Review of 'MacHeads' Documentary

An anonymous reader writes "Just prior to its premiere at MacWorld later this week, CNet has a review of MacHeads, the new documentary film covering the obsessive world of Apple fanboyism. MacHeads features commentary from original Apple employees, the self-confessed Apple-obsessed and girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users. Summed up by CNet: 'MacHeads is a superb film that will give Apple haters a few cheap laughs, and Apple fans a few cheap thrills. But it'll entertain both equally, while educating everybody else.'"

Comments

I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[elrous0]

...like my obsessive defense of Deep Space 9 as the best of the Trek series.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[jellomizer]

Yea but they just coppied Babylon 5.
Think about it...
Based on a space station.
The head honcho of the station had a rank of commander then later on there was a captain.
Head Honcho(s) had some deep destiny that they needed to follow controlled by an alien race with supernatural powers who talked in confusing language that only became clear once the events have happened.
A secondary race of aliens who somehow have a more detailed knowledge of these super aliens.
War against a superior race who at first is considered indestructible and later on in the series killing them becomes a piece of cake.
Command of a ship that is brand new. Much smaller then the other ships and cannot be recognized as one of the good guys. But chalk full of shooting goodness. Now with some alien technology that makes it that much more devastating.

It is only the best Trek series because they stole everything from Babylon 5.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[hey!]

Depends on what you mean by "best series". It had some of the best and some of the worst episodes. If you liked the kind of story arc format TNG moved into, it had much to offer.

The problem with DS9 is that Paramount had decided to structure the ST franchise as a cash cow, running two series at a time on overlapping lifetimes. This wasn't a problem in that DS9's different format provided more leeway for different kinds of stories, but once Voyager was in full swing, both series began to suffer from script problems. Both series continued to produce enough good shows for one series, and in some cases each series produced outstanding stories. But as time wore on the frequency of truly awful scripts began to increase; I don't think there was enough creative energy for two simultaneous shows.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[commodore64_love]

>>>Think about it...

Also the creator of Babylon 5 *gave* the series Bible plus multiple scripts to Paramount in 1991. He made it extremely easy for Paramount to copy B5's design, characterizations, and plot.

No matter.

Both DS9 and B5 rank as my #1 favorite series. B5 has a slight edge with its "novel for tv" presentation, but DS9 has better standalone short stories (like "The Visitor"). I love them both.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[HadouKen24]

I think that DS9 was the best of the Treks for reasons which have nothing to do with the above.

The ethnocentrism and blind idealism of the Federation is brought into view. Though supposedly welcoming and accepting, it views races like the Ferengi with distrust and even disdain.

Religion is treated more directly and more honestly than in most television shows, period. Almost unimportant (except as an occasional plot device) in the other Treks, now questions of personal religious conviction are addressed. And religious extremism and religiously motivated violence as a result have to be dealt with.

The question of the legitimate limit of violence when under occupation is brought up--and we don't get much of an answer at all.

Potential consequences of genetic enhancement are not only considered, but humanized in the figure of an important character.

In general, DS9 manages to help us get a grip on contemporary problems and worries by putting them at a distance from us (and, to be fair, by oversimplifying and exaggerating them). In doing so, it becomes much more interesting.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Anonymous Coward]

It was the best by a large margin but it still suffered from the problem that inherently it was still Star Trek.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Fallingcow]

I thought DS9 was the most consistent of the new Trek series, especially past season 1.

IMO, TNG had a much bigger "amazing episode followed by an unwatchable POS that doesn't even seem like the same show" problem. I think that DS9 generated fewer 5-out-of-5 excellent individual episodes, but also fewer 1-out-of-5ers. Still a few 5s, though, and loads of 4s.

The multi-episode and season-long story arcs are why it's my favorite.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[rickb928]

That is easily indulged in most ST series. Try getting your physical obsessions on in Battlestar Galactica (new version, please). There can be only one, and she's wearing more clothes as the series drags on. All others are just dumbed down to obscurity.

Then again, they could be making us work for it. Yeah, that's it, they aren't so easy on BG. Now Enterprise, that's just too damned easy. And most ST series, which never shyed away from the sensual.

Me? Enterprise was cleary the best series. We saw all the nastiness, and the failures. The Vulcans were indeed imperious, but much more overbearing so long as earth was stuck in Warp 5 hell, and no transporters. They underestimated us. Common error. And of course a captain with a dog? Priceless.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Dishevel]

So.

Aliens underestimating humans is a common error?

I think you may need your meds adjusted a bit.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[hemp]

J. Michael Straczynski has related how he pitched the idea for Babylon 5 to anyone and everyone(including the producers of ST:NG) in Hollywood in 1989.

Some how, they forgot that long story arcs don't work to well on a moving starship and we got Voyager.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Anonymous Coward]

so where did they get the time-machine to steal the B5 episodes...

DS9 was canceled BEFORE B5 aired.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Culture20]

DS9 copied everything from another, older show. There was this show called Star Trek back in the 70's. It had a Federation, Star Fleet, transporters, warp drive, phasers, photon torpedoes, Vulcans, Klingons, and there was one episode of DS9 where they even used old footage of Star Trek and digitally added in DS9 characters. T(e)ribble, if you ask me. ;)

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[StikyPad]

Though supposedly welcoming and accepting, it views races like the Ferengi with distrust and even disdain.

And with good reason!! Those ugly swindling bastards would sell their own mothers if it would turn a profit.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Bemopolis]

It is only the best Trek series because they stole everything from Babylon 5.

That explains why the first season sucked.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[lysergic.acid]

DS9 has some great episodes like In the Pale Moonlight and some of the Ferengi-centered ones provided great comedy relief dispersed throughout the more serious story arc. however, there was also a ton of completely unwatchable crap IMO--particularly the episodes about Sisko's gradual conversion to Bajoran religion and were basically preaching religious faith.

i mean, Gene Roddenberry was a staunch atheist, and he makes this pretty clear throughout TNG. so even though there were TNG episodes that touched on the issue of religion, it was understood that religiosity is not a trait of an enlightened society, nor would it be conducive of the scientific advances necessary for interstellar travel. yet Rick Berman bases the entire DS9 series around the Bajoran race, a backward theocracy steeped in superstition and religious cliches, that somehow managed to develop FTL propulsion technology in a time when their society still obeyed a caste system.

this no doubt gave DS9 a broader appeal to the general population, but it really goes against the original spirit of Star Trek. for me part of the appeal of Star Trek was Roddenberry's use of science fiction to explore alternative lifestyles, social dynamics, and political systems. he used Star Trek to ponder what life would be like without familiar social institutions like religion, nation-states, or capitalism. being set in the future, Roddenberry tried to extrapolate and project the social/cultural/political progress humanity might make over several centuries time.

in contrast, Bajoran society is just an idealized version of past & existing theocracies. there's a state religion, but somehow religious conflict & intolerance aren't an issue, because everyone follows the same religion. and instead of solving problems on one's own using rational thought and human(oid) ingenuity, the series often advocates prayer and having faith in the supernatural to solve your problems for you. i think one season finale even ends with a deus ex machina through intervention by the wormhole aliens (the prophets). not to mention, TOS and TNG were both primarily about discovery/exploration and interaction with alien species, whereas much of DS9 is centered around gun fights and space battles.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[anagama]

Plus, the episodes with Dom-Kira were just 30 seconds away from pornographic.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[mqsoh]

Babylon 5 dealt with all those themes as well. Most science fiction will deal with one or more of those themes. It's a part of the genre.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[rickb928]

Whoa! we're talking about TV series here.

My meds are just fine. You may want to regain your grip on reality.

It's just TV. OK?

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[MortenMW]

Yeah right, everyone knows that Star Wars is the best

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[W2k]

You're missing a key point with regards to the Bajoran religion; their gods actually exist and on multiple occasions throughout DS9 do they interfere directly in the lives of their worshippers, Sisko included. You'd need pretty strong reasons not to become religious if god came to you and told you you were his prophet. (Assuming you couldn't blame it on mental health issues.)

As for solving problems by prayer and faith, praying to a god who not only exists for a fact but who also has a track record of helping his followers actually makes quite a lot of sense from a rational pov.

Of course, none of this has anything to do with religion in the real world. I'm an atheist, too.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[commodore64_love]

>>>The problem with DS9 is that Paramount had decided to structure the ST franchise as a cash cow, running two series at a time on overlapping lifetimes
>>>

Actually according to the producers of DS9, this was a *great* development, because Paramount focused all its attention on the UPN flagship show, Voyager, and ignored DS9. That allowed the producers of DS9 to experiment with new ideas that Paramount otherwise would not have allowed.

 

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[lysergic.acid]

if the wormhole aliens are really supernatural deities then DS9 becomes sci-fi-fantasy. but just because you believe something/someone to be a god/prophet does not actually make them a supernatural deity. the Aztecs initially thought the conquistadors were gods, but that does not make Cortés a divine/supernatural being. likewise, other societies have worshiped natural phenomena like fire and lightning as gods, attributing the unexplained to the supernatural, but that does not make those natural phenomena magical or supernatural.

the point is, if you attribute everything you don't understand to the supernatural, then you won't ever learn and grow intellectually. if Newton or Einstein simply attributed the way things are to the supernatural, then they would never have discovered the laws of physics that underly the natural universe. so it's very unlikely that a civilization based on a theocracy would ever develop any kind of advanced technology, unless it was simply handed to them by their "prophets." i mean, imagine if all schools/universities were to teach creationism rather than biology, or we still believed in a geocentric universe--do you think such an environment would be conducive of scientific/technological progress?

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[spire3661]

I think that is Rule of Acquisition #4453

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[The Slashdot Guy]

There was this show called Star Trek back in the 70's

There was also one in the 60's.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[W2k]

I think DS9 leaves open the question of whether the "prophets" are really "divine beings" or just another kind of alien. They certainly have an air of divinity about them, but so do other entities of the Star Trek universe, such as Q. However, if the Bajorans worship the prophets and that gets then something in return, what's the problem exactly? Obviously it hasn't stopped them from developing advanced tech; although you think it "unlikely", in the ST universe it has in fact happened. Perhaps the Bajoran religion actually encourages its followers to learn about the world around them.

Now, we can of course moan over the fact that a supposedly enlightened human like Sisko went religious, but clearly it saved his/DS9's/humanity's ass on several occasions, so what would have been his alternative? To pretend they didn't exist? To wait for his scientists to come up with plausible scientific explanations for the prophets' appearence of "divinity" before talking to them?

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[cp.tar]

Though supposedly welcoming and accepting, it views races like the Ferengi with distrust and even disdain.

And with good reason!! Those ugly swindling bastards would sell their own mothers if it would turn a profit.

Isn't that called capitalism?</tongueincheek>

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup "Deep Space 9, It's Mission: To Boldly Stay Where No Man Has Stayed Before"

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[jellomizer]

Um no,
Deep Space 9: January 3, 1993 - June 2, 1999
Babylon 5: February 22, 1993 - November 25, 1998

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Fallingcow]

Oh, I agree, they had some great episodes, up there with the best of TNG. Not as many though, IMO. But, as I said, they also had fewer cringe-worthy shitty episodes.

And yes, Pale Moonlight is one of the best bits of television I've ever seen. The ending monologue gives me chills every time.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[delysid-x]

This is true, but doesn't really count, it's not a TV series. Dr Who FTW. 3 Tom Baker

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[CZakalwe]

Show me the Latinuuuuuuum!

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Anonymous Coward]

70s? If you're talking about the animated series, then you're speaking out of canon, sir.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[master_p]

Deep Space 9 does not fit into Star Trek. It could be another separate show, a wonderful show, but it has a style which is not Star Trek.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[Anonymous Coward]

For me the main reason is simple... Dax (Terry Farrell) :) What a body! :)

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[elrous0]

Yes, it's the only one of them where the characters seem to exist in something resembling the real world, as opposed to the laughably idealistic utopias of the other Trek series. It's a different style, and a far superior one (IMHO).

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[elrous0]

DS9 had some truly great episodes and very few really bad ones. Compare that to TNG and Voyager (which had entire seasons of cringe-worthy episodes) or TOS and Enterprise (which had very few episodes that WEREN'T cringe-worthy) and it holds up as easily the best. For anyone who wants to maintain that TNG was the best, I have but one retort: Riker without the beard.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[elrous0]

Only if you live in an alternate universe where Voyager and Enterprise were the only two Trek series. And a horrible, horrible dystopic universe that would be.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[elrous0]

Most of the elements you describe are not particularly original. DS9 and B5 were contemporaries and shared a few very basic ideas (common to many science fiction series that preceded them), but they had vastly different tones and styles. Accusing DS9 of being a rip-off just because it was set on a space station is laughable. And every other element you describe as common to both series had been mainstays of science fiction for decades (the leader-with-a-destiny and powerful-enemy-who-later-becomes-my-friend are in fact *ancient* literary tropes). Even the idea of a space station setting was just a slight variation of the idea of setting a show on a large spaceship.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[tmarsh86]

Stole everything? Hardly. I agree that it is the best of the Trek series. Next Gen. had some awesome single episodes and Season 5 was one of the best ever, but DS9 overall was incredible.

Re:I prefer to stick to more healthy obsessions

[commodore64_love]

I still consider seasons 1 and 2 of the original series the best Trek ever produced. Season 4 of TNG is also quite good.

Huh.

[Anonymous Coward]

girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users

They're probably ugly anyway.

Re:Huh.

[Chrisq]

girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users

They're probably ugly anyway.

Now you can blame Microsoft for nnot getting laid too...

Re:Huh.

[Thanshin]

Now you can blame Microsoft for not getting laid too...

Now?

Re:Huh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't matter, all the Mac users are gay anyway.

c'mon, you knew it was going to be said.

p.s. i'm gay... and anonymous. *phhhhhbt* at mods!

Re:Huh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Foolish little scared gay anonymous guy, I has your IP.

Re:Huh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Here, have mine too.

Re:Huh.

[Anonymous Coward]

girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users

They're probably ugly anyway.

Now you can blame Microsoft for nnot getting laid too...

Can I blame Microsoft for my gonorrhea?

Re:Huh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides that you probably get only one supported position anyway... Mac's and choice...

Re:Huh.

[kv9]

girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users

but will they fuck them? one of my W2K boxen just happens to have 257 days of uptime. hey baby, you wanna go back to my place and restart my services?

Hmmm...

[bowl_of_petunias]

"self-confessed Apple-obsessed and girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users"

Probably true... the odds of *ever* getting laid are not particularly good for os-obsessed humans.

~bowl_of_petunias~

ps- Speaking of not getting laid, anyone know a hot linux-obsessed lesbian?

Re:Hmmm...

[betterunixthanunix]

Linux users don't have sex! I have documentary evidence of this:

http://xkcd.com/196/

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

anyone know a hot linux-obsessed lesbian?

Hmmm...let's do some quick back-of-the envelope calculation. Six billion people in the world, three billion women. Maybe 10% are "hot" (as opposed to cute, pretty, whatever, which would be a lower standard). That's 600M hot women. Say 5% are truly lesbian (as opposed to bi, bi-curious, etc), so 6M hot lesbians in the whole world. Let's say 50% use computers (I'm not sure about this number), and 1% of those use Linux.

There should be about 30,000 hot Linux-using lesbians in the world.

Re:Hmmm...

[Thanshin]

ps- Speaking of not getting laid, anyone know a hot linux-obsessed lesbian?

Yes, and she's looking for another one.

Re:Hmmm...

[bowl_of_petunias]

They do too!

Well, I've heard rumors...

I'm pretty sure...

I can totally prove my point utilizing a clever cartoon and my powers of snarky wit! I just need to find a link...

click...

click...

clickity clack click...

Drat!

Oh well, at least I still have my pron.

Re:Hmmm...

[sakdoctor]

30,000?

Someone should start a social networking site.

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

From TFS:

An anonymous reader writes... the self-confessed Apple-obsessed * and girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users

As the absence of the words "guys" at the asterisk above points out, the anonymous submitter clearly couldn't care about men. Hmmm...

Re:Hmmm...

[bowl_of_petunias]

Or it's a copy & paste from the original post...

Re:Hmmm...

[Thanshin]

Around you 10% of women are hot?

Mr. Hefner? Is that you?

Re:Hmmm...

[bowl_of_petunias]

And most of them are 40 :-)

Small market... though I'm willing to compromise on the "hot" part. Cute is great, too.

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually yes, and she's Asian, too!

Re:Hmmm...

[krunk7]

Because everyone knows, no matter how obsessed a man becomes he'll still sleep with the enemy.

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

*raises hand*

Re:Hmmm...

[joaommp]

Yes, they do get laid... they're just too humble to tell anyone...

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, either that or we're paying for it and just don't feel like bragging about booty we paid for.

Seriously, if you're THAT desperate to get laid and can't get it the normal way for whatever reason, then hookers work fine. Drop a few $$$ and if you go with escorts rather than a street walker you're probably going to be with a girl 10x better looking than you could have just randomly hooked up with anyways.

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Crap, I knew I forgot something. Yeah, a reasonable age range takes it down to maybe 10,000, and I probably overestimated the number of computer users in the world.

But really, I've always found that people with hugely different interests are more interesting. I'm a (male) computer dork, and all my real girlfriends have been of the artist/poet/fashion designer persuasion. As long as they're intelligent and like good music, we're golden.

Re:Hmmm...

[joaommp]

maybe the problem is that they find a girl that actually hooks up with a geek and want to keep her for themselves - possession generates envy :P

Re:Hmmm...

[Beyond_GoodandEvil]

Drop a few $$$ and if you go with escorts rather than a street walker you're probably going to be with a girl 10x better looking than you could have just randomly hooked up with anyways.
Gov. Spitzer is that you?

Re:Hmmm...

[MBGMorden]

Hmmm...let's do some quick back-of-the envelope calculation. Six billion people in the world, three billion women. Maybe 10% are "hot" (as opposed to cute, pretty, whatever, which would be a lower standard). That's 600M hot women. Say 5% are truly lesbian (as opposed to bi, bi-curious, etc), so 6M hot lesbians in the whole world. Let's say 50% use computers (I'm not sure about this number), and 1% of those use Linux.

There should be about 30,000 hot Linux-using lesbians in the world.

Your data is likely skewed in several areas. For one, of those 3 billion women, a significant portion of them are going to be either minors, or the elderly. For the "sex era" you're probably looking at the 18-45 age bracket. You can probably reduce your 3 billion by at least 40% there.

Your 5% number for pure lesbians is also likely a tad high. A wiki article on homosexuality cites a poll taken of registered votes where 4% identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. So 1% less off the bat, but you also have to account for some % of that 4% being bisexual too.

50% using computers is REALLY high. Maybe in the US, Japan, etc, and other developed nations, but a lot of the world's population is still living in huts and figuring out how to survive each day. The number of people using computers to any significant extent is going to be far lower than 50%.

Finally, Linux users are less than 1% of computer users, and I'd posit a STRONG guess that Linux users are disproportionately skewed towards males rather than females (not so much out of any "ew, girls are bad at computers" issue as it is societal pressure pushing many girls out of the fields/areas that would lead to a progressed interest in the technical aspects of computers, which often goes along with running Linux. That's changing some now, but is still an issue).

So, while I'd posit that there certainly is some non-zero number of lesbian Linux zealots out there, I doubt there's anywhere near 30,000 of them ;).

Re:Hmmm...

[geekgirlandrea]

ps- Speaking of not getting laid, anyone know a hot linux-obsessed lesbian?

*raises hand*

Re:Hmmm...

[geekgirlandrea]

You ignored age, and it still only works if you assume all these parameters are uncorrelated. Speaking as someone who was once one of five women in a graduating class of 160 computer science majors, this, rather unfortunately, does not appear to be the case.

On the other hand, I do know two others besides myself now. Well, my girlfriend is more of an OpenBSD person, so maybe that doesn't count. :)

Re:Hmmm...

[Hatta]

You're assuming all of those qualities are independent. I don't think that's the case. I'd be willing to bet that a linux using female is more likely than average to be a lesbian. That's just my personal bias, but it seems likely that a female who enjoys one stereotypical male behavior (using linux) is probably more predisposed to enjoy another stereotypical male behavior (screwing chicks). I'd also predict that lesbians are less likely to be hot than average, simply because a significant proportion of them are butch.

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

all my real girlfriends have been of the artist/poet/fashion designer persuasion

What's it like dating a woman who doesn't shower?

Re:Hmmm...

[Toonol]

Interesting. I'd estimate: 10% hot (sure). 3% lesbian. 10% use computers. 0.1% use Linux. That would lead to 900 hot, lesbian, linux using women. That's probably closer to the truth, because I think the real answer is closer to TWO.

That's assuming those are independent variables, though. There might be a negative correlation between Hot/Linux or Lesbians/Computer use. (Or, sadly, between 'real lesbian' and 'hot'.)

Re:Hmmm...

[Azuma Hazuki]

I know two...well, one bisexual and one lesbian. Though since those are my love and myself respectively and we're like fanatically monogamous, it's not going anywhere. Seirously though, there have got to be more of us out there; just keep looking! Go to the local LGBTA or something, I know there's more of us.

Re:Hmmm...

[Merritt.kr]

Naw, I already found her. Though in my case, I got her interested in Linux! :)

Re:Hmmm...

[CZakalwe]

then hookers work fine.

No No No! For Linux users the sex has to FREE and Open!

Re:Hmmm...

[XDirtypunkX]

Many Linux users find that's something they have in common with these women!

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

*cough* Check the picture on her homepage link before modding up *cough*

Re:Hmmm...

[Gilmoure]

My wife used to admin some SCO Unix boxes in the 90's but now we both support Macs and Blackberries. Belly dancing tech chicks rock!

Holy water? Garlic?

[Thanshin]

Other titles you may also enjoy:

- People who buy Nike shooes!
- Maserati: A noble car embiggens the smallest man.

Re:Holy water? Garlic?

[UltraAyla]

jokes on you motherfucker - you managed to misspell shoes.

It was a perfectly cromulent spelling of shoes for dramatic effect

Re:Holy water? Garlic?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing says "I don't have a personality" like quoting the Simpsons! Please, stop modding this shit funny. If it's funny, then a bird regurgitating food for its babies is FUCKIN' HILARIOUS.

Re:Holy water? Garlic?

[CZakalwe]

Woooosh.. See that vapor trail in the sky dumbass? That was a joke

Re:Holy water? Garlic?

[Gilmoure]

Marge! The internet's making fun of me again.

"Trekkies" with a different context

[CommandoCody]

More likely, "MacHeads is another cheap 'find a subculture and mock it' film that will pander to Apple haters, and bore or irritate Apple fans. It will broaden the minds of neither, and pass unnoticed by everyone else."

Re:"Trekkies" with a different context

[rolfwind]

More likely, "MacHeads is another cheap 'find a subculture and mock it' film that will pander to Apple haters, and bore or irritate Apple fans. It will broaden the minds of neither, and pass unnoticed by everyone else."

Yeah. What I find are more anti-whatevers, than pro-whatevers. People obsessing over what other people use. Some of the causes might be legitimate (marketshare concerns or they end up doing tech support for friends/relatives) and some are petty (obsessing how other people spend their money).

For the classic in OS satire, there is "The Unix Hater's Handbook":
http://www.icce.rug.nl/edu/ugh.pdf

It was pretty much the poke in the eye to unix users but the anti-foreword was written by Dennis Ritchie - but was just as scathing right back:) (This was when some users came from other systems, like Lisp Machines.) It's probably still relevant today, seeing as how OS with unix foundations are the only OS with marketshare outside Windows these days.

Re:"Trekkies" with a different context

[TheRaven64]

The Unix Hater's Handbook, by the way, is well worth anyone reading. Some of the comments are still valid today, and some now apply to a lot more systems than UNIX. Some, such as the X11 section, are largely obsolete (for example, many of the complaints about X11 were due to different, incompatible, X servers - now pretty much everyone uses X.org, even on Windows). A lot of the criticisms are still dead on, however, and are made even more sad by the fact that they are due to Free Software developers who never had access to systems that did things a better way (Lisp Machines, Multics, Burroughs Large Systems and so on), and so don't know any better.

Re:"Trekkies" with a different context

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

I'll keep that in mind when I create my documentary on people who pan movies they've never seen on the internet.

Re:"Trekkies" with a different context

[Rary]

I'm betting it goes pretty easy on the Apple fans. It is premiering at MacWorld, after all.

Re:"Trekkies" with a different context

[earlymon]

More likely, "MacHeads is another cheap 'find a subculture and mock it' film that will pander to Apple haters, and bore or irritate Apple fans. It will broaden the minds of neither, and pass unnoticed by everyone else."

Right on and then some. From TFA:

At just under an hour in length, this unbiased, unnarrated documentary takes a balanced approach to peeling the onion of Apple fanboyism.

As fanboyism is in and of itself biased by definition, I find the claim that anyone can make an unbiased documentary of fanatic behavior to be quite specious.

Fanboys have be about 2.5 or 3 sigma types of users. I find many comments to this article treating it all as +/- 1 sigma - and it's just not.

I only wish they had mods for Incisive, because your post truly is that - many thanks!

Fence Burns

[vjmurphy]

"MacHeads is a superb film that will give Apple haters a few cheap laughs, and Apple fans a few cheap thrills. But it'll entertain both equally, while educating everybody else."

Wow, that's such a fence-sitting position that it's probably hard on their butts. It's as if they don't want to offend anyone. "While World War II was indeed a deadly conflict, it gave the Allies a few cheap laughs, and the Axis a few cheap thrills, but it'll kill both equally." I think I can use this for my upcoming performance review...

Re:Fence Burns

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I can use this for my upcoming performance review...

In that case I hope you didn't perform like the Axis, I would't wish unemployment on anybody in this economy.

Educating?

[Anonymous Coward]

"MacHeads is a superb film that will give Apple haters a few cheap laughs, and Apple fans a few cheap thrills. But it'll entertain both equally, while educating everybody else."

Hmmm ... at one time "educating" meant a bit more than sitting in front of the TV. That's what used to be called entertainment. "Education" was studying people like Plato and Shakespeare and Kant, gaining some culture and learning how to think.

As for "Apple haters" ... are there many? Some people do go overboard for the company, and that can be mildly irritating. But does anyone really "hate" them or the company? Personally, I like Apple's products but I don't give a damn for Apple as Apple. And, frankly, Apple computers pre the Steve Jobs return and the acquisition of the excellent Unix/NeXT technology weren't worth using. Terrible trash.

Really, what person with any sense cares about any brand as a brand?

Now a really amusing subject for a documentary might be "Windows haters". Everyone hates Windows. Even Windows users hate Windows. Mac users might love their machines too much, and the same goes for some Linux-heads. However no-one - but no one - loves a Windows box. People just tolerate them through gritted teeth.

Re:Educating?

[vadim_t]

Depends on what you mean by "apple hater".

For instance, I won't buy any product by Microsoft, Apple, Sony or Creative.

In my view, Apple is just as bad as Microsoft, they just lack the marketshare to pull off the truly nasty stuff, so I'm not going to give them any.

As far as "hating" them, not really. I don't spend the day trolling Apple forums and websites, or anything of the sort.

But even corporate behavior aside, the Apple fanboys are a turnoff. I want to feel like I'm making a good purchase, not buying an entry into a religious cult. I'm also completely uninterested in praises of Steve Jobs, Apple's UI design and such things. Though the same goes for all other companies.

Re:Educating?

[Eli Gottlieb]

Except that Apple's UI and APIs are actually pretty damn good. I keep saying this, but someone ought to write free implementations for Linux...

Re:Educating?

[db32]

I used to think Apple just equated to overpriced junk. Played around with a Mac Book Pro in the store and was impressed with design (Yes... Computers, ESPECIALLY laptops are more than just a processor, RAM, and a hard drive). I picked one up on refurb. I had long since converted to Linux for everything except the occasional game (like one every year or two) and this is what I have learned.

The OS does indeed make a huge difference. PC users mock Mac users for their "fanboy" stuff, but it is because PC users don't understand what it is like to have a computer that is actually nice to use. PC users will use their frame of reference of their experience with computers and think Mac users are just babbling nonsense. They go off on things like "Mac is an Intel PC now" and write it off as that.

You are 100% right. With the exception of the occasional MS zealot (that frequently has a rather weak or warped understanding of computing anyways) I have never met anyone that enjoyed Windows. At best they "like" Windows because of the games, which has nothing to do with Windows itself. People pretty much loathe Windows itself universally.

Linux users are a different variety. It appeals to the power user that likes to tinker. Desktop linux is definitely coming a long way, but it does not have the same polished UI that OS X has. There is certainly way more freedom under the hood, but that appeals to a relatively small group. Linux users tend to enjoy their linux desktops because they like to tinker. Distros tend to get chosen based on how much you must tinker to get everything working the way you want.

This leaves OS X. OS X has that nice unix underbelly these days so power users can get things like fink and macports and still have Aqua with their X11 stuff and so on and so forth. I keep hearing Windows users badmouth linux with "Windows just works" and after using OS X for about a year I do not think it means what they think it means. I work with computers... I don't want to have to go home and work on my damned computer. OS X has an interesting way of making unixy things terribly simple. Installing software...you click on the dmg file, drag the app to Applications, done. At the lower level, you just mounted a disk image, copied a foo.app folder that has a file in it that tells OS X to display it as a pretty icon instead of a folder, and your application is "installed". No silly registry BS, no complicated digging and wondering where the hell it put your files, etc. It is a joy to use it as a generic use computer. That is why Mac users advocate for Mac so much...it makes computers nice to use rather than a constant battle of bullshit like Windows.

That said I think OS X servers are kinda goofy, the major appeal to Apple is their nice hardware, superior design, and nice UI... In the server market where the box stays in a rack all day it pretty much kills any superior hardware/design stuff since you never see it, and the fancy UI on a server is a waste I think. All my servers that I am not forced to use Windows on are all linux. Linux is a joy to use as a server.

Re:Educating?

[Twisp]

I think 'Apple haters' should be more appropriately phrased 'Apple fanboy haters.' I don't really like Apple as a company, but I do respect them.

Apple fanboys, on the other hand, can be rather annoying. I wouldn't go as far as hating them, but I'm not sure I would blame others for doing so.

And no, not everyone hates Windows. Much like Apple, I don't really like them as a company, but I do respect them. In fact, I would go as far as lumping Windows haters in with Apple fanboys. Both are pretty annoying.

Re:Educating?

[vadim_t]

They are good, but the constant preaching about how everything Apple makes is the best thing since sliced bread is what turns me off.

Re:Educating?

[Zakabog]

"No silly registry BS, no complicated digging and wondering where the hell it put your files, etc. It is a joy to use it as a generic use computer."

Until you actually want to delete the program in question and then wonder why the installation took up more room than the delete freed up. Then you do a search to find where it put other files (especially for any large program) and see there's a bunch of documentation lying around, some library files, a couple of random directories that will never be used again, all things that most uninstalls (especially for any large program) should take care of.

Re:Educating?

[db32]

That depends on the app. The most I have seen happen from the drag/drop variety are plist files created elsewhere that hold the preferences and whatnot. The few that I have bumped into that do much more than that often have installers/uninstallers. Though I do agree, the ones that do toss other stuff around with no sane way to clean up are pretty irritating, however losing some disk space is not even remotely in the same ballpark as the registry nightmare that Windows does. Personally my favorite is the apt/dpkg toolset.

Re:Educating?

[mac_sux]

As for "Apple haters" ... are there many?

Yes

Now a really amusing subject for a documentary might be "Windows haters". Everyone hates Windows. Even Windows users hate Windows.

That is a patently false assertion.

Re:Educating?

[denzacar]

Now a really amusing subject for a documentary might be "Windows haters". Everyone hates Windows. Even Windows users hate Windows. Mac users might love their machines too much, and the same goes for some Linux-heads. However no-one - but no one - loves a Windows box. People just tolerate them through gritted teeth.

I smell a potential marketing campaign here...

"Don't be a pussy - use Windows."
"Windows - our users don't get results handed to them on a silver platter. They have to actually work to get things done."
"Windows made me a man I am today."
"People that are insecure about their geek cred keep switching their OSes all the time. True geeks use Windows."
"I used to fear heights and flying. Since I used Windows, nothing fears me anymore."

Sure beats that Seinfeld waste of money.

Re:Educating?

[Gizzmonic]

Serves you right for using Adobe programs.

Re:Educating?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, no.

The application itself is in [~]/Applications, the documents or savegames or whatever are either where you put them or in ~/Documents, and all other files are in ~/Library/Application Support/$APPNAME.

Re:Educating?

[mjwx]

As for "Apple haters" ... are there many?

Depends on who you ask, if you make a disparaging comment about apple, no matter how valid it is a fanboy will label you as a "hater".

Re:Educating?

[bonch]

You're avoiding high-quality stuff because of some vocal individuals. That's silly.

Re:Educating?

[vadim_t]

The problem is that since every Apple fan is going to sing the praises of every trivial trivial thing in every Apple product, it makes it impossible to tell whether it's indeed high quality or not. There are too many people according to who good design is whatever Apple does.

Back when their computers would come with mice with one button, every fan would extoll the superior and intuitive Apple design that didn't need the "confusing" second button. Of course now that Apple changed, that's just dandy too.

Then there's that every fault is ignored or swept under the rug.

But even without that, no, I don't consider Apple to be "high quality". It's shiny and polished, but always with unacceptable "features", such as DRM, non-replaceable batteries, lock-in and so on.

Good God, they're still around?

[Phybersyk0]

I don't get this obsession. Back in the day I was a rabid (psychotic) Amiga fan/user. As I matured I realized something, IT'S JUST A COMPUTER GUYS. JUST ANOTHER TOOL. If people were this committed to, say hammers or forstner bits -- you'd think they were completely insane.

I'm also looking at you, the "yeah, but can it run LINUX" crowd. For fucks sake, people many of you are amongst the most intelligent human beings in the world, you need to be out there breeding instead of developing a goddamn zippo lighter simulator for your iPhone.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[jerep]

I'm also looking at you, the "yeah, but can it run LINUX" crowd. For fucks sake, people many of you are amongst the most intelligent human beings in the world

Since when is the linux crowd the most intelligent human beings? I'm not against linux people or anything but I fail to see how smarter they are compared to any other kind of people. In my opinion they're just more knowledgeable in this one field.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Anonymous Coward]

"yeah, but can it run LINUX" is probably supposed to be taken lightly, like one of those things we call a joke. I highly doubt it means what you think it means.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hammers totally own. Screwdrivers suck.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Tranzistors]

Just another tool, eh?
Considering the fact that we wouldn't be able to do much of what we are doing now without any tools says something about how important they are. And really how much of a human are we with a stick at most?
These tools let us be human like and thus they become part of us.
Should we be obsessed? Of course not, by the virtue of the word 'obsessed', which has negative meaning.
Should we consider a computer *just* another tool? Perhaps, but we won't.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Anonymous Coward]

For fucks sake, people many of you are amongst the most intelligent human beings in the world, you need to be out there breeding

Unfortunately, the more intelligent people are the ones who realize that breeding is a stupid thing to do. It's the idiots who don't know any better.

What the intelligent should be doing is force sterilizing idiots. Then intelligent people can breed without contributing to the overpopulation of the earth.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[yttrstein]

*were* among the most intelligent human beings in the world.

I think what you're not considering is the fact that you yourself have aged, and therefore your opinions and perceptions have changed as well. Most people mellow out of the "raging 20s" where everything seems like a social injustice, even if it's some guy in a coffee shop using an OS that they think "sucks".

It seems to me that it's a problem of relativity. The people you seem to be referencing are very likely right around the same age you were (and I was) when we were ferocious about such things. I was an Amiga person too, and then a rabid Mac owner, then an elite NeXT user, then a smartass Linux user, but eventually I decided, just like you, that it really is just a computer and that there are far more important things to worry about and spend time dealing with.

And that's why I use OS X.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[spruce]

I'd never sleep with anyone who uses forstner bits!

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[knarf]

I was with you all through your comment... just until the last line:

And that's why I use OS X.

It seems to me you have not yet left the state you described in the previous paragraphs... Maybe in age, but certainly not in attitude... If you had that last line just would not be there. Who cares what OS you use? If it works for you, fine. If it doesn't use something else.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[value_added]

As I matured I realized something, IT'S JUST A COMPUTER GUYS. JUST ANOTHER TOOL.

Expect to turn 30 and realise that NOT ALL TOOLS ARE ALIKE. You'll laugh more at yourself than others for once thinking that some of them even belonged in the same conversation.

And if you had the foresight to develop some skills along the way and nurtured your intellectual curiousity, you'll insist on making your own tools by the time you're fourty, an advocating the same to people on Slashdot who are oblivious to the difference.

When you turn 50, you'll insist that all tools you use are either of your own making, or resemble those you used at a formative stage in your life. Incidentally, that's about the same time you prefer hardware stores to other forms of social interaction where you spend considerable time evaluating the relative merits of different manufacturers of hammers and forstner bits. It's all the same time you end up pissing off the wife by buying a sports car and spend even more time in the garage with your tools.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't get this obsession. Back in the day I was a rabid (psychotic) Amiga fan/user

Why is it so hard to get? They are what you used to be. People doesn't mature at the same rate, or even at all in some cases.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[MBGMorden]

I don't get this obsession. Back in the day I was a rabid (psychotic) Amiga fan/user. As I matured I realized something, IT'S JUST A COMPUTER GUYS. JUST ANOTHER TOOL. If people were this committed to, say hammers or forstner bits -- you'd think they were completely insane.

Might your lack of "patriotism" though be just a *little* influenced by the fact that your choice OS died a horrible death long ago? I'm sure if Apple went out of business today in 10 years all the Macheads would either have to adopt a "Meh, it wasn't that great anyways." position or consign themselves to the nuthouse. It's just a survival skill :).

(For what it's worth, I use Mac, Windows, and Linux all pretty extensively, so I'm not too biased in the modern world. Sadly I never got the chance to use an Amiga.)

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Reality Master 101]

Considering the fact that we wouldn't be able to do much of what we are doing now without any tools says something about how important they are.

Sheesh. Just goes to show that people can take offense at anything.

The OP's point wasn't that tools are unimportant, his point was that emotional attachments to what label is on the tool is stupid. "Anyone who doesn't use the XYZ hammer with it's beeeaaauutiful claw design is a complete fool! Can't they see that it's superior, especially when I paid twice the price than your inferior ABC hammer? Never mind they use exactly the same steel with exactly the same materials in the handle, and even get those from the same Chinese manufacturer. MINE IS SUPERIOR BOW DOWN TO MY HAMMER OR I WILL KILL YOU."

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Hatta]

If people were this committed to, say hammers or forstner bits -- you'd think they were completely insane.

But if people had a strong opinion as to the utility of a regular drill vs. a hole hawg, that's pretty reasonable.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[MrCrassic]

You think that a Zippo lighter's a waste of intelligence?

The iFart application is the leading application in the App Store right now. Yes, a farting application.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[R2.0]

That's a lot of words to paraphrase "If you are in your 20's an not a liberal you have no heart; if you are in your 40's and not a conservative you have no brain."

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[ArhcAngel]

many of you are amongst the most intelligent human beings in the world

Intelligence is not an indication of maturity.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[h4rm0ny]

Linux users are normally people who have gone beyond what they were presented with and explored other possibilities (else they would be using Windows). That attitude is an indicator of intelligence. Linux also requires having self-educated oneself on how to manage the system for most of us. That attitude is also an indicator of intelligence. So it's reasonable to guess that statistically, Linux users may be from the intelligent segments of society. But it's only a small part of the larger set of intelligent people. Using Linux might be a clue that someone is smart, but using Windows is not a sign that someone is not.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Anonymous Coward]

or come on...

i don't know about intelligent but if you're trying to suggest that apple/mac users are as technically competent and adept (on the whole) as other computer users then you're just kidding yourself.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Culture20]

If people were this committed to, say hammers or forstner bits -- you'd think they were completely insane.

I know people that are this rabid about other tools which do multiple things (like computers): Swiss Army knives and Leatherman multi-tools. They will swear that the generics are worthless, break or rust. Come to think of it, I know someone who won't use a non-Craftsman hammer because he's a Craftsman snob. But... insanity? No, just strong preference.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you should get back with him, because your last two sentences say it all.

Who cares what OS you use? You do, because you use it! I can't believe this got modded up.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Lars T.]

The typical response of a guy with sucky tools.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[ChrmnMa0]

TRAITOR!! Amiga will never die! Amiga users are fans, apple is just a 3rd class cult.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://xkcd.com/198/

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[angel'o'sphere]

Who cares what OS you use? If it works for you, fine. If it doesn't use something else.

That is exactly what he did. He stopped zealothing and chose his OS.

I did the same (unfortunately I skipped the NeXT experience) and I noticed the same.

And that's why I use OS X.

You know what ... people still wonder and look at me and say: oh, why do you use a Mac? Years ago I started explaining why this better and that is nice and why I prefer this and that! And now? I just shrug ...

OTOH, when I drive in a train it happens more and more often that on the other side of the room 2 or 3 guys sit around a table with their windows notebooks and I and some stranger sit on our table with a Mac each.

Regarding the OOO*P: Yes, old Amigas run Linux 68k .... I wonder he seems not to know this ;D

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[yttrstein]

Would your response have been different if I'd said "And that's why I use netBSD"?

I bet it would, since really no one admits to using netBSD (though why I don't know). I chose to say OS X because 1. it's true and 2. It was funny in the context of the rest of the post and 3. it was a statement of utter irrelevancy.

You're absolutely right, it doesn't matter at all what OS *I* use. It matters what YOU use, and that's none of my business, really. Me saying "And that's why I use OS X" was certainly inviting argument, and its true that that's part of why I said it. But it's also true that I invited argument with something that I believe is irrelevant from top to bottom. I don't care if you use OS X or not.

I only care if I do, and now you have my personal reasoning for it, should you find it interesting or useful. I like knowing why other people choose what they do, whether its on operating system or a good cantaloupe. Then when it comes time for me to choose again, I might have a little more insight insofar as how my needs dovetail with my choices.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[yttrstein]

Actually I run a pretty busy network security company entirely with OS X, top to bottom. But I don't do it for political or social reasons. I do it because it fits the needs of my business the best.

One of the reasons that it's so handy in my line of work is that it's been certified as a Unix by the Open Group. These certifications do actually mean quite a lot, for better or worse, and they often figure deeply into these sorts of decisions.

But if it's not for you, then that's fine. Computing needs vary, as do therefore computational environments, including hardware, software, and operating system. If I want to play some sort of beautiful, cutting edge FPS, I know that for an excellent experience I'll find myself building a 10,000 dollar gaming machine with four video cards running Vista. If I want my machine to never, ever crash while it's running Postfix and a DNS server, I'll use Open or NetBSD.

If I want my Oracle installation to be able to chomp into 6 terabyte databases with as little latency as possible, I'll run them on Solaris with a heavily tweaked kernel.

And if I want a good balance between shallow ramping, ease of use, compliance to common standards and a certification that allows my customers to breathe easy (for whatever reason), then I'll use OS X.

I'm not quite sure why you have a problem with that.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[earlymon]

This is an amplification of yttrstein's comment:

I was ok with what he said, until the last sentence about why he used OS X. And then I laughed my butt off.

Sorry you missed the humor in that remark. I think that it takes a mature view of things to arrive at his POV, and that mature POV strongly correlates to a mature sense of humor.

And that's why I, too, use OS X. -- Ok, see that's humor, informative, insight, support, sarcasm and trolling all in one line. Bet me in advance which one the mods will choose. :)

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[earlymon]

When you turn 50, you'll insist that all tools you use are either of your own making, or resemble those you used at a formative stage in your life.

Or you'll have days where you simply buy them and not want to discuss anything with anyone - much like the old dog with lesser hearing, lesser eyesight, and sore bones who doesn't want his ears pulled when he'd rather be napping.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[kv9]

Back in the day I was a rabid (psychotic) Amiga fan/user. As I matured I realized something, IT'S JUST A COMPUTER GUYS. JUST ANOTHER TOOL.

what I don't get is your hatred for nice equipment. I'm not a mac fanboi, but at home I run exclusively on Compaq/IBM hardware (and some Sun). they are all wonderful pieces of engineering with quality components inside. am I not allowed to actually like my gear? because I do. they're fucking grownup toys.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[mdwh2]

That is exactly what he did. He stopped zealothing and chose his OS.

He didn't simply happen to say "And now I use OS X", he said "And that's why I use OS X." To be honest I'm not entirely sure what he meant, but it comes across as if OS X is a platform for users whilst other platforms are still populated by rabid fans.

He then followed up with a post saying how great OS X is, and implying that Vista is only good for games, and fails on ease of use.

Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a bit of OS advocacy, I enjoy it too and I was an Amiga fan too back in the day - but the point is his OP claimed he had "aged" out of it, which evidently from his posts isn't true.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[NoMaster]

Reading that, it looks to me like he (and/or his co-workers) used a dangerously wrong tool for the wrong jobs. That's not intelligence, that's insanity. The whole point of Tim the Toolman Taylor was comedy, not a HOWTO...

People sometimes use a chainsaw to cut 4x2's for building, and sometimes even use a circular saw for lopping branches. Doesn't mean it's right, or even smart.

(FWIW, there are more powerful, stronger, yet better built and safer, tools of that type than a Hole Hawg. But they're not made by Milwaukee.)

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux is not just a tool, it's also part of a power-to-the-people kind of revolution for some. That is not as unimportant as just a tool. Viva la revolucion!

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[CZakalwe]

I think his his comment about most intelligent human beings was directed at Computer experts in general not just Linux users...

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[dangitman]

Sadly I never got the chance to use an Amiga.

May God have mercy upon your soul.

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[CZakalwe]

I got the impression that "and that's why I use OS X" was further to his previous sentence about there being more important things to think about, and the whole OS X "It just works" thing makes that a bit easier

Re:Good God, they're still around?

[CZakalwe]

Ah, heh reading on I just realised my sense of humour had a Guru Meditation, Please ignore my previous comment as you would the spittle flecked ravings of a MacHead :)

Just take screenshots of Slashdot

[Gothmolly]

Just screenshot all the Apple articles on Slashdot, and you'll see fanboyism and corporate pimping at its finest.

This is nothing new.

[Anonymous Coward]

"and girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users"

This is nothing new...it's been happening to Linux users forever.

Re:This is nothing new.

[clam666]

We're supposed to be sleeping with them? I thought we were supposed to cower and run away from their cooties.

Wrong-O, Big Time

[BenEnglishAtHome]

The os-obsessed person cited in the article as limiting her sex partner options was Violet Blue. Your comment that "the odds of *ever* getting laid are not particularly good for os-obsessed humans" is, in her case, so wrong it's beyond funny.

Violet Blue fans feel free to chime in here.

Re:Wrong-O, Big Time

[bowl_of_petunias]

LOL

Oops, obviously I haven't seen the documentary!

Re:Wrong-O, Big Time

[Neoprofin]

I had to wiki her, but the two points of note in it are both lawsuits.

Thumbs down to litigious Bay area sex bloggers.

Re:Wrong-O, Big Time

[MBGMorden]

Violet Blue (or Noname Jane now as she was ordered to stop using the Violet Blue handle) is an oddball though. She has stated on numerous occasions that she won't have sex with her husband.

Still, cute gal. She's got the porn attitude while maintaining the girl next door look.

Re:Wrong-O, Big Time

[anagama]

The violet blue in Macheads is the writer, not the porn star. If you're thinking of Noname Jane, think again.

Re:Wrong-O, Big Time

[CZakalwe]

According to wiki she has a couple of kids and no longer does porn with guys to "Remin monogamous with her husband" so I guess she came(!) around to a more normal way of thinking

Fanboys

[nasor]

I have a lot of Apple fanboy friends, and they finally convinced me to spend the extra money for a macbook pro when it came time to buy a new laptop. So far I've been seriously underwhelmed. Contrary to the claims of virtually every Apple user I know, my new laptop with OS X doesn't appear to be any more stable than my old Windows XP laptop. It still periodically locks up for no apparent reason, which I can only solve by making it force-quit applications. It still sometimes slows down for no apparent reason (presumably because something is hogging resources). Also, a few weeks ago one of the updates killed my laptop's display somehow and I had to plug it into an external monitor to fix it - which was a huge pain in the ass, because for some inexplicable reason the macbook pro doesn't have a standard VGA port for connecting to external monitors, AND Apple didn't bother to include the necessary adapters with the laptop. Maybe the update was a ploy to see how many people they could force to buy $16 adapters?

Overall I'm still enjoying my laptop, but I'm astounded that so many people basically lied to me with claims of how perfectly stable and wonderful macs are. I find it very difficult to believe that I'm the only one who has to force-quit applications or deal with inexplicable slowdowns. Surely all these fanboys are having the same sorts of problems. So why can't they just admit it? Why do they have to insist that everything is perfect?

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a lot of Apple fanboy friends, and they finally convinced me to spend the extra money for a macbook pro when it came time to buy a new laptop. So far I've been seriously underwhelmed. Contrary to the claims of virtually every Apple user I know, my new laptop with OS X doesn't appear to be any more stable than my old Windows XP laptop. It still periodically locks up for no apparent reason, which I can only solve by making it force-quit applications. It still sometimes slows down for no apparent reason (presumably because something is hogging resources). Also, a few weeks ago one of the updates killed my laptop's display somehow and I had to plug it into an external monitor to fix it - which was a huge pain in the ass, because for some inexplicable reason the macbook pro doesn't have a standard VGA port for connecting to external monitors, AND Apple didn't bother to include the necessary adapters with the laptop. Maybe the update was a ploy to see how many people they could force to buy $16 adapters?

Overall I'm still enjoying my laptop, but I'm astounded that so many people basically lied to me with claims of how perfectly stable and wonderful macs are. I find it very difficult to believe that I'm the only one who has to force-quit applications or deal with inexplicable slowdowns. Surely all these fanboys are having the same sorts of problems. So why can't they just admit it? Why do they have to insist that everything is perfect?

Why spend the money on a MB Pro. The regular MB is pretty good. Killed your display. Umm apparently you didn't upgrade your firmware. Since that was a Slashdot article a few weeks ago.

I have had a MB for a year and a half. Never liked and never used a Mac before. Used Windows XP and Ubuntu. I must say I impressed. I have two toddlers and that think gets beat up all the time. Still keeps ticking.

Performs pretty well using Parallels and XP. I guess to each their own, but in my exp. professionally over a decade they are generally worth the money in the time I save.

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

Er... if you're able to force-quit applications, then the operating system hasn't locked up. The operating system is working fine, and the program in question has locked up. Even Apple can't save you from poorly written applications. (although your complaint is perfectly valid if the apps you're seeing lock up were written by Apple)

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

I use a windows pc for most business stuff because everybody else does and it isn't a big deal to send documents back and forth.

I've had it for 5 years now and added some memory once, which took about 5 minutes.

It still works fine.

I have a mac to do video editing, and it hasn't given me any problems either.

When I want to do one thing, I choose one tool. When I want to do the other, I choose the other.

Can somebody please explain to me why people get so tied up in discussing this for more than fifteen seconds?

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like you bought the Vista Ultimate Leopard to Drive User Back to Windows 7 edition.

Sorry, you should have bought the other OS.

Re:Fanboys

[captnjameskirk]

"inexplicable"... You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Re:Fanboys

[jeffasselin]

Exactly, and I can't understand it either.

I always tell my customers: a computer is a tool, and you should use the appropriate tool to do the job. Run business apps on a Windows PC, do image, DTP, video editing on a Mac. Use UNIX/Linux for servers and embedded devices.

Where it is more murky is for personal home use, and I tend to recommend Macs because they are more resilient to the virus and malware plague.

Re:Fanboys

[nasor]

The slowdowns are "inexplicable" in the sense that although I know they are caused by programs hogging resources, I have no idea which programs/processes/whatever are doing it or why they are doing it.

Re:Fanboys

[gad_zuki!]

Im convinced that most people who talk about OSX being superior are windows users who have built up some kind of weirdo OSX fetish fantasy. At my old job I supported several OSX machines and they were as much trouble as anything else. I loved sitting there watching the spinning rainbow do its thing for no reason and trying to navigate to the command line to run top while it was running so slow. There really should be a hotkey to top or a GUI-based task manager equivalent.

Apple does a good job of forcing a lot of features into its OS but that usually translates into a slow experience, especially coming from XP on an modern machine.

As far as the lying goes, well, exaggeration is human nature. Its really your job to filter out the BS. This doesnt just apply to computers, but to everything in life.

Re:Fanboys

[je ne sais quoi]

I don't know why I'm doing this, because you can almost never figure out what is going on from these kinds of stories but I feel I need to at least try and help you. :) So, did you install any of the "Application Enhancer" or other kernel hacks? If you did, there's your problem, they break with ever upgrade and have been known to cause the system to become unstable. Next, try reseting the PRAM and the PMU. If that doesn't help, try keeping your activity monitor open and see what applications are hogging the resources and see if there's one in particular or something else. Also, you probably should have 1 GB of memory, memory is so cheap that it's worth avoiding any possible memory issues (just don't buy your memory from Apple, they rip you off).

Overall I'm still enjoying my laptop, but I'm astounded that so many people basically lied to me with claims of how perfectly stable and wonderful macs are.

Often, they are. The key word there is often. Sometimes they're not. No computer is perfect, and I suppose that your mac friends were overselling their computers and gave you unrealistic expectations. Yes, Apple computers cost more, and whether that cost is worth it depends on your individual priotities, but they have problems sometimes just like every other computer. I find they have few enough problems to keep me coming back. To give you an indication, I've owned or used macs for about 11 years now and I've never once had a software update cause a problem on any of my computers. Not once. The record for my current desktop uptime is 112 days, and then I only had to reboot to install a security update. I've had three mac laptops, my Lombard powerbook was a handme down and we retired it after 5 years. My Ti powerbook lasted 4 years before a logic board failure caused me to replace it. My current Al macbook pro is running strong after three years and certainly runs better than newer "Vista-ready" laptops that ended up not really having the resources to run Vista well, but I have to say that XP SP2 is probably about as stable as OS X at this point.

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

About 8 months ago my SO's computer(a dell) died. Since then they've been using another mac I had on hand. I know the system is up to date and should work flawlessly(or as flawlessly as a computer can). Despite this, side by side the mac I use suffers almost no problems and hers probably has to force quit an application once or twice a week. I honestly don't know why this difference exists and I can't reproduce the errors she gets.

Basically, your mac using friends may not be lying. They may simply not have as many problems as you do.

Re:Fanboys

[Savage-Rabbit]

spinning rainbow

Spinning beach-ball of doom.

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

Totally agree - I have a Macbook pro, which is mediocre: no better than my previous PC, and a lot heavier. I now run windows on it most of the time, which it does...okay. It's not a horrible machine, but I'd happily swap it for a PC. I get so sick of Macheads ranting about how perfect their machines are -- it seems to fulfill some sort of emotional need for them: to express how much cooler and smarter they are than the common horde. Fine, but the actual kit doesn't justify the raving.

Re:Fanboys

[Tom]

Look, I've had the same story, but a widely different experience. For me the MBP I bought was largely a "wow" experience.

But yes, there are problems. It isn't perfect. Still, compared to XP, I'd say there are worlds between them. Among those I know who switched to Macs during the past 2-3 years, the general consensus is that it isn't perfect, but there are few flaws and many great things, while XP is just barely bearable.

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

There really should be a hotkey to top or a GUI-based task manager equivalent.

Ever heard of Activity Monitor?

Re:Fanboys

[broken_chaos]

Activity Monitor is your friend.

I've found that Mail.app has an occasional memory leak, at least using my setup, as an example. Quit/restart of it, and everything is back to normal.

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

If you've had to force quit applications, or restarted the entire operating system more than a couple of times, it is entirely possible that some vital operating system files are now slightly corrupted or out of sync. I'd like to recommend a wonderful, free utility that should fix up most of the problems, and set your Macbook back to stable operation. This utility is called Onyx, and can be downloaded from http://www.titanium.free.fr/pgs/english.html . I manage a small office with dozens of Macs, and using this utility, along with DiskWarrior, fixes 99% of the problems I encounter with these machines.

Re:Fanboys

[Gizzmonic]

At my old job I supported several OSX machines and they were as much trouble as anything else. I loved sitting there watching the spinning rainbow do its thing for no reason and trying to navigate to the command line to run top while it was running so slow. There really should be a hotkey to top or a GUI-based task manager equivalent.

You're "supporting" Mac machines and you don't know what Activity Monitor is? Sounds like you're the minimum wage idiot who built his own computer and tells people to avoid Macs because "they're not compatible."

Re:Fanboys

[DrgnDancer]

I have a serious love/hate relationship with Mail.app. I like the way the app is organized and it's generally one of the better mail apps I've used from a usability perspective, but it's probably the least stable Apple app on the computer. It's gotten better in recent updates, but still has the occasional memory leak or freeze-up.

Re:Fanboys

[ClioCJS]

Same with windows. THe OS almost never locks up, it's the programs. I typically reboot because a program wont work correctly, not because the OS crashes. In 1 yr of XP, I've only had about 5 non-voluntary reboots (not counting power failures where my UPS ran out of batteries).

Re:Fanboys

[lethargic8]

That is interesting as I recently purchase my first mac when the new macbook pros came out as well. I've owned good, ie not cheap, laptops before (thinkpads, dell xps, and an assortment of other less expensive machines). None of them come close to touching the new macbook pro. It is vastly more stable, goes into and out of sleep mode faster and more reliably then any other laptop I have owned, and in general feels more responsive then any windows machine I have used (including the brand new quad core dell xps I was given at work) I am not saying its perfect, I have had it completely lock up on me twice and had to force quit a few applications, but having 3rd party applications lock up is unavoidable. In the case where an application does lock up, force quit always worked immediately. As for your bitching about the laptop not having vga connectors, it is a standard apple practice not to include outdated ports/tech. Maybe you should have completely researched the machine before dropping that much money on it rather then blame someone else for your own mistake?

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty simple really. People would rather find reasons that are supporting their actions rather than hinting that their choice was not perfect. Think back, have you ever made a decision (such as buying something) that you later felt the need to justify? Note that it didn't necessarily have to be a BAD decision, just not perfect.

Re:Fanboys

[ClioCJS]

They're not compatible. I challenge you to get either my ambilight system OR my PCI FM transmitter working on your mac. Both are niche cutting-edge devices, and neither manufacturer makes Mac drivers. SO yes, if you want to be on the cutting edge of the latest hardware and software, mac wont cut it. uTorrent, the most popular bittorrent client, wasn't even available on mac until this year. I've been using it 3 yrs. If you wanted uTorrent 3 yrs ago, you couldn't run it because.. gasp.. it's not compatible. (Virtualization doesn't count. Every good OS can emulate another and run it's programs THAT way.)

Re:Fanboys

[_Sprocket_]

I always tell my customers: a computer is a tool, and you should use the appropriate tool to do the job.

A long time ago, I was happy if I had a hammer and a screwdriver. Then I ended up in a career that involved an entire roll-around sized toolbox. Now my own personal toolbox is a lot more involved.

During that career, I remember one time where we were building out a new toolbox. One individual involved insisted we order as much as we could from Snap-on. Another claimed Snap-on was over-priced junk and that there were far better manufacturers to pick from. Debate ensued.

To the average person, a screwdriver is a screwdriver and that's all they need. To someone skilled in the trade, not all tools are made the same and to do their best work requires a full assortment of tools. A craftsman will have a certain appreciation for their tools as without them they can not work to their full potential.

IT folks tend to be craftsmen in their trade. It is no more surprising that we would debate over the merits of our tools than mechanics or carpenters. And we are also passionate about those tools we most enjoy using.

Of course, computers are tools like no other. The systems we commonly use are complex and versatile. They can handle diverse tasks and do things we're not even aware of yet. And that's where "best tool for the job" is a bit deceiving. A hammer makes a poor axe and will never be an axe without fundamental changes to the tool. But a multiuse computer can be nearly anything (assuming the right software is available).

Re:Fanboys

[Gizzmonic]

Like many people on Slashdot, you arrogantly mistake your technology desires with the needs of the masses. The masses need a simple OS that can connect to the Internet, play music, and do word processing. The best OS for this is Mac OS X, because of the UI and lack of malware/viruses, and compatibility with Microsoft Office.

And as for your challenge, why the hell would I want to get your stuff working on my Mac? Newsflash: 99.99999% of people don't want what you want. Ambilight is a stupid gimmick. An FM transmitter? That's some real "cutting-edge" technology...or at least it would be, 50 years ago. There are dozens of BT clients for every OS under the sun, so that argument's dick is broken as well. Try again.

Re:Fanboys

[El Royo]

Same thing for me. I decided finally to go with a Mac to see if it really was 'all that'. It's a nice piece of engineering but it's so far from the perfection claimed. There are many things Windows just does better (Keyboard shortcuts for example, even consistent keyboard shortcuts). I'm happy enough that I didn't take it back but I still do a lot in VMWare Fusion for business. I'd say I have to force quit applications about as often as I had to under Windows. I've had complete lockups several times where the only recovery is to power down completely with the power button.

Re:Fanboys

[ClioCJS]

I love how your argument is basically "I don't want hardware". Yea, if what you want is a crippled subset of what personal computing truly means -- then of course something substandard will be sufficient. Ambilight keeps me from falling asleep in a dark room without making me have to watch TV in a white-lit room, which sucks. And it's great for music visualizers, and lighting up the room in response to the music. There's only one PCI FM transmitter out, and they weren't making it 50 yrs ago. Lol. And yes, if you want to use a heavy-weight, CPU-intensive, shitty client -- by all means, use a Mac. But utorrent *is* the best.

Your argument has now been reduced to "people are stupid and don't do much with their computers, so Macs are fine". That's a great pro-people argument, but not great at saying Macs are the best personal computing have to offer.

Re:Fanboys

[angel'o'sphere]

I think your fanboy friends switched to a Mac with old Windos experiences and not from XP.

I know a lot of ppl who actually like windows XP (I never used it). So if you worked with XP (which is often proclaimed as the best Windows made by MS so far) the difference to a Mac might not be that big. Older Windows systems simply where horrible. My Mac only crashes if I do nasty stuff ... which means it crashes after an uptiem of 6 monthes or something ... I'm a software developer, that means I use Windows occasionally ... but the system keeps crashing every few days.

In some rare cases I installed some network stuff for ppl I know on Windows XP (like attaching them to a WiFi network) ... sorry I can not get why this is so utter complicated, not working, missleading in error messages, frustrating .... painfull!

Are you sure you found nothing on your new Mac which is better than Windows? I'm amazed ...

Regards,

angel'o'sphere

Re:Fanboys

[angel'o'sphere]

There really should be a hotkey to top or a GUI-based task manager equivalent.

What about "alt-command-esc"? It brings up a simple task manager ...

angel'o'sphere

Re:Fanboys

[Gizzmonic]

Yea, if what you want is a crippled subset of what personal computing truly means -- then of course something substandard will be sufficient.

Me, me, me, me. The personal computing experience is defined by "ClintJCL." He knows exactly what people want in a computer. That's why people pay big bucks for the ClintJCL PC-1000 with built in FM transmitter and Ambilight! Because everyone wants to run a pirate radio station...and hook that radio station up to their TV so they can spasmodically bounce to the visual rhythms of the Ambilight! (It also comes with 2 tabs of ecstasy). Sadly, the people founded Apple Computer are now bitter, friendless morons posting on Slashdot.

Your argument has now been reduced to "people are stupid and don't do much with their computers, so Macs are fine".

I never said anything about people being stupid. I guess my scope wasn't big enough. Not only are you the sole arbiter of what is good or not in the computing world, apparently you are able to judge intelligence purely by people's computer needs. How do you do it?

Re:Fanboys

[ClioCJS]

"Me, me, me, me. The personal computing experience is defined by "ClintJCL."

You seem to have forgotten what the word "personal" means.

I have a large house. In order to hear the music everywhere, you need speakers in every room. Wiring a whole a house is a very expensive job. An FM transmitter is much cheaper.

You are plainly someone with no imagination. Of *course* a mac is good enough for *you*. But my point remains: If you want to do some *personal* (as in, not some lowest-common-demoniator operation like "watch ameican idol on youtube" and "write my college paper") *computing* (as in, possibilities).

Computing is about possibilities, and doing things you didn't know you ever could have done with a computer 10 years earlier. When I was online meeting people in 1988, modems were far more expensive for our Apple2 than for our IBM PC. And all the software on the BBSes -- one-hundred percent -- was PC software. Not apple software.

And when I first got online on the internet in 1990? It was on a PC, because Apple modems were more expensive. And I telneted to severs that ran unix, not apple servers.

And when the web finally came about? Guess what the first browsers were for? Unix, then PC. Mac came last. As usual

And when recording high quality video came along, and people started using their computers as personal video recorders, recording in 320x200 or 512x384 or even 640x480 tv resolution -- and released those files to IRC for distribution -- Guess which type of computer those people were all using? Mac's are famous for video, but from the corporate side, not from the people side.

And when the PCI transmitter came out, in 2003? Guess who still doesn't have drivers for it, 6 years later?

Yea. Mac. It's great if you want to do NON-PERSONAL, NON-COMPUTING. Writing a paper is only computing in the sense that you're doing a non-computer thing (writing a paper) using a computer. Surfing the net, similarly, is barley computing. Watching youtube videos is just watching TV, but now you're on a computer.

Real computing is using a computer to do things only a computer can do. I turn off my lights. I control the airwaves in my house, literally. I don't have a dvd player. I don't have a console. I have a 52-inch HDTV which is only hooked up to my computer. I watch movies, listen to music, and watch TV shows every day. I don't own an ipod, dvd player, vcr, or cable. There are ways to use a computer for more things than just doing your homework and watching a guy get kicked in his balls.

Do you remember the 70s at all? Remember how exciting pong was? Remember the first MUDs? The first time you could speak to another person online? (1988 for me). Or are you just another apple fanboy, with an emphasis on boy. How long have you been computing, anwyay? Do you have a computer science degree like me? Do you build your computers from scratch? What are your experiences, exactly? Corporate development?

Re:Fanboys

[Alomex]

Like many people on Slashdot, you arrogantly mistake your technology desires with the needs of the masses.

Funny, that is exactly the philosophy behind the mediocre offerings from Microsoft. Yet when Microsoft does it is eee-vil and when Apple does it is good for you.

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

+1

I have a macbook as my media centre, connected to a 32" LCD. Overall it is fantastic and eyeTV is IMHO the best DVR/DTV software on the market today. But...

I use front-row when watching movies and DVDs and I am gobsmacked that a scratched DVD can bring my system to a halt, requiring a forcable power-down (ie a hold down the power button shutdown) to recover. Once the machine hits the scratch I can hear the DVD drive buzzing and whirring but the machine becomes completely unresponsive. The force-quit hotkeys don't work, nor does any other key or remote control button and the only remedy is to power down the machine as described. And no it does not recover after time (I have left it for hours in come cases).

So, fanbois, how is it possible that a scratched DVD can lock up the 'unbreakable' OSX? At least with Windows I can simply press the eject button on the DVD drive...

Re:Fanboys

[auLucifer]

That brings up the force kill but doesn't display all processes currently running, memory/cup usage, etc like top does. For that hell need the 'Activity Monitor' under apps->utilties.

Re:Fanboys

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Who are these idiots that think Apple only makes perfect products? And surely, as a Slashdotter, you should have known better? On the other hand, I can't recall any noticeable slowdowns, and the only app that has caused me to force-quit recently is VLC. I find Apple far from perfect, but still much better. At least in my experience.

Re:Fanboys

[mjwx]

I've had that in the last week.

All due to the fact my processor is now overheating when I play games (its between 30 and 40 degree's C here to start with, my mobo automatically restarts when the CPU hits 70). Simple fact is that 9 out of 10 crashes on any OS is caused by a hardware fault. I'm getting a new cooler for the processor (I have to remove it to clean it anyway), A$22 for an Silverstone heat sink and fan for an AMD processor, I don't want to think of the trouble I'd be in if I want able to change the heat sink myself with a generic model.

Re:Fanboys

[NoMaster]

uTorrent, the most popular bittorrent client, wasn't even available on mac until this year.

OTOH, Bram Cohen's original BT client ran on OS X from day 1, without having to install anything extra (Python was already included in OS X). Say, before they eventually released the Mac version (still in beta, BTW), did utorrent run on anything other than Windows anyway?

Apart from the old mainline releases, OS X had (among others) Bits on Wheels, Tomato Torrent, Azureus, and the (execrable*) Transmission. Azureus & Transmission are even cross-platform, available on *BSD, Linux, Solaris, Windows, OS X, and BeOS.

(* Yes, execrable. Random bug o' the week is excusable, as long as you acknowledge the bugs. Among many others: for how many months, and for how many releases, did the recent "let's download 4~8x the data to get 1 complete copy" bug go unacknowledged and unfixed? And that's without even mentioning the numerous crash, disconnect, bad reporting, and other sharing bugs it seems to have every other release...)

Re:Fanboys

[ClioCJS]

The original BT client only supported 1 file at a time. What a joke. It also pre-allocated 100% of the space used. Talk about a waste of resource -- it was useless. Hardly anybody used it back then. Emule/Edonkey and even Limewire was easier to use back then. I'd say the real BT tipping point was Azureus, but it was a resource hog since it required Java. But since it required Java, I assume mac people got on it. uTorrent toppled it. It's nice to have torrents take 2% of your cpu instead of a constant 15-50% (I don't remember specifically, but it suuuucked and was not really possible to use with your primary computer if it's your music/video player), and to have a 160K binary that requires no installation to run (hmm.. thumbdrive at work on a locked down computer works), handles everything, and handles it well. (And still has a scheduler for bandwidth management.)

Re:Fanboys

[dangitman]

And when the web finally came about? Guess what the first browsers were for? Unix, then PC. Mac came last. As usual

Uhh, that's wrong. The first web browser was for the NeXT - you know, the company lead by Steve Jobs? It was written in Objective C, which still has a legacy today in Mac OS X.

You also overlook the fact that many pieces of important software were released first for Mac. Microsoft Excel? First on a Mac. Photoshop? First on a Mac. It was a long time before Windows got these applications.

As for the rest of your arguments, they are basically retarded, and amount to "Apple stuff was too expensive for me" and "I'm better than you because I'm a real computer geek!"

Re:Fanboys

[Anonymous Coward]

And you're not using LotusNotes. . . a program dedicated to seizing and freezing your Windows experience!

The Mac has jumped the shark...

[Anonymous Coward]

... how do I know? I'm using one. It seems that anytime I pick up something and start using it the cool completely rubs off of it. Look at what happened when I started using Perl and then a few years later finally picked up Java. So I just picked up Objective-C development... guess all the cool will drain out of that now too...

Machead girls not sleeping with Windows guys?

[The Cydonian]

As a MS developer with a journalist girlfriend who runs Linux on her Asus EEE PC, I fart in their general direction. ;-)

</gloats>

Re:Machead girls not sleeping with Windows guys?

[pebs]

As a Mac user who sleeps with a different hot Mac chick every week, I fart in the direction of all Windows users. I also use Linux (just about any UNIX/UNIX-like I'm up to using), but that doesn't get me laid like the little Apple that lights up on my laptop does.

Re:Machead girls not sleeping with Windows guys?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know if I'd want to sleep with the kind of chicks that all it takes to impress them is a logo...

From the promotions page....

[SIR_Taco]

Chimp65 productions is proud to anounce...

a webpage that looks like crap in any resolution over 800x600!

Fans and haters

[Asgerix]

'MacHeads is a superb film that will give Apple haters a few cheap laughs, and Apple fans a few cheap thrills. But it'll entertain both equally, while educating everybody else'

I like this quote. It basically says that if you're not a fan and not a hater, it's because you're not educated properly!

'MacHeads' is weak...

[sugarman]

We need a better name for Apple fanboys:

Mac-aroons?

Re:'MacHeads' is weak...

[clam666]

Or the "I'm-upper-middle-class-and-can-afford-proprietary-hardware-and-my-new-volkswagen-with-a-flower-holder-in-the-dash-and-expouse-my-northern-california-peace-movement-and-oh-my-god-ponies-and-IPhones-and"-heads.

No wait, that's a flame.

But a flame, by any other name, would smell like an apple.

Re:'MacHeads' is weak...

[santiagoanders]

Latin for apple: malum.
Plural form: mala.
Hence: malaphiliac is lover of apples.

It is interesting to note that mala is also the Latin plural form of evil.

Re:'MacHeads' is weak...

[Hatta]

Apple turnovers?

Next, on the Sci-fi Channel

[joaommp]

the Tuxheads.

I only sleep with Windows users

[Fear the Clam]

They're used to lousy performance.
No mater how bad the sex is, I just promise that next time it's going to be better than ever and they believe me.
If I "crash" while they're trying to, y'know, get things done, it's no big deal.
They're used to getting boned in the ass.

Re:I only sleep with Windows users

[tommeke100]

...and they're used at getting infected and spyware being installed on them on their behalf.

Re:I only sleep with Windows users

[Hogwash McFly]

Don't forget the Trojans.

Re:I only sleep with Windows users

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife is like a mac; when there is a problem, she will never tell me what it is, and when she presents me with two oprions they are generally confusing and take time for me to understand what they really are.

Well there's three reasons

[Sycraft-fu]

1) People who have crap hardware. A number of people I know who got a Mac and find it to be much better find that mostly because they had a really bad PC. It was a cheapie and slow right when it came out, never mind the 5+ years later when this is. Also means they were running a rather outdated OS. So it isn't a surprise that a massive hardware + software upgrade gives a much better experience.

2) People who have an extremely broken system. Their system is full of crapware and breaks basically all the time. Software doesn't install, etc. They are finding it a major improvement because it was effectively a wipe/reinstall.

However by far the most common

3) They are lying to themselves. Seen this time and time again. They want/need to believe that this change is 100% for the better, so they tell themselves there are no problems. My best anecdote for this is from when I was in university, back before OS-X. I was in a friend's dorm room and his roommate and I were discussing computers. He had a Mac. He was telling me that the thing he liked was that "Macs never crash." As he was talking and noodling around, his system bombed. You know, the old bomb error. He clicked the restart and continued on. I interrupted him saying "Wait, right there! Your system crashed!" He then argued that no, it wasn't a crash like Windows does and so on. He was just lying to himself. He'd convinced himself that his system just didn't have problems like Windows did.

So that's the biggest reason they won't admit it: They really don't acknowledge that they are having problems. They lie to themselves, which then leads them to mislead you.

The truth of the matter is no consumer computer is perfect, and none likely ever will be. No matter what your OS, when you have an environment as complex and uncontrolled as one where people can install whatever they like, problems WILL happen. Certainly some OSes will have less problems, but anyone who tells you there's no problems is full of it.

Re:Well there's three reasons

[Lumpy]

Also means they were running a rather outdated OS.

sorry but Windows 2000 gives a FAR BETTER experience to the user than Vista could ever hope to give.

Re:Well there's three reasons

[Sycraft-fu]

Sorry but I disagree. I run Vista on a daily basis, it's on my desktop at work and at home, and I support Windows professionally. In my opinion Vista is a superior OS to Windows 2000, and slightly better than XP, when running on new hardware. Not better enough than XP to warrant an upgrade if you don't have a reason, but worth getting on a new system.

Re:Well there's three reasons

[Anonymous Coward]

He was putting pus... Mac on a pedestal!

Re:Well there's three reasons

[Anonymous Coward]

You are limiting your argument to existing problems. I see the same type of head in the sand with features as well. Seems odd that most Apple users are 100% happy and vocal about the existing feature set but oddly enough, will stand in line to get version x+1 when it is released. If you were so happy, what is the rush to get the newest version?

A few years back when the general talk was that the iPod is such a hit because it is simple and plays music and that is exactly what all iPod user wanted, nothing more, nothing less, Apple knows. They don't want all of that other "stuff" because it is not simple. Remember hearing "all I want is a phone that is a phone, simple and easy". Then video iPods and later the iPhone and people stood in line for days....

Another observation I have made. Apple fan people will point to the success of the iPod and assume the technology and simplicity is why people are choosing the iPod over other products. I'd be willing to bet that 75-90% of the average consumers could not even give the name of another brand or model of another portable music player. These people did not buy an iPod because of the simplicity and because it was slick and it just worked or it was so much better than a competing product. They bought it for the white head phones.

Re:Well there's three reasons

[gregorio]

was just lying to himself. He'd convinced himself that his system just didn't have problems like Windows did.

Lots of OSS zealots who sometimes spend 5 days to make something simple work at Linux (sometimes that happens, even if its the person's fault) are also that way. In fact, most of them use "smart people" distributions like Slackware because "they never break" and "allow me to be in full control of my machine". Yet, when something breaks they realise (but don't admit) that they do not have full control over it, that their precious "superior choice" also has issues.

It's the same thing: they're lying, and with a touch of elitism into it. Their "thing" is not about making a good choice about computing or executing tasks faster of cheaper. It's about belonging to groups (and, on an advanced point, being part of the group's institutional machine) and feeling good. It's just radical enviro-activism.

After all, they allowed themselves to define their own personality based on those choices. That's how weak they are right now. They're not in control anymore: denying the tool/group/choice would mean denying their own personality.

Re:Well there's three reasons

[JWallyR]

1) and 2) are both platform agnostic and accurate. I love how your "evidence" of the "by far the most common" reason is just an anecdote about an idiot. I'm sure we could all dredge up our stories of clueless Windows users and prop them up as evidence that "all Windows users are idiots", but it would be knocked down like the non-proof it is.

Fashionable though it be to bash Macs and those of us who use them, the reality continues to be that Macs tend to be better bang for your buck, and are overall a lot less prone to the issues with which Windows use is rife. Those of us with the familiarity to know that it's not "OS-X" could reference the Unix underpinnings or perhaps the fact that Apple's target population is USERS and not business/vendors like Microsoft, but at the end of the day, Apple generally puts out better stuff than Microsoft.

All this aside, as a fairly devoted Mac user, I have absolutely no interest in seeing a documentary about "MacHeads". At best, such a film could focus on the operating system and the practical benefits of its use, but:
1. Everybody who knows about this already doesn't need to see a film about it.
2. People who don't know about computers are very unlikely to go out of their way to see a documentary about "nerds" and nerdy topics.
At worst, as a previous poster said, this is just a lame attempt to ridicule a nerd subculture group to make a buck through a few cheap shots.

Re:Well there's three reasons

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

You forgot 4): People who had enough of all the annoyances of Windows and wanted something better, not necessarily flawless (because they know that's almost impossible). My previous Win2000 system was actually very reliable because I knew how to take care of it. I also built it myself from only good hardware. I'm guessing that there are a lot of stubborn 4's in with your 3's.

Calvin (age 6)

[troll8901]

Bill Watterson's Calvin (age 6):

And ask them for Math answers.
And tell them disgusting things during lunchtime.
And kidnap their dolls for ransom money.
And do all sorts of things to annoy them.
And pelt snowballs at them at every chance.

Welcome to the Get Rid of Slimy Girls (G.R.O.S.S.) club!

(Sorry, I wanted to list Jason Fox, but I couldn't remember him taunting Eileen Jacobson.)

Details?

[Savage-Rabbit]

I have a lot of Apple fanboy friends, and they finally convinced me to spend the extra money for a macbook pro when it came time to buy a new laptop. So far I've been seriously underwhelmed. Contrary to the claims of virtually every Apple user I know, my new laptop with OS X doesn't appear to be any more stable than my old Windows XP laptop. It still periodically locks up for no apparent reason, which I can only solve by making it force-quit applications. It still sometimes slows down for no apparent reason (presumably because something is hogging resources). Also, a few weeks ago one of the updates killed my laptop's display somehow and I had to plug it into an external monitor to fix it - which was a huge pain in the ass, because for some inexplicable reason the macbook pro doesn't have a standard VGA port for connecting to external monitors, AND Apple didn't bother to include the necessary adapters with the laptop. Maybe the update was a ploy to see how many people they could force to buy $16 adapters?

Overall I'm still enjoying my laptop, but I'm astounded that so many people basically lied to me with claims of how perfectly stable and wonderful macs are. I find it very difficult to believe that I'm the only one who has to force-quit applications or deal with inexplicable slowdowns. Surely all these fanboys are having the same sorts of problems. So why can't they just admit it? Why do they have to insist that everything is perfect?

Firstly, you left out some interesting details. Did you get one of the the new glass screen MacBooks? In that case you should have expected crap like this from a newly released product line regardless of whether it is a Mac, a PC or anything else. Which Apps are freezing up on you? Some OS X apps much like some Windows Apps are not particlulary well written. Another point is that OS X GUI apps like those written for Windows and Linux tends to like RAM, lots of RAM and the default amount of RAM that comes with most MacBooks isn't exactly optimal this can lead to what looks like a freeze up. Particularly if you are running some memory hog like Photo Shop, MS Office or Video authoring software. I usually max out the RAM when I buy a Computer, any computer be it PC or Mac. Some people may regard that as a waste but with the prices of RAM these days I'm not really bothered.

Secondly, most every computer manufacturer manages to screw something up. IBM for example sold me a ThinkPad a few years ago that went through a number of mother board changes because the onboard network card kept dying. Finally I got tired of it and bought a slot-in network card. I have also had PC Laptop displays die on me, and not because of a software or firmware issue, the hardware crapped out. Microsoft just recently presided over the mass suicide of 30 GB Zunes.... You are in distinguished company.

Thirdly, only totally sickening Apple fanatics, and Idiot PC users, who erroneously think that all Apple users are fanatics as opposed to a small minority, regurgitate that crap about Apple hardware being superior in quality to PCs. Personally I happen to think that Apple design is usually better than that of most (but not all) PC manufacturers but that does nothing for reliability and hardware quality. Stuff that looks good can be totally unreliable. The same goes for OS X. It is not colossally more stable than Windows is, I'd say they are about equal these days. I went for Macs and OS X because I prefer *nix type OSes, because I think the OS X UI is better (Your milage my vary) and because I got tired of modding Linux until all the irritating little issues that come with that OS were gone and it ran properly on my laptop. If I still had the time to spare to deal with all the issues involved with running Linux on a Laptop I'd probably be just as likely to pick a PC Laptop as an Apple model unless I was in the market for an ultra-light laptop in which case the MBP is a nice if somewhat expensive choice. The new MBP's also offer good value but then so do Lenovo, HP, Acer, Samsung, even Dell has managed to produce a couple of compact laptops that don't make your back and shoulders feel like you have a lead coated marble slab in your backpack.

More more likely...

[denzacar]

"The parent post is another cheap 'find something that mocks your subculture and flame it' post that will pander to Apple-hater-haters, and bore or irritate Apple-fan-haters. It will broaden the minds of none, and pass unnoticed by everyone else."

It will also be moderated as Insightful instead of Flamebait and Troll by Apple-hater-haters, just as this post will be moderated Troll instead of Funny and Insightful by those same Apple-hater-haters.

Please shut up

[GuloGulo]

"PC users mock Mac users for their "fanboy" stuff"

No, stop lying to yourself. They get mocked because of stupid hyperbolic assertions that never hold up in reality, and a total unwillingness to admit problems are actually problems.

"but it is because PC users don't understand what it is like to have a computer that is actually nice to use. "

NO, they understand that it's A FUCKING COMPUTER. My roommate has 2 macs. They're nice. They're by no means "nicer" than my set-up, which I've spent a ton of time customizing. Your assumption that people are downing are Mac users for "not using a nice PC" is ridiculous and kind of stupid.

YOU are the EXACT person I'm talking about, blindly dismissing issues as "PC users frame of reference" because you're totally incapable of registering a real problem because you're so deluded.

Re:Please shut up

[db32]

"which I've spent a ton of time customizing".

You kinda proved my point there. Most people don't like spending a bunch of time customizing just to get it behave in a sane fashion. Power users frequently do. Personally my family is more important than spending "a ton of time customizing" just to get the damned thing to behave in a sane fashion. If it is "just a fucking computer" why did you bother to spend "a ton of time" customizing it? Clearly it is more than "just a fucking computer" to you if you are willing to spend "a ton of time" customizing it. You mentioned something about stupid hyperbolic assertions?

What problem by the way? I didn't say there weren't problems in OS X. In fact I called Apple about a problem that happened after the 10.5.5 update. I spoke with someone whose native language was English. They forwarded me on to the engineering guys who gathered some data. Then a few days later they actually called me back with an update on what was going wrong. Imagine that... I have had to deal with other vendor's support for AGES and have NEVER in my life been treated that well as a generic caller.

Now if it doesn't have the software you need then it isn't the right tool. But everyone I have met that bitches and moans about Mac users have never actually spent a significant amount of time actually using one. They might have fiddled with one, and it didn't behave exactly the same as what they were used to, called it stupid and left it at that (which is exactly what I did for many years before actually devoting some time to trying to learn it).

Re:Please shut up

[GuloGulo]

"You kinda proved my point there."

No I didn't, your "point" was that "PC users don't understand what it is like to have a computer that is actually nice to use."

I HAVE a computer that is nice to use. How it got there is irrelevant to your point, you're just wrong.

" Clearly it is more than "just a fucking computer" to you if you are willing to spend "a ton of time" customizing it."

No. These two points have nothing to do with each other, it can be both "just a fucking computer" and be customizable to my tastes. Your point makes no sense.

"You mentioned something about stupid hyperbolic assertions? "

Yes I did, and you've proven me 100% accurate so far with yours, which I have demonstrated.

SO far, all you've done is prove me totally correct.

Re:Please shut up

[Omestes]

I recently switched back to Windows from OS X. I originally switched from Windows to OS X for much of the reasons you speak of. I had a rather nasty series of hardware issues (New graphics cards drivers did nasty things, and combined with a new HDD needed a new PSU, new PSU fried mobo),and software problems, so when the computer made its freindly "snap" noise, and the ozone filled the air, I decided "screw it" and bought a G4 PowerMac.

OS X was sexy, which is an odd thing to call a mere OS. It was VERY user friendly, and actually somewhat fun to use. With about half the specs of my old top-of-the-line PC, it still ran remarkably fast. With the new iPod that came with it, I was in computer heaven. I never had to work for my computer, as I did with Linux and Windows and the general PC (for lack of a better term) hardware. And it has Adium and Quicksilver, which are probably two of the best designed chucks of code that ever existed.

Finally its HDD died, and I sold it off for about 70% of its original value, even while being broken. (very odd how much Mac people buy crap for).

So I got an Intel MacBook. With around twice the raw numbers of hardware, it ran a bit slower than the G4. It chugged. It didn't like multi-tasking, even when I fed it RAM like candy. Photoshop ran like molasses on the surface of Pluto, which is nice for something I actually shelled out a small countries fortune for. Then OS X updated, and no app developer would ever support my previous (only 1.5 year old) version. No more updates for me, unless I shelled out $100. I realized then that OS X is a subscription, not a release. Each version they make minor (superfluous) tweaks to make sure that nothing developed for the NEW version is backwards compatible with the old version. If you want new toys, you MUST pay Apple, every damn year. Like is MS charged for service packs, and released one a year. Named OS X version are NOT new OSs, they are just boring point releases that cost $100 apiece. (like the latest one, wow $100 for versioning and virtual desktops! Thinks that *nix has had for years, for free)

Then I bought a crappy middle-of-the-road HP laptop that was on a wicked Xmas sale. It was running Vista, which at first I wanted to abolish, but later learned to tolerate (with 4GB of RAM), and later still to actually like a bit (with 6GB of RAM and SP1). The HP had the same exact hardware as the Mac, but seemed faster. I relearned the joy of messing around inside the OS, streamlining it. Making it appear like MY home, and not the Model Home look that Apple likes (its pretty, but generally impersonal).

The Intel Integrated Video sucked. So this year I bought and tweaked a middle-of-the-road Dell, throwing in RAM, a decent graphics card, a huge monitor.

Long story short, it depends on what you want. No OS is superior. They all fit a certain type of user. I giggle at people who think their OS is perfect. I tell my parents to buy Macs, my friends to stick with Vista, while telling a very small percentage of them about various *nix releases. Too each his own, based on style and needs.

Vista fits my middle ground between desire to tweak things, and desire to have things work smoothly. Some people want their computer to be a toaster, let them have Macs. Some people want to treat them like muscle-car projects, let them run *nix.

Just bring Quicksilver and Adium to Windows, please.

Re:Please shut up

[cp.tar]

By the by, I'm a Mac user. (And a Linux user. And, on occasion, a Windows user.)
I've spent quite a bit of time tweaking and adjusting my Mac. Of course, I've never touched the hardware, but the UI is fairly well adjusted to my needs. It was nice out of the box, but it is way better now.

Power users tweak the hell out of everything because they know what they want to do, how they want to do it, and then they make the machine do it the way they want it to. Linux, Mac, Windows... it's just an OS.

Re:Please shut up

[Anonymous Coward]

You DID prove his point! You defined hyperbole in the process and you just don't under stand what it is like to just use a computer instead of obsessing over it's problems and foibles by spending a ton of time customizing it.

    Apple fans and Mac users are a gestalt that you either get or you don't. There are people that just use computers and there are fanboys that argue over them.

Re:Please shut up

[db32]

I got my MBP with 10.5 and haven't had any of the problems. I pretty much stick to the F/OSS stuff regardless of what OS I use since I don't like paying for software. I have a Vista desktop that I use for the rare game that I find time to play, but it feels like a poorly copied interface from Aqua...and they still don't have virtual desktops despite linux having had it for ages and OS X even finally getting the hint on it.

I used to love tinkering, Gentoo was fun. Then I had kids. I have the kids using linux so they learn how a computer works rather than just pretty point n click. For me, OS X has enough of the unix under the hood to let me do my power user stuff and has a really nice UI and things that mostly "just work". I don't have time to unfucker gconf because an update screwed up settings, or to figure out what the hell went wrong in the registry after my daughter hit the power button while it was installing something. I certainly don't think any OS is perfect. I think each OS has its uses. I just think Window's uses don't extend much past software availability because as an OS and UI it just isn't worth much. The big selling point of Windows is that "well you can't install XYZ on OSX/Linux" and when that changes I think OS X and Linux will gain a hell of a lot more ground. With any luck MS will actually be forced to compete rather than just feature creep the golden handcuffs of WGA/DRM/TPA and all the silly shit they include these days.

Re:Please shut up

[NoMaster]

Now, where did my mod points go - I had a bunch of 'em just a couple of days ago...

Somebody, mod parent up - because this is exactly spot-on. As a Mac convert for the last few years, you've captured something of the essence of what makes Macs & OS X so nice to just use - yes, use, instead of fighting little things like Windows (&, yes, Linux) makes you do every day. It's what Mac users mean when they say "It Just Works"...

Now, I'd agree with you on some things, disagree with you on others. I own both a 800MHz G4, with 768M RAM, and a 1.83GHz Core2Duo Macbook. In its day, surrounded by 1+GHz PCs, the G4 still felt like it ran smoother and faster than its peers. People who remember running BeOS on a 200MHz Pentium would understand this; I'm not sure others would.

However, given equivalent RAM (I bought the MacBook with 512M), the Macbook felt ... not slower exactly, nor clunkier, just - lesser than the G4. Chucking 2Gig in there made it shine though.

I disagree with your reasoning on why you consider OS X a 'subscription', at least any more than Windows is. Sure, there's a tendency amongst freeware / shareware developers to only compile for the latest release - a fact that, still sitting on 10.4.x, I'm well aware of. To ameliorate that, I tend to upgrade only every other version (i.e. 10.2->10.4, and I'll jump to 10.6 when it comes out). But, for commercial apps, I don't think it's any worse than case with the Win98->Win2k, Win2k->XP, or XP->Vista transitions. There's always going to be some that require the latest OS version (can anyone give me a valid reason why Adobe Audition required XP, compared to Win2K for its predecessor, CEP?). Photoshop is a pig anywhere unless you throw RAM at it, and running on Rosetta didn't help (I can only assume you were running CS2 or below, because the Mac native Intel versions are fine with sufficient RAM), but even under Rosetta I didn't think it was particularly slower than native G4 or Windows versions once it was up an running (module loading notwithstanding).

Can't say I'm enamoured of Vista as you have been, though. My GF's Vista laptop, despite having more CPU (but only 1G of RAM), is a dog compared to my Macbook (even if I throw back in the original 512M!). The look & feel - not just the UI, but other things like the choice of where to hide both commonly and uncommonly used options and settings - feels random, obtuse; like it's trying to make it hard for you. Having been well experienced with setting up networking in Win2k and XP, and coming back to it from a Mac, getting wireless properly set up in Vista was a nightmare of "where the fsck is that setting going to be hidden this time?" - sometimes, it seems as though a particular option was hidden in different sections, control panel settings, and sub-menus, depending on how you approached it. I walked away thoroughly unimpressed, to the point where I even gave up on removing the random vendorware crap it also came with.

But, as you say, to each their own. If you've got a purpose that requires Windows, fine, get a Windows PC. Conversely, if you've got a purpose that requires a Mac then fine, get a Mac. My default option, for the vast majority of people that actually ask me, is "Buy a Mac!" - because, if they're asking me, they don't know what they want it for. For them, a Mac is probably (initial cost notwithstanding) the best option - for them (it will "Just Work"), and for me (who doesn't have to delve through as many of the arcanities of support for the damned thing!).

Having said that, my father refuses to buy a Mac because "they're not compatible!". Despite the fact that he only ever runs Firefox, Thunderbird, Office, and Adobe Reader, and despite the fact that I've shown him all those on the Mac (and the better Mac options such as Mail.app and Preview.app, and even other Windows stuff in Parallels), he's just stuck in that mindset. It'd save both of us a lot of heartache & trouble if he bought a Mac, and he'd be less frustrated and happier, but that's a whole 'nother story...

Re:Please shut up

[Anonymous Coward]

Just to point out, Mac OS X is Unix.

You can customise it almost anyway you like save recompiling the kernel or closed bits and it's not like you can do that with Windows either.

If you're happy with the hardware choices that Apple offers then Windows is no more customisable than Mac OS X.

Re:Please shut up

[Omestes]

thanks for the vocal mod.

I agree with much of what you say, as well. For some reason Apple never realizes that Macs need about double the RAM that they bundle them with. Heck, I remember shopping around for a iMac, and finding that they wanted around $600 to add a 1GB stick to it, when that was about what OS X needed to run at a usable level. It always confused me.

Can't say I'm enamoured of Vista as you have been, though.

Enamored is a bit strong. its really hard to feel passionate about Windows, the only time I even approached strong feelings towards a Windows release was 2000, and 98SE (no clue why I loved the later). Vista is adequate. With RAM and SP1, it isn't the devil people paint it into. I like it a bit more than XP, not much, not enough to justify actually spending money on an upgrade.

I would prefer a slightly less locked down version (let me mess with my GUI please) of OS X, running on standard hardware with decent 3rd party hardware support. With OS X using a standard release model.

Vista networking is terrible, you are correct. Especially with laptops, for some reason sleep makes your wifi die. When I was playing with some finicky ad-hoc networks, I had every single networking window open, it seemed more trial and error than an actual process.

Vista also handles user directories in the worst, and most inefficient manner ever. It took me about a full day to castrate my public/non-admin accounts of anything that would hose the computer. Vista's security model goes from intrusive and annoying, to pointless and annoying, to completely nonexistent. I suppose its the Windows philosophy.

Re:Please shut up

[CZakalwe]

Yea but you can't customise the Aqua interface is his point! He could run X in it's own root window and customise that but then he might as well run *nix! BTW isn't the Mac OS X kernel open?? You could recompile it but I don't think you could actually install and use it!!

Re:Please shut up

[Anonymous Coward]

Aparently Quicksilver is open source http://code.google.com/p/blacktree-alchemy/, though I dont think anyone really wants to try porting it though, nobody has for the past year the code has been available.

Re:Please shut up

[Anonymous Coward]

> Just bring Quicksilver and Adium to Windows, please.

launchy is the closest quicksilver analogy for windows.

Re:Please shut up

[Omestes]

Porting Quicksilver would be next to impossible. Windows doesn't handle objects the same as OS X. In OS X software can tie more into the OS than Windows, and data isn't quite as segregated (see the Services menu, for example).

I am glad they finally open sourced it though, they were talking about doing that for years. They have they same (ish) development model, with the 10 year beta.

I find it odd that the 3rd Party Free software for OS X is better quality than all of it that exist in windows, and most of it on Linux. The usefulness of Linux, with some eye towards GUI and ease, I suppose.

Re:Please shut up

[db32]

I harp on people getting Macs because I am tired of fixing every stupid Windows problem they manage to wander into.

Vista...wireless...networking...holy fucking god does that insane bullshit send me into a homicidal rage every time I have to configure it. What the fuck where they thinking?! Do you want to configure this, yes. Connect to a network, yes. Welcome to the creating a network share wizard, wait what? no back damnit. Do you want to connect to a network? yes. No networks found, mine doesnt broadcast! Welcome to the build an adhoc wireless network, GOD DAMNIT!. RIGHT CLICK PROPERTIES RIGHT CLICK PROPERTIES WHERE IS IT, I WILL KILL YOU ALL!!! Now throw in a "You said yes, do I have permission to do it?" dialog every 3 clicks that pops under instead of on top half the time so you wonder why the hell it isn't actually doing anything. Yeah... Wireless Vista is fun to set up. :) I used to think setting up wireless in Linux was a bit of a hastle...Vista learned me good on that one...

Re:Please shut up

[ploxiln]

Lots of computers have problems, there are downsides to every platform available, this part of your story is not new to me.

What strikes me is that you complain about core 2 duos running like mollasas and needed 6 gigs of memory for vista.

If you were the typical user with loads of vendor-preinstalled ass-ware on your computer, perhaps this would be realistic, but you apparently have experience with linux and computer component installation as well, so your apparent lack of adeptness at managing your own computer is surprising to me.

As a point of comparison, I have a convertible tablet with 1gb of memory, which I boot into windows for using OneNote to take notes in classes. Frankly, 1gb is enough if you remove all the crap (and replace lots of it with open source alternatives that don't suck), and the intel graphics are enough if you turn off aero transparency and don't play games. So, I understand if you claim you need 2Gb to run vista, but 4? 6? What are you running, iTunes + antivirus + official AIM + updaters for 20 odd apps? You could have skipped the ram upgrades and have a faster computer than you do now if you get the bloatware and the services and "helpers" under control. This has been the case with windows since at least 98. You should know better.

PS pidgin is pretty good, and I've heard of a windows alternative to quicksilver

Re:Please shut up

[Omestes]

What strikes me is that you complain about core 2 duos running like mollasas and needed 6 gigs of memory for vista.

The Mac runs like crap, period. But then again I might be above what the entry level Macs are geared towards. I really have no right running Firefox, iTunes, Adium, and applying filers to a 100MB RAW file in photoshop (via Rosetta, damn CS2). My general observation with Intel Macs is that they don't handle dual cores as well as Linux or even Windows. Anecdotal, yes.

On the Vista boxes, both are completely crap free, including services scrubbed of most superfluous things. On the laptop, it ran okay with 1GB, but not as well as I would want it to. Again, I might have been using it for a bit more than HP expected. I was using it mostly as a desktop replacement, when it really wasn't up to it. I also find Vista dog ugly without some of its eye-candy (such as transparency). With 4GB of RAM, it wasn't bad, barring the stock Intel integrated graphics (which was another thing that stomped a bit on Linux, but oddly only on the HP, not the Mac)

My new PC, with 6GB, which might be a little much, on the other hand is awesome, even with Vista. I'm guessing around 2GB might be the minimum to make Vista run well, even with all its graphics crap, and indexing (which generally sucks). On my new one, I got the extra 4GB for a pittance, so I admit it is overkill (on the bright side, the top usage I've gotten is 3GB/6GB while running iTunes, Firefox, and Fallout 3 at the same time).

So, I understand if you claim you need 2Gb to run vista, but 4? 6? What are you running, iTunes + antivirus + official AIM + updaters for 20 odd apps?

With Vista graphics on, and a minimal load (meaning just Antivir, and Vista default services) I generally boot with with around 1.5GB used. With graphics off, it is around 1GB for just Vista. (Oddly, right now DWM.exe, Vistas widgets, is taking only 23MB).

My own personal take is around 2-3GB, for what I use my computer for. It varies by user, obviously.

And, for your information, all three of my computers are completely clean of crap. Dell isn't that bad for crapwear, but HP is f*ing terrible, I reformatted and reinstalled Vista on it, and then cleaned the useless services from both. The Mac obviously isn't that bad, though it boots with Quicksilver and Adium by default. I keep a clean house, in other words.

Re:Please shut up

[atraintocry]

everything

I know what you mean. :D

I get the impression that most of the /.ers bringing up fanboys do so because they have no actual experience with Macs to report on (or past Apple machines, for that matter).

If they did, they'd understand that computers are computers, and they all make you want to tear your hair out at one point or another. It's all about what you are comfortable with day-to-day. I actually hesitate to recommend Macs to people, because I pushed an iMac on my parents and my father's initial hesitance was a self-fulfilling prophecy. He was barely at home in Windows, so the switch is daunting for him. I don't want to experience that sort of guilt again.

As far as Quicksilver...Launchy and cURL will get you 10% of the way there :)

Most likely you've heard of it...just a heads up if you hadn't.

Re:Please shut up

[atraintocry]

Eeeeexactly.

Materialistic cunts

[Joe Jay Bee]

girls who claim they'll never sleep with Windows users

Good for them. They're idiots. I wouldn't want to sleep with someone who judges people on their OS choice (of all things) rather than things that actually matter, like personality or how well the two of you connect. Them not wanting to sleep with users isn't a damning indictment of Windows, it's a damning indictment of themselves.

Seriously, people like that need to be punched to death.

Re:Materialistic cunts

[Anonymous Coward]

And how is 'Seriously, people like that need to be punched to death' not damning indictment of you? ;)

Re:Materialistic cunts

[w0mprat]

But if the MacGirl was hot enough though, would it be worth pretending you are a MacHead? If your a linux guy you could show her a Bash shell in OSX and she's yours.

Re:Materialistic cunts

[Joe Jay Bee]

I AM, for want of a better word, a "MacHead". I use Macs and OS X exclusively. And yet I don't want to sleeo with someone who's so up herself and materialistic that someone's choice in OS is a factor in wanting to fuck them. That's my point.

Re:Materialistic cunts

[Hatta]

It's likely that for them OS choice is a decent proxy for things that actually matter, like compatible interests. While I wouldn't kick anyone out of bed for their OS choice, I can see how all other things equal, I'd choose a Linux user over a windows user as a sexual partner. At least she'd get my naughty UNIX jokes.

For instance, I can't see myself ever dating someone who listens to Celine Dion. It's not because I'm a control freak who actually cares about music preferences. It's because music preference is a proxy for qualities that matter. If a girl listens to Celine Dion, and actually enjoys it, it's clear that she is not a cynic. Cynicism is a virtue I prize highly, so that's a deal breaker right there.

Girl - singular

[denzacar]

The one that goes by the name of Violet Blue.

Now... being that according to Forbes

"Violet Blue is (...) nearly omnipresent on the Web"

and that I have just now heard about her for the first time... apparently I have lived under a rock all these years.
Then again... I was never in need of sexual education, at least not the on-line kind. Or a tutorial for porn-surfing. Warning: NSFW!
So I guess I was just a tad out of the demographic that is her audience.

Webnation: "Violet Blue is the leading sex educator for the Internet generation."
The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies: "America's leading (very) public intellectual sexologist, Violet Blue."
* Named: Wired's Faces of Innovation 2008
* Awarded: SFBG's Best of the Bay 2008
* Named: Forbes Web Celeb Top 25 2007

Besides not being a MacGuy, not even when it was required for the job.

 
Seems to me rather like a case of a big fish in a small pond.
What was the size of the pond again, 8% of all the ponds?

I wonder if it touches on philanthropy

[ChrmnMa0]

Cause Jobs does jack shit! As evil as MS is, at least Bill gives a fuck.

Preferences of a Windows guy...

[w0mprat]

Do mac girls only have one nipple?

Re:Preferences of a Windows guy...

[Anonymous Coward]

Possible answer - Yep. Except for the ones that have 5.

Alternative answer - Do window girls have scroll wheels between their boobs?

Real answer - Thanks for your hilarious post, showing such deep thought. I especially liked how - before reading your post - I had no idea of the veracity of mac girls not laying windows guys. Your depth on the subject has pretty much proven its truth.

Re:Preferences of a Windows guy...

[atomic-penguin]

I had no idea of the veracity of mac girls not laying windows guys.

Funny, as a Linux user, I tend not to sleep with unshaven, unwashed, dirty hippy Mac girls.

Re:Preferences of a Windows guy...

[earlymon]

Funny, as a Linux user, I tend not to sleep with unshaven, unwashed, dirty hippy Mac girls.

Say, that is funny.

Re:Preferences of a Windows guy...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but you can achieve multidirectional squirming with it.