StarDestroyer.Net BBS

It's nice how Apple is bashing MS on copying features when a major feature they are presenting (Time machine) is a obvious ripoff of tech which existed in Windows, depending on your point of view, since Windows ME. Apple, the hypocrit PR specialists.

Being a direct ripoff, I would expect they implemented it on the bit level (so only changes are stored), so that the space requirements are relativly modest for a decent amount of snapshots.

I find it a little weird that you guys are getting all hot and bothered over a file restore system with a little graphical effect. How often would you honestly need to use it? The only thing I ever delete are game demos and the like; I have my doubts that 6 months later a 1.5gig installer that I got rid of in order to make space for something else would still be hanging around.

Ace Pace wrote:Time machine is so fucking cool, but I have to ask wheres the space for it? Wouldn't it require a shitton of extra HD space?

It only stores changes. But yes, the space requirements might be large. Luckily, you can store the backup data on a separate drive.

While were at it why dont we just say that Time Machine is a ripoff of BackupPC on Linux?

The thing with anything in the business world is that if your competitor has a neat feature in his product, you are going to try and copy it in the next revision of yours.

The word ripoff's negetative connotations are not always warranted. Whilist innovation is good, when one company comes up with a innovation, it is actually beneficial for consumers that other companies both copy and/or improve on the functionality of that product and incorporate it into their own. This however, does work against the incentive for innovation. which is why we have patent laws and some such. The ideal or at least legal balance between dissemination of ideas and plagarism is beyond my layman knowledge, however.

mmar wrote:It's nice how Apple is bashing MS on copying features when a major feature they are presenting (Time machine) is a obvious ripoff of tech which existed in Windows, depending on your point of view, since Windows ME. Apple, the hypocrit PR specialists.

Being a direct ripoff, I would expect they implemented it on the bit level (so only changes are stored), so that the space requirements are relativly modest for a decent amount of snapshots.

ROFL- time machine is a copy of System Restore? No freakin' way.

Time Machine is a copy of the thing in Vista? That feature was announced EIGHT DAYS AGO. No way Apple copied it- and furthermore, Time Machine is far more in depth.

For Vista:

That is, a given document may show 5 previous versions but it will not show any "versions" older than the latest official backup.

Actualy, since the Vista implementation is just a more user-friendly implementation of a Win2003 tech, which itself is just a more generalised implementation of system restore, by Apple's standards its copying.

mmar wrote:Actualy, since the Vista implementation is just a more user-friendly implementation of a Win2003 tech, which itself is just a more generalised implementation of system restore, by Apple's standards its copying.

Version control is not a new concept. Integrating it into the operating system and/or file system is not a new concept. Apple implemented that concept; they didn't steal it from Microsoft. You'd have more credibility saying that they "ripped it off" from the Subversion group.

Of course, but I was speaking in the context of Apple claiming that Windows ripped off/copied functionality and/or concepts found in OSX, while they themselves are implementing features found in existing versions of Windows (and I'm not claiming that those features/concepts originated on Windows).

I'm simply saying that they should shut up and follow the concept of "don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house".

mmar wrote:Of course, but I was speaking in the context of Apple claiming that Windows ripped off/copied functionality and/or concepts found in OSX, while they themselves are implementing features found in existing versions of Windows (and I'm not claiming that those features/concepts originated on Windows).

I'm simply saying that they should shut up and follow the concept of "don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house".

I strongly disagree in this case. Apple is implementing a feature that many third parties have already added on to Apple's OS, and that they should have added long ago. Their implementation is radically different in how the user operates it, and is full backup software backing up every file on the computer to an external drive if needed, not just system restore. It's not a ripoff.

Microsoft, on the other hand, is ripping off Apple's features to the point of copying the interface in some parts.

One example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QdGt3ix ... ws%20vista

[troll] Looking Glass is much more cooler[/troll]
on the other hand, are virtual desktop really a new feature on OsX? i thought that was standard ages ago.....

Edit: for an apple computer i mean