Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

[Junk Parts]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Apples vs Oranges ????
Whats the point or better yet its a moot point. Right now I have the best PC "Dell" in the world and its old and slow. Its the best because its mine and when I started it up just now everything went fine during the Xp Home boot up. Now if it were and Apple it would still be the best "Computer" in the world to me if it was up and working right like my PC "Dell" is. If we want some real fun we can always fire up some unfinished OS like Kubuntu. This is the area where RatDude could give most of us a butt kicking. I'm just not a high level power user like most are on here. I turn it on. It does its thing. After that I'm ether copying a DVD or using the internet. It doesn't take a boat load of computing power to do that.

[ratdude747]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

its not unfinished. not unless your pushing ubuntu 9.10 alpha 5 like i am on the p4 630.

oh, and thanks for the compliment, jp. me part human, part penguin

[NxB]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

I like debate and this is a very subjective issue so it can go on forever. Endless Fun.

Right now its nice to know that millions of Server2K3 and Linux (not ubuntu) boxes are humming along in banks, hospitals and factories while the best macs can do is a high school.

[washu]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Right now its nice to know that millions of Server2K3 and Linux (not ubuntu) boxes are humming along in banks, hospitals and factories while the best macs can do is a high school.

High school was fun. We were 100% macs (well, a few lingering Apple IIs). Not a PC in the building. We eventually got two:

PC 1: A 486/33 that the school won in some contest. A 486 was pretty old by then. Given to the art department. Students would fight over it because of how much faster it was then the Macs and wouldn't crash and loose all their work.

PC 2: The school wanted to implement a kind of graphical BBS (before the net got big) for all the students. The product was aimed at Macs but had a Windows version of both the client and server. The school was all set on buying a big power mac to be the server until they told the vendor how many students we had, almost 2K. The vendor flat out told them to buy a PC as no Mac at the time could handle that kind of load. So a big dual CPU Pentium server (kick ass at the time) was bought to service the Mac clients. The school still saved a few K on that deal.

[Junk Parts]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Well RatDude I have Kubuntu 9.04. Going to use it on another system when I get around to building one. My old one was a Ubuntu version that sucked. Now I do have your Penguin on my desk and he was some sort of Linux promo. There is a linux tag on his ass too. He sits in front of my Taco Bell dog who has a string of Titty beads around his neck. I did have about a dozen strings of titty beads but I took my niece out for drinks on her 21st. birthday. She ended up earning all of them except for this last string. If she had not passed out she would have earned this last string too! It was a fun night.

[NxB]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

The new KDE sucks, if you didn't like ubuntu and you didn't like vista....

[acstech]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

KDE? Never cared for it. Looks too much like Windows for me. I'll stick with Gnome.

[dood]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Well RatDude I have Kubuntu 9.04. Going to use it on another system when I get around to building one. My old one was a Ubuntu version that sucked. Now I do have your Penguin on my desk and he was some sort of Linux promo. There is a linux tag on his ass too. He sits in front of my Taco Bell dog who has a string of Titty beads around his neck. I did have about a dozen strings of titty beads but I took my niece out for drinks on her 21st. birthday. She ended up earning all of them except for this last string. If she had not passed out she would have earned this last string too! It was a fun night.

Tell me you have pictures of this night....

[ratdude747]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

kde sucks. idc what Linus t. says, gnome is best, xfce is second. always has been, i dont see it changing.

but kde is better than windows or mac though.

[Junk Parts]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Dood wish I did have a few pics. I think having pics of your own wifes sisters kid flashing off her nice boobs would be a prime way to get kicked right to the curb! But it did happen and I will put my right hand on the bible on that one. I just wish it would happen again!

[KeriJane]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Whats the point or better yet its a moot point. Right now I have the best PC "Dell" in the world and its old and slow. Its the best because its mine and when I started it up just now everything went fine during the Xp Home boot up. Now if it were and Apple it would still be the best "Computer" in the world to me if it was up and working right like my PC "Dell" is. If we want some real fun we can always fire up some unfinished OS like Kubuntu. This is the area where RatDude could give most of us a butt kicking. I'm just not a high level power user like most are on here. I turn it on. It does its thing. After that I'm ether copying a DVD or using the internet. It doesn't take a boat load of computing power to do that.

That's a great Philosophy JunkParts. May I borrow it?



That's what I really like about my Mac.
It Just Works. And it does what I want without thousands of viruses and tons of headaches. And of course, It's mine or I'm It's depending on who you talk to around here.


Anyhow,
Back to the Superior Apple OS 10.6
This here Snow Leopard is all good so far. No worries in sight. Apparently, I'm not alone:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10345768-37.html

Perfect? No. Really good? Yes.
Just got a minor update today for some issues that didn't affect me at all. Also, HP FINALLY after an entire TWO WEEKS released some more Snow Leopard drivers. That also didn't affect me in the slightest.

Backward compatible? Not so much but that's not one of my priorities.
I'd rather have it run really great with and on new stuff than compromise for the sake of old stuff.

If you're intent upon running old stuff, Mac probably isn't for you anyway. They tend to go out of style after a few years so if that is important to you.... don't buy a Mac!

Can YOUR "Best PC/Mac/Whatever in the world" do something mine can't or do something better or faster?
Maybe. Yours is almost certainly cheaper. But I like mine better. So far as I'm concerned, it's the best computer I've ever used. (and I've used a quite a few)
And that includes this here Superior $29 Snow Leopard OS.


Have Fun,
Keri

PS. We got the best TV Commercials!
Those "I'm a PC" commercials are LAME

http://www.apple.com/getamac/ads/

PPS. Mac Geniuses RULE.

[KeriJane]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

its not unfinished. not unless your pushing ubuntu 9.10 alpha 5 like i am on the p4 630.

oh, and thanks for the compliment, jp. me part human, part penguin

You're a "Hungren"?
Or a "Pengman"?

Watch out for the Orca,
Keri

Gotta see that "Borken" latch mentioned in RatDudes sig someday.
Maybe a pic or an illustration?

[washu]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Can YOUR "Best PC/Mac/Whatever in the world" do something mine can't or do something better or faster?

Play games without dual booting? :-)

For a serious answer, how about running 64 bit on all machines that support it? Macbooks, Macbook Airs and older Minis with 64 bit CPUs can't run Snow Leopard in 64 bit. They do however run 64 bit Windows just fine. Oops, Apple decided those machines aren't good enough, go buy a better one.

Also Snow Leopard also still lacks proper security features like working address space layout randomization. Notice how in the pwn2own contests the Macs always loose bad? There are lots of script kiddy level attacks targeted against Windows, but those are easy to protect against. If a determined hacker wants into your PC specificaly you are way safer with Windows or Linux then OSX.

[KeriJane]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Play games without dual booting? :-)

For a serious answer, how about running 64 bit on all machines that support it? Macbooks, Macbook Airs and older Minis with 64 bit CPUs can't run Snow Leopard in 64 bit. They do however run 64 bit Windows just fine. Oops, Apple decided those machines aren't good enough, go buy a better one.

Also Snow Leopard also still lacks proper security features like working address space layout randomization. Notice how in the pwn2own contests the Macs always loose bad? There are lots of script kiddy level attacks targeted against Windows, but those are easy to protect against. If a determined hacker wants into your PC specificaly you are way safer with Windows or Linux then OSX.

OK, but I don't play games other than the occasional Zuma bout.

64-bit on a Mini or a Macbook Air?
Why would you want to? These are hardly powerhouses. These systems are intended for "normal" less-intensive tasks where 64-bit capability is less important.
Could you run Photoshop or Premiere Pro on a MacBook Air? Yes, but why would you want to?
If this shortcoming becomes important they might do something about it.

Apple focuses more on the user experience than pushing technical abilities for the sake of bragging rights.
For example, Apple uses relatively "Lame" video cards that do just fine for most things but lack the whiz-bang of SLI, etc. Would replacing my HD2600xt with an 8800 or 3870 or even an FX4500 (top cards for my old system) have a huge effect on video rendering? Probably more beneficial for 3-D or Serious Gaming, which I don't do.
Why should I care that a 9800 or a 4870 or SLI or Crossfire is better than my "Lame" card? It does what I want with little fuss or noise.

So why the "New" Snow Leopard, all fixed up under the hood but visually similar when Leopard was probably "good enough"? Just preparing for the future and there is also some though given to.... security!

OK, Apple has vulnerabilities. The ones I found involve older versions of Safari and depend upon the user clicking on a link.
For now, there's far fewer than Windows even if the only reason is the bad guys didn't bother yet.
I suspect that Apple will do a better job than MS did in this regard. Time will tell.

Have Fun,
Keri

[washu]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

OK, but I don't play games other than the occasional Zuma bout.

64-bit on a Mini or a Macbook Air?
Why would you want to?

The point is that the limitation is artificial. There is no reason that these machines can't run 64 bit other then Apple says so. Apple said you haven't given us enough money so no 64 bit for you. It points to the character of Apple, they will limit you when it suits them. What other features will Apple say you can't have when it suits them. I just don't use their stuff so I don't have to worry about it.

If this shortcoming becomes important they might do something about it.

Given Apple's history this is unlikely. More likely they will release "new" versions of those machines and screw over owners of the older ones.

Apple focuses more on the user experience than pushing technical abilities for the sake of bragging rights.

You really are an Apple newcomer. They don't do this anymore because their machines are just normal PCs in fancy cases and EFI. In the PowerPC days this was 90%+ of their advertising. They were all over how much "better" and "faster" the PowerPC was. Problem was it was all a big lie.

OK, Apple has vulnerabilities. The ones I found involve older versions of Safari and depend upon the user clicking on a link.
For now, there's far fewer than Windows even if the only reason is the bad guys didn't bother yet.
I suspect that Apple will do a better job than MS did in this regard. Time will tell.

No. Right now it's been proven OSX is full of holes. It claims to have things like ASLR, but it doesn't work because Apple is incompetent. Things like pwn2own show that if someone actually cares to hack you OSX is way worse than Linux or Windows. The only thing OSX has going for it is that usually no one cares. If someone does care you are in trouble.

Kari, you've said that you don't care about backwards compatibility. Here is why you should:

For the sake of argument lets say 10.7 turns out to be a turd. I'm not saying it will, but eventually Apple will screw up again and release an OS that sucks. They have a good history of doing so.

So 10.7 sucks. Worst OS Apple ever released. Everyone hates it. It's Apple's Vista. You go buy a shiny new Mac Pro and it comes with 10.7. "No problem, I'll just run 10.6" you say. Here is the problem: You Can't! Apple's machines are not backwards compatible with older OSes. You are stuck with 10.7 with no hope of running 10.6. Imagine a PC that could only run Vista and not XP. That is why backwards compatibly matters.

[KeriJane]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Thanks for the insights, Washu.

You're right, I am a newcomer to Mac. I didn't like what I saw until the Intel ones came out, though I did like the G4 cube. Just not enough to buy one.

A G5 iMac compared to a C2Duo Mini or any Core-based PC doesn't do well at all.

But how did it do compared to the PC's of the time?
The "typical" ones with integrated graphics, too little memory a ton of bloatware running and Netburst CPUs? I suspect that Apple was comparing them to this sort of machine, like say a 2004-era eMachines rather than something with decent video and enough memory.

I can think of one $1200 Sony VAIO system from '05 that made a G5 iMac seem great. Most of the VAIOs trouble was solved with more memory, a decent video card and getting rid of the bloat..... but that's not how it came from Sony. It was a P4 540/915 chipset system with a "Hypermemory" Video card as I recall. It was AWFUL .


So far as Apple repeating history and making a V(bleep!)sta OS?
Maybe they will, maybe they learned their lesson.
I'll burn that bridge when I come to it!
For now I like this OS.

Hoping that no one cares about wrecking my poor little Mac Pro,
Keri

PS. I DID pre-order Win7 just for laughs.

[momaka]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Just thought this video might go with the thread .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-JdC04vBik

Not that I have anything against Macs or anything. I just find the video amuzing because it uses 3D characters from a popular PC game called Half-Life 2 and the whole point of that is to show that PCs can be used for pretty much everything whereas Macs are limited. It's also made in such way that it criticizes Mac's anti-PC commercials.
----
For me, XP works and does everything I need, even on my older PII and PIII computers. Security hasn't been a problem either. In fact one of my computer's doesn't use anything right now (other than being behind a router firewall).

[washu]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

Thanks for the insights, Washu.

You're right, I am a newcomer to Mac. I didn't like what I saw until the Intel ones came out, though I did like the G4 cube. Just not enough to buy one.

Good choice skipping the cube. It was a ripoff compared to other Macs let alone PCs of the time. Complete form over function.

But how did it do compared to the PC's of the time?
The "typical" ones with integrated graphics, too little memory a ton of bloatware running and Netburst CPUs? I suspect that Apple was comparing them to this sort of machine, like say a 2004-era eMachines rather than something with decent video and enough memory.

In the G5 days Apple compared it to Netburst CPUs directly using extremely massaged SPEC numbers. Most of their P4 numbers came from relatively high end Dell workstations at the time (no integrated video there), but Apple was dishonest about the methods used for benchmarking. Apple specificly used sub-optimal compilers on the P4 machines to make them look worse. If proper compilers were used then the P4s won.

Apple never published any SPEC numbers for the G4 or G3. No amount of massaging or benchmark cherry picking could have gotten around that embarrassment if they had.

Apple was also very careful never to compare the G5 to the Athlon 64, which soundly trounced it.

Put it this way, my G5 1.8 Ghz cannot play a proper 720p video without stuttering in OSX. It has a proper FX5200 ultra video card.

My P4 1.8 Ghz ACER crapbox can (just barely) play the same 720p video on it's onboard shared 845 video in XP. That ACER is an e-machines level PC.

The G5 can play the video smoothly without issues in Linux so OSX is slowing it down a lot.

Now, the G5 is probably faster then the P4 clock for clock as the Linux test shows, but not by much and no where near the difference Apple claimed. The G5 is very "netbursty" in it's design, trading performance for clock speed just like the P4 did. Apple wanted a chip that could publish high clock speeds which the G4 could not. Problem was, going for high clock speed only works if you can get there. The G5 topped out at 2.7 Ghz, the P4 made it to 3.8.

As another data point my P4 3.0 GHz hackintosh can play 720p on it's integrated video. So at least the P4 3 GHz is faster than the G5 1.8 as that was both in the same OS. Apple claimed otherwise.

The most telling point was this: After years of saying the G5 was faster than the P4, Apple came out with the Developer Transition Kit mac. This was so developers could get ready for the Intel switch. All the Apple sites raved about how it kicked the snot out of the G5. The box was netburst P4 with integrated graphics.

Apple also used to rag on integrated (shared memory) graphics. This is funny in two ways. One, lots of Intel macs have integrated graphics. Two, Apple had integrated graphics first, before PCs ever had it, way back in 1989. Yep, crappy shared memory video cards were an Apple first.

As for too little memory, the first G5 imacs came stock with 256 MB. 256 on OSX is way worse than 256 in XP. No matter what else you can say good or bad about them, OSX requires way more ram than XP, it's that simple.

I can think of one $1200 Sony VAIO system from '05 that made a G5 iMac seem great. Most of the VAIOs trouble was solved with more memory, a decent video card and getting rid of the bloat..... but that's not how it came from Sony. It was a P4 540/915 chipset system with a "Hypermemory" Video card as I recall. It was AWFUL .

First off, it's a SONY, what do you expect? That being said, a P4 540 would be much faster than most G5s if it wasn't hobbled by lack ram and/or being in a SONY. The 915 is not a hypermemory video chipset. Did it have another ATI or NVIDIA card? The 915 is however very close to the 945 that lots of early Intel macs had and used fine.

So far as Apple repeating history and making a V(bleep!)sta OS?
Maybe they will, maybe they learned their lesson.
I'll burn that bridge when I come to it!
For now I like this OS.

Ok, what about developers or support people who need to help users with older OSes? Oops, can't do that either on your new Mac.

We've run into that very problem at work where we could not run 10.4 on a new Mini. Only runs 10.5 or 10.6. 10.4 would be used to help do internet support for user with older Macs. We can't run 10.4 without buying a used machine. Yeah, that's professional </sarcasm>.

My month old quad-core PC however can and has run DOS. Drivers might keep things from working perfectly, but I can run any version of Windows in at least some capacity without emulation. With emulation I can run things even more smoothly, but again that's not an option for OSX.

PS. I DID pre-order Win7 just for laughs.

Do actualy try it. It's way better than Vista.

[ratdude747]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

oops. i guess i had happy fingers in my sig. ill have to fix that. thehook on the latch was broken.

[NxB]

Re: Another Example of Apple's Superior Operating System

kde sucks. idc what Linus t. says, gnome is best, xfce is second. always has been, i dont see it changing.

Did you run ever use KDE 3.5? It was pretty much windows xp. He liked that KDE, not the new vista wannabe KDE, afaik. I like that KDE over GNOME. Linux mint set gnome up in a similar configuration and that is why I like it. Normal GNOME is set up kinda like OSX.

Sony-

Vaio and all, sony shit breaks and breaks badly. I hate sony. The only good thing they do is write info on the PCBs. I would never buy a sony product if I could help it. Worse overpriced junk than apple.