Well, everybody is getting so technical and I'm in a bad mood...
So...
Sorry, won't go off right now, blew it all out screaming at the neighbor's dog..
I'm plumb tuckered out.
By the way, Mac's can kiss my A**.

>

Here is reality from my perspective. I have constantly seen software with "not available for apple/mac" Why decorate the back of a monitor to sell your product apple? I don't care to look at the back of my monitor. Also why create a fancy tower to sell your product apple? I don't care what it looks like, its whats in it. Also I have never seen a apple/mac cheaper than a windows system period. Not even used systems. Another thing. Why don't you have an generic brand of apple systems? Windows compatible systems do. You don't see dell, gateway, HP, compact, or other brand names on my computer, but if I wanted to buy and apple based system, no generics. Do what yopu gotta do, but no business from me apple.

Some of yours are very 'contemptuous' about Macs.
Yes, it's true: Mac comunity it's 'contemptuous' too. But you are exagerating; if you don't like the Mac users attitude, don't act like them.
I disagree too the Apple 'molopolistic attitude' about their computers, but don't forget the 'enhanced molopolistic attitude' of Bill (borg) Gates; he is a opportunist too.

Yes, Apple and Microsoft are equally bad companies with their equally (although different) bad corporate mentalities.

Just a note about software. I'm sure that for most regular users, the amount of Mac software is sufficient, but whenever you're a bit of a "power user" such as I am, it just doesn't cut it anymore. I use a lot of small software that are not available on Macs. It's the plain sad truth. Although I am not fond of Microsoft, I'm stuck using their operating system because that's what software developers develop for, until another operating system comes up that is 100% compatible with Windows software.

Mac versus PC thread --> dead end.

I can work on both and they both suck. Whatever gets the job done is fine for me.

Besides, it's so sad when people identify themselves with the OS they use.

Also, the Annoying Ones are everywhere. Who they are exactly, depends on the side of the fence you're on.

Personally, my eXPerience with Linux during my anti-Microsoft phase led me to believe that although Microsoft might be bad, they surely aren't alone in their EVIL thirst to monopolize, and I'm not just referring to Apple. As for the communities, it's hard to say whether or not the Apple community is worse than the Linux community. I haven't noticed many Windows zealots, but that's probably because most people despise Microsoft anyway.

I really dont care whether you use mac, linux, windows, dos, os/2, anything... every OS has its good thing and bad things... I use both mac an pc, and they both do the job for, although i miss some customization from the pc world, but macosx does look cool...

I just use a hammer and chisel on this pile of rocks, right here...see?

When I get done tapping out a post, I throw it into the phone lines dangling above my thatch-roof hut, and when the sparks go flying, the messages post here. To read them I jump up and grab a line, and right before the juice throws me back a hundred feet or so, I get a flash of the message board and everything on it, so I can read all of the replies.

What is this weird "Operating System" thing you speak of?!?!

/me closes one eye, takes careful aim with tongue sticking out, and hucks the stone "tablet" at the buzzing cables above...

IMHO you use the best of the various systems that suit your needs.
I need to use my G4 because all the print media people I deal with are Mac users (aka Mac snobs!) but the system is OK for that purpose.
For once, MS have a really good OS in XP pro, once you get rid of all the crappy bells and whistles, and it runs fine on my 'built by the Wombat' box.
Linux Mandrake is great for tinkering with on the old 'crash and burn' box ..... but its really just a diversion for me.
Despite our (assumed!) collective dislike of Bill the Borg we should remember that MS were the people who brought the 'OS for Joe Public' to the fore, even if Joe Public was used a laboratory rat!
Wombat retreats to his level 7 bunker in anticipation of a large amount of flak!

Yeah, many of the users posting here have that same attitude they claim to hate so much in mac users. Gotta love ignorant hypocrates.

I think that's the problem.. on both sides of the OS fence. If you don't have something nice, or at least educated, to say.. then don't say it. People choose their OS cuz it suits them best. End of story.

But wouldn't it be nice to chose the OS because you like the OS, period?
If all OS's were compatible, if they all could run the same software, now people could really select the OS they want. And something tells me the Mac OS would win a much bigger piece of the cake.

Paxx, I actually believe that people could choose the OS they want because they like it. Sure, people say that Linux don't have Mac the software necessary, but they do, unless it's some completely obscure and rare software. It's just not always apparent. It's like when people first used Windows. I'm positive that it wasn't bundled with all the software they needed. In fact, I'm sure many of the people didn't know what software would benefit them the most. Like when people first used computers, it will simply require adaptation to find the software one needs.

The old cliche said to choose between lighting a candle and cursing the darkness. Candle was the operative word - not flamethrower. If it works good for you ( and can be skinned to a satisfactory degree) then love it. Just don't insist that everyone else join you!

Paxx, the fact that you may be tied to whatever Windows software you use as a 'power user' doesn't mean that there aren't equally useful apps for the Mac. Plenty of mac users are power users and they get along without missing a thing from Windows, and if a really obscure need arises they can always install X Windows and find a *NIX app. Being Windows compatible is not the answer... it certainly hurt OS/2 a lot more than it helped, IMO.

Paxxy means being able to run any app on any OS, not conforming one OS to the other. Just the same car can use a different engine. To the end user it makes no difference.

Awright, insert a 'like' in there. My mind is faster than my fingers.

plainsong....'ignorant hypocrates' is a 'bit' unfortunate....the word is 'hypocrites'....

There are applications that try to be cross-platform, such as JAVA, Mozilla, and Winamp3, and they're HIDEOUSLY ugly! That is why I believe being cross-platform is overrated.

Well I'm checking up on this a bit late.. but ..DOH! I even ran the spelling of that one by Juni. He ok'd it.. it's his fault.

It's sad, English is Juni's third language, and it's my first (and pretty much only). I always have to go to him for spelling help.

But that doesn't change the fact, there were a few there slamming the mac users for their attitude and then showing that same attitude while spouting untruths about a system they don't use. Got me mad. But I know what Frogboy's talking about. You always run into those zealots and whatever platform's gospel they're trying to spread, it's always annoying.

plainsong - spelling emmpared.

Makes me wonder though, did Frogboy read those articles over at Wired about custization and did he get a tad annoyed that the influence or advances of Stardock weren't even mentioned and that all credit went to the Mac world?

I found those articles lacking too..

*clears throat* customization..

Nevermind Messiah,
I guess I'm not being understood.
No applications are truly cross platform. What I mean is take the same version of Office, or Photoshop or Dreamweaver or heck Windowblinds, and install it on a Mac, on a PC or on a Linux machine and they will all do the same things the same way. That's what I'm talking about. It doesn't exist right now, so there is no comparison since it's not possible right now. All the OS makers are afraid that if they are too much compatible with their competitor they would loose customers.

We all browse the same Internet although there are different browsers (Netscape, Mozilla, Explorer, Opera, etc.), and they all pretty much show the pages the same way. Still, some people prefer one over the other because of different things: speed, special features, stablity, prettiness, etc.
I think OS's should work the same way. Just like there is the W3C, I think there should be the OSC and decide upon a definate standard that all OS's should conform to.

Anyway, I also want peace on earth. Dream on.

I think it would be rather hard to decide the standards, considering that the OSes work in very different quite often. For example, IIRC, UNIX is better at applications that use many processes while Windows is better at multi-threaded applications. Besides that, I think that there would be a huge need for more support. Think about all the problems people already have with programs that just run on Windows. Now, add in the Mac and all the different versions of Linux.

paxx - I think there should be the OSC and decide upon a definate standard that all OS's should conform to.

paxx - Anyway, I also want peace on earth. Dream on.

/me makes an effort to stop agreeing with paxx so often

*sigh*
i give in

i like these ideas!

MessiahWWKD, such a mythical set of compatible OS's would have to mainly require new programs, but would also need a fair degree of backward compatability as well.

at work i use a windows workstation, and UNIX machies (via telnet) for most of my work.

there are lots of things i find UNIX is faster and better at, and other things i find windows to be better and faster at.

i want to be able to have a hybid of the bits that suit me and how i work from all over, all working together smoothly in one place.

oh yes, and piece on earth and love and respect for all people to!