What do you think?

Jeremy

The Lightning Stalker

Performa 631CD, 7.5.5
LC III Mail Server
Q610
Q650

6400/180 40/1.6G/512k L2/enet/video-in/TV
7600/120 '604/233, 80/1.2G & 4G, 9.2.2 (Main Mac)

Jeremy

truly though, I should probably think that the PC users just need to be educated a bit, but they can't go all evangalist on us, because we're the hard-core lifelong macfans, even during the mid '90s, we were using and loving macs (some of us, not knowing that they were nearly 10 years old at the time, and even not knowing that apple had newer stuff...)

I think that something like this would make a good article (or something) for the MLAgazine maybe, I bet it'd make good reading, that's for sure.

quote:

---

Wasn't that about the same time they got rid of the 6-colored apple?

The Lightning Stalker

Performa 631CD, 7.5.5
LC III Mail Server
Q610
Q650

6400/180 40/1.6G/512k L2/enet/video-in/TV
7600/120 '604/233, 80/1.2G & 4G, 9.2.2 (Main Mac)

Lady Smith Apples:
Apple IIc 5.25"
2 Apple IIe

---

"**** em" - Jobs in regards to customers
Warrior maclover5
68kMLA
Official 68kMLA Detective
Number of 68ks Liberated: 7
Number of Contraband (PPC) Liberated from the Dumpster: 1

quote:

---

Does anyone think that the great thinkers that used macs have been over shadowed by dimwit PC converters who have no open minds? I find myself on SpyMac and all these jerks who are PC switchers and stuff. What happen to the pure blood mac users who had all the same good stuff in common?

What do you think?

Jeremy

Covert Ops
68k Hacks General
Macs Liberated:28

---

_r

quote:

---

Sorry but the "All great minds think alike and use Macs" agenda you're referring to is bullshit.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Sorry but the "All great minds think alike and use Macs" agenda you're referring to is bullshit.

---

Agreed, because a lot of great minds use Linux too. Don't know of any who use Windows though.

---

quote:

---

It's what happens when anything goes mainstream. Like cars used to be worked on by really smart people when they first came out and now

---

Edited by - MacTO on 16 Nov 2003 20:58:51

quote:

---

quote:

---

Sorry but the "All great minds think alike and use Macs" agenda you're referring to is bullshit.

---

Agreed, because a lot of great minds use Linux too. Don't know of any who use Windows though.

---

quote:

---

A truly great mind would stay far, far away from crap like Linux.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

A truly great mind would stay far, far away from crap like Linux.

---

Well then, I guess that great minds would stay far, far away from crap like Mac OS X. It's beauty is only GUI deep. Underneath is the wicked core of *BSD Unix. And it is partially open source at that. [gasp]

---

Great minds, will use the computer to get things done, regaurdless of what the computer is, greater minds, don't need a computer. (IMHO)

Even though Windows (and MacOS!) are becoming mainstream, there's still a small tightly knit community of us who actually know what we're doing, who have actually ridden through the ages, suffering the insults coming from those who call themselves part of the mac community today...

(Yeah... that went nowhere huh?)

quote:

---

So what's the problem with linux?

---

--
who | grep -i blonde | date
cd ~; unzip; touch; strip; finger
mount; gasp; yes; uptime; umount
sleep

quote:

---

I don't agree with the jerks bit

---

I've got some mechanics to introduce you to.

quote:

---

Linux is becoming the next Windows. Fast.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Linux is becoming the next Windows. Fast.

---

I don't understand what your point is here. The Linux kernel is just that, a kernel. As for distros: you get what you pay for. I avoid the hyped-up-like-Windows distros, and have never run into problems.

quote:

---

Contrary to popular belief, Linux is not the solution to everything. Linux is not the pinnacle of OS technology. Linux is not the only alternative to closed source software. And open source software is not always the better solution.

---

Agreed, as I have never believed that one solution can solve all problems. I will differ on the open source bit, as I believe that it combats planned obsolesence. (If Apple made the source to Mac OS 9 available, I'm willing to bet that somebody would get it running on the latest models.) I also believe that open source prevents developers from locking users into particular products or platforms. Would I try to ram open source down somebody elses throat? No. For the most part, I doubt that they care about the long term implications. In time they will even figure out how to deal with those implications (may that be by going with the flow, choosing open source, or sticking with what they started with). Does open source have its problems? You bet it does. Some developers/publishers simply aren't comfortable with it, so that may limit quality. There are also some very extreme definitions of open source (think FSF).

