“Apple’s Mac Mini is a step in the right direction for the Appliance PC and what consumers are looking for. Last month I focused on the negative aspects of Apple’s new products to make a point. And, based on the feedback I got, the point I appeared to have made is that there are an awful lot of Apple folks who really don’t like anyone who disparages their beloved products,” Rob Enderle writes for DesignTechnica.
“While there are a number of trade offs that Apple made for the Mini that I don’t think were necessary, the product is actually closer to what I think the consumer market is actually looking for in a desktop offering. No, Steve Jobs didn’t just arrive at my house with explosives, or worse, attorneys. I just think it is time I acknowledged that there are a couple things I really wish the other vendors would learn from what Apple has done,” Enderle writes.
“I am convinced it is time we also rethink the operating system. Windows was largely based on OS/2, which came out in the mid 80s, and both Linux and the MacOS X are based on UNIX which is even older. All three platforms are based on the way the world was in the 80s and both hardware technology and users have changed dramatically since then. When these OSs were new, users were still relatively technical while now the platform has to deal with a much lower understanding of the core technology as users increasingly abstract these old cores behind applications,” Enderle writes.
“Particularly when you look at the security exposures that exist today and the inability of traditional virus companies to get signature files out quickly enough and the massive problems all three platforms are having with patches I believe it is time to take a step back, lose the religion, and see if we can’t do better. In fact, I think we should probably do this about once every 20 or so years,” Enderle writes.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: What “massive problems” is Mac OS X “having with patches,” exactly? Enderle has no credibility.
“and the massive problems all three platforms are having with patches…”
You mean windows NT, 2000 and XP I presume ?
Well it looks like Mr. Enderle is starting to switch. In fact he is quite positive!
His credibility would be gone if he switched from black to white in a few weeks. Give him a break.
Enderle pays me to hump his leg. He keeps me so busy I don’t have time to mess with OS X.
I like critics with no creditbility, that say they get swamped with e-mails when the Apple folk don’t like what they say. There is probably a reason these critics get swamped-they just aren’t in the know.
Enderle – what a fool. Oh it’s bad, no it’s good. Windows is great, no it’s a virus ridden piece of swiss cheese. But everything else is bad too. Let’s do the whole thing over again and start from scratch. Sheesh.
Rob Enderle is irrelevant. I bet his wife has trouble remembering who he is, let alone Steve Jobs and Apple Legal.
I think he’s right in some aspects…
Especially – “there are an awful lot of Apple folks who really don’t like anyone who disparages their beloved products” – Oh Wah, babies
OSX = Unix = 40+ yrs old
Windows isnt OS/2 its VMS Dumbass = 25+ years old (that credibility thing again)
Linux = Unix = 40+ Yrs old
We are all computing on ancient technology…Period..If you cant except that…too bad..ALL OS’s have patch after patch after patch even Mac OS…
I think his point is still valid – that an OS bulit from scratch today could be made with modern technologies taken in to account and could be made far more efficient than these 20 – 30 year old bases used for today’s OS’s. Be tried this with the BeOS, but unfortunately was unsuccessful in the market place, despite having an OS that could run circles around the MacOS and Windows on the same hardware. In this case Enderle is 100% correct.
Letter to the editor:
Dear Mr Bell,
I write because I visited your web site and came across the above cited article by Rob Enderle. After locating your email address I closed the pages from your site.
You may not be aware how far out of touch with reality Rob Enderle is, whilst he has been known (or rather notorious) for his ill informed comment over the last couple of years he has plunged new depths recently even going as far as suggesting stability of desktop computers is a concern in earthquake zones.
I suggest you use your favourite search engine and insert ‘enderle linux’ or ‘enderle apple’ to get a good idea of how wrong Rob’s comments are about two of the preeminent subjects in computing today. Searches for Enderle on the following web sites are particularly informative:
http://www.macobserver.com
http://www.groklaw.net
http://www.macdailynews.com
Publishing Enderle will result in a short term increase in web page hits followed by a sustained fall in credibility. There are already several publishers no longer accepting comment and/or articles from Enderle.
Regards,
“What “massive problems” is Mac OS X “having with patches,” exactly? Enderle has no credibility”
hmmm…OS 10.1.1…10.2.1,10.2.2,10.2.3,…..10.3.1, 10.3.2…………………
Has anyone else noticed that Safari isn’t blocking popups anymore? I noticed this last night on another site in Safari, Firefox AND Camino…
AS for Enderle…well, he still is a dip, doesn’t research his facts (Windows based on OS/2!?) and while I understand the point he’s trying to get at, I don’t think he realizes just how solid OS X is. As the saying goes..if it ain’t broke…don’t fix it.
Ben rote: “hmmm…OS 10.1.1…10.2.1,10.2.2,10.2.3,…..10.3.1, 10.3.2…………………”
Those are updates, not security patches. Sure they release security updates, but scour the web and find me ONE example of a Mac OS X virus. Go troll elsewhere.
MacMalester “Windows isnt OS/2 its VMS Dumbass = 25+ years old (that credibility thing again)”
You forgot that VMS was based on TOPS-10, which itself inherited some codes from OS for PDP-11 and PDP-8. In another words, both unix and Windows can be traced back to about same time, 40+ years ago.
Unfortunately for Windows, it started with CP/M and DOS, which were OS created for 8 bits and 16 bits (questionable, but we will take IBM’s word for this one) computers, I believe CP/M was also based on OS for PDP-11. As I run some software on Windows 2000, I am reminded of this fact, C:\MYDOCU~1\SOMEWH~1\ONMYDI~1\.
What makes MacOSX better than the other OS is, it is a rewrite of unix. It inherited most of user/system administration programs from unix (gnu and bsd), but its core is microkernel, which is considerably newer than the other OS, 20+ years I believe.
The Jaguar XJS 12V’s engine design is still based on the combustion engine designed by Mr. Otto in the late 19th century. Since then, automakers have added various aggregates and patches to the original engine design, making the engine more bulky and difficult to service for non-specialists. Ditto for the Diesel engine design that was conceived in the 1920s, I believe. Since there is nothing better as yet, who gives a shit?
Hagar57,
According to the definitive tome on time travel, “Back to the Future 2”, by the year 2008 we will have cars that run on common refuse and nuclear fusion — oh, and they will fly as well.
You just can’t take them past 88 MPH, much like today’s hybrids…
Yeah, DakRoland. I noticed too that Safari wasn’t blocking pop ups anymore. I think it happened after I did that proof of concept IDN exploit. Don’t know if anything has to do with that. Anyway, I did a Safari reset from the Safari menu and deleted the Safari preference file and everything seems normal now. Hope that Safari not blocking pop-ups wasn’t something nasty.
Ben.. how is that a bad thing?!
There have been no exploits, so those were pre-emptive fine-tunings.. my Mac is perfect and I happily download the latest security updates..
Go figure..
“if it ain’t broke…don’t fix it” is definitely a safe philosophy, and with Mac OS X, there really is no “need” to completely overhaul the thing. But at the same time, progress does not come from playing it safe, it comes from taking chances on new ideas that you are confident in.
If the Cell chip is in fact going to eventually be in a Mac, then it might be nice to see an OS that is specifically tailored to taking advantage of the new chip, modern technology, and future trends.
But then again, I don’t know much about the underlying structure of an OS, so my argument might be completely unfounded. So to summarize… Progress is good, progress that is limited by technology constraints is bad, and even if Enderle is right he is still a fool.
Actually VMS is the Virtual Architectural Extention to RSX-11M+ (PDP) not TOP-10/20. Windows 3.x through 98 was an application on top of DOS, Windows NT through 200x is based roughly on VMS as one of the Architects helped design VMS.
RJ
Enderle’s tone has been and still is one of arrogance: Listen to me, I know it all.
Even when he seems to be apologizing for his own misguided reviews, it comes across as “yeah, all you others have given bad guidance but I know better than you now so listen up.”
He’s right about the first part – his reviews have been misguided.
I’m not sure what point Enderle was making in pointing out the bad things in Apple’s products (other than being naive). But if the point was to get your panties in a bind, he succeeded admirabley. Apparently he got barraged with the same kind of thoughtless, juvenile posts we read here constantly.
The article isn’t all that bad. It does make some generalizations about patches, etc., but his articles in general are generalizations without much technical depth.
I do find it funny how he used to criticize the lack of expandibility of Apple’s products, yet now praises them. I think Apple probably understands it customers a little better than Enderle.
I wonder how many diatribes he’ll get about the Apple link to some dish manufacturer?… Probably lots, and all it will do is server to push him more firmly into his current position.
He E, is one of M$ and let’s wait and see wat M$ and the-PC are doing to stop the amazing reserection of Apple ….
Unix is 40+ years old. What bullshit.
Unix started out 40+ years ago. Now that statement is correct.
Take Movies for instance. The first one was made 100+ years ago by flicking a deck of still pictures before your eyes. Then came flickering silent movies with a piano player in the theater and signs on the screen for dialog. Then sound, then color, then stereo sound, then better color, and on and on. When you go to movies today you do not see 100 year old technology. Todays movies are incredible compared what was made 100 years ago.
Similarly today’s Unix or Linux for that matter has very little to do with the technology or the code used 40 years ago. There is no comparison.
Windows XP/2000/NT does, however, still has a lot of similarities and common code with the original MS-DOS.
If he was just talking about Microsoft’s offerings his spewings would have a little validity.
” think his point is still valid – that an OS bulit from scratch today could be made with modern technologies taken in to account and could be made far more efficient than these 20 – 30 year old bases used for today’s OS’s.”
And would it then take the open source community another 20 years after that to get all the kinks ironed out as they did for UNIX?
don’t bitch on here about rob enderle. bitch on designtechnica for hiring that John Cleese-looking clown…
I once met Enderle backstage at the CES. I followed him around for awhile while I was there doing interviews. That guy was kissing and sniffing more ass than I used to get at the pound. I mean, really, what do you expect from a guy with the name ‘Enderle’? It sounds like a new impotence drug or something. ‘Honey, I just took an Enderle! Here comes daddy!’ Seriously, people. C’mon. Enderle? Why do you even pay attention to this wingnut? I once knew a bassett hound who lied less than this guy. I mean, how far up Bill Gates’ ass can this moron get? Well, he’s done a pretty good job so far, and it’s a tight fit. No. I keed, I keed. But seriously — Enderle’s commentary is always reliable.
Reliable for me to POOP ON!!!!
Here begins the back-pedaling of Rob Enderle, when Apple breaks new sales record next quarter for the Mac mini.
Why is he called a pundit? More like pundiot, or pundidiot.
“And the massive problems all three platforms are having with patches” = Utter rubbish as we all know.
But OS X is not without its foibles either. As far as Repairing Permissions or having to stick apps in an apps folder and docs in a doc folder, I’m sorry to say that (IMHO and dispensing with all delicadeza) that’s rubbish too. OS 9 to OS X was four steps forward and one step back; Deadhorn will be six steps forward and four steps back, starting from two steps behind OS 9. Anyway, the Tiger’s time is coming.
Trust Microsoft to pick an OS name full of bullshit. Enderle is wallowing in it.
You Mr. Enderle don’t have a clue and should really stop writing about high tech especially when it comes to what Apple is doing.
Look it up. Windows 98 wasn’t based on OS/2 but Windows NT was–and thus XP too. In part.
MS and IBM worked on OS/2 together and then split.
I never mind seeing Enderle put [down] but that particular point is correct.
Also it’s Microsoft that is mainly having the problems with security because of there lack of focus on security from the begining. They got over confident and now are paying the price. Unfortunately for Microsoft the next OS isn’t going to be much of a change as Longhorn has turned into shorthorn and now has transformed into stubby. It’s only going to be an upgraded XP with a different name. No new features so why they trying to bring this to market in 2006 is beyond me except to bring in the dough from all of those suckers who think there going to get something better.
If Mr.E and others consider software versioning to be an indicator of “patches” then I guess every software package sold is simply one big patch such as Windows, 95, 98, 2000, CE, ME, XP? This logic doesn’t doesn’t appear to have sound reasoning, although fun to read.
Response from Ian Bell to my letter copied earlier in this thread:
Thank you for your concern. I am happy to hear you will not longer be
visiting us. If you would like, please send me your IP address and I will
block it from our site so you will no longer be bothered by our content.
