So, with WinHEC coming to a close, the biggest talk was of course the newest release of Microsoft (R) Windows (R) Codename Longhorn, now at build 5048. With nearly one year since the previous release (build 4074) build 5048 sports some new features and lacks some others. Recently, the talk was centered around the lack of WinFS, the new futuristic Windows File system. However, we’ll get to all that a little later.The whole install was simple enough, I started it while I was in Windows XP. It was simple enough, it asked for the basic things, and it was on it’s way. It rebooted around half-way through and booted into a Windows Pre-Installation Enviornment to finsh. The process was extremely simple and very efficent, a child could have completed it. I then booted into the OS to experience, what I had thought, would be a driver war zone. However, infact, the driver database turned out to be pretty good. My wireless (Broadcom 802.11g) wasn’t recognized but was available on my Windows Restore disk, same with my modem, and my Display Drivers (ATi Mobility Radeon 9600) were available on http://www.ati.com. Infact, Longhorn recognized more hardware then either Windows XP or Windows XP x64 in a ‘stock’ install.
Now, after the driver showdown was completed, and I rebooted, I found Windows Longhorn to be by far, much more stable and fast then I had expected. My biggest fear was that I was using the bare minimum of system ram (256mb) and that I would experience a world of BSOD. It was completely opposite. I’ve been running 5048 for about 2 days now, and I’ve found little slow down when really hammering the system.
By far the best feature I’ve seen in Longhorn so far is the new refined Search sans WinFS. Although it’s common knowledge that WinFS has now been removed from Longhorn there are still minor tweaks to Search that allow you to instantly Search a section, such as My Pictures or even the Start Menu, for the file or program you need, instantly weeding out other search results. While obviously one could attribute new refinements to desktop search to Apple’s efforts with Spotlight, Microsoft has implemented a flawless search technology.
There are also very minor changes to the Operating System as well, like the new Aero Style that really change the feel of the OS. Simple additions like ‘glowing’ choices for ‘maximizing’ or ‘closing’ a window. The simple glass effects in the Start menu, and the new icons are also quite pretty. Also, the new folder views and My Computer setup make everything a bit more accessable.
Intrestingly enough, the sidebar that was originally in Longhorn, has since been removed and the common memory leak in some of the early leaked builds of Longhorn, i.e. 4051 and 4015 is totally gone. Also, Longhorn is built upon Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1, which in turn is based on Windows XP Service Pack 2, so you’ll notice some of the features like the firewall and the new Windows Security Center are common to Longhorn and Windows XP. Many things still remained unchanged, such as Internet Explorer 6 and Outlook Express which haven’t seen an upgrade in a long time.
Of course, I can’t like everything can I? Well, no, Longhorn does have it’s short comings, however Longhorn does have the advantage that, it truly shouldn’t be judged in a pre-beta stage. The text in some the icons is a bit jagged, and unfortunately DCE, the Desktop Composition Engine, couldn’t be started on my hardware, so I couldn’t experience all the visual effects expected in Longhorn final.
Also, there are very small things which could tend to annoy you. Occasionally an icon looks like it’s been stretched too big just minor glitches which are normal in a pre-beta enviornment. However, having used Longhorn for a few days now, I have to admit that Apple, needs to be worried. Longhorn doesn’t even have a name yet, but it’s by far the most promising thing to come out of Redmond in quite a while. With the release of build 5048 the bar has been raised, and so have my expectations of Beta 1 and beyond of this remarkable Operating System.
If you would like to see your thoughts or experiences with technology published, please consider writing an article for OSNews.
Apparently he can read.
“Longhorn will have minor (if any) improvements over Windows XP. It will use up more system resources and for what (better looking desktop)?”
“”How do you know it? Do you work at Microsoft?””
Wrong. Each new verison of OS X has been noticeably faster than the last.
“Both apple and MS continue to push eye candy and additional resource consumption with dubious merits. Apple, at least, seems to be getting more real features out of their work, like core audio”
Im no ms fan, but what were the comments in the months before windows xp was released? Probably some in the lines of “win98se or me is enough for most users” “won’t upgrade”, “is probably very full of bugs”.
So maybe in ’07 or ’08 most will be posting their comments from their longhorn boxes to osnews.com commenting when sp2 for longhorn will be out?
The more Longhorn gets delayed and disppoints everyone the more people are switching to Linux. About anyone I know who is not a die-hard Mac fan is looking into Linux lately. Linux seems to offer many of the features Longhorn was supposed to have such as a choice of window managers, themes, and customization options. I started playing around with it myself and have to admit that so far I really like what I see and now I can understand what the big hubbub is all about.
I like LInux and am running MEPIS on a machine at home.
Other than myself I don’t know anyone who is using Linux and I don’t know anyone who is considering it for home use.
At work its taking root and maybe thats where the whole revolution will start but I just don’t see it for home use and I doubt the delay in longhorns release will do much for it.
With another 2 years of development it the distros out there just might be up to par.
There’s two sides to saying every release is significantly faster. One is “they’re always improving.” The other is “they must have really sucked at the start.” The speedups in the last couple have been marginal (about 10-20% as a maximum).
But then again, between 2000 and XP so many things seem to have slowed down in Windows. Usually just stupid little things, but I never cease to wonder about that slow root menu load (desktop menu).
Dude, seriously, shorten the name
.
I live on a college campus, so my results are obviously skewed by intelligent able minded people. I know a few people who are running linux as a desktop at home. A couple of them I helped install it.
It’s entirely feasible for a purely home user group. My source for this: Linspire has been around a few years. I haven’t heard of anyone deploying linspire on a major scale, but here it is still going a few years later as a business and not a community of volunteers.
Also, I think Novell is putting money into it for a reason. They didn’t survive in the software world this long by making as huge mistakes as Sun did
.
Introduction
Expectations were especially high this year, as attendees signed in to WinHec’s first day, after they had received the pre-beta DVD copy of Windows Codenamed Longhorn, they were also invited to participate in the beta, a clear sign that Microsoft wants a lot of feedback on the successor to Windows XP.
Just a couple of hours later, reviews and screenshots were popping up all over the web, most if not all noted that DWM (Desktop Window Manager), wasn’t enabled by default but people soon found out how to enable it, quickly realizing just why it was disabled in the first place, more on that later.
A day later, Microsoft started asking attendees to remove screenshots that had been posted on their respective sites (including Neowins’ Tom Warren), a surprising move considering the Internet media presence at WinHec and the growing enthusiasm around anything Longhorn.
The explanation for the move seems to come down to the fact, that Microsoft have offered a build that really doesn’t do too much justice to the builds being previewed at the conference. Enthusiastic writers were however, disappointed with Microsoft’s heavy handed approach to screen shot removal.
http://www.neowin.net/articles.php?action=more&id=118
Kind of curious considering were being inundated with these Longhorn builds in accordance with Microsoft’s longstanding policy of promising a bigger and better product long before they have anything of substance. So we’re continually subjected to these builds while being told that they aren’t the real Longhorn….so what the hell is the point of constantly shoving them in our face? To show what Longhorn could look like on a bad day? Is this meaningless drivel really necessary for them to compete with Tiger?
Agree it’s to pemature coming to a conclusion based on what’s avaible at moment in terms of screen-shots reviews etc.I must be terrible wrong if would think MS will turn 180 degrees and the final product will be revolutionair which MacOSX whas at it’s introduction back in 2001.
Given the fact that MS it’s products aren’t cheap is it so wrong to want most value (features,security,innovation usabillity..) for money.As i said in an earlier post i doubt there will be sold significantly less packages of Longhorn or what the name will be and life goes on.That is for joe average and co.
Wheras other firm’s post about real innovations and improvements,all MS does is postpone and sue( talking about xp’s successor).We call it in Holland:”pappen en nathouden”.We will see what they make out off it.Till then i hope they keep their hat closed intill something substantial comes out off it.
“Microsoft has implemented a flawless search technology.”
What’s that all about?? Hey, does it search source code now (specifically ASP) or does search still purposely avoid it?
That really irks me when I try to search source code, specifically, and I can SEE something in a file when I edit it, but search can’t find it. Yeah, search on Windows is excellent.
[warning, subjective blathering follows]
Anyway, enough negativity. I imagine if Longhorn is built right on top of 2003 and XP it will be quite decent. Solid anyway. Still, I don’t think that Apple has anything “to be worried about”.
What about slow-down? Granted it is beta, and he just got a new version, but has he used any longhorn beta version long enough to encounter the crawl effect which is solved by logging out/in sometimes, or in more drastic cases by rebooting?
I hate it when I’ve been coding/deploying/coding/deploying, reading mail, updating project files, etc. and from the beginning of the week to the end of the week the speed of my system has drastically changed. Reboot – solved.
I have never had that problem with linux, BeOS or Mac OS X. I think Windows needs to tweak process/memory management or the loader and perhaps have background disk optimization running all of the time, or at least running at night.
Still, I am able to get my work done on Windows without it crashing, like a lot of people on OSNews report (“My system crashes 99 million times a day”). My Windows machine hasn’t crashed in a year, at least.
pre-beta XP looked nothing like the final XP. IHV builds of many games and applications look nothing like the final product. Your point?
Great review. I can’t wait until I can use and test the beta. It looks like my hardware will support this release well.
A few people have said this but this is a very early pre-beta build for hardware/software developers, not the end users. It still looks like XP because they’re keeping the final longhorn UI locked up until the very end, we’ll probably see it 1 or 2 months before longhorn goes final, when we are in the RC1 or RC2 stage of development.
As for features, MS has said that beta 1 will only have 1/3 of the planned features and that beta 2 will be close to if not 100% feature complete. What these will be we don’t know, the only thing they’ve said and talked about now is the Search feature which is already in all be it basic at this point IMO.
Lots of the OS’s systems are being or have been reworked from the kernel all the way to the UI, it’s basically a new re-writen OS, while still keeping enough of the Win2k3 bits they started off with so you have compatibility.
I’m not in a rush at all, and i’m not let down by this build, because I didn’t have high hopes for it in the first place. Once we get to see Beta 1 then I can get a better idea of where this thing is headed. Until then, I’ll keep using XP since it works just how I want it to and I get all my work done without any problems.
“Longhorn will have minor….”
“How do you know it? Do you work at Microsoft?”
Just my prediction. Can’t say for sure unless I have Longhorn to compare it with XP.
Using past experience to base this on. Look at Windows 3.11 to 98SE to XP. You will see the requirements increase. Same holds true for Linux. Redhat 5 versus Fedora Core 3. Which do you think will run better on an older system? How about Mac OS 8.x vs OSX? Run Windows XP & 98 on a P2 with 64MB ram & tell me which is better for it.
Simple fact. Newer OSes require higher system requirements and will use up more system resources because of the extra features, addons and the services run. 3d desktop & animation in Longhorn should slow it down somewhat.
I get your point. Longhorn could use less (assuming it is coded efficiently & better), but kind of unlikely. (Unless it turns out to be a tweaked version of Windows 2003 just with another name).
…or more specifically Microsoft vs. Apple. While it seems like Microsoft will be a year or so behind what Apple has now with Tiger, I hope (and I am, btw, a mac zealot/beos zealot) that they are taking the time to lay down a solid foundation for the future. By that I mean they are taking their time refactoring kernel and subsystem code to make this version something they can safely build on over the coming 5 years or so. If they do that, they can then focus once again on new and improved major features/functionality.
Mind you, I am not all rah rah on Microsoft, but I just find it hard to believe that they can take as long as they are and NOT be doing something significant to this operating system! And while I prefer my Mac at home, I do use Windows at work (altho’ we will soon be switching to a dual boot setup of Windows/Redhat for developers, like myself) and I want it to be a good platform on which to get my work done.
One last thing. People are mentioning that when Longhorn comes out it will not even meet the feature set that Mac OS X has and that Apple will be preparing to release 10.5 with even greater features. But what people fail to mention is that every x.x.x release of Mac OS X comes with tangible improvements in the operating system… not just fixes for security vulnerabilities (which it often seems Windows has to do because it is such a target).
And so if you use large files (Like I do a lot of DVD work) you PC is going to always be SLOW.
Or your drive will always be fragmented. As is now after moving 80 GB of files off and on to my 100 GB drive the drive is about 90% fragmented. To defragment it takes about 4 hours.
I would LOVE to see my drive get defraged in the background! Sounds like all they are going to do is use the same defrag tool, but have the system run it as a task instead of you running it yourself. I bet even that it’s not something that will be on by default because performance will take a hit!
Longhorn should be called Windows ME-2.
(Say it out loud. It’s good on so many levels!)
I was one of the testers at one point, however, the following is a purely personal view that I have gained since the time I already had switched projects.
I believe Microsoft has put every effort into showing off the Longhorn demo version at WinHEC with as many features as possible.
In the meantime Microsoft has been sued by several companies regarding a number of the key features that were supposed to be included in the final consumer version and some injuctions have been issued already with more to follow. As anyone knows those types of lawsuits can take years.
This leaves us with with at least one conclusion: Longhorn will not appear with all those features that have been rumored and is likely to get delayed again if it ever makes it into the consumer world at all. All I can say without getting further into it: Microsoft is currently actively exploring other business models.
I don’t know about that. For instance I am running Fedora core on the same P1 Machine I ran Redhat 5. I just installed XFCE instead of Gnome or KDE.
Right now I am running Tiger on the Ibook 600MHZ that came with Mac OS 9 and it runs fine. Yes it’s a little slower but then again they are two different OS’s.
My problem with Windows is not the difference between Windows 98 and Windows XP because they are totally not the same. My problem is with the NT line and why everytime a new OS comes out I need a new PC. It’s crazy!
It’s even more crazy that Microsoft is already telling me that I need a Longhorn certified machine almost 2 years before the OS comes out.
And the entry price of a real Mac/OSX is again? And please, keep the toy computers like the iMac and Mac mini out of the options. Again, zealots, not everyone is happy in expending out 2 grand (US$) for obsolete hardware, just because the OS is good.
If Apple wants to increase their market share, they have to either cut the prices or open their systems. Better yet, port OSX to x86.
Should “Longhorn” be called “Red Herring”?
Why should Apple be worried? Since when does Apple compete in the x86 (ia32/ia64/AMD64) OS market?
I don’t see any Mac users buying Longhorn, so what exactly is there to worry about?
Does it matter anyway – since Apple will have a new OS ready shortly(6-8 months) after Longhorn, which includes similar things to what Microsoft have dropped.
The best way to a lean mean machine that fits any budget is running Linux on a standard PC. Linux has a small memory footprint, runs extremely fast even on older or slower systems, is highly configurable, and lets you take advantage of the entire world of free and open-source software.
I’ve been a devoted windows user and have always thought that Linux was hard to install and difficult to use but since I gave it a try(in my case Fedora Linux) I realized what it is actually about and now I wouldn’t ever want to go back to windows again. Longhorn seems a resource hunrgy beast that makes your new Pentium 4 or Opteron appear like a 486 while Linux does just the opposite.
This leaves us with with at least one conclusion: Longhorn will not appear with all those features that have been rumored and is likely to get delayed again if it ever makes it into the consumer world at all. All I can say without getting further into it: Microsoft is currently actively exploring other business models.
I agree. But this goes well beyong Longhorn itself, which I believe that it could be a good OS.
The bare fact is that MS feels itself much encircled now. They know they cannot grow that much in consumer market since they already dominate it and western countries aren’t going to allow MS to grow more than they are.
They tried to enter developing markets where, for mostly political reasons (not price, for sure), they’re not growing as expected (expecially in China, where Govt explicitly prevented them to take control of enterprises and goverment installations). So what can they do?
Consumer market is important but server market is clearly becoming more important than it. If they want to actively grow in server market (which they don’t dominate), they clearly need to loose some grip over consumer one.
I’m sure Microsoft is exploring new models, expecially those which can switch their revenues to server products (and server-based applications) rather than consumer ones.
They have an huge advantage over anyone else: their prices went almost untouched in last years (even if people kept stating that they were going to die…;-). Cutting (half?) prices for Windows (consumer) and Office would wipe any competition and would just make them the choice for next 10 years.
Other than this, I’m not worried about Longhorn. They’re changing many things in Windows and introducing many new things and even if they will need to cut a few features, LH will be a top seller.
Questioning about features of a product which is probably 1 year far from the shelves it’s not very pratical 😉
“And the entry price of a real Mac/OSX is again? And please, keep the toy computers like the iMac and Mac mini out of the options. Again, zealots, not everyone is happy in expending out 2 grand (US$) for obsolete hardware, just because the OS is good.”
My Dual G4 450 MHz blows my 1.8GHz Athlon XP out of the water in performance and responsiveness. The operating system is just that much better, especially at memory management. If you just look at the numers, yeah, Macs don’t sound that impressive. One of the reasons I didn’t get an iBook was because they could only go up to 1024×768, but now I’m using this G4 in the same resolution on a really old CRT monitor, and I’m multitasking better than I ever did in Windows. You wouldn’t think they were toys if you ever seriously used one. I remember back in the days before OSX when we used to get a kick out of going to Apple.com and putting together a more or less useless machine that would cost $30,000, but from having my own second-hand equipment, I’ve learned that a low-end Mac is a high-end computer. And who figures keyboard, mouse, and monitor into the price of PC hardware, anyway?
“If Apple wants to increase their market share, they have to either cut the prices or open their systems. Better yet, port OSX to x86.”
Yeah, just sail your flagship right into pirate’s cove. No OSX apps would even work on an x86 version without being recompiled. Of course, Apple has managed to bring along its developers through pretty huge changes before (first from m68k to ppc, and now from Classic to X), and if any OS was tailor-made to support multi-platform binaries, OSX is it, but it would be an incredibly stupid move because OSX is good enough to make people buy the hardware. I know scrappers hate the idea of buying a “whole” computer, but a lot of people who would have bought a Dell or HP if they’d been in the market a few years ago are looking more and more at Apple now. I’d say it’s worth it just to avoid all that junk software that seems to cling to OEM Windows installs. So yeah, I’d be worried if I were an OEM pushing pre-configured systems. I think everyone else is more or less safe, unless Longhorn turns out to be significantly more or less than expected. I’m completely certain it’ll be less than advertized simply because they’re basing it on currently-existing versions of Windows, and Microsoft has a long-standing habit of just tacking on “features” that will be turned off by most users right out of the box and completely abandoned by MS within a year or two. Remember Active Desktop? I wish I didn’t.
“pre-beta XP looked nothing like the final XP. IHV builds of many games and applications look nothing like the final product. Your point?”
That’s exactly my point. These builds mean absolutely zip, utterly worthless to most and yet we’re subjected to a constant stream of them. Why? Why not wait until they actually do have a Beta if none of these qualifies as one? Why not stop shoveling this crap until they really have something to show? THAT is my point.
“That’s exactly my point. These builds mean absolutely zip, utterly worthless to most and yet we’re subjected to a constant stream of them. Why? Why not wait until they actually do have a Beta if none of these qualifies as one? Why not stop shoveling this crap until they really have something to show? THAT is my point.”
Perhaps you’re just stupid, or perhaps you just couldn’t be arsed to actually do a little research… either way winHec. THE BUILD IS FOR HARDWARE DEVELOPERS.
copying macos in interface design
at least try too ( microsoft lacks the style )
is it really a problem with the compression? The pictures on Winsupersite looked exactly the same too.
Second, it was built for higher-end hardware and not to be thrifty with system resources.
Having a larger resource pool at your disposal does not in any way justify needless use of said resources. “It’s meant to run on a system build this year from top of the line parts.” Yeah, ok, but why does that mean it uses 300MB of memory at boot time? I can get Windows 2000 to run *well* on a 166Mhz machine with 32MB of memory (yes, I know 64MB is the “minimum” but to hell with that) by removing core components I don’t use, why should I need 512MB to run something that is, for all intents and purposes, a new version of the kernel + upgraded support software? I promise that any excuse you give for that is lacking in actual logic. It ends up being shit like “Windows Firewall” or “Messenger Service”, which, by the way, still loads into memory even if you have the service disabled (again, useless bloat?).
There is too much of this “well, since it’s there we might as well use it” gibberish going around, and it’s mostly needless. Take *nix as an example. If I boot into a Fedora Core 4rc2 environment it tries to use a full 280MB of memory. That’s a fresh boot, before I run anything else. Arch Linux uses 90MB at boot, without the GUI loaded (or a whopping 156MB with same GUI loaded). Why? Because they can. Notice the over 100MB difference there (ARCH Gui vs. Fedore), even though I’m running, more or less, the same software (KDE)?
Then, I load a FreeBSD install with 5.3, and guess what? Memory usage at boot is about 8-15MB, depending on your configurations. Does it lack any functions? Is there any software I can’t readily use, or any logging function I’m missing that I need for my system to run pretty much the same way as either of the Linux distros? No. It’s clean because the developers realize that “thrifty resource usage” is a must, at all times.
Just because I have 768MB of memory and two CPUs doesn’t mean they need to be used on crap that isn’t important. Why pay for a top of the line Xeon if you are then going to go buy an OS that uses 4% of the cycles when idle (if your lucky)? Yes, that’s an exaggeration, but how long will it be?
More resources is no excuse for bloat.
Any of you remember when “640K” really was enough for anybody? The only thing that changed that from “640K” to the soon to be future “640M” is that one attitude: “it doesn’t need to be thrifty with resources”
This one little thing alone is why Longhorn is destined to be at least as much crap as XP, and any future release won’t be any better.
“Longhorn will have minor (if any) improvements over Windows XP. It will use up more system resources and for what (better looking desktop)?”
How do you know it? Do you work at Microsoft?
*cough cough* 2k/XP differences were what he just listed *cough cough*
Really, what “improvements” have actually come after 2k? 2K was when they added DX support to NT, that’s when they started adding PnP that worked well (not the NT4 hack) to NT, that’s when they started reducing crashes, lags, security holes, patches that didn’t require a reboot, patches that didn’t completely overwrite each other, settings changes that didn’t require a reboot, expanded HDD (read: partition) size support, better defrag ability*, easy to use administration tools, improved networking stack (probably just an upgrade from BSD 3.whatever to 4.4 base or some such, check the end of the EULA, it says there’s BSD code in windows right there “Copyrights held by Regends of UC Berkeley” or some such, just about every OS uses the BSD network code), program compatibility layers, the list goes on.
What did XP add? An ugly, wasteful user Shell, ugly buttons, that stupid animated search dog, more “are you sure?” questions, and… I can’t really think of anything that isn’t an eye sore or a complete waste of my time/resources.
That is how he knows.
*by the way, does anyone actually think the built in microsoft defragmenting tools are any good? I don’t want Longhorn automatically defragging anything, it will ruin the jobs that things like PerfectDisk and Diskkeeper do (try it, run one, then run the XP defrag, it causes extra fragmentation because of bad file placement defaults in Windows).
“My Dual G4 450 MHz blows my 1.8GHz Athlon XP out of the water in performance and responsiveness.”
I highly highly doubt that. I also have an Athlon 2500 and it puts my eMac 1.0 Ghz. You must have one super mac.
What did XP add? An ugly, wasteful user Shell, ugly buttons, that stupid animated search dog, more “are you sure?” questions, and… I can’t really think of anything that isn’t an eye sore or a complete waste of my time/resources.
Improved networking (e.g. it wasn’t possible to bridge network connections in w2k). The improved shell isn’t great, I disable most of the extra visuals, but the fonts are nicer on XP. Just a few things.
Can’t say I’m really disappointed with this version of longhorn either. MS would have stripped out most of the unstable desktop features to assure stability in this build which was meant to give hardware developers a previes of future technologies. Wait untill they release the next PDC build.
*by the way, does anyone actually think the built in microsoft defragmenting tools are any good? I don’t want Longhorn automatically defragging anything, it will ruin the jobs that things like PerfectDisk and Diskkeeper do (try it, run one, then run the XP defrag, it causes extra fragmentation because of bad file placement defaults in Windows).
The built in tools aren’t great and usually take a couple of runs before they get it right
.
Apple has absolutely NO reason to worry about Longhorn at this point. With their OS release schedule the way it is, there is every reason to expect that the next version of OS X, 10.5 (Puma, Lion, whatever), will be out BEFORE Longhorn ever shows up.
I know many of you geeks always “on the edge” will scoff at my question, but:
Can Longhorn run on FAT32 partitions?
I know that technically, FAT32 is inferior to NTFS. FAT32 might be more prone to fragmentation, and has a lesser focus on security.
However, FAT32 is the most multiplatform filesystem ever. Linux, BSD, and many other operating systems can read AND write to FAT32.
I know some NTFS drivers and solutions are appearing, but are still in their infancy.
Plus, there are far many more tools for FAT32 recovery. If the system goes the way of the dodo, I can boot with a startup diskette, or liveCD, and save the most important part of any computer: its data.
I’ve seen too many people needing to format their computers, because they somehow lost access to it, or it plain BSOD’d, and had no way to recover their encrypted-compressed-ubersecure-filesystem. or their “now-useless-filesystem”.
I’m getting a little weary of all the Apple braggarts masturbate over OS X. Big deal- it’s still proprietary, running on their hardware. You’re getting ripped off and bent over! “There’s only one true OS…” Yep, Linux.![;)](https://www.osnews.com/images/emo/grin.gif)