He migrated away from Apple hardware to one of the other brands of hardware. He probably was running Microsoft Office on the Macs and on the PCs that he switched to.
There is great hardware freedom in switching from a single-sourced hardware platform to one where there are hundreds of 'clone' vendors.
The Microsoft part of the deal is the 'bad' part that balances it all out.
I looked on the web page. Apparently I have to install the.NET Framework 1.1 in order to use nLite.
Wow. I have specifically avoided the.NET stuff, which to me represents 'extra crap' and now someone advocating a 'lean mean' Windows without all the extra crap tells me I need to install it to use their tool to remove all the extra crap.
Microsoft has been actively campaigning for the removal of 'legacy' hardware features in the PC since PCI and USB came out. I suspect, but don't know, that there are chipsets out there already created minus much of the cruft.
We used to joke that to make a computer 'PC 99' (or whatever Microsoft's term was for their 'PC of the future' specification) you just had to fill the ISA slots with potting epoxy and use a dykes to cut off the headers for keyboard, serial and parallel ports.
Portions of the OS have historically been included in the ROM on Apple hardware.
The venerable Macintosh SE/30 came out before Apple introduced MacOS 7. This doesn't mean that I can't run MacOS 7 ("System 7") on my SE/30, and in fact I DO run System 7 on my SE/30 (the best classic-Mac evah! )
'All that ancient cruft' is the ugliest part of the chipset. Removing a bunch of it will clean up the design, not be an awkward kludge on top of it.
Intel has always had 'higher designs' than the crummy PeeCee architecture their chips are commonly shoehorned into. An 'AT' motherboard was actually a horrible crippled use for the 80286 processor.
Apple can and will take advantage of that, while leveraging the better, newer stuff Intel has to offer.
People in this forum are often very ill-informed about what DRM represents. In hardware, the DRM features Intel is introducing will include 'hooks' that software can take advantage, to prevent said software from running on hardware not including said 'hooks.'
So, the DRM features in the new Intel-based Apple hardware will be absolutely necessary for the Intel binary of MacOS X to run. This has nothing to do with wether Microsoft's OSes will run on the hardware, nor wether any other OSes will run.
Again, there's a 'boogeyman' nature to the way DRM is discussed in these Slashdot forums, so it's probably not your fault that you don't understand.
I have used (attempted) to use OpenOffice and Microsoft's Office 2000 on a particularly aged piece of hardware, and my results are that MS's product wins out greatly.
I have a Toshiba Laptop with a 486-DX2 66 processor and 28MB of RAM in it.
I installed Windows 95 and then Office 2000 on the system. It isn't what you'd call snappy, and it's in fact below what Microsoft recommends as the minimal platform. But it worked quite adequately for word processing and the typical spreadsheets that regular users need.
I've used Linux off and on with that same laptop for years now, since I bought it used in the mid 90's. It isn't pretty getting a 'modern' (read- all eye-candied up) Linux desktop running on it. I still don't know what OpenOffice runs like on it, because the times I tried to load it, I ended up giving up.
Linux used to, and can still be, about squeezing good use out of hardware that is no longer adequate for the latest Redmond eye-candy. Unfortunately, the drive to 'win' against Microsoft on the desktop has added layers and layers of bloat, to the point where it's impossible.
When I want Unix on a portable platform, I now install a clean simple base-install of NetBSD and add in essentials like fvwm for a window manager (or I use the Tab Window Manager- really, it works, people, and it's built right into the default set of binaries that come with X!). I don't pretend anymore to be impressed by the 'user friendly' installers of modern 'Desktop Linux' or the horrible dselect swamp that Debian drags the installer into.
Except there may be side effects, so unless someone has taken the time to fully regression test all card combinations in a robust set of test cases including other potentially conflicting hardware, you might end up with the typical Windows "we know what it is better than you do" plug-n-pray hell.
All I had was a crummy 9-pin dot matrix printer. Windows 2 with the 'Write' word processor gave me, for the first time, DIFFERENT FONTS. And I had Micrografx In*A*Vision so I could do vectored drawings too, and paste the result into Write docs.
So yes, there are people who didn't just install the Windows runtime.
One point worth noting is that this Beta appears to work on non-Apple hardware. It demonstrates that the Apple OS DOES, or CAN, work on non-Apple hardware. And it provides a running sample of the Apple OS running on non-Apple hardware, that might be useful in analysis to make the final release run on non-Apple hardware.
Actually, where I worked, everybody realized they were stuck running old 16-bit versions of Windows programs, and raised hell.
(it was a shop that developed for an embedded OS/2 application, so late in the life of the product some of the developers were 'stuck' on OS/2 desktops for a time)
Slashdot Mirror
It HAS been designed 'many times over' in the last few decades.
/bin/sh (No! Not an alias to bash, that doesn't count!) as your Unix shell?
/bin/csh but use sh for some things.
Or are you running
I prefer
I would bet that there are dozens of people who can cite the tons and tons of absolutley PITIFUL hardware Apple was selling in that same time span.
I know I've scrapped out enough of it to know all about some of the lemons in the Mac family.
But there are things that are cool too. I like my 'all in one' LC system, now that it has a real 68040 in it, forinstance.
He migrated away from Apple hardware to one of the other brands of hardware. He probably was running Microsoft Office on the Macs and on the PCs that he switched to.
There is great hardware freedom in switching from a single-sourced hardware platform to one where there are hundreds of 'clone' vendors.
The Microsoft part of the deal is the 'bad' part that balances it all out.
Right. And the shared libraries of Linux are not 'API's either, just the libraries that the API interfaces to.
I looked on the web page. Apparently I have to install the .NET Framework 1.1 in order to use nLite.
.NET stuff, which to me represents 'extra crap' and now someone advocating a 'lean mean' Windows without all the extra crap tells me I need to install it to use their tool to remove all the extra crap.
Wow. I have specifically avoided the
What about the QT preferences and other detris in the system folder?
I don't know where you got the impression I was disagreeing with you personally, and not just adding to the discussion.
Yes. GEOS was another alternative. But there wasn't In*A*Vision for Geos.
Microsoft has been actively campaigning for the removal of 'legacy' hardware features in the PC since PCI and USB came out. I suspect, but don't know, that there are chipsets out there already created minus much of the cruft.
We used to joke that to make a computer 'PC 99' (or whatever Microsoft's term was for their 'PC of the future' specification) you just had to fill the ISA slots with potting epoxy and use a dykes to cut off the headers for keyboard, serial and parallel ports.
Portions of the OS have historically been included in the ROM on Apple hardware.
The venerable Macintosh SE/30 came out before Apple introduced MacOS 7. This doesn't mean that I can't run MacOS 7 ("System 7") on my SE/30, and in fact I DO run System 7 on my SE/30 (the best classic-Mac evah! )
'All that ancient cruft' is the ugliest part of the chipset. Removing a bunch of it will clean up the design, not be an awkward kludge on top of it.
Intel has always had 'higher designs' than the crummy PeeCee architecture their chips are commonly shoehorned into. An 'AT' motherboard was actually a horrible crippled use for the 80286 processor.
Apple can and will take advantage of that, while leveraging the better, newer stuff Intel has to offer.
People in this forum are often very ill-informed about what DRM represents. In hardware, the DRM features Intel is introducing will include 'hooks' that software can take advantage, to prevent said software from running on hardware not including said 'hooks.'
So, the DRM features in the new Intel-based Apple hardware will be absolutely necessary for the Intel binary of MacOS X to run. This has nothing to do with wether Microsoft's OSes will run on the hardware, nor wether any other OSes will run.
Again, there's a 'boogeyman' nature to the way DRM is discussed in these Slashdot forums, so it's probably not your fault that you don't understand.
I have used (attempted) to use OpenOffice and Microsoft's Office 2000 on a particularly aged piece of hardware, and my results are that MS's product wins out greatly.
I have a Toshiba Laptop with a 486-DX2 66 processor and 28MB of RAM in it.
I installed Windows 95 and then Office 2000 on the system. It isn't what you'd call snappy, and it's in fact below what Microsoft recommends as the minimal platform. But it worked quite adequately for word processing and the typical spreadsheets that regular users need.
I've used Linux off and on with that same laptop for years now, since I bought it used in the mid 90's. It isn't pretty getting a 'modern' (read- all eye-candied up) Linux desktop running on it. I still don't know what OpenOffice runs like on it, because the times I tried to load it, I ended up giving up.
Linux used to, and can still be, about squeezing good use out of hardware that is no longer adequate for the latest Redmond eye-candy. Unfortunately, the drive to 'win' against Microsoft on the desktop has added layers and layers of bloat, to the point where it's impossible.
When I want Unix on a portable platform, I now install a clean simple base-install of NetBSD and add in essentials like fvwm for a window manager (or I use the Tab Window Manager- really, it works, people, and it's built right into the default set of binaries that come with X!). I don't pretend anymore to be impressed by the 'user friendly' installers of modern 'Desktop Linux' or the horrible dselect swamp that Debian drags the installer into.
Except there may be side effects, so unless someone has taken the time to fully regression test all card combinations in a robust set of test cases including other potentially conflicting hardware, you might end up with the typical Windows "we know what it is better than you do" plug-n-pray hell.
I thought it was just the usual gushing about AMD.
True, but shouldn't you feed your old Thinkpad something nice once in awhile?
All I had was a crummy 9-pin dot matrix printer. Windows 2 with the 'Write' word processor gave me, for the first time, DIFFERENT FONTS. And I had Micrografx In*A*Vision so I could do vectored drawings too, and paste the result into Write docs.
So yes, there are people who didn't just install the Windows runtime.
Yes, and it appears you're referring entirely to the class of people whose choice in computer has to do with 'impressing others'.
Sorry, 'so-called "digerati"' gives it all away. Posers aren't a 'higher class of user.'
I have a few K6 processors, and even a bad 486 knockoff or two made by AMD.
One point worth noting is that this Beta appears to work on non-Apple hardware. It demonstrates that the Apple OS DOES, or CAN, work on non-Apple hardware. And it provides a running sample of the Apple OS running on non-Apple hardware, that might be useful in analysis to make the final release run on non-Apple hardware.
Actually, where I worked, everybody realized they were stuck running old 16-bit versions of Windows programs, and raised hell.
(it was a shop that developed for an embedded OS/2 application, so late in the life of the product some of the developers were 'stuck' on OS/2 desktops for a time)
You can get 'Windows for PPC' by buying an old Windows NT 3.51 CDROM on eBay.
Yes, as a matter of fact, I *do* have enough 68k software for this to be an issue :) [Including the last decent version of MS Word).
I keep a Powerbook 165c around for such diversions.
And an SE/30 that I seldom use.
Yes, but that's dead-end hardware from IBM. The PowerPC RS/6000 boxes with that logo are PREP architecture boxes.
Oh, and you can install Windows NT 3.51 on that box.
the other as "that computer the really smart people use."
Huh? I've never heard THAT one out on the street. Is that the new marketing buzz from Apple?