what is Apple thinking?

[Teatowel]

As someone stated, the reason why Macs are popular with graphics designers is indeed that back in the mid 80s they had a fully functional GUI. As did Amigas, which is why they were used as well until the early 90s.

 

[CraigRT]

Apple is lame.. overpriced computers that suck for anything other than Adobe software and/or graphics design.. booo

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

yes, i was kidding. BUT the title of the thread begged it. That is exactly what Apple is thinking. Its a great marketing strategy. They will do well with it. Remember, Apple doesn't have to sell a lot of computers to maintain their market share, likewise they don't have to sell a lot of computers to increase their market share.

Who doesn't want to dance like that white guy in the commercial?

 

[n0cmonkey]

<<

<<

<< correction: OS X isn't unix-like, as is linux, but actually is unix. >>

Any links showing that they got it certified as a UNIX tm? >>

Not really Unix... but a version of FreeBSD... MACWORLD REVIEW >>



FreeBSD is not a UNIX either.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< Apple is lame.. overpriced computers that suck for anything other than Adobe software and/or graphics design.. booo >>



Wrong, but thanks for playing.

 

[Ameesh]

oh for christ sake, have you use BSD and Solarias or Linux and HP-UX? i ve used almost all of those and im telling you they are all the same no matter if they paid for a copywright UNIX or not. only small differences but if you were an adpet on one it would only take a few days to ramp up on a new flavor of Unix.



back to the point, MacOSX is BSD with the nic little gui on top of it i think its called Luna? or Aqua? i always get em mixed up. The POint is Apple cant make an OS, they are stupid, now they gave up and are using other peoples OS. They even shipped itwith out DVD and cd writing support?! wtf? all these lemming mac users need their fix so they gave them OS9 to run in OS 10 so they could burn a cd or watch a dvd, how ridicoulus is that.


As technical reasons go, BSD is not that great especially for their thread pool, their is no throttleing so its very vurnable to many kinds of DoS attacks. there are more but i gotta shower and get to work. write more if you would like to carry on a technical discussion.



oh and about finalcut pro! forget it i dont care how much you like it, Professional Content Creators use Premier, and using one piece of nitch software to support an entire platform is a stupid argument.

 

[ILikeSprite]

WTH is an ipod?

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< oh for christ sake, have you use BSD and Solarias or Linux and HP-UX? i ve used almost all of those and im telling you they are all the same no matter if they paid for a copywright UNIX or not. only small differences but if you were an adpet on one it would only take a few days to ramp up on a new flavor of Unix. >>



Yes, I have used all three. Including older versions of SunOS. They are all UNIX-like, like I said.



<< back to the point, MacOSX is BSD with the nic little gui on top of it i think its called Luna? or Aqua? >>



Aqua, common mistake.



<< i always get em mixed up. The POint is Apple cant make an OS, they are stupid, now they gave up and are using other peoples OS. >>



How is using work that is out there stupid? They cut development time and money, not to mention got a high grade OS for free. With a couple tweaks they specialized it to PPC platform, threw a gui on top, and boom, awesome operating system.



<< They even shipped itwith out DVD and cd writing support?! >>



DVD support is in 10.1. 10.0 was for early adopters.



<< wtf? all these lemming mac users need their fix so they gave them OS9 to run in OS 10 so they could burn a cd or watch a dvd, how ridicoulus is that. >>



And how many people on these boards still dual boot DOS/NT? Same situation, except I can run Mac OS 9 inside of OS X. I did not load OS 9 because I do not know it and do not need it.



<< As technical reasons go, BSD is not that great especially for their thread pool, their is no throttleing so its very vurnable to many kinds of DoS attacks. there are more but i gotta shower and get to work. write more if you would like to carry on a technical discussion. >>



I will agree that the threading in OpenBSD is quite slow. As far as more technical information than that, I have no clue. Im not a developer for that OS or any other BSD.



<< oh and about finalcut pro! forget it i dont care how much you like it, Professional Content Creators use Premier, and using one piece of nitch software to support an entire platform is a stupid argument. >>



Mac OS X seems to work well for me, and what I do. I do networking so having a UNIX system is an obvious help. It comes complete with necessary tools like SSH (OpenSSH), a packet sniffer (tcpdump, pretty much THE standard), and a useful command line.

 

[GreenGhost]

Watching people argue without any knowledge of the subject can be really funny. I have a question: Apple says that the lower level of OS X (they call Darwin, I think; maybe the microkernel, or whatever came from Mach and NextStep) is open source (the Aqua GUI is not), and they say it could be portable to the Intel architecture with relative ease. Does anybody think that the porting of OS X will happen?

The way I see, Apple appears to be more of a hardware company than a software company. I don't have sales numbers, but it looks like the tie of the OS to their hardware is fundamental to their survivor. In other words, the same fact that did not allow the growth of the company in the small business/home front is what keeps them alive.

If they port it to Intel, nobody will buy Apple hardware, but they still will loose pretty bad in OS sales. It would take years to gain significant market outside specialized niches, and have a significant number of applictions in the market. Then, Microsoft could start selling Windows for 30 bucks and drive them away.

Maybe they think they are doing fine right now, and investing on or supporting something that can bring their company down is the definitely not in their plans. But they kept a back door open in case their hardware operation goes belly up.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< Watching people argue without any knowledge of the subject can be really funny. I have a question: Apple says that the lower level of OS X (they call Darwin, I think; maybe the microkernel, or whatever came from Mach and NextStep) is open source (the Aqua GUI is not), and they say it could be portable to the Intel architecture with relative ease. Does anybody think that the porting of OS X will happen? >>



darwin has been ported to x86. You canb find binary releases and probably source somewhere.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Well, since this thread has already been hijacked six ways from Sunday I might as well throw in my 2 cents. IMO, both systems are useful for different things. I prefer a Mac for work, and a PC for pleasure.




<< oh and about finalcut pro! forget it i dont care how much you like it, Professional Content Creators use Premier, and using one piece of nitch software to support an entire platform is a stupid argument. >>



Come to Hollywood and tell me how many people you find using Premiere (or editing on a PC). I bet you could keep count using one hand. No one has ever asked me "Do you know Premiere?" But everyone asks "Do you know Final Cut?" or "Do you know AVID?" Premiere has advantages (like a RT audio mixer), but Apple is making/has made Final Cut able to integrate w/other high end software. FCP can import/export OMF files so you can freely send files between FCP, and lets say, ProTools. No need for extra rendering and PITA "save as" crap to transfer files between proggies. FCP can also import/export AVID compatible EDLs. So you can off-line on FCP and then have your project on-lined using an AVID Symphony, for example. FCP also has better media management and the ability to have multiple sequences in one project. And FCP 3.0 also has RT preview of effects (w/o the need for extra hardware) and improved integration w/AE, and Photoshop (so Premiere's advantage there is shrinking).

Hmmm.. that's enough of a rant for now.

Lethal

 

[McPhreak]

<< IMO, both systems are useful for different things. I prefer a Mac for work, and a PC for pleasure. >>



Well said. Same goes for me.

In addition to iPod, what about the titanium I book? or that phat widescreen lcd they got? mmmmmm......

 

[Ameesh]

<<

<< oh for christ sake, have you use BSD and Solarias or Linux and HP-UX? i ve used almost all of those and im telling you they are all the same no matter if they paid for a copywright UNIX or not. only small differences but if you were an adpet on one it would only take a few days to ramp up on a new flavor of Unix. >>



Yes, I have used all three. Including older versions of SunOS. They are all UNIX-like, like I said.



<< back to the point, MacOSX is BSD with the nic little gui on top of it i think its called Luna? or Aqua? >>



Aqua, common mistake.



<< i always get em mixed up. The POint is Apple cant make an OS, they are stupid, now they gave up and are using other peoples OS. >>



How is using work that is out there stupid? They cut development time and money, not to mention got a high grade OS for free. With a couple tweaks they specialized it to PPC platform, threw a gui on top, and boom, awesome operating system.

They tried to make the OS before and they failed, so now they take another OS wrap it up in Aqua and pass it off as their own work.




<< They even shipped itwith out DVD and cd writing support?! >>



DVD support is in 10.1. 10.0 was for early adopters.


Nice reason, the fact is their programmers and testers had all of this time while devolping the OS to make sure feautures work, IMO DVD and CD Burning Support is not a trivial feature.



<< wtf? all these lemming mac users need their fix so they gave them OS9 to run in OS 10 so they could burn a cd or watch a dvd, how ridicoulus is that. >>



And how many people on these boards still dual boot DOS/NT? Same situation, except I can run Mac OS 9 inside of OS X. I did not load OS 9 because I do not know it and do not need it.


the situation is different, they couldnt get the dvd and cd-r stuff working so they told you to run one OS inside another one to get some functionality which should fundementally handle by the core operating system.





<< As technical reasons go, BSD is not that great especially for their thread pool, their is no throttleing so its very vurnable to many kinds of DoS attacks. there are more but i gotta shower and get to work. write more if you would like to carry on a technical discussion. >>



I will agree that the threading in OpenBSD is quite slow. As far as more technical information than that, I have no clue. Im not a developer for that OS or any other BSD.


Its not just that the threads are slow but the thread pool is vurnable the fact that they could get dvd and cd-r working in the first place goes to show that the underlying architecure is poor and non-scalable.



<< oh and about finalcut pro! forget it i dont care how much you like it, Professional Content Creators use Premier, and using one piece of nitch software to support an entire platform is a stupid argument. >>



Mac OS X seems to work well for me, and what I do. I do networking so having a UNIX system is an obvious help. It comes complete with necessary tools like SSH (OpenSSH), a packet sniffer (tcpdump, pretty much THE standard), and a useful command line. >>



In windows we have IPSec over remote desktop for secure remote shelling, netmon instead of tcp dump which is a lot better because it can handle all ip traffic not just tcp, and windows scripting host which gives a lot of power and flexibility to the script kiddies out there.

 

[McPhreak]

<< The POint is Apple cant make an OS, they are stupid, now they gave up and are using other peoples OS. >>



I don't know about you, but I could care less who's OS they use as long as it's good. Limiting yourself to your own ideas and shutting out everybody else's ideas are not going to get anybody anywhere in the technology field. Just look at Microsoft. You could probably argue that half the stuff they crank out is simply someone else's product with a couple added features and the Microsoft logo on it. That's why they're so successful. But I don't mind cuz they make good software even better (usually). As long as it's good software, who cares? And OSX is a good OS. They've made that jump from is suck to not so is suck.

 

[n0cmonkey]

How many operating systems have everything working perfectly during basically beta releases? I know I dont need either of those features, and didnt start using DVDs until 10.1 came out.

tcpdump can handle more than just tcp. I use it all the time. How does the "IPSec over remote desktop" fare bandwidth wise? Ive never seen that option when I was using Win2k. Apple script and bourne scripting (not to mention the compiler and libraries and whatnot coming with the OS) help out script kiddiots even more

Just because you work for Microsoft does not mean you cant admit that other operating systems are nice. I like OpenBSD, I dont like Windows, but I can see where it would come in handy. Use the right tool for the right job, and for anyone interresting in UNIX, Windows is not the right tool.

We wont mention that Windows is only released for 1 platform. Portable, clean code isnt that big of a deal.