Sunday, May 24, 2009

Beyond Crap

Okay, apparently some freetard who used to work at Microsoft has come out with a book called After the Software Wars that, among other things, touts the 'virtues' of open-source software. Well, I have not read much of it (and it will likely stay that way), but I did read a few sections, and they provided a bunch of unintentional comedy.

GC solves portability issues because programs written in languages such as Java, C#, Python, etc. are no longer compiled for any specific processor. By comparison a C/C++ executable program is just a blob of processor-specific code containing no information about what functions and other metadata are inside it.

If all code written for the Macintosh was written in a GC programming language, it would have been zero work for Apple to switch to the Intel processor because every program would just work!

LAWL!! Okay, where do I began to sort out the idiocy? First GC or Garbage Collection has little to do with "Write Once Run Anywhere." What he is thinking of is a Virtual Machine. VM-based languages often feature garbage collection, but the two features can coexist separately. Many implementations of D generate native code, and LLVM is a virtual machine that (I think) lacks support for garbage collection. Even if all OSX software was written in a virtual machine, it would have been a serious undertaking to both write and then port a virtual machine that gives acceptable performance (look at Sun's efforts to make Java not run like crap). Alright, let's read some more.

Apple’s second kernel wasn’t built from scratch, but is based on Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) Unix code. This code is a lot like Linux, but with a smaller development community and a noncopyleft license agreement. That Apple is depending on a smaller free kernel community, and yet doing just fine, does say something about free software’s ability to deliver quality products. The BSD kernel is certainly much better than the one Apple threw after 20 years of investment!

Unfortunately, in choosing this software, Apple gave life support to a group who should have folded their code and resources into Linux. The free software community can withstand such inefficiency because it is an army of millions, but, from a global perspective, this choice by Apple slowed progress.

Oh snap! I bet that {will,has already} start{,ed} a few flame wars. This is even funnier since it comes a few pages after he jerks-off to the hundreds of Linux distributions that freetards have created.

When I visit coffee shops, I increasingly notice students and computer geeks purchasing Macs. Students have limited budgets and so should gravitate towards free software. If Apple doesn't support free software, their position in the educational market is threatened.

Apparently, this guy has not met any students recently. Sure, they are strapped for cash; this is why the pirate the shit out of everything! If free software can compete with pirated commercial software, then it stands a chance. Otherwise, nada.

Many computer geeks buy a Mac because of its Unix foundation.

The stupid, it burns!!!

In the terminal window of both the Mac and Linux, you type “ps -a” to see the list of processes.

Oh, wow! It has ps! That is, like, so awesome!

(Windows doesn't support the Unix commandline tools.)

Oh noes! Apparently, this guy has never heard of Cygwin, MinGW or even Microsoft Windows Services for Unix.

Apple has good Unix compatibility only because their programmers never took it out while doing their work. It was never any goal of the Mac OS-X to be appeal to geeks — Apple just got lucky.

Yes, they are so lucky to have that 0.1% of their market. He saves the best for last.

After having been a long-time Windows user, and a 100% Linux user for 3 years, I tried out the Mac OS X for a couple of days. Here are some impressions:

Prepare to have your freetard socks rocked!

● A Mac OS has more code than ever before, and a lot of it is based on free code, but it doesn't have a repository with thousands of applications like Linux. There are several third party efforts to provide this feature, but none are blessed or supported by Apple. The Mac comes free with iPhoto, but they really want me to buy Aperture for $159, which they tell me just added 100 new features! Apple ships a new OS every year, but you don't get free upgrades — it costs $140 even to upgrade from OS X 10.4 to 10.5.

First, it seems like Apple now releases a new OS every two years. Next, most Apple users don't care about 95% of the crap in those repositories, so Apple does not want to spend the money needed to maintain a high quality repository.

● Many of the Mac's UI details like how to maximize windows, and shortcut keys, are dis-similar to Windows. Linux, by contrast, feels much more natural to a Windows user. Every time you double-click on a picture, it loads the iPreview application that stays around even after the window displaying the picture is closed. How about just creating a window, putting the picture in that window, and having it all disappear when I close the window? I tried to change the shortcuts to match the Windows keystrokes, but it didn't change it in all applications.

Then you need a window bar along one of the sides of the screen. I will admit it is a bit weird, but the solution seems better than cluttering up the interface.

● The Mac feels like a lot of disparate pieces bolted together. The desktop widgets code has its own UI, and it doesn't integrate well into the OS desktop. The Spaces is a clone of an old Unix feature and doesn't implement it as well as Linux does. (For example, there is no easily discoverable way to move applications between spaces.)

Linux does not?! Linux IS a lot of disparate pieces bolted together.

● As mentioned above, the Mac doesn't support as many of the Microsoft standards as Linux does. One of the most obvious is WMA, but it also doesn't ship with any software that reads DOC files, even though there is and other free software out there.

At least the functionality exists! On Linux, you need to download some potentially illegal codecs to even play MP3s!

● It is less customizable. I cannot find a way to have the computer not go to sleep when the laptop screen is closed. The mouse speed seems too slow and you can only adjust the amount of acceleration, not the sensitivity. You cannot resize the system menu bar, nor add applets like you can with Linux's Gnome.

That is funny. I cannot make my Linux laptop GO to sleep when the lid is closed.

These are just a few of the 'insights' you can find in this amazing tome. If you want, you can buy the book from Amazon, or you can send him a small donation. Make it a penny.


