Sadly, I'd rather have Windows 3.1 at my school than the eMacs run OSX....they're hideously poor machines.

Sadly, I agree... Although, if I did have a set of Linux installers, I would reformat all the PCs at my school.

Hmm. I'd hate to have to agree, but when I've used OSX I've found the interface horribly inconsistent. I guess this is why Linux-based operating systems haven't really taken off either - the interface is too inconsistent. After all, the job of an HCI is to make the computer easy to use... Maybe Mac OSX is consistent, but I found it weird as it's radically different to the other GUIs I've used (Windows, RISC OS, BeOS). RISC OS still remains my all-time favourite interface, in any case. :-)

Well, HCI is about making the system easier to use, indeed. But from how your comment was typed, it sounds like MacOS is inconsistent only because it does not follow assumptions you've made based on previous knowledge with other OSes...which one can say is a case against, but, then again, that can be reversed and used against *insert another interface* easily.

While I agree there are some usability issues with MacOS (the most blaring example - the trashcan acts as a place to delete files, a place to unmount volumes, AND to burn CDs?) you have to remember that usability engineering also includes making it easier to get your work done once you've learned the system enough. It isn't JUST about lowering learning curves, especially if doing so takes away from the ability for a seasoned user to get work done faster and easier in the long run. I think that's what Jeff Raskin was always clammoring about...

Because of this, seasoned Mac vets can't be bothered to relearn the OS for switchers...if you give the OS more time, though, you learn that at the very least it is more consistent in behavior than Windows (the ever-changing meanings of alt+f4 vs ctrl+w for example) or most of the Linux window managers out there...

yes PC's are extremely complicated and you pretty much have to rememorize the keyboard for every "nonstandard" application, but once you've mastered it it's no big deal.

In KDE and Gnome, you can usually change key bindings and functions. For example, Alt+F6 closes windows instead of Alt+F4 because the F4 and F5 keys on my laptop are dead. I am not aware if you can do this in Windows.

Actually, Mac OS X is more consistent from program to program than almost any other OS. Apple made the UI Interface Guidelines (PDF format) so that everything would be the same across the board, from program and file icons to buttons to custom widgets. They also make it very easy to keep everything consistent by doing a lot of work for you (on my Mac, I can write a decent Web browser with no lines of code and implement unlimited undo/redo with three lines of code).

Windows had a bunch of disrepancies from program to program (simply because Microsoft hasn't put the trouble into making it easy to make it consistent), and I know nothing about Linux.

As a third point, Macs are easier - and faster - to use simply from the vantage of Fitt's Law. The menu bar is at the top of the screen, so you only have to worry about horizontal cursor positioning, as it has infinite height.

Or, why not run Wacky Fun Random Numbar Generator Operating System (see link)? :-)

I've still got that on a floppy disk somewhere around my room...

Ah, I found the IRC discussion leading to WFRNGOS's creation!

Mon Aug 09 2004

<Michael_V> I think x86 ASM would be fun
<JMan> It's quite interesting.
<JMan> There are actually mutiplication and division instructions. :-P
<Michael_V> nice
<JMan> And all sorts of fancy prefixes and such
<JMan> And you can do things like mov eax, [ebx + 4 * ecx + 2]
<Michael_V> interesting
<Michael_V> We should port Phoenix to x86 ASM
<Michael_V> in CGA
<Michael_V> 320x200
<JMan> Clearly not phoneix.
<JMan> Do WACKY FUN RANDOM NUMBAR GENERATOR
<Michael_V> oooooooh
* Michael_V wonders how hard it is to generate pseudorandom numbers in x86

Oh goodness. Was it me who gave him the idea? Perhaps I should be more careful when giving ideas in the future (or not)

So it was you!
*calls in geek mafia*

Of course there already is an x86 version of Platinum Ediiton ... for the Casio calculators :)

To set the record straight, I *am* a MSDN Universal subscriber.

Doesn't keep me from preferring slackware on this particular box though.

Hurrah!

And apparently I have Slackware 4.0 CDs in my room. Perhaps it's not as old as Win3.1, but it is starting to age :)

You had control of this laptop and didn't install linux and FireFox?
What's wrong with you people?!

The article states that Magnus immediately installed Slackware on it...

He could have then installed Firefox on that. :-)

Firefox sucks, Telnet forever!

Telnet? Bah. Instead, get complete control over your network card and manually craft the ethernet frames!

netcat forever!

lynx!

wacky random numbar browser :p

IE 6 with multiple security holes and patches!! :)

Or just IE6SP2. Tightest browser I've used that isn't crippled!

IEsp2 is tight as a drum... annoyingly so:

IE has blocked a possibly malicious download!
*unblock*
Do you want to download?
*yes*
IE does not recommend opening files.
*too bad*
Are you sure you want to open this file? Click cancel to stop the open or details to learn why.
*where's the open button?*

Haha, exactly. However, it's a problem - otherwise people end up blaming malware on the browser, rather than themselves for clicking "yes" on "Would you like to install MY SUPERKOOL PASSWORD STEALING FREEE SCREENSAVER TOOLABR OMGLOL!!!!2.10004".

Browser security is one thing - stupid users is another!

...just like when idiots light some product on fire and shove it down their throat, then sue the company that made it for not 1.) putting in safety measures that prevent them from doing it, 2.) adding a warning label that says not to, or 3.) both.

Actually, I sort of like opening Telnet terminal programs on port 80 and typing the HTTP commands like "GET" by hand...

I like opening the python shell and typing:
import urllib
data = urllib.urlopen ("http://www.ticalc.org")
print data.read()

The best part is imagining how the html looks rendered.

netcat is like Telnet, but it waits for the remote end to close the connection before it exits (so it can be used in scripts easily), and it separates all error/warning and information messages from the network data stream (i.e., it writes messages to stderr and the net data on stdout). Telnet mixes messages in with standard out, so it can't be used to transfer arbitrary data across a network.

I also can do the following:

(echo GET / HTTP/1.1; echo Host: www.ticalc.org; echo User-Agent: All your base are belong to us; echo Connection: close; echo) | netcat www.ticalc.org http

With telnet it doesn't work, because it doesn't wait for the remote end to close the connection, so the response doesn't seem to come.

Try that with slashdot.org and look at the headers in the response! (You can replace GET with HEAD for that)

Strange, it used to work fine in Telnet for me...but not anymore...I'm confused. :-[