My report on Firefox 3.5

[WBear2GCR]

OK. Name one.

Name one what?

You are making generalizations too. See how easy this is?

And you are complaining about broad generalizations? The facts are that Apple saw huge growth in its computer sales ever since the introduction of the iMac in 1998 - well before the iPod. Only in the last year or so have computer sales turned down. But so did Dell's. People like you have been declaring the death of Apple since the 1980s. You were wrong every time. Shame on you.   

what do you call huge growth?
from crashing to being somewhat stable?

You've obviously got the wrong idea here, I am not anti-Apple, in fact in the not to distant past I was an Apple fan.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

It has nothing to do with whether you are anti-Apple or not. It has to do with facts. Go look at the sales figures for Apple computer starting in 1998. It's pretty simple to see the growth. It had nothing to do with iPod or iPhones. Apple has been in the top five of computer sales for quite a few years. Look it up.


Give one instance where amateur radio led or was even close to cutting edge technology since WWII.

One of, if not the most used mode in the hobby, SSB, was patented in 1915. Digital modes are still in minority use. Yet, that technology has been around since the 1960s in the real world, and in the cutting edge world, well before that. Most hams comms are still simplex. The telephone created duplex comms in the 1800s.

This is not to say there aren't some small pockets of amateur radio doing some pretty cool things, some of which are pretty high tech. But even most of those are behind the state of the art.

Yea, sure, I was being a little hyperbolic. I was busting Pete's balls. Give me a break.   

OK. Name one.

Name one what?

You are making generalizations too. See how easy this is?

And you are complaining about broad generalizations? The facts are that Apple saw huge growth in its computer sales ever since the introduction of the iMac in 1998 - well before the iPod. Only in the last year or so have computer sales turned down. But so did Dell's. People like you have been declaring the death of Apple since the 1980s. You were wrong every time. Shame on you.   

what do you call huge growth?
from crashing to being somewhat stable?

You've obviously got the wrong idea here, I am not anti-Apple, in fact in the not to distant past I was an Apple fan.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

LOL. That's even more ridiculous. Ham radio is WAY behind new technology. It has been ever since WWII.

This lack of being up to date on technology explains your dislike of Apple.

Twenty-five years ago is ancient history. I thought you were a new technology guy?

just install Safari 4.0.3 and remove all the other worthless browsers and be happy

Is this the perfect browser? Are there any others out there who have tried it?  I have it but never use it. 

I tried some version of Safari some time ago on one of XP machines. I didn't find it any better or worse then using Firefox. Viewing older sites written in Frontpage or similar web designers, both browsers would change fonts and some graphic styles. I seem to remember using it while up on Ebay doing some bidding and eleventh-hour hawking on several items, and some rapid switching back and forth between them, the browser locked/or froze up.  I had to close the browser and start up again. But, then again, I generally barf at anything that Apple pushes. Their product line didn't impress me 25 years ago and it still doesn't now.

I modified my original post to make it clear. Ham radio wise, the move is definitely to new technologies. Computer hardware isn't that far behind.

This is what happens when I try to post using a 3.5 inch screen. This line, "Ham radio wise, the move is definitely to new technologies. Computer hardware isn't that far behind"
Should have said, with my Ham radio stuff, the move is definitely to new technologies and my computer hardware isn't that far behind. I wasn't referring to amateur radio technology in general.

My distain of Apple goes back to when I was project manager for some router and packet switch products and I had to interface numerous times with them in regard to their AppleTalk software. Every time was like dragging my knuckles over very rough sandpaper. I've also tried some of the Mac stuff over the years and was never happy or comfortable with it. Since Windows Version 1.0, released in 1985, I've always been comfortable with the overall performance of the product line. It's worked fine for me for 25 years. I have no plans to change.

[KE6DF]

I certainly never give in to using generalizations, myself.

But, only wimps use either Apple or Windows.

Real men use Linux or Unix.

If you can't install software using the command line interface and shell commands, they you are just not ready for a real computer. 

Fedora (Red Hat) Linux and Firefox 3.5.2 are my main desktop systems.

OpenOffice for when I need a spreadsheet of someone sends me a PPT file.

Very stable and no viruses.

The price is right: Free.

And it's more modern technology than most vacuum tubes and AM transmitters.

Wasn't UNIX developed about 1969?

 

[Pete, WA2CWA]

I certainly never give in to using generalizations, myself.

But, only wimps use either Apple or Windows.

Real men use Linux or Unix.

If you can't install software using the command line interface and shell commands, they you are just not ready for a real computer. 

Fedora (Red Hat) Linux and Firefox 3.5.2 are my main desktop systems.

OpenOffice for when I need a spreadsheet of someone sends me a PPT file.

Very stable and no viruses.

The price is right: Free.

And it's more modern technology than most vacuum tubes and AM transmitters.

Wasn't UNIX developed about 1969?

 

Actually, if your so inclined, so can install windows applications at the command line interface using the Run command. And, for those of us that ran DOS, back in the "good old days", many applications, installing drivers, batch commands, etc. were done at the command line interface. Seems to me Linus and Uniy are still living in the past but then some need to live in the past. In the 70's we at Bell Labs used Unix for text processing. "nroff", "troff", "tbl" and large assortment of other commands, bring back ugly memories. I still have my Unix text processing "starter package" manual around here somewhere. I think Unix was initially developed by a Bell Labs developer to run some game on a main frame back in 1969.

1969 - great year - Woodstock -walk on the moon - me and 6 other guys rent a house at the Jersey shore for the summer - Can I take you higher...........

[KE6DF]

Of course, I'm mainly kidding around here.

I like Apple's interface best. Windows isn't bad ether.

But for those of us that used Unix in the old days, but haven't looked at Linux lately, you might give it a new look.

There are some new graphical desktops that are at least, IMHO, as good at the Windows UI.

Gnome is the desktop that I use on my Linux machine and if you just looked at it without looking closely, you would think I was running Windows.

It's very similar -- icons, mouse clicks to select and open files and programs, drag and drop, etc.

And now days, most software for Linux can be installed through the graphical UI without going to the command line. But, once in a while, you do run across things that have to be installed the old fashioned way.

The big advantage of MS WIndows is the availability of third party software.

On that score, Apple comes in second to Windows, and Linux is a distant third.

But for us more techy types, one advantage of Linux is that most software is open source -- so you can download the source code and tinker if  you are so inclined.

There are a fair number of Ham radio programs out there for Linux.

But I have to go to my wife's Windows machine once in a while for some freeware CAD program or to access a web site that doesn't work with Firefox.

I used to have Windows Vista on the Dell machine I'm typing this on.

We had a thunderstorm one night, and the next day I couldn't get Windows to boot. None of the recovery disks worked. I couldn't repair it.

I thought the hardware had been zapped, but I had my Linux load CD that I had used on another machine, so I tried loading that and it worked.

Installing Linux is pretty easy. It's all graphical these days. The autodetect found all my devices and interface cards automatically and loaded the correct drivers.

It was easy to get shared printers to work over the net and I can print from either my wife's machine or my Linux machines.

Can share files between Linux and Windows no problem.

I now have Linux running on three machines.

My DELL with 3Gig ram. An old Presario that my son gave me which has only 768M ram (works just fine as a backup machine), and an old Compaq notebook which has only 384M of ram. That old notebook is our downstairs browser station.

The earliest of this type of computer OS I ever used was one called Multics at MIT. Multics was a precursor (and much more complex OS) to Unix -- way back in the dark ages.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Open Office is pretty sweet. I use it often on my Mac running in X Windows. [Yea, Mac OS X is UNIX underneath, command line and all.]

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Yea, DOS never had anything powerful like pipes.

There is a huge difference between Windows/DOS command line and UNIX or LINUX command line.

UNIX and LINUX command line is where the power and future still is.

DOS command line is where the limitation is. DOS command line is obsolete and reminds me of the bygone COBALT days. DOS is useless without installing PERAL or some other add-on, but its sill obsolete even doing that.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

There is a huge difference between Windows/DOS command line and UNIX or LINUX command line.

UNIX and LINUX command line is where the power and future still is.

DOS command line is where the limitation is. DOS command line is obsolete and reminds me of the bygone COBALT days. DOS is useless without installing PERAL or some other add-on, but its sill obsolete even doing that.

Since I'm not a programmer, have no desire or interest to diddle with software code, wouldn't know one programming language from another (I immediately purged that info from my brain when I finished my class requirements back in the "good old days"), etc., the Uniy, Linus, and whatever other freeware that is out there is really of no interest to me. Windows applications keeps my business activities running smoothly, keeps my main receiver and transmitter running great and a host of other amateur radio activities, and also provides a host of family, and other spare time, fun and enjoyment activities. Windows has always worked great for me throughout all their iterations over the last 25 plus years.

As far as "where the power and future is" I'll wait for the marketing announcement. Having been a product and marketing manager for a number of years, I tended not to rely solely on what developers and techies perceive the future is going to be. Many of them tend to float in the clouds and not on solid ground.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

I'll stand by for the marketing announcement but I won't hold my breath. Currently, with Windows commanding roughly 90% of the market share and Apple/MACs with roughly 3% to 9%, depending on what statistics you're looking at, any threat to your market share should be a cause for concern. Ignoring the numbers and/or no action will lead you down the GM/Ford route. However, given the current numbers, I doubt Microsoft will be closing their blinds and heading for the door anytime soon. Apple/MACs do have a substantial presence in the high end part of the market, but that's not where the typical consumer wants to shop or typically needs to shop. I view this Windows/MAC "rivalry" sort of like ball point pens. The pen is held and dispenses ink. I can buy a Cross pen with a fancy outer shell for $71 or I can buy a BIC pen with a plain shell for $2. Both do the same thing and both do it well. But, there will always be consumers who will buy the Cross pen.

[WBear2GCR]

I'm going back to my trusty Sinclair!!!

             _-_-bear

[KE6DF]

Well, the computer I miss most is the IBM-360/91.

They had one of these at the Stanford Linear Accelerator, and I used to come in Saturdays and run programs on it.

It gave you a feeling of power to have a $10M+ computer pretty much all to yourself.

It was the high end of the original IBM-360 line and was used mostly for scientific computations.

Below is a poor quality image of the console.

It's hard to tell from the picture, but the console as maybe 7ft x 3ft wide covered with lights.

The whole computer took up a large room and consisted of many cabinets about 7 ft tall.

Of course a standard PC now days is faster and has more memory.

But still, I miss the big computers with blinking lights, the smell of printer ink, spinning tapes, with raised floors and 65 degree AC.

This computer, although built in the late 1960's, has such advanced design that it's still studied in computer design classes in universities.

Dave

[k4kyv]

This computer, although built in the late 1960's, has such advanced design that it's still studied in computer design classes in universities.

So are the Analytical and Difference Engines that Charles Babbage dreamt up in the 1830's.

[Opcom]

This is an old pic of me with my computer. Real computers have lights and switches and real men know how to use them.

I don't get all the o/s discord. It does not matter any more except as personal preference, unless you have to for sure be so many nines available. Then it is not a heimkomputer any more. It is a computer that just happens to be installed in a home.

carry on.

[W1AEX]

I don't get all the o/s discord. It does not matter any more except as personal preference...

Well said. No one is going to change anyone's mind in the OS debate. People will use what works for them and what they are comfortable with, and that's the way it should be...

[w1vtp]

I don't get all the o/s discord. It does not matter any more except as personal preference...

Well said. No one is going to change anyone's mind in the OS debate. People will use what works for them and what they are comfortable with, and that's the way it should be...

Emphasis mine:

I agree.  I'm OK with XP  all of my applications require WinDoz as an OS.  Which reminds me - Flex-Radio DID have a Linux version of their PowerSDR application.  It seems to have gone away _  OOPS Yet another subject.  I'll bring that up on another thread.  Thanks guys for a really interesting thread

Al

[Pete, WA2CWA]

I agree.  I'm OK with XP  all of my applications require WinDoz as an OS.  Which reminds me - Flex-Radio DID have a Linux version of their PowerSDR application.  It seems to have gone away _  OOPS Yet another subject.  I'll bring that up on another thread.  Thanks guys for a really interesting thread

Al

From the Flex web site:
"At the present time, the whole system is capable in principle of running (and being distributed across) most of the major operating systems (Linux, BSD, Mac OS X, Windows. It has *not* been wrung out exhaustively on all those platforms."

Now's it's possible that some guys are playing around trying to port PowerSDR to Linux, but I've never seen one supported by Flex even as an unofficial release, and I've been running Flex stuff since early SDR-1000 days.

[w1vtp]

No one is going to change anyone's mind in the OS debate. People will use what works for them and what they are comfortable with, and that's the way it should be...

I think the point is there are really only two OS players in the industry that will ever appeal to the mass public and that is Windows and Mac OS X. You will probably never see Linux or any of other operating system installed on the majority of all computers like Window. <snip>.

The closest Linux came to mass distribution on a computer was something offered by Wallie World a few years back.  It was a fizzle, as I recall.  My grandson-in-law is really into Linux (he's a programmer by trade) but when we gave him a "go" to buy his dream computer, he ordered a machine with Windows Vista 64 bit.  I think the issue here is that if you give the masses what they demand it doesn't matter what the OS is -- they will buy it.  So far Windows has done the best job of that.

I know I'll catch flack over this but that's my best take on things.  I use computers for SDR control, Photography image manipulation, Word Processing and then publishing to PDF, and finally, I use EXCEL a lot for math etc. Oh, yes, and FireFox 3.52 for web browsing (which is a cross-OS application).

Part of my job requirements at my antenna ranges (at Raytheon) includes the ability to control complex robotic machinery. To date vendors only offer programs that operate on Windows.  I need to have the ability to image OS's for each range and to clone these OS's to new HD's for exclusive use in classified work.  The applications are out there to do this is in Windows.  We have very limited usage with Linux but a LOT of application that uses Windows.  I'm not a real fan of Windows but I have to go where my application needs are supported - so far that's Windows.

Al

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

The problem Linux has is that it has become more of a server OS than a desktop. Some of the top Linux coders have left the scene because of this.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Many of the printer drivers were from open source.

[k4kyv]

Didn't it go something like this:  Xerox developed the concept of the GUI, but it was too expensive for consumer use, so they sold it to Apple. Apple worked on it and came out with the Mac OS.  IBM ripped off the concept from Apple and sold it to M$ and Windows was born. The original Mac OS was about the equivalent clunky p.o.s. to the old DOS-based  Windows.  M$ came out with Windows XP about the same time that Apple started from scratch, taking UNIX open source and developing it into OSX.

Finally, both companies had got something right with their operating systems.

M$ should have stayed with XP and issued incremental upgrades, just as Apple has stayed with OSX and released a new animal every few months.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Quite a few inaccuracies here.

First, Xerox gave nothing to Apple. Apple bought the rights to use SOME of XEROX PARC's ideas. Also, the idea of a GUI was not born at XEROX PARC, although they probably developed the first system using a usable GUI - the Alto. I don't think many of these sold. XEROX did sell quite a few more of the Star. I used one of these in the early 80's and it was quite nice.

Doug Englebart invented the mouse while at SRI in the 1960's and he even demonstrated a crude multi-window environment in the late 60's. Some of the SRI people moved over to PARC in the early 70's and the Alto and Star grew out of their efforts.

Apple's first GUI was on the Lisa. It never really made it commercially, even though it was a much more capable machine than the Macintosh. Anyway, the original Mac GUI was not clunky and it included most of the items we take as standard in a GUI today - full cut and paste (text and graphics) within a program and across programs, WYSIWYG display and printing, drop down menus, overlapping windows, etc. The last few items were not part of the XEROX PARC GUI.

Also, IIRC, Bill Atkinson worked on an idea for a GUI he called QuickDraw while he as still in college in the lat 1960's. He later was one of the main players in developing the Mac OS GUI and MacPaint, probably the first GUI drawing program and one most all such programs copy to some extent to this day.

One the PC side, MS had nothing useful until Window 3. Versions 1 and 2 were terrible and even the PC press panned them. A more preferred GUI was GEM from Digital Research.

Didn't it go something like this:  Xerox developed the concept of the GUI, but it was too expensive for consumer use, so they sold it to Apple. Apple worked on it and came out with the Mac OS.  IBM ripped off the concept from Apple and sold it to M$ and Windows was born. The original Mac OS was about the equivalent clunky p.o.s. to the old DOS-based  Windows.  M$ came out with Windows XP about the same time that Apple started from scratch, taking UNIX open source and developing it into OSX.

Finally, both companies had got something right with their operating systems.

M$ should have stayed with XP and issued incremental upgrades, just as Apple has stayed with OSX and released a new animal every few months.

That’s pretty close except for the part about IBM selling anything to Microsoft. When Microsoft developed DOS for IBM (which they bought from a friend) Microsoft retained the license because IBM was STUPID.

After Apple released their first GUI OS on the very first Mac computer Microsoft started working on OS 2 Warp for IBM. However, at the same time Microsoft was working on Windows behind IBM’s back and then told IBM to go fly a kite because they were releasing Windows instead of helping them continue on with OS 2 Warp because IBM was STUPID.

The most STUPID party of them all was Xerox for giving the OS to Apple in the first place.

Anyway, to this very day Windows is still sitting on top of DOS and is a real POS system compared to the new Mac OS X and that’s the bottom line.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Apple Macintosh introduced January 1984
Microsoft Windows introduced 1983
Microsoft Windows Version 1.0 introduced 1985

[WQ9E]

The short lived Lisa hit the market before Windows.

Apple tried to establish a "look and feel" copyright for the basic GUI; fortunately the courts did not go along although they did award Apple rights to the trash can icon (poetic justice )  In addition to the greater problem of such a broad rights assignment, since this was based on observed Xerox work, it would have been the rough equivalent of allowing a thief to steal a car and then be awarded a title to said car.

At the office I use both but primarily Windows.  My only problem with Apple OS- is a very few of the users are the computer equivalent of evangelical religious types out to save (or destroy) the infidels choosing another OS.  But such antics are not restricted to Apple; I recall a number of emails I received during the OS-2 days from members of "Team OS-2".  When I got the first one I thought it was a joke but then I ran into some of the "team" members from the tech support center and I realized it was a nightmare instead.

As Patrick stated earlier, it is a consumer choice.  Windows does what I need it to do and that is what all of my home machines run.  It has not created any problems for me so I have no complaints.  Even if it did I have a pretty high threshold of pain.  I worked with a lot of the early AT&T 7300 series running Unix along with having to deal with SCO Xenix on other machines.  Couple that operating system with hardware reliability issues and any problems today are a picnic by comparison.  The oddest but most stable system I dealt with in those days was a DEC Vax 11/780 running as a dedicated CAD system.  Very impressive performance, especially compared to Autocad running on a "high performance" PC with a 12 Mhz. 80286.

Rodger WQ9E

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Ford introduced the Model T before Chevrolet introduced the Corvette. That about how close Windows 1 and the original Mac OS were. As I said, even the lap dog PC press paned Windows 1 and 2. It wasn't until version three that it gained wide use. And then it wasn't until 3.11 for Work Groups that any stability was achieved. MS later released NT, purposely starting at version 3.5 because they knew no one in their right mind would buy a version 1 after the debacle with Windows 1. This is a classic example of marketing over substance.


The Lisa was a different machine and preceded the Mac. It was the main focus at Apple and the Mac was originally a secondary project.