Printable View
I think maybe I miscommunicated. I meant that OSX as a desktop is a lot nicer on the BSD base than KDE & Gnome are. And since he is used to using Linux/BSD (which don't have the custom apple gui) I was inferring that OSX is a step up from the window managers currently available in the open source arena (KDE/Gnome/others), but still a step down from 2000/XP.Quote:
Originally posted by Colossus
I agree, but I didnt know OSX was a KDE/Gnome GUI. I thought it was still the custom apple gui.
-MrD
I think it's more a matter of taste. Win2k/XP is nice, lots of options but I wouldn't hesitate to switch to OSX if I could load my windows programs with it and use my x86 hardware.Quote:
Originally posted by MrDigital
I think maybe I miscommunicated. I meant that OSX as a desktop is a lot nicer on the BSD base than KDE & Gnome are. And since he is used to using Linux/BSD (which don't have the custom apple gui) I was inferring that OSX is a step up from the window managers currently available in the open source arena (KDE/Gnome/others), but still a step down from 2000/XP.
-MrD
EDIT: this post written using OSX ;)
Under the hood, I really like OS X. But even with its nice eye candy, I'm not a fan of the Apple GUI. The way it looks is fine, but its logical layout just seems like it could be so much more efficient. I suppose a lot of that is due to making its GUI seem familiar to longtime Mac users.
Aside from the OS, I'm not using Apple because their price/performace ratio still seems higher than their competition's. Even with the huge speed advantage the G5's have over past Macs, you can still put together faster x86 boxes for less money. Not that the G5's are dogs by any means, but they're not "the fastest personal computer ever" as Apple's marketing folks might want people to believe.
I think XP went a long way into making things easier for people to find stuff. Win2k still has lots of things in different locations that aren't very intuitive unless you know Windows OS from past experience. Just as I think is the deal with OSX, the more you use it the more you get a feel for where things are and how things work.Quote:
Originally posted by SkyDog
Under the hood, I really like OS X. But even with its nice eye candy, I'm not a fan of the Apple GUI. The way it looks is fine, but its logical layout just seems like it could be so much more efficient. I suppose a lot of that is due to making its GUI seem familiar to longtime Mac users.
But isn't the point of this thread to see if you could put OSX on PC hardware? If you could do that, would you switch?Quote:
Aside from the OS, I'm not using Apple because their price/performace ratio still seems higher than their competition's. Even with the huge speed advantage the G5's have over past Macs, you can still put together faster x86 boxes for less money. Not that the G5's are dogs by any means, but they're not "the fastest personal computer ever" as Apple's marketing folks might want people to believe.
I just like the dev tools I get while still staying in Unix. It is a pain to not have man pages and unix libraries when all your classes have you program in unix. xcode is one of those really great tools, also I get all the great command line utilities as well. I guess I am just not your average mac user, but I can see why most people would be annoyed by some of the crazies that use one thing or another for no reason.
No, I wouldn't. I'd be more inclined to use *nix than OS X.Quote:
Originally posted by Mr Cherry
But isn't the point of this thread to see if you could put OSX on PC hardware? If you could do that, would you switch?
Like I said above, I like the underpinnings and eye candy of OS X, but I find navigating it to be a bit clunky. For example, why should I have to browse the contents of the hard drive to find an executable to launch? If Microsoft made people use Windows Explorer instead of the Start Menu to launch programs, they wouldn't accept it. Yet Mac users happily use the Finder to do the exact same thing.
Sometimes, we also use the Dock for common programs. Which is easier than the start menu. I also use desktop icons like any computer user. When it's two clicks to get to your applications I don't think it's much of a problem (one click HDD icon, one click Applications icons). Or if you prefer you can use the Apple button and go to Recent Items, just as easy to get to the last 10 apps you used.Quote:
Originally posted by SkyDog
No, I wouldn't. I'd be more inclined to use *nix than OS X.
Like I said above, I like the underpinnings and eye candy of OS X, but I find navigating it to be a bit clunky. For example, why should I have to browse the contents of the hard drive to find an executable to launch? If Microsoft made people use Windows Explorer instead of the Start Menu to launch programs, they wouldn't accept it. Yet Mac users happily use the Finder to do the exact same thing.
Haha, that is where the doc bar comes in ;). Plus, the programs in osx in the applications directory are much more cleanly layed out than in windows. All the executables contain all the programs files etc. I mean it is one .app file *** opposed to all these directories in C:/Program\ Files. It is just much easier to do that stuff when it is setup so much easier, and for things you access more frequently there is the doc. I have no problem with it though, I am a Unix user and a Computer Science major so osx gives me more than enough as far as usability goes, and it gives me a better ui than windows. Windows never tear or go blank on load etc (of course on load there is the beach ball, but I mean that is much more graceful than the window going blank because some stupid process is taking too much cpu time, etc). On top of that I love the integration of the ipod + itunes + other apps that come with osx. My chat, mail, contacts, and calendar all came with the system and work very nicely together too which is a very nice object oriented approach to setting up a group of apps imo. By no means am I preaching osx, the gui is a bit more heavy than say windows xp, but at the same time being rendered as pdfs in opengl makes for some nice functional effects like expose´. I needed a laptop, so I went with the smallest lightest model they had (which is what I want, I don't see the point of having these crazy huge laptops with insane specs, that only makes for less portability and less battery life), which was the 12" powerbook G4, and it is nice, but having that kind of tool is great when you have a tiny little screen. I mean I don't disagree with you, I wouldn't mind a little menu like in windows, but there is really less of a need for one at the same time.Quote:
Originally posted by SkyDog
No, I wouldn't. I'd be more inclined to use *nix than OS X.
Like I said above, I like the underpinnings and eye candy of OS X, but I find navigating it to be a bit clunky. For example, why should I have to browse the contents of the hard drive to find an executable to launch? If Microsoft made people use Windows Explorer instead of the Start Menu to launch programs, they wouldn't accept it. Yet Mac users happily use the Finder to do the exact same thing.
The dock's great for a couple of applications, much like the Quick Launch Bar in Windows. But there are probably over twenty programs that I use on a regular basis and I really don't want a huuuuge dock or a whole boatload of aliases on my desktop.
Like you've pointed out, OS X does have its strengths. But I'm sure we can all agree it has some weaknesses, too. And for my particular uses, I feel the weaknesses still outweigh the strengths.
I'm all for someone using what suits their particular needs or tastes. I'm the last person you'll see zealously advocating one platform or bashing another for no good reason. If OS X meets your needs better than Windows or *nix, use it by all means!
Yup! I am also all about using the right tool for the job. Half of why I like osx so much is due to what I'm used to in freebsd though, the other is the apps and the eye candy :). I really like itunes and itunes sharing, really makes music sharing over a lan very transparent and organised. Best part is that rendezvous is an open standard so you can run these servers on anything (had one on my bsd box over the summer, it worked great). A lot easier than having itunes sort everything over nfs.Quote:
Originally posted by SkyDog
The dock's great for a couple of applications, much like the Quick Launch Bar in Windows. But there are probably over twenty programs that I use on a regular basis and I really don't want a huuuuge dock or a whole boatload of aliases on my desktop.
Like you've pointed out, OS X does have its strengths. But I'm sure we can all agree it has some weaknesses, too. And for my particular uses, I feel the weaknesses still outweigh the strengths.
I'm all for someone using what suits their particular needs or tastes. I'm the last person you'll see zealously advocating one platform or bashing another for no good reason. If OS X meets your needs better than Windows or *nix, use it by all means!
oh btw, have you seen the things spotlight will do in osx tiger, very good stuff.
I haven't had the chance to take Tiger for a spin yet. I've got a subscription for OS X Server, so I'll get a copy in a while.
Yeah I am going to wait until it comes out and get my self a student copy. I really can't wait.Quote:
Originally posted by SkyDog
I haven't had the chance to take Tiger for a spin yet. I've got a subscription for OS X Server, so I'll get a copy in a while.
lol, I think your sig needs some updating. Your altec 641s belong to me now:p and I believe you now own a 9800 pro too and a faster cpuQuote:
Originally posted by GeForce
Is it possible to install MAC OS on a PC??
Anyways I think you can get close if you run FreeBSD 5.3 and kde 3.3.