CrazyBernie wrote:But what would you do with that knowledge? Is it really all that useful? 15 years ago, I might have been interested in learning Unix. Now, I know that it won't do anything for me better than what I already have.
Honestly, I really don't know . . . I suppose if I learned it then I'd know.
Have you used Windows 7? You really can't keep bashing Windows and only referring to previous operating systems (and I know you like bashing WinXP =P )... it'd be like me bashing the Apple OS and continuously referencing OS8 or OS9. I've used OS6, 7, 8, 9, X (various flavors), and I've used DOS 3, 4, 5, 6.22, OS/2, Linux (various flavors), Win 3.1, Win95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, et al. At the end of the day, I keep coming back to Windows. All of the versions of Windows have their quirks, but with Windows 7, they finally got it right. Actually, they pretty much had it right with Vista, but hardware manufacturers sorta screwed Microsoft over that time around. The best part about Windows 7 is that Microsoft for the first time listened to the consumers. W7 is stable, its fast, it's got every bit as much "gloss" to it as OSX and more. I know several people who purchased Macbook Pros for the sole task of installing Windows 7 on them... they never even boot up OSX. They wanted the Macbooks for the looks. Windows 7 is killing OSX right now... and rightfully so.
I find this last statement more than a little specious, but . . . first: I
use Windows 7. True: I haven't run into any show-stopping bugs yet (only incompatibility issues, ahem), so I suppose I shouldn't be too harsh on it yet, only compatibility issues with software and drivers. OSX has the same issues with compatibility.
However . . . well, I'll just tell you about the trouble I had installing the Cable modem I put in just before I left Boston for the week. I plugged it into the PC: nothing. Windows 7 won't recognize it. I turn off the computer and boot it up, thinking maybe when it boots up then Windows will recognize it. Nothing. I spent several minutes investigating the problem, trying to troubleshoot, trying to get Windows to recognize the hardware, to simply establish a connection, anything . . . no success.
So I decide to experiment. I unplug the modem from the PC and plug it into my Mac. Zap. My Mac instantly recognizes the modem and in the same second I get a window saying I'm connected. The icon below says I'm connected. I go into Firefox and I'm doing stuff.
Then I plug it into the PC again . . . no recognition from Windows. Finally after maybe 2 or 3 more minutes of troubleshooting, Windows finally realizes something is there and gives me a "problem corrected" (or however it goes) message.
Pain, pain, pain.
Also, Windows is just simply poorly organized, still. It's hierarchies within hierarchies. Folders within folders. As for copying Mac . . . they're still doing it, now with the dock and the 'smooth type', except they haven't gotten either one right. The dock in Vista is ugly and so far as I could determine it can't be shrunk (glad W7 got rid of it), and smooth type (W7) is still not smooth, not nearly like the OSX.x smooth-type is.
Any PC user who doesn't know what I mean: download Safari and look at the type. Compare it to the type you see whenever you're not running Safari.
Not that I use Safari . . . I still prefer Firefox.
When has Apple ever listened to their customers?
Yes, when you get beyond the initial intuitive approach that I mentioned . . . you have a point. I honestly cannot explain to anyone -- because I'm not a business person -- exactly what I think Apple's approach is.
Apple claims that OSX is the fastest, most versatile, stable, compatible, and bug free operating system, but has never bothered to do anything to make that a true statement. Whenever they get caught with their foot-in-mouth, they just brush it off with an I-don't-know-what-you're-talking-about attitude... and go back to raving about their awesomeness.
You and I both have used both systems, and enough of the versions to know what we're talking about, at least to an extent. (I've used Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP, Vista, and now Windows 7 . . . though I have extensive experience only with XP, though soon with W7, and I have extensive experience with Mac System 6.x, 7.x, 8.x, 9.x and OSX.x.) And you know better than to think that the above suggestions are true; you know better than to suggest that Mac is not actually stable, fast, and nearly bug-free. (To be honest: I only began encountering bugs with System 9.x . . . before that: no bugs.) Whatever bugs do exist in OSX.x are notably fewer than I found in Vista, XP and everything preceding. With Windows 7 you might have a point, they might have cleaned it up, I'll still have to give it more time. But the clumsy, disorganized mess is still there. Software files are stuck on this folder and this folder and this folder and this folder . . . and most aggrevating in W7 is that I
can't find the Uninstall option any longer!
Maybe someone here can tell me where it is. I knew XP. But I haven't figured out yet, in W7, how to uninstall something except by running the inital program and -- now this is rich -- last time I tried it it didn't work. The uninstall ran for a few seconds then stopped. Program is still there. Program won't run, of course, because it's partially uninstalled.
Now . . . this is insane, and I've never, ever seen anything like this on any Mac OS.
I only fixed the problem by doing a System Restore . . . by which process I lost some other files.
So . . . save any fanboy accusations. You're one yourself.
As far as Mac being "versatile" and "compatible" . . . I never made any such claim, myself. (The only 'compatibility' boast that Apple makes is in regard to being able to run Windows through Boot Camp . . . so far as I know, Windows still can't partition a drive and run OSX.) Internally speaking: W7 and OSX both have compatibility issues. W7 seems to have less of a compatibility issue, but I haven't tested it out enough to find out . . . my first impression is that W7 can run a notably larger number of old programs than OSX.x can . . . again, it'll need more testing, but that's my first impression. However . . . while the incompatibility problem with OSX.x is an annoyance that doesn't really matter much because I don't really need the old programs, mostly: the W7 is only beginning to annoy me, and though I've been able to overcome it with patches provided by the people who made the software, I've yet to see whether or not W7 can run 5-year-old software by companies who no longer exist. I'll see whether or not W7's 'fix the incompatibility issue' option actually works. If not: I'm going to have to partition, and install XP.
You can be sure I'll keep you posted!
It's like they're in their own little world and couldn't be bothered by anyone, including their customers.
Here I'll make no argument. Apple
is in its own little world. And this is partly what would make me anxious if I was a top Apple employee.
IMHO, Jobs and his elitist attitude is holding Apple back just as much as it is making them successful. He's riding the company on a very fine line.
Absolutely true. No argument.
But maybe that's the only way Apple can be successful.
I'm not so sure this is true. If they're smart enough to invent the iPod, iPhone, iPad, if they're smart enough to build the original iMac which was so stunningly compact for its time (complete with a tube monitor!), then they're smart enough to figure out how to manage broad production lines and push down the price, and if they can push down the price then more people will buy it. Between W7 and OSX.5.8 (Leopard) . . . I still much prefer Leopard. I do most of my work on it.
Microsoft could easily strip down their operating system and make it the leanest, meanest, fastest OS in town.
Yes, yes, exactly my point. Get rid of the insane dispersion of files, and streamline.
But I suspect . . . without knowing too much about computers (here's where you can enlighten me) . . . I wonder about the extent of how effectively Windows can manage the computer, while sitting on top of DOS.
Now, on to the next thing . . .
Lloric :
Lloric wrote:Sure, I love MacOS but I've dumped way too many thousands on machines where processors and motherboards have gone up in smoke, thereby jeopardizing project deadline.
True, I don't think that Mac
hardware is particularly better than PC hardware (over the ages I've gone through a bunch of Mac hardware issues, myself, and the repair shop would charge me a pound of flesh to fix it . . . though no problem yet with my current Mac) . . . though I've seen many more OS issues on other people's PC's (less often on my own PC's, ahem) than I've ever seen on my Mac OS or anyone else's Mac OS.
...The OS being the point of topic for this thread.
My main point is that in my experiences, the computer/OS is a tool. You wouldn't say to Ansel Adams that he must have used a terrific camera, nor would you suggest to Picasso that his brushes must have been special.
Well said. What works for you is what works for you.
So let's get back to the real important discussion: How long do we have to wait for Book III????
Again: well said.
It doesn't take up much room on my 1TB hard drive and it runs as fast as(in some instances faster than) Windows XP, so I can't complain too much. I do need to upgrade from the RC to RTM, so I'll give you some exact figures when I get around to that (hopefully this weekend). 
Then again, I'm also in the process of putting together a 486 DX-33 and a 200Mhz Pentium... hopefully these Sound Blaster Pro 2 cards still work! *sigh* The things I do for vintage PC gaming... but sometimes an emulator just doesn't cut it.
http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2008/1 ... space.aspx
calm down everyone! bw needs to spray the hose on you guys, or maybe lock this one!! 
or get book2 done so we all can talk about the game!
![Officer [Bronze Rank]](./images/ranks/officer1.png "Officer [Bronze Rank]")
