Can you make an apple computer (an 'OS'os) like you can with a PC and windows?

[Mr. Scram]

Are you perhaps confusing OS X with OS/2 here?

He deserved that

[ThunderCat]

I've used both PCs and Macs since the early '90s. Originally I lusted after the Macs because I thought they were so much better, but I ended up going the PC route for my home computer, and as it turned out most software that I taught ended up being PC-based. It was a good choice.

In 2014 I bought a nice high-end Mac laptop for my personal computer and I haven't looked back. I read a comment on this thread that Mac folks are just form over function, but really, honestly - great hardware/software is BOTH. I get a special pleasure each and every time I sit down to my beautiful laptop, because the fit-and-finish are just amazing, and it works very well. I also run Windows using VMWare Fusion, and that also works well.

I guess at the end of the day posts like these just illustrate the basic point: to each his own; whatever works. But I've spent untold hours in configuration hell with Windows machines that just took a dump for no reason, and endless bleary-eyed hours tracking down weird problems with PCs. In full disclosure I had a lot of weird problems with early Macs at a place I used to work and also used to spend a lot of time figuring them out when things went wrong - and they did.

My one disappointment with Apple lately is I think they've lost their Mojo, their drive, their vision. I don't think Steve would have ever let the new iPhone out the door with that ridiculous notch at the top of the screen; he would have delayed the phone or sat on the engineers until they came up with a solution to deliver a truly "one piece of glass" phone. I've also been disappointed that they have tended to spec lower hardware - I distinctly recall when they came out with some "new" laptops sporting Core2Duo processors that were very long in the tooth already on the Win platform. What puzzles me is that they don't seem to try to use the latest/greatest hardware when in fact as a company like this they could easily get advance samples of hardware from chip and video makers.

In any case, I still teach on the PC and use the Mac and PC at home and honestly they are both good.

[bd139]

I'd just like to add one complaint about the mac. The damn thing is freezing cold in the morning. Plastic laptops are nicer in this respect

[tooki]

So, what are you talking about? Pre-OSX?

Ancient Apple computers ran MacOS, with the same name as the modern OS but with different capitalisation, and he's apparently referring to that. Considering people not part of Apple use all sorts of capitalisation schemes for the modern OS and the subject is obviously the modern variety of the software, I'm not sure posting irrelevant information which might confuse uninitiated passer-bys is considered funny.

There's no accounting for taste, I guess.

OS/X wasn't a thing until the 2000's. MacOS was based off the Macintosh System (1-7) which was ultimately renamed to MacOS, where as macOS (different capitalization) is just a rename of OS/X.

Except that if you're gonna be that specific on spelling, then you're wrong: classic Mac OS was written "Mac OS", not "MacOS". The later NeXT derivative was first "Mac OS X", then briefly just "OS X", then "macOS". No slashes anywhere. (There was a realtime OS called OS-9 or OS/9, but it wasn't from Apple and was unrelated to Mac OS 9.)

Similarly, many people (including some old apple developer docs, which weren't properly vetted by the marketing proofreaders) often incorrectly wrote "PowerMac" instead of the correct "Power Mac".

IIRC Apple's only OS with a slash in the name was its old Unix for classic Macs, called A/UX.

[tooki]

I'd just like to add one complaint about the mac. The damn thing is freezing cold in the morning. Plastic laptops are nicer in this respect

Hah, yes!!! Though if it's like my old MacBook Air, it'll be almost scaldingly hot after a little while of heavy use! (Though in all fairness, I got it used from a friend, who had a protective film applied to it, which may well be insulating a lot of heat radiation from the underside, causing the top to be that much warmer.) It's nothing like my old aluminum PowerBook G4, the only Mac I've ever owned that I actually disliked. That model ran hot as hell, and it was underpowered even for its day, because the desktops ran G5 CPUs, which IBM had simply failed to succeed in making a low power version of.

[bd139]

I'm actually quite impressed with this one's heat dissipation ability. If I'm transcoding video, it kicks the CPU fans in heavily (it's quite noisy then) but it doesn't actually get that warm at all. Also it only ever kicks the fans in when I'm transcoding on all cores. It's a much older 2013 i7 15" model so it has a lot more space to spread the heat I imagine.

[MarkS]

So, what are you talking about? Pre-OSX?

Ancient Apple computers ran MacOS, with the same name as the modern OS but with different capitalisation, and he's apparently referring to that. Considering people not part of Apple use all sorts of capitalisation schemes for the modern OS and the subject is obviously the modern variety of the software, I'm not sure posting irrelevant information which might confuse uninitiated passer-bys is considered funny.

There's no accounting for taste, I guess.

I ask because my first computer was a Mac 512 KE when I was 8 and I had two pre-OSX Macs after that. I spent my formidable years on pre-OSX Macs. The Mac OS, prior to OS X was always referred to as "System xx", where the xx was the version number. Even OSX would have followed this originally, as it was technically "System 10" (the X being 10), although I guess Jobs wanted a more modern naming scheme.

I have never heard of pre-OSX being referred to as, "MacOS".

[Ampera]

Fair enough. I just like the way OS/X looks better. Not to mention I was focusing on capitalization, not spelling/spacing.

[tooki]

So, what are you talking about? Pre-OSX?

Ancient Apple computers ran MacOS, with the same name as the modern OS but with different capitalisation, and he's apparently referring to that. Considering people not part of Apple use all sorts of capitalisation schemes for the modern OS and the subject is obviously the modern variety of the software, I'm not sure posting irrelevant information which might confuse uninitiated passer-bys is considered funny.

There's no accounting for taste, I guess.

I ask because my first computer was a Mac 512 KE when I was 8 and I had two pre-OSX Macs after that. I spent my formidable years on pre-OSX Macs. The Mac OS, prior to OS X was always referred to as "System xx", where the xx was the version number. Even OSX would have followed this originally, as it was technically "System 10" (the X being 10), although I guess Jobs wanted a more modern naming scheme.

I have never heard of pre-OSX being referred to as, "MacOS".

I guess you were no longer using the Mac during the mid- and late 1990s? It was officially the "Mac System Software" ("System" for short)* up through System 7.5.5, but the first appearance of the "Mac OS" name was the boot splash screen in the 7.5.1 update in 1995, in preparation of the Mac clones.

As of 7.6, the Mac OS branding became official, and that naming was used consistently throughout both marketing materials as well as in the software itself. The change roughly coincided with the launch of the Mac clones in 1996, where naming was needed that branded the OS even when running on non-Apple hardware.

As a reminder, Steve Jobs didn't return to Apple until 1997.

Mac OS X would never have been "System 10" because the "system" naming had been retired for many years by that point. (Mac OS X 10.0 was released in 2001, though "Mac OS X Server 1.0", which was really just the final version of OpenStep, dolled up with the skin of Mac OS 8, was released in 1999, whose only real use was to be a NetBoot server for iMacs in enterprise environments. For everything else at the time, an AppleShare IP server was more useful.)

For sure, there were holdouts among users, who insisted on referring to Mac OS 9 as "System 9", but that was never officially correct.

Fair enough. I just like the way OS/X looks better. Not to mention I was focusing on capitalization, not spelling/spacing.

For sure you're allowed your preference, but I don't actually recommend using it in any text intended for anyone else. It's just plain clearer to use the official spelling consistently, lest the reader incorrectly infer a difference. (Can you tell that I worked as a professional technical writer for years? )

(And yes, I think it was unwise of Apple to change Mac OS X's "official" name twice, it's confusing to people who only follow Apple products casually. Though at least the second official name, "OS X"-without-the-Mac, was what lots of people called it casually anyway. macOS is consistent in their modern naming scheme, but I don't think anyone would have felt bothered if Apple's OS lineup had remained "Mac OS X", iOS, tvOS, and watchOS. For completeness' sake, I'll mention that the "old" Apple TV products, the ones without Siri, ran software simply called "Apple TV Software x.x", with versions 1-3 being based on Mac OS X 10.4 for the original Pentium-based Apple TV, while versions 4-7 for the ARM-based Apple TV 2 and 3 were based on various versions of iOS.)



