patrick.net

Dan8267 says

If what I'm writing is too difficult for you to understand, that means you need to become more computer literate. That class you took back in 1986 isn't worth shit today.

It is impossible for me to understand anything you said. And I couldn't be bothered.
Here is my point.....if you tech guys and companies want me to keep you in business by buying your products, you better make it user friendly. All that stuff you said went over my head. Let the computer do all that on it's own, why even ask me? When I turn on a car, it's to get from point A to point B. I could care less for all the technicalities. I don't recall ever opening the hood of the Prius I got 3 or 4 years ago. An electric car I got last month did end up with me looking under the hood, only because an engineer friend wanted to look inside. I could care less.
The same thing goes when I turn on the PC. It's to use a software or get on a web site. If the PC does anything else or takes too long, I expect it to identify and fix the problem on it's own. I expect gadgets that I buy to be smarter than me, not dumber than me. Is that too much to ask for?

Dan8267 says

Restoring the OS partition takes fifteen minutes and you don't have to baby sit it either.

What about all the updates that need to be downloaded and re-installed, often requiring a series of restarts?

Strategist says

And I couldn't be bothered.

This is where Apple succeeds and Microsoft fails: "When you come to a fork in the road, take it."

Apple chooses to make hardware and software that work simply. Customers love it, especially customers who do not want to get dragged into the technical details.

Microsoft tries to copy Apple by making Windows appear simple, but that over-simplification causes endless problems. Microsoft has forgotten the directness of DOS and has failed to incorporate fully the practicality of the Internet: Windows produces countless obscure error messages, and does not even let users copy and paste those errors into a search engine. (Windows may occasionally offer to search for help on the Internet, but in my experience that fails every time. I laugh out loud when it suggests "phone a friend," like a game show on TV.) I had to create a DOS batch file to get Windows "Device Manager" to show all devices, because Windows insisted on creating duplicate entries and hiding them from view, and then getting lost among them. DOS and Windows through 3.11 worked for people who were interested in taking apart their computers and making everything work, then from 95 onwards MSFT over-simplified the GUI while making the underlying OS exponentially more complex with registries and multiple user accounts on each personal computer.

As the market shifted to smartphones, which people can't take apart, AAPL has surpassed MSFT. Ironically, MSFT has actually accelerated that shift by producing oversimplified (and thus really difficult) operating systems that drove people away from desktops. (The HDD duopoly of Seagate and WD hurt too, raising the cost of the destkop's storage advantage.) Due to the problems in the desktop space, people are buying either smartphones or Arduino/Raspberry or a combination.

Strategist says

if you tech guys and companies want me to keep you in business by buying your products, you better make it user friendly. All that stuff you said went over my head. Let the computer do all that on it's own, why even ask me? When I turn on a car, it's to get from point A to point B.

You can either have control or a hands-off experience. You can't have both. Control, by definition, requires understanding.

Can you replace the internal combustion engine in your care with an electric motor? Can you replace the chassis/body of a Ford Escort with one for a Lamborghini? Can you replace the built-in GPS navigation system with another? Can you replace the dashboard with a different one? Sure, but it's hard as balls with cars. In contrast, doing such things are easy with computers.

You can choose to have a hands-off experience. It's called the Cloud. You don't have to configure or administer anything, but you don't have any control either. I prefer control.

curious2 says

What about all the updates that need to be downloaded and re-installed, often requiring a series of restarts?

I typically make OS backups with every service pack or when I reset my system to a prior backup. I prefer to rarely update my OS until a service pack comes out. I don't need the latest panicked security patches to keep my system free of malware. And even if I got any malware, it's fifteen unattended minutes to get rid of it, much less than the time it takes to install the typical week's patches.

I ran Win XP SP3 from April 2008 until December 2014, not even installing later patches, with absolutely no problems.

Yes, there are trade-offs, but I find saving your OS partition and restoring it once a year is a pretty good system. My current workhorse PC is over five years old and runs faster than most PCs you can buy today (unless you reinstall the OS). Same for my Home Theater PC. One caveat: I did recently install an SSD and that hosts both my operating system and most applications.

Dan8267 says

The operating system is irrelevant. If you aren't imaging your OS drive, you aren't doing proper system administration and are subjecting yourself to the needless risk of system failure at an inconvenient time.

Have you heard of Time Machine?

