PDA

View Full Version : Mac OSX makes me feel stupid.



frup
May 9th, 2007, 02:17 PM
Seriously... It treats me as if I am so dumb. Is there even a decent admin mode? How the hell am I supposed network and share properly over DHCP?

They've dumbed it down so much it's impossible to get anything done.

Oh and I thought macs had a cube like compiz.. I saw expose's features (I looked at everything the mac could do it took me about 20 mins to have decent look at all 10 features)

This is my girlfriend's families new mac (30 inch screen one) and I was trying to network it with her edgy PC and her sisters old iMAc (they can't even network automatically, how stupid).

lol Ubuntu is the only operating system for me, maybe I should just stick to that. It just makes sense.

Alfa989
May 9th, 2007, 03:01 PM
Seriously... It treats me as if I am so dumb. Is there even a decent admin mode? How the hell am I supposed network and share properly over DHCP?

Admin mode? Go to System preferences>Accounts...
Network? System preferences>Network


They've dumbed it down so much it's impossible to get anything done.

Really? I find that I can do much more on a Mac...


Oh and I thought macs had a cube like compiz.. I saw expose's features (I looked at everything the mac could do it took me about 20 mins to have decent look at all 10 features)

About the "compiz cube", try fast user switching...
ExposÚ is tremendously useful, instead of the bloody taskbar in GNOME or Windoze...


This is my girlfriend's families new mac (30 inch screen one) and I was trying to network it with her edgy PC and her sisters old iMAc (they can't even network automatically, how stupid).
30"? Is it a Mac Pro?
I find Mac OS X to network very easily, as opposed to Windows or even Ubuntu (network doesn't work since a month ago...), it's got the best Wi-Fi support out there and gets into networks in a snap...

Eric Layne
May 9th, 2007, 03:17 PM
How the hell am I supposed network and share properly over DHCP?
Networking on a OS X is exceedingly easy... It might help if you took 10 minutes to learn the system. Keep in mind, there will be no hacks or terminal commands to execute like in Ubuntu.


(I looked at everything the mac could do it took me about 20 mins to have decent look at all 10 features)
Mac features let me be more productive than both Windows and Linux combined.

Do try to keep an open mind when using a new system...isn't that a mantra of the Ubuntu community? :wink:

aysiu
May 9th, 2007, 04:07 PM
If you want advanced stuff in Mac, get used to using the terminal and editing .plist files. It's worse than people make Ubuntu sound. At least we have
gksudo nautilus There is no
gksudo Finder as far as I know.

When my wife's widgets in Tiger were screwed up, we ended up having to find a system library file and using sudo nano to fix it. I walked her through it, and she loved it. Good thing I learned how to use the terminal in Ubuntu.

Josh1
May 9th, 2007, 04:11 PM
Really? I find that I can do much more on a Mac...

Is that because you can't do anything on a Mac? Only reason I would use a Mac is if it was free and came with full suite of Adobe CS3 for Mac, (Adobe is an excellent company for making products.. no comments about their pricetag).

Alfa989
May 9th, 2007, 06:49 PM
Is that because you can't do anything on a Mac? Only reason I would use a Mac is if it was free and came with full suite of Adobe CS3 for Mac, (Adobe is an excellent company for making products.. no comments about their pricetag).

At least I can:
Run Creative Suite :D
Edit videos with ease
Be able not to loose time fiddling with my system to make it work...
Get 0 viruses
Have an easy-to-use GUI
Install OS X easily (Not like Ubuntu that makes you choose the bloody mounting points... And some people say it's for "human beings"...) :P
And so on...

aysiu
May 9th, 2007, 06:58 PM
At least I can:
Be able not to loose time fiddling with my system to make it work... My wife's spent some time fiddling to make her Mac work. (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-36505.html%3C/t-80341.html)

And if you buy a Ubuntu preinstalled computer, you'd be amazed at how little fiddling you have to do.

Get 0 viruses Uh, and this is different from Ubuntu how?

Have an easy-to-use GUI Only if you're used to it.

Install OS X easily (Not like Ubuntu that makes you choose the bloody mounting points... You need to set up mount points only if you're setting up a dual boot. If you just do a regular installation, the installer takes care of all of that for you.
And so on... What? More pro-Apple anti-Ubuntu FUD and lies? Bring it on! You're starting to believe those "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" commercials, aren't you?

I like OS X as much as the next person does, but obviously not as much as you do.

frup
May 10th, 2007, 12:27 AM
Please note this was slightly sarcastic in reference to the people who say these sorts of things about Ubuntu :)

But yeah I did find it quite hard, I only spent 20 mins as I had to go somewhere but I activated filesharing and windows sharing and then made a SMB share on the edgy PC, the mac couldn't see it, The edgy PC could see the mac computer, but I couldn't find out how to share files on the MAC.

Not sure exactly if it was 30 inches, but I think so, we use centemetres here, it was almost twice the width of a 17 inch screen though, same height.

But really I did feel stupid. It felt too simple, like all I can use it for is opening the programs on the bar down the bottom and nothing else. lol. Seriously though I think Ubuntu is the best. As Ubuntu gets older, It will get better, Having every bit easily changable IF you want to is important, Only linux based systems offer that. Funny thing is I couldn't work out how to open the mac terminal. It's the second time I've really tried a mac running OSX. Other times I've only "touched" it.

I will need to work out how to network them because the printer attached to the Mac is USB so it will be easier to just send across the file than set up a network printer :S (I can't do this with USB cos I can't be bothered/ don't even know if its possible lol)

goumples
May 10th, 2007, 01:33 AM
A family member of mine recently bought a Mac.. and it was like a breath of fresh air. Everything was easy enough to figure out, and this was the first time I'd ever used one. Maybe your problem is familiarity.. most people know windows and only windows.. A little experience will clear up any issues you are having..

Enverex
May 10th, 2007, 01:59 AM
Regarding the thread title, those are the people it's marketed to. Look at the adverts, any sane person would realise that anything can "listen to music and share photos". Apples marketing which consists almost entirely on lies, doubt, confusion and basically misleading people is why I will never buy an Apple product.

Alfa989
May 10th, 2007, 04:34 PM
Apple's marketing which consists almost entirely on lies, doubt, confusion and basically misleading people is why I will never buy an Apple product.

1.- They are not saying lies if you take PC as "Windows PC", and they are definitely not confusing people...
2.- Never? You don't know what you're loosing mate...

Alfa989
May 10th, 2007, 04:59 PM
My wife's spent some time fiddling to make her Mac work. (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-36505.html%3C/t-80341.html)

That's a minor problem... It could just be solved by repairing permissions... If not, doing an "archive and install" would definitely solve it... :)


And if you buy a Ubuntu preinstalled computer, you'd be amazed at how little fiddling you have to do.

The only manufacturer that does that (that I know) is System67, and you can't go into a shop and ask for a "Ubuntu PC"


Uh, and this is different from Ubuntu how?

There are more than 0 viruses for Linux...


Only if you're used to it.

Mac OS X is the easiest-to-use OS out there, not only based on my experience, but also on many other's...


You need to set up mount points only if you're setting up a dual boot. If you just do a regular installation, the installer takes care of all of that for you.

Yup, I know, but what person would like to wipe the windoze partition to install Linux taking up all the drive? The most likely use a dual-boot for games and other win-only apps... And don't get me started about the Swap partition...


What? More pro-Apple anti-Ubuntu FUD and lies? Bring it on! You're starting to believe those "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" commercials, aren't you?

Because the are true... (For windows)... :(

Lord Illidan
May 10th, 2007, 05:05 PM
That's a minor problem... It could just be solved by repairing permissions... If not, doing an "archive and install" would definitely solve it... :)



The only manufacturer that does that (that I know) is System67, and you can't go into a shop and ask for a "Ubuntu PC"



There are more than 0 viruses for Linux...



Mac OS X is the easiest-to-use OS out there, not only based on my experience, but also on many other's...



Yup, I know, but what person would like to wipe the windoze partition to install Linux taking up all the drive? The most likely use a dual-boot for games and other win-only apps... And don't get me started about the Swap partition...



Because the are true... (For windows)... :(

There are more viruses for Mac, than for Linux, check for yourself. Mac users are not immune, neither are Linux users.

Also, Dell is about to bundle Ubuntu with it's machines in a few weeks time, in the US.

ghowells
May 10th, 2007, 05:26 PM
On the Virus issue, The Register had an article about this a few years ago: here (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/)

It's mostly a Linux/OS X vs Windows article but it gives some good background on why there are differences.

On the original issue, I think it really is down to what you are used to and both the Mac and Linux community are highly loyal about their choice of OS. The fact of the matter is that they are both Unix-like Operating Systems and both have their advantages and disadvantages. Ubuntu is not as mature as OS X but having said that OS X only surfaced as a mish-mash of DarwinBSD/NexStep with a pretty (and very good) GUI in 2001 so it has about the same pedigree if you look at each product's parent project (Debian for Ubuntu and Darwin for OS X). Yes BSD pre-dates Linux but development has been nowhere near as rampant or prolific primarily due to licensing issues with AT&T in the early days.

aysiu
May 10th, 2007, 05:32 PM
That's a minor problem... It could just be solved by repairing permissions... If not, doing an "archive and install" would definitely solve it... :) Didn't feel minor to my wife when she was on the verge of tears. And I've also experienced only minor problems in Ubuntu. So what's your point?


The only manufacturer that does that (that I know) is System67, and you can't go into a shop and ask for a "Ubuntu PC" Haven't been keeping up with the news, lately, then. Dell is going to start selling consumer desktops and laptops with Ubuntu preloaded. And even barring that, System76 isn't the only company selling preinstalled Linux or Ubuntu (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=2628897&postcount=177)


There are more than 0 viruses for Linux... And there are more than 0 viruses for Mac OS X. What's your point? Or are you going to start arguing semantics about worms vs. viruses?


Mac OS X is the easiest-to-use OS out there, not only based on my experience, but also on many other's... So what? Could that have anything to do with the hardware and software being made for each (which I think is a great idea... one of the only ones Ubuntu should take from Apple)?


Yup, I know, but what person would like to wipe the windoze partition to install Linux taking up all the drive? But that's not a problem with the OS. That's a problem with the economic circumstances. Until most people start buying Ubuntu preloaded, they'll always start with Windows there first. If you're going to say, "It's too bad Ubuntu has these social and economic forces working against it," I'll agree, but if you're going to make it sound as if the OS is technically more difficult to install than Mac OS X, then you're full of it.

pelle.k
May 10th, 2007, 06:27 PM
There are more than 0 viruses for Linux...
Ooh! flaimbait...
So, where's the hard facts?

[/edit]what i meant is, give me a comparison between linux and macos, based on a "real" study.[edit]

Alfa989
May 10th, 2007, 08:30 PM
Didn't feel minor to my wife when she was on the verge of tears. And I've also experienced only minor problems in Ubuntu. So what's your point?

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you... :(


And there are more than 0 viruses for Mac OS X. What's your point? Or are you going to start arguing semantics about worms vs. viruses?

Today (10-05-2007) there are 0 (zero) viruses or worm or whatever for Mac OS X


If you're going to make it sound as if the OS is technically more difficult to install than Mac OS X, then you're full of it.

Yes, that's what I'm basically saying...

Alfa989
May 10th, 2007, 08:42 PM
Ooh! flaimbait...
So, where's the hard facts?

[/edit]what i meant is, give me a comparison between linux and macos, based on a "real" study.[edit]

Here you got some links:
An interview (http://www.techworld.com/security/features/index.cfm?featureid=1926&pagtype=samecatsamechan)
List of Linux viruses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_computer_viruses)
A comparison (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus_statistics#General_Purpose_Operating_Systems )
About embedded OSs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus_statistics#Embedded_Operating_Systems)

Alfa989
May 10th, 2007, 08:45 PM
There are more viruses for Mac, than for Linux, check for yourself. Mac users are not immune, neither are Linux users.

There are more viruses for Linux (30 or so) than for OS X (0)...


Also, Dell is about to bundle Ubuntu with it's machines in a few weeks time, in the US.
Yes! How could I forget! How stupid! ] (banging head on desk) Let's hope that doesn't come with a price increase because they need to "train new support guys", as it happened before somehere... :|

OFFTOPIC--> Edit: Geez, I didn't know there were so many viruses for Symbian... I'm getting an E61 soon, so does anyone advise me to get an antivirus for it?

pelle.k
May 10th, 2007, 10:14 PM
There are more viruses for Linux (30 or so) than for OS X (0)...
Ok, since you posted your "hard facts" from wikipedia ;) i'll do something similar;

Mac OS X hit by second virus through Bluetooth (http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/3363/53/)

or this;
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/)

i quote;

There are about 60,000 viruses known for Windows, 40 or so for the Macintosh, about 5 for commercial Unix versions, and perhaps 40 for Linux. Most of the Windows viruses are not important, but many hundreds have caused widespread damage. Two or three of the Macintosh viruses were widespread enough to be of importance. None of the Unix or Linux viruses became widespread - most were confined to the laboratory

Enverex
May 11th, 2007, 03:45 AM
1.- They are not saying lies if you take PC as "Windows PC", and they are definitely not confusing people....

Yes, they are and I'm not referring just to the "Hi, I'm a PC, Hi, I'm a Twa.." adverts.


2.- Never? You don't know what you're loosing mate...

Just because I refuse to fund them it doesn't mean I've never used any of their products. And yes, I do know what I'm "losing" which is "annoying fanboyism".

misfitpierce
May 11th, 2007, 08:02 AM
Honestly mac os x is as great as any other OS (besides windows). Sort of like yin and yang is how it goes. For all the good there is equal bad to balance it. Windows has tons and tons of programs... but has viruses! Mac has simplicity and looks stock.... but is limited to functionality at some level... Linux distros have great open source support and lots of things other OS's dont... but is a bit more complex atm(not for long).

To say mac os x is better than ubuntu is dumb... thier both unix based so get over it. just be thankful neither has DLL hell or registry errors...

Alfa989
May 11th, 2007, 01:09 PM
Yes, they are and I'm not referring just to the "Hi, I'm a PC, Hi, I'm a Twa.." adverts.
So what are you referring to and why do you thing that they lead people to confusion?


Just because I refuse to fund them it doesn't mean I've never used any of their products. And yes, I do know what I'm "losing" which is "annoying fanboyism".
Do you only lose "annoying fanboyism"? Well, I'll repeat it: You don't know what you're losing...

yoasif
May 11th, 2007, 01:29 PM
This thread is hilarious.

If you are familiar with command line samba configuration, do that -- it's the same on Mac OS X as it is on Ubuntu.

If you want to use NFS, use google for help.

If you want a simple GUI solution, use google to find Sharepoints (http://hornware.com/sharepoints/).

I find it utterly hilarious that even on a system as simple as Mac OS X, you have people that are lazy no matter what, and won't use available resources to help themselves instead of whining about how it does things differently -- aren't you guys used to Windows guys doing the same thing to Ubuntu?

It's really pretty hilarious -- you can't find GNOME, and you guys are just as confused as Windows guys on Ubuntu. Here's a hint -- think of Aqua as a DE, and work accordingly.

edit: I just reread the opening post... "admin mode?" is that like root access? Ubuntu doesn't have that either. "can't network properly?" seems to work just great, it uses DHCP/BootP, and Zeroconf as well. as far as it having "10 features"... do you complain about Firefox's 10 features when there are a multitude of extensions?

Ubuntu and Mac OS X are different OSes, get used to it. Also, please stop spreading misinformation... it's really childish looking, and makes you look pretty stupid.

Alfa989
May 11th, 2007, 03:17 PM
Ok, since you posted your "hard facts" from wikipedia ;) i'll do something similar;

Mac OS X hit by second virus through Bluetooth (http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/3363/53/)

or this;
Linux vs. Windows Viruses (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/)


The first page dates from February 2006. It talks about a worm that spreads through a Bluetooth vulnerability and says that Sophos experts have discovered the virus around that date... What you don't seem to know is that Apple released a patch for that problem 7 months before the article was written and it is actually mentioned in it, so a virus that is designed to use a bug patched several months earlier, is not a big security concern... The first "virus" that the article talks about was one called Oompa something... It required you to download a "latestpics.tgz" file (While Safari was telling you that contained an Application...), unzip it, and finally run it... (It attempted to wipe your home folder...) Not a virus really...

The second website tells you that: "There are about 60,000 viruses known for Windows, 40 or so for the Macintosh, about 5 for commercial Unix versions, and perhaps 40 for Linux."
Well, the writer is totally mistaken about the number of viruses for the Mac platform. (He also fails to tell the true number of Windows viruses.) It is true that there are about 40 viruses for the Mac, but they are all for Mac OS 9, not OS X. These 2 do not share the same codebase and they cannot run the same apps (OS X can run however classic apps through the Classic Environment, but viruses can't get through that... :)
So basically
Windows: around 140000
GNU/Linux: 30
Mac OS: 40
Mac OS X: 0

the.dark.lord
May 11th, 2007, 03:54 PM
Alfa, seriously stop smoking the mac crack. I find OS X in no way better than windows - I can do fine with an antivirus running. And you have to buy a freaking Apple computer to run OS X, excuse me, that's a lock in.
Perhaps this would interest you: http://www.viruslist.com/en/analysis?pubid=191968025

P.S. - I do not happen to like Windows, it is just that I happen to like it better than OS X.

Linux forever :guitar:

efflux
May 11th, 2007, 04:29 PM
If OSX is dumbed down then how would you describe Vista? That treats you like a complete idiot. I use a Mac and it's worked without a single glitch for two years. This alone is very impressive for something so complicated. Can anybody on this forum say Ubuntu has never given them a single minor error? Macs are very easy to use. Ubuntu is very good though. A potentially fantastic alternative to Windows. I say potentially because I've had a few problems and this wastes time. I've just installed 7.04 and fingers crossed.

pelle.k
May 11th, 2007, 05:45 PM
What you don't seem to know is that Apple released a patch for that problem 7 months before the article was written and it is actually mentioned in it, so a virus that is designed to use a bug patched several months earlier, is not a big security concern...
Oh, so when it's patched, this is no virus any more? So then you could argue there are no viruses for linux as well? That was kind of my point. I didn't miss it...

What i'm trying to say is;
I don't think OSX is more secure than many linux distros by default. Of course there are some ****** distros out there, i'd admit that...

Enverex
May 11th, 2007, 08:13 PM
So what are you referring to and why do you thing that they lead people to confusion?.

Pretty much any of their marketing does but going from the way you don't seem to be willing to step back and assess it then I doubt any amount of effort on my part with change what you perceive.


Do you only lose "annoying fanboyism"? Well, I'll repeat it: You don't know what you're losing...

*sighs and shakes his head*

yoasif
May 11th, 2007, 08:26 PM
So many of these posts are filled with hate and misinformation.

Like Ubuntu, Mac OS X has zero open services by default, so like Ubuntu, vulnerabilities are enabled, rather than packaged in.

I find the ads to be pretty decent, especially if you take into consideration that they are comparing themselves to Windows -- that, and the fact that Linux distributions would probably love to run ads like them (Linux has not achieved "parity" to Windows in the same way that Mac OS X does to the average consumer).

Guys, Mac OS X is a similar OS to Linux. There's a BSD userland for all you command line junkies, much of the software is Free (in both senses of the word), and it can run most "Linux" apps via a simple recompile, or using Fink, an apt-get like package manager.

I really don't understand the hate -- Mac OS X is not Windows, and it's more similar to Linux distributions than anything -- you guys like Ubuntu, but don't like Mac OS because it's not "Free"? Don't use it, but to say that it's worse than Windows is like pointing fingers -- one at Mac OS X, 4 back at yourself -- Ubuntu ain't perfect either.

Enverex
May 11th, 2007, 08:33 PM
I really don't understand the hate -- Mac OS X is not Windows, and it's more similar to Linux distributions than anything -- you guys like Ubuntu, but don't like Mac OS because it's not "Free"? Don't use it, but to say that it's worse than Windows is like pointing fingers -- one at Mac OS X, 4 back at yourself -- Ubuntu ain't perfect either.

It's more dislike for Apple due to underhanded methods, lies (they claimed they "invented" multi-desktop on a single machine a year or two ago, you know, that thing that Linux desktops have had for ages, etc) and attempting to lock everyone in to proprietary things (and I guess you guys have nothing against that either?).

Anyway, I'm walking away from this now as it'll just go on forever.

yoasif
May 11th, 2007, 08:56 PM
It's more dislike for Apple due to underhanded methods, lies (they claimed they "invented" multi-desktop on a single machine a year or two ago, you knowSource?

Enverex
May 11th, 2007, 08:58 PM
Google it, damn, you shouldn't need to be spoonfed.

aysiu
May 11th, 2007, 08:59 PM
This thread makes me feel stupid. I'm going to unsubscribe from it. Have fun, folks!

yoasif
May 11th, 2007, 09:10 PM
Google it, damn, you shouldn't need to be spoonfed.You're making the assertion, I'm just asking you to back it up...

gashcr
May 11th, 2007, 09:51 PM
[QUOTE=

Yup, I know, but what person would like to wipe the windoze partition to install Linux taking up all the drive? The most likely use a dual-boot for games and other win-only apps... And don't get me started about the Swap partition...

([/QUOTE]

I did. I play no PC games, and had no need for any win app. I think nobody needs anything about win, win creates those needs... I can do everything I want with Ubuntu, so win was just taking away useful space in my disk required for more music...

And that, my friend, is the most typical situation around, so I think a lot of people do it.

Alfa989
May 11th, 2007, 10:39 PM
Alfa, seriously stop smoking the mac crack. I find OS X in no way better than windows - I can do fine with an antivirus running. And you have to buy a freaking Apple computer to run OS X, excuse me, that's a lock in.
Perhaps this would interest you: http://www.viruslist.com/en/analysis?pubid=191968025

If an AV app doesn't find viruses that doesn't mean there aren't any... Any Windows user should know that...
OMG! You need to buy a PS3 to play PS3 games! And a Symbian smarthphone to use the S60 platform! OMG!!! Lock in, lock in!!!!!! Nonsense...
The links talks about what I said earlier...

Alfa989
May 11th, 2007, 10:46 PM
It's more dislike for Apple due to underhanded methods, lies (they claimed they "invented" multi-desktop on a single machine a year or two ago, you know, that thing that Linux desktops have had for ages, etc) and attempting to lock everyone in to proprietary things (and I guess you guys have nothing against that either?).

Anyway, I'm walking away from this now as it'll just go on forever.
1.- What are you talking about?
2.- That "propietary lock in" is just bs...

Alfa989
May 11th, 2007, 10:47 PM
Pretty much any of their marketing does but going from the way you don't seem to be willing to step back and assess it then I doubt any amount of effort on my part with change what you perceive.


I just want you to give me the reasons of why do you think that...

Alfa989
May 11th, 2007, 10:54 PM
Oh, so when it's patched, this is no virus any more? So then you could argue there are no viruses for linux as well? That was kind of my point. I didn't miss it...

If a virus comes out that is intended to work based in a security hole that has been patched several months before, it's not much of a virus, is it?

In other words: If it doesn't work, it isn't a virus

Opsidian
May 11th, 2007, 10:55 PM
I moved my Mac into the closet until I find a need for it again. Funny though, setting up networking in Ubuntu was easier then doing it on the Windows or Mac machines.

Alfa989
May 11th, 2007, 11:12 PM
I did. I play no PC games, and had no need for any win app. I think nobody needs anything about win, win creates those needs... I can do everything I want with Ubuntu, so win was just taking away useful space in my disk required for more music...

Windows creates the need of playing games? I you think that people don't need anything about windows... Then you're wrong...

gashcr
May 11th, 2007, 11:28 PM
Windows creates the need of playing games? I you think that people don't need anything about windows... Then you're wrong...

I was talking about apps in general, not just games... what a meant with this is... anybody needed photoshop before it existed?? NO, people worked with whatever tool they had available. As with everything in life, you don't need anything you haven't ever used before. Of course a new program would make your tasks easier, but you CAN do those tasks without having that software. I was just using win as a metaphor, meaning you don't actually need windows to complete any given task. The fact that some win only apps make those tasks easier to accomplish, implies by context, you need win to complete it, and thus, win created that need.

You really shouldn't read so literally my friend. I just did the comment because you stated as a fact that nobody would likely remove their win partition...

Nikron
May 11th, 2007, 11:30 PM
The first of my many irrational reasons for Mac hatred is that you can't true maximize windows.. Or even just fully open them up... My second of irrational reason is that I hate dragging and dropping, it makes me feel like a retard. Another one is that scary prompt when you do sudo -i for the first time in terminal. Hardware corruption if I use programs?!?!? huh.. =/

the.dark.lord
May 12th, 2007, 08:14 AM
OMG! You need to buy a PS3 to play PS3 games! And a Symbian smarthphone to use the S60 platform! OMG!!! Lock in, lock in!!!!!! Nonsense...

Sigh. I hate fanboys.

PS3 and Symbian smartphones- what has this got to do with computers and operating systems?
You don't have to buy a Microsoft computer to use Windows, nor do you have to buy a Linux Foundation approved computer to run Linux. Take Apple: OS X only on their *sacred* hardware. Before you say, I'm aware that OS X can be run on normal PCs by hacking the boot ROM code. It is extremely unstable on PCs -that's why OS X seems so stable, it can run only on a single specific hardware, you put it on a PC- crashes, breaks infinitum. And, not to mention you need to hire good lawyers if Apple gets to hear of it ;)

russell.h
May 12th, 2007, 09:45 AM
Generally speaking only idiots get viruses anyway. People who know what they are doing on a computer start out on Windows, get a virus the first and last time they let someone else use their computer (since if that person wanted to say... check their hotmail they need administrative access), then later when they begin to find Windows too limiting they move to Linux. The rich white untechnical professionals (and their kids) start out on windows, see a popup that says "Klikx0r h3re f0r pr0n", click there for porn, get a virus, buy a new computer, open an attachment advertising cheap ****** from Canada, get another virus, then blow 2 grand so they can get a mac with bigger than a 13 inch screen on which to tile their porn with expose.

Thats not true of all Mac users, there are certainly professionals who genuinely need software that simply isn't available on other operating systems, and the majority of Mac users are just yuppies who got their macs as status symbols.

OSX is good software, really my only complaints about it are its lack of configurability (as compared to Linux), its price, and its politics (as a promoter of Open Source I would choose windows over OSX any day from a purely political standpoint - choice = good).

Also I happen to find its GUI ugly as hell, and I hate its windowing system, but I think they may be acquired tastes, not really a problem with the system itself.

3rdalbum
May 12th, 2007, 01:42 PM
Generally speaking only idiots get viruses anyway.

Be fair - people in the Windows world are constantly told that computer security is achieved by running anti-virus, anti-spyware, keeping up-to-date, etc. It's not their fault that they keep getting viruses; the information they are getting is bad.


OSX is good software, really my only complaints about it are its lack of configurability (as compared to Linux), its price, and its politics (as a promoter of Open Source I would choose windows over OSX any day from a purely political standpoint - choice = good).

How exactly is Windows a better ideological choice than OS X? Me, I'd prefer to run Syllable full-time and write the programs I need myself than run OS X; purely for computing freedom reasons.

Demio
May 12th, 2007, 02:45 PM
Lol. Fanboys. Lol. Yuppies.

Use whatever you want. Since I bought my Mac, nothing in the world would make me switch back to PCs.

Oh, and not all Macs are expensive. The Mac-mini is less expensive than most PCs out there, and it occupies less space. It's a win-win situation.

If you want to go Mac but don't have the cash for a macbook or a macbookpro, just get mac-mini ;)

Oh, and the lockin is a positive thing. While windows and linux engineers are trying to make their OSes run in every single piece of crappy hardware, Apple can devote more time implementing features because they know exactly what hardware the OS will run on and don't have to worry about compatibility and driver issues.

Extreme Coder
May 12th, 2007, 03:45 PM
Because everyone wouldn't resist replacing their state-of-the-art PC with a possibly slower Mac...:roll:

Alfa989
May 12th, 2007, 04:55 PM
Because everyone wouldn't resist replacing their state-of-the-art PC with a possibly slower Mac...:roll:
Macs are faster than PCs and always have been, except the late PowerPC years and the bloody G4... :mad:

Alfa989
May 12th, 2007, 05:03 PM
The first of my many irrational reasons for Mac hatred is that you can't true maximize windows.. Or even just fully open them up... My second of irrational reason is that I hate dragging and dropping, it makes me feel like a retard. Another one is that scary prompt when you do sudo -i for the first time in terminal. Hardware corruption if I use programs?!?!? huh.. =/

1.- It adapts the windows to its contents, so it doesn't take the whole screen space on today's 17" displays... Instead of not letting you see anything but the maximized window, that's retarded...
2.- There is a thing called "window resizing", where you grab the window by a corner and resize it, so it can take up all the screen space you need for your task...
3.- You don't need to drag 'n' drop if you don't want...

Alfa989
May 12th, 2007, 05:13 PM
And the majority of Mac users are just yuppies who got their macs as status symbols.

Well, most of them dont! The are some people that buy a Mac because they say: "oh, it's shiiiiny" How retarded... I bought my Mac because of OS X, the exceptional design is only a plus...



Also I happen to find its GUI ugly as hell, and I hate its windowing system, but I think they may be acquired tastes, not really a problem with the system itself.
Why don't you like the windowing system? (Quartz Compositor)

3rdalbum
May 13th, 2007, 02:04 AM
Macs are faster than PCs and always have been, except the late PowerPC years and the bloody G4... :mad:

Sorry mate, I'm a Mac user and that's ********. OS X put more overhead onto Macs than Windows 9x-XP put onto PCs.

Enverex
May 13th, 2007, 02:13 AM
Macs are faster than PCs and always have been, except the late PowerPC years and the bloody G4... :mad:

Thread > Unsubscribed.

russell.h
May 13th, 2007, 02:33 AM
The Mac-mini is less expensive than most PCs out there, and it occupies less space. It's a win-win situation.


The mac-mini is also not nearly as good (at least in terms of hardware, the software is - obviously - up for debate... although I don't see much debate about the quality of OSX vs Windows, OSX is definitely fairly good quality) as most PCs. And for the price of a mac-mini I can get a PC with a better processor, a four times bigger hard drive, twice the RAM, and a CD/DVD burner.

The only area where apple has a prayer of winning on price is if you buy an apple tv and hack it to run OSX, and thats just because as far as I know no one makes PCs that crappy (and thats not to bash Apple TV either, it's just not designed as a desktop obviously). I haven't looked at parts in that range recently, but I suspect I could still build a better PC for the price, or pick one up from the local antique shop.

As for Macs being faster, it always amused me how the apple people loved to talk about how macs were so much better because they used PowerPC (I have no idea if its better or not), but then when they switched to Intel (and if PPC is so much better why did they do that?) they started going on about how much faster new macs were going to be over the old ones because of it.

And about Vendor lock in, sure, its a good thing for vendors. But since I'm a consumer (whose computer has no hardware compatibility problems in Linux or Windows), not a vendor, its sure as hell not a good thing for me.

the.dark.lord
May 13th, 2007, 09:22 AM
And about Vendor lock in, sure, its a good thing for vendors. But since I'm a consumer (whose computer has no hardware compatibility problems in Linux or Windows), not a vendor, its sure as hell not a good thing for me.

Exactly. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Alfa989
May 13th, 2007, 12:41 PM
The mac-mini is also not nearly as good (at least in terms of hardware, the software is - obviously - up for debate... although I don't see much debate about the quality of OSX vs Windows, OSX is definitely fairly good quality) as most PCs. And for the price of a mac-mini I can get a PC with a better processor, a four times bigger hard drive, twice the RAM, and a CD/DVD burner.


You are making the most common mistake when comparing a Mac to a PC in terms of price: Not doing it fairly... That PC won't be ad quiet as the mini, or as small and easy to carry around as the Mac. It also will not be made of the same high-quality materials or have the same I/O as the mini has. And, of course, the mini's motherboard will be much better...


As for Macs being faster, it always amused me how the apple people loved to talk about how macs were so much better because they used PowerPC (I have no idea if its better or not), but then when they switched to Intel (and if PPC is so much better why did they do that?) they started going on about how much faster new macs were going to be over the old ones because of it.


And they were! It was just the lately, PowerPCs didn't really meet the requirements to put them into laptops, and ran very hot (The G5 is a clear example if it), so Apple had to make the Intel switch to be able to cope with the customer's demands...

pjkoczan
May 13th, 2007, 05:41 PM
And about Vendor lock in, sure, its a good thing for vendors. But since I'm a consumer (whose computer has no hardware compatibility problems in Linux or Windows), not a vendor, its sure as hell not a good thing for me.

To me, vendor lock-in (no matter who's doing it) seems to be an attempt at a mini-monopoly. And the question has been posed many times, can a monopoly innovate? Most times, no. There's no reason for a monopoly to innovate since there's no competition pushing them, and they can always say "hahaha, who else are you going to use?" at customer requests.

It also strikes me as odd, or at least convenient, that Mac users are quick to apologize or make excuses for Apple when they do things that they complain MS is doing (DRM, lock-in, bloatware, flash over substance). Granted, Apple is nowhere near the scale of MS, but where's the criticism for when Apple does something ill-advised?

It is this sheep-like, cultish, and honestly hypocritical behavior/mentality that bothers me the most about Apple and its fanatics. I have no problem with people choosing Apple/OS X, I think it's fine hardware (if a little more pricey and a little bothersome that I need months of training and special tools to fix it myself) and the best proprietary OS out there (I still like Linux and the OSS philosophy better though), and certainly customers are within their rights to do so. It's just the fanatics that irk me.

russell.h
May 13th, 2007, 09:59 PM
You are making the most common mistake when comparing a Mac to a PC in terms of price: Not doing it fairly... That PC won't be ad quiet as the mini, or as small and easy to carry around as the Mac. It also will not be made of the same high-quality materials or have the same I/O as the mini has. And, of course, the mini's motherboard will be much better...

:lolflag:

Thats classic, consider it bookmarked.

Hobbs
May 14th, 2007, 01:58 AM
This conversation makes me lol. It is a cross betweeen "OS X doesn't do precisely what Ubuntu does therefore it sucks" and "Mac users are yuppie fanboys." Both are loads of crap.

The line of reasoning from Quote 1 is so flawed it makes me thing you are all backwoods Americans. All OS's are not designed for the same purpose, to do the same things, etc. OS X is not designed to be some Free Software desktop OS thats great for wannabe ubernerds and people who can't be or won't be arsed to buy Windows. Similarly, Ubuntu is not designed to be an accessible desktop for "computer idiots," a professional multimedia OS, or anything else that makes a Mac a Mac (actually those 2 points are rather all).

The line of reasoning from Quote 2 sucks because, quite simply, if all mac users were yuppie fanboys then what need would you have for the Intel and PPC Mac support forums. I don't think I really need to say more on that.

Btw my favourite exchange in this thread was
Poster 1: "apple uses underhanded methods"
Poster 2: "source plz"
Poster 1: "gtfo find it yourself n00b"
In the world of normal internets Poster 1 has just shown that nobody should ever listen to anything he ever says again that would require a source, and therefore pretty much invalidated his opinion.

Alfa989
May 14th, 2007, 05:36 PM
:lolflag:

Thats classic, consider it bookmarked.

┐?
It's true...

notwen
May 14th, 2007, 05:56 PM
What? More pro-Apple anti-Ubuntu FUD and lies? Bring it on! You're starting to believe those "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" commercials, aren't you?


Lol, perfect setup for me to finally link these vids. I'm sure they've been seen by many already, but here they are anyway. They always give me a good chuckle. =p

Novell's Mac Spoof 01 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDc9I3z7ab4)

Novell's Mac Spoof 02 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LAXg_UmzTY)

Novell's Mac Spoof 03 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkFQVcl62qo)

I like OSX plenty myself and my girlfriend is a religious mac user, perhaps I would be too, but Slack got to me first, then Debian, and now Ubuntu. Debian and it's never-ending repositories have pretty much sealed the deal for my loyalty. Debian-based distros for meh from now on strictly. =]

russell.h
May 14th, 2007, 06:25 PM
Debian and it's never-ending repositories have pretty much sealed the deal for my loyalty. Debian-based distros for meh from now on strictly. =]
Yeah, seriously, I'm contemplating switching distros, but I'm addicted to these repositories.

3rdalbum
May 15th, 2007, 12:00 PM
Oh, and the lockin is a positive thing.

Prison is pretty great too. You get free meals, free accomodation, you don't have to pay any bills or go to work, and there are fewer annoying people to be forced to interact with. Since you don't have to go to work, you can dedicate your life to whatever you want (within limits placed for your own protection; it's a scary crime-filled world out there).

See? You can put a positive spin on anything.

Donshyoku
May 15th, 2007, 11:53 PM
Today (10-05-2007) there are 0 (zero) viruses or worm or whatever for Mac OS X



Yes, that's what I'm basically saying...


Are you lacking a calendar in your room? According to this database, there are at least 3 pages. Well documented too.

Rick 1
May 16th, 2007, 06:28 AM
Seriously
Hey dude: maybe the reason you think OS X treats you as stupid is that you really are stupid?

AlphaMack
May 16th, 2007, 06:40 AM
It also will not be made of the same high-quality materials... <snip>

Oh, you mean the same "high quality" Chinese materials that cause Macs to overheat, stain, crack, warp, bulge, melt, ad nauseam? The same "high quality" commodity internals I can find in every other PC?


Apple had to make the Intel switch to be able to cope with the customer's demands...

Funny, I thought it was because IBM was more interested in the console market.

Adamant1988
May 16th, 2007, 10:47 AM
Sigh. I hate fanboys.

PS3 and Symbian smartphones- what has this got to do with computers and operating systems?
You don't have to buy a Microsoft computer to use Windows, nor do you have to buy a Linux Foundation approved computer to run Linux. Take Apple: OS X only on their *sacred* hardware. Before you say, I'm aware that OS X can be run on normal PCs by hacking the boot ROM code. It is extremely unstable on PCs -that's why OS X seems so stable, it can run only on a single specific hardware, you put it on a PC- crashes, breaks infinitum. And, not to mention you need to hire good lawyers if Apple gets to hear of it ;)

OK, I've been reading this, and he's a fanboy but you're just as in the wrong. Apple's OSX operating system was designed for Apple hardware, with a purpose in mind. Apple is a hardware company and their software is designed to be used with their hardware. This specially designed setup allows Apple to produce a stable, unix-based operating system that doesn't suffer the normal in's and out's of a Linux distribution, or even another BSD deriv.

Now, does this constitute vendor lock in? Maybe to an extent, your data is migrate-able and I honestly can't think of any software you can get on a Mac (besides Apple apps) that won't run on a Windows PC as well. So, the lock-in is fairly minimal. It's just a different way of looking at building the operating system. Whereas Windows PCs are built in pieces (Operating system and then computer) and act as such, Mac computers are designed like almost any other piece of home electronics. The hardware and the software running it are designed for one another, and by messing with that formula you present the weaknesses of both.

3rdalbum
May 16th, 2007, 03:28 PM
Maybe to an extent, your data is migrate-able and I honestly can't think of any software you can get on a Mac (besides Apple apps) that won't run on a Windows PC as well. So, the lock-in is fairly minimal.

If you ever find a way to access PICT files on Windows, please tell me. The same goes for DaxAIF files, and anything with a resource fork (except fonts).

But, of course, you're assuming that people are migrating from a Mac to a Windows machine; what if they are migrating from a Mac to an OSS platform running on the Mac?

Adamant1988
May 16th, 2007, 05:58 PM
If you ever find a way to access PICT files on Windows, please tell me. The same goes for DaxAIF files, and anything with a resource fork (except fonts).

But, of course, you're assuming that people are migrating from a Mac to a Windows machine; what if they are migrating from a Mac to an OSS platform running on the Mac?

I do not need to prove individual case scenarios. The issue at hand is that these methods are vendor lock in, which isn't true. You CAN migrate your data, and an alternative app exists to do whatever. The lock-in with Apple is just theory-craft and paranoia.

Also, you may want to consider using Google once in a while, it's a wonderful tool for finding information like...

PICT files on Windows (http://www.google.com/search?q=PICT+files+on+Windows&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS217US217)

I also looked into the DaxAIF files you mentioned, and found out that the application responsible for creating those is an ancient (designed for Mac OS 7 or later) piece of shareware. I don't think a non-standard application like that really counts as Apple trying to lock you in. Even so, conversion applications exist for Windows if you REALLY do need those files.

Now, does Apple lock you out of using Linux? I would say it does not. Linux can be made to run on the intel macs easily enough, and will operate like a typical Linux installation after that. As for data lock-in, conversion applications exist (there are some that convert .m4a to .ogg for example).

3rdalbum
May 18th, 2007, 01:08 PM
PICT files on Windows (http://www.google.com/search?q=PICT+files+on+Windows&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS217US217)


Now try doing it to PICT files stored individually on a CD, without having to use the Mac to put them into .hqx archives. If you've got to have the Mac to put them into .hqx, you might as well just keep using it anyway. That's what vendor lock-in is - making it difficult to migrate, thereby costing you less to stick with your platform.


Now, does Apple lock you out of using Linux? I would say it does not. Linux can be made to run on the intel macs easily enough, and will operate like a typical Linux installation after that.

Yes, it can - but Apple provided no specifications for getting Boot Camp working to load other operating systems. Before Boot Camp, it was an undocumented process that could brick your computer. If you try booting off a Mac OS CD after you've installed Linux on PPC, you'll find that your lovely bootloader is no longer the computer's default startup target. Possibly the same applies on x86, I don't know.

Yes, that's right. Installing Windows on a PC will stop GRUB from appearing. Merely booting OS X from a CD will stop Yaboot from appearing. When Microsoft does it, everyone cries about monopoly tactics; when Apple does it, they're apparantly not trying to lock anyone in at all.

You don't understand. Vendor lock-in is not where it's impossible to migrate - it's where the system is designed to make it expensive (in terms of money, time, effort or risk) to migrate. Proprietry software does it. My DaxAIFF remark was really a bit of frustration on my account - let's see you find a set of Quicktime codecs for Linux that have been built with Apple's specifications.

Alfa989
May 18th, 2007, 01:12 PM
Are you lacking a calendar in your room? According to this database, there are at least 3 pages. Well documented too.
Three pages of what?

Alfa989
May 18th, 2007, 02:02 PM
Oh, you mean the same "high quality" Chinese materials that cause Macs to overheat, stain, crack, warp, bulge, melt, ad nauseam? The same "high quality" commodity internals I can find in every other PC?
Those problems were solved a long time (several months) ago...
And what I was talking about is that, for example, a Mac mini has got an aluminum outer casing, and a PC with the size (or not) and the same specs is made of cheap, thin plastic, and if you decide to go with a decent case, the price comes up too, and it's still not as good as the mini's one


Funny, I thought it was because IBM was more interested in the console market.
Where did you got that from?

the.dark.lord
May 19th, 2007, 07:01 AM
OK, I've been reading this, and he's a fanboy but you're just as in the wrong. Apple's OSX operating system was designed for Apple hardware, with a purpose in mind. Apple is a hardware company and their software is designed to be used with their hardware. This specially designed setup allows Apple to produce a stable, unix-based operating system that doesn't suffer the normal in's and out's of a Linux distribution, or even another BSD deriv.


I'm aware of the fact that Apple is mainly a hardware company, and use OS X as gravy to sell their overpriced products. OS X appears so stable because it is only designed to be run on a specific hardware. Let me remind you that OS X being not able to run on non-Apple computers is Apple's decision alone. And not to mention that you'll be brutally smacked with a lawsuit if you even try to remove their hardware. I have had a very nasty time installing Ubuntu on this iMac - really nasty. Abandoning BIOS was not in the favor of computing freedom. Apple tries their darnedest to give preference to their own software, and restricts others. When something breaks in an Apple computer, you can't repair it yourself, nor can the shop around the corner, you've go to sacred Apple itself. Apple are greedier than Microsoft, they want the whole pie instead of a slice. This by all means amounts to a lock-in.

By the way, Nice avatar. New glasses?

Adamant1988
May 19th, 2007, 05:41 PM
I'm aware of the fact that Apple is mainly a hardware company, and use OS X as gravy to sell their overpriced products. OS X appears so stable because it is only designed to be run on a specific hardware. Let me remind you that OS X being not able to run on non-Apple computers is Apple's decision alone. And not to mention that you'll be brutally smacked with a lawsuit if you even try to remove their hardware. I have had a very nasty time installing Ubuntu on this iMac - really nasty. Abandoning BIOS was not in the favor of computing freedom. Apple tries their darnedest to give preference to their own software, and restricts others. When something breaks in an Apple computer, you can't repair it yourself, nor can the shop around the corner, you've go to sacred Apple itself. Apple are greedier than Microsoft, they want the whole pie instead of a slice. This by all means amounts to a lock-in.

By the way, Nice avatar. New glasses?

New glasses, and haircut.

Also, I think you're misunderstanding Apple's design philosophy. Apple sells you a complete unit, much the same as ANY OTHER piece of electronics you buy is. The operating system and the hardware are tied together in such a way that neither is really that great without the other, but together they excel. When you buy a Mac, it's like you're buying an mp3 player or a game console. Yes, you CAN change the operating system, but the product works better when the two are working together.

Chrisj303
May 20th, 2007, 09:35 AM
OSX makes you feel stupid? - Don't use it then.

godd4242
May 23rd, 2007, 03:06 AM
About the "compiz cube", try fast user switching...
ExposÚ is tremendously useful, instead of the bloody taskbar in GNOME or Windoze...
..

OS X Leopard = Kiba-Dock + Beryl + Feisty.

And if I'm correct in supposing Expose = f10 on macs, (the thing to make all the windows come up as little tiles on a "dashboard" like interface so you can switch between them) that's in Beryl as well. Throw your mouse pointer hard up into the right hand corner to see what I mean...

godd4242
May 23rd, 2007, 03:09 AM
Those problems were solved a long time (several months) ago...
And what I was talking about is that, for example, a Mac mini has got an aluminum outer casing, and a PC with the size (or not) and the same specs is made of cheap, thin plastic, and if you decide to go with a decent case, the price comes up too, and it's still not as good as the mini's one


My friend bought an iBook about 3 months ago and already that delicious (yes it is delicious) white finish is peeling off the keyboard and where you rest your hands on it. Although I do give it credit for solid battery life and being quiet as a mouse, that really is a result of one manufacturer for both hardware and OS.

Alfa989
May 23rd, 2007, 09:10 PM
My friend bought an iBook about 3 months ago and already that delicious (yes it is delicious) white finish is peeling off the keyboard and where you rest your hands on it. Although I do give it credit for solid battery life and being quiet as a mouse, that really is a result of one manufacturer for both hardware and OS.
Second hand?
And if that happen, just change it for a new one!

Alfa989
May 23rd, 2007, 09:15 PM
OS X Leopard = Kiba-Dock + Beryl + Feisty.

And if I'm correct in supposing Expose = f10 on macs, (the thing to make all the windows come up as little tiles on a "dashboard" like interface so you can switch between them) that's in Beryl as well. Throw your mouse pointer hard up into the right hand corner to see what I mean...
Lots of people think that OS X is just a pretty UNIX... When it's not... You need to get the integration, the user experience, etc... And those 3 don't work as well as the original... :)

Adamant1988
May 24th, 2007, 03:21 PM
OS X Leopard = Kiba-Dock + Beryl + Feisty.

And if I'm correct in supposing Expose = f10 on macs, (the thing to make all the windows come up as little tiles on a "dashboard" like interface so you can switch between them) that's in Beryl as well. Throw your mouse pointer hard up into the right hand corner to see what I mean...

You know, you're right. Kibadock +Beryl + Feisty can produce some of the best eye-candy around... while making your desktop a very pretty brick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anueWdN65gY <<< There is no comparison.

the.dark.lord
May 24th, 2007, 06:30 PM
Second hand?
And if that happen, just change it for a new one!

Yeah, he sure will. If you pay, that is.

Alfa989
May 24th, 2007, 09:33 PM
Yeah, he sure will. If you pay, that is.
Tell Apple to change it for free... The just simply can't refuse! That's not anywhere near normal... :(

Ozor Mox
May 25th, 2007, 02:02 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anueWdN65gY <<< There is no comparison.

Was that supposed to be supporting the Mac? It looked like a big horrendous mess to me.

But then it's the rivalry such as this and the comments on that YouTube video that are truly pathetic.

I almost bought a Mac before I decided to save the money and install Ubuntu on my existing PC instead, but they are indeed very nice computers. If I had have bought one, it would have taken me a little while to get over the impression that I'm a stupid user that can't handle anything more complex, but my housemate has one and it seems very stable and easy to use.

Put it this way, I'll likely never use a Windows computer again, but if I was ever going to have a secondary computer to my main Ubuntu system, it would be a Mac. Probably one of those MacBook Pros, but they are so damn expensive it would probably have to be the MacBook instead.

whistlerspa
May 26th, 2007, 03:04 AM
However I can't figure out Samba shares between Ubuntu and Mac no matter how much time I spend on it. I've given up on it now

bewoofy
June 5th, 2007, 07:42 PM
Generally speaking only idiots get viruses anyway.

That quote tells more about the poster than those whom are referred to as 'idiots'. Yeah the typical dumb things can get one viruses, but what about those/corps who get trogans using rootkit technology, inspite of secure policies, updates and EVEN BEEFY HARDWARE FIREWALLS AND ADVANCED IDS? Yeah what about them???

For those above are the very ones getting hit = or worse than the end user knowing little. Read the news, go to fortinet's site,san.org,,pcworld,washpost, f-secure and shall I go on?

Laura

aysiu
June 5th, 2007, 07:45 PM
I've gotten viruses before. Guess I must be an idiot.

3rdalbum
June 6th, 2007, 11:06 AM
I even got a virus - twice - on the Mac back in the days of System 7 and before e-mail viruses - but they were wiped from the floppy disk before they actually infected the system.

You might have to be a bit incautious to get an e-mail virus, but anyone with Windows and some open ports on their firewall (or none at all) can get a worm.

russell.h
June 6th, 2007, 11:38 AM
I even got a virus - twice - on the Mac back in the days of System 7 and before e-mail viruses - but they were wiped from the floppy disk before they actually infected the system.

You might have to be a bit incautious to get an e-mail virus, but anyone with Windows and some open ports on their firewall (or none at all) can get a worm.

Lol, the first part of that is just funny. Floppy disks :D

As for the second, thats true. But personally I run 3 Windows PCs (well, 1 of them runs Ubuntu most of the time for the last 7 months, but I still boot windows for games sometimes), all behind a router with 1 port forwarded to each computer. 2 of the PCs are "mine", and no one else is allowed to touch them, and for just under 3 years now neither of them has had any antivirus installed (although I run that Trend Micro online virus scanner once every few months just to make sure). The other PC is used by the rest of my family, and it runs Avast. Avast is constantly giving my mother warnings about stuff in her junkmail box, but as far as I can tell unless she was to actually try to open one of the attachments nothing would actually happen anyway.

And back on the topic of Macs I'm pretty sure I'm going to be getting one of the new MacBook Pros in another few weeks here (I'm going on vacation in the meantime), and although I intend to install Ubuntu I'm also going to keep OS X and try to learn it's interface. I'm rather hoping that once the computer is "mine" and I can do what I want to it it using it will become a much more pleasant experience.

_narayan
June 12th, 2007, 11:29 PM
I use my mac when I have serious work to do. I'd rather be treated like an idiot and not spend all day tweaking this and that like I do in my spare time on Linux. Sometimes it's okay to feel stupid, particularly when there's a deadline to meet.

Sp4cedOut
June 13th, 2007, 01:11 AM
You know, you're right. Kibadock +Beryl + Feisty can produce some of the best eye-candy around... while making your desktop a very pretty brick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anueWdN65gY <<< There is no comparison.

Maybe your desktop.....

Extreme Coder
June 13th, 2007, 01:49 PM
You know, you're right. Kibadock +Beryl + Feisty can produce some of the best eye-candy around... while making your desktop a very pretty brick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anueWdN65gY <<< There is no comparison.
Uh, what brick are you talking about?

Xranger60
June 15th, 2007, 02:55 AM
This entire topic is completely ridiculous. I got sick of windows and its inefficiencies a few months ago and switched over to Ubuntu, and I love it. Using Beryl + Compiz is really a treat and a sight to behold for non-linux users.

However, I don't think that this makes Linux superior to Macs in any way. As people on here have tried to say (without effect sadly, as it went through the ears of the fanboys without being processed), Mac OS and Linux are two different OS's, each for people with different needs. Linux is great if you are running standard PC hardware and do not want to run windows anymore, or if you want to dual boot, or you simply love open source philosophy. It's a solid OS, albeit geared more towards those who are more willing to work under the hood of their OS to get what they want. It may not seem like a flaw to you that you need to acquire codecs from the correct repositories to even run a DVD on your first try, but that's beyond what most people are willing to do with their PC, like it or not, Don't for a second try to say that getting Beryl or Compiz to run is easy. The hundreds of threads from people requesting help on this topic are a testament to this. But this does not take away from the fact that Ubuntu is getting more user friendly all the time, is a solid OS, and does not come packed with useless crap that will slow down your hardware. It's a nice OS, free, and available to everybody.

Mac, on the other hand, is geared toward those who are in the market for a computer, not looking for PC parts or building their own. It's not going to stress the fact that you can actually change things around somewhat to your satisfaction, and it's a UNIX based OS capable of command line manipulation. But it is a solid OS. It does excel at making things easy, which for the average user, like it or not, simply means internet, email, mp3 playing, and some video playback. Maybe even some games. It doesn't matter if you like the fact that apple sells its computers with specific hardware... this enables the company to produce an OS that works more seamlessly with the hardware, as Apple does not have to make the assumption that Mac OS will be running on everything from a piece of **** to a high end PC, and it doesn't mean that Mac OS only "appears" to be solid because it's only running on a limited hardware set. Yes, there are drawbacks, just as with Linux. You're just not going to be able to change everything around as you can with Linux. You will have to use Apple hardware. You will have to pay.

Overall what I see here is a choice for non-windows users. The choice you make is going to be based on your preferences, but it doesn't mean Mac OS is a "Noob" OS. If Mac makes you feel like an idiot, don't use it. You also don't have to make a thread about it, as anybody stating "Ubuntu makes me feel like an idiot" should get no respect as well. If anything, there should be solidarity between Mac and Ubuntu users... we both don't use windows, and most of us have our reasons. Grow up, stop acting like 12, and stop being a fanboy if you have "hatred" for an OS or its users.

karellen
June 16th, 2007, 09:42 AM
This entire topic is completely ridiculous. I got sick of windows and its inefficiencies a few months ago and switched over to Ubuntu, and I love it. Using Beryl + Compiz is really a treat and a sight to behold for non-linux users.

However, I don't think that this makes Linux superior to Macs in any way. As people on here have tried to say (without effect sadly, as it went through the ears of the fanboys without being processed), Mac OS and Linux are two different OS's, each for people with different needs. Linux is great if you are running standard PC hardware and do not want to run windows anymore, or if you want to dual boot, or you simply love open source philosophy. It's a solid OS, albeit geared more towards those who are more willing to work under the hood of their OS to get what they want. It may not seem like a flaw to you that you need to acquire codecs from the correct repositories to even run a DVD on your first try, but that's beyond what most people are willing to do with their PC, like it or not, Don't for a second try to say that getting Beryl or Compiz to run is easy. The hundreds of threads from people requesting help on this topic are a testament to this. But this does not take away from the fact that Ubuntu is getting more user friendly all the time, is a solid OS, and does not come packed with useless crap that will slow down your hardware. It's a nice OS, free, and available to everybody.

Mac, on the other hand, is geared toward those who are in the market for a computer, not looking for PC parts or building their own. It's not going to stress the fact that you can actually change things around somewhat to your satisfaction, and it's a UNIX based OS capable of command line manipulation. But it is a solid OS. It does excel at making things easy, which for the average user, like it or not, simply means internet, email, mp3 playing, and some video playback. Maybe even some games. It doesn't matter if you like the fact that apple sells its computers with specific hardware... this enables the company to produce an OS that works more seamlessly with the hardware, as Apple does not have to make the assumption that Mac OS will be running on everything from a piece of **** to a high end PC, and it doesn't mean that Mac OS only "appears" to be solid because it's only running on a limited hardware set. Yes, there are drawbacks, just as with Linux. You're just not going to be able to change everything around as you can with Linux. You will have to use Apple hardware. You will have to pay.

Overall what I see here is a choice for non-windows users. The choice you make is going to be based on your preferences, but it doesn't mean Mac OS is a "Noob" OS. If Mac makes you feel like an idiot, don't use it. You also don't have to make a thread about it, as anybody stating "Ubuntu makes me feel like an idiot" should get no respect as well. If anything, there should be solidarity between Mac and Ubuntu users... we both don't use windows, and most of us have our reasons. Grow up, stop acting like 12, and stop being a fanboy if you have "hatred" for an OS or its users.

give up, you're wasting your time. it's futile talking to deaf ears...

Sp4cedOut
June 17th, 2007, 12:02 AM
You know, you're right. Kibadock +Beryl + Feisty can produce some of the best eye-candy around... while making your desktop a very pretty brick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anueWdN65gY <<< There is no comparison.

hey Adamant, take a look at what the creator of that video says in the comments on youtube:

jungiantheoIogy (1 week ago) Marked as spam
Alright, I admit it. Linux owns OS X. I found out I was wrong, you do have full system functionality while doing those things. In fact, benchmarking sites all over the web have proved that it's a much faster OS as well. I'm switching over, tired of this Mac freezing on me all the time anyway.

He admitted it, now you should too.

EDIT: It's on the first page.

Alfa989
June 17th, 2007, 12:26 PM
hey Adamant, take a look at what the creator of that video says in the comments on youtube:

jungiantheoIogy (1 week ago) Marked as spam
Alright, I admit it. Linux owns OS X. I found out I was wrong, you do have full system functionality while doing those things. In fact, benchmarking sites all over the web have proved that it's a much faster OS as well. I'm switching over, tired of this Mac freezing on me all the time anyway.

He admitted it, now you should too.

EDIT: It's on the first page.
That guy either:
Doesn't use Macs. (used a friend's Mac...) The most probable
His Mac is broken (they don't freeze)
He is so dumb that he doesn't know how to use it...

And until Linux does all the things that a Mac can do, and does them well, I'm gonna keep OS X with me...

the.dark.lord
June 17th, 2007, 02:32 PM
His Mac is broken (they don't freeze)

Froze four times in the three months I used it on my iMac, before I completely switched to Linux. No, I'm not "dumb" in my experience with computers, I'm a programmer and a developer.

Sp4cedOut
June 17th, 2007, 06:18 PM
That guy either:
Doesn't use Macs. (used a friend's Mac...) The most probable
His Mac is broken (they don't freeze)
He is so dumb that he doesn't know how to use it...

And until Linux does all the things that a Mac can do, and does them well, I'm gonna keep OS X with me...

In case you weren't paying attention he made a video about how the Mac UI was better than Beryl, so obviously he has used a Mac. Do you think he just went over to his friend's house and decided to make and edit a 7 min video criticizing Beryl? Another Mac supporter posted his video.

Adamant1988
June 17th, 2007, 09:33 PM
hey Adamant, take a look at what the creator of that video says in the comments on youtube:

jungiantheoIogy (1 week ago) Marked as spam
Alright, I admit it. Linux owns OS X. I found out I was wrong, you do have full system functionality while doing those things. In fact, benchmarking sites all over the web have proved that it's a much faster OS as well. I'm switching over, tired of this Mac freezing on me all the time anyway.

He admitted it, now you should too.

EDIT: It's on the first page.

You should REALLY learn to appreciate sarcasm, incase you have NEVER bothered to watch the Kost's videos he's a very sarcastic individual. I also guarantee you that he's not having problems with his Mac freezing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06_IPNnziqI

And that's not his most powerful system (that's on his quad-core, he also has an opti-core.)

Read between the lines my friend, I understand that sarcasm doesn't translate to text well, but that's ALL the Kost uses. :)

Motoxrdude
June 18th, 2007, 03:05 AM
This is why I don't like mac people. Everyone else says "Use whatever makes you happy" or "Use whatever suites you" but that one annoying little kid always screams "My OS is better then yours! blah blah blah". Makes you wonder why it has only about 5% of the market share :rolleyes:

Adamant1988
June 18th, 2007, 03:55 AM
This is why I don't like mac people. Everyone else says "Use whatever makes you happy" or "Use whatever suites you" but that one annoying little kid always screams "My OS is better then yours! blah blah blah". Makes you wonder why it has only about 5% of the market share :rolleyes:

Except I don't own a Mac :P

Anyway, I could say the same for Ubuntu.

Alfa989
June 18th, 2007, 04:44 PM
Froze four times in the three months I used it on my iMac, before I completely switched to Linux. No, I'm not "dumb" in my experience with computers, I'm a programmer and a developer.
Cmd+Opt-Esc

Alfa989
June 18th, 2007, 04:47 PM
This is why I don't like mac people. Everyone else says "Use whatever makes you happy" or "Use whatever suites you" but that one annoying little kid always screams "My OS is better then yours! blah blah blah". Makes you wonder why it has only about 5% of the market share :rolleyes:
Why?
1.-Microsoft's dirty tactics
2.-Consumer ignorance
3.-Macs are only manufactured by Apple

And, by the way, Mac OS X's share is about 6% and Linux's 0.7-1,5%

karellen
June 18th, 2007, 07:11 PM
apple market share, though small, is steadily increasing, as many reports show...

Extreme Coder
June 18th, 2007, 10:00 PM
apple market share, though small, is steadily increasing, as many reports show...
so is Desktop Linux's market share ;)

karellen
June 18th, 2007, 11:16 PM
so is Desktop Linux's market share ;)

that could be only benefical

ethanubutnumaker
June 19th, 2007, 04:52 PM
I Love my mac. it is older but works better than my work PCs. I love my Ubuntu. it is only limited to my own knowledge. I hate windows. i think it could be better. in fact, if microsoft would do the right thing and start a source code from scratch then windows could be better than anything else. but they dont nor will in the near future. to be fair, i do like a lot of things that windows has that mac doesnt. i still use windows. but after having to help my friends, family, and coworkers with their PCs, i dont want to come home and have to work on one myself. i come home, my mac is turned on automatically before i get home so i can sit back. hit play on the remote and listen to music and work on learning linux and ubuntu.

again, to be fair, i have plenty of problems i run into on my mac. but only when i need to do something that requires a little more knowledge than i have. otherwise, listening to music and being productive is a snap and does not create a headache for me.

Let me bring out this point too. you can call me a fanboy all you want. but the ppl that will are the windows fanboys. yes, thats all they are (with some exceptions of course). i hate this fanboy crap. im not committed to apple. i am just a consumer that bought a product from a company. when you compare computers you want to find one that will work better for you. mac just happens to be my cup of tea. so if you hate apple and want nothing to do with them fine. dont do anything with them. but DONT push your philosophy and prefrences on other ppl. we make our own decisions.

Also, i think it is STUPID STUPID STUPID, to judge someone to the point of disliking or even hating them because of the type of computer they use. I have a lot of friends that use windows. even though i dislike windows, i do NOT dislike them. its my opinion that it would take more than a machine to break or prevent a friendship.

So in summary,

Mac
Windows
Linux
.....
These are computers. these are OSes that push the standards on technology to the point of making the companies work harder, which in turn advance our world as we know it. so you can hate on windows, mac, or linux or whatever. but you would deceive yourself by saying that each one is not neccesary. We need each of these OSes. otherwise we would not have the advanced technology that powers our world today.

So please each one of you realize that these companies contributed greatly to all of our lives, whether we use these OSes or not, in a direct or indirect way. SO GET OVER IT. appreciate what the other has, smile and nod, and continue using what you yourself prefers.

technology forever,
ethan

karellen
June 19th, 2007, 06:04 PM
I Love my mac. it is older but works better than my work PCs. I love my Ubuntu. it is only limited to my own knowledge. I hate windows. i think it could be better. in fact, if microsoft would do the right thing and start a source code from scratch then windows could be better than anything else. but they dont nor will in the near future. to be fair, i do like a lot of things that windows has that mac doesnt. i still use windows. but after having to help my friends, family, and coworkers with their PCs, i dont want to come home and have to work on one myself. i come home, my mac is turned on automatically before i get home so i can sit back. hit play on the remote and listen to music and work on learning linux and ubuntu.

again, to be fair, i have plenty of problems i run into on my mac. but only when i need to do something that requires a little more knowledge than i have. otherwise, listening to music and being productive is a snap and does not create a headache for me.

Let me bring out this point too. you can call me a fanboy all you want. but the ppl that will are the windows fanboys. yes, thats all they are (with some exceptions of course). i hate this fanboy crap. im not committed to apple. i am just a consumer that bought a product from a company. when you compare computers you want to find one that will work better for you. mac just happens to be my cup of tea. so if you hate apple and want nothing to do with them fine. dont do anything with them. but DONT push your philosophy and prefrences on other ppl. we make our own decisions.

Also, i think it is STUPID STUPID STUPID, to judge someone to the point of disliking or even hating them because of the type of computer they use. I have a lot of friends that use windows. even though i dislike windows, i do NOT dislike them. its my opinion that it would take more than a machine to break or prevent a friendship.

So in summary,

Mac
Windows
Linux
.....
These are computers. these are OSes that push the standards on technology to the point of making the companies work harder, which in turn advance our world as we know it. so you can hate on windows, mac, or linux or whatever. but you would deceive yourself by saying that each one is not neccesary. We need each of these OSes. otherwise we would not have the advanced technology that powers our world today.

So please each one of you realize that these companies contributed greatly to all of our lives, whether we use these OSes or not, in a direct or indirect way. SO GET OVER IT. appreciate what the other has, smile and nod, and continue using what you yourself prefers.

technology forever,
ethan

I second you...:)

vexorian
June 19th, 2007, 06:19 PM
I dunno, after I won that ipod nano and saw how much Apple ruined such a full of potential device, I am not feeling like trying another apple product anytime soon...

Demio
June 20th, 2007, 02:43 PM
I dunno, after I won that ipod nano and saw how much Apple ruined such a full of potential device, I am not feeling like trying another apple product anytime soon...
What complaints do you have about the iPod Nano?

I own one and it works flawlessly...

Adamant1988
June 20th, 2007, 03:16 PM
Right, I love my Nano. Flash based devices are FTW. I can't wait until flash harddrives become more commonplace.

vexorian
June 20th, 2007, 03:36 PM
What complaints do you have about the iPod Nano?

I own one and it works flawlessly...
Yeah, old versions of the ipod had the amazing feature that you were able to change the firmware but apple decided flexibility is bad.

Then you have the stupid structure of everything, Music and images and stuff ARE JUST FILES! why the **** did they make it so hard to change them? You need a program to add mp3 to it? A whole program just to copy a file to a flash device? imho sony mp3 players are much better at that.

the ipod nano is a great piece of hardware and very powerful but apple just ruins it because they don't like flexibility, any other company would have made the most amazing gadget, but apple was just interested in selling music and locking users in.

If you ask it, that lame apple attitude is what prevented it to take the lead in OS market, silly, dumb things like only supporting for their own hardware and that kind of stuff.

Specially recently with all recent Mac computers being just normal PCs with a different chasis, they could easily support other computers, but they won't because they are moronic.

Adamant1988
June 20th, 2007, 10:21 PM
Yeah, old versions of the ipod had the amazing feature that you were able to change the firmware but apple decided flexibility is bad.

Then you have the stupid structure of everything, Music and images and stuff ARE JUST FILES! why the **** did they make it so hard to change them? You need a program to add mp3 to it? A whole program just to copy a file to a flash device? imho sony mp3 players are much better at that.

the ipod nano is a great piece of hardware and very powerful but apple just ruins it because they don't like flexibility, any other company would have made the most amazing gadget, but apple was just interested in selling music and locking users in.

If you ask it, that lame apple attitude is what prevented it to take the lead in OS market, silly, dumb things like only supporting for their own hardware and that kind of stuff.

Specially recently with all recent Mac computers being just normal PCs with a different chasis, they could easily support other computers, but they won't because they are moronic.

I love this post. Really.

1) Apple doesn't allow firmware changes? That's odd, care to explain how RockBox is doing so nicely on my iPod nano?

2) iTunes is part of the iPod experience, like it or not. It was part of the experience on the mac, and it will continue to be part of the experience. The integration there is what allows for a lot of fun things, and it provides Apple a channel through which to sell their music, because businesses need to make profits to continue to operate :).

3) Actually, the thing that is bringing Apple back to the forefront, to the extent that everyone is copying them, be it Microsoft or the open source community is clever marketing and an integrated experience. What you call lock-in, I call very well done integration. It's all about perspective.

4) I think it's also very important to acknowledge here that you don't have to be the front-runner in a market to be succesful in it. Just because you're not leading doesn't mean you're losing the race.

5) Mac computers are NOT normal PCs and I am very tired of hearing this argument. Yes, there are SOME hardware similarities, but if you're going to follow that logic the Xbox sitting behind me is a 'PC', as is the Playstation in the other room. God, Sony and Microsoft were just STUPID imagine how the operating systems on those machines could have spread if they hadn't been so dumb and locked it down.

Mac computers rest in a very happy place between PC functionality and game console design. THAT is why they are locked down, because that integration with the hardware provides a superior experience.

6) Apple is both a hardware and a software company now. Typically their software is designed to sell hardware, and their hardware requires the software. Again, this is all about integration and proving a superior experience for the user. I have never heard a Mac user complaining about their experiences with OS X.

vexorian
June 20th, 2007, 11:42 PM
1) Apple doesn't allow firmware changes? That's odd, care to explain how RockBox is doing so nicely on my iPod nano?

1) Hi, I am talking about a second gen ipod nano. If somehow the whole world has changed and I am now able to change the firmware there then give me links and I'll apologize, but after 3 days of research the only answer I ever had was that apple decided to lock the firmware thus it was harder than ever to do so on the 2G ipod nano.

2) Regarding itunes, it is great and all, I however see no need to lock everything to it, one thing is integration and another thing is forced lameness, and the total unability for me to just copy mp3 to a piece of hardware without using any lame program I don't like is something I consider a limitation, they could have had the awesome integration with itunes without making it such a dumb thing.

3) It is not perspective, you can have integration without purpotedly locking users in.

4) Not being #1 is not losing, but less than 1/5 of the market after so many years of work and advertising, not to mean that Apple was there before MS actually had something decent to sell... Apple screwed it up. They may improve later or are probably are already improving the situation.

5) The latest Macs with intel 486 architecture are exactly PCs.

6) And therefore that's the reason they fail, if the software worked on most platforms they would be allowed to then bring more users to their expensive hardware by promoting the improved integration, but they are unable to figure that.

Extreme Coder
June 21st, 2007, 12:10 AM
2) iTunes is part of the iPod experience, like it or not. It was part of the experience on the mac, and it will continue to be part of the experience. The integration there is what allows for a lot of fun things, and it provides Apple a channel through which to sell their music, because businesses need to make profits to continue to operate :smile:.

I wouldn't be so sure having to download and install iTunes on every PC you want to move music from/to could be called fun...


5) Mac computers are NOT normal PCs and I am very tired of hearing this argument. Yes, there are SOME hardware similarities, but if you're going to follow that logic the Xbox sitting behind me is a 'PC', as is the Playstation in the other room. God, Sony and Microsoft were just STUPID imagine how the operating systems on those machines could have spread if they hadn't been so dumb and locked it down.

Yes they are, that's why it's possible to install x86 versions of Windows and Linux on the new Macs. The new Macs use Intel Core 2 Duo processors, which are available for PCs. So is the Intel GMA 950. The new Macs are just PCs in a shiny case.

Adamant1988
June 21st, 2007, 12:30 AM
I wouldn't be so sure having to download and install iTunes on every PC you want to move music from/to could be called fun...



Yes they are, that's why it's possible to install x86 versions of Windows and Linux on the new Macs. The new Macs use Intel Core 2 Duo processors, which are available for PCs. So is the Intel GMA 950. The new Macs are just PCs in a shiny case.

I can install Linux on my Xbox.. does that make it a PC? A processor and a graphics card != PC.

Like I said, Apple's Macintosh computers are in an interesting place. They provide PC functionality, but they are more like consoles in their design. However, if what you say is true then I am going to contend that buying an Xbox, or any other game console from this point forward is fruitless because "They're just PCs in a different case".

Macs are PCs? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2HEwXSTshk) << Please take 9 minutes to watch this.

His arguments are primarily based on Windows, but if you look at it when he starts talking about Hardware that is relevant.

Extreme Coder
June 21st, 2007, 04:11 AM
I'm sorry, my (10 kilobyte/s download) slow internet can't handle the Tube :/

And while you can install Linux on an Xbox, Gamecube,DS, PSP,iPod,etc.. note that I wrote x86 version. You CAN install the same version of Ubuntu you use on a x86 PC on one of the new Macs, but you can't do that with the Xbox.

Adamant1988
June 21st, 2007, 05:06 AM
Ah, so now we're saying that x86 == PC.

Now we're getting somewhere. Well, you tell me, did Microsoft work with Intel to create the logic boards for every PC? Do PC's use EFI?

The man in the video basically says "No macs aren't PCs" and spends a good while bashing Microsoft for forcing vendors to cope with their crap. He then explains that "PCs" use BIOS, whereas the Macs are using EFI. He also goes on to explain that Intel and Apple worked together to create OS X and the logic boards for the macs. Producing greater integration between software and hardware. Name a PC that has those things.

Macs are not PCs, they just have similar equipment in them. Much like the Xbox360 does, or the PS3, etc. SOME of the things involved are custom designed for the specific device, others are stock items (processors, HDs, graphics cards, etc.).

Extreme Coder
June 21st, 2007, 12:29 PM
Ok, we can call it a resolution. The new Macs are very similar(not exactly the same) to PC, because they can use the same Linux and Windows PCs can. But there are some differences(like EFI, and BIOSes, and such). Happy now? :)

saulgoode
June 21st, 2007, 02:06 PM
EFI does not distinguish a Mac from a "PC". Almost all HP and Intel motherboards have EFI hardware support on them and it is left to the PC builders to actually use it. Linux and Windows editions were using EFI long before Apple adopted it so how can EFI be considered an exclusively Apple characteristic?

Adamant1988
June 21st, 2007, 02:50 PM
EFI does not distinguish a Mac from a "PC". Almost all HP and Intel motherboards have EFI hardware support on them and it is left to the PC builders to actually use it. Linux and Windows editions were using EFI long before Apple adopted it so how can EFI be considered an exclusively Apple characteristic?

The HP in the room next to me uses BIOS...

vexorian
June 21st, 2007, 02:55 PM
Ah, so now we're saying that x86 == PC. For software, it is.


Macs are PCs? << Please take 9 minutes to watch this.

For me to download 9 minutes of a youtube video means wasting 3 hours without access to the web. And the beginning sounded as if it was not going to be any serious, unbiased video.


The HP in the room next to me uses BIOS... perhaps that's the reason he said "most" instead of all.

..
Just saying that there is no reason at all right now for Mac OS/X not to become available for PCs, besides of course Apple's odd way of thinking.

That's what I wanted to say, Apple is amazing at designing stuff and getting great ideas but they ruin with their tendency to make everything a lock in, this makes them actually equal to MS. Yes I have said that.

Sp4cedOut
June 21st, 2007, 05:29 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface

Read up, EFI is hardly Mac specific. Apple started shipping systems that used EFI in 2006, while Gateway's been doing it since 2003, and HP since 2002.

Linux has been using EFI since 2000, but many of the advantages EFI offers just aren't needed by the average user which is why a standard BIOS is still used.

Adamant1988
June 22nd, 2007, 01:06 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface

Read up, EFI is hardly Mac specific. Apple started shipping systems that used EFI in 2006, while Gateway's been doing it since 2003, and HP since 2002.

Linux has been using EFI since 2000, but many of the advantages EFI offers just aren't needed by the average user which is why a standard BIOS is still used.

OK, I was ignorant of EFI's use in other circumstances. That still leaves Macs with custom designed logic boards and an OS that was developed in collaboration with Intel.

Sp4cedOut
June 22nd, 2007, 02:05 AM
I can install Linux on my Xbox.. does that make it a PC? A processor and a graphics card != PC.

Like I said, Apple's Macintosh computers are in an interesting place. They provide PC functionality, but they are more like consoles in their design. However, if what you say is true then I am going to contend that buying an Xbox, or any other game console from this point forward is fruitless because "They're just PCs in a different case".

Macs are PCs? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2HEwXSTshk) << Please take 9 minutes to watch this.

His arguments are primarily based on Windows, but if you look at it when he starts talking about Hardware that is relevant.

I just watched the video and I was curious, is that a video really criticizing Windows, or is it playing devil's advocate and making Mac users look stupid, because that guy really didn't give me the impression he knew what he is talking about.

The most obvious technical mistake was when he said "without Apple we wouldn't have PCs or GUIs." PCs were around before Apple, although it is true Apple did a lot to mainstream it. Second, Apple didn't invent the GUI but bought it from Xerox.

Second, he made a point of talking about how much Intel sucks, and I agree with him. I'm using a Core 2 Duo now, but if I built my computer 6 months before I did I'd use an AMD for sure. That's what I like about PCs, it opens your computer to competition. I find it surprising Apple would want to make a deal with Intel considering Intel's horrible track record. It seemed a one point he was confused as to why Apple went with Intel (about 4 min into it).

Third, people seem to think that because Windows and Linux are more flexible OSs, they must be slower, which I simply don't believe. I've seen benchmarks that show Macs slightly faster than PCs, and I see benchmarks that show the opposite. This leads me to believe PCs are slightly faster at some things, and Macs are slightly faster at others. And then I could point out, that if you took the money you paid for that Mac and bought a PC at the same price, it would have better hardware and thus be faster.

Finally, he asked "is windows designed to work with dell, toshiba, etc..." no, it's the opposite, dells and toshibas are designed to work with Windows. I'd like to know who this guy is and where he gets his info, because since upwards of 90% of Intel's customers use Windows, who do you think they'll design their processors for. The same goes for video cards and other PC components. All hardware companies want their hardware to work on Windows, unfortunately Linux and Mac are afterthoughts.

Adamant1988
June 22nd, 2007, 02:30 AM
I just watched the video and I was curious, is that a video really criticizing Windows, or is it playing devil's advocate and making Mac users look stupid, because that guy really didn't give me the impression he knew what he is talking about.

The most obvious technical mistake was when he said "without Apple we wouldn't have PCs or GUIs." PCs were around before Apple, although it is true Apple did a lot to mainstream it. Second, Apple didn't invent the GUI but bought it from Xerox.

Second, he made a point of talking about how much Intel sucks, and I agree with him. I'm using a Core 2 Duo now, but if I built my computer 6 months before I did I'd use an AMD for sure. That's what I like about PCs, it opens your computer to competition. I find it surprising Apple would want to make a deal with Intel considering Intel's horrible track record. It seemed a one point he was confused as to why Apple went with Intel (about 4 min into it).

Third, people seem to think that because Windows and Linux are more flexible OSs, they must be slower, which I simply don't believe. I've seen benchmarks that show Macs slightly faster than PCs, and I see benchmarks that show the opposite. This leads me to believe PCs are slightly faster at some things, and Macs are slightly faster at others. And then I could point out, that if you took the money you paid for that Mac and bought a PC at the same price, it would have better hardware and thus be faster.

Finally, he asked "is windows designed to work with dell, toshiba, etc..." no, it's the opposite, dells and toshibas are designed to work with Windows. I'd like to know who this guy is and where he gets his info, because since upwards of 90% of Intel's customers use Windows, who do you think they'll design their processors for. The same goes for video cards and other PC components. All hardware companies want their hardware to work on Windows, unfortunately Linux and Mac are afterthoughts.

Actually, he's right to an extent. Although the GUI part is debatable, he is correct to the extent that if Apple hadn't gotten involved in the computer market we might not be running PCs right now. Apple and Microsoft really helped to put a computer on every desk.

Benchmarks can be twisted any which way you would like. I could create a series of benchmarking tests right now that would who that my Laptop with XP and an antivirus is faster than my Linux desktop at games. Although I disagree with you about the speed of the Mac computers I know I'll never convince you otherwise.

He's drawing a comparison. Apple's OS X is designed to work with the hardware that it's put on. Windows, however, is written for a processor and nothing more. Also, he gets his info from generally being knowledgable and the fact that he spends a lot of his time repairing PCs and working with various operating systems. He knows hardware and the operating systems in and out almost as much as anyone. (If you watch other videos of his he'll even show you the PC-repair shop he works for)

He doesn't like Intel and it shows, but he bows out saying "I'm just a peon, I'll let Apple make the business decisions"

He actually does know what he's talking about, yes he is heavily biased against Windows, but he DOES know what he is talking about. He just fails to present the other side in his arguments.

Extreme Coder
June 22nd, 2007, 03:00 AM
That still leaves Macs with custom designed logic boards and an OS that was developed in collaboration with Intel.

Care to enlighten me what custom designed logic boards are you talking about?

Adamant1988
June 22nd, 2007, 03:41 AM
Care to enlighten me what custom designed logic boards are you talking about?

I have had extreme difficulty finding any other information than "Macs use logic boards that are custom designed for their computers". It seems the topic isn't important enough for someone to write about in detail, but I will continue to search.

However, like I was saying earlier as a difference to "PCs" this is a quote from Wikipedia:


The Macintosh differs in several ways from other x86-based personal computers, especially those that run the Windows operating system. Apple directly sub-contracts hardware production to Asian OEM laptop manufacturers such as Asus, maintaining a high degree of control over the end product. In contrast, Microsoft supplies its software to original equipment manufacturers, including Dell, HP/Compaq, and Lenovo, who make the hardware using a wider range of components. This less-common operating system means that a much smaller range of third-party software is available, although suitable applications, such as Microsoft Office, are available in most areas. However, following the release of Intel-based Mac, third-party virtualization software such as Parallels Desktop and Crossover Mac began to emerge, allowing users to run much of the previously Windows-only software on a Mac. Apple also released a public beta version of Boot Camp, which allows users to run Microsoft Windows natively on any Intel-based Macs.

Sp4cedOut
June 22nd, 2007, 08:21 PM
This about this:

Microsoft designed their OS to work with Intel chips and even collaborated with Intel. So why is it that AMD was able to design faster processors for Windows? Because AMD's processors were designed with the same interface as Intel's, not only could they work with Windows, but could work better. There was once a time when operating systems and hardware were designed together, and I think that's the rut Apple is stuck in.

DarkStarAeon
June 22nd, 2007, 08:38 PM
Personal opinion: I hate OS X.

Sure, like any OS is has it benefits, but overall it drives me insane. I won't go into detail because that just causes arguments over peoples personal preferences which is just ridiculous.

In my opinion, Apple really isn't all that different than Microsoft, just smaller. Both want to lock you into products that cost waaaaaaay too much, OS X itself is cheaper than Windows, but I can buy a PC for muuuch cheaper than what I can buy a Mac for, also, with a PC I have the option of building my own. Plus replacing parts on a Mac quickly leads you to conclude it would just be cheaper to buy a new Mac altogether.

OS X itself though, (back to topic), is counter-intuitive to me and makes me feel like I am on a computer that was designed for people who are afraid of computers, feels like a "kiddy" version of an operating system.

Before the Apple faithful go off on me, keep in mind, I did concede that each OS has it's strong points, OS X included. Of course using anything made by Adobe is great on a Mac.

anyway, just my opinion. If you disagree, fine, no point in arguing personal preference.

arrrghhh
June 23rd, 2007, 01:41 AM
exactly. this is all personal opinion, people forget that NO ONE is right. no one is wrong. it's an opinion.

i used windows for years and years, and i *tried* to switch to linux so many times i can't count. i could never get everything working properly, and if i can't get my basic hardware working then back to windows it is. i think i finally got it with feisty (although my video card is still not workin right...) hopefully i will not need to boot windows again (unless it's a vm...)

i've used macs, heck my dad still has an apple ii/e.

i love the kernel they are built on, but HATE the interface. if it wasn't for the interface, i'd probably be an avid mac user - their interface is the most annoying, cumbersome, and uncustomizable i have ever come in contact with. now granted i've never owned one and never really tweaked with it - but every time i use one the simplest tasks become a pain. just little things like selecting a list by holding shift and the down arrow key. oh crap, i didn't want to select that last one. so i hit the up key. instead of removing the previous item in the list, it goes all the way to the top of the list and selects the item above the top of the selection. i get angry perhaps too easily, and macs just make me angry.

again, personal opinion! just how i feel about macs. they're not for everyone, which is why their market share is so low. which also explains linux's extremely low market share. mac & linux have their own niches, and so long as there is a niche to fill there will always be those choices. i'm just glad i have choices out there, because if mac was the only option i'd go bonkers. be glad this isn't communisim, just think of the o/s the gov't would write for all of us to use!

DarkStarAeon
June 23rd, 2007, 02:13 AM
I wholeheartedly agree with many of your frustrations with Macs. I cringe each time I have to use one.

Don't get me wrong, for my work I use a variety of computers with a variety of operating systems, and even have a Mac, which is how I know I don't like them, lol

I disagree with one one point though, I think the Mac market share is mostly low due to their high price, even though you and I and others agree about the interface being cumbersome etc etc, I think most people don't buy them because they can get something else a whole lot cheaper.

I think Linux gets the shaft sometimes, people have a few old notions about Linux and the word of mouth continues to spread with old info about it. Sure, the technologically challenged people are probably going to be afraid of Linux even if it is really easy now with several distros, but Windows and Mac users have a habit of telling those who don't know anything about Linux their experiences that they went through 5-6 years ago with Linux and many of their complaints are no longer valid. Linux has come a long long loooong way in the past few years.
Also, Linux gets the shaft with people thinking that because some hardware and software aren't compatible they assume that means that all or most is not compatible, which of course isn't true.

I should add that OS X annoys me because since it has so many attributes of both BSD and Linux that often I expect it to let me have the power and control of either, but it doesn't, everything is off limits or tucked away so that people can't break the system. Which considering their target audience I can understand, but it would be nice if they had a different mode for the experienced, because, quite honestly a lot of knowledgeable people use Macs too.

Again though, all a matter of preference, and in the end, whatever gets the job done is all that matters.

Alfa989
June 23rd, 2007, 02:52 AM
Again, personal opinion! just how i feel about macs. they're not for everyone, which is why their market share is so low.
Macs are specifically made to appeal to anyone...

Alfa989
June 23rd, 2007, 02:54 AM
I disagree with one one point though, I think the Mac market share is mostly low due to their high price, even though you and I and others agree about the interface being cumbersome etc etc, I think most people don't buy them because they can get something else a whole lot cheaper.

Make a comparison: A Mac and a PC, with the exact same components and features, and we'll see who's the most expensive one...

DarkStarAeon
June 23rd, 2007, 03:20 AM
I've made that comparison many times, which is exactly why I chose the PC, it had what I wanted and was cheaper in every single case. That is why I stated that in my post. ;)

DarkStarAeon
June 23rd, 2007, 03:20 AM
Macs are specifically made to appeal to anyone...

Which is impossible for any company to do, and obviously they failed.

pirothezero
June 23rd, 2007, 08:19 AM
I am going to take the time to ask a few questions about this. Planning on going to an Apple store tomorrow and testing the 'genius' there on the following because recently I have had the interest of getting a macbook:

1. I plan on taking a mkv file burned on a dvd into the store. If i can insert that into one of their demo machines nad have it just play my respect for Apple goes up ten fold. This leds me to ask without using VLC is their software just locked into QuckTime? I ask because i saw on page 4 someone said bs to locked in proprietary stuff. Playing embedded videos for example on cnn and msnbc. Getting everything out of the video entertainment experience that you can.

2. Whats the pirate scene like for Apple? Can you find anything at a moments notice?

3. Installing linux apps on OS X. Are they stable? Does it matter if its kde/gnome natural ?

4. Stablity of a OS X? Does it ever crash?

5. Can you uninstall anything Apple? ITunes for example? I want that off my **** so it doesn't take over file associations etc. Secondly do applications try to take over all the extensions so its the one stop app you ever need?

6. Programming on a os x? Differences from windows and linux? Applications that make it fun ?

I'll have more and come back later.

Chrisj303
June 23rd, 2007, 09:30 AM
I triboot osx/ubuntu/xp on my mac.

I feel dirty when i boot into windows.

I grit my teeth when i boot into ubuntu.

Alfa989
June 23rd, 2007, 09:20 PM
I've made that comparison many times, which is exactly why I chose the PC, it had what I wanted and was cheaper in every single case. That is why I stated that in my post. ;)
With the exact same specs and features? I don't think so...

Alfa989
June 23rd, 2007, 10:33 PM
I am going to take the time to ask a few questions about this. Planning on going to an Apple store tomorrow and testing the 'genius' there on the following because recently I have had the interest of getting a macbook:

1. I plan on taking a mkv file burned on a dvd into the store. If i can insert that into one of their demo machines nad have it just play my respect for Apple goes up ten fold. This leds me to ask without using VLC is their software just locked into QuckTime? I ask because i saw on page 4 someone said bs to locked in proprietary stuff. Playing embedded videos for example on cnn and msnbc. Getting everything out of the video entertainment experience that you can.

2. Whats the pirate scene like for Apple? Can you find anything at a moments notice?

3. Installing linux apps on OS X. Are they stable? Does it matter if its kde/gnome natural ?

4. Stablity of a OS X? Does it ever crash?

5. Can you uninstall anything Apple? ITunes for example? I want that off my **** so it doesn't take over file associations etc. Secondly do applications try to take over all the extensions so its the one stop app you ever need?

6. Programming on a os x? Differences from windows and linux? Applications that make it fun ?

I'll have more and come back later.
1.- You can use VLC without any problems
2.- You can find anything on Demonoid or ThePirateBay
3.- Dunno. That depends if there's a port. I haven't used fink, so I don't really know about that.
4.- It doesn't crash, but if it does, it's something you'll tell your grandson in front of a roaring fire... :D
5.- It's not like windows, so you can uninstall iTunes, QuickTime, Safari, etc...
6.- Try Xcode for yourself... It uses a kind of C++ (ObjectiveC), but it's easy to adapt to it...

arrrghhh
June 25th, 2007, 07:28 AM
With the exact same specs and features? I don't think so...

uh... yea. pc's have ALWAYS been cheaper to build. because you can pick components from anywhere and slap 'em together (assuming they all work together...) for example i got a asus a8n-sli premium mobo for ~$60 several months ago...open box from newegg. those things were like $130 when i bought it. try building your own mac the same way... yea you can't. you can't find discounts on the pieces, because you HAVE to buy from apple. i mean there's plenty of places that sell complete ready-to-go pc's (obviously) but i choose not to buy from them, because it's much more fun & a lot cheaper to build your own. don't get all the crap you don't want, just what you want! try doin that with an apple.

sorry for my rant, but that's why apple's are more expensive and will ALWAYS be more expensive. they're all set-top ready-to-go computers, and forget upgrading or swapping parts on 'em. i like the electronics metaphor, buying macs are like buying a set-top piece of electronics, there's no amplifiers or console game systems that you can buy parts and build (at least not like computers...)

Alfa989
June 25th, 2007, 03:10 PM
uh... yea. pc's have ALWAYS been cheaper to build. because you can pick components from anywhere and slap 'em together (assuming they all work together...) for example i got a asus a8n-sli premium mobo for ~$60 several months ago...open box from newegg. those things were like $130 when i bought it. try building your own mac the same way... yea you can't. you can't find discounts on the pieces, because you HAVE to buy from apple. i mean there's plenty of places that sell complete ready-to-go pc's (obviously) but i choose not to buy from them, because it's much more fun & a lot cheaper to build your own. don't get all the crap you don't want, just what you want! try doin that with an apple.

sorry for my rant, but that's why apple's are more expensive and will ALWAYS be more expensive. they're all set-top ready-to-go computers, and forget upgrading or swapping parts on 'em. i like the electronics metaphor, buying macs are like buying a set-top piece of electronics, there's no amplifiers or console game systems that you can buy parts and build (at least not like computers...)
Just because you can build a PC buying independent part doesn't mean that Macs are more expensive or worse computers... Come on, just do us a comparison, but remember to put in the same components and features...

And you can upgrade components and change them in a Mac, just like any other computer...

russell.h
June 25th, 2007, 04:30 PM
So I don't know if you all remember, but I'm pretty sure that at the beginning of this thread I was bashing OSX. Well just so you all know I ordered myself one of the new 15" MacBook Pros on Saturday.

Of course I still think Apple stuff is horribly overpriced, and I don't like proprietary, but in a laptop one doesn't have much choice. Plus with a $100 rebate on a $100 printer, a $200 rebate on the ipod I was planning to buy anyway, a $200 educational discount and free shipping on all of it I would say that Apple actually managed to make the price competitive.

At any rate, I am now going to try to see if I can't overcome my current dislike of OSX. As soon as the damned thing gets here (like 2 weeks... at least my ipod and printer are coming sooner to keep me entertained).

noenter1
June 25th, 2007, 07:12 PM
The first computer that i have ever been on was a mac. That was when i was 5, and i havent been on one since then till about a 2 years ago. To me macs just seem easy to use, even tho people keep telling me its hard to use. I plan on getting a mac soon just to play around with. And yes i am still going to stick with ubuntu.

DarkStarAeon
June 25th, 2007, 07:21 PM
lol russell.h, well let us know how you like it once it gets there and you play around with it.

I will admit the new OS X looks like it takes care of a few things I don't like about it, but I'll have to use it before I could say for sure.

Again, to those defending OS X and Mac, keep in mind, I have one, I have to for work.

I'm going to sound like an echo of arrrghhh's post, but.....

If anyone seriously thinks that a Mac is cheaper to buy than a PC, I want to know where you live and who's been trying to rip you off. I've lived all across North America and in many places throughout Europe and no matter where I have been I could ALWAYS buy or put together a PC cheaper than I could a buy a Mac. Even one with comparable or often exceedingly better hardware than a Mac. Period. It's pretty common knowledge that this is the case, one trip to a computer store will prove it. Do your own comparison online, stop asking someone else to do it for you. We know it's cheaper to get the PC, go look for yourself.

There actually are Mac retailers in my area, several of them, and all of them are just as expensive as buying a Mac online. (although they have one there with dual quadcore processors that made me drool and was actually fairly priced for what it was).

Again, back to the original topic, I think all operating systems have their place and benefits, the more choice we have the better, and again it all comes down to personal preference and how much that preference is worth to ya. lol

DarkStarAeon
June 25th, 2007, 07:22 PM
The first computer that i have ever been on was a mac. That was when i was 5, and i havent been on one since then till about a 2 years ago. To me macs just seem easy to use, even tho people keep telling me its hard to use. I plan on getting a mac soon just to play around with. And yes i am still going to stick with ubuntu.

It's all a matter of what you're used to.

I do not find OS X "hard" at all, just aggravating.

My wife grew up using Macs, then Windows, and she said that until she used Ubuntu she never enjoyed using one before. She loves her Ubuntu.

highlyjhi
June 26th, 2007, 05:21 AM
Funny thing is I couldn't work out how to open the mac terminal.

You couldn't either (A) search for it or; (B) browse the Applications folder? It's not like the Applications folder is hidden or anything. Yes, Terminal is in the Utilities folder which _is in_ the Applications folder but as an intuitive OS user that didn't seem logical?

DarkStarAeon
June 26th, 2007, 06:54 AM
I agree the applications folder is easy to find, but go easy on him man, switch to decaf ;)

Alfa989
June 26th, 2007, 05:08 PM
lol russell.h, well let us know how you like it once it gets there and you play around with it.

I will admit the new OS X looks like it takes care of a few things I don't like about it, but I'll have to use it before I could say for sure.

Again, to those defending OS X and Mac, keep in mind, I have one, I have to for work.

I'm going to sound like an echo of arrrghhh's post, but.....

If anyone seriously thinks that a Mac is cheaper to buy than a PC, I want to know where you live and who's been trying to rip you off. I've lived all across North America and in many places throughout Europe and no matter where I have been I could ALWAYS buy or put together a PC cheaper than I could a buy a Mac. Even one with comparable or often exceedingly better hardware than a Mac. Period. It's pretty common knowledge that this is the case, one trip to a computer store will prove it. Do your own comparison online, stop asking someone else to do it for you. We know it's cheaper to get the PC, go look for yourself.

There actually are Mac retailers in my area, several of them, and all of them are just as expensive as buying a Mac online. (although they have one there with dual quadcore processors that made me drool and was actually fairly priced for what it was).

Again, back to the original topic, I think all operating systems have their place and benefits, the more choice we have the better, and again it all comes down to personal preference and how much that preference is worth to ya. lol
With the same hardware specs you possibly could... But what about the other features? Design, near 0 sound levels (very important!), hardware quality, packaging, detail... The Mac wins... And it's cheaper o the same price...

DarkStarAeon
June 26th, 2007, 05:26 PM
Quite simply, I disagree. Maybe in your experience you can't find equal or better on a PC, but I definitely can.

Chrisj303
June 27th, 2007, 08:36 AM
Prove it then!

DarkStarAeon
June 27th, 2007, 08:58 AM
Prove it to yourself since that's what it will probably take to convince you.
Navigate your way to just about any site that sells computer parts for a fair price, then compare prices among those sites and add up the totals.
I'm not going to waste my time for you digging up tons of very easily accessible information that you can find yourself, how lazy are you? Prove it to yourself if you need convincing of a widely known fact.

I love how completely anonymous internet users act like I owe them something.

The internet gives us all the same access to the same info, go, look around a bit.

Chrisj303
June 27th, 2007, 09:09 AM
I just don't belive that a truely comparable machine can be bought for less than a Mac. I have seen this come up on many forums, and it always turns out to be bogus.

Just becuase you say something, dosen't mean everybodys going to belive you. I could make many claims on the net, if i'm not willing to back them up - then thats all they are, claims.

It's not a widely known fact - it's a widely known myth.


And, even if you do save yourself 50 quid on your new lap/desktop, it's still going to be an ugly, poorly designed old brick.

A Mac will also allow you to Tripleboot (legally) OSX/LINUX/WINDOWS - Total compatibility

DarkStarAeon
June 27th, 2007, 09:42 AM
Well, the proof is out there man, all you have to do is look. If you choose not to then your basically saying you won't believe something until someone else does the work for you.

Well, I guess that works both ways man, your claim sounds like b.s. to me, you say mine sounds the same to you, but I know I've built a comparable machine and so have many people I have known, and I don't reaqlly care whether you buy that or not.
You using hearsay of debates on other forums isn't exactly credible if you ask me.

Ahhh...I noticed you said "quid", which means you're probably a Brit, which also means that we're arguing over prices for parts in two different countries, which is ridiculous.
Seeing as I am a dual citizen of the US and UK, and have purchased computers in both countries, then I will concede that in the UK, no, I couldn't buy a comparable PC for less than what I could get a Mac for. However, in the US, it is very very easy, and a widely known fact that you can get a comparable PC for less than a Mac. That's no myth, what you choose to believe is your prerogative.

By the way, I'm booting Ubuntu Studio 7.04, openSUSE 10.2, WIndows XP Professional SP2, PC-BSD, Solaris 10, Fedora 7, Mandriva 2006, and PClinuxOS on one machine right now. So, Linux, WIndows, BSD, and Java/Unix all in one, that's 4 different ypes of OS's with 8 different flavors to your 3 operating systems I find that pretty compatible. ;)
I have a Mac too, just seperate though, as I rarely use other than for work.

Anyway, I'm done with this debate, have a good one.

3rdalbum
June 27th, 2007, 02:21 PM
Design, near 0 sound levels (very important!), hardware quality, packaging, detail... The Mac wins... And it's cheaper o the same price...

My PC has quite a striking black and dark green look to it.

Sound levels: The fans spin up to full as soon as it is turned on, but it slows them right down immediately. I can honestly say that my 3rd-party speakers make more static noise than the whole computer does.

Hardware quality seems to be excellent, and the only operating systems that don't have great compatibility with it are ReactOS and Nexenta. Other OpenSolaris distros work fine, BTW.

I don't consider packaging to be an indication of anything, as Conia plasmas come in much nicer boxes than Panasonic plasmas.

To top it all off, the whole computer and monitor was only $600 - about $400 cheaper than a Mac Mini alone. (local currency) Like the Mac, it includes a Firewire port. Unlike the Mac, it includes *expandability* in the form of drive bays and PCI slots. It's a dependable machine and it's a PC. Myth busted.

Alfa989
June 27th, 2007, 02:23 PM
Well, the proof is out there man, all you have to do is look. If you choose not to then your basically saying you won't believe something until someone else does the work for you.

Well, I guess that works both ways man, your claim sounds like b.s. to me, you say mine sounds the same to you, but I know I've built a comparable machine and so have many people I have known, and I don't reaqlly care whether you buy that or not.
You using hearsay of debates on other forums isn't exactly credible if you ask me.

Ahhh...I noticed you said "quid", which means you're probably a Brit, which also means that we're arguing over prices for parts in two different countries, which is ridiculous.
Seeing as I am a dual citizen of the US and UK, and have purchased computers in both countries, then I will concede that in the UK, no, I couldn't buy a comparable PC for less than what I could get a Mac for. However, in the US, it is very very easy, and a widely known fact that you can get a comparable PC for less than a Mac. That's no myth, what you choose to believe is your prerogative.

By the way, I'm booting Ubuntu Studio 7.04, openSUSE 10.2, WIndows XP Professional SP2, PC-BSD, Solaris 10, Fedora 7, Mandriva 2006, and PClinuxOS on one machine right now. So, Linux, WIndows, BSD, and Java/Unix all in one, that's 4 different ypes of OS's with 8 different flavors to your 3 operating systems I find that pretty compatible. ;)
I have a Mac too, just seperate though, as I rarely use other than for work.

Anyway, I'm done with this debate, have a good one.
Yeah, and pigs fly! Didn't you know? It's a widely known fact! Google it up! :D
It's the same in the US, in the UK or in Swaziland...

P.S: I did the comparison... Guess who wins... (http://www.box.net/shared/9yxi3x60rn)
EDIT--> P.P.S:It's the iMac-Newegg one

Alfa989
June 27th, 2007, 02:46 PM
My PC has quite a striking black and dark green look to it.

Sound levels: The fans spin up to full as soon as it is turned on, but it slows them right down immediately. I can honestly say that my 3rd-party speakers make more static noise than the whole computer does.

Hardware quality seems to be excellent, and the only operating systems that don't have great compatibility with it are ReactOS and Nexenta. Other OpenSolaris distros work fine, BTW.

I don't consider packaging to be an indication of anything, as Conia plasmas come in much nicer boxes than Panasonic plasmas.

To top it all off, the whole computer and monitor was only $600 - about $400 cheaper than a Mac Mini alone. (local currency) Like the Mac, it includes a Firewire port. Unlike the Mac, it includes *expandability* in the form of drive bays and PCI slots. It's a dependable machine and it's a PC. Myth busted.
You haven't "busted" any myth, my friend... I would also like to see a photo of your PC... To see how it looks...

DarkStarAeon
June 27th, 2007, 04:44 PM
Alfa989, you didn't look very hard then, that is obvious. No, it's not the same in every country, that's a load of crap, prices very greatly from place to place, even just inside the US. Take buying memory for example, that stuff is like the oil market, it's up and down every day. Saying it's the same everywhere is a bold faced lie.

Arguing with a rabid Mac fanatic is like arguing with a brick wall, why am I even trying? No logic with fanatics.

I'll stick with my Ubuntu on a PC, you can have you're bloody Macs.

Adamant1988
June 27th, 2007, 04:55 PM
Prove it to yourself since that's what it will probably take to convince you.
Navigate your way to just about any site that sells computer parts for a fair price, then compare prices among those sites and add up the totals.
I'm not going to waste my time for you digging up tons of very easily accessible information that you can find yourself, how lazy are you? Prove it to yourself if you need convincing of a widely known fact.

I love how completely anonymous internet users act like I owe them something.

The internet gives us all the same access to the same info, go, look around a bit.

I think we're missing out on some important arguments here.

PCs prebuilt are typically more expensive than Macs for the same kind of features and horsepower. In fact if you can even build a feature for feature equivalent to a Mac for a lesser price than what they cost then I would be pleasantly surprised.

However, in that same breath, Macs often have a lot more power than people need or even want, and that's a fact. Every Mac is a real monster compared to most PCs.

Also, the people claiming you can custom build cheaper thana Mac, it strictly depends on what you mean by cheaper. When I think cheaper I think that the TCO should be lower. When you build you have to spend time picking out parts, cases, etc. Then you have to wait for all of those parts to arrive in the mail (if you're a good shopper they're probably all coming from different places), then when they arrive you need to put them all together. Afterwords you'll have to load on the operating system and set that up. This is assuming you don't have to do any kind of studying to figure out which parts are actually going to be incompatible, etc. So, there's definitely a time investment there.

DarkStarAeon
June 27th, 2007, 05:10 PM
Adamant1988, I appreciate your being thoughtful on the subject and not hostile as some others have been.

I will agree that yes, there is a time investment if building a PC. But I don't mind spending the time to save the money.

I definitely agree Macs are built to specs well beyond what their average users ever need, I never knocked their power or performance, and in the original topic of this thread I merely agreed that I dislike OS X.

However, I will have to agree to disagree about the Mac being cheaper and leave it at that with you all. If I and others have done it, then we don't need anyone telling us we haven't done it.

So everyone, should we continue taking this thread way, way, waaaaay off topic? lol

mthakur2006
June 27th, 2007, 05:18 PM
macs look good imo

Alfa989
June 28th, 2007, 11:47 AM
Alfa989, you didn't look very hard then, that is obvious. No, it's not the same in every country, that's a load of crap, prices very greatly from place to place, even just inside the US. Take buying memory for example, that stuff is like the oil market, it's up and down every day. Saying it's the same everywhere is a bold faced lie.

Arguing with a rabid Mac fanatic is like arguing with a brick wall, why am I even trying? No logic with fanatics.

I'll stick with my Ubuntu on a PC, you can have you're bloody Macs.

No logic? You're the one that shows no logic! I proved it picking the US prices, just where you said that Macs are more expensive, and now you say that because prices vary, I haven't proofed anything?
Yeah, sure... ):P

DarkStarAeon
June 30th, 2007, 07:29 PM
I haven't proofed anything?

Proofed? You mean proved? Well, you've proved you have trouble with the English language.

Also, you haven't proved what you found, you didn't prove how long you looked, where you looked, or what you were comparing, so yeah dude, you didn't prove anything. You made a claim with nothing to back it up. And if others in this thread say that my claiming I have wasn't proof enough, then why would you doing it be any different?
Fact is I know I've done it, and a couple other people have too who posted here, and we found it easy. So I'm guessing you and others who couldn't just don't know where to look.

Anyway, this topic is so far off topic now it's ridiculous, so I'm bowing out now. You think you're right, I think I'm right, I doubt that's gonna change. Have a good one.

taktu
July 6th, 2007, 03:29 PM
yeah... nice topic... my god... it makes you feel stupid. maybe it's because you feel smart only when typing in your terminal for 3 hours instead of clicking little nice checkboxes that help you not spend your entire adult life figuring stuff out but actually getting your work done.

bravo...