Slashdot Mirror


Why Developers Are Switching To Macs

snydeq writes "Programmers are finding themselves increasingly drawn to the Mac as a development platform, in large part due to Apple's decision to move to Intel chips and to embrace virtualization of other OSes, which has turned Mac OS X into a flexible tool for development, InfoWorld reports. The explosion of interest in smartphone development is helping the trend, with iPhone development lock-in to the Mac environment the chief motivating factor for Apple as a platform of choice for mobile development. Yet for many, the Mac remains sluggish and poorly tuned for development, with developers citing its virtual memory system's poor performance in paging data in and out of memory and likening use of the default-network file system, AFS, to engaging oneself with 'some kind of passive-aggressive torture.' What remains unclear is whether Apple will lend an ear to this new wave of Mac-based development or continue to develop products that lock out uses programmers expect."

37 of 771 comments (clear)

  1. Strange Complaints by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yet for many, the Mac remains sluggish and poorly tuned for development, with developers citing its virtual memory system's poor performance in paging data in and out of memory

    As opposed to the Windows paging system? Has the author used a Windows OS lately? Swapping is a *bleeping* killer! Especially when you have more than enough memory not to swap. :-/

    likening use of the default-network file system, AFS, to engaging oneself with 'some kind of passive-aggressive torture.

    So don't use it. Macs support CIFS/SMB pretty darn well these days. I keep hoping that someone will come up with a better replacement, but CIFS/SMB will continue to work until that day comes.

    1. Re:Strange Complaints by RocketRabbit · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's Infoworld. What do you expect? They are a Windows-centric publication.

    2. Re:Strange Complaints by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yea it is kinda like saying how bad Dells are because they still have Serial Ports which are so slow compared to modern USB ports that are on Lenovo's

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Strange Complaints by jo_ham · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was going to weigh in on this, but maybe I'm the anti-first-post guy, there were no comments when I came back from the article and I was trying to compose my thoughts.

      I don't think there's anywhere to go with this other than a biased writer grudgingly writing a story about a platform he hates because he needs to pay the bills this month.

      The article makes me want to go through it with the "wikipedia editing brush" like a schoolmaster grading the entries that appear on the site:

      "Yet for many [who?], the Mac remains sluggish and poorly tuned for development [citation?].."

      Move along, nothing to see here folks.

    4. Re:Strange Complaints by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Informative

      I keep hoping that someone will come up with a better replacement, but CIFS/SMB will continue to work until that day comes.

      It's called NFS v4. Kerberos for authentication, encrypted traffic, lower overhead, no passwords or password hashes sent -- ever.

    5. Re:Strange Complaints by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hey it was one programmer. And frankly if you are having issues with swap put more ram in.

      I have to live this line.
      "The sting of ka-ching
      While the price of Macintosh hardware continues to be competitive with the best commodity laptops and desktops, Apple offers nothing in the rapidly expanding lower tiers. It's possible to build a quad-core PC running Eclipse and Gimp for less than $400 with refurbished hardware. At the time of this writing, the Mac Pro with one quad-core CPU begins at $2,300. Adding Photoshop and other tools can push the bill closer to $4,000."
      Okay guess what folks? You can run GIMP and Eclipse on a Mac!
      Not only that but it seems a bit unfair to compare a Mac Pro with a refurbished box!
      Heck I a not an Apple fan but this seems very slanted to me.

      Why do developers like the MAC?
      1. It is Unix so if are doing Unix server work this is a piece of cake.
      2. It will run Windows, Linux, BSD, and Mac OS/x so if you are going multi-platform on the PC it is the way to go.
      3. It will run the Google Phone development stack and the Iphone/IPod stack.
      It is just more flexible. Makes me want to get one now.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Strange Complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Only because you've never used it at scale (or probably not OSX as a NFS server either). Their NFS performance isn't that hot and I would strongly advise against using OSX as a mission critical NFS server. I'll just leave my comments at that.

