Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I don't really think MS's reliance on the NT kernel is necessarily a bad thing. They could remove all backwards compatibility for the sake of performance as well as security, but still stick with the NT Kernel. It's not like it's not stable at this point.

They could then do backwards compatibility similar to VMWare's ThinApp, using virtualization.
 
Oh. I get it. You're in college, and think you know everything. You're bright enough, I'm sure, but just because you're taking a mechanical engineering class (I'm assuming) doesn't make you a mechanical engineer.

Just because you're able to build a computer from components does not make you a hardware engineer, and just because you're able to install and operating system does not make you a systems administrator.

For the record, I *am* a Systems Administrator, as well as Software Engineer, with 20 years of experience, and a Masters Degrees in both Software Systems Engineering and Information Systems from a top-rated school, and graduated top of my class with a perfect 4.0, for the record, since you're in college and such things probably still mean something to you. FTR, they're *really* important until about a year after you graduate...then they're fairly meaningless, once you have some real experience.
<snip>
I think I know everything? No, I don't. I made a connection with some guy who made a snide comment about heat transfer 101 and noted I'm currently taking a heat transfer course. Nowhere did I say I'm a mechanical engineer/hardware engineer/systems admin... I said I'm a student.

You on the other hand, obviously think you know everything judging by your laundry list of qualifications you felt you had to share. Cool, you got a 4.0, cool you have 20 years of experience and some fancy advanced education. Nobody cares.

Obviously you have more experience than me. This whole debate, these ads, etc. are not directed at IT pros or system administrators with 20+ years of experience. I'm talking about the typical home user who thinks that PC = viruses, and that windows will take 20 min to start up.

And yes I realize that my computer is cheaper cause I built it, if I really cared I could go to dells site and price out a similarly specced computer, it would probably be more like $1300 not $900. Still not $3500 like a mac. Sure, mac parts are probably a bit better because they are server grade. Do regular home users need that... maybe not.

Yes, the new imac is a good deal because of the high res IPS panel in it.
 
And yes I realize that my computer is cheaper cause I built it, if I really cared I could go to dells site and price out a similarly specced computer, it would probably be more like $1300 not $900. Still not $3500 like a mac. Sure, mac parts are probably a bit better because they are server grade. Do regular home users need that... maybe not.

You're still not comparing an equal machine. The cheapest I have seen for a comparable dual Quad xeon built from parts on new egg hovers around the $2400 dollar mark. That leaves off some things like FW800 ports and optical in/out, which some pros (including myself) use on a daily basis.

That is still significantly cheaper than Apple's cheapest dual quad core, but not enough to get the people who are running pro hardware to switch, because

a) they will eat up that savings and then some by switching their software over.

b) the software alternatives are not as nice (Apple has logic and Final Cut Studio, hard to move off of that combo)

c) they will need to enable new software like anti-virus that eats up resources

d) they will lose some productivity in the switch until people learn the system.

e) they will slowly spend more money to add the features missing on the cheap PC, unless they add it from the start.

f) many pros prefer to buy from a company with a warranty, so they don't have to deal with trying to fix a bad mobo, etc.


slappy sam said:
I've never had a virus in 10 years. I've been to one fairly sketchy site, clicked on something and had my free A/V software come up and say "this is identified as potentially being a virus" so I clicked the back button in my browser.

I have no idea how people are still getting more than the VERY VERY occasional pop up on their computer. No clue. What are you doing that gives you viruses? Maybe everyone watches a lot more sketchy porn than I do, who knows.

You can be the safest, most intelligent user on the planet, but that won't change the fact that you will have to interact with idiots in the business world.

Chances are, one of these almost computer illiterate people running Windows will share a file or something that contains a virus/trojan/adware, etc. I know 5 people personally that are running the outdated trial version of the anti-virus software that their computers shipped with 2 years ago.

That's how you get a virus. The idiots.

Well, that and the sketchy porn. ;)
 
Which UNIX? There are so many branches, variants, and even trees that "based on UNIX" is almost a joke. ("based on UNIX XYZ" wouldn't be a joke.)

UNIX is a set of APIs with a large number of implementations, not a singular body of code.

UNIX 03, with POSIX compliance. That ought to do it.
 
UNIX 03, with POSIX compliance. That ought to do it.

Of course, "UNIX 03" branding merely means "looks like UNIX".

Apple's advertising hype, though, is that
core_unix_20090824.jpg
means that it's built on a robust, proven foundation that’s scalable, powerful, and crash resistant.

But, how much of the Apple OSX kernel is code that is shared with Solaris, AIX, HP-UX -- the other real UNIX systems that Apple's trying to imply kinship with?

Not much, as Apple's continuing struggle on the multi-CPU scaling front shows....
 
Of course, "UNIX 03" branding merely means "looks like UNIX".

Apple's advertising hype, though, is that
core_unix_20090824.jpg
means that it's built on a robust, proven foundation that’s scalable, powerful, and crash resistant.

