+- Tendo City (https://www.tendocity.net)
+-- Forum: Tendo City: Metropolitan District (https://www.tendocity.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Ramble City (https://www.tendocity.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=44)
+--- Thread: Microsoft can eat my fat cock (/showthread.php?tid=3503)
Pages:
1
2
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - lazyfatbum - 7th February 2006
i have adopted a G4 Mac and boy is my penis erect. Everything runs super smooth, even with a dozen programs open there isn't a single drop in performance. i have to say though, one clicck mice are for the birds, so i'm using the bastard MS wheel mouse which the mac seems to have no problem with.
I'm getting use to this keyboard and the other mac-oddities i'm just not used to. USB plugs in the keyboard? Safari?....panther? we worked on these guys at film school for editing stations and many of the game classes are using them (or were using them, I think its all alienware now) so i have some experience with them but holy krap, this is different. Everything is so integrated and easy to use.
Annyone else currently in a relationship with one of these things?
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 7th February 2006
Lazy I could kiss you. My first computer was an Apple IIe, and I've been using Apple products since then. There were a few years in the 90s where Macs were starting to lose their luster as the company really had no direction, but Steve Jobs has really invigorated the company. I currently have a Blue & White G3 that will turn 7(!) years old this summer and is showing no signs of giving up the ghost. That's one thing you will find about Macs, they last a really long time. When I eventually get a new computer in a year or two I'll probably turn this one into a server or something. Glad to see you've made it back from the dark side. :D
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Paco - 7th February 2006
Don't you mean Intel/AMD or Dell/Toshiba/Sony/Hp/other pc makers can eat you fat cock?
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 7th February 2006
Mac > PC? I'll never agree. :)
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Great Rumbler - 7th February 2006
If only Macs had more games...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 7th February 2006
More and more, the architecture of PC and Macs are intermingling. Pretty soon the basic hardware choice will just be which processor you get.
When that happens, I'll stick a Mac OS on a special partition.
However, I won't just "go mac" because of two reasons. One, I actually know what I'm doing and thus I can get all the performance I can out of my PC. If I can get my PC to do whatever I need it to, I have no reason to spend a few thousand dollars on a "new look". Secondly, game support. Most games are made for the PC, and I play a lot of PC games.
And yes, single button mice are idiotic. Not nearly as much as the excuse Apple uses to justify their lack of 3 button mice and a wheel, but still pretty stupid.
http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/
And now they apparently have this. I'm actually impressed. I wonder how well it will actually perform?
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 7th February 2006
Apple is such a massively overrated company... they have proprietary hardware and software and do not allow anyone else to make hardware compatible with their systems (maki9ng them worse than Intel on that regard, Intel was forced to accept clones...), and on the OS front really the only difference between them and Microsoft is that Microsoft is more successful... I mean, does anyone actually think that if Apple was in MS's position they wouldn't be doing exactly the same kinds of anticompetitive things MS is?
... oh right, Apple does most of that stuff anyway, despite their small market share. Making the answer to that question obvious. :)
Also, I don't understand why people say that MacOS is better. It's just not. It's harder to navigate, doesn't have built-in support for three-button mice (making stuff like right-click menus less functional, from my experience, never mind mousewheel scrolling (a feature I really love)... in the macs the campus has in the lab you've got to go to the file menu in order to just copy and paste! Why the heck can't I just use the rightclick menu like I should be able to? Not to mention the fact that they've got no good alternative to the Program folder in the Start Menu... the Apple menu doesn't compare...)
Anyway, other than stability, which you can get on PC with something like Linux (and MS's current OSes (XP/XP64) are much, much more stable than their older ones (ME and below)!), I see absolutely no advantages and a great many disadvantages.
Oh yeah, they're also more expensive than PCs, less powerful than PCs, have no software, and most models are not very configurable (and even if you have a tower, there's a whole heck of a lot less hardware to choose from, particularly graphics-cards-wise...). What, exactly, is the advantage? Yeah, I see nothing.