    7. Re:Strange Complaints by Guy+Harris · · Score: 4, Informative

      Kerberos for authentication, encrypted traffic, lower overhead, no passwords or password hashes sent -- ever.

      Kerberos authentication, encrypted traffic, and "no passwords sent" apply also to NFSv2 and NFSv3; that's all done at the ONC RPC layer.

      And all of those are supported by Leopard's NFSv2 and NFSv3 (krb5 = Kerberos 5 for authentication; krb5i = Kerberos 5 with a signature for integrity checking; krb5p = Kerberos 5 with encryption for privacy).

    8. Re:Strange Complaints by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's Unix-ish. Try compiling X11 (or any of hundreds of other POSIX compliant software packages) from source on a Mac. I'll wait.

      That depends on how you define Unix. Linux is Unix-ish. I consider any OS that is certified to be UNIX 03 to be Unix. And why compile? Maybe I'm lazy, but I don't feel like doing any unnecessary steps. Just install it from the OS CD; It is not installed by default. Compiling it to me is like compiling a kernel. Sure, I could try to do that, but in the end, I did a lot of work that I may need to do. As for POSIX compliant software, there will be some that don't run on OS X just like there are some that don't run on Solaris, IRIX, etc. Now if you could provide an example, someone could probably help you fix it.

      It's capable of running its own proprietary OS that is specifically designed to not run on any otherwise capable hardware...That would be like Halliburton putting sugar in all its petroleum products and designing a car that runs on sugar-gas, calling it a "feature".

      Wait a minute, proprietary OS on specifically designed platform? Haven't you just described Unix? Only recently has Sun opened Solaris to non-Sun hardware. IBM has never released AIX for anything but their own servers. So is OS X Unix or not because you have just contradicted yourself.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    9. Re:Strange Complaints by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's Unix-ish. Try compiling X11 (or any of hundreds of other POSIX compliant software packages) from source on a Mac. I'll wait.

      X11 compiles just fine.

      http://www.xfree86.org/current/Darwin.html
      http://developer.apple.com/opensource/tools/X11.html
      http://ftp.x.org/pub/X11R6.9.0/doc/html/Darwin.html

      My primary complaint is that most OSS developers expect all Unix systems to be Linux systems. Which means that I have to let Linux software get its hooks into my OS X system in order to get anything compiled. Since OS X is NOT Linux, this is quite an unpleasant process.

      It's capable of running its own proprietary OS that is specifically designed to not run on any otherwise capable hardware

      OS X runs Unix software. Period. I usually get a host of tools installed first thing on my Mac. Thankfully, this has become less and less necessary over time as Apple has started including many of the most useful utilities up front.

    10. Re:Strange Complaints by eggnoglatte · · Score: 4, Informative

      Unfortunately, NFS is not safe since it trusts clients. If users need to have root or sudo on their individual machines, they can go out and read any file on the server (well, technically partition, but who has one partition per user on their server?). NFS comes from a time of big iron servers where no end user EVER had root access. The world has changed.

      CIFS/SMB may be slow, but at least it got the per-user authentication right. If you want an alternative, something like the Andrew File System (the other AFS), or OpenAFS would be better. OpenAFS exists for Macs.

    11. Re:Strange Complaints by element-o.p. · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's Unix-ish. Try compiling X11 (or any of hundreds of other POSIX compliant software packages) from source on a Mac. I'll wait.

      Installing X11 from source on any *nix is painful.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    12. Re:Strange Complaints by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Yet for many [who?], the Mac remains sluggish and poorly tuned for development [citation?].."

      who? Me, for one.

      citation? I agree with that assessment. Mac's are sluggish. There are plenty of theories as to why, from the threading model it uses, to the woeful inadequacies of 'Finder'. Frankly, my gut is that its just the desktop environment and finder itself that suck. Because when you look at benchmarks of optimized applications and servers or big tasks like video encoding etc, OSX tends to hold up just fine... but yet I find every mac I've ever used has always been 'sluggish' to actually use. Its the little things like opening a program, resizing a window, navigating the file system, always feel a bit sluggish... or I'll see the dreaded pinwheel come up and prevent me from doing anything at all time and again for seconds on end.

