What would Jesus use- a PC or a MAC

[FatBurger]

Computer history disagrees with you. Here's one link: http://www.jmusheneaux.com/index10.htm

I never said Apple didn't play a part. But to say that Windows wouldn't exist without Apple I think is an overstatement.

 

[Sycophant]

I never said Apple didn't play a part. But to say that Windows wouldn't exist without Apple I think is an overstatement.

It might exist, but it would have taken a lot longer, and would still probably be mostly copied from Mac OS.

The huge majority of GUI functions in Windows were taken from (or in MS terms, inspired by) Mac OS.

It was amazing when Windows 95 came out to see how much they had made it like Mac OS. It was incredible. Before it took elements of Mac OS, but this version was something else, it took concepts like the 'Recycle Bin' and the unusual 'My Computer' file hiarachy directly from Mac OS.

 

[WalksWithChrist]

Heck, even Atari had a viable GUI! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_ST#Screenshots
I agree that it would have taken MS a *lot* longer, if ever, to develop a *working* GUI if not for using Apple's code as a template. Maybe Jesus could get down with an Atari 520ST? hee hee

 

[Nazarene77]

. . .and would be compatible with every software applictation ever written.

Nah, it would automatically detect and reject any software it deems to be evil!

I think Jesus would write his own software, too.

 

[S682]

I heard that at the beginning Bill Gates stole the DOS for the starting of his company. Is that just a sick rumor, or is that true? It seems I saw the guy who wrote the DOS originally on TV and complaining about that. Anyway, I guess Windows 2000 doesn't use DOS anymore? I've been away from PCs for five years now. I lose track of what is going on. It is true there are a lot of graphics people making games use PCs now. Since there are both a PC and a Mac here, I dread having to reinstall Windows 2000 since I barely got it accomplished in the first place. The Mac is so much easier to operate.

 

[Playerslight77]

p

 

[raphink]

I heard that at the beginning Bill Gates stole the DOS for the starting of his company. Is that just a sick rumor, or is that true? It seems I saw the guy who wrote the DOS originally on TV and complaining about that.

I don't know about the DOS having been stolen or anything like this. What I know is that DOS (for Dirty Operating System) was initially based on QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) programmed by a 15 yo guy that was a friend of Bill Gates when they were in school (I guess this is the guy PlayersLight77 talks about...). I'll never understand how 90% of the computer users on earth got to use an OS based on such a stuff... When DOS was released, there was already good versions of Unix, that were much more stable and powerful. DOS is a pale copy of the Unix consoles...

Anyway, I guess Windows 2000 doesn't use DOS anymore?

Indeed.
Some years ago, M$ got to the conclusion that DOS based OSes were really too bad to be continued... Windows ME is a good example of how bad you can do when you are based on DOS... So what they did is that they started all over again from scratch. People often consider that Windows must be more stable than GNU/Linux as it is older. But this is not true as Linux was first released in 1991 to complete the GNU project that was already quite old, whereas the Windows NT technology is very new (5 years or so). Windows NT was not based on a console, as the old Windows were. I might seem better but I personally think it's a mistake, that was done before by Apple with Mac OS Classic (they went back to a console-based OS with Mac OS X)...

 

[WalksWithChrist]

Depending on how you spin it, you could say it was stolen. You would be more correct if you said it was a missed opportunity by the fellow on the losing end. I think the one you're talking about is Gary Kildall, and there is a decent story about the whole DOS/IBM/CP-M soap opera here.


I never understand these comments. What kind of funky hardware combinations do people have that make it so difficult to install a piece of software? I have installed MS OS'es more times than I care to remember, and I can't recall one time in which it didn't work immediately (after Windows 95, of course). That may be a manifestation of my selective memory, of course, but as far as I recall all my MS installations have been pretty straightforward. In fact, I have always had more difficulty getting linux to install than microsoft, if only because my components tend to be relatively new and there isn't adequate driver support for them. This is much better these days than it used to be, but there still seems to be a lag time for hardware linux drivers.
Once installed, linux tends to be more stable, although XP is leaps and bounds ahead of it's predecessors in that regard.

As for a Mac, it never has the software I want, or if it does there is only one company that makes it and it costs a thousand dollars. PC's have far more choice, and for me choice is good.

What would do you live in? lol I've seen lots of 98, Me (big surprise), 2000 and XP installs bomb out. You can blame the hardware, but the OS plays a big part too. Installs for XP are relatively smooth...I'll admit it. Of course that's in comparison to *other* MS operating systems! heh heh Politics plays a big part in the issue you mention about software for the Mac. Do you think that MS just sits back and lets companies write software for any OS they want? If you deal with MS as a developer, you are making a deal with the devil. I'm surprised you can get MS Office for Mac. It is working pretty well for me btw...at least until I can figure out how to get OpenOffice to run! I'm not a strong UNIX person...WAAAH!

 

[WalksWithChrist]

btw, good link on Gary Kildall. I didn't know all the back-story. = ) Just what I saw on Pirates of Silicon Valley! whoo hoo! Go Anthony Michael Hall...

 

[raphink]

I'm surprised you can get MS Office for Mac. It is working pretty well for me btw...

That's because of how M$ organize their projects : they make several staff on the same project and take the project that is first released for Windows. Then, by the time they think about a Mac version, another staff has finished a better project. This is why M$ products are often better on the Mac than they are on Windows

at least until I can figure out how to get OpenOffice to run! I'm not a strong UNIX person...WAAAH!

That's pretty easy
First install XFree86 if you do not have it yet : http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/x11/
Then get Ooo for the Mac and install it : ftp://openoffice.cict.fr/openoffice/contrib/MacOSX/

and here you are

If you prefer to use Unix programs, you can also use Linux programs on Mac OS X thanks to the Fink project (http://fink.sourceforge.net), though it's better to use Linux to run GNU/Linux programs

 

[superstar4410]

I think the whole initial question is a bit in appropiate. It seems like people take the wwjd phrase and apply it to various context and situations that are really not something that I think Jesus would want to be put in the first place. Example, I'm stuck between buying a ford or a honda, ummh I wonder what Jesus would drive. I think statements like that are really illmatched with the situation at hand. Its different if you say I'm going to pray for God's guidance to direct me to make the choice that he wants me to make. But over used cliche statements like that tend to mute or waterdown the initial intention what that statement really meant to convey.

 

[Playerslight77]

p

 

[Playerslight77]

p

 

[Arnediad]

AFAIK, Apple originally swiped the idea for their GUI from Xerox PARC. Steve Jobs, being the less-than-brilliant businessman that he is, wound up licensing the rights to their GUI concepts (windows, menu bar, and so on) to Microsoft.

 

[raphink]

Especially when the OS will only recognize certain manufacturer-approved components, like on a Mac. I'm not a big Microsoft fan, don't get me wrong, but they have performed a feat that many other OS's haven't: support for almost any hardware combination out there.

I think you ask the wrong question initially. It is not Microsoft that has programmed Windows so as to be adapted to many hardware combination, but all hardware manufacturers that have provided support for Windows.

And linux, from my experience. I've spent more time trying to get various cards and peripherals working on a Linux box than Microsoft, for sure. (of course, when they did finally work they never broke down.)

Of course, as no manufacturer will reveal how their hardware work. They provide drivers for windows (and sometimes for Mac OS), but nothing for GNU/Linux. Therefore, volunteer programmers have to test the hardware and try to program a driver for Linux from scratch. Sometimes the hardware will use a very usual protocol and it's quite easy, but in some cases (with HP for example), it seems the manufacturer choose to use private protocols on purpose, so that you can't use their hardware without having their own driver. And as they do not release drivers for Linux and won't give the source code either, this is where the problem is.

Actually I would say that taking in consideration what I just said, Linux recognizes much more hardware than WIndows does. Try to install your hardware on XP without adding anything to windows and compare with installing it on Mandrake for example. I'm pretty sure you'll be surprised...

 

[Arnediad]

Actually I would say that taking in consideration what I just said, Linux recognizes much more hardware than WIndows does. Try to install your hardware on XP without adding anything to windows and compare with installing it on Mandrake for example. I'm pretty sure you'll be surprised...

\

No offense, but it really isn't hard. Windows (as much as I hate it) comes with plenty of drivers in the base installation.

 

[raphink]

\

No offense, but it really isn't hard. Windows (as much as I hate it) comes with plenty of drivers in the base installation.

Hmm so does Mandrake... And the drivers you talk about have not been programmed by M$ staff I guess.

 

[Arnediad]

Perhaps not, but unfortunately Unix does not have a driver advantage over Windows no matter what way you slice it =:\

 

[raphink]

Perhaps not, but unfortunately Unix does not have a driver advantage over Windows no matter what way you slice it =:\

GNU = GNU is Not Unix

 

[Arnediad]

Er, what does that have to do with anything? =: P