Slashdot Mirror


Windows Expert Jumps Ship

An anonymous reader writes to let us know that Scott Finnie, Computerworld's Windows expert, has given the final verdict to Windows after 3 months of using a Mac. And the verdict is: "Sayonara." Finnie is known to readers here for his many reviews of Vista as it progressed to release. Quoting: "If you give the Mac three months, as I did, you won't go back either. The hardest part is paying for it — everything after that gets easier and easier. Perhaps fittingly, it took me the full three-month trial period to pay off my expensive MacBook Pro. But the darn thing is worth every penny."

939 comments

  1. Lots of folks making the switch by BWJones · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There are some issues certainly of migrating from one platform to any other platform, but it has been interesting to see a number of long time Windows users in hard core sciences with entrenched work flows that made them very dependent upon Windows to make the switch. When I joined the current group I was in, I essentially catalyzed a complete switch of our lab that is now percolating to many other labs in the group. These switchers have not and are not switching because I kept hitting them over the head with how great the platform is. Rather, they kept seeing the amazing presentations I gave with the help of apps like Keynote, or how easy it was to host a number of high traffic websites from a single OS X machine (including my blog), our lab site, and Webvision among a number of others. Or even how easy it was for me to replace an SGI, a Windows machine and a older Mac with a single incredibly powerful workstation running OS X. The new MacPros are one of the most amazingly powerful systems for the dollar that I've ever used making scientific calculations quick and easy.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Pentavirate · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People have different preferences. That's what makes the free market work. Thank goodness we have choices!

    2. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by hollywoodb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Many of the labs around my university's campus use Mac machines, but they're greatly outnumbered by cheap Dell and Gateway systems. Most of the Mac systems are older eMacs. I often see the PCs sitting there with a piece of paper taped to the screen with something along the lines of "Sorry, this computer is down for maintenance". I have yet to see that on a Mac system. When I asked why there are fewer Mac systems on campus I was told it is cheaper to replace the PCs when the upgrade cycle rolls around. I have no problem believing that, but I'm willing to bet that nobody is keeping track of downtime and man hours required to keep the PCs operational between upgrade cycles when they calculate the cost of their Mac vs their PC systems.

      Personally, I'm a linux user across all my systems. I'm fully aware that most of my friends and family are not prepared to be running linux or *BSD as their main OS, but I did manage to convert one of my longtime Windows-using cousins to a MacBook. He's never been happier. Strangely neither he nor I have managed to convince anyone else in our circles to switch from Windows/PC. Hell, I can't even convince some people to try OpenOffice.org before they go drop a couple c-notes on the latest Microsoft Office.

      Maybe I'm a crummy salesman, or perhaps my message would be taken with more interest if I had a black turtleneck and white earbuds. Either way I wish people would stop calling me because their crummy greeting card creation program quit printing a certain color, or their crummy spyware software won't remove a certain portion of spyware.

      --
      I may have to share this planet with animals, but I'm doing my damn best to eat every last one of them.
    3. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Simon+Garlick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I, on the other hand, have no need for the sheer horsepower of a Mac Pro. So when I dumped my Windows machines a couple of months ago, I got Mac Mini for my desktop and a Macbook for my laptop. Couldn't be happier.

    4. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pigeontheory · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The reason for a switch should only be for the 'uses' of the platform. If you're comparing Mac vs. Vista when it comes to video editing, I'm sure Mac's arsenal of video editing software is much more usable than any Vista Video Software (God forbid a Vista Movie Maker). If gaming is your cup of tea, there's no reason to switch to a platform who's variety of games doesn't compare to a Windows machine. However, as for casual users (web browsing, document writing), I don't think there's a clear cut reason to switch. I think you'll find arguments on both sides of the fence.

    5. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The new MacPros are one of the most amazingly powerful systems for the dollar that I've ever used making scientific calculations quick and easy.

      Yes, now that they run Intel chips. Or maybe you've just bought into the megahertz myth? Stop calling them 'MacPros' and correctly refer to them as 'Mactels,' please.

    6. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Flavio · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People have different preferences. That's what makes the free market work.

      Exactly, and this is why a lot less people should be using Windows. As long as Windows is shipped with computers and people have to pay the Microsoft tax, there isn't a free market to speak of.

      Most Windows users didn't choose a Microsoft operating system, so their preferences weren't a factor.

    7. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by rwven · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "Microsoft Tax?" What do you expect? In order to use OSX you have to own apple hardware. Parents buying computers for their kids for college/hs are going to care about one thing: Price.

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy? Parents aside, what do you think MOST people are going to go with.

      Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate. If I could buy OSX for my PC...i probably would, just so I could have both. But I don't want to have to spend twice as much on my computer just to run an OS that TECHNICALLY doesn't do as much as Windows does...

      Linux *generally* isn't as mature enough or well known enough to land on retail PCs either.

      That leaves Windows. Apple has the solution but refuses to bend over and pick it up. Linux might have it someday, but right now most people lack the technical knowledge to use it...

      It's apples own fault that more people don't pick it up. If Dell were able to sell a PC and offer the users the choice of OSX or Windows...I bet with Apple's marketing you'd get LOADS of people adopting it for the first time.

    8. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by DWIM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As long as Windows is shipped with computers and people have to pay the Microsoft tax, there isn't a free market to speak of.


      Are you implying that you can buy a Mac that is not bundled with an OS? Seriously, I don't know. Is that true?

      Regardless, the parent topic demonstrates there is a free market. You can buy a personal computer w/o Windows on it. Mac owners do it all the time.

    9. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Nerftoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bryan,

      Trying to help out here... Your server performance would be much better if:

      1) ..you do not have 3 1/2 MB of images on the landing page of your blog
      2) ..you do not host any mission critical website on the same server as site mentioned in point 1 above.
      3) ..you do not post your mission critical websites on slashdot.

      Hope this helps.. please be more careful in the future.

    10. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 1

      I also work in a lab (and my boss is the one who got a Lombard Powerbook for me, and I haven't looked back since) and we're almost all Mac. There are a few exceptions (our ancient Bio-Rad confocal microscope, and an imaging system tied to an electron microscope, and one machine that runs MetaMorph) but we love our Macs. I plan to get an Intel Macbook Pro when the next revision comes out, now that Photoshop CS3 is out -- I'm sick of Photoshop throwing up a slow progress bar instead of just doing the free transform I asked for.

      Our site (which I built in Dreamweaver with some hand-made tweaks) runs on a Mac Mini running Apache and CGI. (It's all there, but has to be enabled as Apple by default doesn't enable dynamic pages).

      Our PI uses Keynote for his presentations, too.

      Now if only our quote from JEOL for a new TEM didn't include a Windows machine... (and I highly doubt that they have any that run on the Mac platform instead ... sigh.) At least I hope I can avoid having to use the ugly Ulead PhotoImpact they include with the system, and install Photoshop instead.

    11. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Flavio · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Microsoft Tax?" What do you expect?

      I expect to go to any computer retailer and be able to buy a computer without Windows pre-installed. That's all I want -- I don't dispute anything you wrote.

      It's apples own fault that more people don't pick it up. If Dell were able to sell a PC and offer the users the choice of OSX or Windows...I bet with Apple's marketing you'd get LOADS of people adopting it for the first time.

      Yeah, but that's just the thing. Microsoft isn't pleased when vendors start selling machines without Windows (or worse, with Linux). Dell and IBM get away with this on a limited basis, but even then it's tricky.

    12. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by TrancePhreak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My friend also works in a university in IT. They have mostly Windows machines and a small number of Macs. The Macs there require less maintenance because hardly anybody ever uses them.

      Yay for annecdotal evidence.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    13. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Zerathdune · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Care to enlighten me as to why he should not refer to the machine by its model name? And I fail to see that the reason behind why they are faster makes any real difference.

      --
      No single raindrop believes that it is responsible for the storm.
    14. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, so you just posted three URLs to Slashdot, in a first post, which you claim are running on a single machine. Either:

      1. This one Mac is truly, stupendously, orgasmically amazing as you describe, and Google are _idiots_ for building Linux server farms or
      2. The Slashdot Effect ain't what it used to be.

    15. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by metamatic · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate.

      Yes, but it's also what's keeping them profitable. If they didn't limit the hardware base they'd have to jack up the OS price to something people wouldn't pay, to cover the support costs and loss of hardware revenue--and then go out of business.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    16. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC

      You forgot to add the $700 you pay for the old ladys son, who lives in the basement next door, for troubleshooting your PC in the next 8 months.

    17. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "You can pay $1300 for a mac"

      I see the $1300-$1500 figure quoted a lot, but it's just plain wrong -- the actual cost is about half of what people think it is. I can get a Mac Mini for $579 (since I work at a university) and the general-public cost is around $600 or a little more. That's actually less than what I've been quoting people lately who ask me to put a decent gaming PC together for them on newegg (I build wishlists and email them to the "clients" who ask for my recommendations).

      While it is true that a Mac Mini is not a good choice for running games as it's not upgradable and doesn't have a great video card, it is also true that it's great for what most people use a computer for -- web, email, and sometimes organizing photos, music, and videos.

      $600-700ish for a brand new shiny Mac that won't have all the security problems of Windows is not a bad deal. Not at all.

      Besides, didn't Slashdot complain once that Apple didn't have a $500-$700 system available? Now that they do, people STILL complain. You just can't make anyone happy around here.

    18. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by BWJones · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Thanks Nerftoe,

      Yeah, I'm not too worried about this as I've been moving mission critical functions off of this server and it is now principally hosting the low traffic lab site and my (much higher traffic) blog. The performance is also actually pretty good and I've had a bit of fun watching loads in the past when an article has been linked on BoingBoing or one of the other higher volume sites. It also turns out that available bandwidth is the biggest factor in performance as the graphics intensive Webvision site used to be hosted on an old 233 Mhz G3 iMac and it could sustain loads of up to 200k visits from unique visitors per day. At least that was the highest load I ever saw on that machine. It is now being hosted on a Mac Mini and the content is being made freely available to any and all interested parties, so traffic on that can only do Webvision and our lab site good in terms of ranking and such, especially given our move into certain scientific areas like metabolomics.

      What I got irritated about was the DOS attack that appeared to start quickly on a couple of the servers, only to terminate soon after my posting about the attack. It was not terribly well coordinated and appeared to be coming from two IPs only, but it still gets under ones skin a bit. No real damage was done and the machines were able to continue serving up their goodness, so it will likely not be escalated.

      Thanks for the feedback though and best regards,

      Bryan aka BWJones

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    19. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by blueskies · · Score: 1

      Regardless, the parent topic demonstrates there is a free market. You can buy a personal computer w/o Windows on it. Mac owners do it all the time.

      Wow, you come off really high and mighty and then say there is a free market because you can by a computer with either windows or mac on it? That's why where is a free market? Uh huh. That's what a free market is, two choices. Not that there isn't a free market but your reasoning doesn't hold up.

    20. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by the_macman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy? Parents aside, what do you think MOST people are going to go with.

      This is simply untrue. Go to any campus and you'll see the adoption rate of Apple laptops vs PC is making a dominating comeback. Take for exampe my univ, University of Central, 6th largest univ in the nation (47,000 students). I'd say about 3 out of 5 laptops are Macs. A student going to college probably has the financial backing of their parents and they want the best for their child. Most parents ARE willing to pay $600 for a better laptop, which is why they're EVERYWHERE on campus.

      Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate. If I could buy OSX for my PC...i probably would, just so I could have both. But I don't want to have to spend twice as much on my computer just to run an OS that TECHNICALLY doesn't do as much as Windows does...


      This is true, but it's a double edged sword. Apple's ability to control the hardware and the software make the whole computing experience more enjoyable. While making their OS open to other hardware would increase adoption it would ruin the computer experience that Mac OS X and Apple hardware currently do so well.
    21. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by rwven · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can hop on down to best buy or jump on a website and buy a windows based pc for $300....

    22. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Gerald · · Score: 5, Insightful
      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy?

      The "cool" one.

    23. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 1

      ...and then erase windows and install a real OS for free.

    24. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by umdenken · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Microsoft Tax?" What do you expect? In order to use OSX you have to own apple hardware. Parents buying computers for their kids for college/hs are going to care about one thing: Price.

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy? Parents aside, what do you think MOST people are going to go with.

      No, I think this is way over-simplified. You can't just reduce everything down to the price of computer A and the price of computer B. There are a lot of different kinds of people out there, shopping in different markets:

      IMO, the Apples are priced VERY competitively - they're clearly high-quality machines, and they compete in the Sony Vaio and Lenovo Thinkpad market. THAT'S how the computers need to be evaluated.

      The people who are out shopping for the $450 laptops on sale at Fry's aren't going to even consider the Vaio's either.

    25. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pilkul · · Score: 1

      Apple can't run on commodity hardware. The fixed hardware is fundamental to their strategy. How do you think Apple is able to make operating systems that are more advanced than Windows despite having a much smaller staff than Microsoft? Because they are geniuses? No, because they aren't carrying two millstones around their neck: 1) Decades of backwards compatibility, and 2) Support for huge amounts of varied hardware.

      Those two factors are why Microsoft is dominant and Apple is in a niche. But the flip side of that coin is, Apple's not attempting to address those factors is reason they are able to hold on to their niche in the first place. If Apple was to try to carry one or both those millstones, all of a sudden they would be directly competing with Microsoft, they would lose their niche and they would die.

    26. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jcgf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      yeah, if your time is worth nothing it's free. Typed from my Athlon64 running FreeBSD.

    27. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I plan to get an Intel Macbook Pro when the next revision comes out, now that Photoshop CS3 is out -- I'm sick of Photoshop throwing up a slow progress bar instead of just doing the free transform I asked for.

      Photoshop CS3 isn't out yet. There's a beta, but it has some issues.

    28. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Iamthefallen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Funny, when configuring a Mac I don't see an option to select an O/S other than Mac OS X, how do I avoid the Apple tax?

      --
      Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
    29. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Jake73 · · Score: 1

      Ah, but if Apple were to support some random PC with their OS, their margin would drop to ZERO very fast. First, they wouldn't be selling their hardware. Second, the cost of doing business in the OS arena would skyrocket.

      Try writing an OS that relies on a handful of drivers to run on a handful of hardware devices. It's generally not too difficult to perform QC.

      Now try writing an OS that must be able to perform flawlessly on thousands of hardware devices running thousands of drivers written by who-knows-who. You can try to blame the hardware driver writers for only so long. Then you decide that it's in your best interest to encapsulate and abstract the hardware layer to a ridiculous degree to make things easier for hardware vendors and make it more difficult to bring the system down. Eventually, you end up with Windows.

      Choice can be a good thing. But what many people don't understand is that choice is an expensive thing.

      (and before the Linux folks chime in, Linux is only free if you value your time at $0)

    30. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Flavio · · Score: 1

      As long as Windows is shipped with computers and people have to pay the Microsoft tax, there isn't a free market to speak of.
      Are you implying that you can buy a Mac that is not bundled with an OS? Seriously, I don't know. Is that true?

      Nothing I wrote implies this.

      A MacBook doesn't violate the concept of a free market because Apple makes and sells both the hardware and software. The laptop/OS X combo is in fact a single product developed by a single company.

      Most other desktop computer vendors won't give you the option of buying a computer without Windows. These companies didn't develop Windows. In most cases, they didn't even develop the hardware they're selling. They're just software and hardware resellers, yet they don't let you buy the hardware without the software.

      Now to me the problem is crystal clear. You can play the devil's advocate all you want, but the Microsoft tax still exists and it plays a big part in Microsoft's business strategy.
    31. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by xwizbt · · Score: 1

      COMPLETELY off topic, BUT I just LOVE the way you use CAPITAL letters in your post to make sure EVERYBODY gets what you're talking about. SO MANY people use BOLD TAGS to do this, but I like to remember the old days when word processors didn't REQUIRE you to use such weird tags and left us to RELY on those old STALWARTS, the capital letters. God bless EM.

    32. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by kfg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy? Parents aside, what do you think MOST people are going to go with.

      Anecdotal observation says they'll go for an iBook. That's what I see something like 90% of the college kids hauling to the coffeeshops.

      If Dell were able to sell a PC and offer the users the choice of OSX or Windows...I bet. . .

      Apple would be plunged into driver hell. I've got two windows machines on the bench right now with sound cards that don't work. One with an Ethernet card that won't work and one with a serial port that's conflicting with the sound card. I'll get it all sorted, of course, but it will take some hours. I'm no Mac fanboy and there some things about OSX that really torque me off, but I'm still planning to build my small recording studio around a Mac mini, because when I plug the audio gear into the family shared iBook it really does all just work.

      And that's worth a few bucks.

      KFG

    33. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by OmegaBlac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As opposed to the time the average Windows user spends installing antivirus, antispyware, a personal firewall, dozens of patches, and three sets of activation. Then after all that, they finally can get down to crawling the web to download their apps, run in thru the antivirus or inserting CD/DVDs in and out to install all their software. I'll take the Free and free Linux/BSD any day of the week.

    34. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by xwizbt · · Score: 1

      Now try writing an OS that must be able to perform flawlessly on thousands of hardware devices running thousands of drivers written by who-knows-who. You can try to blame the hardware driver writers for only so long.

      Which is interesting, because there are only a handful of devices that I've installed on my mac that have any problems. Really. And they are far outweighed by the number of devices that simply work. Are you suggesting that all Windows' problems are due to third parties? Does the mac not have third parties, then? Or is it that it doesn't have them in enough volume to do any damage?

      Or is it that Mac users seem to demand a better experience. That what Windows users put up with, Mac users won't. That we expect, and somehow get, a better user experience?

    35. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jcgf · · Score: 1
      I'm thinking of buying a black Macbook. I'm coming from a PC running FreeBSD (which I love, but sometimes flash and java have to just work). I guess my question is, what things should I be prepared for if I have never owned a Mac before? Oh and what would you consider the sweet spot as far as RAM goes? ie is it worth buying 2 GB or will I do just fine with 1? I do plan on playing with parallels, so I'm thinking I might need 2 but I'm curious to hear other people's opinions.

      Thanks,
      Jared

    36. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 47Ronin · · Score: 1

      LOL that's nothing. What about the other news item of the day: Intel founder gets his wish and receives his dream computer -- an Apple MacBook Pro 17" ...best part is the photo of him smiling ear-to-ear! ...keep'em coming!

      --
      Those who laugh at you for you having a Mac.. are the people who constantly call you to fix their PC.
    37. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      You mean Windows is usable right out of the box? Or do you not have to configure it when you start it, getting rid of all the crapware and such that is shipped in droves on those cheapo machines? I call shenanigans. Just because you use FreeBSD doesn't make this any less of a troll.

    38. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parents buying computers for their kids for college/hs are going to care about one thing: Price. You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy? Parents aside, what do you think MOST people are going to go with.

      Maybe I went to a strange school, but this is the last thing any parent cared about. ("What, you need $100 for a party? OK...") The thing parents are going to buy is a combination of "what does the university recommend?" and "what do the other students have?". Parents are smart enough that they'd much rather shell out $500 more now than play "help your kid get his/her brand X computer to work on the brand Y network" tech support later.

      Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate. If I could buy OSX for my PC...i probably would, just so I could have both.

      And you still wouldn't have bought a Mac, so why should Apple care? Steve Jobs just pointed out that they average 22 songs sold per iPod, i.e., under $22 in bits for every $250 in hardware. I suspect the ratio is similar for their computers.

      But I don't want to have to spend twice as much on my computer just to run an OS that TECHNICALLY doesn't do as much as Windows does...

      I'm not sure what this means. Do you think Mac OS can't run a particular type of application? Are you bitter that Mac OS can't run Outlook, but conveniently omitting all the apps that only the Mac can run? Or do you think having the choice of 5000 email clients on Windows is really a good thing?

      That leaves Windows. Apple has the solution but refuses to bend over and pick it up. Linux might have it someday, but right now most people lack the technical knowledge to use it...

      The solution to *your* problem (Windows sucks and I don't want to buy a Mac) does not necessarily help them. By your reasoning, they should give away Mac hardware for free, too.

    39. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mroeder · · Score: 1

      Waves red flag.

      Not sure if that request will slow down - or actually accelerate your DOS even.

      I'm thinging you're opening the flood fella.

    40. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by dan828 · · Score: 1

      You forgot to add the $700 you pay for the old ladys son, who lives in the basement next door, for troubleshooting your PC in the next 8 months.

      Know your audience. This is slashdot, we can all maintain our own computers. Hell, the guy living in the basement next door that you pay to maintain your computer because you lack the knowledge to do so youself, is probably a regular poster here.
    41. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by shmlco · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You can. And then you can pay $300 again in six months when the flimsy POS dies and needs to be replaced. According to some stats I've seen most Macs are used and kept around for about four years, whereas the replacement rate for PCs is just two.

      Further, note that all of the Macs are either Core or Core 2 Duos, whereas most of the cheap PCs and notebooks are hitting that $300 price point by using Centrinos. Or in other words, you get what you pay for...

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    42. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jcgf · · Score: 1

      I call shenanigans. Just because you use FreeBSD doesn't make this any less of a troll.

      Just because you disagree, doesn't mean it's trolling.

    43. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by tzanger · · Score: 1

      Apple would be plunged into driver hell. I've got two windows machines on the bench right now with sound cards that don't work. One with an Ethernet card that won't work and one with a serial port that's conflicting with the sound card. I'll get it all sorted, of course, but it will take some hours. I'm no Mac fanboy and there some things about OSX that really torque me off, but I'm still planning to build my small recording studio around a Mac mini, because when I plug the audio gear into the family shared iBook it really does all just work.

      That used to be true. Nowadays pretty much any motherboard from Asus, Gigabyte, Intel, hell even MSI or ECS have peripherals that work "out of the box" or with the driver CD. "Driver hell" is largely a thing of the past, unless you're buying absolutely bottom-of-the-barrel crap. Apple could recognize a handful of manufacturers and have 80% of the PC marketplace, if they chose.

      Honestly though, I don't see why they would. They're already selling like crazy. Why push for more? Why not wait until sales drop and then look for ways to make sales better?

    44. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think the problem most Slashdotters have is that they can't conceive of building the type of machines Apple sells. You can get a 20" iMac with a 2.16 GHz Core 2 Duo and 1GB of memory for $1500. You can get a roughly comparable Dell Dimension E520 for $850. But it's not really "comparable". It comes with a 1.8 GHz processor with 2MB of cache, instead of the 2.16 GHz with 4MB. It comes with DDR2-533, instead of DDR2-667. It has no DVD burner, a GeForce 7300LE, and a 17" display.

      You can't even configure that machine to be comparable to the iMac. To get in the same ballpark, you've got to jump up to an XPS 410, up the CPU to 2.13 GHz, add the 2007WFP and the Radeon 1300 Pro. Now you're at $1487, and you still have half the cache, a slower graphics card, no firewire, no wi-fi, no bluetooth, no webcam, and no remote. And it'll still take up much more space in your office!

      So yes, even with the Intel Macs, you can get machines cheaper than what Apple well sell them for. However, it's no surprise you can get a cheaper machine with lesser hardware! However, if you try to match the basic specs, and a couple of the accessories (ie: no consumer machine today should ship without wifi!) you're not going to save a lot of money over the Mac.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    45. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by BWJones · · Score: 1

      It appears to have stopped and the IP addresses have been logged. The nice thing is that traffic out never really got stepped on.

      Thanks though.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    46. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by iain · · Score: 0

      You just can't make anyone happy around here. You must be new he...Oh I can't be bothered.

    47. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by quanticle · · Score: 1

      Which do you THINK parents are going to buy? Parents aside, what do you think MOST people are going to go with.

      The parents are going to buy the Mac, because it is more durable, both in terms of hardware and software. Apple generally has a higher build quality, even on their entry-level machines. In other words, what a parent thinks is, "Will I buy a $500 notebook that I or my child will have to replace in three years (due to hardware failure), or will I buy a $900 Mac that'll last the entire span of my kid's college education?"

      Once you put the choice in those terms, the choice suddenly isn't so clear anymore.

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    48. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by ScriptedReplay · · Score: 2, Informative

      Further, note that all of the Macs are either Core or Core 2 Duos, whereas most of the cheap PCs and notebooks are hitting that $300 price point by using Centrinos. Or in other words, you get what you pay for...


      You must have meant Celerons. Centrino is the [any Pentium M up to and including Core2Duo Merom]CPU+Intel chipset+Intel wireless mobile combo. So the MacBooks are, horror of horrors[*], Centrino machines!

      [*] welcome to the wonderful world of Intel marketing, Apple. Enjoy your stay.
    49. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So let me get this straight, you want OS/X to run on any combination of cruddy, cheap ass hardware with shitful driver support, etc - yet still expect the OS/X experience to stay the same as on Apple hardware?

      Surely you jest.

      Shitful drivers for shitful products are what has killed Windows and cause a ton of stability issues. I'd rather Apple learn from that and not go down that path at all. At least if you buy Apple hardware for OS/X, you know it's going to work 100% all the time.

    50. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is the parent being modded down? He is simply stating that he has come under attack and that it is being monitored?

    51. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's an important point. I move pretty regularly between Linux and OS X, and I shopped around for a bit to find a PC laptop comparable to my MacBook. They're really hard to find. Sony sells a nice Vaio (C190) that has similar specs, but also costs about the same. And if you want to go into ThinkPad territory, be prepared to pay a whole lot more.

      Sure you can buy a laptop for way cheaper than the $1100 Apple is charging for its low-end MacBook. But how many of those have Core 2 CPUs? And if its so over-priced, why is Dell charging $1000 for machines with almost exactly the same specs*?

      *) Not to mention an inferior LCD panel!

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    52. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2) Support for huge amounts of varied hardware.
      Microsoft doesn't make (all) the drivers for the hardware their OS uses, the hardware fabricants do. Do you think, if Apple where to let it's OS be installable on a PC, the fabricants would not make the drivers to work on it?

      Anyway Apple would lose the "for cool and rich" perception their users have if it where cheaper.
    53. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 2, Funny

      For casual users, downtime and reduced maintenance are decent reasons to switch. A Mac is like a Toyota, it requires almost no servicing, and will withstand a lot of user abuse. Since my mom got a Windows machine, the number of long-distance support sessions I've had to hold have dropped from a couple a month to once in the whole year.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    54. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by kfg · · Score: 1

      . . .recognize a handful of manufacturers and have 80% of the PC marketplace. . .

      If I weren't in the other 20% I wouldn't be using Windows or OSX to run the recording studio, but I understand that isn't a mainstream sort of thing to do.

      On the other hand, it will be.

      KFG

    55. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Mac Mini is only $600 if you want a system with 512 megs of RAM, a crappy Intel GMA video chipset that can't run any games, no expansion ports, a tiny hard disk, and no keyboard, monitor, or mouse.

      For the same price, you can go get an off the shelf HP system with a faster processor, 2 gigabytes of RAM, a 160 gig disk, an Nvidia 7300 chipset with a few PCI-E ports, a flat panel monitor, a keyboard, and a mouse.

      So if you want any kind of a "decent" system from Apple, you're talking about a $1,500+ iMac, at the very least.

    56. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by L0rdJedi · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The "average Windows user" (lets think Dell here) doesn't spend any time doing any of the things you mentioned. Antivirus, antispyware, and a personal firewall come with the machine on a trial period (Norton Internet Security 2005). Sure, it's not the best thing in the world, but it does a good enough job. They get notified to purchase a full copy, they do by entering their information, and it's done. There's no downloading of anything required. Hell, they even have the option to purchase it when they order the computer. Then it either comes preinstalled or they can install it with little to no hastle. Patches are installed by automatic update (Windows defaults to on).

      The "average" Windows user isn't the ones downloading their apps. Those are mostly the power users that build their machines and just download a new copy of spybot anytime they need it. Those are probably also the same people who run Kazaa, Limewire, and every other p2p spyware infested program on the planet.

    57. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by kestasjk · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah, but that's just the thing. Microsoft isn't pleased when vendors start selling machines without Windows (or worse, with Linux). Dell and IBM get away with this on a limited basis, but even then it's tricky.
      It's tricky to sell machines without an OS because MS have some kind of conspiracy going, not because consumers generally just want the machine to come with the current Windows OS?
      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    58. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by ScriptedReplay · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yeah, if your time is worth nothing it's free.


      If you're knowledgeable, the amount of time spent configuring Linux/*BSD is comparable with the one securing a new Windows machine. Hence free in this case is apt. Otherwise you have to climb the learning curve which requires a time investment, or contract someone to do it for you. In which case 'free' becomes one of various levels of 'cheap'. After which, the time and money saved by not having to periodically contract someone to clean up the Windows machine (we're talking non-knowledgeable owners, the average Windows user profile) is just gravy.

      The only case when your quote truly applies is for someone who knows how to keep a Windows machine (relatively) safe and working yet has no experience with other operating systems. So it's a valid point, but limited in scope.
    59. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Get 2. It wont hurt a thing. I have 2 in my MBP. I had 2 in my old G4.

      I give Windows 1 GB when I boot into Parallels.

      Just don't buy from Apple. I personally like http://www.dealram.com/ I've used it for a few years.

      If you're looking for some good deals, you can check out their sister site dealmac.com. Legally (I think) vendors can't sell Macs cheaper than Apple, however some have bundles going for the same price. Warranty and all that work still go through Apple.

    60. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Exactly, and this is why a lot less people should be using Windows. As long as Windows is shipped with computers and people have to pay the Microsoft tax, there isn't a free market to speak of.

      It is trivial to buy a PC without Windows, if you want to.

    61. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by LordEd · · Score: 2, Interesting
      First you said:

      ...the [mini-mac] cost is around $600 or a little more. That's actually less than what I've been quoting people lately who ask me to put a decent gaming PC together
      Then you said:

      a Mac Mini is not a good choice for running games
      So what you are telling us is that a gaming system costs more than a non-gaming system whether it is a mac or a PC.
    62. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 2

      I expect to go to any computer retailer and be able to buy a computer without Windows pre-installed. That's all I want -- I don't dispute anything you wrote.

      What about vendors who don't want the overheads of having to deal with multiple operating systems ?

      You can pretend these overheads are zero, if you want, but reality dicates otherwise.

    63. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by coleridge78 · · Score: 1

      Take a look at real numbers. Things have changed. In laptops, you will not find a comparable system to any Mac which is cheaper, and most are *hundreds* more expensive. In towers, the only place where Macs are not cheaper than any comparable system is in a very small window in the absolute middle of the road, where sellers like Dell can make the most of their volumes of scale.

      Higher-end towers are many hundreds to over a thousand dollars cheaper on the Mac side, and for generally better hardware/more advanced specs. Over one thousand dollars cheaper for a better machine. Take a look for yourself.

      Even anti-Mac sources have done these comparisons recently and grudgingly come to this conclusion, including PC World and the Guardian.

    64. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pilkul · · Score: 1

      The elaborate hardware abstraction framework required to support more than one type of hardware in itself imposes large costs, independently of the cost of writing the drivers. Also, no, many manufacturers would not bother to write good Apple drivers, or at least not good ones, considering Apple's minority market share.

    65. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely, positively get the 2GB. But by it 3rd party, not from Apple.

    66. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by grcumb · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's tricky to sell machines without an OS because MS have some kind of conspiracy going, not because consumers generally just want the machine to come with the current Windows OS?

      That's exactly correct. I'm surprised you would act incredulous, because the fact of Microsoft's abuse of its monopoly position has been clearly documented in a court of law. One of the things it did in the normal course of its business was to tell manufacturers that they could sell Windows only, or not at all.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    67. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by merreborn · · Score: 1

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC


      That may be true for desktops, but it certainly isn't for laptops.

      It's damn hard to find a windows laptop for $1099 that matches the performance, features, and robustness of a macbook.
      Believe me, I tried. Just bought one for the first time a week ago. It's a hell of a lot better than the $900 HP it replaced.
    68. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by dr.badass · · Score: 1

      Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate.

      Doesn't seem to be hurting their profits, though.

      Apple has the solution but refuses to bend over and pick it up.

      Bend over is exactly what they'd be doing.

      --
      Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
    69. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Ah, but if Apple were to support some random PC with their OS, their margin would drop to ZERO very fast. First, they wouldn't be selling their hardware.

      Actually, they probably would. These days, in its niches, Apple hardware stacks up quite competitively with the alternatives.

    70. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think the problem most Slashdotters have is that they can't conceive of building the type of machines Apple sells.

      No, the problem is that most Slashdotters - indeed, most "enthusiasts" - want a machine Apple refuses to sell: a single processor box without an integrated LCD, a replacable video card (plus another vacant x16 slot, even with only x8 signalling) and room for two 3.5" hard disks. In fact, I suspect most would be happy with just having a replacable video card and no integrated LCD (I certainly would). So - depending on your perspective - either a headless iMac (which people have been clamouring for since the original iMac was released) or a "Mini Mac Pro".

      There are 2 - 4 gaping holes in Apple's product lineup. This is one (or two, depending) of them.

      You can't even configure that machine to be comparable to the iMac. To get in the same ballpark, you've got to jump up to an XPS 410, up the CPU to 2.13 GHz, add the 2007WFP and the Radeon 1300 Pro. Now you're at $1487, and you still have half the cache, a slower graphics card, no firewire, no wi-fi, no bluetooth, no webcam, and no remote. And it'll still take up much more space in your office!

      An E520 upgraded to these specs is $1229. While it _does_ lack some features the iMac has, on the flipside you have a machine with infinitely more expandability. This may or may not be important to you - but if it is, the iMac simply cannot deliver, nor can any Apple machine until you hit the $2000+ Mac Pro.

      This is the problem Apple has. In the tiny niche that their hardware targets, it's a fairly good deal - but if you have needs that are even slightly outside that niche, Apple has nothing for you.

      However, if you try to match the basic specs, and a couple of the accessories (ie: no consumer machine today should ship without wifi!) you're not going to save a lot of money over the Mac.

      Again, you may or may not "save a lot of money". If you want a machine that's good for gaming, for example, nothing Apple has really delivers until you hit the Mac Pro - a $2200ish minimum buy-in (and that's without a screen). So, yes, while you might get roughly the same PC as an iMac for roughly the same cost, when you want to upgrade the video card 12 months down the track to play new games, on a PC it's a few hundreds dollars worth of upgrade, on the iMac it's impossible (without buying whatever the latest iMac is).

      (I would also argue that there's no reason whatsoever for compulsory wifi on non-laptop computers.)

    71. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pherthyl · · Score: 1

      I thought about recommending a Mac Mini to my parents when their old computer died but reconsidered because of the price.
      Unfortunately, your price comparison is quite bogus. You're saying you can get the Mini for $579 (discounted) and say that a decent gaming PC is more expensive. Are you even reading what you're writing? A mini is not useful for much more than the basics. It is not anywhere close to a "decent gaming PC" so comparing it to that is silly.
      My parents don't do anything but email, surf the web, and do the occasional spreadsheet. To accomplish this, they could spend a minimum $679 CAN on a Mac mini or $400 CAN on a PC. Yeah the mac is more stylish, but it is also foreign and almost $300 more. Sorry, not worth it. The equation changes when you're looking at laptops, where the Macs are competitive, but the PC still rules the low-end market.

    72. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by maztuhblastah · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's tricky to sell machines without an OS because MS have some kind of conspiracy going, not because consumers generally just want the machine to come with the current Windows OS?

      Not to sound like a smart-ass, but... yes. One of the things that has come to light (in court, actually) is that Microsoft will actively raise the price of Windows for OEM's who sell computers without an OS, and will threaten to refuse to sell Windows to OEM's that wish to ship other OS's in anything more than trivial quantities. This is one of the things that BeOS ran up against -- they almost worked out a deal with Toshiba (IIRC), to include BeOS alongside Windows. Microsoft told Toshiba that if they did that, they would be unable to purchase Windows licenses. Toshiba (or whoever it was, I can't remember for certain) then had to drop BeOS.

    73. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by JackieBrown · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry, but the average Windows user does not purchase a full copy of Norton in my experience. They let the it expire and wonder why 4 month later their PC is running slower.

    74. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by westlake · · Score: 1
      As long as Windows is shipped with computers and people have to pay the Microsoft tax, there isn't a free market to speak of.

      OEM Vista at Walmart starts at $500 for the no-name Vista Basic laptop. The Microsoft Tax amounts to $40 to $80 on a dual-core system with very attractive specs. No one gives a damn about the Microsoft Tax.

      Most Windows users didn't choose a Microsoft operating system, so their preferences weren't a factor.

      The Geek on crack. Living in his dream world.

    75. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Dan_Bercell · · Score: 1

      300 dollars for a centrino pc?? I think you mean Celeron. Ive been in the PC selling business for years. I purchase the pc, set it up, walk it into the door, plug it in then let the users use it. I have never seen a pc die in 2 years, especially since they have 3 year warranty.

    76. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Beer_Smurf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes but your $300.00 PC does NOT come with a copy of Windows Vista Ultimate and the Mac Mini does come with a full version of OSX.

    77. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by shaitand · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is no secret conspiracy. Microsoft made agreements with vendors requiring them to exclusively ship the MS OS. They aren't allowed to do this anymore due to anti-trust provisions. However, they still give pricing advantages in exchange for not shipping other choices. In a buisness with margins as tiny as personal computers there isn't much choice. You can't ship other OS's and still remain competative. And you can't cut out the option of using the monopoly OS either.

      This isn't a gunman on the grassy knoll here. None of this is in dispute.

    78. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by hunterkll · · Score: 1

      One would think, that... well, .... Perhaps he meant that BECAUSE THERE'S A BLOODY FREE MARKET HE *CAN* BUY A MAC!?!? One would think that without a free market, the world would be show in nothing but a scary window...

    79. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mehgul · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's most probably simply what's kept them alive all these years, and still keeps them alive! Face it, guys, even if Apple were to licence OS X to whomever wants it on their computers, there won't be a rush where 50% of computers will sell with OS X within a few months, not even 25%. Only a handful of manufacturers will dip their toes shipping OS X in the beginning.
      A couple of months is all the time it would take for MS to 'renegotiate' Windows prices with this handful of manufacturers that want to ship OS X, thereby sinking their Windows based business, which would still be their cash-cow long after they start selling OS X. That is, if they're still able to do any business. At the same time, the Microsoft Mac Business Unit may or may not unexpectedly vanish, and MS Office for Mac may or may not continue to be developed. You can guess how appealing Mac OS X can be without MS Office (it's the first piece of software on TFA's must have list). And don't hold your breath anticipating the DOJ trying to stop that.
      Nope, the market is not ready for OS X on generic machines. Not until everybody switches to the OpenDocument format.

    80. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by _7miracles · · Score: 1

      > You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC

      Desktop PC? Look at all your electricity bills. How much per annum? Per two? The new laptop!
      Such simple calculations can help to convince your parents and/or yourself to choose laptop over desktop PC.

      Note that UPS is not just "nice to have" addition to desktop PC if you appreciate your data and efforts. Electicity outage is rare, but strikes unpredictably.

      Laptop consumes ~40Wt, and actually already has the pretty decent "embedded UPS" (rechargable batteries run for >4hrs).

      Further, if you have Linux (preinstall some user-friendly Linux distro like Ubuntu for your parents), you don't pay $100-150 (OEM, full version) for some already outdated Microsoft OS.

      I could be Ok with Mac OS X, but still waiting for the (may be impossible) event when Apple allows us to buy her OS without coupling it with her hardware.

      Just my 2 cents.

    81. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by shaitand · · Score: 1

      'Besides, didn't Slashdot complain once that Apple didn't have a $500-$700 system available? Now that they do, people STILL complain. You just can't make anyone happy around here.'

      That was when a low end pc cost $500-$700. Now the figure would be $200-$300. A Mac Mini is not comparable to a decent gaming PC by a long shot. Your comparing a low end Mac to a high end PC.

      The price difference used to be justified with superior hardware but now that mac's are just rebranded pc's with a different OS how does Apple justify the price difference?

    82. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jwsd · · Score: 1

      OS X is shipped with every Mac too. Yet people still have choices: they can choose not to buy a PC. Acutally, people always had this choice from the first day of PC, and they had chosen to buy PC which ran Microsoft software over Mac. If you want to benefit from PC's low price, it is only fair to pay the software company, Microsoft, which made PC popular to begin with.

      When people buy a Mac, they buy hardware and software in a single package. Samething for PC users, they have chosen to buy PC and Microsoft OS as a whole package.

    83. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Deslock · · Score: 1

      In order to use OSX you have to own apple hardware. Parents buying computers for their kids for college/hs are going to care about one thing: Price.

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC.

      {snip}

      If I could buy OSX for my PC...i probably would, just so I could have both. But I don't want to have to spend twice as much on my computer

      You're right about one thing... parents choose to buy the Windows computer because they *think* getting a Mac will cost twice as much (in part because of a misperception that people like you keep perpetuating).

      The reality is that Macs are medium-high grade machines that are priced in the same ball park as similar Windows machines. You can get low-end Windows boxes cheaper than Macs just like you can get low-end Windows boxes cheaper than medium grade Windows boxes.

      For example, a well equipped iMac costs $1099 for a 17" and $1399 for a 20" (edu pricing, which pretty much everyone qualifies for). These have 1 GB RAM, dual-layer DVD, 2.0 or 2.16 GHz Core2Duo CPU, web cam, microphone, wireless remote, firewire, BT, and wifi all integrated into a slick, flat chassis. These often come with free printers and/or iPods after a rebate.

      Get an all-in-one unit with Windows and it'll be priced comparably (and in some cases, the Windows machine costs more). Or you can get a cheap Dell with a standard tower case for $700, but it wont have all those features and will come with a lesser flavor of Vista.

      Likewise, my university store sells the midrange MacBook (1GB RAM, dual-layer DVD, 2 GHz Core2Duo, BT, wifi, webcam, microphone, firewire, mag-power connector, widescreen) for $1119 ($80 cheaper than normal edu pricing).

      Yeah, you can get a low-end Windows laptop at Bestbuy for $600-900, but it won't have those features. Instead, you're looking at $900-1300 to get a medium-grade Windows laptop, which puts you close to the price of the MacBook.

      So enough of the "it costs twice as much" nonsense. Sure, you *can* configure expensive Apple systems, but you don't have to.
    84. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by westlake · · Score: 1
      I expect to go to any computer retailer and be able to buy a computer without Windows pre-installed. That's all I want --

      What the retailer wants is sales. Lots and lots of sales.

      Which is what he gets when he stocks OEM Windows. No arm-twisting required. Walmart.com had thirty Vista systems ready for the January launch, beginning at $500.

    85. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Driver hell a thing of the past? Have you tried installing the hot new DVD from Microsoft: Vista?

      Proof by contradiction. QED

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    86. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by zeno_2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Another thing they would do is if lets say Dell sold a machine without Windows, they would have to pay Microsoft for a copy of Windows anyway.

    87. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by shaitand · · Score: 1

      'The "average" Windows user isn't the ones downloading their apps. Those are mostly the power users that build their machines and just download a new copy of spybot anytime they need it. Those are probably also the same people who run Kazaa, Limewire, and every other p2p spyware infested program on the planet.'

      Which is why those default security programs are NOT good enough. Those users may not spend time doing that but they pay me for my time to do it for them. Their computers slow to a crawl and then they call me. Believe me, they pay for the experience.

    88. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by saleenS281 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it were profitable you would find just that. It's called free market. Start your own company and start selling computers without windows installed. If there is a demand you'll make a boatload of money ;) I think you'll find as most retailers have, the demand is exactly 0.

    89. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by tezbobobo · · Score: 1

      It actually amazed me the amount of effort he put into migrating. I think most people reading this would be misled by the circuitous roue he took. For the average Joe, they can transition more slowly. Going cold turkey meant he had to migrate note, eudora, etc...however the easy solution is to put the mac on your desk, the PC in the back room and walk tot he PC when neccesary. Within about a month most people could transistion. It took me about 3 days a couple of years ago.

    90. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by dunng808 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you're knowledgeable, the amount of time spent configuring Linux/*BSD is comparable with the one securing a new Windows machine. Hence free in this case is apt. Think "free" as in speech. Whenever a comparison between FOSS and commercial software is based on price, Total Cost to Operate, or something similar, the results are inconclusive. The significant difference is in the way *you* get control of your software and data. FOSS programs and file formats are not controlled exclusivley by someone else.

      BTW, I use FreeBSD all the time. But that's not to imply that Linux falls short in any way. And at home, we use Macs. Lots of 'em.
      --

      Gary Dunn
      Open Slate Project

    91. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pclminion · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Funny, when configuring a Mac I don't see an option to select an O/S other than Mac OS X, how do I avoid the Apple tax?

      This argument is just plain ridiculous. When Microsoft starts making PCs, get back to me.

    92. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I just bought a Thinkpad (and am learning that Lenovo's order fulfillment department is incompetent, but that's another story). If I could have gotten it without Windows for even a marginally lower price, I would have. As it is, the only reason I'm even considering not wiping Windows off it immediately is that it's a Tablet PC, and I want to have a basis of comparison with Linux's (and Mac OS's, if I can manage it) tablet applications.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    93. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mehgul · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Consider downgrading to the white MacBook and get the 2GB RAM instead. In fact, that's exactly what I've done. And I even took the RAM directly from Apple, because it's supported by Apple. And actually the price wasn't that bad, considering that if I had to buy 2 sticks of 1 GB RAM, and try to re-sell the 2 sticks of 512MB, I would probably still have paid more than just the upgrade price. However, the upgrade price for the hard disk is steep, and for little more than the price of the 120GB upgrade, I got myself a nice 160GB plus a USB enclosure for the shipping 80GB which I kept as an external HD.
      Oh, and the MacBook really can use the 2GB RAM, it's even a shame it can't take more. I still have huge swaps after long sessions with Parallels, Acrobat, Mail, iTunes, and a whole bunch of tabs in Safari and/or Firefox.

    94. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by BWJones · · Score: 1

      1. This one Mac is truly, stupendously, orgasmically amazing as you describe, and Google are _idiots_ for building Linux server farms or

      Actually those three links went to two systems, but yes... they are stupendously, orgasmically amazing machines that can dish it out. The Webvision link used to point to the site when it was hosted on a little 233Mhz G3 iMac that at it's peak, served up to 200,000 graphically intensive pages to unique users without even a hiccup. It has since migrated to a Mac Mini where it continues to serve it up. As to Google..... those guys are hardly idiots. I know more than one uber smart PhD in computer science that has been recruited by them. In fact, Google is now competing head on with the previous largest employer of mathematicians on the planet for talent, the National Security Agency. In addition to hiring the best talent, they can also ship a product as evidenced by their tremendous productivity of high quality products. It would be safe to say that I am just about a big a fan of Google as I am of Apple.

      2. The Slashdot Effect ain't what it used to be.

      This is also true. The biggest contributor of traffic to my blog is Google image search while the largest spikes of traffic I've seen on my blog come not from Slashdot anymore, but more from BoingBoing and Digg. In fact, I've been seeing a larger increase in traffic from places like multiply.com and traffic falling off from Slashdot, perhaps indicating that Slashdot is in decline. If I were in charge, I'd start using the Slashdot clout to start buffing up capacity and presence like Multiply and other sources to stay out ahead. In fact, if I had advertising on my site (which I voluntarily do not), I'd move some of my resources/presence from Slashdot to other services to maximize profit. I hope this changes as I've been on Slashdot for quite some time and have benefitted greatly from some of the discussions and friendships gained over the years. I'd love to see a resurgent Slashdot!

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    95. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by chrysrobyn · · Score: 1
      And then you can pay $300 again in six months when the flimsy POS dies and needs to be replaced. According to some stats I've seen most Macs are used and kept around for about four years, whereas the replacement rate for PCs is just two.

      My current primary home machine: 1.0GHz Powerbook G4. It's a 2002 machine that I didn't get until 2004. Going on 5 years and will hopefully make another 12-18 months. (5 year life, identical machines on eBay are showing the model holds its value) I have half a mind to keep my Powerbook going until it craters, but the new MacBooks and MacBook Pros beckon.

      My Powerbook G4 replaced a dual 500MHz PowerMac G4. It was a 1999 machine that I got in 2001. Sold it on eBay for over $500 in 2004. (5 year lifetime, not fully depreciated)

      My dual 500MHz PowerMac G4 replaced a homebuilt 350MHz AMD K6+ machine I put together in 1998. The motherboard, an Asus (P55T2P4) was well known as a quality board, but was on its way south when the Powermac came my way. It wasn't going for more than shipping cost on eBay.

      The late 1990s brought me a variety of x86 machines that were short lived. 486-80 that lived from 1996 to 1999 (couldn't upgrade the RAM enough), a 486 66 that lasted from 1994 to 1996 (some driver problems with Win95) and a 286 that came to me used made in 1991(?) to 1994.

      Beating my current 5 year old Powerbook, however, is my dad's IBM PC. I beat on it as a kid almost daily from the time it came home in 1982 until it finally gave up the ghost in 1989. It went into a repair shop, saw some expensive upgrades (like a 10 meg MFM hard drive on an RLL controller for a "hot and unstable but it'll give you 5 extra megs free") and finally stayed down in 1992.

    96. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He didn't say "multiple operating systems," he just said "not Windows." I imagine the overhead of having an extra build-to-order option would be offset by the savings caused by not having to install anything at all on the machine's hard drive.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    97. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by caseih · · Score: 1

      I see this comment get made a lot on slashdot and I think that it shows that most people are missing the point. When I tell people to go out and "buy a mac" I mean go out and buy the Mac OS X system--the complete package of hardware and OS that fits together well. I'm not talking about the hardware only. To buy an Apple computer without the OS is just silly, if not stupid. It's not the "Apple Tax." It's people going out and paying good money for a good product, plain and simple. The reason Windows is called a Microsoft Tax is that if you don't by an Apple Macintosh *system*--say you want to buy a "Linux system"--you have no choice except to plunk down your $300 for Windows regardless of whether you want to use it or not. So people complaining that they can't buy an OS-less Mac is just idiotic. Just go buy a white box. You'll save money anyway. There's no reason to ever buy a Mac without OS X.

      Don't misunderstand what I'm saying. If you want to buy a Mac *because* you can also run Windows and Linux as well as OS X for whatever reason, then I say go for it. But if you want to buy a mac to just run Vista or even dual-boot windows and linux, you're wasting your money plain and simple.

    98. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jcgf · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the reply to you and the other responder above. I agree with you on the RAM, it's a pain to have 2 sticks of ram that you need to keep cause if you send the thing back for warranty they may say hey this ain't our ram... I don't know if apple is like that but I know other vendors that are. You also have a good point about the HDD. I wonder if there would be much performance increase going to a 7200 rpm drive and using the other in a usb enclosure. I don't think I could go for one of the white ones though, the black ones are just too damn nice.

    99. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you a dumbass?

      ***
      Exactly, and this is why a lot less people should be using Windows. As long as Windows is shipped with computers and people have to pay the Microsoft tax, there isn't a free market to speak of. ***

      Don't wanna pay the "microsoft tax?" build it yourself and run linux - isn't that what /. keeps saying is gonna happen "eventually" (and has been for what, 7+ years now?)

      Now, if Apple were smart and were to just sell OS/X on the shelf next to MS, I could agree with you - however, it doesn't mean shit that you have a Mac - it's the OS that is the difference - not the overpriced, lower end, hardware it runs on.

    100. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Strudelkugel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I expect to go to any computer retailer and be able to buy a computer without Windows pre-installed. That's all I want -- I don't dispute anything you wrote.

      I just don't understand this argument. I've been buying whitebox PCs for years. I even bought a whitebox laptop. No one forces anyone to buy an OS with a PC, except for Apple. (BTW, I own an iMac.) Sure, the large vendors may make it tricky to buy a system without Windows, but there is a simple answer: Buy from a whitebox vendor, usually a local PC store.

      If you don't like burgers, go to a sushi joint. There may be more burger places than sushi restaurants, but don't claim everyone is forced to eat burgers.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
    101. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by qwertphobia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      (I would also argue that there's no reason whatsoever for compulsory wifi on non-laptop computers.) I use wireless in my Mac Pro. I help manage the wireless network at my institution, and it's cheaper to put a wireless card in my desktop than it is to get another laptop.

      Maybe someone doesn't want to run an Ethernet cable across the room and around the corner to the only telephone jack in the apartment. Instead they might get a wireless solution. But they use a desktop.

      I haven't checked for a while, but I used to be able to see my neigbor's HP printer-scanner-fax on their wireless network. My neighbor and I might have similar reasons but different motivations to put a wireless interface in a desktop.
      --
      Never ask for directions from a two-headed tourist! -Big Bird
    102. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by qwertphobia · · Score: 1

      Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate. If I could buy OSX for my PC...i probably would, just so I could have both. But I don't want to have to spend twice as much on my computer just to run an OS that TECHNICALLY doesn't do as much as Windows does... If you buy Mac OSX for a generic PC, where will you find all the drivers? Do you expect all the hardware manufacturers to magically develop drivers for Windows and OSX? It's probably difficult enough developing for Windows XP 32-bit, (they mostly ignored XP-64 in my opinion) but now they also have to support Vista 32-bit and Vista 64-bit. And you want them to tackle a completely different platform now, also?

      Things are a bit better these days, but from my experience a large chunk of the instability problems with MS operating systems has been the poor quality of hardware drivers. Microsoft may provide a lot of drivers with its OS, but who do you think wrote them?

      Apple doesn't write all the hardware drivers for its systems, but it does work closely with its hardware suppliers. Apple makes the decision which devices will be supported, and Apple places the limit on the number of devices supported natively in the OS. In my opinion this is one of the reasons the modern Mac OS is so stable.
      --
      Never ask for directions from a two-headed tourist! -Big Bird
    103. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Apple can't run on commodity hardware.

      Are you sure about that?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    104. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      You can. And then you can pay $300 again in six months when the flimsy POS dies and needs to be replaced.

      This is true. I once made that mistake when I was short of cash and got bitten. The CPU was OK but it was sitting on one of those all-in-one motherboards in an inadequately cooled case. Needless to say, the mobo failed a day after the warranty expired, leaving me to start again from scratch.

      Now I don't trust anyone else to build my desktop computers at all. It's cheaper in the long run to buy a well-designed case and put in decent components when you feel the need to upgrade rather than when they fail catastrophically.

    105. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by qwertphobia · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm having trouble keeping a stable wireless connection after installing Vista on my Mac Pro. My isight doesn't work. And a bunch of the system resources have those silly little yellow triangles next to them.

      If only my hardware manufacturer would release some drivers in a timely manner...

      --
      Never ask for directions from a two-headed tourist! -Big Bird
    106. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Let me get this straight - you offer a $300 PC complete with a 3-year warrantee? Give us more information - how do we do business with you? And then you offer plug-in service as well? How do you afford to eat?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    107. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by gobbo · · Score: 1

      I wonder if there would be much performance increase going to a 7200 rpm drive and using the other in a usb enclosure.

      Most emphatically YES, especially booting, loading files, recording and capturing, and for programs with swap files like photoshop.

    108. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pestilence669 · · Score: 1

      "You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy?"

      You make decent point, but you're leaving reality out of the equation. Microsoft Vista will not run on a $700 PC. By the time you equip it with enough RAM and necessary upgrades, a new PC will cost more than most Macintosh models. The effective price difference isn't that great.

    109. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      You can upgrade the Mac mini, a bit at least.

      http://www.hardmac.com/articles/68/

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    110. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      IMO, the Apples are priced VERY competitively - they're clearly high-quality machines, and they compete in the Sony Vaio and Lenovo Thinkpad market. THAT'S how the computers need to be evaluated. But like the GP said, what often matters to the purchaser is the overall price, not the value per dollar. If you're a parent buying a car for your kid, you're probably going to prefer the $12,000 Honda over the $50,000 BMW, even if customizing the Honda to have all the same features as the BMW would cost far more than $50k. Your kid doesn't need all those features.

      Apple is missing out on a lot of sales by not offering anything in these price ranges. If you want to spend $300 for a desktop, you can get a PC, but you can't get a Mac. If you want to spend $1500 for a 15" laptop, you can get a PC, but you can't get a Mac.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    111. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Whitemage12380 · · Score: 1

      Yes! This happens with practically everyone! Even I used to be one of these people (5-6 years ago, when I was in Middle School). And besides, even the strongest of such programs isn't as strong as using an OS that has a practically nil chance of coming across any sort of virus.

    112. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      It's damn hard to find a windows laptop for $1099 that matches the performance, features, and robustness of a macbook. Believe me, I tried.

      The Lenovo Z series seems pretty comparable (including the price), although I'd prefer the MacBook anyway. Of course, sometimes you have no choice but to get a non-Apple, such as when you want a tablet.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    113. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Alt_Cognito · · Score: 0

      I think the problem most Slashdotters have is that they can't conceive of building the type of machines Apple sells.

      I have a 2.16 Core Duo 2 with 2 gigs of memory, a terabyte configured in RAID 5 (120mb/s sustained write speed btw), 2 gigs (DDR 800, dual channel of course), the 7300 video card. Throw in my high quality video card and think you'll agree I paid significantly LESS building my own than

      -- oh, I also have the dual layer DVD burner and _24"_ monitor covered, all at the same price of $1500.

      I'll agree, Dell is expensive, but Macs are more expensive than _building_ by design.

    114. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by catwh0re · · Score: 1
      While I wouldn't call it a conspiracy, it's far too public for that, it's definitely rotten.

      It's a well documented business practice of MS to lower the licensing cost to vendors who only bundle the MS operating system with new PC sales. Bigger companies such as dell and hp can afford to forgo the "bonus savings" to keep their customers happy, also they bundle so many copies of Windows that MS can't play hardball with them. Their customers are asking for computers without Windows bundled. It's now at a critical mass where the likes of dell and hp will be losing out on a growing market (potentially an overwhelming market) if they refuse to offer computers without the MS operating system bundled.

    115. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by the_womble · · Score: 1
      There is not such thing as Linux "generally"

      Mandriva or Ubuntu is (in my experience) mature enough for non-techie end users (if someone else installs it), so why not for retailers?

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy?

      A Mac Mini for $600 perhaps?

    116. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Are you suggesting that all Windows' problems are due to third parties? Does the mac not have third parties, then? To Windows, EVERYTHING is a 3rd party. The motherboard, the video card, even the mouse and keyboard. Microsoft makes very little hardware, so everything is 3rd party. On a Mac, only certain peripherals are 3rd party, and it is very simple for Mac vendors to test those peripherals with every Mac currently worth supporting. Personally, I have noted that my PC (Windows) problems have shrunk to almost zero since I started spending a little extra money on the components. Nice case, motherboard, video card, etc. The "cheap PC" that people keep writing about on here is a nightmare. I always thought that Windows was a steaming pile of crap, but it turns out that it was in fact my hardware.

      That said, I'm still a Mac fan and prefer that OS. Also, despite quite a bit of looking and a willingness to spend the $$$, I could not find a PC case as attractive as my G5. The Antec P150 that I settled on is nice, but still looks like a jazzed up generic PC case... it has a lot of really nice features, but still isn't as well-laid-out as the G5. Even the Apple "clone" cases are just superficial clones - the interior isn't laid out any different than any other ATX case. However, I would recommend that Antec case to anyone - it's cool and quiet and pretty good looking (IMHO).
      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    117. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy?

      That's not really an apples to apples (so to speak) comparison, though.

      It's true that the bottom end of the price range for PCs goes below the bottom end of the price range for Macs, but the bottom end of the feature set does, too. Let's try a couple of more accurate comparisons:

      1) I'm typing this on a new 15" Macbook Pro that my company just issued to me a few weeks ago. It cost around $2000. To get a PC notebook with a roughly equivalent hardware load will also cost about $2000. But it won't have OS X.

      2) The cheapest Mac Mini on Fry's website right now is $599. Core 2 Duo 1.66, 512 meg DDR-2, 60 GB disk, CD-RW/DVD-ROM, Airport Extreme, Bluetooth, Gigabit Ethernet, 1 X Firewire 400, 4 x USB 2.0, DVI/VGA(with adapter)/S-Video/Composite video outs, Intel GMA 950 graphics (64 meg shared memory), built-in speakers, headphone jack, optical digital audio jack. On a quick scan around the Fry's website, I didn't see any PCs in that price range with a Core-2 Duo or wireless, but they do compensate by having maybe a bigger disk or more memory and a (cheap) keyboard and mouse, so you can get rough hardware equivalence at that price point, too. But - you don't get OS X.

      If you look at more price points, I think you'll find more examples of what the above shows: that for a given amount of dollars, you can get Mac or PC hardware that's fairly equal. The big differences, then, are that when you buy the PC, you don't get OS X and you don't get the degree to which everything "just works" like it does on a Mac. Oh, and you don't Apple's top-drawer industrial design, either. No PC notebook I've ever had showed me the design elegance and advanced features of this Macbook Pro, not even my personal favorite, Thinkpads.

      Comparing a $700 PC to a $1300 Mac is a bogus comparison. This really takes your whole argument down. The "spend twice as much on a Mac" line was once true - a long time ago. But it hasn't been true in years. The hardware premium on a Mac, if any, is fairly small. You're advancing claims regarding Apple pricing that ceased to be true before OS X even came out.

      As to your claim that OS X is "an OS that TECHNICALLY doesn't do as much as Windows does" that's just ridiculous. You neglected to back that up with any facts, because you don't have any. OS X and Windows (and Linux, generally) all do the same things. The difference comes down to how well they do them. OS X does pretty much everything better than Windows, and Linux also does a great many things better than Windows. I have Windows machines, Linux machines, and now a Mac. The Windows machines are the ones I use by far the least, because the others are just better.

      The one point you make that could potentially be valid is that Apple would sell a lot more copies of OS X if they sold it as a standalone OS for PCs. By potentially valid, I mean there are problems with it that could constrain sales of PCs with OS X. If it worked, a lot of new PCs could potentially go out the door running OS X and a lot of old PCs would be converted. The problem there is that Apple is primarily a hardware company, not a software company. Being able to buy a Dell or a Compaq or a Gateway with OS X on it would not gut Apple's hardware business, but it would take a bite out of it. At the same time, it would increase Apple's R&D costs and their support costs, and the licensing fees of OS X and its commonly included bits like iLife would not offset the drop in hardware profits and the increased R&D costs.

      So, how, then, does Apple manage the costs of increased R&D and support expenditures from selling OS X for PCs? Vendors would have to pay a lot more than they do for Windows. Result? Whatever hardware price advantage the PC makers might have Vs. Apple would be erased (I think you see now where any price difference that exists comes from; Apple has to bear its support and

    118. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by wolrahnaes · · Score: 1

      So the MacBooks are, horror of horrors[*], Centrino machines!

      [*] welcome to the wonderful world of Intel marketing, Apple. Enjoy your stay. eh....no.

      My Core Duo Macbook has an Atheros 802.11a/b/g card. My co-worker's C2D Macbook Pro has a Broadcom 802.11 a/b/g/n card. Apple does not sell Intel wireless and thus is not part of the Centrino marketing machine.
      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    119. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 1

      "Are you even reading what you're writing?"

      Your ad hominem attack means I'm not going to bother to even read the rest of what came after that. Thanks for perpetuating the stereotype of the forum poster made willing to insult other people because of internet anonymity.

    120. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mr_matticus · · Score: 1, Informative

      Do you (and the four people who modded you up) not understand what the Microsoft tax is? It's when you buy a Dell or an HP, you're giving money to Microsoft even though you don't want to and weren't asked to. When you give money to Apple, you're not handing over extra money for some Party C's ransom demands. You don't get to choose which of Apple departments you fund with your purchase.

      When you buy an Apple, you're giving your money to...Apple. There's no "tax" being added to the price of the computer that goes to funding a transfer of money from the manufacturer to another company for software you don't want.

      There's no HP tax when your HP computer comes with an HP printshop/photo application. If you want to look at it financially, there's no revenue transfer--the price of OS X is $0. Its R&D and support costs are taken out of Apple's healthy margins. If you you think they should shave down that margin, well then I hope you choose which restaurants you eat at based on their gross margins, too, otherwise you're being pretty arbitrary.

    121. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insightful? More like Obvious.

    122. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      If battery life is important to you, consider doing the opposite -- fast drive in a Firewire enclosure and a 5400 in the notebook.

    123. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by rm999 · · Score: 1

      Come on Slashdot people, stop modding up flamebait like this. This post:
      A. Missed the point of the gp post - the point of that post was that Windows just works for some people.
      B. Isn't even rational - the only big OS that you can get without a "tax" is Linux, which is off topic because this is a discussion about OS X and Windows. If anything, that argument should be used against Apple's hardware tax

      Yeah, Windows tends to dominate the market, but it works for so many people because:
      -It's easier to use than Linux
      -It's runs on cheaper hardware than Mac
      -It has a virtual monopoly for a lot of software

      I use all three Operating Systems. I use Windows more than the other three because it works for my needs. I know a lot of people who feel the same way.