      There are non-'performance' related mac-ism idiocies too... like having a global menu bar instead of a per 'application menu'. (seriously, with large dual monitors, its pretty retarded when you have a 2x2" window down in the bottom right of the 2nd monitor, and you have to go to the TOP of the OTHER monitor, to access its disembodied file menu. It was fine on a sinle 15" or 17" screen... but its just demented on dual 24" displays. Basic HCI defect at this point, imo.

      There are a lot of things OSX does REALLY well. But at the same time the rigidity of the platform REALLY can get under the skin of a Linux or even Windows guy who wants to be able to do things a certain (non-Apple) way.

    13. Re:Strange Complaints by LaskoVortex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Try maximizing a window on a mac. Minimize a window, then alt-tab back to that app. You get the app, with no window! You then get the 'pleasure' of moving the mouse to the menu bar, selecting the window menu, and hopefully finding the window you wanted.

      I couldn't reproduce this. Which app?

      OSX server (both tiger and leopard) fail in such spectacular manners that it would make your head spin.

      I've been administrating a 10.4 server box for nearly 2.5 years. Setup sucked and I had to reinstall, but after that, it's worked flawlessly ever since. I only need to pay attention to it after power outages. Except for a perfectly defective dhcp server/nat router, I couldn't be happier with it.

      If you install FileMaker server on OSX Server

      There is your problem. I'll hint to the fix: postgresql.

      On some Apple made apps closing the main windows does not close the app, on others (still made by apple) it does.

      Yes, it would be nice if Apple made their admins read the Apple user interface guidelines. I think the cake-taker was netinfo manager.

      As for the sluggishness of Aqua--yup. Four major upgrades later, a tripling of processor speeds, a quintupling of memory, and nearly two orders of magnitude of hard drive sizes later, you still need to wait six minutes to resize a window in Firefox. I don't know whose fault that is, but it needs improvement.

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
    14. Re:Strange Complaints by leamanc · · Score: 5, Informative

      As others have mentioned, it's AFP, not AFS, but the point remains the same. It's slow because it sacrifices speed for goodies like hi-res icons, and remembering icon positions.

      NFS is slower yet on OS X, both as a server and a client,

      The funny thing is, though, that Mac OS X Server can serve out the same sharepoint over AFP, SMB/CIFS, and NFS. All at the same time. There's no conversion necessary. Just click the checkbox for the protocols you want to turn on. (This includes FTP also.) So why they complain about AFP, when there are other options available with a click of a mouse, is a little puzzling.

      --
      :q!
    15. Re:Strange Complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      First, if you're really using a mac, you wouldn't say "alt-tab." It's Cmd-Tab.

      Second, this has nothing to do with maximizing at all (you rarely ever need to maximize on a mac anyway... it's pretty multi-window friendly). If you minimize a window on OS X, it goes down to the Dock, period. If you want it back, just click on the window in the Dock.

      If you didn't want to really minimize it, you could have hidden the application (Cmd-H), and then Cmd-Tabbing to that application or clicking on its icon in the Dock would bring everything back exactly as it was. Or you could put stuff in different spaces. Or you could use Expose to switch between windows.

      Same with whether or not closing a window closes the application as well. It's pretty simple... if the application only ever uses 1 window and there's nothing to do when the window is closed, closing the window quits the application. Otherwise it stays open. If you don't like it, you can always Cmd-Q quit everything, which would be the same regardless. And seriously... what are you possibly "fighting" with here? It sounds like you're just compiling a list of old rants, rather than saying anything relevant.

      And btw, who seriously installs the update for iTunes on their server? You could just ignore the update (or better yet, delete iTunes from your server... what's it even doing there?)

      If you don't like FileMaker, complain to them, or use something else... they're not Apple (yes, I know it's a subsidiary, but it's independently operated).

      You're simply used to a Windows paradigm, nothing more. Just because you're used to something one way doesn't make a different paradigm wrong.

