The Apple Thread

[sohum]

Apple hasn't had issues with trademarks--they usually end up licensing or buying it. For example iPhone was a trademark of Cisco and iPad was a trademark of Fujitsu.

 

[Cricketman]

Saw the new MBA in person yesterday...OMG. Amazing. So thin, no idea how they fit everything in there.

 

[sohum]

Just bought my first Mac ever--the entry level Mac Mini. Mac Connection was selling it for $599 with no taxes and free shipping so I figured I'd jump on one. Got it delivered today. Started it up but my Logitech DiNovo isn't working too well with it atm. Will stop by Fry's tomorrow and pick up an extra HDMI cable and keyboard/mouse.

 

[Cricketman]

Great purchase! I love my Mac Mini, I have the previous model. It is awesome.

 

[sohum]

Have to say, the one thing I love about OS X so far is how simple it is to install applications. Although there are still about 3 different ways to install (go through a pkg installer, drag an app into the App folder, drag an app into a shortcut to the App folder from within the installer), there's none of the ugliness involved with Ubuntu or Windows.

Technologically, this is interesting since in many cases it means that the entire application is atomic--everything is contained within the .app file--from the actual binary code to any embedded resources and the like. The problem with Windows development is the tendency to put supporting files separately on disk instead of embedding it into the binary).

 

[sachin_rocks]

, there's none of the ugliness involved with Ubuntu

whats so ugly in opening the software center and installing a application

 

[Kshitiz_Indian]

Have to say, the one thing I love about OS X so far is how simple it is to install applications. Although there are still about 3 different ways to install (go through a pkg installer, drag an app into the App folder, drag an app into a shortcut to the App folder from within the installer), there's none of the ugliness involved with Ubuntu or Windows.

Technologically, this is interesting since in many cases it means that the entire application is atomic--everything is contained within the .app file--from the actual binary code to any embedded resources and the like. The problem with Windows development is the tendency to put supporting files separately on disk instead of embedding it into the binary).

I think in the next to next (or maybe even next, not sure) windows version, this might start happening. They've done it in Windows Phone 7 now, and granted the concept is there in all Mobile OS's, the sandboxing technique in Windows Phone 7 is quite interesting. It might make its way to Windows eventually.

 

[sohum]

whats so ugly in opening the software center and installing a application

More often than not the Software Center contains out-of-date releases, especially for packages that are updated often. If you want the latest stuff you have to go into package manager or command-line which is not ideal.

Moreover, this is related to downloading software from the internet. Windows has MSI's that handle installation and OS X has DMGs which contain mpkg files that are basically installers. Some DMGs just have the drag-drop functionality.

Linux software is typically just distributed in tarballs or gzipped tarballs that you then have to manually untar and copy to your binary folders. Unless you have an rpm but most small apps don't have rpms available.

sohum added 2 Minutes and 20 Seconds later...

I think in the next to next (or maybe even next, not sure) windows version, this might start happening. They've done it in Windows Phone 7 now, and granted the concept is there in all Mobile OS's, the sandboxing technique in Windows Phone 7 is quite interesting. It might make its way to Windows eventually.

Could you explain the sandboxing technique?

MS has been pushing Windows developers to stop abusing system directories and registries since Vista, by locking them down and introducing UAC. Legacy software continues to abuse them, though. Now, they are definitely suggesting a more refined system where you put your binary in Program Files and any application data resides in the user app data folder. It's still funky, though, and they aren't mandating it, so it's open to abuse.

sohum added 2 Minutes and 33 Seconds later...

--

Also, got my first chance to play with an iPad (my Dad's) today. While the device itself is beautiful, after using it for a couple of hours, it did nothing to convince me that it is something that people would need. The form factor also surprised me--it was a lot larger than I expected which makes it harder to carry around.

A few of the apps were interesting--natively the Mail app and the Settings app (!) were well-designed. Until third-party apps pick up the slack it's going to just be a large iPod Touch.

 

[sachin_rocks]

Unless you have an rpm but most small apps don't have rpms available.

ubuntu doesn't even use rpm.

and ubuntu has .deb compared to .dmg of mac also if you want updated software you just have to add ppa of the software to software sources(found in the edit menu of software center) and then install through software center

installation using command line is NOT AT ALL required

 

[sohum]

and ubuntu has .deb compared to .dmg of mac also if you want updated software you just have to add ppa of the software to software sources(found in the edit menu of software center) and then install through software center

These are examples of things end users do not want to do.

installation using command line is NOT AT ALL required

The knowledge is definitely required since at some point or another you are going to come up against a compiled executable without any accompanied documentation or installer.

Most Windows software comes with an MSI that automatically installs into Program Files. Very rarely will you get just a compiled EXE as a form of distribution.

From the OS X apps I've seen there's been a mix of installer technology built into the dmg's to just compiled executables that I had to figure out where to install.

For Linux software I've seen out in the wild, if it is not part of a repository then the installer procedure completely lacks documentation. Few people package an INSTALL script. Otherwise, you're just assumed to know where you are going to copy it into.

 

[Cricketman]

I've been using my/my dad's iPad for a lot of reading lately and am absolutely loving it. Kindle bookstore is cheap and has just about every book i want to read.

Plus i've had multitasking for the ipad since this morning and it is just SO much better. Really liking it now!

 

[sohum]

Typing on an iPad is ridiculously cumbersome. It's good for consuming web content (although I've come across a lot of websites that don't work as well because of Flash--more than I'd expect) but not very good for authoring.

 

[sachin_rocks]

These are examples of things end users do not want to do.

these instructions would be given on the apps install page on the net and are very simple and once you add the ppa you would always remain updated with the app (which you would want to do if you are a person who wants up-to-date software otherwise you would just install the older version from the repo) which would require you to check the app's website time to time then download the new version uninstall the older version and then install the newr version

 

[sohum]

these instructions would be given on the apps install page on the net and are very simple and once you add the ppa you would always remain updated with the app (which you would want to do if you are a person who wants up-to-date software otherwise you would just install the older version from the repo) which would require you to check the app's website time to time then download the new version uninstall the older version and then install the newr version

Like I said, it's not comparable. No one wants to do all these extra steps. "Instructions [would be] given on the apps install page" are (a) not standardized and (b) not mandatory. They are also a pain to read. When I download a Windows or OS X app, I don't have to read something to figure out how to install it.

Imagine giving all the other instructions in the post to a casual computer user. Compare that versus the Windows/Mac solution of double-clicking on a file and then following a wizard-interface. There's no contest.

Face it, man, you may be a huge Linux fan but the reason it hasn't taken off in the consumer space is because it is made by developers for developers for the most part.

 

[Cricketman]

You can't beat OSX's way of installing stuff. Just drag it into the applications folder! Amazing.