Rip-off of a Mac OS

[SHS 0]

You all die laugthing win you read this

http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/interact/story/0,23008,3311009,00.html

[EddiE314 0]

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by TechTV.com:
So whenever Mac users claim that Microsoft has ripped off Mac ideas, a common reply is, "Well, Apple ripped off Xerox when it made the Mac!" This, of course, is faulty logic. Even if Apple is guilty of stealing from Xerox PARC, that would not somehow justify a similar theft by Microsoft.

</font>

Bullsh1t, two wrongs make a right.

[Hit 0]

Oh just wait. While that article in itself was yet more MS bashing ("All your Base" is already becoming passe, but MS bashing is here to stay), that's nothing compared to the crap those talkback people write. OS bigotry is always painful to read, cause it's just so silly.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Hit (edited 24 February 2001).]

[EddiE314 0]

Silly?! more like bullsh1t, unless you're bashing a Mac.

[Down8 0]

Bahh...

 

As I understand it, the original Windows was licensed, so it was never 'ripped-off'. More like Jobs dropped the soap and didn't bother to notice that Gates was standing right behind him.

 

I am in more awe of the fact that no one bashes KDE or GNOME for the way they try to copy Windows OSes. At least MS took the time to move the taskbar to the bottom of the screen, the Linux clones didn't even bother to move it.

 

I figure if you want to boycott MS, you could do it for a better reason than this, like the stupid 'call-home' or 'activation' thing that XP is supposed to have. Maybe I don't want to be registered, or hooked up to the 'Net. Win2K forever I guess [i hope they keep the Service Packs coming].

 

-bZj

[DeadCats 0]

The original "Windows" was created by Bill Gates and Microsoft while coding OS/2 for IBM. Gates disagreed with much of the software architecture requirements that IBM demanded for OS/2 and wanted them to incorporate his ideas for a windowed, graphical operating system, instead.

 

This led to the great falling-out (a/k/a "War") that happened between IBM and Microsoft in the early '90's.

 

Regardless of who came up with the mouse+gui (and it was indeed PARC), I have doubts that federal courts would uphold copyrights/patents to either.

 

------------------

"Being married to a programmer is like owning a cat. You talk to it but you're never really sure it hears you, much less comprehends what you say." -DeadCats, 1999

"Talking to DeadCats is like talking to a dead cat." -MrsDeadCats, 2001

 

[This message has been edited by DeadCats (edited 24 February 2001).]

[Hit 0]

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DeadCats:
The original "Windows" was created by Bill Gates and Microsoft while coding OS/2 for IBM. Gates disagreed with much of the software architecture requirements that IBM demanded for OS/2 and wanted them to incorporate his ideas for a windowed, graphical operating system, instead.

</font>

Actually, interesting that you should bring that up. One of the things I've read that he disagreed with was a 30 MINUTE bootup time. IBM, being still stuck in mainframe land, where this was acceptable behavior, saw no problem with it.

IBM started a revolution with its PCs, but throughout most of the 80s, didn't believe they would ever amount to anything and that mainframes were still the way to go. Hell, in some ways, they still don't get it.

[jdulmage 0]

another bullsh1t post...

 

who cares really? if nobody wanted it this way, it wouldn't be this way, MS just doesn't make stuff off the top of their heads, it's YOU!, yes, YOU, the user that decides, trust me, I have seen how they do things, they go by what users want. We know what the future is, it'll be with NT, with win2k and XP (XP for the real users, Win2k for the goofs)....so....it's pointless talk...it's like oh my god, i'm so jealous of Microsoft, so let's start childish things against them (lame). You want to talk about stolen stuff, Apple stole from Xerox, and Linux...bwhahahaha, i won't even start, it's just unix with choice guis that were stolen from MS.

 

Give this crap a rest, because it has lamer and jealousy written all over it

 

[This message has been edited by jdulmage (edited 24 February 2001).]

[Brian Frank 0]

Okay, heres the short version of the GUI: Xerox invented the GUI with the PARC. Steve Jobs saw the PARC project and scrapped there current new Apple. They had to get something big with the horrible sales of the Apple III, and this was the Lisa project. Legend has it our (in)famous Bill Gates was working on this Lisa project. Jobs became an overbearing slave driver, so the Lisa team put him in management. Later, Jobs introduced the Lisa as the original Macintosh. Meanwhile, Gates was working with MS to develop Windows. Windows was a rip off of the Mac OS, but Apple lost the lawsuit over "the look and feel." Windows outsold the MacOS mainly because it was backwards compatible with DOS.

This is what I know. The term paper I did was on the history of the Mac. Unlike MS, they have innovations, whereas Windows incorporates MS "innovations" (read ripoffs) into the latest version. It seems that everytime something cool comes out on the Mac, a few months later, you see PCs sporting something inspired by it. Take the iMac; now you go into places like Best Buy and there are PCs without the classic beige anymore. Even though I prefer Win to any other OS, I still believe that without Apple, the computer industry would not be where it is today.

[Hit 0]

ahh...the story I've read many times. But can anyone tell me this. Why is it that Steve Jobs "borrowed" from Xerox PARC to do his GUI, but Bill Gates "stole" from Apple to do his? Isn't this a kind of double standard? Is it because Steve Jobs is the "good guy"?

 

Maybe Bill Gates should change his name to Steve Jobs. While Stevie himself has been known to be anything but a role model (some would go so far as to say he's an A-Hole), it doesn't matter. He's the good guy. Why, you ask? I have no idea.

[jdulmage 0]

man, you guys are so lame

[Galilee 0]

Do Mac's still only have one mouse button?

[Down8 0]

And, that's why even with the backing of DoomIII and the GeForce3, gamers will still stick to PCs. Well, that and the the $4000 entry price.

 

-bZj

[Brian Frank 0]

Okay, Im not a Mac user, and yes Jobs did essential ripoff the PARC. However, tell me this :Do PCs come with options like an optical mouse, DVD-R/RW/CD-R/RW (superdrive), an easily servicable case (power Mac g4), onboard Firewire ports? Up until the release of the iMac, Im pretty sure computers were classic beige.

With the release of Mac OS-X, Apple said that it was based on Unix, for stability purposes. They came up with the Aqua interface, and now WinXP is touting it Luna interface--or whatever its called. Once again, MS continues to amaze me by taking someone elses work and call it there own. I dont use Macs because I can use the PC better. I just think that Gates needs to come up with something fresh--ON HIS OWN!

Apple does need to get up to speed an get some 1GHz Macs out soon.

The reason Macs are more expensive is because of price and demand. Apple took its once computer world dominance for granted and lost big time. Most PCs run some form of Windows, just because Apple wasnt on the ball.

It cant be ignored that Macs exist, and will continue to do so. Apple lost major ground to Windows through stupidity. When most computers run Windows, its a little hard to have a Mac answer to the Celeron.

[Questionnaire 0]

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Down8:
And, that's why even with the backing of DoomIII and the GeForce3, gamers will still stick to PCs. Well, that and the the 00 entry price.</font>

The Geforce 3 is comming out on the MAC first

The Questionnaire

[EddiE314 0]

i still think Mac blows

[CUViper 0]

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Questionnaire:
The Geforce 3 is comming out on the MAC first

The Questionnaire</font>

actually, Jobs was stepping out of bounds on that one - it will be a simultaneous release on both platforms. Not to mention that DirectX8 is the only API that utilizes the new features, so us pc users still have the upper hand

[SHS 0]

CUViper nope not even PC will have the upper hand why for starter NO DX8 game to utilizes the new features so **** out of lucky there and demo don't count being you can't play them.

Very exspensive board to $600$ beside 3DMark2001 will most like be the frist to show this off but kind of hard to play 3DMark2001 hehehe.

 

GeForce3 (64MB) - $600

======================

 

Fabrication Process: 0.15-micron

Transistors in the Core 30~50 million

Rendering Pipelines 4

Texture Units per Pipeline 3

Core Speed 200MHz

Memory Speed 230MHz (DDR)

Memory Bandwidth 7GB/sec

Pixel Fill Rate 1000 million-pixels/sec

Texel Fill Rate 3000 million-texels/sec

Triangles Processing Speed 120 million-triangles/sec

 

I thougth idea being smaller die size was to make more chip's with less of cost not other way a round. So why is this so damm very exspensive ?Intel?, If there only one chip on board not much as change over GF2 & DRR dosen't cost a arm & leg now in fact you pick a stick DRR 64mb 200Mhz for a round $100 or less.

I tell why now that nVidia have run off 3dfx & own them now & before long it ATI turn that if ATI don't get it head out of a@@ and start making good compatible drv.

All I acn say nVidia got you boy in there back patck hahahaha.

What real get me is xBox is going cost a round $300 something dosen't add up here.

 

[This message has been edited by SHS (edited 26 February 2001).]

[Brian Frank 0]

Id heard about the no-show Voodoo 5 6000 (128 MB ram, 4 graphic processors) was expensive at $500. But $600 for a graphics card? You can buy a new computer for that price! Not a good one though. If you cant get a decent card for $150 or less, theres a major problem. Let me know when AGP 4x is actually used. Nothings wrong with nVidia, but $600 for once board? Get real, you dont have to shell out that much for one PCB.

$200 is my limit, mainly because I dont have the budget nor the need to buy an uber expensive graphics card. But Ive seen some 3DLabs graphics cards for nearly $2000 (yes, I did type that correctly).

INSANE PRICES!!!!!!!!!!!!

[EddiE314 0]

i hear you there Brian, i bought a GF2 MX cause it was on sald for $125 at a retail store, never had a problem with it and i get at lest 100fps in quake 3, so i'm happy. your limit is about the same as mine for the same reason, i have a life to live and bills to pay, and being broke like i am doesn't leave extra $$$ for a $600 video card.

[Vampyr 0]

Wow $600!!!!! Basically it is faster, but then again I could care less if one card puts out 100fps and the other 140fps.

[pimpin_228 0]

No i agree with, eddie mac does suck and i don't think anyone has really has the money for a 600 card, that pushing it a little don't you think

 

[This message has been edited by pimpin_228 (edited 27 February 2001).]

[RattDawg 0]

Hmmm $600 huh? With that I could get a PlayStation2 and the X-Box. Oh and games that work right out of the box. Is Nvidia on CRACK?

[RattDawg 0]

Back to the topic though, in another post someone said it would be cool to have a window shade feature. Yup that wold just about complete the win-mac get-up

[jdulmage 0]

difference is that Mac focused too much on the GUI and not enough on features, stability, etc. (it isn't stable really, it just has a lot of crap hidden and protected like a security blanket)

 

MS actually did the correct thing, they built a good OS (whether you want to argue or not, Windows 2000 is a very good, stable platform). Now they work on some extra features, cut down on the speed reducing in win2k, and work on the GUI.

 

If Apple would have done that, they would stand a chance, now Macintosh, Apple, whatever, just plainly is as newbied up as AOL.

 

Absolutely garbage