      Rule of Thumb: 9 times out of 10, if somebody spends their first sentence trying to convince you they're using a specific system they want to criticize, they're probably not using it.

    16. Re:Strange Complaints by EvilIdler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Windows only sometimes closing an app? If it's a document-based application, of course it leaves the app running! That's how it is supposed to work. Preferences is not, so it's OK to quit. It only ever has one instance of its window.

      Maximise adjusts the window to allow the contents to fit. I hate that too.

      Minimise puts it in the dock. If you're on a Mac, you use cmd-h to hide all of an app's windows, rather than individually minimising each.

      Every OS has a different interface. Learn it :)

      Filemaker sounds like seriously bad engineering. Makes me want to slap it. I'm glad I don't need it. Have you tried reporting it as a bug?

    17. Re:Strange Complaints by CAIMLAS · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's Unix-ish. Try compiling X11 (or any of hundreds of other POSIX compliant software packages) from source on a Mac. I'll wait.

      Seriously?

      Have you tried compiling X11 (let's call it Xorg) on Linux, BSD, or any other architectures of late? HEADACHE.

      There's a reason why essential and commonly used software often comes as a binary package for Linux, *BSD, and yes, OS X. Especially if it's a PITA to build.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    18. Re:Strange Complaints by LaskoVortex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I couldn't reproduce this. Which app?

      Because I couldn't do it you must be lying. Glad you're not my tech support guy. Seriously, if I came back at my boss (or client) and said this, I'd be out on my arse, so top marks in customer service.

      "Which app?" means "which application?" What I mean to say is which program does this? I'm curious to know. Macs have a lot of quirks. I don't use Spaces because it sucks hard with quirks, so I'm not going to argue with you about the possibility of quirks. In fact, if I could reproduce what you are saying, I'd have fun demonstrating the behavior to my friend who thinks that macs are "just toys". Never mind that my mac mini (aka "The Doorstop") can run circles around his AMD fedora box.

      But now that you have copped a defensive attitude, I'm wondering if you aren't just making this stuff up. I actually believed you for a while there. Then I realized that you don't alt-tab through apps in OS X, you command-tab through them--bullshit flag #1. Also, the behavior you mention is reminiscent of something I've observed in windows, where you can minimize a window and not get it back easily. The application just sits in the task bar but has no windows--you can't even "maximize" them into existence. Bullshit flag #2. Also a google for Traffic Office manager os x yields no identifiable results. Bigtime bullshit flag #3. Yup, only *now* that I've had time to contemplate it, I know you are bullshitting. Good try.

      The question is whether you think your trollish bullshit is actually amusing, because if there were a plonk file for slashdot, I'd put you right in it.

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
    19. Re:Strange Complaints by Malekin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "On some Apple made apps closing the main windows does not close the app, on others (still made by apple) it does."

      Right, and there is a good reason for which one is which. Your point is?

      Could you please explain to me the good reasons? Mail, iTunes and iCal don't quit when you close their main window even though these are basically single-window applications. iPhoto, Disk Utility and Calculator do.

      Seriously, I'd like to know. I've been using Apple computers since before there was the Macintosh and the logic of it remains utterly opaque to me.

      Maybe you can then explain to me why when you click on the controls of an application in the background, three different things can happen: with iTunes the controls work but the application stays in the background; with Quicktime Player the controls work and the application pops to the front and with iCal the application pops to the front but doesn't register the action.

  2. The poor performance may get you down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But all that Mac gaming makes up for it.

  3. It is a good middle ground. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OS X is really a good middle ground between Windows and Linux. OS X supports many of the Windows Protocols (a lot better then linux in some ways) as well there is a better selection of high quality closed source applications, then linux has. However being Unix based it it is more stable then Windows and less prone to viruses and other malware. Then combined with virtualization you can run Linux OS X and Windows all at the same time for cross testing your code.

    It has a clean interface and performs well. You are not fussing with simple stuff. all in all it is good for development. (And the Apple keyboards have extended function keys that makes compatibility with old Vax systems much nicer too)

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  4. AFP not AFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    AFS is something else altogether.

