Apple today announced that starting in January 2003, all new Mac models will only boot into MacOSX as the start-up operating system, though they will retain the ability to run most Mac OS 9 applications through Apple’s bundled ‘Classic’ software. There are nearly 4,000 native applications now available for Mac OS X. In the meantime, Apple released iCal. iCal is an elegant personal calendar application that helps you manage your life and your time. iCal lets you keep track of your appointments and events with multiple calendars featuring at-a-glance views of upcoming activities by day, week or month. Our Take: iCal sounds cool, despite the fact that many users await iSync though, in order to be really useful to them. However, how many companies or small developers will go out of business because of this release? Here and here are some of them.
We recently talked about the strategy of the OS maker to create software that competes with its own third party developers, which might result in the developers leaving the platform. Karelia Software, makers of Watson, already said they will now focus on a Windows port. Is Apple looking for a (long term) trouble or these releases will actually strenghthen the OSX platform?
Now, from what I have heard, iCal and iSync cannot be used by third party developers for Mac OS X. The same goes for Sherlock 3. When Microsoft integrates applications into Windows, it in some way helps third party developers.
Let’s look at two examples.
– IE integrated into Windows – it helps more third party developers than harms them. Do anyone here has any idea how much development time and cost have been brought down with bundling IE?
– Sherlock 3, it doesn’t help any third party developers, and it hurts an important one (one that they awarded and praised).
Some things I agree, like bundling Address Book in which third party apps could use. What I see Apple is trying to do is trying to be an all-rounder, trying to get rid of dependancy on shareware. funny, since it was shareware that kept Microsoft in power.
And before we get started on this topic lets not have any talk about Porting OS X to Intel or the AMD 64 Bit Chips (which are vaperware as much as the G5 is)or some X86pcmac.
“iCal is an elegant personal calendar application”
Your article points to the reason why Apple should continue creating applications. To state the obvious – Apple want to drive the adoption of Macs. Applications sell hardware, left to the vagaries of the software scene an elegant calendar app *could* appear but maybe not. By creating an elegant solution Apple can demonstrate another aspect of the Mac experience that is better than its rivals.
Doubtless they’ve done their research and figure that this can capture the imagination their target audience. If other software companies want a piece of the action, they just have to create a better application.
>Your article points to the reason why Apple should continue creating applications
That was just a copy/paste from the iCal description page.
I am downloading iCal as I am writting this. I don’t know if it is “elegant” yet.
Ok, I installed iCal and tried it just right now. Well, when I create a new event, the little blue rectangle, I can’t read very clear what I write there. The white AA font on top of this grandient rectangle is not very readable (it is better when it is in bold though). And when I change its value to “Work” the color changes to a very acid Green. That is not readable almost at all…
This is an example of eye candy that gets in my way on using a computer… I like Apple’s UI elements, but this is one of these times that it is “too much”.
Anyone know what Quark’s plans are for OS X? I gather there is still
not an OS X version of XPress. That must be holding back adoption.
“trying to get rid of dependancy on shareware”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t is it the job of a well designed OS (any OS that is) to satisfy the needs of their users? A great deal of shareware apps are utilities, if an OS is lacking in the utilities dept, then the OS is plain lacking. If there are tasks that need to be performed and the OS does not handle it inately, it usually ends up existing as a shareware/freeware program. What does this say about the OS? Though not in all cases, perhaps it wasn’t as well-designed as one would like to think. That being said, consider how many shareware utilities exist for the Mac vs. Windows. What? If I may quote thee: “since it was shareware that kept Microsoft in power” I’m glad to see that you already agree Rajan, seems like the Windows visionaries aren’t seeing very far…
Furthermore, have you even considered the possibility that not everyone (even developers) want an OS where everything is integrated? I know you really think that having IE integrated into Windows is good thing (at least for developers) but then how many broken apps will be developed because it EXPECTED IE to be there, only to find that (SHOCK, HORROR) Mozilla is there instead. Perhaps you want a world were developers are encouraged to interface with all these ‘secondary’ apps (Browsers, Calendar, PhoneBooks) on the auspice that they ALWAYS exists and no alternatives are even allowed. Isn’t that the beauty of integration?
As far as interfaces available for developers, almost all Apple (and many 3rd party) apps have an interface to their functionality/content via AppleScript (in the same way that Windows apps have one via VBScript).