Anonymous said...

Another fun fact: the OS X kernel isn't even based on BSD, only the system utilities are. It's another Freetard myth. The kernel is based on some academic prototypes and Nextstep.

Anonymous said...

● As mentioned above, the Mac doesn't support as many of the Microsoft standards as Linux does. One of the most obvious is WMA, but it also doesn't ship with any software that reads DOC files, even though there is and other free software out there.Mac OS X ships with two kinds of software that read doc files: Notepad and QuickLook. There is no support for wma in any stock Linux distro. Neither is there in Mac OS X, but you can install the flip4mac codec.

"The Mac feels like a lot of disparate pieces bolted together."This author has no clue concerning Mac OS X. It's not perfect, but the most integrated platform available.

There is lot's of foss in Mac OS X just take a look:
It contains a lot of code, that's also in most Linux distros. But it's better integrated and works out of the box.
I am one of those geeks that bought a Mac in 2002 because of Mac OS X 10.2. All the stuff I liked from Linux systems were there, but also a lot more. I finally saw, that I wanted a Unix like system not Linux.

wbkang said...

Whoever wrote that book must be a fucking idiot.
Nicely done LHR!
BTW, in Windows, C:\Windows\System32\tasklist.exe OR taskmgr should do the job of /usr/bin/ps, /usr/ucb/ps or whatsoeveryoucallit.

Anon E Moose said...

Lusers just can't deal with the fact that Apple has made serious money selling a proprietary unix bolted to an expensive hardware platform.

Nor do they seem to be able to gain any insight into how Apple manages to do this.

Repositories are nice, but I don't see why they are considered a Killer Feature. In Linux they are great because they obviate most of the dependency hell that you otherwise run into (like when you want to install something not in a repo, or compile some source).

Apple, with their drag and drop installation.... Why the hell would you need a repo when you can go to a website, read about a program, see features, screenshots, etc, and then just download the file and run the sucker?

THAT is elegant design. Looking up some cryptic program name and reading whatever terse notes might be provided in the description is anything but.

Plus you unburden yourself from having to maintain a repo, putting the obligation of distributing software into the hands of the vendors themselves (where it should be), saving Apple money.

I don't use a Mac, but even I can see that they have mastered the user experience, and THAT is why they do so well.

...and because Macs are shiny ;P

David Moisan said...

And in Windows 7 you have PowerShell:


PowerShell rawks, but seriously, why would you get an OS just because you can ps? Isn't it something one does in a restroom?

Anonymous said...

There are a lot of flaws in your post. Here is the first one:

When you have a program written Java or C#, etc., you just copy the binary to a different processor, (and assuming the GC / VM is there), the program just works. You wouldn't have the need for fat binaries.

I could keep going, but it isn't my job to educate you. You seem more interested in humor than accuracy anyway. That is fine.

Anonymous said...

So Apple uses open source. Whether a lot or a little doesn't is an issue of perspective, but doesn't that demonstrate the merits of it?

Open source will take over. The trends are obvious.

The Mac sucks -- wake me when they have a backspace and delete key, and a mouse with two buttons.

Anon E Moose said...

open source will always have a place.

I don't see it replacing key proprietary solutions anytime soon in my organization, though.

Regardless, it's not worth getting wet and frothy over, (as seen on many tech sites). I use what works for me, and my organization uses what works for us and what the users demand (within reason). Some of our peripheral applications are OSS, and our infrastructure and core apps are not.

With limited software budgets we always look for a free solution first (OSS or not). Sometimes we find one, and sometimes we either can't find one, or one that meets our needs.

whitetigersx said...

"The Mac sucks -- wake me when they have a backspace and delete key, and a mouse with two buttons."

You can use a standard usb mouse, and I believe a standard keyboard, on a Mac so your argument is a non-starter.

Yes the Mac has plenty of OSS in it, but they discovered that OSS and proprietary can coexist comfortably without needing to be fanatical about either one. They're just fanatical about the hardware.

Declination said...

I'm intruiged. What is this supposed code that Linux shared with Mac OS X. I'm fairly certain that all of the BSDs are BSD licensed and the most zealous of the Gnutards(TM) would pop a carotid before using a BSD licensed utility in their userland.

whitetigersx said...

OSS != Linux.
Open Source Software is just that, the source is open. It is an idea that's not specific to any one OS.

Anonymous said...


"OSS != Linux"Exactly. I love how all the Linux zealots try to latch on to every open source program, case in point:

they all bleat the same nonsense about Firefox. Last time I checked, Firefox isn't Linx-only, nor is Mozilla comprised of a bunch of basement dwellers.

Any popular open source "Linux" program is also available, with a nice, easy to use binary, for Windows.

Esben said...

Dude. Post more.

Bruno said...

Note about that MP3s, it's illegal only in Fascist Developing country like USA where software patents were adopted. You have no problem in democratic country like all EU members. And also you can ignore that patents in US like every linux user in US do. Don't let them controll you freedom.

Anonymous said...

if could in any manner eliminate the fact that windows is buggy and stupidly "vulnerable", it's really good.....and not because you can click on everything to make it work means a system is better than othher kids like you love clicking(you can call it; over-clicking)...

aaaaah something else if a Windows user wants to use GNU/Linux it gets into a hell to him/her, but not the same happens when it viceverse...

TM Repository said...

(For example, there is no easily discoverable way to move applications between spaces.)

That's rich. Did he try dragging the application to another space?