Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 25th Oct 2009 12:51 UTC
Editorial A couple of years ago, a professor at my university had a very interesting thought exchange with the class I was in. We were a small group, and I knew most of them, they were my friends. Anyway, we had a talk about language purism - not an unimportant subject if you study English in The Netherlands.
Thread beginning with comment 391148
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
NathanHill
Member since:
2006-10-06

Wow. You haven't tried Mac OS X? It's way more than a *NIX shell with a fancy skin or whatever. Not sure if it is Unicorns and ponies, but it does make using Windows or any version of Linux feel like slumming.

I don't think Apple makes beige boxes any more, by the way. If you want, you can pick up an older G4 Mac or something for like $100 to try Mac OS X out on. It won't be super fast, but it will give you a great opportunity to see how neat Leopard is and all the great software out there.

Reply Parent Score: 1

r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, I've played with OS X, with the interface at a few shops and it is snappy, snazzy and works well. I've dropped an app-bundle in the application folder on a machine from a friend and that worked OK, but...

Windows is decent these days. Linux is decent these days. I suspect BSD is too (haven't bothered yet). Mostly all work out of the box (although Windows needs a little more hand holding with drivers).

I know my way around computers, so I may be biased. The "it-just-works" factor doesn't really rank highest on my list. I can solve most problems fairly quickly.

I use Ubuntu at home (not because I need the "noob factor", but the distro is targeted by developers more and that broadens available packaged software). And it mostly just works out of the box. The minor niggles I can solve within an hour and it is "set it and forget it".

Except for glitz and some proprietary design in the housing, what does Mac and OS X bring me more than Apple branding? The innards of Apple machines are really bog standard x86 components. EFI, while nice, is just another way of initializing a PC. I don't need a top of the line x86 processor (doesn't even have to be Intel). It will be two years tops and then they are antiques ready for the museum anyways.

I'm curious about OS X, because I'm a geek and like to poke around new stuff and see how stuff works. It be nice to know how Apple solves stuff from a technical standpoint, but I'm absolutely not dependent on Apple to craft an enjoyable computing environment.

I'd like to see for myself how "super" OS X really is, instead of relying on the Apple marketing or the gushings of people around me who I suspect couldn't solve/configure their way out of a wet paper bag, even if their lives depended on it. So these people do seem to have Valhalla in OS X, but I suspect my experiences wouldn't match theirs simply because I'm versed in handling computers.

The trouble with trying out OS X is you have to get Apple kit and these machines are simply not what I want in an x86 box. They are configured with a decent Intel proc, but the rest is fairly stock. Graphics are not top of the line, RAM size is OK. Hard disk space seems to be scarce on the cheaper models. But the mix is exorbitantly priced. I don't need an all in one. I don't need an aluminum case. I don't play soccer with my machines and I like some modularity. On the hardware side, for me, the veil is pierced for Apple's myth.

Buying obsolete PPC hardware, to try out a superseded version of OS X, is certainly out of the question. I've got enough electronic junk as it is.

On another note. Funny you thought that beige box meant an older Apple G4. Back when the PPC line was the bee's knees of Apple, beige box was the choice derogatory term in the Apple community for an x86 IBM Compatible PC.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Abstract Member since:
2009-10-24

Thom said:

For me, there's only one thing that matters: that software be treated like any other copyrighted work. If software vendors want to impose additional restrictions - then fine, but they'll have to handle it the proper way. Software vendors already know perfectly well how to do this: the enterprise market. You won't see a software vendor rely on a click-through EULA in massive software rollouts. Those are properly signed contracts.


Which supports my statement of:
Only thing wrong with the EULA is the time in which it is presented, and the manner in which it is presented.
Only valid argument concerning the EULA. What do I mean by that? The end user purchases the license before being presented with the conditions and what they need to agree to.

From a similar discussion in: http://www.osnews.com/comments/22386 (3rd page of comments)

So no License Agreement is upholdable unless it is printed and signed? Would that mean the GPL is junk since it neither does that or even a click through?
Before you go into how the GPL doesn't restrict you on what hardware you are allowed to use GPL code, thats not the point, its the Terms & Conditions that are called into question regardless of what they maybe in the License Agreement.

@r_a_trip
Obviously Mac OSX is the greatest OS currently available...

Well, that is the big question here, isn't it? Is OS X the greatest OS out there? Apple (and cult fans) tells us it is, but to know for sure, you have to make a leap of faith and buy a beige box in a pretty dress for a pretty steep markup.

When you do make the leap of faith, you either discover Macintosh + OS X is computing Valhalla or you find you basically bought an expensive but bog standard x86 machine, with a run of the mill *Nix with a prettied up shell.

I think most people would like to find out if the "Think different", "I'm a Mac / I'm a PC" and "It just works" marketing magic of Apple is the honest truth or just a puff of smoke up our collective rear.


Quote the complete sentence:
Obviously Mac OSX is the greatest OS currently available or why would there be so much discussion / debate on how Mac OSX should be available to be installed on non-Apple hardware.


If its not, again why all the fuss? Also "great" and "greatest" is a matter of opinion. Some might say the Beatles was the greatest rock band ever, others might not think that. To each their own.

Not disputing that Apple Hardware is not more expensive then the equivlent of Building It Yourself (piece by piece). But again it is the complete package. I can buy the same paint that any other artist does, but what i create with it might not have the value or worth that a famous artist's work does. Also I may not feel as though a painting by an artist is worth millions of dollars, but if someone else does, and is willing to pay it, then so be it.

Try before you buy? You can demo one at an Apple reseller or Apple Store. Not enough time to fully see if Mac OSX is the OS you want, so violating the License Agreement is justified? Go lease or rent an Apple computer then. Does any car dealer allow you to take / use the car you are interested in for longer then the amount of time for a test drive?

Cool Factor? Like how it is also trendy / cool to be anti-whatever is popular or deemed cool by the mainstream? That is just being a hypocrite, so your cool cause you think people who purchase over priced Apple products are idiots wanting to be be cool by jumping on the Apple bandwagon? Thats like all the "Alternative" Music fans, wanting to be non-mainstream / top 40s, but actually wind up making "Alternative" mainstream / top 40 from its popularity. Conforming to not-conforming? Oxymoron.

Reply Parent Score: 1