  5. Re:innovative by PC+and+Sony+Fanboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    once again macs seem to be innovating, the dual gpu thing

    You mean the severely limited, non SLI-hydra-whatever GPU thing that requires a restart/logon-off cycle just to switch?

    That thing was actually released on a few toshiba laptops (and sony laptops?) long before el-jobso did his magic.

    Of course, the (software) inflexibility of that configuration is actually a feature, according to apple. So, I digress.

  6. Now if only Apple would update their documentation by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Informative

    recently got into Cocoa programming and for the most part absolutely love it, Apple has obviously put a lot of effort into their system and it shows. However, Apple seemingly skimped on one of the most important, but usually easiest to implement parts of their system: good, up to date documentation!

    For instance, in the QTKit documentation is just beyond abysmal. There is little documentation on how to do very common things, such as set your export settings. I had to do a lot of hackery just to figure that one out(and its still far from straightforward), they have typos that have been there for eons, even though I used their feedback form to tell them about it, and perhaps worst of all, they don't even mention many methods that are in the API.

    On multiple occasions I have had to go into the header files just to find out what I could do with various classes. I shouldn't have to do this! Compare this experience with say, Javadocs and its night and day. While Javadocs are far from perfect, they are infinitely better than what Apple puts out.

    Why would Apple do something like this? It costs them almost nothing to create a lot of these docs, and actually updating them once in a while could save developers tons of frustration. I guess maybe the paid ADC accounts are bit better? Thats really a low blow if they are though....

    Furthermore, Apple tends to deprecate APIs without really replacing them with an API with the same functionality. Case in point is QTKit. Its a nice API for what its worth, but there are tons of occasions you either:

    a) have to go down to the old Quicktime C APIs(which means your code won't be able to compile in 64 bit and may not work at all on Snow Leopard) or
    b) Have to come up with some creative hacks to get the functionality you want.

    For instance, in order to get an MPEG-4 formatted to anything but the default size you either have to use an atom container which is 32 bit only, or manually set up a Quicktime export with the settings you want, write some applescript to save that to a file, THEN read that file in as NSData THEN set that to be your export settings(which on Apple's website has the oh so helpful documentation:"Information to come."(That was over a year ago).

  7. Apple needs a mini tower not a over priced mini la by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple needs a mini tower not a over priced mini laptop with out a screen in a small box.

    The mac pro is nice but $2300 and only a $30-$50 video card?

    AIO also are not that good.

    Where is the mini tower that can do dual display?

  8. Hard to take someone seriously... by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ...when they refer to Apple Filing Protocol as "AFS", and it shows that Infoworld has idiot editors. There's nothing except an anonymous programmer's opinion to back up the claims made.

    AFP is not strange, twisted, or any sort of barrier for programmers. Over the years, I have found AFP performance (to netatalk) out of the box trounces Samba by almost a 1:2 margin on raw file transfer speed, and 10:1 on directory-intensive operations. It supports international character sets without fuss, and folder/file name restrictions are downright amazing compared to the shit that is SMB/CIFS.

    Don't like AFP? Fine. Use SMB (and yes, you can turn off the "annoying dot files".) Or NFSv4. Or SSHFS with MacFusion, making any Unix box you've got a file server with the installation of one package. There are installers for AFS and (I may have this wrong) Coda.

  9. Nice platform, but... by Daimaou · · Score: 5, Informative

    I really like developing on my Apple machine for the most part, but it has a few issues that make it less appealing to me than Linux.

    Currently, most of the development I'm doing is using Django and PostgreSQL. Installing PostgreSQL and the required Python libraries on OS X is tremendously painful. It was painful on Tiger and Leopard has made it more so. Macports tries to make it easier, but it could use a lot of work/testing/more work.

    Installing the same tools on Linux is so easy, a Windows user could do it.

