RD wrote:i found the unix side of os x a warted down version.
nelz wrote:I wasn't mocking, I make enough tyops myself I just thought it was very appropriate.
sandyman wrote:Totally agree. I only ever dual booted before, but am now an OS X convert. (on the desktop anyway). Tiger rocks. *nix stability and security with a great GUI.
Rhakios. Don't agree with you about finder. The last file manger I tried on *nix was Nautilus which I really did not like at all. It was like going back to Win '95. Each to their own though
Still running, 1 x OS X, 1 x XP, 2 x Linux
jjmac wrote:You mean you see Linux in terms of your window manager, a lot do ...., makes sense in a way ... but the distro isn't exactly linux, it's just running on it. Just like, UNIX dosen't really exist, aside from a spec.
jjmac wrote:The post is directed incorrectly. If you find irritations with a distros implementation, thats an issue with the distro. Like ... there are other wms' around. Just cause there not provided by default ...... oh well, who cares anyway jm
jjmac wrote:Was it a typo ?
andychannelle wrote:I've said this before, but when people say that OS X has a coherance that other OSes lack, they probably haven't tried printing through one of the many different systems Adobe seem to tack on to applications. The iLife suite is the pinnacle of integration, I think, but once you go beyond Apple's own apps, then inconsistancies begin to creep in.
And then there's the cost. How many times have Konqueror users been forced to pay for a simple browser update? If you want to upgrade Safari, you have to splash out £90 on a whole new OS upgrade - not even Microsoft would attempt to force WinXP users to update to Vista to get IE7.
I like my Mac, but to be completely honest, it seems too much of a walled garden, while Linux is more open country.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], leke and 0 guests