Slashdot Mirror


US University Dumps Windows to go All Mac

MacKeyser passed us a link to a MacWorld article about a University doing things a little differently. Instead of sticking with their inefficient mix of Apple and PC systems, the college is doing a 'total technology refresh', and adopting an all-Mac policy on the campus. Previously, a class at Wilkes University would be outfitted with something like 20 Macs and 20 PCs, to allow for individual preferences in software and OS use. With Boot Camp students at the Pennsylvania liberal arts college will be able to switch between Windows and OSX, choosing which applications and OS to use at any given time. "[Scott Byers, vice president for finance and the head of campus IT said] 'We think it will save $150,000 directly, in buying fewer units - even though the Macs cost more per unit than PCs.' The school, which enrolls about 4,000 undergraduate and graduate students, will reduce its inventory from nearly 1,700 computers to around 1,450 after the change over. Other costs savings, however, will be harder to measure. 'By standardizing, the IT department should be more productive,' Byers said."

368 comments

  1. Good for them! by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    They're an arts college, so this should be a perfect demonstration of Apple's OS dominance in the field of digital arts.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    1. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I was just looking at the majors they offer and I'm trying to figure out how Wilkes is an art school. Liberal arts university, sure, but that's it. In fact, the only art program they offer is a minor. Also note that they have about 2,200 students.

    2. Re:Good for them! by PetrusMagnusII · · Score: 5, Informative

      I think you're confusing Liberal Arts with Art.

      Take a look at the undergraduate majors:

      http://www.wilkes.edu/pages/143.asp

      Accounting, Air & Space Studies being the first two on the list...

    3. Re:Good for them! by JackMeyhoff · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apple has nothing special for "Arts", Photoshop etc are all available on Windows as are drawing tablets. If you want specalised hardware for art then you shop Wacom and others not Apple.

      --
      http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
    4. Re:Good for them! by dreamlax · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then why does everyone say Macs are better for video/graphics? Every graphics designer I know uses a Mac.

    5. Re:Good for them! by JackMeyhoff · · Score: 0, Troll

      Because they have nicer cases.

      --
      http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
    6. Re:Good for them! by h2g2bob · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, art does have a well known liberal bias.

    7. Re:Good for them! by blowdart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But it's not about that; and, as is often the case the slashdot headline is an anti-windows line.

      With Boot Camp students at the Pennsylvania liberal arts college will be able to switch between Windows and OSX, choosing which applications and OS to use at any given time.

      They are standardising on hardware, not an operating system. Which makes sense in terms of cost and hardware management.

    8. Re:Good for them! by iBod · · Score: 2, Informative

      This 'dominance' is slipping away.

      The Mac offers nothing special or unique in the field of digital arts today.

      It used to be the case that the Mac had better software tools and better color management but this is no longer true. The same software and specialist hardware is available for Windows and many cost-concious design shops have gone over to Windows on generic workstations.

      A lot of designers still use Macs because they've always used Macs - simple as that.

    9. Re:Good for them! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall there being a lot of fuss about the Altivec unit on PPC Macs being faster for applying filters in Photoshop but that strikes me as such a minor difference that I doubt it's the primary reason.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    10. Re:Good for them! by Bobsledboy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Macs are generally considered more user friendly for novice users, a group that I would guess video/graphics professionals would probably tend to fall into.

    11. Re:Good for them! by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      The same can be said for windows relative to linux... People are still using it because they always have.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    12. Re:Good for them! by omeomi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The same can be said for windows relative to linux... People are still using it because they always have.

      Not at all. I'm all for Linux, but in art or digital audio, the tools available in Linux just don't stack up (yet) with ones available for Windows and OSX. Yes, there's the Gimp for graphics, and Audacity for audio (among a few others), but there's nothing that comes close to competing with ProTools, or any of the other major audio software applications, and I don't think there's much on Linux that competes with Illustrator or Quark, either.

    13. Re:Good for them! by LKM · · Score: 1

      The Windows version of Photoshop sucks. It uses that weird Window-in-a-Window paradigm which makes it really hard to compare files open in Photoshop to files open in other apps. I truly dislike that application. Also, I think color management on Macs is simpler, and the Mac offers other creative apps which are not available on Windows, such as Aperture or Final Cut Pro (granted, both are from Apple, but these are kind of important apps for many graphic artists and photographers).

    14. Re:Good for them! by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 5, Funny

      The 'Altivec meme' has been cancelled. It is no longer to be used as an explanation of why Apple products are 'superior.' Similarly, all 'Pentium' jokes have now been rescinded, and any records regarding said jokes in the past are being wiped.

      Didn't you get the fax?

    15. Re:Good for them! by BiggyP · · Score: 1

      Heh, that's it's biggest selling point for windows users and the thing they get most cross about being different in the GIMP.

    16. Re:Good for them! by JackMeyhoff · · Score: 1

      Then you use this then.. http://www.quantel.com/

      --
      http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
    17. Re:Good for them! by beadfulthings · · Score: 1

      Please, please, please tell me you understand the difference between a liberal arts college and an art college. Hint: It's not an institution of higher learning where non-conservatives go to learn to paint and sculpt--digitally or otherwise.

      AAUGH!

      --
      "Here's what's happening. You're starting to drive like your Dad..." - Red Green
    18. Re:Good for them! by SkyDude · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      A lot of designers still use Macs because they've always used Macs - simple as that.

      You got that right.

      I used to work for a small publishing firm that had Macs in the customer service department. The Macs were used for maintaining the subscription database using an application from a small time developer. The guy that made the decision to buy Macs to do this job was biased in favor of Macs just because they weren't PCs. The Macs sucked at maintaining this type of data and were tossed out shortly after I started there.

      The graphics department was all Macs of course, and for good reason. Back then, Pagemaker, Photoshop and other graphics apps weren't available or ready for the PC platform. Today, the graphics people still use Macs, even though the current state of PC apps is every bit as good as the Mac versions, and some of the graphics guys even told me that. It's just that they feel PCs are souless, corporate machines, and everyone knows, graphics people are so hip and progressive yet just as closed minded as the college described in the article.

      --
      == First cross river, then insult alligator.
    19. Re:Good for them! by curious.corn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Could it be that Apple software is simply better at things like color matching, font handling and other stuff, like making top hardware manageable by non nerds?(since media processing always required more horsepower than say... Office Word + Norton AV + Outlook... wait, forget it...)

      Perhaps, it's a matter of software quality... (limited to certain areas of interest, of course)

      e

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    20. Re:Good for them! by Hott+of+the+World · · Score: 1

      It doesn't even matter. None of this has any impact on anything but Apple's bottom line. Does it hurt Microsoft? No. They still paid the Windows tax.

      They still have PCs, just capable of running OSX. They paid 2 people instead of just one, and I know I would be pissed if I were going there and my Technology fees were wasted like this.

      They didn't dump windows, they're all windows, and all macs. And the students don't get a new lab because of all the money spent.

      --
      | - | - |
    21. Re:Good for them! by saxoholic · · Score: 1

      They're not an arts college, they're a LIBERAL arts college. That has more to do with size than anything else, and the philosophy of a well rounded education. But, they're not a FINE art, or DIGITAL art college, so your point is moot.

    22. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, those "cost-concious" [sic] design shops that hire crappy, low-end "designers" who they don't pay squat and who will tolerate working on a Windows box, they also do crappy work. Most good designers wouldn't want to work in a nickel-diming, Windows-only shop, especially one where the owners were worried about shaving a few bucks off their hardware costs by loading up on cheap white box hardware.

      In a profitable, well-run design shop, labor and software costs are far above hardware expense. You buy high-end LCDs or color-matched CRT monitors, graphics tablets, high-end scanners, color lasers and proofing inkjets/dye subs, Creative Suite and QuarkXPress and FlightCheck and Studio MX and Adobe Font Folio, good chairs and work desks...a few hundred bucks saved by picking up cheap computers is false economy bub.

      Oh, and when the network goes down/gets a virus/is clogged with spyware/can't use fonts sent over by a client/can't seem to color-match a job, that saves LOTS of money.

    23. Re:Good for them! by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      Windows has nothing special for average joes. Why do they continue to use it?

      It used to be that the Mac was the ONLY way to do graphics. Their reputation continues to carry them in the field

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    24. Re:Good for them! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Exactly. Only two things need to happen before I ditch Windows in favor of Linux.

      Decent color management and Photoshop (at least CS2 level). I'm not sure why color management hasn't arrived, but Photoshop may be the killer un-app. Adobe has no particular reason to make it easy to run under Parallels and even less reason to make a native port. No Gimp flames please. I've been playing with it on Ubuntu - actually pretty impressive, but not Photoshop. Not even close.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    25. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've got it 100%, totally and completely arse end backwards. The Mac, today, is the only computer than can run all software from all manufacturers. That fact alone makes the Mac the most special and unique computer that can be bought today.
      Nice try at dissing the Mac, though, but you're utterly wrong.

    26. Re:Good for them! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Informative
      Umm, no. Windows is there. My stepson is currently enrolled at the Vancouver Film School, a well respected digital arts campus (or at least an expensive one....). They have a wonderful mac setup, nice shiny PowerMacs galore. Nobody uses them. All of the serious stuff is done on PCs.

      This comes from the faculty - all real-live professionals in their fields. While lots of folks use Macs - they're perfectly capable critters and I constantly drool about switching, to be perfectly honest - there isn't any drastic need to do that. At least while XP is still supported....

      This argument is really pretty foolish anyway. It's not the OS that does the work - it's the app. And Photoshop on the Mac is just like Photoshop on the PC. If you can't make the switch between the "Mac" squiggle key and control (or Alt, whatever), you've got some serious issues.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    27. Re:Good for them! by chrish · · Score: 1

      Mostly colour matching, I think. Viewing an image on one Mac gives you the same colours as any other Mac. Even if they're using different video cards and monitors. With Windows machines, you get a lot of mostly random variation between systems.

      --
      - chrish
    28. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right up until Microsoft releases their Photo Suite and puts the smackdown on Adobe for releasing better products on the Mac.

    29. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you retarded? Wait I'll answer for you. Yes, yes you are.

    30. Re:Good for them! by DittoBox · · Score: 1

      I'm in Marketing and Communication (yes, I know, I'm not an engineer...don't shoot me) and I use a Precision 490, 2ghz dual 5130 Xeon, 2gb RAM, Quadro NVS 128, two 20" UltraSharps (non-wide, total desktop real-estate: 3200x1200), etc.

      For all intents and purposes it's Mac Pro without OS X, without the pwetty case and without a second Xeon. Having used Macs the only thing missing is the Color preferences item which comes as a PowerToy for XP anyway. All the Adobe apps run exactly the same on Mac as they do on Windows.

      For designers who go through school using solely Macs, that's what they like to work with. It's ingrained in their little psyches.

      --
      Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
    31. Re:Good for them! by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Really? So if I plug in my PC monitor, Change the color balance so that it's completely blue (with the buttons on the monitor), then the Mac will magically take consideration for this and display the right colors anyway? I seriously doubt it. There's so many variables in getting the rigth color that I don't believe any computer, Mac, PC, or Linux is capable of showing colors properly short of being calibrated by a professional. And even then, some monitors don't even have the capabilities to show colors properly. I have a monitor at work that has so little contrast, that if you want it to show dark grey and black as different colours, then you have to turn the brightness way up. Which causes there to be no difference between light grey and white.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    32. Re:Good for them! by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      Then why does everyone say Macs are better for video/graphics? Every graphics designer I know uses a Mac.


      They've continued to be ahead in typography and color support for many, many years. I'm not sure if Vista finally supports independent color calibration of more than one monitor. PDF support is built into the OS in a very functional way, so sending stuff out for proofs or to the press is as easy as printing to your desktop printer, without any configuration or hassle or worry that something will look different on the other end.

      Applescript. What Office macros/VBA scripts are to corporate Windows installations and perl scripts are to the ISP industry, Applescript is to the publishing industry.

      True drag and drop. It sounds crazy, but when you use a Mac and can actually drag and drop things from place to place, that accounts for much of the "intuitiveness". Drag a photo into a document. Drag it from the document into a photo editor. Drag it to the terminal to complete a command line. Stuff "just works" the way it was promised decades ago.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    33. Re:Good for them! by paeanblack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, art does have a well known liberal bias.

      So does Slashdot.

      Has anyone noticed that they aren't dumping Windows at all? They just want to use Bootcamp to cut down on total hardware costs and standardize on a single hardware platform. All they are actually dumping is beige-box PC hardware. They still plan to run Windows and Windows apps just like they did before.

    34. Re:Good for them! by JFitzsimmons · · Score: 1

      Nobody uses the macs at my school either, unless the lab is so full that there's no other computers available.

      --
      Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
    35. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, no "aardvark petting"?

    36. Re:Good for them! by jwdav · · Score: 1

      Most Mac monitors are calibrated in software, not hardware, so after OS X's internal built-in calibration, yes, it would ignore your hardware settings. ColorSync addresses cameras, printers, monitors and proofing systems to try to ensure the the results match the intention.

      Workflow managament & tools, typography, ColorSync and a lack of Windows MDI interface are OS specific reasons why most print designers stick with the Mac. Built in PDF support is also a huge factor in supporting production workflows.

      In typography, even ignoring postscript support, kerning, ligatures etc., Windows makes it difficult to even enter many characters without resorting to Alt-[ASCII code] entry.

      Google Applescript,Automator, Workflow or ColorSync or any combination of the terms and have a look for yourself.

    37. Re:Good for them! by lungbutter · · Score: 1

      No! A lot of "generic" designers have switched over to "generic" workstations. The low-end budget-conscious dime-a-dozen "designer" might be comfortable on the PeeCee but every single designer worth his/her/its salt has either stuck with or returned to the Mac platform. For reasons that if you don't quite yet understand by now then you probably never will...

      But you keep right along making statements like this...cuz ignorance is bliss, eh?

    38. Re:Good for them! by MADCOWbeserk · · Score: 1

      I think they should have gone with Amiga or Acorn... LOL

    39. Re:Good for them! by dangitman · · Score: 1

      The Mac offers nothing special or unique in the field of digital arts today. It used to be the case that the Mac had better software tools and better color management but this is no longer true.

      Not true. You can't get Final Cut Pro or Aperture on Windows. You can't get Logic or Digital Performer. Those are all Mac-only.

      and many cost-concious design shops have gone over to Windows on generic workstations.

      You mean "penny-wise, pund foolish" shops have gone over to Windows. It's not a rational decision, Windows still involves more support issues, and damages productivity. Good shops care about productivity, not saving a few dollars on a PC. It doesn't even make any sense from that angle, because Macs cost about the same price as comparable PCs, and are sometimes cheaper.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    40. Re:Good for them! by ConanG · · Score: 1

      Same at the school I went to. We had a few labs full of Macs and they were almost always empty. They basically just take the overflow from the other labs.

      All the CS lab PCs are dual-boot and both Linux and Windows get used about equally often. There is even an old Sun lab with some specialty CAD software that gets used more than those Mac labs.

    41. Re:Good for them! by mkiwi · · Score: 1

      He got the fax- in a paper airplane, over his head. ;-)

    42. Re:Good for them! by Simon+Garlick · · Score: 1

      The two machines on my desk at work are Macs because I prefer to run UNIX. Nuf said.

    43. Re:Good for them! by ktappe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In response to the three posters who say their Mac labs go unused, that is probably because those who prefer Macs have one. People who use a computer lab anymore are those who probably aren't that computer literate and therefore have only ever been exposed to PC's a few times and will therefore gravitate towards the only thing they've ever seen. PC costs have dropped such that anyone with an interest in computers can buy what they want (PC or Mac).

      --
      "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
    44. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same software and specialist hardware is available for Windows and many cost-concious design shops have gone over to Windows on generic workstations. The reason Macs were/are dominant in the creative field is because the OS doesn't get in your way.
      It doesn't have much to do with the individual software packages not being available for Windows.

      You think people want to fight with Windows all the time or pay someone else to? They don't. Software may be available for more than one platform, but that doesn't mean it runs the same on them all.

      Let's take a look at software, though;

      Hm.. I want to use OmniOutliner, QuickSilver, Butler, Delicious Library, DragThing, and a few others.

      That's not even mentioning the Apple apps like Automator, iMovie/iDVD, Logic Pro, Final Cut Pro, etc.

      I haven't heard of any of those being available for windows.

      Equivalents? Hm.. MS Project ($$$ and nowhere near OmniOutliner), Launchy (closest thing to Butler, QuickSilver or LaunchBar and it's a pretty distant relative), AVID works, but nothing like FCP.

      So really, for the Mac-using creative pro, it would be a huge step backward to migrate to Windows.
    45. Re:Good for them! by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Same here, back when I was still in college a couple of years ago. No one used the Macs, unless you absolutely could not find an open PC in the lab, and I couldn't blame them. They were slow compared to the PCs (PPC machines vs. P4's), and they locked them down so you couldn't use any of the underlying BSD stuff, and when you are stuck with just the Apple stuff, OSX is nothing special.

    46. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      on Linux that competes with Illustrator

      Inkscape is making great progress. In fact many of the basic things that a lot of people use Illustrator for can be done using Inkscape. (Almost like how many things people do in Photoshop can be done using GIMP).

      Inkscape is a great program, and it is available for a great number of operating systems. One thing I did like about Inkscape is the built in tutorials. They are SVG files. So while reading about what is what you actually use the tools during the tutorial. No HTML based tutorials that mostly require a browser to be open.

    47. Re:Good for them! by Lord+Flipper · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Macs are generally considered more user friendly for novice users, a group that I would guess video/graphics professionals would probably tend to fall into.

      Spoken like someone who has never approached compositing software. Come on, pal, professionals? Grow the fuck up.

    48. Re:Good for them! by Bobsledboy · · Score: 1

      You really think that users of compositing software compose the majority of graphics professionals?

    49. Re:Good for them! by SkyDude · · Score: 1

      yet just as closed minded as the college described in the article.

      Apparently the guy that purchased the Macs I described in the original post, or an open minded Mac user must have had mod points, because I was modded "flamebait".

      'Nuf said.

      PS - there is sarcasm contained in this and the original post.

      --
      == First cross river, then insult alligator.
    50. Re:Good for them! by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Nope, Pentium jokes still stand. Just because Intel lagged for years with poor Pentium chips (but great marketing), doesn't mean the Core 2 Duo architecture is crap. Most of us Mac users welcome Intel with open arms, now that they get the concept that bigger-numbers-aren't-better.

    51. Re:Good for them! by Paradox · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because it was, for a long time. In fact, it still seems to be somewhat faster than Intels SIMD instructions. The Altivec gets its amazing speed by being a very, very simple piece of hardware. Using it properly is not easy at all, and in some cases it simply can't provide the precision you want.

      But Apple and Adobe seem to have discovered that it's even faster to have a dedicated GPU do this work. And so the important use cases for SIMD have evolved in Mac OS X, edging more towards a scientific and gaming bias. But anyone can tell you that the Altivec, with its lack of double precision floating point support, is not well suited to scientific applications. The difficulty of using it properly is also a major limiting factor in games. Intel chips have other advantages which end up giving a net win to things like CoreImage, but that assumes that you can farm out work to the GPU.

      People like to say Apple pulled a 180 on this, and I suppose there is some merit to that. But it's also true that Apple Engineers decided they found a better way outright, and the marketing engine didn't fight them on that, unlike in some companies we've seen (Intel with the P4 architecture, for example).

      --
      Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
    52. Re:Good for them! by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 1
      Heh. Just so.


      The Slashdot headline is entirely, willfully and embarrassingly wrong: the school isn't "dumping Windows" or "going all Mac."


      Instead, the college is continuing to use Windows while switching to Mac hardware...which, of course, now sports commodity hardware.


      That may speak well of Jobs' shift of the platform to Intel--or will if others follow the college's lead--but it doesn't justify Zonk going all breathless fanboy on us. ;-)

    53. Re:Good for them! by clanky · · Score: 1

      "The Mac offers nothing special or unique in the field of digital arts today."

      That's a pretty broad statement, and an incorrect one at that. Close, but incorrect.

      Apple has, for the decade plus I have been using macs to do video/interactive production, ALWAYS been six months to a year away from being irrelevant. But they've always managed to pull something out of their sleeve (or events outside their control have conspired) to keep them relevant -- to always keep at least one tool on the mac which wasn't available in the PC world -- and not just OS level tools; actual software. First Photoshop and Illustrator; then, once these were ported to windows, Cosa (then Adobe) After Effects -- a compositing program that fundamentally changed the post production business, and which was mac only for several years. And, of course, ALL nonlinear editing systems which mattered were mac based -- AVID, videocube, sphere).

      With the translation of After Effects to windows, and Microsoft's aggressive courting of Avid over to NT, I, like many others, thought Apple was doomed. I remember preparing a detailed plan for migration over to NT and then 2000. But but then apple came up with the cute little hat trick of firewire, EIDE hard drives and DV cameras (not their invention, of course but they were on all the right development groups to have a leg up in the DV standard) -- the new all-digital production paradigm which changed the entirety of video production pretty much everywhere. I remember sitting in my post suite using my first firewire card (made by radius, and bundled with a surprisingly robust DV editing package called EditDV), and realizing that the business model on which our company was based was irrelevant -- that the 2000 mac on my desk was suddenly capable of editing video at comperable (in some was superior) quality to the 225,000 editing suite sitting behind me. Video editing had gone the way of word processing, and Avid, with it's wildly expensive, custom hardware-dependent approach was the new Wang. This all while microsoft was busy announcing media technologies and then abandoning them.

      And then there was Final Cut Pro. FCP was the first software based editor which was written by people who actually understood the demands and intricacies of video production, and almost a decade later there is nothing (including avid's cross platform software solution) which comes close. Add to this the transition to rock-solid OS X, increasingly competitive hardware, and apple's regular acquisition of high-quality production tools like Shake, all while microsoft floundered with 2000/XP's obviously broken security model and it's increasingly schitzophrenic media strategies ("Video for Windows! ActiveMovie! DirectShow! Windows Media! Whatever marketing has cooked up this month!"), it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the mac platform continues to offer a significant competitive advantage for folks working in many divisions of your vaguely worded "digital arts."

      There are plenty of areas in which the mac platform is poor to irrellevant (high-end 3D work comes to mind), but video post is not amongst them. Today, I don't know any general purpose shops that don't have at least a few macs around. Well, let me reprhase that -- none that have survived more than five years. Many are purely mac based, and in the age of intel machines, boot camp and parallells, have just one or two machines equipped to run windows for that odd piece of sotware (video compression, DVD authoring suite) that they want to use over in the land of microsoft. They do this solely because it makes good fiscal sense, and it's not, as you suggest, purely because the designers are being sticks in the mud.

      I'm not implying this will stay the case forever -- as I've mentioned, Apple has many competitors hungry to take their marketshare, and microsoft is a fierce, if often unfocused, competitor. It's entirely possible that in five years the mac will be irrelevant in this industry. But the exact opposite is

    54. Re:Good for them! by Senjaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A lot of design shops wouldn't switch because they have an investment in Apple scripts that streamline their workflow. That can't be easily ported. Quark and 3rd party plug-in makers are notorious for bad support and huge prices. Even if you can get a Windows version of the plug-in you use, they'll probably expect you to pay for it again. Some of those plug-ins cost as much as Quark does in the first place.

      It's the counter part to those millions of shitty custom developed VB apps that keep businesses on Windows.

      I can't imagine the designers themselves seriously considering switching to Windows. But if some manager type gets the idea of 'saving money' by switching to Windows they are very likely to hit that problem. There is lock-in on both sides of the fence.

      I'd also point out that Photoshop on Windows works as well as it does because it ignores the usual Windows UI patterns and uses those from the Mac.

      Document windows aren't constained by an MDI parent window.
      Every command is in a menu, has a shortcut, and isn't hidden and only available in a context menu.
      Mac based keyboard shortcuts.

      I can move between Photoshop on the Mac and on Windows easily. The problem comes with using other software. As soon as I need to do something outside of Photoshop the user experience falls appart.

      --
      Don't blame me - this .sig had steal me written all over it.
    55. Re:Good for them! by C0rinthian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, since all the hardware is being bought from Apple, the phrase 'all mac' isn't that wrong. No, they're not dumping Windows, but they are dumping every Windows based PC manufacturer out there. And I think that is just as significant.

    56. Re:Good for them! by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Yeah, with XP... SP2... I remember agonizing on a Windows NT4SP5 with Photoshop, pure pain. Perhaps Microsoft has caught up, the workarounds have been put in place and there's a limit to the state of the art so eventually any system, given enough time will get there.

      Thing is, I'm talking about stuff that was state of the art 5-6 years ago, heck even the audio sequencing market has leveled off; the edge today is not PS or DTP but video editing, HD stuff.

      Truth is, people get used to what they're trained, as bad as it can be, habit is a cure.

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    57. Re:Good for them! by prockcore · · Score: 1

      Most Mac monitors are calibrated in software, not hardware


      So the Mac can see what type of lights I'm using and adjust the color temperature accordingly?
    58. Re:Good for them! by jackbarry99 · · Score: 1

      Well.... to cut to the chase:

      who would honestly prefer a PC over a Mac.?

      jb in sf.

    59. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that your best 'easy arts program' joke? We used to make reference to 'basket weaving' as our first year arts program, 'underwater basket weaving' as the 2nd year, and for really advanced arts, it would be 'deep-sea upside-down underwater basket weaving' I think I also heard the term 'Bachelor of McDonalds' used as well.

  2. Major university... by feranick · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wake me up when a major US university does the switch...

    1. Re:Major university... by Hamster+Of+Death · · Score: 2, Interesting
    2. Re:Major university... by Psychotria · · Score: 1

      That's actually more interesting than the actual story. Thanks

    3. Re:Major university... by feranick · · Score: 1

      Nothing to see here. Having an Apple supercomputer designed in a university, doesn't mean that university is switching. If that was the case, there would be way more US universities switching to Linux, since most of supercomputing clusters actually runs on Linux. So I get back to sleep.

    4. Re:Major university... by Overzeetop · · Score: 0, Troll

      You won't find an engineer with a Mac at VT. They have to get real work done.

      *ducks*

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    5. Re:Major university... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmmm.. engineer here. at VT. with a macbook. getting work done.

    6. Re:Major university... by phoxix · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how creating a cluster based on macs is considered switching. If that were the case, many organizations switched to linux ages ago.

    7. Re:Major university... by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      The irony is that they make their most productive use of Macs at VT by disconnecting the keyboard, monitor, and mouse.

      Well, maybe it's not irony.

    8. Re:Major university... by Stinking+Pig · · Score: 1

      What does that have to do with anything? The conversation here is about desktops, not cluster farms.

      By the way, I don't know them, but I'm guessing that the Virginia Tech folks sure do wish that Apple had sprung for some sort of OOB hardware management on those XServes. IPMI, anyone? Only if you've got the new X86-based hardware, which they didn't buy.

      --
      "Nothing was broken, and it's been fixed." -- Jon Carroll
    9. Re:Major university... by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      May I ask which department?

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    10. Re:Major university... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May I ask which department?
      I'm a sanitation engineer, a janitor

      I get work done tho
    11. Re:Major university... by xeniast · · Score: 1

      VISTA the legacy of NT
    12. Re:Major university... by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      I wish I had some mod points!

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    13. Re:Major university... by TheGreatHegemon · · Score: 1

      No major university will go all mac as long as it has a Computer Science department. Our Computer Science department has about 20 nice Apple computers just lined up between 60 or 70 Windows computer and 20 Solaris computers (along with some other less important type). I've never seen any of those Macs used.

    14. Re:Major university... by Overzeetop · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So you could mod me as Troll like the rest of the mac fanbois? (hopefully not)

      FWIW, I went to Tech, and I have worked in industry for 20 years. I have yet to see macs in a production environment for engineering. Architecture, occasionally. Burt Rutan uses them (though he's really pure R&D, and is smart enough he can afford to tell every else to fuck off). Aside from that, they usually only exist in the marketing department.

      Not meant as a slam to Macs (I have a soft spot in my heart for apple - I leaned both BASIC and assembly on a 6502 system) - but the bulk of the engineering software out there really is for PCs. It used to be for Unix, but most of the big boys ported to NT, back when NT was a real working OS (before graphics drivers had access to ring 0). Now the Win PC stuff is mostly there because of momentum (and market share). Even AutoDesk won't port to linux or mac, though I'm certain there'd be a big market. Architects are really just artists who think they can add and subtract (the secret: they can't), and would probably flock to a Mac AutoCAD. Many engineers I know would be happy to switch to Macs or linux, but with most of the work-a-day programs in win-bound apps it's not financially practical. I'd be a linux shop if the apps were there, but I'm too much of a hardware geek to go with apple.

      As for VMs, why would I bother? XP is stable (despite the common perception here) - why pay the penalty for a VM if I'm going to spend 70-80% of my time in Windows anyway?

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    15. Re:Major university... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      Why? Will that mean your opinion was wrong and that you should reconsider Macs?

      Why is it important to refer to an authority, like a major university, to shape your opinion? Isn't your opinion good enough?

    16. Re:Major university... by stephentyrone · · Score: 1

      If they're a computer science department (as opposed to a MS cert tradeskill factory), why wouldn't they? Are TeX, Scheme, and C all windows-only now? In my experience, it's a hell of a lot easier to teach actual computer science on anything that's NOT windows. The only thing you need windows for is teaching your students VB.net or whatever so they can be underpaid code monkeys, until their jobs are outsourced to China.

    17. Re:Major university... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eastern Michigan University's Computer Science department is mostly Mac based. Almost all professors, the secratary, the head of the labs, half the systems in the labs are all running Mac OS 10.4 on PowerMacs or iMacs. We have two xserves for department use plus an xserve RAID. Our webserver happens to be running on FreeBSD but nfs mounts the space on the xserve RAID. I'd say we are Mac friendly!

    18. Re:Major university... by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      Funny... you see a lot of Macs in the Aerospace Engineering department at the University of Michigan.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
    19. Re:Major university... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drexel in Philadelphia was all Mac when I was there (89-94), and had become all-Mac at the time of the Mac 128k. Students were strongly encouraged to each buy a Mac. (The first class sat for a senior picture in 1989, with a huge banner saying 'Wanna Buy a 128k?', which by that time was badly obsolete.)

      They seem to have gone to a more mixed environment since I was there.

    20. Re:Major university... by feranick · · Score: 1

      My opinion is not shaped depending on the adoption of Macs of ANY university. As far as I am concerned moving to Macs to me is not an improvement at all. It's another proprietary platform, in fact it locks the university in terms of hardware too. To me the best would be to adopt a university customized version of Linux. This is my opinion. A University should be totally able to control its own computing environment. My original point was different. An hardware switch (they will be still using Windows with BootCamp), from a small university is no breakthrough. However if a majopr university (think BIG), would make the switch, then that would be something to consider and to talk about. The same would be true for a major university strongly supporting and deploying FOSS (which hasn't happened either). This is not about opinions. It's about visibility.

    21. Re:Major university... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      As for VMs, why would I bother? XP is stable (despite the common perception here) - why pay the penalty for a VM if I'm going to spend 70-80% of my time in Windows anyway? First XP is not stable. It is apparently stable enough for your usage, but it is not stable. A subtle but important difference. (Try sleeping XP sometime....)
      I agree that running a VM for 80% of your time seems senseless. There could be cases where it's a good idea though, or where you don't even notice it.
      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  3. Productivity .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    > By standardizing, the IT department should be more productive

    Translation : Having much less computers to fix, they'll be able to spend more time posting on Slashdot about how great Apple products are.

  4. Going to Linux by orin · · Score: 1

    If they migrate to Mac OSX, does that make it less likely that at some point in the future they would switch to Linux? If people are having a hard time convincing people to move from Windows to Linux, isn't the job going to be harder getting them to move from Mac to Linux? It isn't really Windows that is the challenge to Linux, it is Mac OSX. Is it really a great thing for Free/Open Source software that people that many who are migrating from Windows are choosing Mac OSX?

    1. Re:Going to Linux by toejam316 · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't think so. Mac OS X is unix based, and so more or less, you can use this, "Hey, you more or less already know how to use it, but you wont EVER need to buy a new machine for the newest version AND you never need to pay for the newest version! (Ala Tiger to Leopard (AFAIK, flame me and stab me and etc. if I'm misinformed))". Now, isn't half the reason you cant get them from Windows to Linux BECAUSE they dont understand what the hells going on?

    2. Re:Going to Linux by rvw · · Score: 1

      If they migrate to Mac OSX, does that make it less likely that at some point in the future they would switch to Linux? If people are having a hard time convincing people to move from Windows to Linux, isn't the job going to be harder getting them to move from Mac to Linux? It isn't really Windows that is the challenge to Linux, it is Mac OSX. Is it really a great thing for Free/Open Source software that people that many who are migrating from Windows are choosing Mac OSX?

      I don't care about OSX (BSD) vs Linux. Both have the same (or similar) underlying structure, which makes it stable and safer than Windows. If people move away from Windows, either to OSX or Linux, that would be a good thing. OSX is the more logical choice, as it is more mature as a desktop system, and Apple has a good name here. I don't care if people don't make the next step to Linux.

      I moved from Windows to the Mac six years ago, when OS9 was still the Mac OS but knowing that OSX was coming. I have used OSX to learn how to work with a UNIX-like system. I've tried to use linux then, but it was too much to handle at the time. I'm probably not the typical user, but for my next computer I'm considering moving to Ubuntu.

    3. Re:Going to Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, you more or less already know how to use it, but you wont EVER need to buy a new machine for the newest version AND you never need to pay for the newest version!


      I couldn't install the latest version on OpenSuse on my old computer. So I wouldn't say EVER.
    4. Re:Going to Linux by karmatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, it's a good thing. The transition from Mac to Linux is much easier since they already lost compatibility, application support, gaming, and driver support anyway.

    5. Re:Going to Linux by NickFortune · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If they migrate to Mac OSX, does that make it less likely that at some point in the future they would switch to Linux?

      Possibly, possibly not. After all, in a lot of ways the jump from OS/X to Linux is a lot shorter than the one from Windows to Linux. They're both Unix descended systems and have a lot of apps in common. And when it comes to Linux, the price is always going to be had to beat.

      On the other hand, I have to say that it doesn't much bother me. What I'd like to see is a bit more diversity O/S world. I suppose if Apple ever attain Microsoft's market share, they might well turn out just as bad - I doubt we'll ever know. In the meantime anything help break Redmond's dominance of the market is to be applauded.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    6. Re:Going to Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shh! First you have to kill off MS. "The Enemy of my Enemy is my friend," and all that. After that, you can call for the head of Steve Jobs.

      (Geez... Talk about evangelical...I thought it was about fostering choice, not "winning" the right to be the one driving the monopoly around.)

      But to be serious: No, it's not Windows that is the challenge to Linux, but the reverse. They're currently in the driver's seat.

      As an aside: Who chose 'testicle' to be one of the captchas? And shouldn't it be pluralized?

    7. Re:Going to Linux by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      I don't care about OSX (BSD) vs Linux. Both have the same (or similar) underlying structure, which makes it stable and safer than Windows.

      What "underlying structure" is that ?

      I have used OSX to learn how to work with a UNIX-like system. I've tried to use linux then, but it was too much to handle at the time. I'm probably not the typical user, but for my next computer I'm considering moving to Ubuntu.

      OS X will not teach you how to use UNIX, because its "UNIXness" is an incidental feature. OS X might be a UNIX, but the typical user doesn't use it like one.

    8. Re:Going to Linux by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 1

      Sir, if I had mod points, I'd be modding this Insightful.

      --
      "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
    9. Re:Going to Linux by ka-klick · · Score: 1

      OS X will not teach you how to use UNIX, because its "UNIXness" is an incidental feature. OS X might be a UNIX, but the typical user doesn't use it like one. The typical user doesn't need to learn the unix stuff, but for someone who does, it's all there and there are a couple good choices for F/OSS package management to install all the tools you might want to use. I also don't think I'd call the processes and tools that run all the behind the scenes stuff "incidental" if you do a ps -ax on a mac you get back some mac only stuff, mainly having to do with the Aqua interface stuff and some other specific Apple stuff, but a large portion of what you'll see is the same stuff that powers any other unix or Linux system. You can use all of the standard commands you'd expect, including that ps command, the shell is a nice normal bash (glad they changed that over fairly quickly, I wasn't too fond of tcsh). I admin a bunch of Linux systems from a Powerbook, and really on the command line the differences are not that much more than there are between several different versions of Linux.

      One of the things I think they got right recently is that a Mac can appeal to both classes of user, a casual user just wants stuff to work, and for things to look nice (like a passenger on a cruise ship) and power users and geeks like me want to be able to get at the inner workings and tweek as much as we want and don't want a bunch of stuff getting in our way. I find what is present in OSX a much better balance than it ever had in OS9 and before and also preferable to windows. Windows errs (strangely enough) too much on the passenger side (no serious dev tools bundled) and Linux too much on the power user/geek side. I use all of them and for me the best balance and therefore most comfortable "home" is OSX.
      --

      MSRP - Tax, Title & Licence Extra Your Milage May Vary

    10. Re:Going to Linux by monomania · · Score: 1

      ..I had mod points five minutes ago, used 'em, and then I came across this. Hear hear! 2 honorary mods up for the grandparent.

    11. Re:Going to Linux by NtroP · · Score: 1

      With the release of Leopard, OS X will be fully "UNIX" certified. That means it won't be UNIX-Like it will be UNIX at the core with the OS X interface over it.

      --
      "terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
    12. Re:Going to Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just as bad? You mean "Just as good". And, unlikely.

    13. Re:Going to Linux by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      OS X will not teach you how to use UNIX, because its "UNIXness" is an incidental feature. OS X might be a UNIX, but the typical user doesn't use it like one.


      I think you're missing a subtle distinction here -- OS X will not FORCE you to HAVE to learn about Unix in order to get anything accomplished, but it is great for teaching people about Unix (similar to Ubuntu when it works). Being able to use you computer for whatever you want whenever you want -- whether it's learning about Unix or just checking your email, is one of the main features of the system.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    14. Re:Going to Linux by NickFortune · · Score: 1

      Just as bad? You mean "Just as good".

      I suppose the problem here is that we haven't specified what it is that MS are supposed to be good or bad at. Personally I was thinking in terms of Microsoft's deliberate abuse of it's position in the market, and its systematic suppression of emerging competitors. In that light, neither "good" or "bad" is particularly complimentary.

      I suppose it's possible that you were talking about software quality rather than anticompetitive practices. In which case, I'll just say that "good" isn't an adjective I'm used to seeing in the same sentence as Mircosoft and software. Your mileage may, of course, vary

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    15. Re:Going to Linux by shmlco · · Score: 1

      "OS X will not teach you how to use UNIX, because its "UNIXness" is an incidental feature. OS X might be a UNIX, but the typical user doesn't use it like one."

      Which makes it perfect, since you don't need to be an uber-geek to get a system running and configured. But you can login as root and pop up a Terminal window and command-line to your heart's content.

      And strictly speaking, Linux isn't going to teach you "UNIX" either. ;)

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    16. Re:Going to Linux by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      If they migrate to Mac OSX, does that make it less likely that at some point in the future they would switch to Linux? If people are having a hard time convincing people to move from Windows to Linux, isn't the job going to be harder getting them to move from Mac to Linux? It isn't really Windows that is the challenge to Linux, it is Mac OSX. Is it really a great thing for Free/Open Source software that people that many who are migrating from Windows are choosing Mac OSX? It is a good thing for for the Open Source movement which include software under BSD licenses which promote interoperability through open and well documented standards and protocols but perhaps not so much for the RMS brand of FOSS.

      Having said that, there is a great deal of benefit even the FOSS movement had reap from this shift. Having easily readable open standards can be an asset for any GNU project wishing to interoperate with other projects.

      Many people seem to think of Linux or GNU software as the Open Source software movement but open source is not just about the GPL or about GPL'ed operating systems. I have quite a few GPL'ed OS X applications in my Applications folder. Open Source software with all its flavours of licenses is alive and well on OS X.

      I think you will find that there is more Open Source software available for OS X than for windows and part of this had to do with Apple's culture of supporting and creating open source projects. Apple may never open source their top layer of their OS but they have open sourced the kernel and the bootstrap as well as several key server technologies such as the Quicktime Streaming Server.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    17. Re:Going to Linux by shmlco · · Score: 1

      "What I'd like to see is a bit more diversity [in the] O/S world."

      I'm kind of in the other camp, actually, as I'm all for the world standarding on a single, solid, open, extensible architecture for most desktops and servers. Since pretty much every device and appliance in my house uses the same plug and runs on the same type of power (60hz A/C), I don't have to check the side of the box when I go out and buy a new toaster to see if it's going to "run" on my "system".

      While there could be a need for a different OS for specialized devices, even in the Mac world Apple seems about ready to prove that their OS can power both computers and phones. Doesn't Linux already power some phones as well?

      If a program is really popular, why do I need to rewire (rewrite) three times to port it to different platforms? How much duplication of effort do we have when OS 1 adds a new feature or program, and every other platform sets to work duplicating those efforts?

      I know some of you are going to tell me tha Linux is what I'm looking for, but it's not. Not yet anyway, Not until I can download the latest hot program and know it's going to run on my system/distro/whatever.

      Until then, we're spending half our time reinventing the wheel, all so we can spin it...

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    18. Re:Going to Linux by NickFortune · · Score: 1

      Since pretty much every device and appliance in my house uses the same plug and runs on the same type of power (60hz A/C), I don't have to check the side of the box when I go out and buy a new toaster to see if it's going to "run" on my "system".

      Well, first of all I'd like to point out that there's considerable difference in complexity between an operating system and a plug. Or even a toaster, for that matter.

      Secondly, if that's a valid argument for a single brand of operating system, then we should probably all still be running Windows 3.1.

      While there could be a need for a different OS for specialized devices, even in the Mac world Apple seems about ready to prove that their OS can power both computers and phones. Doesn't Linux already power some phones as well?

      Yes. Um... what's your point?

      If a program is really popular, why do I need to rewire (rewrite) three times to port it to different platforms?

      So why does it need to run on three different platforms? What's wrong with targeting a single OS? Of course, if you're writing FOSS for Linux you probably won't need to port it. If it's really popular, someone else will port it for you.

      I don't see your point at all.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    19. Re:Going to Linux by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      But you can login as root and pop up a Terminal window and command-line to your heart's content.

      No. I and some others of my playful friends can log in at the command line, and start knocking out the 'floor supports' that are keeping the dumb user's eye candy all bright and shiney. Then we can log out and look across the lab to see watch tardboy react.

      (just a fun hypothetical, folks...)

    20. Re:Going to Linux by shmlco · · Score: 1

      I can go into Windows and start zapping DLLs too. Any fool with access can take down a system. Your point?

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    21. Re:Going to Linux by shmlco · · Score: 1

      "What's wrong with targeting a single OS?"

      Because Windows is the most commonly used OS, and all of the Linux types start bawling when some company ignores them and doesn't port their drivers or program or game or whatever.

      "I don't see your point at all."

      No shit.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    22. Re:Going to Linux by NickFortune · · Score: 1

      of the Linux types start bawling when some company ignores them

      Really? Can't say I've noticed.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    23. Re:Going to Linux by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

      I started out with Linux, then moved to FreeBSD and ended up on Mac 5 years ago. Why? Unix core, most OSS apps were easy enough to recomplie into MacOSX, I could purchase commerical applications like Adobe, MS Office, Macromedia(now adobe) and could use the nice Apple Applications Final Cut Studio.

      I got tired of drivers for XYZ device either not working in Linux or sorta working and when I graduated from college I found that my time was worth something: not playing with computers. I needed them to work for work. (Which is video editing mainly). Furthermore I wanted something that was mobile and Apple makes the best laptops hands down. Linux on laptops still tends to have issues even today.

      And I wasn't the only one. I know a lot of web development people that stopped using Linux for LAMPS development and switched to MacOSX and never looked back. Why fight things when you can have your cake and eat it too?

      I first used Linux almost 15 years ago and I've been hearing "Just wait, linux will dominate the desktop market someday". Well, Apple beat the to it with a user friendly GUI interface built on *iux. Linux just replaced the other 50 versions of Unix in the server room. Not a popular thing to say around here, but Linux has had a good decade to mature. It's come a long way, but still really hasn't made it out of the hobbiest/enthusist community as far as deloyment on the desktop side of things.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  5. Monoculture bad ... by IchBinEinPenguin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... diversity good.
    Even it it's a 'non-evil' monoculture.

    1. Re:Monoculture bad ... by geekboybt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How is this different from them buying all Dell (or HP / Brand X / Whatever)? Just now that by buying Apple, every computer can use an OS that runs Photoshop, et. al. that isn't Windows, not just 50% of them.

      Before the switch, every user had a choice - Mac or Windows. Every user still has a choice - OS X or XP/Vista - just now they can standardize on the hardware. Unless you have a real beef with Apple hardware (and every hardware vendor has its critics), I don't see a downside to this policy.

    2. Re:Monoculture bad ... by IchBinEinPenguin · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If you want a windows PC, buy a windows PC. Don't lobotomise a Mac.

      Windows` strength is the diversity of third-party support, both hardware and software.
      Why give half of that up and run only on mac hardware?

      To answer your question, it's no different from only buying Dell or Brand X or whatever. It's just as wrong.

    3. Re:Monoculture bad ... by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      ... diversity good.
      Even it it's a 'non-evil' monoculture.


      Two points.

      1) Plenty of (software) diversity here (more than most places) - students can choose osx or windows (pity there's no linux)

      2) Google is the 'do no evil' company (hah!). Apple sues its customers, pushes DRM, etc etc. They just make better products than MS, so we don't care as much about their evilness.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    4. Re:Monoculture bad ... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      In an educational situatiopn I'd expect there to be Linux comps somewhere. The first uni I was at had Linux and Solaris machines for the CS and math students while the less technically inclined got Windows and Mac computers. Maybe that's because all the expensive CS and math software is available under Linux while things like Photoshop don't support it.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:Monoculture bad ... by macs4all · · Score: 5, Informative
      If you want a windows PC, buy a windows PC. Don't lobotomise a Mac. Windows` strength is the diversity of third-party support, both hardware and software. Why give half of that up and run only on mac hardware? To answer your question, it's no different from only buying Dell or Brand X or whatever. It's just as wrong.

      You obviously have never tried to maintain more than a few computers at a time.

      The main reason IT departments tend to be "monoculture" when it comes to hardware is the sanity of their IT staff.

      You will note that they did NOT create (another) OS "monoculture". The users now have the choice between the two top-selling OSes, and the University gets to buy less hardware.

      Oh, and since they are Macs , they can, through Parallels, even designate some or all of the machines to run nearly any other OS on the planet.

      No other hardware vendor can offer that (at least not legally).

      None. Period.

    6. Re:Monoculture bad ... by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      I almost exclusively run NetBSD on my Apple hardware. And since it's all hardware old enough to be incapable of running OSX, I find your term 'lobotomize' to be laughable.

      I guess it would be 'lobotomizing' an SE/30 or my Quadra 650 to run Bochs on it in order to run Windows on it. The Windows on Bochs on NetBSD would make the machine even more pathetic than the original MacOS made it. And that is a real accomplishment.

      Thank goodness there was A/UX back in the day....

    7. Re:Monoculture bad ... by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

      Right, when Microsoft bundles free software to sell more software it's evil.

      When Apple restricts software to specific hardware to sell more hardware it's good.

      So which monopoly is better for its users?

      At least Microsoft customers have a healthy distrust of the platform we've bought into. Apple fanboys are conformist and submissive, and will take whatever Apple gives them, and like it. Then they'll put a white sticker on their car and modstorm everyone who commits the slightest offense against their cult.

      Remember people, monoculture means a smaller market for all of us, whether it be developers, consultants, integrators, sysadmins, or plain old users. Diversity is a sign of a healthy ecosystem, one with competition that drives innovation. Monoculture means stagnancy and death.

    8. Re:Monoculture bad ... by Eric+Pierce · · Score: 1

      > ... diversity good.
      > Even it it's a 'non-evil' monoculture.

      I agree with your first statement 100%. But how do you figure Apple is 'non-evil' monoculture? OS Marketshare is the only reason Apple isn't Microsoft.

      EP

    9. Re:Monoculture bad ... by dubonbacon · · Score: 1

      Lay off the bold and caps! Stop being SO condescending!

      We can understand what you write, you don't need to EMPHASIZE every other word.

      --
      sw5YRhw4ln3pr7$Ock1/4ma0u8Lw2Tm5l6/7DOiC5e6t4NSb6T en 6g5AOCPa2Xs!MSr!p! hackerkey.com
    10. Re:Monoculture bad ... by Raenex · · Score: 1

      I agree with the sentiment of your post, but link-speak is just as bad as emphasis-speak.

    11. Re:Monoculture bad ... by dubonbacon · · Score: 1

      heheh I was sure someone was going to say that.

      --
      sw5YRhw4ln3pr7$Ock1/4ma0u8Lw2Tm5l6/7DOiC5e6t4NSb6T en 6g5AOCPa2Xs!MSr!p! hackerkey.com
    12. Re:Monoculture bad ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, there's a huge sales gap between those two "top selling" OSes. Makes one of them almost look insignificant.

    13. Re:Monoculture bad ... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Oh, and since they are Macs , they can, through Parallels, even designate some or all of the machines to run nearly any other OS on the planet.

      No other hardware vendor can offer that (at least not legally).


      Let's be real here. There is only a single OS that an Intel Mac can run (legally) that a PC can't, and that's OSX. Every other OS that the Mac can run, the PC can run too. And the PC, due to all the legacy stuff still lingering around, can also run a lot of stuff the Mac can't natively, like Dos or Windows 98/ME.

  6. Confused by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 3, Informative

    Dumps Windows because the new Macs can all run Windows?

    1. Re:Confused by uhlume · · Score: 1

      I'd be tempted to call this one of the stupidest and most misleading Slashdot headlines I've ever seen. Unfortunately, I've been reading Slashdot far too long to make that claim.

      --
      SIERRA TANGO FOXTROT UNIFORM
    2. Re:Confused by mh101 · · Score: 1

      No, dumps PCs. It's just a bad title. That seems to happen a lot here on /.

      --
      Duct tape is like the Force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together.
    3. Re:Confused by _|()|\| · · Score: 1

      Dumps Windows because the new Macs can all run Windows?

      As numerous other posts point out, the headline is a little off. If you get past that, this story shows exactly why Apple moved to Intel. Macs now compete in the broader PC market, with OS X as an exclusive value add.

      I switched from Windows to Mac before the Intel transition, motivated in part by the Windows XP activation scheme. With Parallels or VMware, people much less geeky than I can afford to make the switch. With Boot Camp, they don't even have to switch.

  7. Fewer computers? by Baricom · · Score: 1

    The school...will reduce its inventory from nearly 1,700 computers to around 1,450 after the change over.
    I may be a Mac fanboy, but I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.
    1. Re:Fewer computers? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I may be a Mac fanboy, but I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.

      RTFA.

      The classes used to have (all number pulled from my ass) 15 windows PCs & 15 Mac PCs. In a class of 20, 10 would go unused.

      Now, they'll have 20 PCs capable of running OS X or Windows. All students still have access to a PC.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    2. Re:Fewer computers? by Oscar_Wilde · · Score: 1

      I may be a Mac fanboy, but I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.

      Not all of the resources at a university are there for the students. I think the reduction in the number of computers would be due to researchers who previously needed a PC and a Mac now getting a single box.

    3. Re:Fewer computers? by Baricom · · Score: 1

      I did, and I suppose that if all classes are truly overstocked, then a reduction in machines is great. In practice, however, it seems to me that computers are often unevenly installed, so one class consistently has too many, while another has too few. I guess this all hinges on the newly-gained "productivity" of the IT department.

    4. Re:Fewer computers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In practice, however, it seems to me that computers are often unevenly installed, so one class consistently has too many, while another has too few. I guess this all hinges on the newly-gained "productivity" of the IT department.

      I agree that PCs are often unevenly installed, but the reasons do not necessarily depend on the IT department itself.

      It could depend on the IT department being given accurate operational requirements by administration or academic units before IT-related decisions are made. It also hinges on how the user departments dedicate the resources that are available.

      An academic unit may not properly communicate their requirements at the appropriate time. This can be due to the poor administration of the academic unit or it could be due to the academic unit's requirements being unknown at the appropriate time.

      Sometimes the academic side may not use its resources as efficiently as it can. A lab can go unused by one group it's dedicated to while a different unit doesn't have enough lab resources. In most schools, the IT department does not decide class or lab scheduling. In particular, some academic units at some schools are territorial over their own resources because the minute they let somebody else use it, they lose it and then they don't have it when they need it.

      Generally, the IT department is a support department. They depend on accurate operational requirements, as much as anybody else.

      At a school, learning is supposed to first, whether it's teaching or research. The IT support department has to work within these operational requirements and has to respond to the operational requirements that are communicated to it.

    5. Re:Fewer computers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.

      That's because you didn't rtfa.

    6. Re:Fewer computers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if it is a class of 25?

    7. Re:Fewer computers? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      So they're not really going all mac. Sure they have all Mac hardware, but they still run windows. Which is still specious. I could claim that my university was all Sun, or all Linux, because both were accessible in a remote X terminal from every computer. However, we still used windows as the main OS on 90% of the machines, but we can just ignore that.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:Fewer computers? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      I may be a Mac fanboy, but I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.

      They look cooler.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

  8. Not even dumping windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    That title is very misleading, it is only the hardware that is switching to mac, no the OS. It says they plan to use boot camp to dual boot OSX and windows. Hardly what you'd call a mac campus. They're just making it so that hardware wise they only have to buy macs rather than macs and pcs.

    1. Re:Not even dumping windows by tiny-e · · Score: 1

      OK guys & gals...

      Get your eyeballs up "real close" to the screen so you don't miss anything... APPLE IS A HARDWARE COMPANY. They provide their (IMO) superior OS and applications as part of the deal to get you to buy the hardware at somewhat of a premium. The fact that this simply infuriates some people is just an added bonus. =)

    2. Re:Not even dumping windows by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Wow, that was a total non sequitur to the parent post.

    3. Re:Not even dumping windows by tiny-e · · Score: 1

      C'mon... it had the word "hardware" in it :p Although, I admit that, it may have resulted from "build-up" reading from the beginning to where I jumped in.

  9. Headline Incorrect. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    The university is not dumping windows at all.

    They're dumping generic PCs in favour of mac PCs. They'll still purchase windows licenses & allow dual booting.

    It's a hardware story, not a software story.

    --
    There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    1. Re:Headline Incorrect. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, but it's even better than that. The price of a store-bought copy of windows is several times the royalty paid for an oem windows install. So it's a net win for microsoft. And as was pointed out earlier, this decision will leave classrooms with fewer computers for students -- so it's a net loss for the students.

      I get the feeling I could take a shit in a cardboard box and write the word "linux" on it and get it posted on slashdot.

    2. Re:Headline Incorrect. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The price of a store-bought copy of windows is several times the royalty paid for an oem windows install. So it's a net win for microsoft

      Um, unless they just use the XP licenses they already have?

      Anyway, MS licensing works differently if you're a 2000+ seat university compared to some lone windows fanboy running vista ultimate.... I don't think this is going to be a gain for MS at all.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    3. Re:Headline Incorrect. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get the feeling I could take a shit in a cardboard box and write the word "linux" on it and get it posted on slashdot.

      Only if someone posted it on Digg first.

    4. Re:Headline Incorrect. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it's both hardware and software. They are dumping PC hardware and for once having Windows and Mac go head to head on identical hardware with access for everyone. Not everyone is going to jump ship but I'd be curious how many converts there are and which direction they go, Windows to Mac or Mac to Windows. It's a rare change for a large number of college students to have a chance to try both systems. I hope there's a follow up story.

    5. Re:Headline Incorrect. by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      I take it you've never seen the pricing Universities get from Microsoft most of the time...

    6. Re:Headline Incorrect. by GreatDrok · · Score: 1

      Don't these schools typically have Windows site licences anyway? By buying Macs and installing Boot Camp the users get the choice they want and the school can install a copy of Windows as usual due to their site license. MS doesn't get paid twice for each PC which can only be good IMHO. Personally, I wouldn't give the users the choice. I would do a deal with parallels or VMware to allow the Windows software to be run while encouraging the users to run OS X all the time.

      --
      "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
    7. Re:Headline Incorrect. by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Um, unless they just use the XP licenses they already have?

      Anyway, MS licensing works differently if you're a 2000+ seat university compared to some lone windows fanboy running vista ultimate.... I don't think this is going to be a gain for MS at all.


      Quite correct. Butthe immense likelihood is they don't have any XP licenses. They may have thousands of OEM licenses - which are tied to the PC they were bought with - and thousands of XP upgrade licenses (which are about all you can buy through Microsoft's volume licensing scheme) but without either an OEM or full retail licence to begin with, you can't legally use the upgrade license you get in the site license.

    8. Re:Headline Incorrect. by stefaanh · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, the headline is blatantly wrong.

      But is makes me jump to a conclusion, albeit favoritism, namely that students with easy access to a Mac, will switch more easily too.
      What you don't know, you won't love.

      --
      --------
      * Sigh *
    9. Re:Headline Incorrect. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      sure?
      there is nothing special about apple hardware nowadays, they are just the same generic pcs. the only reason to use macs would be osx.

      --
      Conservatism: The fear that somewhere, somehow, someone you think is your inferior is being treated as your equal.
    10. Re:Headline Incorrect. by Shawn+Parr · · Score: 1

      You are not familiar with Microsoft EDU licensing at all are you?

      Microsoft's license agreements with Universities tend to be very flexible and easy so that everyone on campus can get their hands on it. It helps keep the monoculture strong.

      I know of at least 2 universities where faculty/staff/students can go to a private web site, download an ISO, get an email with the license code and install. Without paying a dime. All covered by the campus site license. For new installs or upgrades, doesn't matter. Some older versions (and possibly newer ones) don't require activation to make handing re-imaging large deployments less complicated.

    11. Re:Headline Incorrect. by lowmanX · · Score: 1

      Funny. I've had nothing but trouble with my ibook. Apples customer relations sucks, and their hardware is highly overrated.

      --
      http://lowman-x.blogspot.com/
    12. Re:Headline Incorrect. by mpotratz · · Score: 1

      You should read the license those Universities hand out I worked at a university with about 12,000 students and we had only upgrade licenses for campus. We also gave away home use licenses for XP Pro it could be installed from scratch but if you read the agreement that you clicked yes through you would see you needed a previous copy of Windows to install it. This typically isn't a problem for most people though since almost all PCs (PC users did most of the installs) come with Windows.

  10. hrmm.. by mrsym0r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    fta:

    "Although the $1.4 million three-year switch - which started last year with the purchase of approximately 500 Macs"

    $965 per apple? including the installation, planning etc? Over three years, in which time period the current macs would be outdated and require hardware upgrades in order to use the mac OS that will be in circulation by then?

    Methinks their budget may fall a tad short..

    1. Re:hrmm.. by feranick · · Score: 1

      You also need to add the $$$ for licenses of MS products...

    2. Re:hrmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over three years, in which time period the current macs would be outdated and require hardware upgrades...

      Never owned a mac, have you? Say what you will about them, they have a history of being able to live a long, long time - usuably so - compared to most other hardware. A usuable life for most models is in the range of 5-6 years before you really have to worry about upgrading. We've got 1999 models here that still perform more than adequate yeoman service, though they are admittedly looking a little long in the tooth and are on the list to be retired.

      The model isn't "replace/upgrade everything every few years" but rather, "Bring in the latest when and where needed, adding to your population." I'm sure in many academic circles, that longevity is considered an important plus when making decisions like this.

    3. Re:hrmm.. by djfake · · Score: 2, Informative

      plus Apple care of $119, plus AMP agreement of $79.

      --
      www.itjerk.com
    4. Re:hrmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, my 7 year old Mac G3 can run the current version of MacOS X without any hardware upgrades, and it has fine performance under things like Microsoft Office 2004 for Mac, or any of the Apple iLife applications.

      I fully expect the Mac G3 to be able to run MacOS X 10.5, due out shortly, also without hardware upgrades. Apple isn't Microsoft. MacOS X isn't Vista. Moving MacOS software versions generally does NOT require one to upgrade or replace any hardware.

      So, to be brutally honest, the parent comment seems both silly and uninformed.

    5. Re:hrmm.. by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Actually, my 7 year old Mac G3 can run the current version of MacOS X without any hardware upgrades, and it has fine performance under things like Microsoft Office 2004 for Mac, or any of the Apple iLife applications.
      Apple doesn't provide support services for hardware older than three years. So, this isn't really relevant.

      Moving MacOS software versions generally does NOT require one to upgrade or replace any hardware.
      It does if you still want to get corporate/enterprise support (I do believe educational support is the same except they pay less for it).
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    6. Re:hrmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and I'm sure the University sells all its vehicles when the warranty expires, and all the TVs they buy, and physical plant equipment, and typewriters, and etc etc etc.

      A piece of equipment having a useful life beyond its warranty and beyond the duration of official support is actually a great selling point. You've depreciated the purchase price already, so effectively you are using free hardware. if it breaks, fine you replace it. Why go on an actual three-year replacement cycle because of obsolescence when you can get more effective use?

      In my business, I have a beige G3 (1997) and a Sawtooth G4 (1999) still in active service. I did just have to replace the power supply in the G4- $35 on eBay and 15 minutes of my time. They aren't my main machines but they still work, whether Apple supports them or not. Why should I run out and buy new hardware?

    7. Re:hrmm.. by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      Over three years, in which time period the current macs would be outdated and require hardware upgrades in order to use the mac OS that will be in circulation by then?


      Unlike Windows, Mac OS X gets FASTER with every version.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    8. Re:hrmm.. by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and I'm sure the University sells all its vehicles when the warranty expires, and all the TVs they buy, and physical plant equipment, and typewriters, and etc etc etc.
      Not warranty, support. You cannot get the support anymore for hardware and software older than three years with Apple it seems.

      A piece of equipment having a useful life beyond its warranty and beyond the duration of official support is actually a great selling point.
      A large amount of equipment that needs to work all year round that cannot repaired under low cost saving plans is not a great selling point.

      Why go on an actual three-year replacement cycle because of obsolescence when you can get more effective use?
      I don't know why /you/ would need to. But where I work, there is no point getting Apple hardware for the lack of support.

      In my business, I have a beige G3 (1997) and a Sawtooth G4 (1999) still in active service.
      In a company I work for, there is some much older hardware there and we still receive support for them.
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    9. Re:hrmm.. by thesandtiger · · Score: 1

      Actually, successive versions of their OS actually run *faster* on older hardware because they spend time optimizing.

      The first version of OSX I had choked a G3 PowerBook I had. Second version was a bit better, and the latest version I've installed is quite snappy. No, I can't run quartz and the other eye-candy, but that's okay - for what I use that particular machine for, it works brilliantly.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    10. Re:hrmm.. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      A 3 year old computer is outdated, no matter how you look at it. That doesn't mean it's not useable, but all the major college computer labs I have seen don't keep the computers more than 3 years (though often the used, but still useful lab computers then get dispersed into secondary labs and other less visible places where they can stick around a long time).

      Besides, the Mac hardware lasts longer than PCs is not true. Good PC hardware lasts just as long, and I have some PCs that are that old and older plugging around just fine. When I graduated in 2005 from the school I went to, some of the lessor used labs were finally getting rid of their Pentium 133 - 233Mhz hardware (9-10 year old computers at the time, most of which still worked fine by the way).

    11. Re:hrmm.. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Unlike Windows, Mac OS X gets FASTER with every version.

      Hardly the case, with Dashboard, Spotlight, and other new features hogging resources. 10.3 is the fastest version of OSX, and will likely always be.

    12. Re:hrmm.. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I fully expect the Mac G3 to be able to run MacOS X 10.5, due out shortly, also without hardware upgrades.

      Rumor has it that 10.5 is cutting support for all G3 machines. Though likely it be just another software check that can be bypassed.

    13. Re:hrmm.. by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      The current line of Macs will not be outdated in three years, given the track history of Apple computers. I have a 6 year old G4 tower that still runs better than my 2-year old pc, for example. And if you haven't noticed, cpu-speeds (the traditional measurement of an outdated computer) have been holding steady, or even going down in the face of more efficient designs. Come back in three years from now, and if my Intel iMac or my MacBook are outdated, I'll buy you a new computer.

    14. Re:hrmm.. by Kantara · · Score: 1

      You are forgetting bulk purchasing. If they are buying 500 at a time, they get a discount plus a negotiated service contract. The MLTI program up here in Maine did not buy the laptops at retail price and have a 4 year contract for AppleCare, not the standard 3 year AppleCare. Bulk can save.

    15. Re:hrmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methinks you're thinking of Dells or HP or some other hardware vendor. This is Apple, where most of the cost is upfront and the hardware works for 4-6 years.

  11. I wonder by Kaitnieks · · Score: 0, Troll

    Would "US University Dumps Macs to go All Windows" make Slashdot news?

    1. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but "Microsoft Utilizes Anticompetitive Practices to bribe US University into banning Macintosh" would.

    2. Re:I wonder by jrothwell97 · · Score: 1

      It'd probably appear under the headline "Evil Ballamer giggles as children die clinging on to their Macs".

      --
      Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
    3. Re:I wonder by ciggieposeur · · Score: 1

      Yes, because the thread would top 500 posts of pissed off people who want to rant, increasing the ad views.

      That's why bad news is more popular than good news.

  12. Not Going To Linux by Jacob+Moogberg · · Score: 1

    When you go Mac, you don't go back.

    1. Re:Not Going To Linux by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      I have heard all kinds of anecdotal evidence in the last decade of people who switched to Windows NT/2000/XP from MacOS because of the pitiful unstable mess it had evolved into. Generally they were jumping ship from MacOS 8 or MacOS 9, not the current system that Apple bought in from outside when they finally acknowledged their inside staff was incapable of a 'next generation Operating System' with things like preemptive multitasking.

      Some of them have 'switched back' to MacOS 10, but I don't think it's a universal. And it is definitely NOT a universal that every Mac user clings desperately to the platform for a lifetime. Some people can understand the utility more than a single mouse button, for example, and once they start 'losing the faith' they're likely to drift further from the 'One True User Interface' dogma. Some even to cool experimental UIs like some of the innovative stuff that happens on platforms like Linux.

  13. major kusanagi said... by acedotcom · · Score: 0

    "over specialize and you breed in weakness"

    --
    they say it is often more relevant then the comment above, all we know is its called the Sig!
  14. This is good news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but it would have been better if they shoved the old PCs up Ballmer's butt. Then his ass would be like all beep beep beep and stuff.

  15. It has actually happened by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    I get the feeling I could take a shit in a cardboard box and write the word "linux" on it and get it posted on slashdot.


    It has actually happened. On August 12, 2005, user "get_me_high"*(25102) in fact took a shit in a cardboard box and wrote "Linux" on it. He was modded +5 Interesting.

    The amazing thing was that the cardboard box actually ran Linux, although there was some trouble getting a wireless connection. It still runs today.
    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  16. Two possible reasons by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1, Interesting

    One is that they may have determined they have enough Macs anyhow that it would benefit going for a sole source situation. There's something to be said for having one point of contact for all ordering, support, billing and so on. The university I work at sole sources various things. Thus if you feel that enough of the computers you order anyhow are Macs, you simply make them all Macs.

    The other, and the one that is more likely, is that there's one or more Mac zealots in the position to make these decisions and they pushed it and people bought in to their justification. Unfortunately, this kind of thing does happen. People push their personal preferences on others and often try to cage it as being "easier" or "saving money" when in fact that's not the case, it is just what they want.

    I say this is more likely since while Macs can run Windows, they are hardly an ideal solution. Boot camp is a beta and isn't supported as well as a PC natively made to run Windows. It would seem to make more sense to sole source another vendor for Windows PCs. That's what we do where I work. Gateway is our sole source (barring justification) for Windows PCs. However if I want a Solaris machine, I am free to buy Sun. Sure, you can theoretically get Solaris x86 running on a Gateway, but it is a much better idea to get it from Sun. Same for supported Linux solutions (don't get me started on Fedora problems on the Gateway blades).

    To me it sounds like a Maccie wanting to push their platform. The hope is that everyone will use MacOS, I'm sure, but they said "Oh well this is easier since they run Windows too!" It isn't a seriously good idea because, as Apple notes:

    "Warning: Boot Camp Beta is preview software licensed for use on a trial basis for a limited time. Do not use Boot Camp Beta in a commercial operating environment or with important data."

    1. Re:Two possible reasons by am+2k · · Score: 1

      Bootcamp will be a part of Mac OS X Leopard, and will be non-beta. If they got this plan finished lately, the first Macs they're going to get will already run Leopard anyways.

    2. Re:Two possible reasons by Thrudheim · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Mac zealotry argument does not really fly in this case. If you read the original article, it says that the IT head of the college was "before the switch was a dyed-in-the-wool Windows user." He clearly states the reasons for switching in terms of cost savings ($150,000). One set of machines will be able to do what previously required two sets of machines. Set up one lab. Boot up in Windows or the Mac OS depending on what the professor wants. They save money by buying fewer machines overall, as the article states.

      Besides, speaking overall, anti-Mac zealotry on the part of IT departments has been a huge barrier against more widespread adoption of Macs. IT people know Windows. They'd rather have to maintain only a single platform. In most business environments, and in many academic ones, there is no choice at all. It's just Windows. So what's the big deal if one institution decides to use machines that, gasp, can boot both Windows and the Mac OS? Must be zealotry. . .

      I suppose they could save even more money by just refusing to buy Macs at all and forcing all courses to use Windows only. In that case, it would just be a smart financial decision, right? Happens all the time.

      Boot camp will be out of beta as soon as Leopard arrives, which will be a few months at most. Not worth fretting about that at this point. Apple has to provide that disclaimer for the time being.

    3. Re:Two possible reasons by Bemopolis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You are correct — you are not up to current pricing. Universities often have campus-wide licenses that bring the per-user cost of a Windows installation on par with what an OEM pays. Based on the numbers in the summary, as long as the cost per Windows license is below $100 they still save money even without the lower cost of a hardware monoculture.

      And, speaking on a purely personal level, it's nice to see how much the Windows users here are enjoying a taste of what IT has been doing to Mac users like myself for years. I'm sending Cartman over to lick your tears as you enjoy the Wilkes chili.

      --
      "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
    4. Re:Two possible reasons by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm just not up to speed on my current pricing, but I can't see this cutting costs.


      Hardware still costs more than OS licenses, especially in bulk where software gets obscenely cheap. A university is paying $15-50 per desk for the OS, so cutting back on total amount of hardware needed (even if it is more expensive per unit) can pay for an awful lot of software. Indeed, this is probably a net win for Microsoft (at least in the short term), as the school will pay for Windows licenses on EVERY system instead of only half of a larger number of systems -- it's only a loss for Dell or whatever hardware vendor lost the site. The school already undoubtedly has a site license with MS, so it's not like they're having to go out and buy all new software that came "free" with their Dell systems previously.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    5. Re:Two possible reasons by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      Right, hardware costs more. So why spend a ton of money on a bunch of new Macs (FTFA: $1.4 million switch) to do the same thing as the replaced Windows PCs?


      The replacement is happening over 3 years. I assume the college has plans in place to replace the computers every number of years regardless of who they are buying them from, so all they are doing is changing vendors on their normal upgrade cycle.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    6. Re:Two possible reasons by dangitman · · Score: 1

      I say this is more likely since while Macs can run Windows, they are hardly an ideal solution

      Which is total nonsense. Running Windows under Bootcamp is better than running it natively on inexpensive PC hardware in my experience. It works perfectly, while many of those "made for Windows" machines have all kinds of setup issues.

      But there is something even better than Bootcamp - Parallels. This is much better than running Windows natively. It's more secure, as it is running as a virtual machine. You can quickly suspend the state of the OS and reboot into that state later. You can switch between a variety of versions of Windows (and Linux) and a variety of configurations. You can quickly switch to MacOS tools, and move data from the Windows VM to the Mac host. It is far superior to running Windows directly on the hardware without virtualization.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    7. Re:Two possible reasons by dangitman · · Score: 1
      Perhaps it would be nice for students to have hardware that doesn't suck? Macs can be more expensive, but it's usually not much. In some configurations, the comparable Mac is cheaper. But one thing's for sure - the Mac hardware is better quality than the average PCs installed in schools andd Universities. Compare an iMac's screen to the typical el-cheapo PC screen.

      Then there are less tangible qualities, that can make a surprising difference. For example, the iMac saves a heap of desk space, and makes installation and servicing easier. You just plonk the machine on a desk and plug it in. No messing around with a bunch of cables and their associated clutter. They are extremely easy to move around.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    8. Re:Two possible reasons by Reaperducer · · Score: 1

      anti-Mac zealotry on the part of IT departments has been a huge barrier against more widespread adoption of Macs.
      You hit the nail on the head. I know one IT head (I assume he still has his job, it's been a couple of years) who could only utter one phrase whenever Macs were mentioned: "Apple is crapple." I assume it was left over from his Commodore 64 days. If you tried to make a point in favor of Macs he would chant, "Crapple, crapple, crapple, crapple..." Nice mature attitude for a man in his late-50's. But he was the big in-charge IT guy, so the rest of the Fortune 500 company was forced to follow his lead.

      And Mac users are supposed to be the zealots. Right.
      --
      -- I'm old enough to have lived through six different meanings of the word "hacker."
  17. Mac? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    At my university, we have half Windows and half Linux. And in one lab, we have 1 Mac. I have never saw anybody to use it more than 10 minutes.

    1. Re:Mac? by Ino · · Score: 0, Funny

      > At my university, we have half Windows and half Linux. And in one lab, we have 1 Mac. I have never saw anybody to use it more than 10 minutes.

      That's because they're so efficient on it, their work is done in 10 minutes. Duh... PC!

      Ino!~

    2. Re:Mac? by brian.reading · · Score: 1

      That's usually because lone Macs like that in computer labs are typically neglected, running old software, and don't have anything useful installed on them.

  18. Makes total sense by PhotoGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've said it before, I've said it again; I bought my first Mac(book) recently, and the thing that pushed me over the edge to do so was the fact I knew I could fall back to Windows when I needed to, or completely stay in Windows if the OS X experience wasn't a good one. But like most people who try it, that "security blanket" of Boot Camp is more of an insurance policy, or peace of mind (or gaming option), rather than something they end up using in real life. I have my MS Office and OpenOffice, Opera/Firefox/Safari, and even IE under Crossover Office or Parallels. (I tend to use Parallels for IE testing purposes of my websites).

    The only reason I reboot to windows now, is for the odd game; and even that's rare with me. Windows seems so much peppier, too, when I do go to it; since I only go there occasionally, the system doesn't get bogged down with addons, startup items, spyware, etc.. (The old reinstall-windows-every-six-months can be extended greatly, if you only use Windows occasionally.)

    I think for a multimedia course that needs to teach students both Mac and PC skills, it makes all the more sense; both OS's on one machine: of course it's an overall savings, and somewhat of a no-brainer.

    Yes, Mac hardware is single-vendor (unless you do the hackbook thing, not viable for a commercial enterprise); but in my experience, it's well designed, solid, stable, fast hardware. My only lament is that I'm a big fan of sub-nootbooks, like Librettos, and Apple has no such option currently. But I can live without that, for all the other benefits that OS X brings.

    Yes, I'm a recent fan, and I am a boy, so fling away with your "fanboy" insults. Meanwhile, I'm productive and enjoying the experience immensely :)

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:Makes total sense by Bravoc · · Score: 1

      "Yes, Mac hardware is single-vendor"

      Now, I'll probably get modded a troll or something for taking this slightly OT, but I got to say it. You hear a lot of people complaining about Apple and the single-vendor thing. I never remember hearing people say "Oh, if we run Solaris, we're locked into a single vendor, Oh, if we run HP/UX, we're locked into a single vendor, Oh, if we run AIX we're locked into a single vendor..."

      I know the argument no longer applies to Sun, but still, you get my point, yes?

    2. Re:Makes total sense by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      I have a Fijitsu machine that is a SparcStation 2 clone.

      So, I can run Solaris on non-Sun hardware.

      I can also, of course, run Solaris-X86 on any recent PC clone system.

    3. Re:Makes total sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I have a Fijitsu machine that is a SparcStation 2 clone. So, I can run Solaris on non-Sun hardware. I can also, of course, run Solaris-X86 on any recent PC clone system.

      So what part of

      I know the argument no longer applies to Sun, but still, you get my point, yes?
      Did you not understand?
  19. nope. in practice macs go 5 years by jpellino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    often longer. every fw imac, cube, power mac and ibook we ever owned is running tiger and doing better than previous OS versons - every non-fw g3+ is running 10.3.9 and doing very well.

    installation? ard.
    planning? has to be done anyway.
    etc? macs have less etc.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  20. Maybe so by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    However that is still a bad idea. I am not going to commit to something as a solution before I've tested it. If I was going to use bootcamp for something I'd need to see it in its final form before I'd recommend it, if I was trying to give an objective analysis. Also there's the issue of release times. Sure, Apple says it'll be final with Leopard and they say it'll be out spring of this year. Fine, but what happens if that's not the case? There's no reason to believe it won't be, but that happens. Companies miss release dates all the time, or release with less features than expected.

    All in all the just speaks of a biased decision not made on good facts. Unfortunately I see it all too often at universities. They are very political entities and as such, don't operate as logically as we might hope.

    1. Re:Maybe so by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      But the Bootcamp beta is stable at this point. It works. It's not exactly complex software, after all, it's just a bootloader and driver pack.

      The buggiest part of using Bootcamp is Windows.

      And if you want a final, supported solution, there's Parallels - which I would call better, since it doesn't require a reboot.

      And by doing this, they get to buy less hardware, and put it in less space - I'm sure building more labs would cost a lot more than just buying more computers. By doing this, they can have fewer labs that serve more classes at once, since they don't have to idle half a lab because it's got the other platform.

      I'm sorry, it's a very logical choice for any university.

    2. Re:Maybe so by NtroP · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We replaced all our computers in our training labs with iMacs running both Windows and OS X. It has worked wonderfully and it takes up much less space and the lab is a lot quieter. We can now train twice as many people at a time because they can all be on the same OS, whereas, before we had half Macs and Half PCs. The biggest problems was with the Windows users not able to manage with the Mac keyboards and Mice so we replaced them with Microsoft keyboards and mice. I found it interesting that the Windows users (and management) just assumed that the "Mac people" could make due with the clunky windows keyboards and MS mice when the PC people couldn't. It really screwed up the clean look of the lab too. But maybe that's what makes the PC folks feel more at home :-). I do know that it sure made management of the lab easier.

      --
      "terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
  21. Umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *** We think it will save $150,000 directly, in buying fewer units - even though the Macs cost more per unit than PCs ***

    Is this guy a retard? If you need 40 computers in a classroom, you need 40 computers. Doesn't matter if they are Windows, Linux, Mac, whatever. So, if you are replacing units, you actually spend more, since you're paying more per machine. Plus the XP license that you have to have to run Boot Camp on each machine...

    So, like, they are actually paying quite a bit more than they currently do, in Apple-crappy-hardware alone, plus the license for XP...

    I personally don't give a rat's ass if they switch to all Macs, but to say they are saving money like that is insane.

    1. Re:Umm... by drinking12many · · Score: 1

      Most instructors can barely teach the app they are running in one OS let alone two. We have a probably 60/40 mix of mac to windows. It used to be that we didnt have creative suite on the windows side. Once we did we found many of our students going to windows classrooms to do their projects because they "didnt like" macs. I know its more of a comfort level thing but short of final cut we have begun having conversations to remove more macs because for us patching and group policy administration is much easier and less time consuming on windows. I dont know how it will end out but as a journalism school we find ourselves moving more toward windows minus video editing.

    2. Re:Umm... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Most instructors can barely teach the app they are running in one OS let alone two

      Why would these teacher be teach an application? Wouldn't they be teaching the subject - English Literature or Art History, for example, and letting the students choose which tools they want to use? A University humanities course has more important things to do than teach applications. Students should learn that outside, if they haven't already learned.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    3. Re:Umm... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Likely they need enough Mac labs that everyone who needs a Mac can find one when they need it, and they need enough PC labs that anyone who needs a PC can find one when they need it. Given that most students need both kinds available, and depending on what projects are due the demand could fluctuate heavily between PC and Mac. They could even end up in a situation where they have more total computers (PC and Mac combined) than they have students. By having computers that can switch easily between being a Windows PC and Mac, they could easily end up needing to buy less computers.

    4. Re:Umm... by zedturtle · · Score: 1

      For some subjects, like layout and composition... teaching the application closely approximates teaching the subject. The theory of leading as it relates to line width is interesting academially, but most compositors need to know how to adjust the first and measure the second.

  22. Because that's what they've always used by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's really what it comes down to. I've heard lots of creative justifications, but they are BS when you get down to it. It is just legacy. Back in the day, Mac was it for graphics work. Windows couldn't do it and didn't have the apps in any case. So it was Mac or nothing. Likewise with things like digital audio. When it first started, it was ProTools or nothing, computers weren't powerful enough to do it on their own.

    Well, many people don't like change, thus they stick with Macs because that's what they've always used. The other justifications usually come from the fact that they either just tend to listen to the marketing hype, or because they feel a need to try and justify the more expensive purchase.

    1. Re:Because that's what they've always used by DKlineburg · · Score: 1

      WHAT!!! Ah, does that mean that Bill Gates stole that marketing practice from Mac as well? I couldn't find the link in my hurry, but note an article about 2 day's old about Microsoft encouraging piracy, and Bill himself saying as such a while ago. Guess they stole that from Mac as well, get them young and they will come; and pay.

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    2. Re:Because that's what they've always used by sgant · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know. Speaking from a perspective of a graphics pro that's used both platforms, the Mac just "feels" more natural to me. No, I can't put that in a quantitative explanation. I've gone from Mac to PC back to Mac and yes, Photoshop performs on both, but as I said, it just "feels" better to me on the Mac. I've tried to understand why this is, but I really can't put my finger on it.

      But honestly, it all comes down to personal preference. I know in the pre-press shops I've worked at, the PC has tried to make inroads, but there are a few things that just keep it back. Font handling is one....though most shops are going to an all PDF workflow, so that mitigates some of these problems.

      But like this article, the great thing about the Intel Macs is, you can run either OS X or Windows....or even Linux, if you want. I would say that the extra you pay for the Mac is actually made up for this ability right there. It's very versatile now.

      --

      "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    3. Re:Because that's what they've always used by LKM · · Score: 1

      The other justifications usually come from the fact that they either just tend to listen to the marketing hype

      How's that for some cognitive dissonance. "I don't understand why people chose Macs. But I know all about Computers. Thus, people who chose Macs must be stupid fucks who just tend to listen to the marketing hype."

      Wow.

    4. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And in no small part: Because they've never grown dependent and/or highly skilled in any Windows-only software. How often do you hear "Yes OS X is great, but as long as it doesn't run $foo it's not usable to me". Or about Linux, for that matter. And a lot of those really creative types I've met, well... their minds seem "jumpy". I'm not saying it's a bad thing, it's probably what makes them creative, but I think they're prime targets for Apple's "just works" marketing because they wouldn't stay focused long enough to get technical problems fixed. Of course you have a whole class of basicly "graphics engineers" in the same way you got software engineers, but they tend to follow the creative guys' lead.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "many people don't like change, thus they stick with Macs because that's what they've always used.

      Well, that, and they probably like the fact that you don't need to run crappy software like Symantec or McAfee. Or Maybe they don't want to participate in the ritual suicide of computer users known as "upgrading to Windows Vista".

    6. Re:Because that's what they've always used by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 0, Troll

      And the only reason you can't run OSX, and Windows, and even Linux on your non-Apple Intel box is why? Because of the dongle embedded in the Apple machine? I wouldn't call that 'versatile.' It's the same awkward kludge that dongles have always been, except, even worse, it's not a dongle you can plug into whichever machine you like.

    7. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is exactly it.

    8. Re:Because that's what they've always used by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're right. He is wrong to generalize in that fashion. The fact that some of us have the personal experience that all Mac users we have encountered are the (to be polite, I'll silently lip the first part) "....who just tend to listen to the marketing hype" folks may be a coincidence.

    9. Re:Because that's what they've always used by sgant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it IS versatile, you just have to use it on their Hardware. Their OS, their hardware. Don't like it? Don't buy it. No one is forcing anyone. But the perk of buying THEIR hardware is the option to run all 3 OS's if you want...that's versatility. Albeit you're paying more for the hardware for that versatility, but to some it's worth it.

      Apple opening up OS X to run on any hardware isn't going to be happening anytime soon and I think that people should just get over it. If it happens it happens. I'm not holding my breath for it.

      --

      "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    10. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      creative examples on windows:

      1. typefaces:
      a designer uses a 'faux bold' and 'faux italic' in there design, when printed, those are reverted to the normal face of the font
      reason: extended windows features that are not typographically correct, and do not translate correctly in postscript

      2. colors:
      a designer makes a design with very vivid colors on it screen, when printed those colors look dull
      reason: standard windows gamma is too high (higher then mac), resulting in more vivid colors, allthought those colors are outside the cmyk range, and therefore are not printed as they are shown on screen
      (test yourself: try to differenciate 80% and 100% black on a pc screen, you cannot)

      these 2 examples illustrate that designers, who do not have a clue about technical aspects, are experiencing issues with there design-workflow on windows.
      offcourse, a designer could avoid using those 'faux' typefaces, and adjust his screen gamma, windows is able to do it all, and has even more options then a mac, but that is not what is required by a designer

      about 'people don't like changes': (to stay in the creative environment) how comes that quarkxpress, the leading page-design tool for ages in the graphic industry (even from before windows95 existed), has been dumped in the course of 1 year in favour of indesign? could this be explained in any creative or non-creative way?

    11. Re:Because that's what they've always used by gb506 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Only on /. (and digg, i suppose) would someone say Apple/OSX "might be a dead end platform before long" while commenting on a post about a university going 100% Mac. With Vista getting panned all over the place along side growing share in the Mac base, you have to either be on serious dope or suffer from mild retardation to put that statement in writing.

    12. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      Apple really needs a head less mid-range system with a real video card in and a DESKTOP CPU and RAM.

    13. Re:Because that's what they've always used by timeOday · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I think you're blind. Take one look at OSX vs XP, and Mac hardware vs PC hardware (on average), and you can't tell me why graphical/artistic types might prefer the Mac? I'm not referring to the functionality of the applications, but to the platforms themselves. And this is coming from a Linux user; my initial desktop screen looks like it's from 1987 and I don't mind having a mix of apps with 3 different widget sets on my desktop at once, but I've noticed that does NOT fly in the Mac world.

      Maybe Vista will help, but Microsoft just doesn't have the culture of design that Mac does and my guess is people with opinions on these things will continue to see Vista as a clumsy attempt at style. Think of the "Mac Guy" vs "PC Guy" commercials. One of these days they'll make one where the PC Guy gets some really tacky designer clothes that look totally wrong on him and reveal a little too much pasty nerd skin and flab.

    14. Re:Because that's what they've always used by sootman · · Score: 1

      Or they just want to continue never, ever having to worry about viruses and spyware. But you're right, a lot of it is inertia and momentum--the same inertia that keeps Windows in the financial and government worlds, keeps Macs in the creative world--because that's what all your vendors, printers, artists, etc. use. Most people don't work in a vacuum.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    15. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Heccubus · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes, but the only reason you are hearing about one University going 100% Mac is that it IS news. The fact that many MANY other Universities are going all Windows and/or UNIX is NOT news, it's an everyday thing. As much as I like the Mac, it's marketshare has not increased significantly over the years, and has dwindled a bit with every major technology change they've made (Switch to OSX, Switch to Intel, etc.). Steve Jobs wants to compete with Sony, not Microsoft. They are rapidly becoming a Consumer Electronics vendor and not a serious competitor in the desktop market, IMHO.

    16. Re:Because that's what they've always used by pyite · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your comments do not make you sound intelligent. Here's a quote; maybe you have heard it before.

      People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware. --Alan Kay

      A lot of people would agree with that.

      Until it can be run on non-dongle-ridden hardware, it is not versatile.

      The claim is that the hardware is versatile. Your comment does not apply.

      In fact, depending on how Jobs' current 'selling sugar water to the kids' (iPod/iTunes) initiative goes

      I'm not even quite sure what this means. Why does everyone fight against iTunes and the iPod? If you don't like it, don't use it. No one is forcing you.

      --

      "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

    17. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Omestes · · Score: 1

      I doubt it is all hype (though I have seen a large degree of it), I think some other factors come into play, like simplicity. On a Mac (IMO) it is easier to focus on the task at hand without your OS screaming at you to pay attention to it. The software is generally more aesthetic than Windows (and especially Linux) software, as well. Add to this the Services menu, and the tight integration between programs, and you make it more attractive to artists. PCs demand attention, which distracts people from the task at hand.

      The actual superficial exterior aesthetics probably plays a role too. Artists like pretty things, and most non-Mac PCs are ugly as sin. Someone who is doing art might think having a large glowing black or silver box growling in the middle of their studio would be rather misplaced.

      And none of this have to do with the story. This isn't an "art school", this is a "liberal arts" college. Meaning these Macs are mostly going to be for general research and writing. I find it strange, since Mactel boxes completely fail at the latter at the moment. There isn't a single quality word processor for a Mac right now. NeoOffice is sluggish and slow feeling, Word is a dog through Rosseta, Pages is good, but completely proprietary. They will need Bootcamp to run Office natively so it doesn't crash every 3 seconds. But then again, how much will it still cost them to get 2,000 XP licenses (does Bootcamp even handle Vista?)...

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    18. Re:Because that's what they've always used by adrianmonk · · Score: 1

      I've heard lots of creative justifications, but they are BS when you get down to it. It is just legacy. Back in the day, Mac was it for graphics work. Windows couldn't do it and didn't have the apps in any case. So it was Mac or nothing. Likewise with things like digital audio.
      ...
      Well, many people don't like change, thus they stick with Macs because that's what they've always used.

      No doubt there is some of that going on. People stick with what they're familiar with and they make up reasons why it's supposedly the only reasonable choice.

      But, there is another reason creative people use the Mac. Windows has caught up or mostly caught up with the Mac in the area of usability. But, the Windows user interface remains butt ugly, and many Windows applications take ugliness to a new level. They get the job done fine, but they make you want to close your eyes while they do it.

      Meanwhile, the Mac is clean and simple, from the hardware to the operating system to most of the applications. And that matters to creative people. It matters to them a LOT. Clean, pleasing aesthetics are as much a part of the creative process as caffeine is part of the programming process. It's all about getting yourself into the right frame of mind, or as a creative person might say, creating a good vibe. This is why even home recording studios have neat-looking rugs and candles, and it's why it's not uncommon for professional recording studios to be located on an acreage with a view in the country and have a swimming pool, a nice deck, comfortable couches, really excellent food, or whatever.

    19. Re:Because that's what they've always used by dr.badass · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      but I think they're prime targets for Apple's "just works" marketing because they wouldn't stay focused long enough to get technical problems fixed.

      It isn't about focus, it's about willingness. All of the Mac OS X users I know are technically adept enough to fix most problems they might have (or have had, on Windows, Linux, etc.) -- they just don't want to have to do that to get real work done. Oh sure, once upon a time it was rewarding to solve some intricate technical issue, but these days, most of the problems are too boring and mundane to be of any interest themselves.

      --
      Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
    20. Re:Because that's what they've always used by mrraven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It depends on what desktop market you are talking about. If you are doing serious digital video production your choices are Mac with Final Cut Pro, or Avid. The Mac offers 90% of Avids capability at less than a 1/3rd the price. That sort of lead isn't going away anytime soon.

      --
      Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
    21. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real Mac users don't use Macs for the image. Real Mac users didn't just buy their Macs last week at Hot Topic. We've been here on the Mac platform since 1984 and believe me, we hate the recent influx of switcheurs almost as much as we don't give a damn about PC users.

    22. Re:Because that's what they've always used by dr.badass · · Score: 1

      Word is a dog through Rosseta, Pages is good, but completely proprietary.

      The main reason people use Word is for compatibility with Windows. On an all-Mac campus this isn't really an issue. Even TextEdit does the 80% task of a word processor and Pages excels at the rest. Both output .doc and PDF.

      Assuming they still spring for Office, which is likely, even if not strictly necessary, the next version is due in the second half, and it will be native.

      --
      Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
    23. Re:Because that's what they've always used by dr.badass · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, many people don't like change, thus they stick with Macs because that's what they've always used. The other justifications usually come from the fact that they either just tend to listen to the marketing hype, or because they feel a need to try and justify the more expensive purchase.

      What operating system do you use, and why? Remember to list only reasons that have nothing to with personal preference. God forbid people should use what they prefer. If it is an operating system you have used before, you must be afraid of change. If that operating system is marketed or promoted in the media, you must be a mindless sheep. If that operating system requires hardware marginally more expensive than others, you must be in denial.

      --
      Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
    24. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Question, how to I get pages to save as a .doc, it's "save as" dialog is rather sparse on options, and defaults to .pages. It does open .docs mostly flawlessly, though prompts you to save them back to .pages upon closing. I really would like Pages more than Office, if not for the saving issue. Even on an all Mac campus using Pages would still hurt the idea of students being able to choose their OS on a Mac Box, since the kids using XP and Office (via Bootcamp) will not be able to open Pages docs from the other students, still forcing people to use Windows for compatibility.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    25. Re:Because that's what they've always used by admactanium · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, many people don't like change, thus they stick with Macs because that's what they've always used. The other justifications usually come from the fact that they either just tend to listen to the marketing hype, or because they feel a need to try and justify the more expensive purchase.
      what a wonederfully condescending post. first off, why do people who don't work in graphic arts care what graphic artists do with their computers? if it has no relevence to you, then why even argue the point. most of the people i know in graphic and visual arts have been using macs for a long time. much longer than any perceived "hype" of recent os x macs.

      has it occurred to anyone that graphic designers prefer using macs and that they might actually have good reasons to use the hardware that they do? i have a windows box that sits on the floor next to my mac. i use it once every couple months to double-check a website design or somesuch other little thing. when i switch to an intel-based mac, i suppose i'll bootcamp into windows for those occassions and not much else.

      nobody questions the choices of people in other fields to standardize on particular platforms or apps, but for some reason people really enjoy debating the graphic artists/mac connection. why do people feel the need to question a professional's choice of tools. do you also debate why certain mechanics use snap-on versus milwaukee tools or why one doctor might use a different brand of stethoscope than another? i don't see how anybody in graphic arts has to justify their hardware choices to anybody.

      the argument seems to generally stem from the "macs are too expensive" crowd. well, when you bill by the hour, having a computer that works perfectly 99% of the time counteracts that argument. i bought a quad core g5 with 4.5 Gb of RAM, a terabyte internal RAID0 setup and 2 24" monitors. how long did it take me to pay off that rig with work? about a week and a half. why would i, or should i switch to save a few bucks when i already know what i'm using works perfectly for my needs. it's not expensive in the world view, only when you compare it to crap pcs.

      seriously, keep your "ooh shiny" and "hype from apple tv ads" and "designers are too dumb to use windows" comments to yourself. it's incredibly insulting. i could choose to learn any platform and could probably get my work done on windows or linux, but why should i? to satisfy the curiousity of some random slashdot posters? or perhaps so i could save $800 on a box and hope that i can transfer all my files, get app crossgrades and generally get up to speed with a different plaform in the 8 hours it would take me to justify the cost savings. anything over 8 hours and i'm losing money. i'd rather just make an educated decision to use macs for my own reasons. but thanks for caring.

    26. Re:Because that's what they've always used by hxnwix · · Score: 1

      Well, many people don't like change, thus they stick with Macs because that's what they've always used. Everything about Macs has changed since the olden days. OS X is of a completely different (and superior) pedigree than OS 9; likewise, Apple totally overhauled the Macintosh's hardware architecture... twice. Don't try to play off the Mac's obvious advantages as an afterthought subordinate in buyers' minds to habit - Macs attract a more refined, creative and picky userbase because, unlike windows, OS X doesn't suck ass. Simple as that.
    27. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "On a Mac (IMO) it is easier to focus on the task at hand without your OS screaming at you to pay attention to it."

      I've heard this a few times....but I'm a bit confused as to what OSes these people refer to? Windows? XP never screams at me. Vista I suppose might for the first couple of days as you install apps and set up your box. No Linux distribution I've ever ran across "screamed at me." Other than some GUI/shortcut differences, I really don't see how one OS promotes a better work flow than another.

    28. Re:Because that's what they've always used by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      That is unless Microsoft designed their software specifically so it wouldn't run if it detected you were running a Mac. That's basically what Apple did. They detect if you're running a "PC" (non-mac) and it won't run if it detects this. This is just stupid limits put in place by Apple, and has nothing to do with whether or not a PC is actually capable of running on a Mac.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    29. Re:Because that's what they've always used by dr.badass · · Score: 1

      Question, how to I get pages to save as a .doc, it's "save as" dialog is rather sparse on options, and defaults to .pages

      File > Export -- It's not perfect, but in my experience it's sufficient. "Save as" just means save a different file. "Export" means use a non-native format.

      --
      Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
    30. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To save a file as a Microsoft Word document in Pages, use the File -> Export... menu item.

    31. Re:Because that's what they've always used by shmlco · · Score: 1

      It must be nice to be able to redefine the language however you like just so you can win an argument.

      OS X is running on a phone too, does that count? Or are you going to cry because it's limited to that phone and you can't run it on your RAZR?

      BTW, have you seen the article where, at $4,000-plus a square foot, Apple's retail stores are pretty much the most profitable on the planet? Or would you like to redefine "profitable" too?

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    32. Re:Because that's what they've always used by NMerriam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've heard this a few times....but I'm a bit confused as to what OSes these people refer to? Windows? XP never screams at me.


      You're just used to it.

      Windows is constantly telling you when things succeed -- like it wants to be congratulated on doing what it's supposed to do. "New hardware detected! You've attached a camera! I found a driver! Do you want me to open the pictures or copy them or sing a song? The camera is now connected and working!" There are balloon tips popping up in the taskbar and notification area periodically, letting you know that whatever you're doing is not important, because Windows just found a new wireless network! Hey, Windows just updated your time thanks to daylight Savings! Thought you should know! hey, you have unused icons on your desktop!! Do you want me to help you clean them up? Icons are hard! Stop what you're doing and pay attention to me!

      The assumption in the Windows OS interface is that things are going to fail -- that at any moment the computer could simply explode and kill everyone in the room, and if things go well it should get a pizza party like the winner of the Special Olympics.

      On the Mac, it is assumed things will succeed. If you plug in a new piece of hardware, it just shows up ready to use.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    33. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

      The bizarre thing is that you hear people claiming all over that the reason for this is that Apple is a hardware company, and not a software company. But things are to the point that the differentiation between Mac and PC is the software, not the hardware. Does this make sense?

    34. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

      ahhh... so unlike you, they are not REAL mac users...

      So you're saying that real mac users are elitist, hate new mac users, and don't care bout others...

      The world needs more REAL mac users!

    35. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Jord · · Score: 1

      You want to Export not Save As. Export will give you plenty of file format options.

    36. Re:Because that's what they've always used by sgant · · Score: 1

      Nope. Until it can be run on non-dongle-ridden hardware, it is not versatile. In fact, depending on how Jobs' current 'selling sugar water to the kids' (iPod/iTunes) initiative goes, it might be a dead end platform before that long.

      What the hell are you talking about? So, the Intel Macintoshes are not versatile? So I can't run Windows and Linux and OS X on the same machine? Wait, I can...so what the hell does having a "dongle" have anything to do with it? I could..if I wanted...buy an Intel Mac and run any OS on it I want. Again, how is this not versatile?

      Just because the OS doesn't run on other machines doesn't mean that the Macintosh itself (which is the hardware), isn't versatile. Put down the pipe for a while will ya?

      --

      "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    37. Re:Because that's what they've always used by sgant · · Score: 4, Informative

      As much as I like the Mac, it's marketshare has not increased significantly over the years, and has dwindled a bit with every major technology change they've made

      Mac sales growth up over 100 percent in January
      Net Applications: Apple's Mac 'market share' continues rise, hits 6.38% in February 2007

      --

      "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    38. Re:Because that's what they've always used by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      A couple significant problems with your argument.

      The 800-pound gorilla in the room - that somehow you're completely ignoring - is how the OS affects the apps running inside of it. Whether it's the interface conventions, "DLL hell", the creeping slowness over time induced by an ever-growing registry, perceived insecurity, or just the lack of a native Unix underbelly... a growing number of people just plain don't like Windows.

      Additionally, not every tool on Mac has an equivalent on the PC. For example if you really think Premiere is the equivalent of Final Cut Pro... well have fun with that, but very few people are going to take you seriously.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    39. Re:Because that's what they've always used by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 0, Troll

      Whoah! A website with the title 'Appleinsider' publishes optimistic sales reports from Apple. Hmmm. Couldn't find a link from outside the hive mentality? And what is a 100% increase in a tiny niche slice of the market, anyhow? They went from 1.4% to 2.8% or something like that? Please don't quote some weird 'retail stores in outlet malls' market segment and skew the fact that Macs are elite salon units that only 'individuals' purchase.

      As has been said repeatedly (yeah, man. mark this one 'redundant' too, "Soldiers's For Steve") the "University Goes All Mac" is a man-bites-dog story. An unusual 'news of the wird' thing. That's why it made the Slashdot front page. (well, actually, it's on the apple.slashdot.org ghetto URL)

    40. Re:Because that's what they've always used by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      In fact, depending on how Jobs' current 'selling sugar water to the kids' (iPod/iTunes) initiative goes

      I'm not even quite sure what this means.


      It's a historical reference. Or, a jab based on a historical reference.

      Steve Jobs asked Scully derisively 'do you want to sell sugar water to kids for the rest of your life' to goad him into leaving Pepsi to come to Apple.

      Then, not long ago, I noticed on Pepsi (or Coke, can't remember, and it doesn't matter much) that iTunes promotions were getting slapped on the side of soda pop bottles.

      Jobs and Apple (no longer "Apple Computer" I might add) are selling shiney crap to the masses. It would be sweet to discover that Scully had phoned up Jobs one day and commented on it.
    41. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Durandal64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is a myth. There is no dongle embedded in Intel Macs. Newly shipping Macs have no TPM chip, and the ones that did didn't use it for anything.

    42. Re:Because that's what they've always used by pyite · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Jobs and Apple (no longer "Apple Computer" I might add) are selling shiney crap to the masses.

      So shinyness aside, I fail to see how what is being sold is crap. Obviously music players are a matter of preference, but some of us bought iPods before they were "cool" simply because they were the most straightforward and logical devices to use as far as portable music players go. And you seem to imply "selling to the masses" is bad. Is Apple only successful if they have only a cult following? As a shareholder, I would answer that with a resounding "no." I don't use Apple because it's cool, I use their products because they work.

      --

      "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

    43. Re:Because that's what they've always used by sgant · · Score: 1

      Meh...Apple is the underdog in the computer world. It probably always will be. Despite the hype, the commercials, the fanbois....it's an underdog. So ANY marketshare gain is news really. The fact that sales are increasing in a world dominated by Windows is kinda cool.

      --

      "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    44. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      "New hardware detected! You've attached a camera! I found a driver! Do you want me to open the pictures or copy them or sing a song? The camera is now connected and working!" I must say I prefer that to the OS X approach: when a camera is plugged in, do nothing at all, and let the user track down the photo-importing applet by himself.

      There are balloon tips popping up in the taskbar and notification area periodically, letting you know that whatever you're doing is not important, because Windows just found a new wireless network! Oh, you mean like the visual notification that OS X shows when it joins a wireless network? Or is that one OK because it's smaller?

      Seriously, if the balloon popup distracts you from whatever important task you're working on, then (1) you need to relax and (2) you can turn it off.

      On the Mac, it is assumed things will succeed. If you plug in a new piece of hardware, it just shows up ready to use. Well, no, it doesn't. Not always. Which makes it especially annoying when the assumption is success.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    45. Re:Because that's what they've always used by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      As a shareholder you should be happy that people pay 'more' because they're 'cool.' Because less expensive options, in fact options that don't 'lead the consumer' into proprietary DRM-ridden file conversions, exist and are quite easy to find.

      'I use their products because they work' is a sneering insinuation that the competing products don't work. It's that same snobbish BS that Apple has always based their marketing around.

      At least 'For the rest of us' no longer means 'for those suckers who will pay $5000 for a machine with 128K of RAM soldered onto the motherboard that cannot be expanded while everybody else runs cheap and expandable clones.'

    46. Re:Because that's what they've always used by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The fact that sales are increasing in a world dominated by Windows is kinda cool.

      I'd agree with that if it wasn't Apple. Apple Computer 'drove' the market towards Microsoft dominanace in the PC-based graphical-interface market.

      You see, they did Microsoft's work for them, suing and driving out of business all of the PC-based GUI competitors. It wasn't until 'deep pockets' Microsoft came along and prevailed in court that Apple backed down. So, fuckin' Apple Computer can be blamed for the situation we now live with, one where a single monolith controls most of the Computer OS market. Apple and their fuckin' love affair with lawyers. It's a shame they couldn't innovate instead of sue, back in the 80's. But Apple is about marketing hype and legal muscle, and always has been.

    47. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But honestly, it all comes down to personal preference. Actually, it comes down to sexual preferece. Macs are infinitely more attractive.

    48. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a true asshole. I have used three different cameras with two different Macs, a G3 and an Intel Mini, and they all open Image Capture automatically. But don't let the truth stand in your way. Keep trolling. How lucky for you! Unfortunately, I have to use my camera (a Kodak CX7430), not yours. When I plug it into my Powerbook G4, nothing happens, and I have to track down the photo-importing applet by myself - just like I said. Don't let the truth hit you in the ass on the way out, mmkay?
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    49. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Canberra+Bob · · Score: 1

      About the only thing missing from your post is a comment on how iTunes sucks because Ogg Vorbis isnt the default format...

    50. Re:Because that's what they've always used by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      When I plug it into my Powerbook G4, nothing happens, and I have to track down the photo-importing applet by myself - just like I said. Then go to System Preferences and change what should happen when a camera get's connected, rofl.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    51. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      OK.. er.. which preferences panel is that on? There's nothing related to cameras there. I'm running 10.4.8.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    52. Re:Because that's what they've always used by LKM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, I think it's at least obvious that Mac users aren't some kind of homogenous mass of psychopathic fancily-dressed iPod-wielding Steve Jobs worshippers.

    53. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't mind having a mix of apps with 3 different widget sets on my desktop at once, but I've noticed that does NOT fly in the Mac world.

      Dude, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Take a look at a recent Mac running Tiger. You have:
      • "Standard" application look and feel (TextEdit, Preview, Activity Monitor, etc)
      • Funky titlebar-merges-with-toolbar look (Mail.app, etc)
      • Brushed metal (Finder, Safari, Calculator, etc)
      • iTunes grey

      Keep in mind that all of these applications are made by Apple. 4 different widget sets! And I didn't even list the Pro apps (Final Cut, Logic, Aperture, etc) since at least those have an excuse for using smaller, more powerful widget sets. If counted, that would make 5.

      As horribly discombobulated and disjointed as Microsoft products are (due to their poor internal management structure and lack of communication across projects), at least they get the fucking widgets consistent. Apple can't even do that. What does that say about their ability to effectively manage multiple large software projects to create the single, unified experience that's so highly (and falsely) touted? I'm a big Mac fan, but even I can see that Apple's fallen far from their days as the UI king. They've been coasting on reputation alone for years now, with no substance behind it. Too bad. Hopefully Leopard improves things.

      That said, once you get past the UI consistencies, it's still a pretty kick ass system.

      (yeah, I'm a few days late replying, sosumi)
    54. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually buried in the Image Capture application's preferences. Rock fucking stupid not to have it in System Preferences -- something I've complained about since day one.

    55. Re:Because that's what they've always used by MyDixieWrecked · · Score: 2, Informative

      For me, the big thing about using the mac for everyday tasks is that the UI is way less cluttered and navigating the filesystem is an order of magnitude faster. Simple file management works far better than in Explorer (and OSX's finder is still a steaming pile of shit).

      Also, bouncing back and forth between open windows and applications and [more or less] system-wide drag and drop make many operations a breeze.

      Another big thing for me are apps and utils that are only found on the mac. Adium, TextMate, Quicksilver, Transmit and Unison. There really is no equal to those apps on any other OS.

      Free programming tools also are a huge plus. Applescript, perl, php, python, gcc all being shipped with the system (although the later languages all needing the dev tools to be installed).

      That's one reason why I hope to hell that I never go to work at another shop that's windows only. My productivity dropped to unbelievable lows and I hated my job. I thought I didn't wanna do computer stuff anymore until I switched jobs.

      --



      ...spike
      Ewwwwww, coconut...
    56. Re:Because that's what they've always used by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      A headless system is normally one run without a monitor - typically machines providing network services. No real need for a 'real video card' in one of them.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    57. Re:Because that's what they've always used by prockcore · · Score: 1

      1. typefaces:
      a designer uses a 'faux bold' and 'faux italic' in there design, when printed, those are reverted to the normal face of the font
      reason: extended windows features that are not typographically correct, and do not translate correctly in postscript


      You see the reverse problem on OSX. When printed it looks fine.. but when translated into XML and sent to syndication, all of a sudden, that movie that previously got 3 stars now gets 3 H's because, instead of using UTF-8, Quark and most other OSX typesetting apps still use Mac Roman character set and dingbats fonts for special characters.

      Mac Roman needs to be abolished from OSX.
    58. Re:Because that's what they've always used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't have a dongle or anything like one. If you knew anything about the hardware, you would know this. The reason OS X won't run on frankenboxes is that OS X requires EFI. In fact, if you had done any research into the issue at all, you would realize that all it takes is replacing a few kexts with versions that provide dummy information "from the firmware" to get it to run on generic hardware.

      Idiot.

  23. Umm dumping the PC not the MAC by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Even in the summary, it states they are intending to use Bootcamp: "With Boot Camp students at the Pennsylvania liberal arts college will be able to switch between Windows and OSX, choosing which applications and OS to use at any given time."

    So they arent dumping windows, they are just going to a more manageable single-source hardware vendor, whch just happens to be Apple.

    Sure, its a good thing as more students will get a taste of OSX, but please be a bit more accurate here of what is going on. Geesh.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Umm dumping the PC not the MAC by dueyfinster · · Score: 1

      PC != Windows, I wish people would stop making this assumption. Maybe it's the fact Apple's marketing is insanely good, but as a Mac user who runs only Linux on PCs, I find this highly offensive.

      --
      --- Duey Finster http://www.dueyfinster.com
  24. Grrrr .. Mistakes... Grrr! by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    I meant to say not dumping *windows*.. Geesh. sorry people.

    Would be nice if you could go back and edit your posts for when you make stupid mistakes you dont catch until after you hit submit.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  25. Big Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So somebody with a pet love of Apple computers got into a policy setting and purchasing position, indulging in bias and personal preference then masquerade as a conclusion formed with proper technical and strategic analysis of requirements. The students will have to get by by doing their real work on their own pc's.

  26. Apple is cheaper? by LaughingCoder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wilkes decided to go all-Apple because the new Intel-based models and the Boot Camp dual-boot software - would let the school reduce the number of machines campus-wide. "This is an aggressive technology refresh," Byers said.
    OK, now I get it. It's cheaper to standardize on Macs because they dual boot - therefore the same machine can be used to run Mac OS (and hence Mac-only apps) or Windows (ditto). So they aren't standardizing on Mac OS (as the headline implies), they are standardizing on Mac hardware because it can run Windows too. This has nothing to do with the OS wars, it is purely a financial decision.
    --
    The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    1. Re:Apple is cheaper? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      So they're going to be buying a bunch of Macs to replace their PCs, in order to save money (the PCs presumably still work). Kind of like fucking for viginity.

      I know that the intent is to save on hardware support costs, but I would think the payback period would be quite long.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    2. Re:Apple is cheaper? by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      So they're going to be buying a bunch of Macs to replace their PCs, in order to save money (the PCs presumably still work). Kind of like fucking for viginity.


      Presumably this is being done over three years precisely so that they replace the PCs at the same time they normally would have replaced them with new PCs. If they just wanted to throw everything out and start fresh, they would have ordered a truck full of Mac Minis and replaced every class system over the summer and every staff system over winter break.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
  27. I'm old enough that this doesn't seem like news by xoundmind · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I began my undergraduate days in 1986 and the entire university was a mix of Macs and UNIX workstations. I do recall a few stray IBM (and yes they were IBM) machines in the computer center, but those were more of an oddity than anything else.
    My first response to sitting down in front of an MS environment was, "What the hell is this and why would someone use something so clumsy?"
    Hopefully we're heading back to those days, albeit slowly.

    1. Re:I'm old enough that this doesn't seem like news by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      Me too, more or less. I was at U of Illinois from 86 - 90 and there were a few basic computer types in the various computer labs:

      • Macs
      • IBM PS/2 PCs running MS-DOS and a home-grown-looking menuing system to startup WordPerfect and a few other things.
      • Various Unix systems (some workstations, some multiuser with dumb terminals) that were pretty much dedicated to specific CS classes. For example, the assembly language class used AT&T 3B2s. The computer graphics class (I think - my memory is fuzzy on this) used IBM RT systems housed in a "temporary" classroom.
      • 4 NeXT workstations in the student union; I was never clear WHAT those were for.

      The labs owned and run by the residence halls were a 50/50 mix of Mac and PS/2. I occasionally used a PS/2 when I wanted a telnet client to get to one of the Unix labs for class instead of hiking across campus, but almost nobody used them for anything - people would stand around waiting for the Macs instead.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    2. Re:I'm old enough that this doesn't seem like news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I graduated in '99 and there were still some old Mac labs, but much of the U had gone to PCs, most of which were IBMs. The CS department dual booted Linux and Windows on the PCs and all of the real work was on Linux (no Windows compiler for example). The Unix servers were AIX boxes and just before I graduated they acquired a moderately big Sun server.

    3. Re:I'm old enough that this doesn't seem like news by xoundmind · · Score: 1

      Attention all old heads from CMU: If anyone has successfully built the Andrew environment on x86 hardware, please share your experience. Looking over the install instructions from obsolete Andrew site, development on the project stopped at about the time Slackware 2....Aside from the fact that it was my exposure to computing, I found the Andrew wm to be a fantastic computing environment.

    4. Re:I'm old enough that this doesn't seem like news by dangitman · · Score: 1

      4 NeXT workstations in the student union; I was never clear WHAT those were for.

      World domination.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  28. Why do people buy that myth? by Vexorian · · Score: 1

    Really people, how does using a Mac makes you more 'artistic'?

    --

    Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
    1. Re:Why do people buy that myth? by NtroP · · Score: 1

      Really people, how does using a Mac makes you more 'artistic'?

      It is a lot easier to focus on the creative process when you don't have your computer interrupting you every 5 minutes with annoying little pop-up bubbles and all the other intrusive, distracting habits of Windows. I use All 3 platforms on a daily basis (Windows, Linux, OSX) and I have to say that Windows seems to be like the attention-seeking child always butting in to an adult conversation. Linux is much better about that but the over-all flow and cohesion of the interface and applications isn't quite there yet. I don't know what it is about OS X, but, right out of the box it just seems to get out of your way and let you do your job. When working with a lot of graphic files (or files in general) exposé is so intuitive and seamless, it makes those large tasks a true pleasure. Contrast that to having 20 or 30 images or windows open on Windows... Try selecting the right 2 to compare or cut and past against. It's a pain. Even with Vista it's not as intuitive. Instead of all the windows simply shrinking and moving apart (which seems, to me, more like spreading your papers out on a large desk and then stepping back to look at them) they come together in a stack that you then have to rifle through. Now, some people may actually work that way. When they need to see a bunch of items they are working on they pile them up and go through them one-by-one, but I don't. I like to spread the project out. BTW, Beryl does a nice job of that too.

      I don't know, it's hard to explain to someone who a) has never really used a Mac, or b) hasn't ever really taken the time to get used to NOT doing things the "Windows way". Because one thing is definitely true: people tend to prefer what they are used to and are more productive on what they are used to. Its just that I use all three platforms every day (and have for years) and I find Windows to be the *least enjoyable* experience, Linux (w/beryl) the most fun and OS X the one I *notice using the least* and the one in which the most actual work gets done with the least heartburn.

      YMMV
      --
      "terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
    2. Re:Why do people buy that myth? by Vexorian · · Score: 1

      My brother uses photoshop and 3dsmax in windows XP all the time and he is not annoyed every 5 minutes with annoying little pop-up bubbles...

      --

      Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
  29. They aren't just an arts college by nicholasjay · · Score: 1

    They do have technical programs such as Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Computer Science, etc.

    See more here

    http://wilkes.edu/pages/143.asp

  30. That's not what he's saying by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

    "If you need 40 computers in a classroom, you need 40 computers. "

    What he probably means is that if you have 30 student in a room, and you know a certain percentage will use Macs, and a certain percentage will use PC's, you need to have more than 30 computers total to satisfy the total student population.

    Or to put it another way, you can probably break the students down into 3 groups:

    Group 1 only knows how to use Macs
    Group 2 only knows how to use PCs
    Group 3 can use either.

    Since the percentage of each group will be random in any one group, you have to put more total computers in the room to satisfy every student, unless you can have computers that can boot to either Windows or Mac, then you can more closely match the total computers to the total number of students.

    They probably got significant discounts from Apple as well to go to an all-Apple solution.

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    1. Re:That's not what he's saying by djfake · · Score: 1

      four groups: Group 4 can use neither.

      --
      www.itjerk.com
    2. Re:That's not what he's saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Group 4: Typical annoying slashdot user that complains about Windows, cheers Mac but only wants to use linux.

  31. Other Mac Colleges? by sevenfactorial · · Score: 1

    Beloit in Wisconsin has been doing the same thing since at least 1995.

  32. Having just tried Vista, it doesn't surprise me! by Wonderkid · · Score: 0, Troll

    OK, I just purchased a Toshiba laptop, yes, it only has 0.5Gig RAM and is not equipped with the fastest processor, but it came pre-installed with Vista Home Basic. Comments: The machine itself is light and relatively well made. And for the price, does a lot. DVD Burner, WiFi, PC Card slot etc. Only design negative is no caps lock light. Now for Vista. I am a Mac user, but have used XP.

    a) It takes forever to wake up or start up.

    b) The graphical user interface (GUI) is appallingly sluggish.

    c) The GUI breaks countless human factors rules, such as security dialogs that contain text in a box that looks like a hotspot when it isn't, and hotspots that one doesn't know are hotspots. It gets worse.

    d) Said secrurity dialogs and upgrade reminders keep popping up all the time making it impossible to get anything done - and we only just purchased the machine!

    e) It often slows down to a crawl and the windows don't redraw properly

    f) The screen darkens for no reason or when an error is displayed, but you cannot see the error right away.

    g) Adjusting the screen brightness and other Function key options is a nightmare. You have to hold down [Fn] and wait a few seconds for a (visually attractive) icon bar to appear at the top of the screen, and then, fiddle with the keys to make adjustments. (On the Mac, you just press a key!)

    h) The whole Vista experience is confusing and way way behind OSX from all angles - and not a touch on XP. XP was/is actually pleasing to use, in particular the file manager which is IMHO better than Apple's appalling effort.

    Not wanting to bash Toshiba as it's not their fault, but I think we're going to return this machine and for the extra £200 get a refurb Macbook or even an iBook that will run about 4 times faster and offer a pleasing trouble free experience! (Yes, a machine that is 1 or 2 years older than a Vista machine at not much more money. I guess if you choose Apple, you're sort of travelling through time to a better future! Those using MS stuff are living in the past. Hmm, interesting.

    --

    O'WONDERWe're working on it.

  33. U of MD used (uses?) Macs... by purpleraison · · Score: 1

    When I was at the University of Maryland, they used Macs in their computer labs.

    In fact, I was amazed because I had never used a Mac before and didn't have my own computer. So when I had to use the computer lab to type up my research papers, and found a room full of these cool little computers I had to ask instructions on how to use them.

    In fact, if you take a look at the Maryland school system, they use Macs solely.

    I'm sure the reason boils down to the promotional programs Apple has with the school system ('Apples for Schools'), but in the end it was the right choice -- so yay!

    --
    I am open source, and Linux baby!
  34. Misleading headline? by The+Second+Horseman · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't it be "University standardizes on Apple hardware to run OS X and Windows?" That's what they did here. So that way, when it takes an extra few months for a package like SPSS to run (or be certified) on a new version of OS X, your academic program can still use the software under Windows.

  35. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  36. Different legacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The sticker for real art studios is color correction. Windows is a mess in this regard. Apple's OS is two degrees better than a mess.

  37. Me thinks their wrong by drinking12many · · Score: 1

    Now they may have a pretty sweet deal with microsoft or other software vendors but licensing for 1400 mac osx licences and 1400 xp licences and their respective softwares in no way will cost less than the additional 300 machines. In essence with boot camp your paying for double the machines you actually have. And in addition to that patching will become a real pain as that I am aware of there is no way to force bootcamp to boot to one OS or the other remotely. Seems to me this will end up costion them alot more not less.

  38. Re:Monoculture bad... by MetalPhalanx · · Score: 1

    Until you get shipped something like 400 Dell boxes (all GX280's) and about 50 of them pop a capacitors within two weeks. And most of those fancy new boxes (compared to what they were running at the time) went to higher-ups who all wanted a new PC and it to be fixed yesterday.

    That was not a fun two weeks.

  39. Real world example. by Jerry+Smith · · Score: 1

    The educational institute where I work, has about 800 computers, about half of them macs (serverside same %-age). They require about 10% of the maintenance the pc's require. Their users are happier/lessgrumpy. Somethings things_just_work! Portable OS, the dream of a lot of sysadmins! (also the nightmare, securitywise). Netboot! NetRestore! Any teacher that can hold down an n-key can restore a machine, no need to rename or domainplace it, second partition will be untouched, so data preserved.

    --
    All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
    1. Re:Real world example. by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Portable OS

      So it's _really_ portable now? I can install the system software on a USB hard drive and plug it into a Dell box?

      Because I have no problem doing that with some other System software.

    2. Re:Real world example. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, yes. You can install on a USB drive (or firewire) and plug that drive into a Dell. That Dell probably won't run OS X. (Though I have heard rumors of a few non-Apple PCs that seem to have the required TPM chip and happily boot into OS X.)

      Windows won't install onto a USB drive, or boot from one.

  40. Parents are impressed by bryan1945 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Both of my parents went to Wilkes (long time ago- my mom met my dad in a slide rule class!), and they are impressed that Wilkes is going forward (for right or wrong). I think my mom was surprised that Wilkes even had computers. Like I said, long time ago! :)

    As to good or bad- let it shake out and see what happens. I'm tired of all the fanboy/advocacy about what's better, cheaper, etc. Let's give some real world craziness a shot.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  41. Double lock-in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they replace an OS lock-in with an OS AND hardware lock-in. Brilliant move in the direction of freedom.

  42. Sounds like they're still mixed... by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 1

    Only with one set of hardware now. Yes, one set of hardware makes it slightly easier on IT staff, but they're still mixed OSes, and now the IT staff has to maintain two OSes on EACH box.

    Hrm, will a Mac NetBoot a Windows disk image?

    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.
    1. Re:Sounds like they're still mixed... by Iaughter · · Score: 1
      Only with one set of hardware now. Yes, one set of hardware makes it slightly easier on IT staff, but they're still mixed OSes, and now the IT staff has to maintain two OSes on EACH box.

      Hrm, will a Mac NetBoot a Windows disk image?

      The default Mac image that we use at my place of emplyment includes a copy of Parallels with a configured Windows image.

  43. One Word by germansausage · · Score: 2, Interesting

    AutoCAD.

    Or is that two words? Anyhow for a lot of engineer/architect/designer folks, Linux would be their first choice too if only it would run AutoCAD.

  44. You get what you pay for by Serengeti · · Score: 1

    "The Mac offers nothing special or unique in the field of digital arts today."

    I disagree. I currently work as a video editor in a building that adopted Windows based Avid Media Composers for one department, and Mac based Avid MC's for another department. I jumped from the former to the latter almost a year ago, and let me tell you, by comparison, that the unique aspect of the Mac machines is that they don't crash every second day. Even Avid, which /has/ crashed on the Mac, does not crash as often.

    You get what you pay for, and on a personal note, I also switched over to Mac at home for a similar reason. It's much more pleasant to use, and I have experienced far fewer problems with it than I did my old Windows machine.

    1. Re:You get what you pay for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows machines doen't crash more often than Max or Linux. Period.

      They simply don't unless you have a faulty hardware or a faulty hardware driver which is rare.

  45. Re:Having just tried Vista, it doesn't surprise me by Wonderkid · · Score: 1

    Omitted to mention that my main issue here is why on earth are Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers even bothering to ship machines that are incapable of running Vista at a speed that makes it usable? I have never purchased a Mac that didn't run it's (authorised) software at a usable speed, except for some clunkers in the 1990s.

    --

    O'WONDERWe're working on it.

  46. Almost all the students will switch to mac by krunk7 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I have not met a single person in real life who used a mac for more then a few days that did not permantly switch to OS X as their primary OS.

    This includes the following categories os users:

    • Linux/Bsd types that bought a mac laptop with the sole intention of installing *bsd or *nix on it. . . .but mine as well see what this osx thing is about, right?
    • Windows types who bought a macbook "just to see". After all they can always install windows on it and it just looks cool for a decent price..right?
    • Developers
    • Casual users
    • Academics
    • Professionals


    Now I have seen a blog or two of people who disliked the OSX experience. And a couple of vocal anti-mac types and purists in places like slashdot. I doubt they're in any way representative of the norm. There are very good reasons to use a pc over a mac. There are fewer reasons to use a *nix/bsd over a mac except in the "server on a shoestring" market. It just so happens that unless your a gamer or need a specific, niche software that isn't available on mac...almost all of the reasons above have nothing to do with the end user.

    1. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      I was forced to use a Mac (laptop) for six or so months. I didn't switch (from Linux---dumped Windows a -while- ago).

      Macs just feel weird. The laptops look really cool, but the keyboard is horrible. If you do a lot of typing... it just feels "wrong". Most PC keyboards feel ``natural'' (ie: IBM Thinkpad keyboard).

      So, just for that, Apple hardware is overrated in my opinion. You mention folks buying Apple Hardware for the sole purpose of installing Linux on it... amm... d0h! No serious Linux user would do -that-; only apple fans...and if they're apple fans... they'll use OSX.

      As for the OS... My Linux box is more functional. I dunno why Apple went through such trouble to screw up a perfectly good UNIX installation.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    2. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      I buy Apple hardware specifically to run NetBSD on it. However, I buy old, often VERY old hardware for this purpose. On older hardware, when Apple was even more closed than they are now, you need to boot into MacOS on the machine and run a MacOS 'bootloader' to boot over to NetBSD. It's refreshing to kick all that Apple smut out of memory, even if you need to use MacOS to do it.

    3. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by dangitman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You mention folks buying Apple Hardware for the sole purpose of installing Linux on it... amm... d0h! No serious Linux user would do -that-; only apple fans...and if they're apple fans...

      At my university, Computer Science seems to be dominated by Powerbook users who run Linux, not MacOS. Are you saying those people aren't "serious" Linux users? I don't understand. Why would the brand of hardware chosen to run Linux make a Linux user "non-serious"?

      These guys probably have vanilla PC desktops at home, but when it comes to portable hardware, the Powerbook and Macbook Pro is held in high esteem.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    4. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by micromuncher · · Score: 1

      I'm a real person. I was also an avid Apple/Mac type, and a developer for almost 10 years. I also had a NeXT, Rhapsody, 10 through .3... and I don't use MacOS on a daily basis. I rarely if every power on my Macs anymore. Most of my machines run 2k or xp. But I also have linux and solaris going... not my desktop machines.

      --
      /\/\icro/\/\uncher
    5. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was a life long PC user who was introduced to the Mac in 1999. I've worked with Macs up until this past fall.

      During that time I came to enjoy the Mac experience, and considered it a viable alertative to Windows.

      Then Microsoft released Windows XP, and eventually Apple released OSX and my opinion has totally changed.

      OS X offers nothing over Windows XP for a number of reasons.. Let me cite just a few:
      1. It crashes more frequently than XP.
      2. When it crashes you have to unplug the machine.
      3. To do anything 'strange' you have to dig in to a *nix command line.
      4. OS Updates are _very_ frequent.
      5. There is WAY more software available for Windows.
      6. Writing software for a Mac is no fun, especially now that they claim the OS is 'open source' and like directing questions to a Darwin forum. MS gives MSDN, and MSDN rules.

      When I was primarily a developer I disliked the Mac. I won't buy one. Ever.

      Now that I'm a 'professional' and spend most of my time in Outlook, Powerpoint, Excel, and thumbing away at a PDA there is no way I would buy a Mac. PC's are cheaper and run faster. They're is more software, and more hardware available.

      Mac's look nice-- thats about it though.

      BTW: Office 2007 is amazing.

    6. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by reav · · Score: 1

      Please do not take offense.I think your statement is over simplified. I use mac os x, various nixs and msft. I prefer gnu/linux, specifcally ubuntu. I do not use a computer as a professional. I see no intrinsic value in proprietary software to run basic computer programs, like using the internet and e-mail. on ocassion I down load pictures from my camera and might need to crop or touch them up with gimp. I've got a mac os-x sitting here, that I have not pluged in for over a year. Okay, it is one case and anecdotal but you would have a difficult time convincing me to switch fc6 for os-x.

    7. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      I don't like defending Apple (I'm a long time Linux user who recently bought a Mac and thinks it's nice but not the second coming), but here I'll bite:

      1. It crashes more frequently than XP.
      Saying one crashes more than the other is pretty subjective. I've seen both crash. I've also seen Linux crash. In the case of all OSes, unstable drivers were usually the cause.

      2. When it crashes you have to unplug the machine.
      Huh? Ever tried holding down the Power button? (and don't tell me it's just a Mac thing, because it's always what I've had to do on any laptop because they lack reset buttons)

      3. To do anything 'strange' you have to dig in to a *nix command line.
      Wait, that's a BAD thing? At least you DO have a real BSD shell environment, as opposed to the half-assed DOS-like shit you're stuck with under Windows.

      4. OS Updates are _very_ frequent.
      (I'm assuming you're talking about major paying updates (ie. 10.3 -> 10.4), not minor updates (ie. 10.4.8 -> 10.4.9))
      They're slowing down. And unlike Windows they seem actually useful. Windows has peaked in 2000. Most new features now are UI appearance overhauls.

      5. There is WAY more software available for Windows.
      That one's a given, but not everyone needs all the Windows software out there.

      6. Writing software for a Mac is no fun, especially now that they claim the OS is 'open source' and like directing questions to a Darwin forum. MS gives MSDN, and MSDN rules.
      MSDN is a bloody mess. You search for a win32 API call and it forwards you to a Windows CE API call of a similar name. I hate that. Apple's documentation is not incredible but so far it hasn't made me cursing. Besides you also get nice stuff like man pages. Anyway we're in the age of the Internet, and Google rarely fails me. Those big documentation blobs are overrated. When I develop under Linux I don't miss them at all.

      BTW: Office 2007 is amazing.
      Yeah, it's amazing how Microsoft manages to make people believe that there is a point in buying their Office suite all over again.

    8. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      "Macs just feel weird. The laptops look really cool, but the keyboard is horrible. If you do a lot of typing... it just feels "wrong". Most PC keyboards feel ``natural'' (ie: IBM Thinkpad keyboard)."

      You sound like a Bud Lite drinker trying to convince me that my nice locally brewed IPA "tastes weird".

    9. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by stewbacca · · Score: 1
      This is not even debatable. If a Mac crashes, it recovers gracefully 99% of the time. If WinX crashes, it is usually a painfully drawn-out and aggravating process of trying to ctrl+alt+del an app that is not responding. My favorite feature of Windows is when the ctrl+alt+del window crashes. Good luck force quitting the force quitter. This simply doesn't happen on a Mac.

      The previous poster was incorrect in bringing up the "uplug" troubleshooting technique. I don't have enough fingers in my house to count how many times I've had to remove a PC from the power supply to get it to reboot. This has never happened on any of my 10 or so Macs in the past 19 years. Killing a hung app in OS X is as graceful as a crash can be. Firefox, for example, even brings you back to the website you were on, and if it was a site that required login, remains logged in for you. You don't see Mac users yelling out their computer trying to figure out why in the hell it isn't responding. Mac users take a calm breath, then right click on the offending app and choose "force quit".

    10. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      Oh great, now I'm defending both sides...

      This is not even debatable. If a Mac crashes, it recovers gracefully 99% of the time. If WinX crashes, it is usually a painfully drawn-out and aggravating process of trying to ctrl+alt+del an app that is not responding. My favorite feature of Windows is when the ctrl+alt+del window crashes. Good luck force quitting the force quitter. This simply doesn't happen on a Mac.
      OK, first of all, you seem to be confusing a system crash and a stalled app. You also seem to imply that system crashes NEVER happen on a Mac, which is plainly false. I've seen plenty of them, from old 68k Macs to brand new Intel Macs. Finally, you claim that stalled apps can bring Windows down, which is downright false on any Windows NT. It appears that the last version of Windows you tried was 98. Or (god forbid) ME.

      The previous poster was incorrect in bringing up the "uplug" troubleshooting technique. I don't have enough fingers in my house to count how many times I've had to remove a PC from the power supply to get it to reboot.
      Hello? Reset button?? And if you don't have a reset button, holding down the power button will shut it down. Please learn how to use a computer.

      This has never happened on any of my 10 or so Macs in the past 19 years.
      Again, I find that hard to believe.

      Killing a hung app in OS X is as graceful as a crash can be.
      Confusing system crashes with hung apps again... Why do I even bother?

      Firefox, for example, even brings you back to the website you were on, and if it was a site that required login, remains logged in for you.
      Now that's just depressing. Firefox does that on ANY operating system. Don't think you're special because you use a Mac.

      You don't see Mac users yelling out their computer trying to figure out why in the hell it isn't responding. Mac users take a calm breath, then right click on the offending app and choose "force quit".
      I'm a Mac user, and OS X managed to make me yell plenty. Almost as much as Windows, in fact. All operating systems have their problems, and those who fail to recognize it are zealots.

    11. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I've been known to argue both sides myself, so allow me to respond.

      OK, first of all, you seem to be confusing a system crash and a stalled app.

      I worded it poorly, so yes it appears I may not know of what I speak. I do understand the difference, but the average user doesn't. They see Windows not responding (for whatever reason) and they get flustered. Equally frustrating is it is difficult to tell on Windows what exactly is causing the anomoly. With the Mac, it is much more elegant. The Mac equivalent of ctrl+alt+del ALWAYS gives you an accurate indication of the offending app, whereas the Windows equivalent is a crap-shoot. Killing a hung app is more often than not, an exercise in futility. There is no denying this.

      As for Mac OS X and NT system crashes: I occassionally get a non-responsive finder. This is hardly a system crash, as it is an easy recovery (kill finder). Other than that, since I've used OS X (X.1 until present), on three home Macs, I've never had the system crash, needed to restart a non-responsive system, or (holy cripes) never had to unplug the computer. At the school I work at, none of our 10 Macs have system crashes, and the newest one is a three year old Powerbook. I've used Win2000 and WinNT exclusively at work for the past 6 years. I crash the system, requiring reboots all the time. The combo of MS Outlook, DreamWeaver and Photoshop (every Friday when I do our school newsletter) crashes the system more than once a day. Saying NT doesn't crash is a joke. When I was in the military we were mandated to get rid of NT because of its instability. Switching to 2000 wasn't much better. I run XP professional in boot camp, and it is marginally better. Forget the anectdotal evidence for this argument, but I know what I've dealt with for the past 20 years.

      you claim that stalled apps can bring Windows down, which is downright false on any Windows NT.

      As I stated, Photoshop and DreamWeaver cause one or the other to hang. I try to ctrl+alt+del and that hangs. Then I try to kill that, and it hangs. Log off and reboot? Nope, crashes on log off, causing another cltr+alt+del attempt (giving me a total of what, 4 now?). This simply doesn't happen in OS X. You kill it and it goes away. Thank you, UNIX.

      The previous poster was incorrect in bringing up the "uplug" troubleshooting technique. I don't have enough fingers in my house to count how many times I've had to remove a PC from the power supply to get it to reboot.
      Hello? Reset button?? And if you don't have a reset button, holding down the power button will shut it down. Please learn how to use a computer.

      Please learn how to think outside of your own realm. Please tell me with a straight face that your Windows box has NEVER frozen up so bad that even the power buttons stopped working? Ask 10 slashdotters (under a polygraph) and 9 of them will tell you a story where they had to remove the power supply from the computer in order for it to reboot. (The 10th guy was lying). Again, in 18 years, I've never had a Mac freeze up so badly that I had to remove it from a power supply (even if you DO find it hard to believe).

      Firefox, for example, even brings you back to the website you were on, and if it was a site that required login, remains logged in for you.
      Now that's just depressing. Firefox does that on ANY operating system. Don't think you're special because you use a Mac.

      Ok, I'll give you that one. I gave a bad example, because it was the freshest in my mind. I wish I had more examples handy, but given my up time is about 99% on 99% of my apps (firefox be damned), I really can't think of the last app that hung on me. I do recall maybe VLC? or DiVX going weird, but again, a simple right click in the dock and it was fixed.

    12. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      Please tell me with a straight face that your Windows box has NEVER frozen up so bad that even the power buttons stopped working?

      On any ACPI-compatible computer I've ever used, holding the power button for 3 seconds triggered a hardware poweroff that the operating system cannot prevent. And in the case of older non-ACPI computers, the hardware poweroff occurred right away, without holding the button.

    13. Re:Almost all the students will switch to mac by brian.reading · · Score: 1

      Apple hardware is overrated in my opinion. You mention folks buying Apple Hardware for the sole purpose of installing Linux on it... amm... d0h! No serious Linux user would do -that-
      That's odd that you say that considering Linus Torvalds himself has been using Apple hardware to run Linux for quite a few years now.
  47. Why should you care? by argent · · Score: 1

    Linux is UNIX.

    OS X is UNIX.

    It's the same damn operating system. Runs the same software.

    I swear, if Linux was in the majority we'd be seeing the same posts except they'd be going on about how the real challenge to their version of Linux was Red Hat and Suse.

    I use FreeBSD and Mac, and I'm still glad to see Linux in use, because it doesn't matter WHICH version of UNIX someone's using... Solaris, AIX, Linux, FreeBSD, OSX, even HPUX, it's still an open system, still part of the software ecosystem that can't be controlled by one company... not Microsoft, not Apple, not Novell, not Sun...

    1. Re:Why should you care? by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Linux is UNIX.

      Sorry, GNU's Not UNIX.

      And Linux and MacOS are not the same damn operating system, and do not run the same software. Some Linux software will run on MacOS with some tweaking, and vice-versa. But MacOS has a ton of libraries and APIs that aren't present in Linux.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    2. Re:Why should you care? by argent · · Score: 1

      Sorry, GNU's Not UNIX.

      Linux isn't Hurd.

      And Linux and MacOS are not the same damn operating system, and do not run the same software.

      They both run any UNIX software out there.

      Linux has a bunch of extra APIs on top of the basic UNIX OS. So does OS X. So does Solaris and AIX. That doesn't keep them all from being UNIX. And that's the important bit.

    3. Re:Why should you care? by prockcore · · Score: 1

      They both run any UNIX software out there.


      Not really. We have an icecast server that streams from 5 different soundcards. This won't run on OSX because OSX doesn't provide /dev/ access to hardware.
    4. Re:Why should you care? by argent · · Score: 1

      This won't run on OSX because OSX doesn't provide /dev/ access to hardware.

      I'll bet if you stuck a little program that fed from the mike to a named pipe called "/dev/mike" you could get your server to work from it.

  48. This doesn't add up. by Qwavel · · Score: 0


    So, let's get this straight.

    The university is forced to buy (more expensive) Mac hardware, because Apple is preventing their OS from running on regular PC's, and somehow this is being reported as Apple/Mac saving the university money. If Apple could back off a little on their whole control/lock-in thing then the university could really save money by buying commodity hardware. (Can someone tell me what the average margin is on a Mac?)

    If MS did what Apple is doing people would go nuts.

    Ideally, they would be able to buy any PC that they wanted and then triple boot it with Windows, Mac, and Linux.

    1. Re:This doesn't add up. by godawful · · Score: 1

      Yes, If if if.

      If only the Apple mafia hadn't shown up in their blue jeans and black mock turtlenecks, and forced them to buy more expensive hardware. If Apple had just donated the hardware it would be even cheaper. If only it were 300 years in the future and the Federation of Planets have given up monetary value.. then the students could get their work done in any OS whilst sipping Raktajino.

      Suprise, they can run any of the three OS's you listed.. maybe the University actually put a little more thought into this than the amount of time it takes someone to post a comment suggesting this is all so terrible.

      --
      Live EVERY week... Like it's Shark Week
    2. Re:This doesn't add up. by Thrudheim · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The point is that college is saving money compared to what had been their alternative prior to Boot Camp. Some people may not like the fact your hypothetical choice is not available (at least not at this point), but Apple has a right to create a differentiated product and try to sell it. It may be a great success, it may not, but I am sure that Apple is in a far better position to do the market analysis than I am.

      Apple is not Microsoft. Apple makes its money from hardware, and it is able to generate higher margins on that hardware by writing its own operating system to go with it. As Dell struggles these days with its business model, it seems to me that Apple is doing a very smart thing. Making the Mac OS available for any random PC out there would be a huge headache for Apple. Think drivers. Take the variety of complaints from Vista owners about drivers not being available and magnifiy that many times for all the drivers that would need to be written for the Mac OS. I recently read that a Vista installation takes about 15 gigs of hard drive space, while the Mac OS takes about 2 to 4 gigs. Part of that must be due to the greater complexity of handling so many different plaforms.

      People can complain, but Microsoft probably doesn't care that much. Their margins from selling Windows licenses to Boot Camp users are surely higher than what they get from the OEMs. The OEMs might not like it, but Apple is under no obligation to make the Mac OS available to them.

    3. Re:This doesn't add up. by Qwavel · · Score: 1

      > but Apple has a right to create a differentiated product and try to sell it.

      Yes, they do. But they should do it by creating a better product (we're talking about the hardware here), not by forcing people to choose their hardware through this artificial lock-in.

    4. Re:This doesn't add up. by Thrudheim · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "But they should do it by creating a better product (we're talking about the hardware here), not by forcing people to choose their hardware through this artificial lock-in."

      Apple is not forcing anybody to buy anything. You buy it if you want it. That's it. Although I can understand that someone might want the Mac OS but not to buy Apple hardware, there are a lot of things that I would like to buy from companies on terms that aren't available to me. Buying channels a la carte from my cable company, for example, is one of them. In Apple's case, the harware-OS combination is the product that Apple offers. It's not "artificial." Consumers can make their own choices. The ability to boot Windows as well as the Mac OS is a bonus, and Apple is smart use that as a selling point.

      Obviously opinions differ, but I like Apple hardware. My first Mac was a Mac SE purchased in 1989. I retired it in 1998. It was still working perfectly. My next Mac was a Power Mac G3 desktop purchased in 1998. I retired that last year, still functoning fine, running Mac OS X despite its age. My current Mac is a G5 dual-processor machine, just about three years old. It's been great. Sure, I paid a little more up front, but I think that I have gotten plenty of value from these machines.

    5. Re:This doesn't add up. by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Saying Apple should make better hardware is kind of like saying Porsche should make faster cars.

  49. Underlying structure... by argent · · Score: 1

    1. Every object in the system is a file in the same filesystem namespace.
    2. Every object in the system can be interacted with via the same small set of system calls.
    3. All communication is through ports that look like open files.
    4. Every program runs in its own address space, communicating with other programs through already opened files.

    Thirty years ago this was a revolution. Most operating systems have adopted some of these principles to some extent, but there are too many exceptions outside UNIX sytsems for you to be able to really take advantage of them. For example, in Windows, you can't create network services by running scripts under a network superserver because open network sockets cant be accessed through read() or write().

    You can use OS X through the Aqua shell only, and pretend the UNIX part isn't there, but the same is true of a Linux system wrapped up in a KDE or Gnome shell. In both cases you're missing a lot of the possibilities inherent in the system, and in both cases you're not learning anything about UNIX.

    And that's a genuine problem. There's a lot of Linux users I know who have no idea what UNIX is. They think a system without X-Windows and Perl and their choice of KDE or Gnome *isn't UNIX*. I'm not talking about new users here, or even run-of-the-mill developers, I'm talking about core developers in major free software projects.

    I'd love to put a few of them down in front of a PDP-11 running Version 7 and wait for their heads to explode.

  50. Re:Having just tried Vista, it doesn't surprise me by xeniast · · Score: 1

    VISTA : the legacy of NT

  51. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  52. Standardizing by JohnnyDoh · · Score: 0

    'By standardizing, the IT department should be more productive'

    If they still support XP and windows apps via bootcamp, I don't think they've standardized much. Same hardware and same warranty but the complexity of the desktop environment probably increased slightly.

  53. Re:nope. in practice macs go 5 years by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

    Not only that, but physically deploying an iMac is a breeze. Everything comes in one box, you've got a computer that's easy to handle and takes 3 chords: Ether, keyboard and power. Stick a FW powered drive into it, and you've got a configured Mac in 20 minutes, which includes unpacking it. With Parallels installed, you've now just deployed 2 computers in half the time it takes to install one Dell. And like others said, this machine will outlast the 3 years easily by another 3 years.
    I myself am running a 1.4G G4 and see no need to upgrade.

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  54. Exactly by illegalcortex · · Score: 1

    Why oh why do I never have those mod points when I need them?...

  55. standardization.. by God+of+Lemmings · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is the first time I've seen the buzzword "standardization" used to defeat a set
    of windows machines instead of the other way around.

    --
    Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
  56. A beautiful shade of quagmire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure their project will work as successfully as Munich's attempts to ditch MS. Because, as we know, both Government and Universities have TOP NOTCH IT staff... bwahahahaha!!!

    I'm sure the consulting companies proposing this are exploding in their pants, thinking about all the billable hours this train wreck is going to create for them.

    Windows = operating system tailored to the needs of businesses and IT

    everything else = operating systems tailored to the needs of... umm.... errr... it's not Microsoft, so it's got to be bettar!!!!

  57. Suckers! The joke's on the university! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These Macs will run Windows! HAHAHA

  58. Hmmmm. by blanddragon · · Score: 0

    'By standardizing, the IT department should be more productive,' Yes since there about 100 IT people that support the MAC and 100,000,000 That support a PC that will 'save them a bunch. And since much of /. hates M$ it's not surprising this article is really only being noted here!

  59. Re:nope. in practice macs go 5 years by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

    takes 3 chords: Ether, keyboard and power. Stick a FW powered drive into it,

    So this FW powered drive is cordless, or does it have some sort of a 'docking connector' so it just nestles up against the Mac to plug it in?

    Or are there now four 'chords' (spelling incorrect)?

    The fifth cord is for the scanner, right? And if I want a web-cam, in comes the sixth. I won't even get into the dude who comes up to me carrying essential data on a floppy disk...

    Starting to sound like an octopus, not a desktop computer.

  60. You're forgetting the poverty of the Win32 shell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Macs are better for media manipulation and transformation; in addition to the better memory management, stability, security, SMP, builtin PDF writer, simplified troubleshooting, etc., they have the FreeBSD command line and with Fink, hundreds of existing *nix programs.

    Graphics and multimedia workers can be far more productive scripting imagemagick, mencoder, transcode, etc., on a Mac than on a PC. Windows still doesn't offer drag and drop filepaths into CLI boxes, an incredibly useful feature offered on Mac for 5 years already.

  61. Re:Monoculture bad... by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

    The worst I can think of in such a situation is you'd get calluses from cutting open so many new boxes from Dell.

    Or doesn't you organization do a good job of ghosting out new OS images easily?

  62. Role conflict by frisket · · Score: 1

    Why is the head of IT also the CFO? Saving a few grand on hardware doesn't seem worth it if you're going to cripple graduating students' chances of a job. The money would be better spent teaching students how to deal with the assorted stupidities of IT that we all have to face eventually.

  63. red herring by jpellino · · Score: 1

    a PC needs the scanner, web cam, and floppy as well (floppy drives are now optional on major PCs)

    the mac runs out of the box on three wires. two if you have wireless.

    the FW drive is just for custom / common setup, and as I mentioned ARD takes care of that over the network.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    1. Re:red herring by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      And my Dell Optiplex at work 'runs out of the box' on keyboard, monitor, mouse, net, and power. That's one more wire. I suppose I could get a keyboard with a USB out on it and then the mouse/keyboard hookup to the CPU box would make it three. But I went with the keyboard that came for no additional charge (ahem...) with the Dell box.

      I am not defending Dell boxes, btw. just pointing out that Apple hardware is almost indistinguishable from a Dell box if you're gonna carry on about wires hanging off the side. Nothin' special there.

    2. Re:red herring by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

      yes, but your optiplex also requires a monitor and monitor power cord, which you fail to mention. (as is the case when a case of sour grapes hits, it's not my fault you got a POS Dell.)
      And macs have excellent webcams built in, with all the necessary software needed to run them.
      And like the other poster mentioned, with built - in wireless, an iMac can be down to a keyboard and power. You're looking at, ether, power, mouse, keyboard, monitor, monitor power, usb 2.0 webcam. 2 vs 7 cords.
      Granted you could have one of those franken-"all-in-one" optiplexes, which would reduce the number of cords.
      Curiously, if you go to dell's website http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetail s.aspx/optix_gx620?c=us&cs=RC956904&l=en&s=hied
        notice what background they have on that monitor. (hint, it's not one that comes with windows.)

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  64. You call that a choice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if they need to right-click?!?

  65. Re:nope. in practice macs go 5 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the dude who comes up to me carrying essential data on a floppy disk died in 2000. And I'm sure lots of schools allow the use of webcams in the classroom.

    Idiot.
  66. A student there by reav · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm in their master program for school admin. I can report that their technology in education courses stress interoperativity and are not OS specific. Students are encouraged to submit projects in open formats which promote open standards. I don't have a handle on their engineering or math departments but there are numerous penguins posted conspicuously on some professors' doors. re-v

  67. Re:nope. in practice macs go 5 years by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    No, actually he's a senior employee. He needed the data off that floppy NOW for a presentation. It was your job to make sure there was the infrastructure in place to meet any eventuality.

    You're fired.

  68. This is irrelevant. by MEForeman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    No one knows where this college is without looking it up. When a major college does this, make news out of it. I'm relatively sure Berklee College has been a mac campus for years, but then again it's an arts college (mostly music) so it's logical. And at least Berklee is in Boston, not Wilkes-Barre PA... which is a lovely area if you like boredom. And yes, I've been there. ::yawn::

    --
    MEF
  69. Apple University Discount? What about Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On such a large volume purchase of Macs, does Apple give them a University Discount?

    I always enjoyed the significant student discount Apple gives to University students and school age students.

    Unfortunately, even OS X is a proprietary operating system, and can never hope to succeed against the unlimited evolutionary power that is Linux.

    Unbuntu, SUSE, and Red Hat are rapidly replacing Windows throughout the world.

    The only way Apple OS X will survive is to become GNU Open Source - otherwise Apple's famous software is bound to die a slow painful death like Windows Vista.

  70. Re:nope. in practice macs go 5 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, actually he's a senior employee. He needed the data off that floppy NOW for a presentation. It was your job to make sure there was the infrastructure in place to meet any eventuality.

    Any eventuality? That's a loaded statement, son. What happens when said senior employee comes in with data stored on a cassette tape? A punch card?

    If anyone—managmement included—came up to me with a floppy disk whining that they need to access data on it, I would have no problem telling them "tough shit."

  71. Re:nope. in practice macs go 5 years by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

    Clear out your desk. You're fired.

  72. um... so? by flAk_mUnkey · · Score: 1

    This doesn't really mean much anyway since academic organizations are the largest contiguous bodies of people to use Macs.

    Take this one out of the "shiny white stuff for miles" category and put it in the (rolling eyes) "making a mountain out of a molehill... again"

  73. Re:nope. in practice macs go 5 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, sir. Good luck with that floppy thing.

  74. Re:Having just tried Vista, it doesn't surprise me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NT: [8] - The Hourglass has been much improved in Windows Vista!

    Vista: [...please wait...]

    Boy, I'm glad they spent all that time and money for such a revolutionary improvement!

    Tried Vista hands on in Best Buy - slow, kept telling me to [...please wait...] and it was running on a brand new Core 2 Duo machine. Zzzzz.

  75. In my experience, users flock to mac labs by Alligator427 · · Score: 1

    I worked at a student assistant at a computer lab at my university. The lab I worked in was a little-known science-library lab that was full of NCD X-terms and Macs, I worked there through my four years of college and we usually had between 5 and 7 macs and about 15 of the X terms. There were many other labs on campus, few of which had apples. There were two other mac labs but you had to be in the art or architecture program to use them. Every single one of the macs at the lab I worked at was almost always occupied, and not just by art/design students. There were lots of scientists, and math people using them as well as journalism majors and lots of other students who just needed to write a paper. They were quite popular.

    --
    -JoeBoy
  76. No, You are wrong. by Alligator427 · · Score: 1

    Is this a fact or an assumption?

    Are you an art director?

    A graphic designer?

    A typeography expert?

    I really doubt it.

    The claim that the mac offers nothing special or unique in the field of digital arts today is very simply not true. I am a programmer now, but I was an art director for many years and I still work with art directors and designers every day. I can assure you that there are excellent reasons for the preference of Mac OS X in this field. Not the least of these is the fact that the Mac OS UI and windowing system is better designed for interoperability between different programs that must be used to cooperatively edit/create a single document. Mac OS X assumes that you want to see more than one thing at once, and work cooperatively between several documents concurrently to complete a single task. It is designed around showing you multiple documents simultaneously, in different applications. Windows is designed around the assumption that you will want to limit your concentration to one program at a time, and one document at a time (minimize/maximize), and although you can work with several documents at once in different applications, windows is not designed for that work style and makes it somewhat of a pain. here is an example.

    Suppose I am working on some marketing collateral, I am going to be using inDesign (or Quark, if I live in the dark ages) for my paste up program. Lets say there is some EPS artwork in my indesign document, that must be edited with Illustrator, and lets say that this EPS artwork also uses some bitmaps that must be edited in Photoshop. Suppose that the collateral piece also contains a few bitmaps that have not been embedded in other EPS artwork. I will need to use inDesign to edit the layout, illustrator to edit the EPSs and photoshop to edit bitmaps in the EPSs as well as the bitmaps directly in the indesign document. I will change my .eps and .psd docs in illustrator and EPS, observe their appearance within my layout in the inDesign program, make changes to my layout in indesign, and re-adjust in photoshop and illustrator until I have it right. I am working on one document, using three different programs and it is much easier to do this with an os that it designed to show you many documents at once.

    Mac OS X puts a priority on document access, even though documents are being edited in a parent application, this is not the case in windows.

    The point is: design work forces you to use multiple applications to work on one document, and the Mac OS windowing system is far superior for this type of work situation than windows. Why? Because windows has always been designed to show one document at a time time. You can run your programs in small windows that are next to each other but if you have more than one document open in a program, those documents are often restricted to occupying only the space of a parent "program" window ... as with photoshop on windows. Any print designer will tell you what a horrific pain in the ass this is when you are working with multiple documents in photoshop that are going to be embedded in an indesign or illustrator document. This is, and has always been one of the reasons that (graphic) designers and art directors prefer Mac OS X (and Mac OS) over windows.

    Some service bureaus use windows machines to cut costs on running certain operations, but the designers and art directors that I work with, all prefer macs with very few exceptions. A very few *web* designers prefer windows because they want to work in the same environment that most people surf in, and because (some) web designers (often) just use photoshop to comp up sites (which makes the windowing thing less of an issue).

    Another reason that macs have always been the leader in the creative industries is it's superior type handling: windows type rendering flat out sucks. Windows has improved its colour handling, but it is still far inferior to what the mac come

    --
    -JoeBoy
  77. I'm Betting... by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ...that Wilkes University doesn't have a school of engineering.

  78. Paging Mr. Anyone by BancBoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But anyone can tell you that the Altivec, with its lack of double precision floating point support, is not well suited to scientific applications.

    Anyone except NASA in 2000.
    http://hpc.sourceforge.net/NASA_G4_Study.pdf
    Or the High Performance Computing gang..
    http://hpc.sourceforge.net/index2.php
    --
    [UID-HeinzIntel]
    1. Re:Paging Mr. Anyone by Paradox · · Score: 1

      NASA is sorely outnumbered on this issue. I don't claim to know why they decided on the G4s, but I can only assume it's because they have very wise mathmaticians who have decided that they don't need double-precision floating point. Even this presents problems, since C stdlib math functions all implicitly cast to double before doing their work. It's really annoying.

      I can only assume that NASA had the resources to work around that problem. I sure didn't when I worked at Lockheed.

      And the HPC page you linked is a software description, is that supposed to mean anything other than that yes, the software existed?

      --
      Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
    2. Re:Paging Mr. Anyone by prockcore · · Score: 1

      Anyone except NASA in 2000.


      Ironically, the year after they lost both the Polar Lander and the Mars Orbiter due to math problems.