On Thu, October 28, 2010 20:05, Emily L. Ferguson wrote: > At 11:08 AM -0500 10/28/10, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: >>On Thu, October 28, 2010 10:20, Emily L. Ferguson wrote: >>> At 5:53 PM +0300 10/28/10, Trevor Cunningham wrote: >>>>I've always thought that the only reason someone would choose to >>>>endure a Mac OS would be the benefits of its hardware, most notably >>>>the graphic display. >>> >>> Hmm. What might it be that you thing about the Mac OS that is so >>> unpleasant as to characterize with the word "endure". >> >>Well, nearly everything; but most specially, having to go all the way to >>the top of the screen to find the menu for the current window > > ? > > Keyboard commands Sure, and I use keyboard shortcuts in Windows a lot too. But sometimes my hand is on the mouse. And sometimes I don't remember the shortcut, or there isn't one. >>Also, they've put their users through amazing amounts of hell; 68k to >>power-pc to Intel just on the hardware side, > > ? > > What's your definition of hell? In 16 years they've changed > processor twice. At only one point was it necessary to actually > upgrade key software to run on the new processor - the 3rd time. > >>and several flag-day changes >>on the software side as well. I wouldn't sign up for any company that >>behaved that way. I've watched my Mac-using friends and colleagues forced through a LOT more expensive changes than my Windows-using friends and colleagues. > I wouldn't buy any product from a company that, in order to have the > product work reliably, I had be on daily watch for invasions and > theft of data through the very product I'm depending on. I've had more breakins on my Linux servers than on my Windows boxes (one verified, one probable, in 17 years with 1-4 servers running). I'm not in any sense "on daily watch". While I run an anti-virus (a free one), it has never in more than a decade spotted or stopped a virus or malware breaking into my computer. (I have used it to scan things I deliberately downloaded from dodgy sources, and some of those I've decided not to run; but that's protection from my own risky behavior, not to protect from external attacks.) Hardware trouble costs me much more time than outside attackers. > And, after more than 20 years, the company still won't and, > apparently, can't fix its core problems - security and reliability. Since they have the market share, they're the target. Linux is much more secure, but is heavily targeted because servers are good things to break into. Nobody much uses Macs, so they're not worth targeting. (I remember back in the pre-internet days, Mac labs were the places where viruses spread worst, because of the horrible idea of automatically executing code in certain files on a floppy when inserted into the drive. Microsoft duplicated that stupid idea with "auto-run" for CDs; luckily I can turn it off in Windows.) -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
