Yep, yep… another new addition to this wonderful thing called Snow Leopard is wiping out all user data after user has logged in into the guest account. Upon re-logging into his normal account, the user will be presented with a nice, clean, brand-spanking-new looking account without any data in it, not even the pr0n the user spent so much time collecting it
I’m caught in a strange emotional vortex… It’s hard not to want to smirk at the misfortune of MS (I’ve got nothing against Apple personally - I’ve never owned one of their products, but I think they operate fairly, even if they don’t sell anything I want), but then I feel like I’m smirking at the users. And I don’t want to be - they really do have my sympathy. I imagine many of them thought that cloud backup was virtually fool-proof [insert chosen MS / fool joke here] - and I think they stated that they had an off-site backup.
I guess the lesson is that if your software doesn’t let you control your own backup, get new software. I’m sure they don’t want to hear that now - but when they do pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and come looking elsewhere, I don’t think they’ll be well disposed to see the difference between me smirking at their former service providers, and me smirking at them. Which I’m not. Or at least I hope I’m not…
Just as I was thinking about how much I hate M$ and that Apple is the quiet observer that isn’t hurting anyone, I got an iPhone and found out differently. IMHO, Apple is M$ x 2. The ONLY choice is Linux for anyone wanting to escape monopolizing business practices.
So first they put BSD under the hood, now this. I simply cannot believe this is possible in any BSD. What the heck did they do to it? Called a friend who has trouble with his Apple, he read the first couple of lines of this post, says it’s exactly that what happened to him. Which brings me to the MS subject: this guy has a full backup of his Leopard install and all data. Made with…dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/sdb …
I knew Apple was very proprietary with computer hardware. But with phones, I was thinking, how bad could it be? I wanted a smart phone, but the factors that led me to the iPhone were this:
Wanted a smart phone that operates over the 3G network in addition to wifi.
I’m already part of a family plan on AT&T, so I was leaning toward staying
Wanted a phone that was going to have new apps / updates for many years
Don’t get me wrong, I really do like the iPhone. I do not like the games Apple and AT&T are playing with us customers. We didn’t have MMS capability until mid-late September (even cheap phones have this). I’m locked in to using the Safari browser because Apple does not allow competing browsers (not only browsers, but locked in to Apple approved apps). iPhone hardware is capable of wallpapers/themes, but OS is not. iPhone hardware is capable of running more than one app at a time, but OS is not. Jailbreaking remedies some of these limitations, but it just shows how Apple is limiting our user experience even though the hardware has the capability.
I think the Google Android will continue to gain popularity because it offers most of the functionality of the iPhone without the restraint.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to interrupt the conversation on this thread. I just had to vent about my “Apple experience”.
Apple suffers from the NIH syndrome (not invented here) and often try to push their “inventions” onto others IMHO this is even worse than MS. Apple has got to be one of the most hostile and closed companies around, even though the majority of its underlying software comes from open source projects (or it has bought firms that were ones). No wonder Uncle Jobs is rich as hell as he found a very good working way to trap users into all things Apple. The “it just works ™” has a double meaning. Yes, for most of the time, “it just works” and given that, it draws users more and more into it because “it just works” so they’ll spend more and more $$$ on overpriced stuff from Apple thus in the end filling the pockets of greedy Jobs even more, even though there are many other similar solutions that “just work” too and are much less expensive. On top of that, Apple has been extremely hostile in legal battles which proves just how much they want to keep up their closed status and protect their “innovations” and it has lobbyed users not to talk about faulty exploding iCr@ps by even trying to pay them to keep their mouth shut, as was the case with a woman in, IIRC, the UK. Apple is paranoid and has always been, as proven many times how secretive they are, even on their own conventions and towards their own users/clients
Apple is very protective of its hardware, also with its software. Snow Leopard does, though, have a few open source components.
Maybe they should make OS X open source, then they could fix bugs like unintended data deletion in minutes. That needs serious thinking over.
Thanks for the explanation. I wonder if there are technical differences of implementation depending on country. In the UK at launch, iPhone was exclusive to the O2 network. With Apple there always seems to be a lock-in, and that’s what I don’t like. On the subject of smart phone competition, here is a recent UK perspective, in case you haven’t seen it: Battle of the smartphones begins as the Palm Pre debuts, dubbed an “iPhone killer”. The competition increases, and that must be good to see.
I thought NIH described a situation where a new idea or invention is rubbished because it wasn’t invented by the body doing the “rubbishing”. I didn’t get that from your particular point about Apple, although I am not disagreeing with anything you claimed in your post.
I would say that you’re nothing but a casual lameass Linux troll like so many others that preceed you, instead of trying to improve your own system you try to find faults and mock others.
Incidentally one of those reasons Linux will neverever get any level of real public acceptance and stay as a minority insignificant player, despite whatever delusions you may have on the matter. After all, less than one percent of market space looks large when you had even less before. Perhaps Vaughan-Nichols was more than than most of you are willing to admit…
I was hoping one of these days you’d grow up Microchip. It seems you haven’t and won’t.
Chrysantine, I generally respect what you say, but… and here comes the big exception, you said “Incidentally one of those reasons Linux will neverever get any level of real public acceptance and stay as a minority insignificant player, despite whatever delusions you may have on the matter.” First off, making a prediction like that is just stupid. None of us can see the future, so let’s not make wild predictions. There are plenty of people that do each camp harm, so attributing the success of a camp to the maturity of people has already been proven to have nothing to do with anything.
The other day I called someone a loon and the moderators mentioned about name calling. Insulting microchip is degrading yourself to his level and a violation of forum rules. You are better than that.
Having less than 1% is not an accurate measurement. As has been reported before, the problem with tracking linux market share is how to track it. It’s licensing is not like Mac or Windows. I can download 1 iso and make a thousand copies. These copies are not figured into the market share unless the users “register”. We already know that browser UI’s are not reliable, since we can change those so easily. So we don’t really have a best guess. But the 1% market share is the closest we can get to best guess. What we do know for sure is that Linux is gaining in the market. Both desktop and server. If you really want to get into it, the Mac market share is 5% to 10% max. That 5 to 10% is a lot closer to accurate than the Linux market share estimate.
Don’t feed the apologistic trolls like Chrysantine
This is exactly what I was expecting from a Mac user like her
Her “less than one % market share” is exactly the thing that gives her away that she has no clue how much market share Linux has. Prove to me that Linux has only 1 % market share… What’s that? Oh yes, you can’t since no one knows how much market share Linux has and this has been stated multiple times that you just can’t know since Linux does not depend on sales to count its share, like Macs and MS do. Did you also count my local servers not hooked to the Net to your “Linux market share”? Or the 30 internal servers we use at work in our intranet that never get access to the Net and we didn’t pay for the distro? Are those too in your “Linux market share”? Or other machines of people who have never payed for Linux? Are those too in your “market share”? I guess not, thus your “knowledge” of this magical 1% market share is flawed from the beginning