the empty calorie

Good point there, but really, I'd much rather take BSD over Linux. Linux is more popular, but not better.

There is no 188x600 mode...Yes, there actually is True Colour and 1024x768 resolution in Windows 95.Every single SVGA monitor I have ever come across, even ones from around 1987-88, have been able to support 1024x768 resolutions, and even 24-Bit colour. It may look a little fuzzy on some, but they can do it. I really doubt he has an EGA monitor...

Not that that sounds like a slow machine or anything...But no, I am not, and will never be a gentoo user.If I wanted to use linux, I would use it, but I don't like linux.I'm an OpenBSD user. One of the few and the proud..or does anyone use OpenBSD out here?

Correction, xboxrulz....Darwin has nothing to do with OS 9 or any precursors to that. Darwin itself is built from FreeBSD and the Mach kernel. And Darwin is the underlying OS that is present in every single installation of Mac OS X.Check out the Apple Developer Connection site, and notice how every release of Mac OS X has it's own corresponding version of Darwin that it runs on. Mac OS X is simply Apple's distribution of their open source operating system, Darwin, bundled with their closed-source suite of applications that you know as Mac OS X.

Quite a good article...very true..although...I have heard otherwise about the Linux replacing Windows part...Well...I know that not what it's designed for, but I do recall hearing something about Linus Torvalds creating quite a ruckus somewhere, not far from the presence of Bill Gates. And as Microsoft continues to shoot itself in the foot...i say give it 5-7 years before the percentage of Windows users in the world is less than half. But back to the topic.. i really agree with the "If you can't drive, that's your problem" part... When I was new to Linux, I never spent my time saying "wahhh, that's not how it works in windows", but rather, hitting up IRC linux channels and how I do the things I wanted to do. I wasn't afraid to learn. However, I see this as a large block for the more average Windows user...and this leads to problems. Windows users just don't know what's up, that's all there is to it. Even many of the "techs" I run into don't know what's up. Some people honestly think that once they find the Control Panel, that they know how everything works in a computer, when rather, it's the complete opposite. When I was employed at a publishing company, there was this "professional" we hired to fix the problems on our computers. The problem was with the printers. They'd stretch the text in some odd way, or smash it all into the middle square centimeter of the page, or sometimes not even print at all. Now this guy kept "fixing" this problem over and over again (which is an indicator that the problem was never fixed to begin with). I observed what he was doing, and he must have either actually been as stupid as I thought he was, or he must have thought I wouldn't know what he was doing. The only thing he did, was run Norton Antivirus' LiveUpdate repeatedly. When I suggested that maybe it was something other than a virus, I lost my job because I questioned "the professional". Also, he complained to my boss that something had gone "seriously wrong" with my computer, and he insisted it needed a reformat to get rid of the "constant error screen on the display". That "constant error screen" happened to only be my wallpaper, which looked like this: If this guy is such a "computer professional" (because after all, he WAS certified by Microsoft, so he MUST know everything...hah!) I'd hate to think of how many people are pouring money into this guy to fix absolutely nothing and mandate that if your wallpaper looks like a Commodore BASIC screen, that computer MUST be reformatted because it's such a serious problem.... I hate Windows users..

I must say, the idea of wiping the hard disk and installing something else sure would help more than any of those...

Okay, I'd like to know something....With the jump into the 64-bit world that's been trying to happen lately...why do I STILL see the X86 being used for everything in these upcoming OS'es. Let's take Apple...after releasing their true 64-bit computer, they've decided to take a step back to a 32-bit processor, from Intel no less (yuck)...and if Windows Vista/Longhorn is, from what I have heard, supposed to be Microsoft's dedicated 64-bit offering for the Windows world, why is it running on an X86???Let's see...we've been using the 32-bit x86 since the late 80's...It's been time to ditch this stupid processor family for a while now. I'm sick of seeing nothing changing but more Hz, and little else. I'm hoping I see IBM's Cell processor appear in desktops...then it's bye-bye Intel

I really do like this mouse...I thought about getting one, but I probably wouldn't use it for long...I'm dedicated to the Logitech TrackMan...but if Apple made a trackball, it would probably be quite sick, and I could see myself buying a few of them

Ohh boy..Well lets take a look here...I have an Apple II+ with 48K RAM, and twin Disk II drives.An Epson Equity II, with 128K RAM and a 4.7MHz Intel 8088.Two iMac DVs, 400MHz PPC750A Macintosh LC II, with a 68020A Motorola Starmax 3000/180 with a PPC603eAnd Two computers I built myself:133MHz Pentium-S based computer1.7GHz Pentium 4 based computerBoth the iMacs and both x86's are running OpenBSD 3.7But really..I wouldn't mind having an Amiga 4000T on that list...

Hello,I'm not sure that many people on this board are OpenBSD users. and out of any, probably even less OpenBSD PPC users...But I'm running OpenBSD 3.7 on an Apple iMac DV (400MHz G3)and there's supposed to be a way to enable hardware accelerated X for ati chipsets, which I have. (Rage 128 series)But the help I found was a sample file for a G4 Powerbook...Does anyone know the proper things to issue to xorg.conf to get the accelerated ati driver working?Also, does anyone know how I can enable the sound on this?

Thats too bad... although I've never used FreeBSD, I must say OpenBSD has been quite nice to me. But, I installed from flopy disk/FTP, not CD.. I would say just try installing the base system and downloading the rest, but Linux is okay.

Well...remember "Longhorn" is a codename...You don't actually see boxes with "Windows Chicago" or Windows Memphis"...

Yeah, Solaris is pretty nice, but beware, you won't find as many programs out there as you will with Linux or BSD. Sunfreeware.com would be the best place to pick up any software you want, but if you want to compile source code...you may be in for an unpleasant surprise..I got all the right tools installed in the right places, but it would always try to use the dummy app for the SunW compiler, rather than using my installed version of GCC.I think you'll probably end up liking that BSD better, but it's jsut a matter of personal taste, really. Solaris is a but more Beginner-oriented (but not by much) for new users. Oh yes...and your performance will be much better if you use the CDE interface instead of the "Java Desktop Environment" (or it might be Platform..)and you may end up needing OSS to get sound.Good luck!

Sorry about the double post...this board needs edit buttons quite badly.But assuming Xorg is already installed, You may want to type in (without the quotes)"xorgconfig"that will run you through an interactive program that will ask you for your mouse, where the mouse is connected, What keyboard, video card, RAM on video card, screen resolutions and colour depth desired. After that, I'm not sure what the pre-set (if any) window manager for FreeBSD is, but on OpenBSD it's FVWM2, and after the "xorgconfig" fun earlier, you just type in "startx" to get xorg (your GUI) running. From there, if you're used to Windows, Ubuntu, Mandrake, etc, you might want to use a different window manager than TWM or FVWM or whatever yours is currently set up for. You could go with KDE or GNOME, although it will cost a little bit of speed, but if KDE or GNOME worked fast enough for you in Linux distros, then it should be fine. I myself prefer just simple Window Managers, due to simplicity, speed, and there are so many more...If you like Mac OS, find yourself MLWM, if you're an Amiga fan like me, AMIWM is a good choice. If you like the Windows interface, FVWM95 (other than KDE or GNOME) should make you feel right at home.If you want, you can PM me sometime and I can offer you more detailed help if you wish.Have fun with BSD! It's addicting!

Well, I use OpenBSD, and I've never used FreeBSD, but during the install, do you remember what packages you installed?By the way, what did you normally use before FreeBSD?

I would definately have to say Tiger. Why? Well, first, it's based on UNIX, so I can trust it. Second, Longhorn is going to cause a great stir in the computing world, and likely, is going to turn out bad for Microsoft. If this interface is supposed to be that graphical, people are not going to like the forced upgrade. I really don't think an interface that is that stressful on the hardware is going to help much either. Not to mention the jump to 64-bit is going to be very shaky for Microsoft. For new users, Tiger is going to look a lot more attractive, due to its significantly higher MTBF over Windows, much more uniform interface, and not to mention most new users, will want to play with pictures, video, and music, and the Mac OS will be much better out-of-the-box than Windows for that stuff. Every day, it becomes clearer to more and more people that Microsoft's new products have a long-lasting tradition of being just as mediocre as before, but with more eye candy. And really, the eye candy factor, I feel, is starting to be taken much too far. (UNIX users can relate, for example, compare the speed of using WindowMaker or FVWM to the speed of using GNOME or KDE, all that eye candy takes a serious toll on your system's performance) Also, Microsoft's inability to let go of old technology has hurt them. Sure, this may seem ironic coming from someone who uses UNIX, but UNIX was built a lot better than MS-DOS. Microsoft just keeps hanging onto MS-DOS, fragmenting file systems, and their old ways in general. If Microsoft doesn't make a serious change, they are going to be hurting very bad. But, if they do end up hurting, I'm not going to feel bad at all. Even though I thought Mac OS classic was good enough to begin with, Apple is really getting back on the ball and getting their user base back as a result of the big changes they have gone through, and are still going through. Even though I'm not entirely enthused about the switch to Intel, Steve Jobs has something big up his sleeve that we haven't even begun to see yet....but judging by what we've seen so far coming from Apple...Microsoft is about to receive one hell of a kick in the stomach that it has been asking for since the mid-eighties. More and more every day, people are starting to get intolerant with the instability of Microsoft's products. They just don't work like they should. And when you have something such as Tiger....something that is so solid, stable, and even friendlier, but yet a better tool for power users...people are going to start asking themselves more "Well, what use is it to spend my money on something that doesn't work as good as Apple's products?" There have been a few road apples in the past, and the Macintosh used to have a bad reputation given to it by people who had rarely ever spent any time with a Macintosh. People used to keep thinking "Oh, a new Windows, maybe all those problems will finally be fixed"....not anymore. Nobody's falling for it anymore. People have wasted too much money, time, and effort with trying to make Windows work reliably. Not to mention that Apple's significant headstart isn't exactly going to help Microsoft either.Although, I'll stick with OpenBSD either way, but that's my 2 cents.+

From what I heard, The Intel-Powered Macintosh isn't going to use an X86 processor at all. Think about it, after releasing the first true 64-bit Macintosh, do you really think Apple is going to go back to a 32-bit architecture? Very unlikely. It's quite a backward step. It's supposed to be a completely new architecture. But it's not going to be any Pentium or 80anything86 out there, that's for sure. But back to topic...My favourite OS? I have a few.First, above anything, is OpenBSD.Why? Well, PROACTIVE security, stability, and not to mention a quite nice selection of OpenBSD packages found conveniently on the OpenBSD site, and none of that extra BS you find in most Linux distros, like odd kernels, programs that run great on one distro, but won't on others....can be installed from a single floppy, very small, I could fill a few paragraphs with all the good stuff about it, but I like how it's not a Windows-wannabe, it's just straight up UNIX in it's most pure and raw form I've seen yet.(Slackware Linux seems to be the only exception to the "Let's make Linux just like Windows!" rule that Red Hat and Mandrake, as well as SuSE and blah seem to follow. I used to be a diehard Slackware user for the same reason I now swear by OpenBSD, and I love slack, very much, but it just doesnt cut it for me now that I've finally used OpenBSD. I'm going to be using OpenBSD for life.)Second, as media isn't OpenBSD's strong point, I use for my media purposes, of course, the straight up Media OS from the ground up, the venerable BeOS VIMBA release. Here is where I listen to my music, watch my movies, make my hiphop beats, play my games, all that good stuff. of course, I would much rather use an Amiga to do these things, BeOS does the job quite well, I must say. While maybe UNIX isn't the (initially) friendliest solution for Windows users wanting to migrate to something more stable, they would very likely get along great with BeOS. Of course, the only thing I use BeOS for IS media, but it does other things quite well too. It can sure "kick *bottom* and chew bubblegum." If you know what I mean (Back when there were actually cool shoot-em-up games...Halo and Half-Life and such will never compare to the Duke.)Third...Apple DOS. I spent the first 7 years of my life with it, and I still use it to this day, although not as much as I did back then. Although I no longer put the master disk in the drive and pound on the keyboard like I did for the first year...(give me a break, I was a baby!) Also thanks to Apple DOS, (well, my Apple II+ in general), I also matched the reading abilities of a first-grade elementary student by the age of 3.Now, I only named the ones I currently use. But in a nutshell...My favourite of all time is, OpenBSD, and my second favourite is AmigaOS. Although, I must say that using an Amiga window manager on OpenBSD, does the trick quite well.

Well really, as I'm sure most of you are aware, Windows XP itself IS spyware.So Big Brother is always watching you guys...And I'll tell you, Bill sure isn't MY brother.But, really, back when I was forced to use Windows, I'll tell you what really helped more than anything...First, I didn't use AntiVirus or AntiSpyware programs.Second, I NEVER used Internet Explorer, or Windows Explorer. Needless to say, I didn't ever let ActiveX on my box get involved with anything. I've never found a reason to NOT disable ActiveX, as it's really nothing but a security risk, period.Third, I removed (that's right, as in deleted, expunged, trashed, you get the idea) explorer.exe right after the first boot, and used Program Manager (aka progman.exe) as my shell. While it's not directly related to security, I would always see quite an increase in performace, and Windows didn't feel as buggy.Not to mention it took up less desktop space than the taskbar. (when minimised)Fourth, I would use file manager (winfile.exe) rather than Windows explorer...we all know WE is the same program as IE.Fifth, other than that, nothing more than just basically good prevention habits. Don't use Outlook to check mail, Don't enable ActiveX, don't install programs you don't trust, (or anything including Gator). Prevention is the absolute best thing you can do. Although it does make me wonder that if people get this concerned about Windows security and such, why not just get OpenBSD. I don't understand why you guys jump all those hurdles just to be in the Windows world. But, if the juice is worth the squeeze for you guys, then squeeze it, I guess..Sorry about the double post (there really should be an edit button somewhere...)but I forgot, one big thing, use Windows 2000 instead of XP.

Okay.....a few things need to be said here... just to shed some light on people. Actually, if you want to make something available to the majority of computer users out there (assuming i's programs you are talking about), UNIX is the way to go. Typicaly it's easier porting to Windows from UNIX than vice versa. Not to mention if you write your source code properly, nearly everyone under the UNIX sun can use it. Also, personnaly, I would never design a Windows application in my life. The environment isn't exactly stable.Not to mention it would also run slower, and of course, not as stable as it would run on UNIX. What's the point of creating software for a buggy platform? Well to be exact, BSD is more of an uncle of UNIX. You have the Mother (UNICS, later changed to UNIX), who had two children, System V and BSD, and then each had their own children. Children of System V being Minix, Linux, IRIX, and Solaris, and the children of BSD being Darwin (The actual OS in Mac OS X)...But yet it is a rather interesting family. And then we have Windows....completely unrelated, it's own family tree consisting of it's own father, CP/M, and then a 16-bit ripoff of CP/M that Microsoft didn't even create (MS-DOS) and Windows, originally the most crude and mediocre GUI out there for DOS, as compared to GEM and GEOS. If anyone actually did deserve to be that powerful of a company (in the AT world), it's Digital Research, NOT Microsoft. DR actually cared about it's customers and made good stuff. Counter-Strike and Half-Life honestly bore me, personally. Besides, I'd rather play games on a dedicated system, like a console. No compatibility issues, better-designed hardware for that specific purpose, not to mention current game consoles are all 64-bit systems, as opposed to 32-bit X86 ATs. Oh yes, and don't forget how much more comfortable it is to use a real controller as opposed to a keyboard. Computers generally, are better for games that exclusively use keyboard input, like Infocom-type games, and games that use something similar to SCUMM (think Monkey Island), or emulation of older, more simple systems. The advances in the past 10 years in video games, just really makes them too complex to play them on an AT. Wouldn't Counter-Strike be so much nicer to play when you can have an analog stick to aim with, rather than a numeric keypad or that horrible upside-down T? Remember, before you drive a car, you must learn how to, and get a license. Before you perform surgery on someone, you must go to school, and before you use ANY kind of tool, you MUST learn how to properly operate it. Learning is an important part of life, and the more you learn, the more successful you will be. And a computer is a tool. If you don't want to learn how to use it, then why did you even buy it? If you are a parent, I'm sure you realise how ridiculous it would be to buy your child a car, them never learning how to drive it, throw them the keys and just say "Just go drive it, don't worry about not knowing what to do." Learning is an essential part of life, and it saddens me to try and see people avoid it.And using GIMP and Photoshop side by side, I can tell you that GIMP is every bit as good as Photoshop, if not, then better. So you have multiple windows open instead of one huge one, which contains, essentially all the same little windows inside it, resulting in nothing more than wasted space. I know, learning, and UNIX and the like can sound like a hassle, but really, it's not, as compared to Windows. Remember, you only have to learn it ONCE. With UNIX, maybe it's a small hassle in the beginning, but once you have it down, you have it down. Windows however, is the neverending hassle. Always Defragging, Scandisking, Antivirusing, and all this other junk that you do, really, only to just have to do it right over again. UNIX is actually a lot simpler and easier once you learn how to use it, in the sense that it doesn't give you **** when you actually want to get your work done. You know the command, and you know exactly what it is going to do. With Windws, you know maybe what it SHOULD do, but that doesn't mean it's going to do it. If you want the computer to do things YOUR way, use UNIX. If you like having problems, and an OS made by a company which doesn't care for it's customers, but only money and control of it's users, get Windows. (And remember, Windows XP is spyware itself, so Big Brother really IS watching.) If you don't want to use UNIX, or you need support for things that aren't yet supported in UNIX, get Mac OS X.

Heh, >looks up at where I said BeOS just isn't for me<Always before, I had used BeOS 5 PE...Well, that was made a while ago, and while it does boot and run on my Pentium-IV, often I would get kernel panics. Well recently, after I decided to use my computer as a tool to make my hiphop beats, I knew that OpenBSD just wouldn't cut it, and I have two iMac DV's, but no keyboards or OS X to throw on them..or even OS 9. So, it looked like I was going to have to mess with my main computer,, my dearly beloved OpenBSD box..but there is no way I'm leaving OpenBSD, so finally, I thought "Well, typically Macs are better for working with multimedia, there is no way in hell I''m going back to Windows....oh yes....the Media OS....BeOS.. but, I wanted something a little more full-featured, and something that won't give me a kernel panic...noticing that VIMBA (BeOS Developer Edition) had a Pentium-IV optimised kernel, I decided to give that a shot. Haven't had a panic yet, and all the audio tools I need are here in the palm of my hand...except for one. I need something similar to the old Voyetra "MIDI Orchestrator Plus". And ugh...I wish Pentium-IV computers had ISA slots...I just can't trust any soundcard as much as I can my trusty old AWE32...I Still keep the thing around in hopes I come across a computer I can throw it in. The EMU8000 is a chip I just can't live without.Other than missing being able to use my old hardware in my new(er) computer, BeOS is doing absolutely great..I thought it was good before, but compared to then, VIMBA absolutely screams on here...If anyone is interested in trying BeOS, I wouldn't even bother with the 5 PE. Go straight for VIMBA..guaranteed to satisfy... a little warning though, I did get a little uncomfortable seeing the menu across the top resembling the windows explorer...but luckily, it moves to the corner, where it should be.And, anyone have recommendations of what MIDI orchestration programs to use on BeOS?

Hmm, yes, I am curious on how to do the same with OpenBSD, but I figure OpenBSD probably doesn't support much I'd need.

Why should people require a license before driving a car?Why should people learn anything?In those kind of situations, that is what a Mac was meant for.But if people aren't wanting to learn about just using their computer, that's fine. But if you are going to do that, why don't you use something that isn't so problematic? Not to mention something from a company who actually cares about its customers?

Heh, the ultimate hacker....I don't know about that...and really the bloat of a distro doesn't make it better. But I wasn't dissing it. I said it's one of the better "beginner" distros.

SafeSearch i always have to disable to find what I want. And no, it's not porn, it's gore.Google is a very wonderful tool, but as with any, you must learn how to use it. if you tried searching for maybe "pud ding" you might come up with something not so appropriate, although, i've never tried.

Sun makes very good stuff, although, I would have much rather run Solaris on an Ultra-2 than an x86. When a company's OS is also run on their own hardware, it can be a beautiful thing. Unless they surprise you with "oh, we're going to ditch superior technology in favour of the crappy Intel hardware!"Can't you tell I've lost respect for Apple?I'm hoping IBM does something in the desktop scene with their Cell processor...the x86 is a dead horse which has been beaten enough, and should be buried.