| Author |
Message |
    
kevin
Citizen
Username: Eloso
Post Number: 43
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 9:54 am: |     |
Intel is trying to woo Apple to use their processors - that why they are saying nice things about apple.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1819286,00.asp
|
kevin
Citizen
Username: Eloso
Post Number: 44
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 9:58 am: | |
Security through obscurity is a week strategy.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1814308,00.asp
" The last few days have been embarrassing ones for Windows alternatives. Apple released a series of vulnerability disclosures and updates rivaling any put out by Microsoft and the Mozilla Group had to contend with a leaked "highly critical" vulnerability disclosure."
"The barriers to entry for Mac malware are much higher, both in terms of writing it and getting it to spread. This isn't because the Mac operating system is more secure, but because there are so many fewer Macs, and fewer qualified developers."
|
Oliver
Citizen
Username: Oly
Post Number: 6
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 10:06 am: | |
Noticeably faster, yes - I think it gets up to 30% faster depending on the device. That is significant, but I wouldn't have said "firewire is a must". It felt like that poster was comparing to USB 1.0.
all quality multimedia? Sure, if you think only Sony makes quality equipment but let's see...
Nikon D2X: Firewire? no USB2? yes
Nikon Coolscan 5k: Firewire? no USB2? yes
Like I said, I use both, I just don't think it's necessary to. Alot depends on one's needs and equipment.
|
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6510
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 10:26 am: | |
Not sure if still cameras and scanners have quite the same needs as video. Multimedia to me means video/sound. Kevin, you can try any and every argument including the obvious: "more people use PCs" but it doesn't change the fact that Macs are more secure and superior for purposes of creating digital video and many other creative endeavors. Read the WSJ item. Itel's chief didn't offer that up, he was pressed by Walt Mossberg because he didn't have any other direction to go in after admitting Windows is a computing hairball. |
kevin
Citizen
Username: Eloso
Post Number: 47
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 11:44 am: | |
Dave,
But that is the essentialy the arguement - Macs are more secure because only 2-5% of the people use them. So I thought I'd post an article from a computer security expert pointing out the fallacy of the arguement.
I'd also like to point out to Tom that both OSX and Windows are proprietery OSs that are based on UNIX. Neither of them are open source and each company has a strong record of defending their IP. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 7103
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 11:57 am: | |
No, Kevin. Windows is not based on UNIX in the least bit. Some of the Windows kernel developers took CONCEPTS from the MachOS kernel, but there is no common code.
There's a lot of source code for UNIX that is freely available. Where it isn't available, Linux source code will suffice. OSX has a lot of add-ons, and I'm sure you're right that the source code for them is proprietary. But the basic stuff under the hood is still UNIX and therefore familiar and modifiable and/or replaceable. |
kevin
Citizen
Username: Eloso
Post Number: 48
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 12:00 pm: | |
What I'd like to see would be the Mac OS on standard archtectures. I mean it can't be that hard to do. BSD, which I believe is what OSX is based on can, so why not OAX?
Then we could switch between OS without having to buy new hardware! |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 7104
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 12:06 pm: | |
That would be great, but I can understand why Apple doesn't want to do that. For one thing, even though it keeps the prices high, mating the OS to the proprietary hardware ensures good quality. The lack of proliferation of third party hardware ensures good quality. When there is a lot of choice, the market becomes more price driven. People don't make informed choice about their purchases, because complete information is not available. This has driven reliability of PC hardware down. If you could buy MacOS for the PC, you wouldn't be as satisfied, because a lot of problems that seem to be OS problems are really hardware or device driver problems. |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6511
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 12:11 pm: | |
Also, a lot of what Apple is selling is outrageously good industrial design. You can put a BMW engine in a Hyundai, too, but consumers probably won't want it. |
kevin
Citizen
Username: Eloso
Post Number: 49
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 12:12 pm: | |
Tom,
Are you sure? My understanding that Windows NT was based on Xenix and that was why it was POSIX compliant. I'll see if I can find out anything on the net.
Has apple published the source code of OSX so one can confirm that it is still UNIX?
I understand the philosophy that open source is more secure and robust because everyone can see the source, but if you take an open source OS, close it, modify it for the Mac - does that make it more secure and robust? |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 7105
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 12:18 pm: | |
Kevin, I'm sure. Some system calls are something-compliant, but that doesn't mean it's UNIX. And it was not based on Xenix.
Apple bought the source code for UNIX, which by itself doesn't prove they didn't throw it away, but enough people have confirmed that OSX is UNIX.
What does closing open source mean? Once everyone has a copy, it's open, like the horse out of the barn.
If they modify it beyond recognition, then it has the advantages and disadvantages of being closed source, except that the interface specs may or may not be the same. |
AlleyGater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 387
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 3:58 pm: | |
Digital Video equipment (as far as I know doesn't use USB 1 or 2). That might be changing as USB2 becomes more popular...I don't know (maybe a video expert could answer), but every digital video camera I have used had the INDUSTRY STANDARD Firewire. Firewire IS faster for doing video (forget the theoretical differences of USB2 to Firewire 800). There are obvious and clear reasons why the industry has standardized on Firewire. |
AlleyGater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 388
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 4:26 pm: | |
There is no way to create a fricking folder easily in the OS using your keyboard – Right click -> New Folder But does this really matter? I create a new folder about once a week, I don’t need a 1 button macro to do this.
What part of "using your keyboard" is there to not understand? Don't lift your hand off the keyboard and move it to your mouse, because that would be "using your mouse". Well other than the fact that using the keyboard is faster, you also need to consider that usually the thing you want to do IMMEDIATELY after you create a folder is give it a name USING THE KEYBOARD. So using the mouse is a waste of time and physical energy. And it's just irritating since the Mac has been able to do this since 1984. I'm so sorry that you only create a folder a week, but EVERY OTHER PERSON I KNOW creates them all the time. For my job, which is all project based, I need to create a different folder (and subfolders) to keep myself organized. I see an obvious lacking, and I sense that you are just covering up for it. You also neglected to address my other issue which is that there is no way to create a File Explorer window with a keystroke. Once again, you need a mouse and it wastes time. I need to do this MANY times a day also.
This opens ONE file - Not on my machine, all five would open, I highlight and hit enter, word opens with the 5 files.
I'm using Windows XP. What OS are you using? I have had disagreements with PC users who back me up on this issue. Did you actually try this or are you just assuming? Can we get an impartial ruling from someone else on this matter please?
I use WS_FTP Pro. I click the file and click send, it’s on the other machine, done
Ok, now I'm sure you didn't read my email. Your opinions are beginning to mean less and less to me. What I explained (with far too much detail) is that I need the ability to copy the filenames of the files that I just uploaded so I can paste them into an email.
I also don't want to edit sys.bin.ini – I use the control panel and have yet to have an issue.
It is possible that Windows has finally addressed this issue, I am not a power user of PCs so I wouldn't know how the OS has addressed this over the years. I still hear people reccomending editing those files in a text editor so I suspect it still needs to be done however. You also didn't mention the rest of my rant on the matter though, about the deinstallers (there is a whole Windows software industry devoted to cleaning up your HD and deinstalling software for the PC) and with the problems of fixing a dead PC. I know people who have been forced to reinstall Windows MANY MANY times because they couldn't figure out how to fix their problems. I haven't done a complete re-install of OSX in a VERY LONG TIME. PCs are overly complex and hard to fix and you didn't even bother to address that.
Then there is the issue of not being able to drag things to the dock – I click on a file drag it to the application and it opens, I don’t see the issue here.
That is fine if the thing you are dragging to is on your desktop or your desktop is visible at all -- keep in mind that PC applications are usually configured to fill the full screen). If you use 20 or 40 applications regularly (like I do) then you would need to have A LOT of icons on your desktop. Once again, you didn't really address my issue. You can't do what I mentioned (drag files to an icon that resides in the dock). It can't be done.
If it’s personal taste that’s great, I would guess that you’re used to a Mac. I’m used to a PC. I bet the first two months of using a Mac would drive me bonkers. I’m not bashing a Mac at all, not even sure that my software wouldn’t run on a Mac. But I have no desire to change.
You are the perfect example of someone who really shouldn't change. We only want the cool people to convert to the cult anyway. |
AlleyGater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 389
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 4:35 pm: | |
Kevin, it TOTALLY can be done. With a lot of work Apple could make OSX run on other hardware. But they don't want to. Steve Jobs believes that it isn't in Apple's best interest. And when you consider that OSX costs very little money (to the consumer) for a TON of development, you can clearly see that this isn't Apple's business model. Apple is in the business of selling hardware, and the OS is the thing that helps convince people that Apple hardware is worth purchasing. They also provide a great platform and support for Software Developers and they also provide some REALLY high quality software for free when you buy your machine (the entire iLife suite).
The thing is Apple has become EXTREMELY competitive in providing high quality, well engineered hardware as of late. So the old argument that Apples are way over-priced is just not true any more. No they don't create a $200 PC and infact you can't buy a new one unless you spend at least $500, but when you compare Apples to apples I think the Mac comes out WAY WAY WAY on top.
There is a reason why there is so much industry buzz around Apple lately. It is because Windows is getting worse (or barely at all better) while Mac just keeps getting better and better. Apple really is doing great things and it is getting the attention it deserves. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 7122
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 4:38 pm: | |
AlleyGater, you can do everything with keystrokes in Windows. Some are just hard to learn. And having said that, I share all your gripes about Windows.
To open Windows Explorer, hold down the Windows key and press E. Or Windows-R and then type a folder name, such as "C:\" (without the quotes).
To create a folder, Alt-F, w, f.
What other keyboard shortcuts do you want? They're all there, hidden where you won't find them. |
AlleyGater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 390
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 5:01 pm: | |
I also note that he complains about the lack of FTP software for a Mac.
Kevin, as I stated earlier it isn't an issue of quantity of software. Windows has TONS of really bad shareware applications far more than Mac. And when it came time to find a good FTP appliation I couldn't find ANYTHING that did what I needed due to the sheer quantity of apps to choose from at the Windows Shareware library. But to state that there is a lack of FTP software for Macs is just crazy talk. I myself have tried at least 20 different FTP apps for OSX.
If you do a search for FTP at the Mac shareware site it comes up with 114 applications (not all of which are going to be full FTP apps of course) -- feel free to check for yourself here.
So the issue isn't quantity it's quality. I don't know if WinSCP is the "best" Windows FTP app that exists (but I can tell you it is FEATURE RICH), but I find it PALES in comparison with the Mac industry standard Fetch. And that isn't even mentioning the very popular Transmit and my personal favorite INTERARCHY which is amazing for how it is integrates into the OS and for all intents and purposes acts and looks just like a OSX file window. It is fully featured and elegant to use. I have yet to get that experience from any Windows application FTP or otherwise.
A lot PC people seem to only care about WHAT a program can do (I'm talking just features here). On the Mac platform that is NOT enough. For instance the totally acceptable graphics application GIMP does 90% of the things Photoshop does and it's free. You would think that this would be a REALLY popular program, and in the Windows world it is. On the Mac not so much so. Most Mac people can see the difference and elegance of Photoshop over Gimp and for most of us Mac users features just isn't enough. How you use a program, it's design and what the program is capable of doing are all of utmost importance. Blame Apple, they created a user base that demands the best. |
AlleyGater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 391
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 5:07 pm: | |
Tom, I realize that you can press Alt-F, w, f. I did my due diligence before I brought up this matter 'cause I new the poopy storm it would bring. I just don't think that pressing 4 keys down is efficient for such a common command. I also don't think I am capable of remembering long sequences of keystrokes. My brain and most peoples can only hold so many of them -- why do most people not use them or even know Alt-F, w, f. Since these keystrokes aren't strings of numbers Tom, can even you remember them? |
AlleyGater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 392
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 5:13 pm: | |
Tom: Windows + E is VERY USEFUL. Windows + R not so much so.
Thank you VERY MUCH for the Windows + E command.
Just yesterday, someone helped me out by showing me Cygwin. Unix for my PC. My PC becomes more and more Mac-like every day.  I am not a UNIX god by ANY stretch of the imagination, but it sure was nice to use the Locate command on my Windows box and I was going crazy that I couldn't TOUCH a file. You guys might want to check it out if you don't already know about it. |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6516
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 5:52 pm: | |
Mac contingent is currently monopolizing the jukebox at Bunnys. |
Mayor McCheese
Supporter
Username: Mayor_mccheese
Post Number: 341
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 9:04 pm: | |
Is their taste in music as bad as their taste in computers?
Sorry, I had to say it. |
Rick B
Citizen
Username: Ruck1977
Post Number: 752
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 11:21 pm: | |
Al, 20-40 apps? Just curious...what are you doing with 20-40 apps at a time? Maybe I misinterpretted, and added the "at a time" in my own head?
I have to say that this thread has gone into a realm of debate that I was not hoping for. I did learn some things about MACs, but not enough about trends. Perhaps, it was an unanswerable question.
I AM checking out Cygwin though...
|
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 7128
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 11:07 am: | |
|
Oliver
Citizen
Username: Oly
Post Number: 7
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 11:25 am: | |
http://www.mevis.de/~meyer/MISC/dilbert/ComputerHolyWars02.gif |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6518
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 12:21 pm: | |
quote:20-40 apps? Just curious...what are you doing with 20-40 apps at a time? Maybe I misinterpretted, and added the "at a time" in my own head?
I frequently have about 20 apps running at a time.
 |
bets
Supporter
Username: Bets
Post Number: 1597
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 2:45 pm: | |
quote:Mac contingent is currently monopolizing the jukebox at Bunnys.
But this comment was posted from a PC. Not into full disclosure, Dave? 
In the above graphic, I also see Internet Exploder and AOL Instant Messenger. What's your AIM name? |
monster
Supporter
Username: Monster
Post Number: 780
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 5:14 pm: | |
you can bet it's not podyjat... |
AlleyGater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 396
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 6:57 pm: | |
If you use 20 or 40 applications regularly (like I do) then you would need to have A LOT of icons on your desktop.
I specifically didn't say at one time. Although a Mac would have ABSOLUTELY no problem doing this due to Mac OSes unbelievably well designed memory architecture. In fact you can leave your Mac running for months on end with tons of apps running and never need to restart because your computer would never slow down because the memory management is so good.
I wrote that comment because I was trying to address your comment about just dragging files to the program icon. But as I pointed out you can't drag a file to a program icon on the dock at the bottom of the screen on a windows machine. So if you can't drag files to the program icons in the dock where are you going to drag the file to? I assumed you meant drag the file to the program shortcut that you left on your computer's desktop. Please keep in mind that your suggestion of dragging the file to the program icon completely fails to address my point of what you do if you want to open 20 different files with multiple file formats. So if you use very many applications (at different times even) say 20 or 40 of them, well that is a lot of icons to leave on your desktop. Now do you see my point? |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page