QuoteThey make you feel good, Apple products – until you try to do something they don't want you to do
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/28/charlie-brooker-pfroblem-with-macs
That is a simply splendid, understated, spot-on little bit of editorialism. The Mac'er's among us simply haven't a clue and will complain about having their 'nads unfairly kicked (again), but for any PC user who has had even peripheral contact with an Apple device, it is the Truth Writ Large. 0:)
8)
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on March 28, 2011, 05:35:50 AM
That is a simply splendid, understated, spot-on little bit of editorialism. The Mac'er's among us simply haven't a clue and will complain about having their 'nads unfairly kicked (again), but for any PC user who has had even peripheral contact with an Apple device, it is the Truth Writ Large. 0:)
8)
He may have a bit of an attitude, but the content is pretty much true. Just today, I was trying to get itunes to show me the path for all my files. It simply isn;t a choice. Windows Media, Media Monkey, etc. all show it or have it as an easy option to add. But not itunes. I guess I am not supposed to look under the hood...
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on March 28, 2011, 05:35:50 AM
That is a simply splendid, understated, spot-on little bit of editorialism. The Mac'er's among us simply haven't a clue and will complain about having their 'nads unfairly kicked (again), but for any PC user who has had even peripheral contact with an Apple device, it is the Truth Writ Large.
It's true that iTunes is a monolithic beast and if you want to sync on a (non-jailbroken) iOS device, you have to use it. But that's all. Want to play any music or video format on a Mac? Use VLC. Want to stream FLACs and dozens of other esoteric formats from your computer to iPad/iPod/iPhone? Use Squeeze Center with iPeng and the player add-on. Want to write a script, program an application? Use Xcode or any of the open source tools and languages that run on your typical Unix flavored OS. Want to run your favorite Windows apps? Get Parallels or Fusion and install Windows on a VM. For ebooks, get a Kindle. Etc, etc, usw. And iTunes is actually a breeze to use on and integrated with the Apple TV, which is the only reason I fire it up on a daily basis.
I use Windows 7 in a pretty souped-up development machine at work. 3 years ago I went the Mac way at home with some reticence due to the feeling that I wound lose control and would no longer be a power user on my own computer. Unfounded fear. 90% of the time, I find I don't really need that control and I just want the thing to work and not waste my patience with flakey drivers or abysmal user experience. The remaining 10% is spent doing work-related Windows-only tasks and for that I fire up Win 7 on Fusion on my MBP. Best of both worlds. The peace of mind that "it just works" is invaluable and I will never go back. Clueless? No. Stress-free? Yes.
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?
I particularly enjoyed this passage:
Quote"The better-designed and more ubiquitous they become, the more I dislike them . . . I don't care if every Mac product comes with a magic button on the side that makes it piddle gold coins and resurrect the dead. I'm not buying one, so shut up and go home."
Why? Because I hate Apple's propriety exploitation of folks who don't know any better...almost as much as I hate Apple fan-boys' insufferably smug ignorance.
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on March 28, 2011, 05:35:50 AM
That is a simply splendid, understated, spot-on little bit of editorialism. The Mac'er's among us simply haven't a clue and will complain about having their 'nads unfairly kicked (again), but for any PC user who has had even peripheral contact with an Apple device, it is the Truth Writ Large. 0:)
Quote from: mc ukrneal on March 28, 2011, 05:54:26 AM
He may have a bit of an attitude, but the content is pretty much true. Just today, I was trying to get itunes to show me the path for all my files. It simply isn;t a choice. Windows Media, Media Monkey, etc. all show it or have it as an easy option to add. But not itunes. I guess I am not supposed to look under the hood...
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 06:25:58 AM
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?
Amen to all. Others' mileage may vary. Some folks obviously like paying twice as much for half the performance to a giant authoritarian corporate monolith because they feel cool every time they lap up Apple's slick advertising that makes them feel as if they're "hip, with-it rebels striking a blow against the giant authoritarian corporate monolith."
And I doubly despise them (although I respect the marketing deviousness) for getting in bed with the schools so they can get kids hooked on their products. I don't like electronic drug pushers on school campuses any more than I like chemical ones.
Those interested in the subject might also like http://www.marketwatch.com/story/missing-the-point-on-apple-its-a-retailer-2011-03-25?siteid=rss&rss=1
I haven't noticed that Windows 7, or any prior versions, was so enthusiastic about letting me do what I want the way I want. It was Microsoft that introduced incompatibility as a weapon.
I remember fondly when I was in the Unix world, where the systems were designed to inter-operate, in their clunky way. The one thing MAC OS has going for it is that it is Unix underneath and you can open a command window and pretend it is a Unix platform.
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 28, 2011, 09:14:03 AM
I haven't noticed that Windows 7, or any prior versions, was so enthusiastic about letting me do what I want the way I want. It was Microsoft that introduced incompatibility as a weapon.
I remember fondly when I was in the Unix world, where the systems were designed to inter-operate, in their clunky way. The one thing MAC OS has going for it is that it is Unix underneath and you can open a command window and pretend it is a Unix platform.
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! :o
8)
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on March 28, 2011, 09:25:26 AM
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! :o
8)
Hmm? They control what "apps" you can get in their iPhone "Appstore" but anyone can write an application for Mac and sell it, no? You can get OpenOffice on Mac. You can also get Firefox for Mac.
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 28, 2011, 09:14:03 AM
The one thing MAC OS has going for it is that it is Unix underneath and you can open a command window and pretend it is a Unix platform.
Yeah but at that point just load up BSD, or if you are lazy, like i am, some prepped up Linux distribution (the best i found being Mint).
Currently running Mint 10 (Gnome based) with Windows XP in dual boot to satisfy my gaming needs. I just cannot imagine a reason to ever use an Apple product, at all. I bought an Ipod classic because at the time it had the largest hard disk among similar devices and i've regretted my purchase ever since. It took me hundred of hours to fill it up, and that's with using some third party substitute to itunes. Not to mention all the time spent in devising some sort of tagging system to sort out all that music. I could have saved myself hours upon hours of tedium with a simple drag and drop operation, but nooooooooo, Apple is too good for that.
(http://gadgetsteria.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/lol-cat-middle-finger.jpg)
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 06:25:58 AM
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?
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.
I don't hate Macs, I just don't need one. PCs are enough for me, and they are amazingly easy to customize to my liking. If there was a big thing I couldn't do it would be a different story.
I have a quad core PC I bought for ~$500. I added a graphics card and a Blu Ray drive for ~$140, and now it's smokin'. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif) It's preposterous to think a Mac could compare with that.
Another Apple-avoider here, the valium comparison in the article is a good one.
"Sacrifice a little freedom for safety. Now a little more, and some money too."
I prefer the chaotic democracy of the PC :)
Sorry Mac haters!
I had an Apple IIGS for 20 years: 1984 to 2004.
It never crashed, froze, crashed, wobbled, crashed, lost data, or crashed!
I had a used PowerBook for 2 years and then bought a MacBook: neither of them ever crashed, froze, crashed, wobbled, crashed, lost data, or crashed!
Like Mickey Dolenz I'm A Believer! 8)
Windows PCs don't really crash anymore - I can't recall having one since XP.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on March 28, 2011, 10:36:11 AM
Yeah but at that point just load up BSD, or if you are lazy, like i am, some prepped up Linux distribution (the best i found being Mint).
I started using Linux around 1994 (Slackware). I also worked for Red Hat for a few years doing tech support. I used Linux pretty much exclusively until about the time that Apple came out with Tiger.
I've pretty much switched to OS X for most day to day usage. It has a very good terminal app and all the unix tools (I use macports to supplement this), but everything else just works without the heroic tweaking that is so often necessary with Linux. This is mostly a matter of vendor support. I do use an Ubuntu box for my Squeezebox server and for various server and development work.
Hey, Windows Millenium crashed, so PCs suck. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)
The only problem I have on a regular basis is caused by me. The more powerful my PCs get the more I try to do, so I multitask the beast until it slows to a crawl. Typically I'll be doing a giant download while moving hundreds of files to a new drive while transcoding a bunch of other files. If I was a bit more patient I'd just hold off on one of these tasks and everything would be fine. But everything is getting done.
Sounds like Amazon is trying to give Apple a few blows to the solar plexus. First they announce their "App-Store" and now they are advertising their "cloud drive" and "cloud player" allowing you to maintain a music collection on their server, to be played through any conceivable device whenever you want. iTunes killer?
Quote from: Cato on March 28, 2011, 03:46:08 PM
Sorry Mac haters!
I had an Apple IIGS for 20 years: 1984 to 2004.
It never crashed, froze, crashed, wobbled, crashed, lost data, or crashed!
I had a used PowerBook for 2 years and then bought a MacBook: neither of them ever crashed, froze, crashed, wobbled, crashed, lost data, or crashed!
Like Mickey Dolenz I'm A Believer! 8)
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.
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 01:17:36 PM
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.
Quote from: petrarch on March 29, 2011, 02:46:15 AM
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.
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 11:06:02 PM
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.
8)
Quote from: The new erato on March 29, 2011, 03:05:55 AM
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.
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?
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 11:06:02 PM
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 :o and am lost and "firmly in their hand." ;D
Here is the solution: never buy their stuff, if you think they are some sort of monolithic monster. 8)
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.
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 11:06:02 PM
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!
Quote from: Cato on March 29, 2011, 06:49:23 AM
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 :o and am lost and "firmly in their hand." ;D
Here is the solution: never buy their stuff, if you think they are some sort of monolithic monster. 8)
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.
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 29, 2011, 10:00:52 AM
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! ??? :D
8)
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.
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 29, 2011, 10:33:46 AM
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. ;)
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?
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.
Quote from: drogulus on March 29, 2011, 12:57:39 PM
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.
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 29, 2011, 10:38:34 AM
That's what happens when you read selectively for the sake of reinforcing your existing beliefs. Go figure. ;)
Well, I did figure, 8) 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:)
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 29, 2011, 01:15:11 PM
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.
Quote from: The new erato on March 29, 2011, 05:55:40 AM
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.
Quote from: petrarch on March 29, 2011, 03:44:19 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 29, 2011, 04:37:57 PM
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:
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 01:17:36 PM
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.
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on March 28, 2011, 09:25:26 AM
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!
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 06:25:58 AM
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?
Quote from: The new erato on March 28, 2011, 11:06:02 PM
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.
Nope--none of the passages you excerpted include Windows PC users telling Mac users what they can and should do.
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 29, 2011, 10:41:36 AM
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?
1. Click on Browse.
2. What maths program?
Quote from: Sylph on March 30, 2011, 07:42:11 AM
1. Click on Browse.
2. What maths program?
1. Yes, there are workarounds. But on XP I can right-click on any appropriate file and my text editor is one of the options. On Windows 7 the program fails to register itself for that and the option is buried.
2. Maple. I would have to buy a new version to run it on Windows 7. I know, you can blame Maple for not providing an update, but why did Windows change their interface in such a way that a working procedure for opening a file doesn't work anymore? Rather than buy a new Maple, I simply wipe away any Windows Vista or Windows 7 on systems where I need to run Maple and install from an old XP media. I have not found anything that Windows 7 does better than XP, so this is the most convenient option.
I have never owned any Apple products and that will not likely change anytime in the future.
While the posts on either side have been interesting, the original article link was NOT! The author spent too much time complaining about itunes when autosyncing can be disabled by manually managing your ipod/iphone/ipad yourself.
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on March 28, 2011, 09:25:26 AM
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!
You can do that on a Mac. I know people with Macs that use chrome as their browser, vlc for media, and MS office for the office suite.
Now this is what I don't like about Apple:
1.They are changing the ebook market, it is Jobs insistence on an agency model if publishers want their books sold by Apple that brought this fiasco with overpriced ebooks that seems against the spirit of a free marketplace. As a kindle user this issue has been important and frustrating to me.
2. Apple's product is overpriced (especially their notebooks) compared to the competition. And in this day and age Windows and Linux are user friendly yet powerful enough that you can't justify paying more for the hardware just for the software.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on March 28, 2011, 05:54:26 AM
He may have a bit of an attitude, but the content is pretty much true. Just today, I was trying to get itunes to show me the path for all my files. It simply isn;t a choice. Windows Media, Media Monkey, etc. all show it or have it as an easy option to add. But not itunes. I guess I am not supposed to look under the hood...
iTunes on Windows tells you what you want to know. If you choose to have iTunes organize your music the files are where you specify under Edit>Preferences>Advanced>iTunes media folder location, which you can change to any place you like. If you don't want iTunes to move your files they are where you put them originally. Either way you choose where the files are. If you just
don't know where you put a file right-click it in iTunes and choose 'Show in Windows Explorer'.
If Macs don't allow a similar procedure you have to use the Advanced Option: Smash Mac with a hammer>go to Best Buy and get a real computer (warning: it won't be stylish)>enjoy life. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/angel.gif)
I dunno...after seeing the guy sitting next to me in class nearly toss his brand new HP laptop across the room due to chronic battery depletion - a charge lasts maybe two hours, tops - I can only rejoice that my MacBook's battery has yet to die on me after oogles of hours "unplugged".....
Another nifty feature of my MacBook (don't know if other laptops have this) is the magnetic AC port. With power cords seemingly sprawling everywhere nowadays (for this gadget or that) it's good to know if someone gets themselves tripped up on my cord I won't have a flying laptop on my hands (so to speak....).
Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on April 21, 2011, 08:43:53 PM
I dunno...after seeing the guy sitting next to me in class nearly toss his brand new HP laptop across the room due to chronic battery depletion - a charge lasts maybe two hours, tops - I can only rejoice that my MacBook's battery has yet to die on me after oogles of hours "unplugged".....
Another nifty feature of my MacBook (don't know if other laptops have this) is the magnetic AC port. With power cords seemingly sprawling everywhere nowadays (for this gadget or that) it's good to know if someone gets themselves tripped up on my cord I won't have a flying laptop on my hands (so to speak....).
Laptops are another country. I don't know much about them, other than if they work you're lucky. I bought my GF an Acer laptop 2 Christmases ago. She loves it. She sits on the couch with the laptop and headphones singing along to Dionne Warwick on YouTube. Best damn thing I ever got her.
Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on April 21, 2011, 08:43:53 PM
I dunno...after seeing the guy sitting next to me in class nearly toss his brand new HP laptop across the room due to chronic battery depletion - a charge lasts maybe two hours, tops - I can only rejoice that my MacBook's battery has yet to die on me after oogles of hours "unplugged".....
I left my power chord at home by accident, and went through an entire work day on my laptop and my battery didn't die. Your claims are exaggerated. Modern laptops have 5-8 hours of battery life. If someone was sporting a laptop with 2 hours of battery life it was most likely an older model. That would person would benefit from shelling out $50 for a new battery. Macs have no inherent advantage over pcs on this issue.
Quote from: haydnfan on April 22, 2011, 06:29:21 AM
I left my power chord at home by accident, and went through an entire work day on my laptop and my battery didn't die. Your claims are exaggerated.
Good for you, Dave. But there's nothing at all exaggerated about that dude's problems with his new HP laptop. ::)
QuoteModern laptops have 5-8 hours of battery life. If someone was sporting a laptop with 2 hours of battery life it was most likely an older model.
Did you perhaps miss where I said his laptop was
new? He sits right next to me in class so either:
A) I need glasses as I can't tell a new laptop from an "older model", or
B) He's a liar, since that's what he TOLD ME. As in, he verbally communicated to me his laptop was BRAND NEW!
QuoteMacs have no inherent advantage over pcs on this issue.
I didn't say they did but peace of mind goes a long way towards increasing the inherent value of anything for me. If not for you, so be it.
Quote from: drogulus on April 21, 2011, 11:36:25 PM
Laptops are another country. I don't know much about them, other than if they work you're lucky.
This is my first experience with a laptop so we'll see. What I've heard is laptops are now outselling desktops these days. Whether that means the playing field is leveling out in terms of quality I couldn't say. But in the popularity contest laptops do seem to be edging ahead.
Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on April 22, 2011, 09:14:11 AM
Good for you, Dave. But there's nothing at all exaggerated about that dude's problems with his new HP laptop. ::)
Except I have an hp laptop, and when I was shopping for it last fall, I saw that every hp laptop out now has a battery life of 5-8 hours, and not just mine. So yeah he is lieing to you.
Quote from: haydnfan on April 22, 2011, 09:45:03 AM
So yeah he is lieing to you.
Yet your word is solid gold despite being FAR removed from either my classroom or my classmate? ??? ::) ???
How ridiculous. Utterly lame.
Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on April 22, 2011, 10:27:27 AM
Yet your word is solid gold despite being FAR removed from either my classroom or my classmate? ??? ::) ???
