Amiga.org
The "Not Quite Amiga but still computer related category" => Alternative Operating Systems => Topic started by: redrumloa on October 27, 2007, 01:38:49 PM
-
You gotta watch THIS (http://www.apple.com/macosx/guidedtour/) Leopard tour! Cybereye and I watched this last night and both came to the conclusion that this is no longer in question, Apple has taken over where Amiga should have been, would have been, could have been, but isn't.
Microsoft is in trouble long term, Leopard is so far heads and shoulders over Vista it reminds me of the gap between Amiga and PCs in the 80's.
-
Now if Apple can get the hardware issues solved they'll be the top dog. Incidentally, agreed. Our office is doing a massive switchover to Apple in the next 8 months after seeing Leopard in action.
Pity Apple doesn't make a thin-client for their Xserve, would be a single vendor for all of our needs.
-
Couldn't watch the demo because I had to download Quicktime. I hate Quicktime on Windows...
-
Hey Nate!
My house is still only a 1 Mac house. We currently have 2 Ubuntu boxes and 1 XP box. I am seriously considering buying 2 more new Macs for X-Mas to replace 2 of these for the wife and kids. For myself, I am still on the fence. I am impressed, but I really want a full tower with expandability but Mac Pro's are damn expensive. I may keep using Ubuntu Gutsy myself, which in itself is pretty damn impressive. But I guess that would be a whole new thread :-)
-
Flashlab wrote:
Couldn't watch the demo because I had to download Quicktime. I hate Quicktime on Windows...
Part 1 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=L55EWwuqpEU), part 2 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=jyj2FukH59o), Part 3 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=myAUMGwC08w).
:-D
-
Thanks! Watching it now!
-
All they need, is to release it for PC, with the ability to run PC software, and Vista is *DEAD*.
-
I have had it running for about 19 hours on my Mac Pro and apart from a few teething problems it's extremely impressive. I did a no-nonsense clean install, and it felt like I'd bought a new Mac, never mind just a new OS X version!
It's really impressive, and although I had my doubts, there are some really good features in it I really am enjoying using. 85 quid well spent methinks :)
-
Flashlab wrote:
Couldn't watch the demo because I had to download Quicktime. I hate Quicktime on Windows...
Thanks! Watching it [YouTube] now!
You'd rather watch some REALLY TERRIBLE quality flash encoded video with the wrong aspect ratio rather than install QuickTime for windows? How lame is that..
QT for windows is fine, especially for embedded QT movies on websites.
Fine control the file types associated with the app, and you'll never even know you've got it installed!
-
Couldn't watch the demo because I had to download Quicktime. I hate Quicktime on Windows...
QT is OK if you disable it for all but QuickTime only content. And don't let it run in the background.
Thats what I do.
-
Apple's movie files are all in MPEG-4 H.264 format. If you're on Windows why don't you just download it and use VLC to play it?
Anyhoo, I heartily agree with RedRumLoa, the Mac is more or less where the Amiga would have been in the right circumstances. Right down to not using the Ctrl key as the default modifier key ;)
-
Apple's movie files are all in MPEG-4 H.264 format. If you're on Windows why don't you just download it and use VLC to play it?
Is that what format the ipod download is in?
If that is the case I will download that instead of steaming quicktime. I hate streaming only content!
If only Apple didn't behave like Amiga Inc. In the way that they only allow their OS on "their" hardware platforms. But at least Apple actually have hardware platforms.
-
I must say, wow the dock bar is brilliant.
And for Leopard, I think that is one smart piece of software.
I don`t know much about Vista apart from a lot of people tell me its got more problems than XP had.
If Leopard were to become available for my PC I would get it.
I think Microshaft has got a bit of a problem there with Leopard.
-
Wow, stepped on a few Mac toes here with my QT comment...
For me the screen quality isn't that important but I wanted to see what the new features are. The Youtube vids were fine for that.
I like what I saw but I don't know if it's for me. When I buy a new desktop I will take a good look at the iMac too.
-
I actually like Quicktime movs for this type of thing, but I don't like Quicktime player.
I use QT Lite (http://www.codecguide.com/qt_lite.htm) - it is basically just the embedded part of Quicktime for your browser. No other nonsense!
It's up to date as well for the latest versions of Quicktime files.
-
Flashlab wrote:
Couldn't watch the demo because I had to download Quicktime. I hate Quicktime on Windows...
Quicktime Alternative (http://www.codecguide.com/about_qt.htm)
-
redrumloa wrote:
Hey Nate!
My house is still only a 1 Mac house. We currently have 2 Ubuntu boxes and 1 XP box. I am seriously considering buying 2 more new Macs for X-Mas to replace 2 of these for the wife and kids. For myself, I am still on the fence. I am impressed, but I really want a full tower with expandability but Mac Pro's are damn expensive. I may keep using Ubuntu Gutsy myself, which in itself is pretty damn impressive. But I guess that would be a whole new thread :-)
One more Mac than I have right now. Saving up for a MacMini this christmas. (it's more than enough computer for a 2nd system). Right now we are an XP, Ubuntu, Solaris and AROS house.
And the iMac seems pretty expandible to me if you use an external Firewire or USB case.
-
Just watching the first few minutes, the AmiDock author has some work to do (hint hint Stefan Robl). Ironically, AmiDock already has a "stack"-like concept in it's subdocks. However, it's not as convenient as OSX Leopard's. You can emulate the grid stack layout by dragging and dropping a directory onto the dock; clicking on it will then bring up that directory in a window. Once again, similar, but not quite as nice.
Coverflow is definitely nice and we definitely don't have anything like it. Workbench is overdue for an overhaul.
Quicklook like functionality could be implemented via the datatypes system and multiview, if more datatypes were made. I've always suggested that things like Flash and PDF viewers should be turned into datatypes.
Time machine looks like a really well done backup system. The fact that all other OS features can be used directly on backups is impressive. I'm guessing that the backups are mounted like a filesystem.
We have the start to spaces with screens and switcher3D (OS4 only). It definitely needs a lot more work though.
iChat theatre like functionality could once again be done via more datatypes, if we had an iChat program to begin with.
It's clear that Apple have worked hard on making organization of information easy. Most of it is taking existing stuff, and just adding extra functionality that's easier to use. The result is definitely impressive.
Hans
-
I've never been a fan of Apple. This changes my mind. The eye candy and features are attractive. Loved the Time Machine especially.
-
redrumloa wrote:
You gotta watch THIS (http://www.apple.com/macosx/guidedtour/) Leopard tour! Cybereye and I watched this last night and both came to the conclusion that this is no longer in question, Apple has taken over where Amiga should have been, would have been, could have been, but isn't.
MIPS and I were saying this 5 years ago when Apple released Jaguar. The OS hasn't really changed all that much since then, there have been a bunch of nice features (expose springs to mind) and a bunch of features that are cool-sounding, but not particularly useful (dashboard). Overall though, not much has really changed, because they got the basics right from that start (Although some might argue that the Finder has been fundamentally broken for some time)
What's annoying is that Gateway-Amiga plans were essentially along the same lines. I wonder if, had the MMC been released with a QNX or Linux based core, we'd be enjoying similar success right now.
-
Yeh I'v also held this view for years. The Easy-to-use-but-powerful-and-rewarding approach Apple use now is very similar to Amiga.
I *hate* the new Dock though. Sure it looks pretty but it's wholly impractical. It takes up too much room (in comparison to the old one, and yeh I know you can change the size but it's still annoying), you can't tell what's running because the white dots are wiped out by all the background noise from the reflections. Thankfully I found a hack to enable the simplified version (used if you have the dock on the left or right) at the bottom, so I did that. It looks way nicer now :)
As far as Gateway-Amiga goes they wanted to make Amiga into a viable x86 platform way back in the 90s, using the Amiga ideal to power a totally new computer platform. The Amiga community (or at least a large part of it) blindly insisted they stick to PowerPC, which was too expensive and was outside the areas Gateway wanted to explore (being a x86 PC maker). I think in the end Gateway gave up and basically told the community to shove it, mostly out of frustration at not being able to push the Amiga platform forward. It could have lead to great things - Gateway have a large leverage in the PC industry and could have put up a decent fight. They'\d have become another Apple, with their own platform and their own OS, and they have seen the advantage then of what Apple have seen now when they transitioned to Intel - if you can do a lot of stuff really well in your OS *and* run Windows for the stuff that people can't run on your OS you are in a win-win scenario. I mean for gods sakes Apple Intel computers are common fodder at companies like Microsoft because they are good products hardware-wise (for work at least ;) ), they run the software they need, and also their closest competitors software as well :D
-
A bit OT, but I've got a Mac PowerPC Performa 5300 with keyboard and mouse which, if anyone can collect, then you can have it for free (Seems to be in working condition).
I also have another Mac mainboard (Decimated) + RAM + cable loom + cable loom SCSI adaptors + internal Mac floppy drive from some towered Mac system that was taken apart (Though not by me...) that i'll also gladly give away to anyone who can collect it.
PM me if your intrested,
Hodgkinson.
-
iMacMiga wrote:
As far as Gateway-Amiga goes they wanted to make Amiga into a viable x86 platform way back in the 90s, using the Amiga ideal to power a totally new computer platform. The Amiga community (or at least a large part of it) blindly insisted they stick to PowerPC, which was too expensive and was outside the areas Gateway wanted to explore (being a x86 PC maker). I think in the end Gateway gave up and basically told the community to shove it, mostly out of frustration at not being able to push the Amiga platform forward.
I think you are being naive if you think a big PC vendor will bow to the will of the (by then) nearly nonexistant amiga community. I do not have proof but I do believe the rumor that it was Microsoft the one that told Gateway to get rid of the Amiga IP. As you have said, Gateway would have become another Apple (hardware vendor with nice propietary OS) and M$ could not allow that.
-
swift240 wrote:
If Leopard were to become available for my PC I would get it.
Revelation: a Mac *IS* a PC, and I don't just mean a "Personal Computer", I mean: it has an x86 compatible CPU and it *DOES* run Windows.
In fact, it's like buying TWO computers in ONE.
And believe me, after you play with Leopard, you will dump the "PC" side so fast, as if it was a virus eating up your hard disk space (oh wait, it IS a virus!)
A general comment based on the intial comment and couple of the following comments:
what makes Apple's OS and software so good, is the ideology behind it's programming/development environment (Cocoa):
You see, when Steve Jobs went to Xerox PARC (if you don't know of them, please do some wikipedia research), he got some of the most brilliant technology ideas of the previous century.
Scientists and engineers at Xerox PARC had not only developed the first laser printer, the first Ethernet network, the first mouse, but they were also doing some incredible software innovations (not of the Microsoft "innovation" type).
Steve Jobs said that in creating the Macintosh and it's GUI, he was so blinded by the GUI concept from Xerox PARC, that he had forgotten the other two major scientific innovations: object oriented programming and networking.
After he left (or thrown out of) Apple in 1985 he created one of the most amazing computer companies: NeXT Computers.
That's when he actually remembered to have his engineers implement those two extrememly powerful technologies at NeXT Computers. What came out with in two years, and improved over the next 7 years until 1994 was the uber-amazing, "AmigaOS for the serious boys" NeXTSTEP operating system. It was advanced in many ways, but one of the most powerful was the fact that the applications relied on a fully Object Oriented programming language (Objective-C) and an equally powerful and a complete API (much like Java, C#, Perl, Python, etc have created years later), as well as UI layout tool which allowed chaning the application UI without recompiling an app. This allowed them to create applications far faster and better (code re-use = less bugs), and much more easily (Objective-C is really *clean* and elegant compared to the dirty rotten pile that you have with C++).