*On early versions of the Mac System Software, the version numbers of the "Mac System Software" as a whole (as labeled on the boot floppy), of the System file, and of the Finder were all separate, which was very confusing. Starting in System 6, the major version numbers were finally harmonized and stayed in sync, though differences in the minor versions did exist. See Macintosh: System Software Version History

[Beamin]

FYI, I think we all fell for a troll anyway -- the OP hasn't responded, and several of their other recent threads are also just shit-stirring...

Oh really? Some people have job or careers and can't check every post on every forum or respond to every email they get. You call it shit stirring others have called my questions both weird and interesting.

[tooki]

FYI, I think we all fell for a troll anyway -- the OP hasn't responded, and several of their other recent threads are also just shit-stirring...

Oh really? Some people have job or careers and can't check every post on every forum or respond to every email they get. You call it shit stirring others have called my questions both weird and interesting.

Not checking in for a whole week, after dropping poorly researched and/or absurd questions? If it looks like a troll and quacks like a troll...

[Beamin]

FYI, I think we all fell for a troll anyway -- the OP hasn't responded, and several of their other recent threads are also just shit-stirring...

Oh really? Some people have job or careers and can't check every post on every forum or respond to every email they get. You call it shit stirring others have called my questions both weird and interesting.

Not checking in for a whole week, after dropping poorly researched and/or absurd questions? If it looks like a troll and quacks like a troll...

sure.

[tooki]

FYI, I think we all fell for a troll anyway -- the OP hasn't responded, and several of their other recent threads are also just shit-stirring...

Oh really? Some people have job or careers and can't check every post on every forum or respond to every email they get. You call it shit stirring others have called my questions both weird and interesting.

Not checking in for a whole week, after dropping poorly researched and/or absurd questions? If it looks like a troll and quacks like a troll...

sure.

Then prove it, by responding to the ensuing discussion. People here have discussed multiple aspects, and the history. Discuss.

[Beamin]

FYI, I think we all fell for a troll anyway -- the OP hasn't responded, and several of their other recent threads are also just shit-stirring...

Oh really? Some people have job or careers and can't check every post on every forum or respond to every email they get. You call it shit stirring others have called my questions both weird and interesting.

Not checking in for a whole week, after dropping poorly researched and/or absurd questions? If it looks like a troll and quacks like a troll...

sure.

Then prove it, by responding to the ensuing discussion. People here have discussed multiple aspects, and the history. Discuss.

No. I don't have to prove myself to you or anyone else for that matter. If my posts are not to your liking because you think you are smarter or superior then I am fine. Don't read them or click on them. If I'm a "troll" because I ask a question about some thing I know nothing about in order to understand it better then I guess I am a troll along with everyone else on the internet. If I feel I'm superior to someone I won't engage with them, I won't argue with them or try to prove my point or show them they are wrong I just let them be. I would gain nothing by interacting with them. If I wanted a pointless argument with people who were dumber then me I would go write comments on alex jones videos on youtube, but I don't because there is no point in dealing with such stupid people. I'm not going to research such a simple question so some guy on the internet has the illusion I know more then I do because I really don't care. Speaking of trolling what do your last few posts contribute to the topic? I didn't see any references to support your point or any well researched responses. I guarantee you will respond to this post trying to prove you are right. And even if you do it proves nothing. 

[tooki]

And that response only further proves that you are trolling, since you literally don't actually care about the answer. If you did, you'd be asking followup questions, etc. 

I'm not gonna go to the effort of providing detailed responses for someone who's clearly not interested in the answer - just like I (and others) suspected you were, right from the beginning.

[Beamin]

And that response only further proves that you are trolling, since you literally don't actually care about the answer. If you did, you'd be asking followup questions, etc. 

I'm not gonna go to the effort of providing detailed responses for someone who's clearly not interested in the answer - just like I (and others) suspected you were, right from the beginning.

You have totally exposed my plan to troll this board by asking a question about a macintosh computer! You have exposed my evil plan!!!! How ever did you know about my evil genius? I join forums asking why is a mac not a PC and chaos ensues! mwahahahahaha!!! But not this time, you have foiled my trolling!!!! What will I do now? Please I beg you for your mercy!!!!