Software interoperability

[George K]

(so as to not derail the "forum issues" thread)

@Klaus said,

It's software interoperability, or rather, the lack thereof.

THIS is the main reason I went with Apple's products in the early 1990s. Many people decried the total vise they had on software, driver, etc., but the positive side was that things, as the ad said, "just worked." I remember reading all kinds of complaints regarding Windows drivers conflicting with one another, and various vendors pointing to each other saying, "Hey, it's not my software, take your issue up with HP."

[Klaus]

It's a mixed blessing.

The iPhone is the primary target of hackers these days. The reason is not only that rich and influential people are more likely to have an iPhone than an Android phone. The other big reason is that the iPhone line of phones is much more homogeneous than the Android phone space. Hence it is much easier to make use of vulnerabilities and use them on any iPhone, whereas an exploit for Android will typically only work on some specific models.

Heterogeniety is maybe the most important security mechanism we have, even though it's completely unplanned.

[Doctor Phibes]

I'd say that Windows is way, way better than it used to be. I kind of thought about switching to Apple a few years back, but since Windows 10 came out I haven't had any problems that would make me jump ship.

[Klaus]

The core of Windows is rotten.

OS X has a lot of crap on the surface, but the core is somewhat sound.

[George K]

@Klaus said in Software interoperability:

The core of Windows is rotten.

OS X has a lot of crap on the surface, but the core is somewhat sound.

Care to explain, in terms that even I could understand?

[Klaus]

@George-K said in Software interoperability:

Care to explain, in terms that even I could understand?

You are asking for the impossible.

[George K]

@Klaus said in Software interoperability:

@George-K said in Software interoperability:

Care to explain, in terms that even I could understand?

You are asking for the impossible.

[Klaus]

@George-K more seriously, Mac OS has Unix roots (e.g., it is POSIX compliant).

Unix and its philosophy are among the intellectual highlights of the 20th century. It got a lot of things right, and the "Unix philosophy" of decomposing an OS into a modular set of independently useful tools is still sound.

Windows, on the other hand, started as a hack. It was always a hack. Hacking around 640K memory limits. Hacking around DOS compatibility issues. Hacking around driver compatibility issues. Hacking around multitasking and process separation issues. Hacking around a file system that wasn't designed to provide protection. Hacking around a user system that was never designed to support user isolation or concurrent usage by multiple users. There was never a clean design. It's a mess with a nice facade.

[George K]

I was aware of the Unix underpinnings of the Mac OS. Jobs touted it for his failed NeXT venture, if you recall.

I wasn't aware of the limitations and the "add on" structure of Windows. Seems like, according to your description, Windows is one patch on top of another.

[Doctor Phibes]

So you're saying that Windows is POS compliant?

[jon-nyc]

@Klaus said in Software interoperability:

@George-K said in Software interoperability:

Care to explain, in terms that even I could understand?

You are asking for the impossible.

lol

[Copper]

Windows has to support everything in the world.

Apple doesn't have to support anything, including their own stuff. And if you don't like it - too bad.