Canards Actuels Mac OS

Google Chrome is a fast, free web browser. Before you download, you can check if Chrome supports your operating system and that you have all the other system requirements. My advice: design a small plane with a Mk1 cockpit, single jet engine, delta wing, canard elevators and simple vertical tail. Play with the fore-and-aft position of the canards until the CoL indicator is just a tiny fraction behind the CoG indicator in the SPH. Take off and fly around. As one commentator quipped: 'Viruses: Mac OS X - three; Windows - eleventy-zillion.' I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but I've been working with Macs on the Internet many hours a day for over a decade, and I've never bothered with antivirus software, firewalls, or any of the anti-malware tedium and ennui that is obligatory in the Windows orbit.

Canards Actuels Mac Os X
Canards Actuels Mac Os Download
Canards Actuels Mac Os Catalina
Canards Actuels Mac Os 11

Home Deals Tech Specs Articles Groups Software Support @LowEndMac

Miscellaneous Ramblings

Charles Moore - 2008.09.25 -Tip Jar

In an editorial posted this week, the University of Denver Clarion'sAlex Gallegos asks rhetorically: 'What's So Great About a Mac? Alex says he's becoming increasingly'annoyed at the number of people who seem to have become enamored withthe Macintosh operating system,' further explaining that his annoyanceis kindled by most of the arguments he hears about why Macs aresuperior to Windows machine are, he alleges, 'based on an almostcomplete lack of knowledge about how computers actually work.'

Some of these ignorami, he concedes, are 'former Windows users whoencountered one Blue Screen of Death too many,' while others have beenconvinced into believing that Macs are the simpler yet more powerfulcousins to the Intel market,' and others think having a Mac isdownright cool.

'I just don't buy this argument,' he says.

Well fine, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but with due respectI just don't buy Gallegos' argument.

Real Men Don't Use GUIs

He starts off with a variation of a dismissive trope that reachesback to the 'real men don't use mice' canard from the era when Macs hadmice and PCs didn't (and didn't have Windows either), calling the MacGUI a 'Fischer (sic) Price' interface, while PC users 'canindulge in customization, meddling and fiddling to an extent that wouldshock a Mac user's socks off.'

Well, if 'customization, meddling and fiddling' are what floats yourboat, they're abundantly available in OS X as close as starting upthe Terminal and interfacing with the OS's Unix underpinnings - and ona more sophisticated level than anything that's possible with Vista.Hold onto your socks!

But most non-geek real-world users would rather just get on withtheir day.

It's the Software, Stupid

As for Macs being 'better artistic machines' - another timeworn(albeit true) rubric, Gallego says: 'What people don't quite seem tounderstand is that these are questions of software, not the operatingsystem. Software is software.'

Yes, and software has to operate in the context of an operatingsystem, and the context provided by OS X is far more satisfyingfor graphics work than Windows, not to mention that the software itselfis often better. Where are Windows versions of Pixelmator or ToyViewer or GraphicConverter?

Even cross-platform graphics apps look and work better on the Mac -just look at Photoshop Elements.

Malware Doesn't Matter

Gallegos dismisses the relentless malware siege Windows users haveto contend with by arguing: 'Just because you don't get viruses,doesn't mean that nobody can write one. It's not an impossibility byany means.'

No, it's not, but the operative reality is that no one has; there'snever been a destructive OS X virus in the wild. As onecommentator quipped: 'Viruses: Mac OS X - three; Windows -eleventy-zillion.'

I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but I've been working with Macson the Internet many hours a day for over a decade, and I've neverbothered with antivirus software, firewalls, or any of the anti-malwaretedium and ennui that is obligatory in the Windows orbit. I never feltthe need to.

It is difficult to persuade ordinary computer users who have onlyused Windows that - at least up to now - viruses have been a non-issuefor Mac users.

As Why Are There No Viruses for Mac OS X? on Switch to a Mac put itthis week:

With today's cyber-threats and focus on computersecurity, it's no surprise that many people are ditching their WindowsPCs for Macs running OS X . . . The requirement toprotect Windows installations from viruses, spyware and malware, haveprompted many to make the switch....

It's well known that there are no known viruses forthe Mac OS X operating system despite it being on the market forover seven years. As of this writing, Mac OS X is virus-free.There have been some attempted exploits in the past but those relied onsocial engineering....

If they had noticed it, Windows fanboys like Gallegos would have hadan 'aha!' moment earlier this this year when an Apple Web pageencouraged Mac users to install virus and security software on Macs,but the page is no longer linked from Apple's Website (you can stillview it in the Internet Archive.

Macs Are For Lazy Folk

As the summary shot in his broadside of Windows-acolyte conventionalwisdom bromides, Gallegos casts Macs as having 'a very specific set ofuses for a very specific niche of users - namely people who aren'treally comfortable with computers and want things to be as simple andeasy as possible without having to go find appropriate software forthemselves.'