Quote:http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/
Standard Apple-style case of form over function? The standard Apple way... thinking of looks first and function later if at all...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 7th February 2006
Some of that is a little unfair. First of all, the current incarnation of Mac OS does have built in support for multibutton mice. The third mouse button doesn't do much, but it doesn't do much of anything in Windows either (unless you assign a function to it yourself).
Further, as to the hard to use thing, I myself am not very familiar with it. However, I will say right now that that is mainly due to just not using it.
But one other thing. lazy, a computer is a computer, and that in mind, if you overload a Mac OS with startup extensions, you WILL feel the slowdown. This at least I know from experience. I had to learn how to unload someone's extensions as I went along.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 7th February 2006
Macs have had support for multibutton mice since 1998, but no one realizes this because Apple stubbornly shipped them with a one button mouse until recently.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 7th February 2006
Quote:First of all, the current incarnation of Mac OS does have built in support for multibutton mice. The third mouse button doesn't do much, but it doesn't do much of anything in Windows either (unless you assign a function to it yourself).
How useful button three is depends on the program (and it seems like that mac mouse is 2 button + a 4-way scroll function, as opposed to 3-button plus a 2-way scroll function like scrollwheel pc mice), but some use the third button... it's definitely very, very useful for keyboard/mouse games. Actually, gaming-focused mice often have at least 5 buttons (with several on the side)... because your fingers are there, they just need buttons for them. In Windows though yeah most programs just use two buttons, but some use three (like how many MS programs use the third one for 4-directional pagescroll). So yeah, the third button is the least useful, but it has its uses too...
Quote:Further, as to the hard to use thing, I myself am not very familiar with it. However, I will say right now that that is mainly due to just not using it.
Familiarity is certainly part of it, but it is true that Macs have no equivilant of the Start menu. The Apple menu is all you get, and that's cluttered even worse than the Start menu is with all kinds of stuff (I know, you can configure it to make it better, maybe you could fix the Apple menu, but Windows comes with one that works right out...)...
I just don't like Apple's interface design. The way all non-fullscreen programs share the same top menu bar, instead of each application window having its own, takes some getting used to and seems to be the worse choice (makes it a little slower to use them if things are windowed...). Having all programs share the same bar as the apple button and the clock and all that stuff just seems inelegant... and it leaves no room for running-tasks buttons, you've got to go to the Finder menu to find what's running. ... oh, and you can make it autohide, right? Never tried, but I know that I hate having the taskbar always showing on my pc.
Oh yeah, and the public imacs here at school are slow and none of the applications run as well as they do in PC. :) There are almost always some free, so once in a while I use one, but I quickly regret it... between the nonfunctioning rightclick menus that have almost no features to how the version of Word they have is evidently incompatible with Word 2000 documents (it could not properly display the formatted file) to everything else... yeah, I don't like macs. :)
But anyway... I can understand how people could say MacOS is easier to use than DOS, but Windows XP? I don't see that at all...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 7th February 2006
ABF, you are basing your opinion on using publically-available computers, which is where most people get their opinion of Macs from. If I had based my opinion of Macs on the computers we had at my university labs I would have hated them too, but that holds true for the PCs as well.
A Black Falcon Wrote:Familiarity is certainly part of it, but it is true that Macs have no equivilant of the Start menu. The Apple menu is all you get, and that's cluttered even worse than the Start menu is with all kinds of stuff (I know, you can configure it to make it better, maybe you could fix the Apple menu, but Windows comes with one that works right out...)...
What you said hear lends itself to the fact that you are unfamiliar with using Macs. The Apple menu hasn't been the main hub of the Mac since 1999 when OS X was released. The Dock is where most of your navigating begins. The great thing about the Dock is that it is fully-customizable. My Dock has my most-used applications (Word, Excel, Safari, Geometer's Sketchpad, and the Terminal) as well as my home directory, applications folder, and documents folder so I can get to everything I need with pretty much one click of the mouse and a second of navigating.
A Black Falcon Wrote:I just don't like Apple's interface design. The way all non-fullscreen programs share the same top menu bar, instead of each application window having its own, takes some getting used to and seems to be the worse choice (makes it a little slower to use them if things are windowed...). Having all programs share the same bar as the apple button and the clock and all that stuff just seems inelegant... and it leaves no room for running-tasks buttons, you've got to go to the Finder menu to find what's running. ... oh, and you can make it autohide, right? Never tried, but I know that I hate having the taskbar always showing on my pc.
This is your opinion so I can't really say it's wrong, but I love that the menu for programs is always in the same place. I am always trying out new programs and it is very easy to learn a new program when the menu is more or less the same in every program.
A Black Falcon Wrote:Oh yeah, and the public imacs here at school are slow and none of the applications run as well as they do in PC. There are almost always some free, so once in a while I use one, but I quickly regret it... between the nonfunctioning rightclick menus that have almost no features to how the version of Word they have is evidently incompatible with Word 2000 documents (it could not properly display the formatted file) to everything else... yeah, I don't like macs.
They could be slow because the Macs are much older than the PCs. And if you want to right-click with a one-button mouse on a Mac you can always press Command (the Apple key) and click. Anyway, the fact that they don't have a version of Word that is compatible with Word 2000 shows me that they don't keep up the Macs in those labs very well.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 7th February 2006
Quote:What you said hear lends itself to the fact that you are unfamiliar with using Macs. The Apple menu hasn't been the main hub of the Mac since 1999 when OS X was released. The Dock is where most of your navigating begins. The great thing about the Dock is that it is fully-customizable. My Dock has my most-used applications (Word, Excel, Safari, Geometer's Sketchpad, and the Terminal) as well as my home directory, applications folder, and documents folder so I can get to everything I need with pretty much one click of the mouse and a second of navigating.
That thing at the bottom, right? Good like the windows quicklaunch taskbar, for a few programs you use often, but is it a true program access manager? No, that's just for quick access, not for something that acts as a program manager... unless it's got the ability to become an unfolding folder tree like the Start menu?
"links to folders" says it all. MacOS still has no good program manager... it'd be like if Windows had no effective Programs folder in the Start menu and you were expected to open your programs in Windows Explorer (you know, what you get when you run My Computer...)... ridiculous...
Quote:This is your opinion so I can't really say it's wrong, but I love that the menu for programs is always in the same place. I am always trying out new programs and it is very easy to learn a new program when the menu is more or less the same in every program.
It's also odd for a Windows user since the menubar is on top, while in Windows the name bar is on top and the menubar is below it... I know that's just opinion/what you are used to though.
Quote:They could be slow because the Macs are much older than the PCs. And if you want to right-click with a one-button mouse on a Mac you can always press Command (the Apple key) and click. Anyway, the fact that they don't have a version of Word that is compatible with Word 2000 shows me that they don't keep up the Macs in those labs very well.
Those computers are the flatscreen iMacs. There are also some older eMacs (the old-style imac...) that run just as poorly... those ones are in a different room though, without chairs, and are meant just for email and for that they function.
Oh, and I know about Apple-Click, but that's a ridiculous thing... any mouse commmand that requires the keyboard to function isn't a mouse command. Oh, they do have multi-button mice, with scrollwheels, so it's not that there isn't a right button... it's just that the right button doesn't actually let you do much compared to the rightclick menus you get in PC programs, presumably because they assume that most people won't care because they don't have right buttons anyway and can't be bothered with annoying stuff like "apple-click"...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 7th February 2006
I was wrong about the Apple-click anyway, it's control-click. Either way, you are right that it isn't a substitute for right-clicking on the mouse, but it still functions the same as on a PC. What is missing from the right-click menus on a Mac that you can do on a PC?
A Black Falcon Wrote:That thing at the bottom, right? Good like the windows quicklaunch taskbar, for a few programs you use often, but is it a true program access manager? No, that's just for quick access, not for something that acts as a program manager... unless it's got the ability to become an unfolding folder tree like the Start menu?
"links to folders" says it all. MacOS still has no good program manager... it'd be like if Windows had no effective Programs folder in the Start menu and you were expected to open your programs in Windows Explorer (you know, what you get when you run My Computer...)... ridiculous...
Again, the Dock is fully-customizable. Most computers you will find in a public lab won't have a customized Dock so you will just find the default icons. You can put anything in the Dock so putting the applications and documents folder in it makes it function just like the Windows Start menu. All of the applications on a Mac are stored in a single applications folder so you don't have to hunt around for things if that folder is in the Dock. It definitely has the ability to become an unfolding folder tree. See the attached screenshot from my computer...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 7th February 2006
I have a huge beef with the nature of ALL GUIs currently being used in all OSs.
That is, they have a million places for icons for no decent reason. There's the task bar, quick bar, action bar, start menu, desktop, and task manager, which ALL have the exact same function. There's no legitimate reason I can see to have so many different systems for placing icons. I mean, what is the point, really?
In fact, I'm about ready to trade in the entire desktop methadology for something resembling a video game interface. Think of it this way. Ever played Chrono Trigger and used it's menu system? That might actually work great as an entire interface for shortcuts (or aliases if you prefer, both terms reveal certain aspects of what that little file actually is).
Here's my idea. Screw the desktop, replace the entire on-screen interface with a bunch of "folders" you flip between. Each folder holds a number of icons. As you flip through the folders, all the other folders are "stored" off to the side, easy to just click on to shift focus to them and open them. So, open programs, lists of files, documents, web sites, even a basic command prompt, it's all in folders. Open a file in one folder and it instantiates itself as a new folder. The start button? Gone! System wide command can be done on the system wide command folder! One could even get into specifics, reordering the open folders and resizing them in a way so that two could be open at once. There wouldn't even need to be a "desktop".
I hope I have explained this correctly. Actually, I'm thinking of a tweaked out version of that weird guide interface on the XBox 360 guide application, only with mouse and keyboard support.
One single way of handling EVERYTHING might really make things a lot simpler for users, as well as cutting down on things being too complicated.
The Chrono Trigger system, I'd call it.
When I get to a point where I think I can confidently program a Linux gui, I might actually design something to that effect.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 7th February 2006
Quote:That is, they have a million places for icons for no decent reason. There's the task bar, quick bar, action bar, start menu, desktop, and task manager, which ALL have the exact same function. There's no legitimate reason I can see to have so many different systems for placing icons. I mean, what is the point, really?
Every one of those things is different and has a good reason for being there... the taskbar shows what is running, your desktop is for whatever you want to put there (I keep it minimal, just the three or four required icons), the task manager (the control-alt-del window you mean?) shows what's running and lets you kill it, including 'hidden' things that don't show up elsewhere, the start menu is the main program manager, and the quickbar is for a few quicklinks for programs you use more often (I've got Winamp, Mozilla, My Computer, and Realplayer in the four quicklaunch buttons (placed next to the toolbar/clock), very handy)...
As for your idea, all I can say is that I still like Tabworks, though I use it less than I used to (the quicklaunch buttons have been helpful, and the only PC game I've played much for most of the past year is Guild Wars, which is easy to launch either from Tabworks or the Start menu...)... not quite the same I know, but it was an attempt to simplify and make easier to use the PC interface while still leaving you full access to real Windows...
http://www.mattsterpiece.com/images/TabWorks_Article.pdf#search='TabWorks'
The Win95 version I have has a bunch more stuff.
Quote:Again, the Dock is fully-customizable. Most computers you will find in a public lab won't have a customized Dock so you will just find the default icons. You can put anything in the Dock so putting the applications and documents folder in it makes it function just like the Windows Start menu. All of the applications on a Mac are stored in a single applications folder so you don't have to hunt around for things if that folder is in the Dock. It definitely has the ability to become an unfolding folder tree. See the attached screenshot from my computer...
You know that Windows has been trying to have all programs install to the same folder too, since like Windows 98, with the 'Program Files' folder? It almost immediately gets massively cluttered with dozens and dozens of programs... (even if, as I do, you don't install games to that folder but to their own folders)...
As in, how is "all the programs install to one folder" any different from my computer? It'd be like having a version of Windows where the only "program manager" was My Computer, which would be somewhat funny, but utterly unusable, because sorting through the hundreds of non-programs to find the applications every time you want to run them would be a stupidly absurd task... at least in DOS you just need to remember the program name, you don't need to sift through the list every time... not to mention Windows 95+ with the nice, 'when they install programs make a little folder here that just contains a link to the program, the uninstaller, and the readmes' Programs folder in the Start menu... it's easy to use, certainly easier than anything I've seen for Mac, unless you make your own "Start Menu" full of links to programs, but that'd be an irritating task... ("but tabworks is like that"? Nope, Tabworks automatically creates a new tab for each new folder or subfolder added in Program Files. I have the Win95 version. :) A little organization is needed, but not much...)
Unless it autohides all non-program/readme files? Then it'd be just as annoying as Windows with how MS wants to make so much stuff these days hidden... no, I DON'T want my Windows folder hidden and made inaccessible behind a "warning do not modify this folder" message, I DON'T want hidden files everywhere, I want to be able to actually see the things on my harddrive...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 7th February 2006
Did you even look at the screenshot from my computer? Here's the one from my desktop which has even more programs than my laptop. You don't get all of those uninstall files on a Mac since parts of the program aren't hidden all over the place besides something like preferences. If you delete the program you don't have to do anything else. You do get read me files for a lot of stuff out there, but you can choose not to include those in the applications folder and I generally don't since that same information can be found in the help menu.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 7th February 2006
*shudders at massive number of alphabetically-organized icons with folders mixed in with the files instead of all being at the top of the list, where they belong (for ease of use, for functionality, for looks, for so many reasons...)*
Folder trees! Categories! ... oh right, mac owners don't have enough software available to have to worry about such problems... :D
Answers my question about 'hiding files' though, if that's actually a representation of your harddrive and not a seperate program manager folder like Windows has...
Quote:Did you even look at the screenshot from my computer? Here's the one from my desktop which has even more programs than my laptop. You don't get all of those uninstall files on a Mac since parts of the program aren't hidden all over the place besides something like preferences. If you delete the program you don't have to do anything else. You do get read me files for a lot of stuff out there, but you can choose not to include those in the applications folder and I generally don't since that same information can be found in the help menu.
Only with newer games... as for uninstalls Windows doesn't really need them there either, because there's Add/Remove Programs in the control panel for that, but it is often easier just to click the link... though yeah, often they don't manage to get everything... but that's the programmer's faults more than anything, not Microsoft's for wanting to make Windows more complex...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 7th February 2006
You misunderstood everything I said...
No, I was NOT talking about the Windows Task Manager or the quick tray.
I was talking about the million places you can place shortcuts. And no, the program menu accessed from the tiny realm of the start button is no real solution. And no, I didn't want "everything in ONE folder" at all. Not installed, not in navigation.
Read it again.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 7th February 2006
You need to clarify what exactly you mean.
But either way, the folder system is a logical, sensible organization method for file access that has no serious rival. Really, what else would make any sense at all... your description sounded ... odd ... and confusing... I don't quite get it, but as it stands I'd rather keep what we have, it works quite well.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Weltall - 7th February 2006
Since I never play games, I wouldn't mind owning a Mac...
...if they weren't so fucking EXPENSIVE. Jesus Christ.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 8th February 2006
Macs aren't really that much more expensive than PCs unless you're comparing a system you build yourself by buying all the components separately. Macs can't really compare with that.
And I still don't see the problem with the way the files are organized on the Mac. If it's a really long list you can start typing the name of the program you are looking for and it will go straight to it. It really is a myth that there isn't enough software for Macs as well, unless you are talking about games. There is plenty of software for Macs, and since OS X is open and easy to develop for there are thousands of free programs out there from small developers.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 8th February 2006
Quote:Macs aren't really that much more expensive than PCs unless you're comparing a system you build yourself by buying all the components separately. Macs can't really compare with that.
Yes, because of Apple's anticompetitive practices that don't allow anyone else to develop for their machines. (oh yeah, and no, I don't think they're ever cheaper. :) Just like buying a laptop, buying a mac is spending more for less power... (and buying a mac laptop is the worst of both worlds! :D) though maybe with the new Intel CPUs they can begin to catch up power-wise again.)
Quote:And I still don't see the problem with the way the files are organized on the Mac. If it's a really long list you can start typing the name of the program you are looking for and it will go straight to it. It really is a myth that there isn't enough software for Macs as well, unless you are talking about games. There is plenty of software for Macs, and since OS X is open and easy to develop for there are thousands of free programs out there from small developers.
Sounds to me like a worse version of the Windows interface. I know, MacOS came before Windows, but Windows has come a long way... (and Apple didn't invent the graphical OS either, they ripped it off of Xerox)
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 8th February 2006
A Black Falcon Wrote:(and Apple didn't invent the graphical OS either, they ripped it off of Xerox)
Just to clarify this, but Apple didn't "rip off" Xerox. Apple paid Xerox for a demonstration of their GUI as Xerox had no plans to put it into production. A little different than stealing, but I will be the first to admit that Apple didn't invent the GUI.
Anyway, I know I'm not going to convince you that Macs are better than PCs, but I just hope you'll be a little more open-minded about them. They really aren't as bad as you make them out to be. :D
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 8th February 2006
Quote:Just to clarify this, but Apple didn't "rip off" Xerox. Apple paid Xerox for a demonstration of their GUI as Xerox had no plans to put it into production. A little different than stealing, but I will be the first to admit that Apple didn't invent the GUI.
Essentially Apple visited Xerox's labs and said "Hey, we like that mouse and graphical OS idea, let's copy/steal the idea from them!"
... which is why it's pretty funny that then Microsoft did exactly the same thing to Apple when they went to make Windows... :)
Of course, Microsoft didn't invent the OS that made them rich, they bought CP/M and based MS-DOS off of it, but at least there they clearly paid for the rights to the product. :)
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - lazyfatbum - 8th February 2006
This G4 monster was purchased for the sum of 200 dollars. Go me and my bad self. The cheapest I found it used was 700 bucks.
DJ/ the mac OS is completely different from windows. It's not just looks, its the package integration and the usefulness of everything. its extremely easy to organize on this OS. (OSX) I know about startup program issues which I had zero on my PCs. On this mac I have like 6 that start up without a hitch in performance. I dunno how it does it, but i can bog this thing down as much as I want and it keeps asking for more. The only tim I noticed any sort of lag was when running an old version of Limewire on it (running on OS9). I installed the new version and now it's fine.
Paco/ I was specifically talking about how the Microsoft OS is poop and how Apple OSX is so neato burrito.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - etoven - 8th February 2006
lazyfatbum Wrote:This G4 monster was purchased for the sum of 200 dollars. Go me and my bad self. The cheapest I found it used was 700 bucks.
DJ/ the mac OS is completely different from windows. It's not just looks, its the package integration and the usefulness of everything. its extremely easy to organize on this OS. (OSX) I know about startup program issues which I had zero on my PCs. On this mac I have like 6 that start up without a hitch in performance. I dunno how it does it, but i can bog this thing down as much as I want and it keeps asking for more. The only tim I noticed any sort of lag was when running an old version of Limewire on it (running on OS9). I installed the new version and now it's fine.
Paco/ I was specifically talking about how the Microsoft OS is poop and how Apple OSX is so neato burrito.
Lazy you are just now discovering the wonderfull world of pc's that exists outside of windows. Mac's truly are the superiour machines hands down. They have a more stylish look, they are much eaiser to use, and plenty of power under the hood. Bill's gates backword way of building an OS is a shining example of ineffiency. Now OS X is running the Lenux keneral and supports an Intell articutecture after changing only 48 lines of code!
Imaging how many lines of code you would have to change to run a power PC processor on a XP machine!
Hint: People have tried, lets just say their past 48!
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 8th February 2006
Quote:hey have a more stylish look,
Irrelevant, and PCs look nice enough.
Quote: they are much eaiser to use,
Completely subjective and, as I've been saying, just not true anymore. Not that it has been for some time now, really...
Quote: and plenty of power under the hood.
Again, nope, not true... unless you're only using it for basic applications and not ones that would push any hardware, but that's not how you determine such things.
Quote:Hint: People have tried, lets just say their past 48!
Given that there are working mac emulators for PC, they've done more than try. :)
Quote:Bill's gates backword way of building an OS is a shining example of ineffiency.
It's inefficient because there's just so much 'stuff' in it... but that's not necessarially a bad thing.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 8th February 2006
etoven Wrote:Now OS X is running the Lenux keneral and supports an Intell articutecture after changing only 48 lines of code!
Just to clarify, OS X runs on BSD Unix, not Linux. Also, Apple has had an Intel version of OS X ready with each new build of the OS so it's pretty obvious that had been thinking about switching for quite some time. OS X is based off of OPENSTEP, which was the OS that Jobs' company was working on when he left Apple. It ran natively on Macs, SPARC, as well as Intel so it wasn't very difficult for Apple to just keep the Intel support in the OS. Pretty smart of them to keep their options open like that.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 8th February 2006
"Help control the pet population: teach your dog abstinence." -Stephen Colbert
If only there was a way to get an OS as nicely designed as Mac (it is Unix based now? Neat) with all the backwards compatibility one could ask for out of... well okay Windows is slowly breaking it's backwards compatibility, and if not that, the hardware of a PC should eventually break most of it.
Let's just put it this way. I'd like something like Dosbox to be made by full time professionals until it can do full emulation of all the old timy computer's features.
If a Mac could run all my games, I'd switch as soon as I could get the money together.
By the way, since it is Unix based now (is that what you were saying?), how does one access a command line interface in the latest itteration?
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 8th February 2006
http://techstories.ytmnd.com/
Wow, angry people. Then again, I can see why they can be so upset. Customer support numbers absolutely suck.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 8th February 2006
I just don't understand this attraction to Mac's OS... why do people seem to think that it's so great? My experience have just been limiting, annoying, and weirdly configured... I know some of that is 'what you're used to', but the point is, if you're used to Windows I don't see how there would be such a great benefit to going to Mac OS. I don't think there would be any.
... right, Macs have one advantage, few viruses. Eh, I've had my computer for four years and don't have a firewall (do have norton, updated when i remember to do so), and I've downloaded all kinds of stuff over the years, but the one time I got a virus it did nothing and Norton immediately caught the (one) file and got rid of it... yeah, some people get their computers killed with viruses/spyware/etc, but that doesn't happen if you know what you're doing. (my computer has all kinds of problems, but it's four-plus years old, and runs arguably Microsoft's worst OS... and since I do know what I'm doing, for the most part, I've always been able to fix its issues.)
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Weltall - 8th February 2006
In a relative sense, ABF is such a Luddite.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 9th February 2006
Dark Jaguar Wrote:By the way, since it is Unix based now (is that what you were saying?), how does one access a command line interface in the latest itteration?
With the Terminal:
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 9th February 2006
So there is a command line interface now. Was there always one?
And also, how does one actually access that?
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 9th February 2006
The Mac OS did not have a command-line interface until OS X was released. You access it by simply opening the Terminal program. There is also a way to run the OS in terminal mode from start-up, but I've only done it for kicks so I don't remember the keyboard command to do that.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 9th February 2006
It is a keyboard command? So is it anything like hitting F8 while Windows is starting up?
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 9th February 2006
Given that OSX is Unix-based, I'd assume that it's a Unix-style terminal...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 9th February 2006
Is the tracert command the same in unix as it is in DOS or NT?
Let me ask this. Do you prefer unix or linux? I know linux is basically modded unix, but I am not aware by how much.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 9th February 2006
Me? I don't know NT or Unix, and have only limited experience in Linux, most of it in the GUI, not the terminal... but from what I've seen of Linux, it's a stable, unattractive (graphically) OS that has all kinds of nice features, but is kind of odd in how it runs because of how I'm used to Windows (though admittedly XP does also have the administrator/other users split thing where you need admin priviliges to do all kinds of things) and it just doesn't work quite that way... I can make Linux work, in a basic sense, but i certainly don't understand its depth or how to get things done beyond the more obvious like I do Windows.
But really, my main complaint is the obvious one: games. :) I could learn Unix terminal commands and stuff, and how to manage Linux, but that doesn't help with software...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Sacred Jellybean - 9th February 2006
Linux sucks ass.
At least, mandrake linux 10.0 on my machine does. Holy shit, I never had so much trouble installing programs in my life. It was screen after screen of, "Oh, you need this .rpm file to install this .rpm file". It went on and on. I'm talking about 10 hours of trying to install the latest GCC compiler or GAIM and getting borderline hysterical ranting to my friends about how all these god damn linux cheerleaders do nothing but talk about how awful windows is, when two weeks 3 trials of different linuxes (I forget the name of the other two, but Mandrake Linux was the first let-down) later and I'm still frustrated as hell and regretting ever even converting.
I'm sure linux is more functional and all, which is great, but holy shit. I've never been so frustrated with a computer in my life.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 9th February 2006
Linux isn't meant for people who don't know what they're doing, that's for sure... it is definitely a complex, hard to manage OS in comparison to mainstream, streamlined (more explained) stuff like Windows. And no, that's not all good (in a 'mainstream = bad!' way), it means lots more irritation and complexity that isn't strictly necessary really... still a solid OS though. And really, no OS installation is ever easy...
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Sacred Jellybean - 9th February 2006
Indeed. Although my room mate, who's a Linux fanatic and a self-proclaimed expert couldn't really help. He tried installing two other "flavors" of Linux onto my computer. One didn't support sound, and the other had graphic card problems, if I recall correctly.
It's a good thing I had the dual boot, or I would have blown my brains out. Or just given up after the initial 10 hours of frustration (it was made worse with the fact that I had a project due that weekend and wanted to get a head-start on it).
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 9th February 2006
Which is better? Unix or Linux?
I will say this. I could never update the video card drivers, even though ATI does have some for Linux, when I was running that one distribution I had (Mandrake, 10.0)
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Sacred Jellybean - 9th February 2006
I honestly couldn't tell you. It's probably up to debate.
Are there non-linux GUIs for Unix? [edit] Actually, I don't think there are. I have the impression that Unix is all text-based.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 9th February 2006
I've read some comparison reviews, but they are all about 5 or 6 years old and have enough outdated information for me to ignore them. Back then, the general consensus was that Linux was "promising" but "needed a better file system and support for 8+ processor servers". Well, I already know that Linux now has a synchronous file system with logging known as ext3.
And oh yes, I think the next itteration of Linux I try out will be a bare command prompt affair. I want something fully powered where I will have to go through the task of installing a GUI myself.
Essentially, I think I'd learn the system better if I had the experience of interacting directly and working it up to GUI status.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - A Black Falcon - 9th February 2006
Linux is like older versions of Windows, it's got GUIs on top of a textbased base...
Quote:Are there non-linux GUIs for Unix? [edit] Actually, I don't think there are. I have the impression that Unix is all text-based.
No, Linux and Unix are different, Linux is just a lot like Unix, but different, and free... :) Unix isn't free or open source, I believe. And Linux is mainly (though not only) for Intel-based x86 architecture machines... I'm not sure about Unix. I think that Sun uses a (proprietary) version of Unix for its computers (servers and stuff)?
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 9th February 2006
Wait, isn't there that free flavor of Unix called FreeBSD or something?
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - The Former DMiller - 9th February 2006
Yes, that is what OS X is based off of.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - Dark Jaguar - 9th February 2006
Ah! So that's how they did it. I knew that Unix at least had to be free ENOUGH that you could alter it and give it away without being sued.
So then, would you say it would be better for them to stick with Unix or move on to Linux based Mac?
I'd still like an informed opinion of the current day consensus on which is better.
Microsoft can eat my fat cock - etoven - 9th February 2006
DMiller Wrote:Yes, that is what OS X is based off of.
Steve Jobs reciently got into some hot water because he is selling OS-X and not giving it away for free. Which vilates the open source license aggrement for the Unix kernal.
Jobs says your paying for the shell extensions and bundeled utilities. However in order to satisify the licenese aggreement the entire package has to be free.
The only way out is to provide a kernal only disto of OS-X for free, but who would buy that!