Apple bashing? [Archive]

LaRoza

December 26th, 2007, 09:19 PM

I have heard that the main reason that they use proprietary hardware is the fact that they can ensure stability by designing software that works with that particular hardware. It seems to me that a lot of people who use apple computers are using them for their profession ( particularly creative work). So if your life depends on your work you need you computers to always work. Is their really that many problems? I have been using apple computers for about two years now, and have had no problems. Also I purchased my previous machine for $500, and I just recently sold it for $520. Although there is more of an initial investment, they seem to hold their value very well. Just go look at ebay.

Just someone looking for some enlightenment... :KS

They use the exact same hardware now, except for a chip solely for the purpose of restricting it.

Look on Newegg at the Apples, then look at the hardware. They are not worth it. (Hardware wise, I have not had a chance to use the software)

anemptygun

December 26th, 2007, 09:24 PM

Just look the place you're posting at.

Let's say you go to any Mac-fan forum and post "OMG WINDOWZ ROXORZ", .

OMG LOL d00d you is funny!

anemptygun

December 26th, 2007, 09:26 PM

What I don't understand is the argument that OS X is locked into Apple hardware solely for the harmony and that chaos would ensue should Apple release it for all commodity.

I don't know. I guess I'm just trying to see what other peoples opinions are in the matter.

AvengingAngel718

December 28th, 2007, 09:06 AM

i'm actually pretty interested in getting a macbook for the sole purpose of playing world of warcraft and just to learn the mac OS to enhance my 1337 skills. I agree that macs are overpriced hardware-wise, but when compared to a windows computer, i would assume it would have a lower total cost of ownership due to the fact that you wont have to take it to the computer repair shop 20 times during its lifespan to get a virus removed or some such BS. of course, ubuntu is and always will be my one true love (as far as operating systems, at least) but i dont understand all the animosity towards mac, who actually tends to work with the open source community. Instead of squabbling amongst ourselves, we should be united against the true enemy, the dark lord Gates and his evil general steve ballmer.

Dr. C

December 29th, 2007, 03:11 AM

The reason many like to bash Apple is that it is even more propriety, DRMed and with even more vendor lock in than Microsoft.

Here is an interesting example a patent application for a WGA type DRM that calls home far more frequently than its Microsoft sibling
http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=205203045&cid=nl_IWK_daily#community
My first thought about this was prior art on the part of Microsoft, but apparantly Apple may avoid prior art by making the DRM even more insidious.

I seriously considered the Mac when I got sick of Microsoft DRM, but I soon realized that moving form Microsoft to Apple to avoid DRM is like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. So it is Ubuntu for me.

PS You can run "the evil" Windows Vista Ultimate in a virtual machine on Ubuntu. All you need to pay for Microsoft for is a software license. With Mac OS X you have to license both the software and the hardware from Apple. Ouch!

JoshuaRL

December 29th, 2007, 03:34 AM

I haven't used a mac in a long time (try OS 8.6) and it wasn't mine at that time anyway, but I kinda liked it. They tend to do the end-user experience pretty well. Slick looking boxes with slick looking GUIs. And since their OS is UNIX (kinda) it's pretty easy. Within about a month I had written about six utilities and three simple games. And that's while in high school with no prior experience coding. All you had to do is to dig a little into the library for AppleScript. I have to say that it started my interest in coding, what little I've done.

But yes, ridiculous DRM. And for anyone that wants anything else from their OS than slickness and ease of use, this may not be the right one for them. I like to have the ability to mod and change, misapply and break, find and fix, and above all, have a good ol' Linux time. And I cannot explain fully my desire to have free software. I really hate paying for it. I'm sorry if that makes me a bad person, but it's true.

But that's why there's different OSs. Some people that I know just want it to work. Period, end of discussion. So there's Windows for them. And there's some who want it to just work, and have more money to pay, and like to think that they know something no one else does. And then there's the select few who like to turn a wrench under the hood, or change the motor completely. And for those type of people, and whoever they can convert, there is Mother Linux.

And that's all I have to say about that.

AvengingAngel718

December 29th, 2007, 05:26 AM

I have to admit i know nothing about apples DRM, but i'd imagine it to be pretty severe. If i do decide to go that route, it will be limited to things i'd feel safe having people know about. Linux will always be my secure desktop and main OS. Of course, i'm gonna have to do a lot of homework before i commit to anything.

Anyway, speaking of running windows in a virtual machine (and i'm fully aware that this has NOTHING to do with the conversation at hand), i've been thinking about doing that and then trying to infect it with every virus i can find. Kind of like a nerd antfarm, just to see what they all do. And before you ask, yes, i got the idea from XKCD.

LaRoza

December 29th, 2007, 05:29 AM

Anyway, speaking of running windows in a virtual machine (and i'm fully aware that this has NOTHING to do with the conversation at hand), i've been thinking about doing that and then trying to infect it with every virus i can find. Kind of like a nerd antfarm, just to see what they all do. And before you ask, yes, i got the idea from XKCD.

http://xkcd.com/350/

Know it well.

I will have to try it too. Just need to get Windows.

JoshuaRL

December 29th, 2007, 05:38 AM

You should try it with something like Windows 98 with no service packs installed just so it's the most infectable OS possible.

LaRoza

December 29th, 2007, 05:38 AM

You should try it with something like Windows 98 with no service packs installed just so it's the most infectable OS possible.

Where am I going to get that?

I will have to look....

JoshuaRL

December 29th, 2007, 05:44 AM

Where am I going to get that?

Try eBay. They'll probably have some copies pretty cheap.

Wait, you're telling me you're such an Linux OG that you don't have any 95/98/2000/XP cds laying around?

EDIT
Oh wait, I just got a look at your bean and thank count. I guess it's possible. (Got to get my best Wayne impression ready)

IM NOT WORTHY!!
/EDIT

AvengingAngel718

December 29th, 2007, 05:51 AM

new topic for thread: half baked schemes involving virtual machines!

JoshuaRL

December 29th, 2007, 05:58 AM

Make two virtual machines and test firewalls by having one brute-force the other. That way you get a benchmark as to how strong each respective firewall is.

snakeeyes

December 29th, 2007, 03:58 PM

I use Apple products as well, this is what I think. Apple is more proprietary than Microsoft, their marketing techniques and methods r horrible and insulting just look at the pc vs mac ads. How does that make Windows users feel even if it is true? Another big reason is that if u want a good experience with Apple then u have to keep on paying them for their products and services, in the end u pay then u would for a single copy of Windows. I have used OS X for a long time and I do like it, not as much as Linux though, but these r the reasons I think people dislike Apple. I am not starting a flame war, Apple the company itself has a lot of pride and that could be their biggest mistake.

Alfa989

December 29th, 2007, 04:32 PM

They use the exact same hardware now, except for a chip solely for the purpose of restricting it.

Look on Newegg at the Apples, then look at the hardware. They are not worth it. (Hardware wise, I have not had a chance to use the software)

Not worth it?

Take a look at the mini, for example. Its PC equivalents cost about 200 more €...

About 6 months ago I was walking through MadiaMarkt and I saw a Mac mini and a Fujitsu Esprimo side-by-side. Although the Esprimo had lower specs, it cost about 200/250€ more...

And let's compare it with a System76... The Koala Mini equivalent of the 799$ Mac mini (again, with lower specs) costs 1012$...

And the Mac comes with one of those closed-source OSs that tries to steal your soul, rip your heart off and rape your sister.

Alfa989

December 29th, 2007, 04:35 PM

The reason many like to bash Apple is that it is even more propriety, DRMed and with even more vendor lock in than Microsoft.

Mmm... There's no DRM in OS X, you know... Apart from when DVD Player doesn't let you take a screenshot of a movie :D

Alfa989

December 29th, 2007, 04:40 PM

Apple is more proprietary than Microsoft, their marketing techniques and methods r horrible and insulting just look at the pc vs mac ads.
Apple has sure got bad things, but saying that it's more propietary than MS is just... Stupid.

Another big reason is that if u want a good experience with Apple then u have to keep on paying them for their products and services, in the end u pay then u would for a single copy of Windows.
Could you explain yourself a bit more?
Because I bought my iBook in late 2005 and since then I haven't payed anything to Apple to keep getting a good product experience.
It's not like every year an Apple salesman knocks at your door at demands you to pay 100€ because if not, he will have to take your machine back to Cupertino...

snakeeyes

December 29th, 2007, 04:44 PM

Apple has sure got bad things, but saying that it's more propietary than MS is just... Stupid.

Could you explain yourself a bit more?
Because I bought my iBook in late 2005 and since then I haven't payed anything to Apple to keep getting a good product experience.
It's not like every year an Apple salesman knocks at your door at demands you to pay 100€ because if not, he will have to take your machine back to Cupertino...
Why is it stupid, they lock down everything. The second is for example their serverices such as .Mac account. I know they aren't important, but I feel like having everything when I get a Mac.

AvengingAngel718

December 29th, 2007, 07:39 PM

Make two virtual machines and test firewalls by having one brute-force the other. That way you get a benchmark as to how strong each respective firewall is.

this is the greatest idea i've ever heard :D

JoshuaRL

December 30th, 2007, 01:26 AM

this is the greatest idea i've ever heard :D

Thanks man. I thought it was pretty good too, but I didn't want to be the first to say so.

Peter Mount

December 30th, 2007, 02:09 AM

I'm planning to buy a Mac Mini in the new year and I want to run Ubuntu, Windows and the Mac OS on it. I'm a Web Developer and I really need something that will suit me for the long term.

I must admit it would be good if Apple had some sort of Live CD where it would be possible to try out the Mac OS on a PC just to see what it's like. Otherwise I'm going on faith at the moment.

cprofitt

December 30th, 2007, 04:45 AM

I am just curious as to why I see so much bashing on apple in the discussions. I am an apple user, and have always been happy with my apple devices. Why are so many people unhappy with apple, and why is there so much argument about the quality and price of their products?

From my perspective it is the dishonest advertising campaigns and 'lock-in' that Apple forces with certain products it makes that bothers me. The OS itself isn't bad, but the company to me is the same, or worse, than Microsoft with mitigation due to the fact they are insignificant in the user base currently.

cprofitt

December 30th, 2007, 04:46 AM

cprofitt

December 30th, 2007, 04:47 AM

How does that make Windows users feel even if it is true?

All the worse since most of the FUD they spread is not true.

LaRoza

December 30th, 2007, 04:49 AM

Try eBay. They'll probably have some copies pretty cheap.

Wait, you're telling me you're such an Linux OG that you don't have any 95/98/2000/XP cds laying around?

EDIT
Oh wait, I just got a look at your bean and thank count. I guess it's possible. (Got to get my best Wayne impression ready)

IM NOT WORTHY!!
/EDIT

I just obtained a copy.

cprofitt

December 30th, 2007, 04:55 AM

of course, ubuntu is and always will be my one true love (as far as operating systems, at least) but i dont understand all the animosity towards mac, who actually tends to work with the open source community. Instead of squabbling amongst ourselves, we should be united against the true enemy, the dark lord Gates and his evil general steve ballmer.

Does Gates or Ballmer have a product out that is only available for one carrier (iPhone)?

Does Gates or Ballmer produce an OS that will not load on a crapintosh?

Does Gates or Ballmer lock down their media player so you can ONLY get music from the msTunes music store?

Does Gates or Ballmer have an OS that only load ons MS Computers?

Sorry... they don't. Apple has done more in the way of willful harm to people despite their working with the Open Source coummunity... to steal their OS.

Nekiruhs

December 30th, 2007, 04:55 AM

Save yourself some money and just get a PC and do a Hackintosh...
Out of curiosity, is it even legal to run a Hackintosh, you know, with the DMCA running amok in the US legal system?

JoshuaRL

December 30th, 2007, 05:50 AM

Dude, you gotta either post it here or shoot me an PM if you get that running. That's so excellent.

Also, much respect on not owning a copy of Windows until now. Much much respect.

AvengingAngel718

December 30th, 2007, 06:01 AM

Does Gates or Ballmer have a product out that is only available for one carrier (iPhone)?

Does Gates or Ballmer produce an OS that will not load on a crapintosh?

Does Gates or Ballmer lock down their media player so you can ONLY get music from the msTunes music store?

Does Gates or Ballmer have an OS that only load ons MS Computers?

Sorry... they don't. Apple has done more in the way of willful harm to people despite their working with the Open Source coummunity... to steal their OS.

All very true.

I suppose i let my hatred for microsoft get the better of me sometimes, but even if they do suck worse, i'm pleased by anything that hurts microsoft, no matter how little, and even if their ads are heavily biased and elitist.

LaRoza

December 30th, 2007, 06:05 AM

Not worth it?

Take a look at the mini, for example. Its PC equivalents cost about 200 more €...

About 6 months ago I was walking through MadiaMarkt and I saw a Mac mini and a Fujitsu Esprimo side-by-side. Although the Esprimo had lower specs, it cost about 200/250€ more...

Show me a modern Mac that is the same price as a modern PC an affordable one.

I am sure you can do an addup and find Mac's worth the hardware, but can I get a low price Mac with its most recent os? My computer cost $500-600 with Vista, I can't find a modern Mac at that price. I would appreciate it if you could prove me wrong, but I have not seen an affordable Mac, as compared to PC's.

AvengingAngel718

December 30th, 2007, 06:08 AM

the mac mini he was talking about sells for $600 US

cprofitt

December 30th, 2007, 03:46 PM

the mac mini he was talking about sells for $600 US

Yeah and you get an Aopen for about $20 more... the mini is the ONE and ONLY example of a Mac that sells for less... but if I built the Aopen myself I would be able to do so for around $489...

Apple Sucks.

LaRoza

December 30th, 2007, 03:50 PM

http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html

That is nothing compared to my desktop, which costs less.

As much as I want a Mac, I can't get one. I would pay a bit for the OS, after all, it does support my hardware except for that Apple chip.

Alfa989

December 30th, 2007, 06:47 PM

Why is it stupid, they lock down everything. The second is for example their serverices such as .Mac account. I know they aren't important, but I feel like having everything when I get a Mac.
.Mac is not necessary to "have everything" to get the full experience of Macs and Mac OS X

Alfa989

December 30th, 2007, 06:50 PM

Save yourself some money and just get a PC and do a Hackintosh...
He probably doesn't want to spend countless hours to get his Sound and Wi-Fi working...

Alfa989

December 30th, 2007, 06:55 PM

Does Gates or Ballmer have a product out that is only available for one carrier (iPhone)?
Does that mena they are evil? Duh

Does Gates or Ballmer produce an OS that will not load on a crapintosh?
Mmm... So are you upset with Siemens because their newest washing machine firmware won't work in your LG?

Does Gates or Ballmer lock down their media player so you can ONLY get music from the msTunes music store?
Mmm... It's called iTunes+iPod for a reason. It's a single product.

Does Gates or Ballmer have an OS that only load ons MS Computers?
Ferrari's engines don't work in my Lamborghini! They are evil!

Sorry... they don't. Apple has done more in the way of willful harm to people despite their working with the Open Source coummunity... to steal their OS.
Well... I don't know how Apple's harming the OSS community...

Alfa989

December 30th, 2007, 06:57 PM

I am sure you can do an addup and find Mac's worth the hardware, but can I get a low price Mac with its most recent os? My computer cost $500-600 with Vista, I can't find a modern Mac at that price. I would appreciate it if you could prove me wrong, but I have not seen an affordable Mac, as compared to PC's.
So now 500 or 600$ PCs are affordable but 500 or 700$ Macs are not? How can that happen?

Alfa989

December 30th, 2007, 06:58 PM

Yeah and you get an Aopen for about $20 more... the mini is the ONE and ONLY example of a Mac that sells for less... but if I built the Aopen myself I would be able to do so for around $489...

Apple Sucks.

Good luck on building that AOpen yourself. And even if you try building it, it will end up costing more.

People suck

Alfa989

December 30th, 2007, 06:58 PM

http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.htmlThat is nothing compared to my desktop, which costs less.

As much as I want a Mac, I can't get one. I would pay a bit for the OS, after all, it does support my hardware except for that Apple chip.
Does your desktop have the mini's size?

AvengingAngel718

December 30th, 2007, 11:55 PM

Ferrari's engines don't work in my Lamborghini! They are evil!..

LOL

I like where this thread is going.

darksidedude

December 31st, 2007, 01:11 AM

amrclutch1

December 31st, 2007, 01:17 AM

I don't care who is on top, I use what I find suitable, and as long as linux exists, which it always will, I will be happy, let MS and Apple do their own thing, don't try to stop them, let's just work on improving the operating system that supports almost all servers over the world, and those people, like my brother, that say linux sucks, have no idea that all the game servers he plays on runs on linux. Why? Simply because linux is better, that is a fact, not an opinion.

jrharvey

December 31st, 2007, 01:25 AM

I am going to school for architecture and everyone knows that any type of graphics arts school supports apple but i have used it for about 10 years and I think linux is just sooo much better. OS X does have MANY great applications that make it a graphics powerhouse and it is certainly the easiest OS to use in my opinion but in the end i like Linux because it is fully customizable, free, secure and based on a community not a corporation. If linux had Adobe CS3, AutoCad and all the 3d modeling programs then i would never touch Windows or OSX again. Macs are waaaaaay overpriced just to get an OS that is safe and secure. For the average user Linux will do all you need it to.

AvengingAngel718

December 31st, 2007, 02:12 AM

this is the kind of problem that always hurts the Linux movement, we are \ our selves hating M$ and apple, just like KDE and the (so called "interface Nazi's") Gnome

we need to work together building our share of the computer world, the reason windows was so big was 1 simple reason, 1 interface 1 version
Mac is growing because of that, 1 type of hardware 1 OS not 6 versions of the same thing,

Agreed.

We all just need to get along, guys! Now let's make a drum circle.

The truth is, no one has made an absolutely perfect OS yet (although Ubuntu and Xubuntu come pretty close in my opinion), and all operating systems have certain strengths. When too many computers run the same OS, such as windows, security becomes an issue because if you can hack one you can hack all of them. I think Linux has been making some huge gains in popularity recently (including a PC sold at Wal-Mart running Ubuntu for $200 US.....they sold out very quickly), but I don't think it needs to be a popularity contest. If Linux can hold maybe, say, 10% of the global PC market, that would be ideal. It would remain secure because there wouldn't be quite as much interest in hacking it, and maybe those fat cats over at Blizzard would finally make a Linux native version of World of Warcraft.

Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ***. What do you guys/girls think?

cprofitt

December 31st, 2007, 03:15 AM

He probably doesn't want to spend countless hours to get his Sound and Wi-Fi working...

I agree... so skip proprietary Apple crap and get a Windows box and add a linux distro.

Apple Sux!

jrharvey

December 31st, 2007, 03:35 AM

Agreed.

We all just need to get along, guys! Now let's make a drum circle.

The truth is, no one has made an absolutely perfect OS yet (although Ubuntu and Xubuntu come pretty close in my opinion), and all operating systems have certain strengths. When too many computers run the same OS, such as windows, security becomes an issue because if you can hack one you can hack all of them. I think Linux has been making some huge gains in popularity recently (including a PC sold at Wal-Mart running Ubuntu for $200 US.....they sold out very quickly), but I don't think it needs to be a popularity contest. If Linux can hold maybe, say, 10% of the global PC market, that would be ideal. It would remain secure because there wouldn't be quite as much interest in hacking it, and maybe those fat cats over at Blizzard would finally make a Linux native version of World of Warcraft.

Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ***. What do you guys/girls think?

One of the main reasons i chose ubuntu is because it is not as popular as windows and apple. I left windows because of constantly getting viruses. I never knew that when I chose ubuntu that i would love it so much. I figured i would just have to deal with it but now i am just dealing with windows, haha. OSX is secure but its only a matter of time before it starts getting malware and viruses also. I think it will be a while before linux sees any of this.

cprofitt

December 31st, 2007, 04:03 AM

Does that mena they are evil? Duh

Guess not.

Mmm... So are you upset with Siemens because their newest washing machine firmware won't work in your LG?

Last I checked the washing machine is not programmable, does not access the internet and does not make phone calls. Also, the firmware is just 'one' issue and its the 'lesser of two evils'... the larger problem is that to get an iPhone I need to use AT&T and can not chose my carrier.

I guess you wouldn't mind that all PCs have to have Windows and ONLY windows loaded on them; right? Or maybe you would prefer that to use Ubuntu you had to chose NetZero dial-up as your ISP?

Mmm... It's called iTunes+iPod for a reason. It's a single product.

Yep its called that for a reason and its restrictive to the point that Apple had its *** taken to court in several European countries. I bet they enjoyed the Microsoft like beating they took over there.

Ferrari's engines don't work in my Lamborghini! They are evil!

Heh? What? I bet with a good mechanic that statement is false.

Well... I don't know how Apple's harming the OSS community...

Well they took an open source OS and closed sourced it... though to be honest so has SUSE and RedHat. What has apple given back to OSS though?

mr32123

December 31st, 2007, 04:14 AM

I agree that macs are overpriced hardware-wise, but when compared to a windows computer, i would assume it would have a lower total cost of ownership due to the fact that you wont have to take it to the computer repair shop 20 times during its lifespan to get a virus removed or some such BS. of course, ubuntu is and always will be my one true love (as far as operating systems, at least)

If you can use Ubuntu, you can fix Windows. I have had Windows XP since it came out and has only crashed twice, and both time it was my fault for messing around with it and installing sketchy software. The problem lies within the software vendors and malicious sites not with Microsoft. And actually if I'm not mistaken it costs a LOT more to fix a mac especially when your so called "Protectin Plan" expires since you can't just swap out parts.

mr32123

December 31st, 2007, 04:44 AM

So now 500 or 600$ PCs are affordable but 500 or 700$ Macs are not? How can that happen?

Because the hardware is the same but the price is higher. Not to mention there's not really a whole lot you can do with a Mac compared to PC.

I've used Macs before (as a matter of fact they were the first ones i had ever used back when I was in kindergarten haha) but its frustrating when you suddenly need to do something other than video editing or the "fun" stuff, like work in a CAD program. Engineering students will find owning a Mac just doesn't mac sense - the same goes for most businesses and anyone that needs to take their work home with them.

Does your desktop have the mini's size?

LOL. That's just a terrible argument.

All that said. I don't hate Macs. I really don't. But the software shortage and the hardware lock-down are major factors when buying a computer. If you're going to use your Mac to run Windows anyway then why not just buy a Windows computer in the first place? I don't understand that about Mac people. It seems that the greatest thing to happen to Macs is to be able to run Windows on them. Ironic.

LaRoza

December 31st, 2007, 11:15 AM

All that said. I don't hate Macs. I really don't. But the software shortage and the hardware lock-down are major factors when buying a computer.

+1

I would actually pay to be able to use OSX on my PC.

handy

January 1st, 2008, 01:54 PM

I fixed broken Windows machines for ten years, retired & went straight to Linux, quickly found Ubuntu, learned enough to then start distro' hopping.

I love the Linux (most especially the Ubuntu) community, which I remain a part of no matter which distro' or OS I'm using. I expect to always be running at least one Linux distro' for a diverse range of reasons.

I have used Macs a little over the last eighteen years, my wife has been using my old Powerbook 15" G4 since about 6 weeks after I bought it, & she loves it, it runs Panther & has never given us a moments trouble, it has been the sole computer for her business for some years now.

We recently took delivery of two 24" iMacs running Leopard. It is the simplest & easiest OS I have ever used, it is as safe as Linux due to it's BSD core, the DRM does not affect my use of the machine at all. I use VLC & other software to do what ever I wish on Leopard. Apple software is so very much cheaper than MS's. There is a lot of free software available for the Mac, MacPorts currently lists 4406 ports, & using the PortAuthority GUI $20- makes using MacPorts really easy. Software that runs on OS X conforms to the common interface standards that make using all software that runs under OS X so comfortable to use once you have become familiar with the OS. I have had no configuration issues on the Apple's, & if there is a system problem, like overheating GPU's for example, (which by the way our machines did not suffer from) a patch is out quick smart to fix it. Oh! & as far as having to keep giving Apple money goes, we have never given them anymore than what it took for the initial purchase of the machine, we don't use iTunes to purchase music, & .mac can dot off!

The OS X is not as good as Linux for gaming at this stage. Transgaming's Cider has been developed to work by arrangement with the game developer's, so it is out of the user's hands & is therefore more expensive, because you have to buy the Mac version, even if you happen to already own a Windows version. Codeweaver's CrossOver is the best thing available for running Windows games on OS X at the moment, & they have a great attitude as far as supporting Wine is concerned, they are all the things that Transgaming are not with regard to supporting Wine. Guild Wars works really well with CrossOver now in the overnight builds, so it will be a goer in the next release of CrossOver. :-)
Wine is in early days with OS X, I think that the work that CrossOver is doing is bringing Wine along this path, though I could be wrong?

I agree with all the criticism regarding the proprietary nature of Apple, & agree that they are worse than MS in this regard. If they had of licensed their technology back in the mid eighties, 90% of the world's computers would be running on technology invented by Apple. MS has always been chasing Apple's innovations & usually makes more money out their own cruddy versions that were inspired by Apple than Apple make out of the real thing!

As far as people not using Apple's products due to the proprietary nature of the corporation goes;- you would really need to become a hermit in the wilderness to make some kind of serious attempt at escaping the inherent corporate nature that unfortunately permeates our entire planet currently.

Intel, nVidia, AMD, ATi, Creative, VIA & Realtek are just a minuscule sample of the huge corporations that have only one thing in mind, their bottom line. There are not too many of us using computers, that these corporations have not made a profit out of... If we use the technology created by the corporations to educate ourselves about the way our world is governed, we may be able to make informed choices that can help create a more equitable future for humanity, which is a vastly superior choice than just turning our back on the opportunity to use these corporate manufactured resources to educate our selves.

LaRoza

January 1st, 2008, 06:56 PM

I agree with all the criticism regarding the proprietary nature of Apple, & agree that they are worse than MS in this regard. If they had of licensed their technology back in the mid eighties, 90% of the world's computers would be running on technology invented by Apple. MS has always been chasing Apple's innovations & usually makes more money out their own cruddy versions that were inspired by Apple than Apple make out of the real thing!

As far as people not using Apple's products due to the proprietary nature of the corporation goes;- you would really need to become a hermit in the wilderness to make some kind of serious attempt at escaping the inherent corporate nature that unfortunately permeates our entire planet currently.

Like Compaq did, starting all the IBM compatible PC's and having a standard for everyone.

As for the avoidance of proprietary software, some do live it out, RMS had a speech transcript posted and he specifically stated that there is no video of it because the equipment for that is not FOSS.

JoshuaRL

January 2nd, 2008, 12:59 AM

Dude, if there's one person who totally lives the FOSS lifestyle, it's RMS.

"Don't Buy ATI!"

Genius, man.

handy

January 2nd, 2008, 02:06 AM

Like Compaq did, starting all the IBM compatible PC's and having a standard for everyone.

Exactly!

As for the avoidance of proprietary software, some do live it out, RMS had a speech transcript posted and he specifically stated that there is no video of it because the equipment for that is not FOSS.

With software it is possible.

How do we get around the corporate hardware problem?

Build our own abacus? :lolflag:

Alfa989

January 2nd, 2008, 02:41 AM

Because the hardware is the same but the price is higher.Err... I've just clearly shown with the mac mini example that that is just not true...

Not to mention there's not really a whole lot you can do with a Mac compared to PC.Like what? In contrast, there are a lot of things that Macs have and PCs (Win & Linux) can't have. I'm talking about iLife, suites like iWork, apps like Delicious Library, Disco, Toast 8, etc...

I've used Macs before but its frustrating when you suddenly need to do something other than video editing or the "fun" stuff, like work in a CAD program. Engineering students will find owning a Mac just doesn't mac sense - the same goes for most businesses and anyone that needs to take their work home with them.
Errr... There are plenty of CAD applications for OS X, you know.
Are you saying that MAcs just don't qualify for work or anything other than graphics?
You (http://www.apple.com/science/)
Are (http://www.apple.com/business/)
Wrong (http://www.apple.com/business/)
Mate (http://www.apple.com/macatwork/)

LOL. That's just a terrible argument.
No. It's not. It's perfectly valid. It's just if you laughed at someone because he has a pickup and you've got a car... Obviously, the pickup is ****** and overpriced because both machine are exactly the same, right?</sarcasm>

But the software shortage and the hardware lock-down are major factors when buying a computer. If you're going to use your Mac to run Windows anyway then why not just buy a Windows computer in the first place? I don't understand that about Mac people. It seems that the greatest thing to happen to Macs is to be able to run Windows on them. Ironic.
Software shortage? What "software shortage"? Actually, there is a system that comes to my mind that doesn't run the most popular apps out there... What was its name? Something like Lunix, i think...
And people don't buy their Macs to run Windows... Otherwise, as you said, they'd be rishing to buy a new Vista PC, which clearly isn't happening because people are instead rushing to install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.

Alfa989

January 2nd, 2008, 02:43 AM

I agree... so skip proprietary Apple crap and get a Windows box and add a linux distro.

Apple Sux!
Errr...

What exactly do you mean by "propietary crap"? Because my personal opinion is that the are no (0) benefits for the end user for runing an open source OS, other than converting in a communist fanboy...

Linux sux!

As you'd expect, this is a joke, but Indigo made such a stupid comment that I had to reply something :lolflag:

Alfa989

January 2nd, 2008, 02:45 AM

And actually if I'm not mistaken it costs a LOT more to fix a mac especially when your so called "Protectin Plan" expires since you can't just swap out parts.
Why should it? If the HD dies, they just put a new one in, and so on, why should it cost more to do it on a Mac? :confused:

Alfa989

January 2nd, 2008, 02:56 AM

Last I checked the washing machine is not programmable, does not access the internet and does not make phone calls. Also, the firmware is just 'one' issue and its the 'lesser of two evils'... the larger problem is that to get an iPhone I need to use AT&T and can not chose my carrier.
Mmm... So what? The washing machine thingy is a perfectly valid example, since it represents "lockdown" from those evil, evil companies...

Cuz it's that way? Vodafone makes that kind of things over here with the latest BlackBerrys, they keep them for themselves, and I don't see anyone complaining?

Yep its called that for a reason and its restrictive to the point that Apple had its *** taken to court in several European countries. I bet they enjoyed the Microsoft like beating they took over there.
They haven't gone to court and it hasn't happened in "several" european countries... Only in ¿denmark/finland?, I think.
It's not restrictive, it's called a product. If you don't like it don't buy it, but if you buy an iPod and expect it to work without iTunes, then you didn't know what you were buying.

Heh? What? I bet with a good mechanic that statement is false.
So If you say that I guess we could call iJailBreak or OSX86 "good mechanics" too

Well they took an open source OS and closed sourced it... though to be honest so has SUSE and RedHat. What has apple given back to OSS though?
What have they given back? Code back to the Konqueror project, for example? The Darwin source code being published under an open source license?

LaRoza

January 2nd, 2008, 03:01 AM

I have nothing against Apple, and do not put them in the same canister as MS. I have nothing against closed source (and proprietary) programs, but I find them often to be worse than FOSS equivilants. As an Opera user, I can say that doesn't hold true for all cases. (Opera > Firefox IMO)

I do want an Apple computer and OS, and would buy one, however, I can find no computer worth the price and I can't use Mac OSX on my existing hardware for reasons that are not technical.

AvengingAngel718

January 2nd, 2008, 07:50 PM

oh noes guys, flamewar! lol

as for the argument on the mini's size: it is really cool that its that small, but ultimately its not a factor in choosing what system to buy. i'm a philosophy major, so i know a bad argument when i see one! I cant really see system size being a factor for a DESKTOP computer that doesnt get moved, unless its small enough to get lost (lol) or too big to fit in your house (double lol).

in regards to linux not running the "hip, popular" applications, i would say the reason many of us use linux is that we want whats best for us, and that means not always going along with whats popular. In my experience, the community maintained applications are vastly more usable, useful, stable, and whatever other adjectives you want to insert there (positive ones at least :) )

And as for the windows/apple argument, use what suits your own tastes. both have strengths and both have inherent weaknesses. As I said before, no one's gotten it right yet, and since the future is yet to be revealed, any software allegiances we may have now are subject to change later on. Maybe Microsoft will come out with a great open source OS and Linux will go closed source. It's extremely unlikely, but hey, you never know.

Riffer

January 3rd, 2008, 01:28 AM

Theres so many myths being perpetuated here its unreal. In this era of cross platform porting of so many programs can be used on either Mac or Windows, Adobe products for instance. Its much the same with hardware.

Recently I was at the local TV station and I asked which platform did they use for production and post product, the answer was BOTH, it all depended on the users preference. The IT guy went on to tell me that at that moment the Mac side of their operation was down and that both sides were pretty much the same for dependability.

As I have said in another thread, its all about preference and which OS suits you. If you prefer to use a Mac, good for you.

rune0077

January 3rd, 2008, 01:48 AM

Err... I've just clearly shown with the mac mini example that that is just not true...

Guess that depends on where you live. Here in Denmark, Macs are definitely more expensive than a PC with the same specs. Add to this the fact, that you can buy a PC in separate parts and then put it together yourself (or even paying someone to do it) and you'll end up with a PC that is much cheaper than a store bought one. That's a no go with Macs, you buy the whole thing in one purchase.

Something like Lunix, i think...
And people don't buy their Macs to run Windows... Otherwise, as you said, they'd be rishing to buy a new Vista PC, which clearly isn't happening because people are instead rushing to install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.

Actually, people are rushing to buy Vista PC's. Mac sales are nowhere near competing with the PC market, and the number of PC-owners that runs Linux is minuscule at best - which means the vast majority of computer-users still buy PC's with Windows installed on it.

It's not restrictive, it's called a product. If you don't like it don't buy it, but if you buy an iPod and expect it to work without iTunes, then you didn't know what you were buying.

My iPod works fine without iTunes, though.

handy

January 3rd, 2008, 09:36 AM

Actually, people are rushing to buy Vista PC's. Mac sales are nowhere near competing with the PC market, and the number of PC-owners that runs Linux is minuscule at best - which means the vast majority of computer-users still buy PC's with Windows installed on it.

Actually that is not how it is everywhere.

Apple is setting every kind of record in sales over the last months. In Japan they were outselling Windows boxes last month & / or the month before.

The average IT IQ is increasing across the board & many people are sick of MS & are prepared to pay a little more for a machine that most people find easier & more consistent to use, a machine that does not need to have a virus checker slowing down its every move, a machine that comes with useful software which can be added to & upgraded for a price that is cheap compared to MS's prices, a system that can be used like Linux & the other BSD's with ports & free software if you want to play that way.

As I've said in other posts, the major problem that I see is the gaming, which is changing rapidly, as EA & others are starting to use Cider to make games OS X compatible, & version 7 of CrossOver will be out soon. I installed the latest nightly build today & Guild Wars is looking better & playing better than it ever has on my much more powerful Linux box. CrossOver 7 is rumored to be the first version to do something about copy protection, so I'm really looking forward to seeing what they have been up to.

Unless the Apple administration lets its collective ego make some disastrous policies, I think that Apple are on a snowballing roll that is going to make a huge dent in the MS world over the years to come.

LaRoza

January 3rd, 2008, 10:28 AM

Unless the Apple administration lets its collective ego make some disastrous policies, I think that Apple are on a snowballing roll that is going to make a huge dent in the MS world over the years to come.

They could in time even make moves to drastically increase their sales. If they reach a point where they feel that allowing the OS to run on any hardware is profitable, they will grow even more.

GSF1200S

January 3rd, 2008, 11:38 AM

Actually that is not how it is everywhere.

Apple is setting every kind of record in sales over the last months. In Japan they were outselling Windows boxes last month & / or the month before.

The average IT IQ is increasing across the board & many people are sick of MS & are prepared to pay a little more for a machine that most people find easier & more consistent to use, a machine that does not need to have a virus checker slowing down its every move, a machine that comes with useful software which can be added to & upgraded for a price that is cheap compared to MS's prices, a system that can be used like Linux & the other BSD's with ports & free software if you want to play that way.

As I've said in other posts, the major problem that I see is the gaming, which is changing rapidly, as EA & others are starting to use Cider to make games OS X compatible, & version 7 of CrossOver will be out soon. I installed the latest nightly build today & Guild Wars is looking better & playing better than it ever has on my much more powerful Linux box. CrossOver 7 is rumored to be the first version to do something about copy protection, so I'm really looking forward to seeing what they have been up to.

Unless the Apple administration lets its collective ego make some disastrous policies, I think that Apple are on a snowballing roll that is going to make a huge dent in the MS world over the years to come.

what kills Linux in gaming is:

1) Lack of application support, as a result of a small user base.

2) lack of quality drivers, as a result of poor commercial support.

Both combined make each other worse. I really dont think Linux will ever be a good gaming platform. I really dont think Mac will take off like you suggest. Macs dont have the same persona as a Windows PC (im not saying I agree with the persona) and they arent looked at as a serious all encompasing PC by the masses (you and I are not the masses). Linux is in the same boat. It sucks, because I would rather see a Mac 85% Linux 10% Windows 5% in the future than Windows in the top slot. Linux I feel (as much as id like it to be) will NEVER be at 85% or even majority market share. Despite everyone playing it off and telling me im wrong, if TC takes hold then will likely never break 2%

3rdalbum

January 3rd, 2008, 01:51 PM

My iPod works fine without iTunes, though.

Thanks to the open-source people who first reverse-engineered the iPod database format and then cracked Apple's recent iPod protection scheme that attempted to stop non-iTunes programs from creating databases for the new iPods.

If the HD dies, they just put a new one in, and so on,
why should it cost more to do it on a Mac?

Apple stores have historically charged more for any sort of upgrades.
And if you think you can put it in yourself, or get a local PC upgrader to do it, try doing it on the latest iMacs. It's friggin' one piece of metal without any joins - how much more restrictive can you get?

handy

January 3rd, 2008, 02:23 PM

Apple stores have historically charged more for any sort of upgrades.
And if you think you can put it in yourself, or get a local PC upgrader to do it, try doing it on the latest iMacs. It's friggin' one piece of metal without any joins - how much more restrictive can you get?

It won't take too long before there is a detailed pictorial how-to on the web... ;-)

rune0077

January 3rd, 2008, 03:19 PM

LaRoza

January 3rd, 2008, 05:34 PM

Sporkman

January 3rd, 2008, 06:31 PM

I bought my wife a Mac, and IMO the hardware seems very sharp & high quality. However I find the OS to be a little annoying & hard to use.

LaRoza

January 3rd, 2008, 07:39 PM

However I find the OS to be a little annoying & hard to use.

Do you find it unfamiliar or genuinely annoying and hard to use? I imagine I would find it awkward to use, at least at first.

Riffer

January 3rd, 2008, 07:51 PM

Do you find it unfamiliar or genuinely annoying and hard to use? I imagine I would find it awkward to use, at least at first.

Genuinely annoying. LOL

Sporkman

January 3rd, 2008, 07:58 PM

Do you find it unfamiliar or genuinely annoying and hard to use? I imagine I would find it awkward to use, at least at first.

Unfamiliar for one, for example the funny fat down-arrow in some dialogs means "expand to show more details", and the way that the top menubar changes to be the menubar of the open application. Things are just not as intuitive to me, as I'm used to the win/linux UI conventions.

I find the way it does minimized applications to be annoying - hard to find minimized items. Plus it shuffles around application icons on the bottom as it sees fit.

Some things that shouldn't be imposiible to do without the CLI appear to be so - for example, I tried to set up a second user account, and set the main user's directory to be inaccessible to the second user, but I couldn't do it properly in the UI - I had to go into the CLI (difficult to find, BTW) & use chmod.

Other minor annoyances - for example, when making a blog post, I couldn't cut & paste plain text from a different source, it always pasted the formatting as well (unlike in firefox) - it took me a while to figure out the complex backflips I had to do to get plain old text pasted in there.

See we went away for on a trip, and I only had my wife's macbook to use while away, so I was forced to use it for a good 10 days. I was quite relieved to get back on my familiar & more usable (to me) ubuntu machine when we returned. :)

Different strokes, I guess.

handy

January 4th, 2008, 03:07 AM

Mac sales has climbed, but I don't think they're anywhere near competing with PC-sales. I'm also not sure Apple is easier or more consistent to use than Windows: user-friendliness is the whole point of Windows, and I always found it easy and working the way I expected it to (though also, like a Mac, rather restrictive). Guess it's just a matter of preferences and tastes.

We also need to take into consideration that Apple has just put out a new OS, which is bound to have a positive effect on sales these past two months. Windows sales also went up considerable just after releasing Vista. It will probably even itself out in another month or two (please note, I know absolutely nothing about economics and have no idea what I'm talking about here, but it sounded pretty smart :))

The Japan statistic is not a fabrication, & shows a HUGE swing towards Apple in that country. Apple sales are setting records in growth around the world currently. True they have got to keep that up for a loooong time to make a very noticeable dent in the MS percentage, but I would expect that the snowball effect is happening due to word of mouth. People don't like the virus ridden MS world.

Some complained about having to upgrade their computers for Win95, XP & Vista, they also complain about the added expense of buying one with an Apple label on it. The owner of Windows will be more likely to spend money on service due to registry corruption & virus/mal-ware than the Apple owner will have to spend due to their BSD system becoming corrupt for any reason. People also complain that the costs of an Apple service center are more than those of your local PC tech'. I agree, there are two points here though, one is that the Apple will need servicing less often if ever, & two is how many of you have notebook computers? When these go back to an authorised service center you are looking at similar costs.

I fixed Windows from version 3.** to XP, before retiring, I did know Windows (happily forgetting what I knew now :-)) OS X has been improving steadily, & Leopard is definitely easier than Windows. The consistent menu placements & keyboard equivalents for everything that runs on the OS, simple drag & drop, simple installation, an installed application be it a file or folder is usually self contained, meaning a far simpler & much more reliable system existing without a registry & that does not throw .dll, .ini, .sys & what have you files throughout the system in an effort to stop simple copy & paste piracy. System Preferences gets easier & easier with each OS upgrade.

Compare this to the hodge podge of the often ever growing Windows Start Menu, the great depths one can have to go to, to try & find a settings panel, the multiple ways to do the same thing - ranging from not obvious but the quickest, to more obvious & requiring multiple mouse clicks. Then their is the dreaded registry & all of it's inherent joys, which of course give all of the viruses & mal-ware wonderful places to play & hide let alone the diabolical problems that result from it's corruption. System Restore is the best thing MS ever invented, & in Windows Millennium too! :lolflag:

We all have our preferred methods of computing, there was a time when the Mac OS's struck me a boring, these days they strike me a simple & effective, one reason is probably due to there being no problems that need solving (in my experience) I can very simply use it to do what ever I want in a straight forward fashion. So when you say that Windows was built with ease of use in mind, I disagree, Windows has been mostly following Apple since day one, & does a very poor job of it. As an aside, Bill Gates first commercial application was Excel for Apple.

The poor design since Windows 95, bringing with it the inherent insecurity, difficulty of use & unreliability by virtue of the attempt to forestall copy & paste piracy allowed me to make a good living for 10 years.

handy

January 4th, 2008, 03:23 AM

They could in time even make moves to drastically increase their sales. If they reach a point where they feel that allowing the OS to run on any hardware is profitable, they will grow even more.

As has been said before in the forum & I agree with it, Apple is a hardware company, the software is secondary & completes the package. The nightmare of reliably supporting the great variety of hardware extant in this world is something that Apple has thus far avoided.

If Apple supplied their OS for all hardware their computer company would become all but extinct.

Whether the popularity & proliferation of the OSx86 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSx86) a.k.a. Hackintosh project has any effect on Apple's policy still remains to be seen.

LaRoza

January 4th, 2008, 12:13 PM

As has been said before in the forum & I agree with it, Apple is a hardware company, the software is secondary & completes the package. The nightmare of reliably supporting the great variety of hardware extant in this world is something that Apple has thus far avoided.

If Apple supplied their OS for all hardware their computer company would become all but extinct.

Whether the popularity & proliferation of the OSx86 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSx86) a.k.a. Hackintosh project has any effect on Apple's policy still remains to be seen.

I have seen the Apple systems on their site, and they are quite nice. For their OS though, I think it would be helpful if they allowed it to be run on other hardware (even if they didn't support it), would be nice.

handy

January 4th, 2008, 12:46 PM

I have seen the Apple systems on their site, and they are quite nice. For their OS though, I think it would be helpful if they allowed it to be run on other hardware (even if they didn't support it), would be nice.

I agree, if they made it legal in all countries to install a bought copy on non-Apple hardware on a buyer beware basis, it would be very nice.

I have looked at a hardware wiki for OSx86, & my motherboard is supported, it has given me something to think about...

LaRoza

January 4th, 2008, 12:52 PM

I agree, if they made it legal in all countries to install a bought copy on non-Apple hardware on a buyer beware basis, it would be very nice.

I have looked at a hardware wiki for OSx86, & my motherboard is supported, it has given me something to think about...

They are a weird company, Darwin is very open, yet OSX couldn't be more locked down.

handy

January 4th, 2008, 01:01 PM

They are a weird company, Darwin is very open, yet OSX couldn't be more locked down.

I don't know what their strategy is there, they used FOSS & added to it considerably I believe. Perhaps they wanted to attract Unix FOSS people? I don't know.

Riffer

January 4th, 2008, 06:11 PM

Traditionally one of the main weakness of Macs is lack of software titles. I can see apple using Darwin as a means to quickly and easily port software from the Linux side to Macs. The cost I would think would be low and it does make them look good.

JoshuaRL

January 5th, 2008, 02:02 AM

I agree with handy about the user interface. Overall, it is really simple. If you're coming from a Windows background, at first you think, "Am I doing this right, there must be more steps involved." But usually there aren't, and it becomes kind of comforting. But that becomes a matter of preference, and I (and I believe most of us here, plus a lot of computer geeks in general) prefer customization. Sorry, but I like to be able to have compositing, widgets, and a launch bar. And have it look exactly like I want. And act like I want too. But others may feel different, and that's perfectly valid too.

But I'm not so sure about security. Now, we can all agree about two things: Windows is more infested than Raccoon City, and there is no fully secure OS. Security lies mostly in three things: amount of attention due to market share, the developer's focus on security, and the amount of well-intentioned eyes looking at the code to find holes and patch them. For those three reasons, Linux is the most stable OS. Not only that, but because it's open source it will likely be able to offset the first security problem with the third as it scales up. So I contend that closed source OSs will never be as secure as open source ones, unless no one uses them.

So what stands in the way of either OSX or Linux from catching on and gaining a large market share? First, they're perenially seen as also-rans. So they have to fight to gain people. And Linux even more so since it has even less supporters and no slick ad campaign. And for OSX, it's flaws have been pointed out already. It only runs on their hardware, and they really like to lock stuff down.

So why hasn't Linux caught on? Well, hold on 'cause I'm 'bouts ready to blaspheme. Linux's main strength and main problem is customization. There are so many distros out there that it boggles the mind. The typical user would find almost all of their needs met cheaply, easily, elegantly, and effectively by Linux. But they don't know that. So it sits, year after year, at about 1% market share. The only solution in my mind comes from two disparate areas. If an Ubuntu-minded distro and WINE are able to make everything within reason work. Not kind of, but almost everything. Which seems unlikely because they're trying to implement standards where Microsoft and manufacturers are more intrested in none. The other way is if Android migrates to or an equivalently-backed OS is fielded for the desktop. And that would be a paradigm shift of geological porpotions.

So apparently when I said

And that's all I have to say about that.

I was lying.

anemptygun

January 5th, 2008, 02:53 AM

You should try it with something like Windows 98 with no service packs installed just so it's the most infectable OS possible.
lolz amen. I remember back when I had windows 95...

JoshuaRL

January 5th, 2008, 02:59 AM

lolz amen. I remember back when I had windows 95...

I know dude, I came across an old 95 install CD yesterday and all I could think was, "Oooooooooh yeah. I know what this is good for!"

anemptygun

January 5th, 2008, 03:01 AM

Save yourself some money and just get a PC and do a Hackintosh...
Ya I heard about that and I purchased some hardware for my hackint0sh project! finding compatible hardware is a pain in the ****... but I've gotten it to semi work. I think it is more for fun or an experiment than for a stable system.

Sporkman

January 5th, 2008, 03:02 AM

lolz amen. I remember back when I had windows 95...

I remember back when I had TRS-DOS... No viruses then!

....of course, no connectivity either. :(

anemptygun

January 5th, 2008, 03:06 AM

Out of curiosity, is it even legal to run a Hackintosh, you know, with the DMCA running amok in the US legal system?

lol. no the license agreement says you cannot install osx on a non apple branded computer.

anemptygun

January 5th, 2008, 03:07 AM

I remember back when I had TRS-DOS... No viruses then!

....of course, no connectivity either. :(

w00t.

anemptygun

January 5th, 2008, 03:29 AM

-----------------------------------------

The Apple Market Share Myth.
(http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/D579148C-8563-4FFB-8E97-C2613215F98E.html)

------------------------------------------

handy

January 5th, 2008, 03:59 AM

But I'm not so sure about security. Now, we can all agree about two things: Windows is more infested than Raccoon City, and there is no fully secure OS. Security lies mostly in three things: amount of attention due to market share, the developer's focus on security, and the amount of well-intentioned eyes looking at the code to find holes and patch them. For those three reasons, Linux is the most stable OS. Not only that, but because it's open source it will likely be able to offset the first security problem with the third as it scales up. So I contend that closed source OSs will never be as secure as open source ones, unless no one uses them.

Both Linux & BSD are Unix. They require administrative privileges to change important aspects of the OS. If either of them are running Outlook or IE where all the MS viruses get in, they are using Wine in some shape or form, & I believe that their has never been a virus work this way. I know that there has never been one work through CrossOver as I read it on their site last night.

So security wise, I don't think their is much in it, I have never used a virus checker on any Linux distro' or Mac. & I live on the net.

This link is old but still perfectly applicable to Window, Mac OS & Linux security:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/

handy

January 5th, 2008, 04:53 AM

JoshuaRL

January 5th, 2008, 06:18 AM

-----------------------------------------

The Apple Market Share Myth.
(http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/D579148C-8563-4FFB-8E97-C2613215F98E.html)

------------------------------------------

That is an interesting read. But not really what I was talking about. In regards to security, I think what I said is still true. While it is easy to understand that OSX is more secure in a base way than even Vista (which I understand now has user privileges too). However, I contend that it would only be a matter of time until OSX would start having, albeit less, security problems. Windows' problem is that everyone has it and Redmond doesn't have enough eyes to throw at it's code to make it even most the way secure. And if OSX was up at 40% market share then it would be profitable to write malware for it. Especially if it was through Safari. Whereas if Linux, especially a single variety, had 40% then that would mean that many more people that could paruse and find issues. Not everyone by a longshot, but enough to make Bill Gates' Security Department green with envy.

anemptygun

January 5th, 2008, 06:27 AM

And thank you for your link as well handy, it was very true.

JoshuaRL

January 5th, 2008, 06:57 AM

Both Linux & BSD are Unix. They require administrative privileges to change important aspects of the OS. If either of them are running Outlook or IE where all the MS viruses get in, they are using Wine in some shape or form, & I believe that their has never been a virus work this way. I know that there has never been one work through CrossOver as I read it on their site last night.

So security wise, I don't think their is much in it, I have never used a virus checker on any Linux distro' or Mac. & I live on the net.

This link is old but still perfectly applicable to Window, Mac OS & Linux security:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/

That is an excellent article, and it probes the reason why Windows is so bad. They have a culture of making money instead of making things secure. It really doesn't need to be that way even if it is closed source, as OSX shows. And maybe I need to revise my stand a little. OSX is much more secure than Windows ever will be until Redmond fully copies Apple.

The way I see it, Apple can go one of three ways:
1) Stay where they are and gain little bits of market share depending on how good their ads are.
2) Change their permission like La Raza pointed out.
3) Let OSX become open source and do a business model much like Red Hat except they sell hardware too.

And with the first one, they keep the statis quo. The second allows them to draw a huge new user base, and probably sell more machines that way too. The third will allow them to make the most amount of people happy, and may well usher in a whole new era in personal computing. One where we can have an OS that is the best of most worlds.

handy

January 5th, 2008, 08:10 AM

@JoshuaRL: I think that Apple are doing very well as they are. They will probably take some action to try to make it more difficult for the OSx86 crew, though the Hackintosh may never be more than a minor inconvenience to them. When you think of how many pirated versions of the various windows OS's have been made, perhaps the Hackintosh will gain them more than they loose in advertising. :-)

As I've probably already said, I think that Apple are having trouble supplying the demand for their products at the moment.

anemptygun

January 6th, 2008, 02:48 AM

I think that if apple stays where they are eventually they will get back to the big company that they were. I have heard that there is a new apple store opened every 9 days.

handy

January 6th, 2008, 05:10 AM

I think that if apple stays where they are eventually they will get back to the big company that they were. I have heard that there is a new apple store opened every 9 days.

I don't think Apple has ever been as strong as it is today.

JoshuaRL

January 7th, 2008, 12:03 AM

I think he meant market share.

And I guess that's the one part of that first article that I disagreed with. Saying Apple didn't really lose market share because the market blew up around you doesn't really work for me. Because a percentage is a percentage. And a lot of really smart people thought hard about what the computer market is. So the fact that a huge market segment sprang up that you weren't able or willing to compete in doesn't mean that you get a pass. It means that you lost market share. There may be vast universes that you don't feel like messing with, but that doesn't mean you get to arbirarily limit what the market is. And there is evidence considered in lightly in that article that Apple in fact did try to take advantage of the market boom, but was unable.

So as far as brand recognition and overt snobishness, I would say that Apple and OSX are stronger than they ever have been before.

But really I can't say which is best. I can only say which is best for me.

Sporkman

January 7th, 2008, 01:04 AM

So as far as...overt snobishness, I would say that Apple and OSX are stronger than they ever have been before.

OUCH! :lol:

handy

January 7th, 2008, 01:36 AM

So as far as brand recognition and overt snobishness, I would say that Apple and OSX are stronger than they ever have been before.

Chauvinistic attitudes are unfortunately the bane of humanity. They steal peace, respect & understanding from people's lives. Chauvinism divides people at every opportunity. Once this is recognised for what it is, it is so easy to free ourselves from chauvinism & join the human race. :lolflag:

JoshuaRL

January 7th, 2008, 01:58 AM

Ah man, I was hoping that would get at least a little flameage! I guess we're just too mature to fall for the easy stuff.

Just for the record, I don't believe Apple and OSX actually have "overt snobishness." They just believe theirs is the best. But so does Linux, UNIX, Windows, and for that matter probably DOS.

Good job sidestepping the mandalay-thread-catcher handy. And I just made that phrase up.

supertails

January 7th, 2008, 10:43 AM

I am just curious as to why I see so much bashing on apple in the discussions. I am an apple user, and have always been happy with my apple devices. Why are so many people unhappy with apple, and why is there so much argument about the quality and price of their products?

Buying a Apple means you give up your buying software and hardware rights to apple. You basically fall into the apple monopoly and the only things that will run on an apple is another apple.

handy

January 7th, 2008, 12:58 PM

Buying a Apple means you give up your buying software and hardware rights to apple. You basically fall into the apple monopoly and the only things that will run on an apple is another apple.

That's not necessarily so.

http://www.opensourcemac.org/

http://www.versiontracker.com/macosx/

http://www.macports.org/

http://www.codebykevin.com/portauthority.html

There is enough software there (many thousands of packages) to interest most people, & non of it was made by Apple.

supertails

January 7th, 2008, 10:24 PM

That's not necessarily so.

http://www.opensourcemac.org/

http://www.versiontracker.com/macosx/

http://www.macports.org/

http://www.codebykevin.com/portauthority.html

There is enough software there (many thousands of packages) to interest most people, & non of it was made by Apple.

You maybe right but if you don't know about it then you play into apple's hands.

Demio

January 8th, 2008, 07:42 AM

You maybe right but if you don't know about it then you play into apple's hands.
What? Do you even know what you're talking about?

Apple doesn't make much software for Mac OS X except for the iLife suite, the iWork suite and some pro editing applications like Final Cut and Aperture.

There is A LOT of software made for Mac OS X, and most of it is very high quality (not necessarily free though).

Where else would I find an editor as good as Coda (http://www.panic.com/coda) or something as original as Skitch (http://plasq.com/skitch)?

The software quality for Mac OS X is generally so good, I always end up buying the software. I have 0 pirated software in my computer :)

3rdalbum

January 10th, 2008, 03:31 PM

They are a weird company, Darwin is very open, yet OSX couldn't be more locked down.

There has always been a lack of communication between Apple and open-source communities, so I'm sure there are people who were involved in Darwin-related projects that will take great exception with your statement. Besides, the actual Darwin that ships inside Mac OS X is also locked down in terms of not being able to see the source, and also in terms of Apple being allowed to close-source it any time they please. (not locked down for security, of course).

For instance, try accessing the Darwin bugtracker without being a member of the Apple Developer Connection.

As an aside, in 2002 a millennium bug was discovered in Darwin's shutdown command. If you tried to schedule a shutdown for, say, a date in 2003, it would actual schedule it for 1903. Crazy. I'm not a member of ADC so I can't look at the bugtracker and see if it's been fixed yet.

LaRoza

January 10th, 2008, 06:50 PM

I found that the OpenDarwin project was ended, so there is communication problems it seems.

GavinZac

January 10th, 2008, 06:56 PM

i dont understand all the animosity towards mac, who actually tends to work with the open source communityhaha, good one!

Where else would I find an editor as good as Coda (http://www.panic.com/coda) or something as original as Skitch (http://plasq.com/skitch)?[/url] "Coda" appears to be exactly the same as bluefish or any FTP-enabled editor. However, few editors have such a lack of dignity to claim that development in Coda is "much cooler", which unfortunately appears to be the entire sales pitch for anything Apple related.

Skitch is a glorified screenshot app.

Comm

January 10th, 2008, 07:31 PM

Alfa989 must be an Apple rep.

anemptygun

January 11th, 2008, 03:37 AM

Thanks for the links handy I hadn't seen some of those before!

Demio

January 11th, 2008, 06:39 AM

haha, good one!

"Coda" appears to be exactly the same as bluefish or any FTP-enabled editor. However, few editors have such a lack of dignity to claim that development in Coda is "much cooler", which unfortunately appears to be the entire sales pitch for anything Apple related.

Skitch is a glorified screenshot app.

I suggest you to read some reviews on Coda: http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/coda

Coda is a huge time saver and very practical. Definitely worth its price.

Skitch is also a very practical app. You call it a glorified screenshot app, I call it a time saver.

I'm sure you also call the car a glorified horse-wagon. :popcorn:

tuebinger

January 12th, 2008, 10:52 PM

I haven't read this whole thread so I don't know if anybody's mentioned the awkward apple laptop keyboards. For example, ctrl and alt are only on one side of the keyboard, there's no page up or page down keys, or home or end keys for that matter. No print screen key. No delete or insert key. No right-click button No key to access the apple menus. You have to mouse around to get anything done. They have apple shortcuts but they are hidden from view... so if you forgot how to access the history menu (or any other menu), well, you're going to have to mouse over there. A lot of their shortcuts, if you do memorize them, require awkward three-key combinations. Does it sound petty to complain about the keyboard? It just seems huge to me to be able to use the keyboard to control your computer. I feel so much more productive with a full-featured keyboard on my laptop.

anemptygun

January 13th, 2008, 01:34 AM

cprofitt

January 14th, 2008, 05:49 AM

Apple is E.V.I.L.

Period.

jcwmoore

January 14th, 2008, 05:54 AM

I think Apple is worse than MS.... Apple has a firm grip over their software AND hardware... at least MS stops with the software....

LaRoza

January 14th, 2008, 06:20 PM

I think Apple is worse than MS.... Apple has a firm grip over their software AND hardware... at least MS stops with the software....

Apple doesn't, as far as I know, try to limit non Apple users.

MS doesn't stop with software, how much hardware works in Windows only or how many complete computer systems come with Windows preinstalled?

Sweet Mercury

January 14th, 2008, 06:49 PM

Save yourself some money and just get a PC and do a Hackintosh...

Mac Mini's are 599.

Any PC he gets for a significant savings under that is going to be a complete hunk. I don't know about anyone else here, but as the defacto "computer guy" for most of my family, I'm tired of trying to convince people not to but the 299 PC (monitor included) because I know it will be garbage after the first few months.

Regardless, the whole "Macs are over priced" thing is bunk, generally. Some of their hardware and peripherals are over priced (the displays come to mind, just get a Dell—they use the same samsung screens!). With the computers, it's hit or miss. Apple doesn't compete in the super low end market. I've seen Compaq laptops advertised for as low as 300 dollars, but we all know that's a crap machine. A MacBook starts at 1100, and I've seen equally equipped 13 inch Vaios at Best Buy for 1900. The MacBook Pros are definitely going to be more than a comparable Dell, though.

Where Apple WILL blatantly over charge is for "upgrading" the machine, upping the RAM from the factory, etc. When you can do that yourself for much less money.

LaRoza

January 14th, 2008, 08:39 PM

Regardless, the whole "Macs are over priced" thing is bunk, generally.

I can find no Mac, with specs and hardware like my computers, for an affordable price.

Sweet Mercury

January 14th, 2008, 09:44 PM

I can find no Mac, with specs and hardware like my computers, for an affordable price.

There's only a $100 difference between this (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?family=MacBook) and this (http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/xpsnb_m1330?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&~tab=bundlestab).

Did you build your own comp? You can definitely save a lot of money building a higher end system on your own, but that's not really a fair comparison, if that's the case.

LaRoza

January 14th, 2008, 11:19 PM

There's only a $100 difference between this (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?family=MacBook) and this (http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/xpsnb_m1330?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&~tab=bundlestab).

Did you build your own comp? You can definitely save a lot of money building a higher end system on your own, but that's not really a fair comparison, if that's the case.

Only a $100? If I only I had the luxary of saying "only".

What I want:

* Dual Core 64 bit processor
* 2 GB RAM
* Enough room in the case for adding RAM and at least three new drives.

My computer has that, cost less than $700.

cprofitt

January 15th, 2008, 12:59 AM

Apple doesn't, as far as I know, try to limit non Apple users.

MS doesn't stop with software, how much hardware works in Windows only or how many complete computer systems come with Windows preinstalled?

Do you really think that Microsoft does that?

What hardware vendor would not write drivers for the OS with ~90% of the market?

Microsoft will allow you to run their OS on ANY x86 machine including Apple assembled hardware.

Apple will NOT allow that.

Yep, Apple is much more restrictive.

cprofitt

January 15th, 2008, 02:04 AM

Mac Mini's are 599.

Any PC he gets for a significant savings under that is going to be a complete hunk. I don't know about anyone else here, but as the defacto "computer guy" for most of my family, I'm tired of trying to convince people not to but the 299 PC (monitor included) because I know it will be garbage after the first few months.

Regardless, the whole "Macs are over priced" thing is bunk, generally. Some of their hardware and peripherals are over priced (the displays come to mind, just get a Dell—they use the same samsung screens!). With the computers, it's hit or miss. Apple doesn't compete in the super low end market. I've seen Compaq laptops advertised for as low as 300 dollars, but we all know that's a crap machine. A MacBook starts at 1100, and I've seen equally equipped 13 inch Vaios at Best Buy for 1900. The MacBook Pros are definitely going to be more than a comparable Dell, though.

Where Apple WILL blatantly over charge is for "upgrading" the machine, upping the RAM from the factory, etc. When you can do that yourself for much less money.

Sigh. Everyone one of you Apple people always say that Apple's are not over priced... that only JUNK computers are less.

Every time I take out a can of whoop ***.

Mac mini:
1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB (two 512MB) of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300)
80GB Serial ATA, 5400 rpm
24x Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Intel GMA 950 graphics processor with 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$599

HP s3300t:
Intel Pentium Dual-Core processor E2160 (1.8GHz)
1GB DDR2-667MHz dual channel SDRAM (2x512)
Integrated Graphics (NVIDIA GeForce 7100)
500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive -- better drive from HP
LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive -- better drive from HP
15-in-1 memory card reader, 2 USB, headphone port
Integrated 7.1 channel sound w/front audio ports
HP keyboard and HP optical mouse
----------------------------------------------------------------
$499

Your theory - BUZZ; wrong.

================================

iMac 20" (the ones with the display issues):
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB (one SO-DIMM)
250GB Serial ATA, 7200 rpm
8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB of GDDR3 memory
----------------------------------------------------------------------
$1199

HP s3300t w/ monitor:
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual-Core processor E2200 (2.2GHz) - sorry had to go for a better processor
1GB DDR2-667MHz dual channel SDRAM (2x512)
500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive -- better drive from HP
LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive
15-in-1 memory card reader, 2 USB, headphone port
Integrated 7.1 channel sound w/front audio ports
HP keyboard and HP optical mouse
HP 20-inch LCD Wide Flat Panel Monitor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
$789

Umm... Apple is more expensive again.

Laptops, you say?

Apple 13" White MacBook:
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
13.3-inch (viewable) glossy widescreen 1280 x 800 pixels
1GB (two SO-DIMMs)
80GB Serial ATA, 5400 rpm
24x Combo drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Intel GMA X3100 graphics processor with 144MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory
5.0 pounds
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1099

I can not get a 13" screen... I can go smaller or larger... so lets go with a much more pleasant 15.4"

HP V6700TX series:
Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo Processor T7250 (2.00 GHz)
15.4" WXGA High-Definition HP BrightView Widescreen Display (1280 x 800) -- is the Mac HD?
1GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator X3100
120GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive -- better drive
SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-R/RW with Double Layer Support -- better drive
5.99 pounds (probably that larger screen)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$829

Oops Apple loses again...

I will admit that in the 'professional' arena Apple appears to have a great buy. The dual quad core processors are roughly $1300 each unless they are using a much different CPU than I think. I also question if those are really professional level products due to the 800Mhz FSB and the majority of the cards being consumer level cards and not professional cards. I can not find a close product due to differences in HD, Processors and Video cards though so I am not sure how to compare them fairly.

In general where most people are buying Apple is over priced in comparison to a tier-one vendor with a very solid track record for quality.

Sweet Mercury

January 15th, 2008, 02:37 AM

Only a $100? If I only I had the luxary of saying "only".

What I want:

* Dual Core 64 bit processor
* 2 GB RAM
* Enough room in the case for adding RAM and at least three new drives.

My computer has that, cost less than $700.

In terms of spending 1000 dollars, 100+ or - becomes "only."

If we were talking about the difference between 25 and 125, then it would be a bigger deal. It's about percentage of the total.

Regardless, you got a great system at a great price. Did you build it?

handy

January 15th, 2008, 02:58 AM

Sigh. Everyone one of you Apple people always say that Apple's are not over priced... that only JUNK computers are less.

Every time I take out a can of whoop ***.

I don't agree with your statement, or your attitude.

Many people buy Apple products because they consider the reliability, ease of use, ergonomics & quality of the product worth the extra dollars.

If you don't agree, don't buy an Apple, it is easy. :lolflag:

I've done 10 years servicing MS equipped PCs, over 2 years on a variety of Linux/BSD/BeOS/Solaris equipped (& self built) PC's, & now I'm also running a 24" iMac running Leopard/Gutsy which is a joy to use, & these days suits me down to the ground.

Personal taste is what it is about, no need to take the name of this thread to heart & be so chauvinistic, that kind of attitude only divides humanity & there is never any good comes from it.

Enjoy the amount of freedom of choice that you still have left while you can...

LaRoza

January 15th, 2008, 03:02 AM

In terms of spending 1000 dollars, 100+ or - becomes "only."

If we were talking about the difference between 25 and 125, then it would be a bigger deal. It's about percentage of the total.

Regardless, you got a great system at a great price. Did you build it?

Well, I make every dollar count.

I didn't make it, prebuilt.

Sweet Mercury

January 15th, 2008, 03:24 AM

Sigh. Everyone one of you Apple people always say that Apple's are not over priced... that only JUNK computers are less.

Every time I take out a can of whoop ***.

Mac mini:
1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB (two 512MB) of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300)
80GB Serial ATA, 5400 rpm
24x Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Intel GMA 950 graphics processor with 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$599

HP s3300t:
Intel Pentium Dual-Core processor E2160 (1.8GHz)
1GB DDR2-667MHz dual channel SDRAM (2x512)
Integrated Graphics (NVIDIA GeForce 7100)
500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive -- better drive from HP
LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive -- better drive from HP
15-in-1 memory card reader, 2 USB, headphone port
Integrated 7.1 channel sound w/front audio ports
HP keyboard and HP optical mouse
----------------------------------------------------------------
$499

Your theory - BUZZ; wrong.

================================

iMac 20" (the ones with the display issues):
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB (one SO-DIMM)
250GB Serial ATA, 7200 rpm
8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB of GDDR3 memory
----------------------------------------------------------------------
$1199

HP s3300t w/ monitor:
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual-Core processor E2200 (2.2GHz) - sorry had to go for a better processor
1GB DDR2-667MHz dual channel SDRAM (2x512)
500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive -- better drive from HP
LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive
15-in-1 memory card reader, 2 USB, headphone port
Integrated 7.1 channel sound w/front audio ports
HP keyboard and HP optical mouse
HP 20-inch LCD Wide Flat Panel Monitor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
$789

Umm... Apple is more expensive again.

Laptops, you say?

Apple 13" White MacBook:
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
13.3-inch (viewable) glossy widescreen 1280 x 800 pixels
1GB (two SO-DIMMs)
80GB Serial ATA, 5400 rpm
24x Combo drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Intel GMA X3100 graphics processor with 144MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory
5.0 pounds
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1099

I can not get a 13" screen... I can go smaller or larger... so lets go with a much more pleasant 15.4"

HP V6700TX series:
Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo Processor T7250 (2.00 GHz)
15.4" WXGA High-Definition HP BrightView Widescreen Display (1280 x 800) -- is the Mac HD?
1GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator X3100
120GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive -- better drive
SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-R/RW with Double Layer Support -- better drive
5.99 pounds (probably that larger screen)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$829

Oops Apple loses again...

I will admit that in the 'professional' arena Apple appears to have a great buy. The dual quad core processors are roughly $1300 each unless they are using a much different CPU than I think. I also question if those are really professional level products due to the 800Mhz FSB and the majority of the cards being consumer level cards and not professional cards. I can not find a close product due to differences in HD, Processors and Video cards though so I am not sure how to compare them fairly.

In general where most people are buying Apple is over priced in comparison to a tier-one vendor with a very solid track record for quality.

Did my response to this disappear?

Anyway, I said the prices were hit or miss. My point was that there tends to be people who have the notion that Apple products are consistently more expensive, and while that may have been true in the past, their prices have reflected the shift of the PC market from specialty product to household staple. They're a competitive product. You also have to keep in mind that they run a different OS than computers from Dell or HP, so companies like that are in neck and neck competition, which means they take a hit in profit to try and increase sales.

CM Xtasy

January 15th, 2008, 03:38 AM

Sweet Mercury

January 15th, 2008, 03:47 AM

cprofitt

January 15th, 2008, 05:37 AM

I don't agree with your statement, or your attitude.

Many people buy Apple products because they consider the reliability, ease of use, ergonomics & quality of the product worth the extra dollars.

If you don't agree, don't buy an Apple, it is easy. :lolflag:

I've done 10 years servicing MS equipped PCs, over 2 years on a variety of Linux/BSD/BeOS/Solaris equipped (& self built) PC's, & now I'm also running a 24" iMac running Leopard/Gutsy which is a joy to use, & these days suits me down to the ground.

Personal taste is what it is about, no need to take the name of this thread to heart & be so chauvinistic, that kind of attitude only divides humanity & there is never any good comes from it.

Enjoy the amount of freedom of choice that you still have left while you can...

I am glad that you enjoy supporting a company that has a closed source OS that they only allow to run on their over-priced hardware.

The OS itself is good for the most part; though I am not fond of all their GUI decisions it works for most folks.

I work in an environment that has roughly equal numbers of Windows PCs (HP/Dell mix) and Apples. I have not seen any difference in reliability or quality that explain the difference in price. As far as ergonomics I think I can find very similar products from HP and I, in fact, like HPs ergonomics better on their laptops. The Dell laptops are not the same quality as Apple (that I will admit).

If some people want to buy the exact same hardware and pay more for it that is there choice... that and a bag of chips doesn't change the fact that Apple products are in general over priced. If Apple were to allow their OS to run on other Intel hardware like Microsoft does I would have no issue with them, but they FORCE people to buy their hardware.

I wonder what Apple would cry about if Windows tested for the Apple TPM module and if found refused to install on the machine... would that be seen as abuse? I would think so, but then again that is what Apple is essentially doing IMHO.

cprofitt

January 15th, 2008, 05:39 AM

Enjoy the amount of freedom of choice that you still have left while you can...

Why is Apple gonna take over the world and force us all to overpay?

handy

January 15th, 2008, 05:59 AM

Most people who pay more than they should for a computer, like a Mac, simply because Apple says they cannot get viruses, and it's extremely easy to use. Don't get me wrong, I like Leopard, but if someone can't handle the simplicity of Windows, then Leopard wont be any easier for them. I saw so many people at the "Genius Bar" for help. One lady tried getting one of the "geniuses" to install an application for her, and she had no idea what a home folder was.

It's not a matter of can't handle the simplicity of Windows (cough!) it is purely an exercise motivated by whatever? In the application of freedom of choice!

& by the way, the Mac OS has continued (& continues) to refine consistency & ease of use. Any OS that spreads parts of the installed software package all over the System, & uses a thing like the Registry NEEDS System Restore (the only good thing about Windows Millennium) to keep it running, apart from the anti: Virus, Mal-ware & Firewall required to try to cover the immense number of security holes. Yes I'm sure about that!

Why is humanity plagued by chauvinism?

Insecurity abounds in so many people, if others choose to do something that they themselves would not do or don't understand.

Repeat after me? I am an individual! :lolflag:

& you don't judge a product by the level of experience of a user or two of same. We all new absolutely nothing about computers once.

handy

January 15th, 2008, 06:15 AM

Why is Apple gonna take over the world and force us all to overpay?

:lolflag:

When they chip us all, the chip will be produced by Apple because it is a more attractive shape to have inserted, it will be easily tuned by our thought processes to play the iTunes play lists of our choice directly into our brain, at night whilst we sleep our brains will be networked with other brains via this Apple iSeed chip, being used as free computational devices in a subconscious human networked supercomputer, which Apple will use to produce their future iToys for the iN crowd.

Once an iSeed implanted human becomes bankrupt, the chip will automatically turn off & dissolve into their bloodstream as they are now no longer of any use to society.

All this because a distant relative took a byte of the fruit.

Hmm, I can see where you are going with this PrivateVoid, I will destroy my iMac before I succumb to the evil forces that instigated it's inception!

LaRoza

January 15th, 2008, 06:41 AM

My main problem with Apple is just that I want to use their OS, on my hardware. I use or have used Windows, Linux, BSD, Solaris, and their derivatives on my hardware, why not Mac OSX?

yabbadabbadont

January 15th, 2008, 06:51 AM

I'm all for Apple bashing. It's the only way to make Apple Butter and I never eat toast without it...

:twisted:

handy

January 15th, 2008, 07:34 AM

I am glad that you enjoy supporting a company that has a closed source OS that they only allow to run on their over-priced hardware.

Contrary to some people's belief I am not a fundamentalist. Though I am all for the toppling of the 1% of the top 1% that basically run this planet.

The OS itself is good for the most part; though I am not fond of all their GUI decisions it works for most folks.

The only way to get an OS just the way we want it (maybe) is to build our own. I'll always settle for a few compromises as I have neither the skill or the desire to dedicate the rest of my life to fail with the other option.

I work in an environment that has roughly equal numbers of Windows PCs (HP/Dell mix) and Apples. I have not seen any difference in reliability or quality that explain the difference in price. As far as ergonomics I think I can find very similar products from HP and I, in fact, like HPs ergonomics better on their laptops. The Dell laptops are not the same quality as Apple (that I will admit).

It would seem that nothing changes much on the Windows machines where you work then.

If some people want to buy the exact same hardware and pay more for it that is there choice... that and a bag of chips doesn't change the fact that Apple products are in general over priced.

Again, I say not to the incredibly loyal market that buys them. That loyalty says something about the product, that loyalty no other existing maker has been able to match. (The Amiga probably out did the Apple loyalty in it's hey day).

If Apple were to allow their OS to run on other Intel hardware like Microsoft does I would have no issue with them, but they FORCE people to buy their hardware.

Apple is first & foremost a hardware company, they produce software to compliment their products. At this stage their sales have escalated to the point that they are exceeding every other computer companies sales rates by far. Again, I say that I think there is something you are missing as to why people are happy to return to Apple & pay a little more (nowhere near the difference that it used to be).

I wonder what Apple would cry about if Windows tested for the Apple TPM module and if found refused to install on the machine... would that be seen as abuse? I would think so, but then again that is what Apple is essentially doing IMHO.

Apple, is a hardware manufacturer, MS is a software manufacturer, that has a monopoly, such that it dictates to the hardware manufacturers with regards to their O.S's being installed by default on each machine that they sell, this manufacturer/product lock in has stifled software innovation for well over 10 years. Apple are the most innovative software company on the planet & software is an adjunct to their prime business of designing, manufacturing & selling hardware.

Apple obviously don't want to be in the O.S. business, or they would be in it. They don't want to have to support all of the different makes/models/versions of hardware, organise the drivers, offer support, & do this all over the world.

Apple are doing very nicely business wise, doing just what they are doing. Why would they choose to change?

handy

January 15th, 2008, 07:38 AM

My main problem with Apple is just that I want to use their OS, on my hardware. I use or have used Windows, Linux, BSD, Solaris, and their derivatives on my hardware, why not Mac OSX?

As previously stated, if Apple go into the OS business they will kill their computer hardware business. If not they would have done it years ago.

inversekinetix

January 15th, 2008, 07:42 AM

I can find no Mac, with specs and hardware like my computers, for an affordable price.

nor can I

3rdalbum

January 15th, 2008, 12:48 PM

As previously stated, if Apple go into the OS business they will kill their computer hardware business. If not they would have done it years ago.

They did, in a way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_clone#Official_Macintosh_clone_program

True story: In 1984, Apple was scared that companies would extract the ROM code, modify it to look dissimilar at the binary level, and thus have a Macintosh-compatible computer. So they hid a compressed image into the ROM and some routines for displaying it. If you opened the Mac debugger and typed in G and then a particular memory address, the routine would be called and an image saying "Stolen! c Apple" would be displayed on the screen.

There are other urban legends about this sort of anti-clone protection being employed to great effect, but as far as I know this is where it all started.

handy

January 15th, 2008, 01:01 PM

They did, in a way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_clone#Official_Macintosh_clone_program

True story: In 1984, Apple was scared that companies would extract the ROM code, modify it to look dissimilar at the binary level, and thus have a Macintosh-compatible computer. So they hid a compressed image into the ROM and some routines for displaying it. If you opened the Mac debugger and typed in G and then a particular memory address, the routine would be called and an image saying "Stolen! c Apple" would be displayed on the screen.

There are other urban legends about this sort of anti-clone protection being employed to great effect, but as far as I know this is where it all started.

They are nothing if not innovative... :-(

It's a shame intelligence got owned.

cprofitt

January 15th, 2008, 03:27 PM

As previously stated, if Apple go into the OS business they will kill their computer hardware business. If not they would have done it years ago.

If their hardware was so much better as you previously implied then it would not kill their hardware business.

cprofitt

January 15th, 2008, 03:31 PM

It would seem that nothing changes much on the Windows machines where you work then.

I am not comparing the 'software' I am comparing the hardware. As you have said Apple is a hardware company not software... so the reliability of their hardware should be compared that way.

Install Windows on the Apple and Windows on the HP -- which is more reliable?

I suspect that the HP will be comparable to the Apple so an Apple user is really paying $200-500 more for the ability to legally run the OS; not for improved hardware.

LaRoza

January 15th, 2008, 05:18 PM

As previously stated, if Apple go into the OS business they will kill their computer hardware business. If not they would have done it years ago.

I understand (sort of). But the thing is, I have hardware....

Sweet Mercury

January 15th, 2008, 05:43 PM

Apple is first & foremost a hardware company, they produce software to compliment their products. At this stage their sales have escalated to the point that they are exceeding every other computer companies sales rates by far. Again, I say that I think there is something you are missing as to why people are happy to return to Apple & pay a little more (nowhere near the difference that it used to be).

I'm not sure how 100% that is. I like Apple for their software, OSX, Logic, etc. I'd buy a Dell if it would run OSX.

cprofitt

January 16th, 2008, 04:12 AM

I'm not sure how 100% that is. I like Apple for their software, OSX, Logic, etc. I'd buy a Dell if it would run OSX.

It is Apple that makes the decision to not allow Dell or other manufacturers computers to run OS X. Apple is to blame for restricting your choice in hardware. It is really that and their blatant lie filled ads that make me dislike Apple.

averagebeatboy

January 16th, 2008, 08:23 AM

Try the site insanelymac.com so many people re running Tiger and Leopard on PC's now that they are tied to Intel. Just briefly browsing through the Hack Messages, I was really surprised at the amount of people running Mac OS's on PC's.

Cheers,

Averagebeatboy

cprofitt

January 17th, 2008, 05:38 AM

anemptygun

January 17th, 2008, 09:36 PM

I'm all for Apple bashing. It's the only way to make Apple Butter and I never eat toast without it...

:twisted:

LOL m8, i needed that...

angryfirelord

January 18th, 2008, 04:53 AM

As previously stated, if Apple go into the OS business they will kill their computer hardware business. If not they would have done it years ago.
Hmm, not necessarily. For example. Solaris will run (to the best of its abilities) on any x86 computer. However, Sun still manages to sell a decent amount of their own servers. Reason? They're high quality.

If Apple released their OS for all PCs, then they would be getting users who wouldn't consider OS X at all.

trash

January 18th, 2008, 05:09 AM

The short answer:

- www.appledefects.com

- Apple heavily censor their discussion forums. Entire large threads about quality issues have been deleted.

- Format and architecture lock-in.

- Expensive hardware that use the same cheap components as commodity PCs.

X-Apple user after 8+ years so i have paid. I've been told by Apple to pay for upgrades to fix issues on a new machine(most issues were never fixed) and have had posts deleted on their forum speaking of those issues.
They did not care, they do not care, because customers come and go and really they only want the customers with real money.

angryfirelord

January 18th, 2008, 01:57 PM

X-Apple user after 8+ years so i have paid. I've been told by Apple to pay for upgrades to fix issues on a new machine(most issues were never fixed) and have had posts deleted on their forum speaking of those issues.
They did not care, they do not care, because customers come and go and really they only want the customers with real money.
I've noticed these types of things happening as well. If anything, Apple is more manipulative than Microsoft, but unlike MS, Apple has a much more convincing marketing strategy to cover it up.

cprofitt

January 18th, 2008, 07:05 PM

Hmm, not necessarily. For example. Solaris will run (to the best of its abilities) on any x86 computer. However, Sun still manages to sell a decent amount of their own servers. Reason? They're high quality.

If Apple released their OS for all PCs, then they would be getting users who wouldn't consider OS X at all.

Sun = High Quality and custom parts

Apple = Same parts that Dell, HP, and other manufacturers use or you could buy direct

No reason to pay a premium for an Apple if you could get OS X without their hardware; unless you happen to like their cases enough to pay the premium.

angryfirelord

January 18th, 2008, 09:52 PM

Sun = High Quality and custom parts

Apple = Same parts that Dell, HP, and other manufacturers use or you could buy direct

No reason to pay a premium for an Apple if you could get OS X without their hardware; unless you happen to like their cases enough to pay the premium.
Well, I was referring to the fact that Apple's hardware line probably wouldn't disappear if OS X was released "to the wild". But yes, their parts are nothing special and I was never attracted to the price of them either.

slimdog360

January 19th, 2008, 05:06 AM

apple are racist.

You see how the macbooks are more expensive if you get a black one compared to the equivalent white one.

LaRoza

January 19th, 2008, 05:49 AM

apple are racist.

You see how the macbooks are more expensive if you get a black one compared to the equivalent white one.

Most colour customizations cost extra. See the Dell prices...

I don't think it has anything to do with race, but production.

3rdalbum

January 19th, 2008, 10:01 AM

apple are racist.

You see how the macbooks are more expensive if you get a black one compared to the equivalent white one.

lol, very clever, very clever indeed :-)

To the previous poster: It's not anything to do with production. Paying more for a stainless steel finish is paying more somewhat due to production. Paying more for black is just paying more for black.

In cooking appliances though, you never pay more for black than for white, or vice versa.

anemptygun

January 19th, 2008, 09:26 PM

my washing machine cost more in black.

eljoeb

January 19th, 2008, 10:05 PM

lol, very clever, very clever indeed :-)

To the previous poster: It's not anything to do with production. Paying more for a stainless steel finish is paying more somewhat due to production. Paying more for black is just paying more for black.

In cooking appliances though, you never pay more for black than for white, or vice versa.

Paying more for black means they primarily produce white (likely it is their most popular color), and because of this they buy up fewer black casings than white. This could mean they don't get as much of a quantity discount for purchasing black, leading to a higher price. It explains more for Dell, as there isn't nearly as much of a price bump. It seems to matter a lot for Apple, however.

LaRoza

January 19th, 2008, 10:28 PM

lol, very clever, very clever indeed :-)

To the previous poster: It's not anything to do with production. Paying more for a stainless steel finish is paying more somewhat due to production. Paying more for black is just paying more for black.

In cooking appliances though, you never pay more for black than for white, or vice versa.

If white is the dominant colour of their systems, it makes sense from a business standpoint to make more white units and try to get extra money for the different ones. Even if the numbers don't add up, it is not racist, just taking advantage of supply/demand.

If someone wants a custom colour bad enough, they'll pay extra. Why not take advantage?

(Not everyone is Ubuntu...)

slimdog360

January 20th, 2008, 02:51 AM

but everyone who is cool has a black one (like me) and the extra money isn't just $10 or $20, its $200 australian. No one can tell me that it costs $200 to paint a case black as opposed to white.

glotz

January 20th, 2008, 04:16 AM

App£e is just like Micro$oft.

Nano Geek

January 20th, 2008, 04:23 AM

but everyone who is cool has a black one (like me) and the extra money isn't just $10 or $20, its $200 australian. No one can tell me that it costs $200 to paint a case black as opposed to white.This is so ridiculous.
The Black one is more expensive simply because it comes by default with better hardware.

Apple is not racist simply because one model costs more than another.

handy

January 20th, 2008, 10:38 AM

apple are racist.

You see how the macbooks are more expensive if you get a black one compared to the equivalent white one.

:lolflag:

anemptygun

January 29th, 2008, 05:30 AM

That's not necessarily so.

http://www.codebykevin.com/portauthority.html

This is neat, I haven't seen that before...

JoshuaRL

January 29th, 2008, 05:36 AM

Dude, it's Synaptic for Mac! Hahaha!

anemptygun

January 29th, 2008, 06:43 AM

Dude, it's Synaptic for Mac! Hahaha!

lol

handy

January 29th, 2008, 11:56 AM

No it's ports from BSD for the BSD that sits under the OS X Aqua front end. ;-)

JoshuaRL

January 30th, 2008, 02:04 AM

No it's ports from BSD for the BSD that sits under the OS X Aqua front end. ;-)

Sure, sure, sure. But it looks and acts almost exactly like Synaptic. I wonder when they'll get the desktop cube? :)

anemptygun

January 30th, 2008, 04:13 AM

....I wonder when they'll get the desktop cube? :)

....Spaces.

JoshuaRL

January 30th, 2008, 04:27 AM

Ah. Well, please excuse my ignorance. I haven't used Mac since OS 8.6

LaRoza

January 30th, 2008, 08:25 AM

Ah. Well, please excuse my ignorance. I haven't used Mac since OS 8.6

The new BSD base is rather new, so you wouldn't have seen it then.

anemptygun

January 31st, 2008, 07:13 AM

Ah. Well, please excuse my ignorance. I haven't used Mac since OS 8.6

Wow, I just sold a old mac tower that had os 8 on it. that thing was ghetto.

Alfa989

February 2nd, 2008, 03:30 AM

It's funny how pople that post in this thread either don't have any idea of what they're talking about or they are totally biased by their preconceived ideas...

Sad...

JoshuaRL

February 2nd, 2008, 03:51 AM

It's funny how pople that post in this thread either don't have any idea of what they're talking about or they are totally biased by their preconceived ideas...

Sad...

Dude, chill it a little. I can't afford a Mac. I love laptops more than I should, and If I was to buy a new one I would go for a MacBook. But at least I have worked with an earlier version of the OS (even a little coding) and I am a voracious reader of tech news. I know that doesn't seem like much, but I have tried to keep up on what Apple is doing.

Just because I'm not a fanboy doesn't mean I don't have a valid opinion. And in the end, that's all I was offering anyway.

Alfa989

February 2nd, 2008, 06:56 PM

Dude, chill it a little. I can't afford a Mac. I love laptops more than I should, and If I was to buy a new one I would go for a MacBook. But at least I have worked with an earlier version of the OS (even a little coding) and I am a voracious reader of tech news. I know that doesn't seem like much, but I have tried to keep up on what Apple is doing.

Just because I'm not a fanboy doesn't mean I don't have a valid opinion. And in the end, that's all I was offering anyway.

I wasn't talking about you, Josh, I was talking bout the guys 2 or 4 pages back... :)

And yeah, you know what you're talking about, even if that experience is from Mac OS 8... :)

Cheers

JoshuaRL

February 2nd, 2008, 11:31 PM

I wasn't talking about you, Josh, I was talking bout the guys 2 or 4 pages back... :)

And yeah, you know what you're talking about, even if that experience is from Mac OS 8... :)

Cheers

Oh, then I guess I'm an idiot. :lolflag:

Alfa989

February 3rd, 2008, 12:28 PM

Oh, then I guess I'm an idiot. :lolflag:

:D

Don't worry :P

3rdalbum

February 3rd, 2008, 03:19 PM

And yeah, you know what you're talking about, even if that experience is from Mac OS 8... :)

Mmmm.... Mac OS 8. An operating system that booted up in under 30 seconds on a 300MHz computer and was so incredibly snappy. Apart from high definition videoconferencing and virtualisation, what do we do now on our multi-gigahertz, multi-core processors with our multi-CD operating systems that we didn't do on Macs with Mac OS 8?

Alfa989

February 3rd, 2008, 03:59 PM

Mmmm.... Mac OS 8. An operating system that booted up in under 30 seconds on a 300MHz computer and was so incredibly snappy. Apart from high definition videoconferencing and virtualisation, what do we do now on our multi-gigahertz, multi-core processors with our multi-CD operating systems that we didn't do on Macs with Mac OS 8?
Dunno what you mean... :confused:

AbredPeytr

February 3rd, 2008, 04:24 PM

the mac mini he was talking about sells for $600 US

If I remember correctly, the Mac Mini comes with nothing (monitor, keyboard (?), etc.).

For the prices I've seen quoted here for the Mac Mini you can get a complete system, sometimes including a printer. AND you can upgrade piecemeal down the road.

Is Apple even still pushing the Mac Mini, or are they trying to offload their stock? I don't think that the Mac store that I buy from for work even sells them. They're pushing the new super-thin Mac books.

Why I sometimes bash Apple:
Macs have problems you can't solve yourself (if with Google).
Having to buy an upgrade CD to upgrade from OS 10.3.X to 10.4 (essentially a service pack) is criminal. If Microsoft tried that, they would land in court faster than you could blink.

I bash Microsoft as well :-) Case in point, moving Office documents between Windows and Mac OS is still not seemless. At least once a month I get an email from my boss with a .doc attachment that I have to save in another format so that he can see either text or figures.

At least his new Mac book is now able to open a TIFF from me without crashing (most of the time).

I'll bash SUSE too: nah, I suppose I would have eventually gotten my WiFi working, if I had spent the time in forums/Google. But Ubuntu pleases me more.

trash

February 3rd, 2008, 04:41 PM

Why I sometimes bash Apple:
Macs have problems you can't solve yourself (if with Google).
Having to buy an upgrade CD to upgrade from OS 10.3.X to 10.4 (essentially a service pack) is criminal.

You got it! My case was buying a brand new G4 with OS 9. Tech support said my problems would be fixed and I should buy OS x 10.1

Problems did not get fixed, and 2 months later I was told fix's for 10.1 were in 10.2, when i protested Apple told me I have to pay for 10.2 because, and I quote 'sir, there are over 140 new programs in 10.2 thats why we have to charge'.

On phone apple care(i bought 3 years) told me they are having thousands of complaints about this upgrade, yet Apple refused to address these customer complaints. The only thing an Apple rep would say to me is that 'tech support should never have told you that sir'.
This is all during a 7-8 month period.

Alfa989

February 3rd, 2008, 10:10 PM

For the prices I've seen quoted here for the Mac Mini you can get a complete system, sometimes including a printer. AND you can upgrade piecemeal down the road.
But is the Pc you get as small as the mini, or does it have FireWire, or does it come with OS X and it's preloaded software, or does it make as little sound as the mini...?

You gotta compare them the right way... :)

Is Apple even still pushing the Mac Mini, or are they trying to offload their stock? I don't think that the Mac store that I buy from for work even sells them. They're pushing the new super-thin Mac books.
They are probably getting rid if the stock to introduce new ones or something... :confused:

Macs have problems you can't solve yourself (if with Google).
Having to buy an upgrade CD to upgrade from OS 10.3.X to 10.4 (essentially a service pack) is criminal. If Microsoft tried that, they would land in court faster than you could blink.
Panther to Tiger a Service Pack? Do you call updating, polishing, optimizing and renewing the whole OS internal and applications a service pack? :rolleyes:

I bash Microsoft as well :-) Case in point, moving Office documents between Windows and Mac OS is still not seemless.
It's not even seamless to do that between different Office versions! :lolflag:

AbredPeytr

February 4th, 2008, 11:13 PM

Panther to Tiger a Service Pack? Do you call updating, polishing, optimizing and renewing the whole OS internal and applications a service pack? :rolleyes:

It's not even seamless to do that between different Office versions! :lolflag:

Ahh, I see. Apple doesn't even follow standards for numbering software. Sorry, I was confused buy that. Still, I didn't see any great improvements from 10.3 to 10.4. Only bought the update in order to be able to install a program that wouldn't run on 10.3. Still ended up having to buy a new Mac for the software because the software doesn't run with an integrated graphics card, which I unfortunately didn't see in the software description. Anywho, it's not my money :-)

Yeah, I recently ran into that very problem that a Word 2000 doc didn't open correctly under 2003 LOL. But I can't be my boss to move away from Microsoft Office either. *sigh*

Alfa989

February 5th, 2008, 01:32 PM

Ahh, I see. Apple doesn't even follow standards for numbering software. Sorry, I was confused buy that. Still, I didn't see any great improvements from 10.3 to 10.4. Only bought the update in order to be able to install a program that wouldn't run on 10.3. Still ended up having to buy a new Mac for the software because the software doesn't run with an integrated graphics card, which I unfortunately didn't see in the software description. Anywho, it's not my money :-)
Oh, is there a standard?

What app was that? Video or audio related thingy? :)

Yeah, I recently ran into that very problem that a Word 2000 doc didn't open correctly under 2003 LOL. But I can't be my boss to move away from Microsoft Office either. *sigh*

Duh... If businesses moved to OpenOffice it would be much easier... Open source, free, open formats... But businesses (and bosses, in general) are just plain stupid... :P

LaRoza

February 5th, 2008, 04:47 PM

Duh... If businesses moved to OpenOffice it would be much easier... Open source, free, open formats... But businesses (and bosses, in general) are just plain stupid... :P

Yes, ODT is the way to go.

PHB's are a pain (I hear)

igknighted

February 5th, 2008, 05:57 PM

But is the Pc you get as small as the mini, or does it have FireWire, or does it come with OS X and it's preloaded software, or does it make as little sound as the mini...?

You gotta compare them the right way... :)

And why do I want firewire (aside from connecting to my first gen ipod?)

Plus, it's an f*ing desktop, I don't care how small it is. If I did, HP and others make PCs in similar sizes, but a small PC like that just doesn't interest me.

Panther to Tiger a Service Pack? Do you call updating, polishing, optimizing and renewing the whole OS internal and applications a service pack? :rolleyes:

It is certainly more than a service pack, but in the grand scheme of things, not much changed. To be completely honest, aside from what basically amounts to "bug fixes" and "tweaks", OSX has barely changed since the inception of OSX. The only real changes have come with software (iLife suite, etc.). It's just a scheme to get users to upgrade, no better or worse than MS.

It's not even seamless to do that between different Office versions! :lolflag:

Office for mac is a joke when you consider what they charge, and what equally obnoxious alternatives charge (OO.o and some iLife app, right?). They literally changed formulae in excel from the windows version to the mac version! It's far worse than the annoying table that got bumped over a little.

cprofitt

February 5th, 2008, 06:38 PM

But is the Pc you get as small as the mini, or does it have FireWire, or does it come with OS X and it's preloaded software, or does it make as little sound as the mini...?

You gotta compare them the right way... :)

Yes, you can get (or my pref build) a machine as small as the mini (or real close - you have a choice); they run as quiet and can have all those features other than OS X since Apple disallows people from legally putting OS X on non-Apple hardware.

Apple 'controls' its OS worse than Microsoft does... and the reason is either:

a) Apple developers aren't good enough to make an OS that can be loaded on so many platforms like Microsoft can

or

b) Apple has decided to be restrictive with its OS to protect the high margin hardware sales they would lose if you could load OS X on any Intel based PC.

anemptygun

February 6th, 2008, 08:30 PM

And why do I want firewire (aside from connecting to my first gen ipod?)

One reason you might consider firewire is that USB rarely exceed 240 Mb/s. While firewire has real life transfer speeds of about 393 Mb/s. This is ideal for external hard drives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firewire#Technical_specifications

pjkoczan

February 7th, 2008, 05:12 AM

But is the Pc you get as small as the mini, or does it have FireWire, or does it come with OS X and it's preloaded software, or does it make as little sound as the mini...?

I can build one so that the answer is...yes, yes, no (but I prefer Linux and can make do with its applications and saving ~$200US), and yes. Quiet, small, form factor PCs and parts to build them exist, they just tend to be the exception rather than the rule...Much the same way that Macs are. I see about a 1:20 ratio of Minis to giant, noisemaking G5s, Pros, and other desktops.

You gotta compare them the right way... :)

And the right way is...? Oh right, with Apple on top thus vindicating your preconceived notions.

To be honest, I think a lot of the comparisons done are fair and a lot of the criticisms justified. At lot of these arguments seem to get hung up on small things that get blown way out of proportion. Macs have firewire...so does almost every PC motherboard made in the last 4 years. PCs have a wider array of software...so, Mac can run virtual machines very well and have tons of OSS ports and more than a few commercial ports and sometimes superior equivalents.

I don't mind the arguments, but let's all start getting a little creative and stop harping on (possibly obsolete) points that have been done to death and are mostly based on opinion and preconceived notion.

Panther to Tiger a Service Pack? Do you call updating, polishing, optimizing and renewing the whole OS internal and applications a service pack? :rolleyes:

What would you call each new Ubuntu release? Service pack, update, new OS? I'd say that Panther to Tiger is the same as one of those. You have core software updates, application polishes and bugfixes, and new features in the core (like Compiz for Gutsy or Time Machine for OS X). Whether or not that's worth the cost of upgrading is up for debate.

Oh, is there a standard [for software version numbers]?

Unfortunately, no. Anyone who says otherwise is full of crap. There are de facto standards and commonly accepted schemes, as well as good practices when creating versioning systems.

A lot of software follows the pattern x.y.z, where x is the major version, y is a minor version (new features from the same base release), and y is the revision (bug fixes and security updates). However, exceptions exist. The current version of OpenSSL, for instance, is 0.9.8g. I believe 0.9.8 would be considered the "major version" and they are at revision "g".

However, you'd never see z.y.x, because it'd be hard in this case to tell if installed software meets or exceeds a specific minimum requirement based on how version strings are represented and compared.

In short, there are no hard standards, and companies and projects are free to number their versions however they see fit. There is, however, a loose set of best practices and de facto standards that should be followed. OS X follows these practices as near as I can figure.

anemptygun

February 7th, 2008, 07:50 PM

I enjoy both working with OSX and Linux. So I have Linux on my desktop, which I enjoy because I can build it from the ground up and use whatever parts I wish (cheap parts most of the time ;) ). But I have my macbook as my portable machine which I will take to work and school.

Thinking about an eee as a fun project/mobile hack station...

Alfa989

February 8th, 2008, 06:04 PM

And why do I want firewire (aside from connecting to my first gen ipod?)
FireWire is reat for storage devices for example... Much better than USB, for instance... :)

Plus, it's an f*ing desktop, I don't care how small it is. If I did, HP and others make PCs in similar sizes, but a small PC like that just doesn't interest me.
What If you want to use it as a media centre? What if you don't wanna have a clunky and noisy beige/black/silver box under the table?

And HP doesn't make mini-sized PCs... :)

It is certainly more than a service pack, but in the grand scheme of things, not much changed. To be completely honest, aside from what basically amounts to "bug fixes" and "tweaks", OSX has barely changed since the inception of OSX. The only real changes have come with software (iLife suite, etc.). It's just a scheme to get users to upgrade, no better or worse than MS.

What about the speediness when compared to previous version of OS X? The changes in the Dock? Finder?, etc... :)

Office for mac is a joke when you consider what they charge, and what equally obnoxious alternatives charge (OO.o and some iLife app, right?). They literally changed formulae in excel from the windows version to the mac version! It's far worse than the annoying table that got bumped over a little.

Yeah, I heard that they've changed some formulae... I just don't know how many of them? Do you know how much have they screwed it up? :)

Alfa989

February 8th, 2008, 06:10 PM

Yes, you can get (or my pref build) a machine as small as the mini (or real close - you have a choice); they run as quiet and can have all those features other than OS X since Apple disallows people from legally putting OS X on non-Apple hardware.

A desktop with the same price as the mini with all the specs of a mini? From what I know, no, it's impossible... :)

Apple 'controls' its OS worse than Microsoft does... and the reason is either:
a) Apple developers aren't good enough to make an OS that can be loaded on so many platforms like Microsoft can
or
b) Apple has decided to be restrictive with its OS to protect the high margin hardware sales they would lose if you could load OS X on any Intel based PC.

They probably make it due to their desire of sending an all-in-one package... You know, hardware & software working together as meant by design... :P

Alfa989

February 8th, 2008, 06:45 PM

I can build one so that the answer is...yes, yes, no (but I prefer Linux and can make do with its applications and saving ~$200US), and yes. Quiet, small, form factor PCs and parts to build them exist, they just tend to be the exception rather than the rule...Much the same way that Macs are. I see about a 1:20 ratio of Minis to giant, noisemaking G5s, Pros, and other desktops.

Well, as far as I know. there are some mini-like PCs out there (the AOpen one, the Fujitsu Esprimo and the System76 Koala Mini), but they are all more expensive then the Mini with the same hardware... :)

And the right way is...? Oh right, with Apple on top thus vindicating your preconceived notions.

No. The right way to compare PCs and Macs is to do so by having the same hardware and the same feature on both of them... :)

What would you call each new Ubuntu release? Service pack, update, new OS? I'd say that Panther to Tiger is the same as one of those. You have core software updates, application polishes and bugfixes, and new features in the core (like Compiz for Gutsy or Time Machine for OS X). Whether or not that's worth the cost of upgrading is up for debate.

I'd say that Tiger->Leopard, XP->Vista and Feisty->Gutsy are all major upgrades. :)

Unfortunately, no. Anyone who says otherwise is full of crap. There are de facto standards and commonly accepted schemes, as well as good practices when creating versioning systems.
A lot of software follows the pattern x.y.z, where x is the major version, y is a minor version (new features from the same base release), and y is the revision (bug fixes and security updates). However, exceptions exist. The current version of OpenSSL, for instance, is 0.9.8g. I believe 0.9.8 would be considered the "major version" and they are at revision "g".
However, you'd never see z.y.x, because it'd be hard in this case to tell if installed software meets or exceeds a specific minimum requirement based on how version strings are represented and compared.
In short, there are no hard standards, and companies and projects are free to number their versions however they see fit. There is, however, a loose set of best practices and de facto standards that should be followed. OS X follows these practices as near as I can figure.

Thanks for the info, mate! :)

cprofitt

February 10th, 2008, 06:37 AM

A desktop with the same price as the mini with all the specs of a mini? From what I know, no, it's impossible... :)

Impossible? That has been shown to be untrue several times in this very thread... but just for you lets do it again.

We will pit a pre-built Acer vs. the Mac Mini

Acer Veriton VL410-UD4201C
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+(2.2GHz)
1GB DDR2
160GB SATA HD
ATI Radeon X1250
802.11 b/g Wireless LAN
Super-Multi drive (DVD+R, DVD-R, DVD-RAM)
10/100/1000Mbps
802.11b/g Wireless LAN
Front USB: 4
Front Audio Ports: 2
Includes Keyboard and Mouse
Rear USB: 4 RJ45:1 port S/P DIF:1 port
Video Ports: 1 DVI

size:
2.5 x 8 x 10 in
-------------------------------------------
$489.99

I selected the lowest base mini (the processors are close in performance), but had to 'upgrade' some items so the specs were close. (all upgrades noted by an *); there were also items I could not match because Mac offered no options to upgrade. (all lesser options are noted by a -). (note: If there was something the Mini had that was not an option on the Acer I noted it with a +)

1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* HD 160gb
* Apple Keyboard & Might Mouse
- 24x Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
- Intel GMA 950 graphics processor with 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory
- Four USB 2.0 ports
+ One FireWire 400 port
size:
+ 2 x 6.5 x 6.5 inches
-----------------------
$847.00

Oh, no.... impossible just got its *** kicked by about $350.00 and to me the things that I could not get in the Mac bothered me more than the slightly larger form factor or the lack of firewire.

They probably make it due to their desire of sending an all-in-one package... You know, hardware & software working together as meant by design... :P

Doubtful. They use stock Intel motherboards in most cases and flash the TPM chip with propriatary code that the install routine looks for. My IT departmet loaded OSX on an HP for a lark once and everything worked fine -- so I don't buy any bull about Apple doing some special design to make things work well. Sure they might do that because it makes less work for them to develop drivers for so many devices like Microsoft does, but I think it is more to protect the margins they have

cprofitt

February 10th, 2008, 06:40 AM

Well, as far as I know. there are some mini-like PCs out there (the AOpen one, the Fujitsu Esprimo and the System76 Koala Mini), but they are all more expensive then the Mini with the same hardware...

See my last post... and I got more if you want the mini to get spanked again.

Alfa989

February 12th, 2008, 05:05 PM

Impossible? That has been shown to be untrue several times in this very thread... but just for you lets do it again.

We will pit a pre-built Acer vs. the Mac Mini

Acer Veriton VL410-UD4201C
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+(2.2GHz)
1GB DDR2
160GB SATA HD
ATI Radeon X1250
802.11 b/g Wireless LAN
Super-Multi drive (DVD+R, DVD-R, DVD-RAM)
10/100/1000Mbps
802.11b/g Wireless LAN
Front USB: 4
Front Audio Ports: 2
Includes Keyboard and Mouse
Rear USB: 4 RJ45:1 port S/P DIF:1 port
Video Ports: 1 DVI

size:
2.5 x 8 x 10 in
-------------------------------------------
$489.99

I selected the lowest base mini (the processors are close in performance), but had to 'upgrade' some items so the specs were close. (all upgrades noted by an *); there were also items I could not match because Mac offered no options to upgrade. (all lesser options are noted by a -). (note: If there was something the Mini had that was not an option on the Acer I noted it with a +)

1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
* HD 160gb
* Apple Keyboard & Might Mouse
- 24x Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
- Intel GMA 950 graphics processor with 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory
- Four USB 2.0 ports
+ One FireWire 400 port
size:
+ 2 x 6.5 x 6.5 inches
-----------------------
$847.00

Oh, no.... impossible just got its *** kicked by about $350.00 and to me the things that I could not get in the Mac bothered me more than the slightly larger form factor or the lack of firewire.

Acer? haha! You might as well open the window and throw the money! Because that's what you do when you buy Acer products! (Kinda happens the same with Airis, if you happen to know that company)
Quality also counts mate! :) And it still isn't the same size... And it will probably make a heel of a lot of noise! :D

(Reviews say hardware doesn't work well out-of-the-box and it may need a Windows re-install... If you happen to use Windows on that thing... lol Also, they say there's some amount of performance bottleneck when used with under 2Gb of RAM)

Doubtful. They use stock Intel motherboards in most cases and flash the TPM chip with propriatary code that the install routine looks for. My IT departmet loaded OSX on an HP for a lark once and everything worked fine -- so I don't buy any bull about Apple doing some special design to make things work well. Sure they might do that because it makes less work for them to develop drivers for so many devices like Microsoft does, but I think it is more to protect the margins they have
They design the hardware with the OS in mind... And no, OSX86 doesn't work nearly as good as OS X on a Mac... :)

angryfirelord

February 12th, 2008, 08:12 PM

Acer? haha! You might as well open the window and throw the money! Because that's what you do when you buy Acer products!
I strongly disagree. I'm using an Acer for 6 months strong & my data has been using one for 18 months. Both work extremely well and are built to last longer than the cheap Dells or HPs I've seen.

& don't get me started on flaming Macbook batteries. ;) Go ahead, google "Macbook fire" (or something similar) and see how many stories you get. Honestly, I can't recommend a lock-in company that puts fashion over function in their products.

Alfa989

February 12th, 2008, 10:00 PM

I strongly disagree. I'm using an Acer for 6 months strong & my data has been using one for 18 months. Both work extremely well and are built to last longer than the cheap Dells or HPs I've seen.
Mmm... Actually, most of Dell's and HP's PCs are quite sturdy, especially the Dell ones... But I've seen Acer laptops' screens breaking live just by closing the lid and then opening it again...

& don't get me started on flaming Macbook batteries. ;) Go ahead, google "Macbook fire" (or something similar) and see how many stories you get. Honestly, I can't recommend a lock-in company that puts fashion over function in their products.
Ok, search for "Dell fire" then... :)

And then do a search for "Sony exploding batteries"

Oh, and the flaming battery problemas dates back from 2006... Quite solved by now... :D

And where do you get from that Apple puts fashion first? Didn't they sell computers when they were all beige?

anemptygun

February 13th, 2008, 01:49 AM

They design the hardware with the OS in mind... And no, OSX86 doesn't work nearly as good as OS X on a Mac... :)
I can vouch for this in my experience. I have never been able to get OSX86 to be stable.

Achetar

February 13th, 2008, 02:52 AM

cprofitt

February 13th, 2008, 04:58 AM

Acer? haha! You might as well open the window and throw the money! Because that's what you do when you buy Acer products! (Kinda happens the same with Airis, if you happen to know that company)
Quality also counts mate! :) And it still isn't the same size... And it will probably make a heel of a lot of noise! :D

(Reviews say hardware doesn't work well out-of-the-box and it may need a Windows re-install... If you happen to use Windows on that thing... lol Also, they say there's some amount of performance bottleneck when used with under 2Gb of RAM)

So now instead of it being impossible to find one... you want to say this one isn't a good one. I see, I see..l. shifting the argument you lost to a different one. Should I post the price on the HP that is similar then? That one is roughly $100 less... and you have already said you think HPs are good.

They design the hardware with the OS in mind... And no, OSX86 doesn't work nearly as good as OS X on a Mac... :)

Remind me again which part of the 'hardware' beyond the case that Apple actually 'designs'. Would that be the INTEL motherboard? Would that be the INTEL processor? C'mon buddy just admit that the sad fact is Apple does NO IMPORTANT design work on the actual hardware that interacts with the OS. Certainly they MIGHT actually select a limited range of hardware, but I have already explained that it is more likely to be restricted to a small sub-section of hardware due to Apple's inability to write drivers for the hardware.

Despite being taken to the woodshed on the subject repeatedly through this thread you keep repeating the same old false statement or shift your argument... Apple products aren't bad, but they are OVER PRICED in comparison to comparable products from NON-APPLE vendors.

FYI the version of OSX we loaded on the HP was not OSX86, but OSX 10.4 with the TPM check disabled.

cprofitt

February 13th, 2008, 05:03 AM

http://forums.macnn.com/69/mac-notebooks/341366/law-suit-against-apple-over-lcd/

Quality Apple Hardware being discussed last year.

JoshuaRL

February 13th, 2008, 06:27 AM

THANK YOU! YOU SAID MY FEELINGS EXACTLY!!! That is the first time in all my forum browsing (mostly to fix the Linux experience) that I have seen it stated so clearly, THNX!

Thanks man. I was starting to wonder if this thread had devolved past usefulness.

And kudos to reading through the whole thing.

joshdudeha

February 13th, 2008, 03:26 PM

I think people bash apple products because of some of the pompousness withing the apple community.
I know a lot of peopel that use mac - and the yare all designers and photographer's etc. Fair enough, a mac is good for that industry, but, what I don't like about a lot of those people is that they really do like to slag the other systems (especially windows) off.
They think they are royalty because they are using mac.
And also, over here in england, a mac computer with dual core processor etc £2000
WTF! You can get a dual core - 2 GB ram - 350GB pc for £350.
I just hate the whole, i guess, 'middle-classness' about it.
They like to look down their noses at people that don't use mac.
Ugh

Alfa989

February 13th, 2008, 05:42 PM

I know a lot of peopel that use mac - and the yare all designers and photographer's etc. Fair enough, a mac is good for that industry, but, what I don't like about a lot of those people is that they really do like to slag the other systems (especially windows) off.
They think they are royalty because they are using mac.
BS, mate!

I've seen tons of Linux users saying that closed-source apps should be avoided by all means, and that the OSS alternative will always be better, just because of she open-ness... :-/

And also, over here in england, a mac computer with dual core processor etc £2000
WTF! You can get a dual core - 2 GB ram - 350GB pc for £350.
I just hate the whole, i guess, 'middle-classness' about it.
They like to look down their noses at people that don't use mac.
Ugh

No, £399 :)

Alfa989

February 13th, 2008, 05:57 PM

So now instead of it being impossible to find one... you want to say this one isn't a good one. I see, I see..l. shifting the argument you lost to a different one. Should I post the price on the HP that is similar then? That one is roughly $100 less... and you have already said you think HPs are good.
Yes, Acer is everything but high-quality... And the PC you showed still wasn't anything near the mini... :)

Could you post the HP's specs, please? :)

Remind me again which part of the 'hardware' beyond the case that Apple actually 'designs'. Would that be the INTEL motherboard? Would that be the INTEL processor? C'mon buddy just admit that the sad fact is Apple does NO IMPORTANT design work on the actual hardware that interacts with the OS. Certainly they MIGHT actually select a limited range of hardware, but I have already explained that it is more likely to be restricted to a small sub-section of hardware due to Apple's inability to write drivers for the hardware.
Despite being taken to the woodshed on the subject repeatedly through this thread you keep repeating the same old false statement or shift your argument... Apple products aren't bad, but they are OVER PRICED in comparison to comparable products from NON-APPLE vendors.
Yeah, they participate in the designing of the boards... Apple's hardware is not close to normal PCs in term of from and design... :)

And why do you say that Apple is unable to write drivers for their hardware?

Apple products are not over-priced. No one gives you more for less, there are always disadvantages! Quality, features, form factor, etc...

FYI the version of OSX we loaded on the HP was not OSX86, but OSX 10.4 with the TPM check disabled.

That's still OSX86... :)

Cheers!

cprofitt

February 14th, 2008, 12:51 AM

Yes, Acer is everything but high-quality... And the PC you showed still wasn't anything near the mini... :)

You are right the Acer bosted slightly better specs. Most people would prefer the Acer.

Could you post the HP's specs, please? :)

Too lazy to do it yourself?

HP dc7800 Ultra-slim Desktop
- Intel® vPRO Technology with IAMT 3.0
- Intel® Core 2 Duo E6550 2.33 4MB/1333 CPU
- Intel® Q35 chipset integrated
- 160GB 1.5-inch SMART IV hard drive
- 2GB SODIMM DDR2 800MHz (2 DIMM)
- PS/2 Standard keyboard
- USB 2-Button Optical Scroll Mouse
- Slim 8X SuperMulti LightScribe drive (DVD +/- R/RW w/ Lightscribe)
- 3-3-3 warranty
$1059

Apple Comparible Mac Mini
- 2Ghz Core 2 Duo (lower end processor and no option to upgrade)
- 2GB DDR2 667MHz ram (2 DIMM) (lower rated ram than the 800MHz ram from HP)
- 160GB HD
- Apple Mighty Mouse and Keyboard
- DL DVD +/. R/RW
- AppleCare protection added to match warranties
$1271

Now the HP just stomped on the Apple. Sorry the Mini loses again.

Yeah, they participate in the designing of the boards... Apple's hardware is not close to normal PCs in term of from and design... :)

Other than your assertion there is no proof that you are correct. They design the form factor. They do not deign the motherboards. They do not design the video cards. They do not design the processors. They do not design the power supply.

And why do you say that Apple is unable to write drivers for their hardware?

Well they certainly limit Apple users to what hardware is supported and have less drivers available with the system than what is available in Windows Vista.

Apple products are not over-priced. No one gives you more for less, there are always disadvantages! Quality, features, form factor, etc...

It is laughable that after so many people have shown them to be over-priced that you can not admit that simple truth. The Professional level workstations are the ONLY level of product that I have found that Apple is NOT over-priced on.

That's still OSX86... :)

I think you are confused as to what OSX86 is. The OS we installed on our HP machine came from an Apple install DVD marked OS X 10.4.

Cheers!

By all means... you too... just admit you are wrong or offer some real proof instead of another set of baseless ASSertions.

cprofitt

February 14th, 2008, 12:57 AM

Here is another little link for you Alfa and that is LAST years model and it was less expensive than your precious mini.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2111399,00.asp

And the comparison they did with the Mac mini

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2105417,00.asp

Notice that the Mac only rated 3 circles out of 5... the HP got 4 out of 5.

oh... and the ACER from LAST year (worse than the current one I already quoted you which got less expensive)

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2101566,00.asp

It rated higher than the Mac too.

weelibin

February 14th, 2008, 01:41 PM

angryfirelord

February 14th, 2008, 03:28 PM

hey private void whats with the massive hate issues of apple did they rape all the members of your family before killing them in front of you? seriously! what the buzz here? apple make good hardware and the fact of the matter is that they generaly just work, and apple work at making them better and cheaper(even if it takes a while), they are not open source and while they do like to do certain things for free and put up links to free programs on their site. they are a company and have never ever said they want to give things away for free or particularly cheap, have you forgotten that their goal is to make money? by the way i love the open source and the community and all that goes with it,(i am a new kubuntu user, its amazing love it!) it is amazing to see this kind of pedantic squabiling among a group of people that do such good things for others, knocking others, this is very petty in my opinion. grow up.
But that's the point.

It's not the point if the stuff doesn't cost anything, it's the fact that Apple tries to sell you proprietary solutions on a locked-in platform. As was pointed out before, I cannot run Apple software on anything but OS X and OS X only runs on Apple hardware, which is usually overpriced PC hardware. Go ahead, try opening a Mac Mini and see if you don't scratch it. At least Windows runs on any x86 hardware and my Windows software has a chance with Wine.

Then of course, what happens if something fails? "Upgrade!", says Apple. Even if the rest of the hardware if good, Apple essentially wants to develop the "disposable PC." Meaning that if something goes wrong, throw it away and buy a new one. Techie users here won't be persuaded by that crap, but the average user won't think twice.

So, as I see it, Apple is NOT a healthy company to have in control. They may look pretty, but as the saying goes, beauty is only skin deep.

cprofitt

February 14th, 2008, 03:31 PM

hey private void whats with the massive hate issues of apple did they rape all the members of your family before killing them in front of you? seriously! what the buzz here? apple make good hardware and the fact of the matter is that they generaly just work, and apple work at making them better and cheaper(even if it takes a while), they are not open source and while they do like to do certain things for free and put up links to free programs on their site. they are a company and have never ever said they want to give things away for free or particularly cheap, have you forgotten that their goal is to make money? by the way i love the open source and the community and all that goes with it,(i am a new kubuntu user, its amazing love it!) it is amazing to see this kind of pedantic squabiling among a group of people that do such good things for others, knocking others, this is very petty in my opinion. grow up.

The discussion was about price not my personal like or dislike of Apple. Alfa made a claim that no non-Apple computer could touch the price of the Mac mini. I am sorry that you feel that because the facts defeat that assertion that it implies Apple raped my family.

I have no hate for Apple, but firmly believe that they over-price their hardware, force vendor lock-in for hardware and have used anti-competitive practices that harm consumer choice with iTunes/iPods.

they are a company and have never ever said they want to give things away for free or particularly cheap, have you forgotten that their goal is to make money?

I guess the same thing can be said of Microsoft, which IMHO, makes an OS that in many ways is far superior to OS X. Yet I doubt anyone would use the 'right' to make money argument as a 'shield' for Microsoft to stand behind when people question that amount of money they have to pay for Windows, Windows Server, Microsoft Office, etc.

cprofitt

February 14th, 2008, 03:36 PM

...snip...

So, as I see it, Apple is NOT a healthy company to have in control. They may look pretty, but as the saying goes, beauty is only skin deep.

Well said, well said.

Watch out that you are not branded as an Apple hater who has had their family raped by Apple.

weelibin

February 14th, 2008, 03:58 PM

I guess the same thing can be said of Microsoft, which IMHO, makes an OS that in many ways is far superior to OS X. Yet I doubt anyone would use the 'right' to make money argument as a 'shield' for Microsoft to stand behind when people question that amount of money they have to pay for Windows, Windows Server, Microsoft Office, etc.

thats pretty weak, we are not talking about microsoft here or are we? apple are a company and it would be really nice if they didnt vendor lock things in but they do and it doesnt say anywhere that they dont have to. as for the rape of your family, just seems that you are an avid apple basher? i appologise if ive offended you. there hardware is good, even if you dont like them, you cant see this? its not like the old days where youd be waiting for them to get around to do something for you for ages, if you have a problem with hard ware they usualy just take the old one and give you a new one fairly quickly. if you want cheaper hardware then there is cheaper, but if you buy apple you buy quality really ive had my macbook about a year and 3 months i think and let me tell you, ive burned it, dropped it, spilt coffe/alcohol/tea you name it, on it and it works just as good as it did out of the box

cprofitt

February 14th, 2008, 04:21 PM

thats pretty weak, we are not talking about microsoft here or are we? apple are a company and it would be really nice if they didnt vendor lock things in but they do and it doesnt say anywhere that they dont have to. as for the rape of your family, just seems that you are an avid apple basher?

The topic was Apple, but your brought making money in to the equation as a defense for Apple's over-priced products.

I appologise if ive offended you. there hardware is good, even if you dont like them, you cant see this?

I don't think you can find a post of mine where I have claimed their products to be bad. I have merely said that they are over-priced.

if you have a problem with hard ware they usualy just take the old one and give you a new one fairly quickly.

Assuming it is still under warranty.

if you want cheaper hardware then there is cheaper, but if you buy apple you buy quality really ive had my macbook about a year and 3 months i think and let me tell you, ive burned it, dropped it, spilt coffe/alcohol/tea you name it, on it and it works just as good as it did out of the box

I have had my Lenovo T42p for about three years and done all of those things except the coffee, alcohol and tea are replaced by Coke. It is still working just as good as it did out of the box as well and it cost less than a comparable Mac notebook when I bought it.

My point is not that Apple make bad hardware. They just over-price it and lock people in to it. I do not consider them a consumer friendly company. I think they are worse for the marketplace than Microsoft.

weelibin

February 14th, 2008, 04:47 PM

cprofitt

February 14th, 2008, 05:03 PM

well when i bought my mac book(i live in Dublin, Ireland) there was no other laptop available to me here that was cheaper for the same specs really and if it was it was about a tenner to a score, im not going to argue about 10-20 euro.
would you?

I would never argue about 10-20 euro... but in all the cases I can see when I go to the Mac store and then compare there laptops to roughly equivalent HPs, Dells or Lenovos the price difference is more in the area of $200-400 (USD). Maybe Apple only over charges us here in the states?

weelibin

February 14th, 2008, 05:18 PM

cprofitt

February 14th, 2008, 05:23 PM

I am not sure, here in ireland we have the luxury of no infrastructure for a lot of things. Electronics being a big one. Everything is imported. I have no credit card and so Prefer to buy in a shop rather than the internet. I am also a design student and very much like the look of the apple hardware so i shelled out the extra score or so. personally i dont think there is a nicer looking laptop for the size/specs i wanted for the same price.

If the difference was only $10 or $20 it would be an easy choice for looks. I still prefer the choice I get in the states over configurations with HP or Lenovo, but price would not be an issue. The 'look' of a Mac is very nice.

Alfa989

February 15th, 2008, 06:55 PM

You are right the Acer bosted slightly better specs. Most people would prefer the Acer.
Most people would get the mini... You know, OS X...

Too lazy to do it yourself?
HP dc7800 Ultra-slim Desktop
- Intel® vPRO Technology with IAMT 3.0
- Intel® Core 2 Duo E6550 2.33 4MB/1333 CPU
- Intel® Q35 chipset integrated
- 160GB 1.5-inch SMART IV hard drive
- 2GB SODIMM DDR2 800MHz (2 DIMM)
- PS/2 Standard keyboard
- USB 2-Button Optical Scroll Mouse
- Slim 8X SuperMulti LightScribe drive (DVD +/- R/RW w/ Lightscribe)
- 3-3-3 warranty
$1059

Apple Comparible Mac Mini
- 2Ghz Core 2 Duo (lower end processor and no option to upgrade)
- 2GB DDR2 667MHz ram (2 DIMM) (lower rated ram than the 800MHz ram from HP)
- 160GB HD
- Apple Mighty Mouse and Keyboard
- DL DVD +/. R/RW
- AppleCare protection added to match warranties
$1271

The HP is still bigger than the mini
That HD's performance is worse than the mini's
No out-of-the-box media center capabilities
Worse casing
No firewire (External backup devices, decent transfer speeds, DV cameras...)
I'd like to see how much does it sound... :D
Worse keyboard and mouse
Worse OS (Debatable)
Much lower software value...

Other than your assertion there is no proof that you are correct. They design the form factor. They do not deign the motherboards. They do not design the video cards. They do not design the processors. They do not design the power supply.
If they design a weird form factor, they have to design a weird motherboard, obviously...

Well they certainly limit Apple users to what hardware is supported and have less drivers available with the system than what is available in Windows Vista.
Less drivers? Only in GPUs, as far as I know... Most of the hardware is plug and play (true plug and play)

It is laughable that after so many people have shown them to be over-priced that you can not admit that simple truth. The Professional level workstations are the ONLY level of product that I have found that Apple is NOT over-priced on.
I'll repeat it: They are NOT over-priced. Obviously, worse hardware will be cheaper!

I think you are confused as to what OSX86 is. The OS we installed on our HP machine came from an Apple install DVD marked OS X 10.4.
Yes. OSX86.

Cheers!

Alfa989

February 15th, 2008, 06:58 PM

It's not the point if the stuff doesn't cost anything, it's the fact that Apple tries to sell you proprietary solutions on a locked-in platform.
So now propietary software is bad? :lolflag:

Then of course, what happens if something fails? "Upgrade!", says Apple. Even if the rest of the hardware if good, Apple essentially wants to develop the "disposable PC." Meaning that if something goes wrong, throw it away and buy a new one. Techie users here won't be persuaded by that crap, but the average user won't think twice.
It's called "Tech Service"... :)

So, as I see it, Apple is NOT a healthy company to have in control. They may look pretty, but as the saying goes, beauty is only skin deep.
Exactly! That's something the vast majority of people do! They overlook things, they just look on the surface! :)

Alfa989

February 15th, 2008, 07:00 PM

[They] have used anti-competitive practices that harm consumer choice with iTunes/iPods.
Like what? :)

I guess the same thing can be said of Microsoft, which IMHO, makes an OS that in many ways is far superior to OS X.
In which ways?

I can think of gaming, hardware deployment and software compatibilty... :)

Alfa989

February 15th, 2008, 07:01 PM

My point is not that Apple make bad hardware. They just over-price it and lock people in to it. I do not consider them a consumer friendly company. I think they are worse for the marketplace than Microsoft.
And what company is, in your opinion, user friendly? :)

PurposeOfReason

February 15th, 2008, 07:01 PM

One of the few things I dislike about macs is this:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=685747

Amazing choice selection, hu? Besides that, it's just the attitude a lot of mac owners (high school and college level) have about being superior. That being said, I've seen the same attitude in many linux users. Everyone trying to force their OS on someone else.

mivo

February 15th, 2008, 07:16 PM

Alfa989

February 15th, 2008, 08:35 PM

OSX is nice, but it's just another closed OS, and I was done with that when I ditched Windows. I don't really see much of a philosophical difference between the two. Apple may seem "nicer", but it's questionable that they would be if they had Microsoft's market share.
Well, they probably wouldn't buy other companies just to cancel any product that could endanger them...

You pay for the brand. I never had "cheap" run-of-the-mill PC hardware break on me. I don't doubt that you believe that you get better hardware for the higher price -- after all, the marketing machine has been telling us this for decades --, I just doubt that you do.
You don't have to pay for the brand to get good hardware... It's enough with them carefully designing their products... High end Asus laptops and T series ThinkPads are a good example... :)

And people just look at the hardware superficially... You have to analyze every detail, mate! And that applies when comparing 2 things, whatever they are... :) You can't say "This computer is better because it looks better" or "This computer is better because it has better hardware specs" You just cant. :)

cprofitt

February 15th, 2008, 09:46 PM

Most people would get the mini... You know, OS X...

Snip. I am done posting things for you...

you dodge evade and change the focus of the discussion to simply not admit you are wrong.

Your initial claim was that it was impossible to get a machine with similar specs to the mini anywhere near the same price. You then make subjective opinions and baseless assertions about the quality of the components to say the product is 'worse'.

The HP is still bigger than the mini
That HD's performance is worse than the mini's
No out-of-the-box media center capabilities
Worse casing
No firewire (External backup devices, decent transfer speeds, DV cameras...)
I'd like to see how much does it sound...
Worse keyboard and mouse
Worse OS (Debatable)

You ignored these facts:
- The processor in the Mac is inferior
- The ram in the Mac is inferior

You then made the following baseless claims:
- The HD's performance is worse - really? Got link?
- No out-of-the-box media center capabilities - great was that one of your original requirements.
- Worse keyboard and mouse - why? how? got link?

You then asserted the following:
- No firewire (External backup devices, decent transfer speeds, DV cameras...) - Thanks while firewire is faster USB2 is good enough for me.
- Made a comment about wanting to see how it sounds... I can tell you from the unit I saw is was near silent.

If they design a weird form factor, they have to design a weird motherboard, obviously...

No, they most likely pass the requirements on to the MB manufacturer who then designs it. Do you have ANY evidence that they design mother boards? Got link?

Yes. OSX86.

In your mind what is the difference between 'true' OSX and OSX86? Just the over-priced hardware?

I'll repeat it: They are NOT over-priced. Obviously, worse hardware will be cheaper!

Yep, but when the hardware that costs less is actually the same or better then it is over-priced. I do not find Apple hardware to be better in the cases I have compared - and the articles I linked to apparently agreed with me... you have any links to articles that confirm what you are claiming or more baseless arguments?

cprofitt

February 15th, 2008, 09:59 PM

Apple's anti-competitive nature:

Like what?

iPod / iTunes
link 1 (http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=8180)
link 2 (http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34251/118/)
link 3 (http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/04/apple-sued-over-supposed-itunes-monopoly-being-mean-to-microsof/)
link 4 (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22546566/)
link 5 (http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=205207895)
link 6 (http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39122969,00.htm)
link 7 (http://www.reuters.com/article/technology-media-telco-SP/idUSL1114922320070312)
link 8 (http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/jan/10/eu-apple-reach-agreement-on-itunes/)

DRM
link 1 (http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/apple-sued-by-french-consumer-group-over-drm/)

iPhone
link 1 (http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/10/08/iphone.bricking.lawsuit/)

I am sure I could find more, but you should probably edu-ma-cate yourself.

I can think of gaming, hardware deployment and software compatibilty...

You found a few - keep searching. :)

Alfa989

February 15th, 2008, 11:02 PM

Your initial claim was that it was impossible to get a machine with similar specs to the mini anywhere near the same price. You then make subjective opinions and baseless assertions about the quality of the components to say the product is 'worse'.
And you said there were mini-sized machines who were cheaper than it with the same or higher specs. And you still haven't proved anything like that, mate... :)

You ignored these facts:
- The processor in the Mac is inferior
- The ram in the Mac is inferior
I didn't ignore them. I know they ARE true and that the mini is worse in that aspect... :)

You then made the following baseless claims:
- The HD's performance is worse - really? Got link?
- No out-of-the-box media center capabilities - great was that one of your original requirements.
- Worse keyboard and mouse - why? how? got link?
You said the HD was "1.5 inches" Small hard drives have got less rpm...
The mini has got media center capabilities. Since we are comparing it to the mini...
PS/2 standard keyboard and mouse? How can ou think they are better than the mini's?

You then asserted the following:
- No firewire (External backup devices, decent transfer speeds, DV cameras...) - Thanks while firewire is faster USB2 is good enough for me.
- Made a comment about wanting to see how it sounds... I can tell you from the unit I saw is was near silent.
Oh, I though we were talking about the user needs in general, not yours
Near silent? Good, they're finally catching up! :D

No, they most likely pass the requirements on to the MB manufacturer who then designs it. Do you have ANY evidence that they design mother boards? Got link?
Do you have any evidence that they don't?

In your mind what is the difference between 'true' OSX and OSX86? Just the over-priced hardware?
Mmm... Because you're installing it on a PC. And since you said you used an official Apple Tiger DVD, I asume you used one of the EFI emulators... right? That's still OSX86, mate

Yep, but when the hardware that costs less is actually the same or better then it is over-priced. I do not find Apple hardware to be better in the cases I have compared - and the articles I linked to apparently agreed with me... you have any links to articles that confirm what you are claiming or more baseless arguments?
The hardware in the HP is not better. It lacks a lot of things that the mini has!

Alfa989

February 15th, 2008, 11:16 PM

iPod / iTunes
link 1 (http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=8180)
link 2 (http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34251/118/)
link 3 (http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/04/apple-sued-over-supposed-itunes-monopoly-being-mean-to-microsof/)
link 4 (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22546566/)
link 5 (http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=205207895)
link 6 (http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39122969,00.htm)
link 7 (http://www.reuters.com/article/technology-media-telco-SP/idUSL1114922320070312)
link 8 (http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/jan/10/eu-apple-reach-agreement-on-itunes/)
A bunch of links that talk about Apple not supporting WMA, a lawsuit to Apple from a guy that just want money and makes no sense, some bs about the old iPod-iTunes argument (which says the same as the 1st), more bs from another person that wants money and has no idea of what she's talking about, the same bs again, and again, some EU woman with no idea of how iTunes works, and finally, a super-hypocrite-link!

DRM
link 1 (http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/apple-sued-by-french-consumer-group-over-drm/)
Same notice again... That you posted 3 times already...

iPhone
link 1 (http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/10/08/iphone.bricking.lawsuit/)
Oh, and the I-wanna-money guy again! did you even read them?

You found a few - keep searching. :)
You tell me, mate

angryfirelord

February 15th, 2008, 11:41 PM

Yes, Acer is everything but high-quality...
I recently spoke to a Firedog employee and he said that HPs and Compaqs are the ones with the most hardware problems. He's never had to fix an Acer yet due to hardware issues. Therefore, I think you should Acer another look.

Face it, with Apple you're just paying for another x86 PC. They could easily cut corners for cheaper hardware and stick with Apple logo over it. With Acer, I know that I'm getting a durable laptop.

cprofitt

February 16th, 2008, 01:39 AM

And you said there were mini-sized machines who were cheaper than it with the same or higher specs. And you still haven't proved anything like that, mate... :)

Here was my actual statement:

Yes, you can get (or my pref build) a machine as small as the mini (or real close - you have a choice); they run as quiet and can have all those features other than OS X since Apple disallows people from legally putting OS X on non-Apple hardware.

here was your reply:

A desktop with the same price as the mini with all the specs of a mini? From what I know, no, it's impossible... :smile:

Did you miss the prices I posted? Clearly they were less than the Mac mini. Clearly their specs were very close and in some cases exceeded the minis. Clearly you are going to quibble about an inch here or the color of the case just so you don't have to admit that the mini really is not the technical marvel it was when first introduced.

You said the HD was "1.5 inches" Small hard drives have got less rpm...

So what is the RPM on the Mac Mini? Wait you just made another claim in ignorance - here ya go:

The Mac mini's weak point is hard drive speed since it uses a 4200rpm 2.5 inch "notebook" drive (either Toshiba or Hitachi). I understand the idea is small size and weight, but a relatively slow drive can contribute to slow overall performance when booting, launching apps, and doing virtual memory operations. Apple could have used a faster drive but it would drive the cost up.

The Mac uses a 4200rpm drive... the drive in the HP is a Momentus 5400.3 which is a 5400rpm drive that uses perpendicular recording and blows the doors of the minis drive.

The mini has got media center capabilities. Since we are comparing it to the mini...

Though the original conversation had nothing to do with software.... but since you lost that argument you dodge and evade.

PS/2 standard keyboard and mouse? How can ou think they are better than the mini's?

What makes you think the minis are better?

Mmm... Because you're installing it on a PC. And since you said you used an official Apple Tiger DVD, I asume you used one of the EFI emulators... right? That's still OSX86, mate

No, we did not use any EFI emulators. I guess any Intel based Mac is running OSX86 then, right?

The hardware in the HP is not better. It lacks a lot of things that the mini has!

whatever; you were wrong and you just can't admit it like a man.

cprofitt

February 16th, 2008, 01:41 AM

I recently spoke to a Firedog employee and he said that HPs and Compaqs are the ones with the most hardware problems. He's never had to fix an Acer yet due to hardware issues. Therefore, I think you should Acer another look.

With HP/Compaq they have consumer (crap) lines and business (excellent) lines. The HPs I have where I work have far less probems than the Dells we have. We do not have any Acers so I will take you at your word that they are of high quality despite Alfas protestations to the contrary.

JordanII

February 16th, 2008, 01:43 AM

cprofitt

February 16th, 2008, 01:55 AM

...snip...

Get your head out of the sand. Despite your waiving away the links I posted the fact is Apple has been and is being sued over anti-competitive practices. You dismiss it because you can't admit you are wrong.

Let me try this again since you seem to lack the ability to read.

link (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10428378)

European Union consumer chief Meglena Kuneva has hit out at Apple's bundling of its popular iPod music players and its iTunes online music store, according to German weekly magazine Focus.

That is a government official of the European Union sport not some yahoo hoping to make money off a frivolous lawsuit.

Do you think it's fine that a CD plays in all CD players but that an iTunes song only plays in an iPod? I don't. Something has to change," EU Consumer Protection Commissioner Kuneva was quoted as saying in a preview of an interview to be published later today.

The specific complaint is VENDOR LOCK IN.

Norway, a European country that is not in the EU, is battling Apple for the same reason. In January, it said the computer and software giant must liberalize its music download system by October 1 or face legal action.

OH, no another entire country that is telling Apple that it is practicing unfair business practices and that it must stop or face legal action.

Pressure on Apple has been building, with consumer rights organizations from Germany, France, Finland and Norway recently agreeing a joint position in their battles against iTunes.

Yet more groups from several countries in Europe.

Let me guess you will have everyone reading here believe that you are correct not millions of people represented by officials from several countries governments; right?

Give it a rest you are wrong... Apple uses anti-competitive business practices.

and for the final blow to your head-in-the-sand belief that they do not...

link (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-01/09/content_7389167.htm)

Apple is expected to settle an antitrust case filed by the European Commission concerning its iTunes online music store after the maker of the popular iPod media players conceded to certain changes.

The commission formally charged Apple in April 2007, alleging the U.S. company reached agreements with major record companies to restrict music sales, to the effect that consumers can only buy music from the iTunes' online store in their country of residence.

Those agreements containing territorial sales restrictions constitute restrictive business practices which are against EU rules, according to the commission.

Despite what you keep on saying it appears as though a great many other people think Apple uses restrictive business practices.

rudder

February 16th, 2008, 02:33 AM

Most people would get the mini... You know, OS X...

Now if most people would go with the mini, wouldn't Apple have a larger marketshare than it does?

kevcool

February 16th, 2008, 02:54 PM

Amazing the lengths to which you Apple zealots will go to argue that this is not expensive hardware - despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Apple is Britney Spears. And you fan boys are Chris Crocker.

angryfirelord

February 16th, 2008, 05:46 PM

With HP/Compaq they have consumer (crap) lines and business (excellent) lines. The HPs I have where I work have far less probems than the Dells we have. We do not have any Acers so I will take you at your word that they are of high quality despite Alfas protestations to the contrary.
That pretty much confirms what I was thinking. My uncle works with some of the HP Blade servers and he never said anything about hardware problems (and HP does provide some nice documentation for their products). Acer seems unknown to many people because they never advertise, but that works to their advantage because the revenue that would normally go into advertising can now go into better hardware.

But yeah, Dells are nothing but problems. The worst part is that it seems every school and university has one. I always see at least one Dell having problems.

darksidedude

February 16th, 2008, 08:04 PM

i don't know if someone brought this up yet but here goes:)
the price of an upgrade to other "pay per upgrade OS's" not counting Linux :guitar: OS X is at least 5x cheaper than windows, so any "Mac is more expensive" doesn't even matter because the upgrade cost, (xp to vista) well overshadows that initial "investment" one more fact, how many service packs will xp have b4 support ends, 3 maybe 4, how many did tiger have, a whopping 11

Alfa989

February 16th, 2008, 08:21 PM

Here was my actual statement:Here was your reply:
I said that you can't get mini-sized machines with better specs for less money. You said you can get mini-sized machines with better specs for less money. You still haven't shown any mini-sized PC with better specs for less money.

Did you miss the prices I posted? Clearly they were less than the Mac mini. Clearly their specs were very close and in some cases exceeded the minis. Clearly you are going to quibble about an inch here or the color of the case just so you don't have to admit that the mini really is not the technical marvel it was when first introduced.
As I always say, you've got to compare EVERY detail, it doesn't matter how small it is. Have you ever heard the sentence "It's small things that make up life's great moments"? And I'm not complaining about "Plus one ir minus one inches" or "Case colour" Both miniaturization (And R&D) and materials (Since I was comparing plastic to aluminium) have to be taken seriously...

So what is the RPM on the Mac Mini? Wait you just made another claim in ignorance - here ya go:
The Mac uses a 4200rpm drive... the drive in the HP is a Momentus 5400.3 which is a 5400rpm drive that uses perpendicular recording and blows the doors of the minis drive.
Get your facts straight, the mini has a 5400rpm drive. And perpendicular recoding provides more store per square inch (or per any other measurement unit), it has got nothing to do with performance, specially at the same rpm...

Though the original conversation had nothing to do with software.... but since you lost that argument you dodge and evade.
Of course, computers come with no software pre installed... Oh, wait!

What makes you think the minis are better?
Because they are USB, got a USB replicator on the back and have got better feeling than HP's standard keyboards.

No, we did not use any EFI emulators. I guess any Intel based Mac is running OSX86 then, right?
Then I guess you used magic, right? You either modified the install disk or used an EFI emulator, there's no other way with OSX86...

Alfa989

February 16th, 2008, 08:23 PM

Alfa989

February 16th, 2008, 08:32 PM

Let me try this again since you seem to lack the ability to read.
link (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10428378)
That is a government official of the European Union sport not some yahoo hoping to make money off a frivolous lawsuit. The specific complaint is VENDOR LOCK IN.
Hahaha! If they don't have any idea of what they are talking about, then obviously I don't think I'm gonna take it seriously... Vendor lock in? Lol, then the EU would have to fill a lawsuit against pretty much every other company on the world, haha

OH, no another entire country that is telling Apple that it is practicing unfair business practices and that it must stop or face legal action.
Same as before

Yet more groups from several countries in Europe.
Same as before

Let me guess you will have everyone reading here believe that you are correct not millions of people represented by officials from several countries governments; right?
Lol, since when politicians represent people? Cause in modern democracy they don't.

Despite what you keep on saying it appears as though a great many other people think Apple uses restrictive business practices.
Same as first... If you think that iPod + iTunes has got anything to do with "restrictive business practices then you're a hypocrite.

Because, you know, I don't see anyone suing Microsoft because their WM + Outlook integration...