backtop


Print 303 comment(s) - last by sprockkets.. on Feb 12 at 11:24 PM


“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” - Bill Gates on the Mac ads
Bill Gates takes exception to Apple's "lying" ads

With the launch of Windows Vista, Bill Gates is giving it the proverbial ‘one hundred and ten percent’ in explaining to everyone in the world why they should care about the new operating system.

In response to analyst speculation that Windows Vista could be the last Microsoft operating system of its kind, as we know it, Gates replies to Newsweek, “Well, people have said that at every major Windows release. Java was going to eliminate Windows programming, or thin clients were going to eliminate people buying PCs.”

The Microsoft chairman says that operating systems keep getting better and richer and that there are no shortages of radical things that will be happening in the next release. When asked if Microsoft will be back with a new OS in 2010-2011, Gates was confident enough to say, “Absolutely.”

Gates said that the next version of Windows “will be more user-centric,” meaning that users should be able to move from PC to PC, whether or not it is their own, and still be able to access much of their own information by using Live Services, regardless of where they are. “So even if you drop by a [public] kiosk or somebody else's PC, we can bring down your home page, your files, your fonts, your favorites and those things.”

“In Vista things got a lot better with [digital] ink and speech but by the next release there will be a much bigger bet,” Gates predicted. “Students won't need textbooks, they can just use these tablet devices.”

“Parallel computing is pretty important for the next release. We'll make it so that a lot of the high-level graphics will be just built into the operating system. So we've got a pretty good outline,” he said.

Coming back to the present, one of the big advantages that Windows Vista provides is a platform for users to jump to for getting instantly caught up on a lot of new technology and security features. Although some of the improvements in Vista can already be found in downloadable updates for Windows XP, the majority of users do not take advantage of added features through Windows Update.

Take, for example, Internet Explorer 7, which is offered to all Windows XP users as an optional update. According to Gates, less than a third of Windows XP users downloaded the new browser, and even less take advantage of less advertised new additions. So how many people have upgraded to IE7? “I would say it's less than 30 percent,” Gates replied. “We’ve had this incredible desktop search [available for download] that won every review, and I’ll bet that less than 10 percent of Windows users went and got that. Now with Windows Vista, you get something better. For most users, it’s the first time they’ve seen it at all.”

With Windows Vista, Microsoft expects that the “wow starts now,” as stated by one of its advertising slogans. But in early January, one of the new Apple TV ads pushing the apparent social-cool factor of a Mac depicted poor “PC” as having to undergo surgery just to upgrade to Windows Vista (see the commercial here). While Bill Gates admits that he hasn’t seen that particular ad, he’s taking exception to the depiction of the PC. “I don't think the over 90 percent of the [population] who use Windows PCs think of themselves as dullards, or the kind of klutzes that somebody is trying to say they are,” he said.

“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” Gates continues to express his disgust with the Apple ads: “Does honesty matter in these things, or if you're really cool, that means you get to be a lying person whenever you feel like it? There's not even the slightest shred of truth to it.”



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

well....
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 9:53:05 AM , Rating: 5
It makes sense. Apple has a competing platform, and that platform has a very very small percentage of the market. Appx 3% worldwide. Of course their ads are geared to make people want to switch. If you switch based on an ad like that, with no demo of the actual OS and what it can or cannot do, then you might be a redneck. Seriously, who buy a computer based on an ad with 2 guys standing in a room?




RE: well....
By Misty Dingos on 2/2/2007 10:02:13 AM , Rating: 5
Sadly many people think that owning an Apple is a sign of intellectual superiority. I don't think that is the case at all. I think that people who own Apples are saying, whether they want to or not, that owning an Apple says that what the computer does is not nearly as important as the social statement being made. e.g. "I am smarter that a PC owner because I own an Apple." Or "I am more creative than a PC owner because I own an Apple." Or the worse yet. "I am not a lackey of the corporate giants because I own an Apple." The ugly truth is that Apples are a closed standard and because of that they will never be anything more than a novelty computer.


RE: well....
By DeepThought86 on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 10:24:18 AM , Rating: 5
No-one that actually knows both platforms thinks that owning an Apple is a sign of intellectual superiority. Perhaps there are some underinformed consumers out there that might think that. And that is what Apple prey's on with thier ads. Oh well, buyer beware.

"The ugly truth is that Apples are a closed standard and because of that they will never be anything more than a novelty computer."

Very very true

Just picture in your mind how stupid the average person is... Now think, half of everyone is stupider than that guy! - George Carlin


RE: well....
By DEredita on 2/2/2007 10:36:04 AM , Rating: 5
While I am a Mac user, I also use Windows too. I am not a fan (yet) of Vista - I do like XP Pro. I have thought of getting a Mac Pro as my main system - but it's a Windows world out there. I reserve my Mac use to my Macbook (and Mini - which btw is grossly outdated and stupid expensive).

See there are Mac users out there that aren't Elitist. LOL


.


RE: well....
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 11:55:08 AM , Rating: 1
Well said. =)

Of course there are. I would wager most of them are't elitist, and are perfectly normal people like you and I. giggetty giggety giggetty goo. ;)


RE: well....
By gspot2016 on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By klutzak on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 9:42:00 PM , Rating: 5
Like the mac guy, you have your facts wrong, your reality backwards, and your head up your ass. In addition, you think you are superior and that everyone is impressed. But instead, we all stare at you, and like Bill Gates said, we wonder WTF you're talking about, because nothing you say has any relationship to reality. What you think will attract us to you, actually makes us really dislike you.

You sum up perfectly what the rest of the world can't stand about "mac people." In fact, you are the mac guy, aren't you?


RE: well....
By gt1911 on 2/3/2007 5:14:56 AM , Rating: 2
Amen!


RE: well....
By retrospooty on 2/4/2007 10:11:18 AM , Rating: 2
I second that. =)


RE: well....
By ScythedBlade on 2/3/2007 6:29:07 PM , Rating: 3
And Bill isn't some dumbass, that's for sure ... I don't think an idiot would be able to make it to be the richest person in the world ...


RE: well....
By Sasuke on 2/5/2007 4:51:23 AM , Rating: 3
would think a dumbass could become president either ;)

*although gates aint dumb

So can you play the latest games on a mac like dx10 ones when they come out or most current games, cause thats te big deciding factor for me ,and well yeah w00t pc cheaper great thats just icing on the cake really isnt it


RE: well....
By imattrix on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By Yawgm0th on 2/3/2007 4:01:34 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Do you guys even know the meaning of the word proprietary? Doesn't seem like it. Mac's are far more tolerant of true open standards; just not the M$ proprietary standards that M$ has forced on you. You think Explorer, Exchange, Active X, etc. are closer to open standards than the BSD underpinings of Mac OS X? You think WMV is more open than MP4? WMA is more open than ACC? man, visit a newsgroup once in a while, dorks.


Explorer, Exchange, Active X and BSD have nothing to do with open standards. Explorer is a shell, and there is no "open standard" shell. There are open source shells out there, but that certainly has nothing to do with the highly-proprietary OSX shell. Exchange is an email system based on POP3 and SMTP, and is every bit as "standard" as any other email system. Active X is simply a browser plugin that provides additional functionality for Windows users, although it admittedly is the source of more problems than it is worth.

Is .Mov somehow less proprietary than WMV? Is anything less proprietary than iTunes? Do you really think Windows somehow doesn't support AAC or MP4, or that Mac somehow "embraces" them more?

quote:
Our workforce is about 10% Mac, so there are thousands of Macs on our network. Our IT department doesn't even have to support them. Yet every single PC user that I know at my job has had to have his PC re-imaged, or repaired by IT for software corruption, installation breakdowns, and of course, occasional Malware within the last 3 years. This is all since XP was supposed to fix the problems with 2000, and 95 before that.


Hold on, are you at such a high level in your company that you have intricate knowledge of what the IT department does and doesn't have to support and how often it does? In any case, I'm sure it doesn't have to support them since they probably don't have the same level of interoperability as the Windows computers, so there's much less room for problems. Certainly though, Windows is more vulnerable for an inept user than Mac. But you can't fix ineptitude with software, and such people will inevitably have problems on Macs just as much as they will on PCs.

quote:
PC's are the prevailing platform for business because they are not just cheaper, but cheap period. It doesn't necessarily make you dumb to buy the cheapest crap on the market, but it doesn't make you a genius, either.

PCs are the prevailing platform for business because they work. They have a level of network functionality that Macs simply can't achieve. Try engineering and supporting a Mac network based on Novell or just Samba, and then try using Active Directory. It's a night-and-day difference with ease of use, functionality, and reliability.

I work at an electronics company with about an 85% PC customer base, but about 50% of our support calls are from Mac users. About 80% of our support calls that last more than ten minutes are from Mac users. The software we use is identical for OSX and XP, so how come a higher percentage of Mac users call? Because the majority of Mac users are morons. They don't know how to use a computer, and simply don't have the aptitude to learn adequately. So they go for Mac, which is supposed to "just work" and have superior ease of use. I guess Macs aren't that bad for grandma and grandpa or anyone so inclined to remain CSL, but for anyone who isn't dumb, Windows offers so much more, for so much less.


RE: well....
By little jon on 2/5/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By Obujuwami on 2/5/2007 9:18:12 PM , Rating: 3
Wow, im fairly insulted.

I own my own IT company and we have to support both MS and Apple OS platforms on a daily basis. I like OS X, its nice and things are easy to find but i agree with what alot of people have said, its not better or worse than XP, it's different.

When you compare cars, you don't compare a Honda Civic to an Austin Martin DB7. You compare a Civic to a Toyota Camery or Ford 500 and an Austim Martin to a Jaguar. With that said, people comparing XP and OS X are those who are comparing apples to blueberries (no pun intended).

OS X has its place in the world and so does XP and Vista. MS has the business side of things covered. Apple has the art side of things covered. Neither OS is infalible and I say that with alot of experience under my belt. Linux isnt even infalable and I got a employee that will verify that.

Personally, I prefer XP over Vista and OS X. Not because I am a "sheep" or an "M$ Fan Boy" but because most business use Microsoft products to get through thier daily grind.


RE: well....
By WhiteBoyFunk on 2/5/2007 2:12:32 PM , Rating: 1
Not like I agree with much (or any) of what klutz is saying, but I think he has some valid points and speaks intelligently. All the MS lovers just rated him down. Klutz, good points and good diction, but I feel that your tone is just a tad hostile. Relax.


RE: well....
By BirdDad on 2/5/2007 5:03:23 PM , Rating: 1
who is talking about wmv?the point is that Cr*pintosh users are idiots.
This is so true.My one experience with a Mac user was like this-he would come into work blabbing about how great Mac is and Mac had this and that first(in many cases he was flat out wrong,the Amiga had most of the stuff he was saying first)and how it never crashes and the OS is so stable.He brought his "computer" to work many times and everytime it was "Wait a minute watch this" then it would crash on him,three boots later what was he doing?He was running virtual PC(very slowly)AND Windows in order to play any real games(and then it would be old games because the emulation was so slow)
It must have crashed twenty times before I just said "I need to get the **** out of here good luck with your G5 or whatever the number is"


RE: well....
By BirdDad on 2/10/2007 8:58:44 AM , Rating: 2
Apple is so open you can copy your ipod
last I checked you had to use a third pary software and you can't use the ipod as a harddrive as it states in the user manual you can


RE: well....
By Funkmeister on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 10:09:56 PM , Rating: 5
You mean, a little $10M project, compared to the other TRILLIONS of dollars of the global economy that runs on Windows? LOL. You mac advocates just can't think big enough.


RE: well....
By Funkmeister on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By nurbsenvi on 2/3/2007 12:08:34 PM , Rating: 2
If I had $10 million...
I will buy the best rig in the world and stick around Daily tech all day long...

I know I'm a sad soul sniff::


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/3/2007 9:06:46 PM , Rating: 2
Well, my point is that OS X is not the only operating system that is involved in hi-reliability work. Lots of businesses rely on Windows all the time. And in the world of government projects, a $10M project is pretty small, right?

I'm neither a windows "apologist" (what is there to "apologize" for?), nor a mac hater. Frankly, I don't care either way; I just don't like seeing the debate made with incorrect facts and bad logic (not referring to your posts personally).


RE: well....
By bobdelt on 2/3/2007 10:40:29 PM , Rating: 3
Youre the same type of fanboi that probably thought intel cpus suck, and power pc was better. Now what do you have running your mac?


RE: well....
By little jon on 2/5/2007 1:05:50 PM , Rating: 2
If you're comparing Intels previous architecture, the Netburst to the PPC then yes, the Netburst sucks, but the Conroe architecture is something totaly different. The most - if not all - mac users I know (I know very few unfortunately) don't see the world b/w only, is that what you wanted to sad? They and I have chosen the Mac platform after precise research and a very good personal experience considering all the possibilities including intel pcs and the mac came out as the best choice for me. Let me ask you something: Have you even tried it?
BTW yeah, linux is great but kinda difficult to set up.

(I use the 2001 iMac G3 PPC@400MHz, 256MB RAM, I play divx fluently, run word, excel, photoshop and listen to the music simultaneously. And I use the latest Mac OS 10.4 Tiger. Try doing that on a PC with same cpu clock and memory running Windows XP. I did and when I started opera the music started skipping, that kind of pissed me off)
And sorry for my terrible english again.


RE: well....
By Cincybeck on 2/6/2007 4:05:36 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
(I use the 2001 iMac G3 PPC@400MHz, 256MB RAM, I play divx fluently, run word, excel, photoshop and listen to the music simultaneously. And I use the latest Mac OS 10.4 Tiger. Try doing that on a PC with same cpu clock and memory running Windows XP. I did and when I started opera the music started skipping, that kind of pissed me off)


That's not even like comparing apples to oranges. More like comparing apples to olives. PowerPC is of RISC design, which is superscalar so of course it is going to be able to do a lot more at only 400MHZ. Later on though it proved to be a big problem for Apple as due to manufacturing issues both the G3 and G4 were delayed and again with 64-bit G5. They weren't able to stay competitive to x86 based designs.
quote:
In 2005 Apple announced they would no longer use PowerPC processors in their Apple Macintosh computers, favoring Intel produced processors instead, citing the performance limitations of the chip for future personal computer hardware specifically related to heat generation and energy usage in future products, as well as the inability of IBM to move the 970 (PowerPC G5) processor to the 3 GHz range.
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC

I think that goes to show that while parallel computing can be good it definitely has it's limitations.


RE: well....
By Accord99 on 2/6/2007 5:04:51 AM , Rating: 4
(I use the 2001 iMac G3 PPC@400MHz, 256MB RAM, I play divx fluently, run word, excel, photoshop and listen to the music simultaneously. And I use the latest Mac OS 10.4 Tiger. Try doing that on a PC with same cpu clock and memory running Windows XP. I did and when I started opera the music started skipping, that kind of pissed me off)
And sorry for my terrible english again.


A 400Mhz G4 with only 256MB? OS X is smooth only if you never turn it on, otherwise it's going to be slow as molasses and swapping like crazy...

and that's even before you log in.

Certainly XP would run a lot better on ancient machine P2 400Mhz than OS X would.


RE: well....
By AzureKevin on 2/3/2007 11:41:33 AM , Rating: 2
George Carlin is the man. Well quoted.


RE: well....
By PenGun on 2/4/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By marvdmartian on 2/2/2007 11:11:47 AM , Rating: 5
I wouldn't say intellectual superiority, so much as intellectual snobbery.

The funny thing is, there's a perfectly good counterpoint to any claims made on Apple's behalf, in their commercials!
1. Apples come with all these built in peripherals (webcam, etc)--okay, which is partly because so few companies make Apple compatible products, versus PC compatible. Add to that the idea that with PC, you're not stuck using the peripheral that came with the machine, you can pick & choose what's right for you, and it's highly likely (though I admit I haven't priced it out) that a middle of the road PC with all the add-on peripherals that an Apple comes with STILL costs less!
2. Apples come with all this cool software already installed. Gee, could that have something to do with the fact that no one was writing software for Apples, as compared to what's written for PC's?? So much so that Apple in fact had to come up with a Windows emulation program, just so that Apple users could use PC-based software that wasn't available on an Apple??? While I applaud the folks at Apple for finally figuring out that if they wanted cool apps, they were going to have to write them themselves, the argument that Apples are so much cooler because of it just doesn't wash!

I'm sure there's more, that's just two to start with.... :)

If Apple truly wants to capture a significant market share, they only have to do one thing. Bring the price of your machines down to where they're competitive with PC's. Let's face it, if you're an average blue-collar parent, with kid or kids harping about wanting their own computer, are you going to pony up thousands of dollars for your own machine, then thousands more for one for your kids? Or are you going to find a pc for (oftentimes) less than $500 to give them to use?? Bottom line, if I can buy one Apple for $2500, or 3 above average PC's for the same price, then Apple isn't getting my business!


RE: well....
By AlexWade on 2/2/2007 11:46:38 AM , Rating: 5
I really believe the two thing that can make Mac big is if they allow OS X to be installed on home built computers and they make something as good or better than DirectX. Those two things hold Macs down.


RE: well....
By stromgald on 2/2/2007 12:03:07 PM , Rating: 2
I think their price and the proprietary, non-standard internal structure of their computers hold them down alot too. Those are the two main reasons that I think companies don't adopt Macs. The weird locations for RAM, PSUs, CPUs, hard drives and other components inside a Mac that changes from one Mac model makes it impossible for an IT department to work with it. The cost/performance ratio doesn't help either, and I certainly agree with you on the OS X limitation.

The main reason I'm talking about business adoption is because that's how PCs became so popular in the first place. Businesses adopted it, so naturally people wanted their home computers to look and feel the same (software wise), so they also went out and bought PCs. If Apple decided to build business versions of Macs with a standardrized interior and allowed IT departments more flexiblity with installing OS X themselves . . . well, let's just say I'd be putting some money into Apple stock.


RE: well....
By kerpwnt on 2/2/2007 1:32:37 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, the extremely proprietary nature holds Apple down, but it is this same aspect that keeps them "secure, crash-free, and cool." If Apple tried to support the rest of the hardware world, they would run into the same customer-confusing flaws that everybody loves to hate Microsoft for. There is no way Apple would/could spend the amount of resources it would take to ensure that every driver for every piece of hardware on the market interacted perfectly with their OS. By having such constricted hardware and software support, they can ensure all the qualities they love to boast about.

Just remember, they aren't a computer company. They make iPods and iPod peripherals they call "Macs." Just kidding guys. Macs aren't that bad, though I wouldn't buy one until I could get the usability I need out of one. They are decent machines and, at the very least, they pass the "would you give your mom one" test.


RE: well....
By Lakku on 2/2/2007 5:49:40 PM , Rating: 2
http://projects.info-pull.com/moab/

I don't think it is any more secure, it's just few try to exploit it because so few people around the world use it. I have had my Powerbook crash/freeze during normal operation on several occasions, and I have installed very little on it outside of what comes from Apple (photoshop is one program that doesn't always play nice).


RE: well....
By Felofasofa on 2/2/2007 6:58:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They make iPods and iPod peripherals they call "Macs."


That says it all, most of their revenue comes from a little music box, must be gutting to the engineers who actually design their "computers". They are fortunate to have an installed base that love being told to "bend over take it in the rear, because that's the way you like it" as Apple continually shafts their customers with their platform ping-pong. A novelty? well on the way to total irrelevance I would say.


RE: well....
By gspot2016 on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By RussianSensation on 2/2/2007 1:20:19 PM , Rating: 5
How about we get back to reality?

Dell Inspiron E1405 laptop:

Core 2 Duo 2.0ghz
Vista Home Premium
14.1 inch WXGA+ UltraShaprt Display
1GB DDR667mhz Dual channel ram (although it would be wise to get 533mhz and save another $50)
120GB hard drive
8x CD/DVD burner
Price: $1,214 or $1,164 with DDR533

VS.

MacBook with
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x512
120GB Serial ATA drive @ 5400 rpm
Superdrive 6x (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
AirPort Extreme Card & Bluetooth
Price: $1,499

Ok so you are saying Bluetooth and firewire are worth a 23% premium? Let's not forget coupons and sales at Dell every other month.


RE: well....
By sprockkets on 2/2/2007 1:55:40 PM , Rating: 5
How is it that apply justifies a $2800 dollar laptop?

Well, it does come with a case (WOW!)

The power cable is smart...

But all it is is a pearl white Asus Laptop with an extra $800 tacked on for bitten off apple logo


RE: well....
By McSporran on 2/2/2007 4:22:16 PM , Rating: 3
I was curious about this so I went through the many hoops for customizing a Dell. The process is a right pain in the rear. Apple's is significantly easier, albeit less flexible. Still, I wouldn't want all the bundled crap Dell pushes anyway...

Anyway, I got $1321 (Dell) vs $1449 (MacBook), getting the two systems as close as possible, both being BTO using your original specs above as a guide.

So, for 10% more you get a smaller, lighter system that also has a built-in webcam, a better power connector design (I've had too many laptops break there) and a slightly higher battery capacity (~5%). Many people will prefer the aesthetics of the MacBook, too. The Dell ain't exactly pretty...

Hardly wildly more expensive, especially considering Apple's reputation. It comes to what, ~8% more for a slightly better-specced machine. For those that prefer OS X, that's not exactly going to be a dealbreaker...

Oh, and let's not forget Apple's refurbs can often be had at a significant discount, too...

For the record, I don't own a Mac, I've never owned a Mac, and my desktop systems are XP Home/Pro. Hell, I don't even own an iPod.


RE: well....
By ogreslayer on 2/2/2007 1:43:33 PM , Rating: 4
If you compare a Quad-Core XPS710($3,479 w/8800GTX) to a dual dual-core Mac Pro($2,968.00 w/ X1900XT) its a yeah, barely though if you take into account performance. Then if you look at the quad-core Precision 390($2,528 w/Quadro NVS 285) there is a $440 difference in favor of Dell. Enough to fill that PCI-E16x slot with a 8800GTS. And thats w/ the 16x DVD burner. Sure no webcam or bluetooth but who cares, and even if the system doesn't have firewire so what a IEEE1394... a card for the 390 is like $30, and the 710 doesn't need it.

No, its not that ridiculous 500-600 you would pay for G4s but its still higher if you shop around. Oh, and add in the 20" widescreen monitors and the XPS hits only $100 more than the Apple...


RE: well....
By TheDoc9 on 2/2/2007 5:43:51 PM , Rating: 5
I don't know what is true on these boards in reguard to the pricing, but if the apples have gotten that much in line with pc's I'd be very surprised. I remimber the days 10-20 years ago, when you would pay 50-100% more for a machine from apple that did 50-100% less. Maybe that's changed? I don't know, I still wouldn't get one just because of the damn one button mouse.


RE: well....
By Lakku on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By rmaharaj on 2/3/2007 9:53:11 PM , Rating: 4
And how about when you want to use the touchpad on your Apple laptop?

The fact remains that you need to jump through hoops to get the same mouse functionality on a Mac than you get on a PC.


RE: well....
By mn98 on 2/4/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By McSporran on 2/2/2007 6:53:10 PM , Rating: 2
Many now come with Apple's "Might mouse" as standard, I believe. It's the one with no "buttons" but touch sensitive areas, and emulates at least two buttons.

I've used one briefly, I didn't really like it, but perhaps in time one would get used to and prefer it *shrug*.

I know you can just plug a regular USB mouse into a Mac tho' -- which leads to the irony of people using MS mice (and keyboards) on Apple hardware.


RE: well....
By senbassador on 2/3/2007 9:50:33 PM , Rating: 5
Well actually these days you only pay 20% more for Macs that do only 5% less. So yeah, things have changed.


RE: well....
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 1:40:54 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
2. Apples come with all this cool software already installed.


Strange, isn't it, that Microsoft gets sued for that?


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 2:00:38 PM , Rating: 3
Another interesting one, I think, is how apple claims to be a hardware company and then they launch an ad campaign against a software company.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 2:05:35 PM , Rating: 1
Yea, that is interesting. I worked for a company once that called itself a "hardware" company. I told them that customers don't buy hardware, they buy solutions to their problems. Calling yourself a "hardware" company is just an excuse for limiting yourself as to what areas you're willing to work in to meet customer needs. It's a self-imposed limitation.

Apple is smart in this way - they will go into whatever area they feel they need to. They really aren't a hardware company any more than Microsoft is a software company. These labels may represent their core strengths, but they do not limit the domains of their offerings.


RE: well....
By FITCamaro on 2/2/2007 3:16:11 PM , Rating: 2
Best comment here.

Microsoft gets sued for including stuff in. Mac does the same thing, boasts about it, and people applaud them.

With both, if you don't like whats included, you can just not use it.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 4:31:01 PM , Rating: 2
I would argue that greater market share does not constitute a monopoly. Moreover, even if it IS a monopoly, it isnt a coercive monopoly because there are FREE alternatives.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 4:41:36 PM , Rating: 3
From the article I linked above:

Judge Jackson issued his findings of fact on November 5, 1999, which stated that Microsoft's dominance of the personal computer operating systems market constituted a monopoly

Also, Microsoft has like 90-95% of market share, not just greater market share.

But I agree with your idea, that alternatives exist, and no customer is forced to purchase Windows. Therefore it is a "monopoly of choice" if that makes any difference.


RE: well....
By Locutus465 on 2/2/2007 8:13:19 PM , Rating: 2
Of course in reality microsoft offered a free web-browser that was better than anything the compition had (Netscape Communicator), which incedently you had to pay for. I think the turn to Mozilla has proved that customers will use the product they persive to be better even if there happens to be something bundled with the OS.


RE: well....
By McSporran on 2/2/2007 8:22:29 PM , Rating: 2
The vast majority will use what is shipped with the computer.

That IE6 stagnated for several years, had numerous major security issues, yet Firefox barely broke a 10% market is pretty demonstrative.


RE: well....
By Locutus465 on 2/3/2007 12:13:18 AM , Rating: 2
No... If IE had sucked at the time like Netscape (or worse) just integrating it into the OS would not have been good enough. People use what their "computer people" tell them they should be using (whether it be someone in IT or the kid down the street).

At the time IE was the best, most innovative and standards complient browser on the block... Then, as you point out it stagnated and lost market share and would have continued to do so till it's demise if MS haddn't stepped up with IE7... Now there's actually competition again so who knows what will happen.


RE: well....
By DOSGuy on 2/2/2007 12:49:44 PM , Rating: 5
I agree that they're trying to say that intellectuals use Macs. Well, I'm an intellectual. I'm a member of Mensa, in fact. I don't own a Mac. When it's time to upgrade, or to get a new computer, I pick the parts I want, find the lowest prices, and I build it myself. When Apple decides to court intellectuals and the computer-savvy by letting us build our own Macs, maybe I'll consider switching.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 1:01:56 PM , Rating: 5
Sorry, you won't have the opportunity to built your own Mac, because you might be tempted to put in non-Apple components, and surely that cannot be tolerated.


RE: well....
By VooDooAddict on 2/2/2007 6:03:39 PM , Rating: 2
(Disclaimer - I don't own one)

They only sell hardware they have certified for use with the software. In theory, this helps limit hardware driver conflicts and enables more optimizations at lower levels of the OS. To a degree this has worked well for them. It also limits the range of support issues.

Microsoft has come a long way in this area thanks to driver certification.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 6:14:29 PM , Rating: 1
I agree. Microsoft realized a while ago that most of the problems with Windows crashing were related to faulty third-party device drivers, faulty applications, and faulty hardware, none of which are of course under Microsoft's direct control. But of course to the end-user, these types of problems are otherwise indistinguishable from "Windows crashes." So their actions were to, change the wording of dialog boxes indicating when your application crashed (circa Win98, IIRC), driver certification (as you pointed out), and more built-in hardware diagnostics (Vista and Office 2007).

Also, I find it interesting that Vista ships with around 20,000 device drivers. I wonder what the same indicator for OS X is?


RE: well....
By zsouthboy on 2/2/2007 2:50:19 PM , Rating: 2
Marketing

I don't know if the "insult your target demographic" thing is working out for Apple though RE: computers.

Then again, I work in marketing. What the hell do I know?:)

I don't want Apple to disappear, though. I wish they'd just license OSX and be done with it.


RE: well....
By dkos on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By Bluestealth on 2/3/2007 11:32:49 AM , Rating: 5
Extending on your car analogy, Macs can access all the major highways but can only enter a few small towns. Whereas PCs can access all the major highways but can also access many more towns and cities, but cannot enter many of the towns the Mac can.

I am a Windows/Linux user, and I absolutely hate Macs, mostly because of their refusal to join the rest of computers and get 2 "real" mouse buttons. I was actually thinking of getting a Mac Book except for the fact that I couldn't see paying money for a computer with 1 mouse button or a broadcom wireless chipset. They are pretty price competitive nowadays.


RE: well....
By trupti on 2/3/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By senbassador on 2/3/2007 9:34:29 PM , Rating: 5
Did you know that Apple computers are the leading cause of smug?


RE: well....
By macgabriel87 on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By shamgar03 on 2/2/2007 11:14:15 AM , Rating: 2
You do realize that for every ilife, every iwork, every mac app there are 100 apps that do the same thing on PC. Do you really think that out of the 100 applications that are equivalent to the mac versions none of them are better? And how about this? Linux has even more software that is free. I fail to see how using a computer that is incompatible with 90% of the computers on the planet makes you a better computer user.


RE: well....
By theapparition on 2/2/2007 12:19:03 PM , Rating: 2
How dare you say that Macs are incompatible with 90% of computers. That statement is completely false and outrageous.........

It should be more like 99%

I just couldn't resist.

In all serious though, that is probably more accurate, because the 3% market share apple enjoys now is for shipping DESKTOPS only. Add in workstations, servers, and legacy hardware in the WORLD, and I'd bet the farm its less than 1%


RE: well....
By djcameron on 2/2/2007 11:24:26 AM , Rating: 1
But much of the built-in software is not superior, take iPhoto for example... hideous.


RE: well....
By JCheng on 2/2/2007 11:28:37 AM , Rating: 5
(disclosure: I'm a Microsoft employee)

Office 2007 >> iWork
Picasa >> iPhoto
iWeb sucks

iMovie is great, iTunes of course is great (available for Windows too though), I don't know about iDVD or GarageBand (the latter of which I have zero use for).

There's plenty of apps on Windows that are better than anything on Mac. Vista's Media Center is just awesome, Apple has a looong way to go to catch up there. Tons of games and peripherals are Windows exclusive. If you blog, check out the app I work on, Windows Live Writer.


RE: well....
By ZeeStorm on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 12:49:21 PM , Rating: 4
I don't see where the OP said Microsoft was responsible for Picasa. I also don't see where the OP said that Windows Photo is better or worse than anything.
quote:
Watch the next OS require a specific built PC and only XXX gfx card, XXX ram, and XXX kinds of HDD's.

No, that's what Apple does, not Microsoft. You can use any hardware with Vista.
quote:
If it wasn't for the fact that our government is so tightly wrapped about your finger (I work for the government and IS dept), then MS would surely lose a great deal of market value. Let alone more anti-trust and monopoly accusations.

Having a monopoly is not against the law. It's only when you do certain things with it that it becomes illegal. For example, the local cable company has a government-created monopoly, and I don't see anybody upset about that.
quote:
Apple does NOT have a long way to catch up

Oh, really? You mean you expect Apple to go from 3% to Microsoft's current >90% in how many years? Seems like they have a long way to go.

Finally, I don't see why you have to jump down the throat, just because the OP is a Microsoft employee. You obviously have anger issues with Microsoft, but I doubt this person has anything to do with your problems.


RE: well....
By ZeeStorm on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By ZeeStorm on 2/2/2007 2:39:10 PM , Rating: 2
Disregard my views on Picasa, it was totally irrelevent.

Anyways, I appreciate your replies. You gave much more thoughts than I wanted to give the initial OP, thanks :)

The idea of copying Apple wasn't regarding the fact that Microsoft made Zune (to the other comment BELOW this one, I wasn't referring to Windows at all -- sorry if I didn't make that clear enough), it was the way they marketed it. I don't own an iPod nor a Zune. My reasons behind it where in regards to an article I read from a MS employee that bashed Apple for their iPod and talked about how Zune will steal all of it's market share just because it has the MS name on it (which, in some cases, could probably happen).

As for the pro-employer piece, it makes sense essentially. I don't know many people that worked at a company they simply *hated*. However, I wouldn't say I necessarily agree with the stances of the managers at my job (and will voice my opinion to them), I respect the work they have to deal with.

I was wrong to say that the majority of MS employees are like the few articles and blogs that I HAVE read, however I will do some more reading on the URL you have provided. Maybe I came off a bit too much anti-MS.

Again, thanks for the argument, it was thoroughly enjoyed. :D

P.S. To the idiots who -1'd my comments, screw you fan boys, accept another opinion.


RE: well....
By aos007 on 2/2/2007 3:20:59 PM , Rating: 2
[quote]After all, they don't have a brainwashing or electric shock therapy session when they start there that renders them thoughtless. [/quote]

Actually they do. By all accounts, Microsoft working environment was like a cult, at least it was several years ago. I remember reading multiple articles about this. Microsoft is definitely an environment where people really believe in what they are doing, for better or worse. Just last year there were articles about Microsoft employees not daring bringing iPods to work. I cannot imagine a normal company dictating the private life of their employees to such an extent. I worked for a big telecom and I had no qualms about using a competitor's cell phone.

As for not working for a company you hate, I used to work for many years for a big company where employeee satisfaction in certain departments was only 30-40%. Most people don't have much choice - you have to work to put food on table, and the fact that you don't like your employer and their products, while probably not healthy in long term, does not alone make you quit them.


RE: well....
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 3:55:37 PM , Rating: 1
And we all know that if its in print, its true.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By DarkIntegral on 2/2/2007 2:18:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As with most MS employees, they will never compliment opposition, even when they KNOW that they copied off a company because they made a successful product.


I so sick of this being the reason people are negative towards m$

Does one complain when company A releases the first blue ray player and company B releases a similar product 2 months later? Does anyone complain that company A releases the first portable video player and company B release a similar product 4 months later? NO

Then why does everyone complain about similar products in software (and specifically features of os's)

M$ is a company and if they want people to use windows they will continue to offer the features that they see that people want. No different than all of the other similar products on the market. Products that are *implemented differently*, created in the companies view of the customers needs to achieve the same end function.

When making purchases of similar products what do you look at? You look at what sets them apart. I use windows because i game (although i run solars on my laptop as there is certain features i need for school) and Gaming is a feature that i cannot get anywhere else. This is a difference that draws me to windows. For every *good* file system/ gui /search bar / app /........ that m$ "steals" from competition (when in fact its not stealing as they write it) that they implement, that is just one more thing that creates similarity between windows and other OS's and one less thing that can define and draw users to the others.

There are thousands of mp3 player and it is not a company's job to create a device with 100% new features it is a company's job to make a device people want to use. in a similar manner It is not m$'s job to *invent every desktop OS feature its there job to give customers the features they want. You cannot ask ANY company to reinvent the wheel for every aspect of every product.

ps
No disrespect to ZeeStorm this inst pointed at you just vented frustration /end rant


RE: well....
By Garreye on 2/2/2007 4:40:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I said that Microsoft will end up turning into Apple if they continue (being as, Apple forces you to use their specific hardware, etc.)

I don't see where you're getting this from Vista is great for supporting various pieces of hardware, even out of the box. When I installed it every single piece of hardware I have had drivers installed without me doing a thing. That's more than I can say for XP. All the drivers may not be bug free, but the only way to get close to that is to have controlled hardware like Apple does. From what I've read it sounds like MS is putting their driver signing program which should help decrease driver bugs...Also the OS is brand new so drivers should get better over time...
quote:
As with most MS employees, they will never compliment opposition, even when they KNOW that they copied off a company because they made a successful product...and as such, a one-track mind to pro-MS only.

The MS guy said:
quote:
Picasa >> iPhoto

and
quote:
iMovie is great, iTunes of course is great

how do you figure he's not complimenting the opposition?

From your earlier comment:
quote:
Google has you beat, get over it. If you start making more allies instead of enemies, then there might a future to your "next-gen" OS. Now you're just trying to monopolize every market that deals with your software like Mac has done.

So MS should just give up on their software, because Google's is better? I think it's great that companies are improving there software due to competition. Especially in this case as MS is improving the tools they bundle with windows so people that buy window get more value out of the box. If you don't like the bundled MS software then use something else, simple as that. As for Apple monopolizing there software, don't a lot of Mac enthusiast claim thats one of the things that make Mac's so good?


RE: well....
By ZeeStorm on 2/2/2007 8:04:07 PM , Rating: 1
I never once claimed to have LIKED what Apple has done. Please read my response to TomZ above these. I do with the "N" versions of a better installation plan of Vista, etc. was more publicly released. I, for one, never use Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer, nor MSN Messenger, just to name a few. It shouldn't come preinstalled with those (or at least, give you the option for others, or none at all). Shrugs, oh well, we're all "into" MS and will have to accept what we get. :P


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: well....
By stromgald on 2/2/2007 4:00:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As with most MS employees, they will never compliment opposition, even when they KNOW that they copied off a company because they made a successful product.

You do realize that Apple copied many features from Microsoft for OS X. With several of these features, Macs have even accused Microsoft of copying because they got the feature into the baseline of an operating system first. IIRC, most of these features were patches of XP and were not overtly advertisied. Nevertheless, it had Apple jumping up and down that M$ was copying, and they're better because they got there first.
quote:
I haven't used the other mentioned, but I think as time progresses and the pricetags on Mac's drop (and the quality of Intel processors rises), then they could steal a hefty market share of MS dominance.

That isn't going to happen because Mac's have been overpriced compared to PCs for well over a decade. Intel chips aren't going to make a difference. The main reason for higher costs is the proprietary nature of each component and the combined hardware and software development costs. By separating those roles into hardware (ASUS, Intel, etc) and software manufacturers (Adobe, M$), PCs have a huge advantage in economies of scale.
quote:
Now you're just trying to monopolize every market that deals with your software like Mac has done. . . Vista has been the fall of MS, along with it's proven monopoly. If it wasn't for the fact that our government is so tightly wrapped about your finger (I work for the government and IS dept), then MS would surely lose a great deal of market value. Let alone more anti-trust and monopoly accusations.

You act like there's something wrong with a monopoly. Well, there isn't. Theoretically, it's bad for consumers, but it certainly isn't illegal. You can accuse M$ for unsavory business practices, but if you want to accuse them of being a monopoly, which they are, then I doubt they'll mind. It does nothing, and has no legal implications whatsoever. Your claim of more 'monopoly accusations' just shows how little you know of the how the market and laws work.
quote:
Watch the next OS require a specific built PC and only XXX gfx card, XXX ram, and XXX kinds of HDD's.

Only Macs restrict hardware compatibility that much. Vista just requires higher powered components . . . which is what every new OS usually asks for.

IMO, you sound like a fanboy, which is exactly how you insulted the people who downmodded your comments. Actually you're not so much a fanboy, but more of a misinformed, ignorant M$ hater, which I think is about as bad.


RE: well....
By Runiteshark on 2/3/2007 12:53:39 PM , Rating: 2
Shh, don't tell anyone about people stealing the GUI idea from the PARC.

People will go apeshit


RE: well....
By themadmilkman on 2/3/2007 3:38:57 PM , Rating: 2
They didn't steal it. They licensed it.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/3/2007 5:15:44 PM , Rating: 1
I never knew that Apple licensed that. Got links?


RE: well....
By Locutus465 on 2/2/2007 8:58:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you blog, check out the app I work on, Windows Live Writer.


Kudos on the great work with live writer. Out of sheer curiosity I downloaded it, installed it and just finished posting my very first blog entry with it. I can't believe that it actually worked, and all very simply (against my blogger.com blog no less).

To be fair I've never used iWeb, it does seem iWeb from what apple claims has a wider range of apps (managing websites in addition to blogging). But then again based on what I see iWeb *only* works with .Mac which as far as I know isn't free. Live Writer worked with my blogger, which not only is free but is google. Whoever said Microsoft can't play nice with the competition?


RE: well....
By stromgald on 2/2/2007 11:55:15 AM , Rating: 2
Using a Mac doesn't make you a better computer user. In fact it probably makes you more of a lazy, less demanding consumer. With Macs, if the program sucks, you're pretty much stuck with it unless you go through the hassle of upgrading (much like upgrading hardware on a PC, most people won't do it).

With a Mac you have to just 'live with it' or 'deal with it'. Sure, there's a ton of PC equivalents to the iLife suite that stink, but some are better. With a PC, you figure out what is good and bad. You're more aware of security issues and such. By sticking with Macs you're almost being forced to be complacent. You're a worse computer user because you don't know what a computer is capable of and are only aware of what Apple produces.


RE: well....
By Arribajuan on 2/2/2007 12:31:50 PM , Rating: 2
The ads try to make you believe that mac users are cool and pc users are boring.

So you want to be cool, so you buy a mac.

They never talk about what system is better or what the systems offer.


RE: well....
By MobileZone on 2/2/2007 12:43:53 PM , Rating: 3
Being cool is different than LOOKing cool...
I don't believe in cool looking persons. I believe in reality.


RE: well....
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 12:51:07 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
They never talk about what system is better or what the systems offer.

I agree. Apple is silent on that topic because they realistically have no advantage over their competition. Like another poster said, it is a tie. So they have to resort to phychological commercials like they have.


RE: well....
By Oregonian2 on 2/2/2007 2:21:13 PM , Rating: 2
It's like the beer ads where if you drink their beer (unlike other brands) the beautiful women will flock over to you and lavish you with their attention.

Neither the beer or Apple ads seem to be truthful (at least in my experience). Yes, I'm sure there are programs available for the Mac exclusively thats better than that on a Windows PC, but for each one there will be hundreds "vice versa".

Any company with a successful MAC program will likely want to make a version for a Windows PC just to increase their potential number of customers by a factor of twenty. Unless, of course, there is heavy competition on the PC in that category where the competitors have not bothered to do Mac versions -- so the company will just stay on the Mac where there's less competition.



RE: well....
By Yawgm0th on 2/3/2007 4:20:13 AM , Rating: 2
Superior? Maybe for video and audio editing. It sure is hard to top FinalCut Pro, and I've had quite a bit of fun with Garageband.

Everything else is better on PC. Office 2003 and OpenOffice are by far the best productivity suites out there. Keynote is okay, but PowerPoint and OO have more intuitive interfaces for those who aren't married to Mac. More importantly, you don't need a Mac to view stuff made in OpenOffice and MS Office.

Gaming of course is not an argument. More games support Linux than OSX, and performance in OSX is unbearable.

The entire Adobe suite runs on both platforms, but runs better on PC simply because they're faster, at the very least.

Directory software and general network functionality also goes to Windows, hands-down.

Even media players are better on Windows (and Linux, for that matter). WMP with some third-party codecs will handle pretty much anything, and has a very nice interface for doing so. Third party apps are even better. QuickTime sucks.


RE: well....
By frobizzle on 2/2/2007 11:42:28 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Seriously, who buy a computer based on an ad with 2 guys standing in a room?


Um...the same people that base their vote in November solely on the political ads coming across their TV. It happens more than you may realize!


RE: well....
By Vim on 2/2/2007 11:54:32 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” - Bill Gates on the Mac ads


You tell them bill! DOWN WITH MAC!


RE: well....
By Oregonian2 on 2/2/2007 2:33:36 PM , Rating: 2
Apple DOES have about the greatest industrial designers on the planet (at least in the computer related products world). However one doesn't get those designs free, and it also has nothing whatsoever to do with Microsoft or any other software. Just makes things look and "feel" spiffy when sitting in front of you.

As I've said before, "Apple" sells Apple-exclusive hardware systems that include an OS which constitutes a very small percentage of the cost, while Microsoft sells only the OS in computer systems that thousands of computer manufacturers all use. So comparing the two is a bit weird. In fact, Apple would likely not even be with us today if it weren't for Microsoft's help (its true, go look it up).

Don't know if it's true anymore, but it at least used to be that the top selling apps on the Mac were Microsoft apps.


RE: well....
By sprockkets on 2/2/2007 12:14:07 PM , Rating: 2
The funniest part is how the vista commerical aired and 2 commercials later, the Mac one comes on against Vista, during The Daily Show.

I like John Hodgeman, but those commercials are like, well usual Mac Elitest.


Apple or Mac
By ChipDude on 2/2/2007 10:28:52 AM , Rating: 1
Some people love to hate Apple because they are what, cool, easy to use...

Some people love to hate MS because they are what; blue screen, hard to use, un-intuitive, monopolistic, arrogrant.

Please are you all as blind as the Apple hater or Apple lover. Stand back and objectively tell me why you choose one vs the other.

For me its easy.. my work is stuck with Windows and the compelling reasons to own two aren't enough. I only need to watch how easy it is for my kids to navigate the Apple OS versus the so familar Windows to know already from a clean slate which I would pick.

Isn't it amazing that a company with only < 5% of MS can hvae such a impact on the big guy. You don't find that in very many other markets do you?




RE: Apple or Mac
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 10:39:44 AM , Rating: 5
"Some people love to hate Apple because they are what, cool, easy to use..."

I dont know anyone that does that. Most people hate apple for thier years of false performance claims and falsified benchmarks to back it up... On top of that many feel that Steve Jobs is an arrogant psycopath.

The truth is, both OS's are very similar in function and do most of the same things. I dont accept that Mac's are easier to use. I have used both extensively and disagree. I call it a tie. Both have good and bad points and in the end it is up to your own personal preference.

One cold hard fact is that PC is an open platform that supports 100's of thousands of peripherals, where Mac is a closed platform that supports very few. This is why PC dominates, and Mac is 3% marketshare. It snot bbecasue Mac is inferior and PC is superior, it is that PC is open, and Mac is closed.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Funkmeister on 2/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Apple or Mac
By Korvon on 2/2/2007 11:44:54 AM , Rating: 2
You said it right there. You have to get an emulator just to run apps that the rest of the world is using. If OSX was an open platform then you would not need WINE to run all of the other apps out there.
We are not talking about hardware (for the most part) since Mac is now running on Intel. Unless you want to upgrade the hardware on say an iMac, then you are really hosed. It's the closed operating system that is the problem.


RE: Apple or Mac
By McSporran on 2/2/2007 4:28:28 PM , Rating: 2
That makes no sense.

Linux is an open platform. It still needs Wine to run Windows apps.


RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Apple or Mac
By McSporran on 2/2/2007 6:58:51 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not convinced, if for no other reason than a Mac *IS* a PC-compatible at this point...

I just saw a review over the weekend discussing Vista and how well it ran (natively) on a current iMac, of all things.


RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 9:20:01 PM , Rating: 1
The discussion is regarding software, i.e., that Macs won't run Windows apps w/o an emulator.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Funkmeister on 2/2/2007 10:28:58 PM , Rating: 2
waitaminnit... before you get stuck on the emulation thing consider that you're not seeing the forest for the trees....

i get a Intel Mac. i can run all the Mac OS apps. i can also run Linux open source apps. i can also run Unix apps. and if that isn't enough i can run Windows apps at near native speeds under emulation using Boot Camp or Parellels. yeah, there will be a slight performance hit BUT i'm not gaming so i'm not worried about that AND i now have access to a freakin' HUGE library of apps. there are some people who do everything they need to do with open source. after the first three i listed i might not even need the fourth! and i would only need WINE to run Windows apps, not all the others.

and if i want hardware i can upgrade, i mean i have an overwhelming need to get inside the case and putter around, i can just get a PowerMac. so, where is the problem?


RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 10:36:35 PM , Rating: 1
It's no problem, it's just that on the PC, you don't really see much of a demand to run emulators, since really there's no compelling content for OS X, Linux, etc. that would make most folks want to emulate. I mean, the only thing I might want to emulate on Windows, is another version of Windows.
With the Mac you're kind of forced into emulation if you want to do anything beyond desktop basics or graphic arts.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Funkmeister on 2/2/2007 11:15:41 PM , Rating: 2
the way i look at it, you use the tool that best suits your needs. if you need Windows to accomplish a specific task then, hey, use it! if your need is more suited to Mac specific apps then that's the tool for you. if i needed Windows to accomplish a certain task then i'd find a Windows computer and do it. so far, that hasn't been the case.

With the Mac you're kind of forced into emulation if you want to do anything beyond desktop basics or graphic arts.

but since you put it that way, i'll bite...

what, then, would i be forced to emulate? i'm not being pushy or confrontational but i am genuinely curious. what would i, the average user, be forced into emulation to accomplish that i cannot do in OS X? mind you, i have no interest in games... i use my son's PS2 for that.


RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/3/2007 9:27:24 AM , Rating: 2
As I said in some other post, I use a lot of engineering apps, and of all of them, there is only one that runs on OS X (MATLAB). All others are Windows only.


RE: Apple or Mac
By mjcutri on 2/2/2007 11:57:26 AM , Rating: 2
"that supports 100's of thousands of peripherals"
"first: Macs support 100's of peripherals too"

he said "hundreds of thousands" and you replied with "hundreds" - which proves his point
maybe you could read a little better and be more accurate in your posts ;)


RE: Apple or Mac
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 12:00:42 PM , Rating: 4
"Macs support 100's of peripherals too. "
I said PC's support 100's of thousands and Mac supports very few. This is correct.

"Mac platform is actually more open than Windows"
I dont think you know what I meant. When you can go to the local computer store buy OSX and install it on any PC you build yourself, or bought from an OEM, then it is open. You cant, because Apples wont allow it, and part of that reason is they dont support 100's of thousands of peripherals out there.

Mac market share is up to about 6%
Perhaps looking at a particular view on a particular market segment for a particular time period, but overall its 3% globally.

No worries though, and no flame intended.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Funkmeister on 2/2/2007 9:50:42 PM , Rating: 2
no worries and no flame taken. nice to have a discussion with someone who doesn't resort to juvenile rants and name calling.

to the debate- what are the peripherals people are going to use? how many will you need? which are the good ones? this reminds me of something someone said to me once concerning availability of Mac vs. Windows software.
they said: "There are thousands of titles for Windows, not as many for Macs."
to which i replied: "True. But several of those titles are games or crappy apps that no one wants anyway. How many apps do you actually need? The average person doesn't need thousands, the average person generally uses only six regularly; a browser, mail program, word processor, spreadsheet, music and most recently photo organizer. add personal finance and that makes seven. so the majority of the other, say... 99,993 programs out there mostly end up in the $9.99 rack in the back of the store. The shelves at EB Games are packed with hundreds of game titles that were marked to discount a couple of months after release. I dont need thousands of crappy games."
the same could be said of peripherals.

also, the average person doesn't want to build a computer. most people want the same from their computers as they want from their cars. they want them to run, they want them to be reliable, they're willing to do regular maintainence and they prefer that they didn't crash. that's it. BUT if i did want or need a peripheral i wouldn't want to have to choose from thousands. i'd only want the one that best suited my needs and fit my computer. there are thousands of mufflers available for cars but you only need a good one that fits your make of car. don't get me wrong, choice is good. but if your mechanic showed you a 3" binder filled with one thousand of brake discs the first thing you'd ask would probably be "Which are the best I can buy for my car?" narrow it down to the top three and buy one... or in this case, four.
and why doesn't Apple allow or wont support all those peripherals out there? i can list two very good reasons...
one, so that they can avoid some of the problems that many Windows users face with iffy third party peripherals that wont play nice with the OS or firmware and...
two, to avoid the problems that Windows users face with some exploits.

re: the 3% market share, eeh... 6% or 3%, all i want is my computer to do what i need it to do. my Mac does that very well, thank you. and there is this...
i have been running my Macs on a high speed internet connection for five years using only a firewall... no anti-virus whatsoever. and while my sis-in-laws PC got zombied and sent me several virus laced emails i emerged unscathed. that alone makes having OS X worth it.


RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 10:07:33 PM , Rating: 1
You say you don't care that there are thousands of apps (or devices) out there for Windows, that you just want the best. But the problem with your argument is that you are assuming that all apps (or devices) are about the same. Consider, instead, that intead of a thousand apps, there are instead hundreds of kinds of apps available for Windows, and just a few kinds of apps available for the Mac. Now when you consider that each user may have some specialized needs beyond the "desktop basics" you mentioned (which are available on any platform), you can start to see why many people appreciate the diversity of the Windows experience relative to any other platform.

For example, tomorrow I'm going to do some microcontroller software development. Well, the best-in-class compiler/debugger/IDE is only available for Windows (no, it's not GNU!). Furthermore, the USB-to-device debug adapter is USB, which is supported by Mac of course, but the device driver itself is only supported on Windows. So for me, having Windows is essential for getting this particular job done. The same example repeats itself all day long in engineering (my domain), and probably many others as well.

So, in the end, the >90% market share that Windows has is important to many people, because it is a de facto market standard, and has far and away the best coverage of apps and devices.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Funkmeister on 2/3/2007 12:21:10 AM , Rating: 2
"You say you don't care that there are thousands of apps (or devices) out there for Windows, that you just want the best."
no, i said the one that best suited my needs. there's a difference.

but, Tom!!

the average user is NOT going to do microcontroller software development!! what average user is going to debug stuff? you're thinking like an engineer, not that there's anything wrong with that 'cause you are one. but the average user, the one who's going to use mostly those six or seven apps i mentioned before, aren't going to be debugging or microcontroller software development! they don't haveta... they don't wanna! and if that's the case one could use Linux and an open source office suite or OS X and MS Office for Mac, which is what i do. so... the average user could do as much as they wanted or needed to do with a Mac and still be able to run Linux AND Windows on one platform.
while i appreciate the efforts of engineers such as yourself, i don't need to be so platform specific and (although i might not have to do it) i could run several OS'es from one platform if i were so inclined. and if there was a particular app that was available for only Linux or Windows hey, i could do that too! so, looking at it from here, a Mac could actually be more cost effective. two computer platforms on one desktop. that is what i call diversity.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Funkmeister on 2/3/2007 1:19:38 AM , Rating: 3
...and now for a parting thought...

it's been an entertaining evening and i've learned a few things but probably the main things i've learned here are:

1) the Mac vs PC Wars are not over.
2) some people would rather vent and rant their prejudices than discuss points of fact.
3) this evening probably would have been better spent playing Gran Turismo with my 11 year old son. the level of conversation would have been far more interesting.

that being said, i leave you with this food for thought. it is somewhat politically incorrect but is well suited to this place and situation:

"Arguing on the Internet is like being in the Special Olympics: Even if you win, you're still retarded." -Anon.

farewell, good night and good luck.


RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/3/2007 1:32:21 PM , Rating: 2
My point is not that everyone will run engineering apps; my point is that many people will need to run specialized apps that are only available for Windows. My post was just an example.


RE: Apple or Mac
By imattrix on 2/2/2007 11:36:17 PM , Rating: 2
The average person uses only 6 applications.

MS Office Pro has 9 alone, 10 if you add MS Project. Then how about a browser - I would use BOTH Firefox AND IE.

Nero and the CD writer stuff.
a half-dozen more DVD roasting tools

Media tools - iTunes w/Quicktime, WMP11.
Intervideo WinDVD, ACDSee, Goldwave, Sonic, DAEMON tools

MS Streets & Trips ($20) and a $49 USB GPS puck, for a Navi system practically equal to the one in your car.

Adobe Acrobat Reader & Photoshop (or LE)

WinZip and WinRar

OpenOffice 2.0 (6 more cool Apps)

TurboTax & Quicken

A decent 3rd Party newsreader like Forte Agent

Netstumbler, Look@LAN

...and maybe 20-30 DirectX games the kids REGULARLY play....purchased but probably in .ISO form.







RE: Apple or Mac
By Funkmeister on 2/3/2007 12:28:31 AM , Rating: 3
ahh... the actual apps may vary, but the number stays more or less the same.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Hawkido on 2/2/2007 1:14:42 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
On top of that many feel that Steve Jobs is an arrogant psycopath.


Steve Jobs is not a "Psycopath". He is a Sociopath.

Get your crazy words straight.

Psychopath - Behaves without reason or logic (Psycho - Logical or thought producing mind / Path - anti, counter, working against)

Sociopath - Counter-culture, fighting society or against the normal (Socio - Society or Culture / Path - anti, counter, working against)

Clearly SJ thinks in a clear and determined manner (not random or unpredictable such as eating feces, banging head on wall, or attacking people for no reason) however, all of his thoughts are directed against the social norm (whatever the norm is he will fight it)

He suffers for the current generation's philosophy of "Don't be a drone! Be an individual, just like me!"

Kids today want to be unique... so they all dye their hair blue... <shakes head>

And in case you are wondering

Schizophrenia - Multiple personality or divided antagonizing will (Schizo - split, fractured, or divided / Phrenia - Head, mind, personality, or will depending on context)

Example: person arguing with them self, or alter ego acting with/without the knowledge of the prime ego, sometimes accompanied with memory loss.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 2:53:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Kids today want to be unique... so they ALL dye their hair blue... <shakes head>


Yes, kids. Now YOU TOO can own and IMAC and be different just like everyone else.

The marketing practically writes itself. :P


RE: Apple or Mac
By dare2savefreedom on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 4:19:14 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I don't know what kind of person would have a kid and not spend time with them especially at an early age.

I do - a selfish person, clearly.

Good post.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Pythias on 2/2/2007 4:50:47 PM , Rating: 1
I don't think Hawkido was defending jobs.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Hawkido on 2/2/2007 6:16:25 PM , Rating: 2
LOL no I wasn't defending SJ... Not in the least he is a whiney Bastich. (take that comic book readers from the days of yore!) I was just correcting the irresponsible use of a crazy word. LOL that just sounds funny.

quote:
"Behaves without reason or logic" - fits sj because it doesn't make any sense to pretend you don't have a daughter or to ignore your daughter at an early age. I don't know what kind of person would have a kid and not spend time with them especially at an early age.


The reason behind this is he didn't want a child. He has reason and he has logic. The fact that society/culture teaches you that Fathers should stick around and help raise children, doesn't make it unreasonable or illogical to abandon a child. See where i am going, Society/Culture dictated something, Jobs went against it(Sociopath). Now, had SJ moved to the north pole and refused to wear anything but a thong and suntan lotion, that would be illogical due to your senses telling you "you are hurting yourself" and there being an easy remedy, such as putting on appropriate clothes and staying inside as much as possible. (Okay freaks you can shoot at me with your comments of "<whiney>But you CAN get a bad sunburn at the north pole!</whiney>") That would make SJ Psychopathic.


RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 6:49:28 PM , Rating: 1
Just a minor correction. Most fathers don't abandon their children because they love them, they want to care for them, etc. - not because society tells them it is the right thing to do.

But maybe I am a sociopath, too!


RE: Apple or Mac
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 6:42:00 PM , Rating: 3
Psychopath - Behaves without reason or logic (Psycho - Logical or thought producing mind / Path - anti, counter, working against)

Sociopath - Counter-culture, fighting society or against the normal (Socio - Society or Culture / Path - anti, counter, working against)

No, I do beleive I meant what I said. The man is nuts. =)


RE: Apple or Mac
By oTAL on 2/5/2007 4:06:41 PM , Rating: 2
Sigmund?

(I only have doubts since you did not mention neither his mother nor his sexual problems).


RE: Apple or Mac
By Fenixgoon on 2/2/2007 10:43:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Some people love to hate Apple because they are what, cool, easy to use...

Some people love to hate MS because they are what; blue screen, hard to use, un-intuitive, monopolistic, arrogrant.


comments like yours exemplify the reason why people love to hate apple and its superiority complex


RE: Apple or Mac
By ChipDude on 2/2/2007 11:29:46 AM , Rating: 2
Now Now such blinding passion on such a un-important topic.

If we were to apply the same metrics as we do to Mac and PCs to Cars where would GM be?

Frankly anyone who brings up the open vs closed system or the thousands of options vs 10. I really challenge you tell me what critical important applicaiton you have that you can argue swings you to PC vs Mac that is technically not capable of being changed. With the migrtion of MAC to INTEL CPU and CS and with their dual boot capability its all not very relevant. For 90% of the applications that 95% of the people use computers for today's MAC or PC do equally well.

I've always wondered if all the Mac really offers form/style/marketying why no mainstream PC maker has been able to capture that as Apple seems to continue to own this angle.

You guys can pooh pah what you want and argue the details I only ask you for those that have children. Have them walk up to a Mac and a PC and fiddle for a few minutes and ask them what they think.


RE: Apple or Mac
By retrospooty on 2/2/2007 12:07:36 PM , Rating: 3
For 90% of the applications that 95% of the people use
computers for today's MAC or PC do equally well.
Agreed, and probably even higher percentages.


I've always wondered if all the Mac really offers form/style/marketying why no mainstream PC maker has been able to capture that as Apple seems to continue to own this angle.
To this, I disagree. Apple owns 3% of the global marketshare, which means they really "own" little.


RE: Apple or Mac
By imattrix on 2/2/2007 12:22:40 PM , Rating: 5
I totally agree! Macs are by large and wide easier to use than PCs. They are so easy to use that even Mac users can use them.

The best way to gauge if a copmuter is going to meet your needs is find a child, perhaps a two-year-old, and see if they can order some music on iTunes or surf for porn.

If they can do it, it's a pretty safe bet that YOU will be able to as well, after all, you're a sophisticated Mac-guy.


RE: Apple or Mac
By ChipDude on 2/2/2007 8:14:32 PM , Rating: 2
You think that insult really bothers me... sorry

My influence on the technology world would make you sooo envious....



RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/3/2007 12:14:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
My influence on the technology world would make you sooo envious....

Anyone who really had influence would never write that. :o)


RE: Apple or Mac
By theapparition on 2/2/2007 12:35:18 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I really challenge you tell me what critical important applicaiton you have that you can argue swings you to PC vs Mac that is technically not capable of being changed.

I want to run 3D modeling CAD software in my organization. I'd then like to analyze it using Engineering tools. Then, design boards with an EDA package. I'll need to write reports (office), manage accounting, and create graphics for presentations. Why do I need 2 platforms for this, when one will clearly do with lower total cost of ownership. Macs are not suited for, nor do they even market for, the business consumer.

The home is the market the Mac is going for. Now, try to add a graphics card that is not supported in OSX. Oh wait, no need to push frame rates since you can't play most games.

The commercials are outright lies, but why should that differ from any of apples other FUD. Remember, the G5's were so much faster than PC's, then the switch and now Intel's are so much faster than those slow G5's. So which was it?


RE: Apple or Mac
By Hare on 2/9/2007 11:42:23 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Remember, the G5's were so much faster than PC's, then the switch and now Intel's are so much faster than those slow G5's. So which was it?

When Apple said that the G5s were faster than Intel it was a comparison to Prescotts . Todays C2D are a totally different beast and exactly the reason why Apple chose Intel. Performance/Watt. Something that the G5 could never really achieve. Don't be ridiculous and compare the ancient power hungry G5 to a new generation C2D, ok?


RE: Apple or Mac
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 12:41:53 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I really challenge you tell me what critical important applicaiton you have that you can argue swings you to PC vs Mac that is technically not capable of being changed.

You're fooling yourself. Most computer software is written for Windows; that is a fact. Some small percentage of those apps also run on OS X. Some even smaller percentage run on OS X exclusively.

Yes, it is of course possible to develop apps that run on both platforms. But the question is whether the small market share that OS X has is even worth the effort on the part of the software developer. With some caveats, developing a software application that is cross-platform is more expensive than developing one that just targets Windows. If 99% of your customer base is Windows, why spend more money to support OS X?


RE: Apple or Mac
By SmokeRngs on 2/2/2007 4:46:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Frankly anyone who brings up the open vs closed system or the thousands of options vs 10. I really challenge you tell me what critical important applicaiton you have that you can argue swings you to PC vs Mac that is technically not capable of being changed. With the migrtion of MAC to INTEL CPU and CS and with their dual boot capability its all not very relevant. For 90% of the applications that 95% of the people use computers for today's MAC or PC do equally well.


But you miss something. On the PC platform I do have so many more choices. That means something to me. I like to find what software works the best for me. The more choices I have, the better chance I have of finding exactly what I want. Besides, I have fun finding new software and trying it out. That's one of the main reasons computers have always been interesting to me and keep my interest. Computers are not just a tool for me.

Obviously, not everyone thinks the same way I do. However, they have choices for other platforms that suit their needs.

I've been running Windows for years and have used just about every major version since 3.1. Currently I'm messing around with Fedora Core 6. It's something different and I've recently had the urge to jump into something completely different. I'm definitely having some problems with it but it's nothing I can't figure out and I enjoy looking for solutions to problems.

