Slashdot Mirror


Newsflash: Mac Users Love Apple, Hate Microsoft

An anonymous reader writes "An article on wired.com talks about how Mac users helped Apple through the dark years of the 90s." It goes on to discuss how a psychologist was hired to figure out how to woo Mac users away from Apple, with some (to him) surprising results.

6 of 737 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Psychology 101 by zenquest · · Score: 5, Informative

    The technical name is cognitive dissonance.

  2. Re:Ahh, blind zealotry by CynicTheHedgehog · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you are going to be blindly loyal, atleast have the decency to KNOW what you are talking about as opposed to 'it just works' and 'its prettier than PC'

    That's exactly why I am loyal. I got a product that is useful to me as well as aesthetically pleasing. Who cares how or why it works as long as it does.

    Coming from a PC background I can understand having to know how to partition or reformat; or move NICs to PCI slots without shared IRQs; or diagnose DLL and registry problems introduced by 3rd party software products. I did learn a lot, but that's a lot of lost productivity.

    Some people like to use computers without having to be amateur computer scientists. That's why people love Macs. That's why people still buy them, despite the good rodgering some people think we got from them over the whole 10.2 and .Mac thing. They're still getting what they paid for--a computer that just works, no questions asked.

  3. Re:Mac v. Amiga by RatBastard · · Score: 5, Informative
    • User Interface: Invented by amiga
      Sorry. Xerox invented the GUI. Apple AND Atari had GUI systems in the market before Amiga did.
    • 3.25" floppy: Invented by amiga
      Wrong again. Invented by Sony.
    • Multitasking: Invented by amiga
      I thought Unix had been doing that for decades before teh Amiga showed up.
    • Multiprocessing: Invented by amiga
      See previous point.
    I've got nothing against Amiga. But I do take umbrage with people who claim Amiga invented things they didn't.
    --
    Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  4. Re:From the article... by jmenezes · · Score: 5, Informative

    But on the same hand, if you want a car with Northstar ( i think thats the name) you go with cadillac.
    If you want a car based on bmw engine, you dont get a mercedes or a VW. you get a BMW.

    so like the poster above you said, "BMW has a monopoly in the BMW market. GM has a monopoly in the GM market. And yet, they both sell cars and compete against each other.
    I can assure you Dell has 0% market penetration in the cow-logo computer market. Therefore, gateway has their own monopoly on cow logo computers.
    if you want a Mac, you get an apple computer.
    simple as that.
    they all have a monopoly on the products they sell, if you define it close enough

    --
    Stop over-analyzing your analizations
  5. Re:Mac v. Amiga by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Informative
    In fact Amiga invented absolutely nothing. What Amiga had was the ability to do everything they bothered to do (which unfortunately did not include memory protection) better than everyone else. For instance, they didn't invent bit blitting, or hardware blitters, but theirs was very fast and integrated into just the right place in the system to really speed up graphics processing.

    Unfortunately the peculiar design of the Amiga, coupled with its lack of processing power (both of which being what made it inexpensive) were a problem because people were forced to customize their software to a particular operating system and machine combination (remember, this is in the early days) to get the most out of the machine, and this led to incompatibility with future releases. Since it didn't have memory protection, this generally meant that when your OS version incremented significantly, things started stepping on each other and exploding left and right.

    The Amiga had a fantastic multitasking OS with all the usual features at the time (though again everyone else was exploring memory protection at the time... well okay, not Apple either) which fit on one floppy plus 512k of ROM. They also had the best autoconfiguration around, bar none, because all drivers were user-mode and you could put the drivers in ROM on an expansion card. When the card was initialized, the driver was executed at which point it was mapped onto or copied into memory. Of course this led to needing to upgrade driver ROMs on various expansion cards but no plan is perfect, I guess. In the modern age of flash ROM this would be a non-issue.

    Anyway if Amiga invented anything it would be the mindless Zealot.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  6. LOL by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Informative

    Forever suck?

    Mac OS has not *always* been inferior.

    Until Windows 95, you really had no choice except a Mac to do desktop graphics and printing.

    Macs had high color
    Macs had multiple monitors
    Macs had TrueType and PostScript
    Macs had color management

    So it took until 1995 for a PC to catch up for that (you use Photoshop in Classic Mode, so there's your history for you). So if it was the year 1994 and you had to do graphics, there was no alternative except a Mac... Oh, sure, you could use Windows NT 3.51, actually, but... people didn't.

    So until 1995, realistically, Adobe had to survive on Macs and Windows NT. You couldn't have your Photoshop on your Windows 2000 computer without Adobe thriving on the Mac. So say thank you to all the Mac users who kept Adobe alive long enough for Windows to catch up enough for a Windows port to be possible.

    What else... Mac OS released without any truly innovative ideas? At the time a mouse, a windowing system, and a desktop metaphor was pretty innovative. Photoshop, released in 1990, couldn't have existed on the PC since Windows 3.0 wasn't available until 1990! The first graphical Mac was unleashed in 1984... of course Windows 1.0 was available the very next year in 1985...

    So what else does that show us? Word 1.0 for DOS was available 1983, Word 1.0 for Mac was available in 1985, and it wasn't until 1993 that Word 6.0 (for Windows) was released. Word for DOS had or Word for Mac had only been available up to that point.

    Then there's Quicktime...

    Okay, so all that is OLD hat. Microsoft (eventually) will catch up, history is showing us.

    So what did Apple do new with OS X that is innovative, you ask?

    How about security? Of course security is a nasty beast to define, because it is only visible through the lack of exploits. No exploits, no news. Do I think OS X is more secure than Windows XP? Yes. Why? Partially because the core OS is open source, partially because the core OS is heavily related to BSD, and partially because the core OS has been in use since 1989 with the release of the first NeXT workstations. Windows, while similarly old, is not similarly aged, with IE exploits, IIS exploits, ActiveX exploits, and other exploits. OS X gets around IE exploits by not integrating IE, though there is an HTML library available. It gets around IIS exploits by relying on tried and true OSS servers such as Apache, BSD-telnetd, BSD-sshd, and BSD-ftpd. It gets around ActiveX exploits by relying on a scripting technology, AppleScript, that has been used successfully since 1993 to automate prepress, print, publishing, and graphics businesses. Oh, and they don't integrate AppleScript into the html rendering engine, though there is a third party AppleScript plugin available. Yes, there have been AppleScript viruses, just like there are VisualBasic viruses...

    But Apple doesn't suffer nearly as badly because Mail doesn't auto execute AppleScript viruses which aren't embedded into the HTML that s rendered by the preview pane.

    Alright, so this is sorta cheap, innovation by not being as *bad* as Microsoft.

    There's legitimate innovation as well.

    OS X 10.0 had it's compositing engine. Vector based, PDF based, output independent. It's certainly not perfect, but it's a continuation of NeXT's PostScript based DisplayPS. Windows already has something called GDI+ and WMF, but I do not believe they are currently used.

    OS X 10.0 introduced iDVD, to match the earlier release of iTunes and iMovie, allowing the sufficiently well of Mac owner the capabillity to make DVDs within 20 minutes, though burning them probably took an hour or so.

    OS X 10.2 upped the stakes with *hardware* accelerated display technology. Big deal, you say? It's 3d hardware accelerated. Microsoft is hoping to catch up next year with Longhorn.

    OS X 10.2 also added new networking technology that doesn't yet exist on Windows, though UPnP is close. Rendevous, otherwise known as ZeroConf, is a peer to peer network discovery protocol.

    OS X 10.2 added bluetooth support, which Windows XP adds later this year.

    OS X 10.2 added full tablet and handwriting recognition, which doesn't appear until . Also, you will probably need a new PC, where OS X only requires a tablet, such as a Wacom tablet, instead of a new computer.

    Anyway, it's really only your loss, not mine, if Apple OS X doesn't somehow suit your needs, and likewise your gain if Windows XP can suit yours (but not mine)