Discussion:
And some were saying that Mac is 3-4 years ahead of Linux
(too old to reply)
Geico Caveman
2006-08-07 20:21:25 UTC
Permalink
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).

Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.

When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
JDS
2006-08-07 20:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geico Caveman
A claim how Mac has invented the zero
?
In other news, Apple has invented the zero. "0"
--
JDS
Aunty Diluvian
2006-08-08 03:54:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by JDS
Post by Geico Caveman
A claim how Mac has invented the zero
?
In other news, Apple has invented the zero. "0"
".......and called it Linux."
I thought leeenus invented the zero.
Oxford
2006-08-07 21:06:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
The Mac has had virtual desktops since the late 80's, it was an App
called oddly enough, "Virtual Desktops" and ran on System 5, 6, 7. Now
there are several Virtual Desktops apps for OSX, and Today: "Spaces" was
previewed, which will outclass anything currently on OSX or Linux.

You can see it here:

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc06/

Again, the Mac has had Virtual Desktop before Linux was even around, so
you grasp on history is rather limited.
TheLetterK
2006-08-09 04:11:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oxford
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
The Mac has had virtual desktops since the late 80's, it was an App
called oddly enough, "Virtual Desktops" and ran on System 5, 6, 7. Now
there are several Virtual Desktops apps for OSX, and Today: "Spaces" was
previewed, which will outclass anything currently on OSX or Linux.
You have *got* to be high. XGL's desktop switching cube beats Spaces, no
contest.
Post by Oxford
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc06/
Again, the Mac has had Virtual Desktop before Linux was even around, so
you grasp on history is rather limited.
But the X Windowing System predates GNU/Linux, which is where the
feature was first implemented.
Peter Hayes
2006-08-08 16:33:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Oxford
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
The Mac has had virtual desktops since the late 80's, it was an App
called oddly enough, "Virtual Desktops" and ran on System 5, 6, 7. Now
there are several Virtual Desktops apps for OSX, and Today: "Spaces" was
previewed, which will outclass anything currently on OSX or Linux.
"Spaces" offers nothing that CodeTek doesn't already give me. Except
perhaps limiting me to four "spaces" instead of a maximum of 10 rows of
10 "spaces", not that I need more than one row... Outclassed? Nah.

Apple need to find another name, "spaces" is a bit... erm... yeuch.

The Linux Enlightenment WM has "spaces" that outclasses anything offered
by OS X, and has done so for several years. You need to do some research
on what other OSs have on offer instead of swallowing Apple's publicity
blurb, hook line and sinker.
--
Peter
Sinister Midget
2006-08-08 22:30:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Hayes
The Linux Enlightenment WM has "spaces" that outclasses anything offered
by OS X, and has done so for several years. You need to do some research
on what other OSs have on offer instead of swallowing Apple's publicity
blurb, hook line and sinker.
That's not all Oxtard swallows wrt iApple & Steve. He also swallows....
umm....err....oh....koolaid. Yeah, that's it! Koolaid! Really /scary/
koolaid! _ELECTRIC_ koolaid! Drugged koolaid! Koolaid that makes the
imbiber hallucinate! Little-green-men koolaid! Bugs-crawling-under-
your-skin koolaid.
--
Bring Windows to its knees: start an application.
Mike
2006-08-07 21:43:29 UTC
Permalink
In article <44d7a04e$0$568$***@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>,
Geico Caveman <***@spam.invalid> wrote:

...a bunch of Linux Loonie drivel in a Mac group, then wants replies
only in the Linux group.

How typical.

Mike
George
2006-08-07 21:56:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
...a bunch of Linux Loonie drivel in a Mac group, then wants replies
only in the Linux group.
How typical.
Mike
What do you expect?
Talk religion inside a church and you will have everyone agreeing with you.
Start talking about religion in the real world and you will meet with
opposition.
FWIW you may or may not already know this, but COMP.OS.LINUX.ADVOCACY is
pretty much considered a joke, wasteland,whatever.
TheLetterK
2006-08-09 01:50:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
Post by Mike
...a bunch of Linux Loonie drivel in a Mac group, then wants replies
only in the Linux group.
How typical.
Mike
What do you expect?
Talk religion inside a church and you will have everyone agreeing with you.
Start talking about religion in the real world and you will meet with
opposition.
FWIW you may or may not already know this, but COMP.OS.LINUX.ADVOCACY is
pretty much considered a joke, wasteland,whatever.
IMO, it's less of a cess pit than CSMA because there's at least some
advocacy going on (a huge number of news postings, if nothing else).
JEDIDIAH
2006-08-08 12:51:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
Post by Mike
...a bunch of Linux Loonie drivel in a Mac group, then wants replies
only in the Linux group.
How typical.
Mike
What do you expect?
Talk religion inside a church and you will have everyone agreeing with you.
Start talking about religion in the real world and you will meet with
opposition.
FWIW you may or may not already know this, but COMP.OS.LINUX.ADVOCACY is
pretty much considered a joke, wasteland,whatever.
...just like any other group that satisfies the .*advocacy.* RE.
--
Oracle... can't live with it... |||
/ | \
can't just replace it with postgres...
George
2006-08-07 21:46:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geico Caveman
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
Can I buy a Linux computer at CompUSA?
Staples?
CircuitCity?
Microcenter?

So where is Linux?

Crank operated PC's in the middle of the Sudan where people are starving?
Great place for Linux.
They can check their email while they starve.
Maybe google for 100 different recepies on how to prepare rat stew.
Oops, sorry that't India.
Same thing.


Apple has managed to increase their market share to 12 percent for laptops.

So where are all of these great Linux laptops with the free operating
system that supposedly does everything better than every other operating
system?
See any at Starbucks?
On people's trays on planes traveling?
In airport lounges?
Cafe bars?
I honestly have NEVER seen a SINGLE person using Linux on a laptop and I
travel all over the world.
Not one.
I see plenty of Apples though.
Erik Funkenbusch
2006-08-07 22:29:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
Can I buy a Linux computer at CompUSA?
Probably not.
Post by George
Staples?
Probably not.
Post by George
CircuitCity?
Probably not.
Post by George
Microcenter?
Actually, yes. They sell Pro-Spec PC's with Linspire. Mostly just the
really cheap systems, though.
George
2006-08-07 22:40:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
Post by George
Microcenter?
Actually, yes. They sell Pro-Spec PC's with Linspire. Mostly just the
really cheap systems, though.
They must be hiding them somewhere because I am in the Microcenter store
on Powers Ferry Road, Marietta GA. all the time and I have never seen one.

They do have a large collection of Linux distributions though in the
reject rack along with 10 year old Chessmaster 1000 programs and 1000 Clip
art programs.

I never see anyone over there looking though.

They also have a great Apple Pavilion in that store with all the latest
stuff. The Pavilion is always packed with people buying things.
B Gruff
2006-08-07 23:34:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
Can I buy a Linux computer at CompUSA?
Staples?
CircuitCity?
Microcenter?
Yep - at all those, and then some.
In fact, you can get one at your local Apple store as well - Linux runs just
fine on a Mac.

Perhaps that's not quite what you meant? Perhaps what you meant to ask was
where can you buy a computer pre-loaded with Linux?

Well, you could try Lenovo or Dell?

(Remember though, you need only a computer which *can* run Linux - the Linux
itself is not a problem, in that it's often gratis. Presumably this is
true of OS X, and I can simply download an ISO on the 'net and install it
(legally) on my system, be it that the system is Intel, AMD, or whatever?)

Anyway, if you don't want a Lenovo, or a Dell, or an Apple, then at a pinch,
you could try these:-

http://www.amazon.com Desktops (+Linspire +Xandros)

http://www.amnet-comp.com Desktops (Debian Redhat Slackware)

http://www.ankermann-pc.co.uk Desktops (+SuSE)
(website: After configuration click "Operating systems sold separately" for
SuSE installation)

http://www.aslab.com Desktops (Fedora +SuSE) Laptops (Fedora +SuSE)

http://www.carvercomputers.biz Desktops (+Mepis TaFusion)

http://www.cheeplinux.com Desktops (CentOS Fedora +Mandriva +Ubuntu)

http://www.cosmoseng.com Desktops (+Mandriva +Ubuntu) Laptops (Fedora +SuSE
Redhat)

http://www.emperorlinux.com Laptops (EmperorLinux +Ubuntu Redhat Debian
+SuSE Slackware +Mandrake)

http://www.eracks.com Desktops (Centos Debian ELX BSD Gentoo +Mandriva
+Ubuntu Icepack +SuSE +Xandros) Laptops (CentOS Debian Fedora BSD Gentoo
+Mandriva +Ubuntu +SuSE +Linspire Redhat)

http://www.fifthedimension.net Desktops (Frontier Linux)

http://www.gamepc.com Laptops (Fedora +SuSE)

http://www.gigastrand.com Desktops (+Linspire) Laptops (+Linspire)

http://groovix.com Desktops (+Ubuntu) Laptops (+Ubuntu)

http://www.ibexpc.com Desktops (Fedora Redhat +SuSE +Ubuntu +Xandros)

http://www.idotpc.com Desktops (+Linspire)

http://www.ikbenstil.nl Desktops (+Ubuntu)

http://www.koobox.com Desktops (+Linspire)

http://www.kmart.com Desktops (+Linspire)

http://laclinux.com Desktops (Debian Fedora +Ubuntu Redhat Slackware +SuSE)

http://www.linspire.com Desktops (+Linspire) Laptops (+Linspire)

http://www.linuxcertified.com Laptops (+Ubuntu Fedora +SuSE)

http://www.linuxemporium.co.uk Laptops (+Ubuntu)

http://www.linuxloft.com Desktops (+Edbuntu +Linspire +Xandros) Laptops
(+Xandros)

http://www.linuxsyscorp.com Desktops (+Xandros)

http://www.marxcomputers.ie Desktops (+Ubuntu) Laptops (+Ubuntu)

http://www.microcenter.com Desktops (+Linspire)
website: search for "Linspire"

http://www.micronux.com Desktops (CentOS Fedora +SuSE Redhat)

http://www.microtelpc.com Desktops (+Linspire LinspireEspanol)

http://www.ncix.com Desktops (+Linspire)

http://openforeveryone.co.uk Desktops (+Ubuntu) Laptops (+Ubuntu)

http://outpost.com Desktops (+Linspire)
website: Desktop Computers > Shop by Operating System > Linux

http://www.pegasosppc.com Desktops (Debian +Ubuntu Gentoo Fedora +SUSE Crux)
new

http://www.pogolinux.com Desktops (Fedora Redhat +SuSE)

http://www.pricepc.com Desktops (Fedora +Linspire)

http://www.reddog.com.au Desktop (+Ubuntu)

http://www.sears.com Desktop (+Linspire)
website: search for "Linspire"

http://www.seascape.us Desktop (+Linspire PCLinuxOS +Xandros)

http://shoprcubed.com Desktops (Fedora) Laptops (Fedora Redhat +SuSE)

http://www.sub500.com Desktops (+Linspire) Laptops (+Linspire)

http://www.swt.com Desktops (Debian Fedora Redhat +SuSE) Laptops (Debian
Fedora Redhat +SuSE)

http://www.system76.com Desktops (+Ubuntu) Laptops (+Ubuntu)

http://www.systemax.com Desktops (+Linspire)
website: Pick store then search "Linspire"

http://technologist-inc.com Desktop (+Mepis)

http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com Desktops (Yellowdog)

http://www.thelinuxshop.co.uk Desktop (+Mandriva)

http://www.tigerdirect.com Desktops (+Linspire)
website: search for "Linspire"

http://www.tigerdirect.ca Desktops (+Linspire)
website: search for "Linspire"

http://www.walmart.com Desktops (+Linspire +Xandros)
website: search Electronics for "Linspire" or "Xandros" ;
or Electronics › Computers › Desktop Computers › Microtel

http://xtops.de Laptops (Debian +SuSE)

http://ztechshop.net Desktops (Vector)

http://www.zinside.com Desktops (+Ubuntu)
486box
2006-08-08 00:36:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
Can I buy a Linux computer at CompUSA?
Staples?
CircuitCity?
Microcenter?
Maybe not, but you conveniently forgot to mention that you can't buy
apple hardware at Staples or Circuit City (space) either. You can at
CompUSA, though.
Proof, as you will undoubtably demand, is here:
http://www.staples.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/StaplesSearch?keyword=apple&storeId=10001&catalogId=10051&langId=-1&errorUrl=searchnoresults&searchSumUrl=searchresultssummary&searchUnsumUrl=searchresults&fromUrl=home
and here:
http://www.circuitcity.com/ccd/Search.do?c=1&context=&keyword=apple&searchSection=All&go.x=0&go.y=0
I don't know about Microcenter, never having been there.
Post by George
So where are all of these great Linux laptops with the free operating
system that supposedly does everything better than every other operating
system?
See any at Starbucks?
No, though I can understand that. Starbucks is one of the most
ridiculously overpriced places I've ever been, and their coffee is
horrible.
Post by George
On people's trays on planes traveling?
Yes, actually.
Post by George
In airport lounges?
Yep.
Post by George
Cafe bars?
I honestly have NEVER seen a SINGLE person using Linux on a laptop and I
travel all over the world.
Not one.
I see plenty of Apples though.
So they happen to be better publicised. I'm not particularly surprised
that you happen to see more of the Macintosh series than Linux, any
more than the fact that you undoubtably see more Windows than either.
Linux is still reputed to be hard to use, though it is slowly gaining
market share.
Oh, and the particular line of computers is called Macintosh.
The company is Apple.
Get your facts straight before you FUD about them.
r***@huntzinger.com
2006-08-09 11:46:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by 486box
Post by George
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
Unfortunately, pretty much nowhere IMO:

<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2>

Which states that Linux's market share was 0.44% last month (July 06).
Post by 486box
Post by George
I honestly have NEVER seen a SINGLE person using Linux on a laptop
and I travel all over the world.
Not one.
I see plenty of Apples though.
So they happen to be better publicised. I'm not particularly surprised
that you happen to see more of the Macintosh series than Linux, any
more than the fact that you undoubtably see more Windows than either.
Regardless of what you think about Microsoft's products, there's little
doubt that they've had marketplace success. Ditto Apple too, although
to a much lesser degree.

The basic problem is that technical compentency does not assure
marketplace success. This has hampered both Apple and Linux.
Post by 486box
Linux is still reputed to be hard to use, though it is slowly gaining
market share.
YMMV on reading the tea leaves on market share gain/loss trends:

<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Linux>

At the surface, this would appear to suggest that Linux is up 0.12%
over the past 12 months, but looking close, it shows that Linux has
also been down and back up nearly half of this change in just the past
three months alone.

Specifically, Linux's peak is reported here as April 06 (0.46%), after
which it slid down to 0.38% (June 06) until last month, where it
recovered to 0.44%. Considering that in March 06 it was 0.32%, it
looks to me that there's either too much noise in this data claim any
reliable trends, or that the data is good, but which indicates a
serious lack of month-to-month stability in the Linux user base, which
would also make claiming of trends even more problemmatic.

Take whatever spin you want, but this data isn't clear either way:
IMO, the current market share status of Linux is "waffling".


Moving on to the Mac, the comparative numbers for Mac OS are decieving,
because the data has split the PPC from the MacIntel product lines.

Here's the 'MacOS' line:
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Mac+OS>

It shows a peak of 4.33% (April 06), declining to 3.80% (July 06), a
trending that would be expected with their transition to the "MacIntel"
line.

Here's the complementary MacIntel line:

<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=MacIntel>

...which shows a clear growth curve. Its marketshare is now 0.49%,
which means that it passed Linux's market share last month, even though
MacIntel is just 6 months old.


