and some of the things it does are the most obtuse way imaginable, just for the sake of being different it seems.
I also like the hypocrysy from Apple surround UAC in Vista. Admittedly, Vista did have a tendency to ask a lot of questions, particularly when modifying files/folders in "Program Files" but have you used the disk manager in Snow Leopard. Every single task re-prompts you for the password. Ask for it once and then keep me elevated; don't keep asking me to type a password in. That's more annoying than UAC.
Another is disabling maximization of windows: I have a very big issue with that.
They go through unconventional means just to be different (one example is inversing the window buttons to the left side rather than the right).
Yep, I dig it.
I used to be a mac head. I bought my PowerPC in 1996 and retired it in 2004, which was a pretty good run, I think. But I feel like the new macs are kind of pushing the social phenomenon rather than being decidedly superior from an architectural standpoint. Sure the hardware is cool and the UI is slick, but for my purposes the cost-over-time factor for the hardware is way way too high, and there are other unix-like OSes that I like better that run just as well on cheaper hardware.
I'm not dissing on macs at all or trying to troll or anything, don't get me wrong. They're just not the machine for me anymore. But if they are for you, then go for it.
OS X is actually "The Nasty". Only runs well on a few computers, not compatible with everything, and terrible product support. Windows and Linux are much better.
My OS progression basically went like this (for my primary systems):
DOS -> OS/2 -> Linux -> OS X (and Linux)
Full-screen maximization is evil. Full-screen maximization is what has got us "This site is best viewed in 800x600", and then "This site is best viewed in 1024x768" and then "This site is best viewed in 1280x1024" and so on ad infinitum ..
As an old Amiga and X Windowing System user I can only say: Full-screen maximization and compound windows with internal windows (à la Windows) is a lousy substitute for real multiple workspaces! It took a very long while, but Apple eventually saw the light and incorporated it in Mac OS 10.6.
The Close button has always been on the top/left corner ... but the Zoom button (toggle between two window sizes) has been moved there from the top/right corner. Having colours to indicate different windowing actions is retarded! What red means is given, but you can't tell (without looking it up or mousing over the button) which lousy button it is that has the Zoom function ...
A Close button (on the top/left or top/right corner), Window Shade when double-click and a pop-up menu on right-click all you really need. The Proxy Icon and Minimize buttons could have been merged into one entity. Less is more.
Yeah, OSX and macs are real real real real dumb. It doesn't have programs like songsmith, and that's why you never see professionals use them.
If you got a nice keyboard, you might as well throw it in the trash if you're gonna use OSX cuz you won't be able to do crap with it. I heard OSX isn't even compatible with cherry mx's!
As an old Amiga and X Windowing System user I can only say: Full-screen maximization and compound windows with internal windows (à la Windows) is a lousy substitute for real multiple workspaces! It took a very long while, but Apple eventually saw the light and incorporated it in Mac OS 10.6.
I like tiling window managers, myself.
A huge proportion of the problems with Windows (and a lot of other operating systems) are caused by backwards compatibility concerns, both for hardware and software. Is Apple killing backwards compatibility to keep quality consistent, or are they killing it to encourage hardware and software sales? All I know is that I wouldn't run Windows 7 on a 10 year old PC, or 10 year old software on Windows 7.
:lol:
As a Mac/OSX user for almost 6 years, and (believe it or not) still using two desktop PCs (XP, DOS 5/Win3.1), I am used to the regular abuse. Mac-bashing is no different to Apple Fanboyism; neither are interesting or useful positions.
As for not having any useful software that won't run under Windows, I'd struggle to get Logic running on it.
Comments about the position of buttons are just retarded. It's like complaining that some people are left handed and therefore you, as a right-handed person and therefore the best, hate left-handed things. Or that you you don't like someone else's shoes. Need to use it? Learn it. Don't use it? Get over it.
It's Christmas. Don't we all have drinking to do?
A big aspect of Microsoft's software design is legacy support. It is a lot of the reason behind their success in professional settings. Many, many businesses use extremely old software, and in most cases that software works just fine on modern machines. You pay for that legacy support, with cruft and basic wonkeyness.
A big aspect of Microsoft's software design is legacy support. It is a lot of the reason behind their success in professional settings. Many, many businesses use extremely old software, and in most cases that software works just fine on modern machines. You pay for that legacy support, with cruft and basic wonkeyness.
I actually like the Apple method of "screw old stuff, everyone can upgrade". It makes for a better end-user experience, at the cost of long-term flexibility.
QuoteA big aspect of Microsoft's software design is legacy support. It is a lot of the reason behind their success in professional settings. Many, many businesses use extremely old software, and in most cases that software works just fine on modern machines. You pay for that legacy support, with cruft and basic wonkeyness.
Except, now that virtualization is so common, there's not very much reason for them to keep doing that.
Even through virtualization might make sense to you, how easy would it be to successfully employ it in a corporate setting where all the users need to know how to use it?
Many businesses and schools still run their computers off of Windows XP and are likely to do so for a few more years, till the past of the Pentium 4 systems are replaced.
Alright, I was saving up this post for when I had time to comment. (I went to see Tran-Siberian Orchestra Yesterday ^__^)
If you were questioning about security, yes the mac mini server came with the firewall defaulted to on. I have attempted a many attacks trying to get in and have yet to be successful.
Well done for being the first Mac user to discuss security in this thread. As expected, the others glossed over it because it isn't important.
It's good that OS X Server comes with the firewall enabled (I'd expect no less from any company selling their product as a professional server), but it's still no excuse for it being disabled by default on the consumer OS, where ignorance is likely even more rife than in a business.
Things really will go up **** creek for Apple and OS X if market share continues to increase, and users remain blissfully ignorant of threats, even to the invincible Apple software (mutter mutter mutter UNIX mutter mutter mutter STABILITY mutter mutter SECURITY).
Remember, all it takes is a vulnerability in Bonjour or QuickTime...
It's could be moot though. Mac users have been brainwashed into believing they're invincible for so long that they're more likely to fall for phishing scams than any kind of malware.
Personally, I don't get excited over the Mac vs. Windows thing, since I would much rather be using Plan 9 or RISC OS or Be OS or ....
Excellent, excellent band! If you like them, you might like Haggard as well. <3 Haggard!
Some of the latest VMware versions allow you to have the virtual machine run in the background, and there's a menu on the host machine that starts applications inside the virtual machine, but it appears and behaves to the user as if it's a normal application running right on their computer.Show Image(http://www.pcmech.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/vmware_unity.png)
I tried it a while ago, and it needs some improvement as it stands, but I think stuff like that is going to become far more common for providing backwards compatibility in new operating systems.
Right, but what I'm talking about here is how new versions of Windows can be backwards compatible without having to deliberately break the OS in a dozen ways so that someone can run a 10 year old version of Photoshop designed for Windows 98.
Hackintoshes do not really cut it for me in the long term.
Never mind. Trying to have a computer discussion with a Mac convert is like trying to have an evolution discussion with a creationist. I think we've already been there.
I don't dislike OS X; I dislike Apple's bull**** marketing and the baa baa Mac sheep who repeat every word of crap that Apple tell them as if it is the truth, then defend design choices that go against everything the almight SJ has preached for years.
Yea.... I tired to run OS10 in VirtualBox for a while, back when I was looking into what all would be required to get into iPhone development, but the performance was abysmal. :<
I like tiling window managers, myself.
I just wish someone would write one that was mouse-driven, supported floaters and multihead properly, and didn't require some variety of oddball special-purpose scripting language to configure. >_>
I'm too lazy/dumb to write one myself. <_<
Runs on a few computers BY DESIGN.I can run DOS programs at native speed on a modern Windows computer.
I can run DOS programs at native speed on a modern Windows computer.
I found a pre-made OS X image on the *coughs* usual corners of the net that actually worked quite well, even if some of the fancy animations aren't so smooth.