Coffeehouse Thread

25 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

If Microsoft gets heat for playing monopoly, should Apple tread carefully in PC territory?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    arunpv

    http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=1678

    Apple is now officially "unofficially" supporting dual booting with Windows. This may create some pretty serious implications for our industry.


    I like this comment



    Applications are a good example:
    In OS X, you have the .app package: just drag it into your application folder and it's "installed", move it to the Trash folder and it's "uninstalled".

    In Windows you have to use an installation/uninstallation program to make sure you get all the right registry and ini settings in place, but these files are also readily accessible directly for modifications - heck installation progress windows even show you exactly where they are putting every single file: does the average user need to see any of that??




    My question is why Windows Install/UnInstall so complicated compared to Apple?

  • User profile image
    Jason Cox

    Because PC users are smarter so we can click a few buttons
    Tongue Out

    I wouldnt be comfortable this that kind of installation/uninstalltion routine, I'd think I was moving the file or creating shortcuts, I prefer the standard installation routines we have now that actually gives me control over the installation.

  • User profile image
    Escamillo

    arunpv wrote:
    http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=1678

    Apple is now officially "unofficially" supporting dual booting with Windows. This may create some pretty serious implications for our industry.


    I like this comment


    Applications are a good example:
    In OS X, you have the .app package: just drag it into your application folder and it's "installed", move it to the Trash folder and it's "uninstalled".

    In Windows you have to use an installation/uninstallation program to make sure you get all the right registry and ini settings in place, but these files are also readily accessible directly for modifications - heck installation progress windows even show you exactly where they are putting every single file: does the average user need to see any of that??



    My question is why Windows Install/UnInstall so complicated compared to Apple?



    The above is a falsehood on two counts.

    Windows apps don't *need* installation programs.  As a hobbiest programmer, none of my Win32 or .NET apps have installation programs.

    Second, most Mac apps nowadays do use install/uninstall routines, including Apple's own programs (iTunes, iWork, etc).  And those programs spread files in numerous places (Applications folder (or wherever you choose to install), user prefs folder, system prefs folder (if the app requires that for some reason), etc, and the app can do things like "register" itself to be launched at system boot (I'm not sure how that's done).  For these apps, you can drag the .app package to the trash to "uninstall" it but you'd have a bunch of the app's leavings still on your sytstem.

  • User profile image
    scobleizer

    >My question is why Windows Install/UnInstall so complicated compared to Apple?

    For corporate manageability.

    Let's say you have 20,000 desktops. With Windows you can delete a file on those 20,000 desktops because you can look at where the file is that you want to delete if it was registered with the registry. But with Macs? How do you do that?

  • User profile image
    Cybermagell​an

    scobleizer wrote:
    >My question is why Windows Install/UnInstall so complicated compared to Apple?

    For corporate manageability.

    Let's say you have 20,000 desktops. With Windows you can delete a file on those 20,000 desktops because you can look at where the file is that you want to delete if it was registered with the registry. But with Macs? How do you do that?


    Who the hell would run 20,000 Macs?

  • User profile image
    AdityaG

    Cybermagellan wrote:
    scobleizer wrote:>My question is why Windows Install/UnInstall so complicated compared to Apple?

    For corporate manageability.

    Let's say you have 20,000 desktops. With Windows you can delete a file on those 20,000 desktops because you can look at where the file is that you want to delete if it was registered with the registry. But with Macs? How do you do that?


    Who the hell would run 20,000 Macs?


    no one.

    Also. I use mac G5s at school sometimes if I am stuck in a lab. Let me tell you, every single program (even iTunes and such) spews random data files all over your home directory. The OS itself won't start without creating 3-4 directories like Library, Music etc. It's the same with any OS.

  • User profile image
    Detroit Muscle

    Jason Cox wrote:
    Because PC users are smarter so we can click a few buttons

    A Mac is a PC.

  • User profile image
    ddewbofh

    Lay off that already, you know as well as I do that using the word PC in this (or any context realted to wintel and macs) is just a term used instead of writing "an x86-based pc not running osx".

  • User profile image
    Jason Cox

    Cybermagellan wrote:
    scobleizer wrote: >My question is why Windows Install/UnInstall so complicated compared to Apple?

    For corporate manageability.

    Let's say you have 20,000 desktops. With Windows you can delete a file on those 20,000 desktops because you can look at where the file is that you want to delete if it was registered with the registry. But with Macs? How do you do that?


    Who the hell would run 20,000 Macs?
    Someone with $40,000,000 to spare and the need for alot of cheese graters (for those who dont know, thats a joke about the G5's case).

  • User profile image
    Project

    I have to say there is an awful lot of ignorance being posted in this thread. But what can I expect from a Microsoft board. >>>>I wouldnt be comfortable this that kind of installation/uninstalltion routine, I'd think I was moving the file or creating shortcuts, I >prefer the standard installation routines we have now that actually gives me control over the installation.>>>Second, most Mac apps nowadays do use install/uninstall routines, including Apple's own programs (iTunes, iWork, etc). And those programs spread files in numerous places (Applications folder (or wherever you choose to install), user prefs folder, system prefs folder (if the app requires that for some reason), etc, and the app can do things like "register" itself to be launched at system boot (I'm not sure how that's done). For these apps, you can drag the .app package to the trash to "uninstall" it but you'd have a bunch of the app's leavings still on your sytstem.>>> Read the above. It doesnt spew "random" files all over the home directory. iTunes puts a folder in your library for any scripts YOU create, or plugins YOU use. And then it has its preference file, in the *surprise* Preferences folder. So to revmoe iTunes, I can just delete iTunes.app. I can delete the preferences if I wish too. Now ask yourself how you cleanly remove Windows Media Player for Windows (on the Mac its a dragndrop affair)

  • User profile image
    jlowgren

    My eyes are melting.

  • User profile image
    ddewbofh

    You've ever had a mac as a workstation for any longer period of time? I have, the "only stores files in your homedir" bit is a load of *bleep*. Stuff gets thrown all over the file-system. There are actual apps written to help you get rid of those files, can't remember any names atm as I haven't used them for a while.

    That being said, the system for adding and removing apps on Mac OS X is a lot better than the WinXP way of doing it. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, the registry on WinXP often acts up while on Macs developers have a bad habit of hard-coding paths. Like instead of using variables equivalent to $WORKING_DIR they write their apps assuming that it's stored in /Applications or $HOME/Applications.

  • User profile image
    Jason Cox

    Project, the Enter button is your friend, please give it some attention every once in awhile.
    Wink

  • User profile image
    spoofnozzle

    Jason Cox wrote:
    Project, the Enter button is your friend, please give it some attention every once in awhile.


    Give him a break... probably uses a Mac.  Wink

    Seriously though...

    OSX... essentially FreeBSD + Aqua

    So... What makes Mac-BSD different to PC-BSD or any other UNIX ??

    As far as I can see... nothing... it should have all the same potential and all the same limits.

    There is no reason why Mac-UNIX should not be able to be managed on the same scale as other UNIX or Windows.

    Text files... Conf files... Ini files... Registry files... it's all much of a muchness... they are just places to store settings... they can all get screwed, and you need to know what you are doing if you go editing any of them.

    The only issue with registry files is that they are structured storage files, and hence need specific tools to manipulate them.

    However... most Mac users couldn't care less about any of this.

    Mac users know about Aqua and Apps... and that's all they want to know about... they just want it to work, and don't care how that happens.

    Apple know this, and 'make it so'.

    The big difference with Apple is that they control... the hardware, firmware, drivers, O/S and most system apps.

    Microsoft control... the O/S... and have even been stopped from trying to control system apps.

    It should be fairly obvious that the Mac model is likely to be more stable and allow for more 'integration' of all areas.

    The downside is that it's a closed shop... and it's just as well that Mac is only a small %age of the market... because their control makes the 'evil empire' look like a benevolent society.

  • User profile image
    ddewbofh

    You are obviously clue-less when it comes to macs. Here's the deal:

    The kernel is Apple's own which in turn is based on the mach-kernel. It uses parts of the freebsd user-land, like libc and lots of the utils. What it doesn't "do" is use /etc for configuration, it's merely there for legacy purposes. Mac-configuration is handled by something inherited from NeXT, the NetInfo system. Any changes in the /etc dir, either by you or the system, is translated to and from the netinfo database.

    Calling Mac OS X "aqua on freebsd" is an insult to Apple, it's far more elegant than that.

  • User profile image
    spoofnozzle

    ddewbofh wrote:

    You are obviously clue-less when it comes to macs. Here's the deal:

    The kernel is Apple's own which in turn is based on the mach-kernel. It uses parts of the freebsd user-land, like libc and lots of the utils. What it doesn't "do" is use /etc for configuration, it's merely there for legacy purposes. Mac-configuration is handled by something inherited from NeXT, the NetInfo system. Any changes in the /etc dir, either by you or the system, is translated to and from the netinfo database.

    Calling Mac OS X "aqua on freebsd" is an insult to Apple, it's far more elegant than that.



    I'm not clueless.

    I'm well aware of what OSX is, and regardless of how much Apple-sauce you want to pour on it... it is still UNIX... and unix derived from BSD -- OpenDarwin to be more exact... which is based on FreeBSD 5 and Mach 3.0.

    I don't give a rats arse if you think that's an insult to Apple... it's a fact.

    I didn't say anything about how OSX does conf or whether it uses /etc... next time, try reading what I wrote before you flame away.

    What I was saying, quite clearly I thought, was that OSX is UNIX + Aqua... and that means that it has all the same capability as any other UNIX... including being managed on a large scale... meaning that anyone who dismisses it as not being as capable as windows, is making a big mistake.

    However... to achieve their 'elegant' approach requires Apple to have a much higher level of control over the entire package.

  • User profile image
    DoomBringer

    This folder idea is stupid.  Lets say I install 25 applications.  That is a huge mess of files.  Or 100 apps.  Or more. 

  • User profile image
    Togora

    Firstly let me say that I am not a programme developer in any way shape or form but perhaps the question that should be asked here is why can some programmers produce software for windows that does not need to be installed but simply unpacked and ran, while others have to be fully installed and listed in the registry. To my simple mind if programs were self-contained then surely the operating system could be made to place limitations on it and thus reduce the chance of a trojan or virus migrating. The up side of this would be a reduced registry or its end and increase the speed of the system. Perhaps the way to go is to produce an OS that is only widget based and using very little in the way of resources but would this be possible in a system that is used day to day? Furthermore, why Oh why can't all programmers create software that prior to installing a new version uninstalls the older version first, Opera browser is an excellent example of this. Finally, will Microsoft answer Apple by creating their own duel-boot interface for Apple and Windows but with the twist that it will allow users to interact between them both within one window? Offering this for free would be sweet justice. Wink

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.