Why doesn't Apple make friends?

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 62
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post


    I'm not overly thrilled with it, nor am I sure it's going to end up being the utopia they envision... but there is a definite reason behind it, and it's not universally reviled. It definitely has the initial "WTF?" factor, but like most such things coming out of Cupertino, some reflection gives it some legs to as least be possibly viable. Maybe. Perhaps.



    Yeah, I can see why it'll be a success in any case. But I think what Apple could potentially reach for here is complete domination of the smartphone/mobile app space, and the resulting software plus hardware profits. Grasping to control as hard as Apple does won't accomplish that. I think blowing the thing open for devs and extending the iPhone line toward the affordable end shortly would make the difference between making a good deal of money with a solid product, and obtaining a license to print your own money for the next ten years, Microsoft-style. iPod was just hardware and a little supporting software in the right place at the right time, this would be something else entirely.



    I don't even believe they'd be giving up much of anything if they allowed uncensored software, right now, and followed up with a serious loosening of the sandbox as soon as their contracts with cell operators allow. When the iPhone goes 3G and gets video chat, that would make a great time to introduce a more affordable little brother running the same platform, same form factor, designed to hog all the marketshare it can, before anyone else makes their media phones truly bearable to use. At that point, even with superior software, it's something of a price war. If Apple heads them off strongly enough, the others won't throw money away to compete with it in the mainstream and will stick to cheap phones and niches.



    Heh. iPhones aren't even sold here yet because contract bundles are only legally allowed for 3G phones, not antiques.
  • Reply 22 of 62
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DigitalChan View Post


    No the very restrictive SDK is proof of their lack of regard for 3rd party development.



    Ah, so you're limiting the discussion of third parties to strictly iPhone development, and ignoring the entire Mac market. Hmm. Whatever way you have to slice and dice the situation to fit your point, I guess.



    Quote:

    Their lack of profit sharing on hardware sales with content providers proves they can't maintain long lasting relationships. Zune sales go partly to the content industries.



    BWAHAHAHAHAHA



    Wait... you're using the *Zune* as a model of how to do business??? Go on, pull my other leg.



    And explain to me, exactly, why *any* hardware manufacturer should have to pay extortion money to the content providers, when the content providers already have distribution channels that are highly profitable. Really, this I can't wait to hear.



    Quote:

    I have been a programmer for a long time. It is not a 70s mentality to assume your interfaces don't change overnight.



    And instead to assume that an entirely different OS will have exactly the same APIs to make your life easier? Ha. Remember, that's the genesis of Carbon - a legacy API created to placate developers who couldn't make the transition to a *completely new OS*.



    Quote:

    Once you publish an interface, you stick with it. That is good software engineering.



    Better software engineering is to acknowledge when there is an opportunity to make a huge leap in productivity and kill code weighing you down. My best days are those when I can make a negative contribution to the LOC on a project.



    Quote:

    You can ADD things, but you'd better think doubly hard when removing something.



    Which is precisely why Apple fought tooth and nail against the whining to *add* Carbon in the first place. It was a huge distraction and sink of their resources, and they knew it. They were shifting to an entirely new OS, and some of the developer base insisted on tying them to the old APIs for the next decade. It may have been necessary to retain some of the less agile companies, but it was certainly not in anyone else's best interests.



    From day one, it was marked for death, and only the most blindered individuals or companies wouldn't let themselves see that. It was *born* deprecated. No one with more than two neurons to rub together could have missed that.



    Quote:

    When you've got millions upon millions of lines of code invested in one API, you don't kill it.



    You do when it's a millstone around your neck. MS is learning this the hardest way possible.



    Adobe has no one but themselves to blame in this - they were given a *decade* to get their act together, and they failed to do so. Tough noogies.



    Quote:

    Hand over the carbon libraries and let adobe make them 64-bit. Makes a lot more sense from an engineering point of view.



    And zero from a business point of view.



    Quote:

    Apple just wanted to kill carbon because it uses C rather than Obj-C. Obj-C forces companies to make a bigger investment in the apple platform to enter it at all, because C code can be more cross platform.



    I can't imagine there could be any technical or engineering benefit to having everyone move to Cocoa, now could there? Nothing that could benefit the end users? Not a single thing that could facilitate a robust and enriched development environment?



    Nope, gotta be that Apple desire for control, and nothing else.



    Here's a bit of a language lesson: Obj-C is a strict superset of C. You can mix and match C, Obj-C and C++ as you like.



    Now, go over and tell me how there's a more cross-platform approach with .NET... or maybe how you can be more cross-GUI with the various Linux approaches. *ANY* platform/GUI you target is going to have a specific portion dedicated to it. You do realize that, right?



    Perhaps if all you're interested in is writing shell scripts, then sure, you can get quite a ways without having to deal with such things, but in the real world, with real apps, you simply can't escape it.



    This isn't the 70s any more, nor the 80s. Not even the 90s. Time to consider that the semantics of the languages and dynamic typing are, actually, a strong tool in the developer's toolkit, and not merely syntactic sugar to be avoided.



    Quote:

    While Apple loves getting things from the windows world(Office, etc..), they hate to see things go the other way.



    First off, I can think of extremely little from the Windows world that would be welcome on the Mac. Office is tolerated at best. Face it, it blows. PowerPoint is the best app of the bunch, and it gets its buttocks handed to it by Keynote so badly it isn't even funny. Excel is a nightmare of missed UI opportunities, and Word is simply a nightmare. What else do you see being slavered over by Mac users that we can't get? Windows Media DRM Edition? SilverFlashLite? A plethora of subpar shareware apps that are painful to use, and all have their own special way of working? No thanks. Quality matters.



    Secondly, Apple hates to see *what* go the other way? QuickTime? iTunes? Safari? Yeah, they're really locking things down there...



    Quote:

    Apple just can't make friends. I am sure if Apple were a person they'd be the kid who gets a bunch of friends, gives them the special koolaid to drink, then starts over.



    Anthropomorphizing companies to elicit an emotional reaction is a sure sign of a lack of evidence to support the suppositions.



    But if you want to use that approach... I think you just described PlaysForSure to a 'T'.
  • Reply 23 of 62
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gon View Post


    Yeah, I can see why it'll be a success in any case. But I think what Apple could potentially reach for here is complete domination of the smartphone/mobile app space, and the resulting software plus hardware profits. Grasping to control as hard as Apple does won't accomplish that. I think blowing the thing open for devs and extending the iPhone line toward the affordable end shortly would make the difference between making a good deal of money with a solid product, and obtaining a license to print your own money for the next ten years, Microsoft-style. iPod was just hardware and a little supporting software in the right place at the right time, this would be something else entirely.



    I don't even believe they'd be giving up much of anything if they allowed uncensored software, right now, and followed up with a serious loosening of the sandbox as soon as their contracts with cell operators allow. When the iPhone goes 3G and gets video chat, that would make a great time to introduce a more affordable little brother running the same platform, same form factor, designed to hog all the marketshare it can, before anyone else makes their media phones truly bearable to use. At that point, even with superior software, it's something of a price war. If Apple heads them off strongly enough, the others won't throw money away to compete with it in the mainstream and will stick to cheap phones and niches.



    I see your point, and your thinking behind it... I'm just not sure that the specific apps that are being disallowed are going to be a huge barrier for adoption. Yeah, I know, I know, they'd be popular... but do you really think that they're going to cause a *significant* number of mainstream consumers to buy a competitor's product, when the entire ball of wax is taken into account? A noninconsequential number of geeks, no doubt... but think about the moms and pops of the world who wouldn't have the first clue what VOIP even is, much less why they'd want a phone on their phone. (I've had that particular discussion before - boy, that was a fun cognitive disconnect to work around.)



    Apple's gunning for the mainstream, and nothing else at this point. It's the low hanging fruit. We'll see what the future holds.



    Quote:

    Heh. iPhones aren't even sold here yet because contract bundles are only legally allowed for 3G phones, not antiques.



    Oh *snap*!
  • Reply 24 of 62
    crazychestercrazychester Posts: 1,339member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DigitalChan View Post


    Steal much music? Oh I suppose some of it could have been ripped by CDs.



    Shows how times have changed and trolls have become so rare that a comment like that wouldn't automatically see you being accused of trolling.



    Sorry but that's no more than a thinly disguised ad hom.



    Who the fuck are you to come in here accusing a long time member of this forum of being a thief without any proof? Piss off and come back when you're either prepared to behave civilly or can produce some proof of your allegations you obnoxious, jump-upped little turd. There's no excuse for accusing someone of theft without a shred of evidence and it shouldn't be tolerated on this forum.
  • Reply 25 of 62
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Woot! You go girl.
  • Reply 26 of 62
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post


    I see your point, and your thinking behind it... I'm just not sure that the specific apps that are being disallowed are going to be a huge barrier for adoption.



    Oh, I don't think any particular missing app alone is a huge barrier. All of them together do matter, however. IM matters even alone. IM *is* mainstream. But this isn't about single apps and linear growth via allowing more of them, but removing enough friction to allow the whole thing to snowball. Devs not having the option to release their software in alternative ways, independent of Apple? Friction. (Plenty of profit, nonprofit, hacking-for-fun, advertising, etc. scenarios where you want to control the release, pricing, etc. of your software in a way Apple currently doesn't allow. Can you even load an app under development into your own iPhone for testing without allowing the same for every single soul in Apple Store?) Devs not being absolutely certain that a public project they're about to engage in will be allowed? Friction. Me not getting Monkey Island on my iPhone? Friction.



    Apple would remain in a position to sell most of the software to the ecosystem because they are most convenient, they are most visible, because users trust them (see hmurchison), because most small devs will *want* to sell through them (like you said), and so on. It just wouldn't happen with an iron grip, but subtler, more voluntary means.



    I really do not think there is a lot to lose here by opening up. When did an open platform actually die to poor software? What's the worst that could happen? There's a huge amount of really bad software for OS X, for Windows, for PalmOS, for Symbian. What mostly happens is that people pick up the good stuff because it's everywhere, and do not even hear about the bad. The less people know, the more they stick with familiar sources, which turns out to be almost the same as trustworthy. (Even Microsoft is pretty trustworthy in the grand scheme of things. )
  • Reply 27 of 62
    mzaslovemzaslove Posts: 519member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by crazychester View Post


    Shows how times have changed and trolls have become so rare that a comment like that wouldn't automatically see you being accused of trolling.



    Sorry but that's no more than a thinly disguised ad hom.



    Who the fuck are you to come in here accusing a long time member of this forum of being a thief without any proof? Piss off and come back when you're either prepared to behave civilly or can produce some proof of your allegations you obnoxious, jump-upped little turd. There's no excuse for accusing someone of theft without a shred of evidence and it shouldn't be tolerated on this forum.



    Thanks for that one. I didn't comment on it earlier because I was just tired, but now you said it all so well.... Let me see, Oh, yeah: I've got 370 gigs of music right now which is not even half my CD library ripped (who's got the time?) -- about 10% is from iTunes (mostly new stuff). Not a drop of it is stolen. So this guy thinks you have to steal that much? Hardly. They just don't have the funds to understand.
  • Reply 28 of 62
    tontontonton Posts: 14,067
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DigitalChan View Post


    Steal much music? Oh I suppose some of it could have been ripped by CDs.



    Doug? Doug Morris, is that you?



    You really don't know that there are hundreds of thousands of music fans who have enough CDs to fill an iPod, even the 160GB monster?



    I'm one of them.



    And you're an extremely ignorant ass, just like Doug Morris, if you're not really Doug himself.
  • Reply 29 of 62
    tontontonton Posts: 14,067
    And something tells me the source of this rant is DigitalChan's boiling ire that the Microsoft/Yahoo deal fell through. Boo fruity hoo.
  • Reply 30 of 62
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post


    Ah, so you're limiting the discussion of third parties to strictly iPhone development, and ignoring the entire Mac market. Hmm. Whatever way you have to slice and dice the situation to fit your point, I guess.







    BWAHAHAHAHAHA



    Wait... you're using the *Zune* as a model of how to do business??? Go on, pull my other leg.



    And explain to me, exactly, why *any* hardware manufacturer should have to pay extortion money to the content providers, when the content providers already have distribution channels that are highly profitable. Really, this I can't wait to hear.







    And instead to assume that an entirely different OS will have exactly the same APIs to make your life easier? Ha. Remember, that's the genesis of Carbon - a legacy API created to placate developers who couldn't make the transition to a *completely new OS*.







    Better software engineering is to acknowledge when there is an opportunity to make a huge leap in productivity and kill code weighing you down. My best days are those when I can make a negative contribution to the LOC on a project.







    Which is precisely why Apple fought tooth and nail against the whining to *add* Carbon in the first place. It was a huge distraction and sink of their resources, and they knew it. They were shifting to an entirely new OS, and some of the developer base insisted on tying them to the old APIs for the next decade. It may have been necessary to retain some of the less agile companies, but it was certainly not in anyone else's best interests.



    From day one, it was marked for death, and only the most blindered individuals or companies wouldn't let themselves see that. It was *born* deprecated. No one with more than two neurons to rub together could have missed that.







    You do when it's a millstone around your neck. MS is learning this the hardest way possible.



    Adobe has no one but themselves to blame in this - they were given a *decade* to get their act together, and they failed to do so. Tough noogies.







    And zero from a business point of view.







    I can't imagine there could be any technical or engineering benefit to having everyone move to Cocoa, now could there? Nothing that could benefit the end users? Not a single thing that could facilitate a robust and enriched development environment?



    Nope, gotta be that Apple desire for control, and nothing else.



    Here's a bit of a language lesson: Obj-C is a strict superset of C. You can mix and match C, Obj-C and C++ as you like.



    Now, go over and tell me how there's a more cross-platform approach with .NET... or maybe how you can be more cross-GUI with the various Linux approaches. *ANY* platform/GUI you target is going to have a specific portion dedicated to it. You do realize that, right?



    Perhaps if all you're interested in is writing shell scripts, then sure, you can get quite a ways without having to deal with such things, but in the real world, with real apps, you simply can't escape it.



    This isn't the 70s any more, nor the 80s. Not even the 90s. Time to consider that the semantics of the languages and dynamic typing are, actually, a strong tool in the developer's toolkit, and not merely syntactic sugar to be avoided.







    First off, I can think of extremely little from the Windows world that would be welcome on the Mac. Office is tolerated at best. Face it, it blows. PowerPoint is the best app of the bunch, and it gets its buttocks handed to it by Keynote so badly it isn't even funny. Excel is a nightmare of missed UI opportunities, and Word is simply a nightmare. What else do you see being slavered over by Mac users that we can't get? Windows Media DRM Edition? SilverFlashLite? A plethora of subpar shareware apps that are painful to use, and all have their own special way of working? No thanks. Quality matters.



    Secondly, Apple hates to see *what* go the other way? QuickTime? iTunes? Safari? Yeah, they're really locking things down there...







    Anthropomorphizing companies to elicit an emotional reaction is a sure sign of a lack of evidence to support the suppositions.



    But if you want to use that approach... I think you just described PlaysForSure to a 'T'.



    In other words....



    "Think different" Or else...



    Apple is just another evil empire.



    Oh as far as Apple software on Windows... Most of that is a joke. It poorly integrates with the windows environment, it's integration is a joke. The applications look and run sluggish compared to all other Windows applications. Their "porting" to windows was a hack job at best.



    As far as your correct acknowledgment of the relationship between C/Obj-C/C++ it's not as easy to plug in C code with Obj-C code as it is with C++. The syntax is completely different and the files look like hogwash. You can also interface Java with C with the JNI, but that doesn't mean it'd be trivial to port adobe photoshop to a Java windowing system.



    Also-- How is it NOT good business sense to allow someone else to maintain something you can't/won't?



    And as far as my comments about music thievery I suppose sarcasm doesn't show up properly on those fine Apple screens that are victims of class action law suits.
  • Reply 31 of 62
    mzaslovemzaslove Posts: 519member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DigitalChan View Post


    In other words....



    "Think different" Or else...



    Apple is just another evil empire.



    Oh as far as Apple software on Windows... Most of that is a joke. It poorly integrates with the windows environment, it's integration is a joke. The applications look and run sluggish compared to all other Windows applications. Their "porting" to windows was a hack job at best.



    As far as your correct acknowledgment of the relationship between C/Obj-C/C++ it's not as easy to plug in C code with Obj-C code as it is with C++. The syntax is completely different and the files look like hogwash. You can also interface Java with C with the JNI, but that doesn't mean it'd be trivial to port adobe photoshop to a Java windowing system.



    And as far as my comments about music thievery I suppose sarcasm doesn't show up properly on those fine Apple screens that are victims of class action law suits.



    Yawn... wake me when it's over.
  • Reply 32 of 62
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DigitalChan View Post


    No the very restrictive SDK is proof of their lack of regard for 3rd party development.



    Their lack of profit sharing on hardware sales with content providers proves they can't maintain long lasting relationships. Zune sales go partly to the content industries.



    I have been a programmer for a long time. It is not a 70s mentality to assume your interfaces don't change overnight. Once you publish an interface, you stick with it. That is good software engineering. You can ADD things, but you'd better think doubly hard when removing something.



    When you've got millions upon millions of lines of code invested in one API, you don't kill it. Hand over the carbon libraries and let adobe make them 64-bit. Makes a lot more sense from an engineering point of view.



    Apple just wanted to kill carbon because it uses C rather than Obj-C. Obj-C forces companies to make a bigger investment in the apple platform to enter it at all, because C code can be more cross platform. While Apple loves getting things from the windows world(Office, etc..), they hate to see things go the other way.



    Apple just can't make friends. I am sure if Apple were a person they'd be the kid who gets a bunch of friends, gives them the special koolaid to drink, then starts over.



    That one did it. You're just trolling now. Absolutely, freaking, hard line, trolling.



    My advice to others it to just ignore this bloke from here on out.
  • Reply 33 of 62
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DigitalChan View Post


    As far as your correct acknowledgment of the relationship between C/Obj-C/C++ it's not as easy to plug in C code with Obj-C code as it is with C++. The syntax is completely different and the files look like hogwash.



    Given that ObjC is a superset of C, you are completely wrong. Whereas C++ and C don't fully overlap, any piece of C code will just work without modification in ObjC.
  • Reply 34 of 62
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,279member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hiro View Post


    That one did it. You're just trolling now. Absolutely, freaking, hard line, trolling.



    My advice to others it to just ignore this bloke from here on out.



    Yup...he's on my ignore list as of now.
  • Reply 35 of 62
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chucker View Post


    Given that ObjC is a superset of C, you are completely wrong. Whereas C++ and C don't fully overlap, any piece of C code will just work without modification in ObjC.





    C code works fine in C++.





    That's good so many decide to block out things that bring them trouble.



    Steve Jobs does have a sensational nature behind him. First Poland, than the rest of Europe while destroying those money hungry content providers!
  • Reply 36 of 62
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DigitalChan View Post


    In other words....



    "Think different" Or else...



    Apple is just another evil empire.



    Blah blah blah blah... do you have any content to share, or are you just going to continue posting empty ramblings?



    Quote:

    Oh as far as Apple software on Windows... Most of that is a joke. It poorly integrates with the windows environment, it's integration is a joke. The applications look and run sluggish compared to all other Windows applications. Their "porting" to windows was a hack job at best.



    Funny, I thought your assertion was that Apple didn't let things flow the other way... took care of that, and now it's that the porting isn't up to snuff. Make up your mind as to what your point is.



    Quote:

    As far as your correct acknowledgment of the relationship between C/Obj-C/C++ it's not as easy to plug in C code with Obj-C code as it is with C++.



    Chucker nailed it - you haven't a clue what you're talking about.



    Quote:

    The syntax is completely different and the files look like hogwash.



    I'm sorry, are you complaining about the *syntax*? A programmer tells me he can't use a language because of the *syntax*, and I'll ask him to clean out his desk. My god, how amateur do you have to be, to be held back by syntax??



    That's just sad.



    Quote:

    You can also interface Java with C with the JNI, but that doesn't mean it'd be trivial to port adobe photoshop to a Java windowing system.



    Photoshop? No, probably not... but not because of limitations of the technology, but rather the design.



    Quote:

    Also-- How is it NOT good business sense to allow someone else to maintain something you can't/won't?



    *jawdrop* This comment belies a depth of ignorance I have neither the patience nor inclination to plumb.



    Quote:

    And as far as my comments about music thievery I suppose sarcasm doesn't show up properly on those fine Apple screens that are victims of class action law suits.



    Not just a troll, but a passive aggressive one at that. Excellent.



    Quote:

    C code works fine in C++.



    No one ever said it didn't.



    Quote:

    That's good so many decide to block out things that bring them trouble.



    Oh that's rich coming from the guy who, when faced with point-by-point rebuttals to his assertions, essentially sticks his fingers in his ears and goes LALALALALALALALA...



    Quote:

    Steve Jobs does have a sensational nature behind him. First Poland, than the rest of Europe while destroying those money hungry content providers!



    You did *NOT* just invoke Godwin's Law... omg, you really did. You really, actually did.



    BWAHAHAAHAHAHA... *sigh*



    This isn't even sporting any more. Welcome to the ignore file.
  • Reply 37 of 62
    mzaslovemzaslove Posts: 519member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post


    Not just a troll, but a passive aggressive one at that. Excellent.



    Ha! You made my day... I needed a laugh (stuck in the muck-pit of writing a script that pays well but has no fun in it). Thanks.
  • Reply 38 of 62
    Wow It's truly amazing how close-minded all you are.



    Jump into bed with Steve and catch his various STDs.



    You kids have no idea how sad it is so many of you adore Apple.



    They fucked up once, they are doing it again.



    Fortunately I'll probably be dead before the ramifications of Apple actually being successful again come to bear. Unfortunately the real world will have to deal with it while all you people are playing with your innovative one-button mice & other apple shortcomings.
  • Reply 39 of 62
    dehgenogdehgenog Posts: 28member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DigitalChan View Post


    Wow It's truly amazing how close-minded all you are.



    Jump into bed with Steve and catch his various STDs.



    You kids have no idea how sad it is so many of you adore Apple.



    They fucked up once, they are doing it again.



    Fortunately I'll probably be dead before the ramifications of Apple actually being successful again come to bear. Unfortunately the real world will have to deal with it while all you people are playing with your innovative one-button mice & other apple shortcomings.



    Yeah, dude. They're especially screwing over all investors who see anything in one of the most financially potent and tightly-run technology companies of the present.



    Oh god, and all those new MacBook owners who've recently switched and think they're genuinely happy with their computing experience right now? The rest of the world is reeling from dealing with the repercussions. Look at Darfur, man.



    Or are you talking about the dangers of buying into Apple's environment? You're probably right. Microsoft has *really* become quite clever in balancing the closed OS with a multitude of open standards and protocols, as seen in Vista. No ramifications with their vision and policy in sight!



    I resisted playing the DigitalChan game all day, but I'm rewarding myself. The work day is almost over.
  • Reply 40 of 62
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dehgenog View Post


    Yeah, dude. They're especially screwing over all investors who see anything in one of the most financially potent and tightly-run technology companies of the present.



    Oh god, and all those new MacBook owners who've recently switched and think they're genuinely happy with their computing experience right now? The rest of the world is reeling from dealing with the repercussions. Look at Darfur, man.



    Or are you talking about the dangers of buying into Apple's environment? You're probably right. Microsoft has *really* become quite clever in balancing the closed OS with a multitude of open standards and protocols, as seen in Vista. No ramifications with their vision and policy in sight!



    I resisted playing the DigitalChan game all day, but I'm rewarding myself. The work day is almost over.



    I am acknowledging the dangers of entering the environment run by an irresponsible company such as Apple.

    So you acknowledge Microsoft's model is bad but when Apple tries to do the same thing, it's okay?

    Apple is even worse as it is a 1-vendor model for hardware and software... NO CHOICE.



    The kind of people who switch to Mac and don't mind is the same reason why Apple sales only started to make traction when they could run Windows.



    I run machines ranging from a SPARC machine running to Solaris to a couple of Windows machines to a few Linux from Scratch machines.... I also own a dreaded MBP.. worst machine of them all. Once I don't need to test on OS X for this contract anymore I am nuking it and putting a real OS on there (and giving it to my mother-in-law)... one with actual security measures. (any suggestions?)
Sign In or Register to comment.