Slashdot Mirror


Why So Many Mac Fanatics?

daeley writes "NewsFactor has published an article, Cult of the Mac - Why So Many Mac Fanatics? -- looking for answers to '...what is it about the Mac that commands such loyalty? An even better question might be, what is Apple doing right?'"

56 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. Conspiracy theories by c0wh · · Score: 3, Funny

    When a key is pressed on an Apple keyboard, chemicals are released which make the user more open to suggestion.

    Subliminal messages hidden throughout the GUI assert that Mac OS is superior.

    1. Re:Conspiracy theories by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      The hot fumes from PC processors make you feel l33t.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  2. What I don't get by Otter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What I've never understood is why people can get so emotionally attached to companies that make CPUs or graphics cards 5% faster than the ones they made the year before. Or to the companies that make first person shooters that push 5% more pixels through that hardware.

    Enthusiasm about a company that tries to make computers qualitatively better -- that I don't have trouble understanding.

  3. Here's why by jchristopher · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Lately, I've been experimenting with Yellow Dog Linux, a RedHat variant for PowerPC hardware. (G3, G4, Powerbook, iBook etc). After the install, I tried to get it working with my Airport Base Station, a setup that works fine for Mac OS 9, X, and various Windows clients.

    For some reason, when the Yellow Dog machine gets an IP from the base station, it doesn't automatically "know" what the DNS servers are. This information is provided to the base station, and thus it's wireless clients know about the DNS servers as well. For some reason it doesn't work, and I can talk to numeric IPs but not named hosts.

    Of course, when I did this under OS X, it worked on the first try, and has worked reliably for months. I never had to use to edit text files, read man pages, or get yelled at in IRC because I didn't know what "Pump" for DHCP was.

    The funny thing is, not only does it not work the way it should, but that you are presumed to be stupid for not knowing why!

    I've also never had to reboot my computer into command line mode because my "Xfree86 config file" went wrong.

    I just want to USE my computer, not waste hours reading Usenet and trying command after command in order to make something work that should be taken care of automatically. That's why I like Macs.

    1. Re:Here's why by darkov · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly. This is why I love my mac. At most times, for most things, it just works. If I want to reconfigure it, it works also. No secret knowledge required. You don't have to be a card carrying unix weenie.

      And said weenies love to mock you just becuase you're not familar with an throwback interface full of archane details, largely undocumented, convoluted and anything but intuative. More likely they should be mocked.

    2. Re:Here's why by extrasolar · · Score: 2
      I've also never had to reboot my computer into command line mode because my "Xfree86 config file" went wrong.

      Command line mode? LOL. What has happened to our beloved slashdot? ;)

    3. Re:Here's why by medcalf · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Exactly. This is why I love my mac. At most times, for most things, it just works. If I want to reconfigure it, it works also. No secret knowledge required. You don't have to be a card carrying unix weenie.

      And said weenies love to mock you just becuase you're not familar with an throwback interface full of archane details, largely undocumented, convoluted and anything but intuative. More likely they should be mocked.

      As a UNIX weenie, I'd like to inform you that many UNIX weenies have been Mac heads for years (in my case, since 1988). Along with the Windows people, it's some of the Linux guys - many of whom come from the PC camp, which seems to believe that if your computer isn't disassembled regularly you don't know enough about it or haven't been pushing it enough - who regularly bash Macs. I like Linux OK for low-end hardware, though I prefer AIX or *BSD when I can get it, but it's a different breed from the professional UNIX types.

      -jeff

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    4. Re:Here's why by jchristopher · · Score: 2
      The reason why Yellow Dog Linux isn't as good as other Linux distros for the PC is because Macs are a closed platform that stifles competition on purpose. Try Linux on an open platform like the PC, and it's a whole different story.

      Oh, please. Yellow Dog is exactly the same Linux that runs on x86. The same things that are broken in RedHat are broken in Yellow Dog.

      The same amount of information is known about the video, sound, network card in a Powerbook G4 as is known about the video, sound, and network card in a Dell. In both cases it's up to a third party (not Apple or Dell) to write and implement drivers. The problem isn't that it's PPC, the problem is that Linux is mostly useless unless you know a good deal about computers, whereas other operating systems can be used by mere mortals.

