I was going to put this in the "Penguin" forum, but I thought it'd more appropriate here . . .
Mandrake wrote:Lots of open source stuff is good, Mozilla for example. But there is no need to discuss that here. Linux maybe UNIX like, but it contains no UNIX code, and is totally open source under the GPL.
So, if UNIX is closed source, like Windows, I don't believe that it is industry standards, or open or anything. I do agree that Darwin is open source, but not all of OS X is open source. Not that I argue that this is a bad thing, companies do need to make money off products.
Javier wrote:There are both proprietary and open source UNIX flavors. FreeBSD is an open source UNIX flavor (a complete OS) derived from the BSD UNIX. Linux is not UNIX; Linux is a kernel based on MINIX. GNU userland + some other stuff + Linux kernel = GNU/Linux OS.
The Mac OS X userland is based on FreeBSD Unix. About licenses; FreeBSD is licensed under the BSD license (you can make derived work
proprietary) and Linux is licensed under the GPL license (you can't make derived work proprietary). Linux is not totally under the GPL license. There many software included on Linux distros licensed under different open source licenses such as the BSD license, artistic work license, etc.
I don't want a flamebait. This is just some feedback.
"The world's safest and most secure online server Operating System (OS) is proving to be the Open Source family of BSD (Berkley Software Distribution) and Mac OS X based on Darwin."
fassassin wrote: Since 90% of google world uses windows.. doesnt mean that you would have a bigger security issue.. i mean if you were a hacker and you could either choose from 90% or 2% (i think that was it) i would certainly pick the 90%.. i think if the OS world was flipped around, apple would have just as many problems because of the bigger market of bad people to find holes in the OS.
When it comes down to it, there are still too many seams showing in Bluetooth on Windows. Sure, if you're a savvy user you can make it work. But unless you're really phobic about a few cables, why spend the time? And in this case, the Mac mystique has some substance behind it. Setting up my whole Bluetooth network on the Mac was quick and painless from start to finish--and truly wireless, unlike the Logitech DiNovo [Windows] set.
Well, I had my first computer back in late 80s, running MS-DOS 3.2, then upgraded with Microsoft, MS-DOS 5, then 6. I started using Windows 3.0 then 3.1 in early 90s. then Windows 95, 98, 98SE, 2000, and now XP Pro.bomfunk wrote:...
but for somebody like me how has been using windows since 3.11 find mac os slow and painfull to navigate around.
rons wrote:I bought a biege G3 300mhz and built a PII 300 mhz at the same time in 1998, the Mac is still running and the PC needs it's 3rd mother board now to run for over 5 minutes.
Maybe Abit doesn't make reliable products, it has not run for 1.5 years now and I don't see a need to fix it.
The Mac was twice as fast as the PC in graphics programs like Brice 3 and POV, both available for Mac and PC.
All of my 5 Macs still work, the oldest is a SE 30, I wish I had kept the 4 older ones.
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot]