only in the sense that they are both computer operating systems and software. darwin (OSX) is a direct descendant of BSD and Mach. the windows NT kernel is only related to unix in the sense that microsoft hired rick rashid (who was one of the Mach principals) to work on NT.
me too. i just build hackintoshes as my desktop machines, and don’t pay any apple tax.
It actually took me a surprisingly long time, even after using Linux for a while, to fundamentally understand this.
I don’t know about the ethos of other people, but throughout my life I have seen abuse of power by police, principals, everyone. I don’t buy into a computing ethos that allows others control of MY data.
I will bluntly tell any authority figure, including CheeTOUS, to go fuck themselves. I don’t trust authority blindly and never will. I hate other people telling me how I should do anything, unless I ask first.
Linux is built for people like me who are persistent learners, curious, and who hate authority. Everything about how it works is distributed. No one ultimately controls it. Don’t listen to anyone who tells you it’s easy to learn. People who are vested in it still have this desire to make it the year of the Linux desktop and they are always trying to evangelize how easy it is to use and learn.
Its not easy to learn. It IS easy to use. Android is a custom mobile linux distro made by ze Googles, for example.
What attracted me to Linux was that people told me that I could make it look any way I wanted or function anyway I wanted. It was sort of sold to me as the ultimate customizeable system. When I first got it running, I was disappointed to find it wasn’t easy to customize. It wasn’t until I started to learn that the freedom is hidden in the code that I started to buy the ethos. Now I run an i3 desktop environment that I constantly tweak to my heart’s delight and run scripts that manage other aspects of the system that I don’t feel like dealing with on a daily basis, and if something goes pear-shaped, it’s usually not a big deal to fix. I don’t even consider myself a particularly skilled Linux guru–I just happened to learn the worst-kept secret of Linux: Man pages.
NT has no real UNIX lineage. Early NT offered a UNIX-compatibility subsystem, but the chief architect that Microsoft hired for NT, Dave Cutler, was the designer of VAX VMS.
Sadly, the emphasis on the Mac side of gluing together memory, hard drive, battery, and logic board means that the laptops, minis, iMacs and even Pro’s are less upgradable than ever, meaning these machines are far more likely to be trashed than upgraded.
Sad to see apple becoming a garbage factory on the PC side.
It might be more accurate to say everything has MINIX heritage, since UNIX obviously has a relation to MINIX and my understanding is that a lot of the original NT engineers had been MINIX developers earlier.
But the nice thing is that it isn’t like Ubuntu is a dumbed-down version of Linux or anything of the sort. You still have all the same power that you have in any other distro. Ubuntu lets you use lots of things without a deep understanding of how the operating system works, but unlike Windows or Mac, it doesn’t prevent you from obtaining a deeper understanding if you so choose.
yes, that’s more or less what i was trying to say; the most “unix” thing you can say about NT is that rick rashid worked on it.
In much the same way mammals and fish are similar. And I guess in this example, Apple would be reptiles.
This sounds like the usual click bait. Every journalist knows that a sure fire way to get clicks is to write an article claiming Apple isn’t innovating anymore and is in financial trouble. It’s like Donald Trump getting votes blabbing about how dangerous midtown Manhattan is.
This theory is ridiculous. Apple has always charged a premium for its hardware and software. The pricing reflects the durability and good design of its products. It also helps defray the cost of providing superior service. Does anyone really see Apple generating enough revenue from media sales, cloud services and repairs to rival its hardware sales? The numbers don’t make any sense, but that’s what passes for business reporting these days.
Apple might not be the first with hardware innovations, but they did manage to get music sold without DRM and a computer with WiFi and applications on a cellular network. They refused to support BluRay because it would require compromising the open nature of the kernel. (Yes, you need to have things signed, but do you really wanted unsigned stuff in your kernel?) Apple is now getting flak from two sides over the security issue. Governments are pissed that Apple makes its computers hard to crack. Meanwhile, hackers complain that they can’t just make internal changes without compromising security.
As the Macalope points out, Apple can’t win.
Apple’s services are booming, their hardware is selling quite well (the new iPhone XR is their most popular device in years), they’re bringing out new mid-range and pro desktop models, and their stock price is still over 200 per share, making them one of the most valuable companies in the world. They’ll be fine.
So say (the aware of) we all
No- Microsoft are reptiles. cold blooded, using the warmth of other things cuz they cant create any on their own. Apple is more like parrots- colorful, but loud, showy, and annoying. And their shit really smells. They swawk loudly because they want everyone to hear their voice.
Linux is obviously cute penguins- warm, loveable, unthreatening, caring, and highly intelligent. Totally accepting of extreme environments, and always adaptable. There is even a breed that lives in the semi tropical forests of New Zealand. No, really! Look it up.
Also I find this whole comparison to animals hilarious.
Edit: god I am such a nerd 
This shit was wankish and sanctimonious in 2008, and it hasn’t aged well.
I first used an Apple computer in art school in 1988. It was a revelatory experience for someone who hates math, and found MS-DOS to be impenetrable. I’ve never looked back. But now it is so much about revenues and sales of phones that it really is a LOT less fun. Maybe Steve is who made it fun, because of “Oh, and one more thing…” He could turn the world upside down on that stage with just a few sentences. I miss that. It was true innovation, not what Gates used to bleat about “eenovaeshin.” Microsoft never innovated anything. They were the world’s best copycats, except everything they did stank. Remember the Zune?
To paraphrase Bonnie Raitt, I miss Steve Jobs like I miss being eight years old. If he were still here, he’d be blowing everybody’s doors off from sheer amazement.
Not that I have any earthly idea as to why you are posting computer specs, but what are you using DVD burners for in an era when a lot of people don’t even have a dvd player hooked up…
What a smug, pompous point of view.
You realize how fact-free this assertion is, right?
I mean, if writing critically about Apple was a great way to get clicks, I’d surely devote a lot of effort to it.
Empirically, though, I barely mention Apple:
https://boingboing.net/author/cory_doctorow_1?tag=apple
Especially relative to Google, of whom I am much more critical:
https://boingboing.net/author/cory_doctorow_1?tag=google
(This is because I use Google products, but not Apple’s, so I’m much more familiar with Google than Apple).
As to the article I reference in my post, this is also bonkers. Did a Goldman Sachs analyst write an investor report about Apple’s services division having room for growth (and its hardware division slowing) for clicks? If you think that, you don’t understand how investment banking works (Goldman Sachs isn’t in the “clicks” business).
Does anyone really see Apple generating enough revenue from media sales, cloud services and repairs to rival its hardware sales?
Yes, a Goldman Sachs banker does.
The fact is, you’ve missed the point of the story, which is that analysts are prone to posing the world as having two possible outcomes: monopolistic walled gardens and monopolistic surveillance-oriented tech companies (or, in the case of Facebook, monopolistic surveillance walled-gardens).
The idea that “Apple can’t win” is also empirically untrue: there has never been a company that has been forgiven for its sins more quickly, nor one whose customers are more prone to accusing critics of bad faith (“clicks” etc) than Apple.
I have to be honest. While I definitely fall on your side of this debate, plenty of other times in the last few years have I clicked through, read the article, watched the video, only to find out that what you were incensed about was not the full story. And in context, the ire was much less justified.
Do better. We like you.