How ridiculous. Utterly lame.
The claim seems bizarre to me, I'm using a T-series Lenovo laptop which is about 1 year old and I'm lucky to get 2 and a half hours on a charge, although I see claims of 5-8 hours on different web sites. I assume that long a battery life requires the outboard battery and assumes the machine is entirely idle. Just booting the thing takes up about 3% of the battery charge.
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on April 22, 2011, 10:33:34 AM
The claim seems bizarre to me, I'm using a T-series Lenovo laptop which is about 1 year old and I'm lucky to get 2 and a half hours on a charge, although I see claims of 5-8 hours on different web sites. I assume that long a battery life requires the outboard battery and assumes the machine is entirely idle. Just booting the thing takes up about 3% of the battery charge.
Well lenovas aren't what they used to be, overpriced, overrated pretty much crap. I looked at it, didn't get enough good reviews and scored poorly on real world performance.
Quote from: haydnfan on April 22, 2011, 10:37:04 AM
Well lenovas aren't what they used to be, overpriced, overrated pretty much crap. I looked at it, didn't get enough good reviews and scored poorly on real world performance.
Quote from: haydnfan on April 22, 2011, 09:45:03 AM
Except I have an hp laptop, and when I was shopping for it last fall, I saw that every hp laptop out now has a battery life of 5-8 hours, and not just mine. So yeah he is lieing to you.
I see you resort to insults or crude language when your word is not taken as gospel truth. Lenovo, HP, Toshiba, and all of the other laptop companies have a variety of configurations with varying battery life. Spending a minute of two on HP's web site I did notice some machines claiming 9 hour battery life, and others claiming only 5, 4, or even 2.5 hours for high performance configurations. It is a matter of how big the battery and how power-hungry the processor and display. Long battery life is not typically found on configurations capable of heavy computation.
My first computing experiences were with Apple - the IIG and then the first of the Macs. I learned to use them and having the first GUI was really great. I'm in education and have to use whatever my school uses so when I became the DP of another school I was forced to switch to PCs. The experience wasn't a good one (anyone remember Win 3.1?). However , since then I have been a PC user and having used some Macs over the years I am happy to stick with PCs and here is why:
1. My i7 Quad PC Core with 8 Gbs of RAM is faster than any Mac on the market
2. A number of programs I use regularly aren't available for Mac
3. In time (sooner rather than later) the hackers out there are going to start targeting their nasties in the direction of the Mac and Macs are woefully under-prepared for this eventuality.
4. I have a wider choice of software with my PC
5. My school does not support Mac and as I do a lot of work from home, if I do need tech support I need to know it's there. Yes, I can use a Mac on our network.
6. I now find the Mac interface rather strange (clunky?) and don't really want to relearn.
These are personal opinions. I'm not a Mac hater, I just prefer my PC.
I apologize for my post, I have a headache was in a bad mood and went a trolling.
Quote from: haydnfan on April 22, 2011, 04:36:27 PM
I apologize for my post, I have a headache was in a bad mood and went a trolling.
No problem.
Quote from: Holden on April 22, 2011, 02:59:25 PM
My first computing experiences were with Apple - the IIG and then the first of the Macs. I learned to use them and having the first GUI was really great. I'm in education and have to use whatever my school uses so when I became the DP of another school I was forced to switch to PCs. The experience wasn't a good one (anyone remember Win 3.1?). However , since then I have been a PC user and having used some Macs over the years I am happy to stick with PCs and here is why:
1. My i7 Quad PC Core with 8 Gbs of RAM is faster than any Mac on the market
Can't see how that is true, you can buy a Mac with Xeon processors (a step up from i7) up to 12 core. Many people I know who do hard-core numerical simulations won't get anything but a Mac. To do serious numerics on a PC you more or less have to use Linux, but on a Mac you can us MacOS.
2. A number of programs I use regularly aren't available for Mac
That is certainly true, and the reason I have to use a PC
3. In time (sooner rather than later) the hackers out there are going to start targeting their nasties in the direction of the Mac and Macs are woefully under-prepared for this eventuality.
I don't think that is true. Windows decided to base a lot of their technology on the idea of loading native code from outside and executing it. MacOS is based on Unix, which is has an inherently more secure underlying architecture.
4. I have a wider choice of software with my PC
Certainly true, but how much software to you really use? I find 99% of the time I am using the same 5 applications, and I am sure there are Mac compatible versions or alternatives.
5. My school does not support Mac and as I do a lot of work from home, if I do need tech support I need to know it's there. Yes, I can use a Mac on our network.
I don't recall ever getting useful tech support for my windows system.
6. I now find the Mac interface rather strange (clunky?) and don't really want to relearn.
Well, I find ksh easy to use. ???
These are personal opinions. I'm not a Mac hater, I just prefer my PC.
Quote1. My i7 Quad PC Core with 8 Gbs of RAM is faster than any Mac on the market
Can't see how that is true, you can buy a Mac with Xeon processors (a step up from i7) up to 12 core. Many people I know who do hard-core numerical simulations won't get anything but a Mac. To do serious numerics on a PC you more or less have to use Linux, but on a Mac you can us MacOS.
2. A number of programs I use regularly aren't available for Mac
That is certainly true, and the reason I have to use a PC
3. In time (sooner rather than later) the hackers out there are going to start targeting their nasties in the direction of the Mac and Macs are woefully under-prepared for this eventuality.
I don't think that is true. Windows decided to base a lot of their technology on the idea of loading native code from outside and executing it. MacOS is based on Unix, which is has an inherently more secure underlying architecture.
4. I have a wider choice of software with my PC
Certainly true, but how much software to you really use? I find 99% of the time I am using the same 5 applications, and I am sure there are Mac compatible versions or alternatives.
5. My school does not support Mac and as I do a lot of work from home, if I do need tech support I need to know it's there. Yes, I can use a Mac on our network.
I don't recall ever getting useful tech support for my windows system.
6. I now find the Mac interface rather strange (clunky?) and don't really want to relearn.
Well, I find ksh easy to use. ???
These are personal opinions. I'm not a Mac hater, I just prefer my PC.
Good points for the most part, though the upgrade from i7 to Xeon is a big step pricewise. If what you want/need is plenty of cpu power for your money it's not a good idea to buy a Mac because the premium is stratospheric. Get a homebrew from one of the custom shops loaded to your specifications for ~$1,500. A new Sandy Bridge i7 will match or exceed all but the most expensive Xeons.
Quote from: drogulus on April 23, 2011, 07:18:33 AM
Good points for the most part, though the upgrade from i7 to Xeon is a big step pricewise. If what you want/need is plenty of cpu power for your money it's not a good idea to buy a Mac because the premium is stratospheric. Get a homebrew from one of the custom shops loaded to your specifications for ~$1,500. A new Sandy Bridge i7 will match or exceed all but the most expensive Xeons.
Performance and performance/dollar are two completely different things. No one will argue that a Mac isn't cheaper for hardware of the same configuration. The question is whether it is worth it.
There are also two ways to do the comparison. You can say, "to get this same hardware on a MAC I'd have to pay $2000 rather than $1000. Do I really want to plunk down another $1000?" Or you could say, "for the same $1000 I'd get a MAC with a smaller display and slower processor." But maybe that $1000 MAC with less impressive hardware configuration would still give more pleasure than the $1000 PC."
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on April 23, 2011, 08:20:22 AM
Performance and performance/dollar are two completely different things. No one will argue that a Mac isn't cheaper for hardware of the same configuration. The question is whether it is worth it.
There are also two ways to do the comparison. You can say, "to get this same hardware on a MAC I'd have to pay $2000 rather than $1000. Do I really want to plunk down another $1000?" Or you could say, "for the same $1000 I'd get a MAC with a smaller display and slower processor." But maybe that $1000 MAC with less impressive hardware configuration would still give more pleasure than the $1000 PC."
No, I agree. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/rolleyes.gif) (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/huh.gif) If you want a Mac for less you can move down powerwise and pay a smaller premium while getting something good. That's if you want/need a Mac regardless. Then price only matters when configuring your Mac. I would want to be sure, though, that a Mac serves my purposes in a way that a PC, even a customized supercharged model, doesn't.
One of these days I might get a low/mid level Mac just to learn it. Probably I'll find out it's really a cool machine for a few things I don't care about, but who knows?
As I see it, if there were not both PCs and Macs that would be very bad for the market and future development. Ideally we could do with a new competitor from China. What do the Russians use?