Projecting forward, the current (moving 3 month) MacIntel trend is
+0.11%/month growth, which will be interesting to watch what happens
over the next 6-30 months to see if/how sustainable it will be. IMO, I
suspect that the MacIntel will get to a 1% market share just before
Vista/Home ships, but the real question in my mind is in if/how the PPC
share holds and the sum for the phychological 5% barrier. IMO, its
premature to consider the 10% barrier.


-hh
The Ghost In The Machine
2006-08-09 15:00:02 UTC
Permalink
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, ***@huntzinger.com
<***@huntzinger.com>
wrote
on 9 Aug 2006 04:46:51 -0700
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Post by 486box
Post by George
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2>
Which states that Linux's market share was 0.44% last month (July 06).
Post by 486box
Post by George
I honestly have NEVER seen a SINGLE person using Linux on a laptop
and I travel all over the world.
Not one.
I see plenty of Apples though.
So they happen to be better publicised. I'm not particularly surprised
that you happen to see more of the Macintosh series than Linux, any
more than the fact that you undoubtably see more Windows than either.
Regardless of what you think about Microsoft's products, there's little
doubt that they've had marketplace success. Ditto Apple too, although
to a much lesser degree.
The basic problem is that technical compentency does not assure
marketplace success. This has hampered both Apple and Linux.
And Commodore Amiga, and DEC VAX, and a lot of others.
There's one thing going for Linux: there's no real company
behind it, although a fair number of companies, like IBM,
are using and supporting it.

But IBM's profits of $8.47B can't hope to match MSFT's
$12.60B, even though IBM has twice the revenue. HP is
even worse; its profits are only $3.62B, although it's
about the same revenue as IBM.

For its part RHAT is a pipsqueak, albeit a fast-growing
one: revenues of $0.30155B, profits of $0.081B, y-o-y
quarterly revenue growth of 38.20%.

(All figures taken from finance.yahoo.com.)
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Post by 486box
Linux is still reputed to be hard to use, though it is slowly gaining
market share.
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Linux>
At the surface, this would appear to suggest that Linux is up 0.12%
over the past 12 months, but looking close, it shows that Linux has
also been down and back up nearly half of this change in just the past
three months alone.
Windows Vista will try to squash Linux, and might very
well succeed in denting it. Not because Microsoft Windows
is technologically superior, or because everyone reveres
Windows, or because everyone adores Bill Gates, or because
everyone is enthralled by Microsoft, but because Microsoft
will spend a large fraction of that $12.60B profit to
promote it -- and almost everyone loves money. :-)

($12.60B is more than $40 per man, woman, and child in the
US (per year). $44.28B is almost $150 per. Even Exxon
Mobil can't quite match those numbers; true, they have
about 3x the raw profit -- $39.39B -- but they also have
about 8x the revenue -- $348.63B.)
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Specifically, Linux's peak is reported here as April 06 (0.46%), after
which it slid down to 0.38% (June 06) until last month, where it
recovered to 0.44%. Considering that in March 06 it was 0.32%, it
looks to me that there's either too much noise in this data claim any
reliable trends, or that the data is good, but which indicates a
serious lack of month-to-month stability in the Linux user base, which
would also make claiming of trends even more problemmatic.
IMO, the current market share status of Linux is "waffling".
ITYM "dying". If you're going to drool, drool
properly. :-) You should also mention the IDC TCO report
and a few other irrelevancies, like how efficiently Vista
presents its user interface and that it's the "most secure
Windows product ever made" or some such drivel. (So was NT,
at the time.)
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Moving on to the Mac, the comparative numbers for Mac OS are decieving,
because the data has split the PPC from the MacIntel product lines.
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Mac+OS>
It shows a peak of 4.33% (April 06), declining to 3.80% (July 06), a
trending that would be expected with their transition to the "MacIntel"
line.
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=MacIntel>
...which shows a clear growth curve. Its marketshare is now 0.49%,
which means that it passed Linux's market share last month, even though
MacIntel is just 6 months old.
Projecting forward, the current (moving 3 month) MacIntel trend is
+0.11%/month growth, which will be interesting to watch what happens
over the next 6-30 months to see if/how sustainable it will be.
Vista is a huge question mark. In 2007 it will make a
big splash; how that will be reflected in 2007 or 2008
sales figures of Intel hardware or Microsoft software,
I for one do not know. Microsoft's desire is to make
Vista's debut as big or bigger than Win95's inauguration,
which at the time "revolutionized" computing, "innovating"
a fair number of features while "eliminating" DOS, and
generated quite a bit of excitement.

Of course, things have changed quite a bit since then.
For starters, the speed of a Pentium P5 was about 133
MHz with a 50 or 66 FSB, although back then FSB wasn't as
prominently mentioned as it is now. RAM might have been
64 MB back then. We are now talking 3.6 GHz units with
an 800 MHz or even 1 GHz FSB, and lots more RAM.

But coupled with that is a more sophisticated clientele.
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
IMO, I
suspect that the MacIntel will get to a 1% market share just before
Vista/Home ships, but the real question in my mind is in if/how the PPC
share holds and the sum for the phychological 5% barrier. IMO, its
premature to consider the 10% barrier.
Apple is a weird company. They appear to me slightly unfocused.
Microsoft is going a bit blurry too.
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
-hh
--
#191, ***@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
-hh
2006-08-09 17:19:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
The basic problem is that technical compentency does not assure
marketplace success. This has hampered both Apple and Linux.
And Commodore Amiga, and DEC VAX, and a lot of others.
Including the classical example, Sony Betamax (vs VHS).
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
There's one thing going for Linux: there's no real company
behind it, although a fair number of companies, like IBM,
are using and supporting it.
Motivationally, they support it as a hedge against the "800lb gorilla"
proprietary vendor. With multiple interests onboard and no strong
driver (ie, billpayer), the effort is more likely than otherwise to
embrace open standards, particularly since the threat is being
controlled by an outside, proprietary, source. Business 101 Risk
Management / Mitigation strategies.
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
YMMV on reading the tea leaves on market share gain/loss trends..
Windows Vista will try to squash Linux, and might very
well succeed in denting it. Not because Microsoft Windows
is technologically superior, or because everyone reveres
Windows, or because everyone adores Bill Gates, or because
everyone is enthralled by Microsoft, but because Microsoft
will spend a large fraction of that $12.60B profit to
promote it -- and almost everyone loves money. :-)
MS is an "Equal Opportunity" squash-attempter: they don't care where
their market share comes from so long as it goes up. As per the
marketshare website I mentioned prevously, the current growth of MS's
flagship product, XP, appears to mostly be coming from Windows 98 and
2000.
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
IMO, the current market share status of Linux is "waffling".
ITYM "dying". If you're going to drool, drool properly. :-)
No, I really did intend to say what I did: the data is ambiguous, so
the jury's out. Note that this was in response to 486box's claim that
Linux's market share was 'slowly gaining market share'.
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
You should also mention the IDC TCO report
and a few other irrelevancies...
Why? Irrelevant is irrelevant, especially when its irrelevant drivel.
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Vista is a huge question mark. In 2007 it will make a
big splash...
I'd paraphrase this as "MS will _try_ to have it make a big splash".
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
...how that will be reflected in 2007 or 2008
sales figures of Intel hardware or Microsoft software,
I for one do not know. Microsoft's desire is to make
Vista's debut as big or bigger than Win95's inauguration...
Given how MS has publically expressed disappointment at the worldwide
adoption rate of XP, I think they're worried. So I'd not be
particularly surprised if they're petitioning management for a huge
advertising budget.
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
But coupled with that is a more sophisticated clientele.
Exactly why they're so worried.
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
IMO, I
suspect that the MacIntel will get to a 1% market share just before
Vista/Home ships, but the real question in my mind is in if/how the PPC
share holds and the sum for the phychological 5% barrier. IMO, its
premature to consider the 10% barrier.
Apple is a weird company. They appear to me slightly unfocused.
Microsoft is going a bit blurry too.
I think that a decent part of both Apple's and Linux's clientel is made
up of people whose primary motivation is "Not Microsoft". In of
itself, this does not bode particularly well for defining one's own
corporate image. Apple has broken out of it some by going the 'Pop'
route (music & iPod, etc); Linux has gone propeller-head technical.

At least in terms of their perceived reputation. The reality is that
neither is this simple.


-hh
The Ghost In The Machine
2006-08-09 19:00:19 UTC
Permalink
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, -hh
<***@huntzinger.com>
wrote
on 9 Aug 2006 10:19:48 -0700
Post by -hh
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
The basic problem is that technical compentency does not assure
marketplace success. This has hampered both Apple and Linux.
And Commodore Amiga, and DEC VAX, and a lot of others.
Including the classical example, Sony Betamax (vs VHS).
*DOH!* Absolutely right.
Post by -hh
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
There's one thing going for Linux: there's no real company
behind it, although a fair number of companies, like IBM,
are using and supporting it.
Motivationally, they support it as a hedge against the "800lb gorilla"
proprietary vendor. With multiple interests onboard and no strong
driver (ie, billpayer), the effort is more likely than otherwise to
embrace open standards, particularly since the threat is being
controlled by an outside, proprietary, source. Business 101 Risk
Management / Mitigation strategies.
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
YMMV on reading the tea leaves on market share gain/loss trends..
Windows Vista will try to squash Linux, and might very
well succeed in denting it. Not because Microsoft Windows
is technologically superior, or because everyone reveres
Windows, or because everyone adores Bill Gates, or because
everyone is enthralled by Microsoft, but because Microsoft
will spend a large fraction of that $12.60B profit to
promote it -- and almost everyone loves money. :-)
MS is an "Equal Opportunity" squash-attempter: they don't care where
their market share comes from so long as it goes up. As per the
marketshare website I mentioned prevously, the current growth of MS's
flagship product, XP, appears to mostly be coming from Windows 98 and
2000.
As it should, at least in part. After all, Win98 is
already effectively dead (since life support has been
withdrawn), though its dying throes may take awhile.
Post by -hh
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
IMO, the current market share status of Linux is "waffling".
ITYM "dying". If you're going to drool, drool properly. :-)
No, I really did intend to say what I did: the data is ambiguous, so
the jury's out. Note that this was in response to 486box's claim that
Linux's market share was 'slowly gaining market share'.
I think Linux will now stabilize at about where it is now, though
it might depend on how deeply Microsoft shoots itself in the foot.
(They've been very good at doing that lately!)

Apologies for mistagging you as a troll, BTW. :-) It's hard to tell
sometimes.
Post by -hh
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
You should also mention the IDC TCO report
and a few other irrelevancies...
Why? Irrelevant is irrelevant, especially when its irrelevant drivel.
Because obviously bosses will read that and believe it. :-)
After all, Microsoft might very well be right in that one
can save 41% by replacing Unix or Linux DB servers with
Microsoft ones.

(I doubt it, personally. But that's what the IDC report claims.
I wish I knew how to independently verify it.)
Post by -hh
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Vista is a huge question mark. In 2007 it will make a
big splash...
I'd paraphrase this as "MS will _try_ to have it make a big splash".
It should be big enough to be noticeable. I'll admit I
don't know how big it should be or will be.
Post by -hh
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
...how that will be reflected in 2007 or 2008
sales figures of Intel hardware or Microsoft software,
I for one do not know. Microsoft's desire is to make
Vista's debut as big or bigger than Win95's inauguration...
Given how MS has publically expressed disappointment at the worldwide
adoption rate of XP, I think they're worried. So I'd not be
particularly surprised if they're petitioning management for a huge
advertising budget.
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
But coupled with that is a more sophisticated clientele.
Exactly why they're so worried.
Well, we'll see. They might try the Joe Camel approach.
(Come to think of it, they probably already did -- BOB was
supposed to be real friendly, and I can't think of any other
reasonable explanation for the butterfly guy.)
Post by -hh
Post by The Ghost In The Machine
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
IMO, I
suspect that the MacIntel will get to a 1% market share just before
Vista/Home ships, but the real question in my mind is in if/how the PPC
share holds and the sum for the phychological 5% barrier. IMO, its
premature to consider the 10% barrier.
Apple is a weird company. They appear to me slightly unfocused.
Microsoft is going a bit blurry too.
I think that a decent part of both Apple's and Linux's clientel is made
up of people whose primary motivation is "Not Microsoft". In of
itself, this does not bode particularly well for defining one's own
corporate image. Apple has broken out of it some by going the 'Pop'
route (music & iPod, etc); Linux has gone propeller-head technical.
At least in terms of their perceived reputation. The reality is that
neither is this simple.
The other side of the sophisticated clientele. :-)
Post by -hh
-hh
--
#191, ***@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
Jim
2006-08-09 17:30:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Post by 486box
Post by George
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2>
Which states that Linux's market share was 0.44% last month (July 06).
MARKET SHARE
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Post by 486box
Post by George
I honestly have NEVER seen a SINGLE person using Linux on a laptop
and I travel all over the world.
Not one.
I see plenty of Apples though.
So they happen to be better publicised. I'm not particularly surprised
that you happen to see more of the Macintosh series than Linux, any
more than the fact that you undoubtably see more Windows than either.
Regardless of what you think about Microsoft's products, there's little
doubt that they've had marketplace success. Ditto Apple too, although
to a much lesser degree.
Anticompetitive practices have helped them a long way in that respect. The
only reason Apple is even a player is a: because Apple are a commercial
concern; like Microsoft, their first priority is to lining their pockets
and b: Microsoft, not so long ago, bailed Apple out with an open loan,
which I'm afraid to say, is entirely at Microsoft's whim as to the recall
date.
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
The basic problem is that technical compentency does not assure
marketplace success. This has hampered both Apple and Linux.
Post by 486box
Linux is still reputed to be hard to use, though it is slowly gaining
market share.
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Linux>
MARKET SHARE
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
At the surface, this would appear to suggest that Linux is up 0.12%
over the past 12 months, but looking close, it shows that Linux has
also been down and back up nearly half of this change in just the past
three months alone.
Specifically, Linux's peak is reported here as April 06 (0.46%), after
which it slid down to 0.38% (June 06) until last month, where it
recovered to 0.44%. Considering that in March 06 it was 0.32%, it
looks to me that there's either too much noise in this data claim any
reliable trends, or that the data is good, but which indicates a
serious lack of month-to-month stability in the Linux user base, which
would also make claiming of trends even more problemmatic.
IMO, the current market share status of Linux is "waffling".
Linux market share is irrelevant. Bring up figures based on actual usage.
Anything else is pulled out of one's arse.
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Moving on to the Mac, the comparative numbers for Mac OS are decieving,
because the data has split the PPC from the MacIntel product lines.
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Mac+OS>
It shows a peak of 4.33% (April 06), declining to 3.80% (July 06), a
trending that would be expected with their transition to the "MacIntel"
line.
<http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=MacIntel>
...which shows a clear growth curve. Its marketshare is now 0.49%,
which means that it passed Linux's market share last month, even though
MacIntel is just 6 months old.
Projecting forward, the current (moving 3 month) MacIntel trend is
+0.11%/month growth, which will be interesting to watch what happens
over the next 6-30 months to see if/how sustainable it will be. IMO, I
suspect that the MacIntel will get to a 1% market share just before
Vista/Home ships, but the real question in my mind is in if/how the PPC
share holds and the sum for the phychological 5% barrier. IMO, its
premature to consider the 10% barrier.
-hh
--
When all else fails...
Use a hammer.

http://www.dotware.co.uk

Some people are like Slinkies;
They serve no particular purpose,
But they bring a smile to your face
When you push them down the stairs.
-hh
2006-08-09 20:46:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim
MARKET SHARE
Yes, 486box's statement was specifically that Linux was 'slowly gaining
market share'. I merely went and found some numbers. FWIW, I was
surprised (disappointed) by these values, as they were much smaller
than I would have otherwise suspected.
Post by Jim
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Regardless of what you think about Microsoft's products, there's little
doubt that they've had marketplace success. Ditto Apple too, although
to a much lesser degree.
Anticompetitive practices have helped them a long way in that respect.
No contest.
Post by Jim
The only reason Apple is even a player... and b: Microsoft, not so
long ago, bailed Apple out with an open loan, which I'm afraid to say,
is entirely at Microsoft's whim as to the recall date.
Not that the public will ever really know all the facts, but this was:
(a) 9 years ago (announced on August 6th, 1997) and (b) had reportedly
been a face-saving cash settlement to resolve a longstanding patent
infringement lawsuit that Apple had filed against Microsoft (ie,
"special stock" purchased and lawsuit "coincidentally" dropped).
Post by Jim
Linux market share is irrelevant.
To you, perhaps. But not to everybody. Seemed important enough to
486box for him to have brought it up...your disagreement on
significance is with him, not me.
Post by Jim
Bring up figures based on actual usage.
Well, my tracking tools on my domain changed last month, so right now I
have only a month's worth of data conveniently available: out of
(15,803) hits, 103 (0.65%) were from Linux OS. I'd have to dig further
to refine these numbers down to a 'unique individuals' metric.

FWIW, I also had 2 hits from Amiga OS, plus one WebTV hit and one
FreeBSD hit. That might be of interest to someone.


-hh
486box
2006-08-09 23:02:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by -hh
Yes, 486box's statement was specifically that Linux was 'slowly gaining
market share'. I merely went and found some numbers. FWIW, I was
surprised (disappointed) by these values, as they were much smaller
than I would have otherwise suspected.
Post by Jim
Post by r***@huntzinger.com
Regardless of what you think about Microsoft's products, there's little
doubt that they've had marketplace success. Ditto Apple too, although
to a much lesser degree.
I think nothing of MS' products. I am indifferent towrard their and
anyone else's success, I just need enough people using Linux so that it
is continued to be developed for. More people using it would be nice,
since there would be more commercial apps developed for it*games*, but
it's definitely not crucial.
I'm against Microsoft itself, but I really have nothing(well, not too
much) against their products.
Post by -hh
Post by Jim
Anticompetitive practices have helped them a long way in that respect.
No contest.
<snip>
Post by -hh
Post by Jim
Linux market share is irrelevant.
To you, perhaps. But not to everybody. Seemed important enough to
486box for him to have brought it up...your disagreement on
significance is with him, not me.
Actually, I very much agree with him. I used the term 'market share'
carelessly, when of course I meant usage.
Post by -hh
Post by Jim
Bring up figures based on actual usage.
Well, my tracking tools on my domain changed last month, so right now I
have only a month's worth of data conveniently available: out of
(15,803) hits, 103 (0.65%) were from Linux OS. I'd have to dig further
to refine these numbers down to a 'unique individuals' metric.
This could be because some Linux users(including me(in fact I happen to
be using XP right now)) log off Linux, get onto Windows to do something
they can't on Linux, and decide that browsing the web isn't worth the
hassle of rebooting for.
Or it could be because your page has Windows-only *cough*ActiveX*cough*
code on it.
Post by -hh
FWIW, I also had 2 hits from Amiga OS, plus one WebTV hit and one
FreeBSD hit. That might be of interest to someone.
-hh
-hh
2006-08-10 03:41:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by 486box
[-hh wrote:]
To you, perhaps. But not to everybody. Seemed important enough to
486box for him to have brought it up...your disagreement on
significance is with him, not me.
Actually, I very much agree with him. I used the term 'market share'
carelessly, when of course I meant usage.
The two terms should -- in theory -- be reasonably able to be
functionally interchangable, under the premise that someone who "buys"
something is generally predisposed to then use it.

In any case, I didn't bother to dig particularly deep into the
particulars as to how that company chose to use as their measuring
stick. IMO, since they were tracking it monthly and they had a couple
of significant digits, its probably fairly likely that they were
tracking something like webpage hit statistics.
Post by 486box
Post by Jim
Bring up figures based on actual usage.
Well, my tracking tools on my domain changed last month, so right now I
have only a month's worth of data conveniently available: out of
(15,803) hits, 103 (0.65%) were from Linux OS. I'd have to dig further
to refine these numbers down to a 'unique individuals' metric.
This could be because some Linux users...
The simpler explanation is that its reasonably accurate (Occam's
Razor), particuarly since surfing the web is indeed a form of "usage".
Post by 486box
.... (including me(in fact I happen to
be using XP right now)) log off Linux, get onto Windows to do something
they can't on Linux, and decide that browsing the web isn't worth the
hassle of rebooting for.
Well, if you have it and aren't using it, there goes your own "usage"
arguement! :-)
Post by 486box
Or it could be because your page has Windows-only *cough*ActiveX*cough*
code on it.
More excuses based on lame, bigoted assumptions.

Apparently you didn't even bother to go to the domain's top page and
read the first paragraph there before spouting off.

Free clue: Wayback Machine will show just how long its been there.


-hh
Tim Smith
2006-08-09 20:56:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim
and b: Microsoft, not so long ago, bailed Apple out with an open loan,
which I'm afraid to say, is entirely at Microsoft's whim as to the recall
date.
(1) It was not a loan. Microsoft bought $150 million worth of non-voting
Apple stock.

(2) Apple had a couple *billion* cash at the time. Please explain how
giving 150 million to someone with a few billion cash can bail them out.

(3) Microsoft has since sold that stock.
--
--Tim Smith
Oxford
2006-08-08 00:52:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
Post by Geico Caveman
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
Can I buy a Linux computer at CompUSA?
Staples?
CircuitCity?
Microcenter?
So where is Linux?
Crank operated PC's in the middle of the Sudan where people are starving?
Great place for Linux.
They can check their email while they starve.
Maybe google for 100 different recepies on how to prepare rat stew.
Oops, sorry that't India.
Same thing.
Apple has managed to increase their market share to 12 percent for laptops.
So where are all of these great Linux laptops with the free operating
system that supposedly does everything better than every other operating
system?
See any at Starbucks?
On people's trays on planes traveling?
In airport lounges?
Cafe bars?
I honestly have NEVER seen a SINGLE person using Linux on a laptop and I
travel all over the world.
Not one.
I see plenty of Apples though.
correct on all counts... good, accurate post!

Linux was a dream by a small Finish kid, he later moved to near the
center of Macintosh land (Portland), and the Linux community hasn't
heard from him since.

Linux is fine for back office stuff, poor children / young adults,
google servers and my tivo, but as a desktop OS that touches people...
it's been dead for the last 3 years, just the walking dead haven't
figured it out yet.

OSX is where the entire Unix based world is heading... OSX Leopard is
5-7 years ahead of Linux. They have nothing on the level of quality as
this:

http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/

-
Rick
2006-08-08 01:21:07 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 18:52:31 -0600, Oxford wrote:
(snip)
Linux was a dream by a small Finish kid, he later moved to near the center
of Macintosh land (Portland), and the Linux community hasn't heard from
him since.
You're a liar.
Linux is fine for back office stuff, poor children / young adults, google
servers and my tivo, but as a desktop OS that touches people... it's been
dead for the last 3 years, just the walking dead haven't figured it out
yet.
You're a liar.
OSX is where the entire Unix based world is heading...
You're a liar.
OSX Leopard is 5-7
http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/
-
Do us all a favor and go qualify for a Darin Award.
--
Rick
<http://ricks-place.tripod.com/sound/2cents.wav>
The Ghost In The Machine
2006-08-08 03:00:02 UTC
Permalink
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Rick
<***@trollfeed.com>
wrote
on Tue, 08 Aug 2006 01:21:07 GMT
Post by Rick
(snip)
Linux was a dream by a small Finish kid, he later moved to near the center
of Macintosh land (Portland), and the Linux community hasn't heard from
him since.
You're a liar.
Indeed, especially since he moved to Santa Clara, California first.
Post by Rick
Linux is fine for back office stuff, poor children / young adults, google
servers and my tivo, but as a desktop OS that touches people... it's been
dead for the last 3 years, just the walking dead haven't figured it out
yet.
You're a liar.
It's an adoption delay, admittedly. The problem is, *everyone* knows
Windows (and its foibles, like BSODs, viruses, the three-finger salute
that "fixes" everything, etc.). Linux is getting some good buzz, but
it's not there yet. OSX is slick but I don't know if it's there yet,
either.
Post by Rick
OSX is where the entire Unix based world is heading...
You're a liar.
Indeed; what is the point of the Leopard GUI? The only really
innovative bit I see is the emailer, and that's not all that innovative,
as it's merely a specialized format.

Woo.
Post by Rick
OSX Leopard is 5-7
http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/
Apart perhaps from the bar at the bottom -- which has already been
replicated -- I see nothing horribly unusual here.
Post by Rick
-
Do us all a favor and go qualify for a Darin Award.
Now now. Just keep him away from the girl in the Leopard pic... :-)
She looks too smart for him. :-)
--
#191, ***@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
Kier
2006-08-08 09:55:44 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 18:52:31 -0600, Oxford wrote:

<snip>
Post by Oxford
Linux was a dream by a small Finish kid, he later moved to near the
center of Macintosh land (Portland), and the Linux community hasn't
heard from him since.
Now I *know* you're utterly insane, to troll with such idiotic lies, that
only a one-celled organism could possibly believe. Does anyone need to
remind you exactly what Linux Torvalds actually does? Does the Linux
kernel ring any bells at all with you?

That small Finnish kid as you call him, is one of the smarter people this
work has produced of late, and far more successful, respected and
fulfilled that *you* could ever dream of being.
Post by Oxford
Linux is fine for back office stuff, poor children / young adults,
google servers and my tivo, but as a desktop OS that touches people...
it's been dead for the last 3 years, just the walking dead haven't
figured it out yet.
Give it up, Oxford, you're making yourself look dumber by the minute.
Post by Oxford
OSX is where the entire Unix based world is heading... OSX Leopard is
5-7 years ahead of Linux. They have nothing on the level of quality as
http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/
-
Bollocks.
--
Kier
JEDIDIAH
2006-08-08 12:53:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
Post by Geico Caveman
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
Been here for awhile actually.

You can't get a Mac at Staples or CircuitCity either.

[deletia]

...although Microcenter has been continuously carrying
Macs since when they had good reason to carry a beefy selection
of Apple II software.
--
Oracle... can't live with it... |||
/ | \
can't just replace it with postgres...
Jim
2006-08-08 14:00:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by JEDIDIAH
Post by George
Post by Geico Caveman
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like
system in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an
innovation. What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the
zero ?
So where is desktop Linux 16 years later?
Where is it?
Been here for awhile actually.
You can't get a Mac at Staples or CircuitCity either.
[deletia]
...although Microcenter has been continuously carrying
Macs since when they had good reason to carry a beefy selection
of Apple II software.
You can get Linux at Staples - not so long ago, when it was just barely
holding on to one end of a shelf at the end of a banner-blasted Microsoft
rack, I picked up a boxed copy of Corel Linux - the whole shebang on
CD /and/ DVD, with about six inches of manuals and user guides, for £60.
Nice blue box, with not much on the front except the KDE Gear and Tux.
--
When all else fails...
Use a hammer.

http://www.dotware.co.uk

Some people are like Slinkies;
They serve no particular purpose,
But they bring a smile to your face
When you push them down the stairs.
Derek Currie
2006-08-07 22:02:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
No actually. It is not the case that 'Mac finally gets them....' There
was no need for Apple to add one since there was a brilliant one for
free in the form of 'Virtual Desktop' as part of the AWOL Utilities by
Canadian Ross Brown. The utilities were FREE. They were first released
in the days of Mac OS 7.1, at the time when I gave away my PC and went
Macintosh. That is circa 1991.

Meanwhile, the REAL starting place for virtual desktops was UNIX, which
is the grandfather to all of our OSes, especially Linux, which is its
bastard son, once removed. Whereas Mac OS X IS Unix with a straight
lineage all the way from the offices of AT&T.
Post by Geico Caveman
Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.
Sorry, but you're the one high on nitrous oxide kid. You're not making
sense.
Post by Geico Caveman
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
THAT I don't condone. He should have kept such comments, silly or not,
in comp.sys.mac.advocacy. Harassing you guys with such stuff is not in
the Mac cultural etiquette. We only harass trolls, or so it should be.
Post by Geico Caveman
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways).
It doesn't have to! If you are a CLI maniac that have at it. I
personally HATE CLIs and consider them very last century, very
primitive, very user-hostile. But I use them to get primitive things
done.
Post by Geico Caveman
Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
Darn, that hurt. But most certainly, Apple were THE first to make the
GUI into something a user actually WANTED to use, and proved it by
BUYING it. Xerox's attempts at selling their precursor GUI were both
failures.

Oh, and you might want to noticed how so much of the competing Linux
GUIs is owed to Macintosh as well.

So please be kinder to us in future. Hopefully we will keep our dopier
types in line so they treat you kindly as well.

:-D
--
Fortune Magazine, 11-29-05: What's your computer setup today?
Frederick Brooks: I happily use a Macintosh. It's not been equalled for ease
of use, and I want my computer to be a tool, not a challenge.
<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/12/12/8363107/>
[Frederick Brooks is the author of 'The Mythical Man Month'. He spearheaded
the movement to modernize computer software engineering in 1975]
Erik Funkenbusch
2006-08-07 22:34:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Derek Currie
No actually. It is not the case that 'Mac finally gets them....' There
was no need for Apple to add one since there was a brilliant one for
free in the form of 'Virtual Desktop' as part of the AWOL Utilities by
Canadian Ross Brown. The utilities were FREE. They were first released
in the days of Mac OS 7.1, at the time when I gave away my PC and went
Macintosh. That is circa 1991.
You're wasting your breath. Linux users are all about "out of the box".
If you have to go anywhere to get some feature, then that's the worst
possible thing that could possibly happen.

I did find it ironic, though, that after spending so much time talking
about the "photocopiers", they went on to brag about a bunch of new
features that have been present in other OS's (including Windows) for
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Tim Smith
2006-08-07 23:32:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Indeed, but note *how* Apple did that much nicer interface. They added a
new system component, Core Animation, which means that it will be easy for
other apps to also do such nice interfaces. Apple's virtual desktops are
using Core Animation to do the interface, too.

You rarely see that kind of thing on Linux, because on Linux, you'd have 5
different groups doing the same functionality, in 5 different ways, and it
would be years before they could agree on any kind of standard. This has
seriously hampered Linux in audio and video.
--
--Tim Smith
Lefty Bigfoot
2006-08-07 23:38:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Smith
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Indeed, but note *how* Apple did that much nicer interface. They added a
new system component, Core Animation, which means that it will be easy for
other apps to also do such nice interfaces. Apple's virtual desktops are
using Core Animation to do the interface, too.
You rarely see that kind of thing on Linux, because on Linux, you'd have 5
different groups doing the same functionality, in 5 different ways, and it
would be years before they could agree on any kind of standard. This has
seriously hampered Linux in audio and video.
It has seriously hampered Linux in all aspects. A classic case
of the "too many cooks" problem. The people in charge of
architecture at Apple are quite obviously extremely good, and
work well together.

In contrast, Microsoft is just a tangled mess of spaghetti
interfaces duct-taped together with no coherent plan.

