Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES - Ubuntu ; No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best Platform of the year in 2008. http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2...hnology-2.html No one is unhappy with Mac OS X Version 10.4, known as Tiger. OS X is not an application platform (I ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 15 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 285

Thread: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

  1. Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
    Platform of the year in 2008.

    http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2...hnology-2.html

    No one is unhappy with Mac OS X Version 10.4, known as Tiger. OS X is
    not an application platform (I bristle at using the term "operating
    system" for OS X; I explain why below) that needed repair, speeding up,
    or exterior renovation. Motivations for major upgrades of competing
    system software ‹ roll-ups of an unmanageable number of fixes, because
    the calendar says it's time, or because users are perceived to have
    version fatigue ‹ don't apply to OS X.

    Apple wields no whip to force upgrades because Tiger stands no risk of
    being neglected by Apple or third-party developers as long as Leopard
    lives. Despite the absence of a stick that drives users into upgrades of
    competing OSes, or perhaps because of it, Apple enjoys an extraordinary
    rate of voluntary OS X upgrades among desktop and notebook users. Why?
    People buy Macs because the platform as a whole is perfect, full stop.
    Leopard is a rung above perfection. It's taken as rote that the Mac
    blows away PC users' expectations. Leopard blows away Mac users'
    expectations, and that's saying a great deal.

    -

    Apple's secret, which is no secret to Mac users, is that major OS X
    releases deliver tangible value far in excess of their asking price,
    which in Leopard's case is $129. OS X is, first and foremost, a platform
    for integrated, user-facing applications. And to a far greater extent
    than previous releases, OS X Leopard itself exploits the facilities that
    Apple's developers have used to create the vendor's commercial software.
    Apple hasn't reserved any of the Mac platform's goodies for itself, and
    users don't need to wait (or spend) for apps that expose the platform's
    richness in productive ways.

    -

    For example, Screen Sharing is now built into OS X, just open the Finder
    icon for a remote server and click the Screen Sharing button to grab the
    remote system's display and, optionally, its mouse and keyboard. Apple
    built Screen Sharing into iChat, and Back to My Mac uses the .Mac
    service and Screen Sharing to securely tunnel to files and consoles on
    Macs behind firewalls. All of Leopard is like that ‹ every Leopard
    feature, even those that would ordinarily be invisible to all but
    developers, or reserved for the use of the vendor, is planted throughout
    OS X in the places you'd put it.

    Freedom in the frameworks
    Looking at it from a technical perspective, Leopard's step past
    perfection lies in its extensive use of the combination of the Mac
    platform's intrinsic integration and Leopard's delivery of hundreds of
    additions and enhancements to OS X's frameworks.

    Apple supplies a consistent, familiar, and well-documented path for
    developers to do any given thing. In contrast, an entire industry has
    sprung up around providing developers with proprietary plugs for the
    gaps that Microsoft leaves in Windows, often intentionally as an aid to
    the third-party development community. The completeness of the Mac
    frameworks leaves no room for a marketplace for Mac developer library
    enhancements.

    What's changed in Leopard is that Apple has invested enormous effort to
    expose Mac framework enhancements to users through OS X's built-in
    facilities and applications. Leopard's out-of-the-box experience, which
    I define as the things that a user can do without spending an extra
    dollar on software, eclipses Tiger's, and Tiger was no slouch in this
    regard. In the past, third parties have offered freeware and shareware
    facilities to extend or even replace Finder, the Mac's answer to
    Windows' primitive Explorer. That died out with Tiger, and Leopard makes
    such efforts entirely useless. That is not a bad thing.

    Congrats to Apple for showing the world how great computing can be!

    You can move up to the most Open OS available here:

    http://www.apple.com/macosx/

    http://www.apple.com/mac/

    Wow, now Apple has over 8% of the Market, Windows has dropped below 89%
    for the first time in decades... and Linux still is vying for 1%!

    What a great world indeed!

    You can learn more about the World's largest UNIX platform here!

    http://www.apple.com/macosx/techspecs/

    And the most respected, scalable, inexpensive UNIX SERVER OS here:

    http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/specs.html

    Around 230% less than Linux installs and over 900% less than Microsoft!

    http://snipurl.com/1wtxw

    Smart people only use OSX, that's for sure!

    -

  2. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    Appil Corproation asstroturfer O x f o r d wrote on behalf of Appil
    corporation:

    > N


    Linux now distributed at a rate of 1 million+ desktops per month.
    Embedded Linux now selling 1 million embedded Linux products PER DAY.
    Linux and open source is winning compared to over priced underperforming
    second rate appil crap products and marketing.

    See for yourself why Linux is superior technology
    compared to appil crap.
    Go to http://www.youtube.com and search for compiz and beryl

    Its all free.
    Time you got a decent PC and installed Linux
    and enjoyed the power of Linux flowing through your computer.
    For speed, performance and bang for buck there is nothing
    that beats it.

    http://www.livecdlist.com
    http://www.distrowatch.com


  3. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, O x f o r d

    wrote
    on Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:20:48 -0700
    :
    > No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
    > Platform of the year in 2008.


    [rest snipped]

    And we're supposed to care precisely...why?

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    GNU and improved.

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  4. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    7 wrote:

    > Linux now distributed at a rate of 1 million+ desktops per month.
    > Embedded Linux now selling 1 million embedded Linux products PER DAY.
    > Linux and open source is winning compared to over priced underperforming
    > second rate appil crap products and marketing.


    and 96% of them are "updates/patches" to previous distributions. Only
    around 2,111 "new" installs with Linux on a day to day basis.

    OSX completely dwarfs that number at 19,000 per day in purely "new"
    machines being brought online, and just look, over 23,000 PER DAY in the
    current 90 days alone.

    Linux just can't keep pace with the more robust OSX, you and I both know
    that. Linus is fine for dumb servers and terminals, don't get me wrong,
    but it never will hold more than .8% of worldwide share on desktops or
    laptops. That's a simple FACT.

    (Apple's Laptops alone already have 22% worldwide share!, so the Linux
    community really must rethink their goals)

    > See for yourself why Linux is superior technology
    > compared to appil crap.
    > Go to http://www.youtube.com and search for compiz and beryl


    didn't see anything, could you post a real example?

    > Its all free.
    > Time you got a decent PC and installed Linux
    > and enjoyed the power of Linux flowing through your computer.
    > For speed, performance and bang for buck there is nothing
    > that beats it.


    OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux was
    a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.

    Now OSX is over 19 times the size of Linux when you look at the
    "installed base", plus it has REAL profession software, not the hobby,
    afterschool projects so often see when downloading Linux software.

    Yes, I feel sorry for the poor regions of Europe that still hang on to
    Linux even though Linus has moved to a purely Mac City. Linux is
    basically dead in the big scheme of things. I'm just the messenger.

    -

  5. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    O x f o r d wrote:
    > 7 wrote:
    >


    > OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux was
    > a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
    >


    There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
    professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and good
    to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it. Linux
    might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are amateur
    hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X

  6. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    O x f o r d wrote:

    < snip OxRetard garbage >

    > OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux was
    > a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
    >


    Only that Linus did never move to OSX

    Sorry to burst your bubble, cretinous typical Mac user OxRetard, but you are
    wrong as usual: He is /also/ using a Apple computer. He runs linux PPC on
    it

    Torvalds: OS X core a “piece of crap”
    http://www.geek.com/torvalds-os-x-core-a-piece-of-crap/

    Scuttlebutt: Torvalds Thinks OS X Is Crap
    http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/ma...9/mac_dev.html

    Torvalds rubbishes core of Apple's OS X
    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1...2085525,00.htm


    Do you need any more links why Linus Torvalds thinks that OSX is garbage,
    utter, complete filth? You can have dozens of them. All telling you what
    garbage your beloved toy-OS really is

    You are really a typical Mac user, OxRetard. Nothing which remotely
    resembles "facts" would be found anywhere near you

    < snip more typical Mac users idiocy >
    --
    Avoid reality at all costs.


  7. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    O x f o r d schreef:
    > No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
    > Platform of the year in 2008.
    >
    > http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2...hnology-2.html
    >
    > No one is unhappy with Mac OS X Version 10.4, known as Tiger. OS X is
    > not an application platform (I bristle at using the term "operating
    > system" for OS X; I explain why below) that needed repair, speeding up,
    > or exterior renovation. Motivations for major upgrades of competing
    > system software ‹ roll-ups of an unmanageable number of fixes, because
    > the calendar says it's time, or because users are perceived to have
    > version fatigue ‹ don't apply to OS X.
    >
    > Apple wields no whip to force upgrades because Tiger stands no risk of
    > being neglected by Apple or third-party developers as long as Leopard
    > lives. Despite the absence of a stick that drives users into upgrades of
    > competing OSes, or perhaps because of it, Apple enjoys an extraordinary
    > rate of voluntary OS X upgrades among desktop and notebook users. Why?
    > People buy Macs because the platform as a whole is perfect, full stop.
    > Leopard is a rung above perfection. It's taken as rote that the Mac
    > blows away PC users' expectations. Leopard blows away Mac users'
    > expectations, and that's saying a great deal.
    >
    > -
    >
    > Apple's secret, which is no secret to Mac users, is that major OS X
    > releases deliver tangible value far in excess of their asking price,
    > which in Leopard's case is $129. OS X is, first and foremost, a platform
    > for integrated, user-facing applications. And to a far greater extent
    > than previous releases, OS X Leopard itself exploits the facilities that
    > Apple's developers have used to create the vendor's commercial software.
    > Apple hasn't reserved any of the Mac platform's goodies for itself, and
    > users don't need to wait (or spend) for apps that expose the platform's
    > richness in productive ways.
    >
    > -
    >
    > For example, Screen Sharing is now built into OS X, just open the Finder
    > icon for a remote server and click the Screen Sharing button to grab the
    > remote system's display and, optionally, its mouse and keyboard. Apple
    > built Screen Sharing into iChat, and Back to My Mac uses the .Mac
    > service and Screen Sharing to securely tunnel to files and consoles on
    > Macs behind firewalls. All of Leopard is like that ‹ every Leopard
    > feature, even those that would ordinarily be invisible to all but
    > developers, or reserved for the use of the vendor, is planted throughout
    > OS X in the places you'd put it.
    >
    > Freedom in the frameworks
    > Looking at it from a technical perspective, Leopard's step past
    > perfection lies in its extensive use of the combination of the Mac
    > platform's intrinsic integration and Leopard's delivery of hundreds of
    > additions and enhancements to OS X's frameworks.
    >
    > Apple supplies a consistent, familiar, and well-documented path for
    > developers to do any given thing. In contrast, an entire industry has
    > sprung up around providing developers with proprietary plugs for the
    > gaps that Microsoft leaves in Windows, often intentionally as an aid to
    > the third-party development community. The completeness of the Mac
    > frameworks leaves no room for a marketplace for Mac developer library
    > enhancements.
    >
    > What's changed in Leopard is that Apple has invested enormous effort to
    > expose Mac framework enhancements to users through OS X's built-in
    > facilities and applications. Leopard's out-of-the-box experience, which
    > I define as the things that a user can do without spending an extra
    > dollar on software, eclipses Tiger's, and Tiger was no slouch in this
    > regard. In the past, third parties have offered freeware and shareware
    > facilities to extend or even replace Finder, the Mac's answer to
    > Windows' primitive Explorer. That died out with Tiger, and Leopard makes
    > such efforts entirely useless. That is not a bad thing.
    >
    > Congrats to Apple for showing the world how great computing can be!
    >
    > You can move up to the most Open OS available here:
    >
    > http://www.apple.com/macosx/
    >
    > http://www.apple.com/mac/
    >
    > Wow, now Apple has over 8% of the Market, Windows has dropped below 89%
    > for the first time in decades... and Linux still is vying for 1%!
    >
    > What a great world indeed!
    >
    > You can learn more about the World's largest UNIX platform here!
    >
    > http://www.apple.com/macosx/techspecs/
    >
    > And the most respected, scalable, inexpensive UNIX SERVER OS here:
    >
    > http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/specs.html
    >
    > Around 230% less than Linux installs and over 900% less than Microsoft!
    >
    > http://snipurl.com/1wtxw
    >
    > Smart people only use OSX, that's for sure!
    >
    > -


    OK you really confuse me. Take a look at http://discussions.apple.com/
    and see how many problems there are with Leopard and with the 10.4.11
    update of Tiger. Yes there are nice features in Leopard, but if your
    system isn't running the way it should it's not worth the trouble.

    --
    Max

    Open Source is an ode to common sense

  8. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:55:11 -0800, Tommy Tickler wrote
    (in article ):

    > O x f o r d wrote:
    >> 7 wrote:
    >>

    >
    >> OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux was
    >> a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
    >>

    >
    > There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
    > professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and good
    > to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it. Linux
    > might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are amateur
    > hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X


    That's true. Funny thing though, out of the box, a Mac can run just about
    anything that Linux can run (as long as you install X11 too).

    --
    How come every time we get a "Major Tax Cut" I get maybe $0.30 more returned
    to me, but every time there's a "Minor Tax Increase" it costs me $300.00?


  9. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    > There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
    > professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and good
    > to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it. Linux
    > might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are amateur
    > hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X


    I will admit that many of the apps running in Linux are not as well
    polished as those of MS or Apple, but given time they will improve. Apple
    and MS spend literally millions in research in fine tuning their GUIs for
    the average user, while apps in the Linux community are built by
    relavtively small groups who are far more intent on ensuring a stable and
    secure core. As Linux distros mature, the interfaces for the apps will also
    greatly improve. At the present, you have various distros that appeal to
    different sets of users. With MS and Apple you take it the way they want
    you to have it.

  10. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    7 schreef:

    Please leave this group for Ubuntu subjects!

  11. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    O x f o r d wrote:

    > No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
    > Platform of the year in 2008.


    If you have to /buy/ plaudits like this, your product is worthless.

    Next month, another "industry" rag will tell the world that MS Vista is the
    best OS available - because MS will buy /lots/ of expensive advertising
    space.

    These silly "awards" are about as reliable a Hi-fi magazine reviews. (Clue:
    the company that buys the most advertising space gets the best reviews!)

    C.

  12. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    O x f o r d writes:

    > No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
    > Platform of the year in 2008.
    >
    > http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2...hnology-2.html


    Huh? According to l33t MS hacker "Christopher Hunter", Apple have
    neither the talent nor the resources to challenge Linux! No wonder
    Microsoft fired him - he's clearly barking mad.

  13. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:20:48 -0700, O x f o r d wrote:

    .... nothing worth reading.


    --
    Rick

  14. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:58:37 -0800, George Graves wrote:

    > On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:55:11 -0800, Tommy Tickler wrote (in article
    > ):
    >
    >> O x f o r d wrote:
    >>> 7 wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux
    >>> was a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
    >> professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and
    >> good to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it.
    >> Linux might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are
    >> amateur hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X

    >
    > That's true. Funny thing though, out of the box, a Mac can run just
    > about anything that Linux can run (as long as you install X11 too).


    .... as long as you install X11 too is not the same as out of the box.

    --
    Rick

  15. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    Hadron wrote:

    > O x f o r d writes:
    >
    >> No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
    >> Platform of the year in 2008.
    >>
    >> http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2...hnology-2.html

    >
    > Huh? According to l33t MS hacker "Christopher Hunter", Apple have
    > neither the talent nor the resources to challenge Linux! No wonder
    > Microsoft fired him - he's clearly barking mad.


    If you knew my *real* name, you'd know why and when I (of my own
    volition) /left/ MS.

    It was actually quite a lot of fun at the time, but the endless meaningless
    meetings, the retarded corporate structure (where a man's level of
    *incompetence* determines how high in the company he gets) and the poor pay
    (I can get three times as much for shorter hours elsewhere) persuaded me
    and many of my collegues to leave. There was a mass migration to FOSS
    projects!

    As to Apple - they have a fairly competent core team of around eighty
    programmers. There is *no* *way* that they have the amount of /resources/
    or amount of /talent/ that's available to FOSS.

    It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX effort.
    There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
    long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
    install /everything/ that's included with a distro).

    C.


  16. Re: Apple's OSX crap compared to Linux

    In article <13o5gaj23tajm15@news.supernews.com>, Rick
    wrote:

    > On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:58:37 -0800, George Graves wrote:
    >
    > > On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:55:11 -0800, Tommy Tickler wrote (in article
    > > ):
    > >
    > >> O x f o r d wrote:
    > >>> 7 wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> OSX is faster than Linux, that has been proven over and over. Linux
    > >>> was a flash in the pan before Linus moved to OSX in the late 00's.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >> There are also a damn side larger number of decent apps that have
    > >> professional polish for OS X compared to Linux. It is all well and
    > >> good to run an OS, but that OS also needs quality apps to run on it.
    > >> Linux might have a gazillion apps, but that significant majority are
    > >> amateur hour by comparison to the apps designed to run on OS X

    > >
    > > That's true. Funny thing though, out of the box, a Mac can run just
    > > about anything that Linux can run (as long as you install X11 too).

    >
    > ... as long as you install X11 too is not the same as out of the box.


    Uh, with Leopard, the default install is with X11...

  17. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    Christopher Hunter writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> O x f o r d writes:
    >>
    >>> No Great Surprise, but InfoWorld has now named Apple's OSX the best
    >>> Platform of the year in 2008.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.infoworld.com/slideshow/2...hnology-2.html

    >>
    >> Huh? According to l33t MS hacker "Christopher Hunter", Apple have
    >> neither the talent nor the resources to challenge Linux! No wonder
    >> Microsoft fired him - he's clearly barking mad.

    >
    > If you knew my *real* name, you'd know why and when I (of my own
    > volition) /left/ MS.


    I take my hat off to you for picking a nym which so clearly matches your
    views.

    >
    > It was actually quite a lot of fun at the time, but the endless meaningless
    > meetings, the retarded corporate structure (where a man's level of
    > *incompetence* determines how high in the company he gets) and the
    > poor pay


    You're misquoting the Peter principle which states that someone is
    promoted to their first level of incompetence. I think ....

    > (I can get three times as much for shorter hours elsewhere) persuaded me
    > and many of my collegues to leave. There was a mass migration to FOSS
    > projects!


    3 x as much eh? Good to see you're after the cash. Nothing wrong with
    that.

    >
    > As to Apple - they have a fairly competent core team of around eighty
    > programmers. There is *no* *way* that they have the amount of /resources/
    > or amount of /talent/ that's available to FOSS.


    Bull****.

    >
    > It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX
    > effort.


    if you think Beryl determines "quality" then good luck to you. Go and us
    OSX or an iPhone to see how a UI should hang together.

    > There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
    > long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
    > install /everything/ that's included with a distro).


    Linux IS great WHEN you get to know it. Unfortunately most of the OSS
    GUI apps are simply atrocious.

    Gimp, and now Amarok are the main exceptions IMO.

  18. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    Hadron wrote:

    > I take my hat off to you for picking a nym which so clearly matches your
    > views.


    HA!

    >> It was actually quite a lot of fun at the time, but the endless
    >> meaningless meetings, the retarded corporate structure (where a man's
    >> level of *incompetence* determines how high in the company he gets) and
    >> the poor pay

    >
    > You're misquoting the Peter principle which states that someone is
    > promoted to their first level of incompetence. I think ....


    You're /nearly/ right (that /was/ the Peter Principle), but at MS,
    incompetence and sycophancy were the only real ways to progress.

    >> (I can get three times as much for shorter hours elsewhere) persuaded me
    >> and many of my collegues to leave. There was a mass migration to FOSS
    >> projects!

    >
    > 3 x as much eh? Good to see you're after the cash. Nothing wrong with
    > that.


    Exactly! I want a comfortable old age, and want to be not too old to enjoy
    it!

    >> As to Apple - they have a fairly competent core team of around eighty
    >> programmers. There is *no* *way* that they have the amount of
    >> /resources/ or amount of /talent/ that's available to FOSS.

    >
    > Bull****.


    Think. The sheer /numbers/ of FOSS developers guarantee that there's /more/
    talent! Some mud always sticks to the wall!

    >> It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX
    >> effort.

    >
    > if you think Beryl determines "quality" then good luck to you.


    When properly configured on modern hardware, it's spectacular - it's the
    "gold standard" for desktop offerings.

    > Go and use OSX or an iPhone to see how a UI should hang together.


    OSX is surprisingly slow - I've got a box next to me. It's pretty, but
    inefficient. The iPhone is a poor joke. The software is easily crashed,
    they missed out *3G* compatability, the transceiver is appalling (low
    output power, poor receive sensitivity), and they're really easily broken!

    >> There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
    >> long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
    >> install /everything/ that's included with a distro).

    >
    > Linux IS great WHEN you get to know it. Unfortunately most of the OSS
    > GUI apps are simply atrocious.


    Not any more. That might have been true five years ago, but no longer.

    > Gimp, and now Amarok are the main exceptions IMO.


    Your opinions are almost right in this instance, but there's a /lot/ more
    good software that you might have missed!

    C.


  19. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    Christopher Hunter writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >>> It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX
    >>> effort.

    >>
    >> if you think Beryl determines "quality" then good luck to you.

    >
    > When properly configured on modern hardware, it's spectacular - it's the
    > "gold standard" for desktop offerings.


    No. It's the gold standard for useless eye candy. I used it for a while
    and got bored with it and removed it. It stopped my dual screen setup
    showing full screen video on the second X display. A known bug I
    believe.

    It IS impressive though. No doubt. But a desktop is not application SW
    for real work I am afraid.

    >
    >> Go and use OSX or an iPhone to see how a UI should hang together.

    >
    > OSX is surprisingly slow - I've got a box next to me. It's pretty, but
    > inefficient. The iPhone is a poor joke. The software is easily crashed,
    > they missed out *3G* compatability, the transceiver is appalling (low
    > output power, poor receive sensitivity), and they're really easily
    > broken!


    I am talking about the UI SW. It is excellent.

    >
    >>> There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
    >>> long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
    >>> install /everything/ that's included with a distro).

    >>
    >> Linux IS great WHEN you get to know it. Unfortunately most of the OSS
    >> GUI apps are simply atrocious.

    >
    > Not any more. That might have been true five years ago, but no
    > longer.


    Rubbish.
    >
    >> Gimp, and now Amarok are the main exceptions IMO.

    >
    > Your opinions are almost right in this instance, but there's a /lot/ more
    > good software that you might have missed!


    Name it. And compare it to the professional Windows equivalents.

  20. Re: Apple's OSX Wins Platform of the Year at CES

    Christopher Hunter wrote:

    > It's quite funny to have a machine running Beryl next to an OSX effort.
    > There's no longer any comparison. The Linux box wins in /every/ way, as
    > long as you make sensible choices about software (and don't just
    > install /everything/ that's included with a distro).


    not in terms of mass "usability", linux never has a chance.

    linux is mainly the purview of the poor, inexperienced and uninformed.

    osx is where the winners live, everyone in the unix community agrees
    with that.

    http://www.apple.com/macosx/

    http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/

    the big boys never even consider linux at this point in the game.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 15 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast