Well the reason for that is that the average aussie doesn't know or care about politics, but mandatory voting exists here. So, every election they get out their crayons to draw penises on the ballot, or flip a coin to decide who to vote for.
There are perhaps 1-2% who care enough to decide properly, hence most aussie elections go down to the wire 49-50 between labor and liberal.
Time machine works fine. I've migrated machines with it, re-installed and restored from it, and retrieved old copies of files from months ago from it.
Time machine is one of THE features of OS X that linux peeps should be copying the shit out of, rather than trying to do some cheap rip off of Aqua as the next UI flavour of the month.
... even at the reduced price, why in the world would I buy one of these over a mac mini? Oh wow, 16gb of RAM! That's worth all of about 150 bucks these days.
I presumed he meant support for connecting TO the machine, not from it. Putty is a free, 1meg download that is just as good as any unix version of SSH. Any other OS has similar ssh clients available. Pretty sure you can even ssh from an ipad.
Pretty similar to me then. I started with slackware 3.1 in 1996. Tried pretty much all the distributions, ran FreeBSD for a while as well (still do on servers). Ran Debian+Solaris 2.5/2.6 extensively in an ISP (squid proxy cache, sendmail relay, pop3, imap, radius services) between 1997-2001. Have run FreeBSD for similar purposes, plus PPTP, ipsec tunnels, content filtering, etc since 2003 in a mining company).
Bought a Mac Mini in 2009 to sate my curiosity regarding OS X, liked it, upgraded to a Macbook Pro in August last year.
Agreed, there are trivial things I don't like, but the trade-off is worth it, by a long shot - there's a lot less about the machine/OS that pisses me off than there is with my previous PCs running Linux or FreeBSD in a desktop situation. And there is a lot to like - automator/applescript, folder actions, time machine, etc.
Those who claim OS X is for noobs and useless for doing anything serious clearly have never used or become proficient with it.
The lack of a cohesive development framework is a major cause of the problems with Linux on the desktop. Every X months all your apps change because new version of GTK/KDE/QT or whatever comes out, breaks backwards compatibility and all the apps need to be updated or replaced. Different apps use different UI toolkits and don't talk to one another properly.
On Windows and OS X, every application is (a) bloated because they have to ship all the dependencies and (b) has to either run some stupid auto-updater or be manually updated to get security fixes.
Actually no, both Windows and OS X have shared libraries, and they are used. If you write an app for say, OS X 10.7, you KNOW that the set of libraries for 01.7 are instaled and available. Every game patch doesn't updated DirectX on Windows, and Quartz isn't updated by applications on OS X, either, just as one random example. The rate of change is far lower, and when change does happen, backwards compatibility is generally maintained for a reasonable period of time. If you'd used either operating system at any level of competency for a reasonable period of time, you'd know this already.
Running Linux applications on Windows? Wouldn't that be the worst of both worlds? I just run a mac, it runs everything I want and the hardware is nice...
I haven't been paying attention to Mac in a good long while, but isn't OS-X based on a BSD kernel, still? I thought it was just a pretty interface sitting on a real kernel?
Its sitting on its own unix kernel (XNU), running FreeBSD userland tools, plus the OS X layer.
However, and this is what a lot of casual observers don't seem to get: OS X is more than the aqua GUI. The GUI is imho the least impressive part. It works, but i don't particularly like it. The major benefit of OS X in my opinion is the deep rooted application of object oriented design throughout the OS. Objects can "observe" other objects and thus be notified on status change. Hence (for example), finder windows update automatically - they're not polling the window contents, they're told to update when a folder changes. Settings apply automatically. User interfaces are standardized, and applications can talk to each other Objective-C has some amazing programming techniques available to extend other people's classes after compile time, so you build on other people's work in a far more effective manner. The end result is better, more consistent applications, as less time is spent reinventing the wheel or attempting to talk to other applications in a non-standardized, inconsistent manner.
And this is in my opinion why Gnome is failing so hard lately - they're trying to copy the superficial OS X UI fluff, without getting the foundations right first. As a result, you're left with a poor UI ripoff of OS X without the lower level object re-use and associated gain in developer productivity.
Don't let aqua (the frosting on the cake) fool you - it may look like OS X is for kids, or less technical users, but there is an extremely powerful platform underneath. If you haven't used it for any real period of time (like, a few weeks or more - enough time to "click" to the mac way of thinking/doing things) you won't see it.
It also means you can't take advantage of security updates to the system's installed shared libraries and need to distribute them yourself. For the end user to re-download for every application that uses them. or you statically link, and they're included in your program's executable, making it bloated. or you just don't bother, and develop for less insane platforms.
Switching to Linux is a lot of work. It's work that pays off immensely, but it's still a lot of work.
Sometimes it pays off. Having been a Linux user since 1996, I decided that the trouble wasn't worth losing access to applications that I want to run - mostly Audio and Video processing related.
hardware support - the subset of hardware supported is limited to apple hardware, but on said hardware it works, and works extremely well
hardware abstraction - apple went through a transition from ppc to x86 without an issue because they have a layer of abstraction
forward looking design, and people working on the non-sexy/hard stuff. display PDF, quartz, core foundation...
development tools that don't suck. Objective-C is different, but it is good. The enforcement of MVC promotes code-reuse from the beginning, and app development is easy and (fear) reasonably fun
Apple doesn't change the colour of the bicycle shed every 6 months, and the UI has remained consitent. the APIs for software development have remained consistent.
the hardware dongle(s) - mac hardware is nice. most apple hardware in general is nice. apple hardware runs OS X
Slashdot Mirror
For the humor impaired: that was intended to be funny, not scientifically accurate.
Well the reason for that is that the average aussie doesn't know or care about politics, but mandatory voting exists here. So, every election they get out their crayons to draw penises on the ballot, or flip a coin to decide who to vote for.
There are perhaps 1-2% who care enough to decide properly, hence most aussie elections go down to the wire 49-50 between labor and liberal.
I say that as someone who lives here :D
Neither of which are bundled with the OS.
Except it kinda doesn't work anywhere near as well, and doesn't automatically snapshot to a different location.
Time machine works fine. I've migrated machines with it, re-installed and restored from it, and retrieved old copies of files from months ago from it.
Time machine is one of THE features of OS X that linux peeps should be copying the shit out of, rather than trying to do some cheap rip off of Aqua as the next UI flavour of the month.
... plus raid.
It has logic gates, so yes.
Ahaha. So true. Any time apple is mentioned, jeddiah is there to have a whinge. :)
Actually, no one has really put out anything that works as well as the macbook air for similar price yet.
No, the high quality hardware is on the OUTSIDE. You know, the stuff you touch, look at and listen to all day. It makes a difference.
... even at the reduced price, why in the world would I buy one of these over a mac mini? Oh wow, 16gb of RAM! That's worth all of about 150 bucks these days.
I presumed he meant support for connecting TO the machine, not from it. Putty is a free, 1meg download that is just as good as any unix version of SSH. Any other OS has similar ssh clients available. Pretty sure you can even ssh from an ipad.
Pretty similar to me then. I started with slackware 3.1 in 1996. Tried pretty much all the distributions, ran FreeBSD for a while as well (still do on servers). Ran Debian+Solaris 2.5/2.6 extensively in an ISP (squid proxy cache, sendmail relay, pop3, imap, radius services) between 1997-2001. Have run FreeBSD for similar purposes, plus PPTP, ipsec tunnels, content filtering, etc since 2003 in a mining company).
Bought a Mac Mini in 2009 to sate my curiosity regarding OS X, liked it, upgraded to a Macbook Pro in August last year.
Agreed, there are trivial things I don't like, but the trade-off is worth it, by a long shot - there's a lot less about the machine/OS that pisses me off than there is with my previous PCs running Linux or FreeBSD in a desktop situation. And there is a lot to like - automator/applescript, folder actions, time machine, etc.
Those who claim OS X is for noobs and useless for doing anything serious clearly have never used or become proficient with it.
The lack of a cohesive development framework is a major cause of the problems with Linux on the desktop. Every X months all your apps change because new version of GTK/KDE/QT or whatever comes out, breaks backwards compatibility and all the apps need to be updated or replaced. Different apps use different UI toolkits and don't talk to one another properly.
Actually no, both Windows and OS X have shared libraries, and they are used. If you write an app for say, OS X 10.7, you KNOW that the set of libraries for 01.7 are instaled and available. Every game patch doesn't updated DirectX on Windows, and Quartz isn't updated by applications on OS X, either, just as one random example. The rate of change is far lower, and when change does happen, backwards compatibility is generally maintained for a reasonable period of time. If you'd used either operating system at any level of competency for a reasonable period of time, you'd know this already.
Running Linux applications on Windows? Wouldn't that be the worst of both worlds? I just run a mac, it runs everything I want and the hardware is nice...
Well, actually it is. The reason driver support sucks on Linux is because there's no reliable ABI.
Its sitting on its own unix kernel (XNU), running FreeBSD userland tools, plus the OS X layer.
However, and this is what a lot of casual observers don't seem to get: OS X is more than the aqua GUI. The GUI is imho the least impressive part. It works, but i don't particularly like it. The major benefit of OS X in my opinion is the deep rooted application of object oriented design throughout the OS. Objects can "observe" other objects and thus be notified on status change. Hence (for example), finder windows update automatically - they're not polling the window contents, they're told to update when a folder changes. Settings apply automatically. User interfaces are standardized, and applications can talk to each other Objective-C has some amazing programming techniques available to extend other people's classes after compile time, so you build on other people's work in a far more effective manner. The end result is better, more consistent applications, as less time is spent reinventing the wheel or attempting to talk to other applications in a non-standardized, inconsistent manner.
And this is in my opinion why Gnome is failing so hard lately - they're trying to copy the superficial OS X UI fluff, without getting the foundations right first. As a result, you're left with a poor UI ripoff of OS X without the lower level object re-use and associated gain in developer productivity.
Don't let aqua (the frosting on the cake) fool you - it may look like OS X is for kids, or less technical users, but there is an extremely powerful platform underneath. If you haven't used it for any real period of time (like, a few weeks or more - enough time to "click" to the mac way of thinking/doing things) you won't see it.
It doesn't. Headless apps are awesome.
It also means you can't take advantage of security updates to the system's installed shared libraries and need to distribute them yourself. For the end user to re-download for every application that uses them. or you statically link, and they're included in your program's executable, making it bloated. or you just don't bother, and develop for less insane platforms.
Sometimes it pays off. Having been a Linux user since 1996, I decided that the trouble wasn't worth losing access to applications that I want to run - mostly Audio and Video processing related.
I'll give you some reasons
Not quite. Its Mach with a XNU/unix userpace layer with FreeBSD tools and a GUI on top.
lol. again, "i disagree" = mod down. if you disagree, how about refuting my points :)
ahahaha :D