Apple overtakes Microsoft to become world's biggest technology company

Kassem · 2010-05-27T12:19:03+00:00

Just read the article Does Apple really deserve to be on top?

crazy

rahmu wrote
mac OS has a linux shell
o_O

Really?

My bad, meant only shell. Its friday, at work :p

beezer

I've used all them, and I will give credit to the *nix and FreeBSD back in the days of Windows 95/98. Those systems were exploit crazy, just pinging a Windows machine could smash it. And ICQ client, man, so many bugs. Anyways.

After XP came out, there was really no "security/stability" reason to stay stuck to those old and rusted OS'. If you installed the proper drivers for your hardware you could easily see uptime as long as you wanted, with stability and speed. This is a fact, but if you went out and cheaped out on crappy ass hardware that didn't come with proper certified drivers, then yes. Your machine would crash, and it deserved to crash. Change the RAM on your Mac to some no name brand and let's see how that holds up. XP is a great OS, and so is 7. Vista was a resource hog and was WindowsME basically :p

OS X. Yes, it's fast, stable, and super deluxe awesome. It even makes my penis size grow 10 more inches. Please, I've had an Apple IIe, a homo blue iMac, and an iBook G4, and then a MacBook. It's stable, cause it's THEIR hardware and drivers, and they finally got it right. Anything pre OS X was a completely unstable crap-hole. But now, there's no screwing up. And back in the days of blue iMac and OS 9, there was a lot you could do and the "Hackintosh" scene was pretty cool. But like Windows. If you screw around with this operating system then yes, you will screw it up. And if your messenger client "Adium" keeps crashing on bootup, and you simply "delete it" by taking it to the trash, and then reinstalling. (that's what's so awesome about OS X, it's so easy to install and delete apps) It'll still crash, no. You have to go to your ~Library, Application Support, find the damn app, then find all its stupid .ext files and delete them one by one. How the hell is that user friendly? Get real. OS X is as much a whore like Windows. And I've had the times when I pressed the power button on my MacBook, waited for literally 20 seconds until it went "dinnnng"

BUT. If you install OS X. And limit yourself to the Apple only software, then it's awesome and stable.
BUT. If you install Windows. And limit yourself to only legal, and proper certified software then it's awesome. But let's face it, if you look at something simple like "Messenger" you'll find a gazillion different freeware options, some of them horribly coded. That's when people start blaming Windows. If OS X had that many options for FTP clients, or chat apps, you'd see more people complaining.
*Nix distro's maybe the coolest and most awesomest thing in the world again, I don't know. But I find no use cause XP and 7 are magnificent. And if you're happy with what you got, then it's all good :) You can code as much as you want on a Windows machine without any worries.

I'm Beezer, and I'm a Windows PC.

ramito123

MS is a software company ! not a hardware one , compare MACs To windows and see the difference:p

kareem_nasser

MS does produce some Hardware like keyboards.

rolf

rahmu wrote
mac OS has a linux shell
o_O

Really?

A bash shell. It has many popular linux commands (like grep, tail, vi...), and BSD and Linux code has been ported to it, but I was deceived in the past when I tried to run ported apps.

rolf

beezer wroteBUT. If you install OS X. And limit yourself to the Apple only software, then it's awesome and stable.
BUT. If you install Windows. And limit yourself to only legal, and proper certified software then it's awesome.

But if you install Windows Vista or 7, and want to find where to change your IP address, you still have to click through 4 places and scratch your head wondering where they hid that link.
I dont like the Windows GUI, it is not practical and smart, besides I have had too many bad experience with Windows. Yes, I'm not dumb, I know that if OSX ran on general hardware and had Window's market share, then it would probably be as crappy and riddled with viruses as Windows, but knowing Apple, I believe that they would not let things get this way, and that they would rather loose market share then put their logo on such crappiness, until they have a viable solution for these problems.

xterm

rolf wroteBut if you install Windows Vista or 7, and want to find where to change your IP address, you still have to click through 4 places and scratch your head wondering where they hid that link.

How many times did that change? once?

If 4 clicks are too much for you just run ncpa.cpl

Edit: Not to mention you could use netsh as well.

Joe

I have a question: Why do you guys always ask for Mac OS X to be released for PC, but have no problem with Symbian, Xbox OS (?), Playstation OS (?), and the likes to be bundled with their own hardware?

Apple manufactures Macs, just like Sony manufactures Playstations. Microsoft produces an operating system that hardware manufacturer could use (impose ?) for their hardware.

xterm

rahmu wroteI have a question: Why do you guys always ask for Mac OS X to be released for PC, but have no problem with Symbian, Xbox OS (?), Playstation OS (?), and the likes to be bundled with their own hardware?

Apple manufactures Macs, just like Sony manufactures Playstations. Microsoft produces an operating system that hardware manufacturer could use (impose ?) for their hardware.

If that applies, then why can't android be installed on iPhone? why can't iPhone OS be installed on android phones? and the lot...

Computers are computers, phones are phones, console are consoles.

xterm

rahmu wroteApple manufactures Macs, just like Sony manufactures Playstations. Microsoft produces an operating system that hardware manufacturer could use (impose ?) for their hardware.

I'm sorry what? Have you ever NOT been able to replace windows with another OS? Oh sorry, except for Apple's OS, which Apple IMPOSES it only running on apple hardware.

rolf

xterm wrote
rolf wroteBut if you install Windows Vista or 7, and want to find where to change your IP address, you still have to click through 4 places and scratch your head wondering where they hid that link.
How many times did that change? once?

If 4 clicks are too much for you just run ncpa.cpl

I don't have a Windows system at hand to give you the exact sequence, but it is unintuitive and it doesn't make sense to organize things this way.
I think it goes something like this:
You have to get to "networking center", usually through the control panel (start->control panel->network center) then find on the left, in the additional links something about managing your connections, then once you get there, you have to right click on the connection you want, then choose properties, then choose tcp-ip from the list of supported protocols.

It was much simpler in XP. Why did they change it?

In OSX it's: click on the apple on the top left, choose "system preferences", then click on Network, then choose the adapter you want on the left and the IP address will appear on the right.

Maybe some people like having a fancy "Networking and whatever center" with nice icons ( a little house and a globe ) and loads of links to the left, that open up loads of other windows with even more flattering names.

But I dont. I like things to be simple and efficient.

Joe

Computers are computers, phones are phones, console are consoles.

... and Macs are Macs.

I do not agree with the politics of Apple. I am merely pointing out that Apple is trying to separate Macs from 'computers'. After all, you can browse the internet and play multimedia with a PS3. So why is it NOT a computer?

A computer is any device that computes info, preferably with elctronic circuits. The distinction is that Microsoft only sells the software to run computers. Hardware manufacturers can chose to run it. A lot of server manufacturers chose not to use it.

I don't know if I'm clear enough. Think about this:

What makes a Mac a computer more than a blackberry or a PS3?

EDIT added quote

rolf

rahmu wroteI have a question: Why do you guys always ask for Mac OS X to be released for PC, but have no problem with Symbian, Xbox OS (?), Playstation OS (?), and the likes to be bundled with their own hardware?

Apple manufactures Macs, just like Sony manufactures Playstations. Microsoft produces an operating system that hardware manufacturer could use (impose ?) for their hardware.

It would be awesome to run PS OS on PC :-) but I think the games are coded in a way that is optimal for the PS hardware and it will be work-intensive and inefficient to port them. OS X on the other hand runs on mostly standard intel hardware. Maybe XBox OS would be a good candidate too.

xterm

rolf wroteIn OSX it's: click on the apple on the top left, choose "system preferences", then click on Network, then choose the adapter you want on the left and the IP address will appear on the right.

How is that in any way different than right-clicking the connection icon in your system tray, hit properties, select the adapter you want and change the IP address?

I'm sorry i fail to see where that is much of a big deal. I understand that you dislike it, but that, in no way makes the operating system impractical.

xterm

rahmu wrote
Computers are computers, phones are phones, console are consoles.
... and Macs are Macs.

I do not agree with the politics of Apple. I am merely pointing out that Apple is trying to separate Macs from 'computers'. After all, you can browse the internet and play multimedia with a PS3. So why is it NOT a computer?

*** A computer is any device that computes info, preferably with elctronic circuits. The distinction is that Microsoft only sells the software to run computers. Hardware manufacturers can chose to run it. A lot of server manufacturers chose not to use it.

I don't know if I'm clear enough. Think about this:

What makes a Mac a computer more than a blackberry or a PS3?

EDIT added quote

Again, you cannot place a mac, pc, blackberry, ps3, xbox, refrigerator, toaster, car, plane or anything else in the same category.

I'm not exactly sure how you cannot see the fact that:

MACs - Capable of installing OSX, Windows, Linux
PCs - Capable of installing Windows, Linux and NOT OSX

This picture is wrong. I'm not here to say that there's no reason behind OSX only running on Macs. It's not a technical limitation, it's a business decision.

None of the reason given so far dictate the business aspect of things.

All i'm seeing is "Because that's how it is! that's how we want it!"

Edit: Concerning the ***'d section of your post (which i highlighted), Doesn't that mean that Microsoft is more lenient than Apple? Doesn't that mean that Linux community is as well?

Joe

xterm wrote
rahmu wroteApple manufactures Macs, just like Sony manufactures Playstations. Microsoft produces an operating system that hardware manufacturer could use (impose ?) for their hardware.
I'm sorry what? Have you ever NOT been able to replace windows with another OS? Oh sorry, except for Apple's OS, which Apple IMPOSES it only running on apple hardware.

I had no problem installing Ubuntu on a Mac either. Here's my problem with PC manufacturers and Microsoft.

Have you ever read the End User License Agreement (EULA) Microsoft has you agreeing on when you first buy a laptop/desktop? It is the license you sign to use Windows on their terms. It clearly says towards the end that if you were to refuse the terms, the hardware manufacturer would refund you the cost of Windows license. Have you ever tried doing that? It is only until 2008 that Dell has started to barely accept such demands. HP is also somewhat compliant. It took a friend of mine over 6 months to get his refund from HP. He got back 50€ !! Sony, Toshiba, Asus, Acer, Siemens, Fujitsu and so much more, these companies NEVER give back. So in a way, not only are they not respecting the license, but they're IMPOSING to buy the OS. And what can you do? Go in court against Sony? Are you crazy?

At least Apple's agreement is clear from the start. If you want to use our hardware, you'll use our software. And vice-versa. If you disagree don't buy. How is it different from what Sony does I don't understand?

xterm

Please quote the License section, all i'm seeing in the EULA concerning refunds, is that they clearly say "Based on the manufacturer's policy".

D. REMEDY FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY. The manufacturer or installer will, at its election, either (i) repair or replace the software at no charge, or (ii) accept return of the product(s) for a refund of the amount paid, if any. The manufacturer or installer may also repair or replace supplements, updates and replacement software or provide a refund of the amount you paid for them, if any. contact the manufacturer or installer about its policy. These are your only remedies for breach of the limited warranty.

And

WARRANTY PROCEDURES. Contact the manufacturer or installer to find out how to obtain warranty service for the software. For a refund, you must comply with the manufacturer’s or installer’s return policies.

Then again that's only related to breaching warranty.

xterm

Erm... I think i got lost in what we're trying to achieve here.

beezer

Apple makes a premium OS that runs on obsolete hardware. Now if you like the fact of paying a premium price for 6month old hardware then good for you. And I'm sure most of you know what 6 month old hardware means.

They just started to get into gaming now with Steam working on the Apple. But there is no real affordable Apple machine that can run those games with reasonable amount of graphical satisfaction.

So the end case is, you pay big bucks for stability on an old machine. It's like paying big bucks to buy an Atari/Nintendo because all you had to do to fix the games was to blow into the cartridge. Now THAT was stable. :)

rolf

beezer wroteApple makes a premium OS that runs on obsolete hardware. Now if you like the fact of paying a premium price for 6month old hardware then good for you. And I'm sure most of you know what 6 month old hardware means.

They just started to get into gaming now with Steam working on the Apple. But there is no real affordable Apple machine that can run those games with reasonable amount of graphical satisfaction.

So the end case is, you pay big bucks for stability on an old machine. It's like paying big bucks to buy an Atari/Nintendo because all you had to do to fix the games was to blow into the cartridge. Now THAT was stable. :)

And what do you gain by buying a PC? For non-gamers....

« Previous Page Next Page »