Downloading a PC app from the Internet is like pouring raw sewage onto your carpet.
This is where Microsoft is failing. They provide APIs for developers, but they failed to provide a safe application source for users.
So people use only services on the web rather than dedicated apps using windows APIs.

People now typically use far more apps on their cell phones than on their PCs.

The PC should by right still be the center place of people's digital world but is losing this role because Microsoft has totally, wantonly, abandoned all willingness to make it so, and abandoned the willingness to defend Windows APIs as the key computing platform - and with that the willingness to live, as a company.

Dan8267 says

Can you replace the internal combustion engine in your care with an electric motor?

I can't even replace the freakin oil.

Dan8267 says

Can you replace the built-in GPS navigation system with another?

Iphone Dan, iphone. I ask Siri to do everything. That's one girl with one helluva sense of direction.

Heraclitusstudent says

Dan8267 says

The operating system is irrelevant. If you aren't imaging your OS drive, you aren't doing proper system administration and are subjecting yourself to the needless risk of system failure at an inconvenient time.

Have you heard of Time Machine?

Yes, it's Apple's knockoff of Shadow copy.

Heraclitusstudent says

Downloading a PC app from the Internet is like pouring raw sewage onto your carpet.

All apps on PCs or phones, on Windows or Unix (including MACs) are distributed over the Internet today. When was the last time you bought physical media.

Heraclitusstudent says

They provide APIs for developers, but they failed to provide a safe application source for users.

PC users generally don't like being boxed into a single store whether it's for music, apps, television, or anything else.

I don't need an Apple or Microsoft app store. I need an OS that properly isolates apps so that malware is impossible. I wrote about this is another thread, calling it a third generation OS.

Strategist says

Dan8267 says

Can you replace the built-in GPS navigation system with another?

Iphone Dan, iphone. I ask Siri to do everything.

Not relevant to the point.

Dan8267 says

All apps on PCs or phones, on Windows or Unix (including MACs) are distributed over the Internet today. When was the last time you bought physical media.

That's the point.

Dan8267 says

PC users generally don't like being boxed into a single store whether it's for music, apps, television, or anything else.

No one needs to be boxed. You can have a choice.

Dan8267 says

I need an OS that properly isolates apps so that malware is impossible.

Yeah, that would be even better. But I guess they didn't even try.

I have never known anybody who was smart enough not to download "Free" Casino or Porn programs from the internet to get a virus.

The only time I ever got a virus on windows was when I hit close through website spam too many times, and hit "Next" by mixtake; I knew I fucked up the second after I hit it and went straight to Avast. This was like 15 years ago.

Really? I think after being burned a couple of times, many Windows users decide not to download anything outside very reputable sources like Mozilla.

I guess some apps on your phone can steal your contacts.

A key logger on your PC could steal financial accounts logins, or tax records for example.

That tends to make me paranoiac...

Dan8267 says

Yes, it's Apple's knockoff of Shadow copy.

It comes standard with MacOS.

Heraclitusstudent says

Dan8267 says

Yes, it's Apple's knockoff of Shadow copy.

It comes standard with MacOS.

Shadow Copy has come standard with Windows since XP (2001). Apple first released Time Machine on October 26, 2007 at it didn't do nearly as much as Shadow Copy.

Once again, Apple fanboys claim Apple invented something that other companies have been doing for nearly a decade before. Apple would need an actual time machine to have invented anything.

And I mean really, who would think that Apple, with it's priorities, would come up with a backup system supporting both volumes and individual files and version control before a B2B/B2C tech company like Microsoft?

Dan8267 says

Shadow Copy has come standard with Windows since XP (2001). Apple first released Time Machine on October 26, 2007 at it didn't do nearly as much as Shadow Copy.

Once again, Apple fanboys claim Apple invented something that other companies have been doing for nearly a decade before. Apple would need an actual time machine to have invented anything.

And I mean really, who would think that Apple, with it's priorities, would come up with a backup system supporting both volumes and individual files and version control before a B2B/B2C tech company like Microsoft?

People don't buy things based on who invented what. They buy things based on needs and wants. When Apple comes out with something new the crowds go berserk, but for Microsoft......LOL. It's the same old crap.

Heraclitusstudent says

A key logger on your PC could steal financial accounts logins, or tax records for example.

That tends to make me paranoiac...

I hate to break this to you -- no wait, I love to break this to you -- but iPhones came with a factory-installed keylogger that you couldn't uninstall called "Carrier IQ". So much for Apple products being more secure.