---

Typicaly there alot of neat OSS projects, but very few are ones that make any specific change in business simply because of the nature of OSS. Only when a company stands behind an OSS project and decides to either fund it or market it does an OSS project really shine.

Simple fact: In this day and age, nothing is free. So if you want commercial grade software with full support, you are going to end up purchasing something retail. If you're just looking for hobby software, then OSS is perfect for you. (And the adage nothing is free doesn't always mean free as in relation to you..because somewhere down the line someone paid something)

OSS and free software are based upon the principle of freedom. If you looked at the license agreements from Apple or Microsoft, you would discover that freedom is only one thing you lack. The other thing you lack is a commitment to quality software. All license agreements, may it be for OSS or commercial software, attempt to limit liability. But OSS licenses do something pretty amazing: they may say 'we are not responsible,' but they also say 'we give you the right to fix.' Of course, you are also free to enhance software in the process.

The record of companies like Apple and Microsoft demonstrates that they are not concerned with fixing bugs: they may patch the latest and greatest software, but they gladly abandon users of older versions. (It wasn't always like this, but it is today!)

Like it or not, OSS works. If it didn't work, we wouldn't have the Internet or it would be very expensive. Everything from the web, to mail, to domain name resolution depends upon open source software. It also has strong support in the scientific community (probably because OSS shares many of the values of the academic community). This is not hobby software. This is professional software. This is software which we should all be thankful for.

Like it or not, not everything has a dollar value attached to it. And I'm optimistic enough to hope it never does -- because once it has, we would have lost all of our humanity.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Linux is becoming the next Windows. Fast.

---

I don't understand what your point is here. The Linux kernel is just that, a kernel. As for distros: you get what you pay for. I avoid the hyped-up-like-Windows distros, and have never run into problems.

---

quote:

---

The "We're the biggest in this market, we make our own rules" mindset.

---

quote:

---

. . . Am I supposed to go out and buy a new computer and a new OS every three years to satisfy some corporate entity. Heck no! I can use and support open source instead.

---

Edited by - Trash80toG-4 on 18 Nov 2003 14:05:10

Just because a ford explorer has 3 cosmetic changes every model year doesnt mean you have to toss your old one out and buy a new one.

If you get caught up in all the hype and dump what works just to have the new version they you are an idiot and deserve to be suckered by everybody.

Use your heads people. I can use my old PM8500 to browse the web, do email, write letters, do spreadsheets, run quicken, etc which is what 90% of people with computers do anyway. Its mostly keeping up with the joneses that makes people do the 2 year upgrade cycle, not the need of a faster machine because quicken is taking .05 seconds to ballance the checkbook instead of .001 seconds on the new machine. You might have to upgrade your HD and memory every few years because your too lazy to clean the drive up or the new bloatware app needs more memory. The days of waiting for your computer to do simple tasks went out with the pentium era.

quote:

---

On the PC side you dont have to upgrade your OS every year. The liscence for win2k doesnt expire every year and all the new software will run on it fine. You also dont have to upgrade the whole thing every 2-3 years unless your a bleeding edge gamer. Just because a company is offering something new every year for its OS doesnt mean you should have to buy it or need it to do what you do.

---

AFAIK, bleeding edge gamers need to do it something like every nine months when each new video accelerator chipset ships. It's the graphics folks on both platforms that need to be closer to the 2.5 year plan! Besides, I'm just making facetious comments about what the companies think would be appropriate consumption levels!

Personally, I like the 90/90 philosophy. I think 90% of computer users could do 90% of everything they really NEED to do on a 386/68030 era box using an early version of ClarisWorks or even Works for DOS 3.x.

Of course it's just too bad that 90% of those folks suffer from Madison Avenue instilled delusions that they're PowerUsers in need of the latest and greatest!

jt �.
Trash Hauler: call sign: eight-ball
C.O. AC-130H SpecOps 68kMLAAF

Edited by - Trash80toG-4 on 18 Nov 2003 15:48:21

quote:

---

The liscence for win2k doesnt expire every year and all the new software will run on it fine.

---

My old p2's browse the web just fine too.

Open source pretty much just supports the newest kernals and software thats out now. You would have more luck finding a bugfix for windows 3.1 then an old version of redhat 5 somebody is using. I would have about as much chance of having a programmer fix some obscure bug in an old linux as I would having somebody whip me up a fender for a 5 year old car from scratch. There are lots of places that will stock fenders for a car because of paying customers, but who is actively supporting old obsolete opensource code for the people who actually need it? It sucks when companies like redhat are ditching support for all their old OS's and just supporting the enterprise software they create (basically paid for server software).

Do we really care about slow boot times? I mean in an office setting you boot it up once a day and they load the programs you will be using then go bullshit with your next door cube friend for the rest of the day anyway. Its more important to have a computer that will shut down quickly at the end of the day when your on your time.

Windows is broken to begin with.

Apple tried to fix mac OS, and then ended up breaking it, and nwo we have a great OS what constantly needs to be updated, with jerks in the community.

Linux constantly needs updating, and it's more sparsely documented.

Nobody wants to be stuck on a proprietary unix platform any more, even Solaris and IRIX are going the way of the dinosaur, with linux available, and being sold preinstalled on sun and sgi boxes.

Just because your older computer can browse the web, doesn't mean it's suited to a graphic artist, the home user concerned about the bad things on the internet, and the business suit-person....

I could certainly use my old iMac, nay, the 7300, nada, even a Quadra or an LC for everything I use my TiBook for, but it'd be slower, it'd certainly be older (10 years is a long time, and that's just the age of the quadra... imagine a PowerBook 170 or an LC...)

I bet that in a few years, things'll have slowed down again and you'll be complaining about that...

Just recently, everything is hitting version X, or has X in the name (If your OS has a year in the name, it's obsolete...)

In the '90s, the computer market was MUCH slower... for example, OS 7.5 to 7.6 was probably a year, and it was probably almost 2 years between 7.6 and 8.0...

And that wasn't like, any needed upgrade until 4 years after OS8's intro, when 8.5/8.6 rolled out...

That's right folks, IIRC, it took apple almost 3 years to update OS 8 to OS 8.5 (8.1 doesn't count)

The funny thing is, when the market does slow down in a year or two, or whenever, or ifever...

Y'all will be complaining your rears off (those who are complaining now at least) because now apple expects you to live with the same old install for 3 years...)

quote:

---

Y'all will be complaining your rears off (those who are complaining now at least) because now apple expects you to live with the same old install for 3 years...)

---

if not, then that didn't apply to you.

Yes, I realize that once you find your groove in an OS, that you like it to keep working...

that's why I don't use Office 98 on OSX, and why I don't use Office v.X on OS8...

In addition to having certain computers that run different OS' in different ways, sometimes, certain OS' run good with different programs...

would you want to use keynote on 10.1?

do you think that 10.1 would work very well for burning dvds in iMovie 3?

iTunes 3/4 don't work in 10.1 because it doesn't have rendezvous....

the list goes on....

the difference between 10.1 and 10.2, is almost like the difference between NT3, and NT4... *(And that's a HUGE-glayven difference...)

quote:

---

That's right folks, IIRC, it took apple almost 3 years to update OS 8 to OS 8.5 (8.1 doesn't count)

---

"**** em" - Jobs in regards to customers
Warrior maclover5
68kMLA
Official 68kMLA Detective
Number of 68ks Liberated: 7
Number of Contraband (PPC) Liberated from the Dumpster: 1

The only real glitch in this system is that many companies hoard they money and don't circulate it. Only when money trades hands faster than you can say "Show me the money!" does the world get nicer in the corrupted model we live in.

People today try to fight the politics in place but the sad thing is that even with free software foundations that fight so called monopolies, they don't have anything to replace the actual political system/economics we use. They only look at the issue from one standpoint.

It's nice to get free software, but at some point having an OSS license lets other people take your gun and shoot you in the foot.

As per the software and upgrade cycles, the world is moving too fast and the quality suffers. To be honest, will it kill a person if it takes 10 minutes instead of 2 to read your e-mail? Not really.

It's a matter of perception that makes people think they need faster. Companies and society in general are pushing the pace of life faster and faster forcing people to adopt a quicker pace of life untill they go so fast it's a blur and they lose controll.

Software and technology today is at a point where no real advancement is going to be truly significant. Because of greed, no-one takes time to fine tune an engine like people used to. People used to fine tune thier cars so that they run better than ever. Nowadays in this example, companies all over think of fuel as cheap and plenty so it doesn't matter if it's not fine tuned.. as long as it works.

True technological balance is when design, logic, creativity and function merge as one. It's when software is optimized over and over again even if it only makes a small fraction of a speed difference. Today the speed of software is only in relation to the hardware it runs on. But a true test of character and design is to see how a software ranks in any hardware..not just so called "System Requirements". I fail to see the logic behind comparing two computers running one OS at various speeds, like XP on a 1GHz Celeron and a P3 1Ghz. That doesn't tell you anything. However, if you turned the tables and gave the software a serious disadvantage like putting Xp on a Pentium 233MMX and see what happens..then you have amark of character for the actual design of the OS. See, there is little intelligence in most of the mainstream software. Sure, the hardware designs are good, but what good is a fast computer if the software decides to run in circles because it can't see head or tail? Something must be said for intelligence. The lack of intelligence and planning is masked by the sheer capacity and speed of today's machines. In my previous example....say for instance putting Linux on an old 233MMX and another copy on a Celeron 233. (If one ever existed, I'm comparing two generations of chips...the old Pentium 1 and the Pentium 2 of which Celeron was the economic brand)

If the scores were only marginally behind each other then it wasn't really the hardware that is to be praised, it's the software for being able to adapt so well to it's enviroment and to exibit intelligent behavoir to strengthen it's position on an older platform.

This is what we are missing... this balance between two sides. Having a powerfull V8 engine is great, but it sucks when you use sub grade fuel. So, we need to improve our software before we start building faster machines.

Anyways...this post is long and I probably lost my track i was on.. but maybe it will add fule to this conversation.

As for Microsoft providing jobs: while it is true, somebody would have to take their place if Microsoft disappeared tomorrow. Hopefully it would be many companies, so that there would be more competition, and more jobs. Hopefully they have a higher standard of ethics too. Like it or not, Microsoft is one of the hoards you speak of. IIRC, they have hoarded $50 billion US. (But I shouldn't complain about that too much, because I am a small scale hoarder too.) But I'm not too concerned about Microsoft either: I understand that some people love them, and who am I to ram my ideas down their throat. I simply wish that other people would stop ramming their ideas down mine.

quote:

---

quote:

---

The "We're the biggest in this market, we make our own rules" mindset.

---

Every Unix vendor has that mindset. Apple is no exception.

---

Somebody comes up with something usefull and make a ton of money
a dozen other companies copy it by making it better and or cheaper
there is a price war and generally companies start losing money and get aquired. Then you have one big winner and maybe an also ran or 2 out of a pack of dozens or more. Happens in any niche like cars, oil companies, railroads, computers, tv's, video games, software, etc.

quote:

---

I just don't like Linux from a technological standpoint

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's right folks, IIRC, it took apple almost 3 years to update OS 8 to OS 8.5 (8.1 doesn't count)

---

Nope. One year, to be exact. OS 8 came out in mid - late 1997. 8.5 came out in late 1998.

"**** em" - Jobs in regards to customers
Warrior maclover5
68kMLA
Official 68kMLA Detective
Number of 68ks Liberated: 7
Number of Contraband (PPC) Liberated from the Dumpster: 1

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's right folks, IIRC, it took apple almost 3 years to update OS 8 to OS 8.5 (8.1 doesn't count)

---

Nope. One year, to be exact. OS 8 came out in mid - late 1997. 8.5 came out in late 1998.

"**** em" - Jobs in regards to customers
Warrior maclover5
68kMLA
Official 68kMLA Detective
Number of 68ks Liberated: 7
Number of Contraband (PPC) Liberated from the Dumpster: 1

---

Despite having proven me wrong, that is EXACTLY WHAT I NEEDED!!

Thanks ML5!!

Hey all! Apple's been doing this FOREVER!!!

Stop complaining about OSX, the only difference is now, instead of moving .4, we're moving by .1, and getting SHEISSLOADS more features for our money (which also seems to be a bit more nowadays anyway...)

we've been getting "major" OS updates spaced nearly exactly one year appart for a long time now, (it'd appear) and you're just now beginning to complain about it?

Also, alot of the time, i hear that 7.5 and 7.6 are majorly different, that 7.5 and 7.1 are so hugely different... what is the difference between 7.1 and 7.6? Nay... System 7.0 and 7.6.1... other than .61 of a full version...

It would seem to me, that just now, Apple is finally giving us more than cosmetic and control panel updates per each new version of the system, and we're paying a bit more, and we need to update the programs, and we need to update the OS to use newer programs... but it's worth it, because it all works better if you do stuff like that anyway...

I guess apple's sentiment is, that if you don't want to pay for the new OS, then you won't want the newer programs as well.

(the difference between 7.1 and 7.6, from what i can see, is a bunch of bulk that doesn't exactly help quickness of the 68ks, and a few control panels that have been redone in 7.5/7.6...)

Just because it takes MS alot longer to make a meaningful update, doesn't mean that MS is better at spacing their updates...

it just means that it takes 10x more programmers, 3x longer to coordinate on a simple thing like updating an OS...

Official 68k videographer
Official MLA TourGuide
Editor of the MLAgazine
"I'm just a normal computer geek who somehow landed a social life"

---

68k Macintosh Liberation Army Forums

© 2001-2003 68kMLA