Linux is somewhere in between, but far closer to Windows than OS
X, sadly.
--
Lefty
All of God's creatures have a place..........
.........right next to the potatoes and gravy.
See also: Loading Image...
TheLetterK
2006-08-09 02:11:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lefty Bigfoot
Post by Tim Smith
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Indeed, but note *how* Apple did that much nicer interface. They added a
new system component, Core Animation, which means that it will be easy for
other apps to also do such nice interfaces. Apple's virtual desktops are
using Core Animation to do the interface, too.
You rarely see that kind of thing on Linux, because on Linux, you'd have 5
different groups doing the same functionality, in 5 different ways, and it
would be years before they could agree on any kind of standard. This has
seriously hampered Linux in audio and video.
It has seriously hampered Linux in all aspects.
It depends on your perspective. It has allowed GNU/Linux to progress
much faster than any other platform out there, including other FOSS
operating systems. It has also culminated in a number of unique
solutions to long standing problems. Additionally, it provides the user
with an unprecedented level of personal choice when it comes to the
manner in which their system operates. There *are* advantages to trying
to go in every direction at once, especially with a developer community
as large as the one centered around GNU/Linux.
Post by Lefty Bigfoot
A classic case
of the "too many cooks" problem. The people in charge of
architecture at Apple are quite obviously extremely good, and
work well together.
Get over yourself. OS X has all sorts of artifacts stemming from
in-fighting between various development teams within Apple. Finder being
a piece of shit is one of those.
Post by Lefty Bigfoot
In contrast, Microsoft is just a tangled mess of spaghetti
interfaces duct-taped together with no coherent plan.
Linux is somewhere in between, but far closer to Windows than OS
X, sadly.
GNU/Linux is as coherent as the user wants it to be. There's a trade-off
in the form of feature gaps, but you see that on OS X as well.
Addle Jones
2006-08-11 09:22:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by TheLetterK
It depends on your perspective. It has allowed GNU/Linux to progress
much faster than any other platform out there, including other FOSS
With all due respect, if you believe this, you cannot be very old or
very experienced. Either that or you've been brainwashed into the usual
Linux denial of reality.
Erik Funkenbusch
2006-08-08 00:51:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Smith
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Indeed, but note *how* Apple did that much nicer interface. They added a
new system component, Core Animation, which means that it will be easy for
other apps to also do such nice interfaces. Apple's virtual desktops are
using Core Animation to do the interface, too.
Yes, but it seems a little similar to Avalon (Windows Presentation
Foundation).
Post by Tim Smith
You rarely see that kind of thing on Linux, because on Linux, you'd have 5
different groups doing the same functionality, in 5 different ways, and it
would be years before they could agree on any kind of standard. This has
seriously hampered Linux in audio and video.
I agree.
Hugh Watkins
2006-08-08 00:59:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
Post by Tim Smith
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Indeed, but note *how* Apple did that much nicer interface. They added a
new system component, Core Animation, which means that it will be easy for
other apps to also do such nice interfaces. Apple's virtual desktops are
using Core Animation to do the interface, too.
Yes, but it seems a little similar to Avalon (Windows Presentation
Foundation).
Post by Tim Smith
You rarely see that kind of thing on Linux, because on Linux, you'd have 5
different groups doing the same functionality, in 5 different ways, and it
would be years before they could agree on any kind of standard. This has
seriously hampered Linux in audio and video.
I agree.
Linux is the camel (designed bt a committee)

Mac is the race horse burning to win

Win XP the work horse plodding along


and which OS is the donkey giving rides to kids on the beach?

Hugh W
--
new computer = new blog
http://mac-on-intel.blogspot.com/

daily blogs with new photos
http://snaps2006.blogspot.com/
http://slim2005.blogspot.com/

family history
http://hughw36.blogspot.com
Hadron Quark
2006-08-08 07:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Smith
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Indeed, but note *how* Apple did that much nicer interface. They added a
new system component, Core Animation, which means that it will be easy for
other apps to also do such nice interfaces. Apple's virtual desktops are
using Core Animation to do the interface, too.
You rarely see that kind of thing on Linux, because on Linux, you'd have 5
different groups doing the same functionality, in 5 different ways, and it
would be years before they could agree on any kind of standard. This has
seriously hampered Linux in audio and video.
It is *so* nice to to know I'm not alone in my thinking here : even if
its patently obvious to anyone who has been involved in real product
development.

Shhh!!!!!! Whats that noise?

Oh its Kier and the mob coming to explain that its "all about
choice"....
Kier
2006-08-08 09:30:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hadron Quark
Post by Tim Smith
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Indeed, but note *how* Apple did that much nicer interface. They added a
new system component, Core Animation, which means that it will be easy for
other apps to also do such nice interfaces. Apple's virtual desktops are
using Core Animation to do the interface, too.
You rarely see that kind of thing on Linux, because on Linux, you'd have 5
different groups doing the same functionality, in 5 different ways, and it
would be years before they could agree on any kind of standard. This has
seriously hampered Linux in audio and video.
It is *so* nice to to know I'm not alone in my thinking here : even if
its patently obvious to anyone who has been involved in real product
development.
Shhh!!!!!! Whats that noise?
Oh its Kier and the mob coming to explain that its "all about
choice"....
So you have issues about choice. We knew that.

Is choice the be-all and end-all of Linux? Of course not. I've never said
it doesn't have a downside sometimes. But forcing some kind of
stait-jacket conformity on Linux is not the answer. Like I said before,
who is going to decide which distro becomes *the* distro. You? Me?

'Too much' choice, IMO, is better than none at all.
--
Kier
ZnU
2006-08-08 17:43:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Smith
Post by Erik Funkenbusch
years. Time Machine, for instance, has existed on Windows since 2003
(though Apple did implement this with a much nicer interface) as Volume
Shadow Copies, and VMS and other OS's before it as well.
Indeed, but note *how* Apple did that much nicer interface. They added a
new system component, Core Animation, which means that it will be easy for
other apps to also do such nice interfaces. Apple's virtual desktops are
using Core Animation to do the interface, too.
You rarely see that kind of thing on Linux, because on Linux, you'd have 5
different groups doing the same functionality, in 5 different ways, and it
would be years before they could agree on any kind of standard. This has
seriously hampered Linux in audio and video.
Right, Linux has major problems with features that require what we could
call "vertical integration".

Time Machine required new features in the file system, the graphics
engine, the application frameworks, and in the Finder and other Apple
apps.

With OS X, this all happens under one roof. It can all be coordinated
from the top down. Some Apple VP can decide that a feature is going to
be included, and then issue instructions to various teams -- tell the
file system guys to do their part, and the graphics guys to do theirs,
and so on.

This can't really happen in Linux. If the KDE guys decide they want this
feature in their desktop, they have to spend a lot of time talking
people on other projects, who have no obligation to listen to them, into
implementing the features they need. (Or they could fork those projects
and implement things themselves... but if they keep doing that, they're
eventually maintaining everything under one roof, same as Apple.)
--
"Those who enter the country illegally violate the law."
-- George W. Bush in Tucson, Ariz., Nov. 28, 2005
Edwin
2006-08-07 23:02:53 UTC
Permalink
[snip]
Post by Derek Currie
Darn, that hurt. But most certainly, Apple were THE first to make the
GUI into something a user actually WANTED to use, and proved it by
BUYING it. Xerox's attempts at selling their precursor GUI were both
failures.
By your own logic, Microsoft was the first to make the GUI into
something a user actually WANTED to use, for as Apple outsold Xerox, so
did Microsoft Windows PCs VASTLY outsell the Macintosh.


[snip]
The Ghost In The Machine
2006-08-08 01:00:02 UTC
Permalink
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Edwin
<***@juno.com>
wrote
on 7 Aug 2006 16:02:53 -0700
Post by Edwin
[snip]
Post by Derek Currie
Darn, that hurt. But most certainly, Apple were THE first to make the
GUI into something a user actually WANTED to use, and proved it by
BUYING it. Xerox's attempts at selling their precursor GUI were both
failures.
By your own logic, Microsoft was the first to make the GUI into
something a user actually WANTED to use, for as Apple outsold Xerox, so
did Microsoft Windows PCs VASTLY outsell the Macintosh.
[snip]
I'm not sure Microsoft was the first, but they have by far
been the most successful, and ultimately made the Internet
what it is today.

(A bug-riddled, spam-wafting, virus-laden mess!)

Tomorrow -- Vista beckons, with its Technology Of YesterYear(tm).
Yes, Microsoft Innovates(tm) yet again.
--
#191, ***@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
TheLetterK
2006-08-09 02:03:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Derek Currie
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
No actually. It is not the case that 'Mac finally gets them....' There
was no need for Apple to add one since there was a brilliant one for
free in the form of 'Virtual Desktop' as part of the AWOL Utilities by
Canadian Ross Brown.
Why do you want a virtual desktop solution supported by the developer of
the window manager? So you can easily move windows from one desktop to
another using the standard methods.
Post by Derek Currie
The utilities were FREE. They were first released
in the days of Mac OS 7.1, at the time when I gave away my PC and went
Macintosh. That is circa 1991.
Meanwhile, the REAL starting place for virtual desktops was UNIX, which
is the grandfather to all of our OSes, especially Linux, which is its
bastard son, once removed.
Which Unix are you talking about? SysV? BSD? GNU/Linux grabs stuff from
all over the place, including Windows in some cases.
Post by Derek Currie
Whereas Mac OS X IS Unix with a straight
lineage all the way from the offices of AT&T.
OS X is not a Unix. So says The Open Group, who own the rights to the
Unix trademark (and therefore determine what is and is not a Unix).
Post by Derek Currie
Post by Geico Caveman
Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.
Sorry, but you're the one high on nitrous oxide kid. You're not making
sense.
It's behind the power curve even in relation to things that Macs have
traditionally done well in, to say nothing of the technical aspects that
Apple has historically been content to ignore. XNU, for example, is
aging rather badly.
Post by Derek Currie
Post by Geico Caveman
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
THAT I don't condone. He should have kept such comments, silly or not,
in comp.sys.mac.advocacy. Harassing you guys with such stuff is not in
the Mac cultural etiquette. We only harass trolls, or so it should be.
Post by Geico Caveman
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways).
It doesn't have to! If you are a CLI maniac that have at it.
OS X makes that more difficult than it should be, for people who are
used to GNU/Linux. It's not as bad for people used to the BSDs, though
OS X still has a number of strange quirks.
Post by Derek Currie
I
personally HATE CLIs and consider them very last century, very
primitive, very user-hostile.
CLIs are easier to use than GUIs, they just take more effort to *learn*
to use. They are, by their very nature, far more flexible than a GUI.
Post by Derek Currie
But I use them to get primitive things done.
Post by Geico Caveman
Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
Darn, that hurt. But most certainly, Apple were THE first to make the
GUI into something a user actually WANTED to use, and proved it by
BUYING it. Xerox's attempts at selling their precursor GUI were both
failures.
Apple's first foray into GUIs didn't sell well either. The computers
required to use them were too expensive prior to ~1984. Xerox had
essentially given up by then. This, of course, has absolutely nothing to
do with the topic we were discussing--it doesn't even relate to the
state of modern GUIs.
Post by Derek Currie
Oh, and you might want to noticed how so much of the competing Linux
GUIs is owed to Macintosh as well.
And Windows, and completely original ideas. Many time the implementation
of a 'Mac idea' is better on GNOME or KDE than it is on OS X. Probably
because there is no corporate culture to fight.
Roy Schestowitz
2006-08-08 01:32:38 UTC
Permalink
__/ [ Geico Caveman ] on Monday 07 August 2006 21:21 \__
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
Also see:

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/02/25/1346201.shtml

Microsoft Seeks Patent On Virtual Desktop Pager

That was in 2004!

Did Apple actually /claim/ that it was their invention? Some hours ago I saw
this in:

http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/index.html

While I know that there are several third-aprty applications that used to
achieve this in OS X, I don't know how good they are (compared to the KPager
combination, for example) and how expensive they are.

Windows Longhorn, by the way, promised to deliver that too... _back in the
days_ ... virtual desktop extension in Windows appear to be third-party
extensions that are utter sh*te. At lease the ones I have seen in action.
It's funny that Microsoft Windows has become the underdog. But not in terms
of marketshare, owing to ignorance and lockins.

Best wishes,

Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz "Web 2.0 is everything that can be spammed" --Unknown
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem: 514480k total, 477384k used, 37096k free, 44540k buffers
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
NoNamer
2006-08-08 04:53:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
Just because OSX adds a feature that Linux has doesn't mean that OSX is
catching up to Linux.

An experience is so much more than just a feature comparison.

For example, user experience, GUI (consistency, nice fonts, nice
design, etc.), applications, integration capabilities, hardware
support, etc.

The Mac (and Windows +/-) has all of this over Linux.

I doubt virtual desktops is even used by >90% of the population.
Windows has had the option for years (see PowerToys) - and it works
great - but I simply don't see the need for the way I work. I doubt
most Mac users will use it as well.
JEDIDIAH
2006-08-08 13:00:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by NoNamer
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
Mac is more like half a decade behind Linux on so many things that make
Linux such a productive and happy OS to work with. Fluff cakes going crazy
at WWDC, I reckon.
When OS X came out, retards like Oxford etc. were rushing into
comp.os.linux.advocacy telling us how Mac was bringing Unix to people
(never mind how Mac frustratingly refuses to behave like a Unix-like system
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
Just because OSX adds a feature that Linux has doesn't mean that OSX is
catching up to Linux.
An experience is so much more than just a feature comparison.
For example, user experience, GUI (consistency, nice fonts, nice
design, etc.), applications, integration capabilities, hardware
support, etc.
The Mac (and Windows +/-) has all of this over Linux.
Oh puleeeze.

Anyone that tries to lump the Mac and Windows together
in terms of 3rd party support, relative to ANYTHING (even BeOS)
is a total moron. Microsoft is far, FAR ahead of the pack in
this area. This is what has driven usage of even MS-DOS over
the Macintosh.

[deletia]
--
Oracle... can't live with it... |||
/ | \
can't just replace it with postgres...
Peter Hayes
2006-08-08 22:42:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by NoNamer
I doubt virtual desktops is even used by >90% of the population.
Just as 80% of users use less than 20% of any apps features I can well
believe that <10% of users use virtual desktops.

but for those of us that do use them they are indispensible.
Post by NoNamer
Windows has had the option for years (see PowerToys) - and it works
great -
Great isn't the word I use, but it's good use of humour nevertheless.

Select desktop 1. Select a taskbar app in desktop 2 and the thing gets
thoroughly screwed. It just cannot cope with the concept of say a
Windows Explorer window open in two desktops simultaneously.

Or something like that anyway. I long ago lost interest in it because
it's such a poor implementation compared to X or CodeTek.
Post by NoNamer
but I simply don't see the need for the way I work. I doubt
most Mac users will use it as well.
Uncle Steve will convince them pretty damn quick... ;-) Six months after
Leopard is out they'll wonder how they coped without it.
--
Peter
Mitch
2006-08-08 09:06:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geico Caveman
I have been a Linux user since early 90s. We have had what you call virtual
desktops for 12 years already (can't think of any window manager / desktop
environment that does not have them - even the lowly twm - the ugliest
looking one, does too). And Mac finally gets them (though it is not very
clear how they circumvented Xerox's claims vis a vis commercial OS'es).
So what? Mac OS handled this (ambiguous) concept differently, and it
was integrated in a way that means the term 'virtual desktop' wouldn't
be used -- it doesn't mean that the Mac OS was missing out.
Post by Geico Caveman
Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
Innovation? What I see seems to be just the way they are talking about
making coding features available to developers. Why do you have to get
nasty and imply that Mac OS has never had any such features, or that
Apple is claiming more than is due them?
Take it easy, cowpoke. If you know something about Linux, ASK the Mac
programmers how they have been working with this kind of feature before
now -- or ask how the new choice will change things.

And if you are going to post this in mac.advocacy, don't redirect it to
a different group. Post in the ONE correct group for your message.
Kelsey Bjarnason
2006-08-12 02:10:38 UTC
Permalink
[snips]
Post by Geico Caveman
in many ways). Now, "virtual desktops" are being claimed as an innovation.
What is next, Maccies ? A claim how Mac has invented the zero ?
Nah, that'd be Microsoft. Mac invented the one. :)

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...