Slashdot Mirror


Return of the Mac

Ben Gutierrez writes "Paul Graham has posted a new essay on the Return of the Mac which begins with: 'All the best hackers I know are gradually switching to Macs.' Tim O'Reilly said some similar things in Watching Alpha Geeks . From the article: "My friend Robert said his whole research group at MIT recently bought themselves Powerbooks. These guys are not the graphic designers and grandmas who were buying Macs at Apple's low point in the mid 1990s. They're about as hardcore OS hackers as you can get."

25 of 1,499 comments (clear)

  1. OS-X based on BSD by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I always throught basing OS-X on BSD was a good move. Sounds more attractive to me than the old MacOS, especially from someone with a long background in c.

    That said... BSD is dy^H^Hthriving.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  2. unix laptop = key by jabella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since around 1993 I've been messing with Unix. SCO, Slackware (1.0-ish), RedHat (pre 4.0...on Sparc!), Caldera, Irix, SunOS, etc.... both in userland, on the desktop, on my own servers, and a professional sysadmin.

    I've got a mac now. The first of my life, from someone who wasn't ever a mac guy (and was probably more 'anti-mac' than most.) My g/f has one too -- more than once I was like 'just open a terminal and do....'

    The fact that she doesn't need to know what the terminal.app is? That's the best part..... I get what I need, she gets what she needs.

  3. Games are the key... by xTK-421x · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would switch if games didn't come out until a year after the PC version does.

    --
    "TK-421, why aren't you at your post?"
    1. Re:Games are the key... by rokzy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      just do what I do - get a console and save hundreds on CPU and GPU upgrades.

      as strange as it may sound, I bought my Mac to do work.

    2. Re:Games are the key... by javaxman · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I would switch if games didn't come out until a year after the PC version does.

      Right. Games are key for you. For these MIT geeks? I remember my college days, and if I wasn't in class, writing code, writing papers, reading, doing problem sets, eating or sleeping, I was decompressing ( partying, playing foosball, hiking, playing music, anything NOT near a video screen ). If you have time to worry about playing Halo2 or Doom3 or whatever the -very- second it comes out, you're actually -not- the guys they're talking about in this article, as much as you might like to be.

      The games aren't key for me, either, even years out of college. I'm more interested in writing my own 3D OpenGL code than shooting an endless series of monsters someone else created. Occasionaly, I do want to do some gaming, but I generally find UT2k or even ( gasp! ) some of my old PS2 games like GTA Vice City fill that need just fine, even though I've played them through many a time... I understand your mentality, but you have to realize, it's just you and a relatively small group of your peers who feel the need to be on the cutting edge of high-performance video gaming. *Most* people are willing to wait, and the *true* tech geeks don't really have the time to spend on games that you do. If they do have that time, they eventually decide they'd rather create their own game engines.

      Also, why not have a Mac, too? I haven't used it in ages, since I can't think of a good reason to do so, but I do have my PC sitting in my shop. Real geeks collect computer hardware just to check it out, and don't get rid of it until they're either out of space. A Mac laptop might make sense for a guy like you, if you have a use for a computer on the go, since gaming on a laptop kinda sucks anyway... but then, if you have no desire to work on anything but your WinXP box, don't know *nix, and don't need a mobile machine, maybe you shouldn't bother with anything different, if gaming is your #1 use for a computer. The guys they're talking about here, though? Gaming is not the #1 concern for them. It's not even number 2 or 3...

    3. Re:Games are the key... by RatBastard · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I bought my PC for both. It's called economy.

      I used to think that way. Until I looked at the pile of games I have that I can't play anymore because of:

      • OS Upgrades
      • New graphics cards (less of an issue now, but I do have a lot of games that no longer work because of this)
      • New soundcard (see above)
      • RAM upgrade (I shit you not)
      • Driver upgrades for video cards or sound cards
      • Needed upgrades to get latest game working
      Then I looked at my PSOne and noted that with the exception of the CD I ran my chair over, every game I bought for it still works. Every game. The same is true for my Dreamcast and my XBox. With the exception of id Software titles, almost none of my games as old as most of my PSOne games still work. I have refused to upgrade from Win2K to WinXP because even more of my games will stop working if I do that.

      So, which is the better economy, a stack of games that no longer work added to the cost of constant upgrades to keep up with the latest titles or a stack of games that will continue to work until either the media fails or the hardware to play them on fails?

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  4. Powerusers && Powermacs by qw(name) · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Last year's Usenix conference was full of Powerbooks. Most of the top dogs in the industry. That prompted me to buy a PowerMac. It's the best computing decision I've ever made.

