Into a hole.

It isn't.

Apple has all the money, they can afford to do both things and it's weird they haven't. Having a meaningful management system is a huge part of selling computers, to corporate and educational users. Back before all computers were on an IP network, when they didn't have security beyond antivirus, you could get away with not offering management.

Apple has a solid alternative to Windows for business use, if only they offered a full suite. They could be digging into that market. That's what NeXTStep really was supposed to be, a Macintosh-ish system for business use. Their prices were even more hallucinatory than Apple's at the time, which prevented any real adoption more than any lack of software, especially since they had very good compatibility with other environments (including, for example, a Netware client.) It's quite confusing what made them think they could get those kinds of dollars for a 68k when the PC was just getting fast. We can't ask Jobs now, though.

I am in favor of Microsoft releasing Linux distributions, donating code for Linux distributions and for the Linux kernel, supporting Linux on their cloud infrastructure, et cetera. I am not in favor of anything which involves Redhat even peripherally as long as they (IBM, really) continue to mount an attack on the GPL by continuously violating the clause about additional restrictions not being allowed, hiding behind the corrupt US court system, and exploiting the fact that approximately no one can afford to sue IBM.

To return to my point, I remain unsurprised.

The issue is that I use Microsoft software every work day, and it is shit all day every time.

cron daemons still exist. Some of them are fairly fancy. I am running the default one for debian (as in, I installed "cron") and even that conveniently creates cron.{daily,hourly,monthly,weekly,yearly} where I can just dump scripts instead of editing crontab, if one will suit anyway. And then there's also at.

That's /etc/boot.d

Windows 8 was the single biggest change in all of Microsoft UI history, and even then they didn't actually change any of the most important parts. All windowing operations are still based on IBM CUA and... work like dogshit.

Every single Windows version has the same problem, some things just won't multitask. If you try to drag an Edge window while the browser is opening a tab, you can't. That's because the application is responsible for that. On Unix systems this isn't a thing because the Window Manager is responsible.

What's especially frustrating about this is that Windows actually has some cool UI features like detecting when you're connecting to some displays you've connected to before, and arranging them logically the way you had them arranged before. But then the process fails as Windows forgets which windows were maximized, or the application doesn't restore to the same size window it had before because of some weird interaction. So Windows has this awesome feature... which doesn't actually work. I still have to rearrange my windows every time because they do actually do it, but they do it incorrectly.

But with that said Windows has never, ever, EVER changed the basic way Window management has functioned since Windows 3.0. It is still basically the same, the only significant difference is where minimized windows go.

I did a google search, then I wanted to do another related search, google figured out accurately what I wanted on the second one based on the first, and offered as a suggestion exactly the search I had in mind. Could they do this without AI? Maybe, they were doing it before, but rarely did it actually give the suggestion I wanted. I might not have thought anything of it but there were interface appearance changes at the same time.

Problem is, lawmakers are too often on the teat. A proper response to this would be to not only force them to restore literally all of these domains but also allow people to use them for commercial use after this, just to remind Google that they don't run the world.

Makes me think of Boxee and why I never used it.

That was the last great windows, for windows values of great. I refuse to go find out, but I bet someone has even figured out how to get it past the 2GB limit and implement USB.

Seems like it would be an improvement.

Every wavelength of IR is attenuated by cloud cover to some degree, some more strongly than others. Absorption is also not the only issue.

What? You absolutely had to authenticate to administer a Netware server, unless you did it from the console in the early days. That is logging in. If you don't think so, then neither is passwordless rsh, or ssh with a key and no password.

Most of the basic behavior of the UI used in Windows was inherited from IBM CUA, and is also shared by all of the commonest DEs for Linux. They also all have an analogue of the start menu. It's unclear what you're talking about here.

Back when the OS MacOS is now based on was created, there was no distinction between workstation and server OSes. Therefore MacOS X not being intended as a server OS is a downgrade from the prior product... like many of the changes Apple made, especially the UI ones.

They chose the under-tested alpha version of an OS from a vendor who is running an attack on the GPL. What could possibly be less surprising than that? You need to recalibrate your surprise-o-meter.