> From: Dan Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sorry, this is UNIX -- it's a multi-user system regardless of how many >> people are actually using it. > > Which is one of my reasons for believing that despite the stability and > ancient roots of *nix, it's really not a personal computer operating > system. At heart it's designed for servers that support multiple > concurrent users. > > Nobody I know uses their Mac like that, except for servers. Kludge that > the classic Mac OS was, it was specifically designed as a single-user > operating system for personal computers. Unix was not, although it can > be > used that way. >
> A true personal computer operating system with multiple users -- say > something like Mac OS 9 -- is much friendlier. But Apple chose to step > away from the computer as appliance into the world of *nix, and we can > either stick with the classic OS or follow into the Aqua world of OS X. > > I realize Apple saved a fortune by acquiring NeXT and leveraging their > expertise, and that OS X is the best consumer *nix ever, but it's > overkill and overly complex for the average user. Loathe as I am to break with the listmom who I regard very highly, I must respectfully disagree. Apart from one small concession to UNIX's history -- the admin account and it's attendant password and login ritual -- what we gain far outweighs what we lose when it comes to "personal-ness" of the OS. I'm not talking about the myriad advantages of OS X in other areas, I'm talking specifically about the personal experience. Yes, the admin-password and hidden danger of root may be something of a bother to some users, and it's a legit gripe in my view -- one that will likely be addressed better in future versions of the OS, though I wouldn't hold my breath anytime soon. But the gain I refer to above is substantial, and it is valuable to almost all but the most Ted Kyzinski-like of Mac isolationists -- the tangible and substantial gains in instant, relatively painless, cross-platform networking. Macs under OS X can plug straight into Windows networks without disruption, can use Windows services, can share printers, files and internet access seamlessly. We also enjoy much-improved communication with UNIX machines, handheld and other "non-PC" computer devices, better internet compatibility and most importantly the ability to quickly adapt to changing standards. Witness the emergence of VPNs and how easily Mac OS X has been able to leap into that fray compared to OS 9, which still doesn't really do that. You can make the same argument with DSL PPTP protocols -- OS X handles this easily compared to OS 9. Maybe a lot of this is lost on someone who has no intention of ever "networking" with anything other than the internet (unless he's on DSL), true. But as His Steveness has said on many occasions, most of us just don't live in that isolated a world anymore. We need our computers to be able to connect, to reach out. We need our computers to be able to work with more than one person. This may not be true of everyone, but it's certainly true of most of us, and that group is getting larger every day. Mac OS X imposes an extremely minor penalty (the mandatory "accounts" and "permissions" thing) in exchange for a huge bounty of advantages, including multi-homing, SMB networking, VPN compatibility, Rendezvous, iChat, PPPoE compatibility, iSync and much more (much of which is yet to come). Almost all of these improvements and services are of use even to people who live alone, and are the only user of their computer. Every time those people plug their cell phone in, their PDA in, connect to a neighbour's LAN party, trade files with Windows users, run DSL or chat with iChat, they are taking advantage of some of the benefits that UNIX adds to OS X. And there are plenty of other examples. While people who are used to the way OS 9 did things can claim it was "friendlier" all they like, it's just not true. It's different, yes, and confusing to someone who's used to the old way, certainly. But that's not the same thing as "more difficult" or "less friendly." Had we stayed with OS 9, the Mac would have inevitably become even further isolated and marginalised by the computer world than it already has. As it is, I think the company "dodged a bullet" by thismuch, IMHO. The emerging standards we're seeing and have been seeing for the past few years -- 802.11b (now being superceded by 802.11g), the rise of VPNs, Rendezvous-type technology and the convergence of digital devices -- simply would never have happened on the Mac apart from very limited ways. Imagine what THAT would have done to sales! No, I think we're seeing a replay of the "car vs. horse-and-buggy crowd" argument that raged a century ago here. Horse-and-buggy setups are still around, still appreciated for their unique qualities and offer some distinct advantages/comforts over cars, even today ... but to say that we should have stayed with the horse and buggy because of those advantages/comforts? Nah. _Chas_ Come to ... The CHASbah! http://thechasbah.blogspot.com **Go see BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE. It may change your life.** -- The iMac List is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | - Epson Stylus Color 580 Printers - new at $69 | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> iMac List info: <http://lowendmac.com/imac/list.shtml> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/imac-list%40mail.maclaunch.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------- >The Think Different Store http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
