Yeah, and apple got the boot, then they lost a round against pystar. Saying someone "sued" someone else is bland. You shouldve said: Apple sued them, but apple lost.
If it was in America - Land of the free and Suee, then its possible. Anyways ole Meemo isn't from the states so doesn't know all the laws over there - but yeah Apple the dream that Mickeysoft wanted to achieve but got sued for
yeah, "apple sued them" implies that you can't do OS X on other platforms... Apple sued, Pystar countersued, Pystar is currently selling systems with OS X on them. Thanks for pointing out the false information merc OS X install disks are actually designed for the specific hardware platform they are issued with, so Pystar is having to mimic apple systems anyway. So are they a "Mac" or a "PC"? The people that are hating on Apple made their minds up before reading anybody's opinions anyway, so it's really not worth the effort to tell of my several years of work on both platforms and favoring the peformance of the Mac's beyond gaming.
There's no real difference between the two from a hardware perspective though. Same CPU line, same system architecture, etc.
indeed, but Apple would stop them if they could, my point stands. if they were truely the idealistic carebears they pretend to be, they would have applauded Py's efforts to bring OSX to a wider audience, not tried to shut them down as i understand it they use emulation, so PC hardware = PC The people that are supporting Apple made their minds up before reading anybody's opinions anyway (because, you know, it makes sence to have your own opinion, and opinions are purely subjective, so people will differ, and you shouldnt blindly accept someone elses opinion simply because they insist you should), so it's really not worth the effort to tell how my several years of college surrounding computer and networking, setup, use, maintenance and repair, and a lifetime of gaming, all demonstrate the undesirability of macs
a hardware company trying to maintain their own software designed for their hardware... yeah, im shocked. the point is that from 3.1 to vista, every new feature of Windows is ripped from Apple's OS... which is usually taken or bought from small companies. both are companies out to make money, your bias is obvious and Apple has never been "carebears". The Macintosh line has been an innovation since the early '80s from computing, marketing, and management standpoints and its primary selling point has been and will continue to be the vertical integration of hardware from a single company with an operating system designed specifically for that hardware. The debate really rests with the software, as Apple's hardware runs Windows very easily and just as well as "PC hardware" making the comparison of a cheap pc with windows vs a mac with windows a simple difference in price. Apple machines aren't cost effective to run only Windows and games are designed around a Windows platform. but then again, you spelled sense as "sence" and as both Firefox and Apple's Safari have a spell check built in means you are using IE - thus negating any intelligence associated with your post unless you are on a public computer prohibiting installation of a better browser
ad hominem, logical fallacy, you cannot prove your point by insulting me, though feel free to sink lower. since you clearly have so little weight to your argument you feel the need to insult me. thats never been the point. and ive never denied that, M$ business model is 'buy the best and steal the rest' though i would argue they probably stole some from linux too. first of all, were all biased, your biased for apple, Im biased against it. feel free to argue otherwise. and i didnt mean the term as a insult, im a carebear ^^ anyway. you undercut your own argument there. youve pointed out that windows works on both, while OSX doesn't (one of my original points), that they are akin in terms of hardware, but apple's is too expensive to justify having just one O/S on it XD so from your argument i could draw the conclusion that mac is overpriced and restrictive compared to PC (edit; actually their slogan is 'embrace, extend and extinguish' but w/e )
as the point is apparently everything you decided not to quote: Mac's are designed to maximize hardware and software compatibility with each other whereas games are specifically designed to run within Windows with larger games having a separate version for Macs. i simply indicated that you likely used Internet Explorer by failing to utilize built-in features of better browsers. should you feel insulted by that, then you can feel free to say i am arguing against "you†or even that assumed that you choose to use IE by default, though its rather obvious a caveat was included in that statement. the humor of your post to me is not lost, as you proceed to apply a fallacy toward attacking my point via paraphrasing to lessen it then claim that it had no weight. i far from say they are too expensive to run 1 OS... i believe i said they were too expensive to run Windows. next time you decide to selectively oversimplify after accusing people of other logical fallacies, you can laugh at the irony and hypocrisy of doing the same a moment later. further, ad hominem relating to personal considerations (of which it is defined) seems fairly valid when discussing an argument toward personal preference. i believe if we are going latin on it, it would be argumentum ad logicam in regard to your first point.
wiki'd that did ya? because if you had any formal education on the subject youd know that that a fallacy can never be applied validly, thats what makes it a fallacy, attacking me personally simply shows you have little enough substance to feel threatened by my opposition. you cannot lever a proper arguement agaisnt mine, so you resort to attacking me, hoping to sway opinion to you, regardless of the validity of my or you position. furthermore argumentum ad logicam doesnt apply there. its only applicable in a situation where one calls a fallacy to invalidate a conclusion, that does not explicitly rely on the fallacy to be true. for example, if i declared that macs clearly suck because you insulted me, that would be argumentum ad logicam, but i did not. i pointed out that it wasnt a valid point, and implied your agument lack substance, which isnt the same for future reference, never argue someone on their familiar ground. puts you at a distinct disadvantage. and regarding my paraphrasing, i cut out nothing important, just your fallacy and a gush about how awesome apple is. to that id say its designed for exclusivity, confinement... proprietary hardware, such a bad concept for users, good for them sure, but bad for users.
