“The most tantalising net rumour burning up the wires this week is the one about the Apple iBrowser. Heard it? It goes like this. Apple co-opts the Mozilla code base for a skunkworks native OS X browser that’s both super fast and grannie-friendly. A Galeon for OS X. “iBrowser” thus completes the set of consumer software apps gradually introduced with iTunes, iPhoto and iMovie, which are being advertised under the slogan ‘everything’s easier on a Mac’.” Read the article at TheRegister. In other browser news, Opera 6.03 for Windows and Opera 6.01 for Linux were released today.
Apple ‘iBrowser’ Insurgency Denied by AOL Techs
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSAlert.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I don’t know if I like the iBrowse concept. I would like to see Apple get interested in Chimera, maybe help out the developers, and make it the default browser for OS X.
Despite popular belief, Chimera is slow. At least it is on the G4 Cube 450 Mhz I got here.
Mozilla itself is FASTER than Chimera in rendering text. The fact that I can’t turn off antialias on Chimera really bothers me, and it is the reason that makes Chimera many times slower.
Go here:
http://www.osnews.com/article.php?kind=News&offset=0&rows=50
and get your mouse fast-ish on top of the links. Not all the links are getting hovered and applied the CSS. Mozilla can apply CSS to all the mouseovers you do, no matter how fast or slow you do it. Chimera can’t do it, because of its antialias. Konqueror is as slow when antialias is on, on my dual Celeron 533.
Also, there is another reason why Apple should get its own browser and not collaborate on Chimera: control. That would be the reason that would leave IE behind anyway. Better do it right this time.
As a user and friend of the open source movement, I would much prefer them to use Chimera. Putting myself in an… exec position at Apple, I would prefer to have absolute control over the browser. So, even if they don’t go with Chimera, I am just fine with it, it even makes business sense.
Chimera is what they are talking about becoming iBrowser, did you read The Reg’s editorial?
Besides
Do we need it?
NO
Will it Create more hassle than it’s worth?
YES
Is Jobs stupid?
NO
Is it going to happen?
No
This is just another way Apple can make sure to keep MS making office and other software for OS X.
We all know that the Mac platform will need to have MS Office for a long time to come. Also having a .Net client will be nice. Basically support from MS is a must in todays market.
But should/Would apple ever want to be totally at the whim of MS, NO
So best bet for apple is to keep some interest in Mozilla/Chimera, OpenOffice, and some other open source projects. Make sure these projects work well on OS X. Then when MS tries to screw with the Mac platform all Apple has to do is point out that they arn’t the only game in town, and the other options are a little cheaper.
The result, Apple gets to keep MS support, and doesn’t have to be totally subserviant to them.
>>Despite popular belief, Chimera is slow.<<
I don’t know Eugenia… the Mac faithful might beg to differ. I personally have the following on my G3 iMac and my TiBook G4:
Mozilla 1.0.0 RC3
Netscape 7.0 PR1
Chimera 0.2.7
I have been using all 3 on your website as well as others. Now of course they’re all using the same browsing engine ‘Gecko’, so which ever one wins I win! But I have found Chimera to be slightly faster than the other 2. But I will admit that there are some issues with Chimera that the other 2 do not possess. I noticed yesterday on one of Netscape’s websites that Chimera does not like scrolling text and sorta freezes itself until you render something else. I think someone already reported that bug to Mozdev, but I haven’t looked to be certain.
All of your other points I agree with totally!
This was actually the most interesting part of The Reg article:
Are there plans for MS to do a Mac .NET client? god i would love to write a DB front end in Delphi.NET and deploy to OS X. That would be super
A Delphi.NET program was written at BorCon last week that automatically deployed to a PocketPC with no change in code, and ran on Windows.
Have Java on the back end, a .NET client running on the front-end. And Asta middleware ( http://www.astatech.com ) or Borland’s DataSnap binding stuff
Alex
Eugenia Chimera 0.2.8 just was released and it seems much faster than the 0.2.7 version. I am running it on a 933mhz powerMac so that could help, but still snappier than Mozilla 1.0rc3.
http://www.versiontracker.com/moreinfo.fcgi?id=14326&db=macosx
Sean
If it’s true, I hope that ‘iBrowser’ is only a working title. I mean look at the other ‘i’ applications, they’re not named literally.
iPhotoEditingSoftware
iVideoEditor
iProgramForBurningAndListeningToMusic
but instead are named for the ‘sense’ of what they’re for.
‘iBrowser’ has about as much appeal as a wet sponge. I’d be really surprised if the marketing hotshots at Apple would actually consider that as a name.
That said, there is merit in the idea of Apple including a full featured browser in their OS so that they can ensure consistency across systems … but then again I agree with MS bundling IE in windows too.
What name would you suggest?
iWeb? Doesn’t sound much better for me
iInternet, iSurfe, iNet? But I don’t think, that the name is important, if this is going to be a good apple-like software.
“List makers” never remember to include iDVD. Is there a cospiracy afoot or what?
iBrowse
iSurf and iWeb would be good as well!
Thanks for the tip! I am so glad he added the auto-complete. There was debate of which way they were going to go. And though I am not the biggest fan of IE, I can say that was one feature I liked (other than the Download Manager)!
CattBeMac, you beat me to it
I like “iBrowse” myself … as in “Raising iBrowse” 
[tongue in cheek]
Just hope that if/when Apple ever comes out with its own browser, it doesn’t listen to some overpaid marketdroid and name it something completely bizarre, yet techno-sounding, like “Athlon” or “Pentium” or “Duron” or “Celeron” (you get my drift
[/tongue]
Of all things to worry about, the name should be the last thing on the list. Howzabout functionality, W3 conformity, speed, rendering quality, etc., etc.
Have you tried the Chimera Chamelion yet? It’s a eye candy tool to spiff up Chimera:
http://homepage.mac.com/slitchdesign/index.html
ChimerIcon:
http://lcms.queens.org/chimericon/
note: at the moment the site seems to be down, so you’ll have to wait. I downloaded a few days ago and its a theme editor type of tool built in AppleScript Studio as an application that allows you to change Chimera/Navigator’s icons and splash screen. ChimerIcon comes bundled with a small set of icon themes. Themes that are created, either by you or downloaded, can be easily placed into one of two folders for use by ChimerIcon.
enjoy…
>>Of all things to worry about, the name should be the last thing on the list. Howzabout functionality, W3 conformity, speed, rendering quality, etc., etc.<<
Couldn’t agree with ya more!
