• Apple are assholes
    116 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27721524]Emm, because they aren't letting anyone make anything for their platform?[/QUOTE] does microsoft make the java runtime environment for windows?
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27721582]I really hope you're making that up because it the most retarded thing I've heard this week.[/QUOTE] Unless it has changed, that is what was reported by CNET. [editline]28th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=ifaux;27721609]does microsoft make the java runtime environment for windows?[/QUOTE] They used to until they got into shit for it.
[QUOTE=advil0;27721567][url]http://support.apple.com/kb/DL848[/url] That update says: They're providing updates for Java 1.6, so there MUST be a way to get it.[/QUOTE] "This release of J2SE 5.0 and J2SE 1.4.2 supports all Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs. Java SE 6 is available on 64-bit, Intel-based Macs only." [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] The only OSX that supports 64-bit is 10.6 [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Euphoracle;27721618]Unless it has changed, that is what was reported by CNET.[/QUOTE] Oh god. They really do like digging a grave for themselves.
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27721564]JRE 1.6 should work fine with 10.5, Apple just isn't releasing it so that they can strip an extra 30$ off of you.[/QUOTE] Probably.
[QUOTE=Euphoracle;27721618]Unless it has changed, that is what was reported by CNET. [editline]28th January 2011[/editline] They used to until they got into shit for it.[/QUOTE] so i take it that oracle does now, then?
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27721631]"This release of J2SE 5.0 and J2SE 1.4.2 supports all Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs. Java SE 6 is available on 64-bit, Intel-based Macs only." [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] The only OSX that supports 64-bit is 10.6 [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] Oh god. They really do like digging a grave for themselves.[/QUOTE] I don't see how. People don't seem to like how Apple conducts itself with Java (as proven by this very thread!) If anything, it's a win. It means the developer of Java (Oracle) will have to deal with Java on the platform.
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27721631]"This release of J2SE 5.0 and J2SE 1.4.2 supports all Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs. Java SE 6 is available on 64-bit, Intel-based Macs only." [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] The only OSX that supports 64-bit is 10.6[/QUOTE] Erm no. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_os_x_10.5[/url] [quote]Platform support IA-32, x86-64, PowerPC[/quote] [quote]Native support by many libraries and frameworks for 64-bit applications, allowing 64-bit Cocoa applications. Existing 32-bit applications using those libraries and frameworks should continue to run without the need for emulation or translation.[32][/quote] 10.5 supports 64 bit.
[QUOTE=ifaux;27721680]so i take it that oracle does now, then?[/QUOTE] Yet to be confirmed as 10.7 hasn't dropped yet. Oracle maintains implementations of Java for most other platforms, odds are they will pick up the slack here so they can maintain their "Works Everywhere" promise.
[QUOTE=Euphoracle;27721710]Yet to be confirmed as 10.7 hasn't dropped yet. Oracle maintains implementations of Java for most other platforms, odds are they will pick up the slack here so they can maintain their "Works Everywhere" promise.[/QUOTE] i meant developing jre for windows. why should apple have to maintain something that's not even their own product?
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27721253]The thing is, I don't want to pay 30$ for bunch of features if I only need ONE which should be available in the first place. JRE 1.6 32-bit is available on [I]every single platform[/I] except <10.6 OSX, because Apple felt like sucking that extra 30$ out of your average customer. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] So you're saying that, the only way to fix your cars honk was to buy a new car, would be okay as long as that cars brand belonged to Apple? [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] Java is an essential packet, not letting users install JRE 1.6 on Leopard is like being forced to update to Windows 7 to play new flash games on Kongregate/Newgrounds/Armor Games. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] 9 months is nothing for an OS, especially since there's very subtle difference between 10.5 and 10.6 You can compare it to Vista and 7, Vista has support for DX11 just like 7.[/QUOTE] Well if Microsoft implemented and distributed Flash for windows, yeah it would be exactly like that. But they don't. So you're comparison is invalid. Though, if you're trying to convince me that it is ridiculous, I'll agree! They shouldn't be distributing and maintaining it in the first place. But since they are (and the company that makes it isn't) I don't expect them to maintain backports. I wouldn't object to them allowing someone else to do it, though. Also please keep in mind that Java 10.6 is available on all platforms for different reasons. It's compatible with windows and previous versions because microsoft goes out of there way to make that a feature of the operating system. Linux has open-source implementations and people who have the expertise, time and are allowed to do it themselves. Other platforms require it as a necessary feature. Apple (and OSX) doesn't. They don't update it and most people probably don't care. Apple is a for-profit company, you can't really fault them for wanting payment for maintenance. In professional software, that's where most of the money actually comes from. Also keep in mind that OSX has no copy protection and no activation. They really don't have that much invested into their OS as people seem to believe. Your scale for the age of an OS depends on how its lifecycle works. Apple's philosophy is maintain a good modern product. Microsoft and other companies have different requirements and philosophies. Perhaps Apple is not the company for you (they aren't the company for many, actually, including enterprise [see: xserve]). [editline]28th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=ifaux;27721816]i meant developing jre for windows. why should apple have to maintain something that's not even their own product?[/QUOTE] Because they want the user experience to be as good as possible and they know how to do that. The reason they keep their shit locked down and exclusive is because 1) they want people to enjoy using their products with as little issue as possible, 2) they don't want to deal with other people damaging/changing 1, and 3) they have no obligation to change as people buy their products. When this is no longer true, they may consider re-evaluating their philosophy.
[QUOTE=Euphoracle;27721917]Apple is a for-profit company,[/QUOTE] every company is for profit
Once again, I am not claiming they are in the right. I am merely claiming that this is how it is and rants are boring/pointless and don't accomplish anything other than to voice the frustration of someone who should work to solve their problem (use a different OS/hardware vendor, etc) rather than complain to deaf ears.
snip, read it was jdk on the site, oops
[QUOTE=ifaux;27721969]every company is for profit[/QUOTE] Thanks for clarifying that.
[QUOTE=Euphoracle;27721917]Also please keep in mind that Java 10.6 is available on all platforms for different reasons. It's compatible with windows and previous versions because microsoft goes out of there way to make that a feature of the operating system. Linux has open-source implementations and people who have the expertise, time and are allowed to do it themselves. Other platforms require it as a necessary feature. Apple (and OSX) doesn't. They don't update it and most people probably don't care. Apple is a for-profit company, you can't really fault them for wanting payment for maintenance. In professional software, that's where most of the money actually comes from. Also keep in mind that OSX has no copy protection and no activation. They really don't have that much invested into their OS as people seem to believe.[/QUOTE] Well, that basically is my point. Apple being a bunch of money-hogging dicks, IMO. Fortunately I didn't choose Apple, MacBook just happens to be the only available option for me right now. I'm just a little bit frustrated by how it fails to provide basic functionality. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=advil0;27721976][url]http://landonf.bikemonkey.org/static/soylatte/[/url] Bam, Java 1.6 on 32bit 10.5. CASE CLOSED.[/QUOTE] That's JDK.
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27722055]Well, that basically is my point. Apple being a bunch of money-hogging dicks, IMO. Fortunately I didn't choose Apple, MacBook just happens to be the only available option for me right now. I'm just a little bit frustrated by how it fails to provide basic functionality.[/QUOTE] you are an idiot, why should apple provide and maintain a product that's not even theirs, especially for an outdated OS? the difference from your point of view between Leopard & Snow Leopard might be barely visible, but from the back..a lot has changed.
[QUOTE=ifaux;27722112]you are an idiot, why should apple provide and maintain a product that's not even theirs, especially for an outdated OS?[/QUOTE] Exactly! Why would they keep their OSs compatible when they can make all the apps themselves and take FIVE times the price for them. [QUOTE=ifaux;27722112]the difference from your point of view between Leopard & Snow Leopard might be barely visible, but from the back..a lot has changed.[/QUOTE] Something tells me that you don't know how this works. "Idiot"
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27722171]Exactly! Why would they keep their OSs compatible when they can make all the apps themselves and take FIVE times the price for them. Something tells me that you don't know how this works. "Idiot"[/QUOTE] i do indeed know how this works; and while i wasn't exactly referring to your problem with JRE, i was referring to the fact that you don't seem to think that leopard and snow leopard are any different
[QUOTE=ifaux;27722112]you are an idiot, why should apple provide and maintain a product that's not even theirs, especially for an outdated OS? the difference from your point of view between Leopard & Snow Leopard might be barely visible, but from the back..a lot has changed.[/QUOTE] They should because they offered to. They shouldn't because they aren't qualified to (they don't have that technologies interests in mind as much as Oracle does/should) [editline]28th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Jack Trades;27722171]Exactly! Why would they keep their OSs compatible when they can make all the apps themselves and take FIVE times the price for them. Something tells me that you don't know how this works. "Idiot"[/QUOTE] I don't understand where you're pulling the first figure from. All of apple's applications are relatively cheap compared to windows counterparts, especially now with the app store. If you're referring to linux, it really isn't fair. You can't compete with free and volunteers.
[QUOTE=Euphoracle;27722208]They should because they offered to. They shouldn't because they aren't qualified to (they don't have that technologies interests in mind as much as Oracle does/should) [/QUOTE] They offered before, they aren't anymore. It's completely their decision as to if they should continue to maintain something that isn't their product on a somewhat outdated OS.
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27722055]Well, that basically is my point. Apple being a bunch of money-hogging dicks, IMO. Fortunately I didn't choose Apple, MacBook just happens to be the only available option for me right now. I'm just a little bit frustrated by how it fails to provide basic functionality. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] That's JDK.[/QUOTE] To be fair, Microsoft charges obscene amounts to upgrade versions of windows. They also force you to undergo activation and provide a multitude of different versions that may or may not support what you need. They're also huge dicks about OEM software and strictly enforce unit licenses (3-packs of office, for example) Apple.... doesn't (in my experience and from what I have heard from others to corroborate my claim) Perhaps the author of the mod can recompile it or w/e to support Java 1.5. Your basic functionality isn't the same as others. I know minecraft is popular amongst geeks and such, I doubt it is that popular in terms of their entire userbase though.
[QUOTE=ifaux;27722251]They offered before, they aren't anymore. It's completely their decision as to if they should continue to maintain something that isn't their product on a somewhat outdated OS.[/QUOTE] And that's exactly what I referred to as a "dickmove".
[QUOTE=ifaux;27722251]They offered before, they aren't anymore. It's completely their decision as to if they should continue to maintain something that isn't their product on a somewhat outdated OS.[/QUOTE] That's true, but it does leave people without a solution if they really must stay back a version (eg. enterprise doesn't like staying current if there is minimal reason to). Fortunately, the solution of "upgrade" is feasible for most of their users, except those not willing to pay, of course, but what satisfies those people? :P
[QUOTE=Euphoracle;27722321]To be fair, Microsoft charges obscene amounts to upgrade versions of windows. They also force you to undergo activation and provide a multitude of different versions that may or may not support what you need. They're also huge dicks about OEM software and strictly enforce unit licenses (3-packs of office, for example) Apple.... doesn't (in my experience and from what I have heard from others to corroborate my claim) Perhaps the author of the mod can recompile it or w/e to support Java 1.5. Your basic functionality isn't the same as others. I know minecraft is popular amongst geeks and such, I doubt it is that popular in terms of their entire userbase though.[/QUOTE] This too, I don't think you can make the statement that Apple is a moneygrubbing company when Microsoft charges MUCH more for OS upgrades.
[QUOTE=advil0;27722368]This too, I don't think you can make the statement that Apple is a moneygrubbing company when Microsoft charges MUCH more for OS upgrades.[/QUOTE] At the same time, Microsoft is much better at keeping third party support and compatibility at a much much higher level. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] Also, new Windows OSs come out more seldom with much bigger changes.
So it's a tradeoff then Either pay $100+ for good support of third party shit or pay $29 for okay support of third party shit
In the end, it's still cheaper.
[QUOTE=advil0;27722368]This too, I don't think you can make the statement that Apple is a moneygrubbing company when Microsoft charges MUCH more for OS upgrades.[/QUOTE] I'm sure I'm coming off as someone just gleaming to lick apple's balls, but I really do believe that they are being reasonable in this respect. Having an income and working in a situation where you produce a product and expect others to pay for it and applicable support really changes your mind about what should and should not be free from the creators' point of view. It also changes your mind on who should actually be maintaining certain things (ie. who really has a vested interest in a technology versus those who want it as a bullet point on their sales powerpoint). [editline]28th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Jack Trades;27722410]At the same time, Microsoft is much better at keeping third party support and compatibility at a much much higher level. [editline]29th January 2011[/editline] Also, new Windows OSs come out more seldom with much bigger changes.[/QUOTE] But that is their job. Without that back compatibility, their largest customers (enterprise) would simply not upgrade. Apple has no such issue; those who would fight this are relatively small and make up a smaller portion of their revenue. Gosh I've posted more in this thread than I have all week.
[QUOTE=advil0;27722445]So it's a tradeoff then Either pay $100+ for good support of third [B]party shit[/B] or pay $29 for okay support of third party shit[/QUOTE] Ohoho, I see someone's browsing FP with Safari, writing documents in Pages and edits pictures in...my bad, I forgot OSX doesn't have any buildt-in image-editing software.
[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27722486]Ohoho, I see someone's browsing FP with Safari, writing documents in Pages and edits pictures in...my bad, I forgot OSX doesn't have any buildt-in image-editing software.[/QUOTE] pfffahahahahahahaha, you're telling me that paint is an acceptable image editor you completely just turned this thread into a os x vs. windows thread, good job.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.