    1. Re:Nice platform, but... by spinkham · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is one of the major issues that keeps me on Linux.
      Despite the fact you can get almost anything to run on OS X eventually, for most software it's much much harder to get up to date software versions then "apt-get install fizzbuzz" on Ubuntu or debian testing.

      For my needs, Ubuntu is much closer to the "just works" ideal then OS X.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
  10. Re:Andrew File System??? by joe_bruin · · Score: 5, Informative

    The author is a moron. He meant AFP, Apple File Protocol. Macs do not support AFS out of the box.

  11. ok. I'm one... by nblender · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Why? All the reasons you've heard before... I like it when stuff 'just works'. I develop embedded systems. I write device drivers and other kernel code for various open sores operating systems. That means I spend lots of my time in terminal windows, pouring over datasheets, staring at PCI analyzer output, etc... I have a number of monitors, at least one is in horizontal mode (for mail, web, pdfs, etc) and the other in vertical mode (for editor windows). I can just as easily work on my macbook at a customer site, plugged into one of their extra monitors. When I'm done there, I can close the lid, go to another customer site, or into a meeting room, open the lid and have my desktop automatically resize. I can then plug into a projector to review some code, and have my desktop automatically resize again without restarting xorg...

    I have linux boxes at home, I have *BSD boxes at home, I have colocated *BSD boxes around the world for other personal endeavors. I have a fairly extensive MythTV/Zoneminder network at home as well. So I'm not your average Mac weenie... To me, the mac is just a decent portal to all the other Unixy boxes I maintain. I've tried using a Linux desktop on a day to day basis and I've found it just too painful... Ever try getting a bluetooth keyboard working on Ubuntu? It doesn't "just work"; or at least not 6 months ago. It might now... But that's my point... Linux is always improving, but it never does everything I want, when I want it... And yes, I know, "patches welcome"... I contribute plenty to open-source. I can contribute more in my area of specialty and I can do it better sitting in front of a Mac. When I want to relax and watch TV, I don't want to have to hack MythTV to do it. I just want to plunk my fat ass on the couch and be entertained.

  12. Re:MacOSX has awful Java support by mario_grgic · · Score: 4, Informative

    Java 1.6 for OS X, has been available for months now. And JDK 1.7 will not be out in a few months either.

    --
    As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
  13. Re:Apple needs a mini tower not a over priced mini by sa666_666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You may 'sigh' yet again, but the reason this keeps popping up is because it's a valid criticism that hasn't yet been addressed. Perhaps it's true that Apple wouldn't make as much money in that particular market; most people don't care! They just want a certain product at a certain price point, and Apple isn't delivering it. Sigh'ing that someone else is complaining about this oversight won't make the problem go away. Apple systems in general are either too underpowered or too expensive. There's no middle ground, and they're losing a lot of business because of it.

  14. Xcode, UNIX 03, Cocoa by jrothwell97 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    These are the three reasons why I enjoy developing on the Mac:

    1. Xcode: it's a complete IDE which is simple to learn, not fiddly, and Interface Builder etc makes it possible to quickly create the UI and front faÃade, and then get on, quickly, to writing the guts of the program. It also supports distcc and (to some extent) SCM.
    2. UNIX 03 compatible: it's relatively easy to port CLI apps to other systems. True, that's true of most *nixes, but it's further simplified on OS X.
    3. Cocoa: I actually like Cocoa. I just find it to be a very good API: maybe that's just a matter of taste.
    --
    Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
  15. Re:So, what would you pick? by egomaniac · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ummm... you realize you can format HFS+ case sensitive, right?

    --
    ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
  16. Re:innovative by chaim79 · · Score: 4, Informative

    From what I understand reading the background of that functionality, the NVidia drivers for mac are a big part of the problem, so they are doing it now as logout feature, after NVidia gets the mac drivers sorted out it will be able to support switching right away.

    --
    DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
    AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
    Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
  17. Re:maybe in USA by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 4, Funny

    Not to be a jackass, but outside of the USA, "people walking on the moon" is also a niche market.

    What happens here technologically, propagates to the rest of the world in its due time.

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.