No, OS X users tend to be tetchy. I've experienced it when I've had the nerve to point out imperfections.

dude get a machine that is powerfull enough to run it... then you'll stop your whining...

G4 400... try again

it's like trying to run XP on a PII 333... good luck

my g4 AGP graphics 400 mhz/512 mb running 10.2.6 is faster than my vaio p3 1.8 with the same amount of ram running xp.
and i master cdroms for a living!

Wow, you're seriously considering going back to OS 9. I remember there was a time that thought crossed my mind. I rebooted and my firts thought was "wow, everything is so fast!"

Until I realized INternet Explorer would hang my machine while web pages loaded... And I had to wait for photoshop filters to process before I could do anything else. And, whle launch times were faster, I couldn't keep working in my current app while the other one launched. And I had no real ability to force quit. And Microsoft word could make me restart my machine. And I had no windows file sharing access. And I had no ability to remotely telnet to my machine. And the list goes on and on...

Good luck with that transition back to OS 9. Glad it worked so well for you.

What, besides speed, makes you think OS X is a beta OS? I use it on a daily basis, and it certainly feels great to me...

I think that if the "MS Envangelists" don't think Apple is on their radar screen then:

1. Microsoft is truly clueless -- all the better for us!
2. Microsoft pretends not to aknowledge Apple, but then steals the ideas
3. Microsoft didn't actually produce that "anti-switcher" ad that I remember so fondly :)

I'm guessing they're just foolin' ya, or maybe the evangelists aren't told what actually happens in the company. If those demos of whatever MS calls "quartz extreme" in Longhorn don't look eerily similar to what Mac OS X 10.2 can do right now, then I'll go chew on my shoelaces.

" Good; by the time MS realises that Apple's beaten them to a bloody pulp, it'll be too late. "

When will the fanboys realized that something exists called a "market?" The market isn't in Apple's hands (how sad that definitely is) and it isn't going to be, even with some really good OS upgrades. Apple gave up all hope of huge market share when they decided to keep the platform closed and proprietary.

"and I thought Shchiller was quoted as saying the 'cycle' was 1-1/2 to 2 years 'as in the past' - so debatably we will have paid twice for beta OSware...? Even at this date I am ACTUALLY debating heading back to OS-9 because it is so much faster & everything works"

10.x is no longer a beta, please. G4 400Mhz is still a good processor, given a enough RAM and a fast harddrive. My guess is that there is probably other reasons why your machine is slow.

As for Longhorn verses 10.x, I'm not worried. Two years ago I switched to Mac because 10.x was going to be a great operating system - and it hasn't disappionted. I'm doing all the things in 10.x that I think computers SHOULD be doing; I'm no longer waiting for Microsoft to deliver the future when Apple already has.

However, Longhorn could be cool... it has a larger clock!

"(how sad that definitely is)"

How sad that it even matters to you. I have a Macintosh, I like my Macintosh. I wouldn't like it any more or less even if had .1% or 95% market share.

As long as people write software for it and Apple's finances are in the Black and there is no worry that my favorite copmuter maker isn't going under, I'm happy with my Macintosh.

BTW. I like proprietary machines. Besides, from my side if the fence, users stuck with Windows are stuck with a Proprietary OS. To me it is no difference that you saying I'm stuck with my Apple machine. The fact of the matter is, if you want to get away from Windows, you ditch everything you own and purchase a Mac. If I want to go to Windows, I ditch everything I own and go with a PC. Linux is out of the equation in my opinion.

" Apple gave up all hope of huge market share when they decided to keep the platform closed and proprietary."

Now let me ask you something, what the f*** did that mean? Where have you been the last couple of years? You might want to take your head out of your a** and start looking around for a bit and getting acquainted with the technologies Apple is using now adays in the OS!! I mean, man!!!, if BSD/UNIX and all the related technologies (e.g. Apache, BIND, gcc, make, SQL, etc.,etc.,****ETC.........******) are proprietary and closed, then what in the f***'s name should we call Micro$$$lop's technologies????!!!!!!!

We agree that Apple has a small market share... but not preciscely because its technologies are closed! One last questions, who made USB popular back in 1998? Just think about that one...

I think what the original poster was referring to by "closed and proprietary" is the hardware. While having closed hardware is good for stability, it also helps keep the prices high due to lack of competition (in the PowerPC processor class). I can run Windows on 50 difference types of Intel boxes (Compaq, Gateway, Micron, brown box from the local hole in the wall dealer for $300, etc)... I can only run OSX on a Mac.

Are you on crack? Why would they worry only about Linux, if the Mac has a bigger market share? Have you actually USED or SEEN WindowsXP? You don't call that an attempt to copy OSX? Why is MS scrambling to get a digital music response to iTunes? Just because everyone an MS doesn't walk around and say "we are out to get Apple", doesn't mean they don't see it as a threat.

I think OS X will definitely be on M$'s radar if/when Apple moves it to the Intel platform... Then Gates & Co. will have a bit more direct competition.

... but I'll respond too.


Microsoft may well not be afraid of Apple as a competitor. But they certainly have their eye on Apple's innovations. A couple classic, example.

Job's introduces the new GUI for OSX, and dubs it "Aqua" the first time the graphic interface itself is given a marketing name. A few months later, Gates introduces the world to "Luna," as if all GUI's have had catchy names used outside of the development teams. Somebody was watching Apple very closely indeed.

MovieMaker was an obvious attempt to capture iMovie magic, and MovieMakerII an even more obvious attempt to close the very wide gap between MMI and iMovie.

Second, people often seem to argue that the dominance of the IBM Compatible, now Windows/Wintel machine was a great plan hatched by IBM to license it's hardware. Wrong. IBM's plan was as certain as Apple's to maintain proprietary hardware designs. The fact that Compaq reverse engineered the IBM BIOs nearly killed IBM in the '80s, as cloning nearly did to Apple in the 90s. The real trick was Gates selling IBM on a sweetheart deal where he sold them an operating system (that was all but stolen) but kept the rights. Had IBM's lawyers been a bit more clever the computer industry would have been radically different. Would Apple have come out on top? No way to tell, but it's almost guaranteed that Microsoft would not now be the behemoth it is.

And by the time Apple is WELL on the UNIX 64bit OS microslop will be posting 100MB plus security patches on a daily basis for it's tepid 32bit unix type OS.
In terms of technology and going forward, only an ignorant a** would claim MS as ahead.

"a Mac is not perfect, it just seems that way next to a windows pc"

XP on a PII 300-400 runs INCREDIBLE. My dad is cheap so I bought him an old ThinkPad. I recently upgraded him from a troublesome Win 98 installation to XP. With the addition of 256 megs of RAM the thing runs incredibly.

This is one thing that MS has done very well with XP. It runs well on a huge variety of platforms power wise. Is my dad doing video editing? No, he can barely decode a DVD! But QuickBooks runs fast and flawless, it never crashes and all his hardware works perfectly out of the box. To top it off the entire thing is easily 3x faster then the Win 98 install he had.

Try that with OSX. I run OSX on a 1st Gen G4 500 Powerbook and its painful to say the least but I won't switch! I couldnt imagine using XP for day to day development tasks. Of course, I do use it for general web browsing and gaming. My G4 500 just doesn't have the oomph to power Quartz very well.

it's kind of funny how PC weenies swear that comparing longhorn to osx is like comparing apples to oranges, but they do the same thing when comparing PowerPC chips to Intels and AMDs.

They got a word for that - hypocrisy, or dumbassness for short. lol

...runs JUST FINE. Sure, it's a mite sluggish at times, but then again so is my brain. You lot who complain about X's performance on G4 machines - my advice is to buy a used Blue and White. Be sure it has the stock Rage 128 video card, too!

I've had mine since January, always in X. Only had one (1, uno, ein) lockup, that was when I inserted a badly written FAT-format CD (oh the irony).

As for Windows... I get paid to use it at work, but I'd never pay to use it. If I want a headache, I can bang my head against the wall - for free!

The thread went downhill when ignorants start saying BSD and Linux are one and the same.

The only problem with your idea that MS isn't concerned about OS X is this - Apple can port it to X86 PCs. Apple is developing an identical X86 PC version of OS X alongside the PPC version. They are doing this for a couple of reasons: 1) in case they need to start using Intel/AMD processors because of Motorola or IBM dropping PPC, and 2) to keep Microsoft from dropping Mac support from all their software, ie Office.

If Apple can't get PPC processors from Motorola or IBM, they switch their Mac hardware to Intel/AMD processors and load OS X for X86 on those new Macs. These Macs will still rely on proprietary ROMs, so you won't be able to load this OS X onto any PC.

If Microsoft drops Office for Mac, Apple can release OS X for any X86 PC out there, along with PC versions of Final Cut Pro, iOffice (Apple's office suite coming), etc.

iTunes 4 will be on Windows by the end of the year.

MS should be concerned about Apple. MS is concerned about everyone.

"MS copies everything from us. EVERYTHING. Anybody who does not like iTunes or anything Apples does works for Microsoft. Nothing new comes out of MS. MS causes Apple to people to not buy Macs. MS reduces Apple's marketshare."

Geez people, when are you going to stop this "Apple is a victim that can do no wrong" c***?

"But it's all true?"

See what I mean?

"Why is MS scrambling to get a digital music response to iTunes?"

Again with the narrow, ignorant, victim mentality!

Everyone is trying to get a reponse to iTunes. MS is only one amongst many.

IBM making those PPC 970 chips, I'd like to see a switch of the late '90s. Instead of yanking clones, Apple licenses OS X for IBM's big iron servers in thanks for Big Blue stepping in and fixing the mess left to Apple by Mot. They run on practically the same chip, and IBM's low end ones use the 970.

s**** Intel and the Itanic.

I can dream, can't I?

"it's kind of funny how PC weenies swear that comparing longhorn to osx is like comparing apples to oranges, but they do the same thing when comparing PowerPC chips to Intels and AMDs.

They got a word for that - hypocrisy, or dumbassness for short. lol"

it's funny how Mac weenies swear that comparing a software that is due out in 3 months and with one that is due in 2-3 years is fair but think it strange to compare processors whose sole job is to perform calculations.

We got a few choice words for you too in the real world. Go back to your little cave and extol how great your little cave is compared to the rest of the world.

Wasn't a follow-up for a dumb article dumb? The end result is still dumb because it was dumb in the first place. Had the first artlce not been so outraguously dumb, the second wouldn't have seemed so dumb to me, but it was dumb so that must make the follow-up dumber. Just how dumb can things be? Sheesh...

Hey, no one here said it was fair. The people here haven't really been comparing OS X to Longhorn (and, really, who could, since demo shows for a 2-3 year coming product is about as trustworthy as watching demo shows of OS X in 1999).

This thing is a workhorse for me - I bought it literally off the local's shelf the week it was introduced. iBook 500/320/10GB. I manage a school campus, author CDs, run the network, MS office, iLife, Keynote, PS, web authoring, I punish this thing, and 2 kernel panics in 26 months on 10.whatever. I don't perceive waiting for it to get much done, the biggest speed issues *were* iCal and iPhoto, but those gaps have been reduced in the last few updates of app/OS. Still have classic running, but the current count is 84 OSX apps, 15 OS9 apps. Do I want a faster machine? of course. Will I buy just for speed? Nope. I'll buy when the 3 year warrantee is up, I'll get an G3/800-900 for $300 less than the G3/500. I'll be running Panther at 900 MHz. I'll be in heaven for another 3 years. Unless there's a 970 at the $1200 price point, I'm good.

As for the lingering other processors spectre, the 970 seems more of a lock everyday - the only PPC doubt ever was MOT's ability to deliver all the way to QC. I'd bet the college fund that IBM can crank out as many 970s as Apple cares to buy.

Having said that, if fortunes reverse and Apple needed to jumnp processors, they should get into bed with AMD. They have repeatedly shown they can go toe-to-toe with Intel and in some important ways outperform them - and they're similarly needy re: market share - it'd be a win-win.

Anything to not have to have an insipid "Intel Inside!" sticker plastered over the case... those blasted things are the tech equivalent of the 'do not remove..." mattress tags. Half the PC users I know have a case that looks like a 30's steamer trunk with all the vendor stickers... ;-)

IBM making those PPC 970 chips, I'd like to see a switch of the late '90s. Instead of yanking clones, Apple licenses OS X for IBM's big iron servers in thanks for Big Blue stepping in and fixing the mess left to Apple by Mot. They run on practically the same chip, and IBM's low end ones use the 970.

First, OS X wasn't around in the late 90's (first release, 10.0, which wasn't a final release even by Apple's standards, came out in March, 2001). Second, clones were killing apple on the fact that they were still marketshare from Apple, rather than the original plan of expanding the market. So, if they left clones, they'd still be out of business (or at least out of the hardware business and trying to get by trying to sell just an OS to computer owners, and most likely end up like Be). Thirdly, the 970 wasn't even around then (my guess is the Power4 wasn't even around then either).

But if you want to live in your little dream world, why not step into the ol' way-back machine, go to 1989, and have Apple stick 970's into their new flagship Mac IIfx machines to run a souped up System 6 (woo-hoo, Multifinder, here I come!).

more productive Mac users are than Windows users.

Windows viruses, constant patching, fixes for Windows patches, software incompatibilities, hardware incompatibilities, DRM, and rampant Microsoft commericialism. Windows is a tool to hold the masses back.

Anybody who's anybody uses a Mac because they need work done.

I know OS X wasn't around in the '90s. I know the clones were eating apple's business. IBM's big iron is _not_ in the same market as Apple's stuff, and therefore less of a market cannabilizer. I think it would only strengthen the credibility of OS X if it also ran on the super big boys that IBM puts out.

My dreamworld is fine...they all know me here...lighten up, Francis ;)

If I did step back in a time machine (didn't mention that in my first post, perhaps it's your dream world?) I'd make sure that Apple and IBM told M$ where to shove it for good back when they should have been squashed like the jerks they (still) are...of course, now M$ is rotting from the inside out.

Trying to steer myself back on topic:

M$ rotting: I have a friend who finished his PhD in Comp Sci working at M$ in the mid 90s, he was working on human motion algorithms for animation. Pretty cool. Last I talked to him he was working on anti-piracy software. Pretty sad. M$ might have 100 times the resources of Apple, but it's run by souless money grubbing dolts flogging droves of Microserfs.

Apple has nothing to fear now that it's back on course. Steve might be an a**hole at times, but the man has vision and is running Apple as a very tight ship. Looking forward to WWDC!

"I think what the original poster was referring to by "closed and proprietary" is the hardware. While having closed hardware is good for stability, it also helps keep the prices high due to lack of competition (in the PowerPC processor class). I can run Windows on 50 difference types of Intel boxes (Compaq, Gateway, Micron, brown box from the local hole in the wall dealer for $300, etc)... I can only run OSX on a Mac."

That's exactly what I meant. Thank you for clarifying that for some of these guys. Also, to the other poster, just because OS X has Unix and opensource underpinnings doesn't mean the whole platform is open to the market like the PC platform. FYI, even though I like Apple and I like my Mac, I'm not going to blindly defend all the decisions Apple makes. Some of them are great, some of them are stupid (the same is of Microsoft or any other company). That's all there is to it. Back to the original topic...

"I've had mine since January, always in X. Only had one (1, uno, ein) lockup, that was when I inserted a badly written FAT-format CD (oh the irony)."

Actually, there is no "FAT-format" CD. CDs are either written in ISO9660, UDF, or HFS. The first two are accepted standards and are used on many different operating systems.

"Last I talked to him he was working on anti-piracy software. Pretty sad. M$ might have 100 times the resources of Apple, but it's run by souless money grubbing dolts flogging droves of Microserfs."

Let me ask you a question. Do you think any software company likes having its software pirated (regardless of anything relating to money)? No. What's the difference between Apple and Microsoft? Microsoft is actually trying to do something about it. Granted, I don't like the way they're doing it, but to make such a stupid statement as you did against something perfectly legitimate as protecting one's own works, I think you're just reaching for straws and saying something for the sake of loyalty. Most of the Mac zealot posts I've seen on this news discussion have been like this -- a lot of talk, but no real thought. As a fellow Mac user, I'm disappointed.

" Microsoft is actually trying to do something about it"

Oh please, Microsoft succeeded in making reinstalls a pain in the a$$ for all their legitimate users, yet all of their server software is riddled with security holes for crooks to break in and steal data - yeah, they're trying to do something about it all right.

Regardless, you completely missed his point. MS hires developers under the assumption that they will be doing cool things and then makes them do boring things. If they wanted to hire someone to write anti-piracy developers, they should say so.

"Oh please, Microsoft succeeded in making reinstalls a pain in the a$$ for all their legitimate users, yet all of their server software is riddled with security holes for crooks to break in and steal data - yeah, they're trying to do something about it all right.

Regardless, you completely missed his point. MS hires developers under the assumption that they will be doing cool things and then makes them do boring things. If they wanted to hire someone to write anti-piracy developers, they should say so."

Would you mind telling me where there's any fact rather than uninformed fabrication in your statements?

Sigh. It's people like you that make the PC community think Mac users are idiots. So first of all...

Riddled with security holes? Do you actually know how many security holes exist in any software? How many are found? And don't you think it's quite obvious why so many more are _found_ in Windows than any other OS? Which OS is mainstream? You're a fool if you think any *nix doesn't also have a ton of holes and bugs. Go look at some Linux kernel changelogs from time to time. Besides, I don't even see what security holes have to do with protecting software from piracy. Maybe thats becuase they have _NOTHING_ to do with protecting software from piracy.

As for "his point" -- I don't see where you get this. What I gather from his statement was that he ended up getting transferred later on. You don't honestly think that a programmer stays with one dev team for the entirety of his stay at a company? Not only this, but so what he does anti-piracy work now? Do you think those other departments simply disappeared? Microsoft does release more software besides OS and server software, and they do, of course, do more things with software than bug fixing and anti-piracy. Regardless, I'm quite sure that the whole situation wasn't explained here, just the surface so there'd be something to poke at Microsoft about.

As a Mac user, I'm disappointed and mildly disgusted with the way some of my fellow Mac users act... If you don't like Microsoft, fine. For the record, I don't either. If you're going to argue against Microsoft, at least try thinking before saying something.

I think my point was that M$ writes some pretty lame software, when they clearly have the resources to write some cool stuff, but their corporate culture, unlike Apple's, doesn't really allow it to flourish.
As a software developer (thank you), I don't get too worried about piracy...I'm not going to spend my time chasing after the 10% of cheats and in the process annoying the 90% legit users with baroque anti piracy measures. I think Apple follows the same tack, but to them it's different, since they sell the boxes that run the stuff, they don't have to worry as much about it.

As a mac user, I understand that even other mac users may miss the point of my posts. No biggie.

What kind of utterly loser-riffic, soulless, morally-bankrupt marketing weasel do you have to BE to aspire to a "Microsoft Evangelist?"

Even laboratory rats turn down that job!

Clue-phone for MS: Apple evangelists mostly work for FREE because they (get this) believe in the product and it's ability to enhance users' lives. Why don't you try copying THAT for once.

M$ only does things for free if there's money involved ;)

Anyone who thinks that software pirates weren't MS's best friends over the last 20 years has his head up his a**. Microsoft would never be in the position they are today if their stuff (particularly MS Office) hadn't been so easy to steal and take home a copy. Never.

MS has never been hurt by piracy because they make their moolah from enterprise business seats, who feel the legal pressure to stay legit. That's why biz license terms and honest-consumer prices are sky-high while MS is practically giving away MS Office etc to students for pennies (and they know darn well every student edition Office gets passed around).

Now, they've recently decided that the home pirates they created are getting too greedy, and they've opted to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Ultimately (ie over a long period -- say 10-15 years) this will be their deathknell. But it starts now.

"Oh please, Microsoft succeeded in making reinstalls a pain in the a$$ for all their legitimate users."
***
And you know this how?
- from a long time expert Windows users and a recent switcher who thinks you are a ignorant kid who knows nothing about Windows/PC.

I got your point. :)

Why is my statement ignorant? You idiot. Just because MS is not the only one scrabling to copy iTunes, does not make my statement not true.

to be a piece of c***. The quality control oversight is the worst I have ever seen for any important dev project in a technology company. Turnover at the MS OS division is huge because nobody wants to work on the thing.

"to be a piece of c***. The quality control oversight is the worst I have ever seen for any important dev project in a technology company. Turnover at the MS OS division is huge because nobody wants to work on the thing."

Did you think before posting this? Longhorn is a pre-alpha.

Longhorn's date of release has been pushed back a year, so that they can copy more of OS X's features, and call it new.

"Longhorn's date of release has been pushed back a year, so that they can copy more of OS X's features, and call it new."

Hello? A lot of the things in either OS weren't thought of by Apple or MS. For example a composited GUI was already talked about before either Apple (or now Microsoft) put thought to implementing it in their OSes.

Beta OSes don't have:

1) Support from HP, Lexmark, Canon and Epson for printer drivers for not only new models, but existing models.

2) An AOL client

3) Support pages with earthlink and other ISPs

4) New software and marjor name softwares (Maya) ported to the OS

Enough said.

And I develop apps on X and 9.

Here's the reality check: Longhorn, as a pre-pre-alpha (remember - it doesn't even ship for at least a year and a half) is VERY stable. And it has all sorts of innovations that aren't in X. Yes, X has things that aren't in Longhorn either. Both are copying thing from each other as well.

Visually, Longhorn is very nice. The Plex theme is blue chrome and neon and will be very popular with gamers and the younger crowd, but still manages to feel professional.

While we obsess with iLife, many of the features of iLife are being integrated throughout the system in Longhorn so you don't have to change from one app to another - you just do it right there on the desktop.

The introduction of Yukon as the new filesystem based on a high performance, high end relational database system means all sorts of amazing new capabilities where your files become data and can be manipulated and searched as data. Microsoft is already way ahead of Apple in terms of natural language query of databases - this has been a focus of their SQL Server group for years.

It's also much more integrated with .NET which removes the need for the Registry on new apps and eliminates DLL h*** (really - I've been programming .NET for a year now and you can build complex apps which are copy and run - just like the Mac... Only far, far more easily designed and built.) To show how powerful .NET is, I've been writing a clone of the entire MacOS X Aqua UI in .NET in VB.NET and it's working - shadows, translucency - everything.. and it's so easy to write it in VB.NET.

Alas, I can't release it as it stands, but I'll probably release a 'look-alike' based on ruby glass tiles I'll call Annikin, so I won't get nailed by Apple. :)

If you'd like to look at an early version: http://www.vargr.com/annikin/screenshot.jpg

All the controls work, although I just found out that I've done the alpha blend shadowing a little wrong for the dropdowns.

Dude, you may be h*** of a great programmer. But when I looked at your shot what didi I notice? Win still looks like an ugly piece of s***. The icons suck, the font sucks, that start button is so fugly it hurts.

I don't care about SQL database in the FS or that c***. I could care less about .NET because I have never needed it.

You see, that's why the Mac will always be around. MS doesn't care about the suff we Mac uses care about. Mac OS X cares about detail, cares about the feel. MS doesn't. They makes a gamer's OS. Serious businesses use UNIX flavors. Home users who are afraid of Linux could use OS X. But only gamers would want Win - and then an xBox is really cheaper.

Some things never change: Win sucks.

I see the last post "Gimme a break" doesn't have a clue. I am a network administrator I currently run Microsoft Server 2003, Advanced Server 2000, W2K, XP on a number of machines. 2 years ago, when OS X just came out, I bought my first Mac. I love it. When OS X finally gets get compatible with all the latest brand name vendors, it will take off. I love it. I do all my administration thru my Dual 1.42 G4 using Remote Desktop Connection (Terminal Services). I do most of my computing on my mac and only go to RDC to run Windows Only business applications. Mac OS X is the NeXT operating sytem redone. That OS was so far ahead of it's time. The Apple developers polished it and now, it's starting to shine. Being a flavor of UNIX you can't beat it. MIcrosoft needs to pay attention, OS X will continue to gain market share.

That was pretty amusing there. How much did Microsoft pay you to write such shining statements about .NET? If you were a real developer, you'd realize that .NET is never going to take off in the form it's in right now. Repeat after me: Customers don't like nor do they want .NET. End of story.

By the way, why do you waste your time making Aqua controls for Longhorn? Are you brain dead? What a waste of time. Moron. Blistering idiot.

"MS is focusing on preventing Linux getting to the desktop successfully; it couldn't care less about what Apple is doing with OSX."

LOL!!! Linux has no chance in bloody h*** of becoming "successful" on the desktop until the dolts writing that kludgy piece of s*** operating system actually figure out how to make one that is easier to use than Windows, not harder (as is the case now). LOL, you dumbass!!! LOL!!

You've each managed once again to beat each other to a bloody pulp and yet failed to convince the other that you're right. Oh well better luck next time. ;-)

LOL!!! Linux has no chance in bloody h*** of becoming "successful" on the desktop until the dolts writing that kludgy piece of s*** operating system actually figure out how to make one that is easier to use than Windows, not harder (as is the case now). LOL, you dumbass!!! LOL!!

In Munich, 100% of machines are going from Windows to Linux.

http://www.idg.com.hk/cw/readstory.asp?aid=20030529005

Get this, their goal is to "drop Microsoft products completely". I'll bet my shorts the Macs in their publishing department will stay, though.

;-)

Yet another thread that could have been a good discussion has turned into Mac zealots going nuts and bashing anyone and anything that might have even the smallest good thing to say about an OS other than Mac OS.

OS X is better than Windows ever was, is, or will be. If it wasn't for Microsoft monopoly lock-down Windows would be dead years ago.

Running an AGP 400 myself AND a 17" PowerBook 1 Ghz I can tell you that both are very responsive systems with Mac OS X. The 400 both feels and acts like a true modern system. Of course this is with 1.25 GB RAM, 100 GB HD and a Radeon 8500 so I guess this proves that CPU-speed truly doesn't matter in everyday use.

The problem is that by 2005, no IT technician with his right mind will have kept a Mac machine on their network unless they can lock it out of sight.

Hello Apple ? Nobody needs 200 Macs to go download a 70 MB file to update your system automatically off the Internet. Come up with a solution that :
1) doesn't need an OS update every time a new mac comes out;
2) can update itself off a network share INSIDE the intranet.

No everybody's got money in Akamai and such...

A mac addict who's keeping his in the attic.

"OS X is better than Windows ever was, is, or will be. If it wasn't for Microsoft monopoly lock-down Windows would be dead years ago."

As if that isn't subjective.

Dude, it's not subjective. It's the bare truth.

OS X is better than Win ever was, is, or will be.

"In Munich, 100% of machines are going from Windows to Linux."

Well, this is nice to hear. But I just leave you with one thought: aren't governments notorious for making horrible decisions in terms of computer hardware and software? (But I suppose that anything that moves us a step away from Windoze and Microsloth is good.)

"Dude, it's not subjective. It's the bare truth.

OS X is better than Win ever was, is, or will be."

No. It's completely subjective because it's a matter of something called "opinion." You've heard of that, haven't you?

It's not a matter of opinion. Because if people are honest they will admit that Win is a horrible piece of s*** and that they don't like having to work with it. The only guys that would take Win are the gamers, but they don't care about the OS - they'd also take a PS2, GameCube, Xbox, etc...

"It's not a matter of opinion. Because if people are honest they will admit that Win is a horrible piece of s*** and that they don't like having to work with it. The only guys that would take Win are the gamers, but they don't care about the OS - they'd also take a PS2, GameCube, Xbox, etc..."

That's an opinion, you idiot.

No, sir, I think you are the idiot here.

Win is c***. That's a fact. If it were just an opinion we couyld discuss an have a different attitude. But there is no discussion. It's clear that Win sucks donkey. No discussion about that.

Sigh. To the above poster -- the other guy is right -- you ARE an idiot. You can't present an opinion as a fact.

People like you make Mac users look bad.

No, the fact guy is correct. Win is c***. There's no bullshitting around that. Be vs. OS X would be an opinion debate...

Mac users trying to crawl up Win butts are the guys who make Mac users look stupid.

"No, the fact guy is correct. Win is c***. There's no bullshitting around that. Be vs. OS X would be an opinion debate...

Mac users trying to crawl up Win butts are the guys who make Mac users look stupid."

Look, you can't call something "c***" based on personal opinion. There's a difference between opinion and fact, you can't call one thing inferior to another and call it fact just because it suits your fancy. Shut up, you stupid moron.

Dude, it is a fact. Nobody that is not paid by MS would ever say that they really think Win isn't c***. If everybody agrees tht it is c*** - well, then it is.

No opinion. Fact.

"Dude, it is a fact. Nobody that is not paid by MS would ever say that they really think Win isn't c***. If everybody agrees tht it is c*** - well, then it is.

No opinion. Fact."

'It's a fact because I said so.' Whatever you say.

Seriously, anyone can see that you're either a) trolling, b) actually stupid or c) a stupid Mac zealot. You already look bad enough. Don't make yourself look worse.

If you can back up your "fact" with something other than assumptions and ignorant blanket statements, then I'll be amazed.

Fact -- you are an idiot. Only an idiot wouldn't realize that his opinions aren't fact.

Whatever dude.

Fact is, nobody likes Win. Nobody that doesn't get paid by MS that is.

However, all Mac users love their OS.

I think that says enough. I'm done here.

"Fact is, nobody likes Win. Nobody that doesn't get paid by MS that is."

That's a fact? How do you prove that? You can't. Like I said from the beginning, you're full of BS. So yes, you are done. Goodbye.

man, what a bunch of idiots here.

win is c***. the mac is cool. i agree, but what is all this debate? what else would ya expect on a mac site?

dumbshits

Losers, no wonder your girlfriends left you... oh wait, you never had any!!! LOL!!! GET LIVES PEOPLE.

Its really sad when people have to swear and piss&moan about something as trivial as{My computer is better than yours}Grow up!Calling them Microslop wow how original.I wonder maybe if you spent some time designing a operating system you could be the next Bill Gates?I must admit it does seem like the Apple fans have a real hate towards MS could it be jealousy?

Bill gates copied ideas from several sources on his thesis, so what makes you think, he wouldn't continue his practice. WINDOWS 95-XP are copies of ideas on the mac. IF I WAS APPLE I WOULD SUE THEIR ASSES OVA COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT....

what are u guys computer geeks? Relax. Go to BEd

what are u guys computer geeks? Relax. Go to BEd