Mrniji From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1532 times:
Klaus does not exist in reality. He is a creation of alien forces to reshuffle the order of power and hierarchies of anet and to cause war between us deciples of master Johan
Pelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2530 posts, RR: 8 Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1525 times:
Quoting Mrniji (Reply 1): He is a creation of alien forces to reshuffle the order of power and hierarchies of anet and to cause war between us deciples of master Johan
Have you visited a certain moderator in the Ruhrpott lately?
It's an expression of the open desperation in the Windows camp right now. But hacking Apple to pieces and then trying to use the pieces as band-aids won't fix the systemic problems MS is suffering from.
Microsoft is a supertanker drifting with broken rudder and engine in severe seas with a crew that's close to mutiny, while Apple is still plowing ahead at full steam (under a despotic but visionary captain).
I can understand the intentions and the pains behind the article, but that's not a viable solution. MS has always relied on their external development department in "Redmond south" (Apple in Cupertino); Unfortunately it would simply stop working the moment the MS blight would fall on Apple as well.
Quoting Mrniji (Reply 1): Klaus does not exist in reality. He is a creation of alien forces to reshuffle the order of power and hierarchies of anet and to cause war between us deciples of master Johan
LOT767-300ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1405 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 3): Microsoft is a supertanker drifting with broken rudder and engine in severe seas with a crew that's close to mutiny, while Apple is still plowing ahead at full steam (under a despotic but visionary captain).
Such technologically inspired poetry can only be expected from the supercomputer from the planet googolplex.
But next time in order to prevent opening a thread with the following words: Apple, Microsoft, Windows, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, iPod, Anti-Virus...just ask yourself this.
Does Microsoft present itself in any kind of favorable way in the article?
If you answered YES to this question, then Klaus says the article is utter rubbish and your wasting his time asking such pompous questions.
SpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1375 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 3):
I can understand the intentions and the pains behind the article, but that's not a viable solution. MS has always relied on their external development department in "Redmond south" (Apple in Cupertino); Unfortunately it would simply stop working the moment the MS blight would fall on Apple as well
Just as Apple relied upon their external development department in Palo Alto (Xerox).
"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20860 posts, RR: 55 Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1351 times:
Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 4): Such technologically inspired poetry can only be expected from the supercomputer from the planet googolplex.
When you've already spent millenia on pondering the question about life, the universe and all the rest, there's always a bit of spare computing power for a sub-thread like this...!
Quoting SpinalTap (Reply 5): Just as Apple relied upon their external development department in Palo Alto (Xerox).
Cookie-cutter response, but not quite correct: Apple did in fact draw some fundamental inspiration from Xerox' earlier research, but Xerox was far removed from an actually usable user interface. What you're using right now when browsing a.net under Windows is a partial ripped-off copy of the user interface Apple developed on their own, building on some of the concepts bought(!) from Xerox but heavily expanding on it in all directions.
Many of the concepts that seem so natural today have been developed in Cupertino back then. And the Xerox information was a singular influence, while Microsoft has never stopped copying from Apple (generally without license or any other acknowledgment, of course).
"Redmond south" is actually a term coined by Microsoft engineers themselves - they knew what they were talking about! And exactly that is one of the sources of desperation among their crew today.
Windows Vista has been postponed again - by the time it will be out, Apple will have extended their lead again with (at least) the next version of OS X ("Leopard") while Microsoft has cut down Vista so much that they'll still be behind the current one ("Tiger").
Is it surprising they're frustrated? I don't think so.
And no amount of transfusion would salvage this mess - the problem at MS is not that they didn't have capable coders or engineers - it's that they apparently have hapless technological leadership (Gates) and management (Ballmer). Much, much more difficult to repair that. Steve Jobs is certainly not the messiah, but he's a highly capable CEO with a keen vision of where technology should go in the future.
Apple has just turned 30 on April 1, 2006, and they're still defining the paradigms of computing more than anybody, while a similarly-aged Microsoft looks tired, worn and disillusioned from much of those 30 years breathlessly following where others had already been before, with visible difficulties of motivating itself to go on at all.
Now just imagine if the world of computing hadn't settled for second best all those years...!
SpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1331 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 6):
Cookie-cutter response, but not quite correct: Apple did in fact draw some fundamental inspiration from Xerox' earlier research, but Xerox was far removed from an actually usable user interface
Really? To me a picture says a thousand words - looks like a useable GUI to me (even though it is in B&W).
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20860 posts, RR: 55 Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1325 times:
From your own Wikipedia link:
Quote: The modern GUI as we know it owes as much or more to Apple as it does to PARC - it is incorrect to claim that Apple "copied" or "stole" PARC's work. A good article pointing out many of the significant improvements that Apple brought to the GUI over PARC's implementation can be read here (folklore.org)
The link goes to exactly the site I linked to above - just read those articles and you probably won't repeat your mistake.
Cookie-cutter response, but not quite correct: Apple did in fact draw some fundamental inspiration from Xerox' earlier research, but Xerox was far removed from an actually usable user interface
Quoting Klaus (Reply 8): The link goes to exactly the site I linked to above - just read those articles and you probably won't repeat your mistake.
Klaus, you'll need to remember a user interface is not the same as a fully working system. It's customary to design a user inferface separately from anything else. Take a look at the car industry, for instance. I won't be asking to substatiate what you wrote, it'd be useless nitpicking.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20860 posts, RR: 55 Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1283 times:
Quoting Eilennaei (Reply 9): Klaus, you'll need to remember a user interface is not the same as a fully working system.
Of course not - although the integration of UI and the system and applications can vary to a great degree. But that aspect has nothing to do with the discussion above.
SpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1254 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 8): From your own Wikipedia link:
Quote:
The modern GUI as we know it owes as much or more to Apple as it does to PARC - it is incorrect to claim that Apple "copied" or "stole" PARC's work. A good article pointing out many of the significant improvements that Apple brought to the GUI over PARC's implementation can be read here (folklore.org)
The link goes to exactly the site I linked to above - just read those articles and you probably won't repeat your mistake.
-but the concept of a GUI was Xerox's. I don't dispute that Apple developed their own completely new GUI and it had features that Xerox's didn't (you might expect that they'd try and make improvement and add their own style).
I did read those articles - interesting that Apple employed ex-Xerox workers, they obviously thought there was talent there.
Quoting Klaus (Reply 6): Now just imagine if the world of computing hadn't settled for second best all those years...!
Apple and their software might be good, I wouldn't have a clue as they are too expensive to consider seriously. Price was and is Apple's Achilles heel.
"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
Not exactly - there had been multiple concepts predating theirs (including ideas from Apple's Jef Raskin); But they had the first prototype that actually did anything usable with a mouse. There's no doubt that Xerox set the starting point for all actually implemented GUIs.
Quoting SpinalTap (Reply 11): interesting that Apple employed ex-Xerox workers, they obviously thought there was talent there.
No doubt, and Apple never denied it - Apple even provided material compensation to Xerox for using the inspiration. As it should be.
Quoting SpinalTap (Reply 11): Apple and their software might be good, I wouldn't have a clue as they are too expensive to consider seriously. Price was and is Apple's Achilles heel.
Only at the bottom of the barrel. Macs aren't particularly expensive, just not dirt-cheap. When compared to PCs at similar price points, you generally get more value from Apple.
And using a Mac doesn't hurt as much, or as often...
Dougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1220 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 3): icrosoft is a supertanker drifting with broken rudder and engine in severe seas with a crew that's close to mutiny, while Apple is still plowing ahead at full steam (under a despotic but visionary captain).
SpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1150 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 12): Not exactly - there had been multiple concepts predating theirs (including ideas from Apple's Jef Raskin).
Were there concepts predating 1975? Thats when Xerox PARC claims to have demonstrated a GUI:
"1975
PARC's current site at 3333 Coyote Hill Road in Palo Alto, California is completed in February at a size of 100,000 square feet; the doors officially open on March 1.
Engineers demonstrate a graphical user interface for a personal computer, including icons and the first use of pop-up menus. This interface will be incorporated in future Xerox workstations and greatly influence the development of Windows and Macintosh interfaces"
LOT767-300ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1136 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 6): When you've already spent millenia on pondering the question about life, the universe and all the rest, there's always a bit of spare computing power for a sub-thread like this...!
You know what question of life my European supercomputer cannot overcome...why American DRIVE on Parkways but PARK on Driveways.
Quoting Klaus (Reply 12): Not exactly - there had been multiple concepts predating theirs (including ideas from Apple's Jef Raskin); But they had the first prototype that actually did anything usable with a mouse. There's no doubt that Xerox set the starting point for all actually implemented GUIs.
SpinalTap, thats actually a "Yes, I agree" with you in his language. He actually isnt programmed to say that one phrase but trust me...thats it.
Quoting Dougloid (Reply 13): Quoting Klaus (Reply 3):
icrosoft is a supertanker drifting with broken rudder and engine in severe seas with a crew that's close to mutiny, while Apple is still plowing ahead at full steam (under a despotic but visionary captain).
All I have to say on this subject is:
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, ya swabs.
Problem is that at least you have a tanker, Apple by comparison is a blow up dinghy in a backyard lake,
Some of them, sure. The first ideas for GUIs go back to the 1960s as far as I remember, but Xerox PARC were the first I know of who actually built a working prototype, so they deserve to be named as ancestors to all modern GUIs - as does Apple, a technological generation later and with the first "real world capable" implementation on which all others have been built henceforth.
Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 16): You know what question of life my European supercomputer cannot overcome...why American DRIVE on Parkways but PARK on Driveways.
That's an easy one - they're just weird!
Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 16): SpinalTap, thats actually a "Yes, I agree" with you in his language. He actually isnt programmed to say that one phrase but trust me...thats it.
No. I reserve the unqualified yes for extreme cases of agreement, as it should be!
Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 16): Problem is that at least you have a tanker, Apple by comparison is a blow up dinghy in a backyard lake,
No, you actually have a drifting buoy that just looks like a tanker!
Apple is smaller than Microsoft, but I'd recommend a look at their actual status over the years - I doubt you'd find many computer manufacturers sitting on zero debt, billions in cash and a rapidly innovating research department...!
More like a fast battle cruiser, to stay in the context...
Dougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1081 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 17):
More like a fast battle cruiser, to stay in the context...
Rather interesting analogy, as the battle cruiser concept turned out to be a failure in practice.
The idea was build something with heavy firepower (8 or 9 heavy guns) and sacrifice armor and combatworthiness for speed. Then go out and find some of your opponents with smaller guns and ships, ideally your enemies' heavy cruisers, and cut them to pieces and beat feet with superior speed when the main battle fleet came into view.
Of course, with all those lovely big guns and speed, navies who had battle cruisers insisted on getting them into fights with better armored opponents that they were not able to fight toe to toe. I mean, they LOOKED like battleships....
A lot of what made them attractive was the dash and elan with which they were fought, although one of the major proponents of the genre, Beatty, was something of a poseur and really did not acquit himself very well at Jutland...errrrrrr the Battle of the Skagerrak-of course, he won the battle for public opinion. (Just finished reading Castles of Steel, by the way)
One major example of the fallacy of the battle cruiser as an opponent to a fully armored battlewagon was the Hood, which blew up and sank after taking one salvo from Bismarck.
One writer described the Hood as a prizefighter with a glass jaw.
I'd analogize Apple more closely to a Polaris sub-quiet, ghostly, cryptic, mostly out of sight, and always ready to open up a baaaaaaaaad can of whoopass when the situation demands it.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2530 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