This is a bit off topic but I just have to say something. I'm assuming the picture is a shot from the commercial. I only guess since I can count on one hand the number of times I've turned on a TV in the last six months. However, I personally find the two people in the ad to be counterproductive for what the ad is supposed to portray. To me, the "hip guy" looks like someone that can't hold a job and probably still lives in his parents' basement. While the "dweeb guy" looks like the type of person that is successful enough to be able to drop a nice chunk of change on a Mac. I'm not trying to flame, but that's just the way things look to me from the picture.


RE: Apple or Mac
By Oregonian2 on 2/2/2007 2:24:38 PM , Rating: 2
I think that's particularly funny because my late father switched from a Mac to a PC because of the <explitive deleted> screen lockups that he got from his Mac. Maybe it's just "blue" that's the problem, Mac's have a more friendly color when they lock up, and so they're better? :-)


RE: Apple or Mac
By MobileZone on 2/2/2007 12:23:20 PM , Rating: 2
Hahahahahahahaha, good joke.

Seems like these crapple ads made some good effect on you.


Apple computer sucks.
By nurbsenvi on 2/2/2007 10:39:53 AM , Rating: 2
Apple computer sucks.
I used it for 3years during uni days and I came to one conclusion: They Suck.

They were slow.
Expensive.
No games.
No as many software as Microsoft.
Peripherals were not compatible.
They were not as stable as they claim to be.
sissy.

And this was the worst

only had one button on the mouse...
so fucking annoying.


I'm not saying MS is all that good but sir... Mac is shit.




RE: Apple computer sucks.
By hiscross on 2/2/2007 11:05:05 AM , Rating: 2
Intelligent design didn't succeed here.


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By Funkmeister on 2/2/2007 11:42:01 AM , Rating: 4
with all due respect sir... apparently "3 years at uni" didn't help you much. perhaps you should have gone for the whole four. if you'd spent a little less time playing games your post might make a little more sense. and for heavens sakes, grow up! your comments are so vague that changing a couple of words renders it pointless. observe...

i drove a Volvo once and i came to one conclusion: they suck.

it was slow.
expensive.
not as many aftermarket parts as Honda
Recaro seats were not compatible.
they were not as safe as they claim to be.
sissy.

and this was the worst

only had one option for a steering wheel
so f***ing annoying.

if i had gone to a car blog and written that, i would have been laughed out of there... just as most people here are laughing at you. one more thing...

i type in all lower case 'cause i want to, not because i cant remember to use the CAPS key.


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By Funkmeister on 2/2/2007 11:47:15 AM , Rating: 2
oh, i meant to add one more thing....
i wrote this on a Mac using my 5 button Microsoft mouse.


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By nurbsenvi on 2/2/2007 7:33:26 PM , Rating: 2
with all due respect sir... Australian University usually have 3 academic years. perhaps I should have gone for two. if I have spent a little more time playing games I might have got more Cs. and for heavens sakes, I'm not gonna grow up! my comments are so true that changing a few words renders it worthwhile. observe...

I used it for 3years (not once) during Uni days and I came to one conclusion: They Suck.

They were slow.
Expensive.
No games.
Not as many software as Microsoft.
Peripherals were not compatible.
They were not as stable as they claim to be.
Sissy.

And this was the worst part:
only had one button on the mouse...
so fucking annoying.

Funkmeister stop diverging from the point I made by comparing computers with cars. I might as well compare it back to computers and it makes sense again.

Every single Macjahadine purists fail to defend the point I made above. All they do is "oh, you missed T at the end of this and didn't use capital there, here so Mac is great"

If you would like to use 5 button M$ mouse you are always welcome to use the Windows System anytime.




RE: Apple computer sucks.
By Funkmeister on 2/2/2007 11:51:09 PM , Rating: 2
not a Mac purist. don't really know what that means. i've used both Macs and Windows machines. i like the Mac. that being said... DON'T hate Windows. i just choose not to have it at home.
but... whenever i read that someone HATES something especially if that thing is actually a thing i become suspicious. such hate and distain for an inanimate object?? look, it's a collection of circuits and wires and metal and plastic... certainly not worthy of such a strong emotion as hate. as such, anyone who tosses about comments such as "I HATE Macs" or "I HATE PC's" might have a little growing up to do and might need to get out and find a worthwhile cause. hey, i'm a kid at heart. i sing silly songs with my own children, at the school at which i teach i play dodgeball and skip rope with 'em. my favorite toy is my bicycle. BUT i've matured enough to know that HATING a thing is silly and i'm quite able to express myself thoroughly without resorting to expletives for shock value.
and for the record... if i found a computer/OS that was better than either Mac OS or Windows that worked for me i'd drop the Mac in a hot New York minute. so, i'm not a "Macjahadine" as you put it. i'm just a little too mature to think in those terms.
...although i do find that description "Macjahadine" funny. so, i just learned something new.


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By ADDAvenger on 2/3/2007 3:29:03 AM , Rating: 2
You hate Macs and you spell MS with a $, what do you like?


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By nurbsenvi on 2/3/2007 5:41:23 AM , Rating: 2
I like sex and money just like everyone else (well... almost).


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By imattrix on 2/2/2007 12:45:21 PM , Rating: 3
In fairness Volvos may really suck, but with Ford now safely at the helm they're certainly bound to get better.

They've traditionally had that whole funky steering column/front-end alignment problem (right out of the factory)...and just how BASIC is that in a CAR.

I think the new Accord Hybrid *IS* superior than either the Volvo S60/70 series both technically (pure engineering and reliability) and from a cost versus benefit standpoint. The Acura line is particularly competitive with Volvo in performance, and it still comes in at a far better price.

Hondas are better and generally more reliable than Volvos. They cost far less to either acquire or maintain.

Your arguement makes total sense. Now I understand why Volvo owners were LAUGHING when I drove my lowly Civic Hybrid back in 2003.

They know more than me about cars!


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 2:13:31 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
In fairness Volvos may really suck, but with Ford now safely at the helm they're certainly bound to get better.

That's an interesting statement. I honestly don't know if you are being sarcastic or not.

Anyway, I work in the automotive industry, and I don't think that Ford has a snowball's chance in a supernova of "improving" Volvo. And really, I'm not sure what needs to improve. Volvo always had decent sales, decent quality, and people who own Volvos seem satisfied with them. You and I may agree that Honda makes better cars, but Volvo has been pretty successful in the marketplace.

Finally, I would add my personal experience. I owned a Ford once - just once - and I never would again. That car seemed designed to have me at the service shop on a regular basis. There are far better brands of cars in the market today.


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By imattrix on 2/2/2007 6:13:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In fairness Volvos may really suck, but with Ford now safely at the helm they're certainly bound to get better.


Dripping with sarcasm!


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 6:16:28 PM , Rating: 1
OK, thanks for clarifying that.

I suppose we're also in agreement in Ford being able to "fix" Jaguar, too!


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By imattrix on 2/2/2007 11:12:14 PM , Rating: 2
Jaguar....hmm....where have I heard that name before....it seems familiar. The name Jaguar just screams quality!


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By nurbsenvi on 2/2/2007 7:28:38 PM , Rating: 2
with all due respect sir... Australian University usually have 3 academic years. perhaps I should have gone for two. if I have spent a little more time playing games I might have got more Cs. and for heavens sakes, I'm not gonna grow up! my comments are so true that changing a few words renders it worthwhile. observe...

I used it for 3years (not once) during Uni days and I came to one conclusion: They Suck.

They were slow.
Expensive.
No games.
Not as many software as Microsoft.
Peripherals were not compatible.
They were not as stable as they claim to be.
Sissy.

And this was the worst part:
only had one button on the mouse...
so fucking annoying.

Funkmeister stop diverging from the point I made by comparing computers with cars. I might as well compare it back to computers and it makes sense again.

Every single Macjahadine purists fail to defend the point I made above. All they do is "oh, you missed T at the end of this and didn't use capital there, here so Mac is great"

Seriously! Mac really sucks.



RE: Apple computer sucks.
By Funkmeister on 2/3/2007 1:30:18 AM , Rating: 2
you've already said that. move on please.


RE: Apple computer sucks.
By MobileZone on 2/2/2007 12:49:01 PM , Rating: 2
Ditto.

I too had the same experience during a mistaken switch to the Mac platform. After that, I promised to myself that I would never buy a mac again.

The incredible hamburger mouse was the extreme point.


Re: the latest commercial
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 2/2/2007 10:03:27 AM , Rating: 2
"Ahh, speaking of peripherals"

What exactly is the Mac guy getting at with this comment? I don't get it.




RE: Re: the latest commercial
By Tegeril on 2/2/2007 10:19:34 AM , Rating: 2
This add was the lead in to Jobs' 2007 MacWorld Keynote, when he introduced AppleTV and then the iPhone. So, I presume those are the peripherals the ad is talking about ;)


RE: Re: the latest commercial
By Tegeril on 2/2/2007 10:19:58 AM , Rating: 2
WTB edit button, "This ad was the lead..."


RE: Re: the latest commercial
By DEredita on 2/2/2007 10:49:16 AM , Rating: 5
I was highly disappointed with the MacWorld keynote. AppleTV is a waste - I would much rather a second generation Toshiba HD-DVD player from Amazon for $367 w/ 3 free HD-DVDs. The iPhone is all flash and trash with a insanely high price tag.
I was expecting Apple to release a newer Mac Mini, since it is now extremely outdated and also very expensive.

.


RE: Re: the latest commercial
By oab on 2/2/2007 10:26:33 AM , Rating: 2
Thats called innuendo. THe hospital gown was open at the back, and mac saw PCs ... data transfer cable.


By therealnickdanger on 2/2/2007 11:36:40 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, see? If you didn't get it, then you're too dumb to own a Mac. LOL!

I just find those commercials irritating, so I just go back to the Red VS Blue mock ad whenever I want to hear the truth.


RE: Re: the latest commercial
By sprockkets on 2/12/2007 11:24:46 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, his gown was not open at the back, and what you are saying makes no sense.


RE: Re: the latest commercial
By Nekrik on 2/2/2007 2:18:39 PM , Rating: 3
since I haven't seen these posted yet and they're a little entertaining:

http://www.internet-nexus.com/2007/01/im-mac-im-pc...



MAC OS is for narrow minded
By RW on 2/4/2007 10:08:01 PM , Rating: 1
Apple has switched from IBM Power PC processors to Intel x86, now just expect them to switch from MAC OS to Windows :))) that's the way things go if they want to survive.

For MAC OS they've got a specific hardware configuration for which they build a specific driver, now that's the easiest way to do it, everyone can do it a particular software for a particular platform that's what Apple did it with MAC OS building their OS around a specific hardware configuration.
That's why MAC OS cannot compete with Windows because Windows is more versatile it can run on a wide range of hardware configurations, all kind of computer configurations from around the world run Windows, instead only a specific hardware configuration run Mac OS and that's Apple because is the only one that has drivers specifically designed for it.
So you are comparing a single hardware configuration like Apple that runs a specific designed OS for it like MAC OS with a more versatile OS like Windows that runs on all other hardware configurations on the planet plus it can run on Apple's own hardware configuration LOL.

So what's the point with MAC OS other than being exclusivist reluctant and dependent to a single hardware configuration ?

Yeah if u live in a cage and never heard of Windows u're probably using MAC OS.

Plus if u think u can live only with the OS without all the good software out there designed for the Windows platform, then MAC OS is for all you narrow minded.





RE: MAC OS is for narrow minded
By little jon on 2/5/2007 2:16:06 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, it's sad. Apple could be such a great software company if it chose to be one. Unfortunately Apple is a hardware company, such as Dell but they've put in something extra in their package for the customer: Their own unique OS, which (believe it or not) works just great! 99% of work I could do on windows I can do on Mac OS 10, except for that when I'm doing it on a mac it feels much easier to do. The system just works and you don't even have to know there is an unix behind it. But if you want you can learn how to use the unix and unleash the amazing potential it hides. The only app I miss is a mac version of AutoCad but for an average joe that doesn't matter. Every other windows app I can imagine has its own mac equivalent. Proove me wrong.

(sorry for my terrible english)


RE: MAC OS is for narrow minded
By little jon on 2/5/2007 2:19:28 PM , Rating: 2
I forgot to mention that there are also countless mac ports of linux apps. That's possible because of the similar underlying layer they both use: the powerfull unix.


RE: MAC OS is for narrow minded
By RW on 2/5/2007 4:13:55 PM , Rating: 2
little jon what's sad is that people like u think that if they are gay all others should be gay.
But don't forget that Apple and MAC OS is only for gay users like u.


What u don't understand is that we don't give a fuck for all u MAC users because u are insignificant useless and tedious.


RE: MAC OS is for narrow minded
By little jon on 2/5/2007 5:33:46 PM , Rating: 2
What a wise man u re. you must have a college degree in OS sexuology. And who is we? Is this the royal we? I've delt with dozens of people like you through my career who can only lower themselves to pathetic insult when they run out of facts, just like you're demonstrating right here and it only makes me laught. I thought that maybe here, on scientific grounds I might find peole who are open to new - different things, not letting prejudice take over their opinion. I guess I was wrong. You have not disproven a single thing i've said so I deduce that you don't dissagree with me, you just can't admit that there might be even a slight chance that I could be right. big difference there. and by the way, sorry, I'm not a gay.


RE: MAC OS is for narrow minded
By RW on 2/6/2007 2:54:49 AM , Rating: 2
Just imagine you and your MAC OS isn't that gay ? Yes it is.


By little jon on 2/6/2007 6:05:57 AM , Rating: 2
You sure have the right to have that opinion but that itself isn't enough to make it a fact. Do you have any other facts to support your " Macs are gay" theory? You've lost it but please go on, I'm enjoing this.


RE: MAC OS is for narrow minded
By oab on 2/6/2007 12:24:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well, macos is not based on unix, it is based on BSD, which has been proven to contain no unix source code (back in the 80s when AT&T owned the rights to it).

Linux is knock-off of minix, a training "mini unix" os that Linus didn't want to buy but instead created his own version of it (linuses minix, shortened to linux by the guy who ran the FTP site he uploaded the os source too).

So, MacOS X and Linux are not unix, just very good "clones" of it.


I hate These Days Apple
By MobileZone on 2/2/2007 12:41:41 PM , Rating: 2
My first computer was an Apple IIe. For a long time, I had a dream of having a IIc (oh man, it was cool). When I was a teengaer, my dream changed to a Mac II (yep, the grey ones). I used to be Steve Jobs fan. Used to...

Apple lost me with their lies, arrogant and manipulated marketing ideas and excess of cosmetic care (no real technological improvement in the last years).

They day I decided to change my PC for a G3 desktop, my life changed. It became hell. Dozens of crashes per day, no softwares available. NO HARDWARE AVAILABLE. Bad usability (no maximize, no minimize, silly drop down menus that kept disapearing when I released the mouse bt), a pathetic hamburger mouse that kept rotating in my hand and many other things that gladly sent me back to the PC platform in less than 6 months. It became heaven when I switched back to a cool Vaio PC.

Apple's marketing is definitely superior. True. Period. Their software is in the same level of Windows. Their hardware is inferior and way more expensive.

I'm a marketing-aware person. Beware the marketing.




RE: I hate These Days Apple
By imattrix on 2/2/2007 1:07:48 PM , Rating: 2
Man I loved that Choplifter and LodeRunner on my Apple II+. Never gotta Mac as a teenager (too expensive, parents a little too middle-class)

Like most of us I was relegated to the lowly PC.

Ah....memories....


RE: I hate These Days Apple
By MobileZone on 2/5/2007 7:57:59 AM , Rating: 2
Captain Goodnight, Ghost Busters, Where in the World is Carmen San Diego, California Games, Karateka... means something to you?


RE: I hate These Days Apple
By Chris Peredun on 2/5/2007 1:14:43 PM , Rating: 3
http://www.virtualapple.org/

(Requires IE6+, ActiveX, Windows.)


RE: I hate These Days Apple
By little jon on 2/5/2007 1:36:22 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I got five old Macs at home (runnig linux on them most of the time) and I just cant find the courage to get rid of them. Theese old f****rs still work! And about your "Theese Days Apple" experience, I've had the same at the time, but that wasn't "Theese Days" but 5+ years ago. The Mac OS 10.0 and 10.1 were a real pain in the ass, but starting with 10.2 it started to improve rapidly. The 10.3 was a realy good OS, almost as good as the 10.4 which doesn't stop suprsing me even after 2+ years of using it. Best system I've ever layed my hands on, you should try it and see for yourself where the apple has gone in the years. I'm looking forward to 10.5 very very much. Although apple is mainly a hardware company you could hardly find a match to their OS. (This discussion is full of crap anyway so I don't feel any regret for posting this.)


He'll never stop pushing it, will he?
By Xenoterranos on 2/2/2007 10:41:20 AM , Rating: 1
“Students won't need textbooks, they can just use these tablet devices.”

Hell, Bill. I've been waiting for this day to come for quite a while. Would you mind buying out some major textbook companies, selling us ebook editions for LESS than the PRINTED book, and maybe not rape us on the resale value of hardcopy books? Just take a little bit (you know, a few dump truck loads) out of the ol' Scrooge Bin out back and kill off a few textbook buisnesses. Please? Also, when you're done tea-baggin Sony's corpse here in a few years and buy them out, discount some of those spiff eBook readers. Thanks.




RE: He'll never stop pushing it, will he?
By xpnewbie on 2/2/2007 11:12:33 AM , Rating: 3
Actually, Gates is not far off. I learned this week why our local school district wants to equip every student with a laptop. Apparently, there's not enough textbooks to go around for all the students, which is purportedly a problem throughout the whole state (Texas). Issuance of laptops would allow for electronic texts, thereby addressing the shortage. I see it as a potential nightmare for the school district's IT dept, who will have to be constantly fixing and replacing broken/lost laptops, which financially would affect the local taxpayers.

What's worse is the potential for such widespread use of computers to further the dumbing down of America's society. Give a kid a laptop w/ speech recongition and/or audio e-books, and now he know longer has to learn/know how to read. Soup up the onboard calculators or add additional math programs, and the kid doesn't have to learn his arithmetic. But I'm sure they'd be some of the best gamers to be sought.


RE: He'll never stop pushing it, will he?
By Xenoterranos on 2/2/2007 11:28:33 AM , Rating: 2
My whole issue with the idea is that neither paper nor electronic texts will cost any less than they do now, but if I continue I'll just start ranting about how much I hate texbook companies.

I'd love to see a tablet-based book system. It could teach students responsibility about caring for expensive property, and provided it was some sort of dedicated system (ie, not a PC) could last for quite a while in a well maintained environment. Of course it all comes down to content, which is sure to up the price of any system by at least 50%.


By xpnewbie on 2/2/2007 12:55:00 PM , Rating: 2
Teaching kids responsibility in your suggested fashion is an interesting idea. However, the cynical side of me wonders how effective it would be in this day and age when it seems the vast majority of kids are so privileged, i.e. spoiled, that they would view such a sophisticated tool as just another fancy toy, for perhaps 10 minutes of interest, and then it would end up in the junk pile with all the rest.

It is a way of teaching technology while teaching the basics. From what I've heard, we'd have to bring the teachers up to par in order to utilize the technological gizmos, otherwise, the result is the children teaching the teachers.


By rykerabel on 2/5/2007 10:17:18 AM , Rating: 2
well, 6 textbooks costing an average of $80 each is about normal. That's $480. So, get tablets down to that price and it may become accepted.


Uhmm..
By wacohoover on 2/2/2007 11:05:15 AM , Rating: 3
NERD ALERT! NERD ALERT!

You guys are beyond ridiculous. Who really cares? PC's are great for some things. Mac's are great for other things. Sometimes, PC's and Mac's can even do the same things! It's amazing!

So, take a deep breath, put down the computer magazine, Cheetos, and Mountain Dew, and just realize that BOTH Microsoft and Apple are screwing us all royally, by rushing out not-yet-ready devices that consumers for some reason salivate over. I look forward to the day when I can get a computer that doesn't crash, or stop responding to certain programs...ever...unlike both my PC and G5.




RE: Uhmm..
By Chaser on 2/2/2007 11:50:07 AM , Rating: 1
Nice white wash try.

3%. Have fun on the G5.


RE: Uhmm..
By TimberJon on 2/2/2007 12:08:25 PM , Rating: 2
Aye, Apple/G5 = Windows Millenium

Apple works like constipation. Constantly pushing, but not really getting anywhere.


RE: Uhmm..
By dare2savefreedom on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Uhmm..
By senbassador on 2/3/2007 11:31:50 PM , Rating: 2
Not to be a smartass, but you DO realize that this is a technology forum, right? Its actually called dailytech. What a shocker theres nerds and geeks on this forum!

Wow, who would of guessed that there would be flamewars of pissed off Mac users, Windows users, and Linux users exchanging insults on a forum dedicated to technology?


Desktop Search? IE7 and Cornfedone
By xpnewbie on 2/2/2007 10:25:51 AM , Rating: 3
1st I've heard about this desktop search feature. Sounds like it's for disorganized people- perhaps I should try it. Pretty bad if you can't find anything on your desktop screen. I downloaded IE7, and I don't care for it- seems to have done away with the history icon, also adds bookmark icon, which is same as favorites, which is still there. Mainly, though, it seems to hic-cup and become non-responsive too often. Don't know why I "upgraded".
It's so nice to have the likes of cornfedone making such stimulating contributions to what I thought was a technical forum/website.




RE: Desktop Search? IE7 and Cornfedone
By djcameron on 2/2/2007 11:34:55 AM , Rating: 2
try Avant Browser http://www.avantbrowser.com It's kinda like firefox, but it uses the IE engine, so you get speed and compatibility too.


By xpnewbie on 2/2/2007 12:41:02 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the suggestion. Any obvious pros/cons between firefox and avant?


By lazyinjin on 2/2/2007 10:31:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
and I’ll bet that less than 10 percent of Windows users went and got that.


So for the 90% that didn't get the desktop search or the 70% that didn't get IE7, they should shell out hundreds of dollars to get those free upgrades through Vista?

If *built-in* updates are the highlight for which people should switch to Vista, count me out!




By Razlakh on 2/2/2007 10:43:55 AM , Rating: 2
Because obviously all you're paying for in Vista are two updates for Windows XP.


By shamgar03 on 2/2/2007 11:21:37 AM , Rating: 1
It is a really interesting point. Everyone complains about how insecure windows is but so few people take the 5 minutes to upgrade. And then they switch to apples when their pc's are so full of virus' they can't even create a page file. What bill gates doesn't get, that apple does: people are sheep. They follow fads, they don't know about upgrades and they complain about microsoft (because everyone else does).


By theapparition on 2/2/2007 12:41:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What bill gates doesn't get, that apple does: people are sheep.

Maybe you should let him know that. Clearly Apple's 3% desktop share is far superior to Microsoft's 95% share. Too bad micorsoft just doesn't get it.


On the flip side
By djc208 on 2/2/2007 11:36:57 AM , Rating: 2
Those commercials have annoyed me from the beginning. Some of them are outright lies, like the one about how Macs are compatable with just about any peripheral. Most are blatent marketing spin. My personal favorite is the "I'm a PC" ones from when Bootcamp came out. They port their OS onto a slightly customized Windows PC and make it sound like they've invented the wheel when they let you do what the hardware was originally designed to do anyway.
I think the real point is not that Mac's can run Windows, it's that Windows can run on ANYTHING now. You can go from Windows on your PC to Windows on your cell phone/PDA to Windows on your X-Box and now Windows on your MAC.
OS X may be prettier and more intuitive, but it should be considering it doesn't have to be nearly as flexible or versitile.
I still want to see a spoof commercial where PC is dressed as a character from HL2 or some other popular game trying to get MAC to join in online and MAC can only bow out because there's no version of the game for the Macs and he'd have to buy a copy of Windows and the game to run it in bootcamp and even then it wouldn't run as well as on a similarly priced PC because the hardware isn't as good, and you can't just go to NewEgg and get the latest hardware because it's not Mac approved, etc, etc.




RE: On the flip side
By MobileZone on 2/2/2007 12:27:44 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, the one of the japanese camera compatibility is the extreme. They've passed the limits with that one.

Most of the cool hardware out there IS NOT mac friendly. Not to mention softwares...


RE: On the flip side
By Chris Peredun on 2/5/2007 1:12:07 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I still want to see a spoof commercial where PC is dressed as a character from HL2 or some other popular game trying to get MAC to join in online and MAC can only bow out because there's no version of the game for the Macs and he'd have to buy a copy of Windows and the game to run it in bootcamp and even then it wouldn't run as well as on a similarly priced PC because the hardware isn't as good, and you can't just go to NewEgg and get the latest hardware because it's not Mac approved, etc, etc.


PC (dressed as Gordon Freeman): Hi, I'm a PC.
Mac (dressed normally): And I'm a Mac.
(PC picks up a crowbar)
Mac: Whatcha doing, PC?
PC: Oh, I'm going to go crush some alien scum. Want to help?
Mac: That sounds violent.
PC (frustrated): They are trying to conquer our world, you know.
Mac (angry): I'm going to videotape it and make a DVD out of the footage to protest alien abuse.
(PC hits Mac in the knee with the crowbar, who falls down.)
PC: Damn hippies.
(PC exits stage left.)
(Mac winces in pain.)
(Headcrab jumps in from stage right and attaches to Mac's face.)

Mac: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!
Headcrab: Chirp!
fin


I agree
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 2/2/2007 9:55:00 AM , Rating: 5
Gates has a point here, the apple ads are getting pretty edgy. But then Steve Jobs is the guy calling the shots and he is one of the most arrogant elitest people on the planet.




RE: I agree
By thebrown13 on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: I agree
By TomZ on 2/2/2007 12:58:51 PM , Rating: 1
Edgy has come-and-gone a while back. Now they're just annoying. It's like they put Jobs' personality into a commercial. He comes across as an okay guy when you first see him, but when you see him again and again, you realize he's just an arrogant ass. The commercials convey that perfectly.

Compare Jobs' personality to Gates'. I think Jobs' is a Gates wanna-be, and he's just pissed because he'll never get to that level. Gates just seems like an ordinary guy.


funniest thing I ever read on DailyTech
By DEredita on 2/2/07, Rating: 0
By clemedia on 2/2/2007 1:34:50 PM , Rating: 2
actually this part made me laugh more " “Does honesty matter in these things, or if you're really cool, that means you get to be a lying person whenever you feel like it?"

LOL


By Nedjo on 2/2/2007 1:36:26 PM , Rating: 3
More for you to laugh ;)

I call this one "Youth":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYjRqeGZmPE

This one I call "Third rate products":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upzKj-1HaKw

This is my favorite:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEAGmBRC1dc

This one is about THE most respected and influential "tech" magazine on the planet, and nearby galaxy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAo4WjFzvZU

And this one is when advert masters from the plane Cupertino are starting to practice their magic! I guess that this series of ads is the one that gates has on mind when he is speaking about lackof any honesty, and truth in this "I'm a blablabla" campaign:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X9FN39oa2A

Did you really noticed that any of the "Wintel" PC producers are ever spoke negatively or in any context whatsoever about apple hardware? I didn't, that why this ad is so "thief running and creaming - get the thief" style:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaNzb7hmtB4

Isn't this misleading trough comedy form:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ot9Jp6-mB-8

I mean, it states that PC hasn't got any multimedia, or "fun" capabilities!

More misleading about (non)existence of web cameras on the PC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xuzY4VFlkA

And about this "better" programs, and platform:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsQ8oeuN_Nw

This one is really funny... misleading, but funny:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aF_H7SMjVE

But, at the end it can't be denied that this campaign has made real success in making keeping attention to the half a min. ad. As a matter of fact it spawned more stupid ads like this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6Y3nUH_0-8

but I've ROFL watching this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PUamBNnK_E

But it makes sense if you consider that Al Gor and Steve Jobs are such god friends!



Mac ad I'd like to see
By walk2k on 2/2/2007 12:52:16 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to see one of these Mac ads where the PC guy is playing all kinds of cool games and the Mac guy is sitting there bored... or playing that puzzle game.

Now THAT would be truth in advertising.

Don't get me wrong, nothing wrong with Macs per se, for general home use, web surfing email etc... they are great. I just hate the smug superiority and outright LIES in those ads.... HURR DURR THE PC COMES IN DIFFERENT BOXES AND YOU HAVE TO PLUG ALL THESE CORDS DURRR HURRR...




RE: Mac ad I'd like to see
By imattrix on 2/2/2007 1:15:30 PM , Rating: 3
If Microsoft were as evil as everyone claims, they would do an ad where a child actually bursts into tears when he finds out that dad's new G9 with OS XIII won't run his favorite DirectX game.

Then there would be a touching wide shot of dad and junior at the Customer Service counter returning the Mac and an understanding clerk say, "Sir, these things run practically nothing in the store."

Last scene: Father and child all smiles as they leave the store with several PCs and a new XBOX-360 with some titles in TWO carts...and some spare CHANGE to boot!


I think the ads are funny
By dajeepster on 2/2/2007 1:55:33 PM , Rating: 3
I'm hard core pc user. I actively use 5 pcs at home... just for me.. the macs are just too expensive for my taste for a single computer...
But I think the ads are hilarious :D
they're very well done.




RE: I think the ads are funny
By just4U on 2/4/2007 2:46:48 AM , Rating: 2
I totally agree with you. I made another statement down below on it .. <grin> should have just posted to your's instead.. (sorry didnt see it!



Gates on Mac
By thedoctorisin on 2/3/2007 5:03:10 PM , Rating: 2
My goodness... all these intelligent posters and yet so many are insulting and abusive. Kids, that just undercuts the point you want to make.

My wife, a mathematician who has worked in atomic research and, later, aernonautical design, has worked with Crays (programing her own code, of course) and has owned any number of Wintel computers. After watching what I routinely accomplish using OS 10.4.x, she switched to Mac, dumping three Windows machines. After two years she's yet to find a need for a single piece of Windows software. I do not think that Windows users are clueless, unsophisticated, brainwashed, classless or otherwise deficient. They've just learned to live with an inelegant, clunky system that crashes so routinely that that seems part of the background noise of life. I do think the Mac offers a far more pleasant environment for both work and play. Doesn't do everything. Doesn't do everything well. But compared to Windows? A colleague who was required by circumstance to run the same software on both Windows and Mac machines described the comparison to me as follows: "After running it on a Mac, using Windows is like making love wearing boxing gloves." I see his point.

I greatly admire Bill Gates for his remarkable charitable works, even thinking that his example -- like Bill Clinton's work fighting AIDS in 3rd world countries -- might deserve a Nobel Peace prize. But I do not understand his virulence in insisting that Vista does not copy OSX. Sure looks like a pretty poor copy to me.




RE: Gates on Mac
By TomZ on 2/3/2007 5:31:46 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
My goodness... all these intelligent posters and yet so many are insulting and abusive. Kids, that just undercuts the point you want to make.

Funny you would put those two sentences after one another. First, you say that posters here shouldn't insult one another, and then you promptly insult the posters here. Interesting.

Anyway, all I would say about the bulk of your post is that you express an opinion about how you think OS X is better. You make them sound like facts, but they are just your opinions. Let's be clear about the difference.

Saying that Windows is "inelegant" and a "clunky system" is totally subjective (I, for one, disagree). Also, by your statement about Windows crashing often, I would guess that you only ran older Windows versions, because modern versions (Win2K, XP, 2003, and Vista) are incredibly stable. Finally, there are many Mac users that report frequent crashes, so it is not like Macs are problem-free.


RE: Gates on Mac
By ThisRegistrationSucks on 2/4/2007 2:36:07 AM , Rating: 2
So your point is that a mathematician, who writes her own code for the Cray, prefers a Mac and that makes it a better choice for those who find using a two button mouse too much of a challenge?

I have two people in my life who have swallowed the Apple koolaid. One "proudly" states that she won't allow any Windows machine in her home. Great. She's a film maker who uses Final Cut. She'll render video for hours only to find a glitch necessitates doing it all over again - once she gets her husband to trouble shoot whatever the problem is "this time." But Macs just work™. Strangely, she never seems to blame her Mac for any problem regardless of how much hair she's pulled out of her head.

The second person was a die hard Windows guy who bought AAPL at $19 and now is an ordained Mac minister. He loves to show people what he can do with his new Apple computers, like create a slide show of vacation pictures with music underneath. Problem is, everyone is getting tired of listening to Greensleeves under every slide show. But he can't change it because he doesn't know how.

In fact, he often gets stuck in the middle of showing off because, contrary to all the proselytizing, you can't just turn the computer on and know what to do with it. You have to be taught how to use it. No shame in that, except I guess that's somehow denying the one true god.

Point out to him that his Mac doesn't seem to work any better than his old Windows computers and he gets absolutely irate even, or especially, when he cannot get it to do something as seemingly simple as opening up a photo. He's always got an excuse because, as we all know, Macs just work™.

Finally, Apple does know how to design eye catching products. The ipod is beautiful. But I dumped mine for an iaudio because it plays FLAC files, allows me to set bookmarks so that if I don't listen to an audio book for a few days I don't have to try to remember where I left off and, most of all, I don't have to use that awful itunes crap software. Now I can just drag and drop files to and from the iaudio and, unlike the ipod, it plays them. Imagine that™.

I gave my girlfriend the ipod but, thank you jesus, I can use Sharepod, a sub 1MB program to load music back and forth. No more itunes. No quicktime trying to take over my computer. See, if Apple actually encouraged third party developers they might get their beautiful hardware to evolve into something even better than what it was supposed to be.

Apple: Do Less!™


By gandalf5619 on 2/4/2007 2:25:33 PM , Rating: 2
First, for all you newbies out there the first true, viable "personal computer" was the Apple. The first IBM machine that approached that market was the PC Junior. That was in the late 70's early 80's. Therefore, the word PC has nothing to do with IBM or Microsoft in its origin. Second, all those machines of that time were text driven machines. Apples ran ProDos and IBMs ran DOS.

In 1984 the first Mac came out. It came with/was BORN with a mouse from day one. Everything you see today on your misnamed "PC" orginated on a Mac. Point and click, cut and paste, drag and drop, double clicking, windows, desktops, menubars, pulldown menus, icons, scroll bars, highlighting text, buttons and check boxes (a GUI). Essentially, the internet and your PC as they appear today are the way they are because of the Macintosh Computer and Apple. If it were't for the Mac, you'd still be running DOS and typing in command lines.

Bottom line is this.... the difference between a Mac and an IBM/Windows Box/your PC, is the difference between a real woman (the Macintosh) and a transvestite (the IBM/WINDOZE BOX/your PC). Get it now?

Essentially, your machines are attempting to perpetrate a fraud. They're immitating Macs. You know what they say about immitation, its the best form of flattery. But I pose to you this question.... why would you want an immitation when you can have the original? I wouldn't.

FYI-Mice weren't a part of an out of the box PC until well after 1992. Until then, you had to buy a card, pop it into your computer, load drivers, cross your fingers and pray that it would work and wouldn't crash your system.

And for the idiot who said that Mac operators don't know how to configure their computers, I say this... I CAN configure both my Mac and your PC. I can run Windows and Mac OS, can you say the same?

BTW- my Mac can read from and write to any disk formatted on your PC. But... if I were to format a disk for my Mac and write a Word file to it, could your IBM clone read it? Nope!


Additionally, regarding viruses and such.... there are well over 17,000 out there to infect your system. For mine... there are only some 600. BIG difference, wouldn't you say? And... with OSX (which I'm running now), which is a UNIX based system, there are even less.

And now, with the newest Macs, I can run Windows (not that I'd want to), Mac OSX and Linux on my machines. And you?
I think you're limited to only two, aren't you? Hey, I can run both (OSX and Windows) simultanteously, what about you?

So tell me again about who has the superior machine? When was the last time your PC crashed? And what was the number of the last security patch you installed on your superior OS? Weren't they coming out with security patches about once a week for a while there last year? Nah, that must've been somebody else's OS, not Microsoft Windows, right?

I think you should reconsider your conclusions. Its obvious you're confused and ill informed, to say the least. Oh,... but there are a lot more games out there for PC's. That should make you happy. ;)-~

Don't get angry... get smarter.




By retrospooty on 2/4/2007 3:28:42 PM , Rating: 3
oh pleese... spare us all the rhetoric, and fast forward to current reality. Your far superior platform that went (admittedly) from being a far superior, revolutionary system that others copied in the 80's and early 90's to a near non-contender in the industry that it basically created. How does that whopping 3% global marketshare come out of such a superior platform? I guess it is so much better that everyone went away from it eh?

I hold to what I said above... "The truth is, both OS's are very similar in function and do most of the same things. I don't accept that Mac's are easier to use. I have used both extensively and disagree. I call it a tie. Both have good and bad points and in the end it is up to your own personal preference. " I also disagree that they are more stable, or safe.

Your virus count is indicative of how insignificant the Mac platform is in today's market. 3% of the market gets no attention at all from the virus writing assbags out there. If Mac were 90% of the global market, there would be just as many attacks, perhaps less successful ones, but you get the point.

As far as newer Mac's running windows and not vice versa, that is because windows works with any hardware, whereas I cannot buy OSX and install it on my own home built machine, or a store bought one for that matter (believe me, I would LOVE to pay good money and buy it and install it as a dual boot system, but I refuse to buy Apples hardware) . Lets see Apple support 100's of thousands of peripherals and the required drivers for such and see how far they get.... Oh wait, Jobs wont allow it, WAY too difficult to be an open platform, lets just bash PC for doing it not quite as perfectly as apple would have if they had the balls to have tried.

Last time my PC crashed.... Never. XP is NOT win95, that was so 12 years ago. ;)

I am sure you are an intelligent individual, and know how to configure your own computer. Given that knowledge some of what I just said must make sense, and you surely must understand, or at least have a theory why most people choose PC over Mac correct?


Nothing better to do, huh?
By ToeCutter on 2/4/2007 3:40:24 PM , Rating: 2
The sheer length of this thread demonstrates the grievous ignorance on BOTH sides of this debate (pissing contest is probably a more accurate description).

What exactly is the point of arguing Windows over Mac or vice versa? Seriously? There's plenty of room for Windows and Mac. Besides, who really gives a rat's ass what kind of computer someone else uses?

It's pathetic that every DT comment board has digressed to some type of geek-fight, REGARDLESS of topic.

These comment boards have zero redeeming social value. What a waste of bandwidth...




RE: Nothing better to do, huh?
By Factuator on 2/4/2007 5:51:56 PM , Rating: 2
Yet you've read them and bothered to post your judgement. GEEK.


RE: Nothing better to do, huh?
By TomZ on 2/4/2007 6:02:54 PM , Rating: 1
I can understand ignoring the debate. I can understand reading the debate. I can understand participating in the debate.

Complaining about the debate? I can't understand the point of that.