--- I might choose to use the word "misinformed" instead of "ignorent". If only to avoid the hostile tone of someone that may occasionally make a mistake. ---
I agree that avoiding a hostile tone is a good thing, but...
'Misinformed' is not knowing the statistic. 'Ignorant' is repeating a highly questionable statistic in a public forum as if it were fact.
Of course, that's assuming that this statistic isn't true - I find it pretty hard to believe though...
--- Instead I hear "Bitch, bitch, bitch". Do you have access to the source or not? What complaints do you have now? ---
It's called 'feedback'. On occasion, some developers are known to be responsive to it, rather than telling their userbase to fuck off or to code it themselves.
This isn't some obscure command line utility, this is Mozilla/Netscape which - I assume - is meant to be used extensively outside of the development community that created it. Since many developers can't develop user interfaces for shit (and the better ones will admit it), I'd hope that they'd be more receptive than you.
--- Are you doing anything to change things, or is it all complaints? ---
Guess what? Good companies spend a lot of time soliciting feedback from the public. The above statement makes the dubious assumption that my 'complaints' (for lack of a better term) aren't an attempt to 'change things'. I disagree, and hope that you're not as rude to your own userbase.
...Anyhow, would you rather respond to my actual points re: Mozilla's user interface, or are you going to attack me personally instead?
--- Yeah and an even more informed Mac user would actually spend some time making the native UI for Mozilla, instead of sniveling about how it's not supported. ---
Yep, imagine that. Someone who doesn't want to code every app he or she uses. Believe it or not, some of us have a Real Job (involving coding, ironically) or a life outside computing that we'd like to see once in a while.
Sorry, but not everyone lives in your little world. For some of us, coding a UI around a browser isn't an option. But do you, as a coder (although I'm not really convinced you are one) really prefer to code without any input from your userbase? If so, I'd hate to see the quality of any software you've written...
--- This is just plain stupid; if you have a page on your website which is viewable by the public then it is available for the public to download. ---
Hrm. How far do you want to extend this, though?
Couldn't it be said that someone launching a Denial Of Service attack by simply requesting documents at an extremely high rate of speed is 'viewing the documents' as expected?
I do think that the judge's excuse was a little suspect - if it were server resources alone, you'd think that this second company would be saving them load by diverting their customers (and advertising dollars) elsewhere.
I do agree that they don't deserve to win, though, by virtue of how they're stealing someone else's content. It's not always certain what kind of precedent this will set though...
--- And, if they were a little more informed they'd know they'd know about chrome! ---
...and the most informed of all will sneer derisively at the concept as chrome can never perfectly replicate the intricacies of an operating system's native widgets (look or feel), and as soon as the user decides to use a system-wide theming program such as Kaleidoscope (or the built in MacOS theming system) Mozilla looks awfully out of place.
Sorry, but Chrome is a poor excuse for native UI widgets. Even if you can match the look - not always possible - the behavior is usually pretty shoddy.
(And it's going to be even worse when MacOS X hits...)
--- For the longest time, I have been harassed by PC users, Linux advocates, and NT whiners. And now? Now I have a BSD-powered operating-system! Looks like it's my time to shine! ---
Dude, don't be an ass. You're giving the rest of us Mac users a bad name.
Everyone else:
We disown this guy, and claim no affiliation to him. If he shows up in our 'camp', it's only because he is tagging along. We'd much rather he went away.
--- I for one find it unfair to blame Janet Reno for all the enforcement excesses of the Clinton administration. ---
Are you serious? Any credible DOJ would have been looking into the Clinton administration long ago, and tossed it out on its ass. Chinese fundraising, Chinese espionage (notice a trend here?), plus all sorts of perjury.
And no, I'm not some right-winger. But consider this: it has been more of a coverup-specialist for the current administration than its supposed 'watchdog' function. At best, they've ignored blatant illegal acts - at worst, they've actively defended them.
As has been said, "the buck stops here". Any competant Attorney General should have spoken up or tossed the guilty parties out. She has been a puppet, basically, but deserved any blame thrown at her.
--- Are you honestly claiming that if you enter into a contract with someone to host your website, that it's entirely within their discretion to take your site offline? ---
Are you honestly claiming that they don't?
First, if it's in the contract that they have the sole right to take stuff down, it's a no-brainer. You read it and agreed to it by signing up.
The main issue is whether or not you get fair warning and/or a refund. If the content is specifically barred, I don't think the host should feel bad at all - the customer screwed up or ignored the rules. If the host decides after the fact, they should be fairly liberal about it and provide the hostee with some sort of recourse.
Personally, I'm all for web hosts being free on what they'll host. But if it's illegal or goes against the pre-defined rules in the terms of service, that's that.
Remember, though: a web host's policies do not necessarily have anything to do with the government they are under. A lot of people use lawyers to scare companies into taking stuff offline, but in the end they most likely didn't have a case (basically, Verio didn't really care about it - even a.5% chance of losing wasn't worth the slight profit they would make).
--- Is anyone else afraid that splitting MS up would results in three smaller, more nimble, more competitive, and more aggressive companies? ---
Isn't that the whole idea?
They'd have to work for their success, instead of having it handed to them on a platter...
--- Large corporations move more slowly than smaller ones, and the last thing we need is a faster, deadlier MS ---
If they actually make products deserving of success, they'll get it. This isn't about punishing the entire company, but rather making it where innovation (the real kind - not the Microsoft kind) is fostered. As much as I'd like to see MS spanked, forcing them to actually make decent products and letting others swallow them up if they don't is far more fulfilling in the long run...
(feel free to moderate 'offtopic', as this is, well, offtopic)
--- I see "piracy" as about as serious a threat to the fabric of commerce and society as speeding on the road. ---
FYI -
"In 1995, 644,000 people received minor injuries in speeding-related crashes. An additional 77,000 people received moderate injuries, and 42,000 received critical injuries in speeding-related crashes."
Apparently, there were 41,798 fatalities in total in the United States in that year.
--- The principle behind it is that artists should be able to make as much money as they want from their product, while everyone else should be forced to pay for it. ---
That's a particularly interesting interpretation of capitalism.
The idea isn't to force anything on anyone - you don't have to have most products, so nobody is forcing anything on anyone (unless you're an abusive monopoly, but that's not all that common).
Second, the consumer has some power as well (once again, unless there is an abusive monopoly involved). You can refuse to purchase a product, and if enough people agree with you, they are forced to lower their price or provide more. If it seems like you're being ripped off, it's either because you expect too much or the rest of the population is too complacent and won't stand its ground.
Either way, capitalism is a self regulating system (albeit with a few bugs).
--- Unfortunately, the principles of geekhood (which are typically not quite as capitalist) support freedom of information in the form of the GPL, copylefting, etc. ---
Speak for yourself. A lot of geeks view open-source in a purely pragmatic way, ie. that it contributes to overall stability, code reuse, and ease of integration - not to mention fun projects to hack on. Not everyone feels that it's a "freedom" issue at all, or that anyone has a right to certain code or information.
And believe it or not, there are lots of kinds of geeks. Some still thrive in the closed-source world, and may not agree with much of the Slashdot party line at all. These guys may not have wandered upon the wonders of the open-source world, but that doesn't stop them from cranking out killer (albeit closed-source) shareware on the weekends more for fun than profit.
[I'm not really disagreeing with you - I think the suit against Napster is retarded, they should instead go after the pirates themselves in they have a problem. I just get frustrated when people assume there is a single 'geek profile' when there really isn't...]
Apple will be providing it as an optional install, or a download from their site (basically, just like they did with ResEdit). I'm pretty sure this is public record.
Of course, as you said, if they don't then there will be a freeware/shareware/open-source terminal available within a day or two. I seriously doubt the 'new Apple' would keep people from mucking around if they want to (remember, they are mostly old NeXT people).
The issue has nothing to do with that. I'm defending the average Mac user, not the actual OS (I believe OSX can stand on its own, for both 'regular' people and techies alike). I just don't think it's right to blame someone because they're not as interested in poking around config files or compiling new kernels on a regular basis. For the vast majority of people out there, a computer is something to get work done, not a hobby.
Anyhow, you're right - the flaming is pretty old. Hopefully all the trolls have left to more recent articles.:>
Not my problem. Slashdot provides a field for your email address, I put it in. Slashdot provides a place for your web site, so I put it in. Slashdot provides a place to put a signature - as I don't have any particularly clever quotes, I put it in.
Here's an idea: don't click on it.
Anyhow, this is way off topic... Back to our reguarly scheduled flamefest...
--- Never forget that while you are here, reading Slashdot, you are shoulder to shoulder with thinkers, puzzle-lovers, and people who cannot leave a mystery unsolved. If you are only capable of seeing this love of knowledge as "arrogance," I can only conclude that you are the arrogant one. ---
Nope. I simply understand that 'we' (I hesitate to use the term inclusively as Slashdot is not some collective sharing a single mind) are not everyone, nor are we all that matters. The point is, I don't believe anyone should be calling someone names and looking at them derisively simply because they choose not to have to mess with the same stuff we do. Not everyone takes pleasure in extensive daily administrative tasks - and if they can be taken out of the picture, that'd be great for those people.
If you're the kind of person who likes to do stuff manually, that's fine. But don't speak for me, Slashdot, or the average person who simply wants to do their job.
Sorry you were offended, but I stand my my original statements.
--- People make fun of mac users because the macies rave on about how wonderful their system is... ---
That's a pretty gross generalization. Mac users tend to like their systems, but not all of them are complete zealots about it. Those who are the most annoying are generally swept under the rug when and if possible.
--- and this is the same system that goes down completely, or locks hard, if an application screws up, or if the system runs out of memory, or.... ---
Compared to Linux and NT, sure. Remember, MacOS X is supposed to fix all of this - and yet we still see flames coming from various people simply because the user isn't a computer expert. Even if OSX is rock-solid, some people feel threatened in that a given operating system doesn't need to be obscure to be powerful.
--- Happily, 'THe next revision should fix all that';-) But people DO have justification for their macuser humor. --
Humor? Maybe - But some people are particularly anal about it. Lots of inflammatory name-calling. It sucks, from both sides of the fence.
Remember, most Mac users are normal people - not idiots, and not zealots. They are professionals of one kind or another, and know what they like (generally for user interface purposes). Usually when someone rails against them, it's due to some sort of insecurity on their part (not you specifically, but...).
I wasn't aware there was a policy against that. Many peoples' sigs have links to their sites. It's not like I'm posting for the sole purpose of advertising, spamming, or anything like that...
Trust me, if I wanted to advertise my site somewhere, I'd find a place that didn't suck up nearly as much of my free time as Slashdot.:>
--- No. But by the same token, those people who want to screw around with the innards should not be prevented from doing so. ---
Of course not. And there have been plenty of Mac users who have screwed up their machines in the process of learning the voodoo that is ResEdit.
But in the end, there are different operating systems for different people. Some are better for those who don't want to poke around (MacOS), and some are better for those who do (Unix/Linux).
That's why MacOS X should be so interesting - can Apple pull off both, making an OS simultaneously intuitive and usable for the masses, while still giving tons of power to those who want to customize their experience? Maybe, it's hard to say. I have used recent developmental versions of OSX and yep, the shell and everything it entails is still there if you want it.
I have some issues with the new UI (Dock sucks, lack of Apple menu, etc) but it has some time for improvement. I can imagine Unix/BSD types swarming over it and making a pretty good high-end user environment, though...
Right, and there are similar things that you do on other systems (example, on the Mac: desktop rebuilds, zapping parameter RAM, throwing away old pref files, etc).
My point is two-fold:
1. Some people should be able to pass this on to others as needed without being called names. Do some people go to the Lube Stop? Sure - but their cars usually get taken care of. Sure they pay a little extra, but if the person doesn't want to do it, why should they be expected to? They pay a little extra for the convenience to have someone else do it, and to save time doing it themselves.
2. What if someone developed a car that didn't require oil changes, ran on solar power (so you never needed to get fuel), was incredibly solid, etc? By the attitudes of some here, this would be a bad thing. I'm not sure why, but I'm guessing it's a combination of job security and arrogance.
People shouldn't have to repair their computers any more than you should have to do their data entry. People each have their roles, and shouldn't ridicule someone if they don't have any interest in taking up someone else's.
Let me guess, you think it's a good thing if people had to spend 10 minutes poking under the hood messing with stuff just to start their cars, right?
Some people are more interested in getting work done than fucking around with machines that should be there to serve them instead. I personally have no problem screwing around with the innards of my OS, writing shell scripts, and so on. But should my mom be forced to? I certainly don't think so.
To call people names simply because they want to get work done - the original intent of computing technology - rather than make it a hobby is pretty arrogant.
(And yes, I've worked tech support in the past and have had a lot of laughs... But the people I supported, albeit without any real computing knowledge, were some of the smartest people I've ever known. Lack of computing knowledge has no bearing on someone's intellegence or lack thereof.)
First, and most obvious, there is still a very small market in the Unix world that has anything to do with higher end graphics. Sure, there are those who do some web graphics, etc. but I doubt there are many Unix/Linux boxen in the print publishing worlds or anything.
Second, while MacOS X is built on BSD, most developers will barely touch it. Carbon is more like programming on a cleaned up MacOS API, and Cocoa is still tied up in Mac specific APIs. Most Mac apps will behave as if there isn't a shell, and definately have nothing to do with the X Windowing System.
But, I'm willing to bet that it'll be a lot easier to port Unix apps over to the Mac, although they'll be "second class citizens" unless they adopt the Mac specific APIs (which is fine by me - most of the main stuff I want are console apps and utilities).
Slashdot Mirror
---
I might choose to use the word "misinformed" instead of "ignorent". If only to avoid the hostile tone of someone that may occasionally make a mistake.
---
I agree that avoiding a hostile tone is a good thing, but...
'Misinformed' is not knowing the statistic. 'Ignorant' is repeating a highly questionable statistic in a public forum as if it were fact.
Of course, that's assuming that this statistic isn't true - I find it pretty hard to believe though...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
I don't get that you're "sorry".
---
Really?
---
Instead I hear "Bitch, bitch, bitch". Do you have access to the source or not? What complaints do you have now?
---
It's called 'feedback'. On occasion, some developers are known to be responsive to it, rather than telling their userbase to fuck off or to code it themselves.
This isn't some obscure command line utility, this is Mozilla/Netscape which - I assume - is meant to be used extensively outside of the development community that created it. Since many developers can't develop user interfaces for shit (and the better ones will admit it), I'd hope that they'd be more receptive than you.
---
Are you doing anything to change things, or is it all complaints?
---
Guess what? Good companies spend a lot of time soliciting feedback from the public. The above statement makes the dubious assumption that my 'complaints' (for lack of a better term) aren't an attempt to 'change things'. I disagree, and hope that you're not as rude to your own userbase.
...Anyhow, would you rather respond to my actual points re: Mozilla's user interface, or are you going to attack me personally instead?
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
Yeah and an even more informed Mac user would actually spend some time making the native UI for Mozilla, instead of sniveling about how it's not supported.
---
Yep, imagine that. Someone who doesn't want to code every app he or she uses. Believe it or not, some of us have a Real Job (involving coding, ironically) or a life outside computing that we'd like to see once in a while.
Sorry, but not everyone lives in your little world. For some of us, coding a UI around a browser isn't an option. But do you, as a coder (although I'm not really convinced you are one) really prefer to code without any input from your userbase? If so, I'd hate to see the quality of any software you've written...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
This is just plain stupid; if you have a page on your website which is viewable by the public then it is available for the public to download.
---
Hrm. How far do you want to extend this, though?
Couldn't it be said that someone launching a Denial Of Service attack by simply requesting documents at an extremely high rate of speed is 'viewing the documents' as expected?
I do think that the judge's excuse was a little suspect - if it were server resources alone, you'd think that this second company would be saving them load by diverting their customers (and advertising dollars) elsewhere.
I do agree that they don't deserve to win, though, by virtue of how they're stealing someone else's content. It's not always certain what kind of precedent this will set though...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
And, if they were a little more informed they'd know they'd know about chrome!
---
...and the most informed of all will sneer derisively at the concept as chrome can never perfectly replicate the intricacies of an operating system's native widgets (look or feel), and as soon as the user decides to use a system-wide theming program such as Kaleidoscope (or the built in MacOS theming system) Mozilla looks awfully out of place.
Sorry, but Chrome is a poor excuse for native UI widgets. Even if you can match the look - not always possible - the behavior is usually pretty shoddy.
(And it's going to be even worse when MacOS X hits...)
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
For the longest time, I have been harassed by PC users, Linux advocates, and NT whiners. And now? Now I have a BSD-powered operating-system! Looks like it's my time to shine!
---
Dude, don't be an ass. You're giving the rest of us Mac users a bad name.
Everyone else:
We disown this guy, and claim no affiliation to him. If he shows up in our 'camp', it's only because he is tagging along. We'd much rather he went away.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Russia?
Is this list still in effect?
I'm kind of surprised that Russia is on there...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
I for one find it unfair to blame Janet Reno for all the enforcement excesses of the Clinton administration.
---
Are you serious? Any credible DOJ would have been looking into the Clinton administration long ago, and tossed it out on its ass. Chinese fundraising, Chinese espionage (notice a trend here?), plus all sorts of perjury.
And no, I'm not some right-winger. But consider this: it has been more of a coverup-specialist for the current administration than its supposed 'watchdog' function. At best, they've ignored blatant illegal acts - at worst, they've actively defended them.
As has been said, "the buck stops here". Any competant Attorney General should have spoken up or tossed the guilty parties out. She has been a puppet, basically, but deserved any blame thrown at her.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
Your comparison of children to women is quaint...when can we expect you to leave the 19th century?
---
Huh?
He was saying that adult women should be treated just like adult males, as well as 'adult' children over the age of 16.
How is this quaint? Wouldn't it be quaint if he said the opposite, ie. that women should be treated differently than men?
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
.5% chance of losing wasn't worth the slight profit they would make).
Are you honestly claiming that if you enter into a contract with someone to host your website, that it's entirely within their discretion to take your site offline?
---
Are you honestly claiming that they don't?
First, if it's in the contract that they have the sole right to take stuff down, it's a no-brainer. You read it and agreed to it by signing up.
The main issue is whether or not you get fair warning and/or a refund. If the content is specifically barred, I don't think the host should feel bad at all - the customer screwed up or ignored the rules. If the host decides after the fact, they should be fairly liberal about it and provide the hostee with some sort of recourse.
Personally, I'm all for web hosts being free on what they'll host. But if it's illegal or goes against the pre-defined rules in the terms of service, that's that.
Remember, though: a web host's policies do not necessarily have anything to do with the government they are under. A lot of people use lawyers to scare companies into taking stuff offline, but in the end they most likely didn't have a case (basically, Verio didn't really care about it - even a
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
Is anyone else afraid that splitting MS up would results in three smaller, more nimble, more competitive, and more aggressive companies?
---
Isn't that the whole idea?
They'd have to work for their success, instead of having it handed to them on a platter...
---
Large corporations move more slowly than smaller ones, and the last thing we need is a faster, deadlier MS
---
If they actually make products deserving of success, they'll get it. This isn't about punishing the entire company, but rather making it where innovation (the real kind - not the Microsoft kind) is fostered. As much as I'd like to see MS spanked, forcing them to actually make decent products and letting others swallow them up if they don't is far more fulfilling in the long run...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Okay then, what would you suggest instead?
Seems to me that they're doing the best they can. If Microsoft's pieces collude, they'll get smacked. There isn't much else you can do...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
I don't know about the Starmax, but Power Computing came out with some damn fine boxen in its time (particularly the PowerTower Pro).
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
(feel free to moderate 'offtopic', as this is, well, offtopic)
---
I see "piracy" as about as serious a threat to the fabric of commerce and society as speeding on the road.
---
FYI -
"In 1995, 644,000 people received minor injuries in speeding-related crashes. An additional 77,000 people received moderate injuries, and 42,000 received critical injuries in speeding-related crashes."
Apparently, there were 41,798 fatalities in total in the United States in that year.
Source: http://www.nhtsa.dot.go v/people/ncsa/FactPrev/spdfacts.html
...whether or not this is serious is left as an exercise to the reader.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
The principle behind it is that artists should be able to make as much money as they want from their product, while everyone else should be forced to pay for it.
---
That's a particularly interesting interpretation of capitalism.
The idea isn't to force anything on anyone - you don't have to have most products, so nobody is forcing anything on anyone (unless you're an abusive monopoly, but that's not all that common).
Second, the consumer has some power as well (once again, unless there is an abusive monopoly involved). You can refuse to purchase a product, and if enough people agree with you, they are forced to lower their price or provide more. If it seems like you're being ripped off, it's either because you expect too much or the rest of the population is too complacent and won't stand its ground.
Either way, capitalism is a self regulating system (albeit with a few bugs).
---
Unfortunately, the principles of geekhood (which are typically not quite as capitalist) support freedom of information in the form of the GPL, copylefting, etc.
---
Speak for yourself. A lot of geeks view open-source in a purely pragmatic way, ie. that it contributes to overall stability, code reuse, and ease of integration - not to mention fun projects to hack on. Not everyone feels that it's a "freedom" issue at all, or that anyone has a right to certain code or information.
And believe it or not, there are lots of kinds of geeks. Some still thrive in the closed-source world, and may not agree with much of the Slashdot party line at all. These guys may not have wandered upon the wonders of the open-source world, but that doesn't stop them from cranking out killer (albeit closed-source) shareware on the weekends more for fun than profit.
[I'm not really disagreeing with you - I think the suit against Napster is retarded, they should instead go after the pirates themselves in they have a problem. I just get frustrated when people assume there is a single 'geek profile' when there really isn't...]
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Apple will be providing it as an optional install, or a download from their site (basically, just like they did with ResEdit). I'm pretty sure this is public record.
:>
Of course, as you said, if they don't then there will be a freeware/shareware/open-source terminal available within a day or two. I seriously doubt the 'new Apple' would keep people from mucking around if they want to (remember, they are mostly old NeXT people).
The issue has nothing to do with that. I'm defending the average Mac user, not the actual OS (I believe OSX can stand on its own, for both 'regular' people and techies alike). I just don't think it's right to blame someone because they're not as interested in poking around config files or compiling new kernels on a regular basis. For the vast majority of people out there, a computer is something to get work done, not a hobby.
Anyhow, you're right - the flaming is pretty old. Hopefully all the trolls have left to more recent articles.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Not my problem. Slashdot provides a field for your email address, I put it in. Slashdot provides a place for your web site, so I put it in. Slashdot provides a place to put a signature - as I don't have any particularly clever quotes, I put it in.
Here's an idea: don't click on it.
Anyhow, this is way off topic... Back to our reguarly scheduled flamefest...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
Never forget that while you are here, reading Slashdot, you are shoulder to shoulder with thinkers, puzzle-lovers, and people who cannot leave a mystery unsolved. If you are only capable of seeing this love of knowledge as "arrogance," I can only conclude that you are the arrogant one.
---
Nope. I simply understand that 'we' (I hesitate to use the term inclusively as Slashdot is not some collective sharing a single mind) are not everyone, nor are we all that matters. The point is, I don't believe anyone should be calling someone names and looking at them derisively simply because they choose not to have to mess with the same stuff we do. Not everyone takes pleasure in extensive daily administrative tasks - and if they can be taken out of the picture, that'd be great for those people.
If you're the kind of person who likes to do stuff manually, that's fine. But don't speak for me, Slashdot, or the average person who simply wants to do their job.
Sorry you were offended, but I stand my my original statements.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
;-) But people DO have justification for their macuser humor.
People make fun of mac users because the macies rave on about how wonderful their system is...
---
That's a pretty gross generalization. Mac users tend to like their systems, but not all of them are complete zealots about it. Those who are the most annoying are generally swept under the rug when and if possible.
---
and this is the same system that goes down completely, or locks hard, if an application screws up, or if the system runs out of memory, or....
---
Compared to Linux and NT, sure. Remember, MacOS X is supposed to fix all of this - and yet we still see flames coming from various people simply because the user isn't a computer expert. Even if OSX is rock-solid, some people feel threatened in that a given operating system doesn't need to be obscure to be powerful.
---
Happily, 'THe next revision should fix all that'
--
Humor? Maybe - But some people are particularly anal about it. Lots of inflammatory name-calling. It sucks, from both sides of the fence.
Remember, most Mac users are normal people - not idiots, and not zealots. They are professionals of one kind or another, and know what they like (generally for user interface purposes). Usually when someone rails against them, it's due to some sort of insecurity on their part (not you specifically, but...).
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
I wasn't aware there was a policy against that. Many peoples' sigs have links to their sites. It's not like I'm posting for the sole purpose of advertising, spamming, or anything like that...
:>
Trust me, if I wanted to advertise my site somewhere, I'd find a place that didn't suck up nearly as much of my free time as Slashdot.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
---
No. But by the same token, those people who want to screw around with the innards should not be prevented from doing so.
---
Of course not. And there have been plenty of Mac users who have screwed up their machines in the process of learning the voodoo that is ResEdit.
But in the end, there are different operating systems for different people. Some are better for those who don't want to poke around (MacOS), and some are better for those who do (Unix/Linux).
That's why MacOS X should be so interesting - can Apple pull off both, making an OS simultaneously intuitive and usable for the masses, while still giving tons of power to those who want to customize their experience? Maybe, it's hard to say. I have used recent developmental versions of OSX and yep, the shell and everything it entails is still there if you want it.
I have some issues with the new UI (Dock sucks, lack of Apple menu, etc) but it has some time for improvement. I can imagine Unix/BSD types swarming over it and making a pretty good high-end user environment, though...
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Right, and there are similar things that you do on other systems (example, on the Mac: desktop rebuilds, zapping parameter RAM, throwing away old pref files, etc).
My point is two-fold:
1. Some people should be able to pass this on to others as needed without being called names. Do some people go to the Lube Stop? Sure - but their cars usually get taken care of. Sure they pay a little extra, but if the person doesn't want to do it, why should they be expected to? They pay a little extra for the convenience to have someone else do it, and to save time doing it themselves.
2. What if someone developed a car that didn't require oil changes, ran on solar power (so you never needed to get fuel), was incredibly solid, etc? By the attitudes of some here, this would be a bad thing. I'm not sure why, but I'm guessing it's a combination of job security and arrogance.
People shouldn't have to repair their computers any more than you should have to do their data entry. People each have their roles, and shouldn't ridicule someone if they don't have any interest in taking up someone else's.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Mr. Advertisement?
I'm not sure I'm following you...
Oh well.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Let me guess, you think it's a good thing if people had to spend 10 minutes poking under the hood messing with stuff just to start their cars, right?
... But the people I supported, albeit without any real computing knowledge, were some of the smartest people I've ever known. Lack of computing knowledge has no bearing on someone's intellegence or lack thereof.)
Some people are more interested in getting work done than fucking around with machines that should be there to serve them instead. I personally have no problem screwing around with the innards of my OS, writing shell scripts, and so on. But should my mom be forced to? I certainly don't think so.
To call people names simply because they want to get work done - the original intent of computing technology - rather than make it a hobby is pretty arrogant.
(And yes, I've worked tech support in the past and have had a lot of laughs
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Actually, it probably won't help with Adobe.
First, and most obvious, there is still a very small market in the Unix world that has anything to do with higher end graphics. Sure, there are those who do some web graphics, etc. but I doubt there are many Unix/Linux boxen in the print publishing worlds or anything.
Second, while MacOS X is built on BSD, most developers will barely touch it. Carbon is more like programming on a cleaned up MacOS API, and Cocoa is still tied up in Mac specific APIs. Most Mac apps will behave as if there isn't a shell, and definately have nothing to do with the X Windowing System.
But, I'm willing to bet that it'll be a lot easier to port Unix apps over to the Mac, although they'll be "second class citizens" unless they adopt the Mac specific APIs (which is fine by me - most of the main stuff I want are console apps and utilities).
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)