A write-up on hating the Macs

[petrarch]

Or - in case of the iPad - buying a pair of reading glasses and having the producer tell you you could only read books approved by them.

The rumours about the draconian hold the company has on their hardware are greatly exaggerated. I read arbitrary PDFs without any issues on my iPhone (and by extension this is also possible on iPad and iPod Touch) synced through iTunes from the computer and I have never had to go through Apple's ebook store to be able to do it.

[The new erato]

The rumours about the draconian hold the company has on their hardware are greatly exaggerated. I read arbitrary PDFs without any issues on my iPhone (and by extension this is also possible on iPad and iPod Touch) synced through iTunes from the computer and I have never had to go through Apple's ebook store to be able to do it.

Well the fact is that any publsiher not willing to pay a 30 % fee, or getting licensed under Apples' publishing rules, won't be allowed to be published on the iPAD. Including a Danish newspaper showing bare breast on their page 3 girl.

[Gurn Blanston]

If you don't understand that this isn't about quality of product (and my Windows setup haven't crashed for years, either), the spindoctors at Apple already have you firmly in their hand. And I'm not a Mac hater, just very sceptical to the corporate control Apple more or less openly are wielding over it's (more or less uncritical) users. This isn't about Macs, iPhones or iPADs, it's about Apple. Your post certainly confirm my suspicions.

What really amazes me is how Apple have managed to instill a sense, in their users, of being the independent alternative for free and creative minds, while all the time being one of the most controlling big business companies of all time.

Ditto.

[petrarch]

Well the fact is that any publsiher not willing to pay a 30 % fee, or getting licensed under Apples' publishing rules, won't be allowed to be published on the iPAD. Including a Danish newspaper showing bare breast on their page 3 girl.

Publishers need to adapt or die. Many independent authors prefer getting 70% of the price than the meagre 5-15% they get through a regular publisher. The same is happening to apps when sold through an app store.

[The new erato]

Your're still not getting the point are you?

The point being that we as consumers are pushing the controlling rights of what we are allowed to use on our devices to an US mega corporation. And that the publishers are put in the same vice.

I couldn't care less what authors are paid. At least when I visit a bookstore - or buys a book more generally - I am free to buy from whatever source I want, anything that takes my fancy. When I buy a device - any device - I should be able to define my use of it myself, without the device producer telling me what use I can put it too.

What's next? Telling me who I am free to call on my iPhone? 

[Cato]

If you don't understand that this isn't about quality of product (and my Windows setup haven't crashed for years, either), the spindoctors at Apple already have you firmly in their hand. And I'm not a Mac hater, just very sceptical to the corporate control Apple more or less openly are wielding over it's (more or less uncritical) users. This isn't about Macs, iPhones or iPADs, it's about Apple. Your post certainly confirm my suspicions.

What really amazes me is how Apple have managed to instill a sense, in their users, of being the independent alternative for free and creative minds, while all the time being one of the most controlling big business companies of all time.

My creativity is in very good shape!   0:)

Since I do not try to break into programs and alter them, for whatever reason, I apparently "have no dog in this fight."

Apple decided to forsake market share for control of its product: they have free will.  How exactly they are "controlling" my use of my MacBook is completely unclear to me.   Do you mean the Apple Police will show up and arrest me, if I use my computer for the third-base bag in a baseball game?        It does everything I need, and more than I want: but maybe I have been unwittingly zombieized      and am lost and "firmly in their hand."   

Here is the solution: never buy their stuff, if you think they are some sort of monolithic monster.   

They do indeed have a superior product, as far as I am concerned.  My school computer, the progeny of Bill Gates, despite endless patches, fixes, and upgrades, crashes regularly twice or more per week.  The entire system crashes several times per month, all Dell/Microsoft products.  But if this is not about the quality of the product, then I am indeed uninterested.  Let the marketplace spank Apple - which it has - for the way it markets and controls its products.

[DavidRoss]

If you don't understand that this isn't about quality of product (and my Windows setup haven't crashed for years, either), the spindoctors at Apple already have you firmly in their hand. And I'm not a Mac hater, just very sceptical to the corporate control Apple more or less openly are wielding over it's (more or less uncritical) users. This isn't about Macs, iPhones or iPADs, it's about Apple. Your post certainly confirm my suspicions.

What really amazes me is how Apple have managed to instill a sense, in their users, of being the independent alternative for free and creative minds, while all the time being one of the most controlling big business companies of all time.

Exactly!

Apple decided to forsake market share for control of its product: they have free will.  How exactly they are "controlling" my use of my MacBook is completely unclear to me.   Do you mean the Apple Police will show up and arrest me, if I use my computer for the third-base bag in a baseball game?        It does everything I need, and more than I want: but maybe I have been unwittingly zombieized      and am lost and "firmly in their hand."   

Here is the solution: never buy their stuff, if you think they are some sort of monolithic monster.   

