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."
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.
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?
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).
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.
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.)
The market preference is shifting...
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.
"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
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.
Any city, any country, an acknowledge 'expert' ought to be able to buy stuff without bitching.
Is he married?
Oh, wait.....
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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...
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
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.
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.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
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
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... ;-)
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.
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
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!
...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?
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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. ;)
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).
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.
WillyHey, 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!
-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.
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
He's just pissed that Objective C doesn't support the GOSUB keyword.
AutoCAD 2007 runs just fine in Parallels.
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.
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.
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).
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)
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.
"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.
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
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.
No, I will not work for your startup
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)
505 comments and no one has once mentioned switching to AmigaOS. Shame on you all!!
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.
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."
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."
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).
C FQsEVAodyWbJuw
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=CN2CiYLeoIo
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).
He's a long-time Windows expert. This looks like a major career change. :-)
Um, I think they've had vi running on OSX for some time now. Where have you been?
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.)
I read "Windows Expert Jumps Sheep" and I thought WTF these guys smoked?
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?
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