ambrosia, you just have faulty tast buds. Speak not, foul imp.

    9. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 0, Troll

      And Apple has been the most consistently anti-DRM company you can name besides the P2P companies themselves.

      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device. The files have your name embedded in them and won't play if you want to let a friend listen to a copy. If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it. How much more DRM-friendly can you get?

      If MS had come up with the Microsoft Music Store with the same restrictions, the press would be tearing them apart.

    10. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft: Let's copy 95% of Mac OS!
      Apple: You shouldn't lose state between users.

      Totally different.

    11. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      > If MS had come up with the Microsoft Music Store with the same restrictions, the press would be tearing them apart.

      If Apple had been convicted of running an illegal monopoly, etc, as Microsoft has, then such criticism of a new Apple venture would be valid.

    12. Re:The both copy each other... by raju1kabir · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device. The files have your name embedded in them and won't play if you want to let a friend listen to a copy. If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it. How much more DRM-friendly can you get?

      You conveniently left out the most important part:

      You can freely burn the songs onto a standard CD and then listen to them anywhere and in any manner you choose.

      THAT's the different between Apple DRM and MS DRM. Apple did what they had to in order to make the deal with the record companies: put some barriers in the way of egregious out-and-out mass piracy. Microsoft, on the other hand, is going above and beyond the call of duty: They're workng overtime with hardware vendors to ensure that in the future nobody, including independent content creators themselves, will be able to generate, distribute, or play any media without express permission from the distribution cartels.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    13. Re:The both copy each other... by ivan256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.

      I don't see how this has anything to do with DRM. If they did let you re-download it people would be screaming about Apple keeping tabs on what their users buy.

      Make backups. Then if your computer dies a fiery death you can restore from your backup and keep listening to your music. Apple even made it easy to make backups to writeable DVDs. It's a single mouse click!

      I don't see anybody bitching that record stores don't replace your CDs if you scratch them...

    14. Re:The both copy each other... by GroovBird · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
      (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

      C:\Documents and Settings\Dave>su
      'su' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
      operable program or batch file.

      C:\Documents and Settings\Dave>

    15. Re:The both copy each other... by los+furtive · · Score: 1

      Uh, Apple didn't copy that feature. They started using BSD (or whatever), which already had a multiuser setup. And if memory serves me correct, that sort of feature existed in Unix/Linux long before it was in XP, so I'd say XP is the one that copied in this case.

      --

      I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.

    16. Re:The both copy each other... by westcourt_monk · · Score: 1
      Apple copied MS or Apple copied Linux?

      Other than bundle, control, DRM to death your home PC.. I don't see anything original coming from Microsoft but that isn't what they do. They make things... umm.. expensive? unreliable? mass marketed? awkward?

      Sure a few of those can go to apple.. but at least you don't have to worry so much about the script kiddies. Oh and OS X.3 is out in few months.. X.4 in 04? X.5 in 05? hope longhorn is *nix.. then maybe they could compete.

      Only thing I wish apple had was remote desktop app built in.. like XP pro, but are you going to say that was MS originality too? or once again following the Open Source world.. which is the the true innovative arena.

      --
      I am going to hell and I am going to take all of you with me.
    17. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device.

      Except after you've burned them to CD.

      The files have your name embedded in them and won't play if you want to let a friend listen to a copy.

      Except after you've burned them to CD.

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.

      Except after you've burned them to CD.

      How much more DRM-friendly can you get?

      Well, you could prevent burning to CD, for starters. But iTunes has a giant "BURN DISC" button right there in the upper-right-hand corner. Creates fully unrestricted CD's in Red Book format that can play on any audio CD player.

      If MS had come up with the Microsoft Music Store with the same restrictions, the press would be tearing them apart.

      If that's true--which I dispute, but that's an opinion thing--then it says way more about the press than it does about the Music Store.

    18. Re:The both copy each other... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 3, Funny
      Microsoft becomes touchy-feely-hippie-interfaced Apple

      If you mean that, like, in the way of a bad acid trip, then I guess you're right.

      Have you seen Longhorn?

    19. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers,

      Wrong. iTunes will be out for Windows later this year.

      won't play if you want to let a friend listen to a copy.

      Wrong. You can have the file installed on up to three computers at the same time, and can freely move it from one to the other. This is only an issue if you want more than three "friends" to listen, in different locations, at the same time.

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.


      Wrong.

      You're batting .0000 so far.

      I don't like DRM either, particularly, but how about some INFORMED criticism?

    20. Re:The both copy each other... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 2, Funny
      If MS had come up with the Microsoft Music Store with the same restrictions, the press would be tearing them apart.

      Correction: Slashdot would be tearing them apart.

    21. Re:The both copy each other... by Alan · · Score: 1

      Well, the songs don't expire, or require you to pay a monthly fee, you can burn them as a music CD to play anywhere, as many times as you want, and with a bit of sidestepping you can easily convert the songs to mp3 (burn to ISO image, rip from iso image to mp3). Now I don't have a mac capable of doing any of this (rev a imac w/o a burner), and I'm in canada, so I can't buy music from the apple music store anyway, so some of this is just what I've read about.

      And as for only playing on apple devices... well gosh, you'd almost thing that was to try to get people to buy more macs! The fact that it only works on ipods and macs shows that mac hardware works nicely together, but there is a promised windows version of the apple music store (or itunes?) coming RSN.

      Just to play devils advocate, you can copy music to a friends computer (two other computers in fact) just fine (assuming they have macs of course) and if you crack your physical CD can you go to the store and get a new one? No, you have to buy it again, just like if you wipe your hard drive you can't re-download the same songs.

      I don't totally agree with all these, but the fact that they have the big 5 agreeing to this is an accomplishment in itself. There are obviously some implementation quirks (lack of support for non macs being the biggest IMHO), but the store is very new, so hopefully things will get cleaned up as time goes on.

    22. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
      (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

      C:\Documents and Settings\Todd>runas
      RUNAS USAGE:

      RUNAS [ [/noprofile | /profile] [/env] [/netonly] ]
      /user:<UserName> program

      RUNAS [ [/noprofile | /profile] [/env] [/netonly] ]
      /smartcard [/user:<UserName>] program

      /noprofile specifies that the user's profile should not be loaded.
      This causes the application to load more quickly, but
      can cause some applications to malfunction.
      /profile specifies that the user's profile should be loaded.
      This is the default.
      /env to use current environment instead of user's.
      /netonly use if the credentials specified are for remote
      access only.
      /savecred to use credentials previously saved by the user.
      This option is not available on Windows XP Home Edition
      and will be ignored.
      /smartcard use if the credentials are to be supplied from a
      smartcard.
      /user <UserName> should be in form USER@DOMAIN or DOMAIN\USER
      program command line for EXE. See below for examples

      Examples:
      > runas /noprofile /user:mymachine\administrator cmd
      > runas /profile /env /user:mydomain\admin "mmc %windir%\system32\dsa.msc"
      > runas /env /user:user@domain.microsoft.com "notepad \"my file.txt\""

      NOTE: Enter user's password only when prompted.
      NOTE: USER@DOMAIN is not compatible with /netonly.
      NOTE: /profile is not compatible with /netonly.

      C:\Documents and Settings\Todd>

    23. Re:The both copy each other... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Try the 'runas' command, available in XP and Win2k.

      Also available in the GUI, by holding down the shift key whilst opening a context menu on something executable, if memory serves.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    24. Re:The both copy each other... by Alan · · Score: 1

      The way that it backgrounds is not that different, but the way it's done, or that people assume it will be done, is. MS took the "background and su/login as another user" idea and made a stupidly simple gui way of doing it (click start, choose switch user, select new user, log in, do stuff, log out, return to old user session still running) and I assume that mac is going to copy that.

    25. Re:The both copy each other... by LamerX · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, that wasn't a Windows XP feature, I seem to remember that I was able to do that with the very first Linux distro I ever used, RedHat 5.2. But you know what, I don't think that it was even a feature of Linux. I'm sure that most flavors of unix have been doing this for YEARS.

    26. Re:The both copy each other... by espilce · · Score: 1

      Microsoft invented su? I never would have guessed... :wq

      --
      :q!
    27. Re:The both copy each other... by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Bah, who needs ambrosia when you have Red Bull. It gives you wings!

    28. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's nothing like the su command.

    29. Re:The both copy each other... by suwain_2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      And UNIX copied su from SCO? ;)

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    30. Re:The both copy each other... by blowdart · · Score: 2, Informative
      You can freely burn the songs onto a standard CD and then listen to them anywhere and in any manner you choose.

      THAT's the different between Apple DRM and MS DRM.

      Actually Microsoft's DRM does allow you to burn to CD. Or transfer to portable players. The difference is Microsoft provides content owners with the ability to toggle these features. Don't blame Microsoft if record labels won't turn the flag on. EMI's new service, for example, is supposed to allow CD burning.

    31. Re:The both copy each other... by bnenning · · Score: 1
      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device.


      Until you burn it to a CD, which you can do without any restrictions. And at that point you can re-rip to MP3 or any other format with minimal quality loss.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    32. Re:The both copy each other... by Hard_Code · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow, that is like 2 burns in one.

      Burn #1: Slashdot is anti-MS!

      Burn #2: Slashdot is not really the press!

      Congratulations.

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    33. Re:The both copy each other... by jdreed1024 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device.

      Actually, you can burn Apple Music Store songs to CD. But you conveniently left that out, didn't you? And once they're on CD, you can give them to whoever you want. Because iTunes will burn to a standards-compliant CD, with no DRM, or any crap, and no identifying information except for what you choose to write on the label.

      The files have your name embedded in them and won't play if you want to let a friend listen to a copy. Forgot about that feature where you can share music with up to 3 friends (provided they also have iTunes), didn't you?

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.

      And if my dog eats my CD, Tower Records or Sam Goody won't replace it for me for free. And if my hard drive dies, my prof won't re-write that term paper for me. And if I lose my Office CD, and my hard drive dies, MS won't buy me a new copy. What's your point?

      --
      There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
    34. Re:The both copy each other... by Aliencow · · Score: 1

      They go together...like beer and cigarettes.. None require the other, but just feels so much better with it..

    35. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are wrong. Apple implemented Unix, they didn't copy it.

    36. Re:The both copy each other... by superdan2k · · Score: 1

      Apple coppied the WinXP feature that lets users switch who's logged in without losing state.

      Really? This feature is in 10.2.6? I'd love for you to point it out to me, as I've been using 10.2 since the day it came out, and haven't seen anything like this.

      Furthermore, it's not a Microsoft innovation, it's a UNIX feature that's been around for more years than I can count.

      --
      blog |
    37. Re:The both copy each other... by ZackSchil · · Score: 1

      But you can't log out of OS X without losing everything... Once you log out all user processes shut down. I'm familiar with the Windows XP feature that allows for user processes to continue after log out and I can assure you, OS X does not do it. XP did, however, copy the look and feel of the OS X login screen (which is just a aquafied version of the one from 9)

    38. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how this has anything to do with DRM. If they did let you re-download it people would be screaming about Apple keeping tabs on what their users buy.

      As if they don't... :D

      I don't see anybody bitching that record stores don't replace your CDs if you scratch them...

      Because we always make copies of the CDs. It's a little bit harder to copy DRM protected stuff.

    39. Re:The both copy each other... by MajorCatastrophe · · Score: 1

      No - nobody is copying anybody. It makes perfect sense for companies to adopt competitors good ideas that their customers want. This happens in all industries with all products.

      Bitching against Microsoft for "copying" Apple (who "copied" Xerox or whatever...) is like bitching against BMW or Chrysler or Ferrari for "copying" Henry Ford's concept of a steering wheel (or whoever first came up with it - that's besides the point).

      There are so many other things really wrong with M$ this "who copied who's GUI" crap is really scraping the barrel.

    40. Re:The both copy each other... by Agent_Basilisk · · Score: 1

      "Remote desktop in XP....... Suppose that was MS originality?...."

      I didn't see/hear of this feature in OSS until KDE 3.1! which is like hot off the press new... I use Mandrake 9.1 and Windows XP.... I like them both :D

    41. Re:The both copy each other... by Rui+del-Negro · · Score: 1

      And SCO got Xenix from Microsoft...

      RMN
      ~~~

    42. Re:The both copy each other... by Golias · · Score: 1
      Wrong. You can have the file installed on up to three computers at the same time, and can freely move it from one to the other. This is only an issue if you want more than three "friends" to listen, in different locations, at the same time.

      If your friends only want to listen, you can also stream songs to (IIRC) up to 5 friends at a time. They don't even need to be close friends... If you share your iTunes folder to the Internet at large, people can search for songs you have and find you using Spymac's new music search feature. At long last, we can share the music we buy without infringement. Having used the new iTunes features for a few days now, I am amazed. I'm also impressed that AAC works as well as advertised. At 128, files generally sound as good or better than my 192 VBR MP3 files.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    43. Re:The both copy each other... by Dasme · · Score: 1

      Because we always make copies of the CDs. It's a little bit harder to copy DRM protected stuff.

      but it isn't DRM controlled when you burn it to a cd as audio. Youa re free to then rip it to MP3 or whatever format from the Audio CD.

      You can also burn the AAC file you bought to a data cd as a backup. You are free to copy it back to the machine you burnt it on or the other 2 that you registered as being yours in the music store.

      Apple it seems did the bare minimum in file security so they could get contract signed. I still believe Apple is anti-drm for the most part. But only time will tell.

    44. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      You can't stream songs downloaded from the music store. It will prompt your friends for your password. Try it.

    45. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeesh, man, chill out. Of course you can burn a CD, but having to burn to a CD and rerip as MP3 to get rid of the DRM isn't the point. You can get around any DRM if you're willing to take a generation loss and deal with headaches. To say that Apple's DRM is consumer friendly, though, is a joke.

      Forgot about that feature where you can share music with up to 3 friends (provided they also have iTunes), didn't you?

      No -- are you always this pleasant when someone disagrees with you? You can't share your iTunes Store music with your friends unless you're willing to give them your Apple ID password -- something that most people probably wouldn't be too kosher with doing, especially since if you ever wanted to authorize another person, you'd have to deauthorize someone else. It's a real headache.

      And if my dog eats my CD, Tower Records or Sam Goody won't replace it for me for free.

      Again with this snarky attitude. My point is that a music download is NOT a CD. If I buy a piece of downloaded software, most places will let you re-download it as long as you have your login. It's one of the nice things about paying for something that doesn't have a physical medium attached to it. Why is the iTunes Music Store so different?

      Really, dude, it's possible to have a civil conversation about this.

    46. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      Microsoft, on the other hand, is going above and beyond the call of duty: They're workng overtime with hardware vendors to ensure that in the future nobody, including independent content creators themselves, will be able to generate, distribute, or play any media without express permission from the distribution cartels.

      I still stand by what I said: Apple is only letting you play songs on their computers with their jukebox software and with their handheld MP3 player. Burning CDs is all well and good, but the inability to use any software or hardware except that provided by Apple is unacceptably restrictive DRM, in my opinion.

    47. Re:The both copy each other... by caluml · · Score: 1

      My god, isn't that a disgusting syntax?

      calum@ns2:~$ su -
      Password:
      ns2:~#

      That's not to say anything of su - -c "some-command" or sudo to run single commands as root.

    48. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thing Microsoft wasn't convicted of 'running an illegal monopoly.'

    49. Re:The both copy each other... by jorisk · · Score: 1

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.

      Rumors say the next version of iSync will contain a option to redownload all of the music you've bought with a specific user id.

    50. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Microsoft got a license from AT&T/Bell Labs to
      port V7 UNIX(tm) to x86 and x68 platforms.

      (S)ubstitute (U)ser was from UNIX(tm) V6 or earlier.

    51. Re:The both copy each other... by klui · · Score: 1

      To someone who feels a middleground is a good starting point for purchasing music via the 'net, I think Apple's policy is consumer friendly and not at all a joke. To someone who wants free music with no strings attached, however; Apple's policy is not very attractive. In fact, I feel those types of music fans will complain loudly even if there are no DRM at all and it's $0.99/song. They would want 44.1Khz/16-bits (no, make that 96Khz/24-bits), $0.10 (well, maybe $0.01), no watermarks or DRM--according to the responses to the iTunes Music Store threads here in slashdot. Exaggerating a bit but that was the impression I got. Well, you can't please everyone, but if Apple/music labels can please the majority of the fans out there and can make money, that's all that matters to them.

    52. Re:The both copy each other... by Rui+del-Negro · · Score: 1

      So now all we need is to find something AT&T stole from Apple, and everything will make sense again... right...?

      RMN
      ~~~

    53. Re:The both copy each other... by rthille · · Score: 1

      That's because Microsoft enhanced 'su' to be 'sue' :-)

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    54. Re:The both copy each other... by phorm · · Score: 1

      You mean Apple becomes more corporation/money-centered, and MS actually starts to care about their users?

      Mac often goes "against the grain" to do things for "Mac people." Why, because they have a following. Being a Mac person is like being part of a social club, where every now and then you get little benefits for taking part.

      iTunes? A good business idea, but also one aimed to do as much as possible to keep customers happy, whilst satisfying good business sense. Customers had a need, and Apple is taking a shot at supplying for it.

      Now if MS had made a similar initiative, if would have been more broadly targetted, aimed at profit - or at least at breeding opposition. There is no MS fanbase. Yes, some people like MS, but not with the dedication Apple has. So, when Apple rolls out something new, it's got that fuzzy special "we did this for you - because we know who our customers are" type mentality to it.

    55. Re:The both copy each other... by Genesishep · · Score: 1

      Your an idiot....they are not limiting you to Macs and iTunes as a method of DR Management. They are simply releasing Mac first versions the same way every other hardware/software company would. They will release a WinDoze version soon enough, they'd be stupid not to.

      The Music Store tunes can be burned to cd's and DVD's, played on multiple computers (up to 3) at a time and transferred without restriction onto ANY MPEG-4 AAC capable player See for yourself . MP3's can be transferred to any number of players also.

      Unlike M$'s system you can authorize and deauthorize computers as you upgrade or replace systems.

      It is by far the most reasonable form of anti-piracy protection out there. I don't mind paying for music as long as they are reasonable in their restrictions. If we don't pay then why work your tail off to become a success in the music business? Those limo's and mansions cost money ya know ;)

      If your beef is with recording artists and record companies making millions of bucks I don't know what to tell you..I'd like to make millions to so I guess I'm just as bad.

      I wonder if you'd like to give away your services for free just because I think what you do isn't worth paying for.

      Ok, maybe idiot was harsh...but please just know the facts before you speak out.

      --
      "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."
    56. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1, Troll

      Your an idiot....they are not limiting you to Macs and iTunes as a method of DR Management.

      Name calling. Nice. If you don't think that the Mac --> iTunes --> iPod connection isn't in place as a form of rights management, you're mistaken. You think it's a happy accident that you can't freely make copies for all of your machines? What if you have four Macs? One at work, one for yourself at home, a laptop and one for the kids? Isn't it kinda of absurd that you can't play the songs you buy on all the machines?

      The Music Store tunes can be burned to cd's and DVD's, played on multiple computers (up to 3) at a time and transferred without restriction onto ANY MPEG-4 AAC capable player See for yourself [apple.com]

      That link doesn't say anything except that "not all players support AAC." Er... yeah. The only one that does is the iPod. Whether new AAC-compatible players will respect the iTunes DRM scheme remains to be seen because right now there are no other players that can play them.

      It is by far the most reasonable form of anti-piracy protection out there. I don't mind paying for music as long as they are reasonable in their restrictions.

      I don't mind paying for music either, but I don't want to buy music that is tied to anything -- platform, player, "authorization" or anything else. Steve made a big show at the launch about "not treating the consumer like a criminal." If he meant that, he would have found a technological way (watermarking or what have you) to release MP3 files that could be used on any player and with any software. I'd be smooching his ass if he'd done so, but this AAC business is no better than WMA.

      I wonder if you'd like to give away your services for free just because I think what you do isn't worth paying for. Ok, maybe idiot was harsh...but please just know the facts before you speak out.

      Music is worth paying for, and I buy a lot of music. I've bought music from the iTunes Store and, right now, CDs are a better deal. $9.99 for an album locked to a platform and a player that I have to worry about backing up lest I lose it vs. a piece of durable, physical media free of any kind of DRM with the added bonus of lyrics and liner notes for a few dollars more.

      I'm not talking out of my ass here -- I've tried the thing, and while I think the interface of the iMS is fantastic, I'm just not really thrilled about the implementation. If that makes me an idiot in your eyes, I can live with that.

    57. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what? Running programs in the background is what UNIX does best. This IS NOT a Microsoft invention.

      Go back to hawking HPs at Best Buy, loser.

    58. Re:The both copy each other... by westcourt_monk · · Score: 1
      Not in Linux but.. I have seen the feature in software apps like Timbuktu for the Mac for years.. and PC Anywhere has been around for years too. Its not a new idea. Its just a bundled idea... but a cool feature. Hope X.3 has it.

      --
      I am going to hell and I am going to take all of you with me.
    59. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No one's denying that you can burn the tracks to CD, and that's a great thing, but am I seriously the only person on Slashdot who is the least bit annoyed that "burn it and rerip it to CD" is the only option if you want to, oh, I dunno, play a song on the 95 percent of music jukeboxes or mobile players that don't support AAC or that want to play on (gasp!) a fourth machine?

      Slashdotters defending DRM... am I crazy or am I the last sane one? I'm not sure sure anymore.

    60. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you don't even need to burn it to a CD. Just open a new cd audio project in Toast and drag your protected file into it from iTunes, you'll get an uncompressed audio file which you can drag back into to iTunes to re-compress as MP3. (or AAC)

      But of course there is some loss of quality.

    61. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but am I seriously the only person on Slashdot who is the least bit annoyed

      No. Lots of people are annoyed. Lots of people are also annoyed that works are protected by copyright at all. Lots of people are going to be annoyed no matter what.

      Slashdotters defending DRM... am I crazy or am I the last sane one? I'm not sure sure anymore.

      You're crazy. Well, maybe not crazy. Maybe you're just dumb. Here's a clue for you, free of charge: DRM is neither good nor bad. It's just a tool, like any other tool. Deployed poorly, DRM is annoying and inconvenient. Deployed well, DRM is invisible to virtually everybody but those who wish to do something illegal.

      FairPlay (which is Apple's name for the M4P protection scheme) is DRM done well. It's invisisble to virtually everybody.

      Here's whatcha do. You download music from ITMS. You burn that music to CD, like, immediately. At that point, you have something that is completely equivalent in terms of what you can and can't do to a store-bought retail CD.

      Everybody else gets this but a few lunatic fringe types on Slashdot and similar fora. This means that it's their problem, not Apple's.

    62. Re:The both copy each other... by The+Cydonian · · Score: 1
      Slashdotters defending DRM... am I crazy or am I the last sane one? I'm not sure sure anymore

      At work now, so a quick comment, but yes, that's to be expected. Such a result can easily be predicted by the Axelrod model of social networks. :-)

    63. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't? First time on Slashdot, eh?

    64. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Good thing Microsoft wasn't convicted of 'running an illegal monopoly.'

      Of course they weren't, but you don't really expect Slashdolts to know that do you?

    65. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      You're crazy. Well, maybe not crazy. Maybe you're just dumb. Here's a clue for you, free of charge:

      Wow, are you always this much of a jagoff or is it just when you're posting anonymously?

      Here's whatcha do. You download music from ITMS. You burn that music to CD, like, immediately. At that point, you have something that is completely equivalent in terms of what you can and can't do to a store-bought retail CD.

      So, like most DRM, it comes down to being annoyware. That's my point. All it stops me from doing is reasonable things like listening to my music on my hardware MP3 player or on an MP3 playing program that's not iTunes. Oh, unless I rerip the songs and retag them (since CDDB can't figure out what the song is unless you've got the full album).

      So, in effect, you can make slightly worse-sounding MP3s with some inconvenience and effort. So why not just sell me MP3s to begin with? Believe it or not, there are things that people want to do with their music that doesn't have an Apple logo on it.

      Why can't they just sell you MP3s? Because you might share them. Hence, the whole line about "not treating the consumer like a criminal" is hooey. That's exactly what you're treated like.

    66. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Big UNIX stud like yourself shouldn't have any problem making a 1 line batch file to do that.

    67. Re:The both copy each other... by Tyreth · · Score: 1

      It looks ungly, IMHO.

      Maybe I'm just biased, but it doesn't strike me as anything exciting. It looks like it's just using up even more desktop space for no reason (my preferred WM is Ion, but I do love a WM that looks very nice, and kde is not bad recently).

    68. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, are you always this much of a jagoff or is it just when you're posting anonymously?

      I call 'em like I see 'em. You wanna be a dumbass, don't be surprised when you get treated poorly for it.

      So, like most DRM, it comes down to being annoyware.

      Yup. You're a dumbass, all right. "Annoyware?" How is it "annoyware" when you NEVER actually ENCOUNTER it ANYWHERE?

      All it stops me from doing is reasonable things like listening to my music on my hardware MP3 player or on an MP3 playing program that's not iTunes.

      It doesn't stop you from doing any of those things, you dweeb.

      So why not just sell me MP3s to begin with?

      Because MP3's end up on P2P ("pirate-to-pirate") networks within seconds. It's way easier to drop an MP3 into your P2P program of choice than it is to rip a CD. Apple and the record labels want an online distribution system that works in such a way that it's no EASIER to pirate than it is with conventional CD's. They've got it.

      Believe it or not, there are things that people want to do with their music that doesn't have an Apple logo on it.

      Believe it or not, there are people out there who use this system every single day, and they're not having anything like the problems that you, a non-user of it, are complaining about.

      Hence, the whole line about "not treating the consumer like a criminal" is hooey.

      Sure, dude. Whatever. You can project your own personal insecurities on Apple all you want. The fact is, unless you ARE a criminal, you'll never even know that an M4P file is any different from any other music file.

    69. Re:The both copy each other... by Zebbers · · Score: 1

      And if my dog eats my CD, Tower Records or Sam Goody won't replace it for me for free.
      You dont even want to know. I vote yes.
      And if my hard drive dies, my prof won't re-write that term paper for me.
      irrelevant, it's between two private parties. theres no license or merchantability, nothings bought or sold.

      And if I lose my Office CD, and my hard drive dies, MS won't buy me a new copy. What's your point?

      A resounding yes. You own a license, not the bits..or a copy of the bits. Getting a copy of a program you have a license for should be trivial and cost only so much as the materials. Cant have it both ways.

      On a side note. How gay is MS. My father bought a bluetooth mouse kit, ms branded. comes with bluetooth dongle mouse and install cd. Cant install on his BRAND NEW toshiba cause it needs sp1. Says so in the instructions. WHY NOT INCLUDE IT ON THE CD. Nope, now he has to dl it over dialup. Good luck.

    70. Re:The both copy each other... by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      Music from the Apple Music store currently can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's AAC software and on the only handheld device able to play AACs.

      BTW, when you buy a CD and your CD breaks, do you get a new one?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    71. Re:The both copy each other... by sql*kitten · · Score: 2, Funny

      C:\Documents and Settings\Dave>su
      'su' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
      operable program or batch file.


      That's funny, because on my Windows machine it says:

      Microsoft Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]
      (C) Copyright 1985-2000 Microsoft Corp.

      H:\>su
      su: user root does not exist

      H:\>

      An argument about what is or isn't installed by default is not the same as arguing about the merits of who copied who! After all, Cygwin predates MacOS X... could you say that Apple copied NT+Cygwin by creating a GUI with a Unix-style command line?

    72. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      Whatever, dude. If you want to be an AC troll, that's your business. I have a Mac, I have an iPod, I've bought music from the iTunes music store. I'm not talking about things I haven't experienced. The difference is that every piece of hardware and software I own isn't built by Apple, so there are limits on how I can use the music I purchased.

      All it stops me from doing is reasonable things like listening to my music on my hardware MP3 player or on an MP3 playing program that's not iTunes.

      It doesn't stop you from doing any of those things, you dweeb.


      Uh... do this: buy a song from the iTunes Music Store, then try to listen to it on a RAM-based MP3 player. Or a software player that isn't iTunes. YOU CAN'T.

      It's way easier to drop an MP3 into your P2P program of choice than it is to rip a CD.

      Uh... where you do think MP3s come from? It's not difficult to rip a CD -- it's just annoying to have to buy an AAC, burn it to CD, rip it to MP3 and retag it just to use it legally as they wish. Then they can put it on P2P networks if they so choose. I'm not defending that and you know it.

      Believe it or not, there are people out there who use this system every single day, and they're not having anything like the problems that you, a non-user of it, are complaining about.

      Whatever, man. Bully for them. Like I've said several times, I've used the service and, despite my issues with the quality of the music (which ranges from good to miserable -- listen to Neil Young's "Heart of Gold" and tell me if you'd pay for it) I think it's a pretty good cut. It's just not as good as it could have been in my opinion. If that makes me a "dweeb" or whatever schoolyard name-calling you want to indulge in, then so be it.

    73. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      No. But as I've said before in this thread, a CD is a physical medium. If I've downloaded software from a service (Handango, Amazon, what have you) on the Web and the file gets deleted, I can almost always log in and re-download it. That's one of the advantages of buying software over the Web. I would expect that the iTMS would offer those same advantages.

    74. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      Wrong. iTunes will be out for Windows later this year.

      I didn't say what will be -- I'm talking about today.

      Wrong. You can have the file installed on up to three computers at the same time, and can freely move it from one to the other. This is only an issue if you want more than three "friends" to listen, in different locations, at the same time.

      Subtract one "friend" from each Mac you own and want to authorize for friends. Added to which, to let those friends listen to purchased software, you have to give them your Apple ID password and use one up one of your "authorizations." I have four computers -- I can only listen to my music on three. Isn't there something wrong with that?

      If your hard drive dies, you can't re-download it.

      Wrong.


      As of today, you can't. Unless they change that policy, you have to rebuy to redownload.

      You're batting .0000 so far.

      I don't like DRM either, particularly, but how about some INFORMED criticism?


      Dude, I'm not talking out of my ass here. I've bought music and tried the service. Have you? If so, try sharing the music you've purchased and let me know what happens. Try redownloading a file from the iTMS. Try listening to it on an Apple machine.

      Why is it that anyone who disagrees with you is "uninformed"?

    75. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      buy a song from the iTunes Music Store, then try to listen to it on a RAM-based MP3 player. Or a software player that isn't iTunes. YOU CAN'T.

      IDIOT! That's like saying, "Buy a CD. Try to listen to it on your tape deck. YOU CAN'T." MP3 is obsolete. Dead and buried. If you don't like it, buy the fucking CD at a fucking store. It'll cost you more, and be a lot less convenient.

      Shithead. Crawl back under your Lunix-loving rock.

    76. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      Heh. No one's ever accused me of being a Linux lover before. Whatever. I'm done with you, troll.

    77. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't mind paying for music either, but I don't want to buy music that is tied to anything -- platform, player, "authorization" or anything else.

      Ooh, sorry about those CDs, then. After all, once they stop making CD players...

      Now, granted, it's not likely going to happen soon. But it certainly has happened before (8-tracks, anyone?), so if you do as you say, you really ought not be buying CDs, either. I'm not sure what that leaves you with? I guess no music for you.

    78. Re:The both copy each other... by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      Ohh, it's the old "physical vs. immaterial goods" argument. When you went to buy the CD, were you interested in the music on it, or the physical medium?

      And even in your software counter-example you have to use a qualifying "almost always".

      Last but not least: What ruckus would you raise if Apple stored the information on what songs you ever downloaded on what computer, and then went to check if you actually did erase the disk without making a backup?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    79. Re:The both copy each other... by clontzman · · Score: 1

      Ohh, it's the old "physical vs. immaterial goods" argument. When you went to buy the CD, were you interested in the music on it, or the physical medium?

      Not sure I see your point... obviously I wanted the music. But if you're going to give it to me in a downloadable format, shouldn't I get the typical benefits of said format (redownloadability)?

      And even in your software counter-example you have to use a qualifying "almost always".

      Right... almost always. I said "almost always" because that's been the case in every situation I've experienced, but I'm sure there are exceptions. Not sure what that proves.

      I'm curious: why are you defending so staunchly not being able to re-download music you've purchased in the event of a crash (or if you're away from your computer and want to, say, redownload them at work)? I mean, isn't that something that you, as a customer, should expect?

      A good, and better, comparison is Audible. Once you buy a piece of content from Audible, it's stashed in your "library" and you can download it again and again as many times as you want. Since the Audible player has to be "activated," there's no danger from their perspective of you sharing the file. It's come in handy for me because I don't have to sweat my downloadable content if I'm wiping a machine or something.

      Last but not least: What ruckus would you raise if Apple stored the information on what songs you ever downloaded on what computer, and then went to check if you actually did erase the disk without making a backup?

      Again, I'm not sure I see your point. In purchasing music from the Apple Store, I can only listen to it on three machines at a time. Why can't I re-download it onto three machines? Apple would have no reason to check to see if I erased it because I'm allowed by their license to make three copies of it. I really don't understand your argument.

    80. Re:The both copy each other... by metalslinger · · Score: 1

      The ability to switch users without losing state still isn't in mac os X; running 10.2.5 here.

      However the ability to run multiple users at the same time (via remote log on or ssh) is something that os x has and windows is catching up to.

      Before you reply though I have to say that the various versions of 'nix' had it first. Osx just happened to inherit it via bsd as far as I can see. I may be wrong so don't shoot me ;).

      BTW, Switching is one of those "features" that are marketed to the unknowledgable public. It's a great way to market your product and make yourself seem to be the best. That's the fault of the other OS's for not marketing it first. So following that line of thought it's the alternative OS's fault that Microsoft has such a consumer share.

      --
      /. Heroics - 99.999%
    81. Re:The both copy each other... by ablair · · Score: 1


      "Yeesh, man, chill out [...] are you always this pleasant when someone disagrees with you?"

      Nobody's ripping on you, don't get all defensive like they did.

      "To say that Apple's DRM is consumer friendly, though, is a joke."

      Well, I guess you're not satisfied with any of the online music services then, because iTunes Music Store has far less stringent DRM than any of them (never mind the DRM that will be integral to Longhorn). Some people won't be satisfied with any level of DRM, and I think you're one of them, but most realise that at least a little bit of DRM is necessary for the Labels to play ball.

      What's more, you're dumping on Apple's Music Store for not having a mechanism for re-downloading a song you lost, being Mac-only and other things. This is new release, bud. Your expectations of them having everything you want (eg. infinite downloads & streaming? Runs on Linux/Be/AtheOS?) first off is unrealistic.

      Please drop the attitude.

    82. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ability to switch users without losing state still isn't in mac os X; running 10.2.5 here.

      Right, but it's on the list for Panther. That alone will be well worth the upgrade price (if any). Weee!

    83. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's in Panther.

    84. Re:The both copy each other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right, but it's in Panther.

  3. Hey...Microsoft is catching up by btakita · · Score: 2, Funny

    Used to be Apple had a great GUI since the early 1980's when Microsoft came out with Windows 3.1. around 1990.

    1. Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up by lxadu99 · · Score: 1

      Then apple came out with OS X leaving windows behind...

    2. Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up by Keeper · · Score: 1

      Apple didn't have crap until '84. You're thinking of Xerox's research labs.

    3. Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up by LamerX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apple was playing catch up too. From what I hear, Amigas had an excellent GUI, and far superior hardware to what Apple ever could offer. Amiga had innovative features such as a Color Screen, Stereo Sound, and 3d Graphics Capabilities. While Macs still had tiny monochrome displays, and the Wild Eep.

    4. Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      And then the Mac II came out in 1987, with built-in multi-head (Just add Graphics Cards), high-res graphics, 24 bit colour available, decent on-board sound, built-in networking (Well, Apple had that in 1984) and support for 128MB of Ram. Not to mention standard hard drives internal floppies and a serial bus for peripherals.

      The Amiga was a great system, but the Mac matched it in 1987 (Apart from pre-emptive multi-tasking, where Apple dropped the ball for over a decade) and had far surpassed it when the Quadra 840Av and Centris 660AV shipped in 1993. And everything the Mac didn't have, NeXT did (Pre-emptive multi-tasking, advanced audio capabilities, OO based OS and GUI).

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    5. Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up by ElGuapoGolf · · Score: 1

      Dude....

      I like Macs and all. But claiming that the Mac II matched the Amiga is kinda... not at all true.

      The Amiga is still used today for a lot of television special effects and production stuff. I don't know of any Mac IIs being used for this.

      The Mac II had a 256 color display at 640x480. Heady stuff when the PCs of the day were stuck with EGA. The original Amiga, launched in 1986 featured 770x480. So we're higher res, right? And it also offered 4096 colors on the screen at once. So we're blowing that 256 limitation away.

      I'm not doubting that the Quadra840AV and Centris 660AV may have matched the original Amiga. I dunno how they'd stack up against a comprable Amiga.

    6. Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up by ElGuapoGolf · · Score: 1

      Actually, watch Babylon 5.

      That's all done with Amiga.

      And you don't think an Ami could be upgraded past it's base limitations?

      Bottom line. The original Mac II didn't blow an Amiga away. It could keep up, but for lots of cash.

    7. Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How dare you mock the Wild Eep!?

    8. Re:Hey...Microsoft is catching up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple was playing catch up too. From what I hear, Amigas had an excellent GUI, and far superior hardware to what Apple ever could offer. Amiga had innovative features such as a Color Screen, Stereo Sound, and 3d Graphics Capabilities. While Macs still had tiny monochrome displays, and the Wild Eep.

      Amiga...look at them today. WOW!

      Boy that sure kept em in the game huh? Why don't you just shut the fuck up.

  4. Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The same company that didn't offer a preemptive, protected multitasking OS until OS X, years and years after Microsoft had Windows NT?

    1. Re:Apple leadership? by EvilBudMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think we are talking about the GUI and not the kernel here. Apple has always been ahead of M$ in that area.

    2. Re:Apple leadership? by Hard_Code · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Point.

      But when they did offer such an OS, they did it right.

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    3. Re:Apple leadership? by d3xt3r · · Score: 1, Insightful
      That preemtive, protected, multitasking NT kernel sure led to a lot of BSODs. I'd say that Mac OS X came to market around the same time that Win NT (2000) became usable for anything other than wasting CPU cycles on business desktops.

      Bring a product to market and make it usable 4 years later. Great job MS!!!

    4. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget Xenix. Yes, boys and girls, the thing we now call "SCO UNIX" was created by Microsoft... the fact that their managers are a bunch of bastards doesn't mean Microsoft doesn't have some extremely competent and talented staff (ex., David Cutler, the chief architect of the NT kernel).

    5. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1; Honesty.

    6. Re:Apple leadership? by darkwiz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Rational arguments can be made against preemptive multitasking for particular applications, or single task oriented machines (if you have a tick every 10ms for scheduling, 100 times a second you are dumping the cache and TLB, potentially for no good reason - and to a reasonable hit in performance). However, the average computer users' patterns of usage have shifted away from single task oriented use (because the cpus are actually fast enough to really be productive doing more than one thing - even w/preemption on a 1ms tick). Josephine User wants that update to download along with her P2P in the background while she's listening to MP3's and emailing someone. This wasn't an issue 5 years ago except to power users.

      However, you are right in criticizing the lack of protected memory - a source of great irritation and many unnecessary crashes and reboots. The market demanded it, and Apple provided. Where is the criticism here?

      ps: I still use Linux, even on my Macs, but I believe in fair criticism.

    7. Re:Apple leadership? by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      As opposed to Mac OS up thru and including 9.x where the whole system would freeze for whatever amount of time you had the mouse button clicked.... It's all relative. And remember the discussion is about desktops. You may no like NTs stability, but it's desktop was much easier to use for 99.99% of folks than most *nix's of the time.

    8. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As if MacOS 7/8/9 didn't ever crash, right...You've never administrated Macs before, I see.

      MS didn't have to take someone else's OS source code to get stability, because they developed the NT kernel in-house. Where's Apple's "innovation" in just using BSD?

      BTW, I _do_ know that MS used some BSD in their OS early on. It's long been replaced.

    9. Re:Apple leadership? by SensitiveMale · · Score: 1

      Yup.

      And everyone knows that ms had the first "preemptive, protected multitasking OS".

      Are you high?

    10. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > But when they did offer such an OS, they did it right.

      True enough. Unlike Windows NT, OS X didn't have any bugs in it upon release.

    11. Re:Apple leadership? by melatonin · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The same company that didn't offer a preemptive, protected multitasking OS until OS X

      Wrong. The Apple Lisa had a pre-emptive multi-tasking OS with protected memory, but the hardware cost too much (the Motorola 68k in particular had a paging bug at the time that required them to use their own MMU). The Lisa was $10K in 1983. The Mac didn't have those features (and a lot more), and was $3K in 1984. The Mac won in the marketplace over the Lisa, therefore it can be argued that co-operative multi-tasking and a simple memory model are better.

      After all, if pre-emptive multi-tasking and protected memory are so important, everyone would have used OS/2 instead of Windows 3.1.

      dork.

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
    12. Re:Apple leadership? by AxelTorvalds · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Never mind that fact that they offered a seemless transition over the years from 68000 to PowerPC, from MacOS Classic to MacOS X.

      If you invested in Apple 15 years ago, they still honor your investment. I can't say that the same is true of MS where different versions of Office don't even like to talk to each other and they are constantly pushing for their customers to spend more money.

    13. Re:Apple leadership? by arkanes · · Score: 1

      Because they provided it YEARS after every other OS in any signifigant use provided it? In fact, not only after MS added it, but after MS made it work effectively (which, following long standing tradition, took 3 versions)? Sounds like a decent criticism to me. Same argument for preemption as well, they didn't add this until long after the arguments against it ceased to be compelling - the criticism is that Apple did not (and, to a large degree, still does not) innovate in OS design - in fact, they're consistently behind the curve in that area.

    14. Re:Apple leadership? by EvilBudMan · · Score: 1

      I think "price" may have had something to do with this as well. $10,000 vs. $3,000. IBM machines with OS/2, MicroChannel, etc. were expensive vs. a PC's Limited, Compaq as well.

    15. Re:Apple leadership? by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you invested in Apple 15 years ago, they still honor your investment

      Huh. And if you invested in PCs then MS didn't? You realize that people can still run most MS-DOS programs that were developed (and compiled) 20 years ago under WinXP, right? No, not all - most. And not all 68000 apps run on PPC, nor do all Mac Classic apps run under OS-X.

      different versions of Office don't even like to talk to each other

      Yeah, there have been problems here, but that's hardly limited to MS. Apple has released apps with the same problems, and they've fixed them just like MS did. No, in general you can't get Word'95 to read a WordXP document. So what? You can't possibly expect forward compatibility to hold true - if it did we'd all be stuck using EBCDIC still.

      BTW, I can read a Word'95 doc into Office 97, Office 2000, and Office XP. It's really a non-issue.

      constantly pushing for their customers to spend more money

      Uh... what world are you living in? Apple charges for point releases to OS-X. And their hardware is still 1.5-2x the price of PC hardware, for less performance. Don't even try to indicate that Apple isn't raping their customers as bad, if not worse, than Microsoft.

      Hint, they're both corporations. They're both out to make money. Apple's been a bit more benevolent than MS, in general, but they're starting to adopt DRM and other "evil" concepts as well. They're just not as absolutely brain dead as MS is about marketing them.

    16. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NT4 kicked ass. At least MSFT offered scalable, robust OSes instead of screwing their customers by giving 'em crap for a decade.

    17. Re:Apple leadership? by Alan · · Score: 1

      MS has been doing this forever, since approximately, well, DOS 1.0. There was a great article about how around the time that Word 2.0 came out MS realized (I think because someone else used the same technique) that you can sell a product completely on a tick list of features that may or may not work, and that may or may not be even useful to people, but since they see that word 2.0 does mail merges and fobricating, and otherproduct 2.0 doesn't, then word must be better. Ever since that time that's how MS has done it's selling (so spake the article, which I'll try to dig up).

    18. Re:Apple leadership? by Build6 · · Score: 4, Informative


      BTW, I can read a Word'95 doc into Office 97, Office 2000, and Office XP. It's really a non-issue

      Yes and no - MS has put in a lot of work (although in the grand scheme of things it may not mean all that much since they have so many resources to throw at any problem) in maintaining forward compatibility for apps etc. (e.g. when Win95 was first released I was reading about how they had specific code to modify behaviour (i.e. reimplement bugs :-) in Win3.x to suit certain commonly used apps so that customers who upgrade-installed Win95 could use their old apps).

      But let's not forget how when Word97 came out the .DOC format changed and Word95 users could not read it, unless the document was saved in "compatibility" format, by which they meant RTF and therefore losing the majority of the Word functions (tables etc.).

      We may be facing this with the next "XML document format" MS Word on the way... .

    19. Re:Apple leadership? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 0, Troll

      M$ may have been second to last with their "preemptive, protected multitasking OS", but they still beat the Mac! By years!

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    20. Re:Apple leadership? by melatonin · · Score: 1
      I think "price" may have had something to do with this as well. $10,000 vs. $3,000. IBM machines with OS/2, MicroChannel, etc. were expensive vs. a PC's Limited, Compaq as well.

      Exactly. Those features don't come for free. You have to pay for them somehow. It's not like OS vendors don't know how to implement those features, you learn them in any standard operating system course.

      MS didn't get those features into their consumer OS until XP, and even then it didn't come for free. They lost backwards compatibility, but it doesn't matter anywhere near as much in 2002 as it did in 1995.

      Apple couldn't integrate them into the Mac OS because the old management was stupid- they wanted engineers to do it without an API change; engineers said they could do it preserving 90% of the API. When Steve came to Apple, they implemented the 90% solution, which became Carbon. OS X wasn't needed; Apple could have shipped Copland/Gershwin with Carbon, but old Apple management was stupid and didn't listen to their engineers. Steve knew NeXT needed a procedural API (NeXT's bigggest tech drawback was being OO only, as was BeOS's), and as such Carbon became a primary requirement for the new OS.

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
    21. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you bought an Apple Macintosh more than 3 years ago, good luck running the latest OS on it (much less running it with any reasonable performance).

    22. Re:Apple leadership? by buysse · · Score: 1
      Actually, what I remember of memory management in traditional MacOS is extremely innovative -- and one of the main reasons that it was nearly impossible to implement protected memory *without breaking compatibility*.

      Apple has tried a few times before MacOS X (ie, buying the technology from NeXT) to reimplement the Macintosh -- the "Pink" project, using IBM's variant of the Mach kernel to implement a whole new OS, Copland -- the ill-fated attempt to create a new MacOS that was supposed to be 8.0, and more that never made it out of the ATG (while it still existed).

      The memory management in the MacOS was extremely, uh, unique and uh, special. Rather than allocating a direct pointer to memory, you allocated a handle. A handle was a pointer to a pointer. At the top of the heap was a block of handles (32-bit pointers), and they pointed to other locations in the heap (actual memory locations).

      That allowed the MacOS to defragment memory. If an app or the system allocated a larger block of memory than was available in the heap, the system's memory manager would shuffle around the contents of the heap (updating the handles) and try to create a larger free area.

      Since the original hardware didn't have a proper MMU (no virtual memory or paging), this allowed much lower memory requirements for complex apps that would need to allocate large, contiguous memory spaces.

      One unfortunate side effect was having to set the memory partition size of an application before running it (either under MultiFinder in 6.x or under the multitasking finder of 7.x). It's another place where the designers did something extremely cool... that just didn't work well with multiple applications running.

      So, after this long (and probably at least partially incorrect) rant, all I'm really trying to say is be nice to Apple. They showed the rest of the world what *not* to do. :) Just because it didn't work out well does not mean is was not innnovative.

      --
      -30-
    23. Re:Apple leadership? by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      OS X will run on my 8 year old 8500/150 (via XPostoFacto), admittedly poorly, until I drop a G4/800 CPU card, 512MB of Ram (1/2 of what it supports) and a Radeon PCI mac Edition into it, then it'll run quite nicely, thank you very much.

      OS X 10.1.5 is quite acceptable on my G3/333, about as well as Win2K does on a similar spec Duron 600.

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    24. Re:Apple leadership? by buysse · · Score: 1

      Based on what I've read, another problem that Apple had getting Copland out the door was that nobody (good) wanted to work on it. The other projects going on were much cooler.

      --
      -30-
    25. Re:Apple leadership? by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      Nope, Apple had that back around the same time MS did. A/UX. And it had about the same share of the Mac market that NT 3.1 did of the Windows Market.

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    26. Re:Apple leadership? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Maybe. But Apple's consumer OS multitasked like Win 3.1! Win95 did better than the Mac!

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    27. Re:Apple leadership? by mjoecups · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OS2 wasn't a complete peice of crap either... Still Apple has more ability to innovate, since they don't have to support as broad a hardware base... This allows them to spend more time thinking about how to build a better widget instead of just scrambling to fix things and support company y's new hardware.

      --
      If your hear it, fear it. If you see it, flee it.
    28. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Maybe. But Apple's consumer OS multitasked like Win 3.1! Win95 did better than the Mac!
      Apple's consumer OS also was 32-bit clean and had folders instead of groups... kind of like Windows finally did when they changed from Win 3.1 to Win95. Waitaminute... Win95 wasn't 32-bit clean... and the folders were yellow! Nevermind.
    29. Re:Apple leadership? by Gropo · · Score: 1

      And MS' "consumer" OS (9x-->Me) multitasked like Win 3.1 until: 2001? uhh...

      --
      I hate Grammar Nazi's
    30. Re:Apple leadership? by drunk_as_in_beer · · Score: 1

      I can't say that the same is true of MS where different versions of Office don't even like to talk to each other and they are constantly pushing for their customers to spend more money.

      At some point, Office (at least Word anyhow) became both backwards and forward compatible. Meaning, a document saved in Word XP could be read and modified in Word 2000. I don't remember when this happened, but I would guess 2000, or possibly 97.

      --
      --Drunk as in Beer
    31. Re:Apple leadership? by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Uh... what world are you living in? Apple charges for point releases to OS-X. And their hardware is still 1.5-2x the price of PC hardware, for less performance. Don't even try to indicate that Apple isn't raping their customers as bad, if not worse, than Microsoft."

      Dare I mention the virtual lack of Apple clones? It's like having only Dell and Gateway to buy computers from.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    32. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OS X will run on my 8 year old 8500/150 (via XPostoFacto), admittedly poorly, until I drop a G4/800 CPU card, 512MB of Ram (1/2 of what it supports) and a Radeon PCI mac Edition into it, then it'll run quite nicely, thank you very much.


      ..er..and?

    33. Re:Apple leadership? by g4dget · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The Apple Lisa had a pre-emptive multi-tasking OS with protected memory, but the hardware cost too much (the Motorola 68k in particular had a paging bug at the time that required them to use their own MMU). Yes, and the Lisa itself was a clone of a similarity priced Xerox machine, which also failed. It's not like Apple invented the technology behind either the Lisa or the Mac. The Mac won in the marketplace over the Lisa, therefore it can be argued that co-operative multi-tasking and a simple memory model are better. And Windows won in the marketplace over Apple. It can therefore, by your reasoning, be argued that Windows is better. Right?

    34. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I bet NT doesn't contain any VMS code whatsoever

    35. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Word's format changed from Office95 to Office97. Office 2000 and Office XP kept this format. The new office will have this format and a new XML format (professional only?) as well.

    36. Re:Apple leadership? by MulluskO · · Score: 1

      Also, don't forget the option to save in many different formats, a trait common to most popular office applications. I use OpenOffice.org Writer on my PC, but when I save my document to the network share, I do so in MS Word format because that is what they have in the university computer labs. While different incarnations of the .doc format are not compatible, there is an option to select to save in an older format, making compatability amoung different versions a non-issue.

      --

      Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
    37. Re:Apple leadership? by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      See the post I was replying to. OS X certainly runs on Macs older than 3 years, and runs quite acceptably on a 5 year old G3.

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    38. Re:Apple leadership? by ahector · · Score: 1

      The same thing can be said about Windows XP.

      --
      sig
    39. Re:Apple leadership? by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      meh, all they did was rip out the Strings they forgot to previously.

      And you know there's a reason why the core NT team were all ex-VMS types.

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    40. Re:Apple leadership? by bigdave64 · · Score: 1

      If you invested in Apple 15 years ago, they still honor your investment.

      Wow, I'm a big proponent of Apple and I've owned a number of Macs over the years, but I've got to take issue with you here.

      Apple has fairly routinely come out with changes that have doomed folks with "older" (i.e., > 2 years) machines. The latest example is OS X. When it was introduced a couple of years ago, a whole lot of people with Macs only a few years old got hung out to dry, because these systems would not run OS X, by design!

      Make sure that you understand me here. I'm not saying that these systems didn't have the technological horsepower to run OS X, I mean that Apple designed OS X so that it would refuse to install on these "older systems" (gratuitous tweaking, aside).

      I realize that slashdot readers probably replace their systems every year or two, but many "ordinary" people don't think that it's unusual to hold onto a computer for five years or more. Apple has certainly not honored the investment of those people.

    41. Re:Apple leadership? by nathanh · · Score: 1
      The Mac won in the marketplace over the Lisa, therefore it can be argued that co-operative multi-tasking and a simple memory model are better.

      Only in the same sense that stale bread and water is "better" than a steak dinner and a nice durif.

    42. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and the Lisa itself was a clone of a similarity priced Xerox machine, which also failed. It's not like Apple invented the technology behind either the Lisa or the Mac.

      ok, so if it can be dismissed because apple cloned it, but microsoft made it after apple cloned it, isn't microsoft twice as bad?

      Jesus I swear some people on here are retarded.

    43. Re:Apple leadership? by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      So Zatrus sez:

      "...And their (Apple's) hardware is still 1.5-2x the price of PC hardware, for less performance. Don't even try to indicate that Apple isn't raping their customers as bad, if not worse, than Microsoft."

      However, Apple hardware remains quite usable for years after x86 hardware becomes "obsolete and/or end of life".

      Look, I'm using a PowerMac 5400/200. It's got 88MB of RAM and runs at 200Mhz.

      It was introduced February 1997, discontinued March 1998. So it's anywhere from 5 to 6 years old.

      This will still be quite usable for another 5 years or so. Sure, I can't run OSX. Boo hoo hoo. But there's nothing preventing me from running Yellow Dog linux, for example.

      When I get around to eventually installing more RAM, OS 9 and a dual USB/FireWire port PCI card in it, it'll be even more usable and extend it's usable lifespan even more, thanks to being able to use USB and FireWire peripherals.

      I know of quite a few first generation PowerMacs that are still in daily, productive use.

      I even know of more than a few 68k Macs still working every day as mail servers, et al.

      Yes, Apple hardware IS more expensive than similar Winel hardware. But the Apple hardware has a substantially LONGER useful lifespan than the Wintel hardware.

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    44. Re:Apple leadership? by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      But let's not forget how when Word97 came out the .DOC format changed and Word95 users could not read it

      Didn't we just go over this? MS Office has (almost) full backwards-compatibility on its file formats. To expect full FORWARD-compatibility (that you should be able to open a Word97 document in Word95) is ridiculous.

      Win95 'emulates' Win3.1 bugs so that Win3.1 apps would run as expected, yes. That means Win95 is backward-compatible with the apps. It does not mean that the apps were forward-compatible with Win95.

    45. Re:Apple leadership? by phoenix_rizzen · · Score: 2, Informative
      Yeah, there have been problems here, but that's hardly limited to MS. Apple has released apps with the same problems, and they've fixed them just like MS did. No, in general you can't get Word'95 to read a WordXP document. So what? You can't possibly expect forward compatibility to hold true - if it did we'd all be stuck using EBCDIC still.

      If WordPerfect could do it, why couldn't Microsoft? A WordPerfect document is nothing more than an SGML document. Create a document in WordPerfect 2002, save it, open it in WordPerfect 6, 7, 8, 2000, or 2002. You don't lose all that much formatting info, and you don't lose any of the content.

      After using WordPerfect since version 7, I am appalled at the lack of consitency in Word. Why the hell can't they make a .doc format that is compatible across versions??

      Afterall, XML is nothing more than a subset/extension of SGML ... why has it taken them so long to take advantage of it?? And why won't it work back to Word 95?? Somebody made a big mistake a long time ago, and they won't be fixing it anytime soon. Afterall, if they don't change the file format, what incentive is there to upgrade??

    46. Re:Apple leadership? by autopr0n · · Score: 1

      OS X will run on my 8 year old 8500/150 (via XPostoFacto), admittedly poorly, until I drop a G4/800 CPU card, 512MB of Ram (1/2 of what it supports) and a Radeon PCI mac Edition into it, then it'll run quite nicely, thank you very much.

      Well, windows2000 will run on an old 8086 if you drop in a p4 mobo, a new hard drive, and a gig of ram.

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    47. Re:Apple leadership? by autopr0n · · Score: 1

      However, you are right in criticizing the lack of protected memory - a source of great irritation and many unnecessary crashes and reboots. The market demanded it, and Apple provided. Where is the criticism here?

      That it took 'em like a decade. I mean, even windows 3.1 had protected memory (without premption you one app could still crash the machine, but it still helped).

      Yet mac users kept bitching about 'gpf's when the same error could take down a mac, and clamed their system was more stable.

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    48. Re:Apple leadership? by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However, Apple hardware remains quite usable for years after x86 hardware becomes "obsolete and/or end of life".

      That's entirely a personal perspective.

      My mother is still using the same system she bought in 1998. I suspect she'll continue using it until it dies. I know people using 386's as firewalls/routers, mail servers, file servers, etc. Heck, I used a PC as a gaming platform for 2.5 years without doing anything more than upgrading the memory - I finally replaced it last November.

      There are people at my company using computers that are at least 4 years old, if not older. And are likely to continue using them since there's no reason to upgrade them.

      You do not get twice the lifespan out of your hardware - thinking that is bullshit. If you don't upgrade your software than - surprise - your hardware needs are unlikely to increase and you can keep using it.

      Should I even mention how quickly PC hardware decreases in price relative to Apple hardware? A mere three months can result in half the price for the same system. That certainly can't be said for Apple hardware, and it's not a matter of it holding its value better - it's called artificial price inflation.

    49. Re:Apple leadership? by autopr0n · · Score: 1

      MS didn't get those features into their consumer OS until XP, and even then it didn't come for free. They lost backwards compatibility, but it doesn't matter anywhere near as much in 2002 as it did in 1995.

      What features? windows 3.1 (in 386 enhanced mode) had protected memory, and win95 introduced premptive multitasking.

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    50. Re:Apple leadership? by melatonin · · Score: 1
      Based on what I've read, another problem that Apple had getting Copland out the door was that nobody (good) wanted to work on it.

      Really OT now, but of course no-one good wanted to work on it. Management imposed 100% impossible-to-implement product requirements. There used to be a page at Macintouch describing a working Copland build at some Macworld or something (rule #1 of the Internet: nothing lasts forever. I'm not sure why they took the page down when they revamped the site; perhaps the credibility of the article was questionable). The Finder was implemented. The technology worked, Nukernal was eventually completed, but anyone with a brain knew that you couldn't make a non-reentrant API re-entrant (ah that's not quite correct or the core problem, but you get the gist). And yeah, there were a lot of other cool projects at Apple that got axed too :)

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
    51. Re:Apple leadership? by cookd · · Score: 1

      No. Win 3.1 was cooperative (mostly -- DOS apps got pre-empted). Mac was cooperative (fully, as far as I know).

      Win95 was cooperative only for Win16 apps. Otherwise it was pre-emptive.

      Where it wasn't "industrial strength" was in resource compartmentalization. Many resources, including certain parts of memory, were shared between processes, allowing one process to take down the whole system. This was done for backwards compatibility as well as performance (more resource sharing meant less resource needed). This was similar to the Mac before OS X.

      Win31 - Not much memory protection - Cooperative multitasking (pre-emptive for DOS)
      MacOS - Partial memory protection - Cooperative multitasking
      WinNT - Full memory protection - Pre-emptive multitasking
      Win95 - Partial memory protection - Pre-emptive multitasking
      MacOSX - Full memory protection - Pre-emptive multitasking

      When it comes down to it, I don't think there is much to complain about on either side.

      Microsoft has had NT for a long time and has wanted it to be the core OS for consumer and business as soon as the market was ready (since it required a beefier computer and caused some compatibility breaks). I'd say MS has been way head of Apple as far as underlying OS architecture goes for a long time (Apple finally imported Mach and BSD to make up for this).

      On the other hand, for simplicity, ease of use, and user interface, Apple has been and still is ahead of Microsoft.

      It therefore should surprise nobody that there is rampant "borrowing" going on in both camps. Kind of like the "innovations" in next year's Toyota Camry are going to be similar to the "new ideas" in next year's Nissan Altima. The industry advances together. Real "innovation" doesn't actually get to market for 5-20 years after it is discovered, and by that time, it is kind of hard to say who really innovated. And when it comes down to it, it doesn't really matter. What matters is who got the innovation into a product first, and who did the better job of turning the innovation into a useful feature.

      --
      Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
    52. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Earth to porno-dude. The non-NT Windows implementations are running on DOS. Protected memory and pre-emptive multitasking are marketing labels, not actual fact. Apps still had access to global pools of memory that they are free to corrupt (for example all windows are in a global memory pool) and pre-emptive multi-tasking is an illussion.

      Those implementations they are obviously very useful, but the issue of features here is the arguement that the original coward had, and even he admitted that those features came with NT. After all, if it was 'done' why bother moving the consumer OS to NT? Let's keep running DOS!

    53. Re:Apple leadership? by TheAncientHacker · · Score: 1

      Hate to interrupt your ignorance demonstration but Win95 had a preemptive multitasking engine for Win32 apps. It only used cooperative multitasking for Win16 apps (which were designed to do cooperative) and all of those apps were run inside a Win16 VM which was itself a Win32 app preemptively scheduled by the real multitasker.

    54. Re:Apple leadership? by Golias · · Score: 1
      Um.... You do know that most of NT was purchaced by MS, not written by them, right?

      But all of this history is irrelevant. Neither Mac System 7 nor Windows 95 were nearly as bad as many of their detractors make them out to be, but all that matters is which OS is the most usefull now.

      The answer to that question depends on your needs. For me, the answer is OS X, but there are many people I would reccomend XP to. We don't all drive the same car, why do we all need to buy our OS from the same company?

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    55. Re:Apple leadership? by Golias · · Score: 1

      Far be it from me to be a front-line advocate of MS, but mail merging was a huge advance in word processing. It might not mean much to the home user, but for offices it was a killer app.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    56. Re:Apple leadership? by vivIsel · · Score: 1

      Seamless transition from 68000 to PowerPC? You must be joking. The 'transition' models, i.e. the PowerMac/Performa 5200-53xx and 6200-6320 are utter crap, and I should know : I have about 20 of them in my basement right now.

      Some of the *cough cough* bright bulbs over there at Apple decided that it would be a good idea to stick the PPC 603 on an LC 475 mainboard. The things can't even do hardware handshaking for serial ports, except on the last revision of the board. So good luck using external ANYTHING with them...you can't have a modem FASTER THAN 9600 BPS!

      If you have an internal ethernet card, the printer port simply won't work.

      There's more, but I won't bother...

    57. Re:Apple leadership? by _avs_007 · · Score: 1

      But apple didn't rewrite the filesystem until years later. MS rewrote the filesystem with VFAT32. We spent lots of time discussing filesystem differences between OSes in my operating systems class back in college.

      From what I remember VFAT32 was higher performance than either NTFS or MACFS. This was years ago, so my memory may have faded :)

    58. Re:Apple leadership? by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1

      What computer platform that used Motorola 680x0 microprocessors DIDN'T use their own MMU and other *custom silicon*? Atari ST? Check. Amiga? Check. (I'm sure NeXT used custom chips as well). That's why those systems had more power than their PC counterparts in the day...

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    59. Re:Apple leadership? by UnixRevolution · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the whole NT 4 support fiasco.

      Apple Forever!! W00t!!!

      --
      You like your new Mac more than you like me, don't you, Dave? Dave? I asked...She said Yes.
    60. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... what world are you living in? Apple charges for point releases to OS-X.

      So does Microsoft. Win98->Win98SE was basically a point release, and that wasn't free. There were a few new features, and a lot of fixes for shit that didn't work right in 98 but they shipped it anyway, and called it a whole new OS. Bullshit.

    61. Re:Apple leadership? by Twisted+Mind · · Score: 2, Informative

      WordPerfect 8 supported somehow sgml, but it wasn't the default. It saved in it's own binary format.
      Besides WP 8 crashed so many times, that I'd rather spent my time converting Word 97 to Word 95 documents (if ever needed).

      --
      (-% TwistedMind %-)
    62. Re:Apple leadership? by TENTH+SHOW+JAM · · Score: 1
      After all, if pre-emptive multi-tasking and protected memory are so important, everyone would have used OS/2 instead of Windows 3.1
      I am of the firm beleif that people very rarely want the best. If they did, the SCSI bus on desktops, BETA videos and OS/2 would be more common. The best technologies are ignored in favor of cheaper nastier versions. Apple time and time again have come out with brilliant peices of technology only to be pushed into the corner by the wintel market. The old funny, "where do you want to go today? Coz Apple was there 5 years ago" rings true again and again.
      --
      A sig is placed here
      To display how futile
      English Haiku is
    63. Re:Apple leadership? by Alan · · Score: 1

      Mail merge was a bad example, sorry about that :) Word has lots of features that hardly anyone uses, but they "win" (or won, now that they are really the only game around) because people look at the long tick list of features and figure that because it has all these features, it's better, even though they will never use more than 10% of the features.

    64. Re:Apple leadership? by phillymjs · · Score: 1

      Don't even try to indicate that Apple isn't raping their customers as bad, if not worse, than Microsoft.

      If you don't think Microsoft is reaming their customers, then I've got four words for you, jerky: Licensing Six Point Oh. A hefty price increase in the middle of a recession. THAT is raping your customers.

      Let's look at server licensing. How much for an unlimited Microsoft CAL on that Windows server? How much you got? By the way, that doesn't include the licensing for Exchange server.

      How much does Apple charge for unlimited licenses for filesharing and mail? $1000. Raping their customers, indeed.

      Here's another question for you-- does Microsoft make any of their older OSes available, for free? No. Does Apple? You bet! Anything prior to Mac OS 8.0 is a free download for anyone who might need it. Microsoft won't even give away copies of DOS 1.x, ~20 years after it ceased to be a shipping product.

      ~Philly

    65. Re:Apple leadership? by madmancarman · · Score: 1
      Dare I mention the virtual lack of Apple clones? It's like having only Dell and Gateway to buy computers from.

      Except that they don't suck.

      First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi

      --
      First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi
    66. Re:Apple leadership? by steveha · · Score: 1

      If you invested in Apple 15 years ago, they still honor your investment. I can't say that the same is true of MS

      Are you talking about Apple Computer? The same Apple Computer that used to make the Newton, and the eMate, and just shotgunned those products and abandoned their users? (Remember how some companies tried to buy rights to the Newton OS so they could support the Newton community, and Apple refused to sell?)

      Is this the same Apple Computer that promised that the original iMac would run OS X, and then quietly walked away from that promise?

      Is this the same Apple Computer that allowed third party companies to make Mac clones, and then suddenly unilaterally shut down the lincensing deals? (That's more of a "screwing the clone vendors" thing than a "screwing their own customers" thing, but I'm still not happy about it.)

      Apple makes some cool stuff, and the premium for it isn't as high as it used to be. (I remember the days when Apple was scoring 40% margins on their hardware! Gouging their own customers for the short-term profit.) For many people, a Mac is a reasonable thing to buy -- after all, if what you do is surf the net, you don't care that your computer is only about a gigaHertz instead of 3 gigaHertz. But to hold up Apple as some shining example of taking care of their loyal customers is a bit much.

      I don't think Microsoft has ever just walked away from a group of customers. Even when Microsoft walked away from OS/2, it was because IBM was there to support the OS/2 customers. I have my issues with Microsoft these days, but on this particular issue I think they are the better company.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    67. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 68000 didn't have a MMU. It was not until the (correct me if I am wrong) the 68020 series that a MMU was on chip (and then not all versions of that chip). There were also versions of the 68030 and 68040 that did not come with a MMU.

    68. Re:Apple leadership? by Gsus411 · · Score: 1

      Uhh.. this post was typed on a revision A iMac under Mac OS X 10.1.5. And I thought revision A was the first iMac Apple ever released.........

      It did need a RAM upgrade, however.

      I think Apple kept their promise that OS X would run on the original iMac pretty well. This machine works like a charm for office/internet use under OS X.

    69. Re:Apple leadership? by vought · · Score: 1

      There was indeed a working, DR-ready Copland build. It required only the following:

      - One current PowerMac (6100, 7100, 8100)
      - One Serial cable
      -One more current PowerMac (6100, 7100, 8100)
      - Lots and lots of fucking patience.

      Copland was up and running - I once saw it briefly. From my brief impression, it was responsive and it was VERY cool. But it never had a chance with developers. In retrospect, I'm glad Apple didn't invest more in Copland, as it was constrained by the graphics architecture of the admittedly brilliant QuickDraw. Quartz is a leap forward in usability when it comes to feedback and cues.

      While I will mourn QuickDraw, I am glad that Quartz is the new graphics model. Copland wouldn't be up to today's eye-candy standards.

    70. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No and no...by default, MS-Office products save the documents in the latest format, even if they use only features present in the older versions. Changing the default is possible, but it's not likely to be done by the average user (or IS crew). After doing so, you get subjected to various "warning!" pop-ups because you're using an old format.

      This effectively makes the document unusable by older versions the first time some PHB pushes the "save" button on a shared file. Another round of unnecessary forced upgrades coming up!

      A customer friendly approach is to take the maximum compatibility approach for both saving and opening files:

      On save, the document format is identified as being the earliest version that supports those features actually used in that document. The save dialog also tells the user what version that is, so they can at least know what older versions won't be compatible.

      On open, the program should attempt to read newer versions as well as it can, offering the option to convert the incompatible features to plain text. Making the file "read only" in this case is a good precaution against losing content and formatting. Refusing to allow any use of the document is not acceptable!

      Somewhere, somehow, will a business realize that treating old customers well is what makes them repeat customers? There is where Apple shows at least a sign of clue-fullness, unlike their larger competitor.

    71. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do your research, it was a pretty fatal and idiotic bug. They fixed it eventually.

    72. Re:Apple leadership? by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      This whole discussion is just a riot (who ever thought we'd see Mac fans regurgitate from the depths yet again to tell the world why their platform is superior, and by extrapolation they are superior. Reading that it took OS X, a open rip of FreeBSD, to beat Windows because "they waited until they got it right and stable" is especially funny given that NT 3.5 was rock solid, but then MS decided to lean more towards the client arena [i.e. high performance video]), and I've restrained myself after idiotic post after idiotic post, however I enjoy replying to the outright lies.

      Um.... You do know that most of NT was purchaced by MS, not written by them, right?

      It was, was it? In what raving fanatics fanzine pat-each-other-on-the-back and convince yourselves your fantasty world is reality site did you read that? Please provide some facts to back up this BS.

      The reality, of course, is that NT was developed in-house along with IBM, in an effort to make the "New Technology" operating system to replace Windows 3.1 (though the Apple camp stayed with Windows 3.1-style technology until, oh, about 2000). IBM and Microsoft parted ways, with IBM taking their ball home and calling it OS/2, and Microsoft continuing theirs as NT. I'm eagerly waiting your facts to the contrary (though it'll be the classic FUD that is seen on Slashdot: Proof through repetition. Wait, Microsoft uses Berkeley style sockets, like virtually every IP-using OS on the market---THEY RIPPED THE BSD STACK!)

    73. Re:Apple leadership? by The_egghead · · Score: 1

      Just for trivia's sake, here's a better example:
      Auto-summarize. I don't know if it's still in there, but it was feature in like Word 97, where you could highlight some portion of text and it would use your own words to extract a summary. When I first saw it I was pretty impressed with how good it was.. but who ever actually used this?

    74. Re:Apple leadership? by geekee · · Score: 1

      I used NT 4 for a few years. Worked great. Never crashed. MacOS at the time would crash every half hour surfing the web. It was complete crap and you're completely clueless.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    75. Re:Apple leadership? by geekee · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Apple didn't have a preemptive multitasking OS with any sort of useful memory management until BSD, I mean OS X.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    76. Re:Apple leadership? by steveha · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. I don't know where I read that the revision A would not support OS X, but clearly it does. The official upgrade requirements page clearly shows the "Bondi Blue" iMac as a supported platform.

      I note that the page is for version 10.2 of the OS. Has the revision A been supported all along, and my info was completely wrong, or was it not supported in 10.0?

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    77. Re:Apple leadership? by Keeper · · Score: 1

      The fact that something is better doesn't mean anything if you can't afford to buy it in the first place...

      People want the best, but buy what they can afford. If that wasn't true, I'd be driving around in an exotic italian sports car...

    78. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So does Microsoft. Win98->Win98SE was basically a point release, and that wasn't free. There were a few new features, and a lot of fixes for shit that didn't work right in 98 but they shipped it anyway, and called it a whole new OS. Bullshit.

      All the fixes in 98SE were available free for 98. It's on the added features that were not.

    79. Re:Apple leadership? by MsGeek · · Score: 1

      The 52xx/62xx-63xx machines were Michael Spindler's fault. Yes, they sucked ass. Even Apple makes mistakes. They still do...the eMac is a disaster. But for every disaster, Apple more than redeems themselves. People throw out 1999-vintage PCs in dumpsters. People still pay $500+ for a 1999 stock vintage G3 Blue And White minitower.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    80. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a while Apple removed accelerated video support for the Rage Pro video chip from OS X (affected early iMacs and other G3 models).

      Only after threats of lawsuits did Apple add (2D) support back in. Maybe that's what you are thinking of.

    81. Re:Apple leadership? by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 1
      Uh... what world are you living in? Apple charges for point releases to OS-X. And their hardware is still 1.5-2x the price of PC hardware, for less performance. Don't even try to indicate that Apple isn't raping their customers as bad, if not worse, than Microsoft.
      The problem with Apple products is that they include many hardware features standard that most other computer vendors do not offer in their base models. Go to a site like Dell (considered one of the cheapest vendors around) and configure a computer to match an Apple workstation as closely as possible. See what the cost is at that point, and then tell me who charges more.

      Apple's second mistake is that they design "designer" computers that the average PC user just doesn't like (first a gumdrop, then a lamp.) Wintel users want beige boxes, dammit! (And the discriminating ones that like silver or black still have to contend with adding drives that have beige faceplates, which ruins the idea of an attractive box.)

      Even the complaints about upgradeability are largely trivial; many claim they want the option to upgrade their computer, yet rarely use that ability before they're replacing the entire system. "I want the option to add a Firewire card." Standard on every Mac; not necessary. The only downside is you pay for it up front, whether you use it or not.

      Apple has always charged for point releases. However, they also give purchasers of new Macs three coupons for use on future OS upgrades. In the past, these upgrade coupons have been good for a free OS update. With Jaguar 10.2, coupons were not honored, which ticked off a lot of Apple users, but they continue to package the coupons with new machines, so it can be hoped that future updates will revert to that tradition. Charging for Mac OS point releases can hardly be compared to Microsoft's licensing structure. Apple sells one OS only, with no differentiation between pro or home user. For example, just being able to use more than one language in the GUI (which I do) is built in by default, whereas Microsoft requires you to purchase extra software that only works with a Pro license.

      It all comes down to preference and habit, and those are fine arguments by themselves. Justification through heresay and poorly researched information (on both sides) is the reason this debate always gets so heated.
      --
      "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
    82. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ok, so if it can be dismissed because apple cloned it, but microsoft made it after apple cloned it, isn't microsoft twice as bad?

      There is nothing "bad" about cloning things--it's the way products get better.

      What is "bad" is when overeager corporate PR departments pretend that their companies invented stuff that they didn't actually invent. And Apple does that even more than Microsoft.

    83. Re:Apple leadership? by justzisguy · · Score: 1

      When IBM decided to create the open architecture of the modern PC, it really created a nightmare for software developers. They have no way to tell any clone manufacturer what goes in their box, which leads to compatibility problems.

      Just look at the hardware timer issue as an example. Every time a new processor came out that was faster than the previous model, all software timers would have to be rewritten. A hardware timer was the simple solution to this. Having a hardware timer on the motherboards costs extra and many vendors have failed to implement this function, even from such recognized brands as Dell. Apple on the other hand has complete control of the user experience, from the hardware to the operating system.

      Charging more for one platform than another is what Capitalism is all about. Apple, just as everyone else, charges what the market will bear, no more, no less. They are betting that people will pay a premium for their widget and if you don't wish to do so, you are free to buy your widget elsewhere.

    84. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ahahaahaha. worked great!?! yeah right. I ran my macos 8.6 machine for years serving websites through webstar. It only rebooted when there was a power failure. MORE reliable than any other single machine i've owned since. that includes my piece of shit ACER laptop, and AMD (homegrown) desktop... etc

    85. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhh, no. the mac is still in the marketplace. ya dick.

    86. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Josephine User wants that update to download along with her P2P in the background while she's listening to MP3's and emailing someone. This wasn't an issue 5 years ago except to power users.
      Way to lose your email password
    87. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note that I was neither a Mac nor Windows user at the time, but my distinct recollection is that Windows apps those days were far more crash-prone.

      Apparently, lack of memory protection is one way to improve application quality.

    88. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple also had A/UX, which was also pre-emptive multi-tasking, but it also offered the user-friendly Finder.

      However, at that time there wasn't the money to port A/UX to ppc.

    89. Re:Apple leadership? by TKinias · · Score: 1

      scripsit poot rootbeer:

      To expect full FORWARD-compatibility (that you should be able to open a Word97 document in Word95) is ridiculous.

      Um, why?

      What is ridiculous about expecting a vendor not to break compatibility for no purpose? WordPerfect has managed to keep the same file format for quite a few generations (back to 6 IIRC). I can save a JPEG in the latest GIMP and open it in early-90s vintage xv with no trouble... Properly written HTML4 Strict should render fine in Mosaic 1.0... Why break things?

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    90. Re:Apple leadership? by TKinias · · Score: 1

      scripsit NanoGator:

      It's like having only Dell and Gateway to buy computers from.

      Lemme guess: Gateway is the [ie]Macs?

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    91. Re:Apple leadership? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      Never mind that fact that they offered a seemless transition over the years from 68000 to PowerPC, from MacOS Classic to MacOS X.

      Hardly seamless... if you used the 68040 FPU, you were outta luck when Apple didn't bother to emulate or thunk it cleanly. Sure you could port and recompile, but that doesn't help when you're using pre-written apps, and it's still hardly "seamless". I would have preferred to see Apple go to the 68060 (which was superior to PPC601 at the time) and who knows, maybe the 68080 after that...

    92. Re:Apple leadership? by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1
      So then Zathrus sez: (his/her comments in italics

      "However, Apple hardware remains quite usable for years after x86 hardware becomes "obsolete and/or end of life".

      That's entirely a personal perspective.

      Oh? Read my profile. I'm still using my Commodore 128 for a lot of things. Games, letterwriting and mailing labels for the most part. If I install the TCP/IP stack, I could use it with my ISP. If I plug in the Ethernet interface, I could even go 802.11b wireless with it.

      Hardware that still works is still usable, and can still be usuable at a higher level than the average WIndows drone could possibly imagine.

      My mother is still using the same system she bought in 1998. I suspect she'll continue using it until it dies.

      And is there any reason she shouldn't use it until it dies? You make it sound as if using a 6 year old computer is somehow eccentric.

      You do not get twice the lifespan out of your hardware - thinking that is bullshit. If you don't upgrade your software than - surprise - your hardware needs are unlikely to increase and you can keep using it.

      And why do we all need to upgrade our software? Eudora Pro 4.3.3 works just splendidly on my Mac 5400/200. What reason is there for me to buy Eudora Pro 5? The 68k version of iCab works nicely on my PowerBook 165c, as does Eudora Pro 3. Is there any really over-riding reason for me to buy a new PowerBook?

      I know why Windows users have to upgrade their software constantly, but then, most Windows users are, perhaps, not quite the brightest of God's creatures

      . Should I even mention how quickly PC hardware decreases in price relative to Apple hardware?

      The average price of the 5400/180-200 on eBay seems to be in the US$100.00 range. But what does the market price for used hardware have to do with it's useful life? If you're claiming that Wintel hardware depreciates fasters than Mac hardware, well, what does that say about Wintel hardware? That the market considers it worth less than comparable Apple hardware? How perceptive of you!

      A mere three months can result in half the price for the same system.

      And what does that say about how the market views the worth of the Wintel platform? But I repeat myself.

      That certainly can't be said for Apple hardware, and it's not a matter of it holding its value better - it's called artificial price inflation.

      Curse Apple and that Evil Genius, Steve Jobs, for building hardware that people value more than Wintel! Curse him and all his progeny unto the 9th generation!

      My Mac 5400/200 works just fine. It's 6 years old or so. Currently has 88 MB of RAM. Runs at 200 Mhz. If I hadn't told you that, you'd have no way of knowing what I'm using right now. For all you know, someone right now is reading /. and posting messages via a VT100 terminal and a 2400 baud modem via dial up shell account.

      My software for email, web, USENET, graphics work, MP3, streaming media, et al, etc. all work spendidly. Why do I need to upgrade the software? Since I'm not locked into the MS paradigm, I don't need to constantly buy new hardware to run the new software I must buy in order to stay current.

      That's a sucker's game.

      When I get around to it, I'll eventually install a second 64MB of RAM. Probably install the TV/FM Tuner packaage and a dual USB/FireWire port card in the PCI slot, and maybe even OS 9. But if I don't do any of that, as long as the machine boots, it's still quite useable and will be until the day Something Terrible happens to it. And on that day, I'll pull the Performa 6300CD and a monitor out of the closet and use that until I can find a replacement for the 5400/200.

      I tell you, staying well behind the Bleeding Edge of Wintel is a very pleasant, comfortable place to be. No viri, no file format incompatibilities, no constant downloading of security patches.

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    93. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      huh. And if you invested in PCs then MS didn't?


      Um, you try getting support for Win95 or NT4 etc. They won't talk to you.

      -- james
    94. Re:Apple leadership? by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      Never heard of A/UX have you then.

      It was a SysV unix, running Finder on top (in either 24bit or 32 bit modes) or X.

      Circa 1992.

      Of course, it was, like Windows NT prior to v4, intended merely for servers.

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    95. Re:Apple leadership? by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      It isn't so much that MS was ahead of Apple in the internals (A/UX argues that that simply wasn't the case) as that Apple spent the early and mid 90's chasing a dream OS-wise. An OS-X type solution could have been available in 1996 or so if Apple hadn't wasted years on Talingent Pink and Copeland.

      MS went for 'Good enough', Apple went for 'Perfect', 'Good Enough' won that battle (And OS X is an example of 'Good Enough', even if it is better than XP).

      And Mac OS was about as stable and multitasked as well as Win95 (95 had a better design, Mac OS was a more mature OS, except for System 7.5, the Win Me of Mac OS).

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    96. Re:Apple leadership? by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1

      maybe Motorola did have bugs with MMU design but that has nothing to do with my point. I illustrated the point that all the other 680x0 based computer platforms used their own designs for their "custom silicon" including MMUs, blitters, etc. Judging with hindsight, it was too bad that Amiga, Apple, and Atari all failed to include the math co-processors (68881 and 68882) standard on their platforms. That would've given them even more processing firepower...

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    97. Re:Apple leadership? by rtechie · · Score: 1

      Never mind that fact that they offered a seemless transition over the years from 68000 to PowerPC, from MacOS Classic to MacOS X.

      If you invested in Apple 15 years ago, they still honor your investment. I can't say that the same is true of MS where different versions of Office don't even like to talk to each other and they are constantly pushing for their customers to spend more money.


      I just pulled out an old copy of the DOS version of Wordperfect 5.1 and if worked fine on my Windows XP box. Virtually every program written for Windows 95 can work on Windows XP as well as the vast majority of DOS programs going back to 1981. Windows has backwards-compatibility in spades.

      Oh, and the file I created in WordPerfect opened just fine in Word XP.

    98. Re:Apple leadership? by rtechie · · Score: 1

      "However, Apple hardware remains quite usable for years after x86 hardware becomes "obsolete and/or end of life". ...
      Hardware that still works is still usable, and can still be usuable at a higher level than the average WIndows drone could possibly imagine.


      You made the claim that Mac hardware remains "viable" longer, and Zathrus pointed out that depends entirely on what you mean by "viable". The very latest Windows software doesn't run well on older x86 PCs, the exact same thing is true of Macs. However, if you're willing to run older, or less "intensive" software, older x86 PCs work just fine, same as Macs.

      I know why Windows users have to upgrade their software constantly, but then, most Windows users are, perhaps, not quite the brightest of God's creatures

      This is demonstrably false. The vast majority of Windows users have little need to constantly upgrade their applications and do not do so. Your prespective is skewed by all the bleeding-edge users hanging around /. They tend to be computer professionals and are far from typical.

      You are probably right in thinking that Mac hardware retains it's value a bit better than x86 hardware, but I'm wondering what that is supposed to prove. Maybe if you were planning on reselling your computer this might be an issue, but I fail to see how "worth less" translates directly to "less useful".

      You seem happy running older hardware. That's great. But there is really no reason why you couldn't be happy running x86 hardware. If you really hate Windows, you can run Linux, or BSD, or BeOS, or one of the dozens of other operating systems that run on x86 hardware. There are even emulators to run older versions of MacOS on x86 hardware using Basilisk II or another emulator.

    99. Re:Apple leadership? by phoenix_rizzen · · Score: 1

      Actually, WordPerfect uses SGML for it's file format. It even comes with its own DTD and everything. You can also use WordPerfect to create SGML documents, or to create your own DTDs.

      If using WP as a wordprocessor, though, you are using an SGML application. That's the beauty of WP, and the wonder of the "Reveal Codes" function. It makes document editing so much easier, because you see the formatting tags, and you can manipulate the tags themselves. I can't stand using a wordprocessor that doesn't let me see and manipulate the formatting tags, now.

    100. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hehe. Right. :)

    101. Re:Apple leadership? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm. Could you help me out here? I've got a 8086, 4.7 MHz I think, and I'm trying to get it to run in my P4 motherboard. Where can I buy an adapter because the pins don't quite line up right? Do you think it's safe to overclock the 8086 to 4 ghz? Please advise.

    102. Re:Apple leadership? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Whoa, whoa, whoa! Hold on there! Charging for point releases? Oh, you mean like from 10.1 to 10.2...

      That's not a point release - that's a new OS. They didn't pick the best naming scheme, since it confused a lot of people, but that's the way it is.

      Windows 95 and Windows 98 are like OS X 10.1 and OS X 10.2 - (except not as good as Apple's offerings). Microsoft didn't give you windows 98 for free if you had a computer with Windows 95 on it did they?

      The point releases for OS X are the numbers after the second point - 10.2.x
      The number after the first decimal point can be likened to the 95, 98, 2000, XP in the Windows name.

    103. Re:Apple leadership? by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, did you mean to reply to my post? I didn't say anything about point releases, OS's, or naming schemes. I just said that you can't buy non-Apple hardware. (or a large variety of it anyway, been a while since I've been Mac shopping.)

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    104. Re:Apple leadership? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Damn, I replied to the poster you quoted.

      I read the quote and hit reply on your post without thinking.

  5. So What else is new? by JivanMukti · · Score: 1

    This has been going on for decades. I remember when Win95 came out and people were talking about all the great "new" features it had. It was all things my Mac (running 7.1 at the time) had had for years.

    Nothing has really changed all these years.

    1. Re:So What else is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      I don't know about you, but I consider application and game compatibility a feature as well. Tell me when OS X catches up.

    2. Re:So What else is new? by proj_2501 · · Score: 1

      Hint: when shopping for Macintosh software, do not shop in the Windows section of the store.

    3. Re:So What else is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hint:there's no mac section...duh...

  6. Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Microsoft Bites Apple, Apple Bites Back"

    It's like one of those "in Soviet Russia" jokes isn't it?

    "In Soviet Russia, Apple bites Microsoft."

  7. this is what free market is about by Raleel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Competition makes the product better. MS learns, they are not stupid. They are stealing from Linux, they are stealing from Apple, Linux is stealing from both, etc.

    Feed on each other to make a stronger whole :)

    --
    -- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
  8. Linux to catch up to 1993! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gnome 2.4 and KDE 3.2 will finally have the option to change the screen resolution of your display without having to restart X, But gnome 2.4 will still have the old win 3.1 file dialog!

    1. Re:Linux to catch up to 1993! by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      control. alt. numpad-plus.

    2. Re:Linux to catch up to 1993! by Zeriel · · Score: 1

      Umm...this assumes you have a decent x-configuration, but Ctrl-Alt-Plus and Ctrl-Alt-Minus switch resolutions/color depths on MY linux box.

      I've been able to hand-roll X configs to do it since 1996 at least, although I'd have to check to see if any distros do it out of the box.

      --
      "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
    3. Re:Linux to catch up to 1993! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh... it's about a real resolution change

      If I change from 1024 to 640x480, I still have a Virtual Screen of 1024x786. The new RandR extension can change that Virtual Resolution on the fly, something both Windows and MacOS had around 1995.

      And I cannot change the colour depth with c/a/+, something Windows 98 could do with a simple systray menu.

  9. Yawn by Scotch+Game · · Score: 1, Troll

    Another Slashdot story detailing how Microsoft can't possibly be actually good at anything, it can only *copy* good things. Or steal. Or bully. Yawn.

    When individuals mock other groups in a social setting they're called insecure and intimidated.

    Same here. Everyone here is a Microphobe. My suspicion is that everyone goes home, hides in their closet, and plays with their WinCE handhelds.

    1. Re:Yawn by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 4, Funny
      Everyone here is a Microphobe.

      Uuummm.... fear of microphones?

      Fear of germs?

      Fear of tiny gay men?

      --
      --- Ban humanity.
    2. Re:Yawn by bbc22405 · · Score: 1

      I think "microphobe" would be "person afraid of small". Maybe it's supposed to be "person afraid of [being] small". I think you need to listen to an old Steve Martin skit to understand what that fear might be.

    3. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not very bright, even for a troll...

      " Another Slashdot story detailing how Microsoft can't possibly be actually good at anything, it can only *copy* good things. Or steal. Or bully. Yawn."

      Slashdot doesn't write the articles, monkey nuts, it only posts links to other articles. If you don't like the social atmosphere of slashdot, why don't you just piss the fuck off? I bet you get dressed up as spock and go to Star Trek conventions just so you can tell everyone else what dorks they are.

      "Same here. Everyone here is a Microphobe."

      If Microphobe was even a word (which it is not) it wouldn't be a proper noun and wouldn't be capitalized.

      "My suspicion is that everyone goes home, hides in their closet, and plays with their WinCE handhelds."

      Well I guess dumb people have dumb suspicions...
      My suspicion is that you are a clueless wanna-be geek, with absolutely no insight or information on the subject matter, yet you feel the need to shoot off your mouth when someone disgraces the only OS you've ever known.

      So you can bother me for a warm glass of shut the fuck up...

      My suspicion is that everyone goes home, hides in their closet, and plays with their WinCE handhelds."

      "When individuals mock other groups in a social setting they're called insecure and intimidated."

      This doesn't even make sense. You are saying when an individual mocks a group, they are insecure and intimidated? WTF? Next time you're alone, try mocking a group of 14-15 jocks. If you have the balls to do that, you are most certainly not "insecure and intimidated".

    4. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He IS correct !

      As much as I like Linux and the topics covered at /. , it's always the same when there's an article about Microsoft. Have a look, the articles about Microsoft always have the most responses. They need to have a go, spouting out the same old tripe time and time again.

      It's a pretty sad hate thing that shows some Linux fans to be very immature. You show your own lack of maturity by the use of foul and abusive language as opposed to reasoned debate and a willingness to listen to the views of others.

      Sure, you're going to flame me but that will only confirm what I'm saying here right now.

  10. "laughed the apple execs" by Loosewire · · Score: 1, Funny

    Then they sued M$ and we all laughed a bit more :)

    --
    Slashdot - The one stop shop for procrastination
  11. how many different ways ... by khalua · · Score: 1

    ...can you slap together a monitor, a keyboard, and whiz bang periphals anyway?

    It seems that someone must lead the way to new designs. If not Apple, who then?

    --


    "There are more pleasant things to do than beat up people." --Muhammad Ali
    1. Re:how many different ways ... by Ponty · · Score: 1

      Dell? :-)

  12. Has either company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has either company ever thanked Xerox?

    25 years next month!
    what would I be doing if I hadn't?
    scares me to think about it

    1. Re:Has either company by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 5, Informative
      Yes. Apple gave Xerox quite a lot of stock options for what little they used from the Alto work.

      Honestly, you'd think the Internet would have spread information to the four corners of the Earth, but all it does it perpetuate the myths.

      --
      --- Ban humanity.
    2. Re:Has either company by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes. Apple gave Xerox quite a lot of stock options for what little they used from the Alto work. And they got permission from Xerox HQ to look at the inner works of Alto in the first place. Xerox PARC was more than hesitant, but HQ ordered them to cooperate.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  13. Sign Needed: by tnak · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "No Feeding the MS Bashers"


    Seriously, this 'article' is the journalistic equivalent of the Sci-Fi channel bumpers and the only reason I can see for Slashdot to post it is to start another anti-MS feeding frenzy.

    Do different companies in the same industry steal ideas from each other? Yes. Is it news? Not unless they get caught doing it before the other fella, i.e. industrial spying.

    1. Re:Sign Needed: by ausoleil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do different companies in the same industry steal ideas from each other? Yes. Is it news? Not unless they get caught doing it before the other fella, i.e. industrial spying.

      When a company has made a living off of copying other ideas and then proclaiming their "innovation" they are going to draw the ire of those who know better.

      Microsoft, more than any company since at least the halycon days of IBM, does more to make informed people dislike them than anyone else. And they do a better job of that than they do creating computer programs.

      Even died-in-the-wool Microsoft bigots have a lot less than love for the new licensing plans that Microsoft has "offered" ... so it is more than just a few malcontents sitting infront of their keyboard after their third triple espresso of the day.

    2. Re:Sign Needed: by autopr0n · · Score: 1

      When a company has made a living off of copying other ideas and then proclaiming their "innovation" they are going to draw the ire of those who know better.

      Oh please, Apple does the same thing but with a good design aesthetic and you people fall all over yourselves to praise them.

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  14. Who's the bad guy today? by YetAnotherName · · Score: 3, Funny

    Not only has Apple been selling cinema-style flat panel displays for several years, but last year it filed patent application 20030002246, titled "active enclosure for computing device," ...

    Help, I'm conflicted.

    1. Re:Who's the bad guy today? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Listen, you know better.

      Apple is ALWAYS the good guy, MS is ALWAYS the bad guy, no matter what.

      You see, cmdrtaco has a mac that matches the christopher lowell decor in his bedroom (which he calls a boudoir as he flicks his wrist), so we all love Apples.

    2. Re:Who's the bad guy today? by PetWolverine · · Score: 2

      How does filing a patent make Apple the bad guy?

      The problem with patents these days is that you can patent an idea, which is counter to the original concept of patents. A patent was originally supposed to be for an implementation, not for an idea, and many of the software patents we have today are for ideas.

      The mentioned Apple patent, however, is for an implementation. It's a legal, valid patent; get over it.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
  15. News? by Ghoser777 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Considering this is all that linux distros have been doing for the past several years, how is this news? It seems that this same idea gets rehashed every so often. Yes, I'm not happy that lil' BG turned on Apple, but what do you expect Microsoft to do...

    Microsoft Employee: Look, Apple just added X feature to OS X!
    Bill Gates: Well rats. Since they beat us to the punch, we should just voluntarially not add the feature for the next five to ten years as if they had a patent on it or something.
    Microsoft Employee: Good idea sir!

    No way - as soon as one company adds some service or markets an idea, other companies can start using it as well. Apple's and Linux's big problem isn't microsoft stealing little features and design attributes, it's that people don't realize that both are very stable and allow you to do almost the exact same thing as a PC running windows. If that myth ever goes away, then there's a legitimate chance that users will start to move over at a noticeable rate to alternative platforms for the desktop.

    Matt Fahrenbacher

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
    1. Re:News? by lxadu99 · · Score: 1

      According to the article, the new computer put out as a joint venture by HP and MS shows some similarity to the LCD imac (wide lcd, diode for button, etc). In fact, the system may be in violation of patents owned by apple. I want to see some screen shots of the new system before I decide if the system is really a bad copy or not.

    2. Re:News? by Ciderx · · Score: 1

      erm, if that happened in the industry, Apple wouldn't have any features to stick into Panther.

    3. Re:News? by SoVeryWrong · · Score: 1

      If I'm not mistaken, I think there's a picture of that system in the May 2003 issue of Popular Science.

    4. Re:News? by melatonin · · Score: 1
      Microsoft Employee: Look, Apple just added X feature to OS X!
      Bill Gates: Well rats. Since they beat us to the punch, we should just voluntarially not add the feature for the next five to ten years as if they had a patent on it or something.
      Microsoft Employee: Good idea sir!

      Jeebus, that's funny. Good point and well made that I agree with. But it's still news.

      The problem is, what has Microsoft done while Apple was building OS X? Up until Win95, Microsoft's goal was to create Win95 (BG: "Make it like a Mac!" or something to that effect). And after? What's the diff between Win95, 98, 98SE, Me?

      Sure, tech advances to keep up with the times. IE's been integrated, the one feature no-one asked for or wanted. Active Desktop, which was similarly useless. And that whole, forgot what it was called, "push content" thing that was part of 98, that big bar of crap from the Internet that they added. That was all a reflex reaction to the Internet; so we can ignore that, I think.

      What did Apple do? Alright, after releasing Sys 7, Apple had problems, because they had this awesome 'Pink' project (Sys 7 was the result of the 'Blue' project, they were in development at the same time) that was document-centric (task-centric as opposed to app-centric computing) and fully OO a la NeXT. They decided to team up with IBM to do it who had some good tech like SOM. That turned into Taligent. Apple eventually saw how that union was going, and put a roadmap out for Copland/Gershwin (also with task-centric computing). Uh, then Win95 came out, Apple couldn't build their machines fast enough to sell them and they started bleeding money....

      So no fundamental changes to the Mac OS since System 7 to OS X, mostly due to bad management decisions. Now Apple's adding features that benefit user experience. Microsoft? Oh shit, Apple's doing stuff again, we gotta start catching up! BE LIKE MAC!

      That's why it's news; it's illustrating Microsoft's true nature, the company that claims it's an innovator and wants to be protected as such. If it was such an innovator, why haven't they implemented their own useful ideas in all this time? Why don't they have confidence in their vision (all that hand-holding auto-shit in XP), and stand out as a leader? Don't they have a vision for computing?

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
    5. Re:News? by rjung2k · · Score: 1

      Of course Microsoft has a vision for computing. Bill Gates said it himself -- "A computer on every desktop."

      ...running Microsoft software. Doesn't matter if it's bloated, buggy, useless, condescending, or a blatant rip-off, as long as you're running it and it has the MS logo on it, Bill's vision is met.

  16. Athens? Yuck! by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Leave it to Microsoft and HP to turn the sleek "I want it" of an Apple into something that looks like a cheap rip-off for a kids toy company. If that's the best they can do in the design, they need to get out and get some fresh ideas.

    1. Re:Athens? Yuck! by broeman · · Score: 0

      exactly ... nothing is consistent about the style I see in the (very) small picture ... as a designer, and off course mac-user (at work), my colleagues and I would never go near it.

      --

      (yes this can be compared with sex)
    2. Re:Athens? Yuck! by satterth · · Score: 1
      Here is a slightly bigger and even BIGGER picture for ya.

      big
      bigger

      --
      Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
  17. Where's the beef by timeOday · · Score: 4, Informative

    That article was short and uninformative. The only "innovative" feature clearly alleged stolen is the particular aspect ratio of the screen, which 1) who cares and 2) isn't an "idea", just a design choice.

    1. Re:Where's the beef by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed.

      That article was content-free.

    2. Re:Where's the beef by sqlgeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's entirely telling that on slashdot design decisions aren't considered "ideas" (Score:5, Informative). Oh dear. What hope do we have for a decent gui?

    3. Re:Where's the beef by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Agreed.

      Your comment is content-free.

    4. Re:Where's the beef by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 1

      They didn't go into detail about Schiller's comment on Longhorn's Quartz-like qualities. The similarities are interesting. If Longhorn is going to use 3D cards to accelerate their 2D desktop, they will be able to quickly do double-buffering for windows, real alpha channels and compositing, etc.

      You know how if an app is frozen, and you hide it then restore it, it can't redraw and looks like soup? Well, that doesn't ever happen in Mac OS X, and it's due to window double-buffering. You'll get that feature, and more. Copied from Apple. It's a major architectural change to the GUI.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    5. Re:Where's the beef by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only let gay men wearing black turtlenecks design my GUIs. There is hope, friend!

  18. Ugly by scrotch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That computer looks like an iMac using a painted Commodore 64 keyboard and 2 little arms stuck on the sides. Couldn't they integrate the camera into the screen a little better? And what is that thing hanging off the left side? And why on Earth would it be there? Couldn't that be under the keyboard somewhere?

    I know it's a prototype, but isn't this the stage where you make it beautiful - because it doesn't have to work well yet?

    This is why MS gets accused of copying more often than anyone else. It's a second class rip off. When you steal from something, you should be able to look at the original and improve upon it. This is just playing catch up.

    1. Re:Ugly by Snork+Asaurus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Personally, I found the camera a little creepy. Is it part of the hardware that MS will require for DRM?

      --
      Sigs are bad for your health.
    2. Re:Ugly by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 1

      MS has done very little in the field of Innovation. For the longest time they have just looked at what was happening in the buisness enviorment as far as software goes and replicate what people were commonly using to meet thier needs. They haven't truely innovated anything.. Just bundling all these ideas into one package.. and if you think thats really innovation think again... innovation Function: noun Date: 15th century 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device All the ideas behind MS's software can be found in other products long before thier release of the software. There's nothing new there at all.. Just a rehash of other peoples innovations(in 99.99999% of the cases they make it proprietary and bundle it in with one of thier products to keep compitetion down to a extreamly manageable level).

      --
      Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
    3. Re:Ugly by evilmrhenry · · Score: 1

      And what is that thing hanging off the left side?

      *Squints*

      I think it's duct tape.

    4. Re:Ugly by phillymjs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And what is that thing hanging off the left side? And why on Earth would it be there?

      It's the handset for the integrated telephone. It does look stupid there, it (along with the camera sticking out on the otherside) ruins whatever sleek appearance the computer might otherwise have.

      This is a perfect example of Microsoft's true innovation-- they do really stupid shit when they're not copying someone else outright <cough>MS Bob<cough>. If you're going to integrate a fucking phone with a computer, do it in a way that leaves people's hands free to operate the computer while they talk! What next, are they gonna hang a memo pad and a pencil on a string off the side of this thing, so you can jot down ideas while you're using the computer?

      If I were designing this thing, I'd build in Bluetooth, and use a rechargable wireless headset for the phone. Hide the recharge bay on the rear edge of the display. Let the headset's mic also be used for speech-to-text and giving verbal commands to the computer. And build in a good mic and speakers so you can use a speakerphone if you don't want to wear the headset or so you don't have to fumble for it if you're not wearing it when there's an incoming call.

      /me runs off to the Patent Office with a hard copy of this post, just in case anyone from Microsoft reads it.

      ~Philly

    5. Re:Ugly by metalslinger · · Score: 1

      Gee I remember owning an acer p166mhz that had a built in phone. You could actually make phone calls using IBM's mwave modem without it being choppy. No innovation here.

      --
      /. Heroics - 99.999%
  19. one of the features they haven't told us about yet by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 5, Funny
    The mandatory registration will automatically register you for the New York Times. Then, Internet Explorer will automatically remember your registration ID and password. Oh yeah, maybe mandatory registration will automatically sign you up for MS Passport as well.

    Heck, it reminds me of the Dilbert cartoon where an "InstalSHIELD" type program displays the message "Install Wizard is now placing orders for products you will probably need... Found your credit card number..."

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  20. umm.... by mike77 · · Score: 1
    do I smell a lawsuit?

    Can M$ actually do this w/out incurring the wrath of Apple's lawyers?

    --

    --Keeping the flame wars alive, one post at a time

    1. Re:umm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.

  21. Here's a summary... by Dthoma · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...of the responses this story will no doubt get when more people start commenting, for the benefit of those lacking time to read them all:

    • Apple copies Microsoft
    • Microsoft copies Apple
    • Everyone copies the hell out of everyone else
    • All of these features were in BSD/Linux/AIX/VMS/SysV since 1995/1990/1985/1930
    • Fuck you all, Apple rulez
    • I know I'm going to get modded down for saying this, but Microsoft has innovated
    • Give one example where Microsoft has innovated
    • An example of Microsoft innovation
    • Five examples of Apple's innovation
    • Somebody screaming that all of these features were copied from an obscure OS from thirty years ago
    • I use Multics! I love it, and you should too!
    • Fuck Linux
    • Fuck Microsoft
    • Shaddap all of you, copying is part of innovation
    • Imagine a Beowulf cluster of iMacs!
    • The latest Microsoft PCs are copies of iMacs
    • Here's a reg-free link to the article
    • Steve Jobs hasn't had an original idea since 1990
    • Bill Gates hasn't had an original idea since 1970
    • ...plus the standard trolls
    --

    Note to M1-ers: a curt but otherwise insightful message is not "Flamebait" or "Troll".

    1. Re:Here's a summary... by Dinosaur+Jr. · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't forget BSD is dying, in Soviet Russia.

    2. Re:Here's a summary... by JargonScott · · Score: 1
      You forgot my favorite:

      Someone is reminded of some crappy obscure sci-fi book from 1973. Other than is being about vampire cyber robots from the 13th dimension, and their quest to find the meaning of life, it describes this whole thing to a T.

      --
      Nuke Gay Whales for Jesus.
    3. Re:Here's a summary... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      Y'know....You could probbably turn this in to a gambling sport, like the races or something. Good if you're a geek to, 'cause it's predictable. Unlike, y'know, horses, or cats....Or whatever they race these days.

    4. Re:Here's a summary... by I8TheWorm · · Score: 1

      Give one example where Microsoft has innovated Thread pooling?

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
    5. Re:Here's a summary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot:

      "They both got their ideas from CowboyNeal"

    6. Re:Here's a summary... by amanpatelhotmail.com · · Score: 2, Funny
      You forgot one,
      • For the benefit of those lacking time heres the summary
    7. Re:Here's a summary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks.
      tl;dr

    8. Re:Here's a summary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...of the responses this story will no doubt get when more people start commenting, for the benefit of those lacking time to read them all:

      [snip]
      [snip]
      [snip] ...


      Um, arent' summaries supposed to be _shorter_ than the text being summarized?

    9. Re:Here's a summary... by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Holy crap that was good!

      Bravo!

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    10. Re:Here's a summary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, I don't have to read the rest now. Very fitting ;]

    11. Re:Here's a summary... by Alpha_Nerd · · Score: 1

      You forgot to include the obligitory "+5 funny post listing sarcastic posts" ;-)

    12. Re:Here's a summary... by Cuthalion · · Score: 1

      Those are the standard trolls.

      --
      Trees can't go dancing
      So do them a big favor
      Pretend dancing stinks!
    13. Re:Here's a summary... by john82 · · Score: 1

      That would be a summary of a significant portion of ALL Slasdot articles.

      Hmm, no innovation on Slashdot either.

    14. Re:Here's a summary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah. It's more likely that someone will bring up a SF book from 1990, with the same subject material, and insist that it was the founding book of its genre. Bonus marks if it is by Neal Stephenson.

    15. Re:Here's a summary... by aarku · · Score: 1
      You forgot...

      Absolute genius points out trends in Slashdot posts, whoring for that funny modifier

    16. Re:Here's a summary... by geniusj · · Score: 1

      Terminal Services.. That's the one killer feature that they have in my mind. It just works so well.. All that said, I still use a mac.

  22. More to come.........uhhhhhh...yeah by curtisk · · Score: 5, Funny
    "We only showed glimpses of the future of Longhorn,Wait until the fall when we'll go into more detail at the Professional Developers Conference."

    Yeah, after they check out Apple's latest OSX version "Panther" in July :)
    They only need a few months to emulate what they see there, right?!

    --

    Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

    1. Re:More to come.........uhhhhhh...yeah by broeman · · Score: 0

      that is exactly was the article is about. Panther uses a multi-login system simular to the one found in Longhorn. But to say that they copy MS innovation might be overrated, as we haven't seen or heard about the real features in 10.3. We have to wait till the conference is over and everyone is leeking information *grin*

      --

      (yes this can be compared with sex)
    2. Re:More to come.........uhhhhhh...yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sure, should be "wait until we pre announce features that will *never* make it into the final release 4 years from now..."

    3. Re:More to come.........uhhhhhh...yeah by Juanvaldes · · Score: 1

      Similar to the one in XP, and I really hope it's not the rumor sites running wild as its' a very good and usable feature. Remember this is not the "not invented here" apple of the early 90's, if they spy a good feature they will copy it as they should. Two can play at MS's game...

  23. Everybody copies everybody by Lerxst+Pratt · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The subject says it all. Everyone is groping to find out what customers like best. That's what I like about competition - it benefits the end user in many cases. There's no reason to bash Microsoft over this one. They're just giving the customer what they want. If what the customer wants happens to look like a Mac, fine. I'm just waiting for Linux to do the same and give the average-Joe-everyday-user what they want. That will really impress me!

    1. Re:Everybody copies everybody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      some more than others... and Microsoft is firmly in that "some" group.


  24. MS Inspiration by Omega1045 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have good frieds at M$. This is no trade secret, but MAC OS X is not the only place they are getting ideas. Just about every person on know as M$ (about 10) has some linux distro running at home or in a VM. I am sure we can all find features in linux that the new Windows will have.

    Seriously, they should just port all their stuff to linux and built a Windows GUI to replace X (I have nothing against X, that would just be a good strategy for M$. Or, they can keep making all the friggin money they are making now).

    --

    Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

    1. Re:MS Inspiration by curtisk · · Score: 1
      Or, they can keep making all the friggin money they are making now

      You have a good "hypothetical" idea, MS making an X-window system, I think that would be interesting. But they are NOT going to give up their $$$ via their licensing techniques, and they can't charge that much for a GUI front end.

      --

      Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

    2. Re:MS Inspiration by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Did you never use Windows 3.1? Geez.

    3. Re:MS Inspiration by curtisk · · Score: 1
      Did you never use Windows 3.1? Geez.

      Hahaha! Point taken.....but you don't think it would be interesting for them to try and play outside of their sandbox...ontop of a *Nix OS? How quickly would they sink, or would they swim? No Win API's etc.etc. outside of their element, so to speak

      --

      Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!

  25. are patents still bad if apple has them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only has Apple been selling cinema-style flat panel displays for several years, but last year it filed patent application 20030002246, titled "active enclosure for computing device," which describes a machine that contains an array of rainbow-hued light-emitting diodes.
    its apple, the company /. loves. are generic patents still bad, or are they acceptable because they might hurt MS?

  26. MS did this with Apple before by marian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Am I the only one who remembers the "Look and Feel" lawsuit Apple lost after MS first released Windows? MS already knows they can steal anything they like without any significant retribution from either the government or other corporations, which is exactly what they do. The only real innovation coming from Redmond is new and better ways to take other people's technology, add it to their own, then put the original creators out of business.

    --
    "Suppose you were an idiot..... And suppose you were a member of Congress... But I repeate myself."
    1. Re:MS did this with Apple before by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 1

      Microsoft won their lawsuit because of expert testimony from NeXT CEO Steven Jobs about the original terms of the licensing he made with MicroSoft when he was Apple CEO.

      Outside observers concur that this was the key testimony that completely undermined Apple's case, but no one is quite certain what MicroSoft put into the black box (aka NeXT) to get Steve to produce this output.

      With the Apple / MicroSoft public declaration of patent cross-licensing back in 1997, the legal ramifications of this case are moot. But whatever back alley deals were made might still have some significance.

    2. Re:MS did this with Apple before by alchemist68 · · Score: 1

      And so NOW you know why the Slashdot crowd refers to Micro$oft as THE BORG.|

      Resistence is futile, you will be assimilated.

    3. Re:MS did this with Apple before by MasonMcD · · Score: 1

      I wonder if Apple could file suit based on this patent.

      It describes "ornamental" light use, but I didn't check to read the whole thing if it covered functional feedback.

    4. Re:MS did this with Apple before by norwoodites · · Score: 1

      Actually it was settled out of court aka Apple won.

    5. Re:MS did this with Apple before by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 2, Informative
      I don't think you and the original poster are talking about the same court case. The "big case" I believe he's referring to was initiated after Windows 3 was released and lasting for 5 years (1988-1993). The court declared victory for MicroSoft. An excerpt from an About.com article:
      6/1/93: Microsoft announces that Judge Vaughn R. Walker of the U.S. District Court of Northern California ruled today in Microsoft's favor in the Apple vs. Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard copyright suit. The judge granted Microsoft's and Hewlett-Packard's motions to dismiss the last remaining copyright infringement claims against Microsoft Windows 2.03 and 3.0, as well as, the HP NewWave. -From the Microsoft Timeline
      I pointed out in another response to this thread that the expert testimony Microsoft used was from Steve Jobs (CEO of NeXT). I believe that there was another attempt at a "look and feel" lawsuit much later (after Windows 95 came out) but that may have been settled out of court, but that was a case of trade dress anyway and had little of the same legal significance as the first Apple / Microsoft suit.
    6. Re:MS did this with Apple before by Funky+M · · Score: 1

      Just like the Borg. Except they just put people out.

      -Vegar

    7. Re:MS did this with Apple before by steveha · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ah, yes, I remember this well.

      Xerox came out with the GUI. Apple and Microsoft both started working on a GUI. Apple asked Microsoft to support MacOS (by releasing apps such as Word and Microplan for the Mac). Microsoft agreed, but required Apple to sign an agreement that Apple not sue MS over Windows. Apple signed the agreement. Later, Apple sued MS over Windows.

      In the suit, Apple claimed that Windows infringed on a nebulous concept called "look and feel". The judge threw out all "look and feel" claims, and would only consider specific claims. Then the judge went down the list, throwing out any claim that was covered by the agreement. About a dozen claims were left. Then the judge went down the list, and threw out any claim that Apple didn't own (common GUI things that anyone could do without Apple's permission). Exactly zero claims were now left, and the judge dismissed Apple's suit.

      Short version: Apple agreed not to sue, sued anyway, and the judge ruled that the agreement was perfectly valid and threw out the suit. Seems fair to me.

      And, by the way, we would not now have either GNOME or KDE had Apple won that suit. Apple winning that suit would mean Apple owns GUI desktops, and that would be Very Bad Indeed. Forget free desktops for Linux. Even forget non-free desktops for Linux; Apple would insist you buy an Apple computer running an Apple OS if you wanted a GUI desktop. (And any Apple fans who want to claim otherwise: how many licenses has Apple sold to the TrueType patents?)

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    8. Re:MS did this with Apple before by TheDanish · · Score: 1

      What I don't get is why the parent rarely ever gets modded up, but "MICROSOFT SUX THEY COPY EVERYTHING HURR HURR" gets a five every single time. It boggles the mind...

      --
      Danish != nationality
  27. BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Microsoft steals from apple. Apple steals from microsoft. Do you know who they both steal from? BSD.

    1. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Do you know who they both steal from? BSD.


      Curious. How do you "steal" from BSD when the very license permits you to use the code in any way you see fit?

      I guess if maybe they're not including the copyright notices you might call it stealing, but otherwise, BSD code is there for anyone to use.

    2. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you didn't get "Steal this Book" either.

      By using the word steal I hope to provoke discussion about the BSD license and how it basically lets Proprietary companies copy IP and return nothing back to the community that created it.

    3. Re:BSD by Mikey-San · · Score: 4, Funny

      Do you know who they both steal from? BSD.

      Stealing from a dead man is called scavenging.

      --
      Mikey-San
      Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
    4. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That isn't exactly bad. In the end, a LOT of proprietary products benefit in the process. even though I am no fan of windows, it is nice to know that the use of quality BSD code benefits as many people using windows and OSX as people running the pure BSD distribution.

    5. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except Apple hasn't stolen the code even under your rather odd definition. They've released the core operating system as "Darwin", provided some rather impressive extensions (it's the only viable Mach based free BSD for instance, and includes such features as Netinfo), and fed back into the circle in other ways such as bolt-ons like Darwin Streaming Server.

    6. Re:BSD by dubious21 · · Score: 0

      Best...BSD...Joke...EVER!

    7. Re:BSD by joeyspqr · · Score: 1

      stealing from a dead man ABOVE the ground is scavenging
      stealing from a dead man below the ground would be grave robbing

      --
      +1 fashionably cynical
    8. Re:BSD by Selanit · · Score: 1
      Do you know who they both steal from? BSD.

      Stealing from a dead man is called scavenging.

      Or "grave robbing" depending on whether or not the stiff got a decent burial.
    9. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      OK, so *BSD is dead; there's no use crying over spilled milk. But the real question is why did *BSD die?

      Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

      The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

    10. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elegy For *BSD


      I am a *BSD user
      and I try hard to be brave
      That is a tall order
      *BSD's foot is in the grave.

      I tap at my toy keyboard
      and whistle a happy tune
      but keeping happy's so hard,
      *BSD died so soon.

      Each day I wake and softly sob
      Nightfall finds me crying
      Not only am I a zit faced slob
      but *BSD is dying.

    11. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! stealing. Why are there so many this kind of amateures?

      Apple didn't steal someting from BSD.
      You should know this if you know about UNIX.
      There are two major branch of Unix.

      One is BSD, and the other is System V.
      Apple's OS is in the BSD tree. It's not stealing.

    12. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFL

  28. Why even bother commenting? by Torgo's+Pizza · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    This is one of those article submissions where I'll set the comment filter to 5 simply because the comments are going to be in four groups. Thirty-two percent of the articles are going to be MS bashing, the other 32 percent will be either reposts of the NYT article or a link to the Google referrer page; 32 percent will mention that Apple stole from Xerox Parc and the remaining 4 percent will actually have something enlightening to say.

    1. Re:Why even bother commenting? by Torgo's+Pizza · · Score: 1

      And no, I don't think that my comment is one of the four percent. Consider it a statistical anomaly.

    2. Re:Why even bother commenting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sick of this kind of mentioning. Did Apple copy its GUI from Xerox alto machine? it's said by half-knowing people.
      The first GUI of Xerox palo alto machine was not about GUI as you know it nowadays.

      It was the representation in object on smalltalk environment. It's different from GUI for OS.
      I think that Steve Jobs got hint from it, not copy the concept of "GUI for OS".

    3. Re:Why even bother commenting? by FireBreathingDog · · Score: 1

      No, it's just redundant.

  29. Swings and roundabouts... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

    (NB. This isn't meant to be a rant. This isn't meant to start an OS flame war. This isn't a troll. It's just an observation.)

    Sometimes Microsoft copies Apple, sometimes Apple copies Microsoft. Sometimes Linux copies from both of them, sometimes they both copy from Linux.

    Big deal.

    Playing feature catch-up isn't anything new. It's been around since the stone age - "Hey, look, that guy's spear flies truer than ours because it's lighter and straighter. Let's do that too."

    Apart from OS zealots, does anyone really give a damn which OS was the first to sport a particular feature? I mean, do you really care more about which OS had the feature first than which has the best implementation? Even then, how often is one single feature* the overriding factor when determining your choice of platform?

    (*Just to be clear, when I say feature, I'm talking about code, like pre-emptive multi-tasking, not price and real-world aesthetics, such as how much an OS costs or how good the box looks on your desktop. Obviously, there are people out there who'll use Linux because it's a low cost solution and there are people out there who'll use Apple Macs because they like their physical design.)

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    1. Re:Swings and roundabouts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People in the stone age didn't have to bother with IPR either.

  30. Did anybody notice the photo (of the MS/HP Athens) by rgoer · · Score: 4, Funny

    I mean, sure, we can go back and forth with the same old MS vs Apple BS... but there is something new and humorous to point out here:

    Did anybody notice the desktop image used in the promo photo of the MS/HP Athens (top right of atricle page)? It's as if MS said: "you're damned right we're copying Apple. Fuck them! We'll copy their default desktop image, too, pompous bastards that they are!"

  31. While Microsoft is "innovating"... by s4dfish · · Score: 0, Troll

    It'd be nice if they could rip-off some "innovation" in the area of a stable OS.

  32. What's so funny? by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Funny
    Apple do lead in colors! I just started using XP for the first time in my life. It took me a few minutes to recognize the color scheme. It's just like the stuff in the 0-6 months section of the toy shop. The pastoral background scene and the primary colors are from the same school of design as mom decorating for her new baby.

    Still, XP does boot and shut down fast. That's something worth paying for and I wish Apple would follow.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    1. Re:What's so funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fast? You obviously haven't installed Norton AntiVirus.

    2. Re:What's so funny? by bbc22405 · · Score: 4, Funny
      Yeah, but MS didn't steal the "Bliss Screen" and color scheme from Apple. They stole it from Teletubbies.

      "Time for Tubby Bye-bye"!

    3. Re:What's so funny? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Still, XP does boot and shut down fast. That's something worth paying for and I wish Apple would follow.

      Hrm. I've never noticed this problem of "booting" or "shutting down." My OS X machine has an uptime of a while. Usually always has an uptime of the number of days since the last update that requried a reboot.

    4. Re:What's so funny? by Assmasher · · Score: 1

      My windoze box has NAV on it and boots in less than 30 seconds...

      --
      Loading...
    5. Re:What's so funny? by Mikey-San · · Score: 1

      Shut down?

      Boot?

      Eh?

      Why are you shutting down your Unix box to begin with? Log out, put it to sleep (or turn the display off, if it's not a portable), and go do your stuff. Go away for the weekend. Whatever. Come back, hit a key, log in, watch as it takes only a few seconds to start working.

      -/-

      --
      Mikey-San
      Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
    6. Re:What's so funny? by Unregistered · · Score: 1

      Still, XP does boot and shut down fast. That's something worth paying for and I wish Apple would follow.

      Having rebooted OSX machines less than 10 times, i could care less.

    7. Re:What's so funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're all fucking idiots. Just because you never turn off your computer doesn't mean everyone else should leave their computer on all the time.

    8. Re:What's so funny? by Pres.+Ronald+Reagan · · Score: 0, Troll

      Congradulations.

      Windows XP is ten times more stable than OS X.

      --

      Abortion is advocated only by persons who have themselves been born.
      --Ronald Reagan
    9. Re:What's so funny? by amanpatelhotmail.com · · Score: 1
      Thanks to your post, the next thing on slashdot will be:
      • MS bites teletubies, Teletubies bite back
    10. Re:What's so funny? by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 1

      Apple's Strong supporters have allways been Desktop publishers... So of course they are gonna have the Spankiest looking desktops... What would Apples customer base have thought if they were restricted to 8 bit colour and crappy colour schemes... It took MS a long time to realise Oh hey! We need to do that too! Gee alot of people are thinking about buying Macs cause they look so Pretty :)

      --
      Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
    11. Re:What's so funny? by 0divide · · Score: 1

      I though the whole deal was, at least for apple, that people should just put their computers to sleep instead of shutting down.

      sure, if you are in development or QA or something you have to reboot machines all the time, which is a pain, but most people can just use the sleep option.

      anyway, sorry to be so off topic but hey; it's monday and I am avoiding work.

      --
      ---mike
    12. Re:What's so funny? by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      No it is not.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    13. Re:What's so funny? by takotech · · Score: 1

      I wish Windows laptops would sleep and wakeup as fast as OSX. Takes <2 seconds to wake up. On my Win2k laptop, I'm lucky if it even comes up.

    14. Re:What's so funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still, XP does boot and shut down fast. That's something worth paying for and I wish Apple would follow.

      A very useful feature if your computer crashes a lot. I only reboot my Mac Tibook once every few months when applying System updates. It fully wakes from sleep before I can even open the lid.

    15. Re:What's so funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good for you, but some of us turn off the computer so we don't have to listen to the fan noise, or to save power. (Suspend _does_ make noise, and uses a little power.)

      Perhaps you haven't used a clean XP machine before, but they don't crash nearly as much as you might think.

    16. Re:What's so funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So then they both have rabies eh?

      Then Apple/Darwin/BSD is the cure!

    17. Re:What's so funny? by UnixRevolution · · Score: 1

      WHY in GOD'S name do i need to shut down anything? I never even shut down my apple notebook. I just close the lid and let it sleep. When i open it back up it comes back just like it had been in screen saver, only with relatively little (almost no) power consumption. And as far as XP, low boot times are good...if you have an os that needs to be rebooted every 10 minutes :)

      --
      You like your new Mac more than you like me, don't you, Dave? Dave? I asked...She said Yes.
    18. Re:What's so funny? by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

      I like to keep up witrh the latest patches. There seems to be a new OSX patch that requires booting about once a week. And have they fixed the way the finder hangs if you detach from a network from which you have a Samba mount? Goddamn! I kept forgetting to unmount first and had to reboot my Powerbook every time I took it home from work.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    19. Re:What's so funny? by geniusj · · Score: 1

      That's why sleep is there. And it works.. Really well..

    20. Re:What's so funny? by Frymaster · · Score: 1

      % uptime
      7:50PM up 113 days, 5:22, 2 users, load averages: 1.21, 1.06, 0.89

      your point?

    21. Re:What's so funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We like to call it 'The Fisher-Price Interface'

    22. Re:What's so funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to boot and shut down Macs. You just close the top or press the power button and they go to sleep in a few seconds. Slap the spacebar and they come up exactly where you left off, in just a few seconds.

      Every day I bring my Powerbook to work, and I wake it up. In seconds I'm pretending to be productive. Every night, I put it to sleep and bring it home. I often use at home at nights and on the weekend with the same routine (two clicks to change the network configuration, and I can usually do it fast enough that Fire never even knows the difference). My Powerbook routinely has weeks of uptime. My Powermac at home can tell a similar story. In fact, about the only time I need to reboot is to install updates to the OS.

    23. Re:What's so funny? by UnixRevolution · · Score: 1

      I do patch my OS and i reboot afterwards, but it never really bothers me as i usually let it do this while i'm in the shower or eating or something. I've seen Finder hang if you don't unmount your SMB shares on other networks, but it is usually just a delay, not an honest-to-god *hang* like the windows-style "hangs". It just takes it a second to think, then remove the share icons from the desktop.

      --
      You like your new Mac more than you like me, don't you, Dave? Dave? I asked...She said Yes.
    24. Re:What's so funny? by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1
      but it is usually just a delay, not an honest-to-god *hang*
      I get hangs. One by one, as applications touch the filesystem and block, every thing hangs up. Processes are unkillable (presumably because they're hanging on a system call) and eventually the finder and then the screen locks up. This has happened in every release except maybe the last one because I've learned not to make this mistake! WIndows machines used to do something like this years ago - but now they can relatively gracefully handle losing the network.
      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    25. Re:What's so funny? by UnixRevolution · · Score: 1

      It must be that i'm never seriously utilizing the network when it happens, i just have the share mounted "in case" i want to pull something from it.

      --
      You like your new Mac more than you like me, don't you, Dave? Dave? I asked...She said Yes.
    26. Re:What's so funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's 1000,00,0,000! times!..

    27. Re:What's so funny? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      When OS X fsck's the disk on startup it can take some time, but after then it's pretty quick.

      My iBook starts up in about 2 seconds since I just put it to sleep instead of shutting down. It took me a while to get used to the idea that I didn't really need to start up from cold every morning any more.

      Sleeping it is just the length of time it takes to shut the lid.

  33. "That's mine, you can't have it" by bmetz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The underlying issue is that people feel that somehow 'their' particular technological provider is the sole benefactor of whatever un-patent-worthy trend in the industry is going on. We should be glad that this isn't the case, but due to 'interface addiction' we see innovation spreading as somehow threatening. All it theatens is the ability to feel superior.

    What, do you think iTunes is visionary? How about the idea of a 'digital media hub'? These are ancient news in the computing world and the fact that one company got to market a year before the other says more about scheduling than it does about innovation.

    The absolute worst is people who think Microsoft making their UI more 'soft' was a direct response to OS X. These UI changes don't get dreamed up at the last minute -- they're part of an evolution that takes years.

    I will admit there are some times when it's pretty blatant that a company's idea is stolen.

    Computer manufacturers noticed apple's sales take off when they went for a more stylish look. Yes, they're copying. It's called capitalism and it's what raises the bar for everyone. What, do you think apple came up the idea of making something they're selling look good?

    It's no different from JC Penny selling some fashion that the GAP came up with. Thanks for the idea, say hello to the free market. We as consumers win, the innovator gets first-to-market advantage. But that's ALL they get.

    --
    What did you eat today? http://www.atetoday.com/
    1. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by PateraSilk · · Score: 1

      The absolute worst is people who think Microsoft making their UI more 'soft' was a direct response to OS X. These UI changes don't get dreamed up at the last minute -- they're part of an evolution that takes years.

      Yeah, sure, but when the "look and feel" (there's that phrase again) of Windows goes from the NT-look of 2000 to the OSX-look of XP (including moving the trashcan ('scuse me, "Recycling Bin") to a Mac-like position), Occam's Razor points to copycatting--or collusion.

      Maybe Apple's interface designers are dipping in both wells!

      --
      Danke tres mucho, tovarishch.
    2. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe it's just me, but couldn't HP had something to do with the design?

    3. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by arkanes · · Score: 1

      They moved the recycle bin? It's at the bottom of the list of desktop icons, the same place it's always been in both MacOS and Windows.

    4. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by PetWolverine · · Score: 1

      Maybe Apple's interface designers are dipping in both wells!

      Nah, I think the quality of Microsoft products can dispell this illusion.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
    5. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1
      Computer manufacturers noticed apple's sales take off when they went for a more stylish look. Yes, they're copying. It's called capitalism and it's what raises the bar for everyone. What, do you think apple came up the idea of making something they're selling look good?

      What Apple realized before anyone else was that as computers became more mainstream and not just for geeks, computer manufacturers have to distinguish themselves in some way for average consumers. The iMac wasn't the most powerful or fastest desktop when it came out. But it was instantly recognizable as distinct.

      It's no different from JC Penny selling some fashion that the GAP came up with

      Well the GAP never copyrights or patents its designs. I don't think they can because nothing that they design is really unique. Khakis. Been done before. Rugby shirts. Done as well. Translucent plastic all-in-one bubble computer with Bondi blue. Now that's different.

      But there is a major difference between copying and stealing. In fact, Apple has sued and won against several companies that tried to steal the exact design. (E-Power, eMachines) They leave alone other companies that merely copy the theme of jelly and translucent colors (Compaq, HP).

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    6. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by alext · · Score: 1

      Yes, they're copying. It's called capitalism

      Ah, so P2P file traders are entrepreneurs... jolly good!

      Y'know, I had a feeling that Capitalism involved something along the lines of:

      1) Defining something as a commodity
      2) Protecting ownership of it
      3) Providing a means of exchanging it in a competitive marketplace

      Hmm... these principles don't seem to explain that 'copying' thing very well - what else could be wrong?

    7. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by PateraSilk · · Score: 1

      It's at the bottom of the list of desktop icons

      In Mac OSes through 9, the trash has always been in the lower right corner of the desktop. Since Win95, the recycle bin has always been on the left side with the system components like My Docs and My Computer. The copy of XP I saw a couple of months ago had the recycle bin in the lower-right--which might be personal preference on the part of that user, but when I commented about it, he said, "Oh, hey, I never noticed that!"

      --
      Danke tres mucho, tovarishch.
    8. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by ThreeToe · · Score: 1
      The absolute worst is people who think Microsoft making their UI more 'soft' was a direct response to OS X. These UI changes don't get dreamed up at the last minute -- they're part of an evolution that takes years.

      Nope.

      In fact, Microsoft was working on a rather sophisticated theme feature for XP; along with this feature came a really slick new theme. Alas, theming was cut (as I understand it, the feature required kernel-level work and wasn't stable enough to ship) and the company had to act quickly to pick up the pieces.

      XP's softness was indeed a last minute effort. Whether it was a direct response to Aqua is anybody's guess. It seems unlikely to me; /.ers would do good to remember that Microsoft employees have brains capable of thinking original thoughts.

    9. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by edmo · · Score: 1

      The underlying issue is that people feel that somehow 'their' particular technological provider is the sole benefactor of whatever un-patent-worthy trend in the industry is going on. We should be glad that this isn't the case, but due to 'interface addiction' we see innovation spreading as somehow threatening.

      I can't speak for other mac addicts, but what annoys me isn't the copying, that's normal and even good, to a point, it's how M$ presents itself as an innovator for using ideas pioneered by apple
      What, do you think iTunes is visionary?
      Many people who have actually used it would say so, but apple doesn't claim that it is the first program for organizing and playing mp3's, M$ would in their position
      yes apple copies other to, but think of OS X, entirely based on unix, did apple claim that they invented unix? no, they gave credit to the older OS(in fact advertised the fact...)

      Thanks for the idea, say hello to the free market.
      it's not a free market if I can't run out at night and burn my competitors office building to the ground, hey, anything to increase my profit margin

      --
      Don't save your orgasms for Heaven; Heaven knows we need them here.
    10. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The absolute worst is people who think Microsoft making their UI more 'soft' was a direct response to OS X. These UI changes don't get dreamed up at the last minute -- they're part of an evolution that takes years.

      Riiiight. Did you see the original Chicago builds? They had different completely different UIs every public showing, and then they finally decided on ripping of NeXT in the last six months. And then Apple creates an OS that has a strong compositing graphics engine, and as such is able to create a UI that has drop shadows and translucency, which they use to suggest depth and temporance. Apple markets it as lickable. Microsft comes up with a 'softer' Fisher-price interface called Luna with no apparent user benefit, as their interface looks terribly dated compared to the competition (originally designed by NeXT for monochrome displays).

      So Longhorn is going to have a GPU accelerated 2D window manager, which they'll use to make windows tumble on the screen. They still don't get it. It's a knee jerk reaction. It's not part of an evolution that takes years.

    11. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by toddhisattva · · Score: 1
      Yes, they're copying. It's called capitalism

      Where do you idiots come from? The William Henry Gates III School of Economics?

      Unless inventors are rewarded for inventing, there will be no invention.

      What you are advocating is nothing but theft, and nothing like capitalism.

    12. Re:"That's mine, you can't have it" by arkanes · · Score: 1

      I've installed at least a half dozen copies of XP, and on every single one it's the last of the dekstop icons (usually at the bottom or the middle of the left hand side, depending on how many icons there are). User probably moved it and didn't notice, or it was some (wierd) OEM choice, or he got the machine used/as a display model, etc, etc.

  34. Seems like an Ugly and impractible design. by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That Microsoft HP computer doesnt look at all good or pratical. It reminds me of a dentist chair. If microsoft is pushing towards Home intertainment they need to produce something that looks good in homes. That is where Apple Excells. People can argue about Tech Specs untill they are blue in the face and it will never end. I am at the opinion PC and Macs technically are about equal and a couple Seconds here and there dosent bother me. But apple products have a practical and formfull design to their products. That actually look good in a home or office. And sometimes that is actually more important. If an i-Mac makes your office seem more high tech and clean then it could help make a potentional customers (The ones that pay the cash and often arnt to technical) because your office seems to be organized and modern. And at home a lot of people dont like having Big Off White or Black boxes in their rooms because they seem to be an indrustral design in a non industral room. Most of us dont really care how a computer will look with your room but for others it is more of a consern and the tech specs dont matter that much if they both can get the job in a resionable amount of time.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Seems like an Ugly and impractible design. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And at home a lot of people dont like having Big Off White or Black boxes in their rooms because they seem to be an indrustral design in a non industral room

      what about a clock?


      http://www.mini-itx.com/projects/theclock/
    2. Re:Seems like an Ugly and impractible design. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A newspaper I was reading the other day contained an insert flyer advertising Dell computers. It had lots on nice shots of shiny, happy people typing away on their laptops. But none of those laptops were built by Dell. All of them were actually built by Apple. The Apple logo was missing of course...

    3. Re:Seems like an Ugly and impractible design. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are obviously a fool and havent seen the new dells.

  35. In Soviet Russia...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everywhere else, Apple just bites.

  36. Well, Yeah, kinda. by Matey-O · · Score: 1

    But can't you also see two teams (one at Apple, the other at Microsoft) thinking:

    "We have all these entrenched 3D GPUs...what can we do to take advantage of them?"

    It's really hard to say GPU acceleration of the GUI is an Apple only idea. If you get past that, "What snazzy stuff can we DO with said GPU?" is the next logical extension.

    --
    "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
    1. Re:Well, Yeah, kinda. by arkanes · · Score: 1

      XP uses the GPU to accelerate it's eye candy, via GDI+. OS X didn't do this till 10.1 (with Quartz Extreme). On top of that, as you said, it's an obvious idea (stupid to have all that dedicated rendering power there being ignored) and the development cycle for adding acceleration like that is probably quite a bit longer than the delay between the product releases.

    2. Re:Well, Yeah, kinda. by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      You're talking about two different levels of acceleration here. What Quartz Exteme does is the compositing/blending of windows that's one of the features to be included in Longhorn.

      Take a look at the difference between "with" and "without" Quartz Extreme at http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/macosx-10.2/ma cosx-10.2-8.html .

    3. Re:Well, Yeah, kinda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes longhorn interesting is that ALL your old Apps will benefit from the graphics acceleration. No rewriting/porting your apps (ala OS9->OSX) they just work. That itself makes Longhorn's graphic subsystem worth a whole lot more to most people.

      Also Quartz Extreme only accelerates desktop COMPOSITING. The apps still have to use CPU to do effects, just the compositing, the final step to put the image out to the screen, is sped up.

      In Longhorn's graphic system, the ENTIRE PROCESS is accelerated - compositing, effects, drawing, EVERYTHING. Under the hood Quartz Extreme is really nothing special.

    4. Re:Well, Yeah, kinda. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In Longhorn's graphic system, the ENTIRE PROCESS is accelerated - compositing, effects, drawing, EVERYTHING.
      I call bullshit. URL, please.
  37. Big Deal, get over it. by Denver_80203 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't remember how many linux flavors are trying to look just like ms, run ms software, blaa blaa blaa. You anti ms people need a life.

    1. Re:Big Deal, get over it. by sehryan · · Score: 1

      Mod this dude up.

      Open Source projects do this same sort of thing, and it's okay because it is in the noble quest of Open Software.

      Microsoft does it, and suddenly it's bad, just because they want to make a buck from it.

      Pot, meet Kettle.

      --
      The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
    2. Re:Big Deal, get over it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, like widget themeability in Gnome that was shamelessly copied from Windows XP. ...
      Oh...

    3. Re:Big Deal, get over it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I can't remember how many linux flavors are trying to look just like ms, run ms software, blaa blaa blaa. You anti ms people need a life.
      apt-get update; apt-get upgrade
    4. Re:Big Deal, get over it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the other way around, as is actually the case.

    5. Re:Big Deal, get over it. by 1010011010 · · Score: 1

      Whoa! Insight^Whateful!

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
  38. Come on Kids.... by sogoodsofarsowhat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure MS steals from Apple and vice versa.... So whats the big deal with computers this is already done in the automotive business everyday. If one car maker has a new feature and the public likes it, then all the car makers get the feature. Its that simple. In the end features are driven by the consumers, not the companies. If companies could just keep shipping last years products and make a profit, they would (and some do). So quit with the eternal bitching and moaning regarding whose stealing what innovation. M$ is evil for lots of reasons but this is really not an evil act in and of itself. Windows is, in and of itself.

    --
    . I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
  39. Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Sanity · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The last Linux UI innovation I can recall is themeability - and I am still not sure whether that was a good thing or a bad thing.

    Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work? Could it be that X is slowing us down somehow? I mean, think of how much fuss there was over minor and superficial enhancements antialiased fonts and transparent windows. Where are the big ideas?

    The Open Source community has demonstrated that it can play catch-up and play it well, but when are we going to see Windows and Apple stealing important UI features from Linux?

    1. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by flynt · · Score: 1

      Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work?

      Just like Porsche uses stone wheels for the basis of their work.

    2. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Telex4 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Where are the big ideas?


      I think you'll find there's a lot of big ideas coming through, both in the back- and front-ends of GUI design.

      Take KDE, for example, and its KIOSlave system, which is slowly moving KDE from being a collection of applications to a collection of pluggable components, with things like Konqueror becoming complicated wrappers for these components. The whole desktop is totally integrated - that's big, isn't it?

      Or Enlightenment, whish is going even further to do away with the whole application concept altogether, or so I've heard (I don't use it).

      And even little projects are doing interesting things, like Slicker, experimenting with how we manage our desktop space.

      All these calls are ill-founded, and probaly stem from the fact that it is easy to keep up to date on Microsoft's and Apple's big moves, since you only get the occasional big article, whilst developments in the Free Software world come thick and fast.
    3. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by tuffy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work? Could it be that X is slowing us down somehow? I mean, think of how much fuss there was over minor and superficial enhancements antialiased fonts and transparent windows. Where are the big ideas?

      There's nothing to stop someone from inventing FancyUI with all sorts of bells and whistles and installing it in place of X11, but who would use it? All of my current GUI-based apps live in X11-land and giving them up isn't going to help me get my work done no matter how much neato graphical stuff FancyGUI offers.

      The better approach, I think, is to merge improvements into X11 through extensions (perhaps moving to X11R7, if enough of them become commonplace) so that people have a smooth upgrade path and without all the wheel reinvention required by Yet Another X11 Re-attempt.

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    4. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take KDE, for example, and its KIOSlave system, which is slowly moving KDE from being a collection of applications to a collection of pluggable components, with things like Konqueror becoming complicated wrappers for these components. The whole desktop is totally integrated - that's big, isn't it?

      Sounds just like windows.

      The linux desktop hasn't changed much in at least the five years since I last used it seriously.

    5. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by SamBC · · Score: 0, Troll

      when are we going to see Windows and Apple stealing important UI features from Linux?

      Probably never, as linux has no user interface, being a kernel and nothing to do with the user.

      So they can steel things from X, as the windowing system itself, or KDE and GNOME as desktop environments, or from kwm, enlightenment, fvwm, openbox, or even twm as Window Managers.

      But may I congratulate you on what I assume is a very skillful troll, such that to a casual reader it appears to be a valid point :)
    6. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you call OSX?

    7. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by aussersterne · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The Linux community is throwing innovation away. There are things about X that drew me from PC/Mac to Unix/X then Linux back in the early '90s:
      • Total configurability... you can choose anything from wm2 to KDE to act as your environment and at least once, you could make your environment behave in almost any way you wanted (remember dotfiles?)
      • Nice UI features like focus-follows-mouse, horizontal/vertical maximize, "user placement" of applications (used to always use this in TWM, FVWM, etc.) and so on.
      • Total network transparency.
      • Multi-display, Xinerama, multiple-input, etc. etc. etc.
      • Multiplatform application support (using Basilisk and Crossover, I have Windows applications, Mac OS applications and Linux/Unix applications all on the same desktop).

      The Linux community has recently been rabid in its desire to get rid of such things. The "choose your environemnt" philosophy has been sacrificed in favor of the KDE/GNOME wars, and /. posters regularly bemoan the fact that even TWO choices are available. GNOME and recent distros have done away with focus-follows-mouse, user placement, and similar features totally; you can't even choose them as options in the default installs. Every X story on /. is met with a flood of "WE HATE NETWORK TRANSPARENCY" posts about the X11 protocol. People are more and more pushing for framebuffer+toolkit options that will make the more flexible output/input options unfeasible or at least less abstractable.

      The current Linux community hates innovation. They wouldn't know innovation if it rose up and bit them in the ass. Anything new and different is seen as a kind of dangerous superceding of Windows, which is apparently what users REALLY WANT and Linux is talked about as being WAAAAAAY "behind" (aside from X-hating, KDE/GNOME-hating posts, witness the diatribes the other day against Unix in general in the Gobo story).

      Linux began as almost pure innovation, an OS written from the ground up by GNU and Linus Torvalds. It is network-centric, runs on devices ranging from tiny to supercomputer, supported SMP, software RAID, IPV6, and a million other features before any of the other consumer operating systems. It's still one of the only free pieces of "major" software in the world. The marriage of Unix, new ideas, new technologies and new languages in Linux has created probably the single most productive large-scale computing environment in history, and at one of the lowest price points, too.

      And yet Linux users (especially the converts over the last 3-5 years) can't stop moaning about how Linux will never be successful until it apes Windows and MacOS. And then they complain about a lack of innovation...

      Methinks Linux users are confused. Or maybe they can't see the forest for the trees. Or something.
      --
      STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    8. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work?

      There is innovation in open source, but funding and leadership are issues with innovative open source projects.

      I've been seeing more and more researchers working with commercial products/platforms due to funding issues, at least at the university that I'm at. Here alone microsoft provides millions to fund research.

      It's not about profit really, but about survival. If you're a research professor and you're not bringing in funding, you get fired, or at least put to use by teaching those annoying freshman courses that no one else want's to teach.

      The open source projects that I've seen have mostly been funded by the government. NSF grants, etc. But those are usually smaller and heavilly contested.

      It's my opinion that Open source innovators have a huge funding problem.

      Leadership also plays a factor. Innovative ideas often come with huge risks. A design built by democratic consensus will assume the risk of its most risk adverse members. The conservatives slow down the pace of innovation, but also stabilize the project.

      This gives open source the stability and reliability it is well known for, but holds back innovation.

      --
      Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
    9. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1
      The last Linux UI innovation I can recall is themeability - and I am still not sure whether that was a good thing or a bad thing.

      Theming is hardly new - I'd consider multiple interoperating desktops/WMs to be far more "innovative" (though i wouldn't use that word for reasons i've expounded upon before) - I have yet to see a widespread OS with such an astonishing zoo of user interfaces. Yeah, some look just like Windows, but what did you expect - lots of people like that interface and are happy with it. But if you compare say KDE against ratpoison, or GNOME against Enlightenment, and yet they can all run the same apps, use each others system trays etc (well, almost) - that's something new, and different.

    10. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by slux · · Score: 1

      Well, Microsoft copied theming with XP and the fruit company also has considerably more eyecandy than in the pre-X days which I'd argue is a result of the theming frenzy too.

      What about grouping in the taskbar?

      Not sure these are the innovations of the free software desktop but I only hear about how it's all just copying. Windows/MacOS still hasn't got virtual windows or as nearly as flexible toolbars to date.

      What about Karamba or Slicker?

      I've probably missed something since my XP use so far has been limited to about 5 minutes (and I'm quite proud of it ;)) and I'm not any more familiar with OS X either but I do know for a fact that KDE/GNOME aren't just copies of either.

    11. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by tuffy · · Score: 3, Interesting
      And yet Linux users (especially the converts over the last 3-5 years) can't stop moaning about how Linux will never be successful until it apes Windows and MacOS. And then they complain about a lack of innovation...

      The problem is that the Linux community is populated partly by ex-Unix guys who are quite capable of installing their own window managers and getting by without pointy-clicky desktop environments. But it's also partly populated by ex-Windows guys who feel more at ease with a desktop full of icons and something resembling a "start" menu where their "applications" live. This generates a fair amount of tension within the community itself.

      For example, take a typical X11 flamewar. The old-school Unix guys have spent a lot of time configuring their system for productivity and certainly don't want X11's benefits to be thrown out. But, the Windows folks want to eliminate any hindrances that prevent their latest OS from looking and feeling more like what they were used to.

      Bringing things back on topic, there's little reason Linux folks and X11 users can't pick-and-choose whatever improvements they want to add (antialiased fonts being the latest example). But without a centralized force in charge of UI development, improvements are ultimately decided by program authors themselves. The result is a more conservative development path overall, but that's not necessarily such a bad thing.

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    12. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by MasonMcD · · Score: 1

      The Open Source community has demonstrated that it can play catch-up and play it well, but when are we going to see Windows and Apple stealing important UI features from Linux?

      I'm sorry, milk came out my nose on that one.

    13. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by norwoodites · · Score: 1

      Sounds like OpenDoc from Apple, IBM, and Novell, which failed because of Novell not doing the Windows port fast enough. Apple had their version for Mac OS, remember the Web Browser before Safari by Apple. IBM had their port of OS/2 done also. Even Microsoft was on board for the Mac version with Office for OpenDoc on the way.

    14. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by bratmobile · · Score: 1

      As soon as there is an open source UI that doesn't suck monkey butts. And, no, a heavily-photoshopped UI is NOT (necessarily) a good UI.

      Like it or not, OS X and XP both have a strong focus on usability -- letting people get something done, rather than dorking around with yet another skin/scheme package. Looking cool, and being usable are two completely different things.

      For example, Microsoft has always required that all or nearly all functionality in Windows, and in all of their apps, be accessible using keyboard, as well as a mouse. There are well-defined means to open context menus, tab around, etc. Every version of Mac OS (including OS X) has really, really sucked when it comes to keyboard input -- they just don't care that some people like to use keyboards, can work FASTER using keyboards, or may have disabilities that make it very difficult for them to use a mouse.

      The same applies to nearly every open source GUI. Usability, and its twin sister, standardization, are just NOT goals of open-source UIs. Why? Because everyone can customize open source interfaces, everyone DOES, and no one feels any need to establish standards, or to make life easy for people who don't want to learn how to edit an .Xdefaults file, just to get some Real Work done.

      When it comes to usability, Apple and Microsoft are miles ahead of their competition -- including all open-source OSes and nearly all proprietary OSes, too.

    15. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by bratmobile · · Score: 1

      You are intentionally distorting the question. The original poster had a very real objection -- that nearly all UIs that run on Linux are stagnant.

      Yes, of course "Linux" really refers to the kernel. Duh. But the reality is that people use "Linux" to refer to complete Linux distributions, including the user interface.

      It is a valid point. You are the troll.

    16. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by bratmobile · · Score: 1
      I've probably missed something since my XP use so far has been limited to about 5 minutes (and I'm quite proud of it ;)) and I'm not any more familiar with OS X either but I do know for a fact that KDE/GNOME aren't just copies of either.

      Sooooo... in other words, you are ignorant, and you are PROUD of being ignorant. Although I do agree that KDE/GNOME/etc. are (of course) not just copies of Windows/Mac/etc., you can hardly base an argument on bragging about NOT knowing what you are talking about.

    17. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you'll find there's a lot of big ideas coming through, both in the back- and front-ends of GUI design.

      Sorry, this thread has been assimilated by the Pro-MS crowd. You'll never get modded up. Just because there are perfectly good answers to the questions being asked by the grandparent post doesn't mean that anyone will care.

      (P.S. What about 3dwm?)

    18. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by sludg-o · · Score: 1

      while I think you have many excellent points, I believe that it's not true linux users so much as people who tried it for a little while then switched back who make those complaints. The thing is, people who try linux but don't use it as their primary OS both at work and at home don't even really have a chance to use such features as X's network transparency. They go shell out $100 for PC anywhere (or more likely, a copy that was duplicated without authorization) and think it's the greatest thing ever, not even realizing that it's been part of X forever.

    19. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by SamBC · · Score: 1

      I was in fact attempting to stop any reader who does not appreciate the distinction from receiving an incorrect idea. If it came across as distortion, or as pedantism, then I failed to express myself clearly.

      Linux as an operating system, or kernel, is not aimed at any graphical work, and allows for it in no user-level manner. It merely allows other systems, such as X, or framebuffer consoles, or SVGAMode or whatever to access the hardware to do such things. So I dislike seeing someone criticise a system for the failure of something that is merely a commom addon.

      And yes, I do regularly use linux systems without any sort of GUI. Unless you count screen, in which case you are entitled to your opinion...

    20. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Realistic_Dragon · · Score: 1

      Wow, thank you so much.

      I just turned 'follow mouse for focus' on in fluxbox and it's made things so much better - it feels like I'm not fighting things any more. (Especially Pan and Xchat.)

      I never bothered before because my old SPARC had a drifting mouse that made it a massive nightmare, but I'm loving it now.

      For all those people doubting it, give it a go, you probably won't switch back.

      --
      Beep beep.
    21. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, there's a lot of 'dorking around with yet another skin/scheme package'. Nobody could even begin to deny that with a straight face.

      However, the utra-flexible, skinnable, themeable nature of X desktops means that if someone has an idea for a new interface style that will make computing easy and beautiful, they don't (necessarily) have to code an entire GUI to try it out.

    22. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Alpha_Nerd · · Score: 1

      That's not true. Recently there are some very cool and innovative UI enhancing programs for KDE.


      Karamba displays useful information such as the weather, cpu utilization, or the latest on Slashdot directly on your desktop.

      Slicker provides the desktop enhacning Kards, Slider, and Taskbar.

    23. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by arkanes · · Score: 1
      Thats funny, I thought Linux was written as a grounds-up reimplementation of well-known UNIX concepts because Linus didn't like any of the existing liceneses. That's hardly "innovation", at least in the technical sense. You'd have an easier sell if you were talking about BeOS.

      And when they say "successful", they are invevitable talking about "on the desktop", where Linux most certainly is NOT a success by any meaningful metric. Nor will it, unless and until it not only apes many MacOS and Windows features and concepts (because thats what people like and are used to - let UI "experts" bitch all they want about broken metaphors, they WORK).

    24. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Ponty · · Score: 1

      OpenDoc?

      Re Enlightenment: Yea, they're replacing the application concept with window borders. Giant, highly functional window borders.

    25. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      Uh, sure, until you bump the mouse and your focus goes flying. How is the clicking of one mouse button such a great inconvienience? Mouse focus is right up there with 'personalized menus' for Worst UI Element Ever.

    26. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 2, Insightful

      An X server is still an X server. It's still network-transparent, and if you want to start it with only a single xterm and no window manager no one is going to stop you. You can spend as much time as you want configuring everything the way you like it. None of the old applications or environments you reminisce about have un-written themselves. You can do a base Debian install, be left with 80MB of nothing but GNU userspace and the infrastructure to install other packages. You don't even have to know KDE or Gnome exist.

      Linux began as almost pure innovation, an OS written from the ground up by GNU and Linus Torvalds.

      Linux began as nothing but a straightforward implementation of POSIX. It was x86 only, and Linus initially had no plans for portability to other architectures. GNU was just reimplementation of UNIX userspace. Pure innovation? Linus just wanted to have the same environment at home on his x86 box as he had at the university.

      I would say it's self-evident that the direction that companies like RedHat are going represents what most people want. They're making money, and I assume they're doing market research to find out what people want. Maybe you're just frustrated that it's not the same as what you want. There's always Debian for you, which given enough time can be whatever you want it to be. Or you could pay Progeny to make this kind of customization easier with their Linux Platform Manager.

    27. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Uh, sure, until you bump the mouse and your focus goes flying. How is the clicking of one mouse button such a great inconvienience? Mouse focus is right up there with 'personalized menus' for Worst UI Element Ever.

      Some of us are better at keeping our mice under control than others. Having to click on a window to focus it is redundant and annoying, but it's the sort of annoying thing Windows users have convinced themselves is "normal" and the "right way" to do things.

    28. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by nathanh · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The current Linux community hates innovation.

      That's because the majority of Linux users are ex-Windows users. They don't want a UNIX system; they want a free version of Windows.

    29. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by JCholewa · · Score: 1

      > The last Linux UI innovation I can recall is
      > themeability - and I am still not sure whether
      > that was a good thing or a bad thing.

      I dunno:

      * I think that the arrangement of the program links (in the KDE and GNOME equivalents to win32's "Start Menu") is the greatest innovation in the GUI world for the last decade or so.

      * The ability to embed applets into the bars is rather nice, and support for multiple bars is cool.

      * The fact that you have the option of doing most tasks in MDI applications is kinda nice. I have to hunt and beg for MDI apps on win32, and while I've gotten most of the way there -- I have MDI capacity for word processing, spreadsheets (though I have to use a clunky "Window" menu there), usenet, http, irc, email and text editing -- I still can't find a decent terminal/console program that works with an MDI.

      * having almost every program's executable in the path is a really nice interface choice, though that's not a new one

      * resource utilization is balanced at the user level, so that programs that really, really need it get temporary dominance of system resources. This may not seem useful on the interface level, but it sure changes how I operate my programs. In Win2k (when I had a USB CD Writer), I had to close almost all my applications to burn a CD without getting a buffer underrun. In Mandrake 9, when I told it to burn, the system slowed down other applications, but I still could have some really intense programs running in the background (heavy downloading, extraction of large compressed files, parity checking, and maybe a compile running at the same time). A good interface is one that doesn't require you to close ten apps when you need to use one.

      For that matter, the system keeps some of those resources so that you can use the KDE interface (well, I'm just assuming that GNOME and others are similarly nice) while a program is locking up tons of cpu/memory/etc. Have you never had portions of the explorer shell white- or gray- out while a program's doing some heavy thinking? I have a similar problem in my Win2k's LiteStep shell, except that I use virtual desktops and can't change them while a program is lost in thought. I love being able to swap back and forth between desktops in KDE, regardless of the resource utilization of applications (granted, screen widget rewrites slow down, but it's got to be hit somewhere).

      * Back to real interface stuff: In KDE, the system controls window behavior. In Win2k, the application controls window behavior. I can make *any* window automatically on-top in KDE with little more than a right-click. In Windows, the app has to support this capability unless you use program hacks.

      * I can set any window to appear in all desktops simultaneously in KDE with a similar right-click action. My upper-right desktop is for web stuff and my lower-right desktop is for typing my mother's handwritten homework papers (she's RCIA). I set my movie player, cd writer and konsole windows to live in all desktops, so I can go back and forth between these tasks without having to think about it, but I always see the progress of my movie/burn/compile. I can do some of this stuff in LiteStep, but it involves editing configuration files to recognize window id names, and that's annoying.

      There's lots of little interface things that annoy me in Win2k that I can fix in KDE. You can't decouple the system tray from the taskbar. Your options for changing the look of the system clock are limited, and you can't really decouple that from the system tray. You can't access the programs menu without going to the Start button (eg, you cant just pop it up at your current mouse position). You can't configure alternate menus for your desktop (for example, what if I want to pop up my control panel by SHIFT-MiddleClicking the desktop?). Most of these problems can be mitigated by using alternative shells (but you'll be laughed at by the Windows Elite as I have been), hardware-specific drivers (I thin

    30. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And for a desktop OS that's perfectly understandable. Sure, I run debian on my desktop, but it irks me sometimes how much tinkering I need to do to get it configured. (Ofcourse, once a debian system is configured, it STAYS configured)

    31. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      Some of us are better at keeping our mice under control than others.

      Some of us aren't acerbic shmucks who like leaving their mouse pointer wherever they like rather than being forced to leave it on the window you're working in.

    32. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by vrt3 · · Score: 1

      Yuck, I hate that. I want to move the mouse pointer out of the way, so I can look and type with no pointer anywhere near where I'm looking.

      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
    33. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by steveha · · Score: 1

      We have seen some UI innovation, and we will see more.

      Before you can raise the bar, you have to reach the bar where it is. The Mac has been shipping, with a UI, since 1984. Windows has been around in one form or another about as long. KDE and GNOME have had much less time to get their acts together.

      Both KDE and GNOME now are decent and usable. From there, they can try new things and perhaps advance introduce some UI innovations. In the past, most of the energy has been going into just getting things working; now, more energy will go into experiments and new ideas.

      P.S. UI innovations tend to be subtle things. If you do radical, weird stuff, people don't like it.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    34. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Sanity · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Total configurability... you can choose anything from wm2 [all-day-breakfast.com] to KDE [kde.org] to act as your environment and at least once, you could make your environment behave in almost any way you wanted (remember dotfiles?)
      Themability simply isn't a priority for the vast majority of users, and it often stands in the way of usability. I would prefer one UI that works well than have the choice of hundreds of inconsistent and incompatable UIs.
      Linux began as almost pure innovation
      Uh? Linux is a reimplementation of Unix - there is very little in Linux that wasn't originally in a commercial unix. Placing it under the GPL may have been innovative philosophically, but there has been very little innovation technically.
    35. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 1

      That's because the majority of Linux users are ex-Windows users. They don't want a UNIX system; they want a free version of Windows.

      Or, in cases such as mine, they want the best of both worlds. Everything Windows gets right, with a fully-powered command-line always a click away.

    36. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by axxackall · · Score: 1
      I would prefer one UI that works well than have the choice of hundreds of inconsistent and incompatable UIs.

      1. As a user you should prefer one UI on your own PC, or on you group of PCs. But you cannot demand the whole open source community to collapse to one UI. That would be against the pluralistic concept of the open source community and it will destroy it.

      2. The talking like "I prefer one UI" is more appropriate to the manager in a commercial business. You cannot dictate OSS developers what UI they should work on. It's absolutely up to them.

      3. If you don't like the pluralism of the open source - you still can stick with the only UI from Microsoft, or to the only UI from Apple (assuming that MacOS9 is already dead).

      4. Hmm, actually you might be angry about inconsistency between UIs from Microsoft and Apple as well. See, har far you can go?

      5. Conceptually, the fact of having many (honestly - less than "hundreds") UIs, being proposed by various open source development groups and picked up by users, just proves that exactly today it's a time on the market when a lot of innovation ongoing in UI. Once the innovation will stop or slow down then there will be one standard summarizing the choice "obvious" for most of users. Until then let evolution put everything on its own place.

      --

      Less is more !
    37. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by The+Cydonian · · Score: 1
      Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work? Could it be that X is slowing us down somehow? I mean, think of how much fuss there was over minor and superficial enhancements antialiased fonts and transparent windows. Where are the big ideas?

      Metlin? Are you listening? :-D

    38. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget it -- you're arguing with a guy who has 11 XTerms on his screen and only uses the mouse as a 2D version of Alt-Tab. It's The Unix Way To Do It. Ug.

    39. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      Thats why there's this wonderful innovation known as the taskbar, and a wonderful consol app called screen. Or are you also using screen on those 11 xterms? :)

    40. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by AegisKnight · · Score: 1

      There are big ideas in UI research. In fact, Iowa State University is starting a human-computer interface graduate program. The desktop isn't the future though. That's all been said and done. What we're looking at is inexpensive virtual environments, wearable computing, nanocomputing, and areas where interfaces haven't been developed that much. Granted, some (a lot?) of these systems use Linux, but the "Linux desktop" isn't what the research is being based on.

      For example, I know a guy who recently developed an head-tracked interface for wearable computers... The problem with wearable computing is that the displays often have very low resolutions, 640x480 or so. But if your head is tracked, you can simply move your head to look around. This interface prototype implemented exactly that using Linux and some weird window manager. Unfortunately, most of you won't actually see this interface in action, since you probably don't have a wearable computer at home. :) But the point is, clear innovation is happening in academia, and a good chunk of it runs on Linux.

    41. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Ilan+Volow · · Score: 1

      The big ideas are in the brains of HCI researchers who can't program (because they spend most of their time doing research), and the people with the linux programming ability are a bunch of traditionalist unix geeks who think that HCI is a load of BS and who don't want to listen to some 'GUI expert' telling them how to program.

      For Linux UI innovation to succeed, it is first necessary to get rid of the 30 years of unix culture that has been holding it back.

      --
      Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
    42. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      moving KDE from being a collection of applications to a collection of pluggable components, with things like Konqueror becoming complicated wrappers for these components. The whole desktop is totally integrated - that's big, isn't it?

      No, Microsoft did that first - that is after all what they got sued for, integrating their browser into their desktop!

    43. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >They wouldn't know innovation if it rose up and bit them
      >in the ass.

      That happened once!

    44. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Telex4 · · Score: 1

      You obviously haven't used KDE, because what Microsoft did with IE is merely cosmetic in comparison.

    45. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work?

      Um, most HCI researchers use windows and are only in HCI cuz real computer science is SCARY.

    46. Re:Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just bitch-slapped the troll mod in meta-mod for you - it seems only fair.

  40. No conspiracy here, just competition by michaelggreer · · Score: 1

    MS, Apple, and Linux compete. KDE copies the Windows interface, because it is so well known and successful. MS copies the Apple GUI. Apple copies (literally) BSD and Konq.

    Round it goes. Its called competition.

    If you fall for any of their propoganda, its your own fault. MS and Apple are hypocritical, but they are corporations people. They are trying to make money off of you.

    1. Re:No conspiracy here, just competition by repetty · · Score: 1

      I believe you are absolutely right about that.

      Walk away from a good idea merely on principle? Stupid.

      I wish the XFree86 guys were willing to copy some of the important stuff from Apple and Microsoft and not just the window dressing shit.

      --Richard

  41. 2005, eh? by LordYUK · · Score: 0, Troll

    " 'Microsoft's 2005 version of its Windows operating system, apes features that have been in Apple's OS X operating system since 2001.'"

    Ironically, by 2005 software available on Windows in 2001 will still not run on the Mac, leaving users with a very colorful paperweight connected to a uni-button pointing device.

    Oh well, maybe Duke Nukem Forever will run really nice on Longhorn... =)

    --
    This is my sig. Its pathetic.
    1. Re:2005, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And by 2020 software available for Macs in 1985 will still not run on Windows. Talk to Mac people about that Windows software the *have* to run, and they can probably point you to either that same software available for the Mac, an equivalent package *for* the Mac, or a fast x86 emulator package that lets them run Windows and it's software on their Mac at about 75-80% the speed of a similarly spec'd PC.

      Of course, based on the Daikatana hype and results, I'm betting that DNF looks like Quake 3, runs like Unreal on a P200, and requires a 4GHz processor with 512MB RAM, 3GB of drive space, and a 128MB GeForce8 equivalent card when it finally comes out in 2055.

  42. osx by jest3r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OSX is a dream OS ..

    I can compile GNU fileutils .. play Warcraft3 .. run Adobe Photoshop .. and use Cron .. all on the same machine in the same OS -natively- without dualbooting .. and you can actually watch fullmotion video (ie DVD's) behind a transparent terminal window thanks to a true OpenGL rendered desktop.

    Apple has done in a few years what many in the Linux community have been trying to do for ages ..

    1. Re:osx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're an idiot. I can already do those things in linux. In fact, I was playing War3 in linux far before you ever could.

    2. Re:osx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with transparent terminals (aterm)

    3. Re:osx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have transparency over a video in Linux, I'd really like to know how you did it, because I'm nearly positive it's impossible.

    4. Re:osx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      play Warcraft3 .. run Adobe Photoshop

      Cool! You can support two companies that wielded the DMCA against individuals at the same time, while running open source software on proprietary hardware. Propz to you!

      ~~~

    5. Re:osx by nathanh · · Score: 1
      Apple has done in a few years what many in the Linux community have been trying to do for ages ..

      Seeing as the first serious desktop project (KDE) only formed in 1996 I dispute your insinuation that Linux is failing to deliver; 6.5 years from concept to what we have today is bloody impressive.

    6. Re:osx by metalslinger · · Score: 1

      I like to concure with this gentleman. Linux never made it this easy to do all of that at once; and I use both daily.

      --
      /. Heroics - 99.999%
    7. Re:osx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDE has come a long way in 6.5 years ... if you think keeping up with the Gates' is innovation ... Konquerer looks so much like Explorer is sickening ... This screenshot says it all: kde300-snapshot2-1152x864.jpg

      when you open the (k)start menu you get (k)word ... which minimizes to your (k)start bar ... and you better integrate (k)explorer into your (k)file manager ... oh you already did ...

    8. Re:osx by nathanh · · Score: 1
      if you think keeping up with the Gates' is innovation

      Did KDE copy from Windows or did they both copy from the experts.

  43. Microsoft is speeding up... by TFloore · · Score: 5, Funny

    Really... Windows 2005 will have things that have been in MacOSX since 2001, huh?

    Windows 95 copied things that had been in MacOS since... 1986 or so?

    The way I count things, MS is getting better, right? They went from 9 years behind to 4 years behind, in only 10 years.

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
    1. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by Dracos · · Score: 1

      Which means, in another 10 years, they'll actually be 1 year ahead.

      Uh, right.

    2. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by Arandir · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Windows 95 copied things that had been in MacOS

      This is a myth. There were things in Win95 that had long been in in the Mac. But Microsoft didn't copy the Mac. They copied OS/2 Warp.

      The reason this myth got started is because most tech reporters at the time (as now) only use Windows. They had to compare this new look to something in their experience, but they didn't have any experience outside of Windows. But they did notice that some people in the publication's art department were using that Mac. So they compared it to that. Most likely they had never even heard of OS/2. And if they did, certainly they never used it.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    3. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do these things get modded up? They're neither funny nor insightful.

      "...Technologies are tools, not religions. Use the best tool for a job. Show other people how to better use a particular tool, if you can. No matter how skilled you are with a tool, please don't hit other people with it." --Eric Meyer

    4. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Actually, they copied from both. They took the UI from the Mac, and the guts from OS/2. And since each one was only 95% as good as the original, they called it Win95!

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    5. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Apple used to say that Win95 == Mac86. The only problem was that Mac99 == Mac86. One thing M$ did NOT have a monopoly on was lack of innovation.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    6. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by norwoodites · · Score: 1

      The GUI of Windows 95 looks like the GUI of the NeXT OS by NeXT (aka Apple now), which is what Mac OS X is derived from.

    7. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by buysse · · Score: 1

      I actually thought it was more NeXTish than Warpish, meself. (I was a Win9x beta tester and also used NeXTstep and OS/2, and shortly later started to use Linux... but I still miss Netware 4.1.)

      --
      -30-
    8. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by cei · · Score: 1

      I don't know about that. The leap to System 7 was pretty significant, IIRC.

      --
      This sig intentionally left justified.
    9. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by senrik · · Score: 1

      ~They took the UI from the Mac, and the guts from OS/2.

      Unfortunately, the whole windows experience was a fork directly off of os/2, which, at least for a time was being co-developed between IBM and Microsoft.

      In case you didn't know

      --
      "the difference between myself and a madman is that I am not mad" -Salvadore Dali
    10. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is a myth. There were things in Win95 that had long been in in the Mac. But Microsoft didn't copy the Mac. They copied OS/2 Warp.
      So Win 95 copied it from OS/2 Warp, and OS/2 Warp copied the Mac? That's even worse!
    11. Re:Microsoft is speeding up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically, the whole OS/2 user experience was a fork off Windows, which predated OS/2 by several years.

  44. Last time this happened... by Orbital+Sander · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The result was Windows 95 and Apple had nothing to bite back with except Guy Kawasaki. They seem to have their act together a lot more these days. Let's hope that, by the time Longhorn is released, they're four years ahead again.

  45. longhorn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and people will still upgrade to longhorn because it's the thing to do. i honestly doubt the sales will put him into the trillionaire's club but that shouldn't keep him from simply having a good time like he has for the past 25 year's & making a little more money.

  46. What's the prob? by Alomex · · Score: 1

    A well run company pays attention to what users out there like and duplicates it in as much as is possible. A badly run company refuses to cede to users' demands and suffers from a bad case of "not-invented-here" (NIH) syndrome.

    Here's a case (for once) in which Microsoft responds to users demands and it does so in response to the threat of competition from Apple. Wasn't this what it is supposed to be all about? .... Sorry I forgot where I was. Slashdot is about dissing Microsoft, whether justified or not.

  47. Quartz/OSX by AlgUSF · · Score: 1

    OSX is slick, it feels 50 times more refined than Windows2K/WindowsXP,KDE,Gnome. The way it renders full color icons, of multiple sizes.

    Every time I go by the Apple store, I can't help myself and go in and play with the powermac G4 with two cineramic desplays. I like to take the Monsters Inc. trailer and fill one display with it, then drag it over to the other cinematic display!!!

    DDDRRRRRROOOOOOL!

    --


    I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
    1. Re:Quartz/OSX by ocelotbob · · Score: 1
      The way it renders full color icons, of multiple sizes.

      SVG icons. Gnome and KDE've got them too. Quickly becoming the default. Look real nice; check out the Crystal SVG iconset for KDE and the Gorilla iconset for GNOME

      I guess it's a matter of choice, but I want subtle more than I want slick. Apple's hardware and software is as subtle as a polar bear. It's why I still prefer x86 and Linux; I can get it slick yet still retain a good degree of subtlety

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    2. Re:Quartz/OSX by AlgUSF · · Score: 1

      I love Linux too! I run Linux on my home computer. For some reason OSX just always feels slick. The dock seems more smooth than my KDE dock does!

      --


      I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
    3. Re:Quartz/OSX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      1. Not refined...try multiple copies in the finder across the network...watch it crash
      2. Try using NFS drives...watch it crash
      3. Drag the windows around a screen...watch the cpu meter...ouch!


      OS X may look cute, sure. However one thing it definitely is not is refined. Try it out as a power user. Use it *all day long*. Use it when your productivity matters and you will see how unrefined it really is....especially the finder.
    4. Re:Quartz/OSX by demon · · Score: 1

      OS X doesn't use vector icons. Its icons are just large(r) pixmaps. I think the max dimensions are 128x128 or 256x256, something like that. Combined with a good scaling algorithm, you end up with very decent looking icons, yes, but that doesn't make them vector images. I think SVG icons will be really cool - I'd like to try them on my workstation, where I have KDE 3.1.1 (on Debian sid).

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
  48. Linux Proprietary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would Microsoft port their code to a proprietary operating system such as Linux? If anything, they'd use a truly free piece of software, such as FreeBSD.

    1. Re:Linux Proprietary by Omega1045 · · Score: 1

      Uhhh... ya. Good one. Keep up the good work.

      --

      Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

    2. Re:Linux Proprietary by someonehasmyname · · Score: 1

      No, he's totally correct. If they fork off Linux, their code needs to be GPL. They can fork off FreeBSD, close the source, sell it, whatever, and it's legit. The BSD license lets you do *anything* you want, including close the source, and sell a product 100% based on their work.

      --
      Common sense is not so common.
    3. Re:Linux Proprietary by Omega1045 · · Score: 1

      Oh, now I get it. Hmmm, that might be why they already have .NET running on BSD.

      --

      Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

  49. It goes on all the time.... by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    Big companies do buy competitors products, strip them down an analyse what they have used and how much it costs etc... I'm sure they also have experts that advice them on what they can get away with doing in regard to copying their ideas.

  50. Once again? by litewoheat · · Score: 1

    What I'm worried about is that Apple will do the same thing it did when Windows 95 came out, and when the IBM PC came out which was mock them as inferior while doing nothing to improve their own products to stay a decade ahead of everyone else.

  51. So f*cking tired of bashing MS... I don't like... by Assmasher · · Score: 1, Troll

    ...MS more than any other company, but they are ALL the same. ORACLE is filled with assholes, Apple is filled with idiots and assholes. MS is filled with assholes. All companies are if you're a critic.

    Note the use of the term 'apes'. FFS, if this was a posting about how Apple have followed some of MS's directions (posted many times here), people would never use the word 'apes', they would couch it in terms and phrases like 'taking the best from the lump of crap Windows' and 'improving on MS' pathetic attempts...'

    Can't you MS bashers see how absolutely f*cking biased you are, simply by examining the language you use? You people make me want to like (gag) MS...

    --
    Loading...
  52. the real question? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how do i get someone who is now accustomed to paying $500 for a new pc to shell out $500x(n) for a flat panel computer that can do what a mac can do (almost, almost as well)--

    AND still say apples computers are overpriced?

    LLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSEEEEEEEERRRRRRRSSSSSSSSSS !! !!! (AS JIM CAREY WOULD SAY)

  53. Correct me if I'm wrong but, by torre · · Score: 1, Informative

    Didn't Next have a compositing display engine way back in the 70's via its postscript based engine? And as memory serves served as inspiration for Aqua and it's PDF based display engine.

    1. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, by Tumbleweed · · Score: 2, Funny

      In the _seventies_?!

      Wow, that _would_ have been impressive! :)

    2. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, by SirOgre · · Score: 2, Informative

      NeXt was founded in 86, so no....but the rest of your argument bears some merit

    3. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, by CommieBozo · · Score: 1

      Sure, but I think Steve Jobs was busy with Apple in the 70's, not NeXT.

    4. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, by FatRatBastard · · Score: 2, Informative

      Doubtful since NeXT didn't exist until Jobs left Apple (later 80s). But yes, they did have PostScript for Displays as their rendering engine. Rumor has it the reason they switched to PDF was to keep from paying Adobe licensing $$$.

    5. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, by mjolnir_ · · Score: 1
      You're wrong. I'm correcting you.


      NeXT was Steve Jobs' second company, in the 1980s, well after Apple's introduction of the Macintosh platform in early 1984.

      Your memory apparently doesn't serve. Apple purchased the remnants of NeXT -- and rehired several key engineers -- Mac OS X does have a few features which could be described as being inspired by NeXT, but few of those are in the GUI, mostly they are in the Mach-O layer.

      -mj

    6. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, by capsteve · · Score: 1

      NeXT did have a display postscript license from Adobe(circa 1986-87), something Apple decided not to do for cost reasons(circa 1983-84), which was the reason screen/printer fonts needed an external rendering engine to do true(or as close to true) WYSIWYG via Quickdraw. remember all the screen font sizes you used to have to add in your font suitcase? Adobe also helped with the display of it's fonts thru the ATM utility to help 'tween screen resolution renditions of the fonts by interpreting the printer fonts. i always suspected that ATM was a mini postscript interpreter. Apple and Microsoft(and others) wanted to further distance themselves from postscript and developed the QuickDrawGX standard, which is becoming the opentype standard. what's really interesting here is that innovation was forced on the industry because of a financial issue; if apple didn't care about the cost of it's initial macintoshes, it would have had display postscript in it... neccesity is the mother of invention, even if it's the pocketbook.

      frankly there are some things about display postscript that i prefer to the other options(especially in the prepress world). we used to send files to a scitex ps2 RIP which had a hardware based true postscript interpreter, and it pushed a preview via display postscript. if it didn't display a preview, it wouldn't print. you could also use this feature to "debug" problem graphics by watching the postscript render on screen element by element until it stopped rendering the image, which meant that the next element to be drawn was causing the problem.

      --
      three can keep a secret, if two are dead - benjamin franklin
    7. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, by torre · · Score: 1

      woops.... thanx to all that caught my dumb typo!!...

    8. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong but, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what, dumbass?

      Steve Jobs started NeXT. It's arguable that NeXT took over Apple since Jobs brought over his people and put them in the most important and influential positions. Avie rocks, Dvorak doesn't, you're a loser, go back to CompUSA.

      Retard.

  54. That Won't Stop Microsoft from Winning by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Interesting
    OS/2 had all the features of Windows 95 back in 1992, and those features were for the most part better implemented. Look where OS/2 is now...

    While OSX does enjoy several advantages over OS/2, I am not convinced that it's going to be enough to buy Apple any long-term gain. I suspect that any move Microsoft makes against the Open Source community will also be very dangerous to Apple. At the very least, Apple is going to have to remain vigilant if they are to avoid any potential dirty tricks.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:That Won't Stop Microsoft from Winning by Bulln-Bulln · · Score: 2, Informative

      OS/2 had all the features of Windows 95 back in 1992, and those features were for the most part better implemented. Look where OS/2 is now...

      There are a few reasons why OS/2 hasn't taken the lead in OSes. One reason is that OS/2 used a lot RAM that was very expensive that time. The people chose what was cheaper.

      Oh and just FYI: OS/2 was a combined effort from IBM and Microsoft (up to OS/2 1.3 I believe).

    2. Re:That Won't Stop Microsoft from Winning by the+idoru · · Score: 1

      you're right, and as a mac user i always have those reservations in the back of my head, "how long until something happens in the tech community to cause this company (apple) to go belly up?" i have friends that, when they see my 12" powerbook or ibook, say, "wow that's really cool." when i say yes, and then try to expound on how REALLY cool OS X is, they give me a glossy gaze and i've totally lost them.

      OS X rocks, but i'm grounded enough to know that joe schmo only sees the really slick hardware. my wallet would LOVE an x86 implementation of OS X, but i know that if apple did such a thing, it would be their death toll. they are a hardware-selling complany that happens to make some wicked software too. case-in-point: they give a whole lot of it away for free when you buy the computer.

      and it's too bad. apple put lots of resources into making (what i think is) software that works very well, but your would-be switchers don't look deep enough into their own computer-using experience to realize that there is a better alternative to windows out there.

    3. Re:That Won't Stop Microsoft from Winning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OS/2 had features, and it sucked. it's quite possible to do both.

  55. Arrogance is Dangerous by repetty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remember when IBM announced their first personal computer. Of course, Apple said something like "Welcome. Serioiusly."

    Then Apple got it's head kicked in.

    In our world, quality does NOT sell computers. This new Microsoft machine doesn't have to be nearly as good as a Macintosh to be good enough for people who don't know any better. That principal, already, has been proven.

    Thankfully, there is one important difference between those days and today: Apple is working its arse off and not just talking shit.

    Apple is definitely pushing the industry -- that has always been its charter. Let us all hope that they don't forget all the obligations that role entails.

    --Richard

    1. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Apple got its head kicked in because IBM created a platform, not a product. The clones kicked it's head in, IBM's own PCs have always done relatively poorly.

      Apple will always be a tiny little niche segment of the market, so long as they stick to a proprietary closed system.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Its all about marketing.

      Apple has a new marketing and advertising team.

      The Imac is a perfect example. Joe six pack sees the cool imac vs an ugly biege pc, he is going to pick the imac.

      MS use to have great marketing. However Jobs has fired and replaced the whole team when he took over. Its quite good but consumers like gui's.

      If its as good as macosx it will hurt apple. If its ugly like XP it might benefit them. I do not know of anyone who likes XP. However longhorn supports brilliant colors in high end monitors that only macs had for years so who knows.

    3. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 4, Funny
      I remember when IBM announced their first personal computer. Of course, Apple said something like "Welcome. Serioiusly."

      Ah, but you forgot the most hubristic - and funniest - ad that Apple ran.

      At the launch of Windows 95, Apple ran a full-page ad (NYT?) that said:

      C:/NGRDLTNS.W95

      Priceless.

      Your point is taken, though. Let's see if Apple is awake this time. Something tells me they are.

      --
      If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
    4. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by Shuh · · Score: 1
      Apple will always be a tiny little niche segment of the market, so long as they stick to a proprietary closed system.
      They have to stay in that niche. "Open" x86 platform is where old proprietary OS goes to die. The only reason Microsoft tolerates Linux is because they can't find a way to "cut off their air supply." Thousands of programmers working for free is a hard thing to shut down from a business perspective... not that they haven't tried.
    5. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by repetty · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Apple will always be a tiny little niche segment of the market, so long as they stick to a proprietary closed system."

      Yes, Apple is quite happy with that.

      I'm quite happy with them.

      All around, we are quite happy.

    6. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by repetty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Its all about marketing."

      There's some truth to that. Not as much as you probably believe, but some, at least. I used to say they same thing about Microsoft. I've come to realize that it's really more about politics than marketing.

      Also, I disagree with your supporting example. The iMacs have done very well, but it's hardly the case you describe wherein Joe Six-Pack sees a colorful iMac and buys it over a beige PC.

      People decide to purchase Macintosh systems because they make the conscious decision to do so. Same case exists for people who make the decision to run Linux or Unix or OS/2 or Be or any of the many other non-Microsoft operating systems.

      By definition, no Windows user has ever made the decision to run Windows--instead, they are born into the situation. Almost to the last person, Windows users lack any meaningful understanding of the alternatives available to them. What motive do they have? What opportunity for knowledge of the alternatives are available to them?

      I'm not blaming anybody for this situation. It's just how things are.

      By virtue of proportions, Linux users and Macintosh users are well exposed to Windows and Microsoft's World(TM). How familiar are Windows users with Mac OS X or Linux? Which type of user has had the opportunity and resources to make the most informed decision?

      Joe Six-Pack doesn't buy iMacs. He bought Packard-Bells by the truckload, then Gateways, and now Dells. In the future, Joe Six-Pack will buy whatever commodity PC is being produced for the masses by the most successful commodity PC maker, and he won't burn any brain cells doing it.

      And somewhere inside this mess is marketing.

    7. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by steveha · · Score: 1

      Did that ad actually convince people to buy Apple computers, or was it just a "we're so cool" thing that was a waste of advertising budget? I suspect the latter.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    8. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by maw · · Score: 1
      This is possibly the most inane, pointless, and incoherent post I have ever read.

      That is all.

      --
      You're a suburbanite.
    9. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      You're 99% right. I know of some Windows users who choose Windows, knowing the alternatives, because Windows fits their needs. However, the main reason it DOES fit their needs better is because Windows is everywhere! The reason that kewl hardware works with Windows it the manufactorer knows it BETTER work with Windows. Joe has dozens of people to ask when he has a Doze question. You're the only Linux user he knows. As long as 98% of people buy Windows "because its there", it will be the dominant OS.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    10. Re:Arrogance is Dangerous by newkid · · Score: 1

      In fact it was the Seattle Times of August 24, 1995 (the same day as Win95 launch):

      C:\ONGRTLNS.W95

      There was a small Apple logo at the bottom-center of the ad, as if to say "do you get it?" What the ad meant was:

      Congradulations Windows 95

      You have to remember that Windows 95 brought support for long file names... except on floppies, which were still very common at the time.

      Have a look here.

  56. hmmm by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From the summary: "...'The one thing Apple's providing now is leadership in colors'..."

    And this is the *best* thing MS can copy? Whatever happened to increasing security? Opening standards? Interoperability? Customer support? Fixing bugs?

    Nope...gotta get them colours right...

    --
    So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
  57. It is a Direct Copy of Quartz..... by Entropy_ajb · · Score: 1

    and Quartz is so original. I bet no software company had ever thought up using a 3D card to render a desktop. That wasn't the natural evolution of things or anything. And Microsoft isn't waiting to deploy one until the hardware is ready or anything. Apple is first to the market with a lot of stuff, not because they are visionary, but because they release it when the hardware isn't ready for it yet.

    1. Re:It is a Direct Copy of Quartz..... by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      take a look at the xrender extensions for xfree. Using openGL to handle portions of desktop rendering isn't new. Apple just embraced and extended the idea

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    2. Re:It is a Direct Copy of Quartz..... by pressman · · Score: 1

      Quartz Extreme uses today's faster graphics cards to render the desktop and graphics, but that's not what Quartz is. Quartz is essentially a graphic layer which uses PDF as it's base.... essentially it's an extension of Display PostScript.

      http://www.apple.com/macosx/technologies/graphic s. html

      Read up a little bit if you think Quartz is about simply rendering the desktop with a GPU.

      --
      Pooty tweet
    3. Re:It is a Direct Copy of Quartz..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Tweet! Flag on play!

      Embrace and Extend generally refers to something different. Not reimplementing an existing technology used by someone else with no premise of comaptabiltiy, but taking a technolgoy or protocol (USB, for example) and making a version that works with the current version... But has some small enhancements or features added, that allows the company Embracing and Extending to effectively realign other devlopers to the way THEY want things.

    4. Re:It is a Direct Copy of Quartz..... by Entropy_ajb · · Score: 1

      Does the Micrsoft system use PDF as it's base? It is an extension of Display Postscript? Last time I checked it wasn't. So the only similarity that I can see between MS's new desktop and Apples, is the whole 3d rendering thing. Which wasn't a new idea when Apple did it, so they don't get to claim Microsoft is copying them.

  58. catching up! by lahi · · Score: 1

    'Microsoft's 2005 version of its Windows operating system, apes features that have been in Apple's OS X operating system since 2001.'

    My, they are catching up; back in 1995 it was "Windows 95 = Mac 85". So the difference is down to just four years now? Amazing -- perhaps they will be head-to-head with Apple by 2015 or thereabout?

    -Lasse

    1. Re:catching up! by sporty · · Score: 1

      Unfrotunately, for MS bases a lot on usability tests, which are practical in some ways, but Apple seems to do a better job.

      Until MS replaces the people in their design staff that says what goes in and what doesn't, Apple will usually be one step ahead.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

  59. Re:Flammery and Irritation by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

    inciteful or insightful?

  60. no archive link by DuckWing · · Score: 1

    Dang it all anyway! Used to be able to read the articles by changing www in the url to archive or archives (I forget which, but tried them both). They don't let you do that anymore ;-(

    I know slashdotters have a userid and password for this site, but I can't seem to find the old post that mentioned it anywhere. Someone care to post it again? I thought it was slashdot and hacker or something like that.

    --
    -- DuckWing
  61. Athens PC just as ugly as beige box by AlgUSF · · Score: 1

    Is it me or does the Athens PC look just as stupid as beige boxes? Nothing like my Lian-Li PC case, which is slick in sort of an industrial h4x0r sort of way!

    --


    I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
  62. OK, fine by dacarr · · Score: 1

    ~Eight years ago, Mac users said the interface on Win95 had features that were reminiscent of Apple's signature Mac OS. In short, this is nothing new.

    --
    This sig no verb.
  63. Actually.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought Apple copied that concurrent user thing off BSD. Maybe i'm wrong..

  64. Can we get over this already? by piznut · · Score: 1

    Both companies have copied each other on several occasions. Innovation is dead. Paradigm shift has become synonymous with re-decoration. Or maybe Im just jaded.

    I don't think many people reasonable people will argue that Microsoft has a better (aesthetically at least) desktop than Apple even though it is completely subjective. I also don't think many reasonable people would argue that Apple hardware is a better "value" (price vs perf) than a comparable Windows box. (Bear with me for a second Im going somewhere with this).

    I think there is bigger picture that is being missed in this whole Athens thing. PC users tend to place more importance on price vs performance where Apple users generally put aesthetics above performance and price. Microsoft realizes this and is therefore moving towards a convergance of those preferences probably in an attempt to "unswitch" some people.

  65. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong... YOU ARE WRONG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next was not even founded yet in 70's, jobs was busy starting apple with woz!!!! Next actually started a couple of years after Scully boot Jobs off apple, which was after the macintosh project took off. So i'd say that would be about the late 80's... get your history straight mate!

  66. T-shirt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I still have a T-shirt that says:

    "Macintosh
    The power of Windows 95... since 1984"

  67. in other news......... by phillyclaude · · Score: 1

    The Apple iMac was unveiled today, in translucent "Bondi Blue". This new computer sports a screaming 233 mHz G3 processor, 6 gigabyte HD, and 32 megabytes ram

    --
    A computer without a Microsoft operating system is like a dog without bricks tied to its head
    1. Re:in other news......... by Squidgee · · Score: 1
      ?

      May I ask, what the hell yer talking about? (I..don't get the joke; sorry. =/)

  68. Oh, wow by The+Bungi · · Score: 4, Interesting
    These stories should be posted on a Mac advocacy website. This is the home of the folks whose crowning achievement remains cloning whatever Microsoft does.

    Oh, and BTW, Apple has a definite point here. The difference is that Apple took an unfriendly OS and turned it into a consumer product.

    1. Re:Oh, wow by geomon · · Score: 3, Informative

      You really believe Microsoft invented graphical user interfacing? (aka 'Windows')

      You should get out more.

      Here's one of several short summaries available on the web covering the development and history of the GUI.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    2. Re:Oh, wow by The+Bungi · · Score: 1
      Did you even read my post? Where did I claim Microsoft invented anything?

      "Get out more"? Is that a joke?

    3. Re:Oh, wow by geomon · · Score: 1

      These stories should be posted on a Mac advocacy website. This is the home of the folks whose crowning achievement remains cloning [gnome.org] whatever [kde.org] Microsoft [microsoft.com] does [lindows.com].

      Implicit in your post was the claim that all of these organizations (i.e., Gnome, KDE, Lindows) have all purloined technologies and/or 'look-and-feel' qualities from Microsoft products.

      I successfully poked a hole in the primary premise of your argument. I leave it as a community pissing match to argue over who cloned who.

      It is a fact that Microsoft did not invent the GUI. They copied ideas from one company who had, in turn, copied the concepts from another company.

      "Freedom to Innovate" = Big Enough To Steal

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    4. Re:Oh, wow by The+Bungi · · Score: 1
      Implicit in your post was the claim that all of these organizations (i.e., Gnome, KDE, Lindows) have all purloined technologies and/or 'look-and-feel' qualities from Microsoft products.

      Soooo... are you saying they copied the "look and feel" from somewhere else? Where?

      I successfully poked a hole in the primary premise of your argument

      ROFL! You are good.

      It is a fact that Microsoft did not invent the GUI.

      And again, where in my post did you notice I implied that?

    5. Re:Oh, wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft did not invent the GUI, and they haven't even made the best GUI out there. However, their version IS what the Linux GUI people tend to copy. As a Mac user, I'd obviously prefer them to copy the Mac. Unfortunately, when they do, they seem to limit themselves to copying the look, while still keeping the clunky feel of Windows...

    6. Re:Oh, wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The previous post isn't suggesting that Microsoft invented the GUI. It is suggesting that KDE and GNOME copied the look and feel of Microsoft's UI. Perhaps it is you who needs to get out more. As long as you're on the subject of "stealing", you MUST realize that with a few window manager exceptions (Enlightenment comes to mind), the "free" GUIs are stolen concepts. Microsoft isn't the only company to steal concepts however, the point of the post (again!) was that KDE/GNOME tend to copy the look and feel of Microsoft, where as Apple's UI has been a consistent evolution over time.

    7. Re:Oh, wow by geomon · · Score: 1

      Soooo... are you saying they copied the "look and feel" from somewhere else? Where?

      I never said who they 'borrowed' their look-and-feel from. Read the article I cited and make your own determination. As for my claim, here's the quote from my reply:

      "I leave it as a community pissing match to argue over who cloned who."

      I never claimed Apple, Linux, X.org or anyone else invented the GUI. I merely took exception at your assertion that Microsoft was the innovator you proclaimed them to be.

      Demanding that I again point out your incredible claims is a waste of time. Too bad you haven't read your own posts carefully enough before submitting them. Backpedaling now just makes you look weak and pathetic.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    8. Re:Oh, wow by bogie · · Score: 1

      Wow how'd this MS trolling crap get modded up? Are there really that many anti-linux moderators out there now?

      "This is the home of the folks whose crowning achievement remains cloning [gnome.org] whatever [kde.org] Microsoft [microsoft.com] does [lindows.com]"

      Yep except they managed to do it without causing billions of dollars in losses due to viruses and worms.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    9. Re:Oh, wow by geomon · · Score: 1

      Read my replies to The Bungie carefully. I never made the claim that Microsoft had not been copied.

      I made the claim that Microsoft is just as culpable in look and feel theft.

      I stand by that claim without fear of equivocation.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    10. Re:Oh, wow by The+Bungi · · Score: 1
      Demanding that I again point out your incredible claims is a waste of time. Too bad you haven't read your own posts carefully enough before submitting them. Backpedaling now just makes you look weak and pathetic.
      • me: "the sky is blue"
      • you: "no, cows can't fly. I have successfully poked a hole in your line of reasoning".
      • me: "Eh... I wasn't talking about cows, I was talking about the sky".
      • you: "You don't understand, cows can't fly".
      • me: "Dude, I said the sky is blue".
      • you: "I told you cows can't fly. You're backpedaling now? Hah! You are wasting my time and you are weak and pathetic".

      Perhaps you should get out more my friend.

    11. Re:Oh, wow by geomon · · Score: 1

      I'm still waiting for the positive defense of your position.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    12. Re:Oh, wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      another "I don't like what he's saying, mod him down" post. typical slashdot.

    13. Re:Oh, wow by The+Bungi · · Score: 1
      I'm still waiting for the positive defense of your position.

      Sure. Right after you provide some sort of meaningful challenge to it. Until now you've merely provided arguments against something I didn't claim.

    14. Re:Oh, wow by geomon · · Score: 1

      Fine. Let's assume that I've mischaracterized your initial argument. If you are not claiming that these organizations have stolen Microsoft developments, then what have you claimed?

      I reject the idea that Microsoft somehow got the ball rolling by developing a working windowing environment. That is my positive counterclaim to how I read your initial post.

      If you believe that Gnome, KDE and Lindows are the benefactors of Microsoft developments or innovations, then spell out which ones. The Apple v. Microsoft case is replete with examples of how both companies 'borrowed' from other developers. Innovation is rare in the software industry.

      As I read the history of the GUI, Microsoft saw the success of Apple's foray into windowing and decided that they needed to develop a GUI. Through a massive development efforts funded by their own sales of DOS, Microsoft was able to produce a workable windowing environment. There were distinct similarities between what Apple claimed were their innovations and what Microsoft have put in Windows. The courts didn't see the situation as Apple did.

      But has Microsoft advanced their interface? Certainly. When faced with a challenge, Microsoft is capable of producing significant improvements in existing technology. But they only produce those innovations when they have a credible adversary.

      Microsoft will not, however, put a penny into innovation just to advance general computing technology. They spend mightily to protect their product from tampering and theft (to their credit), but will also spend millions to thwart innovations by their competitors (which is illegal - Microsoft has been found guilty of monopolistic abuses in a federal court).

      You now have my opinion of Microsoft. They are the quintessential American company. They have both positive and negative qualities that propel them to success.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    15. Re:Oh, wow by OECD · · Score: 1

      Oh, wow (Score:4, Flamebait)

      Parent post is modded +4, Flamebait? Slashdot is weird...

      --
      One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
    16. Re:Oh, wow by PetWolverine · · Score: 1

      Maybe I can help end this silly little flame war. (Or maybe I misread his original argument too. Let's find out, at any rate.)

      I don't think he claimed that Microsoft innovated. He claimed that various Linux GUIs try to imitate Microsoft. This isn't saying that what they're imitating is a good or even innovative product, it's just saying that's what they're trying to imitate. They want to be shitty because people seem to like shittiness--after all, how else do you interpret Microsoft's success?

      Mind you, I'm not in any position to say whether or not this argument has merit, as I don't use Linux at all. I'm just trying to clarify, so you can argue the point he made, rather than the point you assumed he was making.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
    17. Re:Oh, wow by Squidgee · · Score: 1
      Uhm...

      He was stating that "[Insert Linux GUI here] stole their look and feel from MS". Which they did; we all know GNOME is strying to look like Windows; KDE has a frigging start menu for god's sake (while it's not called a "start menu").

      "Lindows". Need I say more?

    18. Re:Oh, wow by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Hi Steve Ballme "in the ass". You post pathetic shit trying to look good. You fail. You are an ass monkey. You are cock smell. You are the leftoevers from your mom's rented cunt.

      Don't even try to be "relevent". You lost, you failed, you are the fungi I wipe off my toilet bowl.

      Just because you are Bill Gate's brother doesn't make you special, generally you have to do something special your self before you will be considered "special".

      Jackass.
      meh

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    19. Re:Oh, wow by geomon · · Score: 1

      Actually, he made a rather sweeping condemnation of all non-MS operating systems since his original post contained references to Mac as well.

      Which is the point I was trying to make: Everyone in the GUI wars has been on a borrowing spree.

      There is nothing innovative about the 'Start' button on the menu bar either. I owned a copy of a nice button bar utility that ran under Windows 3.1.

      I guess Microsoft used the word "Start" first.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    20. Re:Oh, wow by The+Bungi · · Score: 0, Troll
      fungi I wipe off my toilet bowl.

      Maybe that's your problem right there, mon. Does your ass itch?

    21. Re:Oh, wow by Squidgee · · Score: 1
      His original comment was:

      " These stories should be posted on a Mac advocacy website. This is the home of the folks whose crowning achievement remains cloning [gnome.org] whatever [kde.org] Microsoft [microsoft.com] does [lindows.com].

      Oh, and BTW, Apple has a definite point here. The difference is that Apple took an unfriendly OS and turned it into a consumer product. "

      Nowhere does he mac a refrence to any non-MS OSes. In fact, he merely points out multiple Linux GUIs, which, you guessed it, have ripped off MS bigtime.

      Sorry, but you're wrong; you've obviously read his comment and taken it far out of context. In fact, the only Mac-related comment was about the fact that these stories shouldn't be on /. b/c they'll get pounded by Linux-zealots.

      There was no sweeping refrence. There was no refrence to GUI creation. Instead he merely commented on the fact that many of the "features" in Windows have been torn right off and plastered onto Linux.

      And, no, I don't use Windows. I use Mac OS X.

    22. Re:Oh, wow by konker · · Score: 1

      You really believe Microsoft invented graphical user interfacing? (aka 'Windows')

      You should get out more.


      shouldn't that be "You should stay in more"?

    23. Re:Oh, wow by geomon · · Score: 1

      Non-MS OSs: Mac, Lindows.....

      Affiliated with non-MS OSs: KDE, Gnome.....

      As for who ripped off who, there are more than one opinion on that matter: yours, mine, The Bungee, and 500,000 +/- advocates of their favorite flavor of operating system.

      He made sweeping generalizations that I couldn't allow to go unchallenged.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    24. Re:Oh, wow by Squidgee · · Score: 1
      Non-MS OSs: Mac, Lindows..... Affiliated with non-MS OSs: KDE, Gnome.....

      Since when are KDE and Gnome affiliated with Macs?

      I thought so.

    25. Re:Oh, wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      DUMBASS!

      Learn to fucking read. He never said anything regarding MS' s theft. Fucking idiot.

  69. News from WinHEC... by Slime-dogg · · Score: 3, Funny

    Microsoft now announces:

    The arrival of the nExT generation desktop! This desktop will include all-new technology, such as scalable icons and a specialized bar at the bottom that we like to call "the port." You can now land programs in the port, and ship programs from the port.

    At the windows developers meeting, we will be unvailing the UCAPI, or universal component API. This API will be a C++/C# centric API, where MS nExT developers can place descendant classes of current coponents in a directory, and they will be automatically "turned on" for use in all programs that used the original component! Imagine the possibilities, such as a multi-threaded spell-checking text box!

    We at MS are very excited to be the frontrunners in this brand-new nExT-generation technology!

    --
    You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
  70. Have you ever been bitten by a penguin? by dduardo · · Score: 1

    Billy Gates has

  71. Hum dee dum... by WileyWiggins · · Score: 1

    They can copy whatever they want. It's still not going to compel me to trade in OS X for Windows.

  72. lose/lose for Microsoft by VAXGeek · · Score: 1

    What did you expect? Microsoft gets a lose/lose situation on Slashdot. If they did NOT add these features OS X has, Linux zealots would be spouting how inferior Windows is. However, since they DID add the features that everyone seems to want, the plan is just to belittle the fact that Windows 2003 will probably be an improvement on Windows 2000/XP because of features "lifted" from OS X.

    --
    this sig limit is too small to put anything good h
    1. Re:lose/lose for Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What did you expect? Microsoft gets a lose/lose situation on Slashdot.
      There area plenty of Windows cheerleading sites on the web. The fact that Slashdot is not one of them is no reason to cry for your bottle.


  73. Copy of copy graphically, but lets lopok deeper: by westyvw · · Score: 1, Troll

    "Longhorn is quartz" "OSX has colors"
    Ya know what? WHATEVER. Nothing new or inventive from either one of those camps. Just boring old screens with some color. Who cares. Copy each other? Of course, thats how it works. Ever notice that possible KDE and Gnome just didnt come out of nowhere? With the exception of maybe Enlightenment, nobody is doing anything truly interesting with the desktop itself. (oh yeah everyone thank Xerox for the GUI, thats where it all began).

    But whats really going on?
    Microsoft goes the extra mile of course and throws in spyware and DRM and begins its road towards a closed .net framework and trying to kick open source out for good. Meanwhile apple maintains its stronghold on closed computer hardware, but uses open source software to base its OS on.

    So whats NOT interesting is the desktop, but the hardware and software base. MS is jealous of the fact that Apple has so much control over their hardware (and software to some extent) and Apple is jealous of MS for having such a huge user base.

    As each company moves towards its goals: Read MAKE MONEY, dont think for a second it has anything to do with making computing better, the consumer had better keep thier eyes wide open, and not worry so much about a some desktop theme.

    BTW: I tried to be objective: But I have always disliked Macs. From way back when I had a two-button mouse, multi-tasking, thousands of colors, full screen animation, stereo sound, and more. What did the mac have? A black and white screen and a wild eep for sound. Yet even then the mac fanbots would tell me how great it was. The PC crowd didnt have fanbots like that, it was just known that the PC (lets see they were just getting 286's) was what it was, just a text editor.
    Its too bad that we argue about the PC and Mac as if either was all that interesting, and we know full well that a good idea is worth copying.

    ONE LAST NOTE: I have only watched someone else use OSX. They used it for a while and then it was replaced with Gentoo (go figure). Is apple still so ass backword that dragging disks to the trash is the way to eject them? And empty trash is under "Special"?

  74. Macintosh OS = Windows 95 by taaminator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Let me see --

    Windows (19)95 was a brand new operating system concept never conceived before -- with the exception of Macintosh OS (1988)

    iWin (2004) is a brand new computer concept never conceived before -- with the exception of iMac (1997) then iMac FP

    Reverse engineering is the sincerest form of flattery. Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery. Copyright violation is the sincerest form of flattery. -- M$ ripping you off is the sincerest form of flattery.

    Run, Apple, run!

    This is reminiscent of Sony. Sony was only 15% of the consumer electronics market (compared to National/Panasonic), so Sony had to innovate or die. As Sony innovated, others would take Sony's ideas, reverse engineer them, modify them, and create competing products. [Revive Beta versus VHS argument, here] For example, Sony developed and sold the only digital camera with memory card and modem in the early 80s. It did not catch on and Sony was about to cancel the product line when a reporter took pictures of an aircraft crash, sent them to his editor, and his newspaper scooped everyone with pictures. Now, few remember the original Sony digital camera with stick and modem and how Sony helped lead the digital revolution .

    Sony leads, others follow.

    Apple innovates, M$ assimilates ...

  75. Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of M$ by crovira · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its NOT about churning out a first rate product. First rate products are hard to build take time and don't make you very rich very quickly.

    GM, Ford and AMC don't churn out great cars. No Lamborghini's, no Roll's Royces, not even a Beamer. But they churn out a lot of crappy ones and make some money on each one.

    Its all about the Benjamins. M$ would churn out Goethes, Bachs, Rembrants and Piranene's if anybody figured out a way to make a buck doing that.

    But that's not likely is it? So you get "wanna-be" "rip-off" crap that doesn't work well, look good or last long because there's more money in churning crap.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  76. egomaniacs by Zane+Edwards · · Score: 1

    the MS/HP computer looks suspiciously like bill gates head (note the ears) and the imac, well both versions look like steves round head! whats going on here...some kind of conspiracy or something.

  77. Microsoft was working on buffered display long ago by ChristopherLord · · Score: 1

    I seem to recall that microsoft research was working on a '3d' user interface system many years ago. It displayed windows as textures on billboards in a 3d space.

    3d compositing is actually a scaled back version of a full 3d space, in that it prevents windows from having tilt, so that z-buffering is easier.

    I also remember reading an article about a composited desktop on the microsoft website prior to OSX coming out, which described many of the features that are now in the longhorn set.

    And lastly, I have not seen anyone substantiate the claim that MS's implementation is a carbon-copy of OSX. There are some definate features in common, but there is bound to be vast differences. Simply adopting a superior technology which a competitor happens to also use is USUALLY considered a good thing. If this DIDNT happen, we'd all still be using command line interfaces...

    oh wait... many of us still are.

    the ole slashdot story spinner 9000 seems to be functioning normally...

  78. John Markoff by st0rmcold · · Score: 1


    Anyone notice that the guy who wrote this article is the evil John Markoff who profited from Kevin Mitnick's story?

    --
    Posting useless rant since 2003.
  79. This is nothing new... by Mr.+Slurpee · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Mac users have known about this for years. Witness the bumper sticker from a few years ago (from a MacWorld con? I can't remember anymore...):

    "Windows 98 = Macintosh '89"

    Yeah, MS does put some neat and genuinely innovative stuff into their OS's, but that's just "some." They have all this money, yet nary an interface design department that I can tell of.

    --
    - emilio
    neurostyle dot net - it's all in your head
  80. ATTN: Case Modders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Not only has Apple been selling cinema-style flat panel displays for several years, but last year it filed patent application 20030002246, titled "active enclosure for computing device," which describes a machine that contains an array of rainbow-hued light-emitting diodes."

    Pull out those LEDs from your cases, modders--else Apple's gonna sic the lawyers on you! =)

  81. laughing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    why would apple be laughing at microsoft for incorporating features already in os X? they should instead be scratching their heads and wonder how the hell microsoft is so much more popular despite the "lag."

  82. Chain of observation by stonecypher · · Score: 1

    "
    Microsoft's 2005 version of its Windows operating system, apes features that have been in Apple's OS X operating system since 2001.
    " ... which in turn have been in NeXTstep since the beginning of fucking time.

    --
    StoneCypher is Full of BS
    1. Re:Chain of observation by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Really? NeXTstep had display hardware acceleration on the system level? (There's a better way to word that, I'm sure.) Did Apple buy NeXT before 3D vid cards went mainstream? Wasn't NeXTstep not a consumer level product?

    2. Re:Chain of observation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      " Microsoft's 2005 version of its Windows operating system, apes features that have been in Apple's OS X operating system since 2001. " ... which in turn have been in NeXTstep since the beginning of fucking time.
      which in turn was another company founded by Steve Jobs (CEO and founder of Apple).
  83. The Greatest Innovation ... Microsoft Bob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They took the GUI to some ridiculous extremes, at the expense of both security and usability. In fact, you could say that they proved that you don't always have to trade usability and security off against each other, by demonstrating that you can sacrifice both. I remember reviewers counting the number of mouse clicks it took to copy a file. The number was embarassingly high. Personally, I bet during development it was code-named Bill, but that this was something even Bill Gates would never put his name on.

  84. I appreciate the warnings. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I appreciate the warnings like "(free reg req'd)" that the authors/editors put in their articles. I choose/like to not follow those links, and this kind of tip is much appreciated! (I think I miss out on some interesting stuff.)

  85. Apple and Oranges by termdex · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Who cares if Microsoft steals an idea from Apple, or vice versa? Would it really affect either of them?
    Say a VCR manufacture steals an idea from a refrigerator manufacture. Does that make the VCR a better refrigerator? NO.
    If Microsoft steals an idea from Apple it's not going to make Windows a better Mac. All it does is makes Windows better.
    Same from the Apple perspective. "It's not a PC, it's a Macintosh." as the old adage goes. Which means you wouldn't use a Mac for 'personal computing'.
    Take a look at any Fortune 500 company (except Apple) and you'll see that Windows (ie. PCs) is used by 'Knowledge Workers'. Macs are used by people who can't tell the difference between a VCR and a refrigerator.

    1. Re:Apple and Oranges by idsofmarch · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Oh my god, people who buy Apple computers are idiots. Oh wow, I didn't see that coming. That's brilliant, I mean Fortune 500 companies are full of genuises, that's were all the Noble Prize winners go, that's where all the Pulitzer Prize winning writers go, that's where all the sum of human intelligence is. No one ever made a bad decision in the Fortune 500. Maybe people use Macs because they like having a choice, and they like using a different product, and maybe you're just too blind to see it. Is your VCR clock blinking 12:00?

      --
      Anyone who whines about being modded down should be.
    2. Re:Apple and Oranges by termdex · · Score: 1

      What do you care? I already got modded down.
      Geez! It's like people never heard of sarcasm before.

    3. Re:Apple and Oranges by Squidgee · · Score: 1
      Well, look at him backpeddle...

      Seriously, you made a dense statement. A very dense statement. A stupid, retarded fact-unsupported statement worthy of any zealot with their heads far enough..well, you get the point. Now you need to accept responsibility and not try to pass it off as sarcasm.

    4. Re:Apple and Oranges by termdex · · Score: 1

      OK. And how should I do that? No seriously, how exactly would you like to see me accept responsibility?

      I intended that final statement to be interpreted as either to be figurative or sarcasm. Anything else is simply a misunderstanding.
      If you were offended ... well, I'm not going to assume anything at this point.

  86. Intel port of OS X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, Cringely had some thoughts on OS X in Jan 2002 that seem as relevant now as they did then ...

  87. In Soviet Russia by evronm · · Score: 1

    The Apple takes a bite out of you...
    1. Re:In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish I could put reasons for "hating" (seting someon as a foe), then you'd be
      -1 Foe; Wanker; Soviet Russia Joke

    2. Re:In Soviet Russia by senrik · · Score: 1

      ~The Apple takes a bite out of you...

      In New York City (The Big Apple) it does too, but it means something altogether different.

      --
      "the difference between myself and a madman is that I am not mad" -Salvadore Dali
  88. Re:So f*cking tired of bashing MS... I don't like. by TiggerPac · · Score: 1

    Uhhh... the use of the word "apes" actually comes from the article, not the usual M$ bashers...

  89. Loose lips sink ships! by CommieBozo · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Microsoft is touting features of an operating system for 2005. Who knows what Apple is working on for 2005?

    We can be sure Apple is hard at work on something exciting for 2005. They just won't tell us about it two years in advance.

    1. Re:Loose lips sink ships! by curious.corn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Typical MS tactic. Whenever customers start looking some other way there comes the " Look! In 2 years time we'll do the moon!" mantra. It's called vapourware. As far as I'm concerned all Longhorn is about is a fat sidebar and some custom HTML pages embedded in some IE dll. Something Konqueror could do (and in some way already does) consistently if a vendor decided to inject some effort in it. Ah, of course gnome nautilus is just as good too. There's simply nothing MS will do in 2 years that can distract me from next month's (1 month, 1) presentation of Os X 10.3
      In 2 years time I can't even think what unix desktops will have archieved...

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    2. Re:Loose lips sink ships! by Knife_Edge · · Score: 1

      Screw that, I'm sick of so many shiny (but functionally useless) features being introduced into computers all the time. Next computer I buy (and OS it runs) is going to be based on a careful analysis of what I want to do with the machine (how much utility it will offer me), rather than based on whether it has X new features with accompanying buzzwords to describe them.

      To hell with the computer industry that insists I must be buying new hardware and software all the time when my requirements for getting work done on a computer do not change that often. If they don't want to sell me a system that reliably provides me with the ability to perform the tasks I want to do, and does not change constantly so I have to keep relearning these tasks, I'll find an alternative.

      I do not care what desktops will have achieved in the next two years. During this time, I don't see my requirements change to need some supposedly brilliant innovation which wastes all the time that it supposedly saves through the effort it takes to learn the system, which is going to change at the whim of some company anyway when they want to sell me something new.

    3. Re:Loose lips sink ships! by metalslinger · · Score: 1

      Here, here!
      My what a fine day it will be when all things settle down and minimum requirements stay the same from one month to the next.
      BTW, we can help this by developing for the past OS's/Hardware. There are plenty of groups who would love the help.

      --
      /. Heroics - 99.999%
    4. Re:Loose lips sink ships! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Next computer I buy (and OS it runs) is going
      > to be based on a careful analysis of what I
      > want to do with the machine

      Good for you!

  90. I'm Worried.... by Tsali · · Score: 1

    "Wait until the fall when we'll go into more detail at the Professional Developers Conference."

    Well, gee, that's a great comeback. What are they going to have? How much can change? How much can a one corporate entity innovate?

    Can we go into the R, G, & B values for those fancy colors? :-)

    T.

    --
    This space for rent.
  91. we are the borg by wattersa · · Score: 1

    "Resistorum Est Futilitatis"
    [unknown]

    We are the Borg.
    Lower your shields, and surrender your ship.
    We will add your biological and technological
    distinctiveness to our own.
    Your culture will adapt to service ours.
    Resistance is futile.

    Freedom is irrelevant;
    Self-determination is irrelevant;
    You must comply.

    Strength is irrelevant.
    Death is irrelevant.
    Your defensive capabilities
    are unable to withstand us.

    Resistance is futile.
    Your life, as it has been, is over.
    From this time forward, you will service us

  92. it ain't X by Tom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work? Could it be that X is slowing us down somehow?

    No, it's not X. I've done some HCI work, including some very early contributions to Gnome. It is almost never the technology that slows you down in this area, it's almost always people's mindset.

    One thing that's been really damaging Linux in this regard is the load of people who believe that Linux absolutely has to copy windows. Very obviously, innovation and copycat behaviour don't work well together.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:it ain't X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copycat behaviour has been the hallmark of Linux from the beginning. Linux is another UNIX. The GNU tools were written in order to have a free UNIX. GNOME was started - seriously, Miguel said this - to copy Windows.

      "It's turtles all the way down."

  93. perpetuate the myths by simpl3x · · Score: 2, Funny

    how dare you! next, you'll be telling us that al gore didn't say he invented the internet! or, that iraq doesn't have any wmd! it's /. not the new york times... er...

  94. I'm amused that by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even the background image on the Athens PC looks vaguely like the default OS X background image.

    I'm also amused that no one seems to have noticed that while none of the individual ideas MS is pushing are wildly new, the level integration of basic work tasks will be very impressive if it works as hyped...

    1. Re:I'm amused that by deeeev · · Score: 1

      The reason no one noticed, I think, is because its not true.

    2. Re:I'm amused that by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 1

      I don't know if you're referring to the background pattern or the task integration, but in either case I'm guessing you didn't watch the ZDNET video of the Athens demo...

  95. su by SHEENmaster · · Score: 1

    copied the term SuperUser from the SuperMan comics.

    Copying is the sincerest form of plagurism.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
    1. Re:su by Megs · · Score: 2, Funny

      >Copying is the sincerest form of plagurism.

      Copying from the dictionary is the surest-fire way of spelling "plagiarism" correctly.

      --
      Ask me about LOOM(TM).
  96. thank goodness... by simpl3x · · Score: 2

    the gap can't patent the t-shirt!

  97. well, just more proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of how big a leech Microsoft is.

  98. Senseless debate . . . by xyrw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consider:

    Would anyone be surprised if Longhorn turns out to be BETTER than OS X?

    Would anyone be shocked if, alternatively, by 2005, OS X had progressed to a further point than Longhorn then?

    And which of you would switch just because of that? As for me, I'm sticking to the Mac anyway.

    1. Re:Senseless debate . . . by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      Answers:

      Yes.

      No.

      Not switching to Windows.

  99. A/UX shortly postceded NT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Roger that Cap'n! Thanks for answering with A/UX so I didn't have to.

    1. Re:A/UX shortly postceded NT by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      Preceded Actually.

      1992 to be exact.

      You're likely thinking of Apple's Network Servers, the AIX Servers that Apple sold circa 1995.

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
  100. Apple ahead of the game...? THIS is a TROLL!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the fuck is wrong with Slashdot?!? Everything is true! Where dey get this shizznozz

    Here's da angry letter Slashdotting Communist Community Lil Motherfuckers knew tha dude wuz bound get." For da sake of review, I appreciate feedback 'n other muthas's views on subjects." I don't, however, appreciate feedback when that shiznit's given in an unprofessional manner, know what I'm sayin'? Just don't expect consistency from a mutha who is entirely 'n definitely discourteous n' shit. Maybe faster than yo' ass can be like "anthropomorphical", tha dude will cultivate da purest breed of irresponsibility, know what I'm sayin'? Tasteless predictions aside, this would not be an impossible scenario if tha dude's spineless snow jobs wuz gain ascendancy in izzle society." Anyone wit an IQ two points higher than a wet sponge's knows that sometimes, what yo' ass don't know can hurt yo' ass n' shit. But, even so, Slashdotting Communist Community Lil Motherfuckers's most progressive idea is take credit fo' others' accomplishments." If that sounds progressive yo' ass, yo' ass gots be facing da wrong way."

    Slashdotting Communist Community Lil Motherfuckers seems completely incapable of understanding that tha dude commonly appoints ineffective muthas important positions." Tha dude then ensures that these muthas stay in those positions, because that makes that shiznit easy fo' tha dude's ass toss sops da egos of da sinister." His anecdotes always follow da same pattern n' shit. Tha dude puts da desired twist on da actual facts, ignores inconvenient facts, 'n invents as many new "facts" as necessary convince us that obscurantism is da only alternative ruffianism n' shit. The really interesting thing 'bout izzall this is not that there is a political agenda behind da "muthas are pawns be used 'n manipulated" malarkey n' shit. The interesting thing is that this is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where da state would be eager rewrite history reflect or magnify an imaginary "victimhood"." Not yet, at least." But tha dude's reasoning is circular 'n therefore invalid n' shit. In other words, tha dude always begins an argument wit tha dude's conclusion (e.g., that tha dude's way of life is correct 'n everyone else's ain't) 'n therefore -- not surprisingly -- tha dude always arrives at that hella conclusion." Let's keep izzle fingers crossed that Slashdotting Communist Community Lil Motherfuckers doesn't sucker us into buying a lot of junk we don't need." What tha dude is doing is separatism in its most unambitious form n' shit. Let me try explain what I mean by that in a single sentence: Tha dude appears has found a new tool use help tha dude's ass respond this letter wit hyperbolic 'n uncorroborated accusations 'n assaults on free speech." That tool is unilateralism, 'n if yo' ass watch tha dude's ass wield that shiznit, yo' ass'll undeniably see why if tha dude wants abet a resurgence of hypersensitive clericalism, let tha dude's ass wear da opprobrium of that decision." Does Slashdotting Communist Community Lil Motherfuckers actually think tha dude's arguments through, or does tha dude just chug along on tha dude's computer writing 'bout whatever trite maneuvers happen suit tha dude's need that day? I ax, because some muthas think that shiznit's a bit extreme of me preserve da peace -- a bit over da top, perhaps n' shit. Well, what I izzought remind such muthas is that Slashdotting Communist Community Lil Motherfuckers is like a parrot that makes noises fo' attention without any kind of clue as what that shiznit is saying, so speak n' shit.

    Is there, or is there not, an irrational, scurrilous plot gain a virtual stranglehold on many facets of izzle educational system, organized through da years by inane usurers? The answer this izzall-important question is that not only has da plot existed, but that shiznit is now on da verge of complete fulfilment, know what I'm sayin'? Slashdotting Communist Community Lil Motherfuckers recently stated that trees cause mo' pollution than automobiles do n' shit. Tha dude be like that w

  101. What's easier... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...reading the 400 retarded comments posted here or reading 1 comment that summaries them all?

  102. Wrong... by bashibazouk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Detroit puts out beautiful, well done, and only sometimes missing an engine concept cars. Then they try to sell you a crappy car that got up on the wrong side of the design bed at the dealership.

    1. Re:Wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know this is quite off-topic, but hey I am replying to a post.

      Things are changing and you won't be able to make such distinctions soon. Consider this.

      • Volvo, Land Rover/Range Rover, Jaguar: All are now owned by Ford Motor, USA.
      • Saab is owned by GM, USA.
      • Suzuki, Fiat and others are partly owned by GM, USA
      • The joint venture Daimer-Chrysler, although registered in Germany, is still partly owned by US entities.I won't be surprised, if this venture turns around and Daimler will be owned by Chrysler. (No one can beat American management. The Daimler executives said that during the merger).

      This is just about cars. Thing in many other fields are even better. Soon our economic, politiacal and military (you won't realize the importance of this, and if you are a hippie there is no point in arguing with you.) might will make sure that they all fall at our feet.

    2. Re:Wrong... by DaveSchool · · Score: 1

      Aston-Martin, maker of what is considered some of the most beautiful cars in the world, is also owned by Ford now. Fiat also owns some/all? of Ferrari, which as you mentioned is partially owned by GM.

    3. Re:Wrong... by bashibazouk · · Score: 1

      True. That's why I said Detroit rather than US auto makers.

  103. And to misquote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "... I don't think." -- Bill Gates

  104. Re:Did anybody notice the photo (of the MS/HP Athe by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    We'll copy their default desktop image

    Like all things MS, they copy but they don't totally copy. Look at Win95. It has a lot of the features that Apple OS had for years but not all of them. For example you can change the icon used to represent all folders, but you can't change the icon for an individual folder.

    I think MS and their lawyers aren't stupid. They go only so far as to look "innovative" but not outright followers. They know Apple has and will sue anyone who copies them (E-Power, the Korean iMac look-alike)

    That's why the new computer looks like Apple Cinema display with ugly appendages and Longhorn with OS X features but still distinctively MS.

    Actually I thought that XP and Longhorn looks more like a cross between System 8 and BeOS.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  105. AMC??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What decade are you living in? :-)

  106. monopoly by twitter · · Score: 1, Funny
    Apple gets to ship IE with their computers ;-)

    It's more like "forced to ship". Oh wait, that's a joke. OK, that's funny.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  107. what's your point? by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
    Jobs owned Next -- nuff said.

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  108. Re:Flattery and Imitation and Apes by neildiamond · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Apple executives took obvious glee last week in ... Microsoft's 2005 version of its Windows operating system, apes features that have been in Apple's OS X operating system since 2001."

    Apple Innovates Again and Patents Apes in an Operating System.

    Steve Jobs sued Microsoft yesterday over use of clothed chimps to code Longhorn in a blatant attempt to get around the Apple "ape patent."

    Jobs, "Even if they are successful in fighting off the lawsuit, everyone knows that apes are stronger than chimps. This details why Microsoft has been plagued by security problems. Don't send in a chimp to do an ape's work!"

    Jobs added that the next version of the iMac will also utilize a design patent related to apes.

    "Microsoft may have decided to copy our flat panel design, but we still have another patent related to computers that change color. Our designers included this after observing the multiple colors on the back sides of some primates. We call them rainbow butt monkeys internally and the next iMacs will have coloring simlar to that. Most chimps have plain hairy butts, but ours don't. So that's another reason that people will find our computers more pleasing to look at and easier to use."

    While Apple has been known for rounded edges on computer cases, Jobs declined comment on whether the behinds of "rainbow butt monkeys" or plain chimps were more pleasing to the touch.

  109. Yes but who had 802.11 first? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    That's what I thought. Yeah, you could kludge it, but until Airport, Macs didn't have 802.11 APs. MUWAHAHAHAHA. Among a LONG list of other things.

  110. and the problem is... what? by g4dget · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Apple has been imitating and bundling other people's technologies throughout their corporate history. Their entire product line is based on ideas and technologies developed elsewhere.

    Apple didn't invent color management or color science either. They simply happened to have a large graphics arts user community, so they were the first to incorporate this stuff into their systems.

    Microsoft, Apple, and Linux are each years behind the state of the art in many areas. Windows XP is some VMS work-alike on steroids, and OS X is a warmed-over version of NeXTStep. And Linux still gives you that warm-and-fuzzy UNIX feeling from, oh, 15 years ago. That's the way it is with commercial or real-world systems. Just because Apple happens to incorporate some feature into their system first doesn't give them claim to it in perpetuity.

    1. Re:and the problem is... what? by KJSwartz · · Score: 1

      The problem is that first to market to consumers pretty much drives the technology. Why should Microsoft innovate when Apple can create proven business cases for Microsoft? iTunes Storefront is an excellent example. Want more? iPod. Firewire. Advance Device Bus (ADB - precursor to USB). QuickDraw. QuickTime.

      When pointing at commercial implementation of geeky technologies (someone else discovered), then look at the first commercial use of Mouse. Windows. CDE (Quartz).

      By no means does this list do Apple justice. The Microsoft Mystics and Soothsayers must be drooling over today's Apple Tech.

  111. Point Releases.... by Steveftoth · · Score: 1

    So you're saying that Windows XP is not just a point release of Windows 2k?

    Well if you go by name then it's not, but really it is. Most win2k drivers work in XP and also most XP drivers work in 2k.

    Really all they did was add a few graphical enhancements and improve DirectX speed. It's still the same thing. It's about the same with 10.1 to 10.2 in OSX land.

  112. Uh. Yeah. Right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Download this importer, it will let you bring Word 97 documents into Word 6 and Word 95.

    It's not Microsoft's problem that you can't use a search engine.

    1. Re:Uh. Yeah. Right. by Build6 · · Score: 1

      Actually a patch exists for Word that would fix the problem as well.

      (a) The point is that Word97 would save it into a file with the exact same extension that the previous version cannot use, with no warning. Consider it in the context of a world where Word97 had only just appeared, and that you were happily using your not-so-cheap Office95, and then all of a sudden this .DOC appears from a business-associate that you would have thought your Word95 could open, but couldn't. Imagine if someone mailed you a .txt file and you couldn't open it.

      (b) Microsoft only released the importer a significant amount of time after Word97's release. (I personally feel this is evidence that they intentionally made the file-formats incompatible to drive sales, but that's just me). If I recall correctly, more than a year. It's not very useful to be dying of a disease that will kill you in 6 months to know that a cure will arrive in 1 year.

  113. MS & HP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't they supposed to be going to conspire together to re-invent the next generation pc hardware architecture? Especially so that only Windows will be able to be run upon it due to patents, trade secrets, full of proprietary DRM, etc? For the purpose of shutting down all the cheap clone PCs and re-trapping the American desktop computer sheep^H^H^H^H^Hcustomers back into the corral where they belong?

    Maybe this will be when Apple releases a MacOS X.x for the commodity x86 platform?

  114. Translation by Steveftoth · · Score: 1

    [Quote]
    Microsoft executives declined to take the bait. "We only showed glimpses of the future of Longhorn," said a Microsoft spokesman. "Wait until the fall when we'll go into more detail at the Professional Developers Conference."
    [/Quote]

    Translation.
    Apple is going to show off Panther in June and the Apple Developers Conference. We need time to copy them, it should be ready in the fall.

  115. Apple didn't steal it, MS didn't invent it by aldousd666 · · Score: 1

    The ability to have separate sessions has been a feature of unix/linux for years. It wasn't present in windows (for home users) until XP, but it's only the logical next step in OS X. You can run as many sessions as you want on a Terminal Services (which was actually a re-packaged version of citrix metaframe -- even the terminal services manager is exactly like the old citrix server manager, right down to the icons AND menus) windows 2000 or NT TSE box. Nothing new, neither one invented it. I don't see any room for name calling at all on that issue.

    --
    Speak for yourself.
  116. only one way to settle this by siliconwafer · · Score: 1

    Obviously, there's only one way to settle this MS vs. Apple nonsense.

    Gates vs. Jobs in a steel-cage wrestling match. Anything goes!

    1. Re:only one way to settle this by christowang · · Score: 1

      How about an American _____ where some Brit can make fun of the way there operating system looks.

    2. Re:only one way to settle this by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      Gates vs. Jobs in a steel-cage wrestling match. Anything goes!

      Shouldn't that be a translucent plastic cage?

  117. Microsoft is great at what they do! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft is masterful (and profitable) at taking someone else's idea/innovation, purchasing it, and making it their own. What's so wrong with that? How much Cisco gear has Cisco developed? Do you think HP makes the iPAQ? There are people with ideas and innovations and there are people that know how to market them. It's an unusual combination to find people that can do both. Microsoft knows how to market software very, very well. Microsoft embraced a market surrounding products that will one day become a commodity. They've shaped the industry that pays my mortgage.

    This type of so-called theft of innovation takes place in most industries. Look at the auto industry. Ford didn't always have the Explorer. Chevy didn't always have the Trailblazer. One of the automakers developed the SUV and the others took notice, copied the idea, and now look where we are.

    And Apple is still screwing up forcing you into their hardware. I mean, how awful is that? Geez, if Microsoft decided to require you to install their OS on hardware they manufactured, they'd be lynched.
    1. Re:Microsoft is great at what they do! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Apple is still screwing up forcing you into their hardware. I mean, how awful is that? Geez, if Microsoft decided to require you to install their OS on hardware they manufactured, they'd be lynched.

      Give them a few years. Keep some rope handy. Learn how to tie a good hangman's noose.

      Small distinction- Microsoft won't make their own hardware, they'll just cajole/bully the hardware OEMs into making it for them. What do you think Palladium is? "Microsoft approved" hardware running Microsoft software. Once the Palladium train gets rolling, we'll see a whole new kind of Microsoft lock-in. They'll be able to demand your firstborn in exchange for a license, and you'll have no choice. /me hugs his Mac

  118. But .. by n5vb · · Score: 1

    .. it's still the same old Windows engine at the core! Wake me up when they redesign *that* .. anything else is window dressing, no pun intended .. [previous gripes about the same thing concerning XP, NT, 98, and 95 omitted to save bandwidth]

  119. MS really is a steaming pile of... (OT) by stuntpope · · Score: 2, Funny
    This is way off-topic, but in my search on google news to find a no-registration copy of the NYT story, I went to sci/tech news, and right below the headline "Did Microsoft "borrow" the iLoo concept?" is the next headline "MSN Messenger to Offer Steaming Video, Voice". That's not my typo, it really says "steaming" on the link, but then the story it links to says "streaming"

    So while on your iLoo, feel free to serve up a steaming pile of video and voice ;)

  120. Dear Apple, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Apple,

    I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.
    with much gayness,

    Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

  121. Dear Father O'Day: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Father O'Day:

    Thanks for your letter. Being Catholic myself, I know exactly what you're talking about! It has always been our plan here at Apple Computer Inc to revolutionize personal computing with our high-quality and highly gay products.

    I'm happy to answer your letter by letting you know that YES we will be releasing an entire hLife ("homo-life") software line. You'll be able to recognize it in stores by the small stylized logo depicting a large cock entering a tight anus with an Apple logo on it. ("Suddenly it all comes together" indeed!).

    Anyway, I hope you and other members of our community will join us on our mission, and purchase the exciting new hLife boxed set. Only the boxed set comes with translucent cock rings!

    Sincerely,

    Harry Rodman
    Vice-president
    Homosexual Liaison Services
    Apple Computer, Inc.

  122. Re:Microsoft knows Apples are good for colon healt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before I read another comment, I predict this to be another Microsoft-bashing circle jerk by the mac zealots.

  123. successful innovation is determined by users by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 1

    Innovation is about introducing something "new". The problem is that most of what Linux and X represents was new in the 1980s and early 1990s. And the result was that users didn't really value it.

    People complain about a lack of innovation in areas that matter to them. Apple of 1984 innovated in terms of user interface, which mattered then. Today, Apple innovates in asthetics and simplicity. Microsoft innovates on feature-completeness for a flat fee. It's what people seem to want.

    Of course, the fun thing about human nature is that it changes all the time, so there may come a day where network transparency and full configurability become key differentiators.

    --
    -Stu
  124. FUCK C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    C doesn't offer a proper way to clear the standard input buffer. It's so fucking retarded. ANSI C specifically bans the usage of fflush(stdin). Fuck that shit. I had to waste a valuable 'int' variable clearing the buffer using a fucking do { } while loop. Fuck that shit.

  125. Exactly by djupedal · · Score: 1

    MS didn't 'invest' in Apple out of the goodness in Bills heart. MS did put it's PR machine into high gear in an attempt to rewrite history, however. Funny how Encarta skips over this as well....

  126. Corvette vs. Italian Exotic by NeoBeans · · Score: 1

    I'd make the claim that if you compare the price/performance of a Chevrolet Corvette Z06 versus an "Italian exotic car" (Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc...), we'd all agree that for $50,000, the Z06 is -close enough- to leave its intended audience satisfied when compared to a $150,000 car.

    If M$ can make a "Corvette" of OSes, I'd be happy. Unfortunately, it's more like a Malibu. :-)

    1. Re:Corvette vs. Italian Exotic by Malcontent · · Score: 1

      You are presuming those people pick ferraris because of some technical reasons. They don't. They want ferraris because all their neighbors are driving BMWs and Mercedes.

      People buy these cars to show off and a chevy no matter how nice is not going to impress their neigbors.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

  127. This is just not news by writertype · · Score: 1

    ...but a troll carrying a New York Times byline. It's simply not important to note who's copying whom. Screaming "Bill's copying me! Stop it!" is, well, childish. It's a bid for eyeballs, pure and simple.

    Some may argue that this is a point that needs to be argued, that Microsoft's talk of "innovation" needs to be debunked. Fine. That is an opinion which can be expressed.

    But this is a "he said/she said" dime-a-dozen news piece, one of which can always be easily manufactured by interviewing representatives from both camps. It would be NEWS if Markoff discovered a memo or two proving that Microsoft lifted design details from OS X. Without that evidence, it's simply bird-cage liner.

    1. Re:This is just not news by feldsteins · · Score: 1

      You may be right in that it's not "news." But you're wrong in your assertion that someone needs a smoking memo otherwise it's all just kind of "a matter of opinion." That's bunk. The state of affairs is so obvious to any industry observer with a clue that it's not even worth debating.

      But, again, that doesn't make it "news." Nor does it make Microsoft evil. Nor does it mean their products aren't worth owning.

      --
      You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
    2. Re:This is just not news by writertype · · Score: 1
      I have to disagree. Facts are different than opinions, even commonly held ones. "The earth is round" is fact. "There is a God" is an opinion, even if the majority of people believe in one. Furthermore, commonly held opinions are diluted by the breadth of one's audience. Markoff writes for the New York Times, not The Register.

      I'm sure not everyone in Podunk, Iowa believes Markoff's version of the world to be the case--in fact, I'm sure some believe that Windows predated the Mac. That would be an incorrect fact. However, it's theoretically possible to argue that OS X stole features from an early version of Windows, even it's a difficult position to defend.

      My point is, Markoff is a reporter, not an advocate. He crossed the line.

    3. Re:This is just not news by feldsteins · · Score: 1

      The readers here are not reporters. They're nerds. They should know better and I will call them out on in when they fail to demostrate it.

      But the reporter..yeah he can go free. :)

      --
      You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
  128. 5 huh? by autopr0n · · Score: 2, Interesting

    An assertion with no more evidence then "do a google search", which turns up nothing anyway. I've never heard anything like this, and I suspect that you, like a lot of apple advocates have seriously misinterpreted the facts.

    Show some real evidence, please.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:5 huh? by Reverberant · · Score: 5, Informative

      From an MS press release:

      Apple demanded $1.2 billion from Microsoft for alleged patent infringements...

      The negotiations that resulted led to a strategic agreement between the two companies in August 1997, one part of which called for Microsoft to invest $150 million in Apple and for Apple to install Microsoft's Internet Explorer as the default Web browser for its customers... As part of his videotaped deposition, however, Microsoft Chairman and CEO Bill Gates testified repeatedly that his primary goal was to resolve the patent issues with Apple and obtain a patent cross license.

  129. Ob Quote by Tony · · Score: 1

    ...Apple took an unfriendly OS and turned it into a consumer product.

    Hogwash. *BSD is *very* friendly. It's just particular about its friends.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
  130. Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    It's no hassle to use a plethora of keyboard combos to make up for the patronising one-button mouse. Despite the fact that my hands have FIVE fingers, and multiple-buttons make Web browsing so much more pleasant, I prefer my computer to be treat me like a special-needs child.

    1. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by zilly · · Score: 0, Troll

      If you have the money to buy a Mac, then surely you have the additional cash to buy a decent mouse? Like, between your couch cushions?

      yours

    2. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by Surlyboi · · Score: 1

      It's no hassle to shell out for another freakin' mouse with two buttons either, trollboy.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
    3. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you please not use the term special-needs when you mean retard. Political Correctness is very offensive to those of us that do not try to make ourselves feel better by assigning kinder, gentler words to things while doing nothing about them.

    4. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by Lars+T. · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      So how many buttons does your mouse have? And do you still need to use keyboard-mouse combinations to do some things?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    5. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by ananoca · · Score: 1
      Shut up, it was obvious he did not been it offensively, nor was it a statement which needed the regard to correct it. It's people like you who are so politically correct that your making EVERYONE'S life/society a f**ing nightmare to live in.

      Up yours asshole, go die.. now.

    6. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by Gorbie · · Score: 1

      2. And a wheel. And they're all useful. And, no, I don't need to use keys with my mouse.

      Get with it! OSX has been out for...sheesh...5 years now.

      It's been interesting to see it since the beginning, and I still have a web server running on the original code. It has never crashed in 5 years. That's great uptime!

    7. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      So you never had to do a discontinuous selection (of files, say)?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    8. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by Gorbie · · Score: 1

      All right...you are smarter than I am.

      Then again, I need to use a keyboard to do that in windoze as well...

    9. Re:Apple hardware is for real computer lovers. by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Heh, I've got 4 + a wheel. 14 buttons if you count my Claw (www.claw.com.au).

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  131. what are you talking about? by twitter · · Score: 5, Informative
    The Win95 shell imitates NeXTStep in its appearance far more than it does MacOS,

    Exacly what features of the Nextstep does win95 offer? "windowblinds"? Sure, if you download a serious modification. 95 shipped with the clumsy three button junk from win3.1 plus an extra button and a pannel. A root menue anywhere on the screen? Nope. The way it resizes windows? Nope. Menues that you can leave up on the screen? Nope. Can you name one feature that is not simply part of any GUI? I'm not going to go into the tremendous difference in the unerlying systems but just look at the apearances alone.

    Nextstep was made from MacOS and was better. Windoze never did much more than follow along the GUI path, never evolving much from the first one they made. The evolution and lines of influence are clear when you look at screen shots from each.

    For those of you not familiar with Next, check out this 1993 screen shot of the first web browser. The client was developed in 1990. There are many free implementations of the Nextstep such as Window Maker today. It still kicks any GUI Microsoft has ever made. After using a reasonable window manager on X, few people can go back to the M$ GUI confines.

    For those of you fortunate enough to have missed Windoze 3.1, here is a little screen shot from 1993 or so when Netscape became one of the first available browsers for Windoze. 95 added the X button on the top right, so I suppose you could say it coppied Nextstep in one way. Here is a typical Win95/98 desktop. Windoze XP (screen shot to compare), is more of the same and annoying as all hell.

    Please don't compare reasonable software, such as Nextstep or Sun's Common Desktop Environemnt, to junk from Microsoft. People might get the idea that one was better than it is or that the other sucks in ways it never did.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:what are you talking about? by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Typical. Screenshots of AmigaOS and Mac, but nothing from the Atari ST/TT/Falcon experience...

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    2. Re:what are you talking about? by bnenning · · Score: 1
      A root menue anywhere on the screen? Nope. The way it resizes windows? Nope. Menues that you can leave up on the screen? Nope.


      Not to mention scrollbars on the left of windows, which is obviously the correct position if you think about it for a minute.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    3. Re:what are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to know what the hell you are talking about. There is a serious flaw with all the X window managers/desktops I've used - they're a pain to configure. I don't mean hard to make pretty - that's easy. But let's say you want to change what exactly is on such & such menu - Depending on the window manager, it's as easy as trying to find the correct control panel to do it (which didn't get installed since they forgot to make it a dependency of the main package) or edit the effing files by hand. Not that I'm complaining or anything, but shit, at least with M$, you can put a shortcut to whatever you want in a directory, and it's on your menu now. Easy.

    4. Re:what are you talking about? by Ashen · · Score: 1

      I thought about it for a minute... I can't see why one way is better than the other. Although because I am so use to it being on the right side, seeing it on the left made me cringe a little.

    5. Re:what are you talking about? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      The Win95 shell imitates NeXTStep in its appearance far more than it does MacOS,
      Exacly what features of the Nextstep does win95 offer? "windowblinds"?

      Did you flunk the CTBS tests because of reading comprehension? The feature of NeXTStep "offered" by Windows 95 is the appearance. No, it does not look like NeXTStep, but it looks more like it than it does MacOS, especially MacOS 7 which I believe was the version in effect at the time. As you may recall, MacOS 7 was garbage. You could run nothing but the OS and apps from Apple or Claris and still have it blow up all over you. Of course, when Windows got the same feature set of MacOS 7, namely a filesystem worth a crap (FAT32), it became really unstable (OSR2.)

      I certainly never said or implied that Windows offered any feature of NeXT, not that any feature you mentioned isn't really a feature of Sun's Openlook.

      Nextstep was made from MacOS and was better. Windoze never did much more than follow along the GUI path, never evolving much from the first one they made. The evolution and lines of influence are clear when you look at screen shots from each.

      NeXTStep came from MacOS? This is obviously untrue. While some features of the OS and the hardware were both apple-inspired (The hardware is pretty blatant, with NeXT machines featuring ADB) the OS is a microkernel-hosted Unix implementation using display Postscript. That's pretty damned unlike MacOS.

      Also, as to the GUI "never evolving much from the first one they made"; There was a distinct change between Windows 3.1/NT 3.1 and 3.5 and Windows 95/NT4. Since then, there hasn't been any real need to significantly change the interface. Witness how the rest of the computer world (except for Be and MacOS) has been scampering to emulate Windows' interface, including Gnome and KDE, and even many Amiga users have a start button and a taskbar these days.

      Please don't compare reasonable software, such as Nextstep or Sun's Common Desktop Environemnt, to junk from Microsoft. People might get the idea that one was better than it is or that the other sucks in ways it never did.

      CDE is trash, which is why Sun is replacing it with GNOME. NeXTStep is quite good, but never took off, partly because it made the same mistakes Apple made, only worse; It was even less compatible than Macs, and had an even worse price-performance ratio, and problems with being underpowered. A "turbo" slab has what, an '040 at 25MHz? Slower than Unix workstations half its price and several years older. Given the lack of installed base, there was nothing to push adoption of the moderately expensive x86 offering either, which ran on quite limited hardware.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:what are you talking about? by IntlHarvester · · Score: 3, Informative
      and its behavior is Motif-like.

      ...and...

      Please don't compare reasonable software, such as ... Common Desktop Environemnt, to junk from Microsoft

      A stated design goal of Motif was to give the X Window System the window management capabilities of HP's circa-1988 window manager and the visual elegance of Microsoft Windows. We kid you not.

      link
      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    7. Re:what are you talking about? by bheer · · Score: 1

      > Please don't compare reasonable software, such as ... Sun's Common Desktop Environemnt

      Ha ha ha ... *gasp* *wheeze *choke* Have you actually ever *used* CDE? Reasonable, my left foot... :-D

    8. Re:what are you talking about? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      In English and related languages, letters are written from left to right, and from top to bottom. Following this same pattern, icons and directory listings in most GUIs also their content gravitating towards the upper left corner a window.

      Therefore, most useful content will be on the left, so a mouse cursor will on average have less distance to travel when making the transition from editing to scrolling and back (the recent advent of mouse scrollwheels reduces the importance of this effect)

      The only reason not to have scrollbars on the top and left is if there was some other useful clickable stuff already using that space. The top of windows is devoted to menus or buttons- traditionally, there hasn't been anything on the left, although recently some button bars or "Sidebars" show up there.

    9. Re:what are you talking about? by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The only reason not to have scrollbars on the top and left is if there was some other useful clickable stuff already using that space. The top of windows is devoted to menus or buttons- traditionally, there hasn't been anything on the left, although recently some button bars or "Sidebars" show up there.

      Indeed, as a consequence of english being left-to-right, paper books have required us to reach to the right, with our right hand, to turn the page. Since that is essentially what a scrollbar does, it seems to be more fitting with more traditional media to have scrollbars on the right.

      If you think about it. :) Also, since the language is left to right, you're more likely to find a sentence ending closer to the right-hand side than the left-hand side, and your eyes will be closer to the scrollbars.

      One more thing: Since most people are right-handed, and they use their mouse on the right-hand side of the screen, it feels more natural to them to reach to the right to scroll down.

      Final point:

      There isn't any *right place* to put a scrollbar. Windows sucks because you don't have any choice. The closest thing to the right place for a scrollbar is a preferences setting that lets the user pick.

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    10. Re:what are you talking about? by koekepeer · · Score: 1

      as you said rightfully, the scrollwheel definetely reduces this problem to virtually zero IMHO.

      the next ui was designed in the eighties AFAIK, and hey, the computer-human interface is as dynamic as the changes in the periferals used.

      i get a bit tired of people claiming NEXT was the best UI ever, it's not a static situation (BTW i'm not claiming you are saying this!)

    11. Re:what are you talking about? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      it seems to be more fitting with more traditional media to have scrollbars on the right.

      Unless you wanted to scroll backwards in the document. The traditional way would call for reaching to the left side in that case. And of course, with a traditional "natural media" UI, you'd have to drag across the whole page to turn it. (That actually sounds fun- for about 15 seconds)

      I agree that "traditional consistency" is the reason Apple and Microsoft have placed all scrollbars on the bottom or right.

      Also, since the language is left to right, you're more likely to find a sentence ending closer to the right-hand side than the left-hand side, and your eyes will be closer to the scrollbars.

      It's not your eyes that matter, but your mouse (eyes can find the scrollbar faster and more reliably than a mouse cursor can). As someone is reading a document, she has no reason to put the mouse on the actual content- it can stay on the scrollbar the entire time.

      But if she's editing the file, then there will be a need to click on a variety of words inside the content area. However, sentence endings will be no more commonly selected than other words. So overall, the left edge is closer to where the action is.

      Windows sucks because you don't have any choice.

      Of course, Microsoft and Apple will claim that an unchangable scrollbar positions is a feature that improves consistency. And they kind of have a point- it's a good thing when any user can sit down at a strange computer and be somewhat comfortable. (However, I would prefer a different technical implementation- UIs should be customizable, but it should always be easy to fallback to standardized "basic" or "advanced" input configs, without restarting any software.)

  132. Re:Sometimes this works by platypussrex · · Score: 1

    There are add-on progs for Safari that let you change what it reports as it's identity. I have gone to several web sites that refused to let me in because I wasn't using IE, told Safari to claim it was IE, and then the web site let me in and everything ran just fine.

  133. Re:Did anybody notice the photo (of the MS/HP Athe by PPCAvenger · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's not Apple's default desktop picture, Apple's is very different than that. What is pictured is a wallpaper that ships with every copy of Windows XP. I believe it's called Crystal.

  134. Show me the money by g_bit · · Score: 1
    That's brilliant, I mean Fortune 500 companies are full of genuises, that's were all the Noble Prize winners go, that's where all the Pulitzer Prize winning writers go, that's where all the sum of human intelligence is.

    No, that's where all the MONEY is though.

    1. Re:Show me the money by idsofmarch · · Score: 1

      Oh silly me. Money is the incident center of all value, I forgot. Please note, Enron, et. al were Fortune 500 companies.

      --
      Anyone who whines about being modded down should be.
  135. Uh, no by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    Win95 had premtive multitasking. It was 'difficult' for a single app to crash a win95 machine. And almost impossible for one to crash it due to a programming error, as compared to a mac where something like an infinite loop or an ivalid refrence could bring down the whole machine.

    The reason win95 crashed a lot was because it was buggy, included really old code, and supported a lot of funky hardware.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  136. Flat panel display == stealing? by g_bit · · Score: 1

    I don't get it, what did Microsoft steal again? Graphics software that comes with the OS? Oh yeah, that's a new idea. Doesn't Linux come with Gimp if you want? Flat panel display and a futuristic design? Sony did it first and it was an x86 with Windows. Get real.

    1. Re:Flat panel display == stealing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually NEC was the first I believe to have a fully integrated computer with flat panel screen. It was basically a thicker flat panel and had wireless keyboard/mouse

  137. Re:reboot speed by v1 · · Score: 1

    ... isn't so important if you're not always having to go through it?

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  138. Here is a story about two posts by g_bit · · Score: 1
    The first one is the one I'm replying to. Oh, this is a real troll people, let me tell you. F*ck anyone who likes Microsoft, right?

    The second post. This person rants on about how Microsoft stole big ideas (The Flat Panel and Graphics software...oooooh big new ideas), and the moderators think this is SOOO interesting. Really new stuff here.

    This post (...ah f*ck it, the whole web) best viewed in Internet Explorer.

  139. Re:Sometimes this works by madmancarman · · Score: 1

    What program is this?

    --
    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi
  140. Micro what??? by bninja_penguin · · Score: 1

    No, I don't hide in the closet and play with anything Microsoft. I don't agree to the EULA they spout off, so I don't use Microsoft products. I believe the hardware I buy is mine, and if you actually understood the EULA to XP, you would find that agreeing to it would mean you do not own the hardware anymore. By agreeing to the EULA, you give Microsoft control of said hardware, and they feel if you no longer want XP on it, you must throw it away and purchase some other hardware. I'd show you, but I don't have any Microsoft product around to look it up for you. Sure, you could trot out the old tripe that the EULAs aren't legally enforceable, but, what if they are? Whose machine do you have? Your's, or some machine that Microsoft lets you use?
    I hate the way they do business, so I don't do business with them. Simple, eh?

    --
    For those who describe their systems as 'boxen', do you order multiple 'boxen' of corn flakes also?
  141. What do you mean? by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    Not only has Apple been selling cinema-style flat panel displays for several years, but last year it filed patent application 20030002246, titled "active enclosure for computing device," which describes a machine that contains an array of rainbow-hued light-emitting diodes.

    Don't you see? M$ put blinking LEDs on their case as well. Apple totally thought of that before anyone else ever had and MS is just ripping them off completely.

    Oh, and there's something about how MS's new graphics layer is a rip-off of quartz, or something, as if using 'accelerated' features of modern video cards in the general GUI is totally not obvious at all.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:What do you mean? by Keeper · · Score: 1

      Ooh, wow, someone made a design decision to make stuff work faster. That must have been tough ... Apple should apply for a patent. That'd put 'em right up there with Amazon and 1-click shopping...

      MS's new graphics layer is still in the experimentatal phases. They're still playing around with ideas on how to present information. The only thing that's really been decided is some of the basic underlying structure... Try cry "they're copying quartz!" is a bit premature at this point.

  142. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No Lamborghini's, no Roll's Royces

    For the love of God, stop using the apostrophe. You obviously don't understand what it is, or what it's for.

    What letters are missing in the plural of Lamborghini? Is a Rolls-Royce in fact merely a Royce that belongs to a guy named Roll?

  143. Apple is one step ahead by g_bit · · Score: 1
    ...Apple will usually be one step ahead.

    And 95% behind (in market share).

    Personally, I think Microsoft is ahead in usability and I've used them both but that's just my opinion so don't persecute me for it. (Maybe that's asking too much on Slashdot.)

    Market share has no opinion though, it's just straight fact.

    1. Re:Apple is one step ahead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Microsoft is ahead in usability too. 5 years ahead, in fact. If by "Microsoft," you actually mean "Apple."

    2. Re:Apple is one step ahead by the+uNF+cola · · Score: 1

      You are right. They are behind in market share, but then again, the best products aren't always most popular.

      --

      --
      "I'm not bright. Big words confuse me. But Wanda loves me and that should be enough for you." - Cosmo

  144. Your silver lining, then: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "My suspicion is that everyone goes home, hides in their closet, and plays with their WinCE handhelds."

    The only thing I can think of that microsoft did right for the consumer is the WinCE platform. See, they're good at that we maccer's can conceded.

    Of course another person noted that it was so good that they should just run that on the desktop and get a whole operating system into, oh, about 24 megs.

    The sad part is that, i agree, i don't think we'd be losing much....

    cheer up!

  145. nubus by _avs_007 · · Score: 1

    Don't get me started on that :) Wasn't each iteration incompatible with the previous?

  146. Screw Joe Sixpack by g_bit · · Score: 1

    He just buys whatever they use at work because that's what they know. Businesses buy Windows because it's more economically sound and has better development features. Businesses usually take advice from people like me who do know what alternatives exist.

  147. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    GM, Ford and AMC don't churn out great cars. No Lamborghini's, no Roll's Royces, not even a Beamer.

    Beamer's are shit these days, and they've merged with 'amc'. Get witht the times.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  148. Detachable menus by kwerle · · Score: 1

    NS &/ OS let you detach menus. OSX does not. I miss it.

  149. Re:Sometimes this works by phillymjs · · Score: 1

    I think he's referring to Safari Enhancer, which basically enables the hidden Debug menu built into Safari that has the 'change user agent' feature in it, among other things.

    ~Philly

  150. Stronger whole? by Tony · · Score: 1

    Huh? "Feed on each other to make a stronger whole." Is that what this is about?

    This is more like a barfight in which one combatant sees another combatant poke at the eyes, and so copies that move himself.

    This doesn't mean you end up with a "stronger whole." It means you end up with a bunch of blind drunks, a smashed-up bar, and wasted alchohol.

    Until we start cooperating with each other, there is no such thing as a stronger whole. We only get more-attractive divisions.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
    1. Re:Stronger whole? by Twisted+Mind · · Score: 1

      People aren't very good at cooperation. A lot of competing companies might seem a lot less efficient than one monopoly, but it's not.

      A society were every body (should) work together and thus get a equal share will only lead to a corrupted elite and a poor mass.
      You might argue that *everybody* is equally poor then, but I think it's better to have just part of society poor and the rest reasonable to very rich (and the economy as a whole over long time growing in stead stagnating)

      --
      (-% TwistedMind %-)
  151. Money is the root of all evil by g_bit · · Score: 1
    Yes, you're right Enron is a Fortune 500 company...proving what? Apple was a Fortune 500 company too. So is Ford (they are soooo evil). I suppose you think that market share doesn't mean anything? Apple would kill to get back the market share that they had in 1984.

    Money may not be the center of all value for all people but when a large portion of businesses spend their money on one product over another it usually means one thing: that one product offers them something that the other one doesn't in the way of value.

    1. Re:Money is the root of all evil by idsofmarch · · Score: 1

      So long as we agree on what exactly constitutes value or quality. People have been known to spend significant amounts of money on all sorts of stupid things when they should've known better. And Enron, Global Crossing, etc. amassed major fortunes and managed to climb their way to the list using paper profits and accounting tricks, and many people suddenly assumed that their "market share" meant they were providing a superior product. And yet, their product was mostly smoke and mirrors (oh and the gutting of the Californian power industry) Money may or may not be the root of all evil, that's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is just because most people think something works or is good doesn't mean it is. There is an inherent value of quality that is missing from most of these decisions and it all comes down to the holy bottom line. Apple makes a product that I like and find an incredible amount of use for, therefore I buy their products. Windows hasn't. Therefore I don't buy their products. So, don't tell me that a product or an idea, or anything is superior because a large portion of any population believes it so. People can be sheep especially in the large herd-like groups we call companies. On the whole, we used to think the world was flat, cruxifiction was a good thing, and that you could create gold from air if you could only mix the right amounts together. Apple may be a total crap-shoot and I respect that you believe it so, but to argue for any idea because "everyone" believes it rings false in my ears.

      --
      Anyone who whines about being modded down should be.
    2. Re:Money is the root of all evil by g_bit · · Score: 1
      I do not argue for any idea because "everyone" believes it however, as you noted, I was simply pointing out that money is what matters to (most) businesses. Comparing the amount of money that two competing companies can rake in is a pretty good measure of "who's winning" in any particular market.

      What I am saying is just because most people think something works or is good doesn't mean it is.

      I agree completely, but I feel misunderstood. I didn't say that when most people thing buy something, then that must be the top of the line one. When most people think something is good, then it's good for the people who think that, or they wouldn't have bought it.

      So, don't tell me that a product or an idea, or anything is superior because a large portion of any population believes it so.

      There you go again. Please point out where I said that. Just because I said that more companies spend more money on Microsoft than they do the fruity computer, you think that I said one was superior. I may think that (for myself) but that was not my point and I did not say that. All I say is that Microsoft is more succesful where it counts when you're in business.

      I agree with the original poster that having a lot of Fortune 500 companies buying your product is a good measure of success, however he might have put it without the insults. We all have a bad day...

    3. Re:Money is the root of all evil by idsofmarch · · Score: 1

      Of course, and I think you can see my point. What I disagree with is the obvious answer that because most companies use Wintel machines they must be superior, and we should be using them. Companies make good and bad decisions for all sorts of reasons. I'll defend the fruity computer because I think it offers a considerable value that is often ignored and has been for a long time. My problem wasn't with your post but the original which stated, essentially Mac users are idiots, and then the idea that Fortune 500 companies constitute a sense of quality in every decision and we all know that's not true. I'm just cranky today I guess and I got rilled up.

      --
      Anyone who whines about being modded down should be.
  152. Re:Sometimes this works by Wetware · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can also enable the debug menu from the Terminal by typing (with Safari not running): % defaults write com.apple.safari Includedebugmenu 1 then restarting Safari.

  153. mice by _avs_007 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but how long until MACs had more than a single mouse button? :D

    That right click interface seems more useful. Heck, I remember back in college someone pointed out that changing the system time on a MAC was a laborious process. Then again, I didn't care at the time, so I never researched the validity of their claim...

    1. Re:mice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One time in college, somebody said something about system time, and I wasn't paying attention.

      Oh, and by the way, Macs suck.

    2. Re:mice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you trolling? Was there a point to your comment?

      And by the way, it's "Mac," not "MAC." HTH. HAND.

    3. Re:mice by _avs_007 · · Score: 1

      No I'm not trolling, I was pointing out that not everything about the UI of a Mac rules. And yes, sorry about the MAC, but, I'm just accustomed to typing that, because that's how I type that word most of the time, mostly due to MAC address...

    4. Re:mice by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      You don't need more than one mouse button in Mac OS.

      Windows needs two - there are menu options accessed by right clicking that aren't available any other way in some Windows functions and apps.

      That's not the case on the Mac. If you want a two button mouse though, you can get one.

  154. Sales Inspiring! by YetAnotherName · · Score: 1

    If I had moderator points, I'd give that a +1, Sales-Inspiring.

    Seriously, I've played with my wife's Mac G4 laptop running OS X off and on, and I have to admit, it's really pretty GUI on top of a remarkable OS. (I'm a Unix bigot, though, so take that with a grain of salt.)

    But I've held off plopping down money of my own for one. Gaming? I still need a Windows machine for that. Development? I still need a Unix machine for that. DVD Video? I'd like to be able to do that on the plane.

    I wonder how much is in my checking account...

    1. Re:Sales Inspiring! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Development? I still need a Unix machine for that

      Install the OSX Software Development tools package from developer.apple.com .. the BSD SDK contains pretty much everything you need ..

  155. Exactly (and offtopic) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the C5 vette first came out, many reviews had it up there with the Ferarri F355 in all categories, beating it on some.

    And GM doesn't make all crap. They make some of the best automatic trannys in the world. In fact, the non manumatic 5 speed automatics in the bimmers are actually GM hydramatic trannys. Same with the 4 speed tranny in volvos.

    and if you look up your history, you'll see:

    GM invented the electric headlight.
    GM invented the electic starter
    GM invented the automatic tranny
    GM was the first to offer airbags
    GM was the first to offer electronic fuel injection.
    GM was the first to offer electronic brake force distribution in North America
    GM introduced the first V6 passenger engine
    GM's L36 3800 V6 engine was the first V6 engine in the world to get ULEV certification. Hondas claims about the cleanest burning engines a few years back, were in reference to their FOUR cylinder engines.

    And before anyone pipes in about OHV engines being lowtech or old tech, if you check your history books, DOHC design was invented in 1911, while OHV technology was invented by peugot in 1916, so its actually "newer" than DOHC technology.

    Anyways, EVERY company has good things AND bad things. This Mac vs Windows thing is just a big pissing contest that nobody will ever win.

    Also, I currently own an Acura, so I'm not a biggot/zealot :)

  156. Re:"That's mine, you _can_ have it" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple and Microsoft have a patent sharing agreements that was part of the shakedown from the legal actions of a few years ago.

    They are both entitled to freely use the patented 'innovations' of the other.

  157. Re:Sometimes this works by Narcissus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can I make a suggestion? Depending on the site you're referring to, and your connection with them, email them and tell them that you won't do business with them until they remove that crap.

    It's one thing to not support your browser, it's another to support it, but make an assumption that it won't work, or push IE for any other reason.

    The same type of thing happened with my bank: I emailed them, and quite quickly the problem was fixed.

    Why did I do this? Because I want to make sure that they realise that people do care about what they use, and I want to make sure that my browser name shows up in their logs: we're not going to get any support if they keep seeing IE strings there, and we're just going to have to continue faking it.

  158. Hastings's Law by steveha · · Score: 1

    Hastings's Law: Cheaper and adequate wins against more expensive and better.

    SCSI is better than IDE, but IDE is adequate. Beta had better quality than VHS, but VHS was adequate (and had much longer recording time on a tape). Apple was able to charge rapacious margins for a Mac in the days when x86 PCs were much harder to use; once Windows became adequate, customers started buying Windows versus the Mac.

    A BMW 7 Series is a better car than a Honda Accord. But an Accord is adequate. Which sells more?

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  159. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by Durindana · · Score: 1

    Hmmm... No.

    Ford's barely keeping its head above water right now. GM is only slightly profitable, and both companies are surviving solely on their gas-guzzler, high-margin truck models. AMC? Don't make me laugh, building 50,000 narrowly-targeted monster SUVs a year doesn't make you a player, it makes you a niche.

    Ford and GM actually lose money on each Focus, Malibu, etc. consumers buy; everyday cars are a loss leader for Detroit. They churn out those crap cars so you'll hopefully get a raise later on and buy one of the (few) models they do make money on, like the Explorer et al.

    BUT not Japanese automakers like Toyota and Honda. They make styled, well-appointed compacts and sedans that run forever - and they charge a premium, and they get it. The Accord has been America's best-selling car for several years now; it runs several grand more than its domestic competition, but ya know, sometimes technical merit really does win.

    Sorta makes you wonder what we'd all be driving (metaphor alert) if microsoft didn't design the roads to accommodate only their models...

  160. LoL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so 1% of the 5% that run apple are running IE at your site, which translates to about 75 million more people still running IE than all the other browsers combined :)

    Not that I disagree about the quality of M$IE mind you :)

  161. Help please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get it. Somebody help a brotha out. thx

    1. Re:Help please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      congratulations.win95

      Sort of.

      -Z

    2. Re:Help please by msouth · · Score: 2, Informative

      The point was that win95 was still dos underneath, and you still had 8.3 filenames in there, they just faked it to make it look like long filenames were supported. So the C:\ongrats.w95 very elegantly said "Ha, that's just a cheap hack on top of DOS, with all the same limitations", or something like that.

      --
      Liberty uber alles.
  162. riiiiiiiight... by skinlayers · · Score: 1
    The absolute worst is people who think Microsoft making their UI more 'soft' was a direct response to OS X. These UI changes don't get dreamed up at the last minute -- they're part of an evolution that takes years.


    EEEEERRRRNNNNTTTT!
    But thank you for playing!

    Sept 2000 - Mac OS X Public Beta is demo-ed.
    Oct 2000 - Whistler (XP) Beta 1 released w/ a Win2k look
    March 2001 - XP Beta 2 released with Luna added, Mac community laughs.

    Funny that they didn't included (according to you) what MUST have been a multi-year spanning IU change with their first beta. Looks more like they got scared by all of the interest that Mac OS X PB generated, and copied the interface as usual. I was beta testing both and nearly p!ssed myself laughing when I first installed the second beta of Whistler. I'd dig up some screen shots but its not really worth the time.
    1. Re:riiiiiiiight... by DeadScreenSky · · Score: 1

      Not that I particularly want to defend MS, but it is common for beta software to not ship with a final 'paintjob'. It was well known from the start that the consumer-focused XP would ship with a tweaked interface, if nothing else to differentiate it from the more business-orientated 2K. Not saying the look wasn't inspired by OS X (remember when inspiration was seen as a good thing?), but it isn't like they changed the interface simply because of OS X.

      --
      There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
  163. Made from... by kwerle · · Score: 1

    Actually, it would probably be more correct to say that Cocoa is derived from OpenStep, and OSX is derived from NeXTSTEP + OpenStep + FreeBSD.

    Oh, crap - I forgot MacOS in the derived from list. But I dissed it for years and years....

    My NeXT bias shines through...

  164. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by redhat421 · · Score: 1
    I'm not sure if the analogy of making a great car vs making great software makes any sense.

    If GM, Ford, or AMC could spend all there money on RD so they could just make ONE great car, then make 10,000,000 of them for no additional charge, I'm sure they would.

    To tell you the truth, I'm really not sure why Windows is not perfect... Perhaps it's because everybody has a different idea about such things?

  165. Dinky pooh, you confuse me. by twitter · · Score: 1
    Did you flunk the CTBS tests because of reading comprehension? The feature of NeXTStep "offered" by Windows 95 is the appearance. No, it does not look like NeXTStep, but it looks more like it than it does MacOS, especially MacOS 7 which I believe was the version in effect at the time.

    Wow, you ask about apepearance and then you talk about file systems and performance of the underlying operating system, price performance and "compatibility".

    A quick look at a Mac OS 7 screenshot, convinces me more than the dissimilarity between Nextstep and windows 95 that you are full of shit. It's obvious that windoze 95 borrowed heavily from MacOS. Well, perphaps not from 7 as it came out in 1996, durring the deep darkness under the former Pepsi Lord. The tiny application bar at the bottom of the screen, combined with the tinny horizontal pannel at the top of the screen and bad taste make up the Windoze 95 GUI. That horizontal pannel has been a feature of the apple GUI at least since 1984 and the first Macs but is not found in Nextstep which simply puts the icons at the bottm of the screen, or wherever you want. Nextstep has a verticle docking station, which can be thought of as a pannel with much more flexibilty than Microsoft or Apple's. This page walks you through the evolution of the Mac GUI, a subject I'm not as familiar with as I am systems that run on x86.

    In the end, I agree with you. Microsoft never innovated anything outside a court room. I think, howver, that they were only able to rip off stuff that was thrust into their faces and doubt anyone on thier campus used Next, much less were able to convice the powers that be there to persue the neater features of it. Being so "market driven" they would only rip off things proven to have wide market acceptance, despite lip service to ease of use research.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:Dinky pooh, you confuse me. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Wow, you ask about apepearance and then you talk about file systems and performance of the underlying operating system, price performance and "compatibility".

      I explained what I was talking about, and then went on to make a brief comparison of the two operating systems from your point of view, which is to say, the overall operating system, not simply the appearance. I allowed as how Apple had a slight advantage in the technology department, even, back in those days. (Arguably it has one now, though not so much from a user's standpoint. It's technically sweeter but basically does the same things. The GUI is prettier, though you can always skin Windows if you're willing to shell out a few extra ducats.)

      A quick look at a Mac OS 7 screenshot, convinces me more than the dissimilarity between Nextstep and windows 95 that you are full of shit. It's obvious that windoze 95 borrowed heavily from MacOS. Well, perphaps not from 7 as it came out in 1996, durring the deep darkness under the former Pepsi Lord. The tiny application bar at the bottom of the screen, combined with the tinny horizontal pannel at the top of the screen and bad taste make up the Windoze 95 GUI.

      Okay, so when System 7 finally brought mac out of the appearance stone ages (black and white interfaces) we all clapped for you as you slightly past where Windows 3.1 was, appearance wise. Then Windows 95 came out with what many of us felt was a large step past MacOS. BTW, I was a Mac user before I was a wintel user. I started with 6.0.7, hardly WAY back in the day or anything, but I remember finder/multifinder, I remember black and white interfaces which more often than not didn't meet apple's interface guidelines for which button should be labeled how and do what, and I remember when System 7 came out and how happy we all were about "multitasking" but also just how underwhelemed I was by its appearance. And also how unstable it was compared to System 6, but now I'm getting away from the appearance and back to the underlying OS again, which isn't really my point. I'm pointing it out so you don't have to.

      ...the evolution of the Mac GUI, a subject I'm not as familiar with as I am systems that run on x86.

      Well, Windows 1.0 and 2.0 can be safely disregarded. You only need seriously consider DOS, and various versions of Windows since 3.0.

      DOS needs no description. It's a bad ripoff of Unix's interface. It doesn't do much. It has no GUI so we don't need to go over it.

      Windows 3.1 and Motif+MWM have more in common than they have differences. Everything is in the same place and works the same way. mwm has a desktop menu, Windows has a shell, which was generally progman but could be fileman. Progman had non-hierarchical program groups (.grp files) which could hold multiple PIFs, which were like shortcuts are now, they held program options and whatnot.

      Windows 3.1 and its successor 3.51 (heavily patched and ported to more architectures) featured the same interface, so there's nothing to say there.

      Windows 95 (Chicago) brought us the interface which I claimed was closer to the look of NeXT than MacOS. Witness the solid colored title bar on windows, and the raised beveled buttons (as opposed to MacOSX's beveled inset buttons.) Of course, neither one got a "Dock" at the time, which was unfortunate. Litestep was never a very good windows shell, and leads to crashes and instability to this day, as far as I know. (Certainly when Windows 2000 came out it was still really buggy on Windows 98, let alone on 2k.)

      Let's talk about the menu bar and the taskbar before we go on to Windows 2000 and Windows XP, since it has been a recurring item of controversy. The two perform slightly similar functions though of course they are not at all the same thing. (Incidentally, I don't know how MacOSX handles menu bars. I've never used MacOSX, which is wh

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Dinky pooh, you confuse me. by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1
      >Windows 3.1 and Motif+MWM have more in common than they have differences

      FWIW, here's an interesting post:

      The *feel* of Motif was carefully, even assiduously, designed to be the
      same as the Windows/Presentation Manager family. A great deal of effort
      went into ensuring that every gesture you might make had the same (or
      analogous) effect on the two families of systems.[...] The Motif Style Guide retains a 1988 Microsoft copyright, and this is why.
      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    3. Re:Dinky pooh, you confuse me. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Yep. In fact Motif provides no file manager, but session management is provided by mwm in the same way that functionality is provided by whatever shell you use in windows 9x. In windows NT it is provided by... I dunno even, what the hell is login and logout provided by? I'm ashamed not to know that. At the lower level of course Unix is controlled by init generally, which then either directly or indirectly launches gettys and xdm.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Dinky pooh, you confuse me. by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      Think it's called the "Local Security Authority" -- whatever it is, it also does the 'desktop' management, which is the reason that you can't do anything useful with NT without a GUI.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    5. Re:Dinky pooh, you confuse me. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The desktop itself is handled by the first instance of explorer.exe. You don't need a GUI at all for NT, though it does take some hacking to make it stop displaying it and do something else useful. You could easily make it run cygwin or something on the console, and run sshd so you can log in (or microsoft-authenticated telnet, I guess.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Dinky pooh, you confuse me. by rtechie · · Score: 1

      A quick look at a Mac OS 7 screenshot [emuunlim.com], convinces me more than the dissimilarity between Nextstep and windows 95 that you are full of shit. It's obvious that windoze 95 borrowed heavily from MacOS. Well, perphaps not from 7 as it came out in 1996, durring the deep darkness under the former Pepsi Lord. The tiny application bar at the bottom of the screen, combined with the tinny horizontal pannel at the top of the screen and bad taste make up the Windoze 95 GUI. That horizontal pannel has been a feature of the apple GUI at least since 1984 and the first Macs but is not found in Nextstep which simply puts the icons at the bottm of the screen, or wherever you want. Nextstep has a verticle docking station, which can be thought of as a pannel with much more flexibilty than Microsoft or Apple's

      Twitter, you seem to be a bit confused.

      Among other things:

      System 7 was released in 1991. The current version of MacOS when Windows95 was released was 7.5.1.

      This isn't a screenshot of MacOS. It's a screenshot of a PC running WindowBlinds to emulate MacOS 7, that's why all the screen elements are terribly confused. Notice how the open window is "C:" and has it's own menu bar? Here is an actual screenshot, though it's for 7.5.5 it's close enough.

      I'm not sure what you mean by "tinny horizontal pannel at the top of the screen", presumably what you're talking about is the menu bar, a feature that can be reliably traced back to GUIs as early as 1968. MacOS 7.x and Win9x implemented this feature differently, with MacOS keeping the menu bar on the top of the screen wheras Win98 has a menu bar for each window. There is general consensous that the Win9x approach is better on larger desktops.

      The "tiny application bar" in Win9x is called the Taskbar, and also includes the Start Menu and System Tray. While the Start Menu is very similar to the Apple Menu (an idea almost certainly taken from MacOS) the Taskbar, which is basically an "icon panel" of the currently running programs, and the System Tray, which was originally intended for system alerts and such. The Taskbar was a real innovation, AFAIK. Nothing similar was present in either NextSTEP or MacOS (the NextSTEP toolbar was just that, a more primitive version of the Apple/Start Menu).

      The major GUI innovation of Win95 was context-senstive popup menus you could get through right-clicking. For example, you could rename a file by right-clicking on it and selecting "Rename". In MacOS this required highlighting the file then moving the cursor to the menu bar to rename, the Win985 was was easier. (Yes, there were hotkeys on MacOS, but Win95 has them too).

      Asthetically, I think Win95 is closer to NextSTEP due to the similarity of the 'Close' and 'Full Screen' icons, the Recycle bin, the overall grey tone and appearance. In any event, it's simply not possible that Microsoft's design team was not aware of both MacOS AND NextSTEP. If nothing else, the "Close" and "Full Screen" icons are direct ripoffs of the NextSTEP icons.

      What MacOS 7.5.1 GUI had over Win95 at the time were generally better asthetics (a soft grey and blue combo rather than the harsh grey of Win95), the Finder, and many OS features were represented by files and folders (which was more consistent than the Win95 approach). That's about it.

      And Apple can hardly claim the moral high ground in GUI design. They tried to sue MS and failed, largely because Apple stole most of their "innovations" from Xerox PARC.

    7. Re:Dinky pooh, you confuse me. by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      Was trying to refer to a programmatic object called a "desktop" that's part of the operating system, not the picture with icons all over it.

      Maybe "Window Station" is the correct thing. Anyway, you need these things just to get the Ctrl+Alt+Del dialog, and then you get some more after you logon, no matter which shell you start. (I think even service accounts such as sshd will get 'desktops' behind the scenes.)

      I'd be real curious about any hack to boot to something other than ctrl+alt+del -- sounds like a huge short-circuit in the OS.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  166. Re:Flattery and Imitation and Apes by Glytch · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm sorry to inform you that Microsoft has prior art regarding this patent. Specifically, Steve Ballmer's "DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!" performance.

  167. Flattery & Imitation by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

    we all know bill will make money with whatever he sell's. i do doubt that he will make it to the 13 figure mark but that's ok, he just want's to have a good time.

  168. Common Elements by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1


    This is the home of the folks whose crowning achievement remains cloning whatever Microsoft does.


    The problem with this statement is that it ignores the fact that the GUI is not the sole domain of Microsoft. And it claims that all GUIs found within Linux environments (I assume that's what's being suggested) are Windows clones. A cursory look at even a small sampling of Linux desktops will show how overly simplified this claim is.

    Sure - there are elements of Windows to be found. Heck - one can even create a desktop that comes remarkably close to the look-and-feel of Windows. But at the same time, there are elements of other GUIs past and present. And there are also various attempts to mimic other desktops.

    My Win2K desktop looks nothing like my KDE desktop which looks nothing like my GNOME2 desktop. I find it kind of ironic that I've even installed some 3rd party apps to add some of the functionality found in various XWindows Managers to Win2K. All my desktop environments now make use of elements and behaviors found across different aspects of desktop computing history (and even then, they all have some common elements). Even then, there are bits and pieces that are somewhat unique to each environment.

    Of course - there's the default desktop. A fresh install of GNOME or KDE uses GUI elements arranged in a format that will be very familiar to Windows users. Which makes sense. Almost everyone has used Windows. Why plunge a new user in to an environment completely foreign? Which seems to be the strategy of the linked Lindows distribution. Oddly enough, the latest Lindows screen shots seem to be looking more like "traditional" Linux environments. Or maybe that's WinXP - which itself has come to look more like Linux.


    Oh, and BTW, Apple has a definite point here. The difference is that Apple took an unfriendly OS and turned it into a consumer product.


    I agree. Apple has done an excellent job at creating a consumer desktop Unix. There are definate lessons to be learned there.
  169. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you referring to the Chrysler and Mercedes-Benz merger? Also, BMW does own Land Rover and owns the Rolls-Royce name (but licensed it to VW who bought the Rolls factory). haha if ya can't beat em, buy em!

  170. Thats very sarcastic by g_bit · · Score: 1
    I know nobody will read this but I feel the need to post my opinion anyway. I really like the parent post. I will have to remember the technique used here for future use when I want to be really funny.

    I also like the fact that you disagree with me and that you've posted it here, this is a great country.

  171. The market will be free soon. by twitter · · Score: 1
    Competition makes the product better. MS learns, they are not stupid. They are stealing from Linux, they are stealing from Apple, Linux is stealing from both, etc.

    It's only folks like M$ and Apple who call it stealing. Copying and including features is what I think you mean. What we really have is M$ using Apple code gained through violation of NDAs and Apple telling people they can't make Aqua themes for browsers. Pthththfit! Closed source comercial software is full of that kind of thing, the hypocrites. They give lip service to competition and then try to keep others, for doing anything like what they do.

    Meanwhile, in the free world, there are literally dozens of window managers available that can all be made to look like anything you want from Mac OS1 to XP. I'm running Window Maker, which closely resmbles Nextstep, and a few other window managers. Yes, because they are modular you can have more than one installed. They can even share code, wow.

    Both Microsoft and Apple will need to adjust their models soon. The world is realizing that closed source comercial code is inferior to code that's free. If they don't let the light of day in on their codebase it will become irrelevant and no one will bother to sue anyone over it's use or theft.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  172. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by DaveSchool · · Score: 1

    AMC was a smallish car company based out of Wisconsin, they went out of business in the 80's selling off some of their more appealing subsidiaries (Jeep, various parts makers, etc...) At no time in history that I'm aware of did they ever have anything to do with BMW (other than making military equipment to blow them up in WWII).

  173. Gospel by elmusafir · · Score: 2, Funny

    Everybody has copied from the Bible. All the answers to every OS out there can be found in the Old Testament (for applications go to the New Testament). You only need to search for the answers following a plain cabalistic algorithm too simplistic to be mentioned here without insulting people's intelligence. elmusafir Who cares!

  174. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by DaveSchool · · Score: 1

    AMC? They haven't made a car since the 80's, when they went out of business. You might be thinking of AM General, who makes the Hummer. And 50,000? Try under a thousand a year.

    And no, try reading a GM or Ford annual report, they don't lose money on any high-volume vehicles, the only ones they lose money on are low-volume specialty vehicles, and they don't lose money very often. And the Accord may be the best selling car, but it is far outsold by Ford's F-Series and the Chevy Silverado.

  175. Fuck Tom, Fuck Mary, Fuck Gus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    icp 0wnz j00

  176. Screw you, twerp. by Chromodromic · · Score: 0

    Hey, Roidboy -- he can say whatever he wants on Slashdot. It's called "an opinion", bitch, and if you don't like it then you've got three choices: 1) post an intelligent reply, 2) shut your stupid mouth, or 3) go on some moronic profanity-fest where you try to demonstrate some kind of silver-backed dominance all while posting as "Anonymous Coward".

    >

    Uh. Okaaaaayyyy. Well, we know something about your high school career now, don't we?

    Idiot.

    --
    Chr0m0Dr0m!C
  177. Re:die apple by phillymjs · · Score: 1

    "Microsoft's 2005 version of its Windows operating system, apes features that have been in Apple's OS X operating system since 2001."

    Too bad OS X will always be too fucking slow.


    Quoth the bumper sticker:

  178. Why aren't we seeing UI innovation in Linux? by petrus4 · · Score: 1

    Simple. Less demand.

    UNIX/Linux (IMHO anyway) are traditionally used primarily by highly left brained people (programmers and so on) who don't feel a need for a GUI. The only real reason why any GUI development has been done for Linux at all that I can see has been for the purpose of promoting the OS to non-technical end users...people who customarily use Windows, and therefore are used to a GUI.

    Also...in terms of the next wave of UI innovations, the films Minority Report and Johnny Mneumonic feature some good ideas...the use of gloves and gestures etc...but for that we need advances in the area of hardware itself.

    Except for mouse driven gesture tech, my guess is we've pretty much hit a ceiling in terms of what we can do with conventional hardware in this regard...To go further will mean we use new hardware and change the fundamental nature of user interfaces themselves...go from the traditional window-type interface to something truly virtual. Considering how long the ideas for this have been around, it's amazing really that we haven't done it yet.

  179. Apple is safe: MS even ships its jokes late. . . by dasboy · · Score: 2, Funny

    The iLoo (portable toilet with Internet access) thing that has been floating around the media for the last week (CNN, CNET, etc, all had articles) turns out to be a "April Fools joke" according to MS representatives (CNET). The only problem: they released it on May 2nd. Damn! They can't even release their jokes on time.

  180. Apples and Macs Coco loco in the poco by ratfynk · · Score: 1

    If Gates and Jobs don't watch out they will be blindsided!
    Remember that infamous little 'puter the one that Tandy went bust trying to weasel into the market with? Well the people who wrote the OS are not going away, they are just sitting quietly on the side lines picking up scraps.
    Do not be too suprised in the future if the ghost of Coco comes back to life, and does an end run around the big machine in Redmond. There were features in that little OS that people do not appreciate. No chance of catching a cold through a corrupted core virus, is one of them. Steve, Billy Boy and Intel had better watch out there are software patents that no one has bought yet!

    --
    OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
    1. Re:Apples and Macs Coco loco in the poco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, the Coco, it had the first GUI I ever used - Deskmate. Remember OS-9? (a unixy multi-tasking OS, you could run terminals off the crappy RS-232 on the back.) They still use OS-9 on the space shuttle, I believe.

      But Microware, the makers of the Coco BIOS and OS-9, as far as I know are trying to get into the embedded market and have given up the non-embedded market completely.

      I always find the eternal Mac-PC flame war funny, considering Tandy was first to market (as far as I know, at least it was very close to the Mac, ergo they were first with an affordable machine) with a GUI.

  181. Amiga Re:So What else is new? by AlienRelics · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But meanwhile the Amiga had more of those features than Mac 7.1 at that time. No protected memory, but full round robin preemptive multitasking since 1985 with color high res screens. Even with a 68000 at 7MHz with a few Megs of RAM it was a power user system.

    And terrible marketing.

    It is true that marketing and market savvy are king. Otherwise Microsoft would be in the dust bin of history and it would be Amiga and Mac that were vying for market share.

  182. I don't care! by vveeeee · · Score: 1

    I don't care who is copying who! I will be running that whatever M$ OS when it hit the net. Give me an Apple and I will download their OS tooo! Hell, let me eat my apple first!

  183. Re: XP Colours by a_p_irwin · · Score: 1

    At the end of my first session using Win XP I went to logout, to my suprise the screen started to fade to b&w. I thought this was a really nice touch and even thought maybe, just maybe, they were catching up to Apple, then I clicked logout and the background instead of dying and going toally b&w as one would expect, sprung back to full life colour just as one wouldn't expect... this is what Microsoft lacks... attention to detail. It is eviedent everywhere throughout Microsoft products. It is why Mac users love their Mac's and despise Windows. Apple has great attention to detail thats why on a Mac things just work...

    --
    -- Cut and paste is not code re-use!
  184. DRM... am I crazy or am I the last sane one? by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

    Slashdotters defending DRM... am I crazy or am I the last sane one? I'm not sure sure anymore.

    Slashdot continues to get more mainstream readership, even getting mentioned in print articles these days. As a side effect of this visibility, the activity of astroturfers has increased -- notice that the pro-MS AC(s) tend to have the same writing style and logical fallacies. When other readers put them in their place, a handful UIDs dog pile one or two posters with ad hominem attacks or the "you-just-don't-like-Microsoft" (appeal to emotion?) attack. Microsoft has a long practice of 'turfing in it's marketing:

    Also, right now MS is in a panicked marketing blitz. notice all the product placement on the tech sites. The embarassing stuff just disappears from the top page less than a day, but the press releases sit there for weeks.

    It makes sense. Most Windows users have both Windows and Office because it's what the OEMs had installed on the machines they bought, nothing more or less. Most of these are either apathetic or know nothin else, so they will not write. Others are pissed off at the low quality, made worse by Microsoft treating security and stability issues as PR issues -- How many times have you heard "computers" crash from BSD, Novell, QNX, Linux, or OS X users? Or is it just the MSCEs? Most remaining clients could go easily over to OS X or one of the Linux distros and the next IT boom would start, like the previous one, without Microsoft.

    In short, they need DRM to survive the summer and few, except for MS and RIAA staff

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  185. upgrade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm running OS X on a B&W g3 and it's fast enough for me. certainly faster than my Mom's AMD running windows 98. No shit, I clicked on network neighborhood, went upstairs to get something, came back downstairs and still got back to the desk before the window opened.

    OS rot. OS X doesn't have it. Windows does.

  186. The subtext by IdahoEv · · Score: 1
    From the story:


    "You don't have to look too far to see that this is almost a direct copy of Quartz," said Philip W. Schiller, Apple's vice president of marketing, referring to the Macintosh software that controls the computer's display.

    Microsoft executives declined to take the bait. "We only showed glimpses of the future of Longhorn," said a Microsoft spokesman. "Wait until the fall when we'll go into more detail at the Professional Developers Conference."


    Shortly afterwards, a memo:

    FROM: Microsoft Spokesdroid
    TO: Bill Gates
    SUBJECT: New features

    Majesty,
    They're on to us, but I think I bought some time. Tell the Longhorn guys to come up with 4-5 new features before the Developers Conf. and we're golden.

    Suggestion: no paper clips with eyeballs this time. Maybe we can try automatically linking keywords to our sales partners' websites again, I think they've forgotten that one. Worth a try.

    Regards,
    'droid

    --
    I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
  187. Apple needs to learn more from Microsoft by bravado2112 · · Score: 1

    Regardless of what kind of innovation comes out of the Apple camp, Microsoft will still be considered the top dog. The reason is simple: Apple is not catering to the masses! Steve Jobs, with his elitist attitude toward computer products, is not shaping his company for the future. If Apple is to compete at all, they really need to venture more into the business market. They have the tools and the platform to do it...but they are not budging due to the cost and proprietary nature of their systems. Simply put, Apple needs to drop the IBM PowerPC chipset like a bad habit and port OSX to the I386 platform! Intel is running circles around everyone, especially with the release of their new chipset on a 800mhz FSB and processors starting at 3Ghz. Even when IBM releases the new PowerPC chips that run on a 900mhz FSB, it will be too little too late! As it stands, many software companies have made WinXP their preferred platform for one reason and one reason only...raw performance! Adobe has made it very clear that they prefer Intel over Apple for raw performance...and performance tests have proven it! Industry professionals that have long used Mac computers are starting to convert to using Windows systems due to the fact that better performance can be achieved on a much cheaper margin. It works like this: better performance means getting the job done in less time. Time equals money. And if you can get better performance for less money then you'll buy products that will give you that (meaning less overhead!) If Apple were to port OSX to the PC and make it widely available to anyone with a PC then I'd jump on it in a New York minute! But stupid Steve Jobs will never do that so fat chance we'll ever see Apple unlock the proprietary nature of their systems!

    I took a look at the pricing of Apple's latest G4 computers and I was insulted at what I saw! $3,799 for a top of the line G4! And get this...512 megs of DDR333 memory cost $250 on Apple's website! That's insane! And they don't even have any of the latest video cards available for their computers! By comparison, I configured a top of the line Alienware workstation just for the hell of it. You can get a kick-ass Alienware computer with 2 gigs of DDR PC-3200 RAM, P4 3Ghz 800FSB, 120 gig Serial ATA HD, DVD-ROM, Plextor DVD+RW, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro, XP Pro, and for how much? A little over $3000!! Almost $800 less and it'll run cirles around a Mac any day of the week! Now, granted, this is more of a gaming computer, but it would still work great as a workstation. Alienware does have some systems that run on dual 2.0 ghz Xeon's with workstation quality videocards...but I think those are more reserved for 3D animation work. The point is that if you're gonna buy an Apple for graphics design, video editing, etc....don't waste your money! Buy an upper-end PC and you'll save a buttload of money and you'll end up with something that save you both time and money in the long run! Screw Apple! Nuff said!

    --
    Jeff Whitfield jeffwhitfield@gmail.com "I can learn to resist anything but temptation..."
    1. Re:Apple needs to learn more from Microsoft by phillymjs · · Score: 1

      First off, just forget the friggin' pipe dream of ever running OS X on your home-built x86 shitbox. Apple's hardware and software businesses have a symbiotic relationship. Apple's software is what sells their hardware, the proceeds of which go towards the software development. remove one side of that equation and the whole thing collapses. Furthermore, even if Apple did move to x86, they would prevent OS X from running on commodity, non-Apple hardware, so you'd still be whining about it. They'd do it for two reasons: First, because the sanctioned Mac clones almost killed Apple back in the late 90's. Second, because what makes Macs work so well is that their software has ultra-tight integration with a limited spread of hardware.

      If Apple is to compete at all, they really need to venture more into the business market.

      Last I checked, consumers weren't the target market of rack-mountable servers or rack-mountable RAID units. And Apple destroys Microsoft on server software pricing. Apple charges $1000 for an unlimited client license for mail and filesharing. The last client of mine who got a unlimited CAL for Windows 2000 Server paid five figures, and I'm pretty sure that didn't cover Exchange Server.

      Adobe has made it very clear that they prefer Intel over Apple for raw performance...and performance tests have proven it!

      You mean those performance tests that were proven to be flawed because Adobe is too lazy to write their After Effects software to take full advantage of the Mac's dual processors?

      And get this...512 megs of DDR333 memory cost $250 on Apple's website! That's insane!

      Yes, it is. Luckily, Mac users with a clue buy their RAM elsewhere and install it themselves. For the rest, buying Apple RAM is like buying aspirin at 7 Eleven... it's unnaturally expensive because you're paying for the convenience.

      It doesn't matter how fast a machine is, it's not more productive if the faster machine is always needing maintenance like Windows boxes. At my last job they were an all-Mac shop when I started. Not long after I started, my boss quit, and I was able to singlehandedly take care of over 100 users at three different locations while the company looked for a replacement for him. Mostly, I sat in my office all day reading and browsing the web, because other than people needing help with the Office documents sent to us by our Windows using clients (damn Microsoft and their ever-changing file formats), there was seldom a problem. Later the company decided to convert all but the production studio to Windows machines. Can you say expensive? Me, my new boss, and a summer intern could not keep up with all the shit that went wrong, hardware (Dell) and software-wise. Did I mention viruses? ILOVEYOU crippled us for most of the day it debuted. You can have an accident with a running chainsaw and still have enough fingers and toes to count the number of malicious Mac viruses that ever existed, and most if not all of them are extinct and have been for years. Security holes? The last one in Mac OS X, major or minor, was patched on March 24, a month and a half ago. There have only been FOUR since Jaguar was released (I just checked my Software Update log). How many for Microsoft? Four since March 24, and nineteen since XP SP1 was released in August (according to the Installed Updates list on my XP Pro box.)

      Your problem is, you're in denial about the Mac advantages. The Mac is more secure, period. Viruses are practically a non-issue. Same with spyware. No worries about my Mac getting owned by some script kiddie or being used as a spam proxy. My G4 has never crashed since I got it in October. It doesn't try to thwart me at every turn when I'm trying to get work done. It's got a damn nice UNIX base lurking underneath a

    2. Re:Apple needs to learn more from Microsoft by bravado2112 · · Score: 0

      First off, just forget the friggin' pipe dream of ever running OS X on your home-built x86 shitbox. Apple's hardware and software businesses have a symbiotic relationship. Apple's software is what sells their hardware, the proceeds of which go towards the software development. remove one side of that equation and the whole thing collapses. Furthermore, even if Apple did move to x86, they would prevent OS X from running on commodity, non-Apple hardware, so you'd still be whining about it. They'd do it for two reasons: First, because the sanctioned Mac clones almost killed Apple back in the late 90's. Second, because what makes Macs work so well is that their software has ultra-tight integration with a limited spread of hardware.

      You're right....it is a pipedream so long as Steve Jobs is in control of Apple! So while we're on the topic of comparing 'apples' with 'oranges', consider this.... Apple's 'symbiotic' relationship with the hardware and software may seem all fine and dandy but when serious delays in R&D occur then that spells 'trouble' with a capital 'T'. What good is the OS if the hardware itself is lacking and is behind in terms of performance over the competition. I'm not whining about anything...I take a very non-biased approach to computers and look at everything from all angles. So I don't really care what Apple does. If they produce a good product that is both affordable, reliable, and offers top-of-the-line performance then I would buy it, proprietary or not! Problem is this though...sure it's reliable, but it's not affordable and it's not necessarily top-of-the-line in performance anymore....regardless of 'so-called' flaws in testing.

      Last I checked, consumers weren't the target market of rack-mountable servers [apple.com] or rack-mountable RAID units. [apple.com] And Apple destroys Microsoft on server software pricing. Apple charges $1000 for an unlimited client license for mail and filesharing. [apple.com] The last client of mine who got a unlimited CAL for Windows 2000 Server paid five figures, and I'm pretty sure that didn't cover Exchange Server.

      Err...Apple is not what I would call a real contender in the server market. You're right about pricing...but Apple can't compete anyways in the server market. Last I heard, Unix, Linux, and Sun based servers are on top of the market....most of which is cheaper and, again, runs circles around Apple and offers greater scalability and compatility with Windows clients. You do know that Windows rules the corporate desktop, right?? What good is an Apple server on a network of nothing but Windows clients? Hmm...beats me!

      You mean those performance tests that were proven to be flawed because Adobe is too lazy to write their After Effects software to take full advantage of the Mac's dual processors? [digitalpos...uction.com]

      Correction...the tests were not flawed. Many tests have been performed against the fastest G4 and the fastest P4 available....and the testers didn't just use After Effects either! MaximumPC Magazine, PC Magazine, and other industry experts have done similar testing. They used Adobe products (Photoshop, After Effects, Premiere; mostly uses dual processors on a G4), 3D Studio Max, CAD, and other industry standard tests that benchmark things like processor, memory, and motherboard performance. The results were almost unanimous with the exception of but one or two tests....an Intel Pentium 4 platform outperforms the fastest G4 available! And this was testing against a dual-proc G4 against a single processor P4 (533mhz FSB)!! I would hate to think of what the results would be on Intel's new chipset with the 800mhz FSB and dual-channel DDR400 RAM!! Face the facts....the Intel platform is the better performer...regardless of OS!

      And get this...512 megs of DDR333 memory cost $250 on Apple's website! That's insane! Yes, it is. Luckily, Mac users with a clue buy thei

      --
      Jeff Whitfield jeffwhitfield@gmail.com "I can learn to resist anything but temptation..."
    3. Re:Apple needs to learn more from Microsoft by phillymjs · · Score: 1

      Last I heard, Unix, Linux, and Sun based servers are on top of the market....most of which is cheaper and, again, runs circles around Apple and offers greater scalability and compatility with Windows clients. You do know that Windows rules the corporate desktop, right?? What good is an Apple server on a network of nothing but Windows clients? Hmm...beats me!

      First of all, an Apple server IS a Unix server-- It's got a nice GUI for management and configuration, but that GUI just asks you for the settings for Sendmail and Apache.

      An Apple server on a network of all Windows clients is great, especially for smaller companies that don't want to be extorted for the high licensing costs just to do filesharing and e-mail. Also, smaller companies that don't have a lot of money to spend on IT support people find Xserves and Mac OS X Server to be a Godsend-- especially when you don't have to worry about when the next Nimda or Code Red (which are still around in large numbers, according to my firewall logs) hits.

      And as for compatibility, you must be on crack. Out of the box, workstation Macs have been able to read and write DOS/Windows files and read and write to DOS/Windows disks/volumes for over a decade, for one thing. Why would their servers reverse a 10+ year trend of being good network citizens? Apple makes the most standards-compliant stuff around. Really standards-compliant, not "we took the standard and added our own proprietary shit to it to dissuade you from using non-Windows clients." If you care to dispute that Microsoft does that, I've got one word for you: Java.

      But don't take my word for it. Mac OS X Server was just named the Server OS of the Year by Network Magazine.

      ~Philly

    4. Re:Apple needs to learn more from Microsoft by powermacj7 · · Score: 1

      How productive is the amount of down time we spend on WIN$? People prefer WIN XP over Mac is not because of stability and reliability, because the boxes are cheap. Our company spent hundreds of hours of unproductive time, fixing, maintaining, and applying WIN updates. In the real world, where one is responsible for $$$ not gaming, WIN$ boxes are not as popular as you think about executives. Please it is not about speed, or games, or interface favorites.

  188. If you really want to complain... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

    Complain about copy protected CDs.

    Apple's AACs are no worse, technically, except Apple has *given* the user the easy ability to get around the copy protection. Burn to CD and rerip.

    A copy protected CD? You need to apply whatever brand of magic is required to bypass the copy protection. Which I don't know, off the top of my head, for all the variations.

  189. C'mon by bursch-X · · Score: 1

    Ey, come on, we all now that e-machines is king in that field!

    --
    There are two rules for success:
    1. Never tell everything you know.
  190. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or what it's for.

    u niehter, dumbass. hint: its!

  191. Oh dear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're going to kick yourself when you realise how ass-backwards you've got your indignation. Or maybe you'll never realise it because you're too dumb. Either way let me assure you that your comment makes you look like a complete idiot.

    But thanks for playing!

    1. Re:Oh dear by ananoca · · Score: 1
      You are the one posting as a coward showing the lack of belief you have in your own opinions.

      There was no need for your original comment, the guy wasn't being horrible or rude, he was just joking yet there always has to be one idiot like yourself who comes along and wants to get in the light by making someone else look foolish. And what a surprise! You used political correctness!

      Get over yourself, it's easy to shout things from the shadows but at least you are a good example of someone who is just one big waste of space.

      From now on post constructive information and stop trolling for the sake of trolling.

    2. Re:Oh dear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't respond to them, it just fuels their trollish appetite my friend.

    3. Re:Oh dear by Lebannen · · Score: 1

      Here's a little constructive posting to enlighten you as to the grandparent...

      The post you objected to, line-by-line:
      "Would you please not use the term special-needs when you mean retard."
      That is, with emphasis, "would you please not use the term special-needs when you mean retard.".

      Read carefully... now laugh :)

      Mr Coward posted because your comment of "It's people like you who are so politically correct that your making EVERYONE'S life/society a f**ing nightmare to live in" misses the original point... quoting again from the post you flamed, "Political Correctness is very offensive to those of us that do not try to make ourselves feel better by assigning kinder, gentler words to things while doing nothing about them."

      See? Reading posts saves arguments :)

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggie" whilst looking for a rock
    4. Re:Oh dear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You see! Now they are all springing out of the wood work >;) Don't say I didn't warn you...

    5. Re:Oh dear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, here is a little constructive information for you. You are replying to two different people.

      Have a nice day.

    6. Re:Oh dear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't confuse him! First, he needs to understand that he should reply to what a post is saying, rather than the opposite of what a post is saying.

      Then when he's understood that, we can gently introduce him to more difficult concepts, such as that 'Anonymous Coward' is a shared identity.

  192. Steve Jobs is a true visionary by stock · · Score: 1
    Steve created your dream workstation already in 1989. Here's a add inside Byte magazine of november 1989.

    Robert

  193. This sounds like the Cold War shuttle programs by Quila · · Score: 1

    The USSR let us spend all the R&D for the technology leading up to the Shuttle, then took the info and made their own for far less.

    As always, Apple is the outside R&D department for Microsoft.

    1. Re:This sounds like the Cold War shuttle programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, well if your analogy holds true then one day Microsoft will cease to exist, just like the USSR.

  194. If only... by mav[LAG] · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
    (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

    C:\Documents and Settings\Dave>su
    "I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."

    C:\Documents and Settings\Dave>

    --
    --- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
  195. Automotive nit-picking... by jweatherley · · Score: 1

    Ford owns Land Rover after BMW ditched the Rover group. Vickers, who own Rolls-Royce aeroengines, owns the RR name and they licence it to BMW for cars. VW bought the RR factory but were outsmarted by BMW on the licensing aspect and they were left with the Bentley name and -$$$.

    --

    --
    Reverse outsourcing: it's the future
  196. I hear ya by g_bit · · Score: 1

    I agree, the original poster was being mean. Glad we cleared that up :) Have a nice day.

  197. Re:Did anybody notice the photo (of the MS/HP Athe by Ineffable+27 · · Score: 1

    Still, it looks a hell of a lot like the default OS X desktop image. Their choice to use that particular desktop image, esp. in conjunction with the iMac rip-off, is I am sure not an accident.

    --
    "He'd be a broader guy if he had dropped acid once." - Steve Jobs on Bill Gates
  198. Re:Did anybody notice the photo (of the MS/HP Athe by PPCAvenger · · Score: 1

    I've now seen two different pictures of the Athens, one shows XP's Crystal while the other does have a closer resemblence to the Aqua desktop picture, it's not a copy but there are definite similarities.

  199. WinFS just a service on top of plain old NTFS by afantee · · Score: 1

    The most hyped Longhorn feature is Windows Future Storage - a revolutionary file system with built-in database facility (based on MS SQL Server) like the beloved BFS. But after years of typical MS brouhaha, now we are told that it's nothing more than a Windows service.

    Apple innovates and delivers, while MS copies and hypes. Longhorn has nothing new or better than what has been available on Mac OS X since a year or two ago, and 2005 is just too far away. For me, the future OS is Mac OS X 10.3 to be announced next month.

  200. Ouch. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Autopr0n gets to suck it hard and suck it long.

  201. Re:Sometimes this works by the+big+v · · Score: 1

    actually, you have to use defaults write com.apple.safari IncludeDebugMenu 1 -- note the capitalization... it is important. but thanks for the tip!

    --
    The only ``intuitive'' interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
  202. Re:Its in keeping with Windows XP and the rest of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice try, retard, but I do understand the apostrophe, and "it's" is the correct usage.

    Hint: the long version is "or what it is for"

  203. I OWN A COPY OF MECCA--OPENSTEP 4 NEVER RELEASED by tyrione · · Score: 1

    Having worked at NeXT I was fortunate enough to secure a copy of the MECCA Project which I will tell you is still LIGHTYEARS Ahead of MacOS X's UI.

    When I see OS X or should we say OS XI introduce something called a "TABBED DOCKING SHELF" where every item is truly an reusable Object that can be easily drag n' dropped into any document window then I will be even more happy.

    OS X is a rollback to what it should be but on purpose. Thanks to Steve's intelligence and learning from the past with NeXT, Apple will introduce the next series of changes the operating system world will enjoy, along with continuing to refine offering others have introduced and do it better.

  204. Quit dreaming by Quila · · Score: 1

    A world, free...

  205. fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    youre all fuckin homos, seriously. why are you so gay. whats wrong with you. when did you all turn into homosexuals. homosexuals are gay, you know that right. and youre gay. and youre a homosexual.

    faggots.

  206. Re:Sales Inspiring! -- good lord by blakespot · · Score: 1
    Development? I still need a Unix machine for that.

    What???

    As you've said, it _is_ a UNIX machine and you've got access to all of the best *NIX dev tools PLUS apple's incredible Cocoa dev framework and associated tools. Get on board w/ the OS X Dev Tools!


    blakespot

    --
    -- Heisenberg may have slept here.
    iPod Hacks.com
  207. You can always tell by powermacj7 · · Score: 1

    When ever I read WIN vs. Mac arguments, it is always the same. It always appears the PC users argue from the "only standpoint". M$ is the only company that should exist in the computer world. Anything other than M$ is not worthy, unproductive, basically kids play. Really sad. Yet, PC people argue claiming to have the best thing in the world. Then why argue with us low-end, MAC people. Use your WIN boxes and be happy. Realistically, they argue out of knowledge that their boxes are cheap, poorly designed, and spend thousands of dollars to claim the top. All these years, it is believed that anyone not using WIN with Office, can't possible be productive, and those labors are a waste of time. Year after year millions of people are productive on MACs, get important things done. I ask. when does the argument end? If you prefer WIN, then use it and stop projecting it's inadequacies on MAC users. Mac OSX nor WIN XP are perfect, nor will they ever be. Facts are facts and preferences are opinions. Everyone knows that M$ has copied Apple, not rocket science, my 11 old nephew figured that out. Just use what you use, and end it. I prefer MAC, to me it is a robust OS, mature, and reliable. This does not mean I hate WIN XP, i just prefer not to use it. It is like holding the big crayon in kindergarten, made for people with limited computer skills, prompting for reassurance, adding steps to simple computer actions. I am an advanced user who enjoys the maturity nature of MAC OSX. WIN XP or Longhorn will never match that of MAC, simply because it is not UNIX. That is the problem with WIN, its technology outgrows the computer user needs, hence all the recent versions of WIN. In short, be happy with what you use. Both get the job done. If you have limited computer skills and a small budget, fine, get a Dell for 699. For advanced users, who will quickly outgrow WIN XP, you better off with a MAC. Just my opinion. In the end, it is yours as well. Stop the WIN vs MAC argument.