Your thoughts on Macintosh?

[BWF89]

Well for most of my life I've hated Macintosh computers with a vengence. I thought that the OS was hard to accomplish anythign on and couldn't do anythign. And I was right. Until our school switched from OS9 to OS10. And what a difference.

When I first started useing OS10 I liked it but still thought OS's with mainstream interfaces like Windows & *nix were better. But as I began to use them everyday some of their features really stuck out as cutting edge. Such as useing the alt button rathre than the control button to execuite keyboard commands and the fact that when you exited out of a program it's still runnign in the backround if you need to use it again. I can't really tell you why I've grown to like Macintosh. I will probably never buy a Mac because PC's are alot cheaper and MacOS isn't open source. But their new OS has really changed my opinion of the company for the better and if someone asked me what kind of computer is a good one to buy I'd definately reccomend a Mac.

Your thoughts?

[aysiu]

My bet is that most Ubuntu users like Macs.
I happen to think they look cool, but I hate the interface (yes, even with Expose, Dashboard, and Spotlight).

Looks = Yes
Use = No

[BWF89]

Why did you erace my post?

EDIT: Nevermind it's back.

[xequence]

Looks great, but honestly... Not many people are willing to buy a whole new computer (Especially one thats alot more expensive then a PC) just to get a different OS.

Though I really dont like the company. I hate how their MP3 players have a massive monopoly on the MP3 player market - It wouldent be bad if it was because of quality or a great player, but the reason they have the monopoly is because they were the first ones to make an MP3 player AND market it very well.

[aysiu]

Why did you erace my post?

EDIT: Nevermind it's back. Sorry. I kind of hijacked your thread with a poll. I like to read people's responses, but I also like a visual to go along with those responses.

[BWF89]

Sorry. I kind of hijacked your thread with a poll. I like to read people's responses, but I also like a visual to go along with those responses.
I would have added the option: "Macintosh is a great OS but I wouldn't use it because it's not open source".

[aysiu]

I would have added the option: "Macintosh is a great OS but I wouldn't use it because it's not open source". Damn. I forgot that! Unfortunately, I don't know how to tack another option on...

[BWF89]

Damn. I forgot that! Unfortunately, I don't know how to tack another option on...
I don't think you can once the poll has been voted in. You could always erace the poll and create a new one. Only 2 people have voted so far.

[BWF89]

Well for most of my life I've hated Macintosh computers with a vengence. I thought that the OS was hard to accomplish anythign on and couldn't do anythign. And I was right. Until our school switched from OS9 to OS10. And what a difference.

When I first started useing OS10 I liked it but still thought OS's with mainstream interfaces like Windows & *nix were better. But as I began to use them everyday some of their features really stuck out as cutting edge. Such as useing the alt button rathre than the control button to execuite keyboard commands and the fact that when you exited out of a program it's still runnign in the backround if you need to use it again. I can't really tell you why I've grown to like Macintosh. I will probably never buy a Mac because PC's are alot cheaper and MacOS isn't open source. But their new OS has really changed my opinion of the company for the better and if someone asked me what kind of computer is a good one to buy I'd definately reccomend a Mac.

Your thoughts?

[xequence]

There are really no choices on that poll that suit me :P

[arpunk]

iPods are nice, i dont own one though, too expensive and i rather use generic USB MP3 players. Apple computers (talking about laptops) are nice, i'd buy one as soon as they start shipping with the intel processor (make things cheaper).

I just love their design, its kinda innovating if you take a look at other laptop vendors like toshiba and compaq, and they tend to **** them with better hardware design as far as im concerned, too bad they ship with Mac OS, but that isnt a problem since we have a ppc ubuntu version ;)

[BWF89]

I made a new thread with updated options.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=97297

Could someone delete this one to avoid confusion?

[xequence]

I made a new thread with updated options.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=97297

Could someone delete this one to avoid confusion?

Wow, funny enough, again none of them suit me :P

[bored2k]

Missing option: I have never used a Mac.

I haven't.

[bionnaki]

I like Apple more than Microsoft, but I would never pay that much for their hardware/OS. Plus, I prefer to use and support opensource.

[jj26]

I'd have to agree with Xequence. None of the options really work. There needs to be one for indifferent people. I don't like mac, but I don't really hate it either. I'd just rather use a Linux or Windows based machine.

And I also have to agree that I really don't care for the company and think its really too bad that despite battery reliability issues and much higher prices, iPods still control the mp3 player market. But you gotta give them credit for their amazing job marketing it.

I also think its kinda funny how much Macs are moving more and more towards being PCs (Unix core, Intel processors, etc...)

[fuscia]

i considered buying a mac, but after using linux, i've lost my interest in it. it's very pretty, but i could even see getting sick of kate beckinsale if i owned her. the potential freedom offered by linux is too irresistable. plus, the greater options for hardware, macs conversion to intel, etc. etc....

[dtfinch]

Am I the only one here who never liked Mac?

[Iandefor]

My opinion of Macs: Blech/Blarg!

My only actual experiences with Macs are with my current school; we had some ridiculously ancient Macs that could barely handle booting when I first started attending. When these were all burgled we got a bunch of Emacs and a pair of G5's so good I've never seen a computer with better specs anywhere (But those were donated by a student). These all had OS X on them, and my experiences with OS X have only been good when it came to using Final Cut Pro; everything else was horrible. The UI is in serious need of unification, it's slow, inefficient, ugly, and makes pretenses towards being stylish; the best thing that ever happened to Macintosh, in my opinion, was the porting of Linux to the PPC architecture.

[oskude]

well, (as the topic is about mac, not osx)

i never had a mac, but i had to fiddle with a friends powerbook where he somehow messed up the linux boot partition (or what ever) and i (we) found out about

Open Firmware
http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn1061.html

would love to have that in my PC as standard :)

[benplaut]

they have some really good ideas (expose), but the interface is really inefficient. For a new user who i can't convince to use Linux, i'll still try to get them onto a mac.

Power to the *NIX!

[J.C. Denton]

I've used Macs since System 6. I drifted away from the Apple world during the System 9.2.2 years. My first encounter with OS X was 10.2 (Jaguar). I've always had an "older Mac" (e.g., LC III, Performa, Quadra) lying around. Last year, I bought a 17" PowerBook when my Sony Vaio running Gentoo died.

OS X is great. It's not perfect, but it suits my needs. Although I have to admit, I use all the various "major" operating systems. Windows for PC gaming, Mac for work and non-gaming activites, as well as a UNIX (in this case Ubuntu) system for work/programming.

At work, I've got my PowerBook tied to one monitor, and my Ubuntu system tied to another with a KVM. I frequently hop between the two, and find it makes me feel more efficient. Both operating systems have their strenghths. I often do my coding on the Mac with gvim, and then test on the Ubuntu system. Since I use a lot of X11 apps, having two OSes natively support X is pretty nice.

I can't see myself buying a Mac desktop for price reasons. The laptops are excellent though, IMO. I carry my PowerBook everywhere: home, work, university, coffee shops.

I guess the beauty of it is, it just works; just like Ubuntu. Except the PB works well, and has beautiful hardware too :).

[blueturtl]

If you're on a PC it's totally understandable to go Linux. I do not understand people who go out and buy macs to run Linux on them. Mac OS X does have better out-of-box support and accomplishes the basic tasks easily. Maybe you guys like the flashy hardware but prefer a tinkerable OS? :o

[Stormy Eyes]

Though I really dont like the company. I hate how their MP3 players have a massive monopoly on the MP3 player market - It wouldent be bad if it was because of quality or a great player, but the reason they have the monopoly is because they were the first ones to make an MP3 player AND market it very well.

Wait a second, are you telling me that the iPod doesn't rock like ninja?

[az]

If you're on a PC it's totally understandable to go Linux. I do not understand people who go out and buy macs to run Linux on them.

To avoid proprietary software.

[atoponce]

I love Mac OS X. It's pure sex! And it's obvious that practically everyone feels the same way looking at kde-look.org (http://www.kde-look.org). All the Aqua imitations and such. However, Mac isn't as user-friendly as they could be, and as such, keep me from using my iBook full-time.

[towsonu2003]

never used a mac in about 10 (???) years. mom used to have one, very old, and the monitor as big as an actual apple... had weird interface... now, they (computers & OS) look nice (looking through the window of an apple electronics shop) :)

too expensive

not open source => not so different from windows.

[ubuntu-geek]

I use my ibook for everything I will probably never use a PC for my main system again.

[poofyhairguy]

I use my ibook for everything I will probably never use a PC for my main system again.


Until the Minis can do dual head, no Mac for me.

[jnoreiko]

not open source => not so different from windows.

except that Apple's browser is standards-compliant ;)

I like my powerbook.
I think OS X is a fantastic OS, both in terms of looks and usability. Though it's not perfect, and even the latest release has a few irritating glitches and bugs... but way fewer than Windows.

[commodore]

I have never used mac, but I think that MAC RULES UR **** OFF! I like everything made by Apple. I would be even more happier if Mac would be free software (I prefer to say free software not open source).

[Mighty Mik]

I have used Mac OS from 1.1G onward to present, a little OS2, and even LisaOS. I have a Mini connected to a 19" BenQ LCD. One thing LINUX doesn't do: Video Conference. From Cornell's early days as CU-seeme, and thru today's vChat...there is nothing on LINUX that's even close*. I don't particuarly like Grub...but once i'm to a desktop i'm OK with LINUX. I *hate* the way generic apps look in windows, and the next iteration will blow (opinion mine), DRM, vid card requirement, and you'll have to get a DRM compliant monitor as well. welcome to 'trusted computing'. no thanks. Gaming i'll leave to a future purchase of an Xbox360. For me...LINUX just isn't mature enough...i still have to tweak it sometimes(that means WRITING stuff)...the only time i have to get under the Mac's hood is the occational bad app to toss it's prefs file. Other than that, it works pretty flawlessly for me.

*and no...no netmeeting for me. Client must be White Pine compatible.(White Pine its self sucks)

[xequence]

Wait a second, are you telling me that the iPod doesn't rock like ninja?

Yes.

[roachk71]

Well, what can I say...

The first computers I used from elementary to junior high school were Apples (II, //e, //c, //gs, and of course Macintosh), and I found the MacOS interface more efficient than the text-only interfaces of the time.

Of course, when Windows 3.11 (for workgroups) came out, I still thought the same way about the Macs of the time: still better, although 3.11 was among the most stable Windows versions.

I'm divided nearly evenly between MacOS and Linux when it comes to stability and GUI design... Now, however, I'm with Linux to stay. even if I manage to find an old PPC Mac out there, I'll probably install a PPC Linux distro on it. The geek factor and challenge alone on such a project make it more worthwhile than OS X!!! :razz:

[weasel fierce]

Im not a huge user or even know much about it, but the couple of times I have used recent mac's, I've always thoroughly enjoyed it

[prizrak]

I don't think that you can answer the question of which one is best, they both have their streangths and weaknesses. Linux is more of a professional grade OS with alot of possibilities for use at the organization level. OS X is mostly a home user OS that just works out of the box and needs no setting up.

[Linux BASHer]

I love the Mac. I use my Mac as my main machine for several reasons. For example, I haven't found apps as robust and easy to use as iMovie and iDVD for making home movies. And as another poster mentioned, video conferencing (via iChat) on the Mac is like on no other platform at the moment.

Many people mention not being Open-Source as a shortcoming of the Mac OS. Well, it's true that the entire OS is not Open-Source, but Mac OS X's foundation, Darwin, is, as is Safari. So it's not fair to say that it's "just like Windoze" or completely Closed-Source, because it isn't.

Don't get me wrong, I love and embrace Open-Source, and with that Linux. But though some people believe that it's the only way to go, and certainly I think it's one of the best ways to go, I think that other (business, philosophical, legal) model are okay too, as long as their not abused. For example, some of you may be console gamers-- Console and game makers have an entirely different (and usually not Open-Source) business model, yet you still buy.

The only OS that I truly dislike with a passion is M$ Windoze, not so much because of the software, but because of the company, what it represents, what it has done, and what it continues to do. I think that any legitimate alternative to Windoze is good. I think a varying choices of platforms and OSs are a good thing, and I think Open-Source and non Open-Source models can live together peacefully.

So in conclusion, I love the Mac, and rather than belittle it for not being Open-Source, I see it as just another choice users have to the M$ monopoly. I will stick with the Mac for the foreseeable future, unless Apple starts implementing invasive OS-level DRM, in which case I would just fully transition to Linux, which wouldn't be too difficult, since I already use it and am familiar with it.

[Sirin]

Looks great, but honestly... Not many people are willing to buy a whole new computer (Especially one thats alot more expensive then a PC) just to get a different OS.

Well, there might br some bad and some good about OS X on regular ordinary PCs.

The good part is, that OS X Tiger cost less than Windows XP. Professional and Home. People like saving their money.

The bad thing: People mostly rely on Windows for the job because they trust Microsoft more. Lots of people aren't really aware of the Apple world. Most people I've talked to still think that OS 9 is still the current OS, and some even think OS 6 is the current one, but what gets me is that none of them even knew that there was a version number for the Mac OSes. To them, it was just simply... Macintosh. Not to mention that it would take years to get OS X running on your daily average PC.

OS X is better with the Mac, and I believe that prices will fall after they switch to Intel. At the Worldwide Developers Conference 2005 (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/), you can see Steve Jobs using an Intel-based Mac. And by the way, with the FUD about performance issues with the Macs since they decided to use Intel processors, the performance was actually better than PowerPC-based Macs. ;)


Though I really dont like the company. I hate how their MP3 players have a massive monopoly on the MP3 player market - It wouldent be bad if it was because of quality or a great player, but the reason they have the monopoly is because they were the first ones to make an MP3 player AND market it very well.

So, You don't like Apple because hundreds of millions of people chose the iPod over the PlaysForSure (http://www.playsforsure.com/) (players that were made for Windows Media ONLY) players?

[Orporg]

I love Macs, but I honestly don't see that huge a difference between the hardware for PC and Mac desktops. Especially now that Apple is moving over to Intel chips.

On the laptop front, I wouldnt't buy anything else unless I had to. My iBook has been through hell and back for the last 6 year and it's still alive and kicking. Contrast that to my girlfriend's Dell which lasted less than a year. I think Apple simply does very good quality control (most of the time) on their hardware and having OS X is a bonus on top of that.

Super relibability isn't as much of an issue for me in desktops because I can start ripping out individual parts and replacing them. Not so easy with laptops.

[Rovenhot]

Yes.
You guys make the iPod's early publicity sound like a bad thing. True, it did have a major impact in its popularity today, but it actually is superior to almost all other MP3 players. Here's why:

1. A menu-based interface so stupidly simple that other Creative and other businesses designing MP3 players have ripped it off in various, barely-not-patent-infringing ways.

2. Excellent cost-effectiveness. (Creative's Zen devices are approximately equal-priced: $300 = 30GB.)

3. It's the only device capable of playing music from the iTunes Music Store, which, <i>because</i> of its early publicity, boasts the largest selection.

4. It plays videos (unlike Zen players), which the iTunes Music Store also offers (unlike Rhapsody or Napster).

5. It integrates seamlessly with iTunes, which in turn intergrates very tightly with the OS, particularly Front Row, the new remote-controlled media-center-like feature of Apple's new iMacs.

[jdodson]

its a great system, it just does not respect my freedom. so i dont use it. but there is nothing wrong with it as far as i can tell beyond the freedom bit, which is so huge i wont use it.

[kadymae]

Well for most of my life I've hated Macintosh computers with a vengence. I thought that the OS was hard to accomplish anythign on and couldn't do anythign. And I was right. Until our school switched from OS9 to OS10. And what a difference.

Word. Classic Mac OS seems to have been designed to drive me bonkers.

I will probably never buy a Mac because PC's are alot cheaper and MacOS isn't open source. But their new OS has really changed my opinion of the company for the better and if someone asked me what kind of computer is a good one to buy I'd definately reccomend a Mac.

Your thoughts?


Okay, keep in mind, the nice thing about Macs is they age well.

If I may make a suggestion for getting an OS X machine in your price range?

Troll eBay/Craigslist/etc. for a *slotload* iMac. These can be picked up pretty cheap and they run OS X quite well (provided you put enough ram in them.) You can get a g3 400/450 for about $100-125.

Or, look for a Blue and White G3. (The B&W G3 450 is the sweetest [read the profile on lowendmac.com to see why]) The B&W's got that cool draw gate case, can be easily and cheaply stocked with ram, is fairly cheap to upgrade to a G4 and will run OS X and Ubuntu with ease. (Provided you've stocked it with ram. Speaking from experience, 320mb on a G3 350 is sufficient.)

Or, to give another example of how long a Mac can have a useful life, multiple Eisner winning colorist Laura Martin (http://www.sequentialtart.com/article.php?id=68) mainly uses a PowerMac G4 500 ("sawtooth"), a machine she got in May 2000. (She does have 17" G4 laptop which she when deadline crunching at cons.)

You can get a used "sawtooth" for under $200.

A used 10.3 disk won't be that expensive. (10.3 is the version where they first really optimised everything for speed. 10.2 is fine and stable, but 10.3 screams in comparison.)

Now, I remember when I was your age (16 years ago, btw) and how much money I didn't have, and what a pain in the butt it is to save up for something. I got $20 a week allowance to put gas in my car and have pizza with my friends. If I needed more money I had to earn it. (Oy, did I do a lot of babysitting!)

If you can scrape up $300 you can buy (and outfit) a used, but still VERY useful Mac.

Right now I dual Boot Ubuntu and OS X on a PowerBook ("Pismo") G3 500 that I picked up dirt cheap on eBay and gradually (as my budget allowed) added a DVD drive, new battery, AirPort Card and 256mb of ram (total is 512k) this is a six year old machine and it runs both OSes just fine.

---

As far as OSes go, yes, OS X is my choice. It really is "Unix for the masses." And with rare exception, it. just. works.

So why Ubuntu? Because it's the one Linux distro I've seen so far that really takes its cue from OS X. Sure there are a goodly amount of rough edges, but I've yet to hit an application in the default install that was a broken pile of glop. "Team Ubuntu" are bending over backwards to ship a distro that's not all about being bleeding edge and full of "cool" things. They haven't yet hit the "it just works" level of OS X, but they know all about elegant simplicity and less is more.

[Tipo]

I grew up with Macs. My dad's company adopted them from day 1 in 1984, so I always had them in my house. I _never_ owned a PC until about a year ago. After OS X, I saw all the unix based stuff, thought the terminal was cool and learned the terminology. Then I got interested in Linux because it had the unix base as well, and stumbled upon Ubuntu. So I installed it on the PC I had in my house.

Bottom line, I like OS X a little better. But Ubuntu is starting to ease my grasp on OS X, but I don't think it'll take it over completely:p

[engla]

I grew up with Macs. My dad's company adopted them from day 1 in 1984, so I always had them in my house. I _never_ owned a PC until about a year ago. After OS X, I saw all the unix based stuff, thought the terminal was cool and learned the terminology. Then I got interested in Linux because it had the unix base as well, and stumbled upon Ubuntu. So I installed it on the PC I had in my house.

Bottom line, I like OS X a little better. But Ubuntu is starting to ease my grasp on OS X, but I don't think it'll take it over completely:p
Hey this is very similar to my experience.

I voted "It's the best! But I only use open source operating systems", because it's closest. It's not really true, because I use both osx and ubuntu, but the latest months it's been 100% ubuntu.

I have to say that I really love OSX though. Not because it's perfect, but it's very very good, and I've learnt to use the Cocoa programming API. It's easy to make software for OSX, and there is some good software.

Lots of drawbacks though, but if I didn't care about money and wasn't so die-hard tinkerning that I am now, OSX would be perfect.

In OSX-land I ended up tinkering with everything, using open-source software (like adium (built on gaim), camino (on gecko)) then using irssi, screen, ssh etc ... you really see that it's leading to linux :-)

Now at the uni we use Debian GNU Linux there and so Ubuntu is really really compatible with that.. if only MATLAB or Maple was available for linux/ppc all would be perfect with school tools to (they provide us with software like that, but none of those are available for ppc. Proprietary software very seldom is :/)

[SHodges]

If I had the money, and I don't, I'd use Macs over PCs, and if I used Macs and not PCs, I'd use MacOS and not Ubuntu. However, unless I end up getting the iBook I want for college, or through some miracle I suddenly start making drug dealer cash and can afford a Macbook Pro, that will never happen, so I went with "Mac OS X is better than Linux, but I just can't afford it". I really wish Apple gave their stuff away :(

[Klaidas]

Missing option: I have never used a Mac.

I haven't.

Same here. I wish I could try :-?

[bjweeks]

I haven't used a mac since before the powerpc days...

[OfficerDick]

its a great system, it just does not respect my freedom. so i dont use it. but there is nothing wrong with it as far as i can tell beyond the freedom bit, which is so huge i wont use it.
I have an iMac my self .. i recently bought it (intel 20") i was suprised that it had so much freedom... i used ubuntu alot, its great! but osx is more finished. There is not such freedom in apple apps, third party and darwin opensource apps offer alot of freedom. But on the other hand apple software is really stable and runs smooth and works! no compiling no nothing ... im really looking forward to daper to se what it has to offer. but osx is still a great leap ahead from other OS's. But windows and the linux comunity is catching up. And thats what really develeps OS's competetion!

[mrtaber]

I'm going in the opposite direction: I just sold my 60Gb iPod with video, and I"m selling my 17" PowerBook and accessories. I really got tired of Apple's walled garden. Apple hardware is nice, if pricey, and their software is nice, too, if a little underbaked. And I got tired of the yearly expense:

.Mac $100
iLife upgrade $80
iWork upgrade $80
OS upgrade (every 18 months), so 2/3 of total cost per year
$80

That's $340/year, which, at nearly $30 a month, is talking some real money. But I'm not going to bad mouth Apple; as I said, I liked their hardware, and their software. It was just time for me to move on (I've been using Macs since 1984).

Mark :)

[anti-net]

If macs were cheaper i'd buy one. I gotta buy a laptop for college and i hear that the new ibook are comming out soon, would love to see if i could have a dual-boot with ubuntu as i'm building software for linux now :)

They some nice GUI, but no so nice price tag

[kadymae]

And I got tired of the yearly expense:

.Mac $100
iLife upgrade $80
iWork upgrade $80
OS upgrade (every 18 months), so 2/3 of total cost per year
$80



And yet none of these things are mandatory. Your post almost makes it sound like they are.

.mac -- never used it

iLife -- never upgraded

iWork -- I've got Office and until that stops working, iWork has nothing compelling for me.

OS Upgrade -- Not mandatory. With one exception, all my machines still run 10.3.x because it still works just fine.

[mrtaber]

Very true; I should have clarified. None of the things I listed is mandatory. However, one is not having the full Macintosh experience without .Mac and upgraded OS, at the very least. And, let me add, it is a very nice experience. I speak from from a former Mac-head's point of view here. Anyway, the point is, if you want to drink the Macintosh Kool-Aid to the depths, there is a considerable tax every year for it.

Of course, with Windows you have your antivirus and security subscriptions to upgrade every year, and so on.

Mark :)

[Sirin]

they have some really good ideas (expose), but the interface is really inefficient. For a new user who i can't convince to use Linux, i'll still try to get them onto a mac.

Power to the *NIX!

The Mac IS *NIX. :)

[K.Mandla]

I think of MacOS's the same way I think of Windows. Neither one is for me any more. But if it looks good to you, then feel free.

Oh, this is the worst-looking hat I ever saw. What, when you buy a hat like this I bet you get a free bowl of soup, huh? Oh, it looks good on you though.

[MetalMike]

Growing up in the 80’s I used nothing but Apple Macintosh computers. My Dad being a teacher meant totting a large padded case home every night with a Macintosh Classic stuffed neatly inside. I’ve fond memories of that machine; getting to set it up every night, playing The Ancient Art of War with him after all the marking was completed.

Then along came Windows 95, which by any stretch of the imagination is not the most stable operating system but I found my productivity went through the roof. My family eventually bought a PC with Windows 95 on it and it soon became quite apparent that the quirky things like perpetual system hangs and endless other system anomalies were not meant to be commonplace as they were on system 6 and system 7.

As the story goes I got a job at a library with a mixed network of PCs and Macs, mostly the latter, and for two years I fought tooth and nail with those Macs as they seemed to do whatever they pleased seldom giving rhyme or reason to their actions.

Cut to almost 10 years later and I find myself surrounded by Apple hardware as a technician for a school district. I left Mac at around 7.5.x I believe, visited it at 8.x and dabbled in 9.x and now that I am using 10.3.x and 10.4.x the improvement is night and day. The one thing I find though is I still cannot push the computer too much.

When I get home and sit down in front of my personal computer it is not at all uncommon for me to launch Eudora, Firefox, Miranda, Word and Winamp. If I try to pull stunts like that on my Powerbook or my G5 I am asking for trouble. I have to restart my Powerbook about once or twice a day, which is too much for me. Any break in productivity is infuriating. Even worse is the spinning beach ball of death – as it thinks, and thinks, and thinks – never reaching any conclusion on whether or not to open the application, crash it or otherwise.

I think this argument of aesthetics is foolish. Sure it does play a certain factor to the end-user’s decision to use the OS or not but what it comes down to is who gives a **** what it looks like, does it work? Saying OS X is a superior OS because people have based themes on it for various desktop environments is hardly even worth mentioning.

As far as hardware goes – Apple is taking their entire client base for the proverbial ride. The individual parts for their systems are oft inferior but their price point is usually way beyond reasonable. They’re usually 2-3 years behind in technology; their graphics adapters – case in point. As a soon to be certified technician I cannot divulge the exact prices but let me tell you – for the price of most replacement logic boards you could put together a pretty nice i386-based system.

Now that I am getting into Linux I notice some of the similarities between it and OS X although it seems infinitely more hardy, refined and nimble with a focus on stability and user customization. I use OS X every day and it is damn sexy to look at. That I cannot deny – however the usability of it is best left to the novice who aren’t fluent with every shortcut and who don’t demand peak performance.

[Stormy Eyes]

I'd rather have my thoughts on a Beowulf cluster of Ubuntu boxen.

[kadymae]

When I get home and sit down in front of my personal computer it is not at all uncommon for me to launch Eudora, Firefox, Miranda, Word and Winamp. If I try to pull stunts like that on my Powerbook or my G5 I am asking for trouble.

Really? Because I often have Firefox, Opera, Dreamweaver, iTunes and Entourage and Word open on my Dual g4 and have no problems or hangs at all.

My huband often has Opera, Word, Excel, and Mail open on his iMac (intel) at work and again, rock solid stable.

How much ram do you have and what verson of OS X are you using?

Have you tried taking a look at the system logs to see what is going on?

I have to restart my Powerbook about once or twice a day, which is too much for me. Any break in productivity is infuriating. Even worse is the spinning beach ball of death – as it thinks, and thinks, and thinks – never reaching any conclusion on whether or not to open the application, crash it or otherwise.

Hmm ... the last time I had any problems like that I was using 10.3.5 (which *trashed* my PowerMac but ran just fine on my iMac and iBook).

[MetalMike]

10.4.5, 1.5GHz, 1GB DDR 2700 - it isn't so much a matter of having all of the applications running simultaneously it is the initial launch time of each application, especially when I attempt to launch them within seconds of each other; it is ridiculous! I find whenever I throw a flurry of commands at the system I’m always severely limited by the SBBoD. Now either I’m ultra-fast or these computers don’t like my touch. Even my Dual 1.8 G5 cannot cut the mustard as far as I’m concerned.

The number of components in Apple equipment that fail as a result of either poor planning or poor engineering are rarely replaced by Apple but instead the end-user. The obscenely overpriced and horribly under-ranged Airport is a prime example of this. They put in cheap, weak, odd voltage capacitors, no ventilation and they bust – whose fault is that? Yours!?! Doesn’t seem fair to me, doesn’t seem right.

I thought things would be a lot better with OS X but I guess I forgot that it is still the same hardware underneath – and while it is certainly heaps better than OS 9 it still feels frail to me.

[kadymae]

it is the initial launch time of each application, especially when I attempt to launch them within seconds of each other; it is ridiculous!

Um ... when I launch that many power intensive apps damn near simotaneously on *any* machine, it chokes.

Hell, here at work on this Gateway with XP Pro and a Gig of ram, if I try to launch Opera, Sea Monkey, iTunes, and Trillian in a bam bam bam bam fashion it slows to a crawl.

[htinn]

Linux is nicer in a number of ways than Mac, but you can't beat how stupidly easy it is to find Mac-friendly hardware.

Another thought: Why Intel? If they were going to go x86, they really should have gone with AMD. :(

[endersshadow]

Another thought: Why Intel? If they were going to go x86, they really should have gone with AMD. :(

Marketing. Everybody knows "Intel Inside" and the like...nobody knows, "AMD...yeah." Apple was looking for a less power hungry chip than the PPC...Intel provided it for them and provided brand recognition. Simple business.

[AlphaMack]

I was an avid OS X user until I discovered Ubuntu. So far I have 2 machines running Ubuntu (one as a dual-booting OS X/Ubuntu). However, even before that I began to have a disdain for Apple's "security through obscurity" policy recently after the Oompa Loompa episode.

There are some dangerous flaws in OS X <10.4.5 that have yet to be addressed by Apple as summed up quite nicely here (http://www.rixstep.com/2/20060401,00.shtml). Apple, as usual, is in a state of denial. It took an act of God to get my Rev. A PowerBook's display replaced twice from the "white spots" on the LCD. Apple refused to acknowledge the problem as a design flaw until enough PowerBook users chimed in.

Comparing OS X to Ubuntu, it's a pig on resources.

My next hardware purchase will definitely not be a Mac. I can't justify spending the extra money for what amounts to nothing more than the same internals as commodity PCs in a pretty box. Not to mention having to spend money on software updates just to have them x86-compatible.

The only thing keeping me on OS X is wireless. I have yet to succeed in making my Airport card get onto my network (at least it sees the network in iwconfig).

Then of course are the zealots who are showing me the door whenever I speak ill of One Infinite Bloop.

[mrgnash]

Where is the 'I hate Mac, it's evil' option?

[nickle]

My bet is that most Ubuntu users like Macs.
I happen to think they look cool, but I hate the interface (yes, even with Expose, Dashboard, and Spotlight).

Looks = Yes
Use = No My bet is that most users like Macs.
They look cool, and are generally powerful, well thought out, not hugely expensive when you consider the whole package, but somehow lack the sense of advendure associated and variety associated with Linux

[SolidAndShade]

Before college I used Macs occasionally for school and didn't particularly like them. Now I work in a Mac-exclusive office and I've developed a fiery loathing for the Mac operating system and computing philosophy.

I never understood why OSX is said to be user-friendly; I think a lot of people who say that are just taken in by Apple's marketing and the slick looks of Aqua. Apple has great designers and all their stuff looks very pretty, but I find OSX to be very sluggish and inefficient. It takes me, on average, twice as many clicks to do things in OSX as it does to do things in Gnome.

For instance, I have to open two Finder windows to efficiently drag files from one directory to another directory in the same subdirectory, while Nautilus with it's directory tree display makes this process a lot easier. When I have Word, Photoshop and Firefox windows open it becomes a massive chore to navigate among them without a taskbar, and my multitasking on office Macs doesn't approach the scale of what I do with Ubuntu. I currently have more than 30 windows open on 4 desktops with no trouble.

Expose is very nice when you're editing pictures and you want to quickly compare a few of them, but as an all-purpose task switcher it's terrible. My 30 windows would be too small to recognize with Expose. I'll admit that OSX has a few redeeming qualities, while the Classic OS had none.

Aside from that I find Apple's computing philosophy loathsome, especially from the standpoint of the free software movement. Apple wants nothing less than iron-fisted control of every computer they sell, and they don't so much support OSS as they see it as a convenient source of quality code they don't have to pay to develop. Don't forget how bad Macs' networking behavior was before they imported all that BSD code.

Still, though, I like them more than Microsoft.

[LinuxKid]

I actually love mac, but I wasn't able to get it (and I'm still not able) so I really wanted an alternative to windows and I found linux and I really like linux now also. I think the two operating systems were built for two different things and I actually prefer the thing that mac was made for more than the thing linux was made for.

for the record I have to say something: I know mac os x is based on freebsd and darwin which are both open source, but sometimes a company doesn't want to release the source and I think they have the right to choose. This is exactly what the gpl license allows. They want to be paid for all the hard work they put into it and they have every right to believe that if they release its source also, it will be copied and they will lose money.

Imagine for a second what everyones' opinions would be if mac were like another distro, it may have actually been the top distro on distrowatch above ubuntu. I feel that there is a lot of mac hate here, but I can say from my experience in the mac area that they never hate linux, bsd, etc. they even try to support it (check out ##mac on irc.freenode.net). I think anyone who has an issue against Apple about any above should at least lighten up a little and try to walk in their footsteps for a second.

[mrgnash]

Imagine for a second what everyones' opinions would be if mac were like another distro, it may have actually been the top distro on distrowatch above ubuntu. I feel that there is a lot of mac hate here, but I can say from my experience in the mac area that they never hate linux, bsd, etc. they even try to support it (check out ##mac on irc.freenode.net). I think anyone who has an issue against Apple about any above should at least lighten up a little and try to walk in their footsteps for a second

One acronym: DRM.

Apple do not 'try and support' Linux. Quite the opposite. They deliberately engineered their entire iTunes service so that it is only compatible with MS Windows and OSX. Even if you pay for their products, you can't use them in the way you choose -- on an open source operating system, for instance. Even MS rarely sink that low.

[LinuxKid]

Apple do not 'try and support' Linux. Quite the opposite. They deliberately engineered their entire iTunes service so that it is only compatible with MS Windows and OSX. Even if you pay for their products, you can't use them in the way you choose -- on an open source operating system, for instance. Even MS rarely sink that low.

actually they support yellowdog linux

believe me they never engineered it for windows and frankly linux isn't big enough to go through the hassle of making it available for linux (this is why software vendors don't really give much support for linux)

microsoft won't even mention "open source" (except on their commercials against linux ;)), they hate it

[BoyOfDestiny]

actually they support yellowdog linux

believe me they never engineered it for windows and frankly linux isn't big enough to go through the hassle of making it available for linux (this is why software vendors don't really give much support for linux)

microsoft won't even mention "open source" (except on their commercials against linux ;)), they hate it

???

Dude what are you talking about? They are afraid of the GPL. But MS has benefited from open source. MS Windows has BSD code in it (tcp/ip stack). They have their shared source initiative and even run a Linux lab http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,2180,1813672,00.asp

They are providing support for Linux on their virtual server software.
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2153340/shock-microsoft-supports-linux

I've never seen any commercials where micrsoft 'disses' open source. They've incorrectly referred to it as "non-commercial", this is false you can sell GPL software.

Where has apple said it supports puppy linux? I tried googling, and nothing came up on the issue.

[kurros]

Where has apple said it supports puppy linux? I tried googling, and nothing came up on the issue.

I believe at some point they were selling Yellow Dog Linux on store.apple.com but that's the most support I really recall.

[Apocalypse]

Apple may not be supporting Linux, but now, they do (sort of) support windows:

http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

Be affraid