 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / March 2005Who was thinking about switching to a Mac?
http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 I couldn't stop laughing. Too funny. > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 PeeCee people are so clueless. Wish I had access to a video camera...I could do a great rant on Windows, especially XP. >> http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > PeeCee people are so clueless. Wish I had access to a video camera...I > could do a great rant on Windows, especially XP. Do it somewhere else. > >> http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > > > PeeCee people are so clueless. Wish I had access to a video camera...I > > could do a great rant on Windows, especially XP. > > Do it somewhere else. Bite me. > > >> http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Bite me. Civility, people! They're just freaking computers. They get e-mail, porn and occasionally do real work about the same. >> > > PeeCee people are so clueless. Wish I had access to a video >> > > camera...I could do a great rant on Windows, especially XP. >> > >> > Do it somewhere else. >> >> Bite me. I just love PCs' running WinDOZE! I used to curse every breath Bill Gates took until I realized that if Micro$oft didnt push on the general public the crappiest, buggiest, most insecure CRAP on the market, I wouldnt be able to pay my rest, or afford my great DSLR system! I fix (Patch until the next MS screw up) WinDOZE for a living-GO BILL! GO BILL! Oh yeah-when I go on site, I bring my G4 Powerbook. Why? Because I dont want to waste time doing for me what I have to do for my clients. > the crappiest, buggiest, most insecure CRAP on the market, I wouldnt be > able to pay my rest, or afford my great DSLR system! Hmm. Win 98 was fairly stable. WinXP is very stable. Mac fans just hate the truth.  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. >> the crappiest, buggiest, most insecure CRAP on the market, I wouldnt >> be able to pay my rest, or afford my great DSLR system! > > Hmm. Win 98 was fairly stable. WinXP is very stable. Mac fans just > hate the truth. Wow. Sounds like you actually have some industry experience! Oh wait. No you dont. 98 Stable? Compared to win95, yes. XP-far more robust than its predecssors. Please elaborate on the ongoing security issues in Windows, how easily infiltrated Windows is by "Spyware" courtesy of Internet Explorer along with all the other well publicized hacks and security issues there are with Windows and other M$ software. To ignore that is to proclaim one's self just plain ignorant to the facts. Now dont get me wrong-I'm never going to say that Macs are without issue. Just FAR fewer issues. By a HUGE margin. I'll keep my Mac and laugh about how much money I make thanks to WinDOZE. You got another thing wrong- I am a HUGE Windows fan. I really love it. It keeps the roof over my head, my refrigerator full, bought me my DSLR system and my motorcycle. I LOVE WINDOWS! >>>the crappiest, buggiest, most insecure CRAP on the market, I wouldnt >>>be able to pay my rest, or afford my great DSLR system! [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Wow. Sounds like you actually have some industry experience! Oh wait. No > you dont. Oh, 15 years in s/w engineering before going on to more entertaining persuits... > 98 Stable? Compared to win95, yes. XP-far more robust than its predecssors. > > Please elaborate on the ongoing security issues in Windows, how easily > infiltrated Windows is by "Spyware" courtesy of Internet Explorer along The first days of MS DOS had viruses. We bought into anti viruse s/w and got on with work. In later years, the few Mac's we had, had anti-V as well. Firewalls, anti-spam, etc. are just follow ons. Nothing to getr excited about. I run Linux too, and yep, it's firewalled. (No A-V as of yet). I've rarely used IE (Netscape is fine, thanks). The inconvenience and cost of the s/w for protection, and procedures to keep protected are small beer compared to the value of computing, which in the main, for most people is communication, not information processing. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > > the crappiest, buggiest, most insecure CRAP on the market, I wouldnt be > > able to pay my rest, or afford my great DSLR system! > > Hmm. Win 98 was fairly stable. WinXP is very stable. Mac fans just hate the > truth. XP - stable? Windows 2000 was a much better product and far less ugly. [] > XP - stable? Windows 2000 was a much better product and far less > ugly. In my experience both Windows XP and Windows 2000 are suitable to 24 x 7 running without crashes or memory leaks. David >[] >> XP - stable? Windows 2000 was a much better product and far less >> ugly. > >In my experience both Windows XP and Windows 2000 are suitable to 24 x 7 >running without crashes or memory leaks. That may be a function of what applications are in use. I have fewer problems with Windows 2000 -- but I use it very little -- just for things for which I cannot (yet) get unix programs. (Examples are the annual income tax software, and (until recently) processing RAW images from the Nikon D70 (to get us back on topic slightly). And I do *not* allow a Windows system to handle e-mail or to contact the outside world. Most of what I do uses either Sun's Solaris (in various versions), or OpenBSD. And *those* I find suitable for 24/7 operation. ====================================================================== izalco up 9+05:31, 3 users, load 0.07, 0.10, 0.32 popocat-2 up 32+11:43, 0 users, load 0.16, 0.13, 0.08 shindig up 43+10:50, 0 users, load 0.03, 0.02, 0.03 stromboli up 46+12:35, 1 user, load 0.00, 0.00, 0.01 fuego up 60+15:49, 7 users, load 0.00, 0.00, 0.02 popocat up 61+21:24, 0 users, load 1.08, 0.63, 0.22 cadeau up 87+02:18, 3 users, load 0.09, 0.13, 0.20 sponge up 88+13:43, 0 users, load 0.17, 0.12, 0.08 curlmakr up 101+23:35, 0 users, load 0.10, 0.10, 0.08 twenty20 up 311+14:53, 0 users, load 0.00, 0.00, 0.01 ceilidh up ??:??, 0 users, load 0.10, 0.16, 0.16 ====================================================================== Those figures following "up" are in the format: days+hours:minutes and the one at the bottom of the list happens to have been up sufficiently long to overflow the display format. Using a different program (instead of "ruptime" to show a list of machines), I see: 1:37pm up 411 day(s), 21:34, 3 users, load average: 0.09, 0.09, 0.11 with the plain "uptime" program -- so it has been up for well over a year. And it happens to be the oldest OS in the collection. The times for the others reflect when I needed to make hardware changes (thus requiring a powerdown and reboot), or when a power outage took out those which were not on UPS (the servers are the main ones on UPS), or, (in the case of ceilidh), when there was a sufficiently long power outage to require taking all systems on the UPS down before the UPS ran out of battery charge. (O.K. Izalco happens to have a flakey memory SIMM, which takes it down once every few months, but it reboots cleanly on its own, and continues to perform its job. :-) It is not enough of a problem for me to track down which SIMM is the problem. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > PeeCee people are so clueless. Wish I had access to a video camera...I > could do a great rant on Windows, especially XP. Note: The person who made that is a Mac user. He uses a Mac because of Final Cut Pro... and hates it. > > > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The person who made that is a Mac user. He uses a Mac because of Final > Cut Pro... and hates it. And he has a clear case of Clue Deficit Disorder. >>>http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The person who made that is a Mac user. He uses a Mac because of Final > Cut Pro... and hates it. Mac's are sooo great. Through the years Mac has commanded 10% of the computer market going to 7% then 5% and now commands a huge 3% of the computer market. Yes sir, perhaps in years to come, Mac's will become the ultimate computer and fade away. >>>> http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > computer market. Yes sir, perhaps in years to come, Mac's will become > the ultimate computer and fade away. Wrong again, another misinformed peecee user. Peecee users are buying more peecees because their machines are breaking down quicker and have to be replaced. Check consumer reports and see who has better service and realibility Guys, guys, guys! This wasn't to start a pissing match. It was just a humorous little movie clip. Calm down already. No one, and I mean NO ONE is going to buy a Macintosh because of the recommendation of a Mac fanatic. So give it up already. Likewise, Macs aren't the devil. They're a different platform. Are we going to attack Sun workstations too? > Guys, guys, guys! > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Likewise, Macs aren't the devil. They're a different platform. Are we > going to attack Sun workstations too? yeah......YEAH!....... SUN! SCREW SUN. SUN SUCKS. YEAH........ WHAT ABOUT THOSE DAMNED AMIGAS? SCREW THEM TOO! ANYBODY GOT A TIMEX/SINCLAIR? SCREW YOU AND THEM TOO! YOU SUCK! HOW ABOUT A COMMODORE 64? DONT EVEN GET ME STARTED....... Ok, I feel better now. >> Guys, guys, guys! >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Ok, I feel better now. It's been all downhill since the TRS-80 Model I... > It's been all downhill since the TRS-80 Model I... I actually had one of those. I loved the one line readout. Very cutting edge. > > It's been all downhill since the TRS-80 Model I... > > I actually had one of those. I loved the one line readout. Very > cutting edge. I was using one of those while the guys at IBM were still laughing up their sleeves at the thought of the "common people" actually having computers in their HOMES.. What would they do with them??? Then I got a model 2 and an external hard drive... 10 megabytes (a biggie) and it was so small it only took as much space as 3 toasters stacked on top of each other. Memory was about $250 per MB, if you shopped REALLY hard. SignatureLarry Lynch Mystic, Ct. >> > It's been all downhill since the TRS-80 Model I... >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >What would they do with them??? And prior to the release of the TRS-80, I got and built my first home computer -- A MITS Altair 680b (Not the MITS Altair 8800 which preceded it, but the Motorola 6800 based on.) And yes -- I still have it. >Then I got a model 2 and an external hard drive... 10 megabytes (a biggie) >and it was so small it only took as much space as 3 toasters stacked on top >of each other. Don't get me started on the rest of my machines -- especially in *this* newsgroup, where it is all way off topic unless it can run software and hardware for downloading images from the camera/CF card and process those images. :-) Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- "Bob Harrington" <rch.NOS-PAM@blarg.net> wrote in news:NamdndeYPIJWAr7fRVn- oQ@giganews.com: > It's been all downhill since the TRS-80 Model I... ........AND YER LITTLE DOG TOO! >> http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > >PeeCee people are so clueless. Wish I had access to a video camera...I >could do a great rant on Windows, especially XP. They both suck. If there was a God, Digital's Alpha would have become the premier processor and some version of Unix the OS. -Rich > >> http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > They both suck. If there was a God, Digital's Alpha would have become > the premier processor and some version of Unix the OS. And if frogs had wings they wouldn't hit their a.s every time they jumped. > They both suck. If there was a God, Digital's Alpha would have become > the premier processor and some version of Unix the OS. "Some version of UNIX" IS the Mac OS. And there is a God. Merritt > They both suck. If there was a God, Digital's Alpha would have become > the premier processor and some version of Unix the OS. The marketplace is the God of commerce. (I remember them trying to sell their variant of the PC to us back in the mid 80's (aided and abetted by our IT dept. who had a DEC fixation). It was a slick looking piece of garbage that ran a variant of VMS. Had we chosen that, we would have had the ammunition to clear the IT twits who pushed it, I suppose). Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. >> They both suck. If there was a God, Digital's Alpha would have >> become the premier processor and some version of Unix the OS. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > variant of VMS. Had we chosen that, we would have had the ammunition > to clear the IT twits who pushed it, I suppose). Digital sold plenty of "standard" PCs running Windows as well. Indeed, they had some of the first 64-bit Windows systems, until Microsoft dropped support for the Alpha chip. With our larger and larger digital camera images and videos, I think 64-bit computing will come sooner than many people expect. Cheers, David >>http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > PeeCee people are so clueless. Wish I had access to a video camera...I > could do a great rant on Windows, especially XP. did you know that, the clueless chap (who is acting in that video clip), is Bill Gate's illegitimate son that he had with Hillary Clinton :))) mouhahahaha > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > I couldn't stop laughing. Too funny. Yeah, pretty funny. Not truthful, but really funny. > mouhahahaha > > > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > > > I couldn't stop laughing. Too funny. > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > I couldn't stop laughing. Too funny. Thanks. I'm sending it to all my Mac addict friends... Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. >> http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 >> >> I couldn't stop laughing. Too funny. > > Thanks. I'm sending it to all my Mac addict friends... that's an old one, all your Mac addict friends have seen it. Shows you how slow you peecee users are :)))) A recent review of the $6000 dual processor MacG5 praised the G5 because the G5 recovered well after crashing frequently while doing video editing. $6000 and a 90 day warranty. The dirty secret of the Mac OS has always been lousy memory management: this has only caught up to Windows 95 (Windows95!) by abandoning the original software entirely and cobbling together a UNIX OS (hence the name OS "X" as in Unix clone). However even this OS has undergone significant revisions, for which consumers are charged, in its short lifetime. In switching to a UNIX OS Apple brutally abandoned compatibility with prior software and hardware, something even Microsoft has managed to handle in a more reasonable fashion. It is a real shame that Apple remained a monolithic hardware/software system and never opened up for development so that it could be a genuine alternative to Wintel. Even now the Apple UNIX OS clone could be ported to an x86 cpu but then Apple would have to put real effort into developing the OS into a stable platform that could run a wide variety of software and hardware, something that has never been a priority for Apple. There is a good reason virus writers hardly bother to attack the Apple OS: it is not out of respect for Apple. > A recent review of the $6000 dual processor MacG5 praised the G5 because the > G5 recovered well after crashing frequently while doing video editing. which $6000 dual g5 is this? dual g5s start at $2000. perhaps he added ram, hard drives and monitors - that costs the same on a mac as it does on a pc. > $6000 > and a 90 day warranty. all macs have one year warranty. > The dirty secret of the Mac OS has always been lousy memory management: it is based on unix, which has excellent memory management. > this > has only caught up to Windows 95 (Windows95!) by abandoning the original > software entirely and cobbling together a UNIX OS (hence the name OS "X" as > in Unix clone). cobbled?? i see you've done no research whatsoever on its architecture. > However even this OS has undergone significant revisions, > for which consumers are charged, in its short lifetime. minor revisions are free, and major revisions do cost, but are optional. they offer many compelling features, but you are welcome to not upgrade. windows xp was not free and longhorn will not be free. > In switching to a > UNIX OS Apple brutally abandoned compatibility with prior software and > hardware, something even Microsoft has managed to handle in a more > reasonable fashion. actually, they did a stunning job of maintaining compatibility. just about every app that ran in os9 will run in osx within classic, as well as many applications from well before that. in fact, there are numerous apps from the mid-80s that still work just fine, from when a mac had a tiny 9" screen. > It is a real shame that Apple remained a monolithic hardware/software system > and never opened up for development so that it could be a genuine > alternative to Wintel. anyone can develop for the mac. the development environment is included with every mac, every copy of osx and can be downloaded for free as well. in addition, all documentation is available on line, including many example programs. most unix software ports with little to no problem whatsoever, and it is easy to wrap a mac graphical user interface around old unix command line utilities. alternately, one can write an app from scratch. there has never been a restriction on developing software or hardware the mac, ever. all information necessary to write mac software and develop hardware has always been available in book form and/or on line, since day one. > Even now the Apple UNIX OS clone could be ported to > an x86 cpu but then Apple would have to put real effort into developing the > OS into a stable platform that could run a wide variety of software and > hardware, something that has never been a priority for Apple. more misinformation. the kernel of osx is open source and has already been ported to intel. and being unix underneath, it runs a huge variety of software, including x11 apps, as well as all the major software packages such as microsoft office, adobe photoshop, etc. > There is a good reason virus writers hardly bother to attack the Apple OS: > it is not out of respect for Apple. the fact virus writers don't bother is a welcome feature. furthermore, there are substantially fewer security holes than windows, so the possibilities are much more limited. it is a lot harder to wreck havoc. > > In switching to a > > UNIX OS Apple brutally abandoned compatibility with prior software and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > apps from the mid-80s that still work just fine, from when a mac had a > tiny 9" screen. Stunning, perhaps, but not in a good way. Programs run, but Classic mode lacks some capabilities of Classic OS. Network printing can be iffy, or worse. On hardware, Apple's level of legacy support is laughable compared to the Wintel world. You may be able to run a program from a doorstop Mac, but you can't use the keyboard from it. But with a trivially inexpensive adaptor you can use the keyboard from a PC of the same era on a brand new PC today. Only now are "legacy" ISA slots starting to disapear from PCs. Lisa > > actually, they did a stunning job of maintaining compatibility. just > > about every app that ran in os9 will run in osx within classic, as well [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Stunning, perhaps, but not in a good way. Programs run, but Classic > mode lacks some capabilities of Classic OS. of course it lacks some capabilities than when booting os 9 natively. however, the sheer majority of apps and even things which directly modified os 9's behaviour work without a problem. but there will be a few that will have some issues. how many windows 3.1 apps can still run in xp without any problem whatsoever? just like everything else, macs are not without problems. the transition from os 9 to os x was a huge change and it was relatively smooth. unfortunately, there were a few bumps along the way and some things did get left behind. a lot of effort was put into maintaining compatibility where possible, but sometimes the cord must be cut as technology progresses. > > > actually, they did a stunning job of maintaining compatibility. just > > > about every app that ran in os9 will run in osx within classic, as well [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > modified os 9's behaviour work without a problem. but there will be a > few that will have some issues. Typical of a Mac apologist, snipping out the description of the incomplete parts of Classic Mode. Sure, the sheer majority of apps work, as long as your printing situation is simple and doesn't involve certain kinds of network printers. Yup, it's all great, until you need to print. > how many windows 3.1 apps can still run in xp without any problem > whatsoever? How about a more appropriate comparison, like Win 95 programs under XP? > just like everything else, macs are not without problems. the > transition from os 9 to os x was a huge change and it was relatively > smooth. unfortunately, there were a few bumps along the way and some > things did get left behind. a lot of effort was put into maintaining > compatibility where possible, but sometimes the cord must be cut as > technology progresses. Certain cords anyway, like serial ports. I have a printer I bought in 96, it still works great and I like it a lot. I haven't been able to use it on a new Mac in years, as it uses serial to talk to Macs. But I can still use it on virtually any new PC, as they still have the legacy support parallel ports. The Mac has a lot of good points and strengths, legacy support just isn't one of them. Lisa > Typical of a Mac apologist, snipping out the description of the > incomplete parts of Classic Mode. Sure, the sheer majority of apps > work, as long as your printing situation is simple and doesn't involve > certain kinds of network printers. Yup, it's all great, until you need > to print. i'm not apologizing for anything. os x is *far* from perfect and even after several years, i am bewildered at some of the decisions they made as well as not fixing known issues. same with windows - lots of problems there too, but different ones. however, classic is one of the better parts of os x. in an ideal world, everything would have continued to work without a single problem. unfortunately, that isn't realistic. apple could have spent more time getting those last few things working, but at some point, they had to ship something. one must draw the line somewhere, and it certainly sucks if you are on the wrong side of it. for the vast majority of users, there are very few problems with classic, including printing. nothing is perfect, of course, and there will be some things that fail to work. > > how many windows 3.1 apps can still run in xp without any problem > > whatsoever? > > How about a more appropriate comparison, like Win 95 programs under XP? are you claiming 100% of win 95 programs as well as hardware peripherals from that era work in xp? without needing an upgrade? i find that a little hard to believe. > > a lot of effort was put into maintaining > > compatibility where possible, but sometimes the cord must be cut as [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > can still use it on virtually any new PC, as they still have the legacy > support parallel ports. did you try a usb-parallel or usb-serial converter? most old printers work with those. another option is leave the printer plugged into your pc and share it over the network. yet another solution is a network print server or wi-fi base station with a printer port. > The Mac has a lot of good points and strengths, legacy support just > isn't one of them. for most users, old software and hardware continues to work. legacy support isn't 100% nor did they claim it would be, but given how much changed, i find it rather impressive that most things can still be used. > > Typical of a Mac apologist... > > i'm not apologizing for anything. There are things to apologize for, but to apologize for incompatibility with ancient software/hardware is IMO a bit of a credibility stretch. By Lisa's standards, we should complain that the version of Photoshop that ran under Win95 isn't compatible with RAW files from an N70 or 20D. FWIW, I've heard Lisa make this "printer" complaint before, although this one is written slightly differently than it has in the past: I don't recall hearing the 9-year-old printer part...I heard it as the correct observation that Classic mode doesn't do well printing to Network Printers. ...which begs the question of what Pre-OS X software she needs to run in Classic and if the underlying problem is an unwillingness to either (a) keep an old PC around to act as a print server, or (b) pay to upgrade the software revision to the one that runs under OS X. Similarly, if there is now being thrown in a 9 year old printer into the mix, for credibility's sake, I'd be curious to know what the Make/Model is that is so valuable to keep, instead of just buying a new one. Afterall, I have a similarly ancient (~decade old) printer that I've just retired, because: (a) its rubber paper handling rollers had dried out, so it jambed constantly; (b) its toner cartridges were discontinued; (c) the OEM hadn't written updated print drivers for 7+ years (for any OS); (d) the equivalent replacement today sells for "cheap". On the photography side of things, we recognize that film is in decline in part due to digital. No one is being forced to immediately make the switch, but by the same token, only the most unrealistic is assuming that they'll still be able to buy an inexpensive consumer-grade slide projector ten years from today (although they're also the ones who like to think that they'll also be able to buy an analog 17" CRT for $50 in 10-15 years from now too). > > The Mac has a lot of good points and strengths, legacy support just > > isn't one of them. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > changed, i find it rather impressive that most things can still be > used. We all use what works for us, and personally, when I hear people like Lisa try to infer that the Mac is worse than the PC in regards to support of legacy stuff, I'm reminded of the famous Microsoft phrase of "Approved Hardware" that has been quite a headache for upgrader, be their chore to move up to NT, or for 2000, or for XP. I'm waiting with baited breath for someone to predict that Longhorn won't have this problem too. :-) In the end, no one today whines about Canon's decision of a decade ago to not afford backwards-compatibility between FE and FD lenses. It was a bit of an issue at the time, but most people were still objective enough to appreciate that the plusses outweighed the negatives. For those who refuse change at any cost, go buy a Brownie and shoot B&W film exclusively. -hh >>>actually, they did a stunning job of maintaining compatibility. just >>>about every app that ran in os9 will run in osx within classic, as well [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > how many windows 3.1 apps can still run in xp without any problem > whatsoever? I'm currently running code I compiled for DOS back in the early 90's. Direct to the h/w use of timers, interrupts, serial I/O, reads/writes files, etc. I can recompile with my old DOS MS and Borland compilers and assemblers, no prob. Even Excel which starts badly uner XP still _works_ under XP. > just like everything else, macs are not without problems. the > transition from os 9 to os x was a huge change and it was relatively > smooth. unfortunately, there were a few bumps along the way and some > things did get left behind. a lot of effort was put into maintaining > compatibility where possible, but sometimes the cord must be cut as > technology progresses. I'd say there are many more PC programs that have survived through more OS changes than Mac. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > A recent review of the $6000 dual processor MacG5 praised the G5 because the > G5 recovered well after crashing frequently while doing video editing. $6000 [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > There is a good reason virus writers hardly bother to attack the Apple OS: > it is not out of respect for Apple. You should stop reading reviews and check out the real world. OS X is far more stable than any version of Windows. > You should stop reading reviews and check out the real world. OS X is > far more stable than any version of Windows. As long as you don't actually use the system up to its claimed full potential. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > > You should stop reading reviews and check out the real world. OS X is > > far more stable than any version of Windows. > > As long as you don't actually use the system up to its claimed full potential. I have had OS X die on me just once, and that was the initial release several years ago. >> You should stop reading reviews and check out the real world. OS X is >> far more stable than any version of Windows. > > As long as you don't actually use the system up to its claimed full > potential. Anecdotal. Signaturejohn mcwilliams > A recent review of the $6000 dual processor MacG5 praised the G5 because the > G5 recovered well after crashing frequently while doing video editing. $6000 [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > There is a good reason virus writers hardly bother to attack the Apple OS: > it is not out of respect for Apple. Bmoag, where did you get that $6000 price???? A top of the line dual 2.5 Ghz cost $3000 US Why not check it out http://www.apple.com/powermac/ > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > I couldn't stop laughing. Too funny. He basically describes my first experience at using a Mac. In fact, I have never been able to keep any Apple product running for more than a couple hours, and I started using Apples with the II, which in exasperation I finally got a Z80 board and switched to CPM. Now that Apple is running OS X, a version of Unix, I would hope for better reliability. > > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > finally got a Z80 board and switched to CPM. Now that Apple is running OS X, > a version of Unix, I was hoping for better reliability. However, I decided against the PowerBook. Security on this laptop is a joke. If your laptop is stolen, anyone can access all your data. The ThinkPad can be set so that it cannot even access its own BIOS without a password. > However, I decided against the PowerBook. Security on this laptop is a joke. > If your laptop is stolen, anyone can access all your data. The ThinkPad can > be set so that it cannot even access its own BIOS without a password. If the data on a harddisk is valuable to someone, it can be pulled out by the very simple expedient of removing the diskdrive and connecting it as a non boot drive to another system. All the data is easilly read. And even if a WinXP or 2000 machine would refuse to read it, just boot up under Linux and it is wide open. The only way to protect data is to encrypt it well with something like PGP. At that point, nobody, probably not even the NSA can expect to read it. (Rumors of backdoors into PGP are just that, rumors. They may be there, nobody knows. And the NSA probably don't care what's on your disk.) Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > The only way to protect data is to encrypt it well with something like PGP. At > that point, nobody, probably not even the NSA can expect to read it. (Rumors of > backdoors into PGP are just that, rumors. They may be there, nobody knows. And > the NSA probably don't care what's on your disk.) Well, unless you wear a turban and talk funny. > However, I decided against the PowerBook. Security on this laptop is a joke. > If your laptop is stolen, anyone can access all your data. The ThinkPad can > be set so that it cannot even access its own BIOS without a password. you can set an open firmware password (analagous to pc bios) so that the powerbook cannot be booted without a password, including from cd/dvd. you can also encrypt your home folder with filevault (part of osx), and even if someone stole your laptop and removed the hard drive, they'd still have a tough time decrypting your home folder. now what was that about it being a joke? > > However, I decided against the PowerBook. Security on this laptop is a joke. > > If your laptop is stolen, anyone can access all your data. The ThinkPad can [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > now what was that about it being a joke? So why don't salespeople know about it and why doesn't even Apple mention it on their web site? Is the existence of this feature some sort of national secret? > So why don't salespeople know about it and why doesn't even Apple mention it > on their web site? Is the existence of this feature some sort of national > secret? They do mention it on their web site. Apparently you are either not literate, or have your own agenda of spouting misinformation or both...... SignatureCharles > > So why don't salespeople know about it and why doesn't even Apple mention it > > on their web site? Is the existence of this feature some sort of national [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > literate, or have your own agenda of spouting misinformation or > both...... Looked all over it and did not see it. I certainly have no agenda there. I may be blind but I am not illiterate! >>So why don't salespeople know about it and why doesn't even Apple mention it >>on their web site? Is the existence of this feature some sort of national [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > literate, or have your own agenda of spouting misinformation or > both...... There's alot more places to get info from then just a salesman > >>So why don't salespeople know about it and why doesn't even Apple mention it > >>on their web site? Is the existence of this feature some sort of national [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > There's alot more places to get info from then just a salesman Wrong, another misinformed Macintrash user. >>>>So why don't salespeople know about it and why doesn't even Apple > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Wrong, another misinformed Macintrash user. So what are you trying to say peecee weenie user:))) > > > However, I decided against the PowerBook. Security on this laptop is a > joke. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > on their web site? Is the existence of this feature some sort of national > secret? They're not hiding File Vault: http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?productLearnMore=M92 27LL/A And the Open Firmware password is pretty common knowledge. Greg Signature"Keep music evil" - Fatima Mansions > > So why don't salespeople know about it and why doesn't even Apple mention > it > > on their web site? Is the existence of this feature some sort of national > > secret? > > They're not hiding File Vault: http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?productLearnMore=M92 27LL/A > And the Open Firmware password is pretty common knowledge. Well, apparently so -- except one store where I was asking questions (which shall remain nameless). Thank you for the information. > So why don't salespeople know about it and why doesn't even Apple mention it > on their web site? Is the existence of this feature some sort of national > secret? <http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/filevault/> > > > http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > If your laptop is stolen, anyone can access all your data. The ThinkPad can > be set so that it cannot even access its own BIOS without a password. Exactly the same as a Mac. Of course, you can set it up so it doesn't need a password to operate or look at the data, but even then, you will need one to modify the operating system. If you take advantage of the default mode, which requires a password to operate the computer, no one can access ANY of your data. Merritt >>>http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > If your laptop is stolen, anyone can access all your data. The ThinkPad can > be set so that it cannot even access its own BIOS without a password. Wrong again, another misinformed peecee user >>>http://webflash.com/indexframe.php?id=561 >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > If your laptop is stolen, anyone can access all your data. The ThinkPad can > be set so that it cannot even access its own BIOS without a password. wrong, another misinformed peecee user |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.