[OS X] LensForge: Software for professional & amateur lens designers, amateur telescope makers, and others.

John Savard wrote:
Since the availability of software for one's computer determines what
one is able to use it for, it really determines the value of a computer.
If it had been OS X competing against *Windows 3.1*, the first really
usable version of Windows (since it licensed TrueType from Apple, of
course) for most computer users, Windows 3.1 would still "win".

First, let me state that I *completely* agree with the above, with
barely a /remote/ /possibility/ of a /hint/ , /however/ /unlikely/ ,
of an exception for people who /might/ want to run Adobe Creative
Suite, Aperture, AppleScript, Dreamweaver, Final Cut Studio,
GarageBand, iMovie/iDVD, Keynote, LogicPro, Microsoft Office, RenderMan
Pro, Safari, Shake, and/or all the Unix applications that exist,
including optical-design software.

Not that anyone in the /real/ world would want to do any of the
foregoing, mind you. Even if they did, they would run into a brick wall
-- the lack of video poker and malware eradication applications for the
Mac. Macheads can only /dream/ of having something like Microsoft's
Malicious Software Removal Tool.

So I, with my Vaio laptop/XP Pro SP2, am a Believer.

It's Scot Finnie, the Windows maven at ComputerWorld
http://tinyurl.com/nffh8, that needs straightening out. That fool
wrote:

"...Apple has the best operating system this year, last year and next
year. It'll be interesting to see what the company delivers in its 10.5
Leopard version of Mac OS X.

"Meanwhile, I'm placing Windows Vista as a distant second-best to OS X.
I see Linux and Windows 2000 as being roughly tied another notch or two
below Vista, with XP being only a half step better than Win 2000."

Other than the fact that he is a complete fool, that statement tells me
just one thing about Scot Finnie: he doesn't live in Colorado.

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com

On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 20:14:07 -0400, Davoud wrote, in
part:

Not that anyone in the /real/ world would want to do any of the
foregoing, mind you. Even if they did, they would run into a brick wall
-- the lack of video poker and malware eradication applications for the
Mac. Macheads can only /dream/ of having something like Microsoft's
Malicious Software Removal Tool.

There is a lot of software available for the Macintosh, and Windows
users can only dream of not having the *need* of adware and spyware
removal programs.

Also, I apologize for being unfair to the Macintosh by claiming the PC
would still far outsell it if it was still back in the Windows 3.1 days.
This is not quite true, even if you count the free Win32s upgrade that
let Windows 3.1 run 32-bit software. You need at least Windows 98 to
properly use a DVD drive on a PC, and to use larger hard drives.

The relative lack of visibility for Mac software does give PC users a
chill in the spine at the thought of switching to a Mac. Now that it has
gone to the Intel chip, however, buying a Mac is one's chance to enjoy
the best of both worlds. I hope this does significantly improve
Macintosh market share; I would like to have choices available; I would
even like to have OS/2 back. But I can't ignore the gravitational effect
of the advantages of developing for and selling to the most popular
platform.

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account