Anyways, this technology conglomerate became Mac OS X, and was further improved (unlike what a previous person commented, a TON of changes have happened under the hood of OS X since 10.1, to 10.2 which had the first Quartz Extreme implementation, a lot of cleanup and integration going on, improvements in all aspects of the kernel and especially the APIs such as Core Animation, Core Sound, Core Data, Quartz Compozer, stuff that allows Apple to come out with killer apps like Time Machine, Cover-Flow, iLife '08 - do check it out, or even developer tools like X-Ray), which leads to some amazing applications. Check out what's in OS X, but also apps like Delicious Library (http://www.delicious-monster.com/).
Prepared to be blown away with the type of applications that will be coming out now that Leopard is here. We're at the edge of a major paradigm shift in desktop application presentation and dynamics. In fact, I can forsee Apple changing the HCI paradigm: multi-touch and voiceover anyone?
For the tech-heads, all I have to tell you is how simple it's to do animated GUI elements: 2 lines of code, using Obj-C 2.0 with managed code. That's IT. Try out the latest XCode/Interfact Builder - it's a killer duo!
Amiga was my Amiga of the 20th century. Apple is my Amiga of the 21st century.
Cheers
EDIT: a clarification for the inebriated: what I mean when I say "Apple is my Amiga for the 21st century" is not that Apple is creating the groundbreaking technology like Amiga did when it burst into the scene in 1985. Macs are "just" plain PCs, and their OS is from the 1980s actually. Nothing "new" there. What's new is that the features they bring forth, especially to developers and users, were "lost" because for the last 15 years it has been a Microsoft show. Stagnant. Boring. Convoluted. Bloated. Unimaginative. And further more their awesome integration, which is what Apple is really good at, is making them more valuable and prominent and in the end causing a major shift in desktop application programming and very likely soon in the UI too.
I'm still waiting for "the Amiga of the 21st century". A hardware & software package, that just blows everything we've known as customary away. Apple's doing well on the software part. I wonder if they can manage the hardware part... Time will tell.
-
Was a nice demo and expanded on a few of the things I had 'ooohed' and 'ahhhed' at when I first saw the Leopard features. Interesting that you have to have the new dock unless you fiddle with it. Otherwise, it all just looks so slick.
Sadly, Mr Jobs Esq. will never release it for the PC. He kicked all the clones to the kerb when he returned to Apple. He wants you to buy the hardware. I personally don't mind, since I love Apple's design department. However, I would agree that the prices do need to come down. I'm talking Mac Mini at $300, iMac starting at $699 and so on.
I also think that Apple should bring out something more powerful than the iMac and less powerful than the Mac Pros and price it somewhere in between. Aim for 20% of the desktop market in a years time and get the masses interested. People generally feel Macs are too expensive (even if that is not 100% true anymore). Change that mindset and then Dell/HP etc. can begin to worry. Give people a real alternative to the horror that is Vista.
As for me, I was going to pick up Leopard upon my return from Europe. After seeing that demo, I think I may have to pick it up much sooner.
-
For those who hate using Apple's software to view MOV files, there is always the alternate quick time package which gives you the ability to watch quick time on other movie players I.E. Media Player Classic, or you can use Video Lan Client on most MOV's.
http://www.codecguide.com/download_qt.htm
http://www.videolan.org/
As for Mac...
...well I still don't think software bloat is in the spirit of Amiga, but they do make for a better enviroment to work on Large Media files I.E. Avid Pro, as opposed to using Windows, that is for sure!
Unfortunatly, Amiga is more likely to get cool eye candy, than decent video production tools like in the old days. Without that, Amiga's only half an Amiga. :(
-
@FlashLab
Rock on over to Quicktime Alternative, homey.
-
Fester wrote:
I've never been a fan of Apple. This changes my mind. The eye candy and features are attractive. Loved the Time Machine especially.
I *have* been an Apple fan for a long time (but haven't used it in years really). All the things showed in this guided tour video can be summed up to one single thing which Apple always had, and Windows never even came close to: being user-friendly.
MacOS does what the user wants, while Windows does what it wants the user to do.
And Time Machine indeed is a very impressive and useful piece of software. Windows probably would let you restore a complete backup before you even could start searching for a file.
Hmm.. maybe I'll start saving for a Mac. This video sure impressed me.
-
XP. No competition. (at least till they get proper driversupport in Vista)
-
@everyone who thinks that Steve Jobs is the most amazing guy on the planet
Please go to the reality distortion field (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_distortion_field) entry in wikipedia. The phrase was coined to describe Steve Jobs. In some ways he's more cut-throat than Bill Gates. Just beware that this guy excels at convincing people of anything, including his own greatness.
Having said that, OSX Leopard does have some impressive features, and well thought out GUIs to use them. Hoever, there are two things in the Apple design philosophy that I've never liked: the closed system approach, and locking in to Apple products. Locking in to Apple doesn't seem to have changed, just look at things such as the iPod and iPhone. Both are locked in to Apple services (or Apple sanctioned AT&T). Has Apple become less restrictive about developer documentation? Providing all the documentation freely is a requirement for me to even consider anything as "the next Amiga."
Hans
-
Flashlab wrote:
Couldn't watch the demo because I had to download Quicktime. I hate Quicktime on Windows...
Grab the Quicktime alternative.
Link (http://www.free-codecs.com/download/QuickTime_Alternative.htm)
-
meh
When it comes to eyecandy I think Compiz and Linux like implemented in Ubuntu 7.10 have the upperhand on both Mac OS X and Vista.
-
Leopard is much more than an eye candy upgrade.
--
moto
-
motorollin wrote:
Leopard is much more than an eye candy upgrade.
--
moto
What if you don't want eye candy, and more speed, and easier control?
Oh, I long for a modern computer that starts immediately, with easy, intuitive and quick file/program management...
-
Just watched the demo and wonder what was so special about spaces? Looks to me like a simply copy of the mutlidesktop features that has existed for ages.
-
Well, it is Unix.
-
big ho hum... i am using vista. bought a new computer and decided to leave it on and try it. my games/progs work on it. it has a smoother feel than XPpros spasmodic quick and then slow slingshot. I may go back to XP I may not.
-
Well...I've got Leopard installed on my G5 and MacBook Pro. ALOT more snappier - my G5 fans definately don't rev as high as they used to, however, I think both computers still suffer from design flaws in hardware. Go Amiga GO!
-
Chubbyrain wrote:
Sadly, Mr Jobs Esq. will never release it for the PC.
Why wait for Apple to release OS X for the PC, it can already be done. See this guide... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41Z0FJYBd5U&NR=1 (the presenter is a little paranoid about getting sued but it's still interesting).
McVenco wrote:
"MacOS does what the user wants, while Windows does what it wants the user to do."
You seem to have got your descriptions mixed up. When I was watching the Leopard introduction video, I saw a number of well thought through applications, with the benefits largely derived from how well the standard Apple apps integrate with each other. However, you have far more choice on how to accomplish certain tasks on a Windows machine. If you're happy with the way that Apple does things then you'll be fine, but when it comes to customisation you've got more resources with Windows.
For example, I could use an external HD, ZipSnap for backups (http://zipsnap.sourceforge.net/), and then write a simple app to get the same functionality of the Time Machine feature. Probably wouldn't be as flashy, but it would get the job done.
As for Apple being the new Amiga, can't say I see it. Amiga was a strong platform back in the day in terms of hardware and software, but also in terms of flexibility (through customisation of h/w and s/w). Apple has the software part about right, but as Hans pointed out where's the detailed documentation for the platform?
Just IMO of course.
-
Unfortunately, my Mac died some time ago... I always liked MacOS, because it is simple. But my Mac used to crash as often as my Windows PC (Mac fanatics will try to shoot me now :-D ).
Anyway, the only bad thing about Macs for me is that, at least in Brasil, they are awfully expensive. You can buy a nice PC for half of the price of a Mac, and hardwarewise, (thanks to the "clever" idea of using x86) they would be the same.
They know that Mac users would pay the price for the brand.
Maybe if the prices drop a little, I will go back to the Mac...
-
Just installed it. One click install, took about two hours total. Major cool additions, though I'm still tinkering around and learning what it can do.
Looking for someone to test out ichat with. Should be interesting.
Wayne
-
da9000 wrote:
swift240 wrote:
If Leopard were to become available for my PC I would get it.
Revelation: a Mac *IS* a PC, and I don't just mean a "Personal Computer", I mean: it has an x86 compatible CPU and it *DOES* run Windows.
In fact, it's like buying TWO computers in ONE.
And the other way around is true, too: MacOS X can run on PCs with compatible hardware, too:
http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page (http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)
Varthall
-
swift240 wrote:
I must say, wow the dock bar is brilliant.
Check out Object Dock from Stardock if you like what you saw in the video...
-
Looking at the minimum spec. would this run on my brother's base Mac-Mini which he got about half a year ago?
It only has 512mb ram, but it doesn't even really have that because of the integrated Intel graphics.
-
HenryCase wrote:
[
You seem to have got your descriptions mixed up. When I was watching the Leopard introduction video, I saw a number of well thought through applications, with the benefits largely derived from how well the standard Apple apps integrate with each other. However, you have far more choice on how to accomplish certain tasks on a Windows machine. If you're happy with the way that Apple does things then you'll be fine, but when it comes to customisation you've got more resources with Windows.
Exactly! While I rate OS X an best OS out there I personally don't like it too much (i.e. I recommend it to mst ppl, but do not use it personally too much).
If you're fine with the Apple-way, you will become really lucky, happy and productive while using OS X.
But for special needs you're better off with Linux or even Win (ouch! did *I* really wrote this!!!).
I am still best off with my MorphOS setup. Does everything the way I want and *like*.
Anyway Leopard seems to be quite cool and when having a maschine with plenty of cpu power, memory and storage it'll be a very nice system. I wouldn't bother* when the sysadmin at work would replace my W2K box with a Leopard box ;-).
But I guess MOS/AOS could catch up in some fields quite easily (while never reaching mass market) and I have to agree to Hans, that an overhaul of Multiview and the addition af some more datatypes would help. A pdf datatye would be great for a start. And some things which are sold now as the hottest invention since sliced bread aren't that hot when carefully looked at.
--
* In fact I would or would go for dual boot, since my *own* apps are Win or Linux and cannot be ported over to OS X 8no hw driver for my special hw).
-
[
MacOS does what the user wants,
The ONLY OS that ever did this was AmigaOS. Apple has always insisted you work its way, it has always closed off its OS to the user,it never allowed significant user-customization of the OS. Yeah its UNIX underneath, now, so it mutitasks and yeah its more secure than Windows but with Apples resources and 10 years available to it the Amiga could have been at the same place as OS X, 9 years ago.
-
The world has moved on, Amiga will only be a retro box. There are no killer apps out there to make it challenge the big boys. Where would Amiga have been had it survived? Hard to say, but the Mac is a good approximation.
-
well... I'm convinced :-)
Received my new Macbook Pro today :-D
NICE.....
Tom UK
persia wrote:
The world has moved on, Amiga will only be a retro box. There are no killer apps out there to make it challenge the big boys. Where would Amiga have been had it survived? Hard to say, but the Mac is a good approximation.
Mind you ... my A2000/2060 is not leaving
-
alexh wrote:
You'd rather watch some REALLY TERRIBLE quality flash encoded video with the wrong aspect ratio rather than install QuickTime for windows? How lame is that..
QT for windows is fine, especially for embedded QT movies on websites.
Fine control the file types associated with the app, and you'll never even know you've got it installed!
I'm sorry but I have to agree with flashlab there. QT on windows sux big time.
I was forced to install it on my system by the software that came with my Kodak digital camera and now everytime I shut down my computer, I get an error message and the .exe that crashes IS a quicktime component.
Everytime I try to play an MP3 file or midi file of a web site, quicktime tries to play it and crashes my browser and thats even after I set it NOT to play those types of files.
Also, there are lots of free software on the web to allow to edit and/or create .mpg, .avi files or .wmv file. Try to find one who can do that with all types of QT files. (just like .avi files, qt files require codecs to play but some of these codecs are not available to the public for editing, only for playback) Good luck!
-
I'm sorry but I have to agree with flashlab there. QT on windows sux big time.
Agreed, but judge not Apple software on their need to infiltrate the big evil.
Suck as it may, they're just trying to make sure they have a player on the PC capable of playing their media files. Where I think they went nuts is the attempt to add all the other datatypes and ended up stepping on other media players.
Then again, if they'd stuck to a "Apple media player" rather than trying to do it all, someone would just have come along, written their own player for apple files and that means fewer people get to think about the Mac.
The biggest coup for Apple so far has been the iPod and even iTunes on Windows is rather too much. This from a guy who LOVES iTunes on the Mac.
Wayne
-
Wayne wrote:
Just installed it. One click install, took about two hours total. Major cool additions, though I'm still tinkering around and learning what it can do.
Looking for someone to test out ichat with. Should be interesting.
Wayne
I think I will have to wait until the end of the week before I can upgrade to Leopard on my MacBook. Not sure if I will spend the money to upgrade the MacMini which is mostly just a "Carputer" to run Windows navigation software and play movies in the car.
I have never been much of a "chat" person, but would be willing to give it a go to test it with you.
-
Just because OSX's competition is lame it does not mean that OSX is a good OS. It does have some good points but these do no have anything to do with what most "users" perceive as cool. From Cheetah to Leopard little has changed. The same limitations and annoyances exist, the strong points remain the same. Folder/application encapsulation in the Finder, unicode, Unix shell, soft/had links, localisation, XML-based properties, services, Cocoa OOP framework, logical named system folders and files etc. are great. Incosistent look&feel, same old Finder (you couldn't even align desktop icons properly for years), slow and hard-to-master spotlight search, inability to prevent "._" files written all over the place, boing balls when network or HD/CD mounts fail etc. are not.
Apple had a diamond in its pocket and a golden opportunity, in essence of being let to discard most of legacy constraints and start over without having to loose all their marketshare and community. Instead, they pull out a Micro$oft. It's true that in early development bug corrections and speed optimisations occured (e.g. from Cheetah to Puma and then to Puma), but later the only innovation Mac users got were eye candy, which frankly speaking are not that impressive or cool (from an artistic view) and bloated "feature" additions. I am not going wow. I am not a PeeCee switcher; I've been using AmigaOS when these "wowers" typed in their B/W MSDOS prompt or used one program at a time in a Mac and considered that creative.
What drives OSX is its Unix background, the integrated multimedia environment (that comes rather from external applications such as iLife and a consistent lower denominator of installed software than the OS's explicit multimedia capabilities), the incapable competition (Linux does not have desktop applications, Window$ is vulnerable and not robust), and, believe it or not, cool hardware.
Given Apple's and Micro$oft's resources OSX and Window$ are pretty lame both in theory and implementation. IMHO a group of 20 talented people, working full time and hard for 2 years (with no payment problems, deadline constraints, and non-functional requirements from stakeholders), could produce a superior product. How will it be marketed and if it sells is another story.
Nevertheless, even for me, it would be easy to study for a month (maybe less) and come up with a Bill McEwen-type OS "specification" that knocks OSX for dead. A more knowledgeble computing science guy could even come up with a "proper" OS specification in the same time period. The question is whether I would have the money or the will to implement it.
-
toRus wrote:
Nevertheless, even for me, it would be easy to study for a month (maybe less) and come up with a Bill McEwen-type OS "specification" that knocks OSX for dead.
OK, study for a month, since you're obviously not a 'computer science guy' and get back to us with a 'Bill McEwen-type' specification that is superior to OS X. Better yet, rather than give pie in the sky comments, try posting detailed information about how your OS would work.
Get your head out the sand mate!
-
The commentary here, reminds me that no one has jumped up and down and said, but its not really Mac OS!!!! It's really just FreeBSD with a Mac layer!
Of course not...it is Mac OS.
I know, I come at things sideways, but I'm thinking about the whole discussion once upon a time about the next version of Amiga and using QNX or Linux core, and especially Linux, to jump start Amiga OS development.
Amiga Inc. would have still had their work cut out for them, developing the higher level Workbench that ran on top of the Linux core, and I think no one, would have claimed it was really Linux...or at least, such an idea wouldn't have gotten any traction, any more than we think of Mac OS X is FreeBSD...even though in fact the core is based on FreeBSD 5.0.
It's all history now...but basing the new Amiga on Linux, would have gotten us a modern system, that would have been a true Amiga....get a modern looking workbench, use some of the Amiga concepts, Arexx....
In point of fact, its still the way to go with Amiga...if they want to revive things at this late date.
Anyway...I agree with you whole heartedly, Mac OS X 10.5, at a certain level, is what Amiga OS could have been.
Fast, fun, powerful....every machine comes with standard development tools in Xcode. Heck, even before Amiga...in the Commodore 64 and Atari 800 days, what I liked is they always came with Basic, and anyone could tinker with it.
Anyone who has Leopard, can do a program tonight....if they want to start tinkering...and that is really cool. Although I have to admit, even in the Windows arena, Microsoft giving away express editions of their compilers...even if not installed by default, is still a cool move.
-
As far as Gateway-Amiga goes they wanted to make Amiga into a viable x86 platform way back in the 90s, using the Amiga ideal to power a totally new computer platform. The Amiga community (or at least a large part of it) blindly insisted they stick to PowerPC, which was too expensive and was outside the areas Gateway wanted to explore (being a x86 PC maker). I think in the end Gateway gave up and basically told the community to shove it, mostly out of frustration at not being able to push the Amiga platform forward. It could have lead to great things - Gateway have a large leverage in the PC industry and could have put up a decent fight.
BZZZT. FWIW, Gateway were at least interested enough to have a separate division holding their Amiga IP, to put Jim Collas in charge, etc etc. They also had an early start at the multimedia computer concept that had bombed, but were still trying. What came out later in court (unfortunately I have lost the referral URL) is that :madashell: M$ pressured GW to drop the pursuit of the Amiga on threat of having their Windows license revoked or made more expensive, and GW knuckled under.
I'm not claiming that the Amiga "community" were easy to please or to work with, because many of "us" considered it a badge of honor to NOT be working on the x86 platform, even though many of its worst qualities had been redesigned out by then. It would have ended up being a boutique OS running on commodity hardware with maybe a dongle or some such. Gee, where is the Mac now, sound familiar?
-
TheWizard wrote:
OK, study for a month, since you're obviously not a 'computer science guy' and get back to us with a 'Bill McEwen-type' specification that is superior to OS X. Better yet, rather than give pie in the sky comments, try posting detailed information about how your OS would work.
Get your head out the sand mate!
Actually, I AM a "computing science guy", which means I have hardly any time discussing things in forums (check my number of posts) and am too poor to give away ideas to someone that does not even care or understand. You are obviously quite happy with what you got.
-
No offense intended, but that's about the most snide "superiority complex riddled" comments I've read here in a long, long time.
Wayne
toRus wrote:
Actually, I AM a "computing science guy", which means I have hardly any time discussing things in forums (check my number of posts) and am too poor to give away ideas to someone that does not even care or understand. You are obviously quite happy with what you got.
-
Wayne, I was just being rude to TheWizard who got rude on me in the first place.
-
Leopard is cool and all, but that's a lot of money to plunk down.
Personally, my XP Pro system works really nicely and looks great with Stardock's WindowBlinds and ObjectDock. I customize my sounds, and I love it.
Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon is a great alternative because it's free, and very nice to use.
I would only get a Mac if I wanted to do serious video editing, and Vista.... bah! Only if I wanted to play DX10 games, which there isn't anything worth it that's out right now. As far as the Vista look, WindowBlinds is much nicer. Although I will admit that the animated wallpaper in Vista Ultimate has me interested. I think it's called DreamWeaver or something. :-)
-
@Wayne,
Ban Them ALL, Ban them, Ban them!
(just kidding, I haven't even wasted my time reading all the offensive posts in this thread) :-o
-
MarkTime wrote:
The commentary here, reminds me that no one has jumped up and down and said, but its not really Mac OS...
...using QNX or Linux core, and especially Linux, to jump start Amiga OS development...basing the new Amiga on Linux, would have gotten us a modern system, that would have been a true Amiga
Methinks people were rather caught up with hanging onto what was, rather than what could have been.
get a modern looking workbench, use some of the Amiga concepts, Arexx....
Wasn't the AREXX concept borrowed from REX on IBM's OS2? BTW, would the flexibility of AREXX style scripting be a security issue in a modern, widely used, internetworked OS? I guess that level of functionality could be provided in a robust form, but this kind of issue is a little beyond my ken of software design.
Mac was the first platform owned in my family home. Used it for many years, and I just got so fed up with its extremely closed design, and naf all documentation (amongst other things). When I got to see what was happening on Amiga's, WOW! The open system approach was just such a boost to the Amiga's development, with so much community envolvement, which I think went a very long way to developing it's cult following. I don't think any other platform has had the same level of hardware and software hacking by a user community.
I haven't used OSX much at all, but it seems to me that it is offering something which is appealing to many people, but is it something which a user can forge to be appealing to an individual's requirements? Does the basis in BSD allow for Linux style customisation? My casual observation is that low level access can be had, but it's not really in the scope of Apple's intended usage. Does Apple provide any documentation to this end?
Oliver
-
What's annoying is that Gateway-Amiga plans were essentially along the same lines. I wonder if, had the MMC been released with a QNX or Linux based core, we'd be enjoying similar success right now.
Indeed - in an alternative Universe, a company might have bought the Amiga rights, then selected NeXT as the next generation OS, and now it'd be Amiga OS X instead.
It's just names and trademarks really. Those who prefer classic AmigaOS to Mac OS X would still be running the former (presumably not wanting to wait six years to get multiple workspaces again...) whilst the rest of the world viewed it as a continuation of the Amiga platform.
But since that didn't happen, instead you could always slap an Amiga sticker onto a modern Mac instead ;)
-
MarkTime wrote:
The commentary here, reminds me that no one has jumped up and down and said, but its not really Mac OS!!!! It's really just FreeBSD with a Mac layer!
Of course not...it is Mac OS.
It's obviously not FreeBSD, but it's not what used to be Mac OS either - the brand name "Mac OS" refers to two distinct platforms.
I know, I come at things sideways, but I'm thinking about the whole discussion once upon a time about the next version of Amiga and using QNX or Linux core, and especially Linux, to jump start Amiga OS development.
Amiga Inc. would have still had their work cut out for them, developing the higher level Workbench that ran on top of the Linux core, and I think no one, would have claimed it was really Linux...or at least, such an idea wouldn't have gotten any traction, any more than we think of Mac OS X is FreeBSD...even though in fact the core is based on FreeBSD 5.0.
Actually, I remember lots of people moaning about how it wouldn't be a "real Amiga", because it was running QNX and didn't have a custom chipset.
Hell, I even see people saying that the AmigaOne and OS 4 aren't real Amigas, even though they're much more closely related to the classic Amigas than modern Macs are anything to do with classic Macs...
-
Old thread, but hey, just saw it in the mail box.
Hans_ wrote:
@everyone who thinks that Steve Jobs is the most amazing guy on the planet
Please go to the reality distortion field (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_distortion_field) entry in wikipedia. The phrase was coined to describe Steve Jobs. In some ways he's more cut-throat than Bill Gates. Just beware that this guy excels at convincing people of anything, including his own greatness.
I think that statement might have been aimed partially at me. To that I only need to tell you that I hated Macs when I had never used them (sound familiar situation to many of you?). After many years, much experience and knowledge gained, learning to use comparative and critical thinking, and a lot of reading on the history and workings of computers and computing systems, I come to stand by my previous statements. Any time of the day.
We should also remind people that there is a MUCH bigger reality distortion field, emmanating from somewhere near Redmond Washington for some reason and it runs on 95% of the desktops. I think the effects are visible below...
Hans_ wrote:
I've never liked: the closed system approach, and locking in to Apple products. Locking in to Apple doesn't seem to have changed, just look at things such as the iPod and iPhone. Both are locked in to Apple services (or Apple sanctioned AT&T).
Hmmmm, so Hans, how's that different than the Amiga? Did Commodore go around giving the source to Kickstart to everyone? Last I've heard, it's still illegal to have a copy unless you own a real chip. And the company has been dead for 10+ years!
As for the "lock-down", I chose the lesser of the two evils: Compare Apple's lock-down to Microsoft's. Microsoft wrote the freagging book on this subject! Most people don't know that when they're buying a PC to run Linux on it, they are STILL PAYING MICROSOFT money for a copy of Windows that they will never use. You should know better, as I believe it was Germans who first tried to have the EU lift this unfair slave tax. Don't talk to me about lock-down.
Lastly, I'd rather be locked down in an awesome environment such as the one Apple provides, then a Microsoft hell.
To put it more visually, would you like to be locked down in a Swedish prison with hot blondes, or a Turkish prison with man-friendly guards? I picked the first, you pick your favorite.
If the point comes where Apple's hardware and software is so crappy that it's on par with Microsoft's and PCs, then I'll change my tune very quickly, believe me. Until that point, I'm happy locked down in Apple-land.
Hans_ wrote:
Has Apple become less restrictive about developer documentation? Providing all the documentation freely is a requirement for me to even consider anything as "the next Amiga."
Hmmmm.. do you even know that every new Mac comes with a full developer suite and extremely nice documentation, as well as live code-samples, etc? Heck, you can even program vertex and pixel shaders without ever installing a SINGLE file (once you've installed the Dev. Tools that come with the Mac). Now, that's like the good old days where you got a machine and a BASIC manual and could start hacking on day one!
Please don't spread FUD. Macs come with first class developer documentation in the box. Everything you'd like to do, programmatically, on a Mac, is in there.
Now, if you're referring to the iPhone and iPod SDKs, then please don't compare the two. This thread was for Macs. And you already know that the iPhone is "special" in the sense that Apple HAS to work with AT&T, the typical telecom {bleep}s that they are, in order to lock-down the phone because paranoid telecoms are afraid that little mischievious and uncreative hackers will cause havoc on their networks. And anyways, this will change when the SDK is released at MacWorld. In the mean time, jail-break the bizatch, and no more lock-down. Where's the beef?
HenryCase wrote:
As for Apple being the new Amiga, can't say I see it. Amiga was a strong platform back in the day in terms of hardware
and software, but also in terms of flexibility (through
The meaning was: "my new as-favorite as Amiga computer", not "another Amiga-like breakthrough in computing". Apple's Macs are PCs, as I stated to begin with. They're really NO different technologically than most PCs (same busses and architecture, same CPUs, same memory subsystems, disk subsystems, etc).
Believe me, I'm still waiting for the "NEW" Amiga to come, and this means a new platform that changes the rules of the game.
Apple's biggest advancement is in the software department. Unfortunately it's not easy to explain. You have to try programming and many years of CS to realize, and takes many volumes of books to explain the details.
HenryCase wrote:
Apple has the software part about right, but as Hans pointed out where's the detailed documentation for the platform?
You need to look, before you point a finger :wink:
Don't you just love the uncontrolled spread of FUD? It's like a virus, but worse! :-)
@AeroMan:
No need to be shot down, but Mac OS 9 and below were total *crap* technologically (behind the scenes, the UI was good, as far as consistency, look and feel, smarts, etc). Mac OS X is definitely not the same and definitely the only reasonable OS to talk about, as far as Macs are concerned.
@Varthall:
Thank you for pointing out the obvious (to me). I never refuted that you can't run Mac OS X on a PC, but after you try it you realize that one: it's not easy and won't work on most PCs or parts won't work (ex. sound) and two: it ain't too legal.
persia wrote:
The world has moved on, Amiga will only be a retro box. There are no killer apps out there to make it challenge the big boys. Where would Amiga have been had it survived? Hard to say, but the Mac is a good approximation.
I agree. Amiga would have been where the Mac is and actually I believe even further (at least *definitely* as far as the hardware is concerned, if the likes of Jay and company were kept onboard)
Nostalgiac wrote:
Mind you ... my A2000/2060 is not leaving
Of course! Who says the Amiga has to go, right? In fact, it likes being next to the Mac. It reminds the Mac that a long way back, it was kicking it's arse big time, before some big-headed greedy unimaginative egomaniacs who ran a company called Commodore decided to milk the cow...
@toRus:
To be fair, you have some good points for lack of certain improvements (ex. Finder, mount/umount races, etc). To that you can also add a whole slew of things that you and I might have wanted for something to be an "awesome OS", but reality says it's not going to happen, due to economic and time constraints. So out of all the choices we could have had, and out of the ones that we have, OS X is much better off comparatively with the other two popular platforms such as Windows and Linux.
Also, I don't know if your statement about "wower switchers" was directed towards me (I forget what I wrote), but just because I'm rather new to Macs doesn't mean I've not used other platforms including Amigas of course. And it also doesn't mean I'm wowed by the eye-candy. I can see below the surface (and in fact it's the first thing I like to do, and the reason I was in love with the Amiga from early on), because like you I'm a CS guy.
Also your statement "consistent lower denominator of installed software" is unrealistic, because if you honestly judge those applications and the features they offer, they're nothing but lower denominator. Sure they're not chocking with features, but that's also what makes them NOT a nightmare to use. And pardon me, which OS offered better "standard" apps? Even the venerable AmigaOS couldn't give more than standard calculator, notepad and say. Excellence! on the other hand combined the last two for an excellent word processor. That's to be expected, but not in the OS. Also, in order to exploit the underlying capabilities of the OS (APIs primarily) time is needed, because we're talking about paradigmical shifts in application design. We've had the APIs to do something like TimeMachine on *any* platform for at least one decade (Amiga, Linux, etc), yet it took years for the whole thing to coagulate to a vision which then became reality. That always takes time. It's like drawing or painting. You've always had your brushes and pastels and whatnot since you were a child, but it's taken years of practice and absorbing the world, in order to come to the point in time where you can create a Dali painting. Anyhow, I believe the event horizon for this stuff is right now with Apple. I hope they don't drop the ball now. But with Steve on board, I feel they stand a better chance, because he has vision, which I'm sorry to all you Steve-haters, I've not seen the likes since the days of the old Amiga crew in 1983-85. If you've seen it, point the man out to me, I'm interested.
I also disagree with you on the 20 talented people and 2 years to do the job. I don't want to guess wrong, but if you hadn't stated that you've used computers for a long time, I'd assumed you just got out of college and think anything is do-able in a day. This is concerning the software development world, which you clearly know by now is an evolutionary approach to creation. Things take time, because life puts up roadblocks in front. Of course, I'm always hoping I'm proven wrong, because I'm generally unhappy with current computer user interfaces and HCI (I just pick OS X because it's the better of the 'modern' bunch). Prove me wrong, someone!
@MarkTime:
I would have commented on the FreeBSD vs not, but who has time to repeat the whole history of NeXTSTEP from inception to its latest incarnations, or explain microkernels and why the Amiga microkernel was the only one that performed well, and the NeXT folks had to move the BSD core into the kernel to avoid context switching, and other problems related to message passing. Anyhow, at least this way we know who knows and who doesn't :-)
"Fast, fun, powerful....every machine comes with standard development tools in Xcode. Heck, even before Amiga...in the Commodore 64 and Atari 800 days, what I liked is they always came with Basic, and anyone could tinker with it."
Very well said! That's part of the fun with Mac OS X! Reminds me of those good old BASIC prompt days :-)
@pault1:
Very interesting, what you say about Gateway being pressured by none other than Microsoft to drop the Amiga... If there's any truth to this (got any documents or links to share?), my hatred and digust for Microsoft have just increased exponentially. Like all of you, I was hoping I'd be running an Amiga today for my "modern" tasks, rather than a Mac, as good as it may be to me.
Starrfoxx wrote:
Leopard is cool and all, but that's a lot of money to plunk down.
This always gets me. Did you actually pay for Windows yourself, separately from the computer? Or did it come with the computer? I mean seriously, how many people would say the above if they had actually paid the $100-150+ or whatever the slave tax is these days for Windows, separately from the computer, FROM THEIR POCKET. You know: EXTRA. I personally think the latest version of Mac OS X is very competitively priced, compared with general software prices (bought a video game lately, that will last you 2-3 days of fun-time only?), other OS prices, new features and new applications included, etc.
@mdwh2:
Good points.
-
da9000 wrote:
Hans_ wrote:
I've never liked: the closed system approach, and locking in to Apple products. Locking in to Apple doesn't seem to have changed, just look at things such as the iPod and iPhone. Both are locked in to Apple services (or Apple sanctioned AT&T).
Hmmmm, so Hans, how's that different than the Amiga? Did Commodore go around giving the source to Kickstart to everyone? Last I've heard, it's still illegal to have a copy unless you own a real chip. And the company has been dead for 10+ years!
As for the "lock-down", I chose the lesser of the two evils: Compare Apple's lock-down to Microsoft's. Microsoft wrote the freagging book on this subject! Most people don't know that when they're buying a PC to run Linux on it, they are STILL PAYING MICROSOFT money for a copy of Windows. Don't talk to me about lock-down.
Lastly, I'd rather be locked down in an awesome environment such as the one Apple provides, then a Microsoft hell.
To put it more visually, would you like to be locked down in a Swedish prison with hot blondes, or a Turkish prison with man-friendly guards? I picked the first, you pick your favorite.
I feel I should add to this also, When M$ want to lock down a system... they will invent a new format, which one then needs to reverse engineer in order to be compatible with... When apple choose to lock down a system they take a format that already has multiple vendor support... and or is an agreed standard.
I'm not sure exactly just how locked in you are with Apple products either... If I encode a video or some music in wmv or wma... then I've locked into windows only platforms... if I encode the same files in mp4/AAC (as promoted by Apple)... then I can run them on a Mac, iPhone, most *nixes, Windows, Windows Mobile... etc... to me that seems less of a ventor lock in...
Apple's Webkit (the basis of their Web Browser) is also opensource... being ported to AROS as we speak by Robert Norris... used by various other vendors to provide html support in their products... that seems quite open...
Every Mac you can buy comes with gcc... plenty of dev tools and an SDK... seems rather open to me... You don't get that with Windows out of the box.
Even the MacOS X Kernel is free and open source... not so much of a lock in there...
Ok you want to run MacOS X... you have to buy an apple box... but if you want full support for your Windows Box... you have to go to a system vendor too (Dell, HP etc...)... just the same, except, the people who made the OS have no idea about the hardware and the people who made the Hardware have no idea about the OS... that's a great situation to be in, I'm sure!
How is the iPod locked to apple services? I had an iPod for a year an a half, without having an iTunes account, all the music on there was from my CD collection. That iTunes easily imported onto my computer for me (getting CD names and everything) in one click...When I finally got an iTunes account, the service was so good that I use it all the time... it even automatically added album art work to my existing collection... Apple's lock in here, is a damn fine service...
Ok, rant over...
-
Excellent points bloodline!
I actually have an iPod (was given to me from my boss), and I've actually not purchased a single iTunes song. All songs on there are mp3s that I've ripped from my CDs or downloaded (hey, relax! I'm talking about Amiga Round Table, not pirated music :-P) Love that lock-down b*tch! :-)
And one more quickie: as for Microsoft's format lock-down, it's hillarious how Microsoft not only locks you down from other platforms but from its OWN tools! You all know very well how many times you've heard "but I have Office 200x and it says it can't open .doc file from Office 200y" where x < y. So much for "open" formats, har har har.)
To all "oranges", please stop the FUD or at least be more creative.