      Please note that I'm not advocating "dumbing-down" Linux. I think it's important that the user be able to tweak it to their heart's content.

      But there is NO justifiable reason that something as simple as setting up a network card via DHCP should be so difficult. It's just stupid. For some reason people are scared that if you make it easier, you will somehow make it less powerful, but I don't think that has to be the case.

      Pump, ifconfig, netcfg, pico, whatever are great tools for the power user. They aren't great tools for a newbie, in fact, they are quite poor, since you'd have to know the name of the tool prior to using it. Just finding the name of the tool can be a challenge in itself.

      Having a "K" menu item for "Ethernet Settings", on the other hand, that brought up an OS X style network configuration box, would be much more usable for many people.

      The problem is that no one is interested in writing a new network setup control panel, because the existing tools work just fine. For them.

  4. Re:Apple bites by theNeophile · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Through the ages:

    "Macs are the computers that really made a difference, just look at DOS, it's not even a GUI. Too bad Apple's gonna die any day now."

    "Macs are the computers that really made a difference, just look at Windows 3.1, what a blatant rip off of the Mac OS. Too bad Apple's gonna die any day now."

    "Macs are the computers that really made a difference, just look at Windows 95, what a rip off of the Mac OS. Too bad Apple's gonna die any day now."

    "Macs are the computers that really made a difference, just look at Windows XP, huge rip off of Macs. Too bad Apple's gonna die any day now."

    Starting to see a pattern forming?

  5. It's simple. That's it. by Snowfox · · Score: 4, Funny
    1. It's simple. Menus are uncluttered and arranged intelligently. Advanced options aren't missing, they're just not mixed in with everything else. Apple pays more attention to the user interface than anyone else, and it guides its developers in doing the same. Compare Internet Explorer or Office for both Mac and Windows. By following Apple's guidelines (to a degree), Microsoft has created superior products for the Mac despite its best Windows efforts.

    2. The OS and the machines are aestheticaly pleasing. PCs tend to look dull. Macs change. They remain exciting, or at least different.

    3. More focus on programming "correctness." Apple periodically reinvents the OS interface to match current needs. Old functions are dropped when using the newer APIs. Choices are limited, or directed, depending on how you want to look at it. Programs end up being simpler and have fewer bugs as a result.

    4. Apple has always marketed and spoken to the individual, not the company. (This is huge.)

    5. Steve Jobs, brain-controlling presentation zombie.

    And Mac OS X's UNIX base is just fucking cool. This is what's finally pulling me over. I picked up an old iBook for cheap to try it out, and I'm just floored. This OS is schweet!

    1. Re:It's simple. That's it. by foobar104 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But should I get the 68k library or the PPC library?

      Criticize all you want. The transition from 68K to PowerPC wasn't without bumps. But you know what? It worked. I had one of the first Power Mac 8100s on my desk at work, and all of my applications worked perfectly. Sure, running 68K apps was a little slow, but that problem went away as the big names (Photoshop, QuarkXPress, and so on) came out in PowerPC versions.

      Apple was able to pull off the PowerPC transition. The fact that they did it at all was pretty amazing.

      Plus which, don't forget the Fat Binary: a single executable that contains both 68K and PowerPC object code. Runs in native mode on either architecture. Great idea, just brilliant. That was an Apple thing.

      Oh wait, it says that this text editor isn't compatible with my 5200's SCSI bus when it's not actively terminated.

      Oh, wait. I just realized that you're one of those chatbots, aren't you? This sentence was clearly strung together from words and phrases pulled at random out of a dictionary.

      Oh, well.

    2. Re:It's simple. That's it. by foobar104 · · Score: 2

      All while ignoring the fundemental problems such as the lack of RAD software like VB and the universally hated AppleTalk protocol.

      Bitch all you want. When I plug my iBook into the network at the office, I see all the printers and servers. Immediately. They're just there, you know?

      When my boss plugs in his Sony laptop, sometimes he sees the printer and sometimes he doesn't. If he waits a minute, the SMB share on the server will show up. Or maybe it won't.

      Pfeh. I'll choose AFP over AppleTalk any day.

    3. Re:It's simple. That's it. by Jonny+290 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It was a tad bit of hyperbole. But ya know what? My network card in my 5200 does have a conflict with the SCSI bus when I don't slap a 25 pin terminator on the back of the machine. It's a documented problem with it.

      and what "Transition" are you speaking of? I'm tired of them moving to another, barely compatible platform, including an emulator for the old OS, and calling it "compatible". That's just my opinion. I can STILL RUN an 8086-compiled program on my Athlon 1.2.

      And ya know what? I've got three Macs in my workshop(my PPC 5200, my PPC 8100 and my Quadra 700/800 hybrid with a pile of external SCSI gear). I think they're great and use them all the time. But i'm not above saying that they've got some serious problems on both the hardware and software ends.

      --
      Hey Taco! Looks like you're using the "infinite monkeys and typewriters" scheme to generate Ask Slashdots again...
    4. Re:It's simple. That's it. by foobar104 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and what "Transition" are you speaking of? I'm tired of them moving to another, barely compatible platform, including an emulator for the old OS, and calling it "compatible"

      Oh, be fair. You had your 68K Mac, and then you had your PowerPC Mac, which would run 68K code in emulation. That's it. We've been using PowerPCs for, what, about 10 years now? I think one major architecture change in 18 years is just fine.

    5. Re:It's simple. That's it. by foobar104 · · Score: 2

      I think he was also referring to the OS9 > OSX changeover. Switching architectures and including an emulator and all that.

      But there are no architectural changes and no emulation involved in running OS 9 apps under OS X. If your app is written to the Carbon API, it just runs. If it isn't, then it runs inside a Classic VM, but that's not emulated. Inside the VM, code executes natively. Sometimes non-Carbon apps, particularly I/O or network bound apps, even run faster under the Classic VM than they do under OS 9!

    6. Re:It's simple. That's it. by foobar104 · · Score: 2

      I guess that would depending on your definition of emulator. (what does.. say.. VMWare classify as?)

      By my definition, emulated code is code that is translated at run-time from one ABI to another. Kind of like interpreted code, but binary-to-binary instead of source-to-binary.

      The OS X Classic environment provides an interface layer that intercepts system calls from the Classic application and makes that application think it's running on a cooperative-multitasking, shared-memory machine. But there's no translation from one ABI to another going on.

      So no, there's no emulation in Mac OS X TruBlueEnvironment.

    7. Re:It's simple. That's it. by foobar104 · · Score: 2

      That is a result of all the chatter that comes with Appletalk. A lot of networks have become less "saturated" when Appletalk goes of the wire.

      What's a network for? I want my network connections to be at full capacity all the time. Otherwise I'm not getting my money's worth.

      I've had IT types complain to me about the "chatty" nature of AppleTalk before. I've never heard a good answer to the question: exactly why is a "chatty" network a bad thing? If it impacts performance in a significant way, then you have other problems.

    8. Re:It's simple. That's it. by extrasolar · · Score: 2
      Am I better off with: a) a tool that requires me to read twenty pages of assembly and operating directions and periodically stops working if I don't follow every instruction just right, or b) a tool that I snap together and start working with immediately (no classes required!), and which performs flawlessly throughout the job?

      How about this one. Lets say you want to simulate the orbits of the planets, satellites (both artificial and natrual), and minor planets of the solar system. Are you better off with

      1. a tool that requires me to read twenty pages of assembly and operating directions and periodically stops working if I don't follow every instruction just right, or
      2. a tool that I snap together and start working with immediately (no classes required!), and which performs flawlessly throughout the job?

      With a moments thought, 2 can't be right. Use a simple system only for simple things.

    9. Re:It's simple. That's it. by daviddennis · · Score: 2

      My macs are pretty darn good at doing the jobs I assign them, so it's a nice bonus that they're pretty.

      And when you look at an ugly user interface all day, you get tired eyes. That's not something you can easily quantify, it's not like a 1.33ghz Athelon versus a 1.4ghz Athelon, but it sure is something you notice.

      I find it far more pleasant to look at MacOS X than Windows (or Linux, for that matter), and that really won me over to the platform. As long as it works, that's a completely natural thing. And it does.

      D

    10. Re:It's simple. That's it. by jcr · · Score: 2

      Plus which, don't forget the Fat Binary: a single executable that contains both 68K and PowerPC object code. Runs in native mode on either architecture. Great idea, just brilliant. That was an Apple thing.

      Actually, that was a NeXT thing. NeXT had fat binaries for 68K and x86 right around the time of NeXTSTEP 3.0, which was just a bit ahead of Apple's PPC adoption.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    11. Re:It's simple. That's it. by foobar104 · · Score: 2

      Actually, that was a NeXT thing. NeXT had fat binaries for 68K and x86 right around the time of NeXTSTEP 3.0.

      Really? Okay, I stand corrected. But no matter who actually deserves the credit for it, it was still a good idea that made the 68K-PPC transition easier than it might have otherwise been.

    12. Re:It's simple. That's it. by jcr · · Score: 2

      Well, all NeXT inventions are Apple inventions now ...

      ;-)

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    13. Re:It's simple. That's it. by extrasolar · · Score: 2

      Well...the wording is heavily biased to begin with. If you had a choice between

      1. Something good
      2. Something bad

      You'd probably choose the first one. Your example is just an extrapolation of 1 above.

      The reason 2 couldn't exist is because it is too simple to do anything complex. This is not really in regards to OS X but generally.

      With OS X, complex things can be done but only if you read the directions, understand the concepts, and are willing to fix it if it screws up.

      Simple, therefore good is not often true.

    14. Re:It's simple. That's it. by daviddennis · · Score: 2

      You are most welcome. I suppose that means I should update it :-).

      For a new project I'm working on, I bought an Indigo2 R10000 as a web server and development system. Cost me $400 on eBay, and it's been 100% reliable since I bought it. Oldie but goodie :-).

      I did a lot of the development for that project on my Titanium PowerBook and sent the source code right to the SGI for serving.

      MacOS X beats it nowadays for slickness, but it's still the nicest implementation of X-Windows I've ever used.

      D

    15. Re:It's simple. That's it. by CoolVibe · · Score: 2
      Hold it troll boy:

      > My computer is a tool, not a piece of furniture. If i want something pretty, i'll buy a vase. If i need to get a report done or do some graphic layout, I want something that does the fucking job.

      Why not have something that 1. looks aestetically pleasing _and_ 2. gets the job done? I'll take the G4 tower anytime over a dull PC case, for both power and prowess :)

      [snip]
      > ...Oops. It just crashed. Seventeen times. And thanks to Apple's innovative Soft Power, i have to UNPLUG MY FUCKING COMPUTER to turn it off and on again."

      First, those crashes are over because of the Mach/BSD base in OS X, secondly, ever tried _holding_ the power button for a while? This way you force a hard power off on "newer" macs. Problem solved. Oh, the PPC/68k thing is a very OLD 'dilemma'. New macs are obviously PPC, and if they are older PPC's it's marked slap bang across the case that it's a power PC. Or just find out what type of machine you have _once_ and just never forget it.

      Example: Ooh, should I go for the Pentium Pro optimized kernel or the one compiled for 386? Oh shit, the PPro kernel don't boot on that 386, crap. Damn, Linux and Intel suck. See the analogy?

      > "Dude, i've got an idea. Let's get a Free Software core, and put our proprietary garbage on top of it. That way, we'll have tons of *nix geeks worshiping us as 'innovators' and fixing our bugs day in and day out, giving us thousands of man-hours of free development and advancement for our OS, while we reap all the profits and get all the blowjobs!"

      Spoken as a true ignorant person that never tried Mac OS X. _First_ you try, _then_ you judge, capiche?

    16. Re:It's simple. That's it. by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 2

      I can STILL RUN an 8086-compiled program on my Athlon 1.2.

      I can still run software initially intended for a Mac Plus on my OS X G4. What's your point?

      Just because it's a compatibility environment doesn't mean it has to go away. I suppose that's where Apple has one-upped MS. They use a compatibility layer, bu tit's on top of the new fast code. MS takes the opposite tack - graftign new functionality over the old environenment.

      BTW, there's a darn good chance you can't run that old DOS app under XP if it's sufficiently old. The DOS compatibility environment from NT is not fully compatible, so the days of claiming all DOS software works properly under current systems are numbered.

      (Note I don't want to imply all ancient Mac software runs under OS X, it doesn't. Poorly written programs often depended on undocuemnted system calls or specific hardware to function properly.)

      --
      ± 29 dB
    17. Re:It's simple. That's it. by Snowfox · · Score: 2
      I guess that's why they used Pascal-based APIs for so many years? The only reason Mac OS X exists is because "Classic" Mac OS did not have programming correctness.

