Install osx

>install osx
>close button doesn't close
>immediately uninstall

Other urls found in this thread:

opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
nofilmschool.com/2015/01/comparing-maxed-out-5k-imac-hackintosh-which-one-comes-out-top
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

people actually use keyboard shortcuts on os x. also
>install os x
fuck off hackintosh scum

Then what does it do?

close the window, like it's supposed to

>install Windows
>press start to shutdown
>immediately uninstall

>install windows 7
>get windows 10 update pop up
>close button triggers the update
>immediately throw disk out of my window

>install linux
>spend 6 hours working on my network drivers
>everything just works

i'm still surprised there hasn't been a lawsuit or something against microsofts scummy behavour in regards to windows 10 upgrades

spotted the mactoddler

It closes the window, but programs on OS X stay open and active even after all windows are closed. You need to hit Cmd+Q to actually close them. Every mac owner I've seen always has a dock that's bursting at the seams from all the open programs. Doesn't help that OS X now reopens all the programs that were running when you shut down.

Also the maximize button doesn't maximize anymore, and tbqh it never did. Now the maximize button just fullscreens the program, and before it would just like vertically expand it or something, but it wouldn't take up all available space. Depending on the app the maximize button sometimes did nothing at all. It was seriously retarded.

>install windows 10
>ad for candy crush saga pops up on start menu
>immediately uninstall

>install GNU/Linux
>buttons do what they're supposed to
>no ads on any menus
>no forced "up"grades

>install GNU/Linux

nice meem

>install xubuntu 16.04
>EVERYTHING just fucking works

It even reports the battery charge on a wireless mouse right off the bat, while Windows 10 has trouble recognizing a SteelSeries wired mouse as a mouse at all >.<

cucks when will you learn?

>install linux
>no close button
FUCK

where can i find an iso for os x so i can try it on virtualbox?

Look like this advertisement thread was successful OP!

Oh boy oh boy now I get my 3ยข commission.

This is the *one* thing OSX does that I like.

Everything else is horseshit, from their barely-unix unix, to their mistreatment of the user and liberal approach to software quality, but the fact that you can easily run a program without windows is FUCKING MAGNIFICENT.
Not worth using OSX, but I'd certainly use it if it was copied into other programs.

Winfags think this is logical and clean.

does the minimize button at least works as intended?

>install Linux
>Xorg won't start properly
>Can't even use my mouse to click the nonexistent x button that didn't render

>install some linux distro
>realise you chose gnome 3
>slowly push install disc back in

cmd + q asshole

>barely-unix unix
Ironic because OS X is the only commonly used OS X that is 'officially' considered Unix.

>install osx
>gpu fan doesn't work above 35% because "muh minimalism and noise"
>immediately uninstall

Anyone I know that uses OS X uses Cmd+W and Cmd+Q to close windows and programs. It's very consistent in OS X compared to Windows for example. But then again, the people I know who are using OS X are not idiots.

>Doesn't help that OS X now reopens all the programs that were running when you shut down.
You can turn that off and you probably should.

No it's not. It was never certified.

Everything works 'as intended'. The problem is just that you manchildren only ever used Windows and think the erratic behaviour of that piece of shit should be the blueprint for every other OS.

>because OS X is the only commonly used OS X that is 'officially' considered Unix
I'll assume you didn't mean to make that redundant statement.

Anyway, by default OS X isn't POSIX compliant (it needs to be installed as such), and when it is it typically does it poorly.

You could look up various online rants about the patchwork kernel and particularly the horrible filesystem.
If you want it as a terminal, you are fine, but anyone who seriously wants a Unix environment will be better off with a real BSD or GNU/Linux.

>Laying on the internet
opengroup.org/openbrand/register/

Which law did they break?

Linux and Windows work the same when it comes to closing/maximizing windows. OSX is the retarded OS.

>that is 'officially' considered Unix.
The reason that GNU/Linux isn't officially Unix is because of the way it is released (each distro would need to be registered individually at great expense) and that it deviates from the Unix standard to improve upon it (note the current standard was finalised more than twelve years ago).

They probably haven't broken any (at least in the US), but in some countries tricking someone into signing a contract (for example by misleading the user into updating) could be considered a crime.

Checked

>lying on the the internet

OS X is POSIX compliant, and has been certified as such for every release since like snow leopard

Quints of truth

OSX *can* be POSIX compliant... when you install it as such.
The default installation configuration doesn't install a fully POSIX compliant system.

It's like me trying to claim my car (Ford Focus) is fully rally compliant.
The model *can* be rally compliant, but it needs to be configured as such.

Closing it via the red button does not save anything

It does close down and you will lose your tabs in safari for example

The yellow light is what you are talking about

It's in compliance with the terms you agreed to.

Nope, OSX IS POSIX compliant out of the box. It's actually fully UNIX compliant out of the box.

Please stop talking out of your ass...

That pisses me off but you can disable it or mark common icons to always show.

OSX uses the case insensitive filesystem by default.
This throws POSIX compliance out of the door (unless you select the case sensitive filesystem manually during install).

The main problem here though, is how quite a few programs in OSX (to be fair, mostly non-apple ones) depend on the filesystem being case insensitive. They work erratically in POSIX compliant mode.

Regardless of what you think of the quality of Apple's code, this specifically means that unless you install it to comply, OSX *does not comply with POSIX*.

Check it yourself (if you use a Mac). Unless you are using the Case Sensitive filesystem, your own machine doesn't comply with POSIX.

Re-read it. Shutting down saves windows and re opens them next boot. He didn't say anything about the red button saving windows.

That's fine. OS X is technically considered Unix see Why do you think I used single quotes around "official"?

I understand entirely.
I just think it's misleading to say that OSX is POSIX compliant without also mentioning how it is only a small (possibly even less than 10% of the installed base) that actually meet that compliance.

It's like saying America doesn't have nukes*.

*stored in the bathroom of their polish embassy

>implying Linux has a single way of how closing and maximizing windows works
>implying OS X's UI concept isn't older than both.

Stop talking out of your ass you stupid newfag.

>OSX
>not using keyboard shortcuts for everything
I only ever use the mouse for web browsing

>well done rajesh, you truely told him!

oh fuck i didn't realize i got quints i need to call my mom about this

linux still sucks dick btw

Right clicking in Windows is a minigame every time you do it. What kind of design did Microsoft think up of this time? Let's find out!!!!

You do realize that if it brokes law it's still illeagal. Read this:

menus in Windows are special snowflakes

they kinda fixed it with the last Win 10 big patch.

FREE APPS

By turning every menu large and dark. Not a fix at all.

>the context menu shouldn't change depending on the context of the item I'm right-clicking!

>>implying OS X's UI concept isn't older than both.
It's not. X was developed before Nextstep.

>the context menu's appearance shouldn't change depending on the context of the item I'm right-clicking!
ftfy

>OSX can't even lock the desktop with a command, have to wait for the screensaver

Control + Shift + Power button to lock desktop

umm yes you can. i hate tray icons so i hide them all always

>Power
What

That's what I like with OS X, I can have an application loaded in memory and ready to serve but with no annoying windows.

Stop having autism stupid fucking Macafg

Oh that's handy, I've been using a hot corner for that all this time

Pic related, except it's eject on desktop keyboards. On Macbooks it's the power button

>small enter button

Idk why they didn't just make it the L button but whatever, it works.

>go to delete some text
>accidentally eject disc
thanks apple

>install either osx or gnu/linux
>there are several differences but everything just werkz
>don't get spied on by either
>no gaymer faggots polluting the community of either
>both a e s t h e t i c/can be made so easily
>consistent UI
>unix master race
>be happy with both, laugh at the windows users who will never know such happiness

>implying I'm using an apple keyboard

>Use Windows
>App crashes
>try to quit it
>Windows crashes

Neither of my Macs have optical drives but I'm pretty sure it's like the powerbutton on Macbooks; You need to hold it down for a few seconds to activate it.

Are you implying it isn't because you're a poor fag who can not buy decent hardware?

We're not talking about you and your chinese Windows PC.

os x's concept is of Mac OS 6 and original Mac OS and Lisa (early 80s)

Built my own pc you maccuck. I'd ask you what the hard ware specs is in your shitty iMac, but you would probably cry when you realize how much you over payed.

>5120x2880, 10-bit, wide gamut IPS screen with an ATW polarizer, also factory calibrated.
>SSD with 1.8 gigabyte per second read speeds. 1.1 gigabyte per second write speeds
>Core i5-5575R
>AMD M380
>Magic Trackpad 2

Of course I could have bought a Dell 5k monitor for $1600 and built a much shittier computer with the remaining $400, but why would I want to do that?

>amd
>needing a 5k monitor
>have to buy a new computer to upgrade you got cucked
Poor you senpai

Whoah, checked

Also

Yes AMD. Do you think I care about video games if I'm using a Mac? Some of us are over 18 you know.

>needing a 5k monitor
You don't "need" much of anything. You don't "need" more than one 1080p monitor, yet you have three. Though even with your three, my single monitor still has far more pixels, all of which I can utilize if I really wanted.

>have to buy a new computer to upgrade you got cucked

Yes. I would have needed a new motherboard, CPU, and SSD. Though even with the $400 left over after buying a 5K Dell monitor, I'd still need a GPU that has two displayport 1.2 connections, so that leaves you with maybe $300-$250 for the rest of the computer. There's no way to make a computer comparable to the iMac 5k for $2000. You will have to compromise your CPU, resolution, or r/w speeds.

Why are you still talkinf to me faggot, this conversation ended when you told me your over priced shitty specs

Maybe some day you'll know what using such a high resolution is like.

and it still has better mem management than wangblows

I think we are done here
nofilmschool.com/2015/01/comparing-maxed-out-5k-imac-hackintosh-which-one-comes-out-top

Not Miles, but
>Another consideration to make between these two systems is the display and the value that you're getting with each one. Apple's new 5K Retina Display is already widely considered one of the premiere high resolution displays on the market, and many of the competing high-end displays still cost nearly as much as the base model 5K iMac, although that's changing as the technology becomes more widespread. There are currently less expensive 4K displays on the market, but many of them don't even come close to the 5K iMac in terms of overall display quality. Then when you factor in the speed of the computer that's included at that $2,500 price point (for the base-model iMac) and the thin integrated design, it's hard not to see the iMac as the better bargain, especially if display quality is an important factor in your decision-making process.

>A $2000 computer paired with a $1600 5k monitor is faster than a $2000 computer with a 5k monitor built in
Who'da'thunk

I'm not a Mac user, but reading this argument was like going back and forth between an adult and a toddler.

You got blown the fuck out, I think you should stop replying.

>a much shittier computer with the remaining $400
A $400 desktop would kick your iMac's ass. I'm dead serious.

A $400 computer with a $1600 5k monitor is faster than a $2000 computer with a 5k monitor built in.

And if you're spending $2000 already, you should buy a $600 computer which will OBLITERATE the iMac's laptop garbage.

>implying I actually read the article

It would not.

The article did the test using a Hackintosh with specs similar to that of the iMac 5K. Your claims are false unless you benchmark both yourself and somehow manage to prove otherwise.

The i5 alone would cost you $200, which is an underestimate.
An SSD which could do speeds over 1GB/s would cost another $150 maybe.
That leaves you with $50 for the RAM and motherboard. It's simply not going to happen.

>A $400 computer with a $1600 5k monitor is faster than a $2000 computer with a 5k monitor built in.
Got a citation?

>And if you're spending $2000 already, you should buy a $600 computer which will OBLITERATE the iMac's laptop garbage.
The only laptop components are the GPU and RAM. But what would I gain from having a slightly faster computer? What makes it worth spending the extra $200? I mean I'm spending $2000 already. Might as well Spend $3000 and build the best non-gaming desktop possible.
Not everyone needs or even cares about high performance. Look at all the people on Sup Forums using 5 year old ThinkPads.

>thinking that I'm actually trying to argue
I don't care what you fags think, keep buying your shit computers. This is just funny to me hence the fact you could pay just as much and build a computer way better than that shitty iMac

>hence the fact you could pay just as much and build a computer way better than that shitty iMac
Didn't you say you weren't arguing. But you just made an argument, one that's been disproven multiple times ITT.

random shit does not work and requires you to be obscenely ridiculed in front of your girlfriend that you tried to make her use loonix

Not really desu, but what ever makes you feel better about your shitty purchase

>mac for home
>chinkpad t series from work
feelsgoodman.jpg

no seriously youre all troglodytes