You do realize that If i sued you for copyright infringement, and I LOST the Lawsuit, then It means nothing and you didnt infringe the copyright. Apple lost the lawsuit, HENCE, them suing pystar means nothing.
This is true to some extent; the Microsoft ethos does value good ideas, but nowhere does it state that those ideas need to come from within. Hence the acquisitions that happen on a regular basis. That brand of "un-innovation" isn't terribly popular, but it does work pretty well. (I hasten to add that new MS products or features of MS products are not entirely due to acquisitions, though - their people aren't actually unimaginative, it's just that statistically speaking a company of 90,000 isn't as likely to invent the next big thing as the millions in the rest of the sea, even taking financial backing/corporate support into account.)
i referenced it solely because you implied an insult was present was clearly because i had a weak argument. take your post and get over it. you are the one insulting here. i do not have a degree in philosophy, no, i have one in engineering. but i have enough formal education to formulate an argument that you will continue to belittle as you make personal accusations about it as this post demonstrates. it still isn't personal to me and i still point out my first comment's containing specific caveats toward my view toward your error. also, you dictating my post contained nothing important is very opinionated for something that is arguing toward a certain fact to apply. please show me a "gush" over apple in an actual quote. the closest i would compare would be my story of how i didn't invalidate my warranty after complete disassembly, which is simply that, a recounting of my personal experiences in response to "you can't open up a mac" generalization. attack my "formal education" as you reflect on how you accused me of this same thing one post prior and prove me right. it is all up to how you assume a specific phrase should be read. i read your post as "you insulted me because you have a weak argument." implying that my original post, which the line was meant for humor and levity, was proof that i had a weak argument. according to my point of view, that is directly applicable to my previous statement, just as my comment meaning to add humor was taken initially as "personal attack." you made your conclusion based on your opinion as did i, so now you apply that since you still believe in your point of view from then, it must still be accurate. however, you have "sunk" to quote you, to attacking my character and education to discredit what should be seen as simply a post saying what really is the underlying question: how do you compare a software company in Microsoft to a hardware company in Apple? and honestly, my posting here isn't to win an argument or show how Apple is better. in fact, it really isn't primarily to dispute people's claims against Apple's products, though Apple's got the very very open source developmental kit to write things into and for their OS... hardly a confinement beyond what hardware configuration you can have... but i thats why i wouldn't get a mac desktop. anyway, my point is that my involvement is mainly cause i have massive periods of boredom at work and have a lot of fun getting into hot topics like this. from my point of view, you have taken this very personally. perhaps this is untrue, but the level of ferocity in which you have taken to insult me and call me uneducated implies strongly to the contrary. though all the formal education in the world can't undo the stupidity of Internet Explorer. if you don't use IE, and were just too lazy to consider the post i pointed this against, then i completely understand as it lines up with the insulting disrespect you have demonstrated in your followup to "being insulted" you do realize that my quote of you was agreeing with you? i don't see your point in quoting me in some way to point this out. my response was to insure that the previous post you had replied to was understood to be misleading, not to say you said anything misleading. I know we both love to stir up trouble, so I'm guessing from my past discussions with you that you had that intent before really even seeing my post for what it was.
back to the actual topic, this is exactly true of both companies. both are ruthless in their conquest small idea providers, but many of these are added into Windows in late beta tests with limited study of how certain hardware alters performance. for example, the Vista "Sleep" mode where the computer almost instantly saves it's state: it's got a lot of bugs in it and many systems wake randomly moments later and it takes a good deal of time to navigate to the settings to change this and then Ventrillo and even built-in functions of Windows malfunction waking from this mode. not a big deal, but its just one example of how Microsoft doesn't think it's ideas through very well in development and how they constantly apply the engineering adage: if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features. Vista's a huge leap forward once bugs are repaired toward a broadly capable OS, but it's the little things.
Yeah, stuff like that would explain the approach in Windows 7 where the features have been locked down much earlier. From my understanding the upcoming RC will be more about bugfixing than really adding very much.
Erm you do realize that this is a gamers forum and that walls of text bore the hell out of anyone. So the point is not to argue but to discuss - and sometimes poke fun at things not people, although I maybe a hypocrite in this case I'm just wanting to pull back the reins on this one before it gets more "interesting".