Your comments are thinner than water and highly subjective, show me some proof that Apple is smothering their third party developer, and while you are at it, back up your claim that Windows are gently caressing their third-party developers? Well ? I’m waiting…
-Spider
> Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t is it the job of a well designed OS (any OS that is) to satisfy the needs of their users?
That’s what Ms did, and they ended up in court.
Where do you draw the line Mr. That’s the real question that can prove Ms innocent, or guilty.
Quark said a while ago that they would be releasing their OSX version in 1st Quarter, most likely Macworld. So it might work out being that Apple plans to do the OSX only thing then.
…Assuming everyone can keep their scedule, is another thing though.
I agree, Eugenia, the colors or the text and shading are too close, they should lighten the shading perhaps.
Also, you cannot double click on an entered event to open and efit it – you have to use Command-I.
If anyone has removed the HelveticaNeue.dfont from their fonts folder, iCal will crash.
I think Apple is basically doing the right thing in the large sense. They have to get people moved over to OS X and I see that they are on a timetable to do that, with Macs only having Classic and no OS 9 starting 1/03. In the meantime, I realize some of these things are probably hurting 3rd party developers. I guess it depends on how far Apple is going to go with this stuff. It’s sort of fuzzy in a way. iCal is a free download for anyone with OS X, but you have to have .Mac to use it on the internet. So, how far will .Mac go? What other type of things will Apple develop for it?
Eugenia,
You know as well as I do that MS is in cour, not for integrating IE, but for bullying vendors into breaking existing contracts with MS-opposition and making it EXTREMELY difficult for vendors who make a product that MIGHT compete with their own products to even exists.
I agree that the (integration) line is different for different people, but we are not talking about “Should we integrate an Audio Preference into the OS or leave it external apps?” We are talking about major apps. An yes, a browser is major enough were their exists plenty of choices.
-Spider
…the AMD 64 Bit Chips (which are vaperware as much as the G5 is)
I hold in my hands the 2 printed programming manuals (system and application) for the new AMD chips. The chips have been demoed to the public, running Windows no less. I’m afraid that x86-64 is real. Let’s see if I can go order a G5 programming manual from Moto or IBM……
As for Apple’s OS bundling policy, this is to be expected. Apple thrives by picking the low-hanging fruit in the industry: make the most cohesive UI, polish it up nicely, build a stable system with lots of functionality that users really need. None of Apple’s qualities are killer apps alone, but they all add up to be a homerun in the minds of their users.
Microsoft is in a different space: they are gunning for the cream money: big servers, large office installs, huge integrated enterprise apps. _This_ is where they look to inflate their bank acct and this is where their dev efforts are focused.
Now, underneath either of these corporate umbrellas, which one do YOU think would be more hostile toward small 3rd party devs looking to fill niches?
“Now, from what I have heard, iCal and iSync cannot be used by third party developers for Mac OS X.”
Don’t know where you heard that but I heard from an Apple engineer at Mac World NYC that iSync would have an API for 3rd party apps to hook into for synchronization.
A great deal of shareware apps are utilities, if an OS is lacking in the utilities dept, then the OS is plain lacking.
So the fact that there’s already a lot of OSX utilities available is indicative of OSX lacking features? Nice…
Equally dumb is your comparison of how many Mac Utilities exist vs. Windows as being an indication that Mac’s are better “all-around” computers…
The fact that Mac’s have never caught on to the mainstream (read as “Joe Computeruser”, not your average geek, lifetime student, or “Professional with an above average salary”) is why there’s more available for Windows.
Your arguement must mean that QNX, BeOS and Syllable are far superior to both Macs and Windows since there’s far fewer 3rd party shareware apps available, right?
I know you really think that having IE integrated into Windows is good thing (at least for developers) but then how many broken apps will be developed because it EXPECTED IE to be there, only to find that (SHOCK, HORROR) Mozilla is there instead.
Not many… IE’s shipped with Windows, and is the most commonly used browser currently out there (something like 97% or so). Typically someone who is installing Mozilla is doing so in addition to IE. They’re not hacking their registry and system to remove all traces of IE.
Again… Bad example.
Your comments are thinner than water and highly subjective, show me some proof that Apple is smothering their third party developer, and while you are at it, back up your claim that Windows are gently caressing their third-party developers? Well ? I’m waiting…
Ah… So your theory is that by copying 3rd party apps and integrating them into the OS, Apple’s actually benefitting their users. Perhaps you could explain how this is so.
And while I’m by no means saying that MS is any better, their track record at least shows that they tend to buy out companies in order to integrate new technologys.
This removes competition, which is bad for consumers, but at least it compensates the developers, which is good in that it gives them reasons to develop more (“If MS paid $xxx for that last app I wrote, maybe they’ll pay me even more for my new one!”).
Yes there are exceptions to this rule, and I’m not going to get into MS’s bullying tactics, but your point doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. It seems to come from the very narrow viewpoint of “Apple good. MS bad”, which just isn’t true anymore.
And while I’m by no means saying that MS is any better, their track record at least shows that they tend to buy out companies in order to integrate new technologys Uhm, perhaps I should say this slowly but Apple does this too, FinalCutPro was PURCHASED from Adobe, Logic Audio was PURCHASED from Emagic, the list goes on, I could go on but I won’t.
Let me fill you in on something Mr “MS purchases companies to utilize their technology”. While I’m sure this is true in a small limited number of cases, ask yourself your many companies MS bought to destroy their competition. You know, I’ll admit that I used to be an avid Amiga user, I developed all kinds of crazy apps using good ole #include <intuition.h>, are you aware tha MS bought a sh|tload of Amiga development companies because they feared them. Sounds crazy right? Look into the details of some Gateway/MS ‘agreements’ and you’ll see for yourself.
BTW, I’d like to thank you yet again wrapping up your arguement with a “It seems to come from the very narrow viewpoint of “Apple good. MS bad”, which just isn’t true anymore” which is throw at me at every instance a Mac user defends him/herself. Like many people here, I’ve used many OS’s in my lifetime, I ran a good four years using Window’s systems (by choice, mind you), so I don’t want to hear it from you. This is a pot calling the kettle black again…
BTW, I’d like to thank you yet again wrapping up your arguement with a “It seems to come from the very narrow viewpoint of “Apple good. MS bad”, which just isn’t true anymore” which is throw at me at every instance a Mac user defends him/herself. Like many people here, I’ve used many OS’s in my lifetime, I ran a good four years using Window’s systems (by choice, mind you), so I don’t want to hear it from you. This is a pot calling the kettle black again…
Well… the “former Amiga” user at least helps to explain your approach to criticism. You seem way too attached to your arguements…
I also notice that you point out how MS purchased Amiga companies because they feared them. But you somehow forgot to clarify your Logic Audio example, in that Apple’s discontinuing all non-Apple versions of this software now that they’ve completed the purchase.
So… Your point is that by screwing over loyal users of a software company that they’ve purchased (that is, unless these starving musicians want to spend lots more $$ on overpriced OSX hardware, and an OSX version of their sequencer), they’re somehow being better than MS was when they purchased companies to eliminate competition.
Um… Ok.
You’re right: It sure does sound like the pot calling the kettle black again.
Judging by the screenshots they’re using the brushed metal look for iCal. Does anybody know how Apple justifies this decision?
I believe there exist some guidelines for which look to use (Aqua vs. Brushed Metal) based on the type of the application. So, media players (e.g. Quicktime) use the brushed metal look.
But I fail to see why iCal doesn’t use the Aqua look.
So the fact that there’s already a lot of OSX utilities available is indicative of OSX lacking features? Nice…
I think what they’re talking about here are the sheer numbers of shareware UI customization utilities which provide functions which should already be present in the OS anyway.
I’ll be the first to admit that Apple is screwing over the existing (if they still are) Windows userbase of Logic Audio. You made a point about Apple screwing over their 3rdPartyDevs and touted how MS at least BUYS their companies. My example(s) demonstrate that Apple does this as well.
Look, I’ll also admit that both companies are doing something to kill SOMEONE’S development (be they competitors or simple 3rdPartyDevprs). MS just has a sneaky, bullying method of doing it, and the courts agreed with this. Don’t argue with me, take it up with the USAppealsCourt.
Thanks for the “former Amiga” comment as well… That was a nice touch to your arrogance. =)
If you’ll excuse, I have to find a missing *.DLL in my WindowsBox now…
According to Apple guidelines, an app should use the brushed metal look if it is related to the access of hardware or multimedia devices. Apple doesn’t quite follow this guideline themselves, however. I can see them MAYBE stretching it on iCal because you might be using it to create calendars for use on your Palm, iPod, etc… BUT I see absolutely no reason why iChat features it.
Apple is developing software that is part of the desktop experiance. Cloning really good shareware apps after offering those shareware devs a job at apple. Not a great thing to be doing, but apple seems to have its own ideas on what is allowed to be made for their OS. Any basic use apps will be made by apple, and any professional apps will be purchased by apple.
Well not completely, but still. Its good for the consumer, and horrible for devs who attempt to make a living selling apps.
I love the new ibook I got, has everything but opera, chimera, fire.app that I need right out of the box. Its not quite as responsive as my athlon win2k system, but It is a VERY nice work computer. I as a consumer like to see it all free and part of my computer. But as a power user I feel sorry for devs who make great apps which I will pay for.
Sadly it was expected that OS devs would put all the apps a desktop user needs in free, Apple is just the first to do it. I am scared of Jobs and apple, but not nearly as much as MS.
First, I’m going to skip the usual blather about how many OS’s and how many years I’ve spent doing whatever. I suppose it’s done to establish ‘street cred’ or whatever.
Anyway, on the topic of OS vendors developing their own versions of shareware utilities and bundling them into the OS. Utilities are created because the OS is lacking some functionality. If it is minor or a small subset of users actually want that functionality, it tends to remain a shareware utility. If however, it is something that gains wide acceptance, it is not uncommon for any vendor to integrate it into the OS, either as included shareware or the vendor writes their own version.
MSFT does it, APPL does it. The unix vendors do the same thing. They include other apps in their distro’s. MSFT and APPL tend to write their own version, where the *nix vendors include the original app in the open source manner. The reason that MSFT and APPL write their own is they then have to support the utility if they include it. The *nix vendors have different support requirements and different customer bases, allowing them to get away with just including the original app.
On the subject of Logic Audio. APPL is not a general applications vendor. They do not specialize in writing MSFT applications. They write applications for APPL, that is it. They don’t write Solaris apps, or Linux apps. They may want to market and sell the Logic Audio software, however they do not have the MSFT application development experiance or talent in their staff. It is also very likely that it would not provide a good ROI for them to continue to develop and support the MSFT version. It is a simple business decision, not an insidious attack against MSFT users everywhere.
Well put. Roger that. =)
I think a better approach from Apple would be to make common, “popular” systems more pluggable.
For example, say I wrote a 3rd pary app that would like to be able to add an appointment to this new iCal system automagically.
It would be swell if Apple simply published an API for “Calendar Scheduling”, with iCal simply being a client. Then, HappyMouse Computing could come out with an iCal+ program that offers the same functionality as iCal, plus other goodies, but plugs into the same layer as iCal did so my 3rd party app is blissfully ignorant of which application is doing the job.
To use the Window Explorer example, a simplistic view is that I can replace Explorer with Netscape and code my application to “launch x.html”, and have it load up whatever is appropriate (e.g. Netscape).
Unfortunately, this trivial API isn’t any more sophisticated than “Open Document”, and I think folks would like something finer grained.
Another good example would be something like a Spell Checker service.
Let the OS vendors supply all the utilities they want, to promote the platform, but make them easy to reaplace if desired by the user. Apple shouldn’t care if you use iCal, they should only care that you’re using a Mac.
MS COM objects are a fine example, if they only used more generic APIs. A program can “easily” interoperate with Excel through COM, but not “any spreadsheet”.
I assume that OSX will be able to support all the scanners people have right now by the time you can no longer boot into OS9… Hello Apple?
Does Jaguar have TWAIN??
Yes, 10.2 Jaguar supports TWAIN. I’m just waiting for Canon to release X drivers for my CanoSan 656 in the next couple of months.
There already is Epson scanner support in the current release.
iCrap
King Mac Of Apple Land: And before we get started on this topic lets not have any talk about Porting OS X to Intel or the AMD 64 Bit Chips (which are vaperware as much as the G5 is)or some X86pcmac.
It seems you just want this topic to be brought up in every Apple-related or processor-related thread. Why? (Besides, AMD’s Hammer isn’t vapourware. G5 is vapourware. Have anyone seen a G5, let alone know what company it is from? Unlike Motorola/IBM/Apple, AMD had already showcased Hammers in tradeshows, send it for benchmarks in some sites etc.)
Don Cox: Anyone know what Quark’s plans are for OS X? I gather there is still not an OS X version of XPress. That must be holding back adoption.
No, trying to push customers to Adobe and Macromedia… hehe
spider: If I may quote thee: “since it was shareware that kept Microsoft in power” I’m glad to see that you already agree Rajan, seems like the Windows visionaries aren’t seeing very far…
Tell that to the DOJ. My whole message up there is what I gathered. I plan to make my own company, CattBeMac already knows my plan.
But taking away the need for one third party company, without helping a bunch of others (that outnumber the first company), I wouldn’t do it.
spider: Your comments are thinner than water and highly subjective, show me some proof that Apple is smothering their third party developer, and while you are at it, back up your claim that Windows are gently caressing their third-party developers? Well ? I’m waiting…
Okay, for Apple. Sherlock 3. Can any third party developer use it? The trouble is, they can’t. Yeah, yeah, Apple Script, but that’s not the answer. So third party developers don’t save time and money with Sherlock 3 around. In fact, all it caused is one important Mac shareware maker to target Windows users as well.
I still haven’t seen Microsoft, on the other hand, integrating something that cannot be used by third party developers, in the form of DLLs. Like IE, Windows Movie Maker, etc. In fact, if you go to Download.com and browse through it all, you would realize something: most of them require IE.
So it helps developers. They spend less time and less money developing their software.
spider: You know as well as I do that MS is in cour, not for integrating IE, but for bullying vendors into breaking existing contracts with MS-opposition and making it EXTREMELY difficult for vendors who make a product that MIGHT compete with their own products to even exists.
Bullying vendors? The “bullying” mentioned in court is very subjective. For example, Be complain about OEM deals, but it broke one of the major rules of marketing: know your target market, and make sure they want to buy your product. The people complaining in court are a bunch of sourgrapes.
spider: We are talking about major apps. An yes, a browser is major enough were their exists plenty of choices.
Audio, once upon a time, was a major thing. Only rich professionals can have it. Just like browsers then. Now, both of them are available for the masses. A lot of people use browsers. A lot of developers use IE in their apps. So you call Shelock 3, iCal, iSync, iWhatever etc. not major, and IE major? That’s a gross double standard.
Dave: Don’t know where you heard that but I heard from an Apple engineer at Mac World NYC that iSync would have an API for 3rd party apps to hook into for synchronization.
I stand corrected. Now I would support iSync.
spider: While I’m sure this is true in a small limited number of cases, ask yourself your many companies MS bought to destroy their competition.
Microsoft bought FrontPage. Did they kill DreamWeaver? Like any other sane company, Microsoft buys things to either enchance their products or to have new products so they can compete better. For example, their first product was bought.
spider: are you aware tha MS bought a sh|tload of Amiga development companies because they feared them. Sounds crazy right?
Name them.
Jace: I assume that OSX will be able to support all the scanners people have right now by the time you can no longer boot into OS9… Hello Apple?
If you are buying a new computer, you could at least buy a new scanner, no?
The built-in Twain in Jaguar is weak. There is a big potential problem. Apple is relentlessly dropping OS 9, which I know they have to do, but there could be a gap. Scanning is the worst, but even printing is still not what it should be. I just got a Kensington Studio Mouse. It’s OS 9 software is tremendous, but OS X is limited. I don’t know, I suppose this transition process will speed up as companies and developers see Apple is dumping OS 9 asap – at least I hope it will.
While I was installing ICal and was pondering whether or not I should give up the calendar app in enourage and standarize on ICal, I suddenly realized that this would be one of the very few cases in which MS is getting screwed by a “monopoly” from someone else. You probably can’t beat free/embedded with the os 🙂
(I have too much time I know 😉
Did anyone actually look at the versiontracker queries ? There’s 3 commercial vendors that have build calendar or scheduling products. 2 of them offer fat clients on both PC ad Mac, so no competition there, the other ones actually sell calendar *classes* to be embedded in programming languages, so no competition there either.
If a tree falls but no one heard it ……
Now wait a minute, I re-opend iCal and the event I had put in has white text and blue background in all views now – and I didn’t change any preferences. No more blue-on-blue. Hmmm. Now it looks really good.
I think the default filesystem for mac in the next year will be HFS+ since to compatible most Classic’s applications. Who knows when Apple would like to use UFS for the Mac system? Do the developers need to rewrite their applications to run on UFS on the Mac platform?
I would definitely not try to market software with such name in Russia. Its pronounciation in Russian can be interpreted in two ways, one of which is funny, and other is nasty
>> Bullying vendors? The “bullying” mentioned in court is very subjective. For example, Be complain about OEM deals, but it broke one of the major rules of marketing: know your target market, and make sure they want to buy your product. The people complaining in court are a bunch of sourgrapes.
What in the world are you talking about? What made you think that BE didn’t know their target market? Plenty of ppl wanted to buy BEOs but computer vendors cant include them in the system because MS came up with the arrogant either ours or theirs attitude. By trumping on their monopoly card, they forced vendors to exclude BEOs or any alternative OS. Thats the basic definition of abusive monopolistic practice. How you can call that subjective is beyond me.
Saying that Apple doesnt help it’s developers is silly. Apps like the Address book and iSync lays infrastucture for developers to build on. What about rendevous which opens more potential for developement. Heck i dont even see MS bundling developement tools on its OS.
To say that MS doesnt hurt its developers … isnt Netscape a windows developer. Why keep on harping on sherlock? Just because one company is made redundant? How many compnies has been made redundant by IE and MS-Office?
“I hold in my hands the 2 printed programming manuals (system and
application) for the new AMD chips.”
And you are typing at the same time? That’s clever.
And you are typing at the same time? That’s clever.
Are you sure he types? From what I read here, I won’t be suprised if Rayinder uses his toes to type.
Mike: I think the default filesystem for mac in the next year will be HFS+ since to compatible most Classic’s applications. Who knows when Apple would like to use UFS for the Mac system? Do the developers need to rewrite their applications to run on UFS on the Mac platform?
Most likely it would be HFS+. Using UFS is too much trouble. Maybe Apple would fork UFS and place in HFS compatiblity.
Johan: What in the world are you talking about? What made you think that BE didn’t know their target market? Plenty of ppl wanted to buy BEOs but computer vendors cant include them in the system because MS came up with the arrogant either ours or theirs attitude.
Who was Be’s target market? Look at all the successful Linux companies. They know their target market. They interview CEOs. They interview IT departments. They find out what these people want.
Be didn’t do that. First it try to do it ala Apple: selling their own hardware. great idea, really… just who are going to buy these expensive machines? Hardly anyone. Why? No applications. Then they quit hardware, and supply an altenative OS for Mac OS, then target Windows.
Johan: By trumping on their monopoly card, they forced vendors to exclude BEOs or any alternative OS.
I don’t see Microsoft trumping their monopoly card now preventing OEMs to bundle Linux instead of Windows for the Asian market.
Johan: Saying that Apple doesnt help it’s developers is silly. Apps like the Address book and iSync lays infrastucture for developers to build on.
And applications like Sherlock 3 chase away third party developers they once awarded and praised.
(Besides, notice, I am only complaining about apps Apple is bundling who third party developers can’t take advantage of. iSync, Address Book, etc. are all good)
Johan: To say that MS doesnt hurt its developers … isnt Netscape a windows developer.
Microsoft stole the market from Netscape. Only one third party developer (maybe two, counting Opera) gets the beating. Now go to Download.com, and count how many apps that could run without IE. Go to Fry’s, count how many software that won’t run without IE, or won’t be as good.
Besides, Netscape dropped the ball. It build the browser to exclude third party developers. They license Netscape to third party developers to cut down development time, but it was very expenisve, and doesn’t really cut down development time. This is so evident with the harsh reviews Netscape 4 (and 6) got, and the way Solaris users picked IE up way before IE was the dominant force. Starting a four year rewrite also proves how bad their codebase it.
What about Real? It had been years since Microsoft bundled NetShow into Windows. And yet it is #1. And if there is any company eating up Real’s marketshare, it is Quicktime. Why? They aren’t as incompetent as Netscape.
Johan: How many compnies has been made redundant by IE and MS-Office?
I can only count one, Netscape (I’m not counting Opera, in fact they seem to be better off now than back then). Plus, office doesn’t count: it isn’t bundle nor integrated into Windows.
Thanks rajan! I would like Apple can make the two different filesystem to be compatible. I think UFS is better, is it?
Thanks rajan! I would like Apple can make the two different filesystem to be compatible. I think UFS is better, is it?
A few billion times, yeah.