Slashdot Mirror
Boot Camp For Suckers?
DigitalDame2 writes "PC Magazine's Editor-in-Chief says the whole Mac/Windows dual-boot thing is really nothing to get excited about. He writes that Boot Camp is really just a plan to get Windows users to convert to OS X." From the article: "Once you've laid out a few kilobucks on your BC system and been frustrated a few times with Windows limitations, what are you going to do? Jobs's bet: You'll start spending more and more time in OS X, until you--too--become one of the pod people. It's sad to see so many of my compatriots being turned into lemmings. Perhaps they'll wake up and smell the Apple pie in the sky--and realize they've been taken for a ride. But I doubt it."
He would make OSX available for the masses, and not tied down to MAC computers alone. How is letting MAC owners put windows on their MAC going to make them switch to MAC?
Go ahead and call me unreliable; reliable is just a synonym for predictable.
I started to reply "I want to have a threesome with your mom and dad", but I caught the typo before I hit submit.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
His theory is that dual booters will eventually switch over to Apple's OS because they like it better, and he hopes that they will realize Apple has taken them for a ride? How is using an OS you like better being taken for a ride?
And then he blames Apple for everything! Yes, literally everything. FTFA: "I'll bet it's responsible for tattoos, piercings, and the wide-spread adoption of the phrase "no worries." In fact, I believe that most of today's societal ills can be either indirectly or directly attributed to Apple." I assume this is intended as some sort of lame joke (which his intended audience will not doubt love), but any editor who would let an article of this quality slip through deserves to be fired. It's a shame that he *is* the editor. I've got nothing against editorials, but this goes above and beyond that. He's not expressing a considered opinion, he's just engaging in some "let's all laugh at the other guys because we're better" type humor.
I wasn't exactly planning on buying PC Magazine any time soon, but now I know I won't, at least until this clown is gone.
He seems really angry that Apple may win some people over by not frustrating them like Windows does (according to him). Sounds fair enough to me.
OK, so you were the 99999th person to say this and PC Magazine was the 100000th. Good for you!
(Also, I've noticed that linking to one of your own posts is Never-Fail Karma Whore tactics.)
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
It's a definite statement of confidence by Apple that they will *support* the means to run a competing OS on their system.
No. Boot Camp is currently unsupported. Apple also refuses to provide support for running Windows on the machine.
While there may be drivers lacking initially, I have full confidence that the open source community will fill this void.
I sincerely doubt that many from the "open source community" are going to step up to write drivers for closed hardware running on a closed-source OS. Now Linux or *BSD drivers for the Apple hardware are more likely to happen. But writing drivers for closed hardware is difficult enough without having to write them for an operating system that doesn't provide you with source code.
My blog
If you're not a Mac person, then why would you bother buying a Mac? (I'm interpreting "not a Mac person" to mean you keep your windows maximized instead of scattered across the screen; you don't understand why one-button mice make more sense, ergonomically and intuitively; you're confounded by default buttons on the right-hand side of dialogs; etc.)
Macs are designed for Mac people. If you don't think like a Mac user, buying a Mac will probably do you more harm than good. You'd probably be better off with a Dell or something instead.
Bonsai Kitten: TNG
Wow, your list of 'Mac person' attributes is the stupidest thing I've ever read. I you have a really hard time coming up with reasons why 'arbitrary decision A' was smarter than 'arbitrary decision B.' It's cool, none of the things you mentioned is better than an alternative.
Incidentally, I always figure a 'Mac person' can only do one thing at a time, and slowly. How else to explain the piss poor interactivity Macs offered up until about 2002?
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
5, Insightful?
Seems the Mac fanbois are having a field day.
Am I the only one on this forum who prefers working in WinXP? And before you mod me troll, I worked on a Powerbook for half a year, but found its shortcomings too frustrating. At least on a WinXP machine there are ways to circumvent the annoyances. On a Mac I'm stuck with them:
So no thanks, if I can't get a unix machine, I'll stick with WinXP, thank you very much.
Adventure, Romance, MAD SCIENCE!
The Windows UI is the best of the 3 I've tried.
Windows has a large set of consistant keyboard shortcuts that work across virtually every Windows application. The apps where they tend to break are those stupid programs with "themes" or "skins" and those that are ported from other systems that are insanely stupid.
Mac OS has virtually no keyboard shortcuts that are actually consistant across applications. Cut/copy/paste are about it. Even moving within lines of text is not consistant on the Mac. Talk about stupid for the sake of stupid.
X Window has the most ridiculous clipboard scheme imaginable. Who had the absolutely stupid idea to make selection == copy? That is so insane from a usability perspective that only a slash-moron could defend it.