Here is an interesting article you may want to read in your spare time:
http://salon.com/tech/letters/2005/02/01/mac/index.html?x check out the
reader response. Believe it or not, there are several websites on the
internet that are not Apple focused, in fact 95% of the population on the
net visit these “non-Apple” focused sites. It’s like opening your eyes to a
new world, a world without Apple computers and Volkswagens, Volvo’s, Saab’s,
Apple summer camps, etc. You should try it sometime.
But I will take the 95% percent compared to the 5% percent – wouldn’t you?
What you may not be aware of is how out of touch you really are with the
industry. I think it’s a good thing if you do not return.
Kind regards,
Ian Bell
Why oh why won’t anyone focus on the real issue: in the case of an earthquake incited tsunami how are you ever supposed to rely on the Mac mini as a floatation device?
Apple has once again completely ignored practical concerns in favour of aesthetics. Typical. Have a quick glance over at what Dell is doing and you’ll see a company that gets it. Big = stable = something you can hang on to for dear life in the case of a natural disaster.
Mr. Enderle is just rightly pointing out Apple’s complete lack of vision when it comes to bridging the important gap between personal computing and personal safety.
And my follow up:
Dear Mr Bell,
You said, “I am happy to hear you will not longer be visiting us.”
Did I say that? No I didn’t, you jumped to a conclusion.
You said, “Here is an interesting article you may want to read in your spare time: http://salon.com/tech/letters/2005/02/01/mac/index.html?x check out the reader response.”
Thanks for pointing it out but In the plenty of spare time I have available I read the article.
You said, “Believe it or not, there are several websites on the internet that are not Apple focused”
Yes I am well aware, in fact I cited one in my original message, http://www.groklaw.net
You said, “But I will take the 95% percent compared to the 5% percent – wouldn’t you?”
Not necessarily. I believe quality is more important than quantity however I appreciate people make decisions based on their needs and resources and also on the information available to them.
You said, “What you may not be aware of is how out of touch you really are with the industry.”
Quite possibly, but you are certainly in no position to make that judgment.
You seem to have responded with an anti-mac zeal worthy of anonymous posters on internet message boards (just like the one you mention). Just in case that is because my message comes from a .mac address let me explain. After having several ISPs change email (and other) policies in the early nineties when the internet was still relatively early in it’s development I was pleased when Apple introduced their email service. I wanted an address I could consider permanent, provided by a reliable company, a mainstay of the industry, who would be likely to be in business for a long time. As the longest surviving computer company with a focus on end users I believe I made a good decision.
I will not advise you of my IP address as I shall return to your site so I can see who is advertising thereon and forward copies of your message to them.
Regards,
I looked at the letters on Salon.com. Perfect example of how ignorant PC users are about the Mac. 99% of the gripes people had were completely unfounded. That’s OK, I really don’t want my platform of choice being soiled by their stupidity. I’d be happy if the Mac’s marketshare went up to somewhere between 10-20% but not much higher. Let the dregs stay with windows.
Gandalf,
Your firstletter was excellent. In no way could your letter be considered belligerent, confrontaional, or Mac zealous. Yet the pinhead Bell responded in the way he did. I think that speaks volumes about their collective idiocy.
Please continue on with you email campaigns
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Honestly, I could care less what people from the Windoze world do.
They can have their spyware ridden cake and eat it, if they so wish.
You can show people the truth, but they have to want to take the step into the light.
So long as Apple remains perfectly viable (and great), that is fine with me. Windoze people can do what they want.
“Perfect example of how ignorant PC users are about the Mac”
“I really don’t want my platform of choice being soiled by their stupidity.”
Oh the irony:
Take from a Salon Letter to the Editor:
“I’m a Windows user, and the most confounding thing about articles like this is how they talk about Windows users. They are describing a creature that is not me or any of the Windows users I know.
We’re not the stupid people that Apple lovers portray us as. We’ve had 20 years to be convinced that an Apple is worth having. Really, nobody coerced us into keeping our PCs. Apple just hasn’t made its case.”
You just don’t get it. Stop labeling those who choose to remain with their platform of choice as stupid. Its just that, their CHOICE; believe me, we are all aware of our alternatives….’nuff said. Don’t expect many “switchers” with that attitude.
