Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is a Mac a Mac?
- Thread starter Rockridge
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Is a Mac a Mac?
Are you looking for a flame war? This is a good start.
What exactly is your point here? Its pretty well known that OSX is Unix based, that's never been denied. And if I were to go and take up arms as a rebel, what exactly are you suggesting as an alternative for the Mac platform for an OS?
Are you looking for a flame war? This is a good start.
What exactly is your point here? Its pretty well known that OSX is Unix based, that's never been denied. And if I were to go and take up arms as a rebel, what exactly are you suggesting as an alternative for the Mac platform for an OS?
Blah
Just because an operating system is evolutionary doesn't mean its bad, un-mac-like or not truely new.
Mac OS X is the finest desktop Unix in existence. Its interface is a marriage of the Mac OS interface (which has always been great) with the NeXT interface, which many considered very revolutionary. Its underpinnings are the a combination of many OS's and the uniquely designed Mach kernel--it is stable and is getting faster and faster. The level of integration between the new interface and the underpinnings is nothing short of a wonderment; no other Unix has ever been able to accomplish this.
Comparing the potential for growth and movement in new directions between OS X and MS offerrings, I must put my money on OS X.
Your comments show nothing but ignorance and an unwillingness to part ways with Classic Mac OS. Just because Apple is moving in new directions doesn't mean they aren't looking out for its customers. If anything, OS X is an attempt to make the Mac OS extensible and allow it to compete in tomorrows marketplace, thereby extending its life. Keeping the Mac around is probably the best way I can think of for Apple to look out for its customers.
I repeat: blah.
Taft
Just because an operating system is evolutionary doesn't mean its bad, un-mac-like or not truely new.
Mac OS X is the finest desktop Unix in existence. Its interface is a marriage of the Mac OS interface (which has always been great) with the NeXT interface, which many considered very revolutionary. Its underpinnings are the a combination of many OS's and the uniquely designed Mach kernel--it is stable and is getting faster and faster. The level of integration between the new interface and the underpinnings is nothing short of a wonderment; no other Unix has ever been able to accomplish this.
Comparing the potential for growth and movement in new directions between OS X and MS offerrings, I must put my money on OS X.
Your comments show nothing but ignorance and an unwillingness to part ways with Classic Mac OS. Just because Apple is moving in new directions doesn't mean they aren't looking out for its customers. If anything, OS X is an attempt to make the Mac OS extensible and allow it to compete in tomorrows marketplace, thereby extending its life. Keeping the Mac around is probably the best way I can think of for Apple to look out for its customers.
I repeat: blah.
Taft
Umm, the fact that it's UNIX based is heavily touted, as it's a superior OS... it's not like they were trying to "hide" this from us... Apple has done a fine job of bringing it to the masses, with an easy-to-use interface...
If you don't like it, I suggest you go learn Be, or I know a few people still devoted to OS2/warp...
pnw
If you don't like it, I suggest you go learn Be, or I know a few people still devoted to OS2/warp...
pnw
OSX when its speed is up will be the most Mac like product from apple ever.
I LOVE OSX! IT RULES!
LONG LIVE OSX!
I still like os9 but I don't use it anymore!
Ensign
I LOVE OSX! IT RULES!
LONG LIVE OSX!
I still like os9 but I don't use it anymore!
Ensign
i'm actually thinking of using that wonderful "ignore user" option... never wanted to before, but what the hey...
pnw
I used to use the ignore user for GoCyrus (cause he was really annoying) but I always used to read his messages anyway (so I could send a real horrible responce!)
Ensign
Ensign
MacOS has always been the major contributor to a Mac's "Macness." It has evolved from the earliest versions of System/Finder to Mac OS 9. OS X does not lie on that long-stretching line of evolution. OS X is the latest version of OpenStep, with an interface that blends OpenStep with the look and feel of the traditional MacOS, while adding some radical new elements entirely.
I can sympathize with the original poster's perspective.
But the truth is that Mac OS 9 is a weak OS. It is inferior to Windows 95 from a kernel perspective. It is crash prone. It is amazing that an OS lacking so many modern (standard) OS features made it this long. Apple riding that OS for its survival was a scary thing.
Few realized at the time how wonderful NEXTSTEP/OpenStep was. I am one who has appreciated it for years. The fact that it is now shouldering the future of Apple has me very, very hopeful and confident. Yes---there is a deviation from the same old "Macness", but Apple is just definining some new pieces as we step into the future.
blakespot
I can sympathize with the original poster's perspective.
But the truth is that Mac OS 9 is a weak OS. It is inferior to Windows 95 from a kernel perspective. It is crash prone. It is amazing that an OS lacking so many modern (standard) OS features made it this long. Apple riding that OS for its survival was a scary thing.
Few realized at the time how wonderful NEXTSTEP/OpenStep was. I am one who has appreciated it for years. The fact that it is now shouldering the future of Apple has me very, very hopeful and confident. Yes---there is a deviation from the same old "Macness", but Apple is just definining some new pieces as we step into the future.
blakespot
My response is that I think OS X *does* lie on that line of evolution. It is not just the next version of OpenStep; it is a blend of OpenStep and Mac OS. There are elements of both OS's in the interface--as many (or more) from Classic Mac OS than from OpenStep. As Mac OS has long been defined by its interface, this is more of a tangent to the line of evolution. But departures and deviations in the interface have occured before in Mac OS's evolution--this is just a more major deviation.
Under the hood is a different story as it is pretty much OpenStep (with bits of code from other Unixes). This, however, is the one thing I think all Mac users would agree needed to be changed. Mac OS was built on a tower of outdated and inextensible blocks. Not very pretty.
I can identify with OS X "growing-pains", but to say that Apple is not looking out for its consumers is not only unfair, but extremely inaccurate.
Taft
Re: Is a Mac a Mac?
he's right its communism. we're all file trading, copyright burning, BSD loving commies
everbody go back to OS 9 before the screen turns red ahhhhhhhh!!!!!
he's right its communism. we're all file trading, copyright burning, BSD loving commies
everbody go back to OS 9 before the screen turns red ahhhhhhhh!!!!!
Let me just dissect your title here: "Is a Mac a Mac?"
In short, yes.
In long, the title is totally irrelevant to the content of your thread. Of course a Mac is a Mac. A Mac is not defined by its OS. The MacOS is a vital component OF the Macintosh. The Macintosh will always be a Macintosh, regardless of what operating system is on its hard disk.
In short, yes.
In long, the title is totally irrelevant to the content of your thread. Of course a Mac is a Mac. A Mac is not defined by its OS. The MacOS is a vital component OF the Macintosh. The Macintosh will always be a Macintosh, regardless of what operating system is on its hard disk.
Put it like this...
First off, A mac IS a mac!
Secondly, OS X is a Mac OS.
Its like OS 9, based on a GUI. Does it being based on a GUI make it a non-Mac OS? Exactly.
Now shut the hell up, before I put on my fire-suit!
First off, A mac IS a mac!
Secondly, OS X is a Mac OS.
Its like OS 9, based on a GUI. Does it being based on a GUI make it a non-Mac OS? Exactly.
Now shut the hell up, before I put on my fire-suit!
Well, from my perspective as a software developer, what's "under the hood" is far more a determiner as to whether or not the OS falls along the age-old MacOS line of evolution. And in looking at what's under the hood--it does not fall along that line. It's a comparatively trivial task to MacOS-up the interface of OpenStep than to turn oldschool MacOS into a stable and viable OS for the future. Certainly the interface was oldschool MacOS's family jewels, as there is/was little robust underneath.
I certainly believe Apple is looking out for consumers, evidence to that is their converting the standard OS of the Mac from a proprietary, weak, and unstable OS to one based on what I easily consider the most advanced OS that has ever been offered to consumers--NEXTSTEP/OpenStep.
blakespot