A commercial desktop environment that doesn’t even have its own web browser? In the 21st century? That’s pathetic!
Buy, I’m glad that I don’t have to put up with Dark Ages crap like that. Got no shortage of good browsers on my UNIX systems…
A browser, from the start. No downloads, no hassle, no “special skinnable interface with our own widgets and shit”. MacOS X needs a native browser, written for the native APIs, working exactly like the other applications does in MacOS X, following the style guides to the letter. But most importantly straight out of the box, there on boot, never a care in the world. That is the idea of the iMac after all.
Let Microsoft bundle all they want in Windows, and the same with Apple. It makes them better. If you want to fiddle around and change everything and have a dependancy hell, Linux is there for you to play with.
Myself, I rather see FreeBSD/KDE packaged and sold with computers. That would be interesting. That is if X coulde be exchanged for something much better and less dated.
>>A commercial desktop environment that doesn’t even have its own web browser? In the 21st century? That’s pathetic!<<
I must that special person… I have 6 browsers installed on my Macs, it doesn’t seem to be any shortage here!
>>Buy, I’m glad that I don’t have to put up with Dark Ages crap like that. Got no shortage of good browsers on my UNIX systems…<<
And what browsers might they be?
Netscape, HotJava, Lynx and etc…
Are you trying to spread FUD again?!
Poor jealous fools! Poor hypocrites who act sooooo smug when they’re marketeering, but who suffer from penis envy in private. Life is good when you build your GUI on top of X, not just tack the letter “X” into the name and wish like fools.
So you want your OS to be just like Windows, right? Well that can be solved!
Speed, you have a big problem, I suggest that you seek help.
Life can be a lot better if you shed your hatred-be it hatred for a computer company or anything.
Really, I am serious, get some counseling.
You say you run Solaris and Linux, correct? What’s the default, built in browser in those OS’s? Oh, that would be Netscape! What’s the default browser in OS X right now. That would be Internet Explorer. None of them have the browsers integrated into the GUI (like the *wonderful* Windows does). Sounds like either they all have built in browsers, or none of them have built in browsers…depending on what version of “built-in” you have in mind. Either way, your OS’s comes up on the same side of the browser equation. Personally, I prefer being able to plug in whatever browser I wish without having to have the OS default browser running around in the background.
I’ve been using Mozilla since right before RC1, and haven’t looked back since. That’s on all the OS’s I run on–OS X and Windows included.
Nobody remember IBrowse on the Amiga?
It was rather nice at the time…
Eugenia…have you tried the View -> Smooth Text option? Kinda makes Chimera faster…
“The fact that I can’t turn off antialias on Chimera really bothers me, and it is the reason that makes Chimera many times slower. ”
Go to menu, under: view/smoothtext
You can toggle between Carbon/Os9style AA or Cocoa/Quartz style AA. Definetely the best browser on my machine.
“That is if X coulde be exchanged for something much better and less dated.”
Okay, for one, there are many different implimentations of X11. There have also been several versions of the X11 specification. Just saying that X is outdated, that X is slow, or any of the other popular beliefs flying around has no basis. If you are going to say X11 is bad, then get specific.
XFree86 is not dated. Version 4 is a total rewrite on the X11R6 specification. X11 is not slow, it is not a memory hog, and it is not obsolete. I wish people would do thier homework before making claims like this. Unless you can actually understand the configuration of XFree86, don’t try to make grand cosmic claims about the infiority of it. The only problem with XFree86, is the lack of good drivers from the card companies. I think nVidia is one of the only companies attempting to provide drivers.
why should apple go to the trouble of building from scratch a new browser? i say they take a quality gecko based browser, and have a nice little mac engineer team build on that, make it the offficial browser, and be happy.
“None of them have the browsers integrated into the GUI (like the *wonderful* Windows does)”
if it is so wonderful? why won’t it let me get rid of programs that i DON’T need and DON’T want on MY system? not to start a flame, but, while thier are some upsides to “integrated” software, no matter, the user should always be able to install and uninstall programs as they see fit.
I was being sarcastic about how wonderful the integrated browser in Windows is. I don’t like it either, as I stated later on in that post.
“Poor jealous fools! Poor hypocrites who act sooooo smug when they’re marketeering, but who suffer from penis envy in private.”
Looks like somebody has just entered puberty. I’m glad I’m not one of your parents.
Actually CattBeMac, I have the following browsers installed on my Unix system:
– Mozilla 1.0RC3
– Galeon 1.2.3 (mozilla-based)
– Konqueror 3.0 (KHTML rendering engine)
– Dillo (from-scratch, very fast, very simple)
– Netscape 7.0 preview 1
– Netscape 6.2.2
– Netscape 4.78
– Opera 6.0
All are great browsers for what they do. What they do covers all of what I need. The browsers available to Linux/Unix users are top-notch. I’d even argue second to none.
Oh, and sure I can get Links, lynx, w3m, Amaya, HotJava or other browsers, I don’t have a need for these…
With such great options how can the original post be considered FUD?
I don’t think Catt was commenting on a derth in browsers on Unix-like platforms, he was criticizing Speed implying that they were magically integrated, in contrast to OS X. Being as Speed’s original post was a flame bait message about how OS X was a last century OS without an integrated browser, unlike his UNIX platform. Most of the browsers you listed are available for non Unix-like platforms as well though.
>>With such great options how can the original post be considered FUD?<<
Speed is making it sound like that the Mac has no choice in the browser market, like you I have the following:
– Mozilla 1.0RC3
– Netscape 7.0 preview 1
– Netscape 6.2.2
– Netscape 4.78
– Opera 5.0
– OmniWeb 4.1
– Chimera 0.2.8
– Internet Explorer 5.1
– iCab 2.7
Actually I brought up HotJava as sort of a joke (no pun intended torwards Sun). They have ceased development on that unfortunately, but of course Netscape is the default browser for Solaris these days and we use it quite extensively for our work!
Hey, you forgot CyberDog. ;D
I’ve tried using the HotJava browser. It was never especially fast at anything. Everytime there was a new Java release, with massive speed improvements usually, I would try it again. The only thing I really like about it was watching each of the socket connection threads showing their progress bars independantly.
You gotta point… and he was a good ole dog too!
Hank,
to bad Sun didn’t keep it around. We still have it installed on our Sun boxes, but we’re still using Solaris 7 as well, but we plan to push to Solaris 8 very soon!
Whoops, sorry, I mis-read your the point of your post. All of these nice browsers are great, eh?
As for OS-level integration, IE never seemed to offer me much when browsing local files. Oh wait a minute, it made explorer _way_ less stable for a few years, not to mention that it really slowed down local file management, so yeah, guess that wasn’t the best idea…
For the non techie, average user, typical Mac user, do you think they care what broswer is on thier computer? For this kind of person, they’ll fire up AOL and use whatever browser AOL gives them, and lately it looks like Netscape. I don’t think it’s important that Apple have their own default web browser that ships with every Mac and is there out of the box. Simple minded people will just use what’s there and stick with it, 80+ % of the time it’s an AOL web broswer and I got that 80+ figure from a friend who hosts a number of web sites.
I guess some people here are debating on which browser is better, and that’s fine because we all know what we’re doing and we are able to pick and choose what browser we want to use. My point is Apple needs to get rid of all traces of IE, first and foremost. After that, it doesn’t matter to me what browser is pre-installed on a Mac. If they want to roll out their own browser good for them, I wish them all the best, just don’t integrate it into the OS e.g: turn Finder into a web browser.
>>If they want to roll out their own browser good for them, I wish them all the best, just don’t integrate it into the OS e.g: turn Finder into a web browser.<<
TLy, I agree with you, I don’t want the Finder turned into anything other than what it is!
“I don’t want the Finder turned into anything other than what it is!”
Why? It works great in Windows, and it makes the browser faster than a mofo!
Great, but what does this have to do with AOL? If you’re going to mention AOL in the subject line, shouldn’t you mention it in the body?
Opera is the best browser for Linux, like it or not. I’m downloading 6.01, I’m sure its great, and hopefully one annoying bug i encountered would be fixed.
But why I choosed Opera? At the time Opera 5 for Linux came out, there was these choices for me
– Netscape Communicator 4.7, slow, unstable, buggy, the only app using Lesstif.
– Mozilla/ Netscape 6, slow and buggy. Now, they are faster, less buggy, but still takes a long time to load.
– Galeon – buggy and unstable, not sure whether it was fast in the first place. Now it is so much more matured and stable
– Konqueror, It is was buggy, couldn’t support JavaScript, DOM blah blah blah, most web pages won’t work, and slow. Now its different.
But why won’t I change to another browser now? Since Opera locks you in. Once you get used to its interface, its features and so on, its next to impossible using another browser.
—-
You say you run Solaris and Linux, correct? What’s the default, built in browser in those OS’s? Oh, that would be Netscape! What’s the default browser in OS X right now. That would be Internet Explorer. None of them have the browsers integrated into the GUI (like the *wonderful* Windows does). Sounds like either they all have built in browsers, or none of them have built in browsers…depending on what version of “built-in” you have in mind. Either way, your OS’s comes up on the same side of the browser equation. Personally, I prefer being able to plug in whatever browser I wish without having to have the OS default browser running around in the background.
I don’t know. If you use KDE, you use KHTML, that’s the same as IE’s DLLs. Many applications in kde.com/apps and stuff like KOffice depends on it…
As for GNOME, I really don’t know what are they using. Some say they should use GtkHtml, some say they should link with standard Mozilla packages, some say they should fork on Gecko. But nontheless, you need Mozilla to use standard GNOME 1.4, and GNOME 2.0 Betas…
But really, how does having a bunch on DLLs that an average oe wouldn’t notice help Microsoft keep its market share? That’s where the states proposal really lacks.
XFree86 is not dated. Version 4 is a total rewrite on the X11R6 specification. X11 is not slow, it is not a memory hog, and it is not obsolete. I wish people would do thier homework before making claims like this. Unless you can actually understand the configuration of XFree86, don’t try to make grand cosmic claims about the infiority of it. The only problem with XFree86, is the lack of good drivers from the card companies. I think nVidia is one of the only companies attempting to provide drivers.
Okay, weakness in the standard XFree86 installation
– XLibs lacks a lot of widgets. this causes people to make their own incompatible widgets. Wonder why GIMP looks different than Netscape 4.x on your KDE desktop? Because they are all using different toolkits extending XLib’s widgets.
– Bitmap based, so its a bad idea when you have a high resolution. Speaking of resolutions, when one person using XFree86 changes the resolution, everyone else changes resolution.
– No support for antialiasing and alpha transparency. A totally bad idea if you are planing to make a pretty UI, with readable text. There are hacks for it, like QFonts, Pango etc., but then one day, an user could be running like 4-10 font servers at the same time, each doing the exact same thing.
– Slow, compare XFree86 with OS X or Windows NT. It fails by comparison. Especially when there are many windows open.
As another poster mentioned – there was (and still is, although I don’t think its been updated for some time) an Amiga web browser called iBrowse. The name is just a little _too_ similar if you ask me.
Besides which, “iBrowse” is actually quite a clever pun…. iBrowser just sounds clumsy
Does anyone of you remember one of the forst web browsers on Amiga? Its name was “IBrowse”. Do a google on “Amiga” and “ibrowse” and ooh and aah at all the hits…
naming the browser won’t be a problem for apple. i’m sure they’ve got bunches of people sitting around doing nothing but think of names
what i’d really like them do to is: be different. instead of including only ie OR iapplicationforsurfingtheweb they should include both. kewl would be ie and mozilla. or something like that. let the user decide!
– Slow, compare XFree86 with OS X or Windows NT. It fails by comparison. Especially when there are many windows open.
I have to disagree. XFree86 flies even on Trident video cards with 1 meg of video RAM, whereas my iMac G4 700 with a GF2 MX took some getting use to. Scrolling PDF files (use to be fine when viewed on a windows machine) and resizing windows. Yeah yeah, someone’s gonna say Quartz extreme will fix that. But it didn’t take XFree86 hardware acceleration to draw fast!
I will have to take exception to the X Window = slow statement as well. I generally don’t have a problem with speed either. I’ve never written a massive program in any windowing environment. I’ve written small programs, and modified code from large programs, written in Java, MFC, Motif, VB and Cocoa. I find GUI programming ease (in order of ease of use) with standard development environments:
Cocoa
Java
VB
MFT
Motif
However, I think that the X Window font rendering leaves a bit to be desired. However, you can’t beat X Window for running GUI applications on remote machines.
“iBrowser” is far too closer name to the browser in the AmigaOS4 default install!
I wonder if “iBrowser” is too close to iBrowse for iBrowses comfort?
However, I think that the X Window font rendering leaves a bit to be desired. However, you can’t beat X Window for running GUI applications on remote machines.
Exactly, X was meant for remote applications, and its VERY nice when doing that job. But on the local machine, even though it may not SEEM slow on your 2Ghz, 512Meg RAM box, i think it wastes many CPU cycles. Yes, DRM fixes some of that, but you cannot use DRM with all video cards, nor all architectures. While i think that X has done a lot for bringing in new users to linux based operating systems, I do think that finding a replacement, made for desktop purposes, wouldnt be such a bad idea.
“iCruiser”
If I remember properly, wasn’t Chimera being ported to Cocoa (not just the UI, but wrapping Gecko in a Cocoa framework), starting with 0.2.x series? I believe that’s why you can choose between the Carbon and Quartz AA options. (Perhaps it was just the display that is being rendered in Quartz, and not a Cocoa framework. However, a framework would be awesome, which would allow us to embed Gecko in any Cocoa (and conceivably Java) app.) Just a thought and/or comment.
— Rob
whatever happened to Q bati? I haven’t heard about that mac gecko project in a while
The only thing XFree86 is good for is remote access
>>The only thing XFree86 is good for is remote access :-)<<
I agree!
>>The only thing XFree86 is good for is remote access :-)<<
I agree!
Finally, in the weeks I have been here, somebody agreed with me! I want to hold a party, anybody interested?
did you guys check this http://fink.sourceforge.net/news/kde.php out?
KDE now runs on OsX, as does X11.
doesn’t that mean that Konqueror runs on OsX too as far as browsers are concerned?
Also If I remember my history correctly Linux is less of a Unix than OSX isn’t it.
Aren’t OsX and Solaris more related than Linux and Solaris.
Also does anyone know what exactly is shoved up SPEED’s rear entry port.
Is he on drugs, or is he really 13?
Computer History links:
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/levenez/unix/
A VISUAL History of UNIX
This should lay to rest the Unix is not uNIX argument–Speed look around 1988 when NextStep is born from BSD (as is Solaris by the way) and Mach.
Both Mach and BSD are Unix and by extension Darwin OsX’s base.
Which is not the case for Linux–which does not in anyway lower Linux’s value.
http://www.bell-labs.com/history/unix/
A paper on Unix from some of it’s most important constituents.
http://next.z80.org/
A big NeXT information Archive
http://www.cs.ucy.ac.cy/courses/EPL422/readings/Cailliau-fra.html
A paper on the creation of the WWWEB.
Please look in the history section around 1990; for an explanation of NeXTSteps importance in the WWW.
http://www.mackido.com/History/AppleTimeline.html
a fairly comprehensive History of Apple
http://applemuseum.bott.org/sections/history.html
another comprehensive Mac history
More on Openstep:
http://homepage.mac.com/troy_stephens/OpenStep/history/content.html
Speed is in denial!
wmd: So now you’re trying to pretend that “X” is not a letter in the english alphabet? Well I hardly need help in countering such pathetic attempts at deception! I typed that “X” from my alpha keyboard — this machine has no numerical keypad. If “X” isn’t a letter, then explain what it’s doing there.
Speaking of help, I suggest that you help yourself and do something about your obsession with telling lies. If you can’t control the urge, go see a shrink.
Hank: “What’s the default, built in browser in those [Solaris and Linux]?” Oh, that would be Netscape! … None of them have the browsers integrated into the GUI (like the *wonderful* Windows does).”
Hank, it’s obvious that you don’t know what an operating system is, or the difference between OS, GUI and applications. Needless to say, your statements are inane. Makes me wonder if you have ever seen a Linux desktop.
seabass: Hmmm, you’re one of the ones acting boorish, stupidly hypercompetitive and obnoxious, and you’re claiming that I’m the 13-year-old? The irony! Get real, kid. BTW, your faulty logic is still wrong.
Thanks Ben for a more realistic list of browsers.
rajan r has it right about KDE.
Richard Fillion has good points about XFree86, but it’s not like that’s the only X server in the universe! Ah, you all do know that XFree isn’t the beginning and end of X, don’t you? Don’t you?
did you guys check this http://fink.sourceforge.net/news/kde.php out?
KDE now runs on OsX, as does X11.
doesn’t that mean that Konqueror runs on OsX too as far as browsers are concerned?
I don’t know any features KDE for Mac OS X than KDE for Linux PPC. Makes loading KDE faster, but dual booting to Linux seems easier…
Aren’t OsX and Solaris more related than Linux and Solaris.
Yeeeessss, Solaris is more related to Unix than Solaris. Hehehe.
Anyway, of all the three OS, Solaris, OS X and Linux, I would have to say Solaris is the most UNIX like (Solaris 8, IIRC, follows the UNIX 98 standard). OS X seems to least, because it’s standard graphical server isn’t X11, and by default, it is not compatible with Motif. But does it matter? Noooooooooo.
Also does anyone know what exactly is shoved up SPEED’s rear entry port.
Is he on drugs, or is he really 13?
When I reached pubertry, I wasn’t close to being like Speed.
wmd: So now you’re trying to pretend that “X” is not a letter in the english alphabet? Well I hardly need help in countering such pathetic attempts at deception! I typed that “X” from my alpha keyboard — this machine has no numerical keypad. If “X” isn’t a letter, then explain what it’s doing there.
OS X is pronounce OS 10. X is an Roman numeral. Just like Pentium III, is isn’t “triple I” but “three”.
I is one, V is five, X is ten and so on.
Hank, it’s obvious that you don’t know what an operating system is, or the difference between OS, GUI and applications. Needless to say, your statements are inane. Makes me wonder if you have ever seen a Linux desktop.
Well, as for Netscape being the default browser, it wasn’t so for the past few years in most, if not all, new distributions. Mozilla is used as a default browser in some because it is the only free browser that… works. Anyway, Netscape fails to even look like the system it is running on, no less to integrating into the system. BTW, to use GNOME (okay, standard GNOME 1.4-2.0), you need Mozilla, like it or not. You type a URL in Nautilus, Mr. Slow uses Mr. Gecko to get the web page. Galeon, GNOME’s fave browser, is Mozilla-based. KDE uses KHTML as the default HTML, XML etc. renderer. You could change it from UI, but the closest rival is KMozilla, which changes the layout of the entire KDE desktop for the worse, and causes applications to crash. Something I might not like on Windows…
seabass: Hmmm, you’re one of the ones acting boorish, stupidly hypercompetitive and obnoxious, and you’re claiming that I’m the 13-year-old? The irony! Get real, kid. BTW, your faulty logic is still wrong.
So you are twelve?
rajan r has it right about KDE.
Well, I guess I know the desktop I use most.
Richard Fillion has good points about XFree86, but it’s not like that’s the only X server in the universe! Ah, you all do know that XFree isn’t the beginning and end of X, don’t you? Don’t you?
The only other X I have tried was the one of Solaris, which is a 1 minute brush :-). XFree86 is argubly the most used X implementation, it is quite common having resentment towards XFree86 because of X11, nothing else. To me, the XFree86 developers are one of the best developers out there, who else can take a crappy standard and make it into something at least usable?
and now, I shall see the URLs seabass posted.
When I wrote the default solaris browser being Netscape, I wrote that staring at a brand new Solaris 8 box, with the generic “internet browser” coming up as Netscape. The last time I built a FreeBSD/Linux box was a few years ago, back before I bought BeOS or my cube. Maybe my info on Linux was a bit dated. My statement is still true–neither Linux nor Solaris has an *integrated* browser any differently than OS X does. Nice of speed to miss the forest for the trees again…
Hey “Rajan r”
I wasn’t asking what was more of a unix, I was telling you it was.
Read the links at the bottom of my last comment.
As I’ve said before this is not a real debatable topic; it either is or isn’t.
Again start looking at the Unix history timeline starting in 1988.
The DATA is there, this isn’t like choosing between gnome and KDE; it’s not subjective.
(although everyone wants it to be.)
Worrying about osx not using X11 brings us into the questions of wether UNIX is even an OS since it’s Parts can be used independently of each other and exchanged and configured differently.
The question then becomes What is an OS?
Is it the Kernel and it’s services?
Is it the UI?
is it the GUI?
is it the filesystem?
is it the windowing manager?
is it the sum of these parts?
in the same veine:
what is Unix?
I think this helps to answer that question:
http://www.bell-labs.com/history/unix/tutorial.html
read it read it read it read it.
Yeeeessss, Solaris is more related to Unix than Solaris. Hehehe…
Ah…Solaris is a flavor of UNIX. It uses real UNIX code, and it has passed the certification tests.
OS X is pronounce OS 10. X is an Roman numeral. Just like Pentium III, is isn’t “triple I” but “three”.
I is one, V is five, X is ten and so on.
rajan r, you’ve been one of the more mature people here, but now you’re playing the fool. What happened? Do you really think it’s called “the Ten Window System? Don’t you know how it got its name?
Well, as for Netscape being the default browser…
You’re ignoring a fundamental error in the original claim. Netscape is an application. It is there for the user, not the operating system. So while your points are valid, they are off-course.
The only other X I have tried was the one of Solaris, which is a 1 minute brush :-). XFree86 is argubly the most used X implementation, it is quite common having resentment towards XFree86 because of X11, nothing else. To me, the XFree86 developers are one of the best developers out there, who else can take a crappy standard and make it into something at least usable?
For someone with so little admitted experience with X, you sure are jumping to conclusions! Once more I’m disappointed in your departure from sane thinking. The name-calling and lack of any supportive evidence is par for the course for Apple’s sales crew, but I know you can do better.
Worrying about osx not using X11 brings us into the questions of wether UNIX is even an OS since it’s Parts can be used independently of each other and exchanged and configured differently.
Dream on. You can claim that every OS that’s better than Darwin isn’t an OS, but 1.) you would be wrong, and 2.) they would still be better.
The question then becomes What is an OS?
Is it the Kernel and it’s services? <— This one.
Is it the UI?
is it the GUI?
is it the filesystem?
is it the windowing manager?
is it the sum of these parts?
in the same veine [sic]:
what is Unix?
The authoritative source is the Open Group. They have a webpage that’s entitled “what is UNIX?” that answers the question:
http://www.unix-systems.org/what_is_unix.html
I’ve noticed that some people don’t like the authoritative answer, and try to create alternate realities based on their own lies. The AT&T site provides some good supplementary information, but the authoritative document above is the final word. Read it, read it, read it.
I wasn’t asking what was more of a unix, I was telling you it was.
And apparently, I was talking to myself
Ah…Solaris is a flavor of UNIX. It uses real UNIX code, and it has passed the certification tests.
I know, but just read the quote right above that comment.
rajan r, you’ve been one of the more mature people here, but now you’re playing the fool. What happened? Do you really think it’s called “the Ten Window System? Don’t you know how it got its name?
If you are talking about X Window System, you are right, it is X Window SYstem. But if you are talking about Mac OS X, it is Mac OS 10. And because X isn’t a numeral in the versioning system we use today, it isn’t X.1.4, but OS X 10.1.4. It’s kinda confusing, but you would get it one day.
Besides, I’m 16, I’m very sure there are people more matured than me….
You’re ignoring a fundamental error in the original claim. Netscape is an application. It is there for the user, not the operating system. So while your points are valid, they are off-course.
It was made in comparison of Netscape and bundled browsers in desktop enviroments in UNIX. Two of the three most popular DEs uses a browser.
For someone with so little admitted experience with X, you sure are jumping to conclusions! Once more I’m disappointed in your departure from sane thinking. The name-calling and lack of any supportive evidence is par for the course for Apple’s sales crew, but I know you can do better.
I do use XFree86 daily, (as KDE depends on it). So maybe it is XFree86 that sucks or just X11. It turns out to be X11, cause XFree86 is just an implementation of X11. X11’s xlibs for example lacks the amount of widgets available for other TKs. If it had widgets, for example, TKs like Qt and GTK+ and Motif could wrap their APIs around xlib and there wouldn’t be inconsitency. Another example is XFonts. It doesn’t support Unicode, it doesn’t have any support for anti aliasing built it, and worst of all, it doesn’t accept font names with capital letters (for example, Helvetica is bad, helvetica is good). And I can give example after example…
PS: I have briefly read the UNIX 98 standard, and Linux and Mac OS X isn’t close to being qualified enough to hold the “UNIX” trademark. Though Mac OS X could claim, in adevrtisement, that the OS is based on UNIX, as Darwin was built off BSD, which was built off the original AT&T UNIX code.
PS2: How did the dicusssion of iBrowser and Opera turned into a UNIX discussion?
Linux (I’m only using Linux as an example cause its the OS I know best) doesn’t have any default browser, true. It doesn’t have a default desktop too, why not OS X copy that? KDE and GNOME, the closest you’ve got to a desktop on Linux, both require some sort of browser. GNOME uses Mozilla mainly (especially if you want to use the default file browser), while KDE places KHTML as default. Sure, you can take things out of Linux, you can take out any component (something you can do in Mac OS anyway, without closing yourself from Apple’s support) from Linux, but normally, that break applications. Plus, by not having standards, the Linux desktop is so fragmented. So, are you wishing that Windows and Mac OS become like Linux? To me, Linux is perfect cause I only have what I want, and everything else is out, so it is so much more faster. But I doubt this would be useful for the Average Joe…
I know, but just read the quote right above that comment.
You mean the nonsensical question whose premise is fallacy? It’s a loaded question — there is no answer to it. Might as well ask how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
If you are talking about X Window System…
If? There is no if! X is a letter in the alphabet. Roman numerals don’t change that fact. Trying to claim that the letter X only means “ten” just because lazy people use the letter X in lieu of the actual roman numeral (which has bars top and bottom) is not only fallacious, it’s incredibly stupid.
Besides, I’m 16, I’m very sure there are people more matured than me….
I wasn’t talking about temporal maturity. Context, context, context!
It was made in comparison of Netscape and bundled browsers in desktop enviroments in UNIX. Two of the three most popular DEs uses a browser.
Using terms like “bundled” and “desktop environments”, you’re speaking truth. The original claimant was talking ignorant trash.
I do use XFree86 daily, (as KDE depends on it). So maybe it is XFree86 that sucks or just X11. It turns out to be X11, cause XFree86 is just an implementation of X11. X11’s xlibs…
Whoa! Stop right there. What you’re doing is blaming the X server, then pointing at the X client as your proof. Can you see the fallacy in that? If you hear a crappy tune on the radio, it’s not the radio’s fault, it’s the band’s. What you’re saying is akin to claiming that radio technology in general is worthless, just because you heard one song that you didn’t like!
PS: I have briefly read the UNIX 98 standard, and Linux and Mac OS X isn’t close to being qualified enough to hold the “UNIX” trademark.
Let’s stick to the topic. Nobody is claiming that Linux has earned the UNIX name, only OSX.
Though Mac OS X could claim, in adevrtisement, that the OS is based on UNIX, as Darwin was built off BSD, which was built off the original AT&T UNIX code.
And that claim is false and misleading. OSX is not “based on” UNIX, if anything, it is based on Lites. Darwin was not “built off” BSD, it was built (in part) from FreeBSD. And while BSD included AT&T UNIX in most cases, it was not itself “built off the original AT&T UNIX code”. In fact, the vestige of BSD that was used as the basis of FreeBSD has no “AT&T UNIX code” whatsoever! It’s nothing more than a slippery slope of increasingly fallacious premeses. As a whole, it’s a big, fat lie.
I could say that because the word “woman” contains the letters “m” “a” and “n”, and because a man has a penis, that all women have a penis. And since all women have a penis, then all women only impregnate themselves. So if women only impregnate themselves, then all babies come from the same gene pool. So all people are genetically identical, and that means that we must act identically… I could go on and on, and none of it is the least bit true. Same with the Apple claims.
PS2: How did the dicusssion of iBrowser and Opera turned into a UNIX discussion?
In short, penis envy. The Mac-heads can’t find anything good to say about their own product, so they take potshots at everybody else’s.
The only thing that comes out of your worthless mouth is that everybody lies, lies, lies (well except for yourself)!
You haven’t proven anything in any of your posts other than you’re full of $h!t and blow more smoke than what’s enough in this lifetime!
Basically UNIX is something that you do not understand and cannot comprehend in your pitiful little brain, so all you do is spread FUD about to satisfy some ill-logic that only makes sense to you and your other nonsense. You have failed to prove that OS X is not UNIX. Your arguments become moot with every myth you spill of other zealotry that speaks every useless tongue you have ever spoken! Give it up, you’re only making yourself look stupid while others are enjoying your embarrassing disillusion of something you’ll never understand!
The Speed has sputtered to a halt!!!
Rajan r
yes and no
Speed you really should not try to argue in public, you jsut don’t know how to do it.
OSX, is not using just parts of BSD it’s using all of BSD except at the kernel level where it’s sharing time with the Mach microkernel which itself is a certified realtime unix extension.
God Damn man why are you so dense.
what is your basic problem with OSx anyway?
and what makes you an authority on Solaris for that mather.
Also Age means Nada, maturity in discusion comes from understanding concepts of Deductive Vs Inductive reasoning.
you either understand the difference between the two or not.
FUD is basicly inductive reasoning, which in the past where used by the likes of senator Joe McCarthey who was a fool, but made a mess; by Hitler who was a fool and made a mess; and anyone else who has attacked civilisation with inane ideas founded on inacurate; unproven; or just flawed data.
I don’t know where you get that OSX is so evil, but basicly it’s not in this world and definitly not using the data that most of us are looking at.
For you it’s not a question of growing up, because people like you never change, and rely on un-logic to make their decisions.
The question:
is OSx unix based?
the Answer is yes.
is it UNIX certified the Answer is NO.
does that not make it a UNIX?
well no; because it still is based on unix and runs unix applications with a recompile.
Is it the best unix?
only time will answer that.
CattBeMac’s post is full of nothing but venomous personal insults. Absolutely nothing in it has the least thing to do with the topic! Given the absolutely worthless content, what else can I say, aside from mentioning that it’s all lies? (I always show proof, and the proof is kinda obvious in this case, LOL!)
This last expression of frustration is proof positive that CattBeMac is in fact the one who has has sputtered to a halt!!!
I could go on for a long, long time, being armed with actual material. I invite everybody who wants to discuss operating systems, frankly and honestly, to join me. Apple’s bullies can’t harm you over the Internet; there’s no reason to be scared. You don’t have to kow tow to Big Brother. Express yourselves as you see fit!
>>Given the absolutely worthless content, what else can I say, aside from mentioning that it’s all lies?<<
All your posts regarding the Mac and OS X has been worthless content only pointing to the fact that you’re trolling. You sit here disrespect others, but can’t take what you dish out! You call yourself a gentleman (one of your claims in a previous thread), though you insult others, call people liars… actually you pretty much said the computing industry is a bunch of liars, though you offer no weight to back your accusations and/or claims.
>>This last expression of frustration is proof positive that CattBeMac is in fact the one who has has sputtered to a halt!!!<<
Actually I did sputter to a halt myself after celebrating a few friends birthdays last night and now I am at work tryng to recover (but all is well now). I do read your other posts when you’re not attacking Apple an actually have respect for your technical knowledge, but then you just throw that to the wayside with your antics when addressing the Mac platform in general. Why do you even post in the Mac threads, if all you’re doing here is flame baiting? Do you feel threatened by us Mac folks? Are you in need of attention?
>>I could go on for a long, long time, being armed with actual material. I invite everybody who wants to discuss operating systems, frankly and honestly, to join me.<<
I think you’re starting to alienate those that you have disrepected in past threads… good luck on trying to make any friends here.
My advice to you is to tone it down a notch, quit trolling and people might then take you more seriously!
Isn’t it ironic that seabass champions deductive reasoning, but uses inductive reasoning to try to make the point? LOL!
Let’s look at how the Mac-heads arrived at their ridiculous conclusions. They see OSX and UNIX mentioned together in heresay. They notice the pattern of UNIX being linked to OSX. They form a tentative theory that if a bunch of (fools) all insinuate that there’s a link, there must be one. And they arrive at their theory (assumption) that OSX is somehow UNIX.
I on the other hand started out long ago asking “what is a genuine UNIX system?” My theory was that there must be some difference between systems that carried the respected UNIX name and those that looked similar on the surface, but could not carry the coveted title. I refined this into a hypothesis that there was a single arbiter of the UNIX name, explaining why not just everybody used it indiscriminately. My observations quickly turned up that arbiter — the Open Group, traceable right back to AT&T no less! I observed that the products which openly carried the UNIX brand were recognized by the Open Group, and that the vendors of these products recognized the Open Group as the authority. Products which don’t openly carry the UNIX brand aren’t on the Open Group’s list. This confirmed my hypothesis, time and time again.
That speaks for itself.
>>Products which don’t openly carry the UNIX brand aren’t on the Open Group’s list. This confirmed my hypothesis, time and time again.<<
(as Aapje pointed out in another thread)
Platform Vendors Supporting the Single UNIX Specification:
Acer; Amdahl; Apple; AT&T GIS; Bull; Convex; Cray; Data General; Compaq; Encore; 88 Open; Fuji Xerox; Fujitsu Ossi; Hal; Hewlett-Packard; Hitachi; IBM; ICL; Matsushita; Mips ABI; Mitsubishi; Motorola; NEC; Novell/USL; Oki; Olivetti; OSF; PowerOpen; Precision RISC; Pyramid; SCO; Sequent; Sequoia; Sharp; Siemens-Nixdorf; Silicon Graphics; Sony; Sparc International; Stratus; Sun Microsystems; Tadpole; Tandem; Thompson/Cetia; Toshiba; Unisys; Wang Labs.
The Open Group has stated that there is no one UNIX system of originality due to the roots of System V (AT&T) and BSD (Sun) which merged to establish a more powerful and unified UNIX structure in which SVR4 was born. Furthermore with the initiative of pushing standards with the POSIX compliance agenda was to provide a guideline for the single UNIX specification in addressing incompatibilities while forming a true foundation. Of course there are exceptions to the rule (where BeOS was concerned) that though operating systems met POSIX compliance did not mean that they were a UNIX (or UNIX based) system. Unfortunately OS X isn’t a victim of being the exception to the rule, it has roots of BSD UNIX and BSD is one of the building blocks of the single UNIX specification.
The only argument that would make any sense would be that if a true UNIX system would be that which is the foundation of the merged System V and BSD (SVR4), but that is not the issue in which the Open Group is concerned. They are more concerned with a single UNIX specification in general, not the birth or originality of UNIX itself.
as quoted by the Open Group:
“UNIX is now no longer just the operating system product from AT&T (later, Novell), documented by the System V Interface Definition (SVID), controlled and licensed from a single point. Neither is it a collection of slightly different products from different vendors, each extended in slightly different ways. The UNIX specification has been separated from its licensed source-code product, and “UNIX” has become a single stable specification to be used to develop portable applications that run on systems conforming to the Single UNIX Specification.”
UNIX is a foundation, not a single entity… Hank stated this theory earlier, which meets the statement above!
Speed has proven that Apple possesses no trademark of UNIX, but Apple has also not tried to falsely exploit or carry the UNIX trademark. As Speed pointed out… Apple has marked OS X as ‘UNIX based’ which is not a crime nor does it conflict with the Open Group’s guidelines on the UNIX trademark, since Apple isn’t even registered and ‘UNIX based’ is not a valid or usable form of branding for registered UNIX trademark holders (which only applies to them).
In the end, if Apple ever obtains the ‘official’ trademark of UNIX, I’ll say “yeah, good for them!”, but if they don’t, I doubt I’ll lose any sleep over it… it’s no big deal to me and probably most of the people who work around UNIX professionally.
CattBeMac, I don’t know what kind of RDF dictionary you’re using, but if a “troll” is someone who knows more than you, then by all means call me a troll!
The accepted definition of a troll is a post which is designed to attract predictable responses. You obviously don’t know what I’m thinking, so your claim is just as obviously a feeble attempt to discredit me. If I was troling, I wouldn’t have bothered to go into so much detail, would I?
CattBeMac, you are a bully. You have been trying to get your way by using aggression and deceit. You refuse to allow dissenting opinions, no matter how reasonable. Since you don’t respond to reason, I’m using something that you can understand. If you don’t like it, well that’s the point. How do you like getting a taste of your own medicine?
I also have a secret weapon that you’re never likely to understand. When I open my mouth, I have already made sure that what I’m about to say will not emarrass me. That’s not to say that I’m perfect, far from it! But I don’t have to resort to falsehood in order to save face. It’s not me who is making you look bad, it’s you.
>>CattBeMac, I don’t know what kind of RDF dictionary you’re using, but if a “troll” is someone who knows more than you, then by all means call me a troll!<<
You know more based on your opinions, or based on fact?!
>>The accepted definition of a troll is a post which is designed to attract predictable responses.<<
Which you fit the definition to the tee… you just defined yourself. Furthermore, a troll is a person who scopes forums of disinterest and posts slant remarks and other FUD which has nothing to do with sharing intellectual thoughts, knowledge and/or ideas with others in a constructive discussion forum. This you have not done so. You have proven that you have no interest in anything regarding Apple or the Mac platform. But you keep coming into these forums with nothing interesting to say, but insult others, so I returned those insults back to you (though I should just turn the other cheek, but I didn’t this time).
>>You obviously don’t know what I’m thinking, so your claim is just as obviously a feeble attempt to discredit me. If I was troling, I wouldn’t have bothered to go into so much detail, would I?<<
You have repeated your silly rubbish time and time again. Don’t you read your own posts?
>>CattBeMac, you are a bully. You have been trying to get your way by using aggression and deceit. You refuse to allow dissenting opinions, no matter how reasonable. Since you don’t respond to reason, I’m using something that you can understand. If you don’t like it, well that’s the point.<<
I allow opinions if they are of reasonable nature, but using the words ‘liar’ and ‘penis’ and other insulting remarks within your opinions shows no professionalism in your sharing knowledge with others. You lost any respect from others when firing insults at them only to get them in return. If I go into a forum and start being mouthy and saying insulting things like you, I would expect it in return and I definitely deserved what was coming to me!
Face it, have a prejudice against Apple and Mac folks alike, so there really is no reason for you to be in the Mac forums to have mature discussions with others since you have a dislike for them, so why waste our time?
>>How do you like getting a taste of your own medicine?<<
Actually you have been quite entertaining, so I have enjoyed having you in the Mac forums for ‘humor’ only purposes. But why waste your time in here (Mac forums) when you could be more positive and knowledgeable in forums of your interest. Obviously we see that you have no interest here other than what your doing now ‘trolling’!
>>I also have a secret weapon that you’re never likely to understand. When I open my mouth, I have already made sure that what I’m about to say will not emarrass me. That’s not to say that I’m perfect, far from it!<<
Well all you have been doing is embarrassing yourself in here while we help you along. As you are I am not perfect (no one is) and never expect to be.
>>But I don’t have to resort to falsehood in order to save face. It’s not me who is making you look bad, it’s you.<<
I am not resorting to any falsehood. You came into the Mac forums trying to sell a story that no one was buying, so we showed you the door, but you refuse to leave. You’re only making yourself look bad by spreading useless FUD amongst people (Mac-heads as you call them) that have no interest in what you have to say!
A good indication of the trolling by speed is his incomprehensible ” arguement” the ‘X in Mac Os X is not 10 because I don’t have a numeric keyboard’ .
A good indication of the trolling by speed is his incomprehensible ” arguement” the ‘X in Mac Os X is not 10 because I don’t have a numeric keyboard’ .
There’s no doubt about it — Willem is a troll. The “‘X in Mac Os X” words are not mine, so the predictable response is my observation that Willem is lying. Hope you’re proud, kid!
You know more based on your opinions, or based on fact?!
I knew about the Open Group all along. That’s a fact.
Which you fit the definition to the tee… you just defined yourself. Furthermore, a troll is a person who scopes forums of disinterest and posts slant remarks and other FUD which has nothing to do with sharing intellectual thoughts, knowledge and/or ideas with others in a constructive discussion forum. This you have not done so. You have proven that you have no interest in anything regarding Apple or the Mac platform. But you keep coming into these forums with nothing interesting to say, but insult others, so I returned those insults back to you (though I should just turn the other cheek, but I didn’t this time).
Actually the definition that I used came from the Jargon File, an authoritative source, courtesy of DICT.org. The Jargon File is recognized by millions as the last word on technical jargon. How many people agree with your rambling definition/personal attack/allegation? One? Less?
You have repeated your silly rubbish time and time again. Don’t you read your own posts?
LOL…I know what’s in my posts because I write them! Who writes your posts for you? Mommy? ROFL!
I allow opinions if they are of reasonable nature, but using the words ‘liar’ and ‘penis’ and other insulting remarks within your opinions shows no professionalism in your sharing knowledge with others.
LOL…I’m just a visitor to this website — I’m a customer! So what exactly is your job here? What’s your boss’ name, so I can complain? You sure offend me!
You lost any respect from others when firing insults at them only to get them in return. If I go into a forum and start being mouthy and saying insulting things like you, I would expect it in return and I definitely deserved what was coming to me!
Yes, you do deserve what’s coming to you. After all, it was Anonymous, you and Hank who led with the personal attacks. Matter of fact, when I look back at your previous posts, I see you hurling insults at everybody on a pretty regular basis. You talk down at people, and use “FUD” so often that I doubt you even know what it means. And you’re pissed at me because I fought back.
Face it, have a prejudice against Apple and Mac folks alike, so there really is no reason for you to be in the Mac forums to have mature discussions with others since you have a dislike for them, so why waste our time?
“Mac forums”? Look again! It says “OSAlert”, not “Mac Forums”! Not too arrogant, are you? /sarcasm
If I dislike any “Apple and Mac folks”, it’s not because of any prejudice on my part. You have total control of whether I’m pleasant to you, or not. And as long as you make it your business to prevent me from participating in those mature discussions, your fate is sealed. Standing up to bullies is never a waste of my time!
CattBeMac, your odious territorialism has inspired me to fight fire with fire. I will continue to endeavor toward informed discussions with others, but from now on I will make it my personal business to berate you for every last bit of misinformation that you post, and to shame you for every personal transgression that you make. How do you like those apples?
BTW: Liar Penis Liar Penis Liar Penis Liar Penis Liar Penis
Boyo, I was paraphrasing your wrong headed ‘arguement’ about your ignorant posts- re mac os “x” (as in 10) .
It was a very small example of your trolling these threads,
Boyo.
Willem, will you ever stop lying? The world doesn’t revolve around Apple, BTW.
>>”Mac forums”? Look again! It says “OSAlert”, not “Mac Forums”! Not too arrogant, are you? /sarcasm<<
I am talking about the articles that are Mac specific and the threads that go with them!
>>CattBeMac, your odious territorialism has inspired me to fight fire with fire. I will continue to endeavor toward informed discussions with others, but from now on I will make it my personal business to berate you for every last bit of misinformation that you post, and to shame you for every personal transgression that you make. How do you like those apples?<<
You can threaten me all you like… but you’ll just make yourself look even more stupid for being immature! As for misinformation, you already have been giving your share in that arena as we have seen in past forums, and if chasing me on these threads keeps you entertained, then by all means go for it!
>>BTW: Liar Penis Liar Penis Liar Penis Liar Penis Liar Penis<<
Prime example of immaturity!
CattBeMac, you have no authority to tell people where they can go, and where they can’t.
I’m no shrink, but I can tell that a person who acts like a boor, pretends to be an authority figure and obsessively calls others “immature” has a personal problem. Whatever your problem is, that’s too bad. Just don’t expect me to coddle you — when you act out, I will react appropriately. If it’s not the response that you were hoping for, good. That’s the idea.