And there are other keylogger attacks on iPhones. Oh, and whose cloud was hacked releasing naked pictures of celebrities? Oh yes, that was Apple. And Apple knew about their security flaws 6 months before the hacking and didn't bother to fix them.

So get off your high horse about Apple. The real history of the company and its crappy polished turd products and stolen ideas does not warrant the status you bestow upon it. And quite frankly, any person who cannot criticize a company or its product is someone who's opinion does not matter. My opinions on Microsoft and other companies are well-founded as demonstrated by the fact I can go into great detail about what those companies did right and what they did wrong. It proves I'm not religious about products like the Apple fan base is.

Apple fans are not tech aficionados. They are ill-informed consumers brainwashed into thinking that using a particular company's products makes them better people than others. It doesn't. It makes them mindless zombies, slave to a corporation that doesn't give a shit about them.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/CZGIn9bpALo

Heraclitusstudent says

That tends to make me paranoiac...

Tens to make me use Linux.

DieBankOfAmericaPhukkingDie says

BSD is very stable.

Nothing Apple has ever done is original in any dimension.

But choosing BSD as an operating system was a very sound decision.

Ah, but Apple didn't make BSD. BSD or Berkley Software Distributions has a long and ugly history going back to the 1970s, long before Apple abandoned it's MAC OS System N operating system (although it kept the marketing name of the OS). BSD was created by the University of California at Berkeley, a place where acid consumption was mandated by law in the 1970s.

Most products, including operating systems, do get better with time. MAC OS was the exception; it had to be abandoned and replaced by BSD. But after about 40 years of development, most of the problems with Unix in general, and BSD in particular, will have been patched over. But the overall architecture of all versions of Unix is essentially the same as it was in the 1970s, and we've learned a hell of a lot about what's right and wrong in software development since then.

Dan8267 says

I hate to break this to you -- no wait, I love to break this to you -- but iPhones came with a factory-installed keylogger that you couldn't uninstall called "Carrier IQ". So much for Apple products being more secure.

Honey, I'm afraid you're not breaking anything. I know, and I don't use anything financial on my phone.

There's only one reason Macs didn't have many viruses until recently: Nobody used them. It was a waste of time to develop spyware and malware for a fraction of all computer users.

The only reason Macs didn't get malware was for the same reason Hermits don't get STDs.

thunderlips11 says

The only reason Macs didn't get malware was for the same reason Hermits don't get STDs.

Exactly!

Heraclitusstudent says

Honey, I'm afraid you're not breaking anything. I know, and I don't use anything financial on my phone.

Millions of people do. Smart phone security is a damn important issue. And even if you aren't directly victimized by banking or identify fraud, the fact that tens of millions of others are does impose a cost on you. So poo-pooing this subject matter is just plain foolishness.

Of course, Heraclitusstudent's short-sightedness is typical of Apple fanboys.

Dan8267 says

Ah, but Apple didn't make BSD.

No one's claiming that it did.

Here's a list of OS's which Microsoft didn't make:

- DOS
- Windows NT

Microsoft has a tradition of acquiring/absorbing products developed by others, and then ruining them. SQL Server is a notable exception.

And those Microsoft products designed in-house which survive (Office) should be far better products, given the resources MS has. MS Access is an insult to the human race.

At least they got .NET and Windows 8 right (in spite of the awful outer layer, I agree that Windows 8 is their best OS to date).

Windows NT 4.0 Server and Workstation, was by far my favorite version of any OS Microsoft ever put out.
All of the Server components worked as designed with out having to hack fixes and workarounds.

HydroCabron says

At least they got .NET and Windows 8 right

.NET was born out of necessity.
They had all of the work they did on J++ that Java was suing them for. So they took a calamity and turned it into a success.
Had Java been willing to work with MS more, the two technologies would have came to a point where the libraries could have been used interchangeably.
As it is MS took J++ and made it something else entirely, and took 3/4 of the Java developers and about 90% of the Enterprise Java projects with it.

Java would still be SUN and SUN would be bigger than Google today, and we'd all be saying "Oracle who?" today, had they been willing to work with MS.

Dan8267 says

Millions of people do. Smart phone security is a damn important issue. And even if you aren't directly victimized by banking or identify fraud, the fact that tens of millions of others are does impose a cost on you. So poo-pooing this subject matter is just plain foolishness.

Based on your rhetoric, you are probably using Android: a tool designed specifically to spy on you and capture as much information on you as possibly can.
There are probably dozens of key loggers and other spyware applications on your phone.
Funny to see you lecture people on Smart phone security.

Heraclitusstudent says

Funny to see you lecture people on Smart phone security.

DROPOUT JEEP

“Do you think Apple helped them build that?” Appelbaum asks at one point in his talk. “I don’t know. I hope Apple will clarify that… Here’s a problem: I don’t really believe that Apple didn’t help them. I can’t really prove it, but they [the NSA] literally claim that anytime they target an iOS device, that it will succeed for implantation. Either they have a huge collection of exploits that work against Apple products, meaning that they are hoarding information about critical systems that American companies produce and sabotaging them, or Apple sabotaged it themselves. Not sure which one it is. I’d like to believe that since Apple didn’t join the PRISM program until after Steve Jobs died, that maybe it’s just that they write shitty software.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/12/30/the-nsa-reportedly-has-total-access-to-your-iphone/

thunderlips11 says

they [the NSA] literally claim that anytime they target an iOS device, that it will succeed for implantation.

NSA obviously has access, and quite frankly I'm not too worried either about NSA looting my financial accounts or listening conversations.

Also remember the main NSA argument against the 4th amendment: The amendment doesn't apply to private companies and if private parties have your information, then the NSA can take it. Nice way to say "Screw the constitution". But at least in theory it means the NSA shouldn't hack everyone's phone without a mandate, just because they can.

So here is the obvious difference between Apple and Google: Google is in the business of getting any information they can on you, then monetize this info. That means all this info is automatically fair game for NSA. Google acts like a private front for the NSA that free them from the constitution.
Apple is not in this business. Again, at least in theory...

Google has been found to listen to your conversations without explicit approval. Apple hasn't.

Not that I trust Apple, Google or the NSA.

New Microsoft "OS" always requires you to upgrade your PC to take advantage of the improvements, responsiveness of the new "OS" on a few years old PC is always slower than the early version of "OS". And despite its larger installed base, which should spread the cost of software development thinner, cost of a standalone "OS" is very expensive till the coming "free" Windows 10.

Last I heard, world wide "shipments" of PCs is declining while sale of Macs are increasing. This is despite counting Macs and chrome books. In 2014, Apple, with 12.2% marketshare, is the number three "PC" manufacturer in USA. People is beginning to understand the Microsoft way and moving towards Macs.

Choosing between a Mac and a PC is like choosing a piece of art. If you value beauty and great user experience, choose the well design well built Mac. If you value collage, choose "allow you to assemble option" PC.

HydroCabron says

Here's a list of OS's which Microsoft didn't make:

- DOS

- Windows NT

Microsoft bought QDOS, Quick and Dirty Operating System, which itself was a knockoff of CP/M. Microsoft renamed it DOS, Disk Operating System and then refined it over 15 years. It's not like much time was spent on DOS because it was so simple. There were, however, two versions of DOS, MS-DOS and PC-DOS. The later was IBM's fork.

Windows NT was based on and shared code with IBM's OS/2, a great operating system for its time. Both OS/2 and NT were initially developed by both companies, which is why you'll never see the OS/2 code go public. There are too many complicated licensing issues.

However, to say Microsoft didn't make NT is disingenuous. Although the roots of NT and OS/2 are shared, the NT line has diverged from those originals significantly and Microsoft certainly invented thousands of things in NT such as NTFS.

If the point you are trying to make is that Microsoft is also a company that copies products, makes a bad knock-off of them, and then refines them over and over again for years until they are good, then I agree. I've said that many times. Every product from Office to Internet Explorer to Bing is a copy of another product. Granted I.E. never got good and Bing has yet to, but they are the exceptions to the rule.

The difference is that no one suggests that Microsoft invented the word processor, the spreadsheet, email, web browsers, or anything else it didn't actually invent. And users of Microsoft products are brainwashed religious freaks who think Bill Gates and Steve Balmer can do no wrong and there is nothing wrong about Microsoft produces. PC users have always criticized and praised Microsoft as appropriate. We can name many things we dislike about Windows, but at the same time, we don't switch because we dislike more things about Apple's OS.

And PC users have a long history of running multiple operating systems on their PC at the same time using multiboot and even simultaneously using virtual machines. I remember triple-booting OS/2, Windows 95, and MS-DOS on my PC back in college. And that was without VMs. I've also ran Microsoft Office and Open Office concurrently. PC users have no problem making switches when a better option comes along. We're not boxed into an inescapable relationship like MAC fanboys. In fact, PC users strongly prefer platform independence, which is why we like Java and even .NET, whose apps can be ran on non-Windows systems like Unix and platforms like Android thanks to Xamarin.

The bottom line is that if you cannot criticize the products you are using, it's not because they are awesome. It's because you are brainwashed.

Heraclitusstudent says

Based on your rhetoric, you are probably using Android: a tool designed specifically to spy on you and capture as much information on you as possibly can.

You're ignorance is amazing. Do you even know what Android is? Can you define it? No, but you'll Google it and copy someone else's description and claim it as your own, but you'll probably copy something incorrect anyway.

Your ignorance is exactly why your opinion carries no weight.

hanera says

responsiveness of the new "OS" on a few years old PC is always slower than the early version of "OS"

Actually, not always true. It's usually true because the newer version of the OS does more things, but sometimes the new OS is faster than the previous version on any hardware.

This is the case in Windows 8, which is faster than Windows 7. The reason for this is that sometimes a release prioritizes making performance improvements rather than implementing new features. Older functionality gets rewritten in a more efficient manner. And this does not apply only to operating systems.

hanera says

Last I heard, world wide "shipments" of PCs is declining while sale of Macs are increasing.

MAC today are PCs. A MAC sale is a PC sale. PC won the MAC/PC war hands down.

I think you mean worldwide sales of MAC's implementation of Unix, still called by the marketing name OS X even though OS X is not in any way the same operating system as OS 9 and all prior Macintosh operating systems, versus sales of Windows.

What you probably heard is that tracking of operating system use by websites, using the information reported by browsers, indicates a growth in the use of iOS. Here's the graph and an article.

The thing to realize is that these metrics only represent web browsing, which is done on client machines. As more people switch to using tablets or phones for web browsing, the traffic scene by Android and iOS will, of course, become greater. This does not mean people aren't using desktops and laptops running other operating systems, but rather that they are doing more of their surfing on their other devices.

Those metrics also do not measure actual sales or the installation base of operating systems. In fact, they completely discard the server side of the Internet. Every time you use an app or visit a website, your device is talking to an endpoint backed with one, a hundred, or even thousands of servers. And those servers aren't running Android or iOS or even MAC Unix. They are running Linux or Windows (or maybe another version of Unix in a few cases).

It's harder to get statistics on server installations because you can't sample web browsing traffic, but most statistics I read show that a third of web servers are running Windows and two thirds are running Unix, but that's a server version of Unix, not MAC BSD. Of course, web servers aren't the only servers out there. Database servers also throw a monkey wretch in the system. And then there are internal servers for corporations. I've yet to work at a place where they didn't run a Windows NT domain.

Still, Microsoft has definitely gotten crushed in the mobile arena. I strongly prefer Android over Windows CE or Windows 8 for that.

Dear Everyone,
Thank You for educating Dan, the sole cave man who still defends stone age OS.
Unfortunately, you wasted your time, because he never learns.

Thanks
Strategist

Dan8267 says

Do you even know what Android is?

Google phone OS. a piece of software that include features to spy what you do in your apps , from a company making software that listen your conversations without notifying you.

DieBankOfAmericaPhukkingDie says

HydroCabron says

- Windows NT

I wonder where David Cutler is now. . .

I read a microsoft press release recently that mentioned him working on the xbox one.

Dan8267 says

Windows NT was based on and shared code with IBM's OS/2, a great operating system for its time. Both OS/2 and NT were initially developed by both companies, which is why you'll never see the OS/2 code go public. There are too many complicated licensing issues.

However, to say Microsoft didn't make NT is disingenuous. Although the roots of NT and OS/2 are shared, the NT line has diverged from those originals significantly and Microsoft certainly invented thousands of things in NT such as NTFS

I think your memory is faulty. I remember NT/OS/2 as a joint project that fell apart. IBM went on with newer versions os/2 by itself using the os/2 api. MS hired david cutler and team from DEC who wrote NT fresh. NT was a totally different architecture from os/2 without any os/2 code using a windows api. As far as I know cutlers teams code, which became NT, was never used or even seen at IBM.