This guy really needs to get out more - perhaps to a softwaredevelopers' convention or other geek-fest venue where he could countthe high proportion of users running Macs these days.

Why I Use a Mac

Windows is one of the reasons I use a Mac: the clumsy and obtuseangularities, the general clunkiness of PC hardware, the malwareplague, and the irritation of having to deal with Microsoft DRMissues.

On top of that, a lot of the software I find 'appropriate' to mywork as a professional tech journalist is not available on the PC, butthat's just poor ignorant 'not really comfortable with computers' me.

Join us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter or Google+, or subscribe to our RSS news feed

Charles Moore has been a freelance journalist since 1987 and began writing for Mac websites in May 1998. His The RoadWarrior column was a regular feature on MacOpinion, he isnews editor at Applelinks.com and a columnist at MacPrices.net. If you find his articles helpful, please consider making a donation to his tip jar.

Links for the Day

Mac of the Day: iMac G5 (iSight), introduced 2005.10.12. Apple built an iSight webcam into the last version of the G5 iMac.

Recent Content

Go to our home page for a listing of recent content.

Miscellaneous Ramblings©1999-2012 by Charles W. Moore. Low End Mac is an independent publication and has not been authorized,sponsored, or otherwise approved by Apple Inc. Opinions expressed arethose of their authors and may not reflect the opinion of CobwebPublishing. Advice is presented in good faith, but what works for onemay not work for all.
Entire Low End Mac website copyright ©1997-2016 by Cobweb Publishing, Inc. unless otherwise noted. Allrights reserved. Low End Mac, LowEndMac, and lowendmac.com aretrademarks of Cobweb Publishing Inc. Apple, the Apple logo, Macintosh,iPad, iPhone, iMac, iPod, MacBook, Mac Pro, and AirPort are registered trademarks of AppleInc. Additional company and product names may be trademarks orregistered trademarks and are hereby acknowledged.
Please report errors to .
LINKS: We allow and encourage links toany public page as long as the linked page does not appear within aframe that prevents bookmarking it.
Email may be published at our discretion unless marked 'not forpublication'; email addresses will not be published without permission,and we will encrypt them in hopes of avoiding spammers. Letters may beedited for length, context, and to match house style.
PRIVACY: We don't collect personalinformation unless you explicitly provide it, and we don't share theinformation we have with others. For more details, see our Terms of Use.

Follow Low End Mac on Twitter
Join Low End Mac on Facebook

Affiliates

Amazon.com
The iTunes Store
PC Connection Express
Macgo Blu-ray Player
Parallels Desktop for Mac
eBay

Advertise

All of our advertising is handled by BackBeatMedia. For price quotes and advertising information,please contact at BackBeat Media(646-546-5194). This number is for advertising only.

Tuesday, 5 August 2003

When I last wrote about Andrew Stone, I accused him of dishonesty regarding his blatantly inaccurate anti-Carbon propaganda. I’ve reconsidered, however. I don’t think he’s dishonest, but rather that he’s in a deep state of denial.

The gist of the story: Stone is a long-time Next developer, widely regarded as a leading expert in Apple’s Cocoa application framework (which is directly descended from the Next application framework). A few months ago, his company Stone Design released a new utility for Mac OS X called FontSight that displays a WYSIWYG font menu in other applications (similar to old Mac OS utilities like MenuFonts or Action WYSIWYG).

However, FontSight only works with Cocoa applications. This is a serious limitation, given that almost all professional Mac design software is Carbon, not Cocoa. And of course, professional designers are the main market for a font utility like FontSight.

On the FontSight web pages, Stone defends this limitation by describing Cocoa apps as the only “native” software for Mac OS X. That canard is exactly what I took Stone to task over previously. It’s just not true.

Where I went wrong, I think, is in accusing Stone of underhandedness. I made the assumption that because Stone is obviously very intelligent, that he must realize that Carbon is not a stop-gap, that it is a fundamental API layer on Mac OS X that is here to stay. Thus, I assumed, he knew that what he was saying wasn’t true, and was doing so to create FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) among less technically-savvy Mac users. I.e. trying to convince people to buy Stone Design software not because it’s better, but just because it’s Cocoa.

But now, a few months later, I’ve come to a different conclusion: Andrew Stone is out of his fucking mind.

Exhibit A is a May 28 post from his company weblog: FontSight - works great with “native” Mac OS X apps. Ignore the “Carbon isn’t ‘native’” nonsense. Just read it — it’s fascinating. The gist is that Stone is getting lots of email from people telling him that FontSight looks great, but they can’t use it (and thus won’t buy it) because it doesn’t work with their design software. Stone’s response, more or less: Tough.

Think about this. Potential customers are telling him exactly what they want FontSight to do to make it useful for them; and Stone is responding by saying he absolutely will not do that. That simply isn’t rational. The hole in Stone’s stance, from a business perspective, is a mile wide. There is obviously a market for a WYSIWYG font menu utility that works with the popular software people actually use.

“Utilities” are the small software packages people buy to work alongside their main applications. People aren’t going to abandon their software from Adobe, Microsoft, and Macromedia just to use a Cocoa-only menu font utility. They want a menu font utility that works with their existing software. Duh.

Late last month Unsanity’s Rosyna Keller unveiled FontCard, an upcoming Haxie that will provide a WYSIWYG font menu in both Cocoa and Carbon apps. Compare and contrast Keller’s comments with Stone’s. Keller readily admits that getting FontCard to work in most major Carbon applications was difficult — different apps use different techniques to create their font menus, and FontCard needs to handle each case differently — but necessary in order to create a utility that meets users’ needs. Stone, on the other hand, admits that he won’t even consider supporting Carbon applications.

Rhapsody in Blue

And so assuming Unsanity’s FontCard works as advertised (and given Unsanity’s track record, that’s a very reasonable assumption), who in their right mind would opt for the Cocoa-only FontSight? Other than the users of an imaginary world where the Carbon APIs don’t exist, no one.

And so what explains Stone’s refusal to address this limitation? Hypothesis: Stone’s conception of Mac OS X remains unchanged from circa 1997, at the outset of the Apple/Next merger. Apple’s initial post-Next plans — which not coincidentally were drawn up by Next expatriates — did not include Carbon. The idea was to produce a system with one native API — the Next object-oriented application framework — and a compatibility layer for classic Mac OS software. In other words, Cocoa and Classic, but no Carbon.

To say Mac developers were less than thrilled by this plan is a gross understatement — they rejected it completely, and rightly so. Apple’s original plan more or less boiled down to replacing the Mac OS with NextStep; Mac developers had the crazy idea that it should be replaced with a new version of the Mac OS. Apple listened, the plan was revised, and six years later, here we are.

Canards Actuels Mac Os X

Apparently, no one sent Stone the memo. Stone heard what he wanted to hear — that his beloved Next system was replacing the Mac OS — and refuses to acknowledge that this Next-only “Mac OS” of the future was scrapped in the planning stages, replaced by a genuinely new system derived from both the old Next and Mac systems.

Let’s dissect Stone’s comments:

I’ve been getting tons of email saying “FontSight is great — but it doesn’t work with InDesign or AncientCarbonProgram X Y or Z”.

It’s worth noting that InDesign is a relative newcomer, just a few years old — much newer than, say, Stone Design’s Create.

Folks, I’ve been slaving away for the last 15 years to bring the object technology of NeXT (now called Cocoa) to the Macintosh Masses. In 1997, Gil Amelio told all the legacy Mac developers this was the future, and they should begin an effort to rewrite their code in Cocoa (then called Rhapsody).

Stone’s argument that Carbon applications are irrelevant and/or deprecated hinges on the word of Gil Amelio? Gil Amelio? What Gil Amelio said in 1997 is about as relevant today as something uttered by Gerald Ford in 1975. Ancient history.

They decided to ignore him and instead demanded a way for the new Mac OS X to run the old macos [sic] 9 code.

Fine, now you have old code — with all of its old bugs — running on a brand new spanking OS.

Canards Actuels Mac Os Download

Is it worth pointing out that unless Stone has some sort of paddle connected to his machine, he probably meant brand spanking new OS rather than brand new spanking OS? Maybe. But it’s definitely worth pointing out that there’s no inherent reason why old Carbon code would contain any more bugs than old Cocoa code, and many of Stone Design’s products date back to 1989 and the early years of Next.

These carbon [sic] apps are simply quick ports and DO NOT take advantage of all that is cool in Mac OS X and Cocoa like Create and other Stone Studio apps do.

Carbon apps don’t take advantage of all that Cocoa offers? Uh, nor do pure Cocoa apps take advantage of all Carbon has to offer. Duh.

All of Apple’s new apps — iPhoto, KeyNote, Mail, TextEdit, etc. — use Cocoa — and thus FontSight works perfectly with them.

All of Apple’s new apps, that is, with the exception of ones like Final Cut, iTunes, and the Finder.

We cannot be apologists for old carbon [sic] apps, so please don’t expect Stone Design to come up with ways to make those entrenched carbon [sic] apps work more gracefully on OS X.

This sentence encapsulates how Stone is missing the entire point. Carbon and Cocoa are developer APIs; they are of no interest whatsoever to normal Mac users. None. Really. Normal Mac users choose their software based on tangible surface qualities — the features, the human interface, their existing toolset, etc. They don’t care what programming tools were used to create their software any more than they care what CAD program was used to design their automobiles.

Stone’s entire argument against supporting Carbon applications in FontSight is about developer APIs that users don’t care about. This benefits no one — Stone Design is missing out on an untapped market, and Mac users are missing out on a potentially useful piece of software.

It’s not something to get angry about. It’s just sad.

Previous:	Mailsmith, an iBook, and Glider Pro Walk Into a Bar
Next:	Crayolas

Software Brains