"Apple is the next Microsoft"

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by jbjb

OSX is indeed a minority, but can you clarify what you mean by the doesn't-get-on-with-other-OSes bit?

I use a mix of many OSes in my day-to-day work and I've never found OSX to be particularly troublesome in that regard. In fact, as it's a proper Unix, I've generally found it plays better with a broad range of OSes than, say, Windows does.

/JB

Example: I can copy a video from a NFTS file system to a Mac, but I can't copy a video file from a Mac to an NFTS file system. It has to be deliberate.

I appreciate that Windows can probably do neither, but with an almost complete monopoly on PC operating systems, Windows doesn't have to get on with other OSes. Other OSes have to get on with Windows.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Example: I can copy a video from a NFTS file system to a Mac, but I can't copy a video file from a Mac to an NFTS file system. It has to be deliberate.

I appreciate that Windows can probably do neither, but with an almost complete monopoly on PC operating systems, Windows doesn't have to get on with other OSes. Other OSes have to get on with Windows.

Don't quite follow the "...has to be deliberate." OS X recognises NTFS natively now and has for a couple of iterations... I even leave some of my external drives as NTFS so that I can use from Mac and also just plug in to PC without having to install additional software such as MacDrive... and older versions of OS X can be made fully at home to NTFS with an add-on...

[theinfamousj]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Don't quite follow the "...has to be deliberate." OS X recognises NTFS natively now and has for a couple of iterations... I even leave some of my external drives as NTFS so that I can use from Mac and also just plug in to PC without having to install additional software such as MacDrive... and older versions of OS X can be made fully at home to NTFS with an add-on...

When I hook my external black NTFS hard drive up to the giant screen iMac at houses where I babysit in order to show a movie, I can read the files and play them off of NTFS for sure.

However it is read only unless I install some after market thing from Paragon (not going to do on someone else's computer). I cannot delete the movie once shown. I cannot save a cute home made set of Photobooth images to my hard drive. Just read only.

VFAT? Sure! NTFS? Nope.

But I don't blame Apple as I have been told that NTFS is a Microsoft intellectual property and I don't expect other companies to secure licenses to technology of rival companies. That said, my Linux has been fully read/write to NTFS for several major version numbers (since before the appearance of the iMacs in question) now so I would be surprised if Apple didn't make a kitty that could do the same. And why it took them so long.

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Example: I can copy a video from a NFTS file system to a Mac, but I can't copy a video file from a Mac to an NFTS file system. It has to be deliberate.

I appreciate that Windows can probably do neither, but with an almost complete monopoly on PC operating systems, Windows doesn't have to get on with other OSes. Other OSes have to get on with Windows.

If you use compatibility with a proprietary Microsoft file system as your measure of playing well with other OSes, it's unsurprising that Microsoft's own OSes come out well, but I wouldn't say that's a particularly fair test.

In any case, NTFS drives on a Windows PC can be quite happily mounted on a Mac as SMB/CIFS network shares etc. which (at least in my experience) is a far more common way of sharing files between PCs and Macs.

/JB

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by theinfamousj

Sorry to jump in again, but I had a camcorder that could DV out to Firewire so I did a ton of research at the time... Apple owned the intellectual property to Firewire and refused to share with anyone so my camcorder could connect to Macs and Firewire cards made with Apple's blessing and not to Firewire shaped ports that were built into PCs who had hopes of being able to obtain drivers for them but weren't allowed to.

I am surprised that Firewire is being called a "standard" since it is proprietary. All this time I had equated "standard" with "open". Live and learn.

This is again what I mean that Apple doesn't play with other OSes, but this is worse. They refuse to allow other manufacturers to incorporate their standards. They don't want other platforms to be able to talk to their devices. It is an extremely excluding strategy.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

You are comparing apples and oranges here. It is not a race because the companies are playing different games.

That's a fair point, but I'm not sure it totally true.

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

The situation with the iPhone and the iPad was not innovation, it was marketing.

The ipad was the first tablet to penetrate the mainstream. MS had been developing one for ages but were unable to make it for prime-time. The ipad was a huge innovation. It was a game-changer. Of course, now they are lagging behind.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Don't quite follow the "...has to be deliberate." OS X recognises NTFS natively now and has for a couple of iterations... I even leave some of my external drives as NTFS so that I can use from Mac and also just plug in to PC without having to install additional software such as MacDrive... and older versions of OS X can be made fully at home to NTFS with an add-on...

I attempted to copy from a Mac OS to NFTS on a Mac laptop bought this summer. I assume the OS is up-to-date and state-of-the-art. It didn't work.

And look at all the issues with proprietary connectors. Sheesh. Apple doesn't want to play with the rest of the personal computing world. It's their business strategy. That's fine for people that are happy to use only Apple. It's not for me. And I think it's a strategy that isn't ultimately going to work. Apple's products don't offer enough innovation anymore to compete with Windows and Android in the long-run.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by theinfamousj

That said, my Linux has been fully read/write to NTFS for several major version numbers (since before the appearance of the iMacs in question) now so I would be surprised if Apple didn't make a kitty that could do the same. And why it took them so long.

Apple doesn't do it because they don't want to. It's strategy. They want users to be totally committed to their devices.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by jbjb

If you use compatibility with a proprietary Microsoft file system as your measure of playing well with other OSes, it's unsurprising that Microsoft's own OSes come out well, but I wouldn't say that's a particularly fair test.

I did acknowledge the unfairness of the test in principle, but that in practice it's a fair test. Windows is the massively dominant force in personal computing. Apple has to deal with MS, not the other way, round purely because of the numbers.

Originally Posted by jbjb

In any case, NTFS drives on a Windows PC can be quite happily mounted on a Mac as SMB/CIFS network shares etc. which (at least in my experience) is a far more common way of sharing files between PCs and Macs.

/JB

I was transferring files via a USB stick. I think that's a more common method than mounting drives.

[CommonReader]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Last update received a few weeks ago... wow massive difference between Win XP and OS X support...

Just BTW doesn't always mean witty, it also means what it says: Laughing at someone, their comments, ideas or general post...

Oh, really. So which OS do you actually use? To my knowledge Apple has stopped supplying updates for Snow Leopard already - and that's just 4 1/2 years old. Quite a different generation as compared to XP. As Apple doesn't release official timetables to announce end of support it's always a guessing game though. It's not even up to debate that Apple does not support its OS for comparable periods of time as does MS, though.

To react to anyone else's comments with a is just a display of sad fanboi-ism.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by CommonReader

Oh, really. So which OS do you actually use? To my knowledge Apple has stopped supplying updates for Snow Leopard already - and that's just 4 1/2 years old. Quite a different generation as compared to XP. As Apple doesn't release official timetables to announce end of support it's always a guessing game though. It's not even up to debate that Apple does not support its OS for comparable periods of time as does MS, though.

To react to anyone else's comments with a is just a display of sad fanboi-ism.

Resorting to the "fanboi" remark is just the last resort of pathetic desperation especially as I use Win XP to 8, various Linux and several OS X's as appropriate for what I want to do... not to mention Android and iOS as well, hey I guess that makes me a multi-OS, multi-platform fanboi... nahhh, just makes the caller of the "fanboi" name an idiot... and a is a perfectly reasonable response as an opinion of someone's post/opinions unless of course you and your opinions are automatically perfect...

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by Rizla

I did acknowledge the unfairness of the test in principle, but that in practice it's a fair test. Windows is the massively dominant force in personal computing. Apple has to deal with MS, not the other way, round purely because of the numbers.

You said that Apple's OS "famously doesn't get on with the greater outside-world of other OSes". That's not a claim about market dominance, it's a claim about interoperability between OSes. In the deeply technical environment in which I work, Windows and OSX are about equally represented, making up about a third each, with the other third mostly a combination of free Unix-ish OSes - principally Linux with some others such as FreeBSD etc. Of those, the one that causes by far the most pain in terms of playing well with the others is Windows.

/JB

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Well since Strayhorn in his role as an arranger would be Jobs in this analogy, him doing "so little on his own when given the tenth of a chance" would prove my point.

Actually, Strayhorn is analogous to the creative teams hired by Jobs, while Jobs is analogous to Ellington's Svengali. This is true not only in the sense of Strayhorn's having had the greater talent but of Ellington's having far more power. Am I seeing a pattern of selective interpretation?

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Rizla

That's a fair point, but I'm not sure it totally true.



The ipad was the first tablet to penetrate the mainstream. MS had been developing one for ages but were unable to make it for prime-time. The ipad was a huge innovation. It was a game-changer. Of course, now they are lagging behind.

What MS developed at the time wasn't meant to make it into the mainstream. It was meant to show the other manufacturers what can be done. It just happened that the manufacturer that got things going was Apple.

MS did the initial development, Apple used that and added marketing, manufacturers used Apple's marketing and added variety, this resulted in competition that got the specs high enough for MS to use their resource draining OS.

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

Actually, Strayhorn is analogous to the creative teams hired by Jobs and Jobs would be analogous to Ellington's Svengali. Am I seeing a pattern of selective interpretation?

Are you looking in a mirror?

[OtterBooks]

Originally Posted by CommonReader

It's not even up to debate that Apple does not support its OS for comparable periods of time as does MS, though..

It wouldn't make sense for Apple to support their previous OS versions as long as MS, really. I'd guess that demand for the continued support of business software likely plays a big part in this (not to mention just having hundreds of millions more clients out there). Large, infrequently overhauled business and government systems probably demand longer-term support, in general.