02-19-2006, 11:38 AM
After reading the post, they make a very logical presentation based on my limited programming experience and knowledge of computer workings. I would like to hear a rebuttal from an Apple insider, at the same technical level, as to where the article goes wrong.
Reading some of the other articles linked, they sure do take apart Mac OS X. If I understand correctly with each new OS update, and Tiger being the worst, Mac OS X is straying from the safe Unix roots and will become a malware and virus infested OS just like Microsoft. All to keep pace with the Mac Classic UI and the 'user experience.'
If what they say is true, then I would hope that 10.5 should abandon resource forks and other Mac Classic OS workings to return to a truer Unix underpining, as well as dump HFS. Why not! Since Classic OS won't even run on an IntelMac, let's jettison all the legacy stuff. The last thing Apple needs is all the Windows fanboys saying "I told you so, Macs gets viruses too."
Reading some of the other articles linked, they sure do take apart Mac OS X. If I understand correctly with each new OS update, and Tiger being the worst, Mac OS X is straying from the safe Unix roots and will become a malware and virus infested OS just like Microsoft. All to keep pace with the Mac Classic UI and the 'user experience.'
If what they say is true, then I would hope that 10.5 should abandon resource forks and other Mac Classic OS workings to return to a truer Unix underpining, as well as dump HFS. Why not! Since Classic OS won't even run on an IntelMac, let's jettison all the legacy stuff. The last thing Apple needs is all the Windows fanboys saying "I told you so, Macs gets viruses too."