But, how much of the Apple OSX kernel is code that is shared with Solaris, AIX, HP-UX -- the other real UNIX systems that Apple's trying to imply kinship with?

Not much, as Apple's continuing struggle on the multi-CPU scaling front shows....

Hmmm....

Mac OS X is based on Job's NextStep, right?

BSD ---> NextStep ---> Mac OS X.

Pretty much a combination of BSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD.

Or so I understand.

Still, the assumption that *nix box can't be rooted is just ridiculous. I'd say the securest OS out there is OpenVMS.
 
Hmmm....

Mac OS X is based on Job's NextStep, right?

BSD ---> NextStep ---> Mac OS X.

Pretty much a combination of BSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD.

Or so I understand.

Still, the assumption that *nix box can't be rooted is just ridiculous. I'd say the securest OS out there is OpenVMS.

Apple didn't get "UNIX 03" recognition until Apple OSX 10.5. BSD is not "UNIX 03". Nextstep is not "UNIX 03". Apple OSX 10.4 is not "UNIX 03".

My point is that Apple's "UNIX is GREAT" (Tony The Tiger voice) ad hype tries to imply some family heritage.

But, "UNIX 03" is not a code-base. It's an API definition. It doesn't imply security, reliability and scalability to be "UNIX 03" certified.

It just means that your APIs have passed a conformance test suite. The OS can still be a steaming pile of horse manure - and be called "UNIX 03".

And one of the most amusing point is - if we use the "UNIX 03" standard, then Apple OSX 10.4 and earlier aren't UNIX !!
 
Back when POSIX support was part of Windows - yes, Windows was UNIX by some definitions.

MacOSX is Unix just in the Same way Linux/Minix is Unix.

True Unix is practically dead/heading into obscurity. BSD has to be the only one with a certain future ahead. Even then its spreading out into multiple branches.

I think its a good thing, we shouldn't be basing modern OSs on Kernels older than me! Now if only we could get rid of the Bios. I would cringe if something was Pure Unix.
 
Windows can be called UNIX 03??? :D

MacOSX is Unix just in the Same way Linux/Minix is Unix.

True Unix is practically dead/heading into obscurity. BSD has to be the only one with a certain future ahead.

Um, yeah...I think that one went right over your heads. :rolleyes:

Well, not really.

No Linux disto is "UNIX 03" certified - but Apple OSX 10.5 (on Intel) and Apple OSX 10.6 are.

If Linux doesn't worry about "UNIX 03" certification, then why should anyone care that some versions of Apple OSX are certified?
 
Well, not really.

No Linux disto is "UNIX 03" certified - but Apple OSX 10.5 (on Intel) and Apple OSX 10.6 are.

If Linux doesn't worry about "UNIX 03" certification, then why should anyone care that some versions of Apple OSX are certified?


The Linux people will never care about being certified because they pretty much stole the Unix kernel and screwed it all up.
 
The Linux people will never care about being certified because they pretty much stole the Unix kernel and screwed it all up.

Oh good lord.

MorphingDragon said:
True Unix is practically dead/heading into obscurity.

What about, say, HP-UX or AIX or Solaris? Not really an expert in this area to be honest, would love to know more.
 
Windows can be called UNIX 03??? :D

I see what you did there. ;)

Well, not really.

No Linux disto is "UNIX 03" certified - but Apple OSX 10.5 (on Intel) and Apple OSX 10.6 are.

If Linux doesn't worry about "UNIX 03" certification, then why should anyone care that some versions of Apple OSX are certified?

In my version of "WIN/UX", I just want to see "the usual" as with OS X and/or Fedora, Solaris, etc. By "the usual", I mean a Terminal or command-line Unix shell, daemons, self-contained ".app" packages, a new/different file system such as ZFS or JFS, and NO REGISTRY. If Microsoft were to release this, they could almost certainly destroy Apple. Fortunately for Apple, the chances of this happening are about 0.0000001%. :cool:
 
I see what you did there. ;)



In my version of "WIN/UX", I just want to see "the usual" as with OS X and/or Fedora, Solaris, etc. By "the usual", I mean a Terminal or command-line Unix shell, daemons, self-contained ".app" packages, a new/different file system such as ZFS or JFS, and NO REGISTRY. If Microsoft were to release this, they could almost certainly destroy Apple. Fortunately for Apple, the chances of this happening are about 0.0000001%. :cool:

So you want OpenSolaris with self contained programs?

--

There shouldn't be a "Unix" standard. I can understand Posix but aiming a piece of software to preset of standards is very stagnate. A piece of software should be free to grow, otherwise we just get more of the same slop.
 
The OS can still be a steaming pile of horse manure - and be called "UNIX 03".

response:

Windows can be called UNIX 03??? :D

retorted with:

Well, not really.

No Linux disto is "UNIX 03" certified - but Apple OSX 10.5 (on Intel) and Apple OSX 10.6 are.

If Linux doesn't worry about "UNIX 03" certification, then why should anyone care that some versions of Apple OSX are certified?

Priceless...........
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.