They do indeed have a superior product, as far as I am concerned.  My school computer, the progeny of Bill Gates, despite endless patches, fixes, and upgrades, crashes regularly twice or more per week.  The entire system crashes several times per month, all Dell/Microsoft products.  But if this is not about the quality of the product, then I am indeed uninterested.  Let the marketplace spank Apple - which it has - for the way it markets and controls its products.

I love you, Cato, but like many of your non-tekkie schoolman colleagues, subsidized Macs have "loved you long time" and you don't get the issue Erato and I and others are addressing.

Apple didn't choose to forsake market share--they got clobbered by a democratic marketplace free-for-all.  Gates doesn't make PCs--never did.  He just offered an operating system that will work on lots of different hardware configurations.  Every damn hardware geek in the world started making better vid cards, motherboards, processors, storage devices, and applications to run on the OS.  There was mad competition (and still is, though it's a bit tamer now than a dozen years ago) that caused all of it to get better and better and at lower and lower prices.  The consumer benefited enormously and everyone in the world went to Windows OS PCs.

Apple went from OWNING the PC market to about 3% market share--and that was only because they'd gotten the schools hooked on their product.  The company was about to die when it brought Jobs back and he turned it around with clever marketing and propriety products.  Their advertising dept is very clever at turning bugs into features.  And rather than getting spanked in the marketplace, they've been rewarded very handsomely.  And all that iPod then iPhone cachet has spilled over a bit into their PC biz and they've picked up some market share there, too.

The only reason PCs are less inherently stable (well, they aren't really) is because they're so open.  They're like going to a major cosmopolitan city where everything is available and there's no telling what kind of folks you'll run into and how well they'll all get along.  Apple Macs, on the other hand, are like a very safe, gated, white bread planned community, where the riff-raff are kept out and the residents are captive customers at the company store.

Sure, there are tekkie reasons to dislike Apple, but the biggest reason is political/economic--and folks like Erato and me just hate the slimy hypocrisy of their slick advertising that turns reality on its head.

[Gurn Blanston]

The only reason PCs are less inherently stable (well, they aren't really) is because they're so open.  They're like going to a major cosmopolitan city where everything is available and there's no telling what kind of folks you'll run into and how well they'll all get along.  Apple Macs, on the other hand, are like a very safe, gated, white bread planned community, where the riff-raff are kept out and the residents are captive customers at the company store.

Just wanted to add here that my work PC, a now-old Dell running Win XP, has been running continuously on my desk for 3+ years with not a single crash. The only time it has been rebooted is when I get one of those patches that seem to piss off the Applers so badly (and why is that?). If it wasn't for that, my Outlook trash basket would be overflowing! BTW, I use this computer 8-10 hours a day, 5 days a week. Running all the software you can imagine. And despite its affordable price tag, it seems to just zip along keeping up. Go figure!     

[Scarpia]

What I am getting here is that Windows users have the unique knowledge that you can't do anything with an Apple, while Apple users are under the delusion that they are happy with their computers and can do what they want to do very conveniently. 

[DavidRoss]

What I am getting here is that Windows users have the unique knowledge that you can't do anything with an Apple, while Apple users are under the delusion that they are happy with their computers and can do what they want to do very conveniently.

That's what happens when you read selectively for the sake of reinforcing your existing beliefs.  Go figure. 

[Scarpia]

I use Windows computers for almost everything, but I find it an extremely poorly designed platform.  My main system is XP and I have accumulated all of the software I need to get things done in XP, but now Microsoft won't let you buy XP anymore.  I have a laptop that ran Vista out of the box, and 30% of the software I use won't stall on Vista properly, wont install at all, or operates weird under Vista.  Then I got a free upgrade to Windows 7, and even more software won't install or run properly.  Why can't they make Windows 7 so that it can run be compatible with XP?   The external sound card that worked fine with XP goes haywire under Windows 7, every time I restart the computer I have to go into to control panel and set it to 16 bit mode.  On reboot it automatically resets to 24 bit mode, then reports that 24 bit mode doesn't work.  The Microsoft compiler I used under XP instructs me to buy a new version when I try to install on Windows 7.  My text editor can't list itself as the "open with" menu.   My symbolic math program can't write files under Windows 7, they substituted an incompatible version of Java with no backwards compatibility with the old version.  Do Mac people have these problems?

[drogulus]

     I haven't had much of a problem with program compatibility as I've moved from XP to Vista to 7. It really comes down to how well the programs are updated. From the OS point of view it's better if old programs are broken, otherwise the OS will be frozen. Vista/7 is a deliberate break from XP, and I'm pretty sure MS was right to make the change.

[Scarpia]

     I haven't had much of a problem with program compatibility as I've moved from XP to Vista to 7. It really comes down to how well the programs are updated. From the OS point of view it's better if old programs are broken, otherwise the OS will be frozen. Vista/7 is a deliberate break from XP, and I'm pretty sure MS was right to make the change.

I don't see why it could not be designed to recognize software designed for previous versions and respond appropriately, while providing enhanced capabilities for applications that make use of them.  What fundamental thing can Windows 7 do that XP couldn't?  It has translucent window frames, but I'd say that's about it.

[Cato]

That's what happens when you read selectively for the sake of reinforcing your existing beliefs.  Go figure. 

Well, I did figure,      and did not read selectively, and like I said, have "do dog in this fight," but do find the divide     and the debate fascinating!   0:)

[drogulus]

I don't see why it could not be designed to recognize software designed for previous versions and respond appropriately, while providing enhanced capabilities for applications that make use of them.  What fundamental thing can Windows 7 do that XP couldn't?  It has translucent window frames, but I'd say that's about it.

     Maybe it doesn't do much except run new programs designed for it. Future-proofing with partial backwards compatibility isn't all that visible until you try to run an old program that hasn't been modified or rewritten to keep up. My experience is that Vista/7 compatibility is getting close to universal for programs that are maintained. I don't see Win 7 updates/versions/patches that don't work. The same is true for 64 bit. It used to be a problem, now under 7 it just isn't any more. How much of this is due to programmers catching up or how much is Win 7 being far better at compatibility for 32 bit I can't say.

[petrarch]

Your're still not getting the point are you?

The point being that we as consumers are pushing the controlling rights of what we are allowed to use on our devices to an US mega corporation. And that the publishers are put in the same vice.

I couldn't care less what authors are paid. At least when I visit a bookstore - or buys a book more generally - I am free to buy from whatever source I want, anything that takes my fancy. When I buy a device - any device - I should be able to define my use of it myself, without the device producer telling me what use I can put it too.

What's next? Telling me who I am free to call on my iPhone?

So, just continue not buying the device. Since you mention iPhone, I also find it interesting that the so-called "free" option (Android) is usually provided with uninstallable bloatware put in by the telcos with all sorts of limitations to prevent you from upgrading the OS.

I find it fascinating that PC users are somehow "enlightened" while Mac users are just poor manipulated people. As "enlightened" as PC users are, they sure are creative with their views as to what the others can and should do.

In any case, I don't care. I am a happy user of both platforms.

[DavidRoss]

I find it fascinating that PC users are somehow "enlightened" while Mac users are just poor manipulated people. As "enlightened" as PC users are, they sure are creative with their views as to what the others can and should do.

Huh?  Perhaps I missed something but I didn't see this.  Some folks expressed their distaste for Apple--mostly for their business practices--on the "Hatin' Macs" thread.  Some other folks came aboard to trash talk Windows PCs.  I didn't see any PC users telling anyone else what they can and should do.

[drogulus]

    I have no interest in the theology of Win vs Mac, only the practicalities. I don't view Apple as an especially manipulative corporation, just an exceptionally successful corporation. That success is not necessarily attributable to the success of the manipulation. It might even be in spite of it. The products are really good according to owners of them. I only have an iPod, and based on its performance I'd say it's a great product . That matters more than the other stuff.

[petrarch]

Huh?  Perhaps I missed something but I didn't see this.  Some folks expressed their distaste for Apple--mostly for their business practices--on the "Hatin' Macs" thread.  Some other folks came aboard to trash talk Windows PCs.  I didn't see any PC users telling anyone else what they can and should do.

Let's see:

Or - in case of the iPad - buying a pair of reading glasses and having the producer tell you you could only read books approved by them.

PC OS's are still modestly flexible in letting you hack and whack and do what you want. Unless things have changed, that's not true of Mac's.

But the point is that if you don't like IE you can junk it and use Firefox or Chrome. If you don't like Office, you can use any other suite you want. If you don't like Photoshop, you can use CorelDraw/CorelPaint. AFAIK, you can't just pick any software that suits your fancy and put it on your Mac. Especially: if you don't like iTunes, then that's too freakin' bad. I have/use a half dozen little digital music apps, and if I don't like one all I have to do is delete it and get another one. If you delete iTunes, correct me if I'm overstating, but I believe you are screwed!

I won't touch an Apple product as long as they insist on being in control of my use of it. It's like buying a car and having the manufacturer tell you - no; forcing you - to drive it as they intended, and only into areas accepted by them. Who in their right mind would accept that?

What really amazes me is how Apple have managed to instill a sense, in their users, of being the independent alternative for free and creative minds, while all the time being one of the most controlling big business companies of all time.

...in other words, 1) you can't do much on a Mac without the blessing of the company, and 2) Mac users should stop being so pliable and manipulated and embrace freedom. Some of these are greatly exaggerated as I mentioned previously and others are just factually untrue.

[DavidRoss]

Nope--none of the passages you excerpted include Windows PC users telling Mac users what they can and should do.