    124. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 1

      I'm trying to say that the Mac mini is cheaper than a lot of PCs out there and people still think they're too expensive. I should have left the "gaming" part out of there and the statement would still have been true. Something that costs less than the average PC (and I've seen what PCs go for these days unless you get a super-cheap stripper model) is not "too expensive".

      The "macs cost more than PCs" complaint needs to die as something that just isn't true.

    125. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by juiceCake · · Score: 1

      I expect to go to any computer retailer and be able to buy a computer without Windows pre-installed. That's all I want..

      I do this all the time. It's unfortunate, however, that the big name vendors, like Dell, HP, IBM, etc. and so forth don't have the option, whatsoever, to offer say, oh I don't know, an alternative like OS X.

      Linux is definitely an alternative, but I'd love to know how many consumers will:

      1. Buy a system from anyone other than Apple without an OS
      2. Buy a system and insist that Linux is on it
      I think that is in the real of specialized users still.
    126. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 1

      If all you're going to post is the same tripe that gets posted over and over and over even when people make a valid point, don't bother posting at all. "Everyone does it" doesn't make it acceptable.

    127. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "(I would also argue that there's no reason whatsoever for compulsory wifi on non-laptop computers.)"

      So why not disable it? There's an option to turn it off, and then it won't be used. I'd rather have the option there and not use it than not have it when I do need it. It's like how I'll be moving to Florida this summer, but I'm still buying a car that has heated seats. Yes, it's a package deal thing (just like the Mac, have to buy it at order time and can't add it in later) but I'd rather have that switch there instead of a blank hole cover on the occasional time when I do want to warm up my butt. If I don't want to use it, I can just leave the switch on "off".

    128. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by kimvette · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh, sure, Apple has a $500-$700 model to choose from now, but that's without monitor, mouse, keyboard, etc. plus expansion is severely limited. Who wants that except people who do nothing but surf the web, play solitaire, and check email?

      When I buy a Mac (and I decided I'm going to) I'm going to get a dual-processor dual (or quad by then) core Xeon, then I can actually install PCI cards. It will probably run Linux 90% of the time,

      Why would I buy a Mac for that?

      Because their towers are QUIET. For me to build a dual Xeon which runs just as cool, and just as quiet, I'd have to spend what would match list price of an equivalent Mac, or hack together ugly components with outboard cooling. Supermicro chassis may be wonderful and well-built, but quiet is not a term I would use to describe them.

      Oh sure I'd run OS X now and then, but truthfully, I can't stand the dock and I can't stand finder. Oh, and why is the ONLY place I can grab a window to resize it in the lower right? In both Windows and most X window managers, I can grab any edge or corner to resize a window. Also, with a keystroke (either win or alt depending on keyboard config) I can click anywhere on a window to move it where I want in X.

      Vista? I may actually end up taking it home and installing it, but that's only because it comes with MSDN.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    129. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 1

      The low end PC still does cost $550 and up -- I went shopping on Gateway's website and they were charging the same for their low-end PCs as they were for Mac Minis -- and that was at the educational store. The only computers you get for $200 are total stripper base models that don't give you much of anything, use substandard components and processor, not enough RAM, and don't last very long. The Mac Mini is a very decent machine, by comparison, and doesn't come full of shovelware nor does it get infected constantly when the crappy pathetic antivirus "trial" times out after a few weeks.

    130. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by aichpvee · · Score: 1

      I'd love to buy a laptop or tablet pc with decent specs and no windows. Too bad it actually costs MORE to get one since all of the decent ones are after market.

      --
      The Farewell Tour II
    131. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Karzz1 · · Score: 1

      Hell, the guy living in the basement next door that you pay to maintain your computer because you lack the knowledge to do so youself, is probably a regular poster here.

      Hey!! Don't talk about me like I am not even here!

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    132. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      I use wireless in my Mac Pro. I help manage the wireless network at my institution, and it's cheaper to put a wireless card in my desktop than it is to get another laptop.

      Note that I didn't say it should be an option, merely that the arguments for making it non-optional are weak.

      _Most_ desktop machines are located easily within reach of (faster, cheaper) wired connectivity (usually by virtue of being near a power point) and are rarely moved. Most desktops derive no benefit from the possibility of wireless connectivity and for them it is nothing more than additional cost that could have been spent on something useful, like RAM.

    133. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Doctor+Memory · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's tricky to sell machines without an OS because MS have some kind of conspiracy going, not because consumers generally just want the machine to come with the current Windows OS? kinda. Think about it — the #1 (and probably nos 2-5, too) reason people don't buy a Mac is the price. Now imagine you popped over to the Dell site and saw that you could get a bottom-end machine for $299 with XP Media Edition on it OR: the exact same machine with no OS for $199. How many people would elect to just re-use the same OS they've been using for the last 4-5 years to save $100? At that price point, I'd guess about 99.44%. But Dell doesn't do that, do they? Nope, because MS would either raise their OEM license fees (oh, sorry, "reduce their OEM discount") or restrict the number of licenses they were granted until Dell caved. I've heard that Dell does in fact sell some systems with no OS, but apparently they're not a lot cheaper and (allegedly) it's hard to find them on their web site. Not like a straight "This model: $699. Add $139 for Windows."

      Heh, can you imagine: "This model: $299. Add $139 for Windows. Add $29 for Novell Linux." Why do you think we don't see Dell or HP doing something like that?
      --
      Just junk food for thought...
    134. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      "Apple is missing out on a lot of sales by not offering anything in these price ranges. If you want to spend $300 for a desktop, you can get a PC, but you can't get a Mac. If you want to spend $1500 for a 15" laptop, you can get a PC, but you can't get a Mac."

      Ok... but what would a $300 Mac look like? I mean, Apple would have to gut it down to the same specs -- meaning a Celeron, CDRW (no DVD), 10/100 instead of gigabit, drop the bluetooth, drop the wifi, drop the firewire, drop dvi, switch to a paper-thin aluminum case with a $10 power supply, etc

      Sure they could get the price to $300 but what would be the point? Half of iLife would be seriously crippled, half of the available peripherals wouldn't work, etc. On some level it wouldn't really deserve to be called a new Mac. BMW could make a car to compete with a Honda civic too, but it really wouldn't be a BMW anymore, imho. For those who want a BMW on a budget, buy a used one.

      And, in that vein, the 2ndary and refurbished market for Macs has always been robust, and a great way for students to save some cash, and get a Mac at whatever price point they want.

      You can get a "slow as molasses" G3-233Mhz tower, with 512MB RAM, running Panther. It won't blow your mind, but it will be alright for email, web, office apps, and itunes -- for as little as $25 bucks. It'll bog down on complex web pages, apps will take 30 seconds to start, and youtube won't play smoothly, but it will get the job done. And I'd rather have one of these than a PentiumII with windows 98 from the same era at the same price point. (In fact, I got a couple for free, dropped some spare RAM into them, and gave them to some family members and friends who didn't have computers; they're quite thrilled with them)

      Or you could get 450Mhz g4 tower "sawtooth" era, with 500Mhz, 1GB ram, Tiger, combodrive, firewire for as little as $200. Comparable to a decently loaded pentium III, and perfectly serviceable for most tasks.

      Or a 1.5Gz G4 Mac Mini with 512MB RAM, bluetooth, wifi, dvdrw, Tiger, etc etc for $500. On par with an older decently loaded P4, and likely better than what you'd get from dell at that price.

      etc, etc...

      Granted its a bit of a downer if you want an intel based mac, but those will cycle into the 2ndary market soon enough.

    135. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 7Prime · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, this is EXACTLY what Apple was exploring in the mid-90s that almost made them go under... the 5-billion different option lineup. Where I do agree they have a few major holes in their lineup (I'm currently in the market for a new mac, and I really would like a mid-range stand-alone, myself, so I can undertsand the frustration), it's simply that those holes need to be filled, NOT that their whole business strategy is wrong. On the contrary, from a marketing standpoint, what they're doing is common sense: they're establishing a few base models with descreate name-recognition that they can advertise without spewing out a bunch of forgetable spec numbers.

      What they have is a hierarchical lineup. When you get down to it, there are quite a few different computers to choose from: 2 Minis, 4 iMacs, 3 MacBooks, 3 MacBook Pros, and then the built-to-order Mac Pros. That's a lot of options, but from an ease of naming standpoint, there are only 5 discreate lines. Getting rid of the criptic numbered-names was the best thing that happened to Apple.

      There are a couple things they could do to gain a few % more market share, although it might lose them money: take the minis down a notch to $400, $500, and $600, and create a headless line in the $1000-$1500 range (this would directly compete with the iMac line, but it might entice a few people onboard who are looking for lower-priced, expandable systems). It really bothered me when they desolved their $500 line, but I'm sure their marketting anylists found that it was more profitable to do so.

      Putting in a lower-end "built-to-order" jeapordizes their model recognition. Undoubtedly, MANY people would go on and hand-pick their specs. And then you have a bunch of computers that look the same, but function differently, and create no differentiating model recognition. Model recognition is one of the most important aspects of marketting, and Apple are doing everything they can to hold on to that.

      The bottom line is that Apple aren't low in market share due to their product line, or even their pricing (seriously, the $300-$500 PC market isn't really that substantial), it's due to tradition, stigma, and fear of change. People are used to Windows and some even equate user-friendliness to being "hippy-dippy" or "wussy". Another big one is that many corporations strike up deals with Microsoft. I work for clear channel. It's gotten so bad that if there's a microsoft version of a type of application, we are FORCED to use it. Litterally, it is AGAINST POLICY to use Firefox (I got chewed out for downloading it), because they've struck a deal with Microsoft, and in return, they get software that allows them to track employee's internet habits. It's really creepy out there, and some of the reasoning is extremely fucked up, but Microsoft has made it VERY difficult for people involved in corporations to switch away from them.

      --
      Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
    136. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by BlueStraggler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is the problem Apple has. In the tiny niche that their hardware targets, it's a fairly good deal

      You would be referring to the tiny niche that doesn't build custom boxes?

    137. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      So why not disable it?

      Disabling it doesn't put the money back into my pocket, or spend it on things that are more likely to be usable.

      There's an option to turn it off, and then it won't be used. I'd rather have the option there and not use it than not have it when I do need it.

      Sounds like an argument for Apple's cheapest machine to be a Mac Pro with a pair of 30" Cinema displays...

      It's like how I'll be moving to Florida this summer, but I'm still buying a car that has heated seats. Yes, it's a package deal thing (just like the Mac, have to buy it at order time and can't add it in later) but I'd rather have that switch there instead of a blank hole cover on the occasional time when I do want to warm up my butt. If I don't want to use it, I can just leave the switch on "off".

      There's the difference. The _vast_ majority of desktop PCs derive no benefit from having wifi included by default. They will never use it, because cheaper, faster, more reliable wired networking infrastructure already exists and is no less convenient to connect to.

      One cannot make the same argument for the seats in a car or many other "options" in computers like, say, DVD drives.

      The arguments for non-optional wifi in *desktop PCs* are weak, at best.

    138. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vought · · Score: 1

      Parents buying computers for their kids for college/hs are going to care about one thing: Price.

      I don't think that parents prepared to pay 20-150k for a college education are going to quibble over a couple of hundred dollars' difference in the cost of a computer.

    139. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how this low margin thing actualy i a bad thing. Err how do i say it so you understand the meaning the first time.

      In a business with such low margins, there is a choice and you can still remain competitive. First, you base your prices on the regular OEM price not the volume advantage you get for selling hundreds or thousands of computers a year. The mom and pop show doesn't get these advantages yet they survive. And of course, they aren't as large as dell or hp because they have to pay the full cost of the microsoft tax to play the game instead of just 1/3. They do usualy suppliment the costs by different services though.

      But more interesting is the state that they have undercut each other based on the "microsoft advantage" and this entire don't sell anything else aggrement. The terms remain competitive and force to use MS only should rarley be used in the same sentnece. It would appear they are using this as a copout for not wanting to pay the added expense of sorting non OS computers or computers with non standard software on them.

      And if the business is only staying a float because of the discount in MS software then they aren't really competitive are they?. We shouldn't allow this to be an excuse. If the company sold 2000 computers a year, and had the microsoft tax break which require them to pay the $35 instead of $99 for an OEM of XP home, they are only talking about $128,000 or so a year difference.

      It is insane to allow it to go on and it is some what uncompetitive to allow it to happen even with the alternative software taken from the picture. They should be payin the exact same amount as any OEM shop.

    140. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Enrique1218 · · Score: 1

      You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy?

      Yeah, I know some of those kids. However, they wished thier parents went with the Mac or just gave them the money and let them make up the difference.

      --
      You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
    141. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 1

      How much extra do you think it really costs to have it, though? It doesn't take much to implement it - just a chip and an antenna, really. I doubt at this point that it costs much more than a few dollars. It's so common now that it shows up in pocket digicams, not just the pro SLRs and no external antenna is required. Honestly (and I'm not trolling here, honest question) do you really think it's a big deal? You've probably spent more for your average fast-food lunch than you did on that hardware.

    142. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pherthyl · · Score: 1

      Right... The grandparent poster compares the price of a "decent gaming PC" to a Mac Mini, and when the fallacy of that argument is pointed out to him you think its an ad hominem attack. Nice defense there. I'm crushed that you won't read the rest of my comment.

      Clue for next time. My statement would be an ad hominem attack if it had been something like: are you even reading what you're writing, you brain damaged monkey.
      As it was written, it was not an attack of any kind.

    143. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Nossie · · Score: 1

      Mickey dell 6 months or so ago has already said he would LOVE to sell some of his machines preloaded with OSX..

      on the flip side of this argument, Apple has tried this licensing method before to 5 - 6 different computer manufacturers and nearly put itself into bankruptcy ... I don't remember the details to be honest but this isn't the first time Apple has licensed its OS. I think it was before Jobs came back.

      Also note that BeOS was licensed out to white box x86 not long before Be inc went under too... notice a pattern forming here?

      I'm not sticking up for jobs here by any means... I have a G4 cube appliance and a mbp c2d - the rest of my machines are AMD and I would LOVE to run OS X (with updates) on those systems officially.

    144. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by stdarg · · Score: 1

      I think you've hit the nail with Dell. I tried out what you said and you're totally right. The Dell *can't* be configured the same way and it's just as expensive.

      I came to a different conclusion though: They used to be cheap but now they're as bad as Apple!

      Then I went to mwave.com and put together a comparable computer. I did it for $1015. It's even a little better -- I didn't bother looking for a 128mb version of the graphics card so I used the 256. The price includes some assembly (cpu, memory, motherboard, power supply, etc... i.e. the hard stuff).

      I didn't spend long doing it. I didn't hunt for the lowest prices on the items. I used the (needlessly expensive) Shuttle mini case so it's comparable with desk space. It includes the stuff I don't even need (wireless for a desktop?) but don't have the option of leaving off the iMac (so my customized version would cost even less).

      The picture gets worse when you start talking upgrades. Apple wants $200 to *upgrade* to the 500 gb drive! At mwave the entire 500 gb hard drive is $140, versus $69 for the 250 (upgrade cost: $70). Yes that includes cables. Same goes with processor. Memory. Video card. Everything!

      So the baseline version is $500 cheaper. The maxed out version is probably $1000 cheaper (I haven't bothered to clear out my shopping cart and try it).

      I'm only speculating, but I would assume that if you didn't have the skills to set it up once it arrived, you could pay someone $100 or so (I know I'd accept that for an hour's work).

      Could this be what most Slashdotters are talking about, and you were only assuming that they meant Dell?

    145. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by TimTheFoolMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With "Sure, the large vendors may make it tricky to buy a system without Windows...," you made the parent's point.

      If I want to buy a name-brand box (so I can get the benefit of support for hardware issues, or so I can keep a consistent hardware platform across my company), it's very, very hard to do this. There are channels, but Microsoft has made sure that they are not well publicized, and has slapped the hands of vendors who have not played according to the rules (by bumping up the license fees, or put clauses in the license agreements to the same effect).

      When you say "No one forces anyone to buy an OS with a PC...," the answer is what about the major PC manufacturers? For all intents and purposes, they do exactly that.

      Tim

    146. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by nathanh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People have different preferences. That's what makes the free market work. Thank goodness we have choices!

      The free market requires perfect knowledge. Many people aren't even aware there are choices. Ergo, it's not a free market.

    147. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by aluminumtulips · · Score: 0

      The reason you have not been able to buy OS X for non-Apple hardware is that it would not run well on such a wide range of hardware. The brilliance behind producing the hardware and the software as Apple does, is that you get superior reliability and performance.

    148. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Venik · · Score: 1

      This is a ridiculous claim. How many Macs are shipped with no OS X? Apple is a mini-Microsoft. They are not a monopoly because they couldn't - not because they don't want to. Granted, their OS is better. But why is it better? Because they have the brilliant programmers Microsoft couldn't buy? Not really. It's mostly because Mac OS runs on Mac hardware. They control their hardware, peripherals and drivers evey step of the way. Once you bought into this Mac hype, you lost all choice. You will buy everything Apple. And that's why they charge their customers an arm and a leg for these systems. You want something even more stable than Mac? Spend a few grand and buy a Sun workstation with Solaris 10. Hell, at least Sun has an x86 version of Solaris. Is there a an official Apple version of OS X for PCs? Right, that's gonna happen.

    149. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by gregleimbeck · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that thinks that maybe because apple does not decide to make OSX available on any platform except its own hardware is contributing to the fact that it is so stable? Granted, I have not used OSX all that much, and it has its merits as an OS that is simply "easier to use", the argument that it "just works" is moot when you compare it against Windows or Linux. If Windows and Linux only had a handful of hardware options many of their problems would be gone. (And yes, I think Linux would have comparable security problems, if it were as as popular as Windows. The same thing goes for OSX, although OSX/Linux would have slightly less given that they were more secure from the beginning.)

      --

      P.S.,

      This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated.

    150. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Buran · · Score: 1

      Right... like you can't possibly imagine why it was an insulting thing to say.

      The person you assume to be male is, in fact, not, by the way.

      Good job on making yet another blunder.

      I'm not going to perpetuate this thread any further, though, I don't want to argue over something like this. We disagree, end of story. Goodbye.

    151. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did you see those stats? On the piece of paper you wrote it on? How in the world someone would mod your post insightful is beyond me. What is insightful about it?
      I bought 2 $199 "whitebox" computers from walmart.com about 5 years ago and both are still going strong to this day. My main white box Linux machine running 24x7x365 is a P3 from like 2001. Do I get a +1 insightful now as well?

      And for your price comparisons? Dell was offering this earlier this week (take note of the included 19in LCD, 2 year warranty, and the free shipping as well).

      Dell Home has Dimension E521 desktop with Vista Home Premium and 19" LCD monitor for $519 - 3% using Dell Preferred Account = $503 with free shipping.
      Specs:
      AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 3800+
      FREE Upgrade to Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium w/1GB memory
      1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
      160GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache
      48X CD-RW/ DVD Combo Drive
      19 inch E197FP Analog Flat Panel
      NVIDIA GeForce 6150 LE Integrated Graphics GPU
      Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
      2Yr Ltd Warranty and At-Home Service

    152. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by faffod · · Score: 2, Informative
    153. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by dabraun · · Score: 1

      Heh, can you imagine: "This model: $299. Add $139 for Windows. Add $29 for Novell Linux." Why do you think we don't see Dell or HP doing something like that?


      Microsoft does not charge Dell $139 for a copy of Windows (and never has). In fact, it's closer to $29 than $139. With Windows Vista for $50, with Novell Linux for $29. I know what most people would choose.
    154. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by shaitand · · Score: 1

      'The Mac Mini is a very decent machine, by comparison, and doesn't come full of shovelware nor does it get infected constantly when the crappy pathetic antivirus "trial" times out after a few weeks.'

      Those are windows and vendor issues and therefore irrelevant. We are talking about PC's vs Macs, not windows vs OSX.

      'The low end PC still does cost $550 and up -- I went shopping on Gateway's website and they were charging the same for their low-end PCs as they were for Mac Minis -- and that was at the educational store.'

      At full price sure. You can walk into a best buy, circuit city, or office depot and get a PC for $200-$300 after rebate. If they don't have one now they will within the month if you follow their specials.

    155. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by sheldon · · Score: 1

      comes with a 1.8 GHz processor with 2MB of cache, instead of the 2.16 GHz with 4MB. It comes with DDR2-533, instead of DDR2-667.


      Apple is using the T7400, but the Dell you speak of is the E6400. The T7400 only has a 667 Mhz FSB, whereas the E6400 has a 1066 Mhz FSB. The 4M of cache on the T7400 helps to compensate, but the processors are similar in performance in overall benchmarking.

      Before you go matching the specs, you should understand what the specs are.
    156. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by rizzo320 · · Score: 1

      300 dollars for a centrino pc?? I think you mean Celeron. Ive been in the PC selling business for years. I purchase the pc, set it up, walk it into the door, plug it in then let the users use it. I have never seen a pc die in 2 years, especially since they have 3 year warranty.


      If it's a $300 pc you're referencing, well, that comes with the 90 day warranty, not the 3 year that you speak of. I've noticed this when quoting out Dell's for customers who see the low price. With that low price you get a lack of support. What I think they're saying is "If you want to buy a PC for $300, don't expect us to guarantee it will work for more than 90 days". Most of my clients aren't amused with Dell's tactics when you up the warranty to 1,2,3, or even 4 years and watch the price soar.
    157. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by misleb · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate.


      But releasing OS X for generic PCs would kill OS X. Apple has neither the resources nor the experience to get OS X to run reliably on just any random combination of PC hardware. Microsoft can barely do it and Microsoft has broad vendor support! Even if Apple wanted to, they simply wouldn't be able to officially release OS X for white box PCs. People would stop buying Apple hardware. They'd pick up some cheap ass Dell, and then complain that it won't run OSX. Apple's reputation would be shot.

      If I could buy OSX for my PC...i probably would, just so I could have both. But I don't want to have to spend twice as much on my computer just to run an OS that TECHNICALLY doesn't do as much as Windows does...


      Well, Macs can be more expensive, but I wouldn't go so far as to say twice as expensive. A $1400 iMac, for example, is a pretty nice machine. Small (all built into the display unit), sleek, bright 20" LCD display, Core2 Duo, Firewire, WiFi built in, etc. Can you even get that in the PC world? Certainly not for $700. The only thing on Dell's site that I can find which is close is Dimension E521: http://www.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx /dimen_advanced?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs By the time you give it a 20" display, wireless, firewire and some other little bells and whistles, it is breaking $1000. Note that isn't a nice all in one unit. Its just another bulky tower PC. The $1400 for the iMac really isn't bad at all for what you get.

      It's apples own fault that more people don't pick it up.


      Apple seems to be doing quite well for themselves these days if you ask me. The only real "fault" I can find is that they don't offer a wide enough range of base system options. I'd like something between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro that doesn't have a built in display. I already have a nice 22" flat screen ($400 right there). The Mini is just too wimpy and the Mac Pro is way too much.

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    158. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by shaitand · · Score: 1

      'If the company sold 2000 computers a year, and had the microsoft tax break which require them to pay the $35 instead of $99 for an OEM of XP home, they are only talking about $128,000 or so a year difference.'

      You assume that they are pocketing the difference. Mom and Pop's that just sell computers pretty much non-existant nowdays; what you have are service shops that will also build a computer. PC stores have not survived. A mom and pop store simply could not sell a decent machine under $500 today and would be taking a pretty tiny profit (maybe none after honoring the warranty) at that price. You can buy that same computer for $200-$300 after rebates from a large PC vendor. The $50+ discount they get from Microsoft definately plays a role in that. Anyone who has looked into bulk purchasing of PC components can tell you that the low margins in that market assures you won't see a very large discount there.

      I've recommended and sold a lot of computers. A computer that is identical with a 20% price hike will not sell.

    159. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Yes, the tiny niche of non-expert computer users.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    160. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pjpII · · Score: 1

      Actually, I did this same price comparison just this December, and the thing that made the biggest difference was that Lenovo was having a sale. When all things were said and done, the Lenovo T60, with the winter sale, was probably $3-400 cheaper than a similarly equipped macbook (and it came in black for no extra charge). The problem is, I've never seen Apple have the same kind of seasonal sales. In fact, I wasn't even considering a Lenovo until a friend mentioned that they have an annual December discount.

      I will say this though, having made the purchase: though the specs are otherwise similar, the screens on MacBooks are VERY nice, especially compared to the screens on the 14" T60s.

    161. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      Apples decision to limit their OS to their hardware is what is killing their adoption rate. This is false. Apple's "adoption rate" is in fact going up. Apple had a cloning program in the mid-90s. It almost killed them. Their marketshare fell during that period.

      Macs are not unreasonable expensive - Apple just doesn't compete in the extreme low end of the market. If you want a $500 Mac, there are used systems available to buy.
      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    162. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Strudelkugel · · Score: 1

      When you say "No one forces anyone to buy an OS with a PC...," the answer is what about the major PC manufacturers?

      Don't buy from them. You can get support from a local store, and it's probably going to be better.

      I can get the benefit of support for hardware issues, or so I can keep a consistent hardware platform across my company

      The major university in my town bought most of their servers and desktops at a local store. Individuals who claim they are forced to buy Windows are just lazy shoppers. An enterprise buyer might have more of an argument, but I doubt it, given that there are enterprise Linux distros.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
    163. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is that people buy macs specifically for the bundled OS.

    164. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      You would be referring to the tiny niche that doesn't build custom boxes?

      I'm referring to the "tiny niches" that:

      a) want a mid-range, flexible machine at a reasonable price that isn't welded to someone else's choice of screen.
      b) want a business-oriented laptop line with docking station options.

      My personal guesstimate is those two markets cover around a third to one half of potential purchasers out there. Any home user for whom gaming is a significant interest. Any business user who needs a slight amount of flexibility in their desktops.

      The company I work for, for example, requires the ability to connect two of our own LCDs to machines in a portrait orientation (Radiologist reading stations). To do this with Macs, we would need to buy a quad-core Mac Pro *and* upgrade with an ATI video card (since Apple won't fix their Nvidia drivers to support display rotation). When a Dell PC at literally half the price can do the job just as well, it makes Apple an impossible sell.

      Regarding laptops, the lack of a decent docking station is about the only thing stopping me (and several colleagues) from buying MacBook Pros. The other thing obvious thing missing in this arena is a 12" PowerBook replacement (why they didn't take the opportunity to make the black MB such a machine is beyond me).

      The suggestion that the only customers Apple doesn't have products catering to are "custom box builders" is ridiculous when such gaping and obvious holes in Apple's lineup exist. One is a mid-range tower (I can personally see room for two discrete models here, but one would quite adequately fill the gap), the other is a business-user-oriented laptop (and, again, room for two - possibly even three - discrete models).

    165. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just choose not to use it, shitforbrains. mac os doesn't increase the price.

    166. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 0

      An E520 upgraded to these specs is $1229. While it _does_ lack some features the iMac has, on the flipside you have a machine with infinitely more expandability.

      The E520 isn't a fair comparison, though. As evidenced by the 533 MHz RAM, it's using substantially cheaper parts than either the iMac or the XPS. And I'd argue that more people are going to find Wifi or a webcam useful than will be upgrading anything other than the hard drive or the RAM on their system (which you can do on their iMac).

      This is the problem Apple has. In the tiny niche that their hardware targets, it's a fairly good deal - but if you have needs that are even slightly outside that niche, Apple has nothing for you.

      It's the people who incrementally upgrade their machines that are the niche. Your average user is not capable of replacing their graphics card!

      Again, you may or may not "save a lot of money". If you want a machine that's good for gaming,

      Apple has no gaming machines because nobody in their right mind would game on a Mac. Gaming is all about breadth of software support, and there is no way Apple is going to compete with Microsoft on that front.

      (I would also argue that there's no reason whatsoever for compulsory wifi on non-laptop computers.)

      Who still uses wired ethernet in their house?

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    167. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by bogjobber · · Score: 1
      I can get a Mac Mini for $579 (since I work at a university) and the general-public cost is around $600 or a little more. That's actually less than what I've been quoting people lately who ask me to put a decent gaming PC together for them on newegg (I build wishlists and email them to the "clients" who ask for my recommendations).

      And that's where you made your mistake. If you compare the Mac Mini to Dell's cheapest PC, the E521, the Dell is over $200 cheaper. It's got a crappier processor, but more HD space.

      The fact is that Mac's are more expensive than comparable Windows/Linux machines. That's fine because it's the reason Apple makes lots and lots of money. But the market for more-expensive hardware is smaller than the one for less-expensive hardware. It's very simple. It doesn't matter that the Mac is slightly better because a Windows machine is good enough and, most importantly to people, it is cheaper. If it is able to do what most people want (email, web) then most people will choose the cheapest option. Some people want slightly higher quality and are willing to pay for it. But the fact is Apple can't compete on price because Apple doesn't want to compete on price. They want to keep those big, fat profit margins.

    168. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      In the home space, where Apple's market is, wifi has decimated wired ethernet. Look at Dell's "networking options" page when configuring a machine. It's all wireless gear. They used to have "4 port ethernet hub" or the like as an option, but not anymore.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    169. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Ok... but what would a $300 Mac look like? I mean, Apple would have to gut it down to the same specs -- meaning a Celeron, CDRW (no DVD), 10/100 instead of gigabit, drop the bluetooth, drop the wifi, drop the firewire, drop dvi, switch to a paper-thin aluminum case with a $10 power supply, What's wrong with that? A lot of people don't need any of those things. Keep the DVD burner, make wifi an option, and design a nice looking yet still cheap case.

      Sure they could get the price to $300 but what would be the point? Half of iLife would be seriously crippled, half of the available peripherals wouldn't work, etc. iLife wouldn't be any more crippled than it already is on a PPC, and the only peripherals that wouldn't work would be those using FireWire and Bluetooth - both of which are fairly rare, compared to USB, and both of which can be added later if need be.

      Or you could get 450Mhz g4 tower "sawtooth" era, with 500Mhz, 1GB ram, Tiger, combodrive, firewire for as little as $200. Comparable to a decently loaded pentium III, and perfectly serviceable for most tasks. You could probably get a used PC for that price running at 1 GHz or faster.

      Or a 1.5Gz G4 Mac Mini with 512MB RAM, bluetooth, wifi, dvdrw, Tiger, etc etc for $500. On par with an older decently loaded P4, and likely better than what you'd get from dell at that price. Heh, not really... I just priced a Dell Dimension E521 for $479: AMD Sempron 3400+, 1 GB RAM, 80 GB HD, 16x DVD RW. You can pick up wifi and BT adapters for about another $60 together at CompUSA.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    170. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      1) How much of Apple's target market is capable of building their own machine?
      2) I highly doubt you could get that particular configuration for $1500. With Newegg pricing, just the CPU, motherboard, memory, monitor, drives, and RAM come to $1500. Did you get the case, power supply, mouse, keyboard, and graphics card for free? Did you also pull of free shipping on all of those components? That stuff will come to at least $200 if you buy reasonable-quality parts (Apple's PSUs are really high-quality).

      Moreover, the ergonomics of home-built machines tends to be terrible unless you pay special attention. Dell's are pretty quiet, and my custom-built Athlon X2 machine is really quiet (courtesy of a $50 PSU, $120 case, and $50 in after-market fans and heatsinks), but the iMac is even quieter.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    171. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by suv4x4 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If it were profitable you would find just that. It's called free market. Start your own company and start selling computers without windows installed. If there is a demand you'll make a boatload of money ;) I think you'll find as most retailers have, the demand is exactly 0.

      In fact, in Eastern Europe, the "OS-less beige box" companies rule. It allows for max customization, minimal price and no Windows tax.

      Ironically though, guess what people install on those OS-less beige boxes when they get home (hint: pirated Windows).

    172. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      What's the point of comparing a custom-built machine to something sold, shipped, and supported as a unit by Apple?

      Yes, you can get a "cheaper" machine moving the cost of part selection, assembly, installation, and support to yourself. No duh.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    173. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      What they have is a hierarchical lineup. When you get down to it, there are quite a few different computers to choose from: 2 Minis, 4 iMacs, 3 MacBooks, 3 MacBook Pros, and then the built-to-order Mac Pros. That's a lot of options, but from an ease of naming standpoint, there are only 5 discreate lines. Getting rid of the criptic numbered-names was the best thing that happened to Apple.

      And they could *easily* fit a mid-range tower - even two - into that scheme. A "Mini Mac Pro" (small tower, PCIe x16 video, second PCIe x16 slot (maybe only with x8 signalling), room for two 3.5" hard disks) and a "Mac Mini Plus" (small tower, PCIe x16 video).

      (Out of the two, I'd consider the "Mini Mac Pro" more "likely", as it's basically half a Mac Pro.)

      There are a couple things they could do to gain a few % more market share, although it might lose them money: take the minis down a notch to $400, $500, and $600, and create a headless line in the $1000-$1500 range (this would directly compete with the iMac line, but it might entice a few people onboard who are looking for lower-priced, expandable systems).

      The real problem with a mid-range desktop (and why I suspect it has never appeared) is not that it will compete with the iMacs, but that it will compete with the high-margin Mac Pros.

      I'm of the opinion that most people who buy a Mac Pro (or PowerMac), do so because they want the expandability (PCI slots, hard disks, RAM) rather than the extra CPU power. A mid-range desktop offering even a minimal level of similar expandability would, IMHO, slaughter Mac Pro sales.

      To be honest, I don't see a problem in the Minis pricing (obviously, since I bought one - even though it runs Windows) or even the pricing of their other machines. You get quite a reasonable machine for your money in terms of raw hardware and it's quite a nice form factor.

    174. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by alienmole · · Score: 1

      You are being monitored and given that these servers are also being used in and for federally funded work, you have attracted the attention of a number of people who are taking this pretty seriously.
      You're quite the little fascist, aren't you?
    175. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by cp.tar · · Score: 2, Informative

      And let me guess... If you buy a laptop withWindows, it's not a Windows license you can re-sell if you don't want it. Right?

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    176. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      actually, far cheaper,
      I got a just sub top end machine for 1500 bucks, 19 inch monitor and all. by top end, the only things I didn't get at the penultimate were the video card and processor. those I took down by 2 adn 1 notch repsectively(because Intel still doubles the cost to get the best out there). and I guess I skimped 80 bucks and only got 1 gb of ram so far. Granted, I'm happy to get a computer where for 1500 bucks I'm near the top end and can easily upgrade it at any time with easy to access parts.
      I don't understand how you can consider a mac comparable to that in price. and I know as performance goes it competes in the mid mac towers.

      Now, what didn't I get with it: firewire, built in mic, built in wi fi. of those, I wanted a mic which will cost me 100 bucks. but this is because I want a wireless one so I can use skype like a wireless phone and cook or do house chores while talking online. I would need this with a mac even so there is no loss.

    177. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Darby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      )As opposed to the time the average Windows user spends installing antivirus, antispyware, a personal firewall, dozens of patches, and three sets of activation.

      I recently did a Gentoo/MySQL install and an XP install simultaneously. I was done with the Gentoo install *and* imaged that install on the sister machine an hour before I finished getting XP patched and ready to start installing software. Granted, the Gentoo boxes were pretty decent server class machines and the XP machine was a cheap desktop (fresh install, pre SP2 version of XP), but damn.

      OpenBSD on a similar desktop machine took 10 minutes for a base install. 10 more to get it configured as a simple failover NAT + firewall (double the total for the failover partner).

    178. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      "What's wrong with that? A lot of people don't need any of those things. Keep the DVD burner, make wifi an option, and design a nice looking yet still cheap case."
      What would be wrong with that? It wouldn't be premium product. It wouldn't be a Mac.

      Just as BMW could make a deal with Honda to buy civics and replace the logo plates and call them BMWs. Likelwise Apple COULD make 'cheap' units, but Apple's are among the BMWs of computers, not the Kia's. Do you hear many people lamenting that "BMW is missing a lot of sales opportunities by not having a Kia product?" Of course not.

      "You could probably get a used PC for that price running at 1 GHz or faster."

      And how would that help someone looking for an inexpensive Mac exactly?

      As for whether or its true. Yeah probably; I did say it was on par with a decent P3 after all. But you are missing the point. The question is not what kind of PC can I buy for $200. The question is "What kind of Mac can I get for $200 because I was told that to run OS X I have to spend at least $700..." And the answer is you can get a pretty solid OS X experience on 200 bucks.

      "... I just priced a Dell Dimension E521 for $479..."

      Well *I* just priced a Dell Dimension E521 with AMD sempron, 512MB RAM, 80GB HD, DVDRW, wifi, and firewire... and it was 499.00 ... and I still didn't have BlueTooth or gigabit yet, and I'm not sure if it does TV-out either.

      Granted the AMD sempron is a step above a 1.5GHz G4, but that's not the point:

      It would be HARD to buid a a new dell that could do everything the 2 year old Mac Mini does for less than the Mac Mini costs today ($450-500).

      The fact that you were able to put together a computer with a faster CPU, and more RAM, yet can't do everything the Mac Mini does proves what exactly? In terms of Hondas and BMWs all you've shown is that a cheap Honda civic with a Turbo kit is faster than an entry level 2 year old BMW... I doubt you'll find many BMW owners lining up to 'upgrade'. ;)

      So, yes, the AMD sempron will be faster than a 1.5GHz G4, though not nearly as much as the mhz difference might suggest... but the mac mini has more features for the same dollars, and even 2 years later is still a premium product that can turn heads on its styling and features.

      The same will NEVER be said of a Dell E521.

      Besides and after you drop in something like the Norton Antivirus Internet Protection Suite that windows pretty much needs installed to be run safely by a non-geek the Dell might not be that much faster either. ;)

      cheers

    179. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Insightful
      With Windows Vista for $50, with Novell Linux for $29. I know what most people would choose.

      Yep, most, but not all.

      And that's why MS is so terrified of allowing Linux in at an OEM level. The biggest barrier to Linux adoption is its scarcity, but once enough of those scarce customers have ticked the $29 option, the applications will come, the hardware support will come and there'll be competition in the market again.

      The last thing Microsoft wants is to have to compete on price OR quality.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    180. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by cheeni · · Score: 1

      Dell actually gives discounts, so it's not uncommon to get 10-30% off the sticker price, Apple is famous for hitting retailers on the head when they offer a discount.

    181. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is NOT exactly zero. It may be damned close to zero, but it is not zero. I want a computer without Windows installed, and I'll bet there is at least one other person on planet Earth that wants the same thing too.

    182. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not $300!

      OEM pre-installed Windows XP Home is about $30-40 or so per machine, or about $100 for XP Pro.

      Of course, this does not include phone support from Microsoft (you have to contact your OEM instead).

    183. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by gizzmo · · Score: 1

      For $1538 you can configure a Dimension 9200 on the small business site with a 2.4GHz Core Duo, 2GB of 667MHz DDR2, a 2007FPW 20" LCD, and Vista Ultimate. The only slightly less powerfull part would be the video with an 256MB X1300 instead of a 128MB X1600...still, not a bad comparison, and unless you really want everything integrated, this is a better machine for the money. And much more expandable.

    184. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Yea, and then when they ask you what the problem could be, they answer your "virus" sugestion with "I ran a full scan and it didn't find anything".

      I had a potential customer that loaded nortan 2001 fresh (in 2006 on ME) and said it was up to date because the program update thing said there are no updates availible. He then almost called a tech from another shop a cheat that was trying to scam him because that tech tried to tell them he needed to buy another antivirus. I sent him away because I didn't want his ignorace talking bad about me behind my back. Later I found out that he was saying I didn't "know anything" to the other shop that eventualy fixed it by wipping everything and upgrading it to XP and including Free avg because norton 2001.

      I guess some people don't realize that shops talk to each other and the people working at one might have worked at another.

    185. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by ben+there... · · Score: 1

      I, on the other hand, have no need for the sheer horsepower of a Mac Pro. So when I dumped my Windows machines a couple of months ago, I got Mac Mini for my desktop and a Macbook for my laptop. Couldn't be happier.

      I have no need for the horsepower of a Mac Pro either. I went for modern mid-range: the Core 2 Duo E6600. I built my own PC.

      Mine:
      E6600 2.4 GHz overclocked to 3.2 GHz - quiet and stable
      eVGA nForce 680i with 2 x16 PCIe and 1 x8 PCIe
      1 GB Corsair DDR2 800
      BFG 7600 GT
      320 GB Seagate 7200.10 HDD
      16x DVD+-R/DL burner
      Lian Li PC-A05 case
      $950

      Theirs:
      Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon "Woodcrest" processors
      1GB memory (667MHz DDR2 fully-buffered DIMM ECC)
      NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT graphics with 256MB memory
      250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200-rpm hard drive1
      16x double-layer SuperDrive
      $2500

      The funny thing is for most desktop applications, including games, dual-core currently beats quad-core (for example E6600 beats Q6600 in most benchmarks), especially clocked 20% faster. It likely beats 2 separate socket dual-cores even worse. Core 2 Duo also outperforms Xeon in most desktop applications. You also don't have to buy special memory like you do with Xeon. The memory is also 20% higher clock on mine. The board accepts up to the highest memory available right now: Corsair Dominator DDR2 1250. The hard drive is one of the fastest 7200 drives, if not the fastest @ 77 MB/s sustained read. The 7600 GT is also 10-20% faster than the 7300 GT.

      It's also a mid-tower, and I like its looks and size better than the Mac Pro. And I saved over $1400 for a better performing, mid-tower, standard ATX, highly upgradeable machine for my tasks.
    186. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      BMW could make a car to compete with a Honda civic too, but it really wouldn't be a BMW anymore, imho. For those who want a BMW on a budget, buy a used one.

      Not to mention that the BMW brand has a certain image. If BMW produced a low-end car they'd tarnish that image, which might actually lose them sales.

      Likewise, Apple has the image of producing high-quality computers. If they suddenly produced a $300 Walmart special they'd damage their brand and risk alienating their customer base. Not competing in that market is clearly not a bad idea.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    187. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      What would be wrong with that? It wouldn't be premium product. It wouldn't be a Mac. Only if you think a Mac has to be expensive and filled with features most people will never use. In my experience, the main benefits of using a Mac are (1) OS X and (2) no driver headaches because all the hardware is standard. Those advantages would still be intact.

      The fact that you were able to put together a computer with a faster CPU, and more RAM, yet can't do everything the Mac Mini does proves what exactly? That Apple is ignoring all the people who don't want to "do everything the Mac Mini does".

      You can get a faster computer for less by ignoring fluff like Bluetooth and FireWire, but Apple insists that you pay for those features if you want to use their OS... and whenever someone suggests Macs are expensive, the fanboys come out in droves to do semantic backflips, explaining that they're not really expensive because they do so much.

      Well, not everyone wants to spend $50,000 on a car, and that's why smart car manufacturers offer low-end models as well as the Avalons and Escalades. The low-end models don't sacrifice any of the key features like safety or reliability, they just strip away nonessentials like heated seats and 10 speaker audio. Apple does just the opposite: the MacBook, for example, keeps most of the fluff from the MBP but has 40% less screen area and a crappy video chipset.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    188. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Per+Wigren · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who still uses wired ethernet in their house?

      Lets see... Almost everybody who have more than one non-laptop computer in their house?
      Wired ethernet is cheaper, more reliable, more secure and WAY faster than wireless. This will be true for the foreseeable future.

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    189. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by kjart · · Score: 1

      I've never understood the whole "switch" mentality. As a computer enthusiast I'm not interested in just one OS, one brand, one vendor - I'm interested in everything I can get a hold of. Right now? Linux server, Windows desktop, MacBook Pro laptop - works for me, and I certainly don't feel the need to convert any of the three to anything other than what they are.

      Oh, and for the record, in my limited time with OS X, it has crashed about as much on average as Win XP has for me, and I've certainly had to reboot for pretty much every update it has installed (reboot for a Quicktime update - wtf?). It's definitely nice, but anyone who claims it's perfect is a liar.

    190. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Darby · · Score: 1

      I use wireless in my Mac Pro. I help manage the wireless network at my institution, and it's cheaper to put a wireless card in my desktop than it is to get another laptop.

      And through the magic of the PCI slot you can do that. Not so easy with a laptop (PCMCIA, sure, but maybe they're busy plus laptops are inherently more likely to *need* wireless and the cards stick out changing the form factor).

      Maybe someone doesn't want to run an Ethernet cable across the room and around the corner to the only telephone jack in the apartment. Instead they might get a wireless solution. But they use a desktop.

      Sure, but maybe your house is wired and you have Gig switches installed (w00t!!!) and have multiple MythTV frontends and you scoff at wireless speeds ;-) At home, I usually plug my laptop in even though it has built in wireless. I have 2 PCI wireless cards I yanked out of machines after we bought this place and discovered the phone lines were wired with CAT 5 and we use VOIP ;-)

      My point, basically is to back up the parent. Laptops had better come with wireless since they're most commonly carried around. Desktops might benefit, but it's nowhere near as clear as in the case of laptops. In bulk for an OEM they're probably pretty darn cheap (no idea what the actual breakdown might be) but margins are generally thin.

    191. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by saleenS281 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you're a statistical anomaly to the big vendors at best. A .00001% that can be rounded down to 0 when focusing on maximizing shareholder value. If you were not, they would sell what you are asking for.

    192. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Yep, and this is what i'm talking about. But i think microsoft should be selling at a set price. If Intel offered bulk processors at $10 a piece fo lots of 1000, and they decided you had to pay 15 a piece if you ever sold AMD processors, they would be in some legal trouble. Actualy, it apears they are because they did something just like this with Dell. (except Dell tried to hide this).

      So if microsoft is offering OEM software for new computer builds, they shouldn't be able to control the price levels to this point based on using competitors software. But more importantly, they shouldn't be able to offer this steep of a discount only to large manufacturors. The small guys could be bigger if they got the same discount. Not to mention that the example you described with a $500 computer going for 300-400 from dell or hp and marking either of those up by 20% with one price of the OEM OS would cancel any of the negetive effect.

      I mean if dell had to either jack thier price up or cover the 60 some dollar increase, it would make the small shops more in line of being competitive to those who don't get that discount. Especialy if they don't get it because they are selling OSS. If there is a problem with competition and the lack of PC shops, it is because of this.

    193. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Darby · · Score: 4, Funny

      Who still uses wired ethernet in their house?

      People who like to be able to watch multiple TV shows captured in 2GB/hour MPEG2 on different frontends simultaneously ( let alone people with HD ) while still having plenty of bandwidth left over for traffic to the firewall for internet traffic as well as various other LAN traffic with zero stuttering.

      And you call yourself a geek ;-)

    194. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Froeschle · · Score: 1

      In most users' minds, a computer without and OS is "broken". They are not able to differentiate between the OS and the physical machine itself.

    195. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Tom · · Score: 1

      The free market theory rests on the assumption that there are many customers and many suppliers and no one from either side owns a dominating share of the market.

      In other words: The OS market is not a free market, and hasn't been for well over a decade.

      And no, the fact that OSX and Linux and Solaris exist doesn't mean that isn't true. The deciding factor is "dominating share", not "100%".

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    196. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Kulilin · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... I would say there is a market for PCs without an OS on them.

      The company I work for has a corporate volume license for Windows 2000, which is the OS we all are (still) using.

      In spite of the company paying for Windows 2000, the HP computer on my desk has a sticker with a Windows XP Professional serial number, which clearly suggests that they paid for that XP license, too. That XP license has never been used and will never be since we are jumping ship to Vista Real Soon Now (tm).

      Being a multi-national company with 50,000+ employees (and 50,000++ PCs), I'd say the company would be very much interested into buying their PCs without a preinstalled copy of Windows they won't use. Nevertheless, big name vendors don't give you the chance to choose whether you want Windows on your PC or not --except for a few selected models.

    197. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Tom · · Score: 1

      The existence of alternative doesn't mean that the market is a free market. According to the theory, a free market exists if neither a single buyer nor a single supplier controls a dominating share of the market. Dominating != 100%.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    198. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Tom · · Score: 1

      I think you'll find, as most retailers have, that if you sell machines without windos installed, MS will jack up your OEM licence fees. Since margins are slim, you'll be out of business or windos-only within the month.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    199. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by stdarg · · Score: 1

      So you really think "part selection, assembly, installation, and support" is worth $500? Well guess what. Part selection is free (just copy it from the iMac page) and takes about 5 minutes. Assembly and installation is $79 at mwave.com (if you really can't do it yourself). Support costs $20-$50 at your local Circuit City or Best Buy... IF you run into a problem at all. Why would you when everything is already set up and installed? And according to Apple's online store, their included support is only for the first 90 days. Be prepared to pay even more after that.

      I know this isn't for "grandma" or whatever, but the poster was asking about Slashdotters specifically.

      If you really don't want a custom PC, look at tigerdirect.com at the gaming PCs. For $1200 you can get a MUCH better computer (twice the RAM, twice the HD, high end video card(s)). Add a nice 20 inch LCD and you've got a superior system, fully assembled, with support and all that, for the same price.

    200. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Tom · · Score: 1

      It's tricky to sell machines without windos because MS has been basing what they charge OEMs on a weird calculation that includes whether or not you sell machines without windos. If you do, the OEM license cost rises. Since margins are slim, very few OEMs do.

      Yes, most consumers want a PC with windos pre-installed. However, there is enough of a demand for windos-free machines to make it profitable - if you could do it.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    201. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Darby · · Score: 1

      And if you want to go into ThinkPad territory, be prepared to pay a whole lot more.

      Refurb, Baby. Refurb. My CEO's addicted to that shit and being the one who sets them up I have few complaints. Once the default setup didn't have the right drivers for the wireless and the online "fix all your shit" utility didn't recognize it (presumably a bad wireless chipset was the reason for the refurb), but other than that no worries so far.

      I actually had to boot off a linux CD and lspci to find out what it was (Device Manager is a piece of crap.. is there an easy way to find that out in Windows?)

    202. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by BitLifter · · Score: 1

      Apple still doesn't have a $500~$700 system available. A mac mini still doesn't include a monitor, keyboard, or mouse. I just bought a mac mini today, Feb. 9th 2007. It cost $901 excluding tax. Everyone knows you can't run a mac mini on 512MB of RAM (unless you're eternally running bootcamp with WinXP), so I had to upgrade it to 1GB for OSX 10.4.8. This was a new computer so I had to add the "$79" wired keyboard and mighty mouse combo (when was the last time you paid $79 for a "wired keyboard solution" on windows?). Add the $149 two year warranty extension (with a speedy 3 to 7 day repair time) and you're now at $901 with no software other than basic OSX. Add another $299 for a decent LCD monitor and you're now beginning to wonder why you didn't just buy a new iMac. But, heh, the best part about owning a Mac is upgrading it. When that special moment arrives, you just pick it up, throw it away, and buy a new one. They even include free recycling to rid you of any guilty conscience. It's nice to know that Apple doesn't make you pay for waste that's eventually going to end up in some third world country's environmental disaster. But seriously, that whole thing about Mac's not crashing? For the last six months I've been echoing this to my mac users..."Just reboot...it's a Mac...of course it crashes. You can't seriously expect it to do any heavy lifting. It's not meant for that. Just watch at the PC vs Mac commercials. The PC does the heavy lifting like accounting etc...the Mac makes cool videos and pretty pictures". Mac wins the marketing campaign. M$ wins the performance battle.

    203. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by DeviousDevil · · Score: 0

      Depends on which vendors your talking about. If a user is stupid enough to buy from the likes of Dell then maybe but 100% fact if they buy from a local independant they can have whatever they want. An independant buys there software from a supplier NOT Microsoft so MS cannot influence the price at all. Also what a lot of /.ers forget is that Joe Bloggs elderly person or Mum and Dad who want a computer typically want it for email, internet and word processing therefore they can get this with Vista for UK £500 the equivalent Mac would cost them way more than that which they simply will not do. They could use Linux or whatever but they simply will not do that because they don't have the knowledge. Whatever people here say Windows is not hard to use and the vast majority of the time with a computer for the tasks mentioned earlier the above types of people can just turn it on and it will work. The same is not true for Linux and although true for a Mac I refer back to my comments on price.

    204. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by J.Y.Kelly · · Score: 1

      Microsoft does not charge Dell $139 for a copy of Windows (and never has). In fact, it's closer to $29 than $139. With Windows Vista for $50, with Novell Linux for $29. I know what most people would choose.

      Probably true. But how about:

      • $50 for windows
      • $50 for office
      • $50 for photoshop
      • $50 for some antivirus software
      • etc. etc.

      vs $30 for linux which comes with a big pile of applications. There's a lot more to a linux distibution than just the OS. This is one of the big selling points of Macs too with iLife being bundled and iWork usually being included for much less than the cost of office.

    205. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jimicus · · Score: 1

      More than that.

      Read the spec sheet of the $300 PC versus the Mac Mini. While the PC may be fine for most users, I bet you anything you like the mac has higher specs. Once you start speccing up a PC with the same processor, with bluetooth, with the same capacity disk etc etc, those savings soon disappear.

    206. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by xtracto · · Score: 0

      Mmmm I dont know. I am sure that if you go to a Whitebox vendor to buy that any good number of computers, she will be very glad to make all your machines identical (so you can keep a consistent hardware platform across your company). It is no hard at all. Moreover, you will be helping your *local* economy and the small/medium company against the huge corporations.

      And it is almost sure you will get on-site support insetad of an outsourced india call center. And of course, you wont have Linux installed.

      Going back to the article, I found this bit interesting:

      The second problem -- that the Mac and its apps would not recognize these files (I couldn't open them in any application, and they appeared grayed out in File Open dialog boxes) -- took a bit longer to figure out.


      So, this means that OSX wont let you open some files with any program?. Darn, I think that is so bad. I do not care if it does not makes sense, on Linux (and windows) I can open executable files with a text editor. I have never used a Mac, but this really turns it down for me, a machine that stays in *your way* to do things?

      Oh, and about the "screen capture" program the guy wants, its stupid, he wants a picture manipulator inside a screen catpure... a screen capture should capture screens, and then this guy should open the image in any paint program to modify it as he wishes.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    207. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Only if you think a Mac has to be expensive and filled with features most people will never use. In my experience, the main benefits of using a Mac are (1) OS X and (2) no driver headaches because all the hardware is standard. Those advantages would still be intact.

      Unlike you, Apple believes a Mac is more than just OS X.

      and whenever someone suggests Macs are expensive, the fanboys come out in droves to do semantic backflips, explaining that they're not really expensive because they do so much.

      What is being explained is that they are good value for the price; that if you equipped a PC the same way, you'd find that it costs around the same. Demonstrating "good value" is not a semantic backflip.

      Unlike, say, a $3400 Louis Vuitton bag (if you want to talk about a rip off), the sum and quality of the parts in a Mac easily justify the price. You aren't paying 30% extra for a logo, as some people claim.

      the MacBook, for example, keeps most of the fluff from the MBP but has 40% less screen area and a crappy video chipset.

      Or put another way. The MB can do everything the MBP can but costs 40% less. Its just not as big, or as fast, or as stylish. But it has all the features of its big brother and will get the job done. (Rather like the difference between an entry level Porsche Cayman and a Porsche 911 Turbo.)

      cheers

    208. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Onan · · Score: 1

      I think you're wrong about your "almost everybody" assessment. I know you're wrong about the rest.

      Cheaper: Given how many machines have been coming with wireless ethernet standard for about seven years now, there's no significant cost difference. Half the time wired ethernet would cost (trivially) more, just because you need to buy switches and cables for machines that you could instead just tell to talk to one another over hardware they already have.

      More reliable: A few people will have range issues or interference issues. Not only is that uncommon, it's something that's pretty much clear at the outset, not generally a problem that will crop up unexpectedly later on. Like, say, a cheap switch or cable going bad. Again, a wash at best.

      More secure: Nope. Every packet you send out over the internet is going to pass through many networks out of your control. If you want it private, you'd better encrypt it before it ever leaves your machine. Securing one of the thirty hops between you and your destination buys you nothing.

      Faster: I have a 6Mbit/s dsl connection. A few lucky people in my city have 30Mbit/s fiber connections. When residential internet connectivity starts exceeding the speed of residential wireless connectivity, you can talk about faster. Until then, it's not the bottleneck, so it doesn't matter how fast it is.

      Now, let's get to the far more important issues that you happened to fail to mention. Wired ethernet requires far more technical expertise of its users. And even for users with entirely sufficient expertise, it's a pain in the ass.

      I have three options: I can spend an unpleasant afternoon crawling around under my house doing a good job of wiring it; I can spend an hour inside doing a crappy job of wiring it, with cables running over doorways (and need to re-do it if I ever decide to so much as move a desk); or I can spend four seconds just telling my computers to use the tools they already have to just sort this crap out for me, and never have to think about it again.

    209. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by king-manic · · Score: 1

      That leaves Windows. Apple has the solution but refuses to bend over and pick it up. Linux might have it someday, but right now most people lack the technical knowledge to use it...

      It's apples own fault that more people don't pick it up. If Dell were able to sell a PC and offer the users the choice of OSX or Windows...I bet with Apple's marketing you'd get LOADS of people adopting it for the first time. This is most likely because apply is a hardware company that happens to sell a nice look OS. Most mac user have bought into the idea that macs are premium products. Should they open it up they would then also have to open up what hardware is supported. This in itself would undermine one of their key sellign points: Stability. Bad drivers cause more crashes then almost anything aside form spyware. I think their nice machines but dont' suit my purpose. namely games and web design.
      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    210. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Your ad hominem attack means I'm not going to bother to even read the rest of what came after that. Thanks for perpetuating the stereotype of the forum poster made willing to insult other people because of internet anonymity.

      Sometimes it's not anonymity. Sometimes either they are really ascorbic in real life or you just said something stupid. Pick which ever one you want to beleive.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    211. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Note: Dell also charges a price premium. It's fallen a lot since the mid 90's but ti's still abotu 10%-20% over what a whitebox would cost you. So comparing a dell to a MAC is like comparing a Cadilac to a BMW. An expensive POS vs an expensive luxury item. Sure the Mac is close but real prices are found at mom and pops stores. Dell and bestbuy put a bit of a premium on top of the product to leverage their market positions. So for the same price as a Mac you can get a moderately better PC along with Windows. Thats just how they roll, Apple likes nice juicy margins. They can comfortably leave the "make 10 bucks on a $500 machine" to the mom and pops. Conversely I'll keep buying my white boxes.

      Dells are for those too clueless to get better.
      Macs are for those who will pay to be hip.
      White boxes are for those who want as much for their buck as possible and doesn't care about noise, heat or aesthetics.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    212. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Companies do that already - just not for consumer desktops. We buy most of our HP machines sans OS.

    213. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Who still uses wired ethernet in their house?


      I do. It's orders of magnitude better than wireless (I also have wireless, but it's not very useful for anything where you rely on there being no jitter. I use wireless for convenience with the laptop - but if I want to play music to a remote hi-fi, or play video, wired is the *only* way to do it reliably without sound or video stuttering from packet loss).

      Wired is simply faster, more reliable and more secure.

      My house is also built out of stone (with 3 foot thick walls) so wireless also has the disadvantage that it only really works in the same room as the access point. When I renovated the house, I flood wired with UTP so I have several sockets in each room which can be used for phone, ethernet or audio. (Yes, an audiophile would probably faint at the idea of running audio signals through cat5e, but I can't tell the difference in sound quality).
    214. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Unlike, say, a $3400 Louis Vuitton bag (if you want to talk about a rip off), the sum and quality of the parts in a Mac easily justify the price. More parts and higher quality parts doesn't necessarily translate into a better experience. It may be true that the upgrades to make a $1500 HP notebook equal a $2000 MBP would cost 33% or more of the HP's price, but that doesn't mean I'm going to get 33% more utility or enjoyment out of the MBP.

      Or put another way. The MB can do everything the MBP can but costs 40% less. Its just not as big, or as fast, or as stylish. But it has all the features of its big brother and will get the job done. (Rather like the difference between an entry level Porsche Cayman and a Porsche 911 Turbo.) Except the shortcomings really are important. Screen size is one of the main factors in a notebook's price, and one of the main things buyers look for. Most people don't want a 13" toy screen.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    215. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Per+Wigren · · Score: 1

      I get your points but I was mostly talking about a home LAN, not just getting multiple computers connected to the internet.

      Try to watch a movie from the file server on one desktop while another desktop is backing up its data. There is a big chance that the movie will stutter like crazy because it can't fetch it fast enough if your LAN is wireless.

      Try to have a [insert fast paced FPS game here] tournament on a wireless LAN. The latency will probably be way too high, especially if someone else is doing anything on the LAN at the same time.

      I agree that a wireless LAN is superior in some cases though, because of its simplicity. It all depends on what you are using it for.

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    216. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by publicworker · · Score: 1

      You could buy macs with Yellow Dog Linux on them a while back - I think this was before OS X, definitely before the Intel switch. I haven't checked up on it for a while though.

    217. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by master_p · · Score: 1

      The issue is not that customers want computers without a pre-installed O/S; the issue is that customers are not given a choice about which O/S they want. It's a no brainer that people want their computer operational from the moment they buy it; having to install an O/S is not a task to be taken lightly. But the problem is that Microsoft force their own O/S down to the consumers' throats through exclusive deals with Dell and other big manufacturers.

      You know what would be the best approach? to have hard disks pre-installed with various O/Ses and let the customers choose their preferred O/S. Then all that it would be needed is to insert the appropriate hard disk in the computer; a 5-minute job for a computer shop, and the customer would get his/her O/S of choice.

    218. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      they sell at a set price... the money we're talking about here is the Market Development Funds... the kickbacks the OEMs get for doing things like having that stupid "XXXX recommends Windows XP Professional" or not selling naked PCs or not selling PCs with other OSes pre-installed...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    219. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by hey! · · Score: 1

      I'm having trouble parsing your question. I think what you're asking is "it was really the chicken that came first, not the egg?"

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    220. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

      "An E520 upgraded to these specs is $1229. While it _does_ lack some features the iMac has, on the flipside you have a machine with infinitely more expandability."

      I have two comments about this:

      1) First, most people never open their machines. To my family, when I visit, they ask for help with their PC to upgrade RAM or hard disk or something, and when I open the case, it's the equivalent to them of taking apart their dishwasher. A job for a professional!

      [This is not what I do... I bought a Dell 3 years ago and the only thing that's left is the original MB and case at this point. Some things I've replaced multiple times. I recognize this is not cost-effective, but it does let me stay reasonably current for about $200-300 every 6 months. Plus I like to tinker.]

      2) On the flip side, your argument is exactly why I buy Mac laptops. Laptops are by definition not expandable whether we're talking Macs or PCs (beyond RAM and HD). I just bought a Mac Book Pro and if you build a comparable Dell, the Mac is about the same or cheaper, which echoes your point.

      You've got to admit, Apple may be boxed into 5-10% of the market, but they've managed to hold onto this share competing directly with Microsoft for 20 years and they've developed exactly the same reputation in computers as BMW does with cars.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    221. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by odie_q · · Score: 1

      the only things I didn't get at the penultimate were the video card and processor. those I took down by 2 adn 1 notch repsectively


      Sorry, but I can't resist: This would mean that you did get the penultimate processor, as penultimate means just that.
      --
      ...ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
    222. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by rdoger6424 · · Score: 1

      Due to the way that OS X is designed, applications take up a decent amount of RAM. However the apple RAM is expensive for 2 GB. I would buy 1 GB, and then get 2 GB from somewhere else (I use crucial, and my 1 GB stick has yet to fail me)

      --
      "Hello 911? I just tried to toast some bread, and the toaster grew an arm and stabbed me in the face!"
    223. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

      "Who still uses wired ethernet in their house?"

      Still? Hardly anybody ever did. I have it because when we built my house 10 years ago, I spent a day wiring the house with ethernet.

      Now, those of us who have it, use it and love it... because in terms of speed, it's a lot faster than wireless. My wife was VPN'ing into work last week on her laptop and she was complaining about how slow it was. I have multiple access points that cover the house, so there are almost no dead spots. She was connected with 802.11g, and was getting an excellent signal.

      So we got a long cord and connected her to the wired jacks, and the speed increase was dramatic.

      If you're surfing the internet, the speed increase is real, but not important. But if you're doing more than that, wireless just doesn't cut it.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    224. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except of course, that the licence your company bought is an Upgrade licence, like pretty much all MS volume licences. So you still have to have the OEM one to upgrade from.

    225. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

      With the Series 2 & 3 Tivo's, copying files wirelessly is painful. With Wired Ethernet, the difference is substantial and it becomes realistic to watch a show on one Tivo that's been recorded on another Tivo in real time.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    226. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mordaximus · · Score: 1

      Oh, sure, Apple has a $500-$700 model to choose from now, but that's without monitor, mouse, keyboard, etc. plus expansion is severely limited. Who wants that except people who do nothing but surf the web, play solitaire, and check email?

      You make it sound like that's the minority of computer owners. It isn't. We are. It's a great machine for the majority of people.

    227. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by ericlondaits · · Score: 1

      There are tons of open source apps for Windows too... I use OpenOffice in my Windows instead of MS Office because of price. Even though I own a legal copy of Photoshop (more like 600 U$S, not anywhere near 50) because the Gimp can't compete with Adobe's program.

      I believe MANY Linux users would gladly pay 50 U$S or more for MS Office under Linux (specially because of the Exchange compatibility) thing, and would be glad to pay whatever they're paying for Windows Photoshop for Linux Photoshop.

      Linux adoption shouldn't be a cost issue... because that's a fight they won't win (except in the third world (where I live), iff DRM gets its way and copying commercial software is no longer an alternative). People that can afford a computer probably can afford commercial software... specially in companies, where you have the biggest number of legal Office and Photoshop licenses running.

      It's funny reading in Slashdot about consoles, and the how the XBox 360 is cheaper than the PS3, and how everybody is getting a Wii, and stuff... with consoles being in the 200-600 u$S range and games at 50-70 a pop... yet when it comes to buying MS Office everybody's pockets are sadly empty and that's why Free (as in beer?) software will rule the world.

      Linux would be more believable in the eyes of the public if all its evangelists would defend it even if it were priced the same as Vista.

      --
      As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
    228. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Logic+and+Reason · · Score: 1

      I have to agree here. I don't think Macs are too expensive given what you get, but there is definitely a hole in the product line. Just a month or so ago, I was in the market for a new PC. I very badly wanted to get a Mac (have wanted one for years), but the Mac Mini was not upgradeable enough, and I didn't want an iMac with an integrated monitor since I wanted a nice 23" or 24" LCD that wouldn't be tied to a single computer. As for the Mac Pro, I really don't need a computer with two dual-core Xeons, so I couldn't justify the price (~$2200 at bare minimum without monitor).

      However, I should point out that I did not end up with a Dell either, even though I was looking at their offerings closely. It was several hundred dollars cheaper for me to get parts from newegg and build it myself, ending up at around $750 for everything except the monitor. If there had been anything like a Mac Pro in the $1000-$1500 area, I probably would have gone with that instead of building my own-- that's how much I wanted a Mac.

      My guess is that Apple is too attached to the profit margins they get from the Pro line, so they can't offer something that professionals could use at a lower price point (even if they tried to market it at consumers). This is a shame, but I must acknowledge that what Apple does offer is plenty for the typical consumer, and that I am not a typical consumer. It sucks, but maybe I'll just get a Macbook instead.

    229. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes. Exactly.

      I used to build custom rigs at a gaming store. Sometimes I'd offer to install a dual-boot of Linux (Ubuntu) for people when I got to talking to them and of the ones who said "yes", most came back to ask questions on how to work something in Ubuntu - which means they were using it! If I had to guess, of the people I installed Ubuntu for, fully 70 to 80 percent would come back having tried it to talk to me (or would call). A lot of people who never knew there was anything other than windows, are very happy to be without it now. Eventually I stopped advertising it because my boss pulled me aside and told me "we don't make money selling linux" when we got a customer asking about buying a laptop sans the windows and with that african program (Ubuntu) instead - of course our laptops come packaged with windows from our supplier - so that wasn't easy to explain to him. Plus the store was really marketed towards gaming (the premise of me being hired was that I win all the local lans and have street cred) and me pushing an operating system that doesn't natively allow gaming wasn't helping (I dual boot XP/Ubuntu).

      What's more, a lot of our money comes from fixing comps when they go wrong (we sell comps cheap to create repeat customers), so pushing a system that isn't gonna get itself full of spyware and reformat itself, or malfunction and "shutdown the internet" or just not work - isn't good for business.

      That's what your really fighting here, it's not just in Microsofts interest to have everyone using Windows, it's in the interest of every support or service related employee of the entire computer industry - no one makes money from selling Linux, and only Apple makes money from pushing Apple. Every computer professional the majority of people have direct access to, is going to tell them to buy Windows (to the exclusion of everything else, including me - even though I'm a firm Linux advocate).

      So yes, there is a conspiracy - and it's not created by microsoft shelling out big bucks to the entire industry to buy off the mouths of every professional - it's created by a need of every professional to make a living, and many of us do that via software for the windows platform, selling computers (bundled with windows so they break and we make money fixing them), games (what I consider to be the critical windows monopoly).

      If your goal is to end this tyranny of the OS, I have put a lot of thought into it - and I will say that the most critical market to convert is the gamers - if you turn games over to Apple and Linux you will turn over the vanguard of high end computers. Not only are they the most avid non-computer-literate computer-user group, they use the most cutting edge gear - which means that family house hold computers are typically former gaming rigs that are now out of date. The web browsing machine in the kitchen of every household was the gaming rig of the 90's passed up for the new one in Billys room upstairs. In 5-10 years time, it will be the one upstairs that ends up in the kitchen - and if the one upstairs were a linux box? They'd just have to get used to not having to reboot their computer every couple hours because it starts going to slow and not having to close popups all the time or deal with half a dozen spyware programs popping up to ethnically cleanse their computer.

      Convert the gamers, and Windows will fall forever. Of course, MS is well aware of this - which is why there is DX, and good things like OpenGL get screwed over.

      How do we convert gamers to Linux? There is only one viable solution - gamers will not accept Cedega as a permanent system for playing their games, they are high performance users - a few extra framerates is life or death when your in a CSS match. It has to come from the source - people need to know - and need to email/mail gaming companies, video card companies, anyone they can in the industry who will listen - and tell them something just as simple as - "I play these games of yours: , , , and I would appreciate if you would support

    230. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "a) want a mid-range, flexible machine at a reasonable price that isn't welded to someone else's choice of screen.
      b) want a business-oriented laptop line with docking station options."

      Both of those are quite small niches. Most users never upgrade their machines, so those free PCI-slots are next to useless for them. Those people are served just fine by a Mac Mini. And docking-stations? Some people might want to have those, but it's not like we have huge number of people demanding for laptops with docking-stations.

      It spounds to me that you have taken your personal wants and demands, and extrapolated those in to "huge number of people want these!". Yes, most computers sold these days are minitowers that fit your description of "mid-range flexible machine". But are people buying them because they want "flexible" machines? No. They are buying them because they are most common and cheapest machines around. Most of them never open the case and, so the "flexibility" is 100% irrelevant to them.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    231. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by TimTheFoolMan · · Score: 1

      Unless you're a single-city company, you're unlikely to get the kind of support from a white-box vendor. Again, it's not that you can't get it, it's that you can't get a blank-box easily.

      Tim

    232. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "Almost everybody who have more than one non-laptop computer in their house?"

      I know ONE person who has pulled wired ethernet to his house. I know several people who have WLAN though. And those people do have desktops as well. And note: we are talking about networking the home, not just pulling a cable from the phone/cable-socket to the computer.

      "Wired ethernet is cheaper"

      It's not. I thought about wiring my apartment. Ethernet-jacks in ever room, cables out of sight etc. etc. The cables, jacks, switches and having an expert doing it all would have cost me around 1000e. I went with wireless, and it didn't really cost me one dime extra, since my ADSL-router had a built-in WLAN base-station. Had I not owned a base-station beforehand, I could have bought one for fraction of the cost wired Ethernet would have cost me.

      "more reliable"

      I haven't had any problems with reliability.

      "more secure"

      This one might be true, due to the defining characteristics of the two. One is fixed-point, to other is... well, wireless.

      "WAY faster than wireless"

      But the thing is that wireless is still fast enough. My 8MB ADSL-connection is just as fast, regardless that do I used my G-spec WLAN or wired ethernet.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    233. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by DoctorDyna · · Score: 1
      Most Windows users didn't choose a Microsoft operating system, so their preferences weren't a factor.

       


      I'm going to have to disagree with this statement, even though it's the view that most people have. You are basing this on the fact that there are far more computers for sale with Windows loaded versus machines sold with Mac OS, which might be true, but you could just as easily say that the people who walk into the Apple store aren't given a choice either, for the computer that they buy will most certainly be loaded with Mac OS. Sure, more technically minded people can use paralells or boot camp and load Windows if they wanted to, but I'm willing to bet the average user probably won't. Until Microsoft posts guards at the front door of the Apple store, or somehow takes their online store down, there will always be a choice. The only time the user doesn't have the ability to buy whichever system they want (and in turn use whichever operating system they want) is when they work for a corporation that has already made this decision for a work environment.
       


      Would folks still consider it "the Microsoft tax" if Microsoft made the entire computer?

      --
      Windows has more viruses because linux has more virus coders.
    234. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you REALLY think that the apps commonly distributed with Linux are as good as Photoshop and even MS Office then you simply are not living in the real world.

      Apple does not pretend that their iLife suite replaces apps like Office or Photoshop - but personal users don't usually want that level of complexity anyway.

    235. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "So, this means that OSX wont let you open some files with any program?. Darn, I think that is so bad. I do not care if it does not makes sense, on Linux (and windows) I can open executable files with a text editor. I have never used a Mac, but this really turns it down for me, a machine that stays in *your way* to do things?"

      The GP is talking nonsense, you can open anything in a text editor on a Mac if you like, and drag-and-drop support is just unsurpassed. Mac OSX is a very friendly OS, but some people are STILL too stupid to use it. Hard to believe, I know.

    236. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "At full price sure. You can walk into a best buy, circuit city, or office depot and get a PC for $200-$300 after rebate."

      But those ultra-cheap machines suck ass. They really do. And you have the hassle of mailing back those rebates. Yes, they are cheaper than the Mini, but in their case, you get what you pay for: not much. Everything in them has been designed to be as cheap as possible, and it shows. And do those ultra-cheap tower-PC have any better specs than the Mini do?

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    237. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Both of those are quite small niches. Most users never upgrade their machines, so those free PCI-slots are next to useless for them. Those people are served just fine by a Mac Mini. And docking-stations? Some people might want to have those, but it's not like we have huge number of people demanding for laptops with docking-stations.

      If you don't think Docking Station are an important feature, you can't have spent much time with serious business laptop users.

      It spounds to me that you have taken your personal wants and demands, and extrapolated those in to "huge number of people want these!".

      No, I've taken my experience in several corporate environments, extrapolated the needs that drove purchasing decisions there, and made comments based on that.

    238. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      very true, because I only took it down 1 notch. score:
      odie_q : 1
      gordo3000: 0

      in my defense, I had originally written 2 for both, and then afterwards realized that at the time of purchase, it was only one notch down(though I knew there would soon be a release of another higher end system..)

    239. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by natd · · Score: 1

      While I don't expect everyone to know the details of their MS licencing, at 50k seat you won't be on a volume license - you'll be on enterprise. Volume is for fairly small business...think 40 or 50 seats...anything that's only just too big for retail boxes.

      The terms of that that basically give you pretty much everything you *might* need on an average desktop (and you get to negotiate what's included and the terms), plus stuff you don't, for a discounted flat price per seat so long as you agree to keep paying. The fact that you have a wasted OEM is insignificant.

      --
      Only big ligs use sigs.
    240. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      The E520 isn't a fair comparison, though. As evidenced by the 533 MHz RAM, it's using substantially cheaper parts than either the iMac or the XPS.

      The price difference between 533Mhz and 667Mhz RAM is as insignificant as the performance difference. It's _certainly_ not an indicator of "substantially cheaper parts" (you do realise that Macs use the same parts as PCs, right ? That those Dell E520s are probably assembled right next to iMacs in the same Chinese sweatshop ?).

      And I'd argue that more people are going to find Wifi or a webcam useful than will be upgrading anything other than the hard drive or the RAM on their system (which you can do on their iMac).

      Which, as I said, is fine if that's what you want. But if you _do_ want expandability, Apple has nothing for you at a reasonable price.

      It's the people who incrementally upgrade their machines that are the niche. Your average user is not capable of replacing their graphics card!

      Nor do they need to be when they can pay a shop (or next-door's kid) to do it for them.

      Apple has no gaming machines because nobody in their right mind would game on a Mac. Gaming is all about breadth of software support, and there is no way Apple is going to compete with Microsoft on that front.

      The irony here is that you'll probably turn around in a few posts and say people should buy Macs because they can run Windows and, hence, do everything a Windows PC can do...

      A decent mid-range machine would be a boon for all those people "switching", who want a machine they can boot to Windows to play games. It would be damn near the perfect machine.

      Who still uses wired ethernet in their house?

      For a home network of _desktops_ ? Who *wouldn't* use cheaper, faster (_much_ faster), more reliable wired ethernet ?

    241. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      What are hard core scientists - persumably people doing work - doing making such frequent presentations and running high traffic websites on their desktop workstations? Shouldn't they be doing research (aside from grant requuests, I suppose) and not tying up a desktop running a web server? I think most IT folks would cringe at every employee running their own webserver in their organization.

      I presume you found far more efficient applications to run on your Macs, and the switch of OS made the switch of applications automatic. Since MacPros use the same processors available to Windows and Linux Oses, one must presume that the new applications you chose are the things running better, as calculations are calculations to a processor.

      I guess I'm a little skepticle of your fanboi wording.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    242. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by theCoder · · Score: 1

      A MacBook doesn't violate the concept of a free market because Apple makes and sells both the hardware and software. The laptop/OS X combo is in fact a single product developed by a single company.

      So, if Microsoft developed and manufactured all the Windows computers and laptops in use today, that would somehow be better? Not having Dell, HP, Compaq, Gateway, and hundreds of other manufacturers would make a better free market? Apple is actually a worse proposition than the Windows world, because Apple is the single source for both the hardware and the software. At least in the Microsoft world, you have a choice of various hardware providers. True, most of them impose the Microsoft tax, but there are many (mostly smaller shops) that do not.

      Personally, I prefer the Linux world, where the is a choice (and a free market) in both hardware and software. I can choose from a number of different software solutions, ranging from Free (like Debian) to expensive (like RedHat Enterprise) depending on my needs. Sure, the Apple way is simpler because there are no choices, and even looks appealing because they have nice hardware and software, but I prefer the free market way.

      Just imagine if Apple had 90+% of the market share in the 90s. Would there be a MacOSX today? I doubt it. People would be cursing Jobs the way the curse Gates now, and telling people to switch from the oppressive Apple systems (and the "Apple Tax") to the more free Microsoft underdogs. Part of that would be the "grass is always greener" mentality, but products with incredibly large market shares tend to stagnate (for example, IE before Mozilla/Firefox became popular).

      If you want a free market with choice and continued innovation, choose Linux. If you want to get locked into a proprietary solution, choose Apple or Microsoft.

      (I may have been overly critical of Apple in this post. While the Apple system is proprietary, Apple has made strides in the last decade to be more open and to use more open standards. Though this is mostly because they have to to compete with MS, it is good to see more systems support greater interoperability.)

      --
      "Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs" -- author unknown
    243. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      1) First, most people never open their machines. To my family, when I visit, they ask for help with their PC to upgrade RAM or hard disk or something, and when I open the case, it's the equivalent to them of taking apart their dishwasher. A job for a professional!

      Which is exactly what I would expect people to do, and something they _can't_ do with an iMac - ie: my point.

      Expandability is _not_ just an advantage for those capable of upgrading their own hardware, a fact that seems to escape a lot of people.

    244. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "The fact is that Mac's are more expensive than comparable Windows/Linux machines"

      OK, find me a "comparable" machine to the Mac Mini. The closest I could come up with is this. Prices start at $595. For that price you get 1.6Ghz Intel Celeron, 256MB of RAM, no Bluetooth, No WLAN, 40GB HD and DOS (no Windows). For comparison, you could get Mac Mini for $599 (4 bucks more) and get 1.66GHz Core Duo, 512MB of RAM, Bluetooth, WLAN, 60GB HD, OS X and iLife.

      OK, you could get the Dell E521 for whopping 200 bucks less. But that machine is big and ugly. I literally would not have room for that machine, whereas Mini is small enough to be lost underneath a pile of papers. So is the Dell "comparable" at all? And looking at the specs, I can see that the Dell has crappier CPU, a bit more HD-space (+20GB), crappier OS (Vista Home Basic), crappier optical-drive (no burner of any kind), no WLAN, no Bluetooth.... So is it really any better?

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    245. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by rahrens · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not hard to do. You simply right click (if you have a two button mouse or a mighty mouse configured for two buttons - option click if on a single button) on the file, and from the contextual menu, choose "Open with" and pick your program. You can either choose from the programs offered, or navigate to the Applications folder and choose the one you want.

      I've been doing this since the early OS X days...

      --
      "Money is truthful. If a man speaks of his honor, make him pay cash." Notebooks of Lazarus Long, Robert A. Heinlein
    246. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by BWJones · · Score: 1

      What are hard core scientists - persumably people doing work - doing making such frequent presentations and running high traffic websites on their desktop workstations?

      Presentations are part of the process of communicating your science and in fact, if you are unable to do this, you are hobbling your own work. I have presented data and our work at conferences and invited talks around the world.

      Shouldn't they be doing research (aside from grant requuests, I suppose) and not tying up a desktop running a web server?

      Thanks for telling me what I should be doing with my career and how astute of you to be able to comment on what scientists *should* be doing. However, I will let you know that running the server is part of the process of communication for our work. As to my blog, it is a means to communicate with family and friends around the world, share my photography and that is done on my own time, thanks.

      I think most IT folks would cringe at every employee running their own webserver in their organization.

      Perhaps they might. I'd like to think that I am valuable enough to my organization that they not only permit, but encourage my blogging. The fact that I also maintain servers for education and scientific work and collaboration also tends to be helpful to my organization.

      I presume you found far more efficient applications to run on your Macs, and the switch of OS made the switch of applications automatic.

      Some applications we are writing/creating/coding to better suit our purposes. Other applications actually appear to be working better on OS X and integrate in with our work flow quite nicely. We still run a few Windows machines, but I have them running headless and behind my MacPro so they never see the outside world, security issues and all.

      Since MacPros use the same processors available to Windows and Linux Oses, one must presume that the new applications you chose are the things running better, as calculations are calculations to a processor.

      There is also the system architecture to consider as most compute platforms are more than their CPUs. Given that the MacPro has completely independent data busses, one can run calculations and occupy the CPU completely while saturating the IO bus, never touching the CPU. It's pretty nice actually.

      I guess I'm a little skepticle of your fanboi wording.

      As am I of your spelling.... ;-)

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    247. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "If you don't think Docking Station are an important feature, you can't have spent much time with serious business laptop users."

      I work at a management consulting firm, where each and every consultant is equipped with a laptop. During my five years of working here, I have heard maybe two requests for a docking-station. And even in those cases it was more of a "It would be a nice thing to have" than "I absolutely need it". We actually have docking-stations for those who want one. No-one does. They are just gathering dust in the storage. But hey, maybe those consultants are not "Serious business laptop users"?

      "No, I've taken my experience in several corporate environments, extrapolated the needs that drove purchasing decisions there, and made comments based on that."

      We have desktops here as well (many non-consultants have them). And we don't go around adding expansion-cards to those machines, so the "flexibility" is totally useless. Same thing with my previous employes which was basically 100% desktop-shop. Only reason to open the machine would be to take out the HD and move it to another machine in case of a hardware-failure. And you can do that on the Mini as well.

      Pray tell: what expansion-cards should we be installing on our dekstop-machines? Obviously expandability and flexibility are a must-have features in business-environment according to you. Do tell me: what for? Those machines are used for PowerPoint, Word, Excel, email etc., what expansion-cards would we need? Seriously? Hi-end 3D-accelerators? additional soundcards? What?

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    248. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by galego · · Score: 1

      That's the rub ... those are the principles of the free market at work ... now working back against the freedom of the market. I can negotiate my own deals and offer you better prices if you agree to work with me exclusively or at a certain bulk rate. And so I should be free to do. Just as you are free to walk away from the deal. Problem is that the 'free' market is devoid of options and has now remained so by M$'s practices. In a free market, there should be *choices*. M$ has bullied PC Makers to not offer choices, but they have still chosen to lay in bed with M$. Apple, in the end, is a HW company, not a SW company. They make their money on boxen and iPods ... not OS X and iTunes per-song sales. That's why they haven't openly licensed (and taken on support of) OS X to random bits of hardware. Sad dilemna it is. But personally, I contribute to M$ as little as possible. I have Office on my Mac, which I got for $10-$20 through the University ('cost of media'). If my wife didn't use it, I would only use OpenOffice (limited as it is) and Google Docs. You're right many operate purely on sticker price and herd mentality in such decisions as which computer to buy. Much like how we make decisions on those for whom we vote [or against] for public office (Just an analogy ... not meant as a hopping off point for political debate). It would be nice if the 800-pound gorilla let the other options be seen as well as it would be nice to see the PC-Makers rally and stand up to the 800-pound gorilla.

      --

      Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas

      [May God give you double that which you wish for me]

    249. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by GamblerZG · · Score: 1

      You can get a roughly comparable Dell Dimension E520 for $850.
      Or I can go to any online hardware store and build a computer that has everything _I_ need, rather than some "cool" technology I will never use. And yes, it will be cheaper than comparable Mac.

    250. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by erroneous · · Score: 1

      Apple may be boxed into 5-10% of the market, but they've managed to hold onto this share competing directly with Microsoft for 20 years and they've developed exactly the same reputation in computers as BMW does with cars.

      Oh, you mean they're only used by wankers.

      -1 Flamebait. I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.

      --
      erroneous: look me up in a dictionary
    251. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      Legally the only thing they are allowed to vary price on is volume of licenses shipped. That was one of the clauses in the DoJ agreement.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    252. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by kimvette · · Score: 1

      You missed my point; it is still not a $500-$700 computer; it's a $700-$950 computer.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    253. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by The+Spoonman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I'm surprised you would act incredulous, because the fact of Microsoft's abuse of its monopoly position has been clearly documented in a court of law.

      Really? When? The only thing I can think of is that DOJ trial of a couple of years ago when a bunch of failing companies petitioned the government to put MS out of business because they couldn't make their failed models work. AOL, Netscape, Sun...bunch of whiny losers who can't put out a good product to save their lives (literally) and it's all MS' fault their businesses barely scrape by, if at all. True, over a decade ago MS told people they had to sell all of their computers with Windows, that practice was stopped in 1995. The reason vendors sell computers with Windows is because that's what people want. Dell sells Linux as an option, and according to them less than one order in a thousand requests it. Similarly with HP and IBM. As for the original article: I gave OSX a year and dumped it because it was a pain in the ass to use. Pretty, but a pain in the ass. I'll just stick with my Windows box where everything just works all the time.

      --
      Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
      http://www.workorspoon.com
    254. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by wrf3 · · Score: 1

      Parents buying computers for their kids for college/hs are going to care about one thing: Price

      Some things are more important than money. I love my children and that's why my two sons, who are both in college, have 15" PowerBooks and my 14 yr. old daughter has my old 17" PowerBook.

      Well, I loves me too, that's why I have the shiny new 17" MacBook Pro.

    255. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pilkul · · Score: 1

      Yes. A hack that only works on some machines and requires extensive research from the end-user to get running isn't the same as a saleable operating system.

    256. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by name*censored* · · Score: 1
      Wow, that is the single greatest comment I've seen this year.. if only you hadn't posted AC so you could get the mod points. Though,

      Not only are they the most avid non-computer-literate computer-user group

      I've often found that gamers are incredibly computer literate - they frequently build their own PCs (no great feat itself, but certainly beyond the abilities of Ma and Pa), are experts at troubleshooting their systems (can't wait for the technician to pop by, they're losing vital killing time!) and end up learning how the operating system does things by picking up all these tiny pieces whilst troubleshooting. Often the only way to tell gamers apart from real nerds (or geeks, whichever you think to be the smart ones) is whether they can program and/or game; some people are both gamers and nerds, some people are just gamers and others are just nerds.

      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    257. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Helios1182 · · Score: 1

      The other, and very common, type of user is the one that goes along using things for a while until it starts to fall apart. Maybe the virus scanner wasn't set to update automatically. Was it only a 3 month subscription? Oh, I still installed those extra toolbars in IE. They had a slow connection and WU didn't run, or they canceled it. Now a year later they are left with a machine so garbaged up that they think it is broken so they either buy a new one or pay some schmuck at Best Buy $150 to format it. At this point the extra $200-$300 for a Mac doesn't really make a big difference.

      That said, if you know what you are doing you can run any OS and keep it clean and safe -- it is just a matter of knowing how to do it. I've run various Windows, Linux, and Mac operating systems without trouble. Right now I mostly use a PowerBook G4, but sitting next to me is an Ubuntu machine, and at school we run Fedora in our group's lab. None have problems and all work fine. I haven't bothered with Windows in a while since there isn't a need for it. Everything I do fits better in a *nix environment.

    258. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mclarkcdt · · Score: 1

      What? The Mac mini comes with a full OS X. Not OS X Server, but no Macs other than the XServe come with OS X server.

    259. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      It was at the same time as OS X was being shipped. It's been a while since I checked though.

    260. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by clontzman · · Score: 1

      What you're saying doesn't make sense, because including Windows doesn't cost Dell anything near retail and, in fact, can help them make the machine more profitable.

      Seriously, there are laptops running Vista in the Sunday papers for $479. Do you honestly think that $100-150 of that price is the for Windows? Do you think that HP could sell laptops at a profit for $479 if they were paying $150 to Microsoft for Windows? At the volume they sell licenses, I highly doubt they're paying more than $30/unit.

      The other thing you're ignoring here is that having an OS on the machine allows the OEM to sell space on the desktop to ISPs, software vendors for trailware, etc. If you don't ship with an OS, that's going to reduce the profit on a given machine and cause the price to increase (which, I suspect, is why OS-less machines cost about the same as Windows machines).

    261. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by PaxTech · · Score: 1

      And it doesn't run OS X, so your point is what exactly? This article is about switching to OS X from Windows, hardware has absolutely nothing to do with it.

      --
      All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
    262. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone knows you can't run a mac mini on 512MB of RAM (unless you're eternally running bootcamp with WinXP), so I had to upgrade it to 1GB for OSX 10.4.8.

      I have the first generation Mac Mini with 512MB of RAM (have considered going to 1GB, but a Mac Pro purchase is just around the corner for me). The thing is the slowest machine I have used in a long time, slower than my Pentium 2. The reason? They used a 4200RPM drive in it. I recently switched to using a 7200 rpm 3.5" drive via a Firewire enclosure and it became dramatically faster. It's a *lot* snappier, even with only 512MB RAM.

    263. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by intheshelter · · Score: 1
      Exactly! How many people reduce their decision to price on everything else they buy? Are they buying the cheapest car? The cheapest house? The cheapest TV? The cheapest beer? No. So why does this argument always surface when buying computers? The argument that Windows is good enough makes no sense either. By that reasoning they should be buying everything else as cheap as they can as long as it's "good enough", but we all know they aren't.

      This price of the computer argument doesn't hold water on the surface of it, and it definitely falls apart once you consider TCO.

    264. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by muellerr1 · · Score: 1

      At that price point, I'd guess about 99.44%.

      I'm guessing you wash with Ivory soap.

    265. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Dionysos+Taltos · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Parents buying computers for their kids for college/hs are going to care about one thing: Price.

      As a parent, who bought a computer for my college-bound child last year, I cared about one thing ... her ability to use it daily without my presence.

      My daughter is very intelligent. She graduated in the top 10 ... not top 10% ... of her graduating class of 600+ students. She's a freshman at a tier one school and she made Dean's List. I love her dearly, so I say this with total honesty and no ill-will. She lacks a great deal of common sense.

      We had a Dell at home and the child crashed it every 6-9 months with all the crap she downloaded, either intentionally or not. Usually unintentionally. If it wasn't crashing, then it was running really, really slow. There were also the weekly claims of the printer being dead. Never was, but she could never understand how to establish the connection between the computer and the printer.

      She wanted a Windows laptop for college because Windows is what she was used to. After much thought and discussion, we purchased her an iBook. She wasn't happy about it, and I even thought she might try and leave the iBook at home. One semester later, and only one technical call, and the iBook has been everything I wanted for my daughter away at school. There is no price for that, and certainly none that Dell could ever offer.

    266. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by PDubNYC · · Score: 1

      who the hell are you talking to? no one that I can see mentioned server

    267. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by DaveWick79 · · Score: 1

      The problem with this is that you are in the vast minority on this subject. Most people want EVERYTHING pre-installed. They don't have the time or the technical know-how to install an OS and all the drivers and utilities you get with a pre-installed OS. This is paramount to demanding that you be able to go to a retailer and buy a Mac without OSX so you can load Windows on it. Apple doesn't do it, why should MS?

      My company does offer computers with no OS installed but noone has ever bought one. And from Microsoft's perspective, chances are very good that if machines started to be sold at volume with no OS, people using pirated, unlicensed software would skyrocket. You'd end up with thousands or millions of users with non-genuine, unpatchable, security risks; and Microsoft would field the blame for this also.

    268. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by nojomofo · · Score: 1

      If you want a sale, buy a mac at apple.com on the day after Thanksgiving....

    269. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Gadzeus · · Score: 1

      You might want to read the comment "Apple or Geek blind-spot" to understand why Macs are MUCH cheaper than PCs. It's pretty late in the discussion.

    270. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      As for the original article: I gave OSX a year and dumped it because it was a pain in the ass to use. Pretty, but a pain in the ass.

      What about it was a pain? Of course if you're trying to do c# development or something similar it can be troublesome, but for everyday tasks of document writing, other software writing, and any multimedia stuff I found os x to 'just work'. OS X has given me most of the things I like about linux, while also just working where linux can be frustrating. Linux on the desktop though has been improving at a high rate, so I may be able to finally make the real 'switch' to it.

    271. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Steve+S · · Score: 1

      If you you think they should shave down that margin, well then I hope you choose which restaurants you eat at based on their gross margins, too, otherwise you're being pretty arbitrary.


      I cook my own (damn good) food because restaurants are too expensive for approximately the same product. I suppose if I cared about ambiance or the social scene involved that might be an intangible in favor of a restaurant. But I don't.
      --
      ------- Driver carries less than 64K of cache.
    272. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so can you buy a mac without OSX installed?

    273. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

      Yes, I meant both good and bad.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    274. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Bozdune · · Score: 1

      True, but he does make a tangential point -- if you want OS/X, you have to buy their hardware, which (like all mainstream vendors) is pretty much going to suck compared to what you could build yourself. Then again, time = money. If you have time to build it, good for you, because when I collapse at the end of a 10 hour day, weekends included, the last thing I want to do is sit down at a bench and accidentally smear conductive heat sink solution all over the pins of some CPU chip with my shaking caffeinated hands because I'm so damn tired and my eyes are crossing. Can't see building another box myself unless I make a zillion bucks and have time on my hands.

    275. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never understood the whole "switch" mentality. As a computer enthusiast I'm not interested in just one OS, one brand, one vendor - I'm interested in everything I can get a hold of. Right now? Linux server, Windows desktop, MacBook Pro laptop - works for me, and I certainly don't feel the need to convert any of the three to anything other than what they are.

      Well, with Intel Macs you can have all three on one machine. Granted, I would like to be able run Linux as my host OS, and the other two in VM's, like Mac-on-Linux allowed (which is PPC only). Or even better, be able to boot into any of the three OS's at any time, and then run the other two in VM's. Maybe that'll be possible at some point, but its definitely not something Apple seems to be supporting (they don't even want to allow running OS X in a VM with OS X as the host).

    276. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by manifoldronin · · Score: 1

      Most Windows users didn't choose a Microsoft operating system, so their preferences weren't a factor.
      In Soviet Russia (or anywhere else in this case), Microsoft chooses you!
      --
      Tyranny isn't the worst enemy of a democracy. Cynicism is.
    277. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Disabling it doesn't put the money back into my pocket, or spend it on things that are more likely to be usable.

      The same could be argued for USB ports five years ago. Being a little forward thinking is the reason why Macs tend to remain in use longer than PCs bought at the same time. Some people don't want a monitor at all, why should a video card be included in every mac sold? Some people just want to use it over the network with terminals. There will always be some function of a computer (like wifi) some person doesn't want but ends up paying for.

      There's the difference. The _vast_ majority of desktop PCs derive no benefit from having wifi included by default.

      Are you joking? Most home users do not want to run cables and put in ethernet ports or pay to have that done. Hell, I'm about as technical as anyone you'll meet, and I have an ancient tower with a wi-fi card in it sitting right next to my router and wireless station. I never bothered plugging a cable into the back of both of them for faster transfer since that is almost never my bottleneck. The vast majority of PCs will be needing wi-fi in the next few years if they don't already.

      They will never use it, because cheaper, faster, more reliable wired networking infrastructure already exists and is no less convenient to connect to.

      Freeing the placement of the computer from the placement of the TV/cable box, or the DSL line is a huge benefit to most people.

      One cannot make the same argument for the seats in a car or many other "options" in computers like, say, DVD drives.

      He said heated seats, not seats in general.

      The arguments for non-optional wifi in *desktop PCs* are weak, at best.

      The arguments against wifi apply only to a subset of people and only if you do not look to the future. If you move to any town in my county, wouldn't it be nice to be able to get some internet access before your cable service is installed. Gee, with the free county-wide coverage, you can. My county is by no means the only location with such a project. Get with the times.

    278. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Burgers ar fine... it's the ketchup I hate...

    279. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Weedlekin · · Score: 1

      "the #1 (and probably nos 2-5, too) reason people don't buy a Mac is the price"

      That's the #1 reason nerds don't buy them; #2 is not enough games; and #3 is that OS X isn't entirely FOSS.

      Ordinary consumers on the other hand don't compare specifications of even slightly complex devices, because they don't understand them, so they can't tell that this $700 computer is effectively the same as another costing $1500, especially if the $1500 one looks more expensive on the outside. Furthermore, they're accustomed to products from name brands costing more than similar ones from less known companies, and believe that this is because "they're better", so they'd be quite surprised if a computer from Apple, who they've heard of, _didn't_ cost a lot more than one from (for example) Acer, whose name is unknown to them.

      So why then aren't all these consumers buying Macs instead of Windows PCs, if they aren't particularly worried about them costing more? The answer lies in the places they tend to buy computers from, which are usually the same places they go to for TVs and other electric and electronic gear. Few of these even sell Macs, and in the unlikely event you'll find one there, it will usually be turned off and ignored because the sales droids know even less about it than they do Windows, and therefore would prefer not to be asked any awkward questions. If the place you go to for "a computer" only sells Windows PCs, or the staff are only interested in selling Windows PCs, you won't be buying a Mac, irrespective of how much or how little they cost. That's why Apple have been making those nerd-annoying "I'm a Mac" ads -- if consumers know that the "iPod company" also makes computers, they might ask about them when they're considering buying one instead of simply thinking that "peecee" == computer.

      --
      I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
    280. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have two cat5e lines ran to every room in the house. Even the kitchen and living room. Home was built with a central wiring cabinet for coax, cat5e, etc.

      Fast and secure.

    281. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      But like the GP said, what often matters to the purchaser is the overall price, not the value per dollar. If you're a parent buying a car for your kid, you're probably going to prefer the $12,000 Honda over the $50,000 BMW, even if customizing the Honda to have all the same features as the BMW would cost far more than $50k.

      I'd prefer the Honda, but not just because of price. Reliability and likely future costs are important considerations. Realistically, the BMW is more likely to break in the next few years and if it does the repairs will be a lot more expensive. The Honda will last as long, maybe longer. The insurance on the Honda will probably cost a lot less.

      Comparing a Honda to a more expensive BWM makes sense, placing the Mac as a BMW and an HP machine as a Honda, but another important comparison would be a Toyota versus a Ford; with the Toyota being a Mac and the Dell being a Ford. The Mac cost slightly more and has a few nicer features. The Dell is made out of junk parts, poorly tested and will break if you sneeze at it. In the long run, the cost of ownership will be a lot higher. I mean have you people ever bought Dells in quantity. They have very high failure rates and the parts are whatever was cheapest that day. 100 machines of the same model might ship with 3 different brands of hard drives, three different network cards, two different video controller cards, etc., etc. All of them are bottom of the barrel parts. A lot people look at the specifications for a machine and equate 100 Gig hard drive with 100 gig hard drive, but when one of those is a Hitachi and one is a Seagate, well one might be likely to last a year and another likely to last six years. Anyone comparing a Mac against a Dell who does not take that into account is missing out on a lot of the real value involved.

      Apple is missing out on a lot of sales by not offering anything in these price ranges.

      Yeah, and so are other reputable vendors with valuable brands who refuse to sell junk that is likely to break very soon. Apple loses out on a lot of sales by not offering a product to meet a specific need, but they are medium sized company and simply cannot maintain enough hardware to compete with every other hardware vendor on the market. They focus on a few specific markets and if you need some given feature the chances are you may have to get something more than you need in other areas. This is a problem with all vendors, but especially for Apple because they are the only one's that run OS X.

      If the US populace would get off their asses and clean house by refusing to elect any incumbents that are democrats or republican and would vote for reform of election and lobbying laws, maybe we could get an unbiased court system that would break up MS's monopoly. Then Apple would have no need to bundle OS X with hardware and the market would strongly push them to unbundle it. In the mean time Apple has to make tough choices, and so do consumers.

    282. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by otopico · · Score: 1

      Stop making sense.

      People that think you can get a feature comparable pc for less than a Mac are delusional.

    283. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Weedlekin · · Score: 1

      " An enterprise buyer might have more of an argument, but I doubt it, given that there are enterprise Linux distros."

      Enterprise buyers can easily get machines without an OS (or effectively so) from big vendors like Dell and HP because they have corporate Windows licenses, and therefore won't buy from anybody that expects them to also pay for an OEM end-user license on each box. Check out this link for example, and note that you can buy these machines with nothing more than FreeDOS on them if you want, an option that HP seem to have for most enterprise customers (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/en/WF04a/124 54-64287-89301-321860-f50.html).

      --
      I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
    284. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Most users would probably rather just migrate their entire current setup
      to the new hardware. The way Windows and it's apps are put together does
      not readily allow for this. Forcing a new OS install on PC users for a
      new machine is actually subjecting them to a great deal of inconvenience.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    285. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Weedlekin · · Score: 1

      "As opposed to the time the average Windows user spends installing antivirus, antispyware, a personal firewall, dozens of patches"

      Unfortunately, this is what exceptional Windows users do, not average ones. Average Windows users think that their "peecee" is going slowly because the chip's getting worn out, and that having their drive and modem / network router lights permanently on and a screen full of pop-ups advertising "Barely Legal Teens" and Genuine Rolexes for $4 is just a normal part of the computing experience.

      --
      I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
    286. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can get a Mac Mini for $579

      Err, I will crap in your hand for $50. That doesn't make is useful as a computer. The Mac Mini is a joke of a computer. 'great for ... videos', not so much. My phone can do all the things the Mac Mini is 'great' at.

    287. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      You're also missing the other obvious choice: $29 for PC-Migrator or somesuch.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    288. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      No, the problem is that most Slashdotters - indeed, most "enthusiasts" - want a machine Apple refuses to sell: a single processor box without an integrated LCD, a replacable video card (plus another vacant x16 slot, even with only x8 signalling) and room for two 3.5" hard disks.

      You can hook up the additional drives via USB, which does in fact cover almost all real-world uses (except serious video editing, which you will not do on a machine that is less than 2000 usd), and makes migrating the drives to a new box MUCH easier.

      As for an upgradeable video card, the only way I see that making sense is if you're a serious gamer, in which case the mac is indeed the wrong box for you. Most slashdotters however are occasional gamers, and even though most of them would appreciate an upgradeable video card, most of them won't upgrade it. I used to home-build my PC's for the very same reason you mention. I had extra drive bays and an upgradeable video card, and eventually I concluded that I never actually made use of the expandability.

      I suspect the vast majority of slashdotters, like myself, won't expand their box (except perhaps RAM) until they buy another one, and in that case the mac makes perfect sense. Which is why I own a mini, and am planning to buy an imac.

    289. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by otopico · · Score: 1

      Oh, sure, Apple has a $500-$700 model to choose from now, but that's without monitor, mouse, keyboard, etc. plus expansion is severely limited. Who wants that except people who do nothing but surf the web, play solitaire, and check email? Actually, the entire point of the mac mini was to make a cheap mac that pc users could buy, then plug their old pc's monitor, mouse, keyboard, etc. into it. The entire idea was a cheap entry into the Apple product line.

      I like how people forget that.

      Besides, most of the people in this thread miss the point that users should use what they want. If people are happy using Windows, or OS X, or Linux or whatever, then the fanatics should just shut up and leave them alone.

      Just because you think something is better doesn't mean it is. And even worse, even if it was, do you really think the masses would use it?
    290. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Well... that's because msoffice is expensive. Microsoft would charge $400 for it if they could get away with it. It's also something you don't use because you like to but because you need too since everyone else uses it. So not only are you effectively forced into buying it but Microsoft will try to ream you over the deal. ...all of this because of no open standards allowing for the $50 home grade word processor to become prevalent again.

      msoffice simply isn't worth the price. It's actual value to most consumers is far below what it's pricetag is.

      The free competitor gets traction only because vendor-lock prevents the reasonably priced non-free options from surviving.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    291. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Pentavirate · · Score: 1

      Monopolies are actually considered possible inefficiencies of a Free Market but they are in fact part of the free market. The argument lies in what to do with inefficiencies.

    292. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Most Windows users have NEVER needed either. So it is quite assinine that they are held up as the bar to judge by. These two overly expensive commercial applications are simply what everyone feels forced into using due to the non-open nature of data formats.

      99% of Windows users don't need a Word Perfect equivalent. Never have.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    293. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      The desktop version of OS X is comparable to a linux distro when it comes to serving abilities. It includes apache, an ftp server, an ssh server, samba file sharing and remote desktop support. All of which you can enable or disable by checking a single checkbox in the sharing preferences pane (much easier than anything I've ever seen on any other OS), or on the command-line (if need be, across ssh).

    294. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Lies, damned lies and statistics.

      Except both you and I KNOW that it's not just about the immediate cost
      benefit analysis surrounding providing a bare PC. We have a spoilier in
      the equation. You can try to deny it but it would be a pathetic lie.

      Microsoft ensures that there's more to the situation than
      simply the costs of providing another option. Despite all
      recent (court enforced) changes, they still have ways of
      working around pricing and billing constraints and retain
      they're rather hefty leverage of being the dominant player
      in a market hemmed in by compatability complications.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    295. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Odin_Tiger · · Score: 1

      For some people (such as myself) reasons 1 - N would be a list of all the wonderful games which are simply not available on Mac. No, Bootcamp is not an acceptable alternative...why pay $GOBS for a Mac just so I can end up playing games on Windows like I always have anyways? If Apple doesn't want to / can't woo game companies to port their games, fine I guess, but you'd think they could at least come up with a few 'hits' from their own developer pool and just make them Mac-only. As it stands, I have yet to hear of a game I'm even vaguely interested in playing that's made for Mac. What that basically says to me is that Apple -and- the Apple user / developer communities have approximately zero interest in games. Kinda sad, but...yeah.

      --
      Unpleasantries.
    296. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Daggah · · Score: 1

      LOL, you make it sound like it's Microsoft's fault that Apple's OSX isn't available outside of Apple's overpriced computers. It's APPLE'S fault. When will you Apple fanboys realize that Apple is way worse than Microsoft is when it comes to arbitrary restrictions?

    297. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Lazy shoppers,eh?

      The average cottage computer store doesn't stick
      around long enough for a new OS to become
      de-supported. THAT is a real problem if you end up
      really needing some support. THIS is why that most
      people (and companies) tend to deal with business
      entities that they have some confidence will be
      around to support the product they sell until it
      reaches it's expected end of life.

      Even penny-pincher startups have ended up dumping
      whiteboxes for Dells over this very issue.

      Many companies avoid PC's (Dell servers or otherwise)
      over the same rationale more robustly applied.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    298. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      ...which is entirely irrelevant.

      You're basically whining that everyone should pay more for stuff they will NEVER use. How wasteful.

      Do the hippies in the valley (around cupertino) know you're advocating this sort of un-green worldview?

      I run MythTV and I would love CHEAPER & SLOWER machines. They run cooler.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    299. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      but that doesn't mean I'm going to get 33% more utility or enjoyment out of the MBP

      That's a bizarre way to calculate. A BMW costs 4x as much as a honda civic. I don't think anybody thinks they are ever going to get 400% "utility" out it.

      Screen size is one of the main factors in a notebook's price,

      Which is why the MB can do everything the MBP does for 40% less. If a MB was an MBP with the same video card and screen, but with BT and Firewire stripped out it would only be maybe $150 cheaper.

      Most people don't want a 13" toy screen.

      Personally I like my laptops small & portable. I have a 21" LCD on my desk and I use THAT most of the time. To me a 17" laptop is absurd, just barely big enough to be useful and just barely small enough to be portable. I much prefer having a truly small laptop, and plugging it into a truly big screen. To each their own.

      Although, I'd agree (and I've already said as much) that I agree the gaps in Apples line up can be annoying.

    300. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by ericlondaits · · Score: 1

      $400 might be too much... and "the right price" is a very subjective issue... but at 50 U$S MS Office would cost less than GTA St Andreas. As much as I loved playing GTA, if we compare how much use I gave my free Open Office suite over the years compared to the play time of GTA (which I finished), then I should be paying more than U$S 50 for an office productivity suite. Specially since I loose money playing GTA and make money using Open Office.

      I know it's a silly comparison, but my point is that sometimes we're more willing to shell out cash for some stuff, and not for other... despite the actual merits.

      In fact my main gripe with the price of software is not that U$S 600 for Photoshop is too expensive for business (which isn't) but rather than non professional home users and professionals that don't work mainly in graphic design (my case) have to pay the same price, or perhaps get a crippled version (like the one bundled with scanners and such). Through my life I've seen many people that learned using tools like Photoshop, 3D Studio, Visual Studio, Adobe Premiere, Flash, Visual Age for Smalltalk and such through illegal copies... which later allowed them to use those same tools in a professional environment, which was able to afford them.

      --
      As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
    301. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by bogjobber · · Score: 1
      OK, you could get the Dell E521 for whopping 200 bucks less. But that machine is big and ugly. I literally would not have room for that machine, whereas Mini is small enough to be lost underneath a pile of papers. So is the Dell "comparable" at all? And looking at the specs, I can see that the Dell has crappier CPU, a bit more HD-space (+20GB), crappier OS (Vista Home Basic), crappier optical-drive (no burner of any kind), no WLAN, no Bluetooth.... So is it really any better?

      That was pretty much my exact point. I'm not saying the Dell machine is better, I'm saying it's cheaper. They're comparable in the sense that they are both the cheapest PC's put out by their respective companies. The Dell is obviously inferior to the Mac Mini, but it's close enough and can do what most people want out of a PC.

      Macs are better machines, but you pay a little bit more. Some people will pay it, but most people just go with the cheapest option. Apple doesn't care. They're not trying to put out the cheapest machines possible. That's why they don't sell the same amount of machines that Dell does. But they still make a lot of money because they aren't pushing products with razor-thin margins. Macs will always be more expensive because that is Apple's strategy. They want to sell people relatively expensive, quality hardware.

    302. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by corbettw · · Score: 1

      So you're saying a MacPro running OS X can withstand a DOS attack AND a slashdotting? (the second one is assumed due to the number of links you put in quite a few posts) That's impressive!

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    303. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Apple Cheerleader cluelessness.

      There have always been BYOB vendors that have nice pre-canned configurations. They have also always been there to do all of the box building for you. You just pick the parts. ...been this way since at least 1993.

      My first "custom PC" was purchased that way. All I had to do was specify the parts. All I really did was to pick the second cheapest option. That's a rule of thumb that has worked out pretty well since then.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    304. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by onx · · Score: 1

      They do NOT compete with Thinkpads. Thinkpads are known for their durability, Apple laptops are known for exploding into 5,000 pieces if you look at them funny.

    305. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Yes, my /. spelling is lousy. Blame it on the school system or my frigid office or my poor cognitive skills. *shrug*

      I have met lots of technical people in the world, and I'm always a bit skeptical of those who are more interested in process than in product. I used to be one of those people, to be honest. Then I found out that in industry, polish is good, but without substance you have no credibility. Who knows, you may be good at both. I'm surprised that you think that OSX has some odd monopoly on harware IO, since most modern operating systems in the Intel family have been able to do DMA transfers for quite some time (a decade at least).

      You are clearly very fond of your computers, as are your colleages. It is very possible that you are in one of the few places where any OS would work well. You clearly have the resources for machines and software coding to match your application. Enjoy it - it's rare.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    306. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Note: Dell also charges a price premium.

      At the low end, its often hard to beat many of Dells "specials". I've seen many cases where my whitebox builders couldn't get within $100 of a Dell price, never-mind that dell was throwing in a free printer, and including shipping. (Granted the printer is little more than landfill fodder... but it fools many customers...)

      -cheers

    307. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Channing · · Score: 1

      > No, the problem is that most Slashdotters - indeed, most "enthusiasts" - want a machine Apple refuses to sell:

      It depends what your enthusiasm is for. I am an computer enthusiast and apple's products fit my needs exactly.

    308. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      People building their own houses. There's a lot of that going around you know.

      They're called "housing starts" in the news reports.

      Great opportunity to make sure that GigE capable wiring gets into the house.

      I have Cat5e as well as fiber. Home builders love to offer lots
      of extra premium features & home networking just happens to be
      one of many.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    309. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Knara · · Score: 1

      While I'm not the most experienced businessperson in the world, I've worked for a few firms. In every one, docking stations were standard equipment that was ordered with laptops. In my experience, your situation is non-standard.

    310. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Creepy · · Score: 1

      yeah, but Apple (at least at last check) also doesn't resort to bottom-of-the-barrel components like you get in a $300 PC. Best Buy is happy selling PCs with these because they can often sell an overpriced maintenance contract as well, and the real money is in the service contracts. By the time Best Buy gets the box, it has at least survived a power-on test, so the majority of component failures are weeded out.

      Not that I find Macs all that appealing for myself - I can usually assemble a decent box with similar hardware features for about the same price (but without all the bundled software, which tends to be the real deal for most mac buyers). I also can add components for much cheaper than Apple's store (which is really where Apple milks you, but so do most other PC makers), which is where I usually come out ahead as a DIYer. Back when I bought the mac I have (now 8 years old) Apple wanted $175 for a memory card. The same card (with matching memory timings) could be bought from Crucial for $95 at the time and is trivial to install - $80 for a 5 minute install job (this was a screwless B&W G3, making it even more trivial)? - that's ridiculous. The only components in the machine that ever failed were ones I added (like a 250GB drive) - I still use it as my web server. Even my home built PCs haven't lasted that long component-wise (though the legendarily bad "Deathstar" drives were mostly to blame). I've never had a CD or DVD burner last more than 3 years on a PC (including a $300 Plextor when they had a pristine reputation), but my DVD drives in both my mac and PC have never failed and I use both frequently.

    311. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      comes with a 1.8 GHz processor with 2MB of cache, instead of the 2.16 GHz with 4MB. It comes with DDR2-533, instead of DDR2-667.


      Apple is using the T7400, but the Dell you speak of is the E6400. The T7400 only has a 667 Mhz FSB, whereas the E6400 has a 1066 Mhz FSB. The 4M of cache on the T7400 helps to compensate, but the processors are similar in performance in overall benchmarking.

      Before you go matching the specs, you should understand what the specs are.
      Hell, yeah, wouldn't that be nice - of you. He was talking about a E520 for $850 - no such beast with a E6400. Instead that gets us a E4300. Which does have an 800 MHz FSB.
      --

      Lars T.

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

    312. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by LKM · · Score: 1

      Did you actually follow the trials? Microsoft tried to blackmail competitors (for example, they wanted Apple to kill QuickTime for Windows, otherwise they would kill Office for Macs), they intentionally broke third-party apps with Windows updated, and the blackmailed PC vendors to only sell Windows machines. Among other things.

    313. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is fine with Dell and IBM, errr, Levono selling machines without Windows... as long as Microsoft gets paid for every machine sold.

      What MS doesn't want is for Dell and IBM to offer consumers the choice to not pay for (and not get) Windows.

    314. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by odie_q · · Score: 1

      Woohoo! I got a point!

      --
      ...ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
    315. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Descalzo · · Score: 1
      Well, I've found that to be true, and also untrue. Let me explain: I heard one of these interminable discussions once and decided to find out for myself. I went to Apple.com and priced a sweet MBP and then went to 1toppc.com and priced an ASUS notebook, configuring it to be as close as possible, and found that I would save well over $100. I didn't save the exact specs or savings, though, so I may be a little off, plus I did this months ago. That's why I have to disagree with you.

      Why I agree with you is that I find the Mac OS to be superior. I just like it. I wish, oh how I wish, they would let me put it on my Dell at work (and have it work!).

      The other reason I find myself forced to agree with you is that my PowerBook is lighter and still has better battery life than any other lappy the same age. In fact, if I ever raise the money to repair the screen I'm gonna make it my computer I take with me to conferences and stuff: It's lighter, better battery life, and doesn't play games to distract me from what I should be doing.

      It seems to really come down to a matter of preference. I don't like Apple as a company: they piss me off with their stupid commercials and their (successful) efforts to hijack the term PC for their own purposes and their (successful) efforts to turn themselves into some kind of religion and their nightmarish tech support (at least for the people I work for, they say it's simply too expensive to work with (but I have my doubts as to their objectivity, I think they just hate Macs)), but if I had enough money I'd buy a MacBookPro. If my the IT people over at the main office weren't punks, I'd have a MacBook on my desk right now (If Techno-Nathan at the Tech Office is reading this, I don't include you in this 'punk' designation.).

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    316. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      Like I said, we have docking-stations. Anyone who wants one, gets one. And no-one does. What the users keep asking for is external mice, but that's it. It was more or less same situation at my previous employer, altough they used mostly desktops.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    317. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by The+Spoonman · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I did, and none of them could provide any real proof of those allegations. As for breaking third-party apps with updates, I'd say the apps were already broken. I've rarely seen apps that are well written that were broken by updates, and those few had patches that came out before the updates (in other words, they tested them and fixed them rather than bitching that it was MS' fault).

      --
      Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
      http://www.workorspoon.com
    318. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Doctor+Memory · · Score: 1

      Microsoft does not charge Dell $139 for a copy of Windows But then, we're not talking about what MS charges Dell, we're talking about what Dell charges their customers. Right now, Dell will sell a home edition of Vista at prices ranging from $99 to $239. However, Red Hat Linux, while mentioned as an option if you browse their server lines, doesn't appear under either desktop or server OSes (although Datawatch's "Monarch", a reporting and analysis tool, does...)
      --
      Just junk food for thought...
    319. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      The price difference between 533Mhz and 667Mhz RAM is as insignificant as the performance difference. It's _certainly_ not an indicator of "substantially cheaper parts"

      In my experience, machines that use bargain-basement RAM (Dell probably gets a great deal on it as its last-gen tech) also tend to use bargain-basement motherboards, power-supplies, etc. It's indicative of a machine built to save every last penny (which adds up to a lot when you sell a million of them). The iMac uses a lot of substantially more expensive parts (mobile Core 2, mobile GPU) in order to save space and power dissipation, yet still comes in at a competitive price.

      Which, as I said, is fine if that's what you want. But if you _do_ want expandability, Apple has nothing for you at a reasonable price.

      Sure, I'm not going to argue that. But what's it to Apple if a small minority of the market isn't served?

      Nor do they need to be when they can pay a shop (or next-door's kid) to do it for them.

      And how many actually do this?

      The irony here is that you'll probably turn around in a few posts and say people should buy Macs because they can run Windows and, hence, do everything a Windows PC can do...

      Why would I say that? If your goal is to run games, all you can get away with a really shitty machine with a great graphics card, and you won't notice the difference. Why then spend the extra money on a Mac?

      Look. I'm hardly a Mac zealot, I've had a couple for about a year and a half, and before that I built my own machines and put Linux on them. The catch was that I always built them the way my PowerMac is built: fast, quiet, well-rounded, with premium parts. When I got my Mac, I noticed I didn't really miss anything. You can build exactly the machine you want if you build it yourself, but Apple happens to build exactly what I want. And I'd argue that for 90% of people, Apple has a machine with the correct level of expandability and features, at a price that's competitive with other such machines.

      For a home network of _desktops_ ? Who *wouldn't* use cheaper, faster (_much_ faster), more reliable wired ethernet ?

      It's barely any cheaper, the speed doesn't matter in a home environment, and the lack of convenience sucks. At my parents house, there are four computers and three people (my doing). They're all desktops, and all on wireless, because I didn't feel like running Cat5 over three floors. Almost any multi-computer household is the same way. The internet connection is a critical bottleneck, as its invariably in a different room (and usually a different floor) from PCs that might be in peoples' bedrooms or offices. That's why Wifi has taken over so fast, and why even at CompUSA the Wifi APs are right in the center of the display while you have to go hunting to find a wired hub.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    320. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Your system is nowhere near the Mac towers. The Mac towers are quad core machines with server motherboards and FB-DIMM RAM. You can't even buy the parts for a Mac Pro for what Apple charges you for it.

      As for as your machine: how much did your monitor cost? The 19" segment is cheap/low-quality (TN panels). The 20" panel in the iMac is the same 20" S-IPS LCD in the 2007WFP, which costs $350-$400 retail. So the price difference is probably ~$200 right there. The price difference between your CPU (the 2.4 GHz Core 2) and the iMac's is less than $100 ($222 versus $315 on NewEgg). And the price difference between an X1600 Pro and your graphics card (I'm guessing 7600GT?) is probably not more than $200. So you saved maybe $100 over the iMac? And for giving up form factor, noise, and a boatload of accessories (not just firewire, mic, and wi-fi, but bluetooth, a webcam, and a remote), maybe you got some extra hard disk space in exchange?

      So in summary you traded a great deal of monitor quality, along with lots of ergonomics and accessories, for 11% more MHz, a bit faster graphics card, and maybe some extra disk space? And you call that "far cheaper"?

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    321. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Consider this. The iMac trades some expandability for vastly reduced desk-space requirements, and great ergonomics (heat, noise). Now considering that you can still perform the two most common upgrades (RAM expansion and HDD expansion) on the iMac, do you agree that for the majority of people, the latter advantages outweigh the former disadvantages?

      Especially since more than half the machines sold today are laptops, it would seem to me that a lot more people care about factors other than internal expandability!

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    322. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      If I go to TigerDirect, I can configure a Core 2 2.13 with 1GB of RAM, X1600 Pro, 250GB HDD, and WinXP Home for $1050 (with shipping). Basically, it's an iMac with a slightly cheaper CPU, slightly more expensive RAM, and no accessories. Throw in the 2007WFP for $350 (cheapest I can find on Froogle), and you're in for $1400. So how much have you saved here? Less than 10%!

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    323. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Apple also gives discounts. Amazon had $100-$200 off Macs awhile ago, and of course all students automatically get 10% off.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    324. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you'll find, as most retailers have, that if you sell machines without windos installed, MS will jack up your OEM licence fees.

      If you have actual proof of this you would be able to take down Microsoft. Because this would directly violate the DOJ-MS antitrust settlement of 1994, where this then previous business practice is expressly forbidden. And has not been documented since (I'm afraid numerous /. references won't be good enough).

      http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f0000/0047.htm

    325. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by PaxTech · · Score: 1

      I never understand people complaining that Apple hardware costs more. It does, but it tends to be very well engineered and built from high quality components.

      Buying an Apple machine can be compared to buying a Mercedes or other type of high end automobile. I never hear people say buyers of luxury cars are crazy because they could have bought a car that will get them to their destination just as quickly for half the price. I spend *much* more time using my computer than I do driving my car, and I'm willing to pay extra for reliability and quality. The extra money Apple hardware costs is also offset by the productivity gains I get from using OS X. Apple hardware also lasts much longer than comparable PC hardware, when I used PCs I bought a new machine or drastically upgraded at least every year to 18 months or so, with Apple hardware I'm generally happy with my machine for the entire 3 years my AppleCare warranty lasts.

      Why is it that even people in IT are so cost conscious when it comes to their hardware? I spend ten hours a day, at least five days a week, working on my computer. Spending a few hundred dollars extraa year that makes all of that time more productive and more enjoyable is easily money well spent. Money is replaceable, my time is *not*.

      --
      All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
    326. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by shaitand · · Score: 1

      They work around it. They charge the same price upfront and give the incentives as kickbacks after the initial sale. It works out to the same anti-competative behavior but complies with the letter of the DoJ agreement.

    327. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      No, a hack means that it can run, but merely isn't supported.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    328. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and so are other reputable vendors with valuable brands who refuse to sell junk that is likely to break very soon. You know, I've owned plenty of cheap PCs, and none of them have fit that description. I don't believe Apple would have to sacrifice reliability to offer affordable computers with the features people need.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    329. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by sheldon · · Score: 1

      This is one of the secrets of Dell. You don't have to just order the off the shelf computer, you can custom configure it to your needs. And you can custom configure it with better processors than the E6400 even.

      If you guys weren't still living in the 1980s you'd understand why that is a good thing.

    330. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      That's a bizarre way to calculate. A BMW costs 4x as much as a honda civic. I don't think anybody thinks they are ever going to get 400% "utility" out it. I think they do - they value whatever comfort features the BMW provides, so much that they're willing to pay extra. If they weren't getting four times as much enjoyment out of the car, why else would they pay four times as much for it?

      Which is why the MB can do everything the MBP does for 40% less. If a MB was an MBP with the same video card and screen, but with BT and Firewire stripped out it would only be maybe $150 cheaper. But wait, I thought it was features like BT and FireWire that made the MacBook Pro so much more expensive than other brands. Now you're saying that if you stripped out the fluff and kept the essentials, it'd still cost more than a 15" Core 2 Duo laptop from HP? If HP can sell a 15" laptop for $1500 or less, why can't Apple?
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    331. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Jake73 · · Score: 1

      I don't find this to be the case. I have a MacBook Pro 17" and it is by far the worst LCD I've seen in 5 yrs. The verticle viewing angle is horrible and there is significant backlight leakage at the bottom. The display hinge doesn't have enough friction.

      It's fast, but any Core 2 Duo machine will be fast. Battery life isn't any different than any other laptop of its class. I'm a big fan of the slot DVD, but I imagine there are other makers with those.

      My Compaq X1000 laptop from 4 yrs back is much better in construction. The MBP feels flimsy. My X1000 is indestructible with very little wear to show from 4 yrs of use.

    332. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Jake73 · · Score: 1

      I've found the same. When I have good hardware with solid driver support in my machines, they are extremely reliable. If I swap out a graphics card or add new memory, I can soon detect any problems. Crashes start to happen.

      It has been said many times before and I echo the same: crummy hardware and driver support is the biggest problem Windows has to face.

    333. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by LKM · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I did, and none of them could provide any real proof of those allegations

      Yeah, except actual witness accounts, internal mails from Microsoft, Bill Gates lying to the court, Bill Gates pretending he did not understand simple questions from the court, and, last but not least, the fact that they were convicted. I guess you must have looked out the window or something during that part.

      There were internal Microsoft mails where they talked about breaking compatibility with Netscape Navigator. I mean... Looks, you obviously have some kind of agenda. Maybe you're paid by Microsoft or something, so I think I'll just stop wasting my time. If you really can't remember all that stuff, look it up.

      Have a nice weekend.

    334. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Alt_Cognito · · Score: 0

      You reiterated my point!

      I think the problem most Slashdotters have is that they can't conceive of building the type of machines Apple sells.

      Alright, I'll give you, they were post-thanksgiving specials (off newegg indeed!). In particular, I got the WD 250gig RE hard drives cheap ($60), and the memory on a bit of a deal as well ($200). I could definitely build the machine today with specs off of new egg. The LCD would probably be the tough part, the deals on LCDs around Thanksgiving were really good. But I didn't spend 10 hours outdoors for any of them either. Back to the point:

      The ergonomics are definitely less than ideal -- but again you make my point beautifully: I don't care about the ergonomics. I do care about performance and quality -- my parts are high quality. I don't really care about quiet (though it's a pretty quiet machine, my fans are never above 1200 RPMs, but the hard drives get going from time to time).

      My point being -- Macs look and run great, and come with great software. They are worth the premium for that combination.I like my choices, and not overpaying for commodity parts like a dvd burner. I simply don't need MAC OSX.

    335. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by The+Spoonman · · Score: 1

      except actual witness accounts

      Uncorroborated witness accounts.

      internal mails from Microsoft

      That said things like "we're going to cut off Netscape's air supply", a common statement made by one company when discussing going after their competition. People at Apple have said similar things about Microsoft, and that's ok. Microsoft says it, it's proof of some kind of wrong doing. It's called business, and it's cutthroat. Can't take it, get out.

      Bill Gates lying to the court

      People lying in court? Really? Oh, the shame! If you can't trust someone under oath, who can you trust. Blah! What about their "expert" witnesses who lied to the court when they presented 6 different situations in which you could disable IE, but it would still come up...only problem is none of them were true. How 'bout the lies from Sun when they discussed MS' Java implemention...that followed the rules laid down by Sun. At least, that is, until they changed the rules and sued MS for not following the new ones all along?

      the fact that they were convicted

      Convictions are for criminal trials, an anti-trust suit is not a criminal trial, it's a civil trial. You can tell the difference because in a criminal trial there has to be no doubt of a person's guilt. In a civil trial, as long as you tip the scales slightly in your favor, you win. In other words: whoever lies better. It's easy to find a bunch of losers who hate MS simply because MS is better than they are...just stop into any IT department anywhere. Winning an antitrust case that's been brought against you when everyone just "knows" that you're guilty of something is very difficult, if not impossible. Then again, overcoming overwhelming stupidity has always been difficult...

      I guess you must have looked out the window or something during that part

      And yet, I know more about what happened than you did.

      There were internal Microsoft mails where they talked about breaking compatibility with Netscape Navigator

      See above.

      Looks, you obviously have some kind of agenda

      Yup, just trying to cut down on the bullshit and lies.

      Have a nice weekend.

      Thanks! You, too!

      --
      Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
      http://www.workorspoon.com
    336. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pherthyl · · Score: 1

      Alright there Jennifer Scott. I assumed you were male. Mea culpa.

      But seriously, I can't imagine how what I wrote could be taken as insulting. I was merely pointing out a flaw in your argument (a point which you would rather sidestep than defend apparently). Perhaps a thicker skin is in order.

    337. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      This is one of the secrets of Dell. You don't have to just order the off the shelf computer, you can custom configure it to your needs. And you can custom configure it with better processors than the E6400 even.

      If you guys weren't still living in the 1980s you'd understand why that is a good thing. Whether 1980s or 2000s, when you change the parts, the price changes. Even if you use a Dell. If you had a brain, you'ld have noticed.
      --

      Lars T.

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

    338. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by pilkul · · Score: 1

      Obviously OS X can run on some commodity hardware, Macs' CPU and videocards are sold as PC parts too. I meant supported. The main target market isn't going to jump through all the hoops to get it running (heck even a nerd like me can't be bothered), so can run/is supported is basically the same.

    339. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      see, this is the problem with a mac fan, you think that someone actually wants the parts just how apple give them. I know its hard for you, but try to imagine this isn't my first computer and most of those gadgets I already own. But, because those parts aren't optional on a mac, I don't give apple bonus points for doubling what I already own. I don't buy something saying, "well they tried to give me something I needed. I mean, I'll pay for it even though I don't".

      1. I don't want a built in mic at all
      2. I have no use for blue tooth because a phone I bought 2 years ago came with it. But I coudl buy it for 25 bucks if I wanted one.
      3. graphics was the 7950 GT
      4. This was about 4 months ago, ish
      5. I've had a webcam for about 18 months, but I also don't need one because I got a new one 6 months ago as a going away present.
      6. a remote is fucking worthless for what I use my computer for, I have a mac book and have never, not even once, used the remote
      7. I have no way to compare monitors but my monitor was 400 bucks retail(though there was a sale going on at this particular store so I picked it up at ~340, and this was the only store putting it on sale). the model is at IO Data, AD-194VB. I have a widescreen model as well because I saved so much on the computer.
      8. The mac towers are only now quad core. they weren't all quad core 4 months ago.

      now, even after buying a second monitor, I have over 600 bucks left over. I'm comparing with the tower now, which is at least 2500 bucks w/o monitor, much less dual monitors. I'm quote happy with my monitor so I'd get the same one for a mac tower if I had bought one. Just the box, I'm at half the price, far more powerful than any iMac I could have gotten, and with my use of the computer, close enough to a mac tower at the time.

      now, my machine is quiet, just a hum I don't mind. I prefer its form simply because I'm not lugging it around everywhere. The form makes it easier to upgrade when I feel like I need to make my machine more powerful rather than buy a new one.

      so wait, what did I trade again compared to the mac?? I can now use my money to get a KMV switch and start using my macbook as a dual screen machine as well.

    340. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Why else would they pay four times as much for it?

      Lots of reasons.

      But wait, I thought it was features like BT and FireWire that made the MacBook Pro so much more expensive than other brands.

      Get real. Features like BT and FW make the Mini $650 instead of $450 (not to mention that I have yet to see a Dell that even comes close to thinking about approaching the size of a Mini.

      And I don't know what you are talking about with the MBP being more expensive than other brands... a similarly equipped Thinkpad or Sony Vaio are right there with it. Hell the Dell Precision line of laptops starts at 2500.00.

      If HP can sell a 15" laptop for $1500 or less, why can't Apple?

      I'm sure they could if they lowered their quality standards and hired a color blind moron to do their case design.

    341. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Offtopic my ass!

      Fuck you mods, you're all on crack and you have completely ruined Slashdot.

    342. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      But hey, maybe those consultants are not "Serious business laptop users"?

      Your environment is atypical, in my experience.

      Unless you're talking about users who are only in the office for, say, a few hours a week. That would make it a bit more beleivable. Or has no-one ever shown them how much more convenient life is with a docking station ?

      Pray tell: what expansion-cards should we be installing on our dekstop-machines? Obviously expandability and flexibility are a must-have features in business-environment according to you. Do tell me: what for?

      The most common upgrades are video cards (usually to get multiple displays, moreso than performance), additional hard disks (often for RAID), more RAM (the iMac's RAM upgradeability is relatively limited) and DVD writers.

      Those machines are used for PowerPoint, Word, Excel, email etc., what expansion-cards would we need? Seriously? Hi-end 3D-accelerators? additional soundcards? What?

      Apparently you've only worked in offices full of secretaries. There _are_ offices full of more demanding users out there, especially in technology-driven industries. Apart from the admin staff, even our lowest-end users are on machines with 2GB RAM, RAID1 and dual 17" - 21" LCDs.

    343. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      In my experience, machines that use bargain-basement RAM (Dell probably gets a great deal on it as its last-gen tech) also tend to use bargain-basement motherboards, power-supplies, etc.

      Firstly, 533Mhz DDR2 isn't "last-gen tech". DDR1 is "last gen tech". There are numerous machines out there still only using 533Mhz RAM - and most of the ones using 667Mhz RAM derive no benefit except in a handful of synthetic benchmarks. Indeed, they might actually be suffering in real-life performance due to the greater latencies of higher-Mhz RAM.

      In other words, your assumption - and hence conclusion - is incorrect.

      It's indicative of a machine built to save every last penny (which adds up to a lot when you sell a million of them). The iMac uses a lot of substantially more expensive parts (mobile Core 2, mobile GPU) in order to save space and power dissipation, yet still comes in at a competitive price.

      The iMac is assembled to a budget - to save "every last penny" - and with the cheapest parts available to fill its requirements (which happen to include a particularly small form factor, requiring some low-power parts). Don't kid yourself otherwise. Like I said, iMacs roll off the same assembly lines PCs like the E520 do. Heck, MacBook Pros are just rebadged Asus laptops (or certainly used to be).

      Nor do they need to be when they can pay a shop (or next-door's kid) to do it for them.

      I don't think it's a small minority - a minority, certainly, but there are smaller ones out there that Apple cater to (like people buying Mac Pros).

      And how many actually do this?

      I think you'd be surprised. Again, anyone with more than a passing interest in gaming has probably had their video card upgraded at least once (even though most of them probably didn't do it themselves - at least the first time).

      Why would I say that?

      Because one of the most commonly championed advantages of the new intel Macs is their ability to run Windows, and hence replace peoples' Windows PCs, even for things like gaming.

      If your goal is to run games, all you can get away with a really shitty machine with a great graphics card, and you won't notice the difference. Why then spend the extra money on a Mac?

      You seem to have that arse-about-face. Gaming - on of the few things the average person will do that actually stretches a modern computer - is something where you most certainly can *not* get away with "a really shitty machine with a great graphics card".

      It's barely any cheaper, the speed doesn't matter in a home environment, and the lack of convenience sucks.

      It's substantially cheaper. 5 and 8 port 100BaseT switches are so cheap they're practically free (AU$25). ADSL modems with builtin switches are about 30% cheaper than their counterparts with wifi APs (AU$75ish vs AU$120ish). Even low-end 5-port gigabit switches are cheap (AU$70ish).

      Despite wireless cards being "standard" on Macs for a few years now, on most the world's PCs they are not - meaning an upgrade of some sort is required.

      The speed isn't noticable if the only thing you do is browse the web with a couple of machines. As soon as you want to move data between machines or anything involving latency (like gaming), the speed difference is _massive_. A 54Mb wifi network will deliver 30Mbs of performance to a single client sitting right next to the AP, on a good day, if the wind is right. A 100Mb network will deliver 100Mb/s and gigabit with conteporary home PCs will deliver up to about 300Mb/s. Not to mention the reliability problems in apartments or buildings with solid walls using wifi.

      If you've got any sort of "home server" - and that includes a desktop PC that just happens to have all the video files on it - the difference in performance between wireless and even 100BaseT is massive.

      I have wifi in my home to service the laptops. However, I'd never use it in leiu of gig ethernet with my desktops (even though two of them are actually capable) because of the related performance and reliability issues.

    344. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      [Why would someone pay 4x as much for something that isn't 4x as good?] Lots of reasons. Ah yes. Perhaps they're a contestant on a game show, and they have to spend a million dollars as quickly as possible?

      And I don't know what you are talking about with the MBP being more expensive than other brands... a similarly equipped Thinkpad or Sony Vaio are right there with it. Hell the Dell Precision line of laptops starts at 2500.00. Look at HP's lineup. A customized dv6000t has most of the same checklist features as the $2000 MBP, same size screen, slightly lower CPU speed (by 160 MHz), same or better RAM/HD/optical drive, dimensions within 0.5", weight within 0.5 lb, for about $500 less. What's missing is mainly fluff like FireWire and ambient light sensing.

      I'm sure they could if they lowered their quality standards and hired a color blind moron to do their case design. Well, most people don't seem to have an issue with competitors' reliability or design.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    345. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that's my point exactly. If you don't care about the intangibles, there's no reason to buy a Mac. If aesthetics (inside and out) and one-stop support and all the advantages of an end-to-end system don't appeal to you, then you're going to look elsewhere.

      It's not as though people cry over a Chevy tax when you buy a new car with the intent of putting a Chrysler Hemi in it. You don't complain about a Kitchenaid tax when you buy a blender, but you want the motor to be a Cuisinart. If someone doesn't want to sell you the parts, they don't have to sell you the parts. If Henkel made a deal with Pyrex requiring you to buy a set of pyrex custard bowls with every knife, then I could see a complaint about a "Pyrex tax." But if Henkel decided only to sell knives with a wooden case, well that's just tough shit if you just want the bare knife. There's no "Henkel tax."

    346. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Firstly, 533Mhz DDR2 isn't "last-gen tech". DDR1 is "last gen tech". There are numerous machines out there still only using 533Mhz RAM - and most of the ones using 667Mhz RAM derive no benefit except in a handful of synthetic benchmarks.

      The issue with DDR2-533 is that it's kind of a bastard-stepchild speed grade. It had a run of only about a year, after being introduced with the earliest Intel DDR2 platforms and supplanted by DDR2-667 very shortly afterward. DDR2-667 has been common now for almost two years, and as you said the price difference is minimal. Since all Core 2 chipsets support DDR2-667, the only reason to ship the older memory in a machine would be to save a few extra cents. It's that sort of scrimping that worries me. After all, if they don't want to pony up a couple of extra bucks for RAM, who knows how much they're skimping on the PSU or motherboard.

      The iMac is assembled to a budget - to save "every last penny" - and with the cheapest parts available to fill its requirements (which happen to include a particularly small form factor, requiring some low-power parts). Don't kid yourself otherwise. Like I said, iMacs roll off the same assembly lines PCs like the E520 do. Heck, MacBook Pros are just rebadged Asus laptops (or certainly used to be).

      This is actually very much incorrect. Yes, the same Taiwanese manufacturers (like Asus) actually build the machines, but Apple is the one that does the design (no Apple laptop is a re-badged anything). Moreover, it's well known in the industry that Apple's tolerances are a lot tighter than everyone else's. Take their laptops for example. The MacBooks has a case design that is really hard to build. When closed, you can run your finger along the seam between the lid and the body, and it should be tight and flush. Even a slight misalignment results in a noticeable defect. As a result, they have to specify stricter tolerances on the build, which costs money. Almost every other laptop design includes some sort of rounded lip, which can hide substantial misalignment without the user noticing, and can thus be manufactured more cheaply. Also, take a look inside a PowerMac or Mac Pro sometime. Apple doesn't skimp on things like the PSU, motherboard, or even case fans. A lot of manufacturers do, because a great PSU is not something they can advertise in the spec sheet. Apple's PowerMac PSUs run from 700W to 1000W (real, not like the $30 "500W" PSUs you see on NewEgg), and they're heavy and solid like a PSU should be. The PowerMac (and probably Mac Pro)'s fans are a custom variant of a Delta model that runs $10-$12 on the internet. You're not going to find a $10+ case fan in that E520.

      Note that Dell used to build machines like this too. I've got a Dimension D300 from 1998, and its probably as heavy as a modern E-series machine despite being substantially smaller. It uses more expensive hard plastics (as opposed to the cheaper soft plastics you see on modern Dells), and an Intel Seattle motherboard modified for better power delivery. The damn thing is getting close to 10 years old, and is still running flawlessly. A couple of years ago it was sitting in a closest acting as a server while the room was remodeled. I realized after a couple of months that it had been inhaling all the dust from the remodeling for all that time, yet it never even so much as crashed.

      Now, Apple certainly isn't as premium as you can get. I've spent $20+ on a CPU fan because that has a drastic effect on the noise profile of the machine. I've spent $130 on an Antec P180 case because of the noise-absorbing aluminum/plastic/aluminum sandwich paneling. These are a cut above even what you find in an Apple machine. However, I've dug around my fair share of cheaper PCs, and almost all of them cut corners on these sorts of parts.

      You seem to have that arse-about-face. Gaming - on of the few things the average person will do that actually stretches a modern computer - is something where you most certainly can *not* get away with "a really shitty machin

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    347. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      see, this is the problem with a mac fan, you think that someone actually wants the parts just how apple give them. I know its hard for you, but try to imagine this isn't my first computer and most of those gadgets I already own.

      If you don't want the parts, then fine, don't buy the machine. But don't say you can get a similar machine for a lot less money (which is what you did!) If you want to compare price, then spec out a roughly comparable machine, and compare the price. If you want to argue about flexibility, then argue that instead. I'm perfectly happy to admit that Apple's canned configurations are nowhere near as flexible as building something yourself, that's really a no-brainer.

      now, even after buying a second monitor, I have over 600 bucks left over. I'm comparing with the tower now, which is at least 2500 bucks w/o monitor, much less dual monitors. I'm quote happy with my monitor so I'd get the same one for a mac tower if I had bought one. Just the box, I'm at half the price, far more powerful than any iMac I could have gotten, and with my use of the computer, close enough to a mac tower at the time.

      The Mac Pros are just about six months old. They're all quad core (2 x Xeon), and always have been. They're completely out of the league of your machine. In addition to the pair of Xeons, they've got a server-grade Intel 5000X motherboard that'll run you $400-$500 by itself. They've got quad-channel FB-DIMM memory and 8 memory expansion slots. And the parts alone will cost you about as much as a Mac Pro, even neglecting labor, warranty, etc.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    348. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      slightly slower speed, dimensions plus ~0.5", weight plus ~0.5lb, no ambiant light detection, no fall detection, no magnetic battery cord, no firewire, no camera, no DVI port...

      It all does add up, but not just the hardware, the dimensions are crucial. Doubly so given the MBP weighs LESS and INCLUDES all those extras, while the HP is bigger, heavier, yet doesn't.

      Are you honestly trying to convince me that an MBP should be the same price as an inferior, heavier, larger laptop? Don't be absurd.

      When you actually find a unit that matches what the MBP can do in the space and weight the MBP does it - and which costs $500 less too, let me know.

      Ah yes. Perhaps they're a contestant on a game show, and they have to spend a million dollars as quickly as possible?

      I'm sure you can do better than that.

      A Porsche 911 Turbo is only about 1 second faster 0-60 than a 911 C4, yet costs over $50,000 more. You really think anyone thinks there's $50,000 worth of 'utility' to be able go 0-60 one second faster? And that's about it for differences. The two cars that are nearly indistinguishable otherwise in terms of appearance and overall driving experience. They are both 911s after all. For the average person who buys the T car the extra bit of performance isn't even tapped into, never mind "appreciated" in relation to its extra cost.

      Here, let me get you started:
      Some people just want the best, regardless of price, and can afford it.
      Some people want the bragging rights.
      Some people are affected by salesmanship and marketing.
      Some people prefer having options even if they won't use them.
      Some people buy what their friends tell them to buy.
      Some people buy what is available.* ...etc...

      I suspect Apple is using this to drive sales of the MBP.

      There are probably a lot of people out there who bought an MBP because the MB wasn't enough. If Apple had a middle product, say a 15" mb with fast video for 1500... it would probably GUT the sales of the MBP. And sure, it might be what you want... but is it really in Apple's best interest? Sure they'd lose a few sales to people who simply refuse to buy... but I expect overall profit from people ante-ing up to the MBP more than offsets that loss.

      cheers

    349. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      As for an upgradeable video card, the only way I see that making sense is if you're a serious gamer, in which case the mac is indeed the wrong box for you.

      BS. What about Boot Camp to run XP?

      How about a casual gamer who doesn't want a piece of shit Radeon X1600? That card retails online for $90. For $180 I can get a Geforce 7900 GS that has close to three times the performance. More importantly, it will run today's and tomorrow's games satisfactorily. The X1600 will not. Furthermore, the X1600 only comes with 128MB, unless I pay Apple $75 for 256MB. The 7900 GS of course comes with 256MB.

      With the exception of the video card the iMac hardware is fine for casual gamers. What a waste. Consider all the PC gamers from 4th to 12th grade who get their parents to buy them PCs because those can game but Macs can't really. These kids go to college and get PCs too. Not all of them are the enthusiasts who pay $200 to $600 for a video card, but 99% of enthusiasts started gaming as kids. Even before the xBox there were enough of these people to keep ATi, 3dfx and nVidia in the market. Consider if a whole lot of them could get mini-tower-cased iMacs for them to game on and upgrade.

    350. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Apple has no gaming machines because nobody in their right mind would game on a Mac. Gaming is all about breadth of software support, and there is no way Apple is going to compete with Microsoft on that front.

      BS. What about Boot Camp to run XP?

      Now the iMacs just need a video card that isn't a piece of junk. I can buy an iMac with a Radeon X1600? That card retails online for $90. For $180 I can get a GeForce 7900 GS that has close to three times the performance. More importantly, it will run today's and tomorrow's games satisfactorily. The X1600 will not. Furthermore, the X1600 only comes with 128MB, unless I pay Apple $75 for 256MB. The 7900 GS of course comes with 256MB.

      Ohh, or I can buy a $2000 iMac with a GeForce 7300 GT. Too bad the 7900 GS is still twice as powerful. And if I want it with 256MB or RAM I have to pay Apple $125. Wait. WHAT? According to pricegrabber.com, I can buy that card for $100. What a way to screw the consumers.

      With the exception of the video card the iMac hardware is fine for casual gamers. It's such a waste. Consider all the PC gamers from 4th to 12th grade who get their parents to buy them PCs because those can game but Macs can't really. These kids go to college and get PCs too. Not all of them are the enthusiasts who pay $200 to $600 for a video card, but 99% of enthusiasts started gaming as kids. Even before the xBox there were enough of these people to keep ATi, 3dfx and nVidia in the market. Consider if a whole lot of them could get mini-tower-cased headless iMacs for them to game on and upgrade if they wanted to. The boxes wouldn't even have to be that big. Just wide enough for the card and two quiet 120mm fans in the front and back.

    351. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by larytet · · Score: 1
      "I expect to go to any computer retailer and be able to buy a computer without Windows pre-installed. "

      Move to Israel then. It is hard to find a PC with Windows preinstalled here. You have to explicitly ask to install Win OS on the new PC and the store will charge you for the OS. Ok, let's say I slightly exaggerate, but only slightly. You can find HP or Dell PC with Windows in the OfficeDepot. But frankly, who is going to buy a PC in the OfficeDepot ? Quick comparison of prices in the online store vs. large store and your decision is obvious.

    352. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by larytet · · Score: 1

      I think, that in Israel at least half of PCs are sold without OS or with illegal copy of OS (actually I tend to believe, that the number is 2/3 or more). The same is true for countries like Russia, India, etc. When I say that Linux is free OS people answer me that Win OS is free too. The market for blank box exists at least in some countries. Start to install Linux on PCs and may be some customers will not figure out, that this is not Windows. Start to write two different prices for a box with and without WinOS and may be that $80 will do the trick of switching. Today you can find a laptop at $500. OS is 15% of this amount, higher than sale tax in most (any ?) US states.

    353. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      slightly slower speed, dimensions plus ~0.5", weight plus ~0.5lb, no ambiant light detection, no fall detection, no magnetic battery cord, no firewire, no camera, no DVI port... It does have a camera (and mic, and remote).

      Are you honestly trying to convince me that an MBP should be the same price as an inferior, heavier, larger laptop? Only that the "inferior" laptop is more attractive to a lot of buyers, who consider saving $500 well worth losing a few pointless bells and whistles. And when they look down from the MBP, the lower-end model still has all that crap - instead of cutting away the fluff, Apple kept the fluff and cut away the important features to make their low-end model. So they look over to HP, Compaq, Toshiba, or some other brand where they can save a few hundred bucks by keeping the steak and losing the chocolate sprinkles.

      If Apple had a middle product, say a 15" mb with fast video for 1500... it would probably GUT the sales of the MBP. And sure, it might be what you want... but is it really in Apple's best interest? Sure they'd lose a few sales to people who simply refuse to buy... but I expect overall profit from people ante-ing up to the MBP more than offsets that loss. On the contrary, I think the increase in sales would easily make up for the lower margin. You can sell a lot more laptops at $1200-$1500 than at $2000 if they actually compete with other models in that price range.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    354. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      So they look over to HP, Compaq, Toshiba, or some other brand where they can save a few hundred bucks by keeping the steak and losing the chocolate sprinkles.

      You can sell a lot more laptops at $1200-$1500 than at $2000 if they actually compete with other models in that price range.

      And that is where Apple has you over the barrel so to speak. There are no other models that compete in that price range on Apple's biggest feature: OS X.

      If OS X is an important feature (and it probably is if you are looking at Macs in the first place) than HP, Toshiba et al aren't really even in the running. You are going to buy either an MB or an MBP. Its just a matter of choosing which.

      The value of comparing an MBP to an HP is to validate the MBP price. The MBP is not over priced -- true, it may have a lot of features YOU might not be interested in, but any laptop with all those features, at that size and weight and quality are going to be the same price, and thus the price of the MBP is fair for what you get.

      That you can get a 1500 HP with the hardware features you want, but you can't get a 1500 Apple with the hardware features you want doesn't really hurt apple. Because the HP can't match Apple's software feature: OS X -- and that feature is the biggest reason people buy a mac.

      While I concede there is a group of people buying $1500 Dell/HP/etc who would have bought a $1500 mac I don't think they're that relevant. I think if they wanted a mac they got one, and usually anted-up. Moreover, as I said before, I think if a 15" $1500 MB existed, a LOT of people who bought the 2k+ ones would have scaled back, and that would have hurt Apple.

      You see the same thing in car lots. If they bring in the base model and the fully loaded model, both sell well.

      If they bring in the base model, a semi loaded model with the most popular options, and a fully loaded model. The semi loaded model ends up taking a lot sales from the fully loaded model, while not really adding to the total number of sales. Even if a customer only wants some of the features of the fully loaded car they generally ante-up for the fully loaded one if that's what is in stock. Few people walk out of the lot and buy a completely different model of car because the semi-loaded model wasn't in stock.

      And yes, in the case of cars people -can- special order exactly the car they want with the options they want in the color they want etc but most people don't do that they buy from whats available on the lot(s). (Plus the cars on the lot are generally better value as the dealer is motivated to move inventory.) By choosing not to bring in semi-loaded cars with the most popular options the dealer can upsell more people into fully loaded ones.

      I think Apple does the same with their product lineup, and I think it works for them. Despite how much it frustrates some of their customers (including me).

    355. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never understand people complaining that Apple hardware costs more. It does, but it tends to be very well engineered and built from high quality components.

      Buying an Apple machine can be compared to buying a Mercedes or other type of high end automobile. I never hear people say buyers of luxury cars are crazy because they could have bought a car that will get them to their destination just as quickly for half the price. I spend *much* more time using my computer than I do driving my car, and I'm willing to pay extra for reliability and quality.

      The part I think you missed is GP's hardware is higher quality components than that of the Mac Pro. That would make his computer the Mercedes in your lame car analogy. A $1400 cheaper Mercedes at that.
    356. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      You know, I've owned plenty of cheap PCs, and none of them have fit that description. I don't believe Apple would have to sacrifice reliability to offer affordable computers with the features people need.

      You miss the point. Any company can always offer more options so that they have models that better fit the needs of some subset of people. If Apple had a thousand models, someone would still be unhappy that the exact feature set they want was not available and they need to buy the model with a 120G hard drive when all they really need is 110G. This is more of an issue for Apple than other companies since they tie their OS and hardware, but I was trying to explain the other part of the equation. Apple does not sell to fit the very, very low end, like the bottom of the line Dell machines, which use inferior grade parts much of the time and, in fact, whatever manufacturer bids lowest for a given lot. The same model of machine from Dell may contain a whole slew of different parts. The consistent part is they are all the lowest quality, cheapest ones they could buy. This is why Dell consistently has higher failure rates than almost anyone else and it is also one of the reasons why some of their computers are very inexpensive. Sometimes these computers are a good deal, if you have a lto of them and keep replacements handy, but for an individual family these are usually very poor machines, that fail and lose the data they contain and are nonfunctional or being repaired regularly or fail right out of warranty, resulting in higher total cost of ownership.

    357. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Again, I think you're exaggerating. I work in an office full of eMachines and other cheap, off the shelf PCs. In the past seven years, only one of them has suffered a hardware failure, and that was because there was a mouse inside it. If we had bought Macs, we'd be no better off than we are now; we'd just have half as many computers for the same money.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    358. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      The issue with DDR2-533 is that it's kind of a bastard-stepchild speed grade. It had a run of only about a year, after being introduced with the earliest Intel DDR2 platforms and supplanted by DDR2-667 very shortly afterward. DDR2-667 has been common now for almost two years, and as you said the price difference is minimal. Since all Core 2 chipsets support DDR2-667, the only reason to ship the older memory in a machine would be to save a few extra cents. It's that sort of scrimping that worries me. After all, if they don't want to pony up a couple of extra bucks for RAM, who knows how much they're skimping on the PSU or motherboard.

      Or maybe they're taking the money saved on the "slower" RAM (that isn't any slower in actual use) and spending it on better motherboards or PSUs ?

      Seriously, it's a non-issue. Dell still have options for 533Mhz DDR2 on machines like their PowerEdge 2950s, which aren't quite solid and reliable servers.

      This is actually very much incorrect. Yes, the same Taiwanese manufacturers (like Asus) actually build the machines, but Apple is the one that does the design (no Apple laptop is a re-badged anything). Moreover, it's well known in the industry that Apple's tolerances are a lot tighter than everyone else's.

      I think it's "well known" in some circles, but I wouldn't call them "the industry".

      This whole "Apple has better build quality" used to be somewhat true back in the 68k and early PPC days, when the machines were still coming with things like SCSI drives. However, they had pricetags to match (and if you spent the same amount on a PC you got similar build quality). It's not true any more. Apple do the case design and maybe a bit of internal layout to help get things into the case they want, but now they've switched to Intel pretty much everything is off-the-shelf and built in the same factories pumping out regular old PC components - because they *are* regular old PC components.

      Added to that, even if they did do the whole design top to bottom, that still wouldn't impact build quality. You can have the best architect in the world, but if the builders and incompetent and the cement bad, the building is still going to fall down.

      Take their laptops for example. The MacBooks has a case design that is really hard to build. When closed, you can run your finger along the seam between the lid and the body, and it should be tight and flush. Even a slight misalignment results in a noticeable defect. As a result, they have to specify stricter tolerances on the build, which costs money. Almost every other laptop design includes some sort of rounded lip, which can hide substantial misalignment without the user noticing, and can thus be manufactured more cheaply. Also, take a look inside a PowerMac or Mac Pro sometime. Apple doesn't skimp on things like the PSU, motherboard, or even case fans. A lot of manufacturers do, because a great PSU is not something they can advertise in the spec sheet. Apple's PowerMac PSUs run from 700W to 1000W (real, not like the $30 "500W" PSUs you see on NewEgg), and they're heavy and solid like a PSU should be. The PowerMac (and probably Mac Pro)'s fans are a custom variant of a Delta model that runs $10-$12 on the internet. You're not going to find a $10+ case fan in that E520.

      Yes, but we weren't talking about Mac Pros, PowerMacs and MacBook Pros, we were talking about _iMacs_.

      iMacs (and Mac Minis and MacBooks) are built to a budget. Mac Pros (and the other "pro" machines aren't (well, are less so), and carry a suitable price premium to compensate (and they _are_ very nice inside - well, the MBPs are a bit of a mess...). You can get the same thing from Dell, as well, if you want to spring for a Precision workstation or higher-end Latitude (vs Inspiron) notebook (or go IBM/Lenovo).

    359. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they're taking the money saved on the "slower" RAM (that isn't any slower in actual use) and spending it on better motherboards or PSUs ?

      Which one do you really thing is more likely? Honestly? If they're trying to save a few bucks on something like RAM, which is a spec they can advertise, what do you think they're doing with the stuff they can't advertise. I've been around too many Dells in the last few years to give them the benefit of the doubt.

      Seriously, it's a non-issue. Dell still have options for 533Mhz DDR2 on machines like their PowerEdge 2950s, which aren't quite solid and reliable servers.

      The 2950 uses server-grade, high-capacity FB-DIMMs, which are a whole different kettle of fish from what they're putting in the E520! When you see a lower speed rating on a server DIMM that costs $3000, you assume conservativeness, not cost-cutting. I have a hard time believing the 533 MHz DIMMs in the E520 are otherwise high-quality parts that are just conservatively rated. More likely they are low-quality parts sold at a discount to get rid of the inventory of 533 MHz chips.

      Apple do the case design and maybe a bit of internal layout to help get things into the case they want, but now they've switched to Intel pretty much everything is off-the-shelf and built in the same factories pumping out regular old PC components - because they *are* regular old PC components.

      Sure, Mac's use a lot of the same parts as PCs. However, Apple still has control over parts selection, and still custom-designs their motherboards, power supplies, cases, and cooling systems. In my experience with building PCs, these are the reliability bottlenecks. I rarely see PCs where the Intel CPU or chipset craps out. On the other hand, I quite often see PCs where the motherboard is a cheap 3-layer piece of shit, or the "500W" power supply can't reliably deliver half that, or where the case is made of cheap plastic and has flimsy bits that break off easily. You're not going to find that stuff in an Apple machine. Of course, you can find it in the PC world too (think ThinkPads, or building it yourself), but then you're going to have to be prepared to spend as much money as you would on an Apple machine.

      Added to that, even if they did do the whole design top to bottom, that still wouldn't impact build quality. You can have the best architect in the world, but if the builders and incompetent and the cement bad, the building is still going to fall down.

      The build quality is largely a factor of how much you're willing to spend. You can easily have 0.01" tolerance on a spec, instead of 0.1" tolerance, even with the same builder, it's just going to cost you more money. Dell's suppliers in Taiwan are probably easily capable of building a machine with the same tolerances as an Apple, but it seems that since about 2000 or so, Dell isn't willing to pay for that.

      iMacs (and Mac Minis and MacBooks) are built to a budget. Mac Pros (and the other "pro" machines aren't (well, are less so), and carry a suitable price premium to compensate (and they _are_ very nice inside - well, the MBPs are a bit of a mess...). You can get the same thing from Dell, as well, if you want to spring for a Precision workstation or higher-end Latitude (vs Inspiron) notebook (or go IBM/Lenovo).

      Every machine is build towards a target price. However, Apple seems to be less willing to trade user experience for that target price than does Dell. Even the MacBook has the same close-flush design that causes Apple's cases to cost more to build. Even the iMac uses high-quality acrylics and hard plastics that cost more than the softer stuff you see in most Dells. Apple could've saved quite a bit of money on the iMac by making it an inch thicker, specifying a more powerful (and hence louder) fan, and using desktop parts instead of laptop ones. They didn't because they didn't want to trade off the user experience.

      To be fair, Apple isn't the only one who builds machines like this. Lenovo's Th

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    360. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Which one do you really thing is more likely?

      Neither. I think the 533Mhz and 667Mhz parts are they same "quality", the 533Mhz ones are just cheaper to buy because they're cheaper to make (lower speed = less rejects).

      The 2950 uses server-grade, high-capacity FB-DIMMs, which are a whole different kettle of fish from what they're putting in the E520! When you see a lower speed rating on a server DIMM that costs $3000, you assume conservativeness, not cost-cutting.

      Hmm. Same conditions, different conclusion...

      533Mhz and 667Mhz "regular" DIMMS cost about the same.

      533Mhz and 667Mhz "server" DIMMS cost about the same.

      But, apparently, using one is evidence of cost-cutting and the other is not...

      I have a hard time believing the 533 MHz DIMMs in the E520 are otherwise high-quality parts that are just conservatively rated. More likely they are low-quality parts sold at a discount to get rid of the inventory of 533 MHz chips.

      More likely they are parts that were of the same quality that are cheaper to make and, hence, acquire.

      Your criteria for establishing "quality" seems to be based solely on price. This is somewhat reasonable when "all else is equal", but it's pretty worthless when you're talking about two items with different capabilities. A 2Ghz Core 2 CPU is cheaper than a 2.33Ghz Core 2 CPU. Does that mean the 2Ghz chip is inherently "lower quality" ? Because that's basically what you're trying to argue here.

      Sure, Mac's use a lot of the same parts as PCs. However, Apple still has control over parts selection, and still custom-designs their motherboards, power supplies, cases, and cooling systems. In my experience with building PCs, these are the reliability bottlenecks.

      Once again, design != manufacture.

      In any case, even with the quality argument aside, the iMac is a very competitively priced machine for its class. You might not be convinced by the performance advantages of an 667MHz RAM or a CPU with 4MB of cache, but computer companies still charge more money for computers with newer specs (certainly Dell does!), and it's entirely consistent for Apple to do so as well. In real life, the difference between the 2.93 GHz Core 2 and the 2.66 GHz Core 2 is almost unnoticeable, but would it make any sense to spec out a 2.66 GHz machine, compare it to a 2.93 GHz machine, and call the latter "over priced" on that merit? When you account for all the differences between the E520 (not just the older memory, and less cache, but the lack of wifi, the lack of speakers, and the boatload of other accessories that the iMac has), it's really hard to call the iMac overpriced.

      I didn't. I said an E520 having similar specs is noticably cheaper, with the caveats that it lacks some features the iMac has. HOWEVER, it also has features the iMac lacks (in particular, expandability).

      This whole discussion came about because of your poor assumption that slower RAM in a cheaper machine was somehow conclusive evidence that the rest of the machine was composed of "lower quality" parts.

      Macs today are reasonably well priced. They _are_ on the more expensive side (which is a distinct improvement on "ridiculously overpriced"), but generally have the components and build quality to match it. The biggest problems with Macs vis-a-vis pricing is that the "minimum buy-in points" tend to be relatively high, the gaping holes in the product lineup and the lack of configuration flexibility "forcing" consumers to pay for features they don't want.

    361. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      I work in an office...

      Anecdotes are not valid evidence for making objective decisions. Look at the Consumer Reports studies, or any of the other independent studies for useful information.

      If we had bought Macs, we'd be no better off than we are now; we'd just have half as many computers for the same money.

      The cost and benefit for any given deployment of machines will be different in different situations. I've purchased large numbers of Dells, because they were the best value at the time, but I took the failure rate into account and had a number of spare machines and a quick restore option handy. Even with those extra machines as spares the cost was lower than going with another vendor and the cost incurred with swapping them was minimal since they paid for shipping, and it only took a few minutes of actual work to swap them (very unusual situation).

      In the past seven years, only one of them has suffered a hardware failure...

      I don't have numbers from 7 years ago, but for machines from 3 years ago an independent study a friend of mine bought access to while doing some purchasing shows emachines average a 18% failure rate in three years of use, which is still not as bad as Dell, but is a lot worse than a vendor like Apple or Sony or Lenovo. Also, those failures were almost 50% more likely to be the hard drive resulting in data loss. So if you have 3 emachines and one failed over 7 years, you're doing about average.

    362. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      So if you have 3 emachines and one failed over 7 years, you're doing about average. We have about 8-10 cheap PCs (mostly eMachines with a couple Compaqs). The one system failure didn't result in any data loss, and I'm pretty sure the fact that a mouse crawled inside the machine and electrocuted himself can't be blamed on the vendor. The one data loss incident we've had involved drives that were purchased and installed separately, not the original equipment.

      Anyway, your argument seems to be that Apples are more expensive than Dells because they use higher quality parts. But this directly contradicts all the other claims that Apples aren't actually more expensive than competing systems with the same specs; the Apples just have higher specs.

      The problem I've encountered is not that a MacBook Pro costs more than an HP laptop with exactly the same features, it's that I can't get the one feature I absolutely need (a 15" screen) without paying 33% more than the cost of a satisfactory HP model, and the extra features I'd get with the MBP hold no attraction whatsoever. I believe a lot of potential customers are in exactly the same position.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    363. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by Annymouse+Cowherd · · Score: 1

      Well, for some reason they don't buy macs...

    364. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure of current prices in the UK. In the US, though, the iMac is cheaper than an equivalently equipped Dell. By about $300.

      Then there's the Mac Mini if anyone really needs a sub-$1000 Mac. A G4 PowerMac can be had used for hundreds, too, if someone's desperate for a computer.

      Systems preloaded with Linux and KDE, Gnome, or Xfce tend to work just fine for people accustomed to Windows 9x/2000/XP. They don't know how to administer them, but most people don't know how to administer Windows, either. My Dad, who won't even install his own games on his PC, sat down once at a Mandrake system of mine with KDE on it and proceeded to play solitaire and Doom. The only thing he asked was why the start button looked different.

    365. Re:Lots of folks making the switch by thrashee · · Score: 1

      The only Windows users who didn't choose an MS operating system are those that use them at work. Otherwise, of course they choose them. No one forced Windows into anybody's hands.

      I get tired of all the complaints against the OEM manufacturers and Microsoft's strong-arm tactics with them. How do you think Microsoft has amassed so much wealth? They are a business, as people are so oft to forget. They exist at heart for one true purpose: to make money.

      The majority of people don't care what their operating system is. They are the regular joe schmoes who walk into a Best Buy and tell the Geek Squad teenager that they want a computer to surf the net, print their vacation photos, and send emails. So the kid in the blue shirt hands them over a nice Gateway or HP that comes preloaded with more than they'll ever need, the customer goes away perfectly content...and then everyone comes in here and waxes eloquent on the plight of the Everyman who has been forced into accepting an ubiqitous operating system they did not want to begin with.

      As for competition--the OEM manufactures are businesses as well. Which means they're going to go with what makes the most fiscal sense. So you can't just focus on Microsoft when you're discussing an entire market. If any serious competitor offered a comparable deal, perhaps we'd see more variety in the OSs that come preloaded on these machines. Or maybe you're busy writing that very OS as we speak. Until then, Microsoft is doing what any busines would do--enjoying and taking advantage of their position right now.

      Back to people's freedom and choice...the people that really care about their operating system are you and I. And we will either do one of three things when presented with the challenge of buying a new system: 1) We'll go with an alternative, such as a Mac. 2) We'll build our own machines with the added benefit of not feeling like we were robbed of our choice of a motherboard as well. 3) We'll buy the Dell or Gateway because we're lazy, and then turn right around and reformat the hard drive with anything our heart desires (if you're feeling especially masochistic or just relish the opportunity to call people "noobs", this means Linux).

      See, we all have choices. What you're really arguing against is the proliferation of Windows. And that proliferation exists--is allowed to exist--for one simple reason: the majority of computer users are lazy and don't want to dig for a great OS, so they'll take what's handed to them. And no other company has figured out a way of challenging this.

  2. What about those of us who switch the other way? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Ignored as always.

  3. Old news by goto11 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I switch Windows users on a daily basis to Macs... The next switch will be to Linux. Let's see how long it takes until Linuz is ready for Joe Average.

    --
    Why don't you just make 10 louder and make 10 be the top number...and make that a little louder?
    1. Re:Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDE is quickly eclipsing OS X in terms of usability and "must have" features.

      http://www.linux.com/article.pl?sid=07/02/01/19352 38

    2. Re:Old news by Orthodork · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeah, let's continue on with this sad fantasy that seems to pervade the Linux world.

    3. Re:Old news by PygmySurfer · · Score: 1

      What're these "must-have" features in KDE? Any time I've used it, I've found a bunch of stupidly-named applications, and a big, bulky UI filled with toolbars. I'd rather use GNOME. Hell, I'd rather use Windows.

      I like how you linked to an article on KDE 4, has anything of KDE 4 even been shown yet? All I recall seeing is some hand-drawn diagrams and some mock-ups. The Release Plan indicated they were aiming for a technical preview release in October, did that even happen?

      I did find a screenshot, hardly looks like the revolutionary improvements shown in the mock-ups (linked site not in English, but if you scroll about half way down the page you can see the mock-ups).

    4. Re:Old news by mikek3332002 · · Score: 1

      Hopefully Linux is never ready for Joe Average(Mr Stupid Computer User #456767), because that would destroy what linux is.

    5. Re:Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is that any worse than people praising Apple for iPhone mockups? Get your head out of your ass, Apple is not the be all and end all of technology companies. They are primarily a marketing company, just like Microsoft.

    6. Re:Old news by hitmanWilly1337 · · Score: 1

      The great thing about linux is if you don't like one flavor, try a different one. There will always be more user friendly distros ie Ubu or RH, but i seriously doubt Gentoo or Slackware will ever relegate themselves to that category. Ubu might be just what Joe Average is looking for, but ther'll always be others out there (or build it from the ground up the way you want it.) Thats the beauty of FOSS. Plus, if more people use linux, then more apps will be written for it, which means more people will use it, etc...

    7. Re:Old news by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that Linux is about being hard, rather than free?

    8. Re:Old news by PygmySurfer · · Score: 1

      I didn't say anything about Apple or OS X, so I'm not sure what your point is.

      As for the iPhone, Jobs demoed a prototype, not a mock-up. Huge difference.

  4. Another victim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of Steve Jobs' RDF.

  5. I still miss Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have had my Mac G5 for a year now. There are many things which still aren't quite "perfect" enough yet. I am waiting for OS X 10.5 (as I've never been around for a point release) to see if it is an upgrade.

    For me I have one goal: Productivity. I'm am a network administrator for a enterprise company. I'm dripping in Windows but at home, I use a Mac. Why? Final Cut Pro and Aperture. That's it! I'm building my photography business and it's growing.

    That said I still miss Windows for a few applications and MOSTLY for the keyboard commands (in the OS GUI). Window Key + R + cmd = CLI. On the Mac it's click or Apple + Space + Term + Click.

    Lame.

    I see Mac and Mac-like products taking over the home desktop. Not the OS but the "utility" aspect of it. iTV and the iPod are nice because they just sit there.

    Microsoft can (and should) have the Enterprise desktops (for now).

    1. Re:I still miss Windows by Lightborn · · Score: 5, Informative

      That said I still miss Windows for a few applications and MOSTLY for the keyboard commands (in the OS GUI). Window Key + R + cmd = CLI. On the Mac it's click or Apple + Space + Term + Click.

      Command (Apple) + Enter tells Spotlight to open the Top Hit.

      --
      My .sigs are not what they used to be.
    2. Re:I still miss Windows by Fahrenheit+450 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Install Quicksilver. It' makes a world of difference -- soon you'll have a "Window Key + R"-esque experience for all of the apps on your machine.

      --
      -30-
    3. Re:I still miss Windows by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      Command (Apple) + Enter tells Spotlight to open the Top Hit. That tip deserves a '+1 Informative'.... pity I just ran out of mod points.
      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    4. Re:I still miss Windows by NMerriam · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or he could create a shortcut in Universal Access. Or make a service with a shortcut. Or make a QS shortcut. Or geez, just put the terminal on his dock if it's such a hassle.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    5. Re:I still miss Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's a QS shortcut?

      As for the dock, it's there, I just don't think I need to fondle the ferret testicle (mouse with fuzzy ball on top) to gain access to it.

    6. Re:I still miss Windows by wass · · Score: 1
      What's a QS shortcut?

      That refers to Quicksilver , which in a nutshell, is a super efficient way to launch your applications, and also get at your files, music, oft-viewed webpages, etc.

      --

      make world, not war

    7. Re:I still miss Windows by NMerriam · · Score: 3, Informative

      Quicksilver, makes launching apps/finding information insanely great and is completely customizable -- much more powerful than the default Spotlight interface. You could easily make a Windows-R shortcut to launch terminal, or you can enter terminal commands directly in the QS interface. QS can even access my bash history and rerun command lines that I ran manually from terminal.app two days ago.

      There's also an app that adds a small terminal to every window on the system (can't think of the name of it at the moment, pretty sure it's on sourceforge).

      I do wish there was an easier way to universally access all menus on OSX from the keyboard, the way that Alt does on Windows (there is keyboard access, but it's nowhere near as straightforward), but beyond that I've found the Mac to be ridiculously powerful in terms of keyboard use, even before I found QS.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    8. Re:I still miss Windows by yum · · Score: 1

      I missed having quicksilver on my xp machine, until I found http://www.launchy.net/

    9. Re:I still miss Windows by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      I still miss the insert key -- I program for a living, and its annoying not having it.

    10. Re:I still miss Windows by screeble · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can remap any key combo you wish in OS X using System Preferences => Keyboard and Mouse => Keyboard Shortcuts.

      If that isn't flexible enough you could always create and edit ~/Library/KeyBindings/DefaultKeyBinding.dict by hand.

    11. Re:I still miss Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      QuickSilver will solve this problem. Check it out:

      http://quicksilver.blacktree.com/

    12. Re:I still miss Windows by willy_me · · Score: 1

      I do wish there was an easier way to universally access all menus on OSX from the keyboard, the way that Alt does on Windows (there is keyboard access, but it's nowhere near as straightforward), but beyond that I've found the Mac to be ridiculously powerful in terms of keyboard use, even before I found QS.

      There is an easy way. To move the focus to the menu bar press ^F2 (ctrl-F2). From there the arrow keys can be used to navigate the menus. The shortcut can be changed via System Preferences - other shortcuts are also listed there so check it out.

      Willy
    13. Re:I still miss Windows by tww · · Score: 2, Informative

      Install QuickSilver - about 100x better for application launching than Spotlight & way better than Windows-R. You'll never look back.

    14. Re:I still miss Windows by mehgul · · Score: 2, Informative

      At the risk of being redundant, please do yourself a treat and install Quicksilver (http://quicksilver.blacktree.com/). It may look a bit scary at first since it's extremely customizable, but once you make the jump, you will hurt when using a Mac that doesn't have it installed.

    15. Re:I still miss Windows by Chikenistheman · · Score: 1

      Vista: Windows Key + cmd = CLI Ahhhh search.

      --
      If a million people jumped off a cliff, it'd only be a short time until I landed in a nice soft mountain of bodies.
    16. Re:I still miss Windows by G-funk · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you need Quicksilver buddy :)

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    17. Re:I still miss Windows by pclminion · · Score: 1

      That said I still miss Windows for a few applications and MOSTLY for the keyboard commands (in the OS GUI). Window Key + R + cmd = CLI. On the Mac it's click or Apple + Space + Term + Click. Lame.

      Why do people buy a cat and then complain that it doesn't act like a dog? I don't get it.

    18. Re:I still miss Windows by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      That said I still miss Windows for a few applications and MOSTLY for the keyboard commands (in the OS GUI). Window Key + R + cmd = CLI. On the Mac it's click or Apple + Space + Term + Click.

      I gave up closing all but the fattest applications a few weeks after getting a Mac. Apple-tab to Terminal, Apple-N to open a new one. There's no point rebooting, rarely any point shutting down and no point closing Terminal if you use it enough to care. I'm sure if something else needs the massive 8.7MB the seven Terminal windows I have open, the system will swap it out. Close all the windows or Apple-H if seeing the extra windows in Exposaaay annoys you.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    19. Re:I still miss Windows by qwertphobia · · Score: 1
      As a fellow network administrator, I've been very happy running OSX. It has all the stuff a network admin needs (well, at least for my job functions)
      • SSH2
      • tcptump
      • perl
      • expect
      • net-snmp
      • cron
      • openldap
      • kerberos
      • network locations
      I know, you can get all this stuff for Windows (and perl is included for free) but my point is that OSX makes a handy network admin's workstation. I can sit down at any OSX station on my network and get all these tools at the cli. I have to spend some time getting the stuff I need on a Windows station.
      --
      Never ask for directions from a two-headed tourist! -Big Bird
    20. Re:I still miss Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or.. keep an alias of the Terminal in the Dock like everyone else that uses the Terminal frequently does?

    21. Re:I still miss Windows by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      That's what i was referring to about there being access, but nowhere near as straightforward. Yeah, it works, but it's not as fast as the more direct Windows Alt-key menu access. If I want to apply an unsharp mask in photoshop, I can hit Alt-t, s, n, enter, which can be done in about a half-second.

      On the Mac I'd have to do ctrl-F2, s, right arrow, s, right arrow, u, enter (and that would be if I knew the shortest possible way, in reality I'd be doing something more like ctrl-F2, right, right, right, etc). It's much slower because you can't reliably get to a specific menu in one combination, and then once you're in the menus you wind up doing a lot of manual arrow key directing to get from place to place because you can't tell without experimentation which particular letter can be used to jump from to a specific item or if it's even possible.

      (Of course now I make a shortcut in Photoshop that goes directly to unsharp mask, it's just an example)

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    22. Re:I still miss Windows by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

      May I be so bold as to recommend you try out Quicksilver? CTRL+Space then you can type in what you want. It's adaptive so if a bunch of apps share the same first characters it'll move what you use most to the top of the list. For me it's CTRL + Space + term + enter. I barely even use the dock because of Quicksilver.

    23. Re:I still miss Windows by mindbooger · · Score: 1

      You can use more than just the arrows for menu navigation once you hit C-F2. They use standard completion -- just start typing the menu item you want. I'm in Safari now; if I want to "Window", "Zoom", I hit C-F2, W, enter, Z, enter. For multiple menu items that are similar, you just type past the similarity: for "View", "Hide Status Bar" (there are several "Hide..." items) hit C-F2, V, enter, "hide s", enter.

      Not to mention the accelerator keys for most common functions and the fact that you can add them to others if you prefer, in System Preferences/Keyboard and Mouse.

      Once you get used to it, you may find you prefer it to the Windows (and KDE, and Gnome, and...) way of having an underlined accelerator key. I know I sure do. :)

    24. Re:I still miss Windows by TheLink · · Score: 1

      I like Windows (Win 95, 2K or WinXP in classic mode) because I can create folders in the start menu and call them stuff like:
      1 Explore
      2 Tools
      4 Command Prompt
      7 ssh

      Then in the folders I can put more similarly named folders or shortcuts. For example in "1 Explore" I could have
      1 Explore Desktop
      2 Explore My Documents
      3 Explore Home Directory
      A Explore A
      C Explore C
      R Explore CDROM drive

      And in "2 Tools" I could have:
      Calculator
      Notepad

      Then I just press winkey, 1, R = explore CDROM Drive. Or winkey, 2, C = start calculator. And so on.

      No need to download and install new software. No need to figure out configuration files- it's a fairly logical extension of the windows start menu behaviour. I can even copy the relevant directories to a new machine to transfer the setup.

      At the office I use KDE, and it's ok for some stuff, but I haven't figured out how to do this on KDE.

      Win98 sucks because if you press the windows key too early during the boot up/login process you crash something and have to restart again.

      --
    25. Re:I still miss Windows by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      By the way, one thing I'd like would be a terminal roughly equivalent to Terminal.app as a Dashboard widget. All terminal widgets I know are rather cruddy as far as terminals go.

      If there's one thing I miss from Linux (currently my main system is an iBook due to hardware issues with the Linux box) is Yakuake.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    26. Re:I still miss Windows by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

      Put it in your Dock!

      That's where my terminal is and it's just "click".

      As an admin, you really should have your Dock full of useful things.

    27. Re:I still miss Windows by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      That's what the 's' keys are for -- after them, I could type more of the menu item name rather than hit the arrow, the point is that there is no one-key solution for getting to a specific item. Such progressive name matching is great for spotlight and quicksilver, where you're dealing with arbitrary data and names, but for application menus which are limited and fixed lists, I'd rather the developer just picked a key to be the accelerator and I could hit that key to jump right to an item without any ambiguity.

      I know I can sit down on any windows application and navigate through the keyboard more quickly than most use the mouse, but it just is nowhere near as fast using menus on the mac because you have to be paying much more attention to what's getting highlighted at any given moment rather than looking ahead to what the NEXT key you need to press is.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    28. Re:I still miss Windows by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      You can run terminal stuff right in Quicksilver if you want -- I hate the modal nature of dashboard, so I never use it, but do use Quicksilver for quick lines of bash.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    29. Re:I still miss Windows by Barsema · · Score: 1

      Or install Visor and have a quake like terminal available using a hot-key

    30. Re:I still miss Windows by andy9701 · · Score: 1

      I will second this. The one concern I had when I bought my MacBook last summer was if I would be able to cope without the Run dialog. Thankfully, Quicksilver has filled that need nicely - so nicely, in fact, that I miss a lot of its features that aren't present in the Run dialog on Windows.

    31. Re:I still miss Windows by plate_o_shrimp · · Score: 1

      I have had my Mac G5 for a year now. There are many things which still aren't quite "perfect" enough yet. I am waiting for OS X 10.5 (as I've never been around for a point release) to see if it is an upgrade.

      It's not a "point release" -- 10.5 will be a major version. In Apple's (somewhat confusing) numbering scheme 10.X are all major releases, whilst 10.X.y are point releases....

      Trivia question: What's the next theoretical release after 10.9? (Hint, it's not 11.0!)

      --
      This sig has exceed its monthly bandwidth allotment.
    32. Re:I still miss Windows by Thrudheim · · Score: 1

      Another endorsement for Quicksilver (or LaunchBar for another option). I can't imagine working without it! Every important app, file, web url, etc. that I use is accessible with just a few keys. Best of all, the program learns the user's own shorthand. Anybody who is frustrated with navigation on the Mac should give it a try.

    33. Re:I still miss Windows by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I don't really like Quicksilver. Most of what it does can be done just as well by putting the Applications folder in the Dock... Besides, as far as I know Quicksilver doesn't have a full terminal built-in. I need terminals for things like Portage, so anything without a decently sized, persistent I/O window is useless.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    34. Re:I still miss Windows by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      I'm sure KDE has a Quicksilver-like app.

      Quicksilver (Mac quick launcher) lets me do Ctrl+Space and type 'calc' - the Calculator app pops up. If I want TextEdit, I type 'text' and it's in the list. Just as easy, and there are oodles more features for those interested - tying together commands, doing common tasks without even opening the app, etc.

    35. Re:I still miss Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Windows developer, I have to disagree. Once you do it a few times, the Mac way is much faster. You don't have to look for the underlined character or memorize, you just need to type.

    36. Re:I still miss Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10.A obviously... but what's after 10.F?

    37. Re:I still miss Windows by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      That said I still miss Windows for a few applications and MOSTLY for the keyboard commands (in the OS GUI). Window Key + R + cmd = CLI. On the Mac it's click or Apple + Space + Term + Click.

      I've heard arguments like this before and they usually end up in the same thing. It's not that OS X is worse at "keyboardability," it is that Windows users have trained themselves to learn the keyboard shortcuts for Windows, but not for OS X. Others have already pointed out Cmd-space+t+e+enter works for what you want, but beyond that it works for so many more things than the same feature in Windows. In Windows you're limited to things in the start menu, while on OS X it includes all applications and even files and their contents. I can hit cmd-space+m+p+l+s+enter and it will pull up that PDF about the MPLS protocol that I was reading the other day. I find that way easier than opening a Windows to c: and then running a search to try to find it.

      Before 10.4, you might have been able to argue that using the keyboard on Windows was better, but it is behind these days. Take selecting a given window with the keyboard. Say you have 100 windows open, 10 per application. To go from app 1, window 1 to app 5 window 5 you hit the same key combination 49 times. On OS X you hit one key combination 4 times and then another 4 times. That's 41 fewer key presses. The more windows, the bigger the advantage to OS X. Another thing is because OS X is designed for one button mice by default, you almost never find programs that make that the only way to get to some function, rather than putting it in a regular menu. This means it is easy to use the keyboard to navigate to any function, which is untrue for a number of Windows apps.

      I think you're just wrong. I think you are used to Windows keyboard shortcuts and what is most annoying about OS X ones to you is that they are not the ones you've already memorized. I use both OS's daily and I know which one seems ahead for keyboardability to me.

    38. Re:I still miss Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10.10, obviously!

      (or, if they aren't counting in hex, 10.10 comes after 10.9. People wanna make "10.x" a fraction, but "10.9" isn't "ten and nine tenths," but "OS Ten, release Nine."

  6. Dell Laptop + Linux by tomstdenis · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    what's that you're sitting on? OH THE WADS OF MONEY YOU JUST SAVED!

    Honestly, y0 h0 h0 and a bottle of rum, macs are good computers [I guess...] but dell + linux works just fine [I imagine acer+linux or hp+linux work fine too ... just have personal exp. with dell].

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    1. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by smash · · Score: 4, Informative
      Whilst i'm a fan of free unix in general, and FreeBSD in particular (though I will use Linux on a desktop instead of FreeBSD if appropriate) - if you're buying a new PC and want proper support it's hard to go past apple at the moment. You don't have to resort to sorting out hardware compatibility issues yourself, you'll be able to run virtually any open-source software via the X11 compatibility and you get better commercial application support.

      Is linux usable on the desktop? Certainly.

      Can it hold a candle to OS/X in terms of polish and ease of use? Not yet. Is dell's hardware as aesthetically pleasing and stylish as Apple's? No way...

      As a Windows/DOS user since the late 80s, and a Linux/BSD user since the mid 90s - my next computer is going to be a Mac.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    2. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      dell + linux works just fine [I imagine acer+linux or hp+linux work fine too ... just have personal exp. with dell]

      I do have experience with an Acer laptop and Linux. It sucked! Getting the on-board wireless to work was a huge project, and I couldn't get suspend or the volume control keys to work at all.

      Desktops are generally OK, but some laptops just do not play nice with anything but Windows. If you want to run Linux, do some research before you buy. That's what I should have done - unfortunately, that was kind of an emergency purchase, since my old laptop died suddenly while I was on the road.

    3. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by Mahoro.san · · Score: 1

      I asked my friend to install Ubuntu in my laptop, (Dell Latitude D420). Things work out of the box, but it is not optimized. - I can get 6:30+ battery on Window while 4 hrs on Linux, a big trade off. - Learning curve is too long and steep, installing drivers are PITA.... While Mac has a good OS, but it lacks of good small ultra-portable laptop (5 pound Macbook isn't portable) two of my friends are Mac guy (PB 12"), but Mac no longer produce any 12" laptop... Which put me back to Window..... As long as I can keep it virus/malware free, why not? It is still very productive (and hassle free compare to Linux)

    4. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "if you're buying a new PC and want proper support it's hard to go past apple at the moment."

      I whole heartedly DISAGREE. I bought a new Mac Mini when they came out, almost a year after I bought it I had some Apple representative call me and ask how I was getting on blah blah blah, and after a few minutes ask me if I wanted to extend Apple Care, when I replied "No thanks" she HUNG UP THE PHONE IMMEDIATLEY.

      Stuff like that leaves a bitter taste in your mouth.

    5. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by smash · · Score: 1

      Whilst I agree that sort of thing is vile, you can hardly take on isolated pissed off employee as representative of an entire multinational corporation.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    6. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I think you can. She was (probably still is?) working for them, she was representing them when she called. I can only imagine she was under pressure to meet certain targets imposed by Apple themselves to explain her behaviour. # Calls per day, # of signups, etc.

    7. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by smash · · Score: 1
      Well, you "can", but a sample size of *1* is statistically insignificant. Yes, she was "representing apple", but "representing" and "being representative of typical behavior" are two totally different things. Presuming that this is typical or apple reps worldwide based on one phone call is unwise.

      Claiming that apple are bad because of one experience with an employee is like me saying that all free software is shit based on my experience with a single alpha version project. Or that all microsoft managers throw chairs because Steve Ballmer did it. Etc...

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    8. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is dell's hardware as aesthetically pleasing and stylish as Apple's? No way...
      Why do people always talk about this as if it matters in the slightest? I can just picture legions of Mac users sitting at their desks, staring at their computers and thinking how 'beautiful' they look..
    9. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by misanthrope101 · · Score: 1

      Not all desktops are Linux-friendly, either. My Sony something-or-other has an Intel soundcard chipset (also commonly used in laptops, sadly) that ALSA seems to dislike intensely. My sound level is about a quarter of what it should be. I've googled the hell out of the problem and there isn't a fix yet, at least that I can find. I've even installed the latest ALSA manually, and no dice. I've tried sound on Ubuntu 6.04, 6.10, Knoppix, DSL, Puppy, DreamLinux, PCLinuxOS, Fedora, and Suse, and the outcome is the same, meaning very, very quiet, so I guess I'll just wait (quietly) for the fix to magically appear, assuming it does. Eventually I'll probably buy a Mac Mini to serve as a media computer. For desktop use, I really love Ubuntu, and if my sound worked properly I'd consider it perfect.

    10. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by smash · · Score: 1
      Because i spend a lot of time looking at it? No its not a major factor, but it *IS* a factor. Build quality/fit and finish also seems to be a lot higher on the apple gear.

      When you get out of your parent's basement and into your own place, and stop worrying about getting 10 more fps in quake 3 timedemo benchmarks, you might understand :D

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    11. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      Why do people always talk about this as if it matters in the slightest? I can just picture legions of Mac users sitting at their desks, staring at their computers and thinking how 'beautiful' they look..

      When your computer is in your living room, and you're spending money on furniture that all looks stylish and soothing to the eye, there is nothing that spoils that worse than a dell box right in the middle of that.

    12. Re:Dell Laptop + Linux by ibi · · Score: 1

      If you can keep it virus free, sure. But the risk of getting your machine owned is pretty high.

      I work for a very large company with a very aggressive IT security department. The windows boxes are tightly locked down, run firewalls, virus scanners, pretty much the state of the art for windows machine security (and of course the company has pretty decent perimeter controls). The result? A co-worker's machine got infected (probably via IE).

      Your mileage may vary, but be assured past success is no guarantee. Plus, all that constant scanning for viruses kills performance and battery life. (If yours isn't, it isn't agressive enough :-)

  7. Re:What about those of us who switch the other way by goto11 · · Score: 1

    Knock yourselves out!

    --
    Why don't you just make 10 louder and make 10 be the top number...and make that a little louder?
  8. Re:MBP NOT WORTH EVERY PENNY by Element43 · · Score: 1

    I've had 0 issues with my macbook pro (intel core 2 duo) In fact I plan on buying a mac pro in the next 3 months and retiring my linux desktop to the closet as a home server.

  9. a payment plan??? by User+956 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Perhaps fittingly, it took me the full three-month trial period to pay off my expensive MacBook Pro.

    Jesus. Did he buy it from DeBeers, or something?

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:a payment plan??? by Heir+Of+The+Mess · · Score: 4, Funny

      >Perhaps fittingly, it took me the full three-month trial period to pay off my expensive MacBook Pro.

      Jesus. Did he buy it from DeBeers, or something?

      Maybe the Mac he got came with a pound of coke and a lifetime porn subscription, which would explain why he had such a good time using it.

      --
      Australian running a company that does C# / C++ / Java / SQL / Python / Mathematica
    2. Re:a payment plan??? by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Saying that it's expensive to switch from Windows to a Mac running OS X is legitimate, because it means buying a whole new piece of hardware and usually a fair number of apps (since the developers usually won't let you just install the OS X version of apps for which you bought the Windows version and call it even). But if you're already planning to buy a whole new piece of hardware and upgrade a fair number of apps to run properly on Vista, the extra cost of switching to OS X instead isn't nearly as high.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    3. Re:a payment plan??? by Crasty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I could buy it from Bob's trunk-porium and still not have it payed off in three months. Not everyone is rich, or willing to put their income directly to computer purchases.. Price is relative.

    4. Re:a payment plan??? by User+956 · · Score: 1

      Not everyone is rich, or willing to put their income directly to computer purchases..

      Yeah, or you can do what some people do, and put money away until you have enough to pay for the computer in cash. That way, if it's really something you want, you have more incentive to save for it (and you're not wasting money on cc interest).

      --
      The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    5. Re:a payment plan??? by sokoban · · Score: 1

      Jesus. Did he buy it from DeBeers, or something? Yes, how else can he make three months salary last a lifetime (or 3 years, whichever comes first).
      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
    6. Re:a payment plan??? by Xugumad · · Score: 1

      Wait, it took him 3 months to pay off a $2,800 laptop (plus tax, and any upgrades), and this seems long to you? Bloody hell, I wish I had your disposable income...

    7. Re:a payment plan??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mine seemed to come with a lifetime porn subscription, but I didn't get the pound of coke. :-(

    8. Re:a payment plan??? by Viceroy+Potatohead · · Score: 1

      A pound of coke?!?!?

      I've got to change OS. All I got when I installed Linux was a recipe for meth.

    9. Re:a payment plan??? by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

      If you'd bothered to read TFA, you see that he also had to upgrade his main windows PC to Vista. No wonder it took so long

      --
      I don't therefore I'm not.
    10. Re:a payment plan??? by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      Well, when you live in your mom's basement, you can spend all of your money on computers.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  10. Patience by sudnshok · · Score: 1

    I use both Mac (at work) and PC (at home). I must say that I love my Mac and really can't stand using my PC. I've tried to convince friends to switch, but human nature is simply resistant to change. They have no interest taking time to learn a new OS/Platform even though in the long-run, it will provide a better experience for them. Hopefully, as Windows tries to emulate the great aspects of OS X, it will be less of a learning curve for Mac newbies.

    I've also tried to convince friends about the advantage of using a Wacom tablet instead of a mouse. It really is a great interface, but takes a few weeks to get used to.

    One day, I'm sure I'll convince at least 1 person to have enough patience to discover the benefits of Mac and a Wacom tablet. But, it has not happened yet.

    --
    People who say "money does not buy happiness" are just people without money trying to make themselves feel better.
    1. Re:Patience by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not the OS, it's the apps. People don't want to learn new apps, or face the fact that many of the apps (games) don't work on OSX, which means having to use two OS's, which is pointless.

    2. Re:Patience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used a wacom tablet in class about a month ago, and it was love at first click.

      I've tried to use my Mom's iMac occasionally, and I've never felt the same way.

      Just saying, I don't think the benefits of switching from Windows->Mac are anywhere near as pronounced as some people make them out to be.

    3. Re:Patience by Quilted+Porcupine · · Score: 1

      I also have the Mac at work, PC at home combo and I find I prefer Windows, for all its flaws. Of course, of the two Macs I am mostly using at work both are on the older side, running older OSes (7.6 and 10.2 respectively) and the mice are of the one button, no scroll wheel variety so I'm sure that my experience is somewhat tainted, making the comparison less than fair.

    4. Re:Patience by jcgf · · Score: 1

      The 7.6 one isn't worth bothering with, but why don't you just bring a usb 2 button-with-a-scroll mouse and hook it up? I bet you'd notice a huge improvement. I hate working without a scroll wheel personally.

  11. Welcome to the light by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows is such shit. At my last job we had over 100 Windows XP machines. WE also had 3 full time admins who spent their days running around dealing with all the problems. A couple of months ago we replaced all those with Mac Mini. After a couple of weeks only 1 admin was needed to handle the Macs. The other 2 got reassigned.

    1. Re:Welcome to the light by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      We had a similar experience, but we replaced all of our workstations with rocks and promptly fired the admins.

  12. "Windows" versus "A Mac"? by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm confused by this. You can run Windows on a Mac with Bootcamp, right?

    I suppose what he or the summary meant to say is "PC versus Mac" or, probably, "Windows versus MacOS on a Mac." It's really fallacious to compare an operating system to a computing architecture. You Linux users out there should be angry, since it tacitly implies that the only thing a PC ever runs is Windows.

    Personally, I'm a computer gamer. Much of my computer time is spent gaming, with the rest being internet browsing and completion of homework/programming/etc. I use a PC because I want the level of control this architecture provides over my components. I use Windows because, well, for most games I pretty much have to.

    (Yes, techincally "PC" means a lot of things. I use the term PC out of convenience, which is probably ironic of me to say given what half of my post is complaining about.)

    1. Re:"Windows" versus "A Mac"? by QuantumG · · Score: 1, Troll

      Or, ya know, you could use BOTH. Shocking.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:"Windows" versus "A Mac"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's the Slashdot community, or just people in general, but what's the fucking deal with splitting hairs. I'm not new to Slashdot, but maybe not the vet as some others; but it still amazes me how many posts that are just ranting about semantics get modded up. Sure, this might have been misspelled, or that might have not been the perfect term to use, but it that all there is to discuses? Is Slashdot an editing room?



      With this article in specific, there is very little talk about the topic of the post, and a bunch of bitching about minor semantics.



      Yes, much like this post, but I am just following the crowd, after all.


    3. Re:"Windows" versus "A Mac"? by gardyloo · · Score: 5, Funny

      You Linux users out there should be angry

            Oh, we are. We're fucking enraged . We just don't know why.

    4. Re:"Windows" versus "A Mac"? by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      PC v. Mac? That doesn't make sense either. Macs ARE PCs! Any non-server non-mainframe is a PC.

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    5. Re:"Windows" versus "A Mac"? by colinbrash · · Score: 1

      Oh, we are. We're fucking enraged. We just don't know why.

      You're just frustrated because you can't beat NetHack.

    6. Re:"Windows" versus "A Mac"? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      At least I know that the Linux/AMD users are rebels without a Core.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    7. Re:"Windows" versus "A Mac"? by dmccarty · · Score: 1

      One of /.'s best posts ever. No, really.

      --
      Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
    8. Re:"Windows" versus "A Mac"? by aardwolf64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, both of us are very angry...

  13. Of course by adambha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps fittingly, it took me the full three-month trial period to pay off my expensive MacBook Pro. But the darn thing is worth every penny. Of course. Even Jim Allchin said, "I would buy a Mac today if I was not working at Microsoft."

    The market preference is shifting...
    1. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah for the technical minded. My ceo wanted a mac because it was the in thing in the ceo circle jerks they all have. 2 weeks later we bought him a pc because "It didn't work like my last machine" Your average home user will be much the same.

    2. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah for the technical minded. My ceo wanted a mac because it was the in thing in the ceo circle jerks they all have. 2 weeks later we bought him a pc because "It didn't work like my last machine" Your average home user will be much the same. True enough, but I don't think Apple is out to get the 85-90% of average home desktop computer users, they'll be happy if they get the 10-15% that break the mold. Apple's OS.X will never compete with Microsoft's Windows for domination of the desktop computer OS market unless Steve Jobs decides to make some fundamental changes to Apple's business model which seems unlikely. Even if everything goes perfectly for Apple I'd be surprised to see the OS.X market share top 15% of the total OS installs.
    3. Re:Of course by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Of course. Even Jim Allchin said, "I would buy a Mac today if I was not working at Microsoft."

      Of course, he also said that 3 years ago...

    4. Re:Of course by rizzo320 · · Score: 1

      Of course, he also said that 3 years ago...


      Shows you how highly he thought of Windows XP, which was the current desktop OS until about a week ago. I'm not sure that anything Microsoft has done in the last three years would change his mind, other than the threat of being fired.
  14. Re:hooray by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    And you're adding your two-bits for what reason?

  15. W00t! by Crasty · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Sounds great! I'm going to go buy a mac right now! I can't wait to see how well my games run on it.

    1. Re:W00t! by Crasty · · Score: 1

      The so-called moderator that called this flamebait is a dipshit. Fact of the matter is, the mac is not going to get a full fledged swing in it's favor until AAA -=current=- gaming titles are -=consistantly=- released on the platform.

      If you think that is an invalid point worthy of being called flamebait, then you (and YOU, the guy shaking his head no) are morons.

      P.S. You have my express written consent to call this reply flamebait. Maybe I should have just written I LOVE MAC! Then I guess I'd be a better contributor, eh?

    2. Re:W00t! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't mod this thread, but I did read it. If you actually look at your one line post, how was it not flamebait? You are provoking windows gaming flames. It was mod'ed accordingly.

  16. Re:MBP NOT WORTH EVERY PENNY by Biff98 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Good rational, because you haven't had a problem with yours means there aren't any problems with any MBP's and I'm a liar. Great.

  17. Use what you want ... by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Change if you want, stay if you want. I work on a Mac at home, an MS-Windows based PC at work and Linux my website. I like my Mac, but in a properly managed environment Windows does a good job too. I don't like the "I'm better than you attitude" coming from either side, use what you like and recognise each has its issue - like a significant other, you need decide what attracts you and which issues you can live with.

    If I had to choose a new computer tomorrow it would be a Mac, but that's my preference and my choice.

    --
    If you use the Mac, my choice of apps: Adium, Delicious Library, Disco, TextWrangler, Transmit, Darwin Ports, Handbrake

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:Use what you want ... by MBCook · · Score: 5, Informative

      I agree. I've used all three for large periods, but my current computer is a Mac and when I replace it I intend to get another Mac. In general, I find it better than Windows. There are tons of little annoyances that I run into almost daily using my PC at work that I don't have when using my Mac. But I also like it for it's "best of both worlds" that it provides me. Commercial applications and an extremely polished UI in all places (where parts of Linux can get hairy, although it's gotten better), but the UNIX command line and GCC and all that for when I feel like fiddling low level/programming/etc. A real CLI that I can use (let's face it, the windows shell is ancient and pales compared to Bash. Maybe when Monad comes out).

      These facts have provided me with great benefits besides my basic preference for the Mac. When I worked on my senior project (LAMP site) while my friends were testing on the test box the school was letting us use, I was able to run the whole thing on my laptop easily because all the components were already there and easily setup (where with Windows I would have had to download/install/configure each part). When I changed code I could test it instantly, no "copy to server, test, edit, copy" over the slow connection. I could work on it without an internet connection, or worrying about interfering with what my partners were working on (overwriting them).

      The only "long-standing" problem I have with my Mac is the lack of big games, but I don't have a ton of time for them anymore anyway so my consoles work fine for that (although I miss a good game of CounterStrike, I'm on PPC so I can't run BootCamp).

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:Use what you want ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could be like me. I have a Mac & Win box at my desk. The Macintosh compiles the firmware, the Windows box does the windows software I have to develop and runs the hardware design tools. A FreeBSD box runs Subversion where all the work is stored and customers download updates from a co-located Linux server.

      After Cygwin and FINK and friends the platforms all really some mostly interchangeable during basic use.. I guess I just don't see the huge religious differences here.

    3. Re:Use what you want ... by codemachine · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but I think many of us here would prefer our friends and relatives made a choice other than Windows not just to make their own lives easier, but ours as well. Many people on here are stuck with the "support" role for others due to being the "computer guy" (or gal) in the group.

      Not to mention the spam epidemic filling our inboxes right now that is being caused by Windows botnets.

      So I can see why people here try to sell the "Mac is better" to anyone asking them for an opinion before buying. Other people's preferences and choices can negatively affect the rest of us, not just the person who makes the decision.

      For home use on the hostile internet, Windows is just a poor choice for most common people, but they just don't know any better. However this isn't really the place to preach that - most people here that are running Windows know how to keep it safe and don't have to ask their friends and relatives for help. The problem isn't the "computer people" using Windows, it is the people who buy it OEM without knowing anything about the options out there. (You'd think the OEM's would be clamoring for something other than Windows too to keep their support costs down, but I guess OS X isn't an option and Ubuntu/Linspire probably wouldn't help most OEMs either).

      Of course for me, most of my friends either know what they're doing or are on the Mac or Linux already. And the family is quite a distance away. So I don't have to do the free tech support thing that much anymore. And I could always just refuse to if it became a problem. I can just see where many people here may be coming from when trying to influence other people's choices of OS.

    4. Re:Use what you want ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      let's face it, the windows shell is ancient and pales compared to Bash.
      Which is why Cygwin is absolutely essential if you must run Windows.
    5. Re:Use what you want ... by ThePhilips · · Score: 1

      Same's thing here. [ Well, "was" - until I lost my iBook :-((( ]

      Honestly, I was afraid of Macs and the "hardware lock". But seeing how Intel/AMD force everybody to upgrade completely every two years - the issue became moot.

      Another barrier for me was keyboard navigation. As Linux addict, being able configure to everything to my needs became a requirement. With Windows it is plain impossible to configure all on shortcuts - for some unknown reason Windows (or Explorer.exe) often like to hang for several seconds when shortcut is invoked. I was afraid that Mac OS wouldn't be as convenient as Linux can be or it would expose some sort of problems Windows always does. But already after two weeks, I have noticed that GUI of Mac OS is made very simply yet provide all functions to you in easily accessible manner. I LOVED single button mouse. Really. I HATE right-click pop-up menus Windows GUI is plagued with. [ In Linux the question doesn't exists since I have everything on keyboard shortcuts ;-) ]

      Overall, for me - a decade long PC user - Mac OS was a "breath of fresh air". Just like long time ago (after several years of Windows NT 4.0) Linux was a "revelation". I was really surprised that single company - magnitudes smaller than M$ - could have made such great and slick product.

      P.S. Kudos to Jobs: as long as you are with Apple, I would be buying Macs.

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    6. Re:Use what you want ... by MBCook · · Score: 1

      I had Cygwin installed on my old Windows box. Someone always mentions it (I was just waiting for a comment like yours). It does help a lot, but it's not integrated well (as you would expect). Installing it and software is weird. It just doesn't always feel "right". OS X doesn't have that problem since it's based on UNIX.

      The shell in Linux and on OS X is like a big powerful truck. The Windows shell is a bit like a Ford Taurus... you can use it to move things around, and if they are big you could always strap them to the roof with duct-tape... but it's no truck. Cygwin in a serious step up, but it's an El Camino. It's a truck... but it's not the same thing.

      I'm glad Cygwin exists, but it's no substitute for the real thing.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    7. Re:Use what you want ... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      So your're saying that the Mac is so good, even a representative of neutrality would prefer one.

      (only making a joke, not an elitist comment)

    8. Re:Use what you want ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The shell in Linux and on OS X is like a big powerful truck. The Windows shell is a bit like a Ford Taurus... you can use it to move things around, and if they are big you could always strap them to the roof with duct-tape... but it's no truck. Cygwin in a serious step up, but it's an El Camino. It's a truck... but it's not the same thing.


      Yeah, Windows is no dump truck. It's more like a series of tubes.
    9. Re:Use what you want ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    10. Re:Use what you want ... by andy9701 · · Score: 1

      A real CLI that I can use (let's face it, the windows shell is ancient and pales compared to Bash. Maybe when Monad comes out).


      Monad was actually released last fall for Windows XP under the new name "Windows PowerShell". You can download it at here.
  18. Took me three months... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    It took me only three months to make the switch. The transition was smooth since I was using Thunderbird and Firefox (switched to Camino later), and got Parallels to run a virtual machine copy of Windows 2000 for my work applications when I work from home. Still got my PC to play video games and run that experimental operating system, Windows Vista.

  19. If you listen very closely... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you can hear the sound of hundreds of chairs breaking in Redmond.

    1. Re:If you listen very closely... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

      ...and a high-pitch rumbling in the background: "imgonnafuckingkillgoogleimgonnafuckingkillgooglei mgonnafuckingkillgoogle".

      oh wait...

      "imgonnafuckingkillappleimgonnafuckingkillappleimg onnafuckingkillapple"

      There... :)

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

  20. Re:This is fantastic by geekoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "They would put an end to all of that"
    No it wouldn't, Simple economies of scale will tell you that.

    BTW, Apples are built to a higher specification then your 750 dollar bosx.

    Comparing all the ing equal, then the price is about the same.

    Another thing, time is money and not having to deal with the MS issues would more then pay for any difference.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  21. Made such a change a long, long time ago by TWX · · Score: 3, Informative

    About ten years ago I switched from Windows to Linux. I was prompted to make this change by Microsoft's bundling IE 3.0 with Windows 95 OSR2.1 where it would start an installation of IE after the Windows installation concluded. It could be fairly easily cancelled by Ctrl-Alt-Del/End Task, but that one had to so was ridiculous.

    Ditching Windows was a little hard as I used to play games, but I was reaching the point where gaming held little appeal for me anyway. Switching to a platform that ran for literally years on end without major crashes demonstrated the value of Linux, and obviously, the lack of worth to Windows.

    Microsoft only holds its place because people are too timid to try something else. Apple's OS is slick. Linux has had windowmanagers that mimic the windows shell for many years. For people who don't play computer games it shouldn't be a big deal to switch.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by DogDude · · Score: 0, Troll

      For people who don't play computer games it shouldn't be a big deal to switch.

      Don't forget those of us who run businesses (and yes, Slashdotters, there are businesses out there other than Best Buy and McDonald's). Apple/Linux aren't really options for businesses until you're a Fortune 500 company and can afford teams of programmers.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by Scud · · Score: 1

      Same here. I haven't used Windows for anything substantial for years. I use it here at work (where I'm currently goofing off reading /.), but other than that I mostly only use it for playing games in Windows. My latest box doesn't even have Windows on it.

      My biggest need for Windows is for some of the electronics programs (things like Electronics Workbench, my OOPics, and the programming software for the Tiger family of microprocessors). That and TurboTax.

      I occasionally take a peek at the Apple hardware over at CompUSA. They have some cool stuff, but
      a) I really don't need it, and
      b) I don't care to do business with Apple while Steve Jobs is in control (ok, so I'm another disgruntled Newton owner).

      --
      I dream in binary.
    3. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by earthbound+kid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You stopped using Windows because they forced you to install a web browser?

      If so then my question is what do you do now that the only OS that doesn't come with a web browser built-in is Abacus 1.0?

      Seriously, MS has done a lot of crap things over the years, and it was harsh of them to make IE uninstallable, but bundling the browser with the OS? If you can bundle worthless stuff like solitaire with an OS and no one complains, I don't see how anyone can be upset about an OS coming packaged with the single most important piece of software for a modern computer. Seriously. I'm a proud Mac user, but I'll go to the mat for MS on this one: Bundling a web browser was the right thing to do. While strong arming OEMs into not including Netscape was evil, including IE was completely justified.

    4. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by bcrowell · · Score: 1
      For people who don't play computer games it shouldn't be a big deal to switch.
      Two big barriers:
      1. It's hard to find machines with linux preinstalled, and most people can't handle installing an os (any os).
      2. Many people are locked into proprietary file formats. E.g., when I switched to mac to linux, the process took years to complete, working in my spare time, because I had a bunch of books in Adobe PageMaker format, which I had to convert to latex. Most people aren't that motivated.
    5. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by nick.ian.k · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If so then my question is what do you do now that the only OS that doesn't come with a web browser built-in is Abacus 1.0?

      100% untrue. Numerous permutations of Linux and BSD come without web browsers, and most of the ones that do have them included make it fairly trivial to remove them. I'm sure there are other browser-less OSs out there besides these, though I'm not explicitly aware of them.

    6. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by dbIII · · Score: 1

      You stopped using Windows because they forced you to install a web browser?

      I'd say it was a straw and camel's back situation. For me I listened to all the hype and got excited by Win95 - but the long delay for release and disappointment as more and more things were revealed to be a pile of crap (TCP/IP networking built in but they couldn't even get ping right) made the three other main options look better. I recently was asked to get stuff off a win95 machine that had been "doublespaced" twice - the thing really was a barely usable steaming pile that Macs, OS/2 and even fvwm on linux was vastly superior to. The only reason to use a computer is for the appilications - which is why Win95 was the better solution for a lot of people no matter how broken it was.

    7. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      And what Linux distro compels you to install Firefox, or Konqueror?
      Or maybe it's Lynx?

    8. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. The only thing tying me to windows was games, and also some educational software for kids who needed them for their courseworks.

      Nowadays, many educational softwares are web-based, or are written in formats available in multi-platform (Flash 9 is available in linux, and many are written in java or pdf.) Only remaining ones are commercial games, but I had not played games much. Once I accidentally erased a windows game, which I rarely touched. That triggered me to just wipe windows partition off and use the free space as additional linux partition.

      I just don't find anything lacking in linux: video editing, multimedia, word processing, internet, personal finance, database, education, etc.

    9. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by earthbound+kid · · Score: 1

      I'm using OS in the sense of "distribution" not "kernel." If there's really a full-fledged, desktop-ready, consumer-friendly distribution that doesn't at least encourage you to install a web browser with it, I'll eat my hat.

      (Incidentally, I'm not sure why people always insist that OS refers only to the disk controllers and such. The initials mean "operating system." Surely the web browser is an important part of the system? If nothing else, your computer needs to have a default browser so that you can go download an alternative one.)

    10. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by nick.ian.k · · Score: 1

      I'm using OS in the sense of "distribution" not "kernel." If there's really a full-fledged, desktop-ready, consumer-friendly distribution that doesn't at least encourage you to install a web browser with it, I'll eat my hat.

      I didn't mean "kernel". I meant operating system in the very here-and-now contemporary sense of "a kernel and group of applications packaged with said kernel that allow you to do stuff with things".

      Now you're using undefined qualifiers to specify what constitutes an operating system, and, besides meeting this previously unmentioned set of requirements, the browser now doesn't necessarily have to be installed at all costs, but now spec'd as a default option that can't be opted out of prior to installing the operating system.

      Really, nobody's asking you to eat your hat or anything of the sort. You were just wrong. These things happen to everyone all the time. Misinformation needs to be corrected for the benefit of others who might read your modded-up statement and take it as being rooted in fact. If I make an incorrect statement, I expect somebody to step up and tell me and everyone else concerned know I was wrong. This is not for the sake of humiliation, but actual correction: we can't have people going around believing things that just aren't true, at least in the realm of genuinely verifiable factual matters. It's counter-productive and leads to people repeating false statements and possibly making bad decisions (though specific to this case, probably not so much).

      (Incidentally, I'm not sure why people always insist that OS refers only to the disk controllers and such. The initials mean "operating system." Surely the web browser is an important part of the system? If nothing else, your computer needs to have a default browser so that you can go download an alternative one.)

      No, it doesn't. You just need a program which can handle retrieving a file stored some place else and copies said file to a place on your local disk. It may not be incredibly practical, as in this case you'd to know what are available and where to get them, or maybe evenbe presented with a list of such applications and the option to install or not install them -functionality which you seem to perhaps be aware of but are suddenly discounting upon remembering- but no, it's not impossible.

    11. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ditching Windows was a little hard as I used to play games, but I was reaching the point where gaming held little appeal for me anyway. Switching to a platform that ran for literally years on end without major crashes demonstrated the value of Linux, and obviously, the lack of worth to Windows.

      Microsoft only holds its place because people are too timid to try something else. Apple's OS is slick. Linux has had windowmanagers that mimic the windows shell for many years. For people who don't play computer games it shouldn't be a big deal to switch.

      I agree, that is basicaly the case with me, too. Most games I'm interested in nowadays run natively on Linux anyway (the UT series, id games, emulated stuff). For one thing, I don't really have the time to play anything that requires an extensive amount of time (ie rpgs, though I love them). But mostly I'm just not really interested in games that much anymore (with the exception of Gothic 3, if only because I loved the first two, and of course above examples).

      Naturally this "I don't play games (anymore)" argument only counts in the event that games would be the only reason you're still using Windows, or have Windows on a seperate partition/computer. I have a WinXP x64 edition sitting around, but haven't used it in months, though admittedly I want to do some audio work on it. But thankfully my favourite sound tracker program (so to say one of a few "killer apps") is being ported to Linux in a cross-platform manner (http://psycle.sf.net/).

    12. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by TWX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I stopped using Windows because they made me use their web browser, which, if you remember the hardware that we had at the time, reduced the available resources for other programs. It also was steaming pile of crap. When Microsoft decided that the web browser was the next hot thing I decided that Linux was the next hot thing, as my Linux machines had uptimes significantly longer than those running Windows, and I got tired of a little thing called a Blue Screen of Death. The browser was, as another poster put it, the straw that broke the camel's back.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    13. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by psychokitten · · Score: 1

      Microsoft only holds its place because people are too timid to try something else. Apple's OS is slick. Whereas I find it to be anything but slick. I used to be one of those raving Mac fans, my first Mac was the original, and it kept getting upgraded to various other models throughout the years to my current G3 and G4 iBooks that I have.. and I find OSX to be a sheer abomination. I hate it, pure and simple. I damn near hate every single aspect of the 'user experience' side of the operating system. My main system now is a MCE2005/Ubuntu system, and to me, both Windows and Gnome are -far- better experiences. It's actually quicker and easier to get things done in both of them than OS X could ever dream of getting it done. When my mom's desktop went down due to hardware failures awhile back, I sent her my G4 to use until she bought a new system (it was time for her to upgrade anyway,) thinking she might like the Mac, being in one of the demographics Apple targets, and everyone says Macs are -so- wonderful for. The result? After using it exclusively for 3 months, she hated it. "I was considering getting a Mac, but now I know there's no way in hell I'll buy one." It's all about personal preferences - Macs, just like Windows, Linux, BSD, anything, aren't for everyone - and it's a great thing that the choices are out there. (Ugh.. need more coffee.)
    14. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by martyros · · Score: 1

      Or to make your argument stronger: Would you buy a Unix-like OS without a shell? Without a text editor? Without perl or a compiler? These are required to use the basic functionality of the system; it's part of what you expect a computer to be able to do. Well, modern GUIs you expect to be able to use windows, surf the web, and play your MP3s. I'd argue that antivirus and anti-spyware capabilities comes under that too.

      --

      TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.

    15. Re:Made such a change a long, long time ago by mephistus · · Score: 1

      Why, quite obviously you didn't use the bloated P.O.S. that was IE3. :) Quite obviously he has been using Lynx and Gopher to browse the intertubes for 10 years. N00b! :)

      I keed, I keed. :)

  22. Virtulization is the key to more switches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are only a handful of legacy apps keeping people tied to windows. This is why Microsoft are discriminating against competitio^w VMs in their vista licensing.

  23. I'm sticking to Windows by eebra82 · · Score: 1, Troll

    I understand that OSX is a solid alternative to Windows, but better stability and security is not going to make me switch. I want the same operating system my friends, parents and neighbours have. It may sound ignorant but it's not.

    Although Macs are great (I've had a Macbook, btw), there are still too many issues that need to be solved first. For starters, I enjoy computer games every now and then. Also, despite the fact that Apple does great hardware, I'd like to see third party vendors create Mac hardware too. That's the great thing about PCs. There's endless stuff for and around your computer that is restricted to PC usage.

    1. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by wall0159 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      circa 1994:

      I understand that Windows is a solid alternative to DOS , but a better interface and graphics is not going to make me switch. I want the same operating system my friends, parents and neighbours have. It may sound ignorant but it's not.

      Change is inevetable. Sticking with a familiar brand-name won't mean avoiding change.

    2. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "I want the same operating system my friends, parents and neighbours have."
      Why?

      What game are you playing that isn't available on the Mac?

      Just curious.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is older than Windows 95 and they didn't really managed to get better marketshare for the last decade. What make you think it'll change right now ?

      He won't avoid "change", when change means a new Microsoft product. But he will gladly avoid change if you mean "switch to a mac".

    4. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want the same operating system my friends, parents and neighbours have.

      I see you're an adventurous free-thinker.

    5. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by skingers6894 · · Score: 1

      "I understand that OSX is a solid alternative to Windows, but better stability and security is not going to make me switch. I want the same operating system my friends, parents and neighbours have."

      Yeah I had that too. I'm the guy who knows computers and the one they always used to call for help. Then one day I said "If you want my assistance in future, switch to a Mac", they did, and now they don't need my support nearly as often, win-win.

    6. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by niktemadur · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'd like to see third party vendors create Mac hardware too.

      Apple tried that during the wasteland years of the nineties (post- and pre- Steve Jobs). They were called clones, and from what I remember, the very first thing Jobs did when returning to Apple was axe that arrangement with third party manufacturers, due to 'quality concerns (not up to par)'.

      For starters, I enjoy computer games every now and then.

      That's one of the few issues left standing today. Another very specific example is US government standards, let me explain: My wife is a translator, working on a Mac, and she had to do a series of jobs for the Justice Department, which only accepts files in the WordPerfect format. Since there hasn't been a WordPerfect for the Mac since the mid-nineties, she got stuck and had to work elsewhere, on somebody else's PC, not a comfortable arrangement. Considering that this has been the lone compatibility issue in the years she's been working as translator, she prefers the Mac by a long shot.

      Here's a bit of third-party Mac database software that has no peer in the world: Claris Filemaker, which I use every day. Sure, there's a version for PC, but it's not quite as astonishingly great as the original Mac version. Here's another: DVD Studio Pro.

      The list of Mac feats is long and distinguished. Four years ago, I got a brand new Mac installed in my office, then called the tech guy to ask what the particular configurations should be to connect to the internet, as he had done none. The guy said "Click on the Safari icon". I said "But it's not configured". He said "Click on the Safari icon, it's a Mac, c'mon". I did. Within thirty seconds, I was staring at the Apple homepage. I was impressed.

      BTW, I've been a Mac user since 1989 (B&W screen! No internal hard drive! Diskette slot!), and I've come to this conclusion:
      Switching from PC to Mac may be perplexing, but switching from Mac to PC may be infuriating.

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    7. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by NaugaHunter · · Score: 1

      If you truly mean "now and then", I don't see a problem. Casual players aren't usually as concerned about getting the latest games as soon as possible. Even if you are, the development gap has been steadily decreasing.

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
    8. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For starters, I enjoy computer games every now and then. Also, despite the fact that Apple does great hardware, I'd like to see third party vendors create Mac hardware too. That's the great thing about PCs. There's endless stuff for and around your computer that is restricted to PC usage.


      And then every time Apple wants to release a new version of the OS their test matrix asplode. It's the same deal with running OSX on commodity hardware. Suddenly, J. Random user plugs in some unknown piece of hardware (with drivers written by the unpaid intern, who has a crack habit btw) into his cheap Dell POS, and boldly proclaims "OMGZ! This doesn't just work! APPLE IS TEH SUX!!!!!1111".

      Apple's schtick is "It just works." Running everywhere means endangering one of the main selling points of the mac has in the first place.
    9. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by nidarus · · Score: 1
      Microsoft forced that change by killing off DOS after the release of Win95. After '95 you couldn't buy DOS even if you wanted to.

      Also, Windows 95 included DOS, so there was no problem running DOS games and apps.

      The situation is simply not comparable.

    10. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Claris" isn't a third party, they are wholly-owned by Apple. They actually don't go by that name anymore, they renamed the company to "FileMaker" in '97, and moved some of the apps back into Apple (ClarisWorks -> AppleWorks).

    11. Re:I'm sticking to Windows by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      That amazing thing is called DHCP, and surprise! it works in Windows too!

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  24. A BROKE Windows Expert? by LibertineR · · Score: 2, Funny
    Forgive me for saying so, but how many people with Windows expertise and a software reviewing job to boot, who have trouble paying for a laptop? Budget concerns? Payment plans? I mean, WTF?

    Any city, any country, an acknowledge 'expert' ought to be able to buy stuff without bitching.

    Is he married?

    Oh, wait.....

    1. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by Xugumad · · Score: 1

      Wait... your idea of broke is "Doesn't have $3,000 spare"? I mean spare, not saved for something else, but spare, available to spend as they wish?

    2. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WAIT A MINUTE YOU FIRST WORLD CITIZEN

      I'm a IT Professional with several years of experience from assembler to wathever you choose and my salary is just U$S 1000 a Month... Why? I'm a looser? NO, in fact I have a big salary around here It just happens tha I live in the third world and ... I'm married with childrens, feeding them demands me U$S 800 a month... so I can't even buy the (cheap for you) PC I use at work.
      Why you american never EVER stop a minute and THINK that YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES IN THE WORLD??????????

    3. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by LibertineR · · Score: 1
      If you dont have 3Gs in the bank, you are BROKE! Less than $3K at your disposal means you are living on a paycheck.

      And I dont mean available credit either. I feel sorry for anyone who cant save up 3-6 months salary in case of emergencies, or the next big Newegg sale, which ever comes first.

    4. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by LibertineR · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Fine, have you got 3-6 months of YOUR salary in the bank? If not Pilgram, you are still broke.

      Sorry. In America, we suggest having money before having children, because the day may come when instead of a child, you might just want a kickass video card.

      But, good luck with that.....*shiver*

    5. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      Well in the USA if you're a freelance journalist or a contractor you effectively are running your own business and it PAYS to buy expensive tech because come tax time a higher deduction for an equipment purchase is always a good thing. The US govt encourages business expenses to build the economy. Sorry to hear your govt is so short sighted. Sucks to be you.

    6. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is he married?

      No, he's a Mac user now, and the laws don't allow that.

    7. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by Xugumad · · Score: 1

      We're going to have discuss the finances of many recent college graduates...

      More seriously, sure, but the money I have in the bank for emergencies (and saving in a desperate attempt to catch up with the housing market) isn't money I'd count for spending on a laptop. Even if I'm only paying back my own savings, rather than a credit card company, I'd consider a laptop paid for when I've covered the cost of it from my discretionary spending money...

    8. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      You just described 90% of americans.

      Most people dont even have a savings account let alone a huge amount like $3000.00

      Maybe if you would get off your high and mightly horse ant take a ride on the reality train you would realize how fubared america really is.

      Forclosures on homes are up 40%, A shitshack in SanFranSisco is $1.2 MILLION Dollars and salaries have not been increased to match the rising costs for anyone but the executives.

      You might be lucky enough to be rich, most americans are actually $10,000+ in debt on signature loans and unsecured credit.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    9. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      Assuming you haven't already, please do the world a favor and do not breed.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    10. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by LibertineR · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Picture 7 years of college and graduate school, a career at Microsoft, then owning my own company.

      Luck had nothing to do with it. I worked my ass off, and in America, anyone willing to do that can be successful.

      ANYONE!

    11. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by LibertineR · · Score: 1
      Awww, why not?

      I've already GOT a cool video card!

    12. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any city, any country, an acknowledge 'expert' ought to be able to buy stuff without bitching.
      I'm well-versed in .NET, PHP and Python, I know SQL to a high degree, I know all the HTML and CSS tricks and I'm the admin on a couple of Windows and Linux (Fedora) servers. I'm also the person who designs user interfaces in the company I work for.

      My monthly salary: $550
      My monthly income after paying the bills and putting scarce food on the table: -$100

      I'm not married, I don't have children, I don't have a car, I don't have my own house or an apartment.
      I just happen to live in a country with an awful economy.

      The PC I'm writing this on was bought 7 years ago, when I worked two regular jobs for half a year.
    13. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2

      Including those people who receive piss-poor education because they can't afford going to anything but the local run-down highschool?

      Success is not only a function of how much work you do. Social standing is still an important factor.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    14. Re:A BROKE Windows Expert? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked my ass off, and in America, anyone willing to do that can be successful.

      Bullshit

  25. Are you playing any of these: by geekoid · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.gamedb.com/ssps/0/0/00009

    or how about World of Warcraft?

    There are many games for the Mac.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Are you playing any of these: by Crasty · · Score: 2, Informative

      Battlefield 2, Tribes Vengeance, Day of Defeat: Source, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, and soon to be released Supreme Commander...

      Sorry, the mac is simply not a gamers platform. :(

      They have some games, and some good ones at that, but if you like playing games, the mac is still a foolish choice.

    2. Re:Are you playing any of these: by Blahbooboo3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I think "Foolish choice" is a bit strong, I would like mac but the gaming part keeps me back. If they made a decent headless mac that I could dual boot to play games (i.e with a decent graphics card that is user upgradeable). Yes, I know Imac, but i just don't like this form factor -- I want to be able to upgrade things as I want. Mac Pro is too expensive. If Mac made a mid-range headless computer, I would finally make the jump to mac I think..

    3. Re:Are you playing any of these: by no+reason+to+be+here · · Score: 1

      what about the MacMini? It's headless and much less expensive than the Mac Pro.

    4. Re:Are you playing any of these: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Sorry, the mac is simply not a gamers platform. :(


      What about Crystal Quest? Got you there.

    5. Re:Are you playing any of these: by 47Ronin · · Score: 1

      How about a more comprehensive list from Apple itself?

      --
      Those who laugh at you for you having a Mac.. are the people who constantly call you to fix their PC.
    6. Re:Are you playing any of these: by Blahbooboo3 · · Score: 1

      Macmini for games won't work. The graphics are terrible.

    7. Re:Are you playing any of these: by geekoid · · Score: 1

      After reading Vista's EULA, I will be perfectly happy with a slightly limited pool of games. Especialy since all the genres are coverd and most of the big name games.

      No I don't own a Mac, but I have been looking into it.

      Yes, I am a gamer and have been gaming for the entire existance of consumer electronic games.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Are you playing any of these: by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Not until there is an "Alcohol 120%" for the Mac will it take off as a gaming platform. 'Bout the only real utility I miss... :-(

    9. Re:Are you playing any of these: by Crasty · · Score: 1

      Well if we are talking Vista, then I'm in the mac camp too. But in the mean time, I'll stick with XP.

    10. Re:Are you playing any of these: by jdp816 · · Score: 1

      Of course Mac makes makeup, not computers. Apple makes computers. ;) I bought a Mac mini from Apple. I still wonder why people can't use "Mac mini" and call it "mini Mac" "macmini" "Mac Mini" etc. Is it a Thinkpad Lenovo? Is it an Inspiron Dell? Is it a Sonyvaio? It's not hard to keep straight.

    11. Re:Are you playing any of these: by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Are you playing any of these?

      Short answer: Not really.

      Long answer: I'm stuck on the pre-installation level of Duke Nuke 'Em Forever. The rest I finished several years ago, when they were released.

    12. Re:Are you playing any of these: by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Mac doesn't do mid-range headless, tho if you wait another few months, one-year-old Intel Mac Pros will start coming on the market :D . Half of the macs I've ever owned have been used, were 1-2 years old when I got them (off of ebay in both cases), and lasted 2-3 years after I bought them, without having to replace any parts, so that might be an option.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  26. Re:What about those of us who switch the other way by emor8t · · Score: 1

    You get marked as a troll. Because MS makes Apple Fanboi /.ers hurt cry. (Venture Bros refence, FTW)

  27. Re:This is fantastic by superpulpsicle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A PC with linux can be built to far higher specification than a mac locked-in by proprietary Apple. It's crazy to think a USB cable is better if purchased from Apple because they charge you more. Let's not confuse hardware with software quality.

  28. A reporter on a budget? by argent · · Score: 1
  29. Re:This is fantastic by Sam+Ritchie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pro-linux I get, it's all about philosophy, but pro-apple, pro-microsoft, pro-nintendo, pro-proctor-and-gamble, I don't get - unless you're an employee or stockholder.

    I'd call myself pro-Apple - I've been a Mac owner since '92 (and a user prior to that), I like and enjoy their products, and I'm happy to give them my hard-earned in exchange for new kit. Similarly, I'm 'pro-Nikon' since picking up my Dad's Nikonos fifteen years ago; even to the extent I'm willing to pay more for one than a comparable Canon. Just because you don't 'get' it doesn't mean loyalty to a company is irrational or misplaced. It's kind of like having a favourite sports team - there doesn't have to be a philosophical reason behind it.

    Regarding the Slashdot coverage, I don't think it's necessarily all pro-Apple as much as pro-not-Microsoft. One day we'll reach a point where OS choice in the average school/home/work environment is not predestined. IMO, that's a good outcome for everyone (except MS stockholders & employees).

    --
    This sig is false.
  30. Re:MBP NOT WORTH EVERY PENNY by mhokie · · Score: 1

    This is merely a hardware issue in general. We could pick any model from any manufacturer and find people who had issues with their hardware.
    Likewise, I know there are plenty of people who will swear by their Dell/HP/Gateway/Mac/PenguinPC. They'll tell stories of dropping it, spilling things on it and having it for 2 decades.
    What it comes down to is the fact that all physical things wear down. It could happen in six year or six months. Isn't that what a warrenty is for.....?

  31. I recently switched by GWBasic · · Score: 1

    I recently switched to a MacBook Pro. While the platform has its advantages, XCode is about ten years behind Microsoft Visual Studio.

    Apple really needs a modern development enviornment; without one it will always be second-runner when it comes to variety of applications.

    1. Re:I recently switched by wass · · Score: 3, Insightful

      XCode is about ten years behind Microsoft Visual Studio. Apple really needs a modern development enviornment

      Care to elaborate a bit more on that?

      --

      make world, not war

    2. Re:I recently switched by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Visual Studio sucks compared to Eclipse - it's so far behind with refactoring support and other stuff - that I can't imaging how bad XCode must be for you to say that.

    3. Re:I recently switched by filterban · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ten years behind is a bit much. Did you use Visual Studio in 1997? I specifically remember it destroying more than a few projects on me. XCode (and friggin CodeWarrior) trump older Visual Studios easily. Current releases of Visual Studio are great from what I've heard. But I am productive in XCode and I am also productive in Eclipse (when it doesn't crash!) Personally, I love XCode's UI. What's your beef with it?

      --
      rm -rf /
    4. Re:I recently switched by donutello · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not the original poster, but here are some of the things I don't like about XCode:
      - Search is broken. It's virtually impossible to find even all instances of a simple function being used in the open project. I use egrep on the command line instead of the useless XCode search. This extends to XCode being completely unable to find the definition of any function you are looking for. It's a huge productivity killer when more often than not when you ask it to find the definition of a symbol, it gives you the wrong one. Instead, I end up doing an egrep and hand-sifting through the list to find the definition v/s uses.
      - The debugger sucks. I can't tell you how many times I've run into the dreaded "gdb timed out while accessing variable value" in the middle of debugging something and had to restart the session because that's the only way out of it. The only workaround I know of is to turn off the Variable View, which makes for a pretty pathetic debugging experience.
      - Xcode is very unfriendly to automation. They've fixed this in more recent versions but not completely. It's a PITA to set it up so you can have a single configuration file shared between multiple projects.
      - This last one is a relatively minor gripe, but it's annoying that you can't choose the configuration you want to debug in the debugger window. Instead, you need to go to the Build Results window to do that.

      --
      Mmmm.. Donuts
    5. Re:I recently switched by Stamen · · Score: 1

      The bulk of programmers are programming in Java, for which the IDEs are identical, because most of them run on OS X as well as Windows (Eclipse, NetBeans, Idea).

      All the open source editors people love, such as EMacs, VI, etc. run exactly the same in OS X as they do in Linux or FreeBSD. Without using some hack like Cygwin. OS X has the same compiler too, gcc, as it uses it itself for compiling.

      OS X has my very favorite editor TextMate, which I miss very much when I'm on Windows.

      XCode is used mainly for Objective-C and Cocoa work. I've used it some, it's fine, but not awesome. How is Visual Studio for Cocoa development?

      As for Visual Studio being all that; I use it a lot when doing c# work, and it is hardly all that, and it is hardly ahead of other IDEs like Eclipse or my favorite Java IDE, IntelliJ IDEA (which had re-factoring and such years before Microsoft "invented" it in Visual Studio 2005).

      Yes, if you are programming in Visual Basic.net OS X sucks, well, because you can't program Visual Basic in OS X. But if you are programming in any non-Microsoft controlled language the tools in OS X are exactly the same, or better (TextMate baby), as they are in any other platform.

    6. Re:I recently switched by Reverend528 · · Score: 1

      XCode is about ten years behind Microsoft Visual Studio.

      Does that mean it's 20 years behind vi and the gnu build tools?

    7. Re:I recently switched by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      Eclipse is fine for java development, but for C++ development it's equivalent to an early 90's IDE.

    8. Re:I recently switched by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      Some people like IDE's and some don't, but it's a bit absurd to suggest that vi and the gnu build tools are "ahead" of any IDE. vi was designed in the teletype and dumb terminal era, so it can't possibly play the role of an IDE (and it doesn't need to for those who prefer it).

    9. Re:I recently switched by Rattyuk · · Score: 1

      Basically he's sayin' you just can't cut and paste the code. Actually with XRAY (leopard feature) it looks like Apple might be coming back in this case.

    10. Re:I recently switched by f8l_0e · · Score: 2, Funny

      He's just pissed that Objective C doesn't support the GOSUB keyword.

    11. Re:I recently switched by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      It has vi. Emacs, GCC, and Sun Java run on it too. What more does one need?

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    12. Re:I recently switched by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, you apparently haven't used VS for very long. I'm a c#'er by trade, and routinely pick notepad over VS2005. Jesus what a bloated buggy disaster that beast is, even Borland's Builder is better.

    13. Re:I recently switched by GWBasic · · Score: 2

      Care to elaborate a bit more on that?
      1. The whole connections thing. In Visual Studio, I can double-click on a button and all event handlers are automatically written for me; XCode still requires me to wire the button to the code.
      2. Depricating Java. There's something to be said for having a strongly-typed language with null checking.

      Basically, it's difficult to write a quick-and-dirty GUI on a Mac. With XCode, I need to spend more time wiring and debugging. The real advantage of Visual Studio is that it allows the programmer to slap together an imperfect program, which results in the Windows platform having more applications.

    14. Re:I recently switched by p0tat03 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I use both XCode and Visual Studio daily at work, even though I use a Mac at home I still prefer VS for development. Here are a few reasons off the top of my head:

      - Quick work with large codebases. "Go to Definition" and "Go to Declaration" in my experience works much better in VS than "Jump to Definition" does in XCode.
      - "References To" that allows me to quickly find all references to a particular function, this allows me to assess quickly the potential impact of any code changes without too much hunting.
      - I still find VS' debugger to be faster and easier than gdb integrated into XCode.

      XCode has some things that I really do wish Visual Studio had:

      - A keyboard shortcut to jump between corresponding .cpp and .h files.
      - A more comprehensive Find-in-Project feature that can generate a report instead of just taking me to the next found location.

      IMHO XCode is the best IDE hands down outside of Visual Studio, but VS has a pretty big lead as #1.

    15. Re:I recently switched by GWBasic · · Score: 1

      He's just pissed that Objective C doesn't support the GOSUB keyword.

      Laugh. When I was 12 I wrote a video game in GWBasic using GOTOs.

      Actualy I'm dissapointed that XCode with Objective C doesn't have anything like intellisense. It's a real time-saver.

    16. Re:I recently switched by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A wha?! You've got to be kidding. You're talking less now about the XCode IDE (which in some ways is behind VS) and about the framework. You're certainly kidding if you're trying to get me to believe that any GUI/app quick and dirty or big is harder to develop with Cocoa/Objective-C than Visual Studio and any framework/language it supports. I mean...the point of the Cocoa design is so you don't have to code all of these friggin' event handlers to get basic stuff working.

      My god. How did this uninformed parent post get modded up.

    17. Re:I recently switched by GWBasic · · Score: 1

      Oh, I also forgot to mention intellisense. Basically, when you hit ".", Visual Studio allows you to use tab completion with whatever API you're using. It also shows the arguments and expected types in the IDE. Such functionality makes it very easy to learn a new API, and it reduces spelling mistakes, (which aren't caught by the Objective C compiler.)

    18. Re:I recently switched by misanthrope101 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Apple really needs a modern development enviornment

      Um, I think they've had vi running on OSX for some time now. Where have you been?

    19. Re:I recently switched by garote · · Score: 1

      Xcode now does the same thing.

      Straight from the docs:

      "Xcode includes a feature, called Code Sense, which maintains a rich store of information about the symbols defined in your project and its included files. Xcode uses this feature as a basis for code completion. Xcode supports code completion for C, C++, Objective-C, Objective-C++, Java, and AppleScript."

      To use it, start typing something, and hit ESC.

    20. Re:I recently switched by demallien2 · · Score: 1

      Personally I set up cscope to play nice with xcode - programming bliss, on a stick! Way, way nicer than egrep. Of course, if you aren't programming in c, cscope isn't much use to you...

    21. Re:I recently switched by jaavaaguru · · Score: 1

      It doesn't do .Net applications. Even Linux with MonoDevelop can do this. Yeah, sure, you can get MonoDevelop running on OS X, but:
      a) It doesn't fit in with the other applications (look and feel)
      b) Why do I have to install a second IDE to use one of the most popular development frameworks?

      Ever tried installing MonoDevelop on OS X? It's not as simple as "apt-get install monodevelop".

    22. Re:I recently switched by LionMage · · Score: 1

      Depricating [sic] Java. There's something to be said for having a strongly-typed language with null checking.

      Just FYI, the only thing deprecated here is the Cocoa-Java bridge. That is to say, the Cocoa API for Java has been deprecated; you can still write Java Swing applications, and if you need to use Cocoa, write your application in Objective C. Pure Java apps are still supported in OS X and likely will remain so for some time, as Apple has been pretty good about supporting and promoting Java. (Their presence at the last Java One spoke volumes, and judging from the number of Java developers at the conference using Apple laptops running OS X, I don't think the lack of a supported Cocoa-Java bridge was a big problem for anyone.)
  32. And keep paying and paying by Omeger · · Score: 1

    Because of how difficult it is to upgrade a Mac compared to a PC. That and so few native OS X games that don't run like crap. And terrible driver support for running Windows on a Mac. Yep, us gamers have known which platform to use for a LONG time now.

    1. Re:And keep paying and paying by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I lokoed into this, and the games i am interested in are available on the MAC.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:And keep paying and paying by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Because of how difficult it is to upgrade a Mac compared to a PC.

      OK, please explain what you mean. What part of upgrading are you talking about exactly? RAM? You just open up the case via the pull latch and you can easily put it in. Hardrives? You open up the case, take four of the little green beads that are there and screw them in and then push your drive into place. Then plug in the cables which are already there and waiting to be plugged in. Video card? Just plug it in and the Mac recognises it and all you have to worry about is opening up the Display preferences to make sure your extra desktop space is arranged the way you want. CPU? Haven't tried lately but I've heard that people have been dropping in new Intel CPUs into their Mactel boxen without issue. Before that you had plenty of 3rd party upgrade cards including things like ZIF sockets to make sure things didn't get broken doing so. The only thing I don't think you can upgrade is the motherboard/case and then it's not difficult, just expensive because you have to buy a new machine. So, I really don't get this "difficult to upgrade" thing you're coming up with since in my job as desktop support in multiplatform environment for years, the PC side has historically been harder to upgrade (especially with unusual case designs). Perhaps you mean more exspensive, but once again you're talking about motheboard/case and perhaps video cards since everything else is stock and the same stuff you put into any other PCs and has been for years.

    3. Re:And keep paying and paying by thyarcher · · Score: 1

      I used to think about the whole upgrade path thing before too, but really beyond a video card, I've found that upgrading a PC is not as feasible as it once was. It is often cheaper or easier to just buy a new one in the end anyway and use the old one for a guest machine. I look at my couple year old computer now, and I think of what actually needs upgrading. I can't upgrade the processor because the new ones don't fit the motherboard. So, I would have to replace most of the internals anyway to fit the newer PCI express slots. And after all that is done, my machine that is usable for everything but this years games would have to be wastefully thrown out.

    4. Re:And keep paying and paying by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1

      A playstation?

  33. Keyboard commands by Calibax · · Score: 1

    I find "Butler" to be very useful. It's a free application (although I donated) and you can set up many aspects of your Mac easily. And it's been around long enough to be well tested.

    For me, a Terminal window is control + apple + t, safari is control + apple + s, the calculator is control + apple + c, my editor is control + apple + e. You get the idea. It shouldn't take an experienced user more than 10 minutes to install and configure simple keyboard shortcuts. More complex things might take a little longer, but it's not a biggie.

  34. Re:This is fantastic by Blahbooboo3 · · Score: 1

    Why do all mac haters say it is $100/150 per year for service packs? Plesae, you are giving Windoze users a worse rap with this stupidity. I am a Windoze user, don't have a mac (though thinking more and more about it), yet even I know that each of these PAY releases are MAJOR NEW VERSIONS of the Mac OS and NOT SERVICE PACKS!

    Stop spreading this fallacy and making Windoze users look stupid(er)

  35. Quicksilver! by wass · · Score: 1
    I was just about to respond saying the same thing, but instead I'll provide some links. Quicksilver is gotten there, albeit a minimalist page that barely says anything useful. Dan Dickinson has a very good tutorial , appropriately named "A Better OS X In Just 10 Minutes."

    It's like all the power of the CLI with the visual interface of a GUI.

    --

    make world, not war

  36. Re:This is fantastic by skintigh2 · · Score: 1

    Agreed. I haven't used a Mac in a long time, but I know it must be nice to own a computer where everything works most of the time. They also come with some cool software that I may or may not use.

    But then I look at the prices, and for $1500 I can get the same or less than what I would pay about $600 for with some Dell coupons.

    I would love to be a convert, but I just haven't been convinced the 150% markup is worth it.

  37. Re:MBP NOT WORTH EVERY PENNY by Biff98 · · Score: 0

    Wow..... I feel differently.

    I should also point out that I manage a fleet of over 60 laptops for field use. They happen to be IBMs and Dells. The IBMS we had actually had a pretty poor track record, but I'm happy to report our Dells have had a VERY low percentage of failures.

    I know my sample of Mac's is fairly small at 8, but I submit to you that I've had a failure in my list on ever laptop that we own.

    That's not a hardware issue in general, that's a freakin quality control nightmare.

    P.S. Are you a Hokie, as in from Virginia Tech, as in one of the largest Apple clients in the world? As in you might be an Apple apologist? Hmmmm.... Could you comment on the failure rates of the desktops or XServe's used in the giant cluster there?

  38. Re:This is fantastic by gordgekko · · Score: 1

    BTW, Apples are built to a higher specification then your 750 dollar bosx.


    The long and inglorious history of Apple hardware problems makes that statement nothing but sheer fanboyism. I'm not here to defend commodity hardware but if Apple's products are indeed "built to a higher specification" then the company ignores them an awful lot.
    --
    You want to know who isn't running Firefox 2.x? They spell it "definately" and "rediculous".
  39. Re:Jumped to eComStation and OpenOffice.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you, as the owner and manager of Curtis System Software, tell me more about the development tools available for eComStation? Is there a recent port of GCC that works well, for instance?

  40. He's too kind to UAC... by argent · · Score: 5, Interesting
    In the first article...

    My assessment of UAC is that it's a good idea that is badly implemented, even after recent refinements. I think it will have the opposite of its intended effect on many Vista desktops, where it will deaden users to security risks by asking them too frequently whether they're sure an activity is something they really want to do or allow.


    I disagree. It's a bad idea that's badly implemented... and it's not a new idea. Windows has been popping up "I'm about to do something that might be stupid, is that OK?" or "Which stupid mistake do you want me to make now?" dialogs for years now, and the biggest effect they have is to train people to automatically approve security dialogs. As a system administrator I had the same people come to me multiple times saying "Um, Peter, I just clicked 'open' on that popup again and I think I have a virus".

    Here's a helpful suggestion for developers. Anytime you're thinking of popping up a dialog like that, ask yourself "how can I make it so the user can *always* cancel the operation", and if there's a way... do that instead. For example, instead of asking the user "Should I automatically open this file you just downloaded in NEW-APPLICATION", consider the possibilities of not automatically opening files at all... give the user a better tool for managing downloads instead.

    Oh, and Mac users shouldn't feel smug about this one.
    1. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by yakumo.unr · · Score: 4, Informative

      IMHO most people mocking the 'muscle memory flaw of UAC' don't actually consider the real intention or application of it.

      UAC is not 'the little poppup that says do you want to do this yes/no' it's the whole system behind it, and the entire reworking of how windows deals with user accounts.

      Vista's been rebuilt to work properly as you would expect with non administrator level accounts. Applications should work without error from lower level accounts. People you do not trust to tinker freely with 100% of the entire system should not have administrator access, period.

      the "yes/no" prompt ONLY appears as a warning for possibly hazardous actions, if you are logged in as an administrator.

      If your logged in with a lower level account, you are required to authenticate the action with an admin level user & password a-la *nix.

      For the first time with reason in Windows, as an admin, you should be wondering 'why on earth is X webtard still on an admin level account, he doesn't need that access, he's a security risk' not 'why is UAC so stupid'

    2. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by kingtut · · Score: 1

      my opinion of UAC is that they are a heartless corporation ruining mars. Leave those artifacts where they belong.

    3. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by yakumo.unr · · Score: 1

      I think it's a great shame that MS didn't split the admin levels like *nix, to root/admin, or some other name if they have to, I think it's a better system.

      They haven't though,so admin is the highest level account and the basic idea for the rest is still there, no-one sits at a *nix box all day logged in as root, no-one should sit at a vista box logged in as admin for any longer than it takes to perform the specific admin tasks that require that login.

      More so-called 'expert reviewers' should be spending less time moaning about UAC prompts, and more time seeing how viable treating admin as root, and using a 'user' or 'powerusr' account day to day actually is after MS's claims. Vista should make this actually viable for any end user, or deployment, as it wasn't in any previous version of windows in far too many situations I'd like to hear of others experience with this.

    4. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by yakumo.unr · · Score: 1

      First time I've spotted someone bringing up what's been on my mind, wish I had some mod points left :)

    5. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by NaugaHunter · · Score: 1

      One thing I've always hated about Windows is how applications throw their dialog boxes in front of other application windows. I can't even count how many times I've been touch-typing and answered a dialog box without even seeing it. Do the UAC boxes respond to keys as well? Seems like it could have the exact same problem.

      And I'm not sure what the point is with that link. It's referring to a patch almost three years old and therefore certainly incorporated in 10.4. Also, one of the first sentences is "All an attacker needs to do is find an exploit in a frequently used component, one that would have already been launched through LaunchServices for most users (such as help:), and they will be able to launch an attack on almost as many systems as they would have without this patch." Has this actually happened? Seems like if it were easy to do it would have been done before now.

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
    6. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Vista's been rebuilt to work properly as you would expect with non administrator level accounts. Applications should work without error from lower level accounts. People you do not trust to tinker freely with 100% of the entire system should not have administrator access, period.

      Strictly speaking, Vista has been kludged so that all those broken applications _assuming_ they have the run of the machine will work without it.

      The problem of running software as an unprivileged user has always been because of broken applications, not because of Windows. While Vista gives the illusion of having "fixed" the "problem" due to all the ugly stuff it's doing in the background, unfortunately it's not going to help fix the _real_ problems of incompetent developers and broken software.

      (Yet another example of why people who say Microsoft don't bend over backwards to help developers and end users are clueless.)

    7. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by argent · · Score: 1

      If your logged in with a lower level account, you are required to authenticate the action with an admin level user & password a-la *nix.

      UNIX doesn't require you to authenticate an action with an admin level user and password. UNIX requires you to acquire privileges before attempting the action. Mac OS X provides a helper component that allows you to acquire those privileges when you need it, but that's not a common feature for UNIX-based systems and it's not a standard part of UNIX... and I'm not at all happy about a lot of the underlying infrastructure that Apple uses there.

    8. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by argent · · Score: 1

      And I'm not sure what the point is with that link. It's referring to a patch almost three years old and therefore certainly incorporated in 10.4.

      The point is that the patch does not fix the underlying problem, it just papers over it.

      Has this actually happened?

      May 2005
      Mar 2006
      May 2006

      There may be others I've missed going through Apple's security updates.

      I won't attempt to provide a similar list for Windows. It would go back to 1997, and be hundreds of lines long... Apple's "surface area" to this class of attacks is significantly smaller than Microsoft's, but the whole problem should be avoided.

    9. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      The problem of running software as an unprivileged user has always been because of broken applications, not because of Windows.

      So were applications supposed to deal with the problem of running software as unprivileged users in Windows 95 or Windows 98?

    10. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      So were applications supposed to deal with the problem of running software as unprivileged users in Windows 95 or Windows 98?

      Firstly, Windows NT has been around longer than Windows 9x and always been multiuser.

      Secondly, from Windows 98 and Windows 95 OSR3 (not 100% sure on the latter, might even have been OSR2), Windows 9x had the same capabilities for per-user home directories, registry hives, etc. Certainly, it couldn't enforce user separation, but the API infrastructure for developers to write multiuser-friendly apps that would work properly under the multiuser NT-based Windows, was there.

      No developer has had an excuse for releasing an application that doesn't run in an unprivileged account (discounting situations where elevated privileges are genuinely necessary, which are few and far between) since *at least* ca. 1998. None.

    11. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by yakumo.unr · · Score: 1

      I knew it was bad application development that was significantly to blame for the problem, but didn't want to more than double my post going into it.

      With each failing piece of software under a limited account, It won't magically just work under vista, it will have to be rewritten no matter which side's camp held the original faults. The work on vista has apparently been done, so it is now up to the software developers to patch their apps, or make sure their new releases work.

      I believe MS has made correct functionality under limited accounts (depending on the specifics of software in question) a requirement for vista certification, this will help to encourage the developers to actually do this for the first time.
      In all honesty having not looked at the API's, for all I know this certification requirement may be all that's actually changed ;o) It is possibly the most important thing they could have done, how else could they get developers to change habits on this.

      The problem bringing this up, is rather than celebrate the fact that MS is trying to actively do positive things to rectify this, and see the light finally at the end of the tunnel, Ii'll bet the great unwashed masses will see the delays for app updates, or possibilities of the software they wish would work NEVER being updated, and.... knowing 'people', probably blame Vista for it. :(

    12. Re:He's too kind to UAC... by jackbird · · Score: 1

      How about "Autodesk and Intuit are doing it, why can't I?"

  41. Apple Please Port OSX to non Mac hardware.... by Jeepnut24 · · Score: 1

    That is what really holds me back from the switch. I like OSX, but don't like the locked nature of Mac hardware. Id easily switch over if I could make quick and easy upgrades to my PC hardware. The OS is nice, but the hardware holds it back for me. Oh and gaming is still an issue, but I could easily ignore that given the opportunity to run on the hardware that I choose.

    1. Re:Apple Please Port OSX to non Mac hardware.... by metamatic · · Score: 1

      You can upgrade Mac hardware. You can upgrade the hard drive, the RAM, the video card. You can add additional cards. You can upgrade the CPUs. About the only thing you can't do is buy a new motherboard without buying a new machine. There's really nothing "locked" about the hardware, it's all industry standard parts.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    2. Re:Apple Please Port OSX to non Mac hardware.... by Jeepnut24 · · Score: 1

      Can I drop in the latest and greatest SLI card?? What about the latest and greatest RAM or Sound Cards or etc... Sure you can upgrade, but hardly the latest and greatest available. Oh and what about the latest and greatest chipsets? Heck Ive got a set of hardware sitting there looking for an OS, but there is Zero way for me to get OSX running on it even though it should technically be just fine running the OS.

    3. Re:Apple Please Port OSX to non Mac hardware.... by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

      But if I upgrade the case, my eyes hurt...

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
    4. Re:Apple Please Port OSX to non Mac hardware.... by rizzo320 · · Score: 1

      Can I drop in the latest and greatest SLI card?? What about the latest and greatest RAM or Sound Cards or etc... Sure you can upgrade, but hardly the latest and greatest available. Oh and what about the latest and greatest chipsets? Heck Ive got a set of hardware sitting there looking for an OS, but there is Zero way for me to get OSX running on it even though it should technically be just fine running the OS.

      Not to sound harsh, but, you are the .01% of the computer purchasing market that Apple, and other PC vendors really don't care about. Apple targets the largest amount of consumers they feel they can make a profit from. Most consumers aren't caring about having the latest and greatest chipset, video card, or sound card. This isn't a Mac/Wintel thing. Look at how many computers are sold with integrated graphics from Intel? A good majority. Which makes that computer useless for playing many 3D accelerated games.

      Apple's looking to cater to the consumer who wants a computer to browse the web, do office work on, and wants to dabble with multimedia (photo/music/video/dvds, etc). So they market a computer that does that stuff, and does it well. They're not worried about running their OS on another platform, because they already are reaching the specific markets they want to grab, and hence you'll never see Mac OS X for generic x86 hardware.
    5. Re:Apple Please Port OSX to non Mac hardware.... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Apple does have a product for the "I need a really beefy machine" market, the Mac Pro. It doesn't have a product for the "I need to buy that GPU because it just came out" market. That market is pretty much restricted to the hardcore gamer crowd anyway and they won't consider a Mac because it doesn't immediately have all new game releases available.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  42. Macs are not expensive by nsayer · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    That old canard is getting very tired. When compared to equivalent hardware and bundles, Macs are very competitive.

    What IS true is that the least expensive mac is more expensive than the least expensive PC. But, of course, the least expensive PC is invariably a cheap piece of crap one step up from a calculator.

    1. Re:Macs are not expensive by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      That old canard is getting very tired.

      To use a simple example, I'm quite fed up with the layman asking why I use a Mac, when it's "not compatible with, say, Word or Excel", then when I let them know that Excel was originally for the Mac, and all Office apps are available for Mac, and the files are cross-platform, I get blank stares and "Ummm...I didn't know that". And yet they still have an "opinion".

      "Yeah, but I like Yahoo Messenger, or MSN, or whatever". There's Adium. "Ummm..."

      Tired old canard indeed.

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    2. Re:Macs are not expensive by AusIV · · Score: 1

      That old canard is getting very tired. When compared to equivalent hardware and bundles, Macs are very competitive.

      Macs are competitively priced for the hardware, but they still require you to change your hardware. Apple started their Switch campaign a few months after I bought my current laptop. Had they started earlier, I probably would have bought a Mac, but as the timing stood, I had a PC and it was going to be a few years before I thought about replacing it. During that time I grew incredibly tired of Windows, and decided to try out Linux, which I was able to put on my current hardware. Earlier this week, I decided it's time for a new laptop, and settled on a System76 Gazelle. Apple missed their chance - I was looking for a new operating system, and would have gladly dropped $200 or so to put it on my current hardware, but it wasn't in my budget to pay $1049 for a MacBook. By the time I was looking for a new system, I was hooked on Linux.

      What IS true is that the least expensive mac is more expensive than the least expensive PC. But, of course, the least expensive PC is invariably a cheap piece of crap one step up from a calculator.

      That's not completely true. I was able to build a nice Linux box for myself for about $500, $200 of which was spent on a couple of TV tuners for using MythTV, and most of the rest was spent on my 400 GB RAID. The remainder of the system, (case, RAM, mobo, cpu & fan), cost only $120 after some rebates. I spent $15 on a serial IR port for my MythTV setup, and programmed it to use a remote I already had. It's both cheaper and more functional than a mac mini, though it does have a larger footprint.

      Macs also tend to come with everything you could possibly need, whether or not you really need it. The Mac Mini comes with WiFi, Bluetooth, a remote, digital audio, and DVI by default, but many desktop users are going to use Cat5, a wired keyboard and mouse, regular speakers, the VGA-DVI adapter, and lose the remote in a drawer somewhere. It would be nice to be able to choose from the features you want from your computer and be able to save a few bucks.

      I think Apple would do well to have some commodity hardware. A tower with specs similar to a mini would be quite a bit cheaper, since they don't have to be as compact to be just as functional. Their laptops aren't going to get much cheaper without sacrificing performance, but I don't think it would hurt to have something they could sell at $800 rather than over $1000 for the cheapest laptop. Drop Bluetooth, DVI and the built in iSight, and you're well within that price range.

      In short, switching to a Mac is an expensive proposition because it requires that you get new hardware, and you'll likely get more than you'll really use. I realize Apple has a reputation to maintain as a high quality computer vendor, but it's a far stretch to say that it's not expensive to switch to a mac.

    3. Re:Macs are not expensive by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      That old canard is getting very tired. When compared to equivalent hardware and bundles, Macs are very competitive.

      The problem is as soon as you step outside one of those narrow sets of hardware specification, you're pretty much stuffed when it comes to Macs. This is a problem, because there are 2 - 4 gaping holes in Apple's hardware lineup (and that's just regarding desktops and notebooks).

      So, yes, while comparing, say, a 20" iMac to an equivalent PC is quite favourable for the iMac, if you want one of those things the iMac can't deliver (like, say, an upgradable video card or a separate LCD), suddenly the PC becomes a _far_ better deal.

    4. Re:Macs are not expensive by rizzo320 · · Score: 1

      "Yeah, but I like Yahoo Messenger, or MSN, or whatever". There's Adium. "Ummm..."

      Ha. They don't even need adium. They can go out and get Microsoft Messenger for Mac http://www.microsoft.com/mac/default.aspx?pid=msnm essenger or Yahoo Messenger for Mac http://pager.yahoo.com/mac.php;_ylt=AhHtxG.ZLiA5Nr 4351pFM1Xg5MkF! AIM is horrible on the Mac, but, iChat is built in and soooo much better.
    5. Re:Macs are not expensive by Gadzeus · · Score: 1

      You might like to read the comment: "Apple or Geek Blind-Spot", currently the last comment, to understand why you are wrong.

  43. Good luck Apple by mark99 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Apple was always cooler and "better" than Windows, but Apple always found a way to screw it up. I think we would all like to see a world where MS didn't have such a ridiculouly large piece of the desktop, and Apple is still the best bet, but they have a very long way to go.

    And most of the things that stopped Apple from suceeding are still true, i.e.
    - they are still a lot more expensive (at least for a good laptop),
    - The software choice on Windows is still infinitely better,
    - The commodity hardware makers still aren't allowed to make platforms that host Apple's choices. (I think)
    - Probably some other things that I have forgotten :)...

    So I guess Apple won't make much progress (again). Even if they are better (again).

    1. Re:Good luck Apple by januth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All true, but you forgot "enterprise integration".

      Picture this: you work for a large multinational firm with users numbering in the 10's of thousands. How, exactly, would migrate the lot of them from Windows to Mac? Moreover, do you think that you could actually sell the migration to upper management?

      Actually, this is a great topic for a general Slashdot discussion...

    2. Re:Good luck Apple by SkyDude · · Score: 1

      Picture this: you work for a large multinational firm with users numbering in the 10's of thousands. How, exactly, would migrate the lot of them from Windows to Mac? Moreover, do you think that you could actually sell the migration to upper management?

      Of course you could make the presentation. Then be prepared to leave through the nearest windows, with your feet never hitting the ground.

      --
      == First cross river, then insult alligator.
    3. Re:Good luck Apple by kiljoy001 · · Score: 1

      I would basicly design and network around using mini macs as thin clients for such a roll out.

  44. Linux is ready now. by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1, Informative

    Ubuntu is plug and play. Actually using it is easier than Windows. For some reason, on windows everything is about the applications, they get in the way, thrusting their way forward to try to be the center of attention and, in the process they make the system less usable. The documents have been relegated to files which have to be opened to use an application.

    OSX and Ubuntu, the applications get out of the way, the key is the document, not the application. I don't want to use a word processor, I want to write a letter, it just so happens that I need a word processor to do it. So instead of clicking on the Office icon to start the word processor and then opening a file, I click on the document on my desktop and the relevant application (whatever it is) starts. If you look at a typical Windows desktop, there will be dozens of icons for starting applications and relatively few documents or files, it's completely backwards.

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Linux is ready now. by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      Completely terrible reason. You can click on documents in Windows/Mac/Linux and they will all open the associated program. A user choosing not to put documents on the desktop is not a valid reason for a system to be better.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    2. Re:Linux is ready now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What Utter Crap.
      1) You don't go around installing shit and spyware and expect the system to work.
      2) *MY* Vista desktop has (well, had util the last cleanup) at least 10 documents on it - not app shortcuts.

    3. Re:Linux is ready now. by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu is not plug and play, not even close.

      It's great but it's just not ready for primetime.

      I can install XP right now on my PC have windows autoupdate software including drivers within an hour of install.
      Ubuntu, while bloody great for linux, it's come a long way, if I want to use a different resolution or 100hz on my nvidia card - whoah I'm going through a 6 page tutorial on the ubuntu forums and manually editing config files.
      If I want wireless to work, with WPA - OUCH, wep, fine but WPA? pain!

      Overall I like Ubuntu and I'd love to switch but it's not ready - not yet.

    4. Re:Linux is ready now. by dr00g911 · · Score: 1

      I disagree.

      Right click the menu bar at the top of the screen and click "close" by mistake. Can't tell me you haven't done that.

      To ma, pa, grandpa and most of the people I know the machine is now 100% useless because they can't launch an app or even shut down the machine properly.

      For the rest of us that know how to boot into terminal mode and band-aid config files or run re-init scripts for the desktop then reboot (or relaunch Xorg) to get their menus back, Linux is ready.

      The very things that make Linux appeal to the most hardcore of geeks (ie you can bend the entire system to your will and customize EVERYTHING if you're geek enough or willing to spend enough time) are the very things that make vanilla PC users try it once and never come back.

      Apple would never let you turn off the dock or the finder by mistake. MS sees to it that a simple misclick or typeo doesn't remove the bleeding start menu.

      Half of the world lives in fear that they're going to screw up their machines. Linux makes it entirely too easy to do. That's its nature.

      That's just one example. There are quite a few more, but I assure you that Linux isn't ready for the real world, until the entire world has bearded geeks living directly next door.

    5. Re:Linux is ready now. by quizzicus · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu is plug and play. Try telling that to my BCM43xx wireless card... I have searched ubuntuforums, google, and a couple Linux sites extensively, and all I ever found, other than general resignation, were hacks that worked on some models, sometimes, only to have the connection dropped when you actually tried to use it.

      Not that I'm frustrated...

    6. Re:Linux is ready now. by Hunch · · Score: 1

      I would say Ubuntu is close to being plug and play. I have almost no experience with Linux and recently I installed Ubuntu on my desktop computer and it was very simple. Everything works properly without any mucking around with config files except the wireless card. Luckily for me I don't need wireless, looking through the forums it will be a pain to get it working. But apart from this one problem I actually found Ubuntu easier to install and customize than windows.

      I will never go back to windows now. With Ubuntu I have no spyware or viruses and a whole heap of free applications just a couple of mouse clicks away to choose from. The only software I have found lacking is a good gui ftp client. Anyone know a good gui ftp client for Linux? gFTP is rubbish.

    7. Re:Linux is ready now. by RiffRafff · · Score: 1

      What *are* you talking about? I haven't had to manually edit a config file for video in years.

      Today's Linux is not your father's Linux.

      --
      "I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
    8. Re:Linux is ready now. by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      What *are* you talking about?

      http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=176998 I had to do this with either drake or edgy within the last 6 months.

    9. Re:Linux is ready now. by jlowe · · Score: 1

      Without doubt, there are specific areas where linux is behind windows and osx, especially wireless drivers. I just have to believe that over time, this will improve.

      Specifically, the Broadcom 43xx drivers DO work when using ndiswrapper. Download the program, download the XP drivers from your vender, extract them, and then use ndiswrapper to initialize them. You can then use one of a number of gui-based tools to configure your card.

      But yes, this is a technical process and more difficult than plug-and-play. Just think what it would be like if venders created drivers for linux all the time! It would make things much easier. As it is now, most have to be reverse-engineered. Over time, I think we will get to plug-and-play wireless.

  45. Re:What about those of us who switch the other way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about those of us who switch the other way

    the same 5 people who purchased the Zune?

  46. Re:What about those of us who switch the other way by superangrybrit · · Score: 0

    You get the labeled troll for disrespectin' the Mac Overlord. Ever read the posts saying "We welcome our..."?

  47. jumps ship? by dlt074 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    MAN OVERBOARD!

  48. Amen brother by edwardpickman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Long time user of PCs but there's no comparing the two. You get spoiled fast on a Mac. After reading a large number of reviews about Vista by pro Windows people ironically I'm afraid to buy a new machine. I hate XP because it's always harrassing me. Now I'm reading from people that didn't find XP a hassle that Vista is really bad about the constant prompting? Sorry but that's a massive productivity killer. Also most things don't have drivers yet. Yes I know they'll come out eventually but not overnight. Software was keeping me using Windows but I started researching Mac alternatives again. Final Cut Pro got me to buy a Mac. I think I can switch 90% of my operation to Mac and just keep one machine running Win 2000 for the softwares I can't live without. If most people tried the current Macs they'd switch. For a six year development cycle Vista is a joke. Apple is making more improvements in a single year and they get easier to use not more of a hassle.

    1. Re:Amen brother by drwtsn32 · · Score: 1

      Vista is really bad about the constant prompting? Sorry but that's a massive productivity killer.

      It only prompts during system-level changes. After your system is configured, you generally don't see the prompts. If you're an advanced user that knows what you're doing, just disable the damn thing entirely.

      Also most things don't have drivers yet.

      That's flat out wrong. Most things have drivers. There are a few things that may not, but you can use XP drivers in the meantime for most everything (except graphics drivers).

    2. Re:Amen brother by Penguin+Follower · · Score: 1

      Also most things don't have drivers yet.

      That's flat out wrong. Most things have drivers. There are a few things that may not, but you can use XP drivers in the meantime for most everything (except graphics drivers).

      My friend would be disagreeing with you tonight - he could not get his scanner to install on Vista. It would not take the vendor's Vista drivers or the XP drivers. It simply did-not-work. Just one of many factors why we have a policy of not adopting Vista for two years where I work. And despite I support MS software for a living (we are a MS solution provider), at home I am *seriously* considering switching to Mac as much as possible.

    3. Re:Amen brother by jcgf · · Score: 1

      It only prompts during system-level changes. After your system is configured, you generally don't see the prompts. If you're an advanced user that knows what you're doing, just disable the damn thing entirely.

      So it's just like the commercial where PC says "I could turn it off, but then he wouldn't give me any warnings at all, which defeats the purpose"?

    4. Re:Amen brother by Serious+Callers+Only · · Score: 1

      . I think I can switch 90% of my operation to Mac and just keep one machine running Win 2000 for the softwares I can't live without.

      Or use parallels on your mac.

    5. Re:Amen brother by b.burl · · Score: 1

      I think you missed his point. It was about his impression of Visda after reading the articles, he wasn't arguing whether they were right or not. and lets be honest, no one is going to fire up a vista machine in a critical environment (or even a highly productive one) for a fair while yet. Why? because its not reliable, and productivity would take a hit.

  49. Re:What can a Mac do that a Win/Linux machine cant by emor8t · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    What are these hybric cars you speak of? There isn't anything a Mac can do that a PC can't. I have crashed there OS several times, so it can't run stable. I can't remember the last time I had XP crash, although it does happen. I can recall sitting in class, closed the lid on my iBook, opened it up, BSOD (Black Screen of Death) Linux doesn't run nearly enough apps in native mode to make it a viable alternative. No Adobe Creative Suite, etc. Running servers it is awesome obvioulsy, and my first choice (Free+Stable=Can't be beat) I prefer XP for my creative work. My iBook is only used for mobile file access and web surfing. beyond that it's pretty well useless. Not powerful enough to run photoshop or many apps like the newer macs can (Its a g3 900mhz) and the screen is way too small. My PC i built however, has faster ram (800mhz, capable of 1000mhz), more mobo options, should be able to OC my e6400 faster than any Mac. I don't even know if you can OC an Intel based mac. I would assume so. Higher FSB, better graphics card, etc. All for about $1000 less than a Mac. There are very few legitimate reasons to own a Mac over a PC. If you can't secure a PC, Like shiny things, Can't build your own computer, have fleece, need to look cool... buy a mac. But if you actaully need to do something.. PC/Nux.

  50. Seconded, quicksilver foo' by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

    i say foo' cause i just don't see how anyone can live without it.. ....well after they're addicted to it anyway

    --
    CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
  51. Re:What can a Mac do that a Win/Linux machine cant by Angostura · · Score: 1

    OK, Well I'll tell you why I switched several years ago. These factors may be or may not map onto any of your requirements.

    1. I wanted to tinker around with, and learn a Unix - but I also wanted to run MS Office
    2. I was starting a family and new I would want to be creating some home movies and DVDs. I had a video camera with firewire- the iMovie/iDVD/iPhoto combo is SO cheap for what it gives you, that this was the main selling point.
    3. I liked OS X - I found it elegant and thought it just 'did things right' not perfect, by any means, but overall a pleasure to use.
    4. Decent security. Not perfect, not invulnerable but a good compromise between usability and security.
    5. The hardware was cute (it was one of the new G4 angle poise iMacs which fitted nicely in a cramped room).

    That was it. When I factored in support for Firewire and the iLife software costs, the price wasn't too far over a comparable PC and I knew it would work without too much dicking about.

  52. Re:What can a Mac do that a Win/Linux machine cant by BWJones · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's how you use it son! LOL

    Seriously though, it is in the implementation mostly and the ethos secondarily. These things are harder to quantify and you essentially just have to experience it first person rather than trying to academically pick apart the differences, because then you would simply be arguing about interface design, code design, and aesthetics. Basically, the OS simply does not get in your way to perform actions, like supporting USB drives or external peripherals. On OS X, they simply work and with Windows, it's always popping up messages saying "I see you are trying to add new hardware" or something like that. We've simply found that productivity is much higher with OS X than it is with Windows because of all the little stuff like this. The hardware itself is actually pretty good (windows generally runs faster on Mac hardware than it does commodity and the thought that goes into its design is stunning. I still think that the G4 case design is one of the best computer case designs in history, but the same holds true for the OS as well. It is good to see NeXTstep fully mature in OS X and I look forward to what productivity gains 10.5 is going to bring.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
  53. Dumped Dell too by user_ecs · · Score: 0, Troll

    For Christmas I bought a new computer preloaded with eComStation and OpneOffice.org. I have had too many problems with Dells and Gateways so I bought the system from CSS because I wanted good quality hardware (ie ECC memory, etc).

    http://www.curtissystemssoftware.com/preloads.htm

    eComStation, much more stable and secure than windows yet much friendlier than Linux

  54. Shouldn't there be a Mac-like Linux distro? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lots of people like Macs, there's no doubt about it, and choice is good.

    But a lot of those people who like Macs would also prefer a 100% open system.

    So how come that there are no Linux (or *BSD) distros that seek to emulate the best of the Mac interface? After all, underneath it's just another type of Unix, so much of the work is already done.

  55. Science lab switch to Linux too. by feranick · · Score: 1

    I see lots of labs doing the switch to Linux machines. Easier (you can use the current hardware) and most of all, cheaper. If I am a PI in a project I'd rather spend money in lab equipment and less on computers. For this reason, I would personally not buy Macs, but mid range PCs, and install Linux on them. OpenOffice is good enough for presentation. If you rely on Word for your science paper, well, that's a big mistake to start with, regardless of the platform. LaTex is at its best under Linux. Because large clusters use Linux for the most part, libraries for calculation are vastly available. Unless you do lots of imaging (as you seem to be doing), the Mac won't give you any advantage. Again, I rather buy new PCs and run Linux on them, than buying Macs. Nothing personal, but for my lab I prefer to use the money for science equipment.

    1. Re:Science lab switch to Linux too. by cvdwl · · Score: 1

      Been there, done that, and am in fact doing it again (damned government lab won't allow Macs). Windows, in my experience, requires reinstallation every year or so if you're a (lazy) power-USER (not administrator). A drag, and a couple of days work lost by the time you get it back to optimal state. And their ease of use for quick, large scale data processing is a nightmare! The next time I get asked to put several hundred MB of data into Excel, I'll scream.

      On the other hand, Linux boxes almost inevitably have some arcane failure mode involving hardware/drivers, only solvable by some googling and experience (e.g. livna repositories for nvidia drivers or the fact that the device manager modules for 64 bit kernel 2.6 are flakey which makes Logical Volume Management a nightmare). I've never done an install that didn't go wonky at some point in a STANDARD, point-and-drool, GUI installation. I've learned a LOT that way. Some of it even had wider utility.

      Meanwhile, my G4 Powerbook chugs faithfully along... occasionally it throws a nice grayed-out kernel panic when I do something really stupid involving multiple bits of hardware, but otherwise, It Just Works. If you want to play in the free software world, you have apt/fink and, for the diehards, Linux PPC or boot camp.

      Yes, I've been administrator of single-user and small (32P) clusters, hacked and rebuilt kernels just to get my mp3 player to sync, built systems and tested multiple distros on them, remastered Knoppix for fun... I've a masochistic streak (I post on slashdot). But the Mac does Well Enough. Sometimes I don't like things, but it does the same thing every time.

      And yes, it's shiney.

      --
      ... grumble, grumble, grumble, mutter, mutter, Millenium... Hand... Shrimp, I tol' 'em, I tol' 'em.
  56. Effect of the Net by WebHostingGuy · · Score: 1

    >>>t has been interesting to see a number of long time Windows users in hard core sciences with entrenched work flows that made them very dependent upon Windows to make the switch.

    This is why Windows is going to lose market share. In the past these processes were embedded in apps which needed Windows to run (run on the desktop). Now that these work flows are being replaced by browser driven apps Windows is not so much a requirement anymore as you just need a browser to run them.

    The process of changing will not happen overnight and it will be slow, however, it will take place.

    --
    Quality Hosting e3 Servers
  57. Price is my problem... by stanleypane · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have to agree on the price issue many people raise. I wouldn't say Apple is expensive if you compare their specs to an equivalent PC, but I'd still say they sell expensive systems.

    I do think many people want control over their hardware. The only true desktop Apple offers is the Mac Pro. An entry level Mac Pro comes with two dual core xeon processors. Four cores for a home desktop? Maybe for a professional. But your average Joe isn't going to dump $2500 on a desktop for Mac OS and hardware control combined. They'll buy a cheap PC and configure/upgrade as much as possible. They might even find away to hack OS X onto that machine and save a few bucks. I don't think Apple will go on a legal crusade over the OSX86 market.

    If apple gave me a $1500 desktop, I'd jump ship on my next PC purchase. I just built a $1300 Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM system last month and plan on adding a new monitor for a grand total of $1700.00. I'd never get what I wanted out of a new Mac for that price. I'd get a beefed up iMac. pffft.

    1. Re:Price is my problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac Mini?

    2. Re:Price is my problem... by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Apple has chosen its market, and I doubt they will ever make 'average joe' desktop machines. The 'average joe' desktop margin is the land of razor thin margins where you have to ship vast number of boxes making little profit on each unit, and it would undoubtedly dilute Apple's brand. It's a bit like how Porsche make expensive and fast sports cars, and don't cater for the Geo Metro market. Apple's business model works for Apple, and I suspect they would be less profitable if they tried to enter 'low end Dell/Gateway box shifter' territory.

    3. Re:Price is my problem... by stanleypane · · Score: 1

      I hear you man. It's why I pointed out the entry level options of the Mac Pro. I don't need the "Porsche" of computers and neither do most desktop users.

    4. Re:Price is my problem... by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1

      I'd argue two things. First, you're thinking about this in a very different way from most people. First, while I'm sure some people buy computers to upgrade them, lots more people never upgrade their computers. They simply buy a new one. Computers, to these people, are information appliances. For these people, the iMac and Mac Mini (and, until lately, the eMac) are perfect.

      This happened to my parents. When their old computer died, they got a new one and had me transfer the files over. When that computer died, they got a Mac Mini and had me transfer their old files over.

      Second, you know that getting a Mac is a lot more than a box with hardware in it. You get a lot of special software and peace of mind with a Mac. If you want the most quantifiable bang for your buck, get a PC. But there are a ton of qualitative aspects that the Mac will have and the machine you build won't.

      Finally, I'd argue that people who are going to research and configure their PCs aren't Apple's target market for their consumer machines. The people they're going after are people who would normally walk into Best Buy and grab whatever computer the employee there says is good. For these people, specs are meaningless. Getting things done is how they measure computers, and dealing with driver conflicts and virii and spyware prevents people from getting things done.

      People like you and I are willing to put in the effort to keep their machines clean and know what not to click. We're not Apple's target market.

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
  58. Macs ARE expensive by DogDude · · Score: 0, Troll

    But, of course, the least expensive PC is invariably a cheap piece of crap one step up from a calculator.

    I run my business on $200 PC's that I buy off-lease as refurbs (right now, $200 gets you P4 2.x Ghz, 512 RAM, 40 Gig HD, 1 Gb ethernet). The cheapest PC you can buy today will do everything that most people need, and much more. Anyone care to point me in the direction where I can get a refurbished Mac for $200 that will run all modern applications quickly?

    Exactly.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Macs ARE expensive by geekoid · · Score: 1

      A) Linky

      B) No big business uses refirbs.

      C) Most office workers could do there work on an iMac. which is in the same range as most corporate bought PCs

      d) They will save money on maintainance.

      e) Since you are a business owner(and good for you!), I hope you are taking maintenance, viruses, EULA, and DRM into your TCO.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Macs ARE expensive by DogDude · · Score: 1, Informative

      A) Linky

      ubid.com. Tons and tons and tons of them.

      B) No big business uses refirbs.

      I don't own a big business.

      C) Most office workers could do there work on an iMac. which is in the same range as most corporate bought PCs

      Any computer made in the past 20 years can do documents. That's not a big deal.
      No good accounting software. No good point-of-sale software. That's a big deal.

      d) They will save money on maintainance.

      What maintenance? Windows Update is automatic.

      e) Since you are a business owner(and good for you!), I hope you are taking maintenance, viruses, EULA, and DRM into your TCO.

      There's no maintenance. Viruses aren't a problem with basic virus software and employees that aren't brain-dead. EULA's are ignored. DRM isn't applicable to work.

      In fact, I just threw out a Pentium 1 last week that I replaced with one of these refurbs. It worked just fine as our main machine (accounting, point of sale, shipping, email, and documents), but was slow. I couldn't get anywhere near that kind of longevity with a Mac because the software/hardware requirements for the OS and the apps changes so frequently.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    3. Re:Macs ARE expensive by nsayer · · Score: 1

      Nice straw-man.

      The least expensive mac has a 1.66 GHz Core Duo processor, 512M of RAM, a 60GB hard disk and a DVD / CDRW drive and Gig-E. It is $599.

      Your comparison machine is used, not as fast, has a smaller hard drive and (presumably) no optical drive. Try again. Remember, the object of the game is to find the same configuration for less money.

    4. Re:Macs ARE expensive by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Try again. Remember, the object of the game is to find the same configuration for less money.

      Not at all. I could care less what the specs are. I don't need bragging rights. I need to be able to USE my machines. I can DO much more with a $600 PC than I could ever do with a $600 Mac. $600 is a high end PC. $600 is a low-end Mac (that you can't upgrade).

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    5. Re:Macs ARE expensive by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You really aren't getting the rules of this game at all. If you're going to compare refurbished PCs with Macs then you should compare with Macs on eBay. These rules really are simple - it's hard to understand how anyone could fail to understand them.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    6. Re:Macs ARE expensive by KillerBob · · Score: 1

      d) They will save money on maintainance.

      What maintenance? Windows Update is automatic.


      Y'know, I was supporting you until you said that. People telling you that you didn't understand the game, people insulting you personally because you believe that PCs are a better option, people telling you that you should get a Mac just because. You're right, in that the cost of entry into the marketplace is significantly lower with PCs. You can put together a *new* PC for under $300 that'll do everything you need to do for business. It'll run Office, it'll do e-mail, it'll be able to surf. It's certainly not a gaming rig, but it's half the cost of an entry-level Mac. For a business, that's a very significant thing.

      But *please* don't tell me that you rely on Windows Update for your maintenance. It should not be relied on for a corporate system, because there have been many instances where MS has actually caused more serious errors by rushing fixes to Winodws Update. You could be screwing yourself over by letting it handle your system maintenance. Instead, I'd suggest that the site be blocked, and that you download the patches directly from MS and periodically install them on the computers on the net. That can be automated by means of a login script, even. It'll give you much greater control over what is running on each desktop, which can save you an enormous headache down the road.

      e) Since you are a business owner(and good for you!), I hope you are taking maintenance, viruses, EULA, and DRM into your TCO.

      There's no maintenance. Viruses aren't a problem with basic virus software and employees that aren't brain-dead. EULA's are ignored. DRM isn't applicable to work.


      I sincerely hope I never have to work with you. You're an idiot. Repeat after me: Running Antivirus does NOT immunize against viruses. It significantly reduces the risk of contracting a virus, but no software has a 100% catch rate, particularly with new viruses coming out every day. Do NOT rely on your antivirus to do all the job, because you WILL eventually have a problem. You still need to use your brain and a degree of wariness when you use your computer, or you will eventually get burned.

      And I sincerely hope you're going to revisit that whole ignoring EULA thing, because if not, then you're screwed when somebody decides to do a software audit. They do them, and small businesses are usually the ones that get screwed over. Do everything legal. It's simply not worth it in the long run.

      Finally, DRM most certainly is an important consideration. It applies to a heck of a lot more than just movies and MP3 files. You'd do well to look into exactly what the implications of your software are.
      --
      If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
    7. Re:Macs ARE expensive by ktakki · · Score: 1

      What maintenance? Windows Update is automatic.

      Automatic pain in the ass is more like it.

      My company supports a few dozen small- to medium-sized companies, maybe a few hundred workstations and servers. Majority are Windows, with some Macs in design/graphics companies. Allow me to share some Windows Update tragedies...

      • Two Windows SP1 workstations were rendered useless by a Windows Update patch to the point that they couldn't even boot into safe mode. SP2 machines were unaffected. The reason that these PCs were still at SP1 was because SP2 broke a terminal client needed for 80% of this business's data processing needs (we found this out the hard way). Solution: wipe and reinstall, turn wupdate off.
      • A year ago, WU 908531 (which installed verclsid.exe, a program for validating COM objects) broke Explorer, Internet Explorer, and Word on any computer with an HP DeskJet or scanner installed. Documents would not open or save in Word. The My Documents folder would not open. Immediate workaround was to rename or delete verclsid.exe. Now with all the Windows PCs out there with HP peripherals, you'd think MS would catch this in QA, right? Nope.
      • Windows Genuine Advantage...'nuff said. No, wait. I spent too much time on the phone with Microsoft's Bangalore phone bank resolving this one. Even my own office PC got bit when I added a DVD burner; I had to reactivate over the phone.
      • Pushing Internet Explorer 7 as a critical patch. Stupid. Broke a lot of applications that depend on the underlying DLLs for their user interface, most notably recent versions of Quickbooks. Easy fix, uninstall IE7. But time is money for our clients. I will admit that it seems like MS took IE7 off the critical list, since the HP workstation I bought (probably the last to ship with XP) did not have IE7 among the 69 Windows Update critical patches I installed after bringing it up for the first time.


      Automatic Windows Updates are like playing Russian Roulette with five rounds in the revolver. But hey, living dangerously is wicked fun.

      Okay, in the interest of fairness, a couple of years ago an OS X Security Update broke Samba for me (though it only affected one of my home PCs). I worked it out eventually, recompiling Samba from source. But still, compare the percentage of Mac users who use Samba with the percentage of PC users who have HP printers and use Word (see verclsid.exe bullet above).

      k.
      --
      "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
    8. Re:Macs ARE expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was agreeing with YOU until you reached the part where you called him an idiot. The reason for this, according to you was, that he relies solely on an antivirus for security. However, if one reads the sentence that you quoted...

      Viruses aren't a problem with basic virus software and employees that aren't brain-dead.

      STILL not 100% protection, but it does cover your rant. An apology would be in order.

    9. Re:Macs ARE expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "$600 is a high end PC"

      Um, no. Try $5000+ a for HIGH END PC. Do your homework before you make such ridiculous statements.

    10. Re:Macs ARE expensive by Gadzeus · · Score: 1

      You might like to read the comment "Apple or Geek Blind-Spot" to understand why you are wrong about upgrading Macs. It is FAR cheaper than a PC.

      The comment is at towards the end of this discussion.

    11. Re:Macs ARE expensive by nsayer · · Score: 1

      "$600 is a high end PC"

      Um, no. Try $5000+ a for HIGH END PC. Do your homework before you make such ridiculous statements. Not only are you right, but even in this space Macs are competitive.

      $5045 buys you a Mac Pro with 4 3 GHz Xeon cores (2x dual core), 4 GB of RAM, a 750 GB SATA hard disk, an ATI Radeon X1900 512M (2x dual-link DVI) video card, a 16x DVD+/-RW (DL) optical drive.

      Just fooling around on Dell's site for a few minutes I wound up with a price for an XPS 710 H2C with a quad core 3.2 GHz ("Factory overclocked." I am not kidding.), 4 GB RAM, 500GB RAID 1 (2x 500 GB drives), a similar optical drive (though they also throw in an extra DVD-ROM optical drive) and an NVidia GeForce 8800 GTX with 768M running Windows XP Pro for $5224. It's pretty close. Replace the Mac Pro's single 750 GB drive with 2x 500GB and the price is $5244.
  59. Re:Jumped to eComStation and OpenOffice.org by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

    Wow. What a crap scam.

    Doenst even LOOK legit. Even spammers and crapware dealers pay a few bucks for a pretty web presence.

    --
  60. Re:What can a Mac do that a Win/Linux machine cant by livewire98801 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    First, I'm a Linux user, not a Mac user. My notebook runs Fedora 6, XP MCE, and MacOSx86 (HP notebook), but my server/desktop runs FC6. I would LOVE to switch everyone I know to FC6, but it's not happening. My Parents' computer won't move because they own businesses and require QuickBooks. With Vista coming out, that means that the next time my mother needs hardware updgrades, she's getting a Mac tower. Her Windows notebook is rather new, and that will stick around for a while.

    The number one reason she's going to switch? Vista. The cost of the license, plus the extraordinary hardware it will require (she won't be able to use Home Basic, it'll have to be a higher end license), along with the price of AV and other considerations puts her right past the Mac pricepoint. Of course, the fact that I refuse to support Vista on her computer might be part of it :)

    She'll be able to keep her current XP PC for a bit longer yet, but when it goes, she's getting a Mac.

    --
    "He may be mad, but there's method in his madness. [...] It's what drives men mad, being methodical." G.K.Chesterton
  61. About drivers for specialized hardware? by feranick · · Score: 3, Informative

    Let's not forget one major thing: drivers. Macs gan be the best thing after chocolate. However if you use PCs for real experimental science, computers are supposed to gather data. Good luck finding drivers for specialized hardware for Macs. That is why many labs uses PCs. Luckily many drivers are available for Linux too. This unless you just run code or a website, of course. But then it's not a science lab anymore... ;-)

    1. Re:About drivers for specialized hardware? by demonbug · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In our lab, we've got both. PCs run the instruments, the data generally gets stored on network servers (running some sort of Unix - it is shared with the whole department), and then we do most of our analysis/writing work on Macs (because my PI likes them, and none of the rest of us really care - though it helps that our department computer staff have a very strong Mac background and tend to push them, and my PI's son works for Apple). I also work on my Windows laptop when I'm not around lab, transferring stuff back and forth without problems. I wouldn't say this is a typical setup, but it is becoming more so - Macs and PCs really do work together pretty well, and if you can use one you can probably use the other without too much trouble.
      That said, in terms of the instrumentation side of things the scientific world is still very Windows-centric in my experience. Especially for the types of equipment we use, where the computer running it isn't really considered to be a separate entity (even if it says "Dell" on the side), it is just a component that comes with the equipment when you order it (or, as is the case with our latest computer, it came as part of a "software upgrade" for an instrument - the $1000 or so for the computer is small potatoes compared to the cost of the software and the rest of the hardware).

    2. Re:About drivers for specialized hardware? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      However if you use PCs for real experimental science, computers are supposed to gather data. Good luck finding drivers for specialized hardware for Macs.

      This is actually pretty funny. I know a research biochemist and while visiting the lab, several times he had to walk across the hall to the other lab, where the workstation was a mac. The reason, a lot of the software including the control setup for much of the really expensive hardware, only runs on the mac.

      From my experience specialized tools for the sciences are all dependent upon which of the sciences you're looking at. For biology, audio research, linguistics, and now much of physics, you're a lot more likely to find a mac version than a Windows version of research software. For mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, or CAD, you're a lot more likely to find Windows software.

    3. Re:About drivers for specialized hardware? by feranick · · Score: 1

      Much of Physics doesn't run on Macs, but Windows. A vast majority of Electron microscopes, probe microscopes runs on Windows too (Omicron, Philips, Veeco). It's funny that some of the best electron microscopy software actually runs on Macs, but only for PPC, so big centers (like the NCEM at the Lawrence Berkeley Lab) runs on old G4. Raman probes runs on Windows for the most part. A lot of custom built equipment uses National Instruments LabView, which runs bot Windows and Mac, but it's commolny installed in PCs, being usually cheaper. So unless you are doing advanced imaging world, most of the equipment runs on PCs. So you are probably right about biology, linguistics and possibly others. But the physics and material science world is mainly a Windows world. P.S. It's funny because sometimes you see in labs old Macs (from the late 80s and 90s) running very old equipment. Macs were the standard in Physics labs. At some point that changed....

    4. Re:About drivers for specialized hardware? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      I qualified the statement about physics because it is not just Macs or Windows, but divided among disciplines, from what I've seen. I know some physicists specializing in fluid dynamics and lasers who have told me they pretty much have to have a mac to do anything useful. I also know some who work with aerospace modeling who need Windows exclusively. I suspect this is broken up by discipline for the most part.

  62. Re:What can a Mac do that a Win/Linux machine cant by LibertineR · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Firewire?

    I use a Creative Audigy 4 Pro card with 2 Firewire ports. I capture video through them to Adobe Premiere Pro from my Sony Camera. I know a lot of people like Final Cut pro on the MAC, but I find Premiere to be fine. I use Adobe Encore and Nero Vision to create DVDs.

    My hardware aint cute, so I guess you got me.

  63. So what? by drwtsn32 · · Score: 1

    For every "Windows expert" that switches, there are probably 10 experts that wouldn't. I consider myself a Windows and Linux expert, and I owned a Mac OS X laptop for about 6 months. It was fun to play with, but I would never have considered switching away from Windows as my primary machine.

  64. Finally by Enrique1218 · · Score: 1

    Someone has read the sig.

    --
    You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
  65. Re:What can a Mac do that a Win/Linux machine cant by LibertineR · · Score: 1
    I use the Adobe CS2 suite as well, which would eat up that extra $1K for a Mac.

    Fleece!

  66. Re:What about those of us who switch the other way by Atroxodisse · · Score: 1

    If I had mod points I'd mark you up for the Venture Brothers quote. Go Team Venture!

    --
    Read my short stories - You won't regret it.
  67. I can do better than that - $169 by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    How about $169

    My mother actually uses a slower version of this same computer (the 400Mhz model) to do Adobe CS2 InDesign and other publishing work, along with light graphics work with Photoshop CS2 (600 DPI scans of half page artwork). It helps that the computer has gotten a little faster with each OS release. Can you run Vista on the computer you mentioned? Because she can make full use of Spotlight on that old 400Mhz Mac and even Leopard should work on it...

    Of course, you might want to add a little memory to improve performance, but that's true of the computer you listed as well.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:I can do better than that - $169 by DogDude · · Score: 0, Troll

      $200 got us business-grade workstations with a warranty that are our HIGH end machines. No need to shoe horn new software onto it. That's different than a used low-end Mac that may or may not run current software. Mac hardware, for what it can do, is many times more expensive than generic PC hardware.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:I can do better than that - $169 by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      $200 got us business-grade workstations with a warranty that are our HIGH end machines. No need to shoe horn new software onto it. That's different than a used low-end Mac that may or may not run current software. Mac hardware, for what it can do, is many times more expensive than generic PC hardware.

      Come on, for $200 you don't really need a "warranty" - and since Macs are built with higher quality parts to start with, they will hold up better and so are not nearly as likley to have problems as the system you bought. The value you get from far lower downtime more than makes up for any lack of warranty.

      There's also no need to shoehorn new software into the system I mentioned, because it comes with iLife. I mentioned Photoshop and InDesign because these are examples of modern apps that you had mentioned running (probably more modern than what you use which is likley just word processing). It can run any modern Mac software, because it runs the latest version of the OS.

      Mac hardware, for what it can do, is many times more expensive than generic PC hardware.

      Pretty funny statement considering I just showed you a better Mac is $30 less, it is also the ONLY computer she uses and is her "high-end" computer as well, as it has been for years. Indeed they make great servers as well.

      It just goes to show how ingrained that myth is with PC users that refuse at all cost to see any different, much less Think Different. All you can do is trip on the PC blinders and go forth.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  68. why do linux/mac hackers suffer with gdb?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't understand why the kernel, libc, gcc etc. all continue to evolve at an amazing rate and the damn debugger is still stuck in 1985. Is gdb the slow kid or what?

    Does gdb work for anyone? Whenever I get a no to this in conversation with another programer, I know I'm talking to a programmer who only (lightly) debugs "C" code. For java, c++, and MT "C" code gdb is worthless.

    Besides the time out, there is the coring, the mistaking template declarations for definitions, the "unable to evaluate expression" in C++ where things like p vector.size() cannot be evaluated.... really now: can you imagine a world where p sizeof(array) didn't work?? Hello out there!!!

    Is it just that everybody is using printf again?

    Please enlighten me: I want to know.

    The only solution I see is totalview, but that's a pretty penny and non-free.

    1. Re:why do linux/mac hackers suffer with gdb?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand why the kernel, libc, gcc etc. all continue to evolve at an amazing rate and the damn debugger is still stuck in 1985. Is gdb the slow kid or what? Does gdb work for anyone?

      You answered your own question: apparently it works well enough to develop the kernel, libc, gcc, etc., at "an amazing rate".

  69. Scot, not Scott by fo0bar · · Score: 1

    Nothing huge, but his name is spelled Scot. I know this because there are relatively few "well known" Finnies in the world (at least with that spelling), and I happen to be one of them.

    -- Ryan Finnie

    (hey, it looks like I finally have more google juice than him.)

    (subliminal message: download Finnix.)

    1. Re:Scot, not Scott by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

      My apollogies, I went with the "default" spelling.

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  70. Hmm.... by 8127972 · · Score: 1

    Perhaps it's switchers like him that makes Bill Gates react like this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQmOmdYPKJQ&eurl=

    Face it Bill, there's no place to go but DOWN for you.

    --
    This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
  71. List of software. by ThePhilips · · Score: 1

    The only useful you find in RTFA - is the list of Mac OS X software. Rest - is mundane routine.

    IOW, for me the article is pointless. I'd rated highly an article on topic "100 and one annoyances M$ pushed last minute into Vista - and how to disable them." Most of us would end up using Vista anyway and saying that Mac (or Linux) is better is plain stupid. As if we - IT-drones - had any choice...

    At home I can use whatever I like - Windows for games, rest under Linux - but in office all of us are confined to the Redmond's crap.

    --
    All hope abandon ye who enter here.
  72. Re:MBP NOT WORTH EVERY PENNY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could you comment on the failure rates of the desktops or XServe's used in the giant cluster there? *chirp* *chirp* *chirp*
  73. What's wrong with the iMac? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    For as much as you spent you would get an iMac, and have:

    A Better screen

    Gigbit ethernet

    More I/O options.

    Bluetooth

    Faster processor (speculation)

    The ability to run OS X and Windows

    Sure you can't upgrade the video card. But it already comes with a pretty good card anyway, and will hold up for many years, in addition to being a lot more portable than most computers. The iMac in fact would make an almost ideal LAN computer, where having a slightly lower capability video card more than is made up for in having only one unit to carry back and forth.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:What's wrong with the iMac? by wass · · Score: 1

      I just bought an iMac several weeks ago, it seriously rocks. Other benefits (superficial mind you but still benefits) you didn't mention are : - It's an all-in-one design is pretty efficient in terms of saving space - I'll going to get fanboyish here, but regarding appearance, it's really quite elegant. There's no tower box anywhere, no bundle of wires (if you use airport + bluetooth), it's just basiaclly a display on your desk, similar to how computers were back in the 70's/80's. - Built in iSight camera (not sure how many other desktops, displays, or laptops have these built in, but with the iMac it's quite nice) But seriously, before I ever got a mac I wondered how people could be so fanboyish over them, but after using OS X (and I mean REALLY using it, not just dabbling with it for a few minutes as some Microsoft fanboys do before giving up) I can totally see why people really prefer OS X.

      --

      make world, not war

    2. Re:What's wrong with the iMac? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      But seriously, before I ever got a mac I wondered how people could be so fanboyish over them, but after using OS X (and I mean REALLY using it, not just dabbling with it for a few minutes as some Microsoft fanboys do before giving up) I can totally see why people really prefer OS X.

      Personally I think people mistake genuine admiration for a computer as fanboyism, because they have not really experienced the joy of well designed hardware and software working in unison.

      That totally sounds like an advertising blurb but I have to say that after years of owning a Dell and then buying a Mac, I simply had forgotten how much FUN it could be to use a computer. I had not really had that since the olden days of the Atari/Amiga era. When something is pleasing to use, naturally people will be somewhat enthusiastic about it. I really did not have that same degree of fun on a Dell, in fact is was a video editing nightmare effort there that drove me to a Mac in the first place. I also use XP every day at work but that also cannot be considered "fun" since it's constantly doing small things that piss me off (like the modal policy of windows and focus behavior of alert windows).

      Vista has improved on that to be sure, something Windows users should rejoice about. But they should not the detract from claims on the Mac side that we have been having just as good a time all along (or at least for the past few years). There is nothing wrong with saying you like something, as much as a lot of people seem to think it's a bad indicator.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    3. Re:What's wrong with the iMac? by stanleypane · · Score: 1

      I've read your reply, as well as those below yours. Keep this in mind: I'm a Mac admin where I work and I've converted quite a few PC users to Macs. I just got my sister to jump ship to an iMac (w/ C2D). I've nothing against the iMac and think it is an excellent piece of hardware. I'm tired of repairing spyware ridden Window's machines as favors. But... We're on Slashdot. And the average Joe here on Slashdot just isn't going give up the versatility of a PC unless they can afford a Mac Pro. It's that simple. Ask any self respecting computer geek if he would by an iMac for their primary desktop. You'd get very few that would. As far as the panel goes... The 17" iMac that is priced comparatively to my system has a 17" widescreen panel. It's resolution is nowhere near that of my new 22" widescreen, 1680x1050 screen. Maybe the color of the apple panel is a bit more vibrant, but... I'm not into licking my screen ;) All that said... I love Apple hardware and Mac OS X... They just don't offer a mid-range desktop in my price range for a home PC.

    4. Re:What's wrong with the iMac? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Sure you can't upgrade the video card. But it already comes with a pretty good card anyway, and will hold up for many years...

      No. It comes with a card that will play WoW on middle-quality settings. It won't make Oblivion look nice, nor F.E.A.R., nor Ghost Recon, nor other new games and those just around the corner.

      Let's see on apple's site. I can buy an iMac with a Radeon X1600. That card retails online for $90. For $180 I can get a GeForce 7900 GS that has close to three times the performance. More importantly, it will run today's and tomorrow's games satisfactorily. The X1600 will not. Furthermore, the X1600 only comes with 128MB, unless I pay Apple $75 for 256MB. The 7900 GS of course comes with 256MB.

      Ohh, or I can buy a $2000 iMac with a GeForce 7300 GT. Too bad the 7900 GS is still twice as powerful. And if I want it with 256MB or RAM I have to pay Apple $125. Wait. WHAT? According to pricegrabber.com, I can buy that card for $100. What a way to screw the consumers.

  74. Keynote is quite good by mo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm giving a talk at the Southern California Linux Expo this weekend, and it will be done on my wife's Mac using Keynote.
    I actually mocked the slides up in MagicPoint, but I just don't trust my linux laptop to play well with the VGA port and whatever projecter they might have. The Keynote slides look amazing, and I know her Mac will just work with the display they give me. I sometimes wonder if that was Apple's intention in making Keynote so good. Every presentation with it is basically a MacOS commercial.

  75. Only non gamers?? by BillGod · · Score: 1

    I play WOW and Diablo2 just peachy on my Ubuntu box. Wine has come a long way. So far I have only found 1 or 2 games that dont work. Unfortunately its my 3 year olds kids games. They HAVE to have 256 colors to run and a 3 year old is not able to switch around the resolution and colors to play a game.

    --
    MISSING - Sig file. 2 years old black and white and very funny. If found please email me.
    1. Re:Only non gamers?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just use a 2nd X server? Setup a copy of your xorg.conf file with 256 colours etc, then write a small script that starts another copy of X on display :1 using that config file, and loads the game up on that display. Put a nice pretty icon pointing to said script on your desktop. Anything's possible :)

  76. Who pays for what by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Because of how difficult it is to upgrade a Mac compared to a PC.

    For desktop Macs it's actually far easier to upgrade, as the case and components are way more acccessible. There are few cases that I would say anyone on earth could add a HD, Apple has one of them. And four bays so you have room to grow.

    But really, the thing is with Macs they ship with good hardware at the start so you don't need to upgrade beyond the obvious things like memory or HD. That's why people use them for several years instead of just two. I used my last Powerbook for four years before I finally gave in and bought a Macbook Pro.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  77. Re:This is fantastic by DogDude · · Score: 1

    Comparing all the ing equal, then the price is about the same.

    Not in the least. I can buy a $200 PC and do anything I want with it. (How about using a 500 MB Quickbooks file all day?). A $200 Mac is pretty much a doorstop.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  78. Lcoked by what again? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    A PC with linux can be built to far higher specification than a mac locked-in by proprietary Apple. It's crazy to think a USB cable is better if purchased from Apple because they charge you more. Let's not confuse hardware with software quality.

    Apple does not even sell USB cables! What exactly is worse about a system that:

    * Uses high quality components
    * Uses EFI instead of BIOS for booting
    * has a million different I/O paths built in, including Firewire and Bluetooth and Gigabit ethernet even in the cheapest Mac mini?

    That sounds like an AWESOME platform for Linux. And because some of the hardware (like firewire and Bluetooth) is more homogenized, it means that it would probably work better in Linux right off the bat as there would be less testing involved.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  79. Re:This is fantastic by garote · · Score: 1

    Apple doesn't make USB cables. But their online store sells Belkin cables at 20 bucks a pop. Belkin cables _are_ built to high specifications, but whatever. Thanks for the non-sequitor.

    And so a PC can be built to higher (but I doubt FAR higher, as you claim) specs than the top-of-the-line Mac ... what's your point? Like the GP said: TIME IS MONEY. Whether software and hardware quality are "confused" is completely irrelevant. Even if the (now mythical) Apple hardware 'tax' were in effect, the up-front fee would pay for itself tenfold in the first couple years of use, because you'll be hacking in OS X.

  80. this just in.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Bill Gates on DRM, Making plans to drop DRM in Windows Vista, and Zune player

  81. um, uh by chrwei · · Score: 1

    i think you actually agreed with him...

    but anyway, it's fully true. at work they ask me to add popups to warn of this or all the time, to point where in certain cases one has to click through up to 4 popups just to get to a single form. The wanted separate popups for each one. I said it will only work for a while then they will just ignore it and click it. they say "maybe, but I want it anyway". apparently there's some popular belief that popups can fix stupid, well, they can't. they may delay it a bit, but there is no fix for stupid.

    --
    - Disclaimer: Information in this post deemed reliable but not guaranteed.
  82. Re:This is fantastic by garote · · Score: 1

    Not in the least. I can buy a $200 PC and do anything I want with it. (How about using a 500 MB Quickbooks file all day?). A $200 Mac is pretty much a doorstop.

    If I bought a $200 PC, the only thing I'd want to do with it would be use it as a doorstop.

    So no difference there.

  83. Re:Price by Technician · · Score: 2, Informative

    Parents buying computers for their kids for college/hs are going to care about one thing: Price.

    Ummm No! Most parrents look at the course requirements. After meeting the requirements, second is price. Some schools require XP & IE for their applications, Web applications, and/or secure wireless connectivity client. Not all schools or classes in a school have Microsoft requirements so Linux and Mac are OK. As Linux and Apple become more common alternatives to the MS monoculture, pressure is on the schools to become platform agnostic.

    In many places the requirements instead of listing a platform simply list file compatabilities such as Acrobat 5, Flash 9, Firefox 5, Wireless G, etc.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  84. Unrealistic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps fittingly, it took me the full three-month trial period to pay off my expensive MacBook Pro.

    must be nice to be filthy rich...

    This guy is so far out of touch from reality it's incredible. Hey let's ask someone that would take 18 months to pay off that macbook pro if the $150.00 a month out of their tight budget is worth it instead of some rich asshole that had an extra $450.00 a month in his fun-money budget.

  85. Price is not an argument! by TrashGUY · · Score: 0

    MacBook 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo - White Part Number: Z0DS 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Accessory Kit 80GB Serial ATA drive @ 5400 rpm Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW) Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English 2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB $1,399.00 DELL XPS M1210 Intel® Core(TM) 2 Duo T5600 (1.83GHz, 2MB L2 Cache, 667 MHz FSB), Genuine Windows Vista(TM) Business $1,614.00 For roughly the same Windows based system it appears apple is cheaper. Not to mention having to click through 1000 of dells pages to just get a price.

  86. Re:This is fantastic by DogDude · · Score: 1

    My $200 machine right now: Explorer, Thunderbird (4 mailboxes), UPS World Ship, Point of Sale software, Financial software, Firefox. And it's snappy.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  87. I tried a Mac twice and, well..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tried Macintoshes as my alternative computer twice, first a G4 450 tower about five years ago, and a Mac Mini about two years ago. In both cases I sold them after about four-six months. They were in general expensive (like having to buy a $150 Dr. Bott adapter to use an LCD display on the G4), had slow performance, and I had to go through too many workarounds to make them usable for me. (Mostly 3d apps, office apps, and so on). Most of my software packages didn't run on a Mac, or had an arcane and again expensive alternative. I was limited in hardware and upgrade options, and finally, I just go tired of the long winded rants by the Mac zealots about how great OSX was and why couldn't I see it.

    But that was then and this is now. OSX on Intel means a lot of apps have been or will be ported for it, and everything has gone topsy turvy. Office--Use Open Office, Blender for 3D, and so on. I also really am not seeing much difference from a utility standpoint between a Mac and a Linux distro like Ubuntu at this point, just the Linux hardware is cheaper and I have more choices.

    I can really only count at this point four 3D apps that just won't work in Linux or OSX unless I run a virtual machine, and then one is slow as molasses (Vue Infinite). The rest is either already available (Picasa, Office, etc.) or several alternatives are available. (Like Cinelerra for editing movies on Linux, and I think Vegas comes on it now, too). Run a KDE window manager for OSX and most of the same is available.

    So aside from those four apps and games, there's not much reason to stay on Windows aside from the "comfort zone" and the ease of fixing it.

    Here's the deal on how to quit:

    1. Quit COMPLETELY. Too many people balk at learning a new system and go back to the familiar.
    2. Find alternatives, only try to get a Windows app running in Wine or a VM when there's no choice.
    3. Don't look back.

    So there.

  88. When I first saw this headline... by RareButSeriousSideEf · · Score: 1

    When I first saw the headline among my RSS feeds, I thought Mark Russinovich went back out on his own. Somehow that idea made me feel warm & fuzzy.

  89. Re:This is fantastic by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    It's crazy to think a USB cable is better if purchased from Apple because they charge you more.

    but it's white! and it has stylized ends! it HAS to be better!

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  90. Re:This is fantastic by CthulhuDreamer · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, $600 at the Dell store will not buy a low-profile system with an embedded 20" LCD (neither will $1500, since they don't make one). Assemble a decent Core 2 Duo system through Dell's site and add in the $450 20" monitor, and the iMac markup doesn't look so bad for a system with half the footprint. The $999 with the 17" looks even better price-wise.

    (And I work at a Dell-only shop. The Mac Pros would be cheaper that what we're buying, but no one wants to draw attention to themselves by buying something other than a Dell.)

  91. My milage varied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bought a Wallstreet OS8.6 to get away from Windows. The darn thing crashed more often than a North Korean rocket. Cryptic error messages, to boot. The thing Just Didn't Work. And, here in East Texas, there's no support group to tell you what the problem is. So I just figured that Mac fanboys were full of it, and went back to windows after a couple of years of total frustration. So I hear that OS X is Way Better. Will I invest $1500 to find out? Doubt it.

  92. whatever... by ninja_assault_kitten · · Score: 1

    I gave the Mac 5 years. Guess what? I'm back with Windows.

    1. Re:whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What took you so long ?

      I bought a MacBook last year and after 3 months knew that my next system will be Windows-based again. Cool looks just don't make up for overpriced hardware of poor quality (hard disk died after 2 months, random crashes with 2GB RAM sticks) and a limited software selection.

    2. Re:whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oooh, that's gotta hurt!

  93. I'm a parent... by Franklin+Brauner · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...and I buy my kids Macs.
    You see, I love my kids.
    --
    Franklin

    Your quote:
    You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC. Which do you THINK parents are going to buy?

  94. Windows Expert... by SleeknStealthy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    this doesn't make the guy a respectable source by any means. How hard is it to write super shiny reviews at a fifth grade level? I don't care what this guy thinks about a computing experience, whether it be Windows, Mac or Linux. I don't know why Mac products are trendy, they are generally less complete, annoyingly simplistic and the apple kernel (XNU) is a cluster fucked Mach + Freebsd combo. OSX sucks for scientific computing and it annoying for anyone who actually wants to do work. Windows and OSX user interfaces continue to decay as time goes on. So who cares what this guy does in his personal time.

    --
    Math
  95. Re:This is fantastic by Franklin+Brauner · · Score: 1

    It's crazy to think a USB cable is better if purchased from Apple because they charge you more. Let's not confuse hardware with software quality.

    Perhaps, but it's not so crazy to think that a computer is better if purchased from Apple because they charge you more. Let's not confuse cables with components.
    --
    Franklin

  96. KDE Excellence. by Erris · · Score: 2, Informative

    What're these "must-have" features in KDE? Any time I've used it, I've found a bunch of stupidly-named applications, and a big, bulky UI filled with toolbars. I'd rather use GNOME. Hell, I'd rather use Windows.

    There are a lot of excellent KDE applications, none of which require you to use their window manager:

    • The kicker - yes, it can be big but you can place and size it or hide it to fit your preferences. If you don't want it floating around, un-tack it so that it only lives on one virtual desktop. It's a good menu system.
    • Konqueror - The file manager. No other comes close in terms of network integration and flexibility. Try using sftp in Safari on a Mac and you get a screen that asks you for $25 to continue! Konqueror has panes that split both horizontally and vertically for easy drag and drop. The mime list and sub menus based on file type are also excellent. It knows what you can do with a given file and makes it easy to do it. It does tabs, of course and makes a good browser with built in spell check, form completion and all that kind of thing.
    • K3B - the CD/DVD burner.
    • Kontact - showing you how network transparency makes distributed PIM easy. Kmail on it's own is awesome. This is a best of class application.
    • Amarok - Better than iTunes.
    • Konsole is nice for bookmarks, and I like the speed of gnome terminal better, but what is there like it on Windoze or Mac?
    • Kword is a good and light application that works with ODF.
    • kate - an excellent text editor with session management, syntax highlighting for about any file type and other goodies.
    • Kformula is a nice formula editor, which also works with ODF. The list of science applications, like the periodic table Kalzium, Kstars and on and on is first rate.

    There's more that I missed, I'm sure. Everytime I turn around there seems to be some nice new application from them.

    Like I said, you don't have to use the window manager to use these applications. They work just as well or better under the window manager of your choice.

    Best of all, it's all free! That's why there's so much of it and why it all works together.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
    1. Re:KDE Excellence. by BlueStraggler · · Score: 1

      Amarok - Better than iTunes.

      I use both; in fact I run my Amarok off my iTunes library backup. Furthermore, I'm running an older OSX and a sparkling new Linux. Furtherfuthermore, the Linux is running on a smoking AMD64 system, while the OSX is limping along on an old PPC. And to top it all off, it took zero configuration to get Linux sound and music going, thanks to SuSE, so I have absolutely no gripes against Linux. And I don't use the iTMS, download album cover art, nor do I own an iPod, so I have no bias to the Mac.

      Which means I can definitively say you're delusional.

    2. Re:KDE Excellence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Amarok - Better than iTunes."

      ROFLMAO

    3. Re:KDE Excellence. by jlowe · · Score: 1

      Could you back up your grade-school comment with real-world arguments to the contrary? Or are you just blindly replying without even being familiar with or considering the merits of amarok?

    4. Re:KDE Excellence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Maybe you should request "back up" from the GP as well? I mean "Better than iTunes" doesn't really cut it in my book, either.

      "Erris" here is a sockpuppet of twitter, who has a long history of trying to "evangelize" people to not use iTunes and use Amarok instead because, well, who knows.

      twitter is unfortunately the kind of person who thinks software is inherently superior merely because it's free.

    5. Re:KDE Excellence. by Erris · · Score: 1

      What does iTunes do for you that Amarok does not?

      --
      DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
    6. Re:KDE Excellence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything. Amarok sucks, period.

    7. Re:KDE Excellence. by BlueStraggler · · Score: 1

      I've never read a single word of documentation on iTunes, and yet I know how to do all kinds of weird stuff like tie it into multimedia presentations in Keynote or iPhoto, listen to the BBC, watch Lost season 3 episodes, browse my music collection with the handy remote control, or wirelessly stream my music from the office to the stereo in the living room. Note: I don't actually do all those things, but I know how to do them, without ever having looked it up.

      I've also never read a single word of documentation on Amarok, but I have no idea whether it can do any of those things. The only thing I know how to do is Play All in random shuffle mode. It has a helpful message up telling me that I need to build a collection if I want to make use of the context browser, but I honestly don't know what the hell it's talking about, nor am I that "into" my music player that I care.

      In a word, "usability". If a music player is harder to use than a CD player, it's not a great player, no matter how big its feature set is.

    8. Re:KDE Excellence. by Erris · · Score: 1

      I've never read a single word of documentation on iTunes, and yet I know how to do all kinds of weird stuff like tie it into multimedia presentations in Keynote or iPhoto, listen to the BBC, .... I don't actually do all those things, ... I've also never read a single word of documentation on Amarok, but I have no idea whether it can do any of those things. The only thing I know how to do is Play All in random shuffle mode.

      You should not say you can do something until you have tried and it worked.

      With a little time, patience and curiosity you would have discovered many useful things Amarok does, without having to read a manual. First is the filter box above your music collection type "love" into it to get all your love songs. The next is the excellent sorting. Right click on the table above your collection and you get a remarkably large collection of useful choices that make it easier to find the music you want. Most distributions load up a bunch of radio stations in your playlists, but the people at Amarok can be held responsible if the station does something dumb and breaks Amarok. Everything is drag and drop, so managing your music playlists is just as intuitive as the above. Finally, a remote control is nice, but the whole point of programs like Amarok is to not have to fool with the music player. With Amarok it only takes a few minutes to set up days of music, so you can spend your days doing something other than pushing buttons.

      --
      DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  97. [ot] Menu delights by wild_berry · · Score: 1

    I've enjoyed a great new filling for sandwiches, omelettes, fritters and more foodstuffs than you can imagine. Put it with chips, peas, cheese, lettuce, in pies and on pizza, roast it, toast it, boast about it:

    Spam.

  98. seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i never can understand this whole mac vs. pc debate. i have our marketing person who thinks macs are the best thing in the world. then i come in and plug in a cf card into her mac and it locks up her mac and she starts screaming that you cannot do that! it will lock her quark application up! and everytime i talk to her she's screaming at her mac and how she likes her old mac better. so no i don't think pcs are any better but neither does the mac. but she thinks pcs are horrible and always crashes.

  99. A switcher by PhotoGuy · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've been using Windows from day 1, and seen the Mac as a curiosity. Being a hard core Unix junkie and developer, with the switch to OS X, my ears perked up for sure. The switch the Intel, even more so, so I picked up a Macbook. Well, baby, there's no looking back.

    I only got the Macbook because it was a fast x86 machine that could run Windows (faster than most laptops, it turns out), and I had Parallels to run a virtualized Windows (Crossover and VMWare still suck on OS X, but won't before long I'm sure). But guess what? I haven't booted Parallels in a week, and probably won't for another month. Almost *everything* works under OS X. VLC Player filled in the "play windows media files" hole, which really was one of the last reasons to boot Windows. Good bye windows, and Sayonara indeed!

    Yes, Jobs might be slightly evil ("Evil light, just one Calorie!" as Dr. Evil might say), but as compared to MS, he's freakin' Mother Theresa. (Oh wait, she was a little evil, too. But you know what I mean.) Even though Jobs obviously has Apple's shareholders' bottom line in mind, and embraces DRM, etc., etc., at least Apple shows a slight bit of respect for the consumer, while taking their money. MS is just stabbing in the dark, and nothing short of offensive in their business practices.

    In short, I love my Mac. I'll develop on it, likely deploy on Linux (LAMP is LAMP, on OS X or Linux), while having a wonderful desktop to use in the meantime.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:A switcher by Vexorian · · Score: 1

      Yes, Jobs might be slightly evil ("Evil light, just one Calorie!" as Dr. Evil might say), but as compared to MS, he's freakin' Mother Theresa
      Come on: They are bussiness, if Apple had the monopoly they would be behaving exactly as microsoft, it is what corporations do.
      --

      Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
    2. Re:A switcher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      VLC Player filled in the "play windows media files" hole, which really was one of the last reasons to boot Windows.

      You might want to try Flip4Mac. You can play windows media files from any quicktime application, even with the free version.

    3. Re:A switcher by keeboo · · Score: 1

      Being a hard core Unix junkie and developer, with the switch to OS X, my ears perked up for sure.
      The switch the Intel, even more so, so I picked up a Macbook.

      Intel processor as a positive reason?
      Are you sure you're a Unix guy?

    4. Re:A switcher by davidgay · · Score: 1
      I've been using Windows from day 1, and seen the Mac as a curiosity.


      You used Windows 1?


      David Gay

    5. Re:A switcher by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's also Flip 4 Mac (http://www.flip4mac.com/), providing a free component for Quicktime that enables seamless playback of most WMV content in Quicktime Player and from within browsers, that's much better than the official MS WMV player (for one thing, you can actually scrub with the playhead, unlike the official player).

      It won't handle DRM-ed wmv content, but the official MS client for OS X doesn't either. DRM WMV is strictly windows only. Apart from that, it's excellent.

      We've been using the full HD studio version of Flip 4 Mac to create wmv files for client preview right out of Final Cut Pro.

    6. Re:A switcher by PhotoGuy · · Score: 1

      In my experience, Flip4Mac didn't play any of the media files I had kicking around, and VLC played them all (with a nicer interface, and didn't require a paid upgrade to simply play full screen, a la Quicktime). Flip4Mac sounds interesting, but it didn't play many files for me.

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  100. Re:This is fantastic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've got a Bic Pen, which cost me 59 cents.

    I'm looking out my window "Exploring" my neighbors wife.

    I have envelops and stamps ($2.25), the cardboard sign in my window that says "UPS YES" on it was free.

    I have an abacus for calculating tax for my customers (5.99 at yard sale, anything more is a waste of money), I found that a general ledger works just as well on yellow paper as it does on white (99 cents).

    The resolution of my pen is awesome, I rarely see any lag so I'd say it's pretty snappy. I may upgrade later, but only if the new pen is capitable with my ledger.

  101. Re:This is fantastic by dlenmn · · Score: 1

    Well, if someone likes Apple equipment, it makes sense for them to be pro Apple: the more people who use Apple equipment the easier life is for Apple users (more software is made, more websites work with Safari, etc.) I can't explain Proctor and Gamble in the same way. Some would say that people just like to identify and belong to gorups -- explains nationalism and whatnot. Maybe people are generally nice so they recomend things they like to other people. Is there anything wrong with that? What causes people to be so OMG I'M SO SUPERIOR THAT I TYPE IN CAPS anti pro things? What's it to you?

  102. Um... by Samah · · Score: 1

    I have nothing against Macs at all. I've never used one except for like 15 years ago at school, so my experience is pretty limited.
    The thing that pisses me off is your stereotypical Mac user. "OMG sif use M$ Windoze you should use Macs there way kewl" (spelling/grammar errors intended).
    I'll use a Mac if and when I decide to try it and if I like it, not just because a Mac user pushes me around. Linux elitests can be somewhat similar in this, but usually not half as bad.
    I've used Ubuntu desktop briefly and I quite liked it. There's only two reasons I haven't moved to it:
    a) JMicron support is still screwy, b) I'm too scared to run World of Warcraft (the only game I play) after the whole Cedega banned account deal (even if it's supposedly resolved now).

    --
    Homonyms are fun!
    You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    1. Re:Um... by rizzo320 · · Score: 1

      Then why are you reading this article and all the discussion :-). If you don't want to be told to switch don't read a slashdot Mac vs PC article!!! :-)

    2. Re:Um... by revscat · · Score: 1

      The thing that pisses me off is your stereotypical Mac user. "OMG sif use M$ Windoze you should use Macs there way kewl" (spelling/grammar errors intended).

      In other words: you're basing your decision upon a strawman.

      I'll use a Mac if and when I decide to try it and if I like it, not just because a Mac user pushes me around. Linux elitests can be somewhat similar in this, but usually not half as bad.

      And were the grammar and spelling mistakes in this sentence also intentional? People in glass houses really shouldn't throw stones.

      Choose to buy or not buy something because it works best for you, not because of your loathing of imaginary "fanboys".

    3. Re:Um... by Samah · · Score: 1

      Ok, I slipped up with the single word "elitests", sorry about being human. It's not a word I use every day, unlike the common homonyms there/their/they're, your/you're which are in common use and still frequently misused by people who should know better.

      a) I'm not making a initial or final decision, and certainly not due to others' attitudes. I said I will make a decision (final or not) in my own time, on my own terms.
      b) I never said "I won't buy one because I hate fanboys". My argument was that I would try/use one when I wanted to, not just because another person or persons feel the need to push me into it.
      c) Fanboys (for any subject) are imaginary? News to me.

      If I give the Mac a shot, who knows... I might even love it! I'm happy enough with my current system that I see no need to try one yet.
      If I end up getting one I'll let you know. :P

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    4. Re:Um... by Samah · · Score: 1

      Oh and by the way, can I auto-mod you down for using the word fanboy in your own post? :D
      (kidding)

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
  103. Re:OSX is just plain crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First, alot of individuals do actually choose to run Windows because it has the software solutions necessary to function. Where is AutoCAD for OSX? I don't want another version of CAD, nor do I want to dual boot the system using Boot Camp. I would want a native version for OSX.

    I think if Apple wants this to happen they need to completely opensource the entire operating system under the GPL. They would have to release all of their software under the GPL. They of course will never do this for a number of reason. The most important is that their software is vastly inferior to most of what is out there. It looks good, but nice like ****. Even OSX on a core 2 duo is slowwww. It almost crawls.

    As a Linux user who has to tolerate Windows, I have no time for OSX. It just isn't open, is slow, and surrounded by what really amounts to nothing more than a cult. Why don't you just go back to worshiping Steve and leave the rest of us the **** alone. Mac users really do equate to the Jehovah Witness movement (you think your paradigm is the only one that is important, and you just won't leave people alone to actually select something that you view is inferior). Maybe, we actually like what we use and are not driven by wants and desires for manipulation.

  104. Not in my experience. by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 0, Troll

    I had to do a Mac port of an application I was working on about a year ago. I needed to edit a plain text file on the Mac, and the editor that came with it would only save files to formats like html, rtf, etc. I don't know how to use old-school editors like EMACS, so I searched apple.com for info on how to edit plain text on a Mac. The only thing I could find was a third party application sold through apple.com called "Plain Text Editor(R)" that cost $20!!! Now, there probably is at least one free plain text editor for the Mac, but I couldn't find it after about an hour of searching. In Windows, it's just Start>Programs>Accessories>Notepad. Even after you pay the ridiculously high price for a Mac, you still have to pay for things (if you can find them at all) that are completely free on a Windows or Linux machine. And then there are those ass-backwards and poorly documented resource bundles. And the fact that applications launched through the GUI have no current directory. Macs are fine if all you want to do is surf the web and listen to music, but for a developer, they're severely lacking. No thank you.

    --
    If you can read this sig, you're too close.
    1. Re:Not in my experience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dude, if you used TextEdit (ie included with Mac OS X) then you already had a plain text editor available.
      Dear god, if you couldn't work out how to find TextEdit (clue, Applications --> TextEdit) I really don't ever want to see the quality of your code!

    2. Re:Not in my experience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I had to do a Mac port of an application I was working on about a year ago.

      I needed to edit a plain text file on the Mac, and the editor that came with it would only save files to formats like html, rtf, etc. And .txt. Not that you were able to figure out how.

      I don't know how to use old-school editors like EMACS And you're a developer?

      Now, there probably is at least one free plain text editor for the Mac, but I couldn't find it after about an hour of searching That just means you suck at searching. Like, really suck.

      Even after you pay the ridiculously high price for a Mac, you still have to pay for things (if you can find them at all) that are completely free on a Windows or Linux machine Oh good, a price troll. Because it's not like there's any overpriced shareware for Windows. And how could someone as helpless as you ever use Linux?

      And then there are those ass-backwards and poorly documented resource bundles Apple's developer docs are a bit hard to navigate, I'll give you that.

      And the fact that applications launched through the GUI have no current directory Yes they do.

      Macs are fine if all you want to do is surf the web and listen to music, but for a developer, they're severely lacking You're either incompetent or a troll, but I can't quite decide which.
    3. Re:Not in my experience. by jdp816 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Right click on the file and it'll pop up a contextual menu with the top two choices as "Open" and "Open with...". If you select "Open with..." it'll show you what the default program is to open that type of file, and what other apps you have installed that might be able to do it. You will have TextEdit on your system, as the AC already pointed out, and it will edit .txt and .rtf. It will also edit .html, as it's just plain text. You lose at computing by doing it the HARD WINDOWS WAY. If you need to do something, try to do it. Don't go looking for an app to do something simple, like you would on a PC (ie unzip a file).

    4. Re:Not in my experience. by jdp816 · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is an option in TextEdit, Shift-Comand-T, that switches between plain text and rich text. (also under Format - Make Plain Text/Make Rich Text)

    5. Re:Not in my experience. by ignavusinfo · · Score: 1

      First, it's GNU Emacs (or XEmacs, or Aquamacs Emacs), not EMACS. That just makes you look like a 'tard.

      Second, as others have pointed out, the cryptically named TextEdit edits plaintext no problem; I'll admit that hiding the rich text to plaintext conversion under the Format menu makes things difficult, but there you are.

      Third, if you're so inclined (and you *are* a developer, right?) Apple estimates that it'd take you 15 minutes to roll your own and even provides instructions:

      Text System Overview: Building a Text Editor in 15 Minutes

      I'd like to know what's lacking developerwise. I develop Common Lisp (both SBCL and OpenMCL), Perl, Python, C, Obj-C, and Haskell on mine without issues. But then I do know Emacs...

    6. Re:Not in my experience. by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      I don't know how to use old-school editors like EMACS

      Let's see.

      day@ockham:~ emacs myfile.txt

      (Type stuff, then click File->Exit,and save at the prompt)

      day@ockham:~

      What's so difficult?

    7. Re:Not in my experience. by Enrique1218 · · Score: 1

      What the hell are you talking about? Dude, with textedit, hit shift-command-t to convert to plain text. Give it whatever extension you want when it saves. Here is a better thought. Use freaking Xcode that came with mac to develop you software.

      --
      You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
    8. Re:Not in my experience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just type vi . (Ducks....)

    9. Re:Not in my experience. by Erik+K.+Veland · · Score: 1

      TextEdit does plain text. It's right there in the menu: Format -> Make Plain Text. Duh.

      --
      "I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
    10. Re:Not in my experience. by rizzo320 · · Score: 1

      Steps to create plain text files in Mac OS X.
      1. Go to the applications folder. Open TextEdit.
      2. Go to "Format" in the Menu Bar. "Choose Make Plain Text".

      If you want TextEdit to default to making plain text documents everytime you use TextEdit:
      1. Go to TextEdit in the file menu, open "preferences".
      2. In the new document field, click the "plain text" button. Close the window to save your new preference.

      In addition, you can use text editor for the terminal.
      1. Go to Applications folder. Go to Utilities. Open Terminal.
      2. Type "nano" or "pico".

      Some of these same instructions can be found by going to http://www.apple.com/support and in the search window typing in the words "plain text". I found several articles are listed there on how to save plain text documents, most dated over a year old, the time you were allegedly "searching" for how to do this, including

      http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=151 181About Document Formats
      http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=106 212Mac OS X: How to Set Up TextEdit as an HTML or Plain Text Editor

      Please let me know what software application you ported to the Mac, so that I may avoid it. Come on man, you're programming and you can't figure this stuff out? Besides, if you copied the plain text file to the Mac, and double clicked on it to open it, it would open in TextEdit by default! Wow...

    11. Re:Not in my experience. by demallien2 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that someone explaining in detail to the slashdot community that they are an incompetent programmer can even be defined as a troll. It's just kinda... sad.

      Let's count the strikes:
      1) can't use vi/emacs
      2) can't figure out how to open a .txt on a Mac
      3) couldn't find TextEdit (I mean, come on!)
      4) didn't have xcode installed (and wants to make us believe that they're a programmer!)
      5) didn't think to install any of the 50 squillion X11 open source editors available out there...

      Good grief.

      Even my computer illeterate partner is capable of opening a .txt for editing on a Mac.

    12. Re:Not in my experience. by DoubleEdd · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the fact that the default OS X emacs doesn't have a gui? So clicking isn't going to get you anywhere.

      Not that the OP wasn't a clueless troll.

    13. Re:Not in my experience. by jaavaaguru · · Score: 1

      Gotta love the Slashdot moderation system sometimes. Hopefully the above Anonymous Coward post was informative to its parent's author :-)

    14. Re:Not in my experience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Macs are fine if all you want to do is surf the web and listen to music, but for a developer, they're severely lacking You're either incompetent or a troll, but I can't quite decide which. You are being narrow minded, he could easily be both.
    15. Re:Not in my experience. by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that's what I couldn't figure out. I wasn't editing an existing file; I was creating one from scratch, and it seemed to only allow me to save it in a rich text format.

      --
      If you can read this sig, you're too close.
    16. Re:Not in my experience. by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 1

      First of all, smartass--can I call you smartass?--I don't give a flying fuck what it's called, I have never found any use for any variant of EMACS. Second, if you weren't such a knee-jerk, Steve Jobs loving Apple fanbois, you might stop to realize that if you create a text file in TextEdit (which was the first thing I tried) it will not let you save it in plain text. In MS Word and Wordpad, it always allows you to save plain text files after warning you that you will lose all formatting, of course. I was in a huge hurry, and I hadn't discovered the well-hidden option that lets you convert to plain text. Naturally, I assumed that the editor was incapable of saving plain text, so I searched apple.com's developer site for "plain text editor" and came up with nothing (go to developer.apple.com and try it for yourself if you don't believe me).

      I'd like to stress that this was my first time using a Mac in about ten years, and my first time ever using one for development. I was actually running Panther inside PearPC on a Windows machine, so it was very slow and prone to crashing. This was spare-time, contract work, and all I wanted to do was get in, get the port compiled, and get out (so creating my own text editor from scratch was obviously out of the question). It was written to be cross-platform from the beginning, using FLTK for the GUI, so it should have taken a couple hours at most. However it ended up taking several days to get all the libraries I needed to compile. I'd say that's still pretty good for someone who's never touched a modern Mac before. But that TextEdit thing left a bad taste in my mouth.

      --
      If you can read this sig, you're too close.
    17. Re:Not in my experience. by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 1

      I needed to edit a plain text file on the Mac, and the editor that came with it would only save files to formats like html, rtf, etc. And .txt. Not that you were able to figure out how. Then try it right now. Open up TextEdit. Type some text (but don't apply any formatting). Now try to save it. ".txt" isn't one of the options. Naturally, I assumed that it couldn't save plain text, so I went looking for a replacement on developer.apple.com. Now go there and search for "plain text editor" and see if you find any useful links. You're the troll, AC.

      And the fact that applications launched through the GUI have no current directory Yes they do. Applications launched from Finder (and iirc, also from the desktop) have / as their cwd (not very useful). On Windows, the cwd of a program launched from the desktop or explorer is the location of the executable. See what you can learn when you stop humping your Mac and read something?
      --
      If you can read this sig, you're too close.
    18. Re:Not in my experience. by ignavusinfo · · Score: 1
      You're free to call me what you'd like; however, being vituperative doesn't make you correct. TextEdit will indeed let you save a newly created file as plaintext and no amount of arguing to the contrary will make it otherwise. It may not have been (to you) obvious how to do it but then maybe you shouldn't attempt to comment on an application or operating system you haven't actually used for more than a few minutes. Maybe? Searching for "plaintext" in the TextEdit help viewer returns a number of pages. First is "Creating a document" this is the second paragraph:

      TextEdit can create Rich Text Format (RTF) files and plain text documents. To change the type of all new documents, choose TextEdit > Preferences and click New Document. Select "Rich text" or "Plain text" under Format.
      As for this fanboi nonsense, you do realize there's a wide gulf between "uninformed" and "fanboi" right? With most people (myself included) falling somewhere in the middle. The fact that many find the platform to be an optimal development workstation doesn't make us any more than satisfied customers. I really only replied because your claim was incredible and deserved calling out.
    19. Re:Not in my experience. by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 0, Troll

      Do me a favor. Open TextEdit. Type "I am a smartass". Try to save the file as "smartass.txt". Can't do it? So you see my point. Mac interfaces are supposed to be intuitive. This wasn't. This is just another example of Apple living in a computing vacuum, where they ignore the norms of Linux and Windows applications.

      --
      If you can read this sig, you're too close.
    20. Re:Not in my experience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Open TextEdit. Type "I am a smartass". Try to save the file as "smartass.txt". Can't do it? So you see my point.

      I sure don't see your point, since your original claim was "the editor that came with it would only save files to formats like html, rtf, etc." which is just plain wrong.

      Of course, like a true developer, you didn't read the Help file which tells you how to create plaintext documents on page fucking one. Instead you wasted your time searching online for something that works exactly like what your used to.

      "Well-hidden option that lets you convert to plain text"? Yeah, well-hidden on the fucking "Format" menu, which you also didn't bother to look at. What a wanker.

    21. Re:Not in my experience. by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 1

      Of course, like a true developer, you didn't read the Help file which tells you how to create plaintext documents on page fucking one. You're onto something there. A good developer realizes that his users will only read the documentation as a last resort. The people that created TextEdit obviously missed this point. A simple text editor should be able to save files to plain ASCII format (without toying with advanced options). Maybe you should reread my posts if you don't see my point.
      --
      If you can read this sig, you're too close.
    22. Re:Not in my experience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Of course, like a true developer, you didn't read the Help file which tells you how to create plaintext documents on page fucking one.

      > You're onto something there. A good developer realizes that his users will only read the documentation as a last resort.
      > The people that created TextEdit obviously missed this point.

      No, they didn't miss it, because the documentation is NOT the last resort. It's the FIRST place you go when you don't can't figure out how to do something in a program-- unless you're a know-it-all who thinks he doesn't ever need to read docs because it's obviously "just like Notepad."

      > A simple text editor should be able to save files to plain ASCII format (without toying with advanced options).

      TextEdit is not a simple text editor, it's a rich text editor, and "Format->Make Plain Text" is hardly an advanced option.

      Face it, you couldn't figure out how to make it do what you wanted because of your expectations. Your expectations weren't unreasonable (I ran into the same wall), but unlike you I didn't throw my hands up and say "this program is stupid." You must have felt like a fucking genius when you finally found out what you were doing wrong!

  105. hitting the wall with The Print Shop by westlake · · Score: 1
    I wish people would stop calling me because their crummy greeting card creation program quit printing a certain color

    Stop right there.

    In Linspire's CNR Warehouse there are no "Greeting Card" programs.

    20,000 titles.

    But nothing to replace The Print Shop, which has been doing business at the same old stand for about twenty-five years.

    Page through the catalog as a home user would.

    Strip away the programs that are available for Windows, then ask yourself what is left and what is missing. You may not find the answers very comforting.

    1. Re:hitting the wall with The Print Shop by rizzo320 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they should switch to Mac OS X. They have "The Print Shop" available...

      http://www.mackiev.com/print_shop.html/

    2. Re:hitting the wall with The Print Shop by westlake · · Score: 1
      Perhaps they should switch to Mac OS X. They have "The Print Shop" available...

      Of course they do. Look hard enough and you'll find Print Shop running on Apple II. But it is telling when a commercial Linux distribution for the home market has so little to offer to the home market.

  106. I did just that.... by seanismdotcom · · Score: 1

    My coworker had a G4 Tower he sold me and I used it and I got my OS X fix in. After a few months I got tired of it and wanted to go back to Windows. It was nice but it got annoying and I felt very limited when I was using it. I sold it and now I have no urge to use OS X.

    So here I am 6 months later typing this on Windows XP...

    just my 2 cents.

    1. Re:I did just that.... by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      I'm curious, what did you find "limiting"? With the new Intel Macs you can pretty much do anything Windows could do. I realize that you were using a G4 but even on PPC I can think of few things that just can't be done on Mac.

    2. Re:I did just that.... by JoeCommodore · · Score: 1

      Kepp in mind the G4 towers go all the way back to 350 mghz, which still can run OS 10.4 OK but rather slow (no cutting edge games at those speeds). Maybe he had one of the older ones.

      --
      "Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
  107. I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by guidryp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am nearing the point of upgrading my Windows box (Athlon XP) to a new dual core. I really wanted to give Apple a shot. But the lack of Hardware really had me give up. I was willing to pay a small premium but still there was nothing.

    First I have two monitors, so a built in monitor computer is out. Even if I needed a monitor, I would not be Crazy about tying them together permanently.

    That leaves the Mini and the Pro. I wanted decent graphics (~7600GT) so the mini was shot down.
    That left the pro. Way too much money. That left: another new windows box.

    There is just no reasonably priced Mac with even remotely mainstream graphics power.

    It is not so much that Apple takes an excessive profit margin, it is that they choose components that have poor bang/buck. The mini is built out of laptop components that all cost more and have less power. Graphics power seems completely irrelevant to Apple as well. You move to the Pro and you are forced to buy overkill Dual Xeons with ECC memory.

    I have no problem with Apple controlling their HW, but with that they need to offer broader HW choices.

    1. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by Pinback · · Score: 1

      My home desktop has a 6600GT and dual 20" 1600x1200 LCDs on DVI. Even with binary NVIDIA drivers, the best of the Linux distros do a shitty job with the screen realestate.

      So I too am stuck with XP on a PC until Apple makes something reasonable to take its place.

    2. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately true, the last mac probably will be my mac mini for the next years unless something decent in the mid range comes along. Apple has a severe problem in the product lineup, they have an affordable low end range, they have a mid end range with integrated monitor and good graphics, and they have an absolute high end range. But they do not have any mid end model witout integrated monitor. Most of us have enough monitors but they need graphics power, Apple really could open an additional market with a mac mini like model with an Nvidia or ATI graphics chip!

    3. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by hey! · · Score: 1

      So -- go for the high end box and put off replacing for another eighteen months to two years. In the end, you're at the same place, but you've had a year or so of being spoiled by having a high end machine.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by guidryp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't afford to take money and burn it. Dual Xeons and ECC memory this platform is at least twice as expensive as it needs to be. This exceeds my computer budget by over 100%. I could build something on the PC that meets my needs and has similar power on most tasks for a little over 1/3 this cost. Giving Apple a chance, doesn't include being a moron with my money. I won't lay down an extra $1500 just to have OSX. That premium is a little rich for my blood.

    5. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by Alioth · · Score: 1

      They need to offer more hardware choices like Porsche needs to offer a Geo Metro type car. They aren't in the razor thin margin box shifter market. They would probably make less profit if they did start selling razor thin margin Dell-alikes.

    6. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by American+Infidel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      First I have two monitors, so a built in monitor computer is out.

      I'm sorry, I've missed a step. The current iMacs have a connector for an external monitor. Do you mean that you need both monitors to be better than any iMac's built-in panel?

    7. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by guidryp · · Score: 1

      "I'm sorry, I've missed a step. The current iMacs have a connector for an external monitor. Do you mean that you need both monitors to be better than any iMac's built-in panel?"

      It seems rather pointless to buy another monitor when I don't need one. I already paid for 2 monitors, I don't want to pay for a third.

      Even if I had zero monitors I would not buy an all in one unit. It is a restricting, needless integration. Can I use the internal monitor too play Xbox on? If the computer fails can I still use the monitor? If the monitor fails can I still use the computer? Can I upgrade the computer and keep using the same monitor? Integrating the monitor is a stupid idea and I would not buy a computer with integrated monitor. Good for my grandma, but not for me.

      Even if I lost my common sense and would consider an integrated monitor computer, iMacs still have underpowered wimpy graphics cards. iMacs cannot drive dual link DVI displays like the Dell 3007, ACD 30". I usually keep computers about 5 years, so I definitely want to keep my options open regarding dual link displays.

      Apple make only one computer with the ability to house half decent graphics that will drive dual link DVI, and that is the Pro. Which is outrageously expensive.

      Apple continues the trend of underpowered, overly expensive hardware. I had hoped the move to Intel would bring them economies of scale that would lead to improved bang/buch. It didn't happen. Instead Apple wastes money on expensive components that don't help performance, and skimps where it is needed like in the graphics department.

      My only hope for OSX is to build a FrankenMac.

    8. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by American+Infidel · · Score: 1

      It seems rather pointless to buy another monitor when I don't need one. I already paid for 2 monitors, I don't want to pay for a third.

      Okay, that sounds reasonable.

      Even if I had zero monitors I would not buy an all in one unit. It is a restricting, needless integration. ... Integrating the monitor is a stupid idea and I would not buy a computer with integrated monitor. ... Even if I lost my common sense and would consider an integrated monitor computer, ...

      This, not so much. I see that it's not about having two monitors at all; you just hate the idea of a computer having a built-in monitor. You really, really hate the idea of a computer having a built-in monitor. Anyway, on to your questions:

      Can I use the internal monitor too play Xbox on?

      Yes, if you have a TV digitizer. Otherwise, of course not.

      If the computer fails can I still use the monitor?

      Yes, if you're willing to get the failed parts fixed. Otherwise, of course not.

      You do raise a good point, though. It would be cool if Apple added video input to the iMac.

      If the monitor fails can I still use the computer?

      Absolutely. As I mentioned before, there is an external monitor port. I have no idea what you're getting at, here.

      Can I upgrade the computer and keep using the same monitor?

      Yes. The upgrades you can put on an iMac leave the internal display alone. I assume you were trying to hint at the no-user-serviceable-parts-inside aspect; that is annoying, but it has nothing to do with the display being built in.

    9. Re:I looked into switching, but HW held me back. by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Consider all the Windows users who have a monitor and do not want to buy an new one integrated into a Mac. In four years if they want to buy a new machine they don't want to buy another new screen unless they have someone to give the iMac to. A headless minitower Mac with decent performance would still give Apple plenty of profit.

      Just look at how they gouge customers $75 to get the 256MB version of the Radeon X1600. The damn card is barely worth $90!

  108. Re:This is fantastic by thedbp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You are absolutely right.

    And that Linux box will run iMovie, GarageBand, iTunes, Microsot Office, require no command-line knowledge, and work out of the box with most major peripherals without having to download or install any drivers, right?

    Right?

    *crickets*

    I love linux. I do. I reccomend it constantly. But the truth is, it isn't there yet for most people.

  109. Question for osx experts.. by yakumo.unr · · Score: 1

    How can you fullscreen an application? it annoys me no end that maximise ...doesn't

    I've used osx on and off for years, and there are many little things that I find make it slow (workflow not proccessing speed) and frustrating to work with compared to the way I work in windows, but this is the only thing that's always just frustrated the hell out of me.

    1. Re:Question for osx experts.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The max button on the Mac expands the window to the size required to display the window. On smaller monitors this is annoying, but on a 30" monitor, you learn to appreciate that maximize does not expand a browser to the full screen.

    2. Re:Question for osx experts.. by 4iedBandit · · Score: 1

      And it annoys me to no end that Windows users constantly Maximize everything. Of course this is simply the natural progression from having every window have it's own menu, all visible all the time even when that particular application isn't in the foreground. It annoys me even more that when I use Windows I have to Maximize every application to keep things clear, like all the other windows users.

      Tomaytos, tomahtos.

      I love games. I still buy Macs. You would not believe the amount of money I've saved by owning a computer that can't play all the latest games. ;-)

      --
      "The avalanch has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote." -Kosh
    3. Re:Question for osx experts.. by JoeCommodore · · Score: 1

      From a Mac more than Windows user perspective - A lot of the time "full screening" of a Windows app is so you can have the window (which contains both the document menu and the palletes) large enough to sufficiently work. On the Mac most of the pallettes and windows are unbundled from a parent the the menu which is shared amongst the open document window(s) is on the top of the screen, making it much easier to work in a full screen environment without needing to fullscreen an app window.

      As an example, I found this screenshot from MS Office 2004 which is a Mac bassed app - you can see that the application menu toolbars are not bound inside any sort of application window. So technically all Mac apps run at "full screen."

      --
      "Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
    4. Re:Question for osx experts.. by yakumo.unr · · Score: 1

      I'd disagree, I carefully chose to use the term 'fullscreen' rather than maximise, so as to not gain any confusion from mac users saying 'what are you on? click the maximise button'

      The idea of 'maximise' is to take the maximum space available on the display device for the application, all of it.

      Your image clearly shows desktop space and icons that are taking up several words of text per line, several thousand pixels of image space, or even just (if working on a constrained format piece like the one in a pic) a good hunk of nice clean empty space (come on, aren't mac users meant to be artists/art lovers?) to ease the eye and let it concentrate on the work at hand properly.

      not too long ago I'd say that 'totally unused by the sole application I'm working on area' was wasting a good couple of hundred $'s of screen space on a laptop.

    5. Re:Question for osx experts.. by yakumo.unr · · Score: 1

      That's a gross unprovable generalisation, I certainly doubt I'm not the only one who spends lots of time working with many windows up not maximised.

      I use machines as the tools they are, I spend time finding the applications/utilities/tools that let me work the best/fastest I can. Find the tool to fit the job, thoughtless consumer loyalty just costs you time and money.

      I use both systems very similarly, I even use stardocks objectdock on my to increase my free space on my XP laptops small screen.

      I do however happen to particularly like being able to click straight from [menuSetA in app1] straight to [menuSetB in app2] (2 steps, single direct mouse movement), rather than go screentop -> change application -> screentop (3 steps, back and forth movement). That's an illogical disruption of flow, and imo it makes sense for an applications menus/options to be in the application.

      Back on topic, It seems to me your defending a lack of choice? I honestly thought there must be some shortcut I didn't know, this is totally mad... :o(

    6. Re:Question for osx experts.. by 4iedBandit · · Score: 1

      I do however happen to particularly like being able to click straight from [menuSetA in app1] straight to [menuSetB in app2] (2 steps, single direct mouse movement), rather than go screentop -> change application -> screentop (3 steps, back and forth movement). That's an illogical disruption of flow, and imo it makes sense for an applications menus/options to be in the application.

      You obviously want the Mac OS to operate just like Windows. Sorry, but windows it is not. (Thank God.) If you use each system every day and profficiently at that, then this really shouldn't be a problem for you. You want a two step for getting from application menu to application menu? Mouse top (step 1, and conveniently always at the very top, so you don't even have to focus on where to move your mouse. Just zip that puppy straight up, it'll stop when it gets to the edge of the screen.), change app (Command-Tab), done.

      Tomaytos, tomahtos.

      Back on topic, It seems to me your defending a lack of choice? I honestly thought there must be some shortcut I didn't know, this is totally mad... :o(

      The topic never left. It just didn't go the way you wanted. As I pointed out, what you find superior on Windows drives others nuts. See the above for the ultra complex and hideously obfuscated process for changing apps on a Mac while NOT moving your mouse. (That's just step 2 in the above process in case you're wondering.)

      Lack of choice? It seems you have plenty of choice. Windows, which has application menus on every window or Mac OS which has one appliation menu at the very top of the screen that changes depending on focus. Where's the lack of choice? You want the Mac OS to be exactly like Windows? Two different products that are exactly alike? You think that would be choice? That would be totally mad.

      --
      "The avalanch has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote." -Kosh
    7. Re:Question for osx experts.. by yakumo.unr · · Score: 1

      The topic never left. It just didn't go the way you wanted. As I pointed out, what you find superior on Windows drives others nuts. See the above for the ultra complex and hideously obfuscated process for changing apps on a Mac while NOT moving your mouse. (That's just step 2 in the above process in case you're wondering.) The topic did change, it being how to maximise a window.

      I should have thought to never mention windows and use linux or zeta as an example instead, but I thought I'd mentioned my otherwise happy use of osx enough, and merely questioning something a little, enough to subdue pointless fanboyism.

      My comment on menus was purely my personal thoughts on the logic of flow in 2 different methods of display, it's nothing to do with windows v's mac. and I'd intentionally left out shortcut keys as :

      1. I'm proficient with shortcuts on several OS's, but plenty of people aren't.
      2. it's still more efficient to direct click menu to menu when there are 3 or more apps open than tab through them or use expose.

        Besides it was merely a retort to your defensive 'it's BETTER that it can't do it because... ' approach, I'd mistakenly thought the subject might actually segue into intelligent conversation on UI design rather than rabid fanboyism.

      The matter of 'choice' in this cases context clearly was my amazement that you argue your tool of choice is better, because the user doesn't even have the OPTION to use it as they wish. Ie you think osx is better as it's incapable of maximising a window even with shortcut, leaving your beloved original 'maximised-application free, mac world' settup untouched.

      with other OS's (PLENTY more than windows) , that option is there, that people so often use it should simply prove to you that it's useful. plenty of people DON'T use it a great deal, but myself, I generally beleive in free choice, but in this issue I'm biased as it is something I use sometimes, mostly with Photoshop.

      to argue FOR a limitation of free choice seems pointlessly idiotic.

      Here, lets be pointlessly argumentative, it's the internet after all, so are you pro DRM too? anti net nutrality?

    8. Re:Question for osx experts.. by 4iedBandit · · Score: 1

      The topic did change, it being how to maximise a window.

      Ah a revisionist historian I see. Fortunately we have the benefit of your original post to go back to:

      "How can you fullscreen an application? it annoys me no end that maximise ...doesn't"

      Now had you left it just a question, you would be right. However you didn't. You expounded on the question by saying how annoyed you were about it. Thus broadening the topic to how one OS annoys you with it's behavior. My response was quite on topic by simply stating how the oposite behavior in another OS annoys me.

      {snip} I'd intentionally left out shortcut keys as :

      So in your original argument you should have stated that you have no intention of using keyboard short cuts. But you didn't, and thus my explanation of how to do what you wanted is quite valid.

      it's still more efficient to direct click menu to menu when there are 3 or more apps open than tab through them or use expose.

      This is a matter of conjecture. Although if one assumes that you've maximized your windows (from your original argument) you would first have to un-maximize them in order to see them all at once. That would hardly be more effcient than even Alt-Tabbing in Windows. Under your new argument that keyboard shortcuts are not allowed I think the Mac OS approach would still be more efficient given that you now have the extra process of clicking through all your maximized windows to make them smaller, and arrange them so you can see each one regardles of what's on top.

      Besides it was merely a retort to your defensive 'it's BETTER {snip}

      Better for me. Yes, of course I'm not hobbling myself by not using keyboard shortcuts. Let's take a minute to examine the deeper meaning of something I added to my previous two posts: Tomaytos, tomahtos. This is simply a shortening of the phrase, "You say tomatoe, I say tomatoe." Which in this forum works better if I spell it phonetically as, "You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to." In other words two different ways of doing the same thing. Neither is necessarily wrong, just different. Discourse on UI design was not part of your origninal topic. Personal preferences and annoyances was.

      The matter of 'choice' in this cases context clearly was my amazement that you argue your tool of choice is better, because the user doesn't even have the OPTION to use it as they wish.

      Again, your topic was really about personal preference. So in that light, yes my choice of Mac OS is the best option for me as it allows me to work the way I want to. Your choice is in no way limited. There are plenty of OS' out there that do indeed allow you to maximize your windows to be full screen if that is your hearts desire.

      with other OS's (PLENTY more than windows) , that option is there, that people so often use it should simply prove to you that it's useful.

      Again this is conjecture. Correlation is not causation, and thus I question why so many people find maximizing all of their windows so useful. There are some, no doubt, who simply like it that way. Fortunately for them, there are a host of OS' that allow them to do that.

      I generally beleive in free choice,

      And fortunately free choice abounds! Maximize to your hearts content in Windows or your favorite window manager in any number of other OS'.

      to argue FOR a limitation of free choice seems pointlessly idiotic.

      You're absolutely right. Arguing that everyone should tie their knees together is pointless and idiotic. Expressing a personal preference as a counter to your own expression is nothing more than expressing a counter opinion.

      Here, lets be pointlessly argumentative, it's the in

      --
      "The avalanch has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote." -Kosh
  110. Re:This is fantastic by wall0159 · · Score: 1


    I hear you. Being proud of Linux, is being proud of something that's collectively owned by everyone. It's like being proud of a National park. Being proud of a Mac, is like bring proud of a company's skyscraper, or your wealthy neighbours back yard.

    Having said that, if Macs got 25 - 30% market share, it'd make the IT-world a better place, would help Linux (because of more open standards) and would spur MS to make some half-decent software, and stop being such assholes. I definitely don't think that Macs are _ever_ going to destroy cheap commodity hardware.

  111. Re:This is fantastic by Slur · · Score: 1

    If you're not impressed, I gather you haven't looked too closely. I think that if you ever got into programming Mac OS X and became intimate with its underpinnings, you'd be forever in love with it. You'd also wonder just why just about every other OS has such a lame set of APIs.

    I guess I can justify my love for Mac OS X on a similar basis as my love for the *idea* of Linux, which is that they both adhere to the *nix Way. The fact that Microsoft hasn't tossed rebuilt their aging OS fro the ground up just baffles me. *nix is the future, and Windows is a relic.

    --
    -- thinkyhead software and media
  112. Windows is harder to use than Linux by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A user choosing not to put documents on the desktop is not a valid reason for a system to be better. Of course it is, it's completely unintuitive. Hell, even the My Documents folder in Windows is hidden away in the file browser by default instead of right there on the desktop... You have to manually link it to the desktop. Which means you have to know how to link it... Which makes it harder to use than Linux or OSX. Then there's all the application links cluttering the desktop, what's that all about? And the applications are under Start-> All Programs > then they're organised by vendor (doh!) rather than purpose.

    In Linux, your documents are in Documents, right there on the desktop, the applications are in Applications, organised by purpose.

    Face it, Windows is now the hardest to use of the three. It's desktop metaphor is fubar, the applications are hidden away by vendor so you have to know who makes the sofware you want to use to work.
    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Windows is harder to use than Linux by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      I have to agree. My really-computer-illiterate mom uses Linux. She considers it a lot easier than Windows for exactly what you said about the Start menu. When she clicked that, she had no idea where to go to find Word. Instead she opened an old file and held down backspace. Using Gnome, she can figure out what category of application it is and get to OOo Writer (it says Word Processor) easily. She also likes how much faster the computer is without a virus scan, and the eye candy provided by Beryl isn't hurting either. My brother and sister like Linux too. They intend to take Linux laptops to college with them, and they decided that after playing with my laptop a little bit after I got it, finding out they don't have to worry about viruses, and that installing free applications is as easy as marking a few checkboxes.

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    2. Re:Windows is harder to use than Linux by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Of course it is, it's completely unintuitive. Hell, even the My Documents folder in Windows is hidden away in the file browser by default instead of right there on the desktop... You have to manually link it to the desktop. Which means you have to know how to link it... Which makes it harder to use than Linux or OSX. Then there's all the application links cluttering the desktop, what's that all about? And the applications are under Start-> All Programs > then they're organised by vendor (doh!) rather than purpose.

      In Linux, your documents are in Documents, right there on the desktop, the applications are in Applications, organised by purpose.

      Face it, Windows is now the hardest to use of the three. It's desktop metaphor is fubar, the applications are hidden away by vendor so you have to know who makes the sofware you want to use to work. Umm.. Linux is the least user friendly of the 3. Mac just works, Windows just barely works.. but works. Linux... requires 16 config file 3 required packages and you need to code your own driver for random network card X if it's not a common one. I think in GUI and user friendlyness *nix has a long way to go.
      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    3. Re:Windows is harder to use than Linux by HAKdragon · · Score: 1

      It's not like Apple put an alias for the Documents folder on the desktop either, though granted, there is a link to it on the sidebar of the Finder windows.

      For what it's worth:
      Location of My Documents folder in Windows 2000/XP: C:\Documents and Settings\UserName\My Documents\
      (In Vista "Documents and Settings" simply became "Users")
      Location of Documents folder in OS X: /Users/UserName/Documents

      --
      "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
  113. Re:MBP NOT WORTH EVERY PENNY by coleridge78 · · Score: 1

    You're either cosmically unlucky, or dropping your laptops every time you pick them up.

    I work at a 80k+ user institution. Over eighty thousand, a large percentage of whom have laptops and use both our services, our sales channels, and our help desk. I see a very large sample size.

    The MBP has its problems just like anything, but far less than any other laptop. Biggest issue was heat in early models, no longer a problem.

    I don't see the amount of problems you're talking about in 150 machines, much less eight. Seriously. This isn't an attack on you, you just may want to examine what's going on in your environment or supply chain.

  114. Re:This is fantastic by willy_me · · Score: 5, Insightful

    WHY ARE PEOPLE SO PRO APPLE? ARE YOU THAT FUCKING STUPID? Pro-linux I get, it's all about philosophy, but pro-apple, pro-microsoft, pro-nintendo, pro-proctor-and-gamble, I don't get - unless you're an employee or stockholder.

    People are pro ---- because they found a product/company that they are happy with. They found something that makes their life better and are publicly stating this fact so that others may also benefit from the product/company. It doesn't matter what product or service they are talking about, the reasons are generally the same. The same applies when people are anti ----, just for different reasons. They got screwed over by a product/service and they are spreading the word so that others can avoid making the same mistakes that they made. It's basic human nature. Come to think of it, ants do the same thing. ;)

    Do you realize how much it would suck if Apple completely took over the desktop market?

    I agree with you completely and don't think anyone wants Apple to dominate the desktop market. But wouldn't it be great if they had a 20% market share? Now developers will think more about cross-platform compatibility. This would benefit everyone (Mac, Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, - but not Microsoft).

    I won't buy a Mac, ever. Quit trying to sell me one. I have no problems using a PC, and would rather keep my cash. I have no problems if you like your Mac, but seriously, GET OVER IT. It's really not that amazing or impressive to me.

    Nobody is trying to make you buy a Mac - well, except maybe Apple. If you're happy then that's great. Personally, I'm hesitant recommending a Mac to most people for fear there is an application they can no longer run. But for certain people a Mac makes a lot of sense.

    What people are trying to tell you is that, if you have the opportunity, you should give MacOS a try. And it takes more then a day so give it a couple of months. You will either think it is a waste of money and stick with Windows or you will have found a better way to get your work done. Either way, you would come out knowing more then when you started. People might not agree with your choice, but they will respect it.

    Willy
  115. I game... by crossmr · · Score: 1

    and I hate 99% of consoles. I like, and purchased a Wii, my first console ever (I've played them before just never owned one myself) and while its fun, it won't replace PC gaming for me. The switch right now is on the developers. If they start making their programs for everything you'll start to see what the market really looks like rather than a twisted market where someone is sticking with a specific platform because of one or more applications/games. I'd be over to linux in a heart beat on my home machines if all programs were equally supported on all platforms.

  116. Re:This is fantastic by biftek · · Score: 1

    At least round here (Perth, Australia), in terms of Firewire cables Apple's ones _are_ superior. For the sole reason that they're about 3mm thick (~0.1" I guess?), as opposed to all the other ones you get that are at least twice that. Thinking design is useful :) But yeah. You can get what you pay for with any platform.

  117. unfortunate headline by lakelady · · Score: 1

    considering that Jim Gray is still missing at sea this headline is really bad taste.

  118. Hell.. Did they actually work on Vista? by k1e0x · · Score: 1

    I mean.. Microsoft has to attack everyone who puts 1's and 0's in order.. when did they have time to make Vista?

    They attack Apple, Google, Adobie, Sun, IBM, HP, Yahoo, Myspace, Real, Firefox, AOL, Open Office, Corel, Sony, Nintendo, RedHat, Novell, Motorola, Nokia, Earthlink, Symantec, Trend Micro, Webroot.. you name it they are after it.

    Surpised they had time to worry about Vista..

    --
    Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
  119. .. with a grain of salt. by bakeman · · Score: 1

    I don't particularly believe that someone who is a proclaimed expert in a field of marketing could provide an unbiased view. Regardless of the perceived quality of the argument, it will always be flawed.

    A better case is when the average Joe/Jane who switches to a MacBook "'cause it's pretty" and "the glowing apple is sweet". And decides to never go back to Windows because of the opinion that "Mac OS doesn't get viruses" and "iPhoto is cool".

    I've used Vista and I've used Mac OS, and I don't think that Vista sucks as much as Mac OS rocks. Based on all the negative press, one should believe that that is the situation.

  120. I bought a Mac too. by RonTheHurler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hey, I was a windows user for fifteen years. I've also been a developer for AIX and been using Slackware since it was born- still do on all my servers (and not planning to change that).

    I bought my first mac (Mac Pro) two months ago to replace my desktop on the home computer. I'm now in the process of replacing ALL my windows computers with Macs in my business too, starting with the CEO (my own box). Costly, yes. But I'm convinced it will be well worth it.

    Why are Macs better- I believe it's because of a dedication to this quote: "People who are serious about software design their own hardware." I forget who said it, but as a programmer, I agree 100% and I believe it's BETTER that you have to buy the OS AND the hardware from Mac.

    Go Steve!

  121. Fixing macs is still a huge headache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work tech support for the U of Maryland. I take care of about 75 computers, roughly a 50/50 split between macs and PCs. After two years of doing this I can only say my loathing for Apple grows by the day. In those 2 years two DoA machines from Apple, none from any PC manufacturer. Software problems seem to occur with about the same frequency between the two. The factor that drives me up the wall is when a real problem occurs it is far more difficult to find reliable documentation of the problem for a Mac.

    As an added bonus, our Macs seem to have an insane amount of problems with printers. Very standard office printers using the software from HP and the other manufacturers yet no end of problems. Another kicker is the number of non standard connectors Apple has used over the years.

    Thankfully the department I work for is slowly but steadily switching back toward PCs.

    1. Re:Fixing macs is still a huge headache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds as if you need to take a course or two on how to work with large numbers of Macs. Apple offers certification for just that purpose. It also teaches you how to find the relevant documentation.

  122. Transmissions from the UNIX Alliance... by Digital_Mercenary · · Score: 5, Funny

    -Episode 1

    Y0d4- to >g4+35
    Windows is the path to the dark side. Windows leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.

    -Episode 4

    06iw4n- to >1uk3
    I have something here for you. Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough, but your uncle wouldn't allow it. He feared you might follow old 06iw4n on some damn fool idealistic crusade like your father did. It's your father's OSX. This is the weapon of a Computer User. Not as clumsy or as random as a Windows OS, but an elegant weapon for a more civilized age. For over a thousand generations, the Computer Users were the guardians of # and / in the Old Republic. Before the dark times, before the Empire.

    1. Re:Transmissions from the UNIX Alliance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      w00t w00t!
      Funny :)
      Thanks.

    2. Re:Transmissions from the UNIX Alliance... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      This is the weapon of a Computer User. Not as clumsy or as random as a Windows OS, but an elegant weapon for a more civilized age.

      So, the moral of this story is: Get a Mac, kill your father?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  123. Just did it. by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I just bought six Windows Free computers and promptly infected them with Windows XP. The cost? $139 Per Machine. That's an OEM windows license which, apparently means it's non-transferable. $139 for last decade's OS.


    Ironically the six computer I bought were Mac Minis. They were nearly exactly what we were looking for. Dual Core, Slow Clock (runs cool), really small form factor, gigabit ethernet, USB+DVI. We use them as reservation terminals for our Northern California Campground.


    I'm kind of curious 'cause I did a lot of shopping around- is there a similarly spec'd cheaper core duo (need not be core 2 duo) compy out there? We were looking for Core Duo, Min 512MB Ram, only need like 20GB of HD, don't need a CD drive optional, Gigabit Ethernet, decent onboard graphics in a small form factor.


    Back on topic I can't wait for the day that we get a good Mac client for our res system (likely never). Still, we're waiting to jump ship too.

    Ed

  124. Re:This is fantastic by Pinback · · Score: 1

    The only thing which kept me from abandoning Windows when XP came out was the access I had to a no-activation-required corporate copy of XP. I will not put up with needing to call support because something changed on my system. I've never needed to call support for help with anything, and I'm not going to start now.

    OS X doesn't require any activation bullshit. For me, that is almost enough by itself to justify the extra cost. I'm also happy that the decision of whether to update is left at my discretion. No annoying ballons whine about updates being disabled for example.

    In the time between the purchase of a newly shipping Amiga 500 and my MacBook Pro, every system I've owned was hand assembled from parts I picked out. Over the years, I was happy with the 386 and its descendents.

    But during that time I've seen controllerless modems, capacitor death, increasingly flimsy motherboards, low cycle count PCI connectors, shitty chipsets, dead pixels, unusually short lived fans, binary only drivers, outragously hot processors, and non-functional features a-plenty. Build-it-yourself PCs lost their lustre for me. All the component brands with traditions of quality have gradually become no better than the average. With a few exceptions, the industry is a discouraging mess.

    There is no motivation for improvement. The mouth breathing masses keep financing 2k$ Dell or HP game machines every other year. Even stiff necked Intel has screwed the pooch long enough to be playing catchup to AMD. Morale is pretty low over there.

    And those people who haven't given up on building their own machines have devolved into take-a-credit-card-to-fry's-and-sell-the-glowing-s hitpile-on-craigslist-next-week-cause-I-can't-pay- the-bill pussies. Even allowing that a quarter of them got the parts through the Intel employee-discount program, its a sad sight.

    Microsoft long ago stopped any making any worthwhile improvements, and is in the business of turning the crank on the upgrade cash machine. Direct X 10? Gotta have Vista! Yawn.

    The era of self-built and self-installed systems is almost over. The cattle won't protect themselves, so the platform will do it for them.

    Some people put their hope in Linux. But the one enduring quality you can count on with Linux fans, is their cheapness. No significant hardware success story has come out of the years the Linux market has grown. Where are the "Designed for Linux" stickers. Even sad-old-Netware had stickers.

    Apple hardware, like anything with any desirability, is going to cost more. But it ships with GCC. And Ruby. And Perl. And Python. And Xcode. And not-Internet Explorer. Its a good platform for anything but gaming. But they're not for everyone.

  125. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  126. My experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There certainly are tons of ways of maximizing your Mac OS application windows... From tiny AppleScripts to dedicated applications. However after working in Mac OS a while you find new ways of working and fullscreen mode never seems necessary again. I felt the same way when I first tried a Mac a year ago - today I dont understand the need for fullscreen - having access to my other apps/windows just seems easier. And with expose I work much faster than I did in Windows. I still miss my shortcuts though, I am still "replacing" them.

  127. Ohhhhh by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

    Oh, You're BWJones.

    I never clicked on your site link before today but I've always enjoyed your comments.

    Cheers, Ed

    1. Re:Ohhhhh by BWJones · · Score: 1

      *waves*

      Thanks Ed!

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
  128. Quicksilver by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

    I don't know how you ever lived without it. I've cut my catalogue to apps addresses and just a few other bits (plugins). You've hear it plenty by now.

  129. WTF is Scott Finnie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who is Scott Finnie and why should anyone care about his opinion? Is Slashdot going to post an article whenever someone switches from Windows to OSX? What about people switching from OSX to Windows? What about people switching from Linux to BSD? Or OSX to Linux? Who cares?

    Macs are overpriced PCs these days. If Apple wants to make a difference, all they need to do is sell the OS by itself, and compete with MS for real. As long as they refuse to do that, they're just another company trying to lock you into their products (iTunes shop only working with iPods, anyone?).

    The only advantage OSX has over Linux is DCC software support. But Windows has that, too, plus games. Vista may be a DRM-infected piece of crap, but XP is cheap, stable (finally!) and has tons of software. Plus it doesn't force you to buy Microsoft hardware to run it. It's evil, but it's the lesser one.

  130. Re:OSX is just plain crap by tiny-e · · Score: 2, Insightful

    First, alot of individuals do actually choose to run Windows because it has the software solutions necessary to function. Where is AutoCAD for OSX? I don't want another version of CAD, nor do I want to dual boot the system using Boot Camp. I would want a native version for OSX.

    AutoCAD 2007 runs just fine in Parallels.

    The most important is that their software is vastly inferior to most of what is out there. It looks good, but nice like ****. Even OSX on a core 2 duo is slowwww. It almost crawls.

    I'd take iTunes over WMP, iPhoto over the Camera and Scanner Wizard, and iMovie over Windows Movie Maker any day. I've also used OS X on 3 recent Core Duo machines and if was very snappy, I would hardly say it crawls.

    As a Linux user who has to tolerate Windows, I have no time for OSX. It just isn't open, is slow, and surrounded by what really amounts to nothing more than a cult. Why don't you just go back to worshiping Steve and leave the rest of us the **** alone. Mac users really do equate to the Jehovah Witness movement (you think your paradigm is the only one that is important, and you just won't leave people alone to actually select something that you view is inferior). Maybe, we actually like what we use and are not driven by wants and desires for manipulation.

    Whatever helps you sleep at night.
    I work in an office that is 100% Windows based, and I bring my Powerbook with me to work everyday for my personal stuff, and inevitably wind up using it to solve some problem that our Windows machines can't fix (admittedly sometimes due to the fact that end users are locked out of everything -- which is due to XP's neato take on what a multi-user environment is).

    6 out of 6 of the last personal computers purchased by employees (for personal use) were Macs. All end-users are more than happy with their purchases as most of them had gone the Windows route on their previous machines and can genuinely appreciate the Mac & OS X user experience.

    Another thing... almost 100% of all purchases are emotional decisions. People just tend to make up supporting "logical facts" to help themselves deal with the fact that they bought something simply because they wanted it.
  131. windows by ralph1 · · Score: 0

    Daa. hmm mr holmes how long were you on the case?

  132. troll, or incompetent? by metkat · · Score: 1

    step 1: google "os x text editor" step 2: there is no step 2

  133. Mac success by mshurpik · · Score: 1

    I remember going to a friend's house and getting bittorrent to work on her Macintosh in 10 minutes because Macintosh had an "internet settings" page.

    It was the nicest experience I've had on a Mac in 20 years. After that, we tried to figure out why her desktop icons were disappearing. LOL. Reboot, retry, good luck.

    "Hey Mike, what do I do when my downloaded files disappear?"

    "It shouldn't happen. Reboot, retry, good luck."

    Windows gives me a lot of problems, but things don't just disappear. That's what I expect from a system that's written by *cough* twenty people.

  134. Wow by moria · · Score: 1

    No kidding, when I open this post, the first thing I see is the "Wow" ad, and "getting windows vista today". Bet it's context-sensitive ad targetting in the worst example.

  135. Right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Unfortunately KDE requires about as much firepower to run as Vista or OS X.

    OS X has a normal Unix console.

    Oh, and "Windoze", that's rich.

  136. Aging geeks with consoles by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    But... We're on Slashdot. And the average Joe here on Slashdot just isn't going give up the versatility of a PC unless they can afford a Mac Pro. It's that simple. Ask any self respecting computer geek if he would by an iMac for their primary desktop.

    Something to think about here is that Slashdot is also filled with aging geeks with consoles.

    What does that really mean? It means that all many of these geeks end up upgradign very often is memory and hard drive space - I bowed out of PC gaming a few years back, content with Console gaming which is really getting most of the PC games now anyway! And it's not like you can't open up an iMac, it's just fewer parts you can change out but more desk space to store interesting toys.

    It's not even unrealistic considering the iMac is essnetially the new "tower" with more and more people going laptop only for primary systems. The iMac then becomes more like the fixed server of the house.

    So while there will always be a number of people that really need a fully changable desktop, an iMac will do for quite a few people - even as a primary desktop.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  137. UNIX + commercial software by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 1

    It's not hard to see why the Mac would be a hit with slashdotters: You get UNIX all the way down, so to speak, and you get most of the key commercial apps at the same time. UNIX/Linux/BSD certainly isn't the epitome of software design, but at least it's relatively secure and lets you easily use standard tools and OSS.

  138. Re:This is fantastic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where are the "Designed for Linux" stickers http://sysphere.org/~anrxc/local/images/no-powerdb y.png ....
  139. Re:This is fantastic by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Having said that, if Macs got 25 - 30% market share, it'd make the IT-world a better place

    I'd be getting a few dozen less "Virus Detected" notifications daily from a mailserver for a start. There are a lot of compromised machines out there trying to send me garbage and not one of them is a Mac.

  140. My attempted migration by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    So a 12" Powerbook G4 was freed up from work, so I took it home to play.

    Ok, not a bad machine per se. But here's what really frosts my cookies, I cannot for the life of me get it to connect to my Linksys WAP54G. Some googling indicates that this is a known problem for Apple, and the fix is Panther. Except I don't have Panther - this is a 10.2.8 machine.

    Bad Apple, very bad Apple. I was considering a Macbook but if this is what I can expect you just lost a potential new customer. Too bad.

    1. Re:My attempted migration by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      I'm not really sure if this is Apple's fault. Also being 2 (almost 3) point versions behind can be a real issue when you are using hardware that is newer than the OS. Maybe Linksys should have made sure their routers would work properly on the Mac. I have had no troubles with the routers I have used on 10.2.X

    2. Re:My attempted migration by Wildcat+J · · Score: 1

      Is the problem that you need to enter a hex WEP key? I remember this being a problem when I first went wireless, and I'm pretty sure I was using Jaguar at the time. Panther (and Tiger, I assume) has a drop-down list where you can specify the type of WEP key, but if I recall correctly, Jaguar just asks for the WEP key. Putting a '$' before the WEP key indicates that it's in hex, which solved my issue. My AP is from D-Link, but the same principle should still apply.

    3. Re:My attempted migration by rizzo320 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Part of the problem is that the Airport software in 10.2.8 is not very up to date. Compare it to trying to connect to a wireless with the built-in software of Windows 2000 (there isn't any of course, it's all third party).

      Keep in mind that Mac OS X 10.2.8 is end of life, just as Windows 2000 is (or will be very soon). Mac OS X 10.3.x is still actively supported by Apple with Security updates and patches, until, Mac OS X 10.5 comes out, and then, it too will be retired. Also keep in mind that your Powerbook will support Mac OS X 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5 when it comes out. So if you don't feel like spending the whole $149 it usually is to upgrade, you can spend the $79 for 10.4 or $59 for 10.3http://www.applerescue.com/?gclid=CN2CiYLeoIoC FQsEVAodyWbJuw

      I can't blame you or stop you from being upset, but to judge a vendor on software that's EOL is silly. And in most cases, 10.2.8 is still a really good system to run, and does most things well. You just happen to be complaining about support for a technology thats been evolving rapidly (wireless).

    4. Re:My attempted migration by kilodelta · · Score: 1

      Actually I'll cast the blame at Linksys too. Their B routers work fine. The G routers have been an all around embarassment.

      But explain to me why an XP machine can deal with them. That's why I drubbed Apple on this one.

  141. Re:Price by mpathetiq · · Score: 1

    In order to be accepted, you must travel into the future, install Firefox 5 on your machine, and come back in one piece.

  142. Re:Jumped to eComStation and OpenOffice.org by user_ecs · · Score: 1

    You might like to spend your money paying for a glitzy web site but I would rather have my money go to getting top notch hardware and software.

    www.curtissystemssoftware.com/preloads.htm

    www.ecomstation.com

    www.os2world.com (user supported web site)

    www.os2voice.org (user group)

    Jumped to eComStation and OpenOffice.org
    by user_ecs (878826) on Thursday February 08

    For Christmas I bought a new computer preloaded with eComStation and OpneOffice.org. I have had too many problems with Dells and Gateways so I bought the system from CSS because I wanted good quality hardware (ie ECC memory, etc).

    www.curtissystemssoftware.com/preloads.htm

    eComStation, much more stable and secure than windows yet much friendlier than Linux

  143. Switch? Only on PC hardware will I. by blankoboy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I would gladly switch to using OSX and dumping windows but not until it is officially supported (not talking about osx86) on PC hardware. I realize that I may be waiting a looong time (read: forever) for that to happen but I will never shell out $ for an Apple branded box. I want the OS, not the hardware.

    If it were ever to happen you would see a landslide of switchers. This would after several years, I believe, creep into the corporate environment. Microsoft would be the sad nerd at the party that no one talks to. What a sweet vision that would be.

  144. burn ins by zogger · · Score: 1

    Don't they do burn-ins anymore? Or is that no longer cost effective, they just ghost the image onto zillions of drives and hope enough of them work? Seems most smaller shops still do 24 hour burn ins.

    Anyway, I always thought that was the last real quality assurance before something went out the door, so to sell with no OS, you'd have to load one, burn it in to see if it worked, then wipe the disk several times.

    But I agree, they should sell blank computers, I just don't think the cost would be zero extra, it seems like it would have to be a few bucks a machine anyway regardless, just from the extra work.

    The real bottom line is though, you CAN get blank machines or machines with linux, etc from any number of vendors now, even in large quantities. they just aren't dell or hp or at bestbuy, etc, but you can get them. The tier 2 and 3 and 4 vendors are out there, just needs to look.

    1. Re:burn ins by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Anyway, I always thought that was the last real quality assurance before something went out the door, so to sell with no OS, you'd have to load one, burn it in to see if it worked, then wipe the disk several times.

      Why would that have anything to do with the hard disk? Just net-boot it, let the tests run (including one that checks the operation of the hard disk, but doesn't necessarily load anything on it), and shut it down again.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  145. Keep dreaming slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm getting tired of this websites constant anti Windows stance. It's kind of funny since the vast majority of it's readers are using Windows.

    So Mac put a good OS out for once. Apple is still Apple and will .. without a doubt shoot their own foot off as soon as they get a chance. If you look at the two companies it's apple who approached the market trying to make a monopoly but couldn't pull off the sales of their proprietary computer. MS never set out to make a monopoly, but their product was so popular they could hardly avoid it. If Apple had their way PC's would be twice as expensive and you'd probably have to be an Apple certified engineer just to work on one without voiding some agreement.

    But really Tiger is a good OS, but that's still ONE successful distro for Apple compared to MS's streak of superior businesses and computing approaches. It was Apple's desperation that led them to UNIX not their foresight. Look at Apple's move to keep the iPhone proprietary. Apple ideal marketplace is still a closed market proprietary design and if given the chance that's what they would move back to, but they can't because it's not economically practical at this point. Without the new lower cost Apple's the Mac wouldn't be competing with IBM clones regardless of OS.

    Tiger is nice, but it's not nearly enough to justify jumping ship and changing your entire infrastructure, especially to a company with an unproven track record and questionable stability. How is Apple doing in the server market again? How long have then been making computers? They just got good at it now... and that's supposed to be impressive. Please people .. you are all being driven by your anti MS emotions and not logic.

    The Win platform is in far better shape then most of you people think. MS has just about perfectly merged the gaming console and the PC. .Net is easily more complete than anything else the competition has. DirectX is easily more complete than anything the competition has. Office is easily more complete than anything the compeition has. The list goes on...

    That doesn't mean you can't get it done with an Apple, but you are losing out on the most complete computer infrastructure out there. In some cases the Mac's simplicity is ideal, but eventually the Mac still looks more like an appliance and the PC still looks more like... wll something Nasa would use... a computer. If you want to give up flexibility for simplicity and reliability that is a reasonable trade off, but it is a trade off. Apple is racing to keep up with MS and to share their infrastructure, but ultimately it was MS's decisions that put the PC where it is today... not Apple's.

    If MS did go down I think you'd all be unhappy to realize the golden age of computing was probably at an end. Apple will keep their products as closed as they can. Just because they adopted a new OS doesn't mean the company has changed at all.

    How come we don't see all the articles on people who dumped Linux or the decades of Apple users who came to PC durig the Win95 days with all the same BS reasons. Point is your ideal OS choice is going to change constantly, but jumping from one OS to another is pretty much a childish waste of time since what are you betting on.. That apple will now magically continue to make better software than MS even though they are massively less funded and have a long track record of failures, vs MS's track record of constant profit.

    I'll stick with the company with the more developed infrastructure and proven business model and not assume that one good Apple release does anything more than fuel overzealous editorials... and editors. I can see how some people who don't really use their PC for much can easily switch to MAC, but why run MAC when ultimately I'll be running windows programs inside an OS that they aren't written for. Then when MS's latest great OS turns out to be needed or has some feature Apple doesn't or just kick ass like 95 or XP did then will I just jump right

  146. Re:MBP NOT WORTH EVERY PENNY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know my sample of Mac's is fairly small at 8
    That's not a hardware issue in general, that's a freakin quality control nightmare.

    I'm having trouble reconciling these two statements.

  147. the opposite is also true by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "So yes, even with the Intel Macs, you can get machines cheaper than what Apple well sell them for. However, it's no surprise you can get a cheaper machine with lesser hardware! However, if you try to match the basic specs, and a couple of the accessories (ie: no consumer machine today should ship without wifi!) you're not going to save a lot of money over the Mac."

    The opposite is also true. The various accessories might cost a lot to add, but you save a lot if you don't add them because don't need them. Having something like firewire or a camera bundled only justifies the cost if you're willing to pay for that stuff, if it'll give you some benefit. It's not reasonable to simply point at all the stuff an iMac has, and point at how much it costs to match that with a PC, if you'd never get a PC like that. It's a comparison without meaningful context.

    I was in this position when I got my current machine. Mac Pros are priced pretty reasonably as dual-Xeon machines go, but having all that CPU power was never my goal. I wanted RAID for data integrity, and PCI-E to allow for upgrades in the future, and nothing about that requires dual-Xeons. For my needs, a Mac Pro is stupidly expensive.

    Similarly, if you don't need a remote, or firewire, or a webcam, or a fancy graphics card, then you're paying a lot for an machine that is well equipped in ways that don't benefit you. Conversely, if you want more than an iMac offers, you're SOL. If you'd prefer to substitute firewire for an interface that's fast enough to handle current hard drives like eSATA, or want something better than an underclocked 7600GT, or want 4 gb of memory, then there's just no way to do it with an iMac.

    They may be sufficiently well equipped to justify the cost, but that does not imply one's needs justify the expense.

    --
    I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
  148. Re:Price by Technician · · Score: 1

    In order to be accepted, you must travel into the future, install Firefox 5 on your machine, and come back in one piece.

    I see you didn't sign up for the same quantum mechanics class I did.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  149. Re:Plus, let me warn you... by symbolic · · Score: 1

    If the Dell has a touchpad, and it's anything like the one I'm using now, it will SUCK ASS. Seriously.

  150. Re:This is fantastic by javacowboy · · Score: 1

    Why don't you try it before you criticize it? You don't have to buy one. Just try it in a store.

    --
    This space left intentionally blank.
  151. Re:Jumped to eComStation and OpenOffice.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am just a user but there is a GCC compiler. I think the eComStation-OS/2 version of Mozilla/Firefox uses GCC. I think there is developer stuff on the eComStation CD. Many developers use Open Watcom.

    Programming forum
    http://www.os2world.com/cgi-bin/forum/UltraBoard.c gi?action=Headlines&BID=60&SID=1p4zzqyDu4zGR2hs

    InnoTek GCC for OS/2 (free download)
    http://www.innotek.de/index.php?option=com_content &task=view&id=23&Itemid=40

    Developer project site
    http://netlabs.org/en/site/index.xml

  152. Apple shouldn't get too popular... by stardude82 · · Score: 1

    otherwise they are going to have to get their hardware/software monopoly busted. Then they'll have to make it available for X86 and they'll have to start dealing with all that crappy hardware out there just like MS. That and they'll have to keep people from pirating the software resulting in draconian limitations. If they have such a great OS then the FTC should snap the unfair advantage Apple has over Microsoft.

  153. Fires by Enrique1218 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I made the switch back in the days of 10.0. Year after year, I find myself putting out fewer fires. Now, I can't believe I spent time with that other OS doing things like defragging, virus scans, spyware scans, and my favorite- the clean reinstall. OS X moves to the background and I actually get work done on it. My powerbook is my workhorse. But, I would like to see a OSX on a Thinkpad. Reliable OS on reliable hardware.

    --
    You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
    1. Re:Fires by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      My powerbook is my workhorse. But, I would like to see a OSX on a Thinkpad. Reliable OS on reliable hardware.

      For the last several years our standard options for laptops here at work have been Powerbooks and Thinkpads. If you wanted a laptop, that was your choice. Both are near the top of the heap for reliability according to consumer reports. Operations just mentioned something the other day, and I guess the powerbooks (now a mix of Macbooks and Macbook pros) are still winning the reliability race by a hair, largely due to two major recalls of power supplies for the Thinkpads. My point is, objectively, I'm not sure you can just make the assumption that Thinkpads are more reliable.

    2. Re:Fires by Enrique1218 · · Score: 1

      Well, it is not very objective. Though I like my Powerbook, I have yet to encounter one recently that does not display some sort of problem. These problems usually creep in during midlife (a year or two after purchase) after the review sites stop paying attention and warranties expire. Display and DVD drive are the usual culprits. In addition, the power adapter has joined the list where Apple again chose form over functionality. The computers are by no means obsolete from a software perspective or completely unusable but they have problems that hampers use.

      The reason I put more faith in Thinkpads is once they adopt a working design, they keep with it for years. Also, my experience with Thinkpads is that all components continue work after a few years of service.

      --
      You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
    3. Re:Fires by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Well, it is not very objective.

      My comments are objective. I spoke to objective data collected by independent reviews and from a small scale study in the workplace. My personal experience is one of the three thinkpads I owned or was given by work failed, and then only after many years. I've had four different powerbooks, two of which had issues. That, like everything you've cited, it subjective data. It is anecdotal, and not particularly useful for determining real trends.

      Nor did I say powerbooks are more reliable. I simply stated that your anecdotes are not a valid sample set and your opinions, if based solely on that, are unlikely to be accurate, except by chance.

  154. Re:This is fantastic by Enrique1218 · · Score: 1

    You statement is too simplistic. You should include the hours it take to build the system and install and optimized Linux with similar open source applications. Take those hours and multiply by you hourly pay rate. Add that to the cost of components and compare it to the price of a mac. Now, don't get me wrong, build your higher spec system if you like just how people build thier own house. Just accept that it is not for everyone much like building a house.

    --
    You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
  155. I did the linux-mac switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And i am definitly going back...
    Reading slashdot i realy got convinced OSX ws the OS grail
    Since I have quite limited finacial capability i waited for my next mobo upgrade and when time came, ibought one
    that has full hardware support in the DRM overiden version of OSX 10.4 and it worked fine so i got in to the mac experience and became quite disillusioned within 4 weeks.
    The highlights of my experience :
    The system became unusable, technicly it didnt crash but a reebot was needed when i tried to run matlab7 with roseta
    I realised UNIX!=GNU\* when i tried to invoke any Aqua program from the command line.
    I realised that ./configure && make && make install is not as simple as i thought
    I realised that I need to be "protected" from seeing /usr in finder
    I realised that roseta is crap if i simply whant to run unreal tournament 2000 on 2006 hardware
    I realised that there is no "always ontop" option in aqua
    I realised that althow aqua has had the technology for yeas ,i cant make windows translucent at will
    I realised that even in OSX you are beter of with a right click
    I realised that apt is not worth much without the equivalent repositories
    I realised i took the extreme user power the GNU\* platforms give for granted
    I realised that idot proof systems are the reason we have idots in the first place

    In conclusion the only thinks i liked and found beter than ubuntu where expose,the smbmount interface,the dock,the icons and colors .
    Having instaled beryl on ubuntu I see no reason for going back.
    For fucks/gods sake they are marketing multiple desktops as something innovative of leopart about 11 years after i first saw it on slackware.
    I can understand why for many people macs are the right solution ,what i dont get is the slashdot mac fanboys.
    I might buy a mac when i make money ,if i do it it will bee so i can score some chicks it wont be for mac osx.
    Objective-C, how about that?As good as it might be, why would someone lern it ,unless he was payed to do so or for the fun of it?

    An other think i realised is hat OSX depends totaly on free software ,its the most dependant non free platform i have seen and yet they only mention in the very very fine print .And correct me if i am wrong they killed open darwin so that their DRM would bee harder to crack.

    In conclusion fuck apple,a person switching from windows to mac is as important news as switching from mac to windows .

  156. The ad that didn't make it by Jesus_666 · · Score: 4, Funny

    We see A, a typical "I'm a Mac" guy and B, a typical "I'm a PC" guy.
    A: "Hi, I'm a Mac expert."
    B: "And I'm a Mac user."
    A: "Shouldn't you be the PC expert?"
    B: "Yeah, but I just switched."
    A: "Well... They couldn't have made this ad any more blatant, could they?"
    Steve Jobs (offscreen): "Shut up!"
    A and B stand around a few seconds in uncomfortable silence.
    A looks at B from the side.
    A (mumbling): "There goes the neighbourhood."
    B: "What did you say?"

    "Apple. It's not just for us painfully hip elitists anymore and boy, are we pissed about it."



    The sad part is that this actually fits the tone of the "I'm a Mac" ads rather well...

    --
    USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  157. What about Amiga? by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    505 comments and no one has once mentioned switching to AmigaOS. Shame on you all!!

  158. Re:Jumped to eComStation and OpenOffice.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree! I actually loaded up this crap and it definitely feels like the stone ages revisited. I will stick with my ubuntu or even go back to M$ before switching to this shit.

  159. I've Never Used a Mac by okmijnuhb · · Score: 1

    I've never used a Mac, and I'm not terribly interested to, if iTunes is any indication of how working on a Mac is.
    Seriously, Apple really needs to rework iTunes to make it as impressive as Mac users say Macs are.
    It's Windows users only exposure to how Macs work, apart from the irritating Quick Time program.

    1. Re:I've Never Used a Mac by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      I've never used a Mac, and I'm not terribly interested to...

      I've never eaten chocolate, and I'm not terribly interested in so doing...

      When you confess to ignorance on a topic, why would anyone value your opinions on it? You just said you don't know what you're talking about.

  160. IMHO...as a Windows Vista and Mac OSX user... by notaprguy · · Score: 1, Interesting

    He's wrong. The funny thing is...the only real nice things about Mac's are (1) very nice hardware (2) a couple of their bundled apps like iPhoto. The overall user experience is way over rated. I'm not a total Mac newbie. I owned several Mac's "back in the day" including a Mac SE with a whopping 4 MB of RAM, then a FX machine, and a Quadra 650. Then I started using Windows and didn't use Mac's except occasionally for several years and didn't buy any. Last summer I bought a Duo Core Intel iMac b/c I wanted something that would look nice in my kitchen nook. It looks great. But the OS is not what it's cracked up to be. Installing applications is...wierd... Unless you're experienced you end up with all of the foo.dmg files on your desktop... Thinking that you've installed the application you throw them into the trash. Wait a sec! The app doesnt' work anymore. Oh. I guess I should have known to drag that file into my applications folder. What would have thought? Safari is a piece of shit compared to Firefox or IE 7. Spotlight is nice but the new search in Windows Vista works at least as well if not better. The overall "polish" of the Mac UI is nice-ish but not really "better" than the Mac unless you're a designer weenie. The hardware is the only real compelling strength. Were it not for the nice hardware - one wire for power and two wires to connect and power and external hard drive - I'd get rid of it today. If a PC company would finally design a nice form factor Windows machine I'd buy it tomorrow. Bottom line: Mac's are over rated and mostly the fetish's of fanboys/fangirls who walk around wearing nothing but black, Doc Martins and...never mind. Time to shut up. If you're all about image, get a Mac.

    1. Re:IMHO...as a Windows Vista and Mac OSX user... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh. I guess I should have known to drag that file into my applications folder."

      Hmmm ... I guess ~/Applications would be a better place than /Applications for self-installed bundles.

      But, I'll pass on that, as you're obviously pretty clueless. Yes. I would sooner have application bundles that are installed simply by dragging them to an ("the" to you) applications directory ("folder" to you). Strange as it may seem, I don't want files dropped all over my machine and dozens of entries in that crock of shit the Registry.

      "Safari is a piece of shit compared to Firefox or IE 7. "

      It's far nicer in many ways than either of those applications, and, of course, is capable of interacting well with other applications built on the Cocoa franeworks in ways that a user at your level wouldn't be aware of. But for those of us who do know, it's pretty cool.

      Your "IMHO" is a joke. You're not humble. More importantly, your opinion is worth little as you show little knowledge of the platform you wish to pronounce on.

    2. Re:IMHO...as a Windows Vista and Mac OSX user... by Gadzeus · · Score: 1

      Things that are nice about the Mac you forgot to mention:

      1. Low depreciation
      2. Really classy software from small companies like Omni Group and Delicious Monster
      3. Consistency between apps
      4. No exploits
      5. OS stability
      6. Intuitive ease of use (drag in and out of dock; drag text off internet; drag internet page straight into Text Edit)
      7. The helpful good manners of other Mac users
      8. Consistent GUI metaphors (no confusing window closing with quitting; different window configurations which actually work as alternative methods [try turning off the browser type back buttons on both OSes and see the results: Mac becomes multiple window while Windows leads you in via a single window down a blind alley with no way back!]; Windows My Computer throws a sense of file system hierarchy out the window; double tab lines jumping position confuse in Windows)
      9. CDs and DVDs appear on the desktop needing no auto-run
      10. No registry hell
      11. No inaccurate warnings like the delete warning that doesn't empty the trash/recycle bin or "illegal operation" bad manners
      12. Good English unlike the infuriating My Little Pony language of Windows
      12. No juvenilia: yellow dogs, telly tubby styling, talking paper clips
      13. Clean minimalist GUI unlike the Windows garrulousness of endless notification, comments down the left side of windows and poorly thought out repetitive layouts (count the duplication in Windows Media Player of 'Artist' & 'Library' - I think it is three each)
      14. Easy, consistent working with drag and drop between windows and apps
      15. Not just a couple of bundled iApps, the whole integrated iLife suite.
      16. It just works

      So you downloaded disc images and didn't notice that they were not installers. Then you mounted the disc image and ignored the sign saying "Drop this app in your apps folder". Then you didn't understand why the app you hadn't dropped in your apps folder was not in your apps folder. hmmm

      Safari is faster to open that Firefox on a Mac. It works for every site I know and text looks better than Firefox. I prefer Mac scrolling (higher def) to Windows (lower Def) smooth scrolling which makes me feel a little queasy to watch but the Windows browsing experience is faster. Given the exploits which affect Windows I would say that the sense of security on a Mac is much higher. I would not bank online on a PC.

      You say: "The overall "polish" of the Mac UI is nice-ish but not really "better" than the Mac unless you're a designer weenie."

      Aside from the unnecessary dig at designers I think you mean that you see no difference in the quality of the Windows and Mac GUIs. Perhaps that is why you have a go at designers: because they can see what you can't. The Mac interface is much more mature. It achieves more with less. Vista continues with the tradition of cluttered over-helpfulness which characterised earlier versions of Windows. That is why Windows users are so keen on that maximise window button (or as Mac users call it: The waste my nice big 30" LCD button). They need to hide the clutter to be able to focus. Mac users work happily with multiple open windows and use their "Optimise my window size button" so they can see more, not less.

      Giving credit where it is due, Vista has removed the juvenilia. The possessive language is gone, as is the dog. It still makes serious design errors. Why transparency in windows? To confuse their edges? Why only a touch of red on the close button to signify the current window? Why the child's graffiti like inconsistent shapes to buttons. Count the lines of menu options in Windows Media Player... including the title bar I think it is nine! The number of shutdown options: 9!

      If you can't see these things as clearly as Mac users can then that explains your opinion of Windows, however, I think that, though few can design, many can recognise good design when they see it. What Microsoft's Vista demonstrates is that, like you, they believe good design is just pretty colours, shadows, shapes and transparency. Apple, like good car designers, know that design is actually how it works.

    3. Re:IMHO...as a Windows Vista and Mac OSX user... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your stereotype of mac users is laughable. More macs than ever are popping up in my CS department and trussssst me they are far from the chic Doc Martin-wearing types you mention. OS X is one of the most incredible platforms for art/design/software development. My productivity in software development has skyrocketed with the workflow paradigm of OS X as compared to that of Windows. I've been using Windows for 8 years before getting a mac last year. Believe it or not, many of us don't live in the ad-hominum shitflinging world of calling everyone a fanboy/fangirl. Some of us use the right tool for the right job. Imagine that!

      Think for yourself. Don't be a tool.

    4. Re:IMHO...as a Windows Vista and Mac OSX user... by notaprguy · · Score: 1

      I appreciate your well written response but I disagree with much of it. 1. Low depreciation Probably true but who really re-sells PC's/Mac's? PC's are democratic. Anybody with $400 can buy a reasonably good PC that does everything they need - surf the web, write letters, listen to music, rip CD's etc. Who cares about depreciation of a $400 machine? 2. Really classy software from small companies like Omni Group and Delicious Monster True. One of the best Mac apps to me - someone who uses it mostly for "productivity" plus photos/videos is Microsoft Office. Very nice. 3. Consistency between apps I don't disagree. But I might add that part of the reason there is less consistency in PC apps is that there are so many of them and they're being written by average joe's all over the place. Hey, with VB I could write a decent Windows app and I'm far from a programmer. 4. No exploits Blatantly not true. 5. OS stability Seems to be true but I haven't had a crash of my Windows XP machine in a couple of years and not one on my newer Windows Vista machine which was running pre-release versions. 6. Intuitive ease of use (drag in and out of dock; drag text off internet; drag internet page straight into Text Edit) True. 7. The helpful good manners of other Mac users Others might say the condescending arrogance of (many) Mac users. 8. Consistent GUI metaphors (no confusing window closing with quitting; different window configurations which actually work as alternative methods [try turning off the browser type back buttons on both OSes and see the results: Mac becomes multiple window while Windows leads you in via a single window down a blind alley with no way back!]; Windows My Computer throws a sense of file system hierarchy out the window; double tab lines jumping position confuse in Windows) This is all in the eye of the beholder. Ten minutes ago (no kidding) I watched my mother struggle for minutes trying to figure out why she couldn't see the address bar in a browser window or how to "close" the browser and open a new window. I'm sure she's just clueless and ignorant of good software design principles. 9. CDs and DVDs appear on the desktop needing no auto-run True 10. No registry hell I've used PC's for many years and have not experience registry hell. What is it? 11. No inaccurate warnings like the delete warning that doesn't empty the trash/recycle bin or "illegal operation" bad manners BS. I have a bunch of files in my trash can right now that Mac wont' let me delete. Why not? Why doesn't it tell me what I need to do to delete the files? Do I need to hit some special key combination? 12. Good English unlike the infuriating My Little Pony language of Windows Whatever. 12. No juvenilia: yellow dogs, telly tubby styling, talking paper clips Point taken but I don't see that in Windows Vista and the yellow dogs and talking paper clips were Office, not Windows. Telly-tubby design is all in the eye of the beholder. Mac OS looks nice. Nicer than Windows XP in my personal opinion. Vista is much closer but probably still less elegant. 13. Clean minimalist GUI unlike the Windows garrulousness of endless notification, comments down the left side of windows and poorly thought out repetitive layouts (count the duplication in Windows Media Player of 'Artist' & 'Library' - I think it is three each) Maybe. 14. Easy, consistent working with drag and drop between windows and apps True. 15. Not just a couple of bundled iApps, the whole integrated iLife suite. The whole iLife suite is nice but over-rated. Why is so hard to figure out how to simply crop a Photo in iPhoto? I have thousands of photos in iPhoto and neither my wife or I - both experienced computer users - can really figure out how to actually edit photos. It's a nice storage container. 16. It just works Not really. My Mac drops its network connection much more often than my PC's on my home wireless network. No, the network is not running through a PC - it's direct from the cable to the router. Why is that? My Mac is fairly slow. I only have 512 MB RA

    5. Re:IMHO...as a Windows Vista and Mac OSX user... by Gadzeus · · Score: 1

      I'll quote you and then offer comments:

      "1. Low depreciation Probably true but who really re-sells PC's/Mac's? PC's are democratic. Anybody with $400 can buy a reasonably good PC that does everything they need - surf the web, write letters, listen to music, rip CD's etc. Who cares about depreciation of a $400 machine? "

      The choice is yours. A $15,000 house is cheap... trash it and it becomes expensive. A $100,000 Morgan sports car is expensive but the waiting list is so long that they actually appreciate... so reselling it for more than your paid for it makes them the cheapest cars you can buy. Who resells $400 PCs? Sure, no one wants them second hand. They can't run XP fast, or Vista at all. Who resells Macs? There is very high demand for them. I have an 800MHz G4 iMac I bought for £750 5 years ago. They sell on eBay for £380. I think you would sell your PCs too if they kept that much value.

      "4. No exploits Blatantly not true."

      This is a constant refrain from PC enthusiasts: because there have been half-baked attempts at exploits and the odd macro that just might run in Office for Mac there is an insistence that there is no reason to choose a Mac on the grounds of safety, or Macs are no safer than PCs, or some other self-serving semantic argument. It really strikes me how strange this is. It is sort of like the denial one heard from smokers: "I know someone who smoked like a chimney and lived to 110 so smoking does you on harm".

      The fact is this, I have wasted months of my life maintaining PCs for stubborn relatives who refused to just buy a Mac. Browser hijacks, viruses, trojans, spyware... I've seen the lot... but in 8 years I have NEVER come across anything on Macs. Nothing! 8 years of browsing the internet with no security software on the Macs I support and the 5 or so belonging to the more forward thinking of my relatives who let me chose them a Mac. More than that, I have never had to reinstall from OS 8 to OS X 10.4 for reasons of malware on a Mac ever. My grandfather's iMac has been running OS 8.5 for 7 years now... no reinstalls and no Norton.

      In fact, I have never met a Mac users who has been infected by a virus. Yes, they are possible. No, you don't see them. All that spam out there... all those compromised bots out there... they're all running Windows. You'll probably say "one day...", well yes it may well happen, but it's 8 years and counting.

      Look at it this way: typical staffing levels for Windows PC techs is 1:20. That's absurd! the University of Basel has 2500 Macs and 2 techs! If you think that's impressive take a look at the Isle of Man. 3800 Macs on 400 different networks throughout government, libraries and schools... 2 techs. That's a hundred times lower than PC tech levels in a school system connected to the internet. Try and get them to use PCs instead. Come out with that stuff about Macs not being invulnerable... or face the reality of the situation. For whatever reason you chose to believe, Mac computing had been a whole lot safer and a whole lot less hassle for the vast majority. Not "blatantly false", patently obvious!

      "5. OS stability Seems to be true but I haven't had a crash of my Windows XP machine in a couple of years and not one on my newer Windows Vista machine which was running pre-release versions."

      Yes, I have heard that Windows is getting better... but try to match my grandfather's iMac. That's OS is 8 years old, and no reinstalls. I have two PCs here at home. They both accumulate junkware all the time as less than expert geeks use them. The Windows 2000 machine had to be reinstalled recently because of a trojan trying to steal bank details. The XP needed reinstalling twice last year, once because of an MSN worm and the other time because of Logitec webcam drivers! There is no way I am going to waste my life becoming a Windows open heart surgeon and playing around in the registry. I want a tool that works!

      Vista still has that registry. It will still have to m

    6. Re:IMHO...as a Windows Vista and Mac OSX user... by notaprguy · · Score: 1

      "The fact is this, I have wasted months of my life maintaining PCs for stubborn relatives who refused to just buy a Mac. Browser hijacks, viruses, trojans, spyware... I've seen the lot... but in 8 years I have NEVER come across anything on Macs. Nothing! 8 years of browsing the internet with no security software on the Macs I support and the 5 or so belonging to the more forward thinking of my relatives who let me chose them a Mac. More than that, I have never had to reinstall from OS 8 to OS X 10.4 for reasons of malware on a Mac ever. My grandfather's iMac has been running OS 8.5 for 7 years now... no reinstalls and no Norton." No offense intended but...your relatives must not be very bright. :) I have never once had a virus or trojan in all my years of PC use. I have been using the Web since...let's see...1994 using a "mosaic" browser. I browse widely.

  161. The choice is what's important. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In fact, it's closer to $29 than $139. With Windows Vista for $50, with Novell Linux for $29. I know what most people would choose.

    Maybe you do, but I don't. I don't think it's an obvious choice at all. Most people don't even consider Linux as an option right now because it's not listed when they buy their Dell or HP; it's some sort of weirdo aftermarket geek hack, hardly a "legitimate" OS. If Dell priced out Windows, at whatever it actually costs, right next to Linux, I'd be happy. Even if it was "Windows Vista $50, Novell Linux $29," at least Linux would be there, next to Windows, as a valid option. That would go a very long way towards driving adoption -- even if people didn't buy it at first, they would probably at least see it there, and know that there is an alternative. It might take a few upgrade cycles, and a lot of good PR work, to get people to actually give it a shot, but having Linux as an option would plant the seed in people's minds that there is something besides Windows, and it is not just some integral part of the computer.

    To be honest, I think Microsoft fears the erosion of that 'package deal' more than they fear any particular OS. From their perspective, alternate operating systems have come and gone; first there was OS/2, and BeOS, and even the Mac OS has been pushed into a corner. They have been able to do this, because people have come to assume that Windows is the computer. When you make the OS a choice -- when you let people know that yes, they are choosing to use Windows, instead of something else, you strike at the very heart of this assumption. From there, you have a "foot in the door" for any number of alternate OSes (although admittedly, the field is a little thin aside from Linux at the moment).

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  162. Give me two things by mqduck · · Score: 1

    A true maximize button that doesn't only sometimes work, and an extra button or two on my laptop and I'll consider Macs to be a good choice. (As it is, I run Windows for the games or I run GNU/Linux so I guess I'm not the target consumer)

    --
    Property is theft.
    1. Re:Give me two things by Onan · · Score: 1

      I can give you a version of one of the two: powerbooks from the last couple of years have had multi-touch trackpads. And among the things they do with that is acting as a secondary button. A tap with one finger is a primary click, a tap with two fingers is a secondary click. I find it pretty smooth to use, far more so than using the control key.

      And I know I can't dictate your preferences to you, but I still just don't understand the obsession with wanting a maximize button. A maximize button struck me as silly back when we were using 9" displays, and it has only gotten sillier since.

    2. Re:Give me two things by Cochonou · · Score: 1

      And here is the other.
      If you want a "maximize" function (Mac OS X only shows a "zoom" function), you can use a collection of handy applescripts: Spooky
      It will be linked to a keystroke. If you really want to link it to the finder buttons, someone could hack it with APE or SIMBL.

    3. Re:Give me two things by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      ...a true maximize button that doesn't only sometimes work...

      This would be a design anti-feature. On Windows the assumption is that only one program will be visible on a screen at a time. This is because they all replicate the menus in the window taking up space and making it really annoying if they are not always maximized all the time. For OS X, this need not be the case and it is useless to take up space you don't need in many instances. Thus, Apple leaves the function of the zoom button up to the developer to decide. Sometimes this means they implement the zoom to fit to content and it is much, much nicer than the same behavior on Windows. Sometimes this means the developer makes a bad choice and does not maximize when that would be better. This is a flaw with the individual application, not with OS X. I agree that some of the apps misuse this including several from Apple. File a bug on the app, don't try taking away the functionality from everyone.

      ...an extra button or two on my laptop and I'll consider Macs to be a good choice.

      Barring the creation of a better technological solution, Apple is doing the right thing with this. Multi-button mice make sense for power users. Your hand is already off the keyboard using the mouse, so extra buttons can be mapped to extra features and it is faster. Multiple buttons on a laptop do not make usability sense. Currently, they cannot be customized for novice users and multiple buttons are one of the most common usability problems for users in general. Combined with current development practices, a multi-button mouse as the standard leads to less functional programs. Gee thanks WordPad for taking up that second mouse button with completely useless crap instead of letting me assign useful functions to TextEdit like I do on OS X. Finally, because your hands are already on the keyboard when using a trackpad and buttons, chording with a keyboard button is actually faster than having multiple buttons, it is just slightly harder to learn. For power users this should not be an issue. For novices, the multiple buttons are a net loss. So who benefits? Only those people who are sort of power users and would use multiple buttons, but who are not able to learn to use chording.

      So, I assert that with current designs, what they have is the best option. Better yet would be a solution like the mighty mouse, where people are allowed to enable or disable multiple buttons in software, but which physically look like one button so as not to confuse novices. Slightly less ideal would be a solution where a user can drop in a replacement set of buttons, which is not default. Both of these, however, would be less benefit for the work than the mighty mouse is. I recommend you actually try using chording. Once you are used to it, it is measurably faster than multiple trackpad buttons.

      As it is, I run Windows for the games or I run GNU/Linux so I guess I'm not the target consumer

      Half the people I know switched from Linux to OS X. You can still buy a Mac and then run Windows and/or Linux in a variety of ways including on a separate partition, through a VM, or both. With both Parallels and VMWare racing to get graphics card acceleration working in their VM modes, you might even find it more convenient than running Linux/Windows in the near future. Wouldn't it be nice to not have to reboot to play any Windows game? Also, WINE and the like are progressing on OS X providing similar levels of Windows API re-implementation and at least one company is concentrating on that code for quick and dirty ports of Windows games. I'd argue that right now Windows gaming is better on a Mac than on a Linux PC and the situation actually looks to be getting better for the foreseeable future.

  163. Doubtful. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have a strong suspicion, judging from the increasing number of DOAs I've witnessed in the past few years, that the Big Name manufacturers (hardly 'manufacturers,' really they're just 'assemblers,' or better yet, 'name-stampers') do not do any real burn in testing anymore, besides making sure it POSTs.

    Perhaps I'm just cynical. It seems like it would be possible, though, to write a utility that would conduct a burn-in of the machine, and then erase itself, if you wanted to. It would just need to load itself into RAM, go through its test cycle, and then at the conclusion of the cycle, wipe the HD and then power the system down. Or you could have a burn-in program that was run off of the USB port, or a CD. The cost of writing something like that would probably pay for itself in a few hundred units; you wouldn't even have to be Dell for something like that to make sense.

    Just installing an OS and then letting the machine run idle for a few hours doesn't strike me as a particularly good test; for good QC you'd want heavy processor usage and disk I/O, in order to make sure that everything gets correctly stressed. That implies some sort of special software (which needs to be deleted afterwards); having an OS on the machine when it goes out to the customer doesn't really make this process that much easier.

    There is a certain overhead involved in dealing with more than one OS, that's understandable: if you previously only had one type of HD that got stuck into all your boxes, adding another option obviously creates some complexity. However, I don't think this is a legitimate anti-Linux argument: Microsoft has rolled out more and more versions of its OS, and the manufacturers have seemingly accepted without complaint. Obviously there are systems in place that allow for Windows {Home|Professional|Media Center} to get installed, and while the cost of going from 1 option to 2 is great, adding one more option seems fairly trivial. (How many options does Vista have? Adding another for "blank drive" or "FreeDOS," if not Linux proper, can't be that hard. It's only when you factor in Microsoft's retaliatory measures that it gets expensive.)

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Doubtful. by caluml · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just installing an OS and then letting the machine run idle for a few hours doesn't strike me as a particularly good test; for good QC you'd want heavy processor usage and disk I/O, in order to make sure that everything gets correctly stressed. That implies some sort of special software (which needs to be deleted afterwards);

      What you seek is installing Gentoo from the Live CD! Plenty of disk, network, and CPU activity there.

  164. Lamp on OSX? by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

    I love LAMP.

  165. That's beefy hardware for a terminal. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    Core Duo, Min 512MB Ram, only need like 20GB of HD, don't need a CD drive optional, Gigabit Ethernet, decent onboard graphics

    Is your reservation program a first-person shooter? That seems like some awfully excessive specs for a kiosk machine; particularly the GigE.

    The Mini sort of sits in a class by itself, mostly IMO because it goes after a market that most of the SFF PC makers aren't interested in (or, are too inept to target correctly). Most of the mainboards I've seen that are the size of the Mini's are meant for embedded, portable, or automobile use, and don't touch it for features at the price. But then again, they don't have to; most of the Mini's features aren't necessary for embedded applications, and people building bespoke portable or automotive equipment aren't constrained by price.

    When I think "reservation terminal," what comes first to my mind is something like a Wyse WinTerm; nothing near the specs of a Mini.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  166. great, a switch to another watered down system by recharged95 · · Score: 1

    I think one main reason (like myself) has switched to Macs is the hardware. I mean were thing is compatible and the drivers work, period. Also, all mac laptops have the latest and greatest stuff--they're fast. Yes, OSX is fast and has some bling, but I mainly run SuSE 10.2 with XGL on my MacBookPro--the OS (Linux) is the best of both worlds for a power user bar none.

  167. Mac OSX vs Windows Vista by Septje · · Score: 0

    Macs are great. Until you want to do something. Sorry. Nothing will ever replace the Windows PC. Theres no substantial range of products for Macintosh and there never will be. If you want to burn music or view photos or something along those lines, by all means, get a mac, but if you want your computer to do something useful, get a PC. Simple as that. Sorry Scott Finnie.

  168. So now what's he do for a job? by FishinDave · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He's a long-time Windows expert. This looks like a major career change. :-)

  169. Re:This is fantastic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are pro ---- because they found a product/company that they are happy with. They found something that makes their life better and are publicly stating this fact so that others may also benefit from the product/company. It doesn't matter what product or service they are talking about, the reasons are generally the same. The same applies when people are anti ----, just for different reasons. They got screwed over by a product/service and they are spreading the word so that others can avoid making the same mistakes that they made. It's basic human nature. Come to think of it, ants do the same thing. ;)

    It also applies to religion. Those of you who always bitch and whine about Christians whenever the subject comes up, take note. Then again, I guess it's probably valid to categorize this as religious behavior regardless of the subject...
  170. Not in europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Macs are silly expensive over here in holland. Lets compare the mac mini to a random cheap PC like this weeks Medion box sold by the Aldi retail chain.

    Mac mini:
    1,66-GHz Intel Core Duo
    512 MB geheugen
    60-GB harde schijf
    OSX
    619,- euros

    Premium - Allround - Talent-MD 8820 entertainment-pc
    Intel Dual Core processor 2,8 GHz, 2 x 2MB L2-cache, 800 MHz FSB.
    250 GB SATA harde schijf, 8 MB cache, 7200 tpm.
    1024 MB werkgeheugen DDR2 SDRAM met 533 MHz 64-bits (1 slot vrij).
    GeForceTM 7300 SE videokaart 128 MB DDR2 geheugen met DVI-I, D-Sub VGA en TV-out
    CD-/DVD-brander
    TV-tuner voor analoge TV
    Basisstation voor externe USB harde schijf HDDrive2go
    2 Multimedia luidsprekers (speakers
    keybord, mouse, remote control

    software
    Windows VistaTM Home Premium
    MEDION Home Cinema Suite:
    PowerDirector 5 SE,
    PowerProducer 3,
    PowerDVD 7,
    MediaShow
    Microsoft® Works 8.5
    Nero Burning ROM 7

    only 599,- euros!

    Now dont get me wrong, the mac mini is a nice little machine that people can use to e-mail and the surf the web for a bit. The medion box can handle that and a whole lot more. It comes with mouse, keybord, speakers not to mention vastly better specs than the mac for 20 euros less.

    Does anybody want to play the "I took a mac and configured a dell to the same specs" game? Configure a mac to match the medions specs and see why for a lot of people macs are so overpriced it just doesnt make any sense.

    The same thing goes for the macbooks, they are nice little machines and i looked at them when shopping for a laptop but i like to have a semi decent graphics chip as well so i can play a game now and then. Apple doesnt start offering laptops that can realistically run games until you spend 2000,- euros. Dells, HPs and other laptop vendors that cover those needs can be found for 500 to 1000 euros less.

    1. Re:Not in europe by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "Does anybody want to play the "I took a mac and configured a dell to the same specs" game? Configure a mac to match the medions specs and see why for a lot of people macs are so overpriced it just doesnt make any sense."

      There are more to computers than mere specs. To use a car-analogy: I could get a BMW for 40.000e (or more). Or I could get a Lada for 12.000e. They both have engine, four wheels, room for 4 adults, room for cargo, stereos, headlights anbd they can take you just fine from point A to point B. Does that mean that the BMW is overpriced, since you can get a Lada so cheaply? I mean, both of them do the exact same thing, right?

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    2. Re:Not in europe by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      OTOH, you could get a Honda or a Toyota for a lot less and end up with a BETTER and MORE reliable car.

      Comparisons such as yours only work if you've got a nice false strawman to knock down.

      They quickly become absurd in a well populated marketplace.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:Not in europe by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "OTOH, you could get a Honda or a Toyota for a lot less and end up with a BETTER and MORE reliable car."

      Better in what way? Cheaper interior, less precise steering, lower quality materials, crappier suspension etc. etc. You actually do get something for the extra money BMW (or Audi) costs. Yes, Toyota is propably more reliable, but that's about it. There's more to the "goodness" of a car than reliability.

      If you really think Toyota or Honda is a "better car" than BMW, then I can't help but feel that you are deluding yourself.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    4. Re:Not in europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my world value for money is important tho. Sure BMW makes nice cars but for joe sixpack like me a Seat or Toyota makes a hell of a lot more sense since i can get an equally good car for a lot less money. I think we have stretched the car analogy far enough as it is btw so back to computers :-)

      My medion box example shows that you can get a much more powerfull computer for less money. I'm not saying that the mac mini doesnt make sense for anyone, i'm just saying that it makes no sense at all for me. I got one for my completely computer illiterate mom to get her online, so there is a market for it obviously. For me it would be just a cool toy to play with since i can do the same stuff on a much cheaper old PC or get a much more powerfull machine for the same money.

      The same is true for all of apples offerings. Sure they make nice machines but given my requirements and taking value for money into account none of them make sense for me. As i mentioned before, i was in the market for a laptop but given the lack of any graphical power in the macbook line means that the only thing Apple has to offer me is a macbook pro that starts at about 2000,- euros and can easily go up to 2500,- without even trying. That doesnt mean that the macbook pro isnt a nice machine - It is! Or that it isn't even good value for money - It might be. It just doesnt make sense for ME since i can get a laptop from other vendors that does cover all my needs in the 1000-1500 euro bracket which is a lot of money allready. I'd love to give apple computers a go as soon as apple gives me the options i want. I'm willing to pay a premium for great design but the lack of say a half decent graphics chip kills the macbook as an option for me.

  171. Mac sure gets a lot of publicity from this by popo · · Score: 1

    How about when people switch the other way?

    Articles? It certainly happens.... Happened to me when I got tired of the confined
    software/hardware choices. Anyone here of any bigtime "converts" getting a press blitz
    for moving to Windows?

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  172. Not exactly... by garote · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You stopped using Windows because they forced you to install a web browser?

    Not exactly...:

    Bundling a web browser was the right thing to do. While strong arming OEMs into not including Netscape was evil, including IE was completely justified.

    I think the argument is, he stopped using Windows because they forced him to browse his local filesystem with the web browser.

    (And all the atrocious hacks and spyware that engendered.)

    1. Re:Not exactly... by earthbound+kid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      KDE does it. It doesn't have to turn out as a security nightmare. That was more of a problem with Microsoft in general than the weird intertwining of iexplorer.exe and explorer.exe in particular.

  173. Re:This is fantastic by Tom · · Score: 1

    Oh, please! Have you been looking around? Cables especially are something that almost every non-electronics store charges for as if they were made of solid gold. I'm sure Dell, IBM, etc. will charge you 5-10 times its worth as well. I can go into any random store in the inner city and find CAT-5 cables at prices that I can get a small drum of CAT-5 for in the right shops.

    That's definitely not an Apple "feature".

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  174. /. having a field day with this topic by caywen · · Score: 1

    Windows had dominated the market while OSX was far superior. Now that Windows has (mostly) caught up, how can one even begin to think this market will change? It's not like Apple has lacked marketing power these past 7 years. The basic problem now is that, in the minds of consumers, Apple's "Why Windows?" message has now become "Well, why NOT Windows?"

  175. Re: Does not embrace DRM by Guanine · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure Jobs does not embrace DRM.

  176. not in australia by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    IN australia, every city has 10s of chineese computer shops that sell anything and everything, especially PCs with nothing on them optionally.

    www.istore.com.au
    www.cworld.com.au

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  177. Charlie Bookers Perspective by jools33 · · Score: 1

    As someone who loves building PCs and so wont go near a Mac until there are equal possibilities I found this article amusing - Charlie Brooker (ex pczone games journalist + comedy writer) has an amusing mickey take- initially a tirade against Apple's switching campaign in the UK and why he hates Mac owners - below's a snippet from the article here:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2005931,00.h tml
    "I hate Macs. I have always hated Macs. I hate people who use Macs. I even hate people who don't use Macs but sometimes wish they did. Macs are glorified Fisher-Price activity centres for adults; computers for scaredy cats too nervous to learn how proper computers work; computers for people who earnestly believe in feng shui."

  178. microsoft are dim wits... by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    1999... We have a new driver model, its the best in the world and its perfect, Embrace Win2000 NOW... then it takes years for people to write decent drivers.

    2003... XP uses same model, drivers keep working

    2006... VSTA changes to new model, oh sorry, yeah we got some new coders and they say the last drivers were crap, and written by coders who dont comment their code. We need something new, that uses DRM and needs billions of new man hours in redevelopment.

    Oh and what happened to rewriting 90% of the interface/desktop in .net because .net is soooo coool and fast.... oh it didnt work, was too slow used too much ram!! ah go back to MFC/C++ .
    If MS wont use it, why would the rest of the world. Again remind me, what MS application or OS component uses .Net ? OR is it just a feature to kill Java and annoy sun.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  179. I pity the fool that hasn't tried FedoraCore6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we're almost there

  180. Who needs 3 months by DrXym · · Score: 1
    I have a Mac, I have a PC. The Mac has less games and less apps than the PC. What games and apps there are usually cost more and / or arrive later than the PC versions. And the hardware is more expensive too. And while the Mac's UI is attractive, I get annoyed by amount of bloat in the UI, the single menu bar and the dock. I don't see why I would want to swap from a PC to a Mac until that situation changed.

    In its favour OS X is a nice operating system, far more spartan and usable (at least to novies), and anything running over Unix can't be bad. But use it day to day? No way. I think I'd prefer Ubuntu over OS X if Windows disappeared tomorrow.

  181. Re: Does not embrace DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm pretty sure Jobs is full of shit.

  182. The hardest part is paying for it ... by operato · · Score: 1

    ... everything after that gets easier and easier. yes, it was the same for me and that prostitute last night and she was worth every penny. thank you, thank you. i'm here all week.

  183. Re: Part selection by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

    Since most pre-configured machines have some components I'm not happy with, I want to look at the part list and do some research anyway. As the most pertinent example, let me discuss graphics cards:
    I found that most pre-configured computers have either

    - Cards with active (fan) cooling. My experience with those is not so good, as the fans tend to be crap and the market for high quality replacement parts is limited.
    - or passive cooled but low end&slow cards that don't meet my idea of reasonable gaming performance.

    So I have to do the most time-consuming part of the part selection anyway - not much difference to assembling my own

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  184. I take your point, but... by RMH101 · · Score: 1

    ...it's a bit light on specifics. "Powerful"? If you mean CPU-power, then an Intel Core2Duo running OS X is pretty much the same as running Windows. It's then all about the applications available...

  185. I like Macs, but WTF? by RMH101 · · Score: 1

    "Also, all mac laptops have the latest and greatest stuff"
    Um, like 7200rpm drives as standard? Nope. Like Core2Duo before the cheap Wintel Laptops? No. Like cheap, powerful graphics cards? No. They make great hardware, but you can't pretend it's cheap or cutting edge in terms of components.

  186. Compare apples to apples, bud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The $50 OEM windows comes with restrictions: only for that machine, retailer supports it. The $29 Novell OS comes with no such restrictions (install it where you want as many times as you want) and Novell look after OS problems, not the retailler.

    So to match the $29 Novell OS, you'd need the retail pack. Now a bulk discount could make it a lot less than $200 but not less than $100, could it.

  187. wrong by slashbart · · Score: 1

    No wrong

    even when Apple was relatively larger than nowadays (say late eighties), the quality of the OS api's was already incredibly better than that of Windows. I know, I programmed them both for money.

    When in Dos/Windows you had to play with hand written vga drivers, and obscure undocumented bios calls, and were trying to work around the insane memory model if you had more than 64k of data, the Mac (OS 7) api was already 32 bits. In windows everything was passed around as a (void *) although they called it HANDLE. In Mac's, everything was typesafe pretty much from the start. You don't think Mac's had a year 2000 bug in the operating system do you?

    Ofcourse Apple is a company aiming to make money, but there is a sense of quality in that company that is completely absent in the Microsoft universe.

    Bart

  188. Re:This is fantastic by b.burl · · Score: 1

    You've actually heard someone say that OSX is a waste of money compared to windows, and then proceed to dump the mac for that reason?

  189. Mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know why people always convert their e-mail to other apps and complain about how difficult it was when they could just use IMAP and never worry about what e-mail program they use. That includes filtering rules where you could use something like procmail for server-side filters.

    Granted, that is no solution for migrating your addressbook.

  190. You know, I was hoping for boxes from Apple to fit those holes, but the Apple TV and some other offerings show me what Apple intends there.

    So I suppose I'll probably buy a Soekris and install openBSD on it to do what I might have wanted the $400 Mac Mini to do. Wish I ccould find a decent PPC mobo in the price range.

  191. Missread the title by chord.wav · · Score: 2, Funny

    I read "Windows Expert Jumps Sheep" and I thought WTF these guys smoked?

  192. What's all the fuzz about? by tbcn · · Score: 0
    I got my first Mac (Macbook Pro) this january. Nice hardware, nice specs.
    I consider myself a somewhat hardcore Linux dude, and after a month of Mac OS X usage, I am not impressed.
    Maybe it helps if I learn the 287,3 keyboard shortcuts, or brainwash myself for another couple of months. Time will show, unless I choose to install Linux first.

    I SO wanted to be a switcher, but I'm not impressed. At all. :(

    --
    /tb
  193. bah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So jumping from a dying proprietary monopoly to an emerging proprietary monoply is news worthy how?

  194. Re:This is fantastic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Personally, I'm hesitant recommending a Mac to most people for fear there is an application they can no longer run. But for certain people a Mac makes a lot of sense."

    This is no longer a valid argument for not buying a Mac. No computer is able to run a larger selection of software than a current Mac. In addition to running native Mac OS X software and Unix software out of the box, with Boot Camp or Parallels you can run Windows software as well. So, you should be advising people if they want the most software choices to buy a Mac not avoid one.

  195. the whooshing sound of the point flying by... by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 1

    "No one forces anyone to buy an OS with a PC..."
    Maybe, but Microsoft the convicted monopolist is guilty of forcing several large PC vendors to *sell* Windows with their computers, which has dramatically restricted the range of choice for consumers. Are you new in these here parts?
    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
    1. Re:the whooshing sound of the point flying by... by Strudelkugel · · Score: 1

      Are you new in these here parts?

      Newer than you, Mr. 124661!

      Microsoft the convicted monopolist is guilty of forcing several large PC vendors to *sell* Windows with their computers

      Ask yourself this question: "Which company has a greater market dominance, Microsoft or Intel?" The answer is Intel. Why isn't Intel a convicted monopolist? They settled with the DOJ. Probably the biggest mistake Microsoft made was not doing the same. Did you ever read the Jackson decision? His position was frequently based on absurdities, such as claiming that Microsoft was abusing its market position by including IE, which was unfair to the consumer because of the amount of disk space its components required, among other things.

      I hope you are never party to litigation, but if you are, do not expect decisions to be made in a manner in which a technologist might expect. I was party to a situation in which a panel of three judges had their decision overturned by Congress, I kid you not. Judges are fallible. Jackson was telling me I could not by a PC without Windows, when I had been doing it for some time. Yet the monopolist conviction held.

      People in these parts love to trot out the "M$ is a monopolist" argument, but get bent by the provisions of the PATRIOT act. There is a contradiction there.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
  196. Pricing Blind Spot: Apple's or Geeks'? by Gadzeus · · Score: 1

    There a many comments here claiming Apple computers are expensive relative to PCs. A typical one is: "I still can't see how you can claim that Macs are cheaper than PCs!" May I help? A computer cost over a year has three main components (ignoring finance): Lost interest on capital Depreciation Upgrade costs Let us work them out. You bought your $800 PC last year and were content that you didn't need the higher spec of the iMac. Now Vista is out and you need to upgrade the graphics. What did it cost you? PC depreciation here in the UK is about 30% per year. That of Macs is around 15%... my 5 year old iMac 800G4 is still selling on eBay for £380... I paid £750... that's only 10% depreciation/year. The PC: Lost interest: $32 Depreciation: $240 Upgrade: $150 (typical 256MB card) Vista upgrade: $160 (Home premium is what most people need) So you have a hardware total of $422. If you include the Vista upgrade you hit $582. That is provided you got an XP install CD with your cheap PC. What people who got one of those secure partition restore options on the HDD do I have no idea. Anyway: $422 or $582. So what does the Mac cost you? Before I start let me explain that I am trying to save you money. An experienced PC buyer will know a few ruses to save money there. With regard to Macs, this is how you do it. The refurbished store is an option. You get a full 1 year warrantee but no special deals, education discount or the original box. I find that the original box helps sell it when you need to. Anyway, the refurbished store will offer you anything from 15% to 35% discount. The 15% discount isn't worth it because the higher education discount is 12%. Anyone who knows anyone in University can get that... just buy in their name... the warranty is transferable. It is often the case if you buy from the refurbished store with a 30% discount your Mac at the end of the year will sell for what you paid for it. Yes I did say that. I have done that twice with iBooks. Cost to upgrade? Just the lost interest in the bank: $40 on a $999 MacBook But I like the original box. So sometimes I buy in the Fall/Autumn.... when the iPod offer is on. I buy with the 12% higher education discount and I eBay the iPod. I get £65 for it. A month before the warrantee expires I sell it on eBay. It sells for about 17% less than the purchase price. Here are some figures in UK pounds as I know these to be correct: MacBook 2.0GHz £879 - with Higher Ed discount £755 minus the money back from the sold iPod £690 Value at end of year £720 Lost interest from the Bank: £30 Cost to you to upgrade? £0. So, who has the blind spot? Apple or the geeks who keep claiming that Macs cost more than PCs? These are the real figures I have paid over the last 7 years. Before the iPods there were printer deals. Before eBay I sold things in London through Loot.com I don't just upgrade the graphics for $422 or the OS for another $159, I get new iLife apps, the latest OS, entirely new hardware and an full 1 year warranty on some pretty smart hardware... and I get it for nothing more than the effort of selling a Mac and an iPod. Here in London, through Loot that has never taken more than a single free ad. As for upgrading the HDD I use a Wiebetech firewire dock. You can buy a USB 2 to IDE/SATA cable from NewerTech for $25... cheaper still on eBay. Now perhaps it's me that has the blind-spot, so could one of those people who keeps complaining that Macs are expensive please explain why I should think the PC a good deal?

  197. Apple or Geek Blind-Spot? by Gadzeus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There a many comments here claiming Apple computers are expensive relative to PCs. A typical one is:

    "I still can't see how you can claim that Macs are cheaper than PCs!"

    May I help?

    A computer cost over a year has three main components (ignoring finance):

    Lost interest on capital
    Depreciation
    Upgrade costs

    Let us work them out. You bought your $800 PC last year and were content that you didn't need the higher spec of the iMac. Now Vista is out and you need to upgrade the graphics. What did it cost you?

    PC depreciation here in the UK is about 30% per year. That of Macs is around 15%... my 5 year old iMac 800G4 is still selling on eBay for £380... I paid £750... that's only 10% depreciation/year.

    The PC:

    Lost interest: $32
    Depreciation: $240
    Upgrade: $150 (typical 256MB card)
    Vista upgrade: $160 (Home premium is what most people need)

    So you have a hardware total of $422. If you include the Vista upgrade you hit $582. That is provided you got an XP install CD with your cheap PC. What people who got one of those secure partition restore options on the HDD do I have no idea. Anyway: $422 or $582.

    So what does the Mac cost you? Before I start let me explain that I am trying to save you money. An experienced PC buyer will know a few ruses to save money there. With regard to Macs, this is how you do it.

    The refurbished store is an option. You get a full 1 year warrantee but no special deals, education discount or the original box. I find that the original box helps sell it when you need to. Anyway, the refurbished store will offer you anything from 15% to 35% discount. A 15% refurbished discount isn't worth it because the higher education discount is 12%. Anyone who knows anyone in University can get that... just buy in their name... the warranty is transferable.

    It is often the case if you buy from the refurbished store with anything over a 20% discount your Mac at the end of the year will sell for what you paid for it. Yes I did say that. I have done that twice with iBooks.

    Cost to upgrade? Just the lost interest in the bank: $40 on a $999 MacBook

    But I like the original box. So sometimes I buy in the Fall/Autumn.... when the free iPod offer is on. I buy with the 12% higher education discount and I eBay the iPod. I get £65 for it. A year later, a month before the warrantee expires on my Mac (MacBook or iMac) I sell it on eBay. It sells for about 17% less than the purchase price. Here are some figures in UK pounds as I know these to be correct:

    MacBook 2.0GHz £879 - with Higher Ed discount £755 minus the money back from the sold iPod £690

    Value at end of year £720
    Lost interest from the Bank: £30

    Cost to you to upgrade? £0!

    So, who has the blind spot? Apple or the geeks who keep claiming that Macs cost more than PCs? These are the real figures I have paid over the last 7 years. Before the iPods there were printer deals. Before eBay I sold things in London through Loot.com

    I don't just upgrade the graphics for $422 or the OS for another $159, I get new iLife apps, the latest OS, entirely new hardware and an full 1 year warranty on some pretty smart hardware... and I get it for nothing more than the effort of selling a Mac and an iPod. Here in London, through Loot that has never taken more than a single free ad. As for upgrading the HDD I use a Wiebetech firewire dock. You can buy a USB 2 to IDE/SATA cable from NewerTech for $25... cheaper still on eBay.

    Now perhaps it's me that has the blind-spot, so could one of those people who keeps complaining that Macs are expensive please explain why I should think the PC a good deal?

  198. Been there for 6 years... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People thought I was crazy to switch back in 2001 when I bought my first Powerbook, rather than the ubiquitous ThinkPad. I was a independant Oracle DBA consultant at the time (now fulltime DBA at major corp) and I evaluated what I did, what I would do and where the bulk of my work was going. The result was...that Mac OSX was unix. Had nice terminals and allowed me run X11 and JAVA apps "smoothly" (unlike on Windows). Exporting a display to a mac OSX with Xll is a dream compared to the nightmare of Windows...Other consultants saw that I was using it and they tried and found that developing perl, shell scripts and a host of other utility scripting languages was easy...and portable. The big bonus was I could take the same computer out of my bag when home on the weekend and record my rock band with a MOTU 828 interface...8 tracks 24 bit 41Khz recording at once on a g4 400 Mhz, mix it, bring the AIFF into iTunes and burn it to CD and give a copy to the guys in the band....linux on a PC notebook or Windows just wasn't capable of doing that as easily as Mac...

    I tossed out my PC. And will not go back. Now is only we could convince corps to forget the pending VISTA nightmare and really consider other platforms. Most of our admins have Linux boxes and RDP to a box for MS-Outhouse e-mail. But the .net juggernaught will prevent any movement into the corporate desktops by MAC OSX.

  199. Dell? Ha by metamatic · · Score: 1

    It'll be a cold day in hell before Jobs allows Dell to sell Macs, after Dell's public advice to Apple...

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    1. Re:Dell? Ha by Nossie · · Score: 1

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/16/dell_eyes_ apple/

      I never said apple would allow it :) just that Mickey apparently said it:

      "Michael Dell would like to license Mac OS X and ship it with future PC products, the Dell founder and chairman has revealed.

      It's not likely to happen any time soon, of course - Apple CEO Steve Jobs has already said it's not something he wants to do for now - but according to name-dropping Fortune online columnist David Kirkpatrick, Dell would jump at the chance if offered.

      "If Apple decides to open the Mac OS to others, we would be happy to offer it to our customers," Dell apparently wrote in an email."

      Funny how times change? is Apples time now?

      I do not think Microsoft has given them a better chance before.

  200. Geo Metro by stud9920 · · Score: 1

    It's a fucking Suzuki Swift ! Fuck your "Erector sets", "Sega Genesis" and "Geo Metros", they are fucking Meccanos, Sega Megadrives and Suzuki Swifts.

  201. Re:Beefy Hardware by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

    We use our "terminals" for a lot. We're not talking about green screen airline reservations. Plus they're great to have as general purpose machines- we run a copy or our website, we run our timeclock on them and on a slow day you might catch someone playing games on their lunch. We expect to use them for about 6 years during which they will have paid for themselves several times over. Who knows they might last much longer if our computing demands don't rise.

    That being said I'm sure our software is bloated and inefficient (not to mention it's windows only)- but I'm not willing to write something better so I'm not complaining.

  202. Everybody jump jump jump... by extern_void · · Score: 0

    You don't need to be an expert to jump away from this ship.
    It is just an observation, no flame here,please move along.

  203. Doing things the hard way... by thefinite · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Part of your comment reflects my experience with switchers. Many of them want to keep doing things the hard way. Installing an application by drag and drop just doesn't feel right when you have spent your computing life running installer programs. (Ditto for uninstalling, "I can just drag it to the trash!?!?! Are you crazy? What about the registry?")

    Network settings, burning files to CD, and the list goes on. Between that and learning new keyboard shortcuts, most people have to learn new habits--usually a simpler way of doing things--but then they are hooked. The same appears to be true of the guy who wrote this article.

    --
    Boom Shanka
  204. Bootcamp. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dual boot, run windows natively, no emulation, on any Intel Mac.
    You lose nothing, gain an entire platform.

  205. Switchers Abound by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1

    My parents recently bought a Mac Mini and loved it so much my Mom bought a MacBook. She had a problem with ripping a CD and, even though she's admittedly computer illiterate, she figured it out herself and was very proud. She said "If it had been a Dell, it would have been in the garbage." She's been telling all of her friends about it and they're all looking into getting a Mac.

    My dad went out and bought a new printer at an after-Christmas sale. He was able to hook it up and get it working without calling me once. He was very impressed, and every time I'm over there he says how he should have switched a long, long time ago.

    Now they've subscribed to Podcasts and are ripping their extensive CD collection to their respective computers so that they can play them over the stereo using the Airport Express I bought them for Chrismas.

    --
    I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
  206. Well, the trend seems to be going to Apple by jocknerd · · Score: 1

    UVA has been doing a technology survey of incoming freshman since 1997 and this year's numbers are startling. The use of Macs is up to almost 20% of freshman according to this http://www.itc.virginia.edu/stuserv/ca/cainventory /compare/ survey.

    And Princeton's school newspaper has reported that 45% of all computers sold on campus this year are Macs. http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/10/ 12/arts/16162.shtml

  207. Re:This is fantastic by stratjakt · · Score: 1

    How do you know that? Do you nmap ever single machine to try to determine the host OS? That's not reliable, so you must make contact with the admin of each machine that spams you, and verify that they are all, indeed, windows.

    Are you saying that it's un-possible for some guy to install sendmail on his mac and fuck up and turn it into an open relay?

    Truth is I played a little bit of the hax0r game a while back, mostly looking for public ftp in my warez days, but I'd stumble across open relays. A lot (you'd be surprised) of the ftp site's I'd find, that allowed anonymous write access, were proftpd's running on linux, and merely misconfigured. I'd find the odd mac, solaris, BSD, all kinds of crazy stuff. Of course, the majority were NT4.0 boxes, which allowed anony write access by default, but a lazy admin or user can make ANY computer insecure.

    If Mac was 25% marketshare, people would write trojans for it. There's no architecture immune to "moron user clicking OK when he shouldnt"

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  208. Mac Hardware Durability Sucks by zenblend · · Score: 1

    From my experience, mac hardware is a proprietary piece of shit. My girlfriend had a 1.5 year old ibook G4. Her hard drive was failing so I figured, "just back up what you need on your ipod and I'll replace the hard drive and install OSX again." I thought it would be a few screws off the bottom panel (like 95% of other laptops), unplugging of the hard drive and plugging in of a new one. But holy shit, after looking at directions online, you have to take apart the entire goddamn chasis just to get at the hard drive. (http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Mac/iBook-G4-12-Inch/ Hard-Drive-Replacement) We took it to Fry's and had them do it for $150. It took a week because their regular techs wouldn't touch the ibook and we had to wait for their "Apple Specialist" to come in (which he only did once a week). I sold the goddamn thing on ebay after it was fixed and built her a windows box with a 19" widescreen monitor with the money. This is why Macbooks only come with a 3 month warranty. They know the lifespan of an average component is 1 year. Go figure that Consumer Reports doesn't recommend extended warranty for any laptop except an apple one.

  209. Re:Jumped to eComStation and OpenOffice.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sir, what's that eLolStation? some kind of os/2 sibling exhumed from like 1997 or something? huh huhuh

  210. Aaaand... troll. by Spaceman40 · · Score: 1

    Linux... requires 16 config file 3 required packages and you need to code your own driver for random network card X if it's not a common one. I think in GUI and user [friendliness] *nix has a long way to go.

    Have you even used Linux? Let alone Ubuntu recently? I have worse driver problems with Windows XP than Ubuntu. Even my sound card, the old standard of Linux incompatibility, just works out of the box with Ubuntu. I need to go through a half-hour of searching and installing for WinXP.
    --
    I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
    1. Re:Aaaand... troll. by king-manic · · Score: 1

      I guess the Jobs RD field technology has been GPL'd? Even ubuntu needs some configuration. Most commodity hardware come with xp drivers. If you've lost them then it's a pain finding them again. A lot of hardware have no linux drivers at all and you need then to code your own or put up a bounty for it. Ubuntu is several steps int he right direction, but as some other poster mentioned... it still falls a bit short of being ready for your mum to use.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  211. Re:This is fantastic by jsebrech · · Score: 1

    You've actually heard someone say that OSX is a waste of money compared to windows, and then proceed to dump the mac for that reason?

    OS X is considerably cheaper than Windows Vista in the EU (don't know about the US), and it does more.

  212. Re:This is fantastic by Spaceman40 · · Score: 1

    And that Linux box will run iMovie, GarageBand, iTunes, [Microsoft] Office, require no command-line knowledge, and work out of the box with most major peripherals without having to download or install any drivers, right?

    Actually, don't knock it until you've seen what's out there. While you might have to find alternatives to software (a problem of choice), solutions exist.

    On the driver note, my current system requires more driver installs for Windows XP than for Ubuntu, which amazes me.
    --
    I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
  213. Re:This is fantastic by thedbp · · Score: 1

    In my experience, Ubuntu has MUCH better device/driver support than Windows out of the box, and it is easier to add programs using the built in package manager. Using Easy Ubuntu gets all the proprietary stuff up and running as well. I agree that with research and trial-and-error, one could find programs that work SORT OF like the iLife suite - but none of them are as tightly integrated, feature complete, or professionally supported, and again - the Mac does all of this out of the box.

    I have seen what's out there - like I said, I love linux. But then again, I'm much more tech-minded than most of the people in my family/circle of friends, and most of them don't have the time or inclination to work all these little details out. Plus, you can sit a 6 year old in front of GarageBand and they can make their own music tracks right away without much of a learning curve. None of the linux offerings are that user friendly - music pros may know what to do and how to work it, but novices are still out in the cold, and those are the users that Linux is trying to target, n'est pas?

  214. Re:This is fantastic by Spaceman40 · · Score: 1

    [N]ovices are still out in the cold, and those are the users that Linux is trying to target, n'est pas?
    C'est vrai, while things are getting better. (Personally, I use it for the power. That said, I'm a big fan of OSX and I run Windows XP for the games. We computer people are the minority, unfortunately.)
    --
    I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
  215. woosh! there it goes again! by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 1

    Consider the Findings of Fact in the case, and see in particular Section H, Paragraphs 62 through 67.

    The point concerning Intel is a red herring Courts typically don't recognize the "Sure I'm guilty but look over there! He's even more guilty than me!" defense.

    I do agree that courts seem to be poorly equipped to deal with complicated technical issues and other elements of this case were absurd. That really doesn't undermine the relevant point, which wooshed past again. The acceptance by courts of suspect science like bite-mark analysis and their over-reliance on eyewitness testimony support your assertion that it's best if one minimizes interaction with courts.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  216. Re:This is fantastic by dbIII · · Score: 1

    How do you know that?

    Very easily - those viruses are not Mac compatitible.

    One other thing with the reply that has little to do with what I wrote earlier - a machine that allows anon ftp is not necessessarily out of the control of the operator, which also holds for open mail relay - they just need to fix their config to solve their problems. By compromised I mean controlled by somebody that has broken into it, by spyware that controls it or by a virus. The first holds for pretty well any system, but the virus and spyware problems are a Microsoft platform problem. As for the marketshare thing - I think that is less of an issue than the ease of breaking these things - as the IIS vs apache examples show. It would be much harder to write a virus for any plaform other than the Microsoft ones and since these losers have to start somewhere they won't find any code examples to adapt and call it theirs for anything but the Microsoft platforms. Things may change - perhaps enough machines will actually get antivirus software and maybe Vista or it's successor will address the problem - but for now we live in a situation that would be considered bad SF of millions of compromised systems on the net under the control of petty criminals.

  217. FTP is built in by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    Places -> Connect to server

    Add an FTP connection, it'll appear on the desktop as a volume (and in Network Servers), treat it like any other folder. Bookmark it like any other location to remember the settings.

    --
    Deleted
  218. That was me, please reply to this. by mr_matticus · · Score: 1

    Sorry, my computer signed me out somewhere between starting the comment and submitting it. Also, In re-reading, 'Henkel' should be "Henckels"--how embarrassing. At any rate, if you reply, please reply to this so I get emailed.

  219. Re:What can a Mac do that a Win/Linux machine cant by Angostura · · Score: 1

    And the price of the Audigy card + Premiere + Encore + Nero?

  220. You could say... by Trogre · · Score: 1

    ... he told them Hasta La Vista

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  221. Re:This is fantastic by syousef · · Score: 1

    Well I've had abysmal experiences with both Apple and Nikon in their customer service/repair. Before you jump to the conclusion, I do not misuse their products at all and I'm very careful with anything expensive I purchase.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer