Another example of superior Apple hardware

[washu]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

>Linux isn't hard, its disorganized.
something else: i've heard cleartype sort of technoloigies are deep inside apple.
does it mean it can't be turned off?
this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Advanced_Typography

that thing alone(i hate cleartype) would steer me away from apple(if price was same as pc).

OSX does have a "Best for CRT" setting which disables cleartype. I don't know if it will let you set it on a LCD or not.

[i4004]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

how can it tell if it's crt or lcd?
if u were to use dvi->vga adapter, for example...

[ratdude747]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

it assumes you set it right. its just that retarded.

[370forlife]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

how can it tell if it's crt or lcd?
if u were to use dvi->vga adapter, for example...

I would think it would tell through the DDC from the monitor, then it probably has a list of known monitor makes/models that are either crt or lcd.

[washu]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

how can it tell if it's crt or lcd?
if u were to use dvi->vga adapter, for example...

I would guess that at least for Apple monitors, OSX has an internal table and looks up the monitor model. Or if it's one of the many Macs that has a built in monitor it would know what to do with it.

A DVI->VGA adapter won't stop DDC/EDID info from passing from the monitor to video card, so any info that might indicate type will still go through.

My G5 currently has Linux on it because OSX is so slow, so I'm unable to test this setting right now.

[ratdude747]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

dont put osx back on. like trading in a ferrari for a sub-compact.

[NxB]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

On every old mac...

[ratdude747]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

On every old mac...

and to which post are you referring to?

[NxB]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

washu's

[washu]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

On every old mac...

Unfortunately some of the terrible older Macs are so badly designed that it is impossible to run a real OS on them. They are stuck with MacOS. The hardware should be able to run Linux/BSD, but Apple screwed it up so bad that nothing but MacOS will work. So the machines are basically paperweights.

As much as we slam OSX, it is an awesome OS when compared to MacOS (9 and below). The old MacOS is in the same league as DOS as far as OSes go, but tries to pretend it can play with the big boys. Windows 3.1 is a better OS on a technical level.

[i4004]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

>As much as we slam OSX, it is an awesome OS when compared to MacOS (9 and below). The old MacOS is in the same league as DOS as far as OSes go, but tries to pretend it can play with the big boys.

same with win9x branch vs. nt branch...
difference is that NT was released much. MUCH sooner than osx branch....
ie wintel had stability much before apple did...

i once asked about why didn't we have "nt for all" sooner...
answer was that there was not enough ram to run these os on commodity hardwer, and it's a good answer...nt won't really work on 16mb of ram....

that discussion was on ars technica forum.

[washu]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

same with win9x branch vs. nt branch...

Not exactly. Win9x had all the main features of a modern OS, it just wasn't very good at them. It had things like memory protection and real multitasking, but fitting them into the limited RAM of the time made for some severe compromises. It was still light years ahead of MacOS.

MacOS had nothing that would define it as a modern OS except the fancy GUI. No memory protection, no dynamic memory allocation, a barely functional virtual memory system, abysmal multitasking. Even what it did it sucked at, it crashed way more often then windows of the time. It was crap through and through. At least Win9x tried.

Windows NT is a high end sports car, Win9x is a crappy compact car. MacOS is a kid on a tricycle pretending to be a sports car.

[ratdude747]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

and linux is an f1/indy car. in its own leage of speed.

but, 9x's big issue was it was a 16/32 bit hybrid. nt was full 32 bit. explains more memory but also streamlines some things as its all on one common word size. but then you had vista:

if xp=amd athlon (xp?), then vista =p4 socket 423 Willamette. xp could use existing stuuf like athlon (pc133) and lower cost, vista needs newer hardware like original p4 (rdram only), and was expensive. and slower.

i could care less about win7- if it does well then less people switching to mac but if it flops then linux has a shot. hopefully before google os hits.

[ratdude747]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

for above:
edit- google os is linux (yay) but isnt as good as ubuntu. but google has a big enough share that it might work. may play with it when it is released.

[370forlife]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

Kind of funny that NT is brought up here, as wasn't it originally designed to work with ibm's PPC (as well as other non-x86 architecture processors,) processor?

[i4004]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

>It had things like memory protection

that wasn't really working.
it was all too easy for a program to bring down whole OS.
if i was left with win98 i wouldn't be using pcs today.

>Win9x is a crappy compact car.

bicycle. with one gear.
and no brakes...
torture!

i thought macos was crashing in simillar amount as win98?
after a year or two win98 was in totally unusable condition.
sure i install lots of programs, but i did that on 2k too and there was never an issue.

some people say win98 works ok if you keep it clean...
i think that's true, if by "keep clean" you mean "not used at all"..

anyway, you get the picture about my opinion on win98.

[i4004]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

>Kind of funny that NT is brought up here, as wasn't it originally designed to work with ibm's PPC (as well as other non-x86 architecture processors,) processor?

nt is spinoff from os/2, ie ibm and ms worked on os/2, then ms left and made nt.
ibm did os/2, yeah, but that wasn't it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/2

that was before ppc...essentially they wanted to make better os....i guess apple inspired them...offcourse apple was inspired by somebody else etc.

[washu]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

Kind of funny that NT is brought up here, as wasn't it originally designed to work with ibm's PPC (as well as other non-x86 architecture processors,) processor?

NT was originally written on the Intel i860, and then ported to x86, MIPS, PowerPC and Alpha later. The i860 kinda sucked as a general purpose CPU, it was better suited as a graphics accelerator. NT on MIPS went nowhere and Apple being the biggest PowerPC vendor never made their systems standardized enough to be useful. Plus the PowerPC was too slow once the Pentium Pro came out despite Apple's claims. The Alpha version lasted for a while, but died with that chip.

[washu]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

>It had things like memory protection
i thought macos was crashing in simillar amount as win98?

MacOS crashed way more often than even ME, the worst of the Win9x line. Win9x at least had crappy memory protection that sometimes worked. Also MacOS encouraged developers to directly patch the OS (extensions), which was extremely dumb from a stability point of view.

[ratdude747]

Re: Another example of superior Apple hardware

to me 9x was a mess. some 16 bit, some 32 bit... that means two different word sizes of code, requiring a translator... developers needed 2 types of code knowedge plus where to use both... since word size affects memory usage, i see why memory was an issue.

but nt was 100% 32-bit. all on one standard. one word size and therefore no translations or memory usage issues...

why ME failed was simply this- the mess could only go so far. trying to make 2k for dummies on a hybrid mess was the problem. it just got too complex and cluttered. too many things to go wrong.

also the dos type monolithic kernel was another problem. linux is how a monolithic kernel should behave. dos was too insecure. only one level of command. like doing every task as root, by anybody including any program or hacker.but the nt kernel is a hybrid kernel an such it has an admin (root) level of command and a user level. it is more secure as things must go up a level to compromise the core, but, no password is needed half the time and so it is still les secure than linux, but far superior to dos/9x

think of it like this:

if kernel= front door to house:

9x = door left wide open

nt= key hanging next to locked and shut door

linux= door dead-bolted with little chance of forced entry.