J. Clarke wrote:

And target or no, I've never had a security problem.

The major security problem with Windows is all the crap that people
add because Norton and other such hucksters have convinced them that
they need it in order to be safe.

I used to dink around with nonstandard operating systems. Finally
realized that I had to make a decision--do I want to get work done or
do I want to make a political statement.

"nonstandard operating systems", and you picked M$, BWAHAHAHAHA

M$ is not standard, by any stretch of the imagination.

Back on topic, Craftsman is the standard in woodworking tools, just because
they made/sold good stuff many years ago?
--
Froz...

2 feet longer than a d00tchie.

FrozenNorth wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

And target or no, I've never had a security problem.

The major security problem with Windows is all the crap that people
add because Norton and other such hucksters have convinced them
that
they need it in order to be safe.

I used to dink around with nonstandard operating systems. Finally
realized that I had to make a decision--do I want to get work done
or
do I want to make a political statement.

"nonstandard operating systems", and you picked M$, BWAHAHAHAHA

M$ is not standard, by any stretch of the imagination.

OK, so what is "standard" and back that up with numbers for the
installed base.

Back on topic, Craftsman is the standard in woodworking tools, just
because they made/sold good stuff many years ago?

Oh, I see, you take "standard" as being some measure of quality, not
of commonality.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

-MIKE- wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of which
are
open source. People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is best
for
us.

The real problem is all the new crap people feel compelled to cram
on
their websites,meaning you have to update your browser or plug-ins
constantly in order to enjoy the content.

So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? Don't _any_ of them work?


I'll assume you don't need a remedial course in reading
comprehension,
but instead chose to ignore the statement, "People can choose a
browser that best fits their needs and personality."

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of which
are
open source. People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is best
for
us.

So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? Don't _any_ of them work?

Huh?

Who said any one needs dozens of browsers?

Well, apparently Mac users do.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Dec 29, 8:56*pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of which
are
open source. *People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. *We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is best
for
us.

So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? *Don't _any_ of them work?

Huh?

Who said any one needs dozens of browsers?

Well, apparently Mac users do.

They do? What do you base that on? Please back this up with stats.

J. Clarke wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:

I'll assume you don't need a remedial course in reading
comprehension,
but instead chose to ignore the statement, "People can choose a
browser that best fits their needs and personality."

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.


You keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel better. :-p


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Charlie Self wrote:

Heh. Well, Safari isn't exactly a Wonderland, either. I've spent
upwards of six hours trying to update my web site, only to have it
fail on one page or another on Safari, while the changes come right
through on Firefox.

don't forget to delete the cache if you need to see changes.
--
replace spamblock with my family name to e-mail me
Pics at http://www.meekings.net/diving/index.shtml
and http://www.meekings.net/photo-groups/nui/index.shtml

-MIKE- wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:

I'll assume you don't need a remedial course in reading
comprehension,
but instead chose to ignore the statement, "People can choose a
browser that best fits their needs and personality."

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.


You keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel better.

Yeah, bet you think your excrement smells of roses too.


--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
I'll assume you don't need a remedial course in reading
comprehension,
but instead chose to ignore the statement, "People can choose a
browser that best fits their needs and personality."
I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.

You keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel better.

Yeah, bet you think your excrement smells of roses too.


No. **** stinks and so does windows.



--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
I'll assume you don't need a remedial course in reading
comprehension,
but instead chose to ignore the statement, "People can choose a
browser that best fits their needs and personality."
I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.

You keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel better.

Yeah, bet you think your excrement smells of roses too.


No. **** stinks and so does windows.

Smells a lot better than rotten Apples.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"J. Clarke" writes:

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.

Microsoft IE is proprietary.

"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of which
are
open source. People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is best
for
us.

So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? Don't _any_ of them work?

Huh?

Who said any one needs dozens of browsers?

Well, apparently Mac users do.

So you are making up facts, and then arguing against these "facts"?

ALurker wrote:
B A R R Y wrote in
:

J. Clarke wrote:
-MIKE- wrote:
You mac guys might want to check out Camino.
http://caminobrowser.org/

Geez, Internet Explorer just works. I'm _so_ glad I don't have a
Mac.


Are you aware of the latest security threat?

http://www.microsoft.com/protect/com...ins/200812_oob
.mspx

I don't mind IE. I have to use it at work, and it just works fine
for me. Make sure you've covered yourself as stated above.

I've always subscribed to the "fringe user, off the radar" security
method at home. When all the script kiddies were attacking Outlook
and IE, my lesser known stuff was rarely, if ever, a target.


Reading this on Xnews running on wine for Ubuntu Linux 8.10
(Intrepid
Ibex). Webbrowser is Opera.
Using Eudora for an Email client on WinXP but switching to
Thunderbird for cross platform. Ubuntu is
rapidly becoming my default OS. For a nonemotional analysis of why
there needs to be a Windows
alternative go to http://www.winehq.org/why which gives a balanced
arguement to all this.

Well, except that that "balanced argument" shows that the author
doesn't know Windows all that well.

"Wine makes it possible to take advantage of all the Unix strong
points (stability, flexibility, remote administration) while still
using the Windows applications you depend on."

I'm not going to comment on "stability", which is a hot button for a
lot of people, or "flexibility" which is a matter of opinion, but
Windows has had remote administration for more than a decade now.

"Wine makes it possible to access Windows applications remotely, even
if they are a few thousand miles away."

While this may be true you can do it with out of the box Windows too,
so it is not a "benefit" of WINE.

"Wine makes it economical to use thin clients: simply install Wine on
a Linux server, and voila, you can access these Windows applications
from any X terminal."

I can access Windows applications from Linux boxes without WINE so
again it's hardly a "benefit".

"Wine can also be used to make existing Windows applications available
on the Web by using VNC and its Java client."

That can also be done with Windows without using WINE.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.

Microsoft IE is proprietary.

So what? The OS it runs on is not proprietary to a single hardware
vendor and has more than 80 percent of the market, so for every
application that runs on the niche market proprietary crap there are 8
that run on Windows. Not that it needs yet another boring browser but
people seem to enjoy writing them.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of which
are
open source. People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is best
for
us.

So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? Don't _any_ of them
work?

Huh?

Who said any one needs dozens of browsers?

Well, apparently Mac users do.

So you are making up facts, and then arguing against these "facts"?

Why mention that there are dozens if you don't need dozens?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke wrote:

FrozenNorth wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

And target or no, I've never had a security problem.

The major security problem with Windows is all the crap that people
add because Norton and other such hucksters have convinced them
that
they need it in order to be safe.

I used to dink around with nonstandard operating systems. Finally
realized that I had to make a decision--do I want to get work done
or
do I want to make a political statement.

"nonstandard operating systems", and you picked M$, BWAHAHAHAHA

M$ is not standard, by any stretch of the imagination.

OK, so what is "standard" and back that up with numbers for the
installed base.

"Standard" is not measured by popularity, but by adherence to
internationally recognized protocols.

Back on topic, Craftsman is the standard in woodworking tools, just
because they made/sold good stuff many years ago?

Oh, I see, you take "standard" as being some measure of quality, not
of commonality.

Correct, you are starting to see the "light".
;-)
--
Froz...

2 feet longer than a d00tchie.

FrozenNorth wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

FrozenNorth wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

And target or no, I've never had a security problem.

The major security problem with Windows is all the crap that
people
add because Norton and other such hucksters have convinced them
that
they need it in order to be safe.

I used to dink around with nonstandard operating systems.
Finally
realized that I had to make a decision--do I want to get work
done
or
do I want to make a political statement.

"nonstandard operating systems", and you picked M$, BWAHAHAHAHA

M$ is not standard, by any stretch of the imagination.

OK, so what is "standard" and back that up with numbers for the
installed base.

"Standard" is not measured by popularity, but by adherence to
internationally recognized protocols.

If 90 percent of the installed base is adhering to a single vendor's
protocols, and the remaining 20 percent is adhering to
"internationally recognized protocols" then the "internationally
recognized protocols" become nonstandard.

Back on topic, Craftsman is the standard in woodworking tools,
just
because they made/sold good stuff many years ago?

Oh, I see, you take "standard" as being some measure of quality,
not
of commonality.

Correct, you are starting to see the "light".
;-)

You are putting politics ahead of utility, which makes you a fool.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.

Microsoft IE is proprietary.

So what?

Oh. So I should not run Microsoft IE, and instead use some standard OS
like Linux?

Okay - Your point is MUCH clearer now.

On Dec 30, 9:07*am, "J. Clarke" wrote:
Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of which
are
open source. *People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. *We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is best
for
us.

So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? *Don't _any_ of them
work?

Huh?

Who said any one needs dozens of browsers?

Well, apparently Mac users do.

So you are making up facts, and then arguing against these "facts"?

Why mention that there are dozens if you don't need dozens?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Why do YOU mention:
"The OS it runs on is not proprietary to a single hardware
vendor and has more than 80 percent of the market, so for every
application that runs on the niche market proprietary crap there are 8
that run on Windows." Sooo

By Clarke's logic 'dozens of Mac browsers x 8 = a couple of hundred
browsers that run on Windoze?

I think you are lying, John.

"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of which
are
open source. People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is best
for
us.

So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? Don't _any_ of them
work?

Huh?

Who said any one needs dozens of browsers?

Well, apparently Mac users do.

So you are making up facts, and then arguing against these "facts"?

Why mention that there are dozens if you don't need dozens?

To quote your own words.

"so for every application that runs on the niche market proprietary
crap there are 8 that run on Windows."

So apparently Windows needs 8 times the number of applications that
MacOS needs.

J. Clarke wrote:

FrozenNorth wrote:

"Standard" is not measured by popularity, but by adherence to
internationally recognized protocols.

If 90 percent of the installed base is adhering to a single vendor's
protocols, and the remaining 20 percent is adhering to
"internationally recognized protocols" then the "internationally
recognized protocols" become nonstandard.

Do you always give 110%?
;-)

Back on topic, Craftsman is the standard in woodworking tools,
just
because they made/sold good stuff many years ago?

Oh, I see, you take "standard" as being some measure of quality,
not
of commonality.

Correct, you are starting to see the "light".
;-)

You are putting politics ahead of utility, which makes you a fool.

Politics has nothing to do with it, utility and quality have everything to
do with it.

--
Froz...

2 feet longer than a d00tchie.

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of which
are
open source. People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is best
for
us.
So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? Don't _any_ of them
work?
Huh?

Who said any one needs dozens of browsers?
Well, apparently Mac users do.
So you are making up facts, and then arguing against these "facts"?
Why mention that there are dozens if you don't need dozens?

To quote your own words.

"so for every application that runs on the niche market proprietary
crap there are 8 that run on Windows."

So apparently Windows needs 8 times the number of applications that
MacOS needs.


and I'm wondering whose shoes will be filled up first...

J. Clarke wrote:
Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.
Microsoft IE is proprietary.

So what? The OS it runs on is not proprietary to a single hardware
vendor and has more than 80 percent of the market, so for every
application that runs on the niche market proprietary crap there are 8
that run on Windows. Not that it needs yet another boring browser but
people seem to enjoy writing them.


Do you honestly believe that having 80 percent of the market means it's
better?
All it means is that it's more marketable.

Kenye West sold millions of records this year.
Does that make him "better" than Tony Bennett?


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

J. Clarke wrote:

Why mention that there are dozens if you don't need dozens?


Why have 31 flavors at Baskin Robbins, when you only need one?


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"FrozenNorth" wrote in message
...
J. Clarke wrote:

FrozenNorth wrote:

"Standard" is not measured by popularity, but by adherence to
internationally recognized protocols.

If 90 percent of the installed base is adhering to a single vendor's
protocols, and the remaining 20 percent is adhering to
"internationally recognized protocols" then the "internationally
recognized protocols" become nonstandard.

Do you always give 110%?
;-)

10% overlap. Not everyone is so pure in their beliefs. MS enjoys much deeper
market penetration such that it becomes remarkable, for example, to note
when someone is *not* using Windows on their desktop. That's a simple fact.

Back on topic, Craftsman is the standard in woodworking tools,
just
because they made/sold good stuff many years ago?

Oh, I see, you take "standard" as being some measure of quality,
not
of commonality.

Correct, you are starting to see the "light".
;-)

You are putting politics ahead of utility, which makes you a fool.

Politics has nothing to do with it, utility and quality have everything to
do with it.

"Standard", as in ubiquitous, as opposed to "proprietary". Proprietary
hardware didn't do so well. Witness Sun OpenSPARC, their open source
hardware core, apparently a last gasp seeking relevance for their
processors. Mac dumped proprietary hardware and interfaces to become what it
is today, just another PC clone with minor benefits and differences.

It is and has long been politically incorrect to slam the underdog, just as
we have the Special Olympics. At some point, though, products have to reach
their own maturity and be counted on their merits. I think it's fair to say
that both the Mac and Linux are now mature products. There is no more "wait
and see". They are what they are, and if you're into counting, they're the
"also rans", the best of the rest. I didn't decide this, nor did Bill Gates.
The market has voted and Wintel won by a landslide. For whatever those
merits might be.

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.

Microsoft IE is proprietary.

So what?

Oh. So I should not run Microsoft IE, and instead use some standard
OS
like Linux?

Okay - Your point is MUCH clearer now.

Huh? I'm sorry but you people are making no sense at all.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

There are literally dozens of browsers available, many of
which
are
open source. People can choose a browser that best fits their
needs
and personality. We're not stuck with what Bill thinks is
best
for
us.

So why do you need "dozens of browsers"? Don't _any_ of them
work?

Huh?

Who said any one needs dozens of browsers?

Well, apparently Mac users do.

So you are making up facts, and then arguing against these
"facts"?

Why mention that there are dozens if you don't need dozens?

To quote your own words.

"so for every application that runs on the niche market proprietary
crap there are 8 that run on Windows."

So apparently Windows needs 8 times the number of applications that
MacOS needs.

Nope, Windows has 8 times the number of bored programmers looking for
something to do. Besides, writing a browser is a student exercise.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

FrozenNorth wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

FrozenNorth wrote:

"Standard" is not measured by popularity, but by adherence to
internationally recognized protocols.

If 90 percent of the installed base is adhering to a single
vendor's
protocols, and the remaining 20 percent is adhering to
"internationally recognized protocols" then the "internationally
recognized protocols" become nonstandard.

Do you always give 110%?

Yup, the only way to get ahead.

;-)

Back on topic, Craftsman is the standard in woodworking tools,
just
because they made/sold good stuff many years ago?

Oh, I see, you take "standard" as being some measure of quality,
not
of commonality.

Correct, you are starting to see the "light".
;-)

You are putting politics ahead of utility, which makes you a fool.

Politics has nothing to do with it, utility and quality have
everything to do with it.

If I click on a link and the page won't open or won't function
properly, then the utility is nonexistent and with no utility
"quality" becomes irrelevant.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

-MIKE- wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
Maxwell Lol wrote:
"J. Clarke" writes:

I see. Well, if it's choices you want then you should go with a
standard OS, not some piece of niche-market proprietary crap.
Microsoft IE is proprietary.

So what? The OS it runs on is not proprietary to a single hardware
vendor and has more than 80 percent of the market, so for every
application that runs on the niche market proprietary crap there
are
8 that run on Windows. Not that it needs yet another boring
browser
but people seem to enjoy writing them.


Do you honestly believe that having 80 percent of the market means
it's better?
All it means is that it's more marketable.

It means that it has 80 percent more people developing code for it and
thus gives me greater choice of applications.

Kenye West sold millions of records this year.
Does that make him "better" than Tony Bennett?

I dunno. What applications do either of them run?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

-MIKE- wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

Why mention that there are dozens if you don't need dozens?


Why have 31 flavors at Baskin Robbins, when you only need one?

So what flavor from Baskin Robbins will let me access my checking
account?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

MikeWhy wrote:
Mac dumped proprietary hardware and interfaces to become
what it is today, just another PC clone with minor benefits and
differences.


I don't know if you're talking hardware or OS.

As OS goes, MS has been transparently and ineptly trying to copy
Mac OS for 25 years. And as you put it, "that's a simple fact."



--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"MikeWhy" wrote in message
"also rans", the best of the rest. I didn't decide this, nor did Bill
Gates.
The market has voted and Wintel won by a landslide. For whatever those
merits might be.

The truth is that all those "also rans" have an inferiority complex. The
softwares they use might well be superior, who is to say? But, the fact is
that their products have a very low market share compared to Windows and
they just can't idly sit by and live with that knowledge. So, Gates and
Windows becomes a very easy, very large target.

If those "also rans" truly believed their products were superior in every
way, then they should be secure in that knowledge and not find it necessary
to resort to Windows bashing. That's not how it is though. Every time an
"also ran" bashes Windows, all they're really doing is confirming how much
of the market that Windows has and confirming the simple fact that they're
jealous. Nothing wrong with that I guess, it's just being human.

J. Clarke wrote:
Do you honestly believe that having 80 percent of the market means
it's better?
All it means is that it's more marketable.

It means that it has 80 percent more people developing code for it and
thus gives me greater choice of applications.


Firstly, that is flawed logic. The amount of people it takes to
manufacture a product vs. the amount of people who buy the product has
no correlation whatsoever.

To use my music analogy. It's takes the same number of people to produce
two albums, each. One sells 10 million, the other 10 thousand.


But on to your hypocrisy...
Why do you get to claim that more applications equals "greater choice,"
but when I say it, you reply,
"why do you need dozens of [applications]? Don't _any_ of them work?"


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Why mention that there are dozens if you don't need dozens?

Why have 31 flavors at Baskin Robbins, when you only need one?

So what flavor from Baskin Robbins will let me access my checking
account?


Yep, I do believe it's a problem with reading comprehension.
Here, this might help:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simile



--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Subject

Now children, be nice.

Lew

"-MIKE-" wrote in message
...
As OS goes, MS has been transparently and ineptly trying to copy
Mac OS for 25 years. And as you put it, "that's a simple fact."

?! Do you mean with a mouse centric GUI? API? Drivers and peripherals
interface? File systems? Which part of the OS?

1983, 25 years ago, was the hey day of MSDOS, the birth of the IBM PC, and
the beginning of the end for CP/M. The Lisa came out about then, and crashed
and burned. Windows and the first Mac appeared shortly after. Desqview was
still in the running (briefly), and if you ask me, it was the better product
and closer to Windows than the Mac's one button mouse. If you're talking
about the mouse and the GUI, you'll have to credit not Apple and Mac, but
Xerox PARC.

I have a long history of buying Apple products, all of them harbingers of
things to come, but years before the world was ready for them, and years
before the technology was available to support the vision. The Mac, Newton,
and even the original ipod all led the way. This is to Apple's credit. What
they don't have, though, is dominant marketshare. This is the simple fact.

J. Clarke wrote:

I'm aware of many, many so-called "security threats". That particular
one only affects idiots who run on a root account. So what?

Not picking on you, just passing along the info...

MikeWhy wrote:
"-MIKE-" wrote in message
...
As OS goes, MS has been transparently and ineptly trying to copy
Mac OS for 25 years. And as you put it, "that's a simple fact."

?! Do you mean with a mouse centric GUI? API? Drivers and peripherals
interface? File systems? Which part of the OS?

1983, 25 years ago, was the hey day of MSDOS, the birth of the IBM PC,
and the beginning of the end for CP/M. The Lisa came out about then, and
crashed and burned. Windows and the first Mac appeared shortly after.
Desqview was still in the running (briefly), and if you ask me, it was
the better product and closer to Windows than the Mac's one button
mouse. If you're talking about the mouse and the GUI, you'll have to
credit not Apple and Mac, but Xerox PARC.

I have a long history of buying Apple products, all of them harbingers
of things to come, but years before the world was ready for them, and
years before the technology was available to support the vision. The
Mac, Newton, and even the original ipod all led the way. This is to
Apple's credit. What they don't have, though, is dominant marketshare.
This is the simple fact.



Yes, the interface. They have always lagged behind and copy Mac... and
still do.

There you go with market share again. Who cares about that?
Go ahead and buy something because everyone else does. Jump off the
bridge.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"-MIKE-" wrote in message
...
MikeWhy wrote:
"-MIKE-" wrote in message
...
As OS goes, MS has been transparently and ineptly trying to copy
Mac OS for 25 years. And as you put it, "that's a simple fact."

?! Do you mean with a mouse centric GUI? API? Drivers and peripherals
interface? File systems? Which part of the OS?

1983, 25 years ago, was the hey day of MSDOS, the birth of the IBM PC,
and the beginning of the end for CP/M. The Lisa came out about then, and
crashed and burned. Windows and the first Mac appeared shortly after.
Desqview was still in the running (briefly), and if you ask me, it was
the better product and closer to Windows than the Mac's one button mouse.
If you're talking about the mouse and the GUI, you'll have to credit not
Apple and Mac, but Xerox PARC.

I have a long history of buying Apple products, all of them harbingers of
things to come, but years before the world was ready for them, and years
before the technology was available to support the vision. The Mac,
Newton, and even the original ipod all led the way. This is to Apple's
credit. What they don't have, though, is dominant marketshare. This is
the simple fact.



Yes, the interface. They have always lagged behind and copy Mac... and
still do.

There you go with market share again. Who cares about that?
Go ahead and buy something because everyone else does. Jump off the
bridge.

Popularity isn't always the best indicator of quality, but believing you
know something the lemming masses don't grasp is a step or two worse. Next
thing you know, you'll be telling us you ride a Harley as well.

I notice we've drifted away from lighthearted and fun. How about we both
quit before it gets really ugly. Okay, Mike?

Popularity isn't always the best indicator of quality, but believing you
know something the lemming masses don't grasp is a step or two worse.

I would say popularity is hardy ever the best indicator of quality.
I'll quit calling PC users (I never have) lemmings, if PC users will
quit calling me arrogant just because I use a superior product because I
want the best.


Next thing you know, you'll be telling us you ride a Harley as well.


No, they are noisemakers. They are "look at me" vehicles.
Besides, like Jesse James said, "Riding a Harley used to mean you were a
bad ass, now it means you're a middle aged dentist."


I notice we've drifted away from lighthearted and fun. How about we both
quit before it gets really ugly. Okay, Mike?


I don't know. It's hard to infer what someone is feeling, in type. To
me, this is a bunch of guys sitting around, having a couple beers,
watching the game, joking around with each other.

If I said, "you're an idiot if you think the Steelers are going to get
past the Titans in the playoffs," in that setting, no one would accuse
me of getting ugly. They'd joke right back. I think it's the same in
here.

BTW, I don't like either of those teams. :-)



--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply