Apple revisited

This was a comment that I originally posted to my Why I hate Apple post. But I think it's worth its own post.

I could have a lot of respect for Apple. But I cannot while they greedily feed off of free software (FreeBSD) and charge a killing for their icons and animations and stuff that they throw on top.

Look folks, Apple made a wise decision in going with FreeBSD. FreeBSD is an excellent OS. The only problem with it is that it's not Open Source. So it cannot benefit from the many advantages OSS has. It is good and stable, but it will not be able to keep up with Linux in

Why I hate Apple

Next in our series will be our piece on the Apple Corporation in general.

Apple is generally considered very innovative and user friendly. And they are. They innovated the first PC user interface, for the most part. And that interface was very user friendly. But what Apple left out was the usefulness. While Unix computers were involved in UUCP and early popular TCP/IP networking, Apple computers were doing something called hyper cards or something. While powerful unix editors such as VI and EMACS were being perfected, Apple had, er, well, I don't know what they had until Microsoft came out with Word, but I'm sure they must have had something, and I'm sure it was useable. When Microsoft started catching on to the whole Internet thing, providing crude and barely functional TCP/IP networking, Apple provided even cruder and even less functional networking capability.

In fact, by the time Apple caught on firmly to the whole networking thing, they were already an also-ran. This is when they became obsessed with lawsuits and this silly, Albert Einstein, pot-smoking, "different" image that was supposed to somehow elevate them above functional computer systems.

Move ahead a few dull years, and we come to Mac OSX.

Now Apple decides, understandabley, to scrap their, useless, Mac OS in favor of something that works and that is free and that they can integrate with a bunch of pretty icons and sell for lots of money.

This was a good thing for Apple users who were already used to spending lots of money on pretty icons but weren't used to an OS that actually did anything. Now Apple fanatics had an OS with pretty icons and a functional operating system. But in the spirit of previous Apple OSs, Apple locked this thing up and prevented developers from easily developing Apple applications. They also neglected to contribute back to the community from which they took (the open source community) and refused to contribute their own software (itunes, the apple gui, etc.) back to the community).

I hear from folks that OSX is very pretty and has lots of nice wallpapers. I've seen it. Yes, it's very shiny and sparkling. Folks claim it's very stable, and I have to agree; FreeBSD has always been a very solid OS. But is Apple now much different than M$? They take other peoples technology and re-package it. It doesn't work very well, but it's "more stable" than the previous version. It's locked up like a drum, but should somehow magically be comatible with stuff that shows up a year or two from now.

Apple/Mac is no better than Microsoft, they just smoke more pot and spend more on fancy billboards on the 101.

Next installment: Why I hate Redhat

Why I Hate Microsoft

It's very difficult to explain to people why Microsoft is such a bad company. In a nutshell, there are several main reasons why I personally hate them with inordinate passion:

1) Crappy software: M$ has gotten most people used to software that doesn't work, OSs that consistently crash, user interfaces that are clunky and ineffective. By doing this, they ensure that folks will continually need to upgrade to the next less buggy release of a piece of software. In fact, software should not crash at all. If it does, it's not finished. M$ software is never finished and users of their software are in effect beta testers (who should probably be getting paid :)

Syndicate content