Start from scratch and do what? Rewrite UNIX? The various incantations of unix have been kicking for 35+ years because they are still relevant today. Windows was never relevant built on top of a DOS shell, it was kludgy then, it is even more kludgy now.
How many different ways are you going to code DSZ (decrement one and skip on zero). <– extreme example at its most basic form. Until the time arrives that computers no longer deal with binary input, then you wont have (nor need) much change to the basic code blocks of UNIX.
Enderle is hedging his bets. He senses a real war with a winner being immanent, he just cannot pallet the fact that it will be Apple.
Zac
[After having several ISPs change email (and other) policies… I wanted an address I could consider permanent, provided by a reliable company, a mainstay of the industry, who would be likely to be in business for a long time.]
Seems logical, I had a similar problem starting with a rogers.wave.com to a rogers.home.com to shaw.home.com to shaw.ca. Wheeeew!
But anyway, may I suggest that in the future you (all of us MacZealots! – for that matter) email these ‘journalists’ with helpful advice from your Hotmail account.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
BTW, both letters were great. I’ve copied and pasted your ‘decisions’ comment to my iNotePad ‘Quotes’ note (with your ‘handle’ as the quoting author, of course). Cheers!
When someone points out that the state of computing is pretty sad, Mac fans like to point out how wonderful OS X is.
Well compared to the alternatives it is, but the state of computing is still very awkward and inefficient. We can do lots of wonderful and amazing things, but we still have our little windows on the screen controlled by two separate and awkward control devices.
That said, I don’t have a better way, but I won’t be one to defend all computers. They all have to be patched and fixed and upgraded. Computers are not like a kitchen table that just sits there ready to be used.
But an iPod is. We’re getting closer, but there needs to be a paradigm shift. Apple might be on the right track, but there’s a long way to go and people are going to have a hard time accepting those changes because they want to be able to do everything with every microchip.
Simplify. Computers are appliances. The mini is a good acknowledgement of this, but not an end. Where is my electronic paper? I want to remove the operating system from the data.
A camera takes pictures. A printer prints them. Don’t put movies on my music player and don’t put music on my camera and don’t put a camera in my phone and don’t put a printer in my camera.
Everything has its place. Apple seems to be the only designer that can keep things separate and stop trying to do it all with every device. No screen on the “shuffle” way to go! People love it. It plays your music, it doesn’t take pictures and it’s not a Geiger counter. It plays music. It’s a music player.
Amazing.
The mini may be a movie player. We’ll see. Put one of those Cell processors in and it’s a game console that plays movies and surfs the internet and handles your documents and searches for aliens. Uh oh, we’re doing it all again. Oh well eventually someone will get it right.
Apparently Mr. Bell never got as far as page two of the cited article, wherein an equal number of writers sing Apple’s praises eloquently and often dispose of the Pro-MS rantings on page one very neatly.
I to will be avoiding Mr. Bell, all of his enterprises, and all of his advertisers.
from the Salon missives:
“In the 15 years since I discovered CompuServe, I’ve had almost no problems with spyware or viruses, because my use of the Internet is almost always limited to “serious” sites. (Few people admit that many of their problems arise from accessing porn or other sites that are on the fringes of Internet commerce.)
— Alison Barnard”
Anyone touting this sort of stupidty as a grand retort, as Mr Bell has, needs to rethink their lines of argumentation.
And while I’m in the mood, I’d ike to address the oldest and most obsolete OS in existence, upon which every computer of any size is still dependent…BINARY. In 60+ years haven’t we outgrown the outmoded, inefficient, and rigid binary code system? Haven’t we matured enough to recognize the futility of addressing the world in black and white, on and off terms? Why can’t we have a trinary or decinary system? We’ll never progress as a species as long as we’re tied to such simple logic.
(Removing tongue from cheek) – The single salient fact about Unix is that running it is the point toward which personal computer evolution has been driving for these last 25 years. Windows is an elaborate extension of the 8 bit languages necessary for the rudimentary nature of the original personal computers, and elephant on stilts, trying to be a giraffe. Apple recognized that modern machines have evolved to the point that they can utilize Unix, and having come to that realization, they started over on their OS. Doing the same is the only thing that will save Microsoft from eventual oblivion. Longhorn is Microsoft’s signal that it is still in deep denial.
So, OS is 40 years old. And just exactly how old is the light bulb?
I hate magic words.
Let me edit my own post:
I wrote:
“Enderle is hedging his bets. He senses a real war with a winner being immanent, he just cannot pallet the fact that it will be Apple.”
What I should have wrote is:
Enderle is hedging his bets. He senses a real war with a winner being immanent, he just cannot pallet the fact that it will not be MicroSoft (without government intervention*).
*I am not a tin hatter, but we do have economies at stake here too.
Zac
further edit, change immanent to imminent
Hmmm…. Looks like Mr. Bell is due for a tasty IP bomb.
My treat.
Ben wrote: “You just don’t get it. Stop labeling those who choose to remain with their platform of choice as stupid. Its just that, their CHOICE; believe me, we are all aware of our alternatives….”
I don’t think people like this are stupid because they choose to remain with Windows. If they like Windows, fine, I couldn’t care less. But when their reasons for dismissing Apple are based on ignorance, and the real answers to their concerns are found with just the slightest bit of research, I find that stupid. To dismiss the Mac because there’s supposedly no software available is absolutely ludicrous. There are over 18,000 software titles currently available for OS X alone, and the truth is, Macs ship with all the software some people would ever need.
Another reader posted something about how the fact that OS X is Unix based means nothing in regards to security because a recent study by Mi2g found Linux was the most successfully breached OS and it’s based on Unix too. He failed to mention, conveniently, that that same report found that the most secure system was BSD Unix, which, surprise, is the foundation of OS X.
Yet another reader expresses his distaste for the Mac because there aren’t “buckets of cheap software” at Staples, it won’t run software he already owns, he’d have to pay for every minor upgrade, etc. OK, let’s see, just because Staples doesn’t carry buckets of cheap software doesn’t mean you can’t get it. Go to VersionTracker.com and download scores of cheap or even free quality software from the comfort of your own chair. Most vendors will do cross-platform upgrades of Windows software to Mac software, and some will even give you the current version for the price of shipping. And, again, the Mac ships with tons of great software. For many users, they wouldn’t need their old software anyway. Lastly, Apple only charges for major upgrades, and you get a lot for the price. Minor updates are free. Microsoft does the same thing. If you’re running Windows 98 you pay for Windows 2000 or XP. It’s no different.
Other readers posted drivel such as that there are no keyboard shortcuts in Mac software – false – that, if something goes wrong, you can’t get under the hood to find out what’s wrong – false – that Macs are incompatible with other systems – false again. I could go on and on.
Very little research and an open mind would show these folks and others like them that the Mac is much different than they’ve been lead to believe. They are no at all aware of the alternatives, they just think they are.
From the “Designtechnica” quasi-blog ‘news’ site:
Ian Bell – Editor-In-Chief
Ian Bell co-founded Designtechnica Corporation in June 2000 and currently resides as the site’s Editor-in-Chief. Ian studied marketing at the University of Oregon and the University of Phoenix. Prior to working for Designtechnica, Ian has held positions with Semiconductor Technology America, Lockheed Martin and Intel Corporation.
Tool.
Send all mail bombs to:
ianbell@designtechnica.com
ndelc’s points are excellent, and unfortunately for Ben, his post hilights the very ignorance he attempts to obfuscate.
By the way, for being unabashed Windows apologist who admittedly cater to the “95%” who are Windows users, why is DesignTechnica running their site with Apache on Linux?
Ah, the hypocrisy.
By the way, for being unabashed Windows apologist who admittedly cater to the “95%” who are Windows users, why is DesignTechnica running their site with Apache on Linux? – BSOD
Most likely because that is the package they chose to use from their hosting service….Notice “Global Network Access”? They own the (Netblock) server that the site is being hosted on…That is why they appear to be using linux…So what…I remember a time when Apple ran Solaris and IBM was runing linux aswell…Its just hosting dude. and really, you dont know what they are running on, as that could be just a redirect or a Domain caching server…You dont know exactly what a company is running unless the own the netblock…
NoMacForYou – No shit, dumbass. But they could easily find a Winblows host. Of course, last year Microsoft was running Windows Update on linux servers because they were getting bombed.
…and really, I do know what they are running on – but that’s neither here nor there. The Netcraft is just a link to show y’all.
Hypocrisy is hypocrisy. It’s even worse when the credibility-free defenders (you) make excuses for it.
Guys, I was just teasing about Ian Bell’s e-mailm he didn’t really say that. But seriously that article really sucked.
Back to work…
Jake E.
BSOD – You have got to be the biggest tight asses i’ve ever met on MDN..Get a grip..
“Microsoft was running Windows Update on linux servers because they were getting bombed.”
Yeah, and I’m the dumbass?
NoMacForYou, your ignorance has reached new heights. Here’s just one of many, many articles on the subject:
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/2072/
Isn’t recess over? Shouldn’t you go back to home room?
10.3.8 is out.
From your link..Read 1st Fucko.
“DNS Resolving moved to the Akamai caching system, which runs Linux” & “although microsoft.com is reported as running on Windows Server 2003”
Man you are clever. Hows that working for you anyways? Being Clever?
Just so you’re clear on this…http://v5.windowsupdate.microsoft.com is a subweb of http://www.microsoft.com..Just incase you thought windowsupdate.com may be its “own” instance of a webserver.
So you see. Linux wasn’t pushing updates, it was caching updates from a Windows Server…
What part of Moron DON’T you understand…
Oh and MDN isnt biased towards MS either….No, Not at all…
10.3.8 installed and we’re back to tell the tale. Details here
I notice the wake from sleep PowerBook issue has received attention as have graphics drivers. Does this mean I will get a mouse pointer every time now like I used to?
10.3.8 Installed but why does my mouse disappear when i move it into the tools area of Safari……Hmmm….
Here is one for you guys..Ever since the 10.3.6 update…My second processor on my G5 is hosed…anyone have a clue as to why?
My mouse used to do that under 10.3.7, but only on certain websites. If I switched applications and went back that fixed it.
Wasn’t this the Ass clown who said Apple would never, ever do a low cost computer?
Yes, in fact Enderle mocked everyone for thinking it.
Now, that he was as wrong as one could be, he is now ripping on the very object he didn’t think was possible?
What a loser. These PC guys are better suited to going back and reviewing Microsoft’s latest monthly bug fix for critical holes, 10-A127A-144-GA. Now that is more their speed.
Because they simply don’t get it.
I like to keep the Ass Clown around and occasionally beat on him when I’m not abstracting my cores and shit like that.
RE
My penis is very very small…
Just for those who haven’t worked it out the imposter using my nick above is no other than Ian Bell.
Come on Ian, you know that’s really bad form, blows your cred, the internet never forgets.
10.3.8 ???? Enderle is must be psychic !
Nothing wrong with having 40-year old operating systems, as obviously they have evolved over time (though some branches of the OS tree have apparently regressed). I found TOPS-10 to be a great improvement over other mainframe OS’s (nothing much else around in the early ’70’s) and VMS shows some of that friendly PDP heritage too. Unix was a bit of a retrograde step in readability, but the conceptual structure made up for that (even though it was sad to leave TECO behind!). Windows, MacOS, OS/2 all owe a big debt of heritage to these earlier OS’s … DEC pretty much singlehandly (slight exaggeration) the era of relatively friendly and powerful OS’s which we are still in today.
(See IBM and UNIVAC for unfriendly and not so powerful kind of OS’s!)
Magic word is “straight” as in damn straight or as in evolution wasn’t so much a straight monotonic improvement (e.g. see Windows!).
NoMacForYou, you’re cracking us all up. You’re typing as fast as you can, but what you clearly don’t realize is that every word just provides more humour – at your expense – for everyone else reading the comments.
When will you get a clue?
I love seeing you post to a story because I know you’ll so easily get drawn into any bait that’s sent your way. It’s so sad! Give us more! More of your pathetic drivel… PLEASE.
…by the way, NoMacForYou, since you’re obviously having difficulty comprehending the information from the story I linked for you, and since you’re unable to do any research on your own, the history of this was that Microsoft actually off-loaded their entire site (including Windows Update) to Akamai and disabled the domain windowsupdate.com.
This is a very, very old story and was good for days of laughs to all of us on MDN for quite some time. Granted, at that time you may have still been in diapers or too busy watching Dawson’s Creek to know it was going on, but it did happen nonetheless. Like it or not.
Sorry, but your heros in Redmond depend on a UNIX knock-off every now and then, too – just like the idiots who publish Enderle’s slop.
Oh look, the magic word is “children” – how appropriate.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smirk” style=”border:0;” />
alright, break it up.
nothing to see hear, nothing to see hear.
go about your ways…
RandyJ70999: “VMS is the Virtual Architectural Extention to RSX-11M+ (PDP) not TOP-10/20. Windows 3.x through 98 was an application on top of DOS, Windows NT through 200x is based roughly on VMS as one of the Architects helped design VMS”
I stand corrected. However, I believe TOPS-10/20 had significant influence on the VMS (I have never used RSX-11, so I cannot say for sure).
“Windows NT through 200x is based roughly on VMS as one of the Architects helped design VMS.”
Unfortunately, MS chose to implement MS-DOS CDL instead of VMS CDL. Cutler probably did a great job on the OS and MS did bring decent GUI (relatively speaking. I believe Windows was big improvement over DECwindows), but implementing MS-DOS CDL for compatibility was just a bad idea (I doubt it was his choice).
Al: “Unix is 40+ years old. What bullshit.”
I agree. I don’t think today’s unix has much of codes from the original unix (SCO probably disagrees, but that is another story). Similarly Windows 2000/XP’s codes are probably quite different from “original” RSX-11. So both OS contains experience of 40+ years, but the code in the OS are not that old. When MS developed Windows from experience of “VMS”, the OS took a big step back (I believe VMS was one of most secure OS available, possibly true even today).
Hey RandyJ7099 and s, you’re both right, though s has the more complete story, since TOPS-10 did influence VMS (and I’m speaking from considerable personal experience of RSX-11, TOPS-10 and VMS).
As I implied previously, “Code concepts developed for TOPS-10 ended up in RSX-11 that ultimately ended up in OpenVMS. These same operating system design ideas can probably be traced to current operating systems like Microsoft’s Windows NT.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOPS-10)
s and Al:
“Al: “Unix is 40+ years old. What bullshit.”
I agree. I don’t think today’s unix has much of codes from the original unix ….”
I would differ on this point, as in the same way a Fortran compiler then is still a Fortran compiler today, albeit evolved (rather than devolved), Unix today is essentially based on Unix 40+ years ago. No bullshit at all! The codebase has evolved and expanded considerably (I used to be able to run a multiuser Unix (AIX) on a 75MB hard disk with multiple compilers, editors, graphics packages, and usual Unix tools, and still have 30MB left for user space!) but it is still definably Unix. And I make no real distinctions between UNIX/BSD/Linux/OS X as they all yield the essential Unix experience from a User and Developer perspective.
Magic word is final as in there is unlikely to be a final OS!
“10.3.8 Installed but why does my mouse disappear when i move it into the tools area of Safari……Hmmm….”
Actually, what NoMacForYou says also affects my Mac. The disappearing cursor is a pain in the ass. When I move the cursor into that same upper area of Safari it occasionally disappears for me too. And I’m still running 10.3.3. It bothers me that this is still occurring in 10.3.8.
Thorpedo:
unix/bsd/linux/os x may yield same unix experience, but the code that instructs computer to interpret the command may be rewritten few times.
Think of it this way. Bell Lab wrote the original unix. UCB extended unix, then after court case, they removed the original unix source code and created NET1(?), which became BSD. While BSD was busy with court case, Linux and GNU rewrote the code from scratch. Meanwhile Avi and Co. had a better idea and developed microkernel and run BSD on top of microkernel. So, I think there are at least two unix like OS (BSD and Linux), which claims to be free of original unix source code.
If you mean both BSD and Linux have 40+ years of experience, then yes they do. However, the source codes in these two OS are not as old as original unix. I don’t know how much of SCO unix contains the source code from original unix. More interesting question will be how much of BSD is in SCO unix, but that is another matter.
Similary, both FORTRAN and Fortran compilers may yield same machine code (which I doubt) when it compiles a Fortran program, however the compilers were probably rewritten several times over the years by many different groups. Again all groups have learned from experience of original compiler and subsequent compilers from various groups (ok, may be not MS).