    1. Re:Powerusers && Powermacs by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Replace "cooler" with "smarter" and you're right on. When you see people you've admired for years walking around with Powerbooks, you start to get the idea that maybe they know something you don't, you know?

    2. Re:Powerusers && Powermacs by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Smarter? Because they bought a certain product?

      Um, no, smarter because they're smarter. We're talking about people we admire here. You don't understand my comment at all, do you? I said that when you see somebody smarter than you carrying a Powerbook, you notice. I didn't say that people who carry Powerbooks are automatically smarter than you.

      They built their own Altair? They know the registers on an Apple II? That earns my respect. That quantifies "smarter" in my book.

      Okay, so your definition of "smarter" hinges around having a pathological interest in stuff that's utterly obsolete and of no practical use to anybody. That explains so much.

      You know, I really wish your nickname were literally true.

  5. And? by Quasar1999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What's your point? I don't like Dell laptops... IBM sold their laptop division to some no-name, can't be yet trusted for quality company over seas... what's that leave us? Yes, Powerbooks... they're great hardware... I'm not a Mac lover... but I have had to work on PPC hardware, and I do like the power it has over similiar x86 based laptops... and OSX is a nice unix environment with a pretty shell... now if the powerbooks still had OS9 on them, there would be no way I would buy one...

    That's the seller, an OS that's stable and powerful, on hardware that's powerful... Less to do with it being Apple, more to do with being better than Dell and HP and the rest of the crap out there.

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
  6. well by Sv-Manowar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    at least at my university, it seems as if apple have changed their image. No longer for graphic designers - it's for people who wanna 'get stuff done' with their computers

    Also, their laptops are pretty much class dominant, and compare favourably on price with the high-end thinkpads in the powerbook range.

  7. Re:OMG... by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It is true. Slashdot is a Mac advocacy site! I usually hate it when people say this, but it's true!!! Oh, the horror.

    Most /. advocacy seems to stem from the following:

    Macs aren't Microsoft (unless you used Word or something on them)

    You can install Linux on them (not that you can't even an electric toothbrush these days)

    They were an underdog, which made those really cool Apple ][ computers back in the day (some of us have the emulators installed on our PC's and still fiddle with them.)

    They had a sense of style, which the monolithic PC companies still can't seem to get (PC's, seen them lately? Was Dell/HP styling inspired by pinching a loaf?)

    They were evolving, which always inspires some hope.

    did I miss anything?

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  8. Re:Author is on crack by ctid · · Score: 5, Insightful
    My favorite part of his essay:

    "If you want to know what ordinary people will be doing with computers in ten years, just walk around the CS department at a good university. Whatever they're doing, you'll be doing."

    Seriously, this guy lives in fantasy land. It's been a long long time since universities have done anything that has influence the software industry.

    Are you sure about that? Think about messing around on the Internet. Ten years ago that was just getting popular in universities and now it's perfectly normal in the home.

    --
    Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
  9. Re:I would buy a Mac... by JackAtCepstral · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's the obligatory rebuttal. You're forgetting the software. You can put Linux on it for free, but you're not getting nearly the user experience you get with a Mac. Or you can pay for Windows and the software that runs on it. That will bring up the cost of that $450US system. Still, not the same user experience. With a Mac, it's the compete system your paying for, not just the hardware.

    --
    Cepstral: Quality TTS for OS X, Linux, Windows
  10. Re:Author is on crack by McSnickered · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google - 2 PhD students at Stanford
    Linux - 1 grad student at Helsinki University
    GNU - bunch O' long hairs at MIT

    You were saying something about the author being on crack? Those are 3 examples off the top of my head that have not only influenced but re-defined the software industry. I'm sure there are probably at least a couple more out there ...

    --
    They call me the working man. I guess that's what I am.
  11. Re:Lemme guess... by revscat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I bet you also voted for whoever your favorite actor told you to.

    Sheep. Baaaaaaa! B-a-a-a-a!

    Sometimes taking unspoken advise from those whom you respect is a conscious choice, not mindless groupthink. There are developers out there who are better than I am, and when they speak, I listen. I also pay attention to what tools they use. This is neither blind nor foolish, when not taken to an extreme.

  12. Windows - Linux - Mac? by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, I was a die hard Windows user, been that way since 3.0 (3.11 and 2k were my favorite releases), but 18 months ago I switched to Linux (first SuSE and more recently FC3). And now I'm thinking of a PowerBook.

    Leaving Windows wasn't a problem, but sticking with Linux is. Sure it's very fast on my machine, and I have all the familiar Unix tools from the GNU chain, but so much doesn't work right. Linux on the desktop is close to a joke. I've tried both GNOME and KDE and neither is bug free (cf. Win2K which was very, very stable), and there are so many hardware incompatibilities that it's a pain.

    Ultimately, I want to support F/OSS, but I may have to switch because it's a productivity drain for me to discover that gnome-panel has crashed something and now Evolution can't open the File dialog. Ugh. Or figure out why gaim's icon disappears in the tray some of the time, or have gdesklets eat the CPU for no apparent reason, or...

    John.

  13. Re:I would buy a Mac... by Moofie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hey, what are you using right now to read my post? A monitor? Wow, there's that problem solved.

    What are you using to click on the Reply button. A mouse? Good! Two down, one to go.

    Now, what are you using to make the letters appear on your monitor. A keyboard? Brilliant!

    What were you complaining about again?

    --
    Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  14. Malware, Viruses by JackL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe you can sell your wife the same way I did. She hated how our old windows box slowed to a crawl frequently due to malware, adware, etc. I'm sure I could have kept up on all the service patches and updates and adware programs and virus protectors, but screw it. My mac works. Always. With no complaints and no effort on my part.

    By the way. Virus protectors are as bad as the viruses themselves. Does any body else complain about these pieces of crap?

    Jack

  15. Re:Funny... by g00z · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obligitory "Me to".

    The mac mini HAS to be as serious turning point. Finally, you can buy an economy mac without paying for redundant hardware you most likely have (monitor, ram, hard drives). It's as close as you can get to being able to buy a PPC motherboard, G4 CPU, copy of OSX, and do with it as you please. I got my mini last week and was pretty much able to take all of my old PC hardware and shuffle it over to the mini thanks to a USB 2.0 HD enclosure, spare ram, exisiting monitor and USB mouse.

    I've been one of those fence riders for a long while about buying a mac, but damnit, now there is no reason not to. If you were like me and liked Linux for the *NIX'ness, but also wanted mainstream apps like Photoshop, etc with a GUI that beats the snot out of Windows, get one of these mini's. It's the best of both worlds. You can be a geek with a crapload of terminals open and still be chic.

    --
    "The Wright brothers were the first to fly with a heavier-than-air machine, but boy did they have a lousy plane"
  16. Re:sorry, just won't buy it. by grunherz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One reason Apple is more streamlined than Windows is that it refuses to keep backwards compatability.

    Not flaming you (although I think that's what you want). Most anti-Mac folks I run into these days haven't touched a Mac since the System 7 days and continue to carry that prejudice.

    Stating that Apple refused to adopt backward compatibility is ignoring the fact that you can still run ancient software in Classic layer and will be able to for some time.

    Can't use a floppy?
    I haven't missed it, but I can go buy a USB external for peanuts.

    No two-button mouse?
    Never mind, I'm not going there ...

    Seriously ... have you even used a Mac in this century? Or are you just busting on them because people are migrating from the platform you like and you don't: understand why, fear change, fear being a follower or that you just plain like what you're using and get a funny feeling when others find something they like better.

    Anyway, I guess I don't understand where you get "Apple thinks it's customers are idiots" out of any of this.

    All I can say is fear not, there is enough room in this town for two OS's.

    They can switch. I'll stick with *nix and free updates, and save myself $140 every other year in upgrade costs.

    Too bad, those $140 (sic) upgrades are friggin' awesome.

    --
    Four weeks, Twenty papers, that's two dollars ... plus tip.
  17. Re:What amazes me most by Coryoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What amazes me most is how short of a time it took for OS X to get put together.

    What really made MacOS X work is that Apple already had a very secure decently sized niche market for Macs. That is, there was a guaranteed devoted userbase that:

    (1) Hardware manufacturers bother to write and include drivers.
    (2) Software companies bother to release OS X versions of their applications.

    That means that "things just work" - hardware works, and there is enough software, all built for the specific platform, that it all plays together nicely.

    Imagine, for a minute, that there was a Linux distributor (Call them X) that standardised on a fixed platform (say GNOME for example), and had enough guaranteed userbase that Adobe wrote a version of the Creative Suite (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.) for GNOME, Microsoft released MS Office for GNOME, and lots of other serious software companies also wrote GNOME versions of their commercial applications. All of a sudden distribution X would be a viable platform that had all the software you need, and it all works seamlessly together inside GNOME. Presuming you also have hardware coming with distribution X drivers, dsitribution X would be quite reasonable competition for OS X - it would certainly have the "it just works" factor.

    You can redo the whole gedanken experiment with KDE if you like, you'll get similar results.

    What made OS X really work was the guaranteed userbase and the fact that it could run old mac software to ensure a smooth transition of that userbase and an immediate supply of software. Honestly, if a small startup company wrote a brand new OS that was as good as OS X but lacked the userbase, and hecne software and hardware support, it would just potter along and probably eventually die or get bought out (see BeOS, NeXTStep etc.)

    Jedidiah.

  18. Re:OMG... by aristotle-dude · · Score: 4, Insightful
    # Sue fan sites
    Oh the shock and horror. Apple is a "corporation" which has to protect its IP and trade secrets from being leaked to the competition.

    # Tried to use the DMCA to remove content from source forge
    See above.

    # Use DRM to lock product(itunes) to device(ipod) and threaten to use the DMCA to protect the lock in
    I have news for you, the labels want and demand DRM. But it can be easily circumvented legally with a thing called a CD-R disk.

    # Reciever of numerous customer lawsuits from selling used products as new, and to lie about about the battery life on ipods
    Those lawsuits are being pushed by disgruntled resellers, not consumers. Have those cases been proven?

    Does the competition speak honestly about their battery life? No. Companies like Dell and Sony forget to mention that their "numbers" are based on testing using the lowest bandwidth settings with no user interaction.

    YMMV but I've experienced battery life on my 2nd generation iPod which exceeds Apples claims for battery life but then again, I don't use the backlight and I'm not deaf. What this means is I usually listen on Shuffle mode and my volume is less than a fifth of full volume.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  19. Graham's a few years late on this trend spotting.. by Naum · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...personally, I made the OS X switch in 2003, and it was my first ever exposure to Apple's world, and my days had been spent in Linux/UNIX, PC and MVS realms... ...I even liked running Linux on the desktop, but spent a lot of time tinkering to get stuff to work, and frequently simple stuff that just works on Mac/Win platforms is a chore on Linux (USB back a few years ago, wireless, syncing other hardware...).

    However, my powerbook purchase brought the joy of computing back into my life. I frequently read the comments of those who decry the overpriced Mac when compared to constructing your own box (which I used to do - and I still believe that a Mac is equivalently priced with Dell/Gateway/IBM hardware, when all things are factored in properly) and while true on one level, it misses the mark on the total picture. That is depending on your interests and usage desires:

    • Time spent on system administration tasks is time not spent on other activities. Time is a non-renewable resource and I'd rather spend it writing software, using software (i.e., playing a game or other activity) than fiddling with the system to figure out why things arn't working or what's gunked up the box. I never see this factored into "cost" metrics -- that is, if you figure conservatively, your time at $20 per hour (maybe more, maybe less, I'm just gauging on median 40K salary), each additional 10 hours you spend a month administering your Win box is $200 per month difference. Which means in the span of 3-6 months, the Mac OS X will prove its cost superiority.

    • It really is the best of both worlds -- the shiny, eye friendly Aqua GUI plus having a full fledged *nix/BSD system at your disposal. Running MySQL/Apache/Perl/Python/PHP all on a local box where I can have my own testbed sandbox before presenting to clients. Yes, Win platform is capable of doing same thing, but to me, it's a kludge, and again, back to that time thing, where I waste time setting it all up and then dealing with the discrepancies between that environment and the *nix environments where the software will eventually run. And running PuTTy or Exceed is a weak substitute for an anti-aliased terminal window, custom setup. The one major thing that bugged me about OS X, that I missed from running Linux, was the virtual desktops, until I discovered this gem.

    • I realize there are specialized software needs that may not be met with OS X, but for most, the available software plus the F/OSS normally primarily in the domain of Linux OS is available to run on Mac OS X. And I don't even run Fink anymore, I just have a few X11 apps (Gimp, and a few others...) that I compiled and built and placed them within the X11 environment.

    Life got a lot simpler when I replaced my wife's Win XP box with an iMac. No more weekly degunk sessions, antivirus, malware consternation and constant admonitions for her to be vigilant about keeping her machine clean were necessary. And she took to it like a charm -- things were unfamiliar (and still sometimes she stumbles on a Win -> Mac how-to-do question) but she is enthralled with it now and spends more time on email/web browsing than she ever did on the Win box. The iLife/iPod deal is just gravy and really we've experienced firsthand on how much more hassle-free life became after the Mac switch.

    So, I'm not swayed by saving a couple hundred dollars. Just like I wouldn't buy a Kia or a Yugo, I'm not going to opt for a bargain basement PC over a quality machine like a Mac. No, it's not perfect and presents its own set of flaws, but at this juncture, it seems to be the product of greater quality for me.

    --

    AZspot
  20. Re:I would buy a Mac... by steve_bryan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So you are just itching to buy yet another keyboard, mouse and monitor? With iMacs that force one to acquire the built-in monitor there were complaints about the forced bundling. Now that Apple has an option that doesn't require you to buy a new monitor we still hear nothing but whiny complaints.

    For anyone who has owned a computer the cost of upgrading to Mac OS X is no more than $600. The excuse that it costs too much is gone. Find another one.