From: Raymond Wiker on 13 Nov 2009 01:02
A.L. <alewando(a)aol.com> writes:
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:20:00 +0100, Raymond Wiker <raw(a)RAWMBP-2.local>
>> Further, many of the companies that switched from Unix to
>>Windows are now looking at Mac OS X and Linux; either for better
>>stability and performance, better security or simply for cost reasons.
There are examples of large companies and government bodies
replacing their Windows PCs with Linux or Mac OS X, and they have been
pretty open-hearted about why.
From: JAM on 13 Nov 2009 08:44
On Nov 12, 4:20 pm, Raymond Wiker <r...(a)RAWMBP-2.local> wrote:
> JAM <ja_1...(a)yahoo.com> writes:
> You're plain wrong, or at least several years out of date....
> The situation now is that many people have a Windows PC for
> work, which they only use because that is what they get given for
> work. Meanwhile, at home, they use Macs.
I agree. If you do nothing important at home, then Mac is probably
sufficient. It's fashionable, looks great on the desk and makes you
feel like you belong to elite. Those of us, however, who still use
adavnced software at home must use computers that can run it. And that
is only Windows these days.
> Office is not a good reason for using a PC at home, and given
> that you can actually get good, free alternatives, it is not even a
> reason for using Windows for work purposes.
Of course it is. Once Office is used at work it makes zero sense to
make yourself incompatible with Office documents created at work.
There are no good alternatives for MS Office. There are cheap ersatz
that can do some of the functionality that is within the MS Office.
For a light users that maybe sufficient, but for those, who need more
advanced functionality, "replacements" do not come even close. Take
for example Excel. Where is a replacement for MS Excel that is
programmable as easily as Microsoft product is ?
But even if Office is not enough, please, find me good RAD for Macs
like MS Visual Studio or Embarcadero RAD studio.
Where is NX or Catia for Mac ? Have you seen Nastran, Adams or
HyperMesh that runs great on Mac ? I have seen NX for Unix. it is a
stripped version of Windows original that lacks number of functions. I
suspect that this is probably a case in a number of applications. NX
in the past was designed to run on UInix but for many years recently
it is strictly Windows with some afterthought for those who still run
The simple rule is, whatever is available for Macs, is also available
for Windows in either same or much better quality (functionality) and
for less cost. The opposite if however not true. Simple fact of life
is that mumber of applications and hardware pieces available for
Windows is not available for other systems or are available with
reduced functionality and in most cases at a higher price.
> Further, many of the companies that switched from Unix to
> Windows are now looking at Mac OS X and Linux; either for better
> stability and performance, better security or simply for cost reasons.- Hide quoted text -
Name one big company that does this.
> - Show quoted text -
From: John H Meyers on 13 Nov 2009 09:22
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:44:10 -0600, JAM...
Hmm.. must be Jacek!
How's things in automobile engineering?
My own auto wasn't engineered to last too long,
that's all I know -- perhaps it was designed using Macs?
Actually, the fact that everything breaks down at once
may indicate greater comprehensive engineering than I have credited :)
From: rs1n on 13 Nov 2009 10:56
Amazon using Linux:
IBM saves with Linux:
I think there you may have some confusion between Macs, Linux/Unix
machines, and Windows machines each as a platform (how well each
platform runs) versus the software available to each platform. Each
platform has their advantages and disadvantages. For example, I would
never consider running a web server using Windows. I would prefer to
do any multimedia editing on a Mac (e.g. Photoshop is a native Mac
application). For publishing papers, I would stick to LaTeX while
running Linux (even though there are packages for LaTeX under
Windows). The only reason I run Windows is because people send me
documents that I would need software which runs on Windows to open.
To claim that Windows is the be-all-end-all solution for computing is
like saying the only type of automobile we ever need is the <insert
most popular car model here> since it is the most widely used car with
the most after-market accessories.
From: JAM on 13 Nov 2009 11:09
On Nov 13, 9:22 am, "John H Meyers" <jhmey...(a)nomail.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:44:10 -0600, JAM...
> Hmm.. must be Jacek!
Hi John. Yes, it's me again.
> How's things in automobile engineering?
Let's just leave it at "difficult" :-)
> My own auto wasn't engineered to last too long,
> that's all I know -- perhaps it was designed using Macs?
No. All major manufacturer use either Catia or NX for design. Both
those CAD systems run on Windows. There are functional subsets of
those packages on Unix but almost nobody is using this on Unix
anymore. For simulation it is typically Dyna, Nastran, Adams etc..
Those CAE applications run on either Unix or Windows. But since CADs
are run on Windows there is an increasing pressure on CAE community to
switch their Unix boxes to Windows just to be common. It cost IT dept
a lot to maintian different systems around and data exchange creates
issues between the systems.
Regarding your car, what brand and model do you have ?
But in general you are right. Cars are engineered to last finite
amount of time. However they are not engineered to last just after
warranty. That would kill your market reception. In general cars are
designed to last about 10 years for a typical user. It is mostly
because of the market competition pressure. Cost of the parts forces
car companies to use cheaper solutions not as robust as you could
have. Another one is fuel efficiency which calls for reduced vehicle
mass. You can reduce mass of many parts assuming finite life. There
are other factors, but it is just not economical these days to create
cars that "last forever". You would loose on the market with such
product due to it's price penalty.
> Actually, the fact that everything breaks down at once
> may indicate greater comprehensive engineering than I have credited :)
We have much better analytical understanding of vehicle physics and
excellent simulation tools for metal fatigue, crash deformation, heat
transfer etc these days. There is a sea of change during last 20
> -[ ]-