      Ever hear of an unterminated Pascal string?

  6. I just got my first Apple by angelo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And shock!, it's an iMac even. I got rid of Windows just a bit ago on my pc and installed BSD in it's stead. My other system runs Linux. My iMac is running OS X, with very little chance of running 9.x. The reason why is simple: I like a nice interface that opens up to a horrible ugly little unix box (sarcasm) when you want it to. It's absolutely great!

    I bought this machine because, just like mechanics that work on American cars and drive Hondas, I don't want to put up with the BS when I get home. I like firing up a system that just works.

    I've always been interested in macs, and I never had the bawlz to buy one until the iMac came out. They have a serious winner on their hands, now if only they would market the damn thing without being pretentious.

  7. Funny timing by rjamestaylor · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I need a new laptop. My Toshiba 2805-202s is over a year old and has put in meritorious service (having survived a shorting power supply, replaced under warranty, and a motherboard-damaging fall, also replaced under warranty free-of-charge), running WinME (for DVD entertainment for the wife and I) and Linux (SuSE then RedHat 7.2; for work), but needs to be replaced.

    This time my employer will purchase a laptop for me -- I just have to choose which one. Since the low end Toshibas no longer come with the point-stick (*sigh*) I'm considering alternatives. Suffice it to say I am torn between an IBM A-series or an Apple Titanium.

    I'm leaning toward the Titanium. And, it's funny, but I feel like I'm returning to a first love... I started with an Apple ][+ in 1979 (I was 12) and eventually had a Apple //e, Apple //c, and, later, a Mac Plus. In the meantime I was using UNIX and DOS. I always hated DOS. Then OS/2 -- it was Ok, but...well...stiff. Then I had the opportunity, as a salesman for Businessland/ComputerCraft, to experience the NeXT -- it was slick and satisfying but unaccessible 'cause of price. But I had to bow to Windows, since I had to support my clients who used a WinTel desktop to access our UNIX accounting package. Eventually I started writing business apps in VB, Access, Paradox...that was an unhappy period. Happily, I found Linux and felt better ('cause I like server-side programming).

    Mac OS X is NeXT but backward Mac compatible and at a reasonable price. That's my take. Playing with the Titanium at Fry's has been enjoyable -- sometimes frustrating, honestly -- and the underlying UNIX is accessible and tempting. Hey - it beats Win4Lin for using Internet Explorer for client-side testing (and I like Win4Lin and won't run Linux without it).

    So I guess I'm getting sucked into the Mac Cult. Blame it on early conditioning...

    My weirdo co-worker is also going get the Titanium but will scrap OS X and install PPC Linux. Honestly, I have no idea why.

    --
    -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    1. Re:Funny timing by extrasolar · · Score: 2
      My weirdo co-worker is also going get the Titanium but will scrap OS X and install PPC Linux. Honestly, I have no idea why.

      Ask a BeOS user.

    2. Re:Funny timing by jdavidb · · Score: 2

      My weirdo co-worker [slashdot.org] is also going get the Titanium but will scrap OS X and install PPC Linux. Honestly, I have no idea why.

      I'm weird like that, too. I bought a refurbished ibook and am running Debian on it. (Of course, it didn't come with OSX, but I could have bought it separately.)

  8. Re:What is apple doing right? by baka_boy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think that marketing is the one thing that's allowed Apple to keep their head above water in recent years. Have you been inside an Apple store? The internal design is open, they have machines set up and running (gasp!) actual software, just like you could do at home, and they have a bunch of attentive, friendly salespeople who know what the hell they're talking about roaming the store to answer questions, etc.

    Sure, it might not appeal to a hard-core, alpha geek who prefers to build their own boxes from parts they buy at a dark, warehouse-sized discount store, but to your average consumer it's like a breath of fresh air. Also, their print ads (at least since the B&W G3s came out) have been consistently well done.

    At this point, anyone other than Microsoft, IBM, and Dell who can stay in the PC game without whoring themselves out to the beige-cubicle-box market deserves some serious respect. Most Wintel manufacturers practically can't give away new PCs to home users, while Apple has actually managed to coax new customers over to their side of the fence, and keep them consistently upgrading every couple of years.

    I think the secret is actually just that Apple manages to make their new designs look and feel truly new, rather than just cramming twice the clock speed and RAM into the same, boring machine. When you buy a new Mac, every part, from the case, to the OS, to the mouse, is at least slightly improved, in appearance if not in functionality, than it was on the last one.

    Don't let yourself get confused about the respective roles of marketing and sales. Marketing is all about listening to what your customers are asking for, predicting trends, and shaping your product to meet their needs. The sales guys are the ones responsible for pushing the finished product to customers. Apple's level of polish and "consumer touch" in their products, stores, and ads shows that they definately understand how to market their products. If they've failed significantly, it's in the area of sales, where you pretty much have to give up on any sense of quality or design if it means you can ship a few more boxes.

    Most PC manufacturers go that route; hence the total lack of attention paid to the physical design of their product. Whether you buy a Wintel from Compaq, Gateway, HP, eMachine, Dell, or some mom-and-pop clone builder, you're going to get more or less the same machine, with a nearly identical case, monitor, peripherials, software, etc.

    Of course, Microsoft should get some of the blame for this; it's hard to make your product truly distinctive when you are absolutely required to make it support the newest versions of Windows and Office, no questions asked. The kind of risks that Apple takes periodically (moving to PowerPC chips, ditching the floppy drive, and totally re-writing their OS) would give any Wintel company's entire board of directors heart attacks.

  9. Re:So many? by foobar104 · · Score: 2

    There are not that many of them, but of those users, there are certainly an abnormal number who are fanatics.

    You are clearly an idiot ("little dick syndrome??"), but I feel like responding anyway.

    About a month ago I was at a Starbucks in Mt. View, California, checking my email with my iBook. On his way out of the coffee shop, a completely anonymous nobody walked up to me and said, "Nice laptop." I said "thanks," and he walked away.

    This sort of thing happens to me fairly regularly.

    There may or may not be many Mac fanatics. But you don't have to look very hard to find a Mac admirer. And that's clearly a sign that Apple has done something right.

  10. Re:what apple did right by foobar104 · · Score: 3, Informative

    macs only appear to be a success because they sell products to the *same* people.

    You're simply wrong. According to Apple, of all the people who bought iMacs, 40% of them had never owned a computer of any kind before.

    Sure, it's Apple saying that, so consider the source. But despite the apparent prevailing attitude on Slashdot, big companies are not in the habit of out-and-out lying in their marketing materials. There's obviously a grain of truth to the statement.

  11. Re:What is apple doing right? by Currawong · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Their product is purchased by a select crop of people who are repeat customers. Funny, alot of recent Mac-owners I've met were PC diehards, or UNIX system admins, many of whom had never owned a mac before.

    --

    What is the point of the internet?
  12. Re:Apple bites by foobar104 · · Score: 2

    Here's the last two years. Starting to see a pattern forming?

    Why, yes.

    (Too lazy to click the link? The parent linked to a chart of Apple's stock price over the last two years, showing a fairly significant decline. My link superimposes a chart of Dell's stock price over the same period. The two curves are almost identical. Proving that the parent poster has no idea what he's talking about.)

  13. Re:what apple did right by foobar104 · · Score: 2

    its UNIX *now*, but how the hell did it get a userbase with crappy OS 9 and less?

    Amazing. With all its shortcomings, tons and tons of Mac users still chose OS 9 over any alternative operating system.

    You're right. Sure musta sucked. ;-)

  14. Re:my question by foobar104 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How can someone possibly think that a 7XX MHz G3 running with slow SDRAM, and a slow IDE harddrive is soo much faster than a 14XX MHz Athlon running DDRAM, and a faster IDE harddrive or a faster scuzzy drive.

    My iMac is faster than any other computer I use. Why? Because it spends less time waiting on me.

    When I use a PC, I spend more time than I want to futzing around. For instance, when I plug my iBook into the LAN at work, I pull down one menu item and all my network settings change. When I go to the coffee shop and use their 802.11 service, I pull down that menu again and poof! When I go home, poof!

    Even in Windows 2000, location management is rudimentary at best, and in most aspects simply absent. With my Mac, I don't have to futz around with that stuff.

    Within a certain set of boundaries, it's not about clock speeds, or bus speeds, or hard drive speeds, or any of that shit. It's about the computer not getting in the way when I want to do something.

  15. Hold there Jonny by extrasolar · · Score: 2
    ... while we reap all the profits and get all the blowjobs!

    Please Complete These Steps

    1. Take Swordfish out of the VCR and lay it on the ground.
    2. Step on it.
    3. Jump up and down while repeating to yourself "Movies are not real, movies are not real."

    There you go. Feel better? Not my fault if you find you are no longer motivated to become a hacker.

    1. Re:Hold there Jonny by extrasolar · · Score: 2

      Clever, aren't you.

      Twas a joke. Are you not entertained?

      Meant no offenses. And trolling is something completely different :)

  16. Re:What is apple doing right? by Ford+Fulkerson · · Score: 2, Informative
    They used to be what, 8% of the market, but the market grew and they didn't.

    Well I'm a mac user and the one thing I always hear from Wintel users is how small Apple's market share is. Like I'd care..

    When it comes to Apple there are only two things that I feel completely certain about.
    The first thing is that Apple will never die, they will always have their loyal group of supporters to keep them afloat.
    The second thing is that Apple will never dominate the personal computer industry.

    The thing that my Wintel using friends don't understand is that I as a mac user am perfectly happy with this. In fact I want Apple's situation to be like it is right now! Apple are after all a creator of a proprietary operating system and perhaps the most important thing thing that stops them from treating their customers as bad as Microsoft does is that they really need to satisfy the customers they have. If Apple had the same monoploy that Microsoft enjoys today, they would probably we just as bad, and I would not be a mac user.

    --

    Somewhere in the heavens... they are waiting.
  17. Who cares about MHz, was Re:my question by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How can someone possibly think that a 7XX MHz G3 running with slow SDRAM, and a slow IDE harddrive is soo much faster than a 14XX MHz Athlon running DDRAM, and a faster IDE harddrive or a faster scuzzy drive.

    They can because for a lot of tasks, processor speed is not the limiting factor. It's the user. And on a Mac, it often takes the user less time to accomplish a task due to the superior UI.

    Apple's "there is no step three" ad campaign was much more relevant to real-world computer usage than the MHz-flaunting going on elsewhere.

  18. Re:what apple did right by foobar104 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Have you ever tried to edit source code in Windows (NT, 2000)? God forbid you ever try to select something on a long line! I spend a lot of time trying to get applications to allow me to select just what I want instead of what it wants.

    A classic example of the Microsoft way of doing things. Who sat in a staff meeting and said, "You know what's hard? Selecting text. We should try to make selecting text easier.

    "See, if the user drags the cursor over part of a word, he obviously meant to select the whole word, so we should select the whole word for him. And if he selects a word at the end of a sentence, he obviously wanted the terminal punctuation and space too, so we should select those for him."

    "Hey, boss, I've got some thoughts on how we can simplify that collection of six interrelated modal dialog boxes for managing network settings."

    "Not now, Johnson. We're making real progress on the text-selection problem! Guys, I smell bonuses!"

  19. Re:Possible FUD? by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

    Very likely. But is this only because there are so many Windows-PCs, or because you can be sure so many of them are wide open to attacks?

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  20. Re:Apple bites by Lars+T. · · Score: 2
    Shocking! Let's see:

    'nother pattern

    YAP

    How 'bout that one?

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  21. Re:Apple bites by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

    Yeah, good for you if you bought DELL back than, if you bought Apple in the last 1.5 years you fared better than the dude who bought DULL. No matter if you bought stock or computers.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  22. Re:Apple bites by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

    IRQs are still an issue, because P'n'P won't help if you run out of IRQs. And the config files all migrated into the registry.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  23. Re:what apple did right by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

    Yeah, you're so l33t, I bet you pick your nose with more than one finger.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  24. Re:Possible FUD? by jcr · · Score: 2

    is it just me or is this (especially on Macs that aren't running OS X) more a function of the fact that few Mac viruses are written because the potential damage is so minimal relative to a Windows virus?

    Sure, that's part of it, but Mac OS X is pretty tight, out of the box. No services enabled until you turn them on, and the /Applications, /bin, /usr/bin, and similar directories are all root/admin, -rwxr-x-r-x by default.

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  25. On again, off again, on again... by weave · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I was a big mac fanatic from 1984 until about 1996. It ruled, was years ahead of the competition. But Apple pretty much was stuck for ages and Microsoft caught up (with win 95), then surpassed them (with Windows NT). So I switched.

    How dare you say? OK, I was annoyed by the Windows GUI but let's face it, the Mac OS was still running what was basically 1985 Andy Hertzfeld "Switcher" technology. While there were OS hacks to permit apps to be kind to CPU cycles (co-operative multitasking) and allocating memory from the system space instead of requiring fixed memory size per app, it was still just kludge upon kludge.

    But now I'm heading back. OS X is what I've been wanting for years. The stability and usefulness of UNIX with the user interface that only Apple can do right. I've got my order in for a new iMac to get my toes wet again and if I love it as much as I expect to, I'll be dishing out for a dual G4 in the not too distant future for my main powerbox (It's currently a 2GHZ Intel box running XP Pro).

    I've used them all, so when I get to the point where I will say again that Macs are the best computers out there, it will be an informed opinion!

    (Note to Apple, please bump my iMac order up in the queue... :-)

  26. Re:what apple did right by foobar104 · · Score: 2

    Hell, you'd be lucky to find 5 text editors in Windows that behaved consistently and used the same keyboard shortcuts and modifier keys.

    Have you noticed that all Cocoa apps that use the text editing widget have the same key bindings? And what's more, they're Emacs bindings! C-a for beginning of line, C-e for end, and so on.

  27. It isn't possible to explain by epepke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look, it isn't possible to explain this. Many metaphors have been tried, but here's another:

    • Windows is like Budweiser
    • Linux is like homebrew
    • Mac is like hand-pumped Abbott ale

    The Budweiser people who don't understand why some people like to drink Abbott ale never will, because in their minds,

    1. You can get a lot of Budweiser really cheap.
    2. It gets the fucking job done.
    3. Everybody buys it. Look at that market share! Woohoo!

    The homebrew people are a bit more flexible. They might like Abbott Ale, or they might not, but if they don't like it, it's either because they don't like it on its merits or they would rather change the recipe.

    (I should also point out that Be OS is like Old Peculier poured from an elevated oak cask.)

  28. The Underdog by The+Donald · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Everyone loves an underdog. Plain and simple. The big player, Microsoft, doesn't have the implied ideals or fun that Apple has.

    I don't like to see Wal-Mart crush a little store or person. I like to see the smaller guy win sometimes. The same holds for Apple.

    I think most people feel the same way. However, most people still shop at Wal-Mart becuase it's convienent. Same is true for Microsoft. Since it's on every street corner...

    --
    You know who I think is crazy? All my ex-girlfriends!
  29. Why I just bought a G4 by agent+oranje · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For my entire life, I've been an advocate of PCs. Aside from my first machine, a commodore64(if you can call that a computer), I've owned PCs exclusively.

    Last summer, I got a job doing various media creation, and had to use Macs exclusively. "Oh no, the horror! I hate the Macs!" is essentially what ran through my mind. They were strange, alien little beasts that I've heard the masses whine about over the years.

    Within a week, I wanted to throw my PC out the window. MacOS 9 is just MacOS, but it's simple, straightforward, and easy to maintain. MacOS X, on the other hand, made me weep in its beauty. Sure, the initial release was pretty slow, but having a terminal(!!!!) pop up when I logged in was a wonderful thing. It's the simplicity of a Mac and the power of a GOOD OS.

    I spent the rest of the summer saving my nickles and pennies for a G4. The release of the dual gigahertz beast was the straw that broke the bank.

    Macs are more expensive, true. They're a bit more proprietary than PCs, true. But, the fact that I have an original, functional Macintosh(a recent gift from someone who didn't want to move it!) gives me plenty of faith that my new Mac will last.

    Oh yeah, and Final Cut Pro beats any other video editing software with the biggest beating stick ever.

    --
    -agent oranje.
  30. Re:Why pull down one menu by foobar104 · · Score: 2

    If you set "Location" to automatic and
    drag the interfaces into the desired
    direction you don't have to change settings
    at all.


    One LAN uses DHCP, the other static IP. "Automatic" can't help there.

  31. Re:Apple bites by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

    The registry (and the way you have to fiddle with it and how fragile it is) is unique to Windows, and running out of IRQs because the designer saved a few cents by using ISA components is specific to "the" PC.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck