Why Are Macs the Superior Choice for Computing?

[graphic7]

Are you capable of speaking without trying to insult people? I mean honestly, are you even capable of being civil, or are you just automatically a ****ing *******? **** off.

I am, but I feign at the sight of ignorance.

Further that was hardly a 'UNIX history lecture', nor was it an attempt at one, but we all know you're too much of a dick to make a post without trying to insult someone. So its ok, I forgive you.

If I wanted to be forgiven, I'd take up a religion, but thanks, anyways.

Ok. And this has what relevance? I never said linux was superior to UNIX, and i didn't mean to imply that.

To quote you exactly:

UNIX is not basically flawless by any means, though it is superior to windows, without a doubt. Mind you, i like UNIX. But its not perfect. And again, nothing that linux doesn't offer

What is that? You didn't say it was superior, however, you did say that there was something that a commerical UNIX could not do, that Linux could. This implies that Linux is superior in some regard. I cited an instance of something that a UNIX, AIX, can do, that Linux cannot, and you throw up your arms and whine about it.

I wasn't badmouthing OS X. At least, i did not mean to, though its not uncommon for me to miscommunicate what i actually mean.

Yes, it is common for you to miscommunicate what you mean. You might mean something else, however, the readers of whatever you write will read it and they will end up being misguided. I'm only straightening everything up.

I know it uses the FreeBSD kernel. In fact, if you were intelligent enough to not take the statement out of context, you might realize that's what i just said. I didn't know it had gcc with it, or the man pages.

No, I did not see that anywhere. If you'd like to cite an instance of where you gave the impression that OS X was actually FreeBSD, I'll stand corrected.

 

[franznietzsche]

What is that? You didn't say it was superior, however, you did say that there was something that a commerical UNIX could not do, that Linux could. This implies that Linux is superior in some regard. I cited an instance of something that a UNIX, AIX, can do, that Linux cannot, and you throw up your arms and whine about it.

Actually i was referring to the comparison of OS X to UNIX, meaning the similiarities between OS X and UNIX are nothinh linux does not have.

THe entire second half of that post was about OS X vrs Linux, UNIX was only brought up because gsch said:

Unix core
Many scientific applications are written for Unix. This makes them work on Mac.
Unix is basically flawless. No security leaks, practically no crashes, exellent server capabilities (I run a http/MySQL server from my home computer without any problems). All this with the easy-to-use interface of Macinosh

I was saying that those things are all on linux. And since i was saying this right after quoting that, i thought it was a sound assumption you would understand that. Guess not.

I did not 'throw up my arms and whine about it'. I pointed out it had no relevance to my statement. It still has no relevance.

Yes, it is common for you to miscommunicate what you mean. You might mean something else, however, the readers of whatever you write will read it and they will end up being misguided. I'm only straightening everything up.

While being as much of a dick as possible.

No, I did not see that anywhere. If you'd like to cite an instance of where you gave the impression that OS X was actually FreeBSD, I'll stand corrected.

Unix core
Many scientific applications are written for Unix. This makes them work on Mac.
Unix is basically flawless. No security leaks, practically no crashes, exellent server capabilities (I run a http/MySQL server from my home computer without any problems). All this with the easy-to-use interface of Macinosh

FreeBSD has one too

Are you entirely incapable of reading my posts in context?

When i quote a section of a post and respond to it, it might be important to read, to understand what i am saying, since i will assume you have read it when I'm writing my response to it.

Granted i could have been more specific, but i don't usually have to deal with little ****s that like to tell me what i do and do not know. I mentioned FreeBSD specifically because its so similar. That was the entire point in mentioning it right after the quote where he talks about OS X's UNIX core. Sorry, from now on, i'll assume you can't figure that out.

 

[aychamo]

Hey you geeks, stop derailing this topic!

 

[graphic7]

was saying that those things are all on linux. And since i was saying this right after quoting that, i thought it was a sound assumption you would understand that. Guess not.

I did not 'throw up my arms and whine about it'. I pointed out it had no relevance to my statement. It still has no relevance.

Are you blind? Are you comprehending anything that I stated in the previous post? In the future, I will not bother to correct you. You may go on spewing your inaccuracies and ignorance.

While being as much of a dick as possible.

All subjection.

Are you entirely incapable of reading my posts in context?

I am incapable I suppose. I don't know what you're assuming that people will understand when you make such outrageous posts. They're riddled with misconceptions, inaccuracies, and pure nonsense. Quite frankly, I'm tired of it.

Granted i could have been more specific, but i don't usually have to deal with little ****s that like to tell me what i do and do not know. I mentioned FreeBSD specifically because its so similar. That was the entire point in mentioning it right after the quote where he talks about OS X's UNIX core. Sorry, from now on, i'll assume you can't figure that out.

Come again? It sounds like you're trying to wiggle your way through my corrections to prove that you are correct in some form or fashion. In no way did you ever come close to inferring that OS X is essentially FreeBSD.

 

[aychamo]

Boring. Who cares? Yall both look stupid now.