Apple: Cheer them or boo them?

[schauerlich]

How many UF'ers see Apple as the underdog helping to destroy the evil Microsoft Monopoly, and how many see them as just another proprietary empire looking at its shot at the top?

[bsharp]

They are a "proprietary empire" as you say. Personally, I think they would be worse than Microsoft (not in quality) if they had a monopoly.

[bruce89]

WebKit is nice, but the rest is irrelevent.

[cardinals_fan]

They take a decent BSD base (Darwin) and splatter a hideous and unconfigurable UI on top of it. I will NEVER use OS X.

[Ozor Mox]

I used to think that Apple were preferable to Microsoft, but I'm realising more and more that although their software is probably better, as a company they are really just as bad. You only have to look at the incredible state of lock-in they have.

Here's hoping open source operating systems are always with us!

[Chilli Bob]

I could never support that kind of vendor lock-in.

And it's hard to forgive a thing like Quicktime.

[Amstell]

Steve Jobs is a jerk. Doesn't want open source even though the Mac is a linux build. They charge way to much for their systems, yes they are good, but really. I hope to never see Mac beat Windows. Hopefully open source takes over and shows them all that greed is no match for knowledge.

Peace

[cardinals_fan]

Steve Jobs is a jerk. Doesn't want open source even though the Mac is a linux build. They charge way to much for their systems, yes they are good, but really. I hope to never see Mac beat Windows. Hopefully open source takes over and shows them all that greed is no match for knowledge.

Peace
Mac is not a 'linux build', its core system is based off of BSD. And the problem with OS X is the UI, not the core.

[SomeGuyDude]

They're an even worse proprietary build than MS is.

At least MS goes on whatever computer you want it on, if you want OSX you have to buy a computer from Apple, and if you want to upgrade the hardware? Gotta get it from Apple.

The wrangle you in and give you ZERO choice by forcing you to use Apple everything. iLife is their cute little term for removing selection.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Both, as even though apple uses open technology they hardly give anything back to the open source community.
However Apple can still be an ally in the long run, as if apple takes more of the market it could possibly help us too at least in companies wanting to invest in unix/unix like technology.
What is good for apple is good for us in the future.

[gn2]

I like the Mac Mini, its kinda cute and I want one.

[Zeotronic]

While they are the underdog presently, trying to best the corporate Godzilla that is Microsoft... if they were to destroy Microsoft and eat it's flesh, they would be worse than it was... because correct me if I'm wrong, but for the most part, don't they make you use their hardware? At least there is competition on the PC hardware field. Althought I admit, I don't think they will ever become as big as Microsoft is... they may succeed at balancing the market one day however.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Well if Apple decided to finally make their OS for non apple systems they could increase in popularity for sure...
really there is nothing stopping them from doing it except Apple wanting to lock people in.

[kamaboko]

Everyone has a choice. I chose to use Microsoft products as well as Nvidia, Intel, AMD, Seagate, Linux based OS's, etc., you get the point. No one is depriving me of anything I want. If I want an Apple product, then I'd get one. This whole "evil" empire stuff has been done to death here. Put it to rest.

[SnappyU]

If Apple manage to have monopoly, they would become what IBM was. ;)


Closeness: IBM -- Apple -- Microsoft -- FOSS

Finally someone in this thread pointed out some truth about MS and Apple, that between the two, MS is somewhat more open.

[kutjara]

I like Apple's approach to product design. The iPhone is a great product and I really enjoy my various MacBooks, MacBook Pros and whatnot, but I dislike the company intensely. I worked closely with Apple in Europe back in the 90s, and they were a company ruled by paranoia and fear. The golden rule for any project we pitched to Apple was that it had to cost less than the amount they'd need a signature from Apple US for. To put it in the words of one of Apple's senior European managers, "we don't want the guys in the States to know we're here." Now that The Steve is back in the driving seat, it seems that, if anything, the working environment has gotten even less pleasant. Jobs is apparently a martinet, whose tantrums and rages are legendary. Apple is his baby, and woe betide anyone who "thinks different."

As for Apple's attitude to its customers/partners/developers, it's pretty much thinly veiled contempt. They know they need us, but they don't like it one little bit. If they could, they'd only sell Apple products to Apple employees and then sit around all day admiring how stylish they look.

No, in my opinion, Apple is a lousy company that just happens to make some nice products. I'm perfectly happy for them to sit at a 8-9T market share, where their niche status will force them to keep making cool stuff.

[gn2]

Well if Apple decided to finally make their OS for non apple systems they could increase in popularity for sure...
really there is nothing stopping them from doing it except Apple wanting to lock people in.

Spot-on.

The only (legit) way to get the Apple OS is to buy (or use it on) an Apple.

If the OS was available separately to use on any machine Apple would stop selling hardware very quickly, unless they slashed their prices.

[master5o1]

Every person who switches from Windows to Mac should have become a Linux user. The fact that they chose mac shows Ubuntu has a whole lot further to go.

Mac OSX is a horrible system. If it was an open source UI you wouldn't a GNOME vs OSX UI or KDE vs OSX UI debate because GNOME and KDE just kick it's **** so thoroughly. The funniest thing for me is when people say they like the look of OSX, which I personally think is the Ugliest operating system apart from XP with blue theme non media center edition.

[bigbrovar]

God do i dislike apple and any thing it represents .. it is the direct opposite of what Linux and the Foss Community represents .. and from it attitudes one can see that it hates Linux more than it dislike MS .. and the reason is simple .. Linux is apples biggest competitor not MS .. MS makses wack product .. that is cliche .. but Linux is a good secured and stable platform that has taken over the web server market, the embedded market and is on its way to taken over the Desktop market .bringing more and more pple to the light from the Evil empire .. apple sees this as a big threat to its goal and as such its does everything to frustrate the effort of Linux devs .. ever wonder why itunes,safari and other mac product never had a linux port .. it would have been easier making a port for linux due to their Unix bacground .. but no there rather port it to windows while making the world feel the linux is just for geeks .. everytime there is a newer itunes /ipod firmware release .. the only thing notable is that ur ipod would nolonger sync with amarok,rythmbox and co. .. its motto of think different is a direct opposite of what would happen to u if u use an apple product ... or how can u think different when ur OS can only work on one hardware, and ur Hardware can only work on one OS ,.. when ur phone has been locked to one Service provided .. and even ring tones and snyc has to be done on one Software.. how can u think differently.. when if u buy a song from itunes u are only allowed to play it on 3 pcs .. i can go on and on..

apple products are cool no doubt but that is the catch.. the bait .. bite it and u are locked in ..
linux is not has glossy but the good thing about the foss community is that u have absolute freedom to make it as glossy as u can.. when mac users see my ubuntu and wht i have turned it into .. there marvel .. all i can do is pity them .. there are locked in

[rudihawk]

I voted them as an ally, even though they lock users into their own hardware and systems. I feel in the long run, if they grow they could start to seriously challenge Microsoft = good for everyone.

[bigbrovar]

rudihawk Re: Apple: Cheer them or boo them?
I voted them as an ally, even though they lock users into their own hardware and systems. I feel in the long run, if they grow they could start to seriously challenge Microsoft = good for everyone.

that is the missconception pple have about apple .. many see them as an ally.. yeah apple is an ally quite all right - and ally with Windows .. and toghther they can crush the Foss movements .. their closed source connection with windows is more important to them than their Unix Connection to LInux

[ZarathustraDK]

if apple-marketshare < microsoft-marketshare [
then apple = ally ]
else apple = enemy

if apple-marketshare = 10% && apple = enemy [
then linux = teh winner && duckforchairs() ]

:guitar:

[jespdj]

One of the reasons why I want to use Ubuntu is because I do not want that some big company decides what I can and cannot do with my computer.

Apple is worse then Microsoft if you're talking about controlling what users can and cannot do with Apple hardware and software. The iPhone for example is seriously locked down.

Apple makes cool stuff, but it is absolutely not a nice and friendly company.
Steve Jobs is a jerk. Doesn't want open source even though the Mac is a linux build.
Mac OS is not a Linux build, nor is it based on Linux. It is BSD (which is a Unix-like OS just like Linux, but no direct family) plus a whole bunch of proprietary stuff.

[D-EJ915]

Apple plays their "underdog" status when it's not exactly what's going on. Sure in the computer world they aren't a huge market share but their biggest revenue is from the iPod whose market they dominate.

[Perfex]

I have always regarded Apple as a good company, they put allot of effort in the design of their hardware.. it all looks very Elegant
reminds me of (Bang & Olufsen) but keeping it simple as well, their software is very much stable.

They pioneered the mp3 player and the use of it, I doubt there would be so much digital downloads and such if it were not for Apple.

[caravel]

Apple have always catered to a different market, they're not underdogs nor are they "Microsoft's heir" (I'm amazed how many voted for that). Apple are far too restrictive in terms of both hardware and software to be any serious competition to MS. In the past, graphics designers and CAD and DTP users used to swear by apple. There are still a few die hards but generally people are realising that those same apps (such as Adobe Illustrator) can run on a windows based PC just as well (and have done so for years).

[andyrue304]

IMO, apple are somethng else entirely.

They market themselves as 'Trendy', 'for designers' and even (very cleverly) market "PC users" (notice that windows or microsoft is not referenced!) as idiots. Yet they cash in on this fan boy attitude and totally overprice their systems.

As a designer, I was considering buying a mac. Designers have a tendency to want to surround themselves with pretty things in the hope that some of it would rub off in their design.

Macs are pretty. They look good at parties when you put iTunes on and make your desk look very po-mo. But in terms of ability to get your work done, there is nothing separating a mac and a PC. (unless your a biased fanboy)

You can't really compare apple and windows because apple design and make their machines + OS, where as windows is just an OS. Vista and OS X are very similar in many ways in terms of functionality. Maybe OS X is more streamlined towards running programmes (designed by? yup - apple), but that is coupled with the lock in you get vs the choice you can have on windows machines.

I'm moving to Ubuntu 8.04 in any case with my new laptop!

[public_void]

Apple are extremely good at marketing. Just take a look at their TV adverts or even the product packaging. There products are marketed are stylist fashionable products that "make you look good". I think they also try to portray themselves as the "good guys" compared to Microsoft. They have really done a brilliant job at marketing their products. Unfortunately this clever marketing attracts customers and exposes then to the lock-ins and proprietary formats. Apple are good at getting people to buy their products.

[herbster]

They're successful, they must be evil. Where's the boo-erns option?

[amazingtaters]

Well, the fact is that I think Macs are rediculously overpriced. Also, I don't really like the OSX theme. I think it's ugly. I'm not a fan of the dock either. Beyond this, I just really don't like Apple culture. It's kinda like that episode of South Park where everyone starts driving hybrid cars, and all of a sudden the nation is blanketed in smug, and finally a smug storm destroys much of the country. Most of the Mac users on campus here are smug, and to some extent I think it's rubbed off on me, because some smug Mac user will see my lappy (an Acer Aspire) and make some comment about windows, at which point I say something to the effect of "Your Mac wishes it could be my Linux distro." This type of behaviour is supported by the local Apple Store and its staff, so I'm definitely not pro Mac.

On the flip side, their hardware looks damn nice. I love my iPod. I just wish they would cut all of the BS out of apple.

[billgoldberg]

Apple the underdog? Don't make me laugh.

Just another propitiatory computer giant that wants to restrict users (drm technology in kernel) for their own profit.

I voted microsoft's heir, but they won't become much bigger than they are now (maybe 10% of the market in a few year, not bigger).

[tbrminsanity]

If Apple is the underdog it is their own fault. Apple like many now defunct companies (Commadore bing my favoirite) only made their OS for their hardware which limited the number of customers they could cater to. In the proprietary world you need to make your software available to the largest group, get it to them quickly, and make them think your the only option available. M$ did this very well in the 80s and 90s and that is why they are number one in the proprietary world. If Apple changes some things they can unseat M$ but this will take a lot of time and in the end they will just be another M$.

[kragen]

Originally I was sympathetic to their vendor lock in - after all they were the underdogs, and I think mac osx is pretty nice, probably in part because of the vendor lock in, rather than despite it...

Recently however, I've changed my mind when it comes to the iPhone. Frankly - its a fantastic piece of kit, and the UI is really nice, but the whole AT&T / O2 only thing is just... welll... crap!
Not nearly as crap as their SDK mind - If If their SDK was half decent, and I actually though I stood a good shot at being able to make and distribute some cool apps on it, I'd be the proud owner of an iPhone right now, but from the sounds of things the SDK is severely gimped. It might still be good... but its not what it could be.

Perhaps their attitude on the iPhone will change... I hope so.
At the moment the iPhone is a fantastic piece of hardware - way more impressive than most phones, but without the full features of a proper OS (i.e. you can run programs on it!), its nothing more than a gimmicky toy.

[Dixon Bainbridge]

I have always regarded Apple as a good company, they put allot of effort in the design of their hardware.. it all looks very Elegant
reminds me of (Bang & Olufsen) but keeping it simple as well, their software is very much stable.

They pioneered the mp3 player and the use of it, I doubt there would be so much digital downloads and such if it were not for Apple.

Spot on. Apple are very much like Bang and Olufsen in that B&O also produce over priced rubbish that sounds awful, and Apple do a parallel thing with computers.

They also pioneered and championed DRM, as well as getting sued by Creative for patent infrigements with the ipod, and being sued by various European states for Itunes anticompetitiveness. Jobs is the Napoleon to Ballmers Chairman Mao. I'd like to see a computing world without either.

[kutjara]

Well, the fact is that I think Macs are rediculously overpriced. Also, I don't really like the OSX theme. I think it's ugly. I'm not a fan of the dock either. Beyond this, I just really don't like Apple culture. It's kinda like that episode of South Park where everyone starts driving hybrid cars, and all of a sudden the nation is blanketed in smug, and finally a smug storm destroys much of the country. Most of the Mac users on campus here are smug, and to some extent I think it's rubbed off on me, because some smug Mac user will see my lappy (an Acer Aspire) and make some comment about windows, at which point I say something to the effect of "Your Mac wishes it could be my Linux distro." This type of behaviour is supported by the local Apple Store and its staff, so I'm definitely not pro Mac.

On the flip side, their hardware looks damn nice. I love my iPod. I just wish they would cut all of the BS out of apple.

You're right-on about Apple Store personnel. Some of them are relatively normal, but there's always a significant subset who seem to think they personally designed and made all the products they sell. They walk around with a proprietorial air, answering questions as if dispensing wisdom from Olympus, smirking smugly to themselves as they operate under the delusion that their jobs differ in some material way from similar roles at Best Buy. Or Carl's Jr.

Even better is the new store design. At my local Apple Store, they'd dispensed with the cash registers and replaced them with wandering blackshirts sporting wireless card readers. I assume this is supposed to fool customers into believing they won't have to wait in line to make a purchase. It's true, they won't. Instead, they'll have to hunt around the store, looking for someone among the crowds of black t-shirted wannabes who actually works for Apple.

Of course the "cash-registerless" system only works if you're paying with a credit card. If you want to pay cash, you have to traipse over to the "Genius Bar," where there's a cash drawer hidden behind the inevitable throng of real housewives of Orange County, for whom even an iPod is too complicated to figure out unaided . If you want a bag to put your purchase in, the sales person disappears to another corner of the store for five minutes, followed by a cloud of supplicants desperate to make their own purchases. So now, an activity that used to be completed in one place requires a hunting-expedition coupled with a mini-marathon. I guess that's Apple's idea of thinking different.

And what's with the blue-shirted "concierge" schtick? I mean, it's a shop, not a frickin' hotel. And they're not even concierges. Real concierges know stuff, like where to get the best steak or how to get tickets to the hottest shows. In Apple Stores, the concierges seem only to have been trained how to point at an employee in a black shirt. Admittedly, this can be useful when the store is full of customers also wearing black shirts, but it's hardly an indispensible skill.

No wonder Apple products cost so much: they're supporting a huge staff of clueless concierges and smug salespeople in each of their stores. Not to mention all the "geniuses."

[aysiu]

In the proprietary world you need to make your software available to the largest group, get it to them quickly, and make them think your the only option available. Actually, this is exactly what Apple did... with the iPod and iTunes.

[Blue Heron]

helping to destroy the evil Microsoft Monopoly,

lol
Sklavenmoral

[alejo0823]

I voted heir, its clear for many of us that if apple gains more popularity it would make more damage than Microsoft has done. if Microsoft doesn't step up with a better operating system the open source community would be facing a more unethical enemy, with tendency to censorship and fanaticism.

[Ozor Mox]

Spot on. Apple are very much like Bang and Olufsen in that B&O also produce over priced rubbish that sounds awful, and Apple do a parallel thing with computers.

Sorry for going a little off topic, but I looked up Bang and Olufsen on Wikipedia and found they made an MP3 player recently that was criticised for being overpriced, so I Googled it and nearly fell off my chair!

Typical price: £485

What is it: UFO-shaped MP3 player

What we think: This exorbitantly priced MP3 player should do more than just sound fantastic

:shock:

[schauerlich]

I don't think Apple wants to be the majority market share. It gets so much of its strength from being the underdog that people who dismiss Linux cheer, and from having such a passionate fanbase, that if it became the majority, it would cease to be the same company. It would then be subject to the same wave of the criticisms that Microsoft has fought off for so many years, and it would no longer have the protection of being the Last Hope against the Microsoft Empire. It's like being an independent musician - you're cool until a lot of people think you're cool. Then you're just lame.

[aysiu]

I don't think Apple wants to be the majority market share. It gets so much of its strength from being the underdog that people who dismiss Linux cheer, and from having such a passionate fanbase, that if it became the majority, it would cease to be the same company. It would then be subject to the same wave of the criticisms that Microsoft has fought off for so many years, and it would no longer have the protection of being the Last Hope against the Microsoft Empire. It's like being an independent musician - you're cool until a lot of people think you're cool. Then you're just lame.
They don't seem to have any qualms about being in the dominant position for digital audio players.

[Old Marcus]

I would agree that Apple are the underdogs as far as laptops and Desktops go, but for mp3 players and that market they are very much the dominant race as such.

But what gets me is the arrogance of some Mac users. I know a few, and most of them are pretty cool about things. Admittedly they do like to trumpet far and wide how cool their Macbook/Mac mini/other mac computer is and how it is superior to all other OS's. But most of them are pretty ok. But I do know a couple who are not only arrogant twonks but also quite ignorant of anything other than Mac and windows. A classmate at school claimed when I was talking about getting ubuntu to a friend that Linux was "****** unstable freeware". I didn't reply, I just sat down and shook my head in disbelief.

As others have said here, I think that if Apple were to make their OS available on PC's then they would most likely get a hugely increased desktop market share. I think they need to realise that the days of proprietary hardware for desktop computers is long gone. Ok, Windows may not bee the neatest or most secure OS out there, but at least it is available on pretty much anything that looks like a PC.

That said, Microsoft are a pig for making DX10 Vista only, this means eventually I'll have to upgrade to Vista, and spend the first few weeks stripping endless twiddly stuff out of it that I don't really need. :(

[schauerlich]

They don't seem to have any qualms about being in the dominant position for digital audio players.

They never had a "Giant" to fight. They were the first major company to come along and pour a bunch of money into the market. Right now the Zune is the Mac of the MP3 player market, except no one likes Microsoft.

[gn2]

The iPhone lock-in is only possible because of the laws of the countries concerned.

Some more enlightened countries forbid mobile phone companies from locking phones to a single network deal.

http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/apple/buy-an-unlocked-iphone-in-france-154098

[LightB]

Well, WELL, if you're a hippy, you will hate any corporation just for being a corporation, and it would be your right to do so. It's making money. All free market enterprises are basically about the same things and have the same goals. Beyond all the philosophy of economics and morals, there are one or two basic things that set MS and Apple apart. Apple actually tries to create good products so they can sell them, while MS is all about the initial deals with PC vendors decades ago which seeded their OS monopoly and from which every bit of relevance they have, and will probably ever have, branched.

Whether Apple would decline in quality if they were to reach the same OS market share that MS has, that's pretty random conjecture. Both because that likelyhood isn't too related to the reality of today, and because it all but answers it's own question if we consider that decline in quality is part of what defines the very idea of a monopoly. Or to put it yet another way, anyone in MS's place would be MS, or one tyrant taking over for another one.

Today though, MS sucks and create more harm than good with their sloppy OS monopoly, while Apple is just another company that develops products it needs to sell.

So in conclusion, you could be a "fan" of a company if you wanted, but if you would not be getting paid somehow, I think you would be a fool.

[LightB]

Right now the Zune is the Mac of the MP3 player market, except no one likes Microsoft.

Huge insult on the Mac.

In all seriousness though, in that analogy, the Zoune is more like a cardboard box with "LabtopXS" scribbled on the flap. I'm sure some kids have their own, but just not that popular in the PC market.

[Erunno]

If Apple is the underdog it is their own fault. Apple like many now defunct companies (Commadore bing my favoirite) only made their OS for their hardware which limited the number of customers they could cater to. In the proprietary world you need to make your software available to the largest group, get it to them quickly, and make them think your the only option available. M$ did this very well in the 80s and 90s and that is why they are number one in the proprietary world. If Apple changes some things they can unseat M$ but this will take a lot of time and in the end they will just be another M$.

Apple is making most of their money from hardware and not software sales (excluding iTunes store) so it's not in their best interest to offer OS X as a separate package as there's only little money to be gained in the OS market. And growth for growth's sake doesn't seem to me like the most thought-out business plan to me.
OS X is the proverbial cherry on top in their PC section and judging from the many people who complain about OS X not being available on hardware other than the one offered by Apple indicates to me that their decision is correct as people will be more likely to buy Apple desktop/notebooks just to be able to use OS X.

Additionally, by being in control of both software and hardware Apple can shape its public perception more easily (imagine official images of OS X on a bulky Thinkpad, it could hamper Apple's effort to present themselves as an "in" company).

[SunnyRabbiera]

If Apple manage to have monopoly, they would become what IBM was. ;)


Closeness: IBM -- Apple -- Microsoft -- FOSS

Finally someone in this thread pointed out some truth about MS and Apple, that between the two, MS is somewhat more open.

well these days IBM is becoming a MAJOR and I mean major ally of our movement so your list would be revised to
Closeness: Apple -- Microsoft -- IBM -- FOSS

[tbrminsanity]

Actually, this is exactly what Apple did... with the iPod and iTunes.

Which is why they own 90% of the MP3 market.

[K.Mandla]

Moved to Mac OSX discussion forum.

[LaRoza]

I voted "Other". They are a corporation, and the only thing a corporation has to do is make money.

They may have less of a marketshare in some areas, but they are making a profit, and have a loyal following.

[Jackster]

I used to be of the opinion that Apple was 'nicer' than Microsoft but in recent months I've reaslised that they're just as bad as Microsoft. Actually, I might even go as far as to say I prefer Microsoft, their Xbox support is really good, they even gave me a month free of Xbox Live when my Xbox died, whereas I've only had bad experiences with Apple's Genius Bar.

Still, just because I prefer Microsoft to Apple doesn't mean I actually *like* Microsoft, it just means I really don't like Apple 8-)

[Jammy4041]

Yes, I like apple stuff- I think it looks and is good.

But, like any big company really, they are trying to shut out the competition. Take their attitudes to attitudes to Ubuntu and Open source- little or no wireless support, for example. I think that it will be companies like apple who will all but help destroy the computer industry: and it will be *Ubuntu who helps repair it again.

[Jammy4041]

Yes, I like apple stuff- I think it looks and is good.

But, like any big company really, they are trying to shut out the competition. Take their attitudes to attitudes to Ubuntu and Open source- little or no wireless support, for example. I think that it will be companies like apple who will all but help destroy the computer industry: and it will be *Ubuntu who helps repair it again.

BTW, sorry for the double post.

[cprofitt]

Far worse than Microsoft. MS doesn't seek to control the hardware and software as Apple does.

[Truefire]

I agree with amstell.

[IHATEDLINK]

Apple is just another company i mean, i prefer it to Microsoft (cause of the better hardware/software) but it's another company at the end. They charge crazy amounts of money for their products and they get old SO QUICKLY! (lol :P)
I think that A LOT of people will be using a Mac right now if there only be more cheap, I've seen tons of users saying that if they could afford it they will switch to mac.
I'm not saying that is better or worse than any Linux or windows distribution, that's up to the user choice.
At the bottom line, Both cause although apple is trying to get Microsoft out of their throne, it is just for sitting on it for a while. THERE ARE JUST TRYING TO GET MORE MONEY.

[IHATEDLINK]

I voted "Other". They are a corporation, and the only thing a corporation has to do is make money

Couldn't agree more.

[chewearn]

Voted "Other".

Apple == :evil:

[the.dark.lord]

How many UF'ers see Apple as the underdog helping to destroy the evil Microsoft Monopoly...

That just made root beer come out of my nose...

[LaRoza]

That just made root beer come out of my nose...

Clean your keyboard!

[doorknob60]

Well, Apple as a company is just....the opposite of Open Source, worse than Microsoft. BUT, Mac OS kicks Windows' butt! A lot faster, more stable, no viruses, a lot of the things you get with Liunx, plus some nice software to go with it. Linux still rules though :)

[karellen]

as a personal feeling, I think apple hardware is heavy overpriced, at least this is the situation here in Romania. a mac book - core2 duo 2 ghz with 1 gb ram, 80 gb sata hdd, intel video chipset - costs 1150 euro, which I find outrageous
for comparison, a dell inspiron with the same cpu (core2 duo) but with an nvidia GeForce Go 8600M GT, 2 gb ram and 160 gb sata hdd costs around 920 euros. now tell me why on earth should someone pick the mac book? for mac os x? no thanks, I can install any linux distro on the Dell laptop and benefit of the same performance

[imronak]

Boooooooo

I believe Apple are much worse than Microsoft.

If Apple had been in monopoly, then everyone had to buy software through iTunes (or similar) or worse pay for every nano-second of software you use, even the equivalent of gedit ( i don't what it is in mac).

I used a mac in school lib, and i swore never to use it again.

I also read about the iPhone software issue, it sucks.

Well, I have used a s60 phone (nokia 6600), which I loved a lot, because you can do practically anything and everything on it.
It is YOUR phone, you paid $$$ for it, and you should be the one to decide not a whimsical corp or its CEO.


I like the attitude of MS vs attitude of apple. But, the attitude of linux is the best. Because, you do whatever you want to do on linux.:guitar:


Another point is hardware lock in. Thats a ridiculous policy.

I also think that there will be more and more virii and stuff for linux and mac as they get famous. the only reason there aren't any is because of the marketshare.


finally, Pwn2Own showed us which machine got pwned earliest. :lolflag:

Well, I see linux may face more attacks in future, but i hope they will come out with a stronger defense :popcorn:
In a way, being attacked will help is cut out the holes that are present.

[andrewjoy]

I like apple.

People have to stop thinking of apple as a software vendor and a hardware vendor they are not its a package you buy a mac and you get a mac its like buying a phone you get the hardware and sotware as one.

Apple support is also very good, you have a hardware problem apple fix it as its an apple product have a software problem apple fix it as its an apple product, jsut this week i had a problem with my 2006 macbook, the plastic where the magnet is that holds the laptop closed was cracked the support guy said thats no problem we can fix that free of charge.

Apple are not saints but they offer good products with good support and service OSX is far far better than windos you cannot configure it as well as linux ect but you dont need to as its well designed in the first place.

They cost more yeh but you get what you pay for. I respect everyones view , but alot of people that hate apple for lock ins ect dont understand how it work at all , they design the os for the hardware and its one package so ofc you are locked to what hardware you run it on should you be able to use the OS of a nokia phone on a toaster ?

[AlexMono94]

Personally I dislike Apple. I think they're quite big headed and I got really annoyed when their Leopard trailer said "Spaces, only in Leopard" and of course, everyone who has never heard of Linux etc. will believe them.

I may be wrong, but that's just what I think.

[andrewjoy]

When they say only in leopard i think they are talking about here own os 10.2 10.4 ect

[stonefingers]

Spot-on.

The only (legit) way to get the Apple OS is to buy (or use it on) an Apple.

If the OS was available separately to use on any machine Apple would stop selling hardware very quickly, unless they slashed their prices.

Well, that's probably true and as others have pointed out, Apple is proprietary. But here are a couple of my thoughts on it...

Apple supports their products, end-to-end. Have a problem w/ OS X on a given platform (Mac Pro/iMac/Mac-mini/Macbook), the tech guys know where and what to look for. In my eyes, that's a good thing. How many times has a Microsoft rep said "Oh, we're sorry, that's an OEM problem", only to call the OEM to hear "Oh, that's a Windows problem..."?

Does Apple charge a lot and keep their doors closed? Yeah, they do. But they have a reason, and I don't think it's necessarily a bad one for a company. This is business after all, right? If they opened up their OS to run on multiple platforms, the support would become a nightmare (from a business standpoint). With Mac OS X running on Apple hardware, you don't have driver issues, etc, and you can buy third-party hardware/software designed to run on Mac. They do run a tight ship and the result is generally a good computing experience.

Will they take over as the "monopoly"? Probably not. I really don't believe that's their aim, and I don't believe, even if it was, the general user could afford Apple. What I do think is that during this period when Microsoft shot itself in the foot (thank GOD!!!), Apple will take a larger chunk of the market, and by doing so, introduce *nix to more people who are intimidated by it. And that alone will help everyone, particularly the Open Source community.

Again, just my thoughts...

[chewearn]

Apple "lockdown" is not only about OSX and Mac, but also iPod and iTunes, etc.

Sure you can use iPod without iTunes, but with difficulties. Where is the good user experience then? Can you use iPhone with any network? Sure, but again, with difficulty, and probably voided the warranty.

[desertboy]

Apple's horrible lock in policy is the first step towards "Trusted computing" I always thought they were cool until I used linux which opened my eyes now I think they 10x worse than M$.

[HenningS]

Apple's lockdown is a good thing for the average consumer. The average consumer doesn't give a flying fudge about openness. They just want their stuff to work without having a 2-hour CLI orgy. The Mac platform, while coming with a hefty price tag, offers fantastic consumer software like the whole iLife suite, not to mention all the pro apps, something which is unparalleled by any other platform. Also, the UI is the most user-friendly I've seen so far, and the cross-product integration is amazing.
If you're into freedom, get Linux. If you want your stuff to work out of the box, get a Mac. If you don't like the price, don't pay it, but don't go around whining about how Macs are oh so expensive. And please stop saying that Macs "just look nice". Design is beyond looks.

[tbrminsanity]

Actually, this is exactly what Apple did... with the iPod and iTunes.

Which is why they own over 50% of the MP3 market.

[cardinals_fan]

Also, the UI is the most user-friendly I've seen so far
Was this meant to be a joke? I find OS X very hard to navigate...

[Alfa989]

Was this meant to be a joke? I find OS X very hard to navigate...

May I ask why, cardinals_fan? :)

I just want to see what people think... :)

[cardinals_fan]

May I ask why, cardinals_fan? :)

You certainly may not! ***just kidding :razz:***

I don't find the dock useful and the 'omnibar' on top confuses me. How can I remove it? The configuration panel has few options. And I find OS X to be extremely unreliable - it crashes constantly.

[chewearn]

Ok, thing starting to slide downhill. We can state our opinions civilly without the personal attacks.

[Eclipse.]

What annoys me is the fact they take open source darwin then inject it through the eyeballs with proprietary software and an totally unconfigurable UI.They need to make a decision to go one way or the other.Currently darwin is the only thing that is giving them their "secure" status over windows.Safari and everything proprietary are all buggy and full of exploits like windows.Which is why I think they have made webkit open source.They are begning to relise that proprietary software is always going to leave them with wholes in their software.

[cardinals_fan]

You're either a liar or a fool who's installed layer-violating hacks on your machine. I've been running it for years besides Windows and Ubuntu machines and I've almost never seen it fall over. It's the least crash-prone OS I run.

This is what is so off-putting about the "open-source community" -- it includes a bunch of turds who can't even tell the truth and wouldn't know generosity of spirit if it knocked down their door. They always have to be running down the work of people on other platforms.

At times it makes me embarrassed to run Linux.

If you don't like OS X -- and you're a fool if you don't -- wipe it off and put Windows or Linux (or even something more difficult) on there.
Whoa... nice post there.

1. I don't like the menu bar, but your link did help explain the "logic" behind it and I won't dispute that anymore.

2. This is on school computers (which are unreliable for obvious reasons) and my Mac-literate teacher's personal computer. These machines do not include 'layer-violating hacks' I don't like that one unstable app tends to lock up my whole system on OS X. When Firefox stalls, everything goes along with it.

3. I USE BSD! I have no problem with proprietary software, and I am happy to use software under the BSD license which allows proprietary forks such as OS X to exist. What irritates me is a subpar UI, FOR ME. If I could customize things more, I might be happy. Apple shouldn't assume that one design fits all.

4. This fool will never buy a Mac, since all I get is overpriced hardware and an OS that I hate.

Let's try to make this a clean debate, or the mods will have to close yet another thread that has descended to personal attacks and wasteful flames.

[LaRoza]

4. This fool will never buy a Mac, since all I get is overpriced hardware and an OS that I hate.

Let's try to make this a clean debate, or the mods will have to close yet another thread that has descended to personal attacks and wasteful flames.


I will probably get one in the future when I have the extra cash, but I disliked OS X also. The hardware is so...average, yet they are so expensive.

Offending post removed.

[angryfirelord]

Apple's lockdown is a good thing for the average consumer. The average consumer doesn't give a flying fudge about openness. They just want their stuff to work without having a 2-hour CLI orgy. The Mac platform, while coming with a hefty price tag, offers fantastic consumer software like the whole iLife suite, not to mention all the pro apps, something which is unparalleled by any other platform. Also, the UI is the most user-friendly I've seen so far, and the cross-product integration is amazing.
If you're into freedom, get Linux. If you want your stuff to work out of the box, get a Mac. If you don't like the price, don't pay it, but don't go around whining about how Macs are oh so expensive. And please stop saying that Macs "just look nice". Design is beyond looks.
But the problem is if a hardware issue arises, it's very difficult to work on them. Apple deliberately designs their cases so that you almost have to ship it back to them in order to get it repaired. The average consumer won't care, but those who have to work on PCs won't like it.

[3rdalbum]

I also dislike the dock. There's no seperation between running programs and non-running programs, except for the little triangle. You can't use the dock to switch between windows unless they have been minimised to the dock. And, most importantly, there's no categorisation of programs in the dock according to function.

When OS X came out, Apple basically replaced the applications switcher, the Apple menu, the Control Strip and my tabbed windows from OS 9, with this "dock" that did not replicate all the functions of any of the things it replaced. That, as well as the low speed, new file manager, black-box nature of the operating system (seriously, is there any way for the user to maintain and customise the operating system?), and a couple of other things, eventually moved me over to Ubuntu.

[iindigo]

I also dislike the dock. There's no seperation between running programs and non-running programs, except for the little triangle. You can't use the dock to switch between windows unless they have been minimised to the dock. And, most importantly, there's no categorisation of programs in the dock according to function.

When OS X came out, Apple basically replaced the applications switcher, the Apple menu, the Control Strip and my tabbed windows from OS 9, with this "dock" that did not replicate all the functions of any of the things it replaced. That, as well as the low speed, new file manager, black-box nature of the operating system (seriously, is there any way for the user to maintain and customise the operating system?), and a couple of other things, eventually moved me over to Ubuntu.

Keep in mind that the Dock alone is not supposed to be a replacement for the application switcher, Apple menu, control strip, and tabbed windows. It's supposed to be an application/document launcher with process manager features. To replace the Control Strip, there are menulets (those little black and white symbols next to the clock on the menubar). For window management, one is supposed to use Exposé, the application's Window menu, or the window list that is shown in the contextual menu invoked by right-clicking an app's icon in the Dock.

As for the closed/"black box" nature of the operating system, I don't see why that's really an issue. 90+% of the population will never need nor desire to change their operating system's inner workings. They just want something that does the job. Even if you do need to mod it in some way, there are communities centered around this subject (mainly http://macthemes2.net/ , but others exist).

I do have to ask, though, what is it that you're itching to change so much? OS X comes across as extremely usable in its default state to me.

[Alfa989]

You certainly may not! ***just kidding :razz:***

I don't find the dock useful and the 'omnibar' on top confuses me. How can I remove it? The configuration panel has few options. And I find OS X to be extremely unreliable - it crashes constantly.

I personally prefer the Dock over any kind of windows-like menubar (Win, GNOME, KDE, etc...), it just seem more "graphical" and representative... You know, you get the App's icon instead of a little name... :)

The single menu bar was designed with several problems/advantages in mind:

- It saves screen space: Especially true when the 128k Mac had a 9" screen... :P Still useful on 12" and possibly 13" (haven't used a MacBook) screens.
- It's easier to get to. Just move the mouse up quickly. Done. :D
- Reduces clutter by having simpler windows... :)
- Etc...

[bashveank]

For now I very much enjoy using my Apple products. If Apple got much bigger than there's no doubt that they would be even more monopolistic that Microsoft, but I'm thinking that Apple wants to stay a niche company. That way they can cater specifically to the people that love them, and not have to try and please everyone.

[kjb3696]

i love mac osx it kicks microsofts butt!! idk about linux but maybe it to i cant use xubuntu to well

[Canis familiaris]

Boo! They dot make native versions of their programs like iTunes and even do not support iPod in Linux. They are Microsoft's heir, maybe worse.

[vishzilla]

Apple is the new Microsoft without a doubt.

[Redrazor39]

Every person who switches from Windows to Mac should have become a Linux user. The fact that they chose mac shows Ubuntu has a whole lot further to go.

Mac OSX is a horrible system. If it was an open source UI you wouldn't a GNOME vs OSX UI or KDE vs OSX UI debate because GNOME and KDE just kick it's **** so thoroughly. The funniest thing for me is when people say they like the look of OSX, which I personally think is the Ugliest operating system apart from XP with blue theme non media center edition.

I agree with your first comment. The ONLY reason they are choosing macs besides not beliving free software can be good is that Apple puts ten layers of double-shine extra thick gloss all over everything they make. They make awesome demo products.

What we as the linux and/or ubuntu community need to do is to compile some applications that when all put on a CD, can allow you to do almost anything on a computer that almost all users would want to do. Then, we need to make the UI look extremely simple and pleasing to the eye. That's key here. We have the stability, the features, all the things windows did wrong are pretty much fixed except hardware support (but progress is great on that) but all we need is gloss. G-L-O-S-S. That's it! People take computers seriously if they have tons of gloss. Then, smart people look for features and stability, which we already have.

That's all we really need after continuing what we're already doing.

[nicedude]

Their IPOD is the only MP3 player in the world that requires it to be connected to the home corporations servers in order to fix problems to which I am aware of. They act like the IPOD is so great when in reality it is a piece of very slick looking poop and to me carrying one around shows you are not that bright. I have a Cowon A2 with 4 inch screen that blows everyone I knows video IPOD away and it doesn't require that I connect to any servers to be spied upon. In my opinion apple used to be a cool company in the late 80's and since has slid to a Microscum type closed source control model compete with the capability to spy on your habits and dictate terms of usage on the device you bought. To me when you buy something it is yours to do with as you wish and that should be the way it is even if you want to hack or tweak it. Unless of course you are trying to steal patented technology or software code from a company then they have no business saying what I can or can't do and if I did steal code and use it for a new device they would just catch you anyway eventually and sue you till you didn't exist, so the patent protection is not why they all use closed source as they are already protected from theft of their ideas ( too bad allot of small companies haven't been protected from MS stealing code from them over the years but I guess they can't employ an army of lawyers like Microscum does ).

SO IN SHORT BOYCOTT APPLE AND MICROSCUM - PROMOTE UBUNTU & OTHER LINUX VERSIONS AND ANY PC MAKER THAT TRIES TO BE LINUX COMPATIBLE

This is our best chance to actually work towards changing the world of computers to a wonderful place again instead of a scummy corporate EULA quagmire that it is today.

Every time I wipe XP or VISTA off a PC & Change to ubuntu I feel like I just kicked Bill G in his butt :-)

[Saint Angeles]

i was raised on the mac classic. then we got a performa and a quadra (basically the same old mac OS but with COLOR!!)...

i wasnt really into computers so much... but then in high school i got my first PC and realized how much more configurable it was. also, much more software was written for windows...

I soon learned of linux from a friends of mine and i went on a distro-crusade, trying to install every distro i could. i tried red hat, mandrake, and some others i don't remember but because i had an AMD athlon, and it was a custom made computer, i always had trouble getting everything 100%

then college came along and i went to a music school. everybody had a mac and i was always being told that macs were the greatest thing ever for recording and such. i bought me a g4 ibook and fell in love with garageband.

about a year later, the ibook broke (they decided that the GPU should be held on by a single blob of solder and it melted off). apple refused to admit there was a problem with the design even though thousands of others had the exact same problem. the ibook now exists as a hunk of useless scrap metal somewhere in my room. I bought a nice custom P4 last year and used XP (just out of convenience) until i got a new roommate who is a computer guru who works on windows all day long. he uses kubuntu and immediatly i saw how much more awesome it is.

so I used kubuntu and then moved to ubuntu. i hate mac because of their shoddy cheap hardware with a huge pricetag (my ibook cost me about $2000 after getting all the software and stuff)... i feel so hugely ripped off.

ever since moving to linux, I have zero problems and because it works on any PC hardware, its easily upgradable and configurable.

hurrah for linux!!

[karellen]

macs are hugely overpriced. that's a fact (for the same hardware, I pay almost double only because it's "compatible with Mac OS X" and other bull**** like that)

[Apple Ink]

Im a great apple fanatic......

But somethings cant be denied and for one, its best that Apple never gets the first place in OS....(At least until job is the CEO)

It is already a monopoly in Mp3 market, players, and now phones. We definitely don't want a monopoly in something as big as an operating system!

Windows is hopeless!

So that leaves us with Linux!!!!
PEOPLE ARE YOU LISTENING...SUPPORT LINUX...SAVE URSELVES FROM APPLE!

[Alfa989]

macs are hugely overpriced. that's a fact (for the same hardware, I pay almost double only because it's "compatible with Mac OS X" and other bull**** like that)

No. You don't even pay more. Get a PC from a good brand, with the same specs and form factor as a Mac. They'll cost the same :)

[Alfa989]

Boo! They dot make native versions of their programs like iTunes and even do not support iPod in Linux. They are Microsoft's heir, maybe worse.

Because they don't think it's worth doing it. I mean, with a ~0.63% market share compared to Mac OS X's ~7.38%... :(

[Alfa989]

Im a great apple fanatic......

But somethings cant be denied and for one, its best that Apple never gets the first place in OS....(At least until job is the CEO)

It is already a monopoly in Mp3 market, players, and now phones. We definitely don't want a monopoly in something as big as an operating system!

Windows is hopeless!

So that leaves us with Linux!!!!
PEOPLE ARE YOU LISTENING...SUPPORT LINUX...SAVE URSELVES FROM APPLE!
Apple hasn't got a monoply in any market whatsoever. (Good)

From Wikipedia:In Economics, monopoly (also "Pure oligopoly") exists when a specific individual or enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it. [1] Monopolies are thus characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide and a lack of viable substitute goods.

[Alfa989]

I agree with your first comment. The ONLY reason they are choosing macs besides not beliving free software can be good is that Apple puts ten layers of double-shine extra thick gloss all over everything they make. They make awesome demo products.

What we as the linux and/or ubuntu community need to do is to compile some applications that when all put on a CD, can allow you to do almost anything on a computer that almost all users would want to do. Then, we need to make the UI look extremely simple and pleasing to the eye. That's key here. We have the stability, the features, all the things windows did wrong are pretty much fixed except hardware support (but progress is great on that) but all we need is gloss. G-L-O-S-S. That's it! People take computers seriously if they have tons of gloss. Then, smart people look for features and stability, which we already have.

That's all we really need after continuing what we're already doing.

Err... ********.

Of course, when Mac OS was not "shiiinyyy" Apple sold 0 computers a year, didn't they?

Oh, wait! :D

People don't buy Macs because they don't care about OSS (consumers don't care really), they buy them because they work well, are easy to use, cause use software like MS Office, Photoshop, FCP, etc...; are a polished product, offer solutions that other manufacturers don't, etc... :)

So stop the "Macs only sell because they look good" argument, people don't use Linux instead because they don't give a damn about open source and they'd rather use an Os in which you can drag and drop in between apps, for example. Linux has still a loooooong way to go. Specially in the UI field. GNOME and KDE are just copies of Windows with nothing added. We need to create a different concept. A completely new and revolutionary one, rather that just copying the way Windows works. :)

My 2 cents

[karellen]

No. You don't even pay more. Get a PC from a good brand, with the same specs and form factor as a Mac. They'll cost the same :)

yes I do. here in Romania, at least. look:
http://www.emag.ro/notebook_laptop/notebook-dell-inspiron-1520-core2duo-t7250-20ghz-2gb-160gb-negru--pWXT7252G16WNN84T3BBK
it costs aproximately $1270
and, compared to:
http://www.emag.ro/notebook_laptop/notebook-apple-macbook-pro-22ghz-core2-duo-2gb-120gb-154--pma895zha
which costs no more or less than $2966 !!!:confused:
almost identical specs....
feel free to compare the prices of the laptops, notice that $1 = 2.36 RON (Romanian currency)

[ch_123]

A lot of Mac's supposed greatness comes from the fact that its so limited - design it to work with more software and more hardware, and it would be as bad as Vista. Its limited hardware and software set creates the illusion of a perfect-running homogeneous system.

It is already a monopoly in ... phones

They do? When did that happen? I dont think you can have a monopoly with one model of phone that is only sold to a single network in any given country.

[LaRoza]

A lot of Mac's supposed greatness comes from the fact that its so limited - design it to work with more software and more hardware, and it would be as bad as Vista. Its limited hardware and software set creates the illusion of a perfect-running homogeneous system.


If that is entirely true, then Linux should be the worst. Linux runs on more than OS X and Vista and on all sorts of hardware and with all sorts of devices. Much of it is out out of the box.

[rune0077]

No. You don't even pay more. Get a PC from a good brand, with the same specs and form factor as a Mac. They'll cost the same :)

Don't know where you are from, but where I live, a PC with the same spec as the mac cost much less. Add to this the fact that you can scratch build your PC one part at a time (something Apple, being rather fascists about it, won't let me do) and my current PC is roughly 50% the price of what a Mac with the same specs would cost.

[go_lanche]

I voted that they are the heir to MS for many of the same reasons that have already been mentioned here (lock-in, insanely expensive stuff, etc.). I am also not into their marketing, which can basically be summed up as "Do you think you're smart? If you buy our stuff we will agree with you!" But honestly, and I know this is unscientific, I am REALLY tired of seeing aluminum and white everywhere. It makes me think I am trapped in THX-1138.

[karellen]

Don't know where you are from, but where I live, a PC with the same spec as the mac cost much less. Add to this the fact that you can scratch build your PC one part at a time (something Apple, being rather fascists about it, won't let me do) and my current PC is roughly 50% the price of what a Mac with the same specs would cost.

I second this

[glacialfury]

Apple has done some nice things in terms of keeping the OS UI look unified, but that comes, as others have amply demonstrated, at the cost of freedom.

What irritates me about Apple is that there is a general perception that their software is better than Microsoft's, or unix-based software - this is simply not true. Apple has much better *marketing*. Most people, if you ask, think Microsoft has the biggest chunk, then Apple, then unix variants, whereas the truth is that Apple and the unix variants each comprise a nearly equal market share - Apple simply markets more vigorously, leading to an illusion of a company that is much bigger in the computer world than it actually is.

I will always choose substance over the ethereal qualities of Apple, and as pretty as they are, I see them as fundamentally worse than Microsoft due to the lock-ins.

[Alfa989]

yes I do. here in Romania, at least. look:
http://www.emag.ro/notebook_laptop/notebook-dell-inspiron-1520-core2duo-t7250-20ghz-2gb-160gb-negru--pWXT7252G16WNN84T3BBK
it costs aproximately $1270
and, compared to:
http://www.emag.ro/notebook_laptop/notebook-apple-macbook-pro-22ghz-core2-duo-2gb-120gb-154--pma895zha
which costs no more or less than $2966 !!!:confused:
almost identical specs....
feel free to compare the prices of the laptops, notice that $1 = 2.36 RON (Romanian currency)

The Dell has a weaker processor, plastic case, worse build, comes with FreeDos, no iLife, etc...

[Alfa989]

Apple has done some nice things in terms of keeping the OS UI look unified, but that comes, as others have amply demonstrated, at the cost of freedom.

What irritates me about Apple is that there is a general perception that their software is better than Microsoft's, or unix-based software - this is simply not true. Apple has much better *marketing*. Most people, if you ask, think Microsoft has the biggest chunk, then Apple, then unix variants, whereas the truth is that Apple and the unix variants each comprise a nearly equal market share - Apple simply markets more vigorously, leading to an illusion of a company that is much bigger in the computer world than it actually is.

I will always choose substance over the ethereal qualities of Apple, and as pretty as they are, I see them as fundamentally worse than Microsoft due to the lock-ins.

Well, my opinion is that there's not better home office packgage than iWork... :) I mean, easy to use, light, great looking reasults... :)

I find that windows software (for the most part) seems like a toy, and linux software (for the most part) feels unfinished... :S

Weird...

[Mhurst1]

MACS are proprietary garbage!

[Alfa989]

Don't know where you are from, but where I live, a PC with the same spec as the mac cost much less. Add to this the fact that you can scratch build your PC one part at a time (something Apple, being rather fascists about it, won't let me do) and my current PC is roughly 50% the price of what a Mac with the same specs would cost.

Compare a Mac with a prebuilt PC with the same quality materials, form factor, and software and then look at the price tag.

[Alfa989]

MACS are proprietary garbage!
Do you have a problem with Media Access Control addresses? :lolflag:

[chewearn]

Compare a Mac with a prebuilt PC with the same quality materials, form factor, and software and then look at the price tag.

I hear this refrain a few times, whenever someone complaint about Macs being expensive.

It is conceivable that if you were to make a purely material and construction comparisons, you could find that the price difference might not be so great.

Provided if it is even possible to make this comparison, because very few manufacturers (if any) make computers as Apple make them.

Analogies can be misleading. Nevertheless, you could rebut the statement "Ferrari are expensive", by saying that if you find a Toyota with same specs, you might find the price difference not that great.

My view about the "Macs are expensive" statement can be summed up as this: you pay what you are willing to pay.

Macs are expensive to people who are unwilling to pay the price of a Mac. The argument about equal specs comparison is irrelevant in this context.

Thus, in the same vein, you could say Alienware are expensive. Would I buy an Alienware laptop? Nope. Too expensive.

.

[karellen]

The Dell has a weaker processor, plastic case, worse build, comes with FreeDos, no iLife, etc...

would just justify the mac costing twice as much? it depends, maybe for someone else. I could find a comparable product at a smaller price, but that's not the point. I wouldn't pay that much for a PC
as it was said, it's expensive only if you're not willing to pay the price tag
I'm not. so for me it's "boo" all over the place :)

[aysiu]

I
My view about the "Macs are expensive" statement can be summed up as this: you pay what you are willing to pay.

Macs are expensive to people who are unwilling to pay the price of a Mac. The argument about equal specs comparison is irrelevant in this context. Finally someone else who sees how silly the argument about equal specs is.

I agree completely with you:
http://ubuntucat.wordpress.com/2007/06/24/the-price-of-apples-2/

[rune0077]

Compare a Mac with a prebuilt PC with the same quality materials, form factor, and software and then look at the price tag.

It is still much more expensive (around 25% so, last I checked) in my part of the world.

[handy]

I cheer them & boo them.

[Alfa989]

I cheer them & boo them.

Exactly, I think that's the right thing to do. :)
I mean, the do good things, but they are a company, and all they want is our money. Plus, they have really weird view on some aspects of the computer business and on their product strategy in general.. <_<

[LaRoza]

Finally someone else who sees how silly the argument about equal specs is.

I agree completely with you:
http://ubuntucat.wordpress.com/2007/06/24/the-price-of-apples-2/

That is assuming that anyone getting a "PC" is using Windows and anyone getting a "Mac" is going to use OS X.

Also, it fails to take into account that a "computer" doesn't have to be bought preassembled with preinstalled software.

[aysiu]

That is assuming that anyone getting a "PC" is using Windows and anyone getting a "Mac" is going to use OS X.

Also, it fails to take into account that a "computer" doesn't have to be bought preassembled with preinstalled software.
Not really. I didn't say "PC" in that post at all - I specifically compared Windows PCs to Macs, because that's what people tend to compare, and most consumers do not build their own computers, fewer still build their own laptops.

The same principles apply, regardless of whether you build your own PC or not, though - for many consumers, the issue is absolute price, not price when you compare similar specs. If the Macs can't go below a certain price, they're still expensive, whether they're a good value or not (and even whether they are a good value or not is debatable).

Both the build-it-yourself and prebuilt Windows PCs can be much cheaper than even the cheapest Mac Mini.

[LaRoza]

Not really. I didn't say "PC" in that post at all - I specifically compared Windows PCs to Macs, because that's what people tend to compare, and most consumers do not build their own computers, fewer still build their own laptops.


For me, the issue is not what proprietary OS that comes by default, it is the hardware and how it works with Linux.

I guess I shop differently. I look at Macs and see grossly over priced hardware with software I find "ok" but not what I would use. So, to me, a Mac is just the hardware.

[aysiu]

For me, the issue is not what proprietary OS that comes by default, it is the hardware and how it works with Linux.

I guess I shop differently. I look at Macs and see grossly over priced hardware with software I find "ok" but not what I would use. So, to me, a Mac is just the hardware.
Regardless of what OS you buy it with or install onto it, the Macs are expensive, and that's all I'm saying.

Whether you want to use Mac, Windows, or Linux, it doesn't matter. The principle still holds that if someone wants to spend $400 on a desktop computer or $600 on a laptop for surfing the web and checking email, she isn't going to want a Mac because the Mac is too expensive.

[rune0077]

most consumers do not build their own computers, fewer still build their own laptops.


And no one at all build their own Macs, because they can't, and regardless of price, that fact alone should be reason enough to boo them.

[Alfa989]

For me, the issue is not what proprietary OS that comes by default, it is the hardware and how it works with Linux.

I guess I shop differently. I look at Macs and see grossly over priced hardware with software I find "ok" but not what I would use. So, to me, a Mac is just the hardware.

But remember, you can't get the PC equivalent to an iMac without it being more expensive. And try to build a PC with a Mac Pro's upgreadability (no screws whatsoever). It will cost more. :)

Etc... :)

[Alfa989]

And no one at all build their own Macs, because they can't, and regardless of price, that fact alone should be reason enough to boo them.

Just because the handful of people (comparatively speaking) that build their own computers can't build a Mac themselves means Apple should be booed?

Yeah, right... :lolflag:

[rune0077]

Just because the handful of people (comparatively speaking) that build their own computers can't build a Mac themselves means Apple should be booed?

Yeah, right... :lolflag:

Yes, precisely. It is not that very many people build their own computers, it's that they have the choice to do it, should they so desire. The fact that Apple intentionally are taking away that choice, makes them the bad guys. They're restricting my options as a consumer, and that can only be bad.

[odysseusjak]

I happen to like Apple products. In fact, it was because of my Mac that I started looking at Linux.

[handy]

I'm sure I've said this at least half a dozen times before, half a dozen different ways, but here goes anyway:-

Mac's are more expensive to buy, some Mac's are less competitive than others regarding their initial purchase price.

The design of the OS is vastly more secure than that of the Windows world, as we all know.

The Mac OS is very easy for the basic average computer user to adapt to, & the installation/removal of software is also usually very simple.

The Mac OS's file system is not perfect, neither is the Finder ideal, though most users will not be troubled by permission problems & adapt easily to the Finder.

Where Mac makes up some for the extra initial purchase price is in the OS's ease of use, security by design & reliability. These factors can save an owner with average & less, computer skills, a great deal of money, time & stress. The stress & time factors are huge variables & impossible to put a financial value on, though for businesses where employees can't work for whatever reason, it can be very expensive.

My wife is all but totally autonomous regarding her computing life on her Macs. She installs, removes, purchases on the web, downloads/installs software. She uses torrents, sets up her own printers, scanners, software for her windows CE handheld to talk to the Mac's iCal, Addresses & what have. When she used windows machines all of this stuff was my job, & there were the inevitable problems due to MS's poor design.

So, I cheer Apple for making it easier & more enjoyable for the average computer user. Their hardware & software is far from perfect, but I will recommend it to non-geeks over the Windows alternative any day. Apple owners are generally happier computer users than Windows computer users, at least those that I know who have migrated are.

I boo Apple's policies regarding DRM, & their vendor lock-in tactics suck! The arrogance of Steve Jobs is not attractive (though in the end it is just a personality I'm talking about there), marketing is marketing, blame the marketroids, as they come from another planet where manipulation & trickery for personal gain are held in high esteem.

I have an ambivalent attitude towards Apple's closed source software; would they financially benefit from open licensing their OS? I also have no idea what they may do if anything with regards to their OS being used on non-Apple hardware, in the end these two are their problems.

[chewearn]

But remember, you can't get the PC equivalent to an iMac without it being more expensive. And try to build a PC with a Mac Pro's upgreadability (no screws whatsoever). It will cost more. :)

Etc... :)

I thought I did a good debunking of the "equivalency" argument. Mmm...

Really, I couldn't understand why you think Apple need to be cheaper, or same price as a PC. It's a different product, with higher brand index. It is not needed for Apple to make it cheaper, in fact it might be bad to do so. They charge more to sustain the higher brand index, and because it's extra money they can get.


Also are we now arguing about no screw? Really? :roll:

I have a PC that is SFF type; not Apple-cool-guy type, but functional and take up little space. There are exactly three screws for the PC cover, with large screw heads that can be twisted open with bare hand. I can open the case and replace/upgrade any component, without using any tool.

It has been like this for PC boxes for a while now. I rarely see a PC case that need a screw driver to open and service.

.

[angryfirelord]

Just because the handful of people (comparatively speaking) that build their own computers can't build a Mac themselves means Apple should be booed?

Yeah, right... :lolflag:
Because these handful of people are ones who end up fixing computers. It's not very attractive when Apple's attitude toward broken hardware is "ship it to us for $$$$$$ or go out and buy a new one". Some Macs only allow you to access the RAM, everything else is locked off and opening that part would void the warranty. How arrogant of Apple!

No thanks, I'll take the cheaper and much more flexible PC. :)

[handy]

Because these handful of people are ones who end up fixing computers. It's not very attractive when Apple's attitude toward broken hardware is "ship it to us for $$$$$$ or go out and buy a new one". Some Macs only allow you to access the RAM, everything else is locked off and opening that part would void the warranty. How arrogant of Apple!

No thanks, I'll take the cheaper and much more flexible PC. :)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Apple's policies, but a way to look at Apple's computers is as though they were all notebooks, there are similarities in the processes for repair, the availability of parts & the price of repair.

[karellen]

Really, I couldn't understand why you think Apple need to be cheaper, or same price as a PC. It's a different product, with higher brand index. It is not needed for Apple to make it cheaper, in fact it might be bad to do so. They charge more to sustain the higher brand index, and because it's extra money they can get.
yes, it may be bad. showing people that they pay more money for the same thing under the hood. or do you really think intel, nvidia or ati has a special pile of chipsets only for Apple? ;;)

[the6step]

I'm just going to go through this whole thread starting from the first page and respond to people.


The wrangle you in and give you ZERO choice by forcing you to use Apple everything.

They do give you a choice. They offer their products, and you have a choice to buy them or not.

Well if Apple decided to finally make their OS for non apple systems they could increase in popularity for sure...

Apple operates on an entirely different business model than Microsoft. Microsoft gets it's profit from the software they develop. Apple gets it's profit from their hardware, which they sell by their excellent software.

If you hadn't noticed, compare software from Apple to Microsoft, decidedly less, ESPECIALLY when everyone claims Apple is the one who charges insane amounts of money.

So you see, while it makes sense for a few users on Linux forums (:rolleyes:), they wouldn't be making much profit off of their software, and it would be that much more of a hassle to support for all different configurations, and would introduce oh so many problems, all the while eliminating a lot of it's customer base who like the model Apple has now. So I think we have to ask ourselves, what does Apple have to gain by selling their operating system? Absolutely nothing.

Every person who switches from Windows to Mac should have become a Linux user. The fact that they chose mac shows Ubuntu has a whole lot further to go.

please someone gives this man an award, please anyone!

ever wonder why itunes,safari and other mac product never had a linux port

Ever wonder why Adobe won't make Photoshop for Linux? For the exact same reasons ..

it would have been easier making a port for linux due to their Unix bacground .. but no there rather port it to windows while making the world feel the linux is just for geeks

me being a geek (and being proud of it), I would argue that linux is indeed, just for geeks.

when ur phone has been locked to one Service provided ..

A lot of web developers don't develop for Internet Explorer 6. Do you know why? Because of it's lack of support for standards, and the amount of hacks you have to use to get it to work. So instead of developing a great site, you have to develop for this extra, horrible web browser. How does this have anything to do with Apple?

Apple doesn't want to have multiple service providers. When they first made the iPhone, they tried to make a deal with Verizon, they refused. At&t was the only ones willing to. Even if they were to offer multiple service providers, visual voicemail would only work with At&t. Apple reasoning, is why go through extreme amounts of trouble offering different providers when in the end you will have an inferior product for it?

That is the lesson to learn here today. If Apple were to really support all this different stuff, at the end of the day their product would be considered more inferior than if they just went with 1 obvious choice and made the product all they could be. Considering AT&T is one of the few that offers 3g and Visual Voicemail, and all other service providers turned them down before, I totally agree with them too.

when mac users see my ubuntu and wht i have turned it into .. there marvel .. all i can do is pity them .. there are locked in

My Mac comes glossy and configured. So while I'm getting stuff done, you are busy tuning Ubuntu to look like Mac OS X..... talk about inefficiency ;)

There are still a few die hards but generally people are realising that those same apps (such as Adobe Illustrator) can run on a windows based PC just as well (and have done so for years).

I'm just wondering how many people have seriously used CS3 on both Windows and Mac to make an educated comment on how well they work compared to each other. If you want to use Illustrator as an example, compared to the Windows version, everything floats in a highly configurable way. Every new file you work on can be minimized to the main dock (as opposed to minimizing just inside of the program like Windows version) and for every file, expose can be used in conjunction, which kind of makes you think about the power the mac version has. Any serious CS3 users, please actually TRY using it on a Mac and see the difference. Also, CS3 on my laptop with osx86 project screams in comparison to on same laptop with Vista/Xp.



Alright that's it for now, more later.

[HunterThomson]

I like to see most people here think apple is headed in the wrong direction:guitar:

I agree getting a mac is better for a average computer user then getting a wincrap box. Mac's are probaly way simpler to use for them. It is also nice to keep M$ sales down:guitar:

However, I think Ubuntu is simpler for the novice to average computer user to use then Mac OS. Do to packaged based software repository and the ability to use windows programs with wine. Maybe the more novice users would need a more experienced Linux user to install Ubuntu on there laptop but I think that would be the the same with installing any OS (my grandma just can't do it) I also think that being asked to "Spend Spend Spend" for programs or to do anything on Mac OS is not fare. I have never been asked to spend any money wile using Ubuntu:)

All in all, Steve Wozniak is a grate guy:) but Steve Jobs is and has always been about making money not making a good computer or OS. This shows in there Micro$oft like business model and tactics. I don't like there gratuitous marketing ether. For this reason I say Mac is the new Micro$oft.

[chewearn]

Apple doesn't want to have multiple service providers. When they first made the iPhone, they tried to make a deal with Verizon, they refused. At&t was the only ones willing to. Even if they were to offer multiple service providers, visual voicemail would only work with At&t. Apple reasoning, is why go through extreme amounts of trouble offering different providers when in the end you will have an inferior product for it?

That is the lesson to learn here today. If Apple were to really support all this different stuff, at the end of the day their product would be considered more inferior than if they just went with 1 obvious choice and made the product all they could be. Considering AT&T is one of the few that offers 3g and Visual Voicemail, and all other service providers turned them down before, I totally agree with them too.

Maybe this apply to USA (which is strange for a country who value freedom, but that's another story).

In some other countries, there are usually some form of standardization of the mobile market. This is either being enforce by the government, or by the market competition.

What this mean is any user can buy any phone in the country and use it in any service provider. All phones are unlocked and not tied to a particular service provider company. The free market does not restrict the service provider, service plan and phone you choose.

Now, comes along Apple trying to make a deal with one particular service provider in the country, and trying to impose the restrictions that was not there before.

Should we cheer or boo Apple for this?

.

[LaRoza]

I like to see most people here think apple is headed in the wrong direction:guitar:

I agree getting a mac is better for a average computer user then getting a wincrap box. Mac's are probaly way simpler to use for them. It is also nice to keep M$ sales down

I think they are headed both ways, in a seemingly paradoxal manner.

Don't judge the system by its preinstalled operating system. The "win" box can be the same hardware but with a lower price tag, and if the buyer is like me, Linux is going on anyway.

[buntunub]

How many UF'ers see Apple as the underdog helping to destroy the evil Microsoft Monopoly, and how many see them as just another proprietary empire looking at its shot at the top?

Apple is neither. They have the most proprietary and closed OS in the world. They are the flagship for Vendor Lock in at the moment. All that can really be said well for them is that they do not resort to the same shady business tactics that M$ does, but thats not really saying much.

[LaRoza]

Apple is neither. They have the most proprietary and closed OS in the world. They are the flagship for Vendor Lock in at the moment. All that can really be said well for them is that they do not resort to the same shady business tactics that M$ does, but thats not really saying much.

Well, for shady we could discuss their misrepresentation of the hardware. Monitors of inferior quality, shady soldering jobs, etc.

[HenningS]

I'm getting sick of people saying you can build systems comparable to Macs at the same price. The specs may be the same, but you can not compare anything to a Mac that doesn't have OS X on it, and I'm not talking about a Hackintosh.
I need to buy a portable computer in the next time, and I have two options. I either get a ThinkPad with Ubuntu on it, which I hear works great, or I get an old iBook, which might be slower, but will run Keynote very well. This is how I am locked into buying Apple products - They're the only people that ship the software I rely on, and not because they wrangled me into anything, but because their software is the best/only proper software on the market.
I love the spirit of Ubuntu, the mentality behind it, but let's face it, Linux sucks for Office applications. OpenOffice Writer or AbiWord are an absolutely pain to use if you've seen Apple's Pages before. You might find them an improvement over MS Office, but that's it.
The same goes for music production. Ardour for example is a nice try, but being free is it's only advantage over software like Apple Logic or Propellerhead Reason.
Video editing is the same again, and don't even get me started on Graphic design. I do love Inkscape, though.
Bottom line, Linux as it is today is for geeks. That's not insulting, nor derogatory, it's a compliment. You got Windows for games, OS X for productivity, and Linux for running servers. And mobile phones. And ultraportable computers.
I don't care if you cheer Apple or boo them, but if you're not adequately informed, maybe you should just ignore them...

[karellen]

I'm getting sick of people saying you can build systems comparable to Macs at the same price. The specs may be the same, but you can not compare anything to a Mac that doesn't have OS X on it, and I'm not talking about a Hackintosh.
I need to buy a portable computer in the next time, and I have two options. I either get a ThinkPad with Ubuntu on it, which I hear works great, or I get an old iBook, which might be slower, but will run Keynote very well. This is how I am locked into buying Apple products - They're the only people that ship the software I rely on, and not because they wrangled me into anything, but because their software is the best/only proper software on the market.
I love the spirit of Ubuntu, the mentality behind it, but let's face it, Linux sucks for Office applications. OpenOffice Writer or AbiWord are an absolutely pain to use if you've seen Apple's Pages before. You might find them an improvement over MS Office, but that's it.
The same goes for music production. Ardour for example is a nice try, but being free is it's only advantage over software like Apple Logic or Propellerhead Reason.
Video editing is the same again, and don't even get me started on Graphic design. I do love Inkscape, though.
Bottom line, Linux as it is today is for geeks. That's not insulting, nor derogatory, it's a compliment. You got Windows for games, OS X for productivity, and Linux for running servers. And mobile phones. And ultraportable computers.
I don't care if you cheer Apple or boo them, but if you're not adequately informed, maybe you should just ignore them...

don't you think you oversimplify? you can be productive on Linux or Windows, you can play games on Mac OS X or Linux and so on...
I agree with you on one thing: Mac OS X is the best reason to buy a Apple computer

[dusanx]

Perl, Python, Ruby etc are all the same on Linux and OSX so I don't see any point in Mac being more productive. If productivity is measured only by audio / video software capabilities than maybe I can agree but focusing only on them is very narrow point of view.

If I need to create home video or home demo tape than yes, I would probably buy Mac. If that's the case, I would be happy to give more money for specialized hardware and software. If I need to do anything else Mac is only shiny overpriced item (no offense intended).

How many Mac users actually do some professional audio or video job with their Mac's?

[HenningS]

Maybe I didn't word that correctly. I believe bad software limits your productivity, and good software boosts it. Whenever I try to do anything in Linux, I find my productivity severely limited. But because the Mac platform has such great software, you can do more in less time.
And yes, I am oversimplifying. I'm not saying there's no games for OS X/Linux, it's just that Windows excels in this area. Adobe's Creative Suite may run on Windows, but only runs properly on OS X. You may be able to run servers on Windows (act I don't know about that), but Linux is the real choice for this kind of operation.

[karellen]

Maybe I didn't word that correctly. I believe bad software limits your productivity, and good software boosts it. Whenever I try to do anything in Linux, I find my productivity severely limited. But because the Mac platform has such great software, you can do more in less time.
And yes, I am oversimplifying. I'm not saying there's no games for OS X/Linux, it's just that Windows excels in this area. Adobe's Creative Suite may run on Windows, but only runs properly on OS X. You may be able to run servers on Windows (act I don't know about that), but Linux is the real choice for this kind of operation.

why does adobe creative suite run properly only on Mac OS?

[3rdalbum]

Adobe's Creative Suite may run on Windows, but only runs properly on OS X.

With all due respect, to quote you, you don't know a lot about that :-)

My father is a typesetter and web developer, and as such he uses a large amount of the CS suite for his various employers. On Windows. He has used it on a Macintosh, and he still owns a Macintosh, but to him the Windows version of CS works faster and with fewer quirks.

As for "Linux is the choice for servers", Linux is very flexible but many people would argue that Unix systems are better for servers. Yes, you can run a server on Windows, and there are versions of Windows designed for server use.

The only thing that defines a platform is the programs for it. Any sufficiently-good operating system can be a server as long as it has server software - even Syllable does. Windows has exactly the same software for it as the Macintosh, when you're talking about real productivity. Windows stays out of your way when you're in a corporate setting, and doesn't force you to do extra work, so it's just as good as the Macintosh for these things.

To put some humour into this thread :-) Windows users who are familiar with the one-window Photoshop complain about the multi-window GIMP, that "The GIMP isn't as good as Photoshop". If those people tried Photoshop on the Mac, which uses multiple windows, they'd probably say that Creative Suite works "best on Windows" :-)

[LaRoza]

As for "Linux is the choice for servers", Linux is very flexible but many people would argue that Unix systems are better for servers. Yes, you can run a server on Windows, and there are versions of Windows designed for server use.


Not really. Windows as a server isn't all that great. It is mostly used for intranet servers, not web servers with lots of visitors. Look at the system requirements for running it, this is just for running it, not taking into account it being used: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_2008#System_requirements

Contrast with Slackware: http://www.slackware.com/install/sysreq.php

Linux was designed as a multi user networking OS, Windows wasn't.

[the6step]

My father is a typesetter and web developer, and as such he uses a large amount of the CS suite for his various employers. On Windows. He has used it on a Macintosh, and he still owns a Macintosh, but to him the Windows version of CS works faster and with fewer quirks.

Ok, this might be good.

Please delve into said "quirks", please explain what controlled environment you set up to make the statement that it is faster on Windows (comparable specs on both computers?), and please explain why he prefers to use CS3 on windows, and please go into exactly which CS3 programs he is using for web development.

I have yet to come across a person who can come up with solid reasoning why you would prefer Windows over OS X when it comes to CS3 use.

[rune0077]

Ok, this might be good.

Please delve into said "quirks", please explain what controlled environment you set up to make the statement that it is faster on Windows (comparable specs on both computers?), and please explain why he prefers to use CS3 on windows, and please go into exactly which CS3 programs he is using for web development.

I have yet to come across a person who can come up with solid reasoning why you would prefer Windows over OS X when it comes to CS3 use.

There is no need for anyone to explain or go into details. There is no need to come up with solid or good reasons for why something works better on Windows. When all is said and done, some people like it one way, some another. Software is like everything else, pure and simple, a matter of choice and personal taste. My personal taste and experience tells me that OS X is crap, and after having tried it for a while, I now wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. Windows just struck me as being far more intuitive (because I was used to it). Now that I've tried Linux, I feel much the same for Windows as I used to feel for OS X. But this is just my personal choice. Your personal choice may be that you prefer running a piece of software on a specific OS, but not everyone else may share your taste. You don't need explanations for why this is, anymore than you need explanations for why I might prefer a different brand of coffee than somebody else does.

[the6step]

You don't need explanations for why this is, anymore than you need explanations for why I might prefer a different brand of coffee than somebody else does.

People prefer different brands of coffee because they taste different, and cost different. Easy explained, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I'm talking about.

CS3 is a suite developed by Adobe, and other than things like for Mac, the commands being up in the menu bar, the programs are fundamentally THE SAME. The only differences come in when you can obviously see that there was added functionality added for the Mac version of the software.

Most software developed for cross-platform are for the most part THE SAME. The big UNLESS comes in, where there is obviously extra functionality added for the software on that certain platform. I personally would like to know exactly what it is you prefer about CS3 on Windows.

Furthermore, please don't tell me what I don't need explanations for. I'm pretty sure in casual conversation, 2 intelligent people could talk about which coffee they prefer and why without getting lambasted by someone for doing it :rolleyes:


As a designer, I was considering buying a mac. Designers have a tendency to want to surround themselves with pretty things in the hope that some of it would rub off in their design.

?????? I don't even know where to begin with this statement....

I'm pretty sure if they offered linux boxes with great specs inside of a great chassis for 100 dollars at some freak sale on a weekend, I'm pretty sure anybody would be in line for it. People like pretty things, that's pretty much a given...

Furthermore, the current standard for designers who actually do it for a living, is the CS3 suite (InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop). If you get a job in that industry, CHANCES ARE that your going to be working with CS3, and depending on how big the company is, there is just as much chance you will be working on Mac as there is Windows. I personally don't know any Design companies that seriously run linux boxes and run Photoshop (or whatever) under Wine.

Macs are pretty. They look good at parties when you put iTunes on and make your desk look very po-mo. But in terms of ability to get your work done, there is nothing separating a mac and a PC. (unless your a biased fanboy)

So what if my company uses a Final Cut Studio 2 workflow? Some people actually think Final Cut Studio 2 is the best software when it comes to professional video editing. I guess that makes me and all the other people in the industry who prefer Final Cut Studio 2 biased fanboys I guess :rolleyes:

Vista and OS X are very similar in many ways in terms of functionality....

What the..........? Vista & OS X similar? Just because Vista took all of it's design cues (horribly I might add) from OS X does not make Vista and OS X SIMILAR. This is the equivalent to saying Windows and Linux are the same, because they are both operating systems, right?/sarcasm


All in all, I think people need to get away from the "People only buy macs because the chassis and stuffs look shiny!". I like to think of OS X as a tasty cake. I would gladly eat the cake as is, but it JUST SO HAPPENS this cake (OS X) has great frosting (design). Not that it needs it, not that it adds anything spectacular, not that it makes or breaks my choice to eat it (use it), but it just so happens to be there and it makes the cake look better, FOR better or worse. If said cake didn't have frosting, I honestly couldn't care less.

[karellen]

have yet to come across a person who can come up with solid reasoning why you would prefer Windows over OS X when it comes to CS3 use.
and I have yet to come across a person who can come up with solid reasoning why you would prefer Mac OS X to Windows when it comes to CS3 use
do you think it's a special relations between Adobe and Apple? ;;)

[the6step]

and I have yet to come across a person who can come up with solid reasoning why you would prefer Mac OS X to Windows when it comes to CS3 use
do you think it's a special relations between Adobe and Apple? ;

In a previous post I outlined that exactly, in case you haven't been paying attention. I could easily make a video showing the differences I know them by heart, but anyone who has used both already knows about what I'm talking about so there is no point.

And yes Adobe and Apple have had a close relationship for a while now, they collaborate on a bunch of stuff...

[rune0077]

People prefer different brands of coffee because they taste different, and cost different. Easy explained, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I'm talking about.

CS3 is a suite developed by Adobe, and other than things like for Mac, the commands being up in the menu bar, the programs are fundamentally THE SAME. The only differences come in when you can obviously see that there was added functionality added for the Mac version of the software.

Most software developed for cross-platform are for the most part THE SAME. The big UNLESS comes in, where there is obviously extra functionality added for the software on that certain platform. I personally would like to know exactly what it is you prefer about CS3 on Windows.


Well I agree that if two thing work the same, then obviously one should be as pleased with one as with the other. That makes perfect sense. My statement was more aimed at OS's in general, since so many people make statements like "Linux is the best OS ever" or "Mac is better than Windows" as if it were a fact, when it's really just a matter of preference.


Furthermore, please don't tell me what I don't need explanations for. I'm pretty sure in casual conversation, 2 intelligent people could talk about which coffee they prefer and why without getting lambasted by someone for doing it :rolleyes:


I am really sorry if I came off sounding lambasted (well, English is not my first language, so I actually don't know what lambasted means, but I'm assuming it's nothing good, and if correct, then I'm sorry ;)). Two intelligent people could discuss their different tastes in coffee, but it would be a fairly meaningless conversation, since neither of them could make a valid argument for why his/her tastes should be preferred to the others. It's a bit like saying "blue is a better color than red".



All in all, I think people need to get away from the "People only buy macs because the chassis and stuffs look shiny!". I like to think of OS X as a tasty cake. I would gladly eat the cake as is, but it JUST SO HAPPENS this cake (OS X) has great frosting (design). Not that it needs it, not that it adds anything spectacular, not that it makes or breaks my choice to eat it (use it), but it just so happens to be there and it makes the cake look better, FOR better or worse. If said cake didn't have frosting, I honestly couldn't care less.

Again, personal choice. I wouldn't eat the cake, frosting or not, I wouldn't even give it to starving child. You would, and that's perfectly fine. I don't particular like Mac designs (though I do like the iPhone design, I have to admit - there, I said it), I much prefer the look of my PC to that of my (now somewhat dated) Mac. Again, blue color and red color, you get to decide which one you like the best.

[the6step]

It's a bit like saying "blue is a better color than red".

Ok.

I entirely get where you are going, and I understand COMPLETELY the point you are trying to get at. Your talking along the lines of never-ending battles like emacs vs vim, playstation vs nintendo, even linux vs windows vs mac. I understand and agree.

But the operating systems aside, there is a decidedly huge difference in the way CS3 for Windows works, and how it works for Mac. Just a for instance, there is practically no canvas to speak of for Illustrator/Photoshop! Instead of being a big window which forces you to work inside it, everything can work independently. They have developed the software so that OS X treats every single file you are working on, as a separate instance, which allows you to do things like minimizing it away from the main programing, and using expose to quickly navigate to a file if you have, say, 20 files open you are working on at the time.

So, as you can see, this is not merely a red vs blue discussion. As above, I just elaborated exactly WHY I prefer the software on the Mac, and did not simply resort to a "I like it and you just have to respect my opinion" sort of tactic. I'm pretty sure if there is a reason to prefer CS3 Windows over CS3 Mac, someone out there probably knows those reasons and can elaborate on them. Like I said, I don't really see how that would be the case, but maybe I'm wrong, you never know.

In any case, it would be interesting for someone to attempt it, which is why I asked the person who said they prefer CS3 on Windows to elaborate.

Edit: I knew someone was going to take the cake analogy and be like "Well I wouldn't even give da cake to my dog":rolleyes:

[mick222]

probably even worse than microsoft overpriced products and with the iphone you cant even choose your provider.

[Alfa989]

probably even worse than microsoft overpriced products and with the iphone you cant even choose your provider.
Overpriced? Just because you say so? some are, but the majority are not.

And you will (with the iPhone 2G, or so they say)

[chewearn]

And you will (with the iPhone 2G, or so they say)

2G? I thought it's 3G? Or is Apple going backward against everyone else, mmm? :lol:

[Alfa989]

2G? I thought it's 3G? Or is Apple going backward against everyone else, mmm? :lol:

2G= Second generation... :rolleyes:

If I wanted to say 3G iPhone I would have said "3G iPhone", not iPhone 3G :D

[handy]

Back to the original poll: The time it would take Apple to overtake MS, (which I think they could do, given some decades) will have put the human population of the planet in the situation where the oil crisis & the global warming induced climate changes have wreaked havoc on most societies & their economies, so it is quite possible that by then the internet will only exist for the privileged wealthy tiny minority & their armed forces, & electricity will be a bed time story.

By then Apple: Cheer them or boo them will be a long way away from the top priorities of humanities concerns.

[karellen]

Back to the original poll: The time it would take Apple to overtake MS, (which I think they could do, given some decades) will have put the human population of the planet in the situation where the oil crisis & the global warming induced climate changes have wreaked havoc on most societies & their economies, so it is quite possible that by then the internet will only exist for the privileged wealthy tiny minority & their armed forces, & electricity will be a bed time story.

By then Apple: Cheer them or boo them will be a long way away from the top priorities of humanities concerns.

:( that's a pretty grim prediction. and in the meantime, one based on facts; I just hope that the future will be a little better and some of today problems will be solved by technology and good will (because I doubt that people will ever become moraly better of wiser)

[handy]

:( that's a pretty grim prediction.


I have been researching for a couple of years, & that is the most likely future for humanity I'm sorry to say. I sure do hope that I'm wrong.


and in the meantime, one based on facts;

Boy that is a BIG statement that you have not backed up in any way shape or form.


I just hope that the future will be a little better and some of today problems will be solved by technology and good will (because I doubt that people will ever become morally better of wiser)

& then you follow your statement based on facts with a variety of hopes for humanities future!?

Sorry, but wishing won't make it so.

[karellen]

I have been researching for a couple of years, & that is the most likely future for humanity I'm sorry to say. I sure do hope that I'm wrong.



Boy that is a BIG statement that you have not backed up in any way shape or form.



& then you follow your statement based on facts with a variety of hopes for humanities future!?

Sorry, but wishing won't make it so.

well I like to keep myself informed in various fields and problems (I study history & international relations and I hope some day I'll get to work in diplomacy or something close) and I consider myself to be a realist, but nevertheless I try not to let to the hope(s) for the future...How can we fight and do something if we don't believe that we can change something, make a difference?...For example those Red Cross volunteers that work in Africa, they won't eradicate famine but at least they'll manage to make some children less hungry and miserable. and this matters a lot
ps we've gone pretty offtopic with this ;)

[CrazyArcher]

I know what parts I want in my computer, and I want the freedom to have it precisely that way. Apple takes that freedom from me. Kay-thx-bye.

Comps aside, I hate Apple for their arrogant marketing attitude of iPods, iPhones and other iSucks. Those elitists try to say that they are the most awesome products in the universe, while they are clearly not. I don't like listen people lying.

[Kronie]

i dont leik apples(both kinds)... simply because mac is just overpriced HD monitor with OS very similar to linux.. they all come prepacked, so u cant choose what hardware u want to have in there. they are not upgradable, once it gets old u threw away ur spent $1000 in the garbage, and buy new one for $1000. compatibility. so linux has the wine wich could run most of windows applications. what about mac? ...o yea there is a crossover thingy -_- anyway. all you could do on macs is watching moovies, listening to the music, browsing internet(all of that we have in iphone/ipod touch), some photoshop, and some entertainment apps like the clone of moovie maker(i dont know whats its name -_-) and the music composer! yay! and the last but not least.. ONE MOUSE BUTTON! i mean comon! its not even a mouse! its a laser soap that makes clicking sounds xD

[chucky chuckaluck]

bunch of slimeballs. i wish bad things on the mac guy.

[x0as]

they all come prepacked, so u cant choose what hardware u want to have in there.

That's what makes them work so well imo, if you could properly install OS X on any hardware you'd have the same problems with drivers & incompatible hardware that linux & windows has.

so linux has the wine wich could run most of windows applications. what about mac?

Wine is available for OS X.

anyway. all you could do on macs is watching moovies, listening to the music, browsing internet(all of that we have in iphone/ipod touch), some photoshop, and some entertainment apps like the clone of moovie maker(i dont know whats its name -_-) and the music composer! yay!

Can do pretty much everything you can do in linux and more. Mac's are much more productive.

and the last but not least.. ONE MOUSE BUTTON! i mean comon! its not even a mouse! its a laser soap that makes clicking sounds xD

Do people really still think that?. Clicking the right side is unsurprisingly a right click.

http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/design.html

[chewearn]

2G= Second generation... :rolleyes:

If I wanted to say 3G iPhone I would have said "3G iPhone", not iPhone 3G :D

Ah hah!

The new iPhone finally announced, and it's called iPhone 3G.
http://www.apple.com/iphone/

Even Steve Jobs said it as iPhone 3G, instead of 3G iPhone.


.
Yes, it's childish, but it's greatly satisfying to say "I told you so". :mrgreen:

[thedevnull]

Booo! Apple is a joke! Get real hardware and a real OS!

:lolflag: