Unix has been around for 30 yrs+...
UNIX is a "modern" OS... for microcomputers... a market where they previously had to cut-back functionality and power in order to run on comparatively anemic RAM/CPU for the single-user, single-tasking consumer market: e.g. DOS/Win3.1/Win9X/Classic MacOS/WinNT.
"The difference is this: the P.C. platform is supposedly an "open" standard, yet Microsoft has used its market position (abused its monopoly) to drive every other proprietary vendor (DR/OS-2/BeOS/Novell) out of the market."
And Apple tried to take what was open hardware and made it into a Mac locking all others out they were just less sucessful.
B.S. the Macintosh has never been an open standard, you may be thinking of when Apple liscensed the Mac motherboard to other companies for a fee. There is a big difference.
"If Microsoft designed and sold its own proprietary x86-based P.C.'s, no one could tell them to put anything but Windows on it."
BS. As a monopoly they would still be hurting the PC market because Windows is the defacto standard OS. Finally unless harm is shown AND parties show said harm, the antitrust process does not begin.
I have shown you how the Mac has never been an open standard -- but you cannot show me that the P.C. is a closed standard! Yet somehow you think M$ has the right to force OEM's to drop all competing OS's (read: "choices for the consumer") or pay inflated Windows liscensing fees. This is what is known as an "uncompetative practice" and is illegal for a monopoly to do in an "open" market.
To make things abundantly clear for you... so there's abolutely no misinterpretation: Apple = closed proprietary OS on closed proprietary hardware. M$ = closed proprietary OS on an open hardware standard. If tells it's own factory to put only MacOS on Macs... it's legal because Apple owns the whole method of production straight-up. But... if Microsoft tells Dell, Gateway, HP/Compaq, etc. to put only Windows on their computers (with higher liscensing fees for non-compliance), this is illegal... because Microsoft DOES NOT "own" Dell, Gateway, HP/Compaq, and Microsoft's competitors should have equal access to a purportedly "open" standard/market.
Most proprietary OS's on proprietary boxen are still around and making money. By comparison, most proprietary OS's on OPEN PC boxen are dead... killed by M$ anti-competative liscensing schemes. Get a clue.
So that's $649 difference. I'd personally not get myself the LCD, and spend $150 on a decent 17" CRT. The Athlon system also has a faster processor, and faster RAM.
Hey! I have an idea! Why don't you buy 1Gb of RAM from Apple and jack up the cost a 2 or 3 hundred dollars? </jackass mode> Seriously, you are leaving a lot of stuff off your P.C.(relative to the Mac):
OS, Windows $100, Linux $50
Firewire (IEEE 1394) card,
ethernet card,
sound card,
equivalent software "sweeteners,"
Expensive fans (for the hot hot hot Athlon)
power cord, etc.
I'm sure the real difference is more like a couple of hundred bucks... if that. Keep pinchin' those pennies though, you will need them for your next upgrade in 2 years.
I will undoubtedly be flamed for it, but I fail to see how Apple isn't a monopoly on Apple hardware. If a 3rd party developer writes exclusively for Mac platform, and Apple comes out with a bundled, "free" version of the same app, how would that not put the competitor out of business?
Funny you should ask that, because Apple's last browser (yes they wrote one) was called CyberDog and was included with System 8... Opera, iCab, Omniweb, Netscape and yes, even poooor ole Microsoft Internet Explorer managed to survive! Who wouldah thunk it?
They have a monopoly on hardware that'll run any Mac OS. "But that's where Apple makes all it's money!" Then they shoulda gone for a business plan that wasn't bullshit. Not my problem.
Kind of like Ford has a monopoly on cars that are made by Ford. Or perhaps the Sun "monopoly" on Sun boxen? Or the HP monopoly on HP RISC servers? Or perhaps the IBM monopoly on AIX boxen? Gee... you're right... every one of these companies has a MONOPOLY ON THEIR OWN PRODUCT!
The difference is this: the P.C. platform is supposedly an "open" standard, yet Microsoft has used its market position (abused its monopoly) to drive every other proprietary vendor (DR/OS-2/BeOS/Novell) out of the market. If Microsoft designed and sold its own proprietary x86-based P.C.'s, no one could tell them to put anything but Windows on it. As it stands, they tell the large OEM's whether or not they can put Linux (or anything else) on any of their product by jacking up Windows liscenses on the the rest of their sales.
Hope this helps, as you appear to be fact-understanding-challenged.
All of the reasons that keep being presented for Apple's locking of its OS to one proprietary hardware platform really just fall flat
Almost all the proprietary OS's on proprietary RISC boxen are still around and still making money. Almost all the proprietary OS's on "cheap" x86 boxen have been destroyed by M$. Linux does not count, because it is not proprietary. 'Nuff said.
Wrong. Apple can merge DRM into the Darwin core and their hardware. You'll be powerless to stop it, because modifying the kernel automatically invalidates your rights to do *anything* with software running on it in the realm of DRM-restricted software or content. And since you're locked into one hardware vendor (and Apple has, in the past, gone after alternative 68k/PPC manufacturers who produced MacOS-compatible hardware), there's no way out if Jobs gets a knock at the door from the Content Cartel.
I find it highly amusing that it seems more people are more afraid of what Apple might do to screw its customers than they are of what Microsoft is doing to screw its customers. Especially considering their relative track-records in this category.
Better to have a good Macintosh and just buy one of those "cheap" P.C.'s and intall Linux when "the unthinkable" happens than to buy a P.C. and deal with the daily virus/DRM/beta-test-of-copied-Apple-features soap-opera that is Windows.
Funny how the program manages to remember my other personal settings like my library, and my skin preferences, but GOD forbid I go from 7.0 to 7.01 and expect it to remember that I had turned off DRM
Microsoft: "Oh look! You forgot to put on those wonderful little digital shackles I worked so hard to "innovate" for you! Here... let me just help you on with them! There! Don't you look like a good little consumer now!"
"Where do you want to go today?" -- question asked by the digital cabbie who owns the taxi that you're only renting...
There are many reasons why I use mozilla, but security isn't one of them.
You obviously haven't heard "the browser is part of the operating system!"(tm) with Internet Explorer... if that isn't a bigger security-risk... I don't know what is.
In a recent poll of the denizens of Hell [a wholly-owned subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation], researchers have found that 1) "Hell isn't so bad if you don't move around and do much," 2) "Hell is only hot because there are so many clueless users here!" and last but not least: 3) "Hell is getting much cooler now with Hell XP!"
So its kinda hard to compare both of those situations to Windows users who have been running Windows 95 since October 1994 (and have literally installed/uninstalled/deleted/fixed/patched hundreds of times).
You're right about Mac OS X and at least partially right about Linux, so the best comparison is to Mac OS 7/8/9 (Classic MacOS)... which have been out for years, and for certain doesn't require a full-reinstall... even when upgrading to a new system.
It refers to a Windows installation, but as the author writes, 'But there will shortly be ports to Linux, Mac OS X, and other Unices; we are confident these OSes are just as prone.'"
I wonder what is the source of this "confidence"... I have never seen Linux or Mac OS X make that steady march toward instability that ultimately ends in the kind of reformat and total re-install that you see on Windows every year or two.
I beg to differ... they apparently do care if I eat at their restaurant or not... they're now serving tacos and chicken sandwiches and stuff. Kind of like how Microsoft started bringing in more Mac-like functionality with Windows.
There was no such phrase as "plug-n-play" in the Macintosh market because that's just how the computer and its peripherals work. With Windows, that behavior is such a big deal, it gets a phrase and a huge marketing-push in the release of Windows 95. I'm sure Microsoft will be making like they invented digital video editing/authoring in another couple of years. Meanwhile I have it first (and better) right now... on the Macintosh... just like it has been done for years now.
Releasing OSX for x86 would most certainly kill Apple's hardware business. However, if they could convince Dell to sell Dell branded Apple machines, they'd gain a ton of marketshare.
Wrong. Microsoft fixes it so the most popular OEM's can't afford to sell anything besides Windows boxen. They raise prices ever so much when "the competition" has a chunk of a big OEM's production and thereby cut into those razor-thin margins the big guys live off of.
If it were really so EASY to a bring superior OS to the general P.C.-using public, you wouldn't have Sun, H.P., Apple, et al designing and selling their own computers (and sometimes microprocessors) to get around being choked off by Microsoft.
That's one way of looking at it. Another is that Apple should be kissing Microsofts ass for keeping them alive this long. If MS hadn't invested in Apple when it did, there would be no Apple today.
If Apple hadn't let Microsoft copy it's OS for Windows 95 and its MacWrite program for WSYWIG Word, where would Microsoft be? Still selling and upgrading some doof's x86 hobbyist DOS.
If you use VLC to read.avi's and sundry.mpg's, don't upgrade to QT6! Especially if you are on a G3! QT6 hoses this program so badly it will only just barely work in "Thousands" color-mode on a G4. It is useless on a G3.
You have been warned.
10.2 is not to 10.1 as Windows 98 is to Windows 95. Instead, it's analogous to a "Service Pack" in Windows... and don't kid yourself... there are many service-pack updates in the Windows world.
Hmmm...
I am a fan of Charlotte Church, and I can either pay $16.88 for her CD or I can get the DVD of the same music for $19.99. The CD has no "extras" on it or interviews, or video, or extra tracks for home-theater multi-channel.
This choice is a real toughie!
Slashdot Mirror
Unix has been around for 30 yrs+... UNIX is a "modern" OS... for microcomputers... a market where they previously had to cut-back functionality and power in order to run on comparatively anemic RAM/CPU for the single-user, single-tasking consumer market: e.g. DOS/Win3.1/Win9X/Classic MacOS/WinNT.
To make things abundantly clear for you... so there's abolutely no misinterpretation: Apple = closed proprietary OS on closed proprietary hardware. M$ = closed proprietary OS on an open hardware standard. If tells it's own factory to put only MacOS on Macs... it's legal because Apple owns the whole method of production straight-up. But... if Microsoft tells Dell, Gateway, HP/Compaq, etc. to put only Windows on their computers (with higher liscensing fees for non-compliance), this is illegal... because Microsoft DOES NOT "own" Dell, Gateway, HP/Compaq, and Microsoft's competitors should have equal access to a purportedly "open" standard/market.
Most proprietary OS's on proprietary boxen are still around and making money. By comparison, most proprietary OS's on OPEN PC boxen are dead... killed by M$ anti-competative liscensing schemes. Get a clue.
Hey! I have an idea! Why don't you buy 1Gb of RAM from Apple and jack up the cost a 2 or 3 hundred dollars? </jackass mode> Seriously, you are leaving a lot of stuff off your P.C.(relative to the Mac):
- OS, Windows $100, Linux $50
- Firewire (IEEE 1394) card,
- ethernet card,
- sound card,
- equivalent software "sweeteners,"
- Expensive fans (for the hot hot hot Athlon)
- power cord, etc.
I'm sure the real difference is more like a couple of hundred bucks... if that. Keep pinchin' those pennies though, you will need them for your next upgrade in 2 years.Funny you should ask that, because Apple's last browser (yes they wrote one) was called CyberDog and was included with System 8... Opera, iCab, Omniweb, Netscape and yes, even poooor ole Microsoft Internet Explorer managed to survive! Who wouldah thunk it?
Kind of like Ford has a monopoly on cars that are made by Ford. Or perhaps the Sun "monopoly" on Sun boxen? Or the HP monopoly on HP RISC servers? Or perhaps the IBM monopoly on AIX boxen? Gee... you're right... every one of these companies has a MONOPOLY ON THEIR OWN PRODUCT!
The difference is this: the P.C. platform is supposedly an "open" standard, yet Microsoft has used its market position (abused its monopoly) to drive every other proprietary vendor (DR/OS-2/BeOS/Novell) out of the market. If Microsoft designed and sold its own proprietary x86-based P.C.'s, no one could tell them to put anything but Windows on it. As it stands, they tell the large OEM's whether or not they can put Linux (or anything else) on any of their product by jacking up Windows liscenses on the the rest of their sales.
Hope this helps, as you appear to be fact-understanding-challenged.
All of the reasons that keep being presented for Apple's locking of its OS to one proprietary hardware platform really just fall flat
Almost all the proprietary OS's on proprietary RISC boxen are still around and still making money. Almost all the proprietary OS's on "cheap" x86 boxen have been destroyed by M$. Linux does not count, because it is not proprietary. 'Nuff said.
Better to have a good Macintosh and just buy one of those "cheap" P.C.'s and intall Linux when "the unthinkable" happens than to buy a P.C. and deal with the daily virus/DRM/beta-test-of-copied-Apple-features soap-opera that is Windows.
"Where do you want to go today?" -- question asked by the digital cabbie who owns the taxi that you're only renting...
A-men!
Where do you download "Navzilla" theme?
I'll make it easy for the infidels:
;c)
Some Mozilla Themes
This link will take the netizen to a "completely infexible" theme-installer for Mozilla! </sarcasm>
That's why I'm happy to use it on my Macintosh!
Die By the DoS It's RIAA against the world now... backed up by a U.S. law... wonder who's goint to "win?"
In a recent poll of the denizens of Hell [a wholly-owned subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation], researchers have found that 1) "Hell isn't so bad if you don't move around and do much," 2) "Hell is only hot because there are so many clueless users here!" and last but not least: 3) "Hell is getting much cooler now with Hell XP!"
So its kinda hard to compare both of those situations to Windows users who have been running Windows 95 since October 1994 (and have literally installed/uninstalled/deleted/fixed/patched hundreds of times).
You're right about Mac OS X and at least partially right about Linux, so the best comparison is to Mac OS 7/8/9 (Classic MacOS)... which have been out for years, and for certain doesn't require a full-reinstall... even when upgrading to a new system.
It refers to a Windows installation, but as the author writes, 'But there will shortly be ports to Linux, Mac OS X, and other Unices; we are confident these OSes are just as prone.'" I wonder what is the source of this "confidence"... I have never seen Linux or Mac OS X make that steady march toward instability that ultimately ends in the kind of reformat and total re-install that you see on Windows every year or two.
I beg to differ... they apparently do care if I eat at their restaurant or not... they're now serving tacos and chicken sandwiches and stuff. Kind of like how Microsoft started bringing in more Mac-like functionality with Windows.
There was no such phrase as "plug-n-play" in the Macintosh market because that's just how the computer and its peripherals work. With Windows, that behavior is such a big deal, it gets a phrase and a huge marketing-push in the release of Windows 95. I'm sure Microsoft will be making like they invented digital video editing/authoring in another couple of years. Meanwhile I have it first (and better) right now... on the Macintosh... just like it has been done for years now.
But even with all of that, Microsoft still has the lion's share of the market.
And McDonald's has the lion's share of the hamburger market. Still doesn't mean I'm going to eat one.
If you use VLC to read .avi's and sundry .mpg's, don't upgrade to QT6! Especially if you are on a G3! QT6 hoses this program so badly it will only just barely work in "Thousands" color-mode on a G4. It is useless on a G3.
You have been warned.
10.2 is not to 10.1 as Windows 98 is to Windows 95. Instead, it's analogous to a "Service Pack" in Windows... and don't kid yourself... there are many service-pack updates in the Windows world.
Hmmm... I am a fan of Charlotte Church, and I can either pay $16.88 for her CD or I can get the DVD of the same music for $19.99. The CD has no "extras" on it or interviews, or video, or extra tracks for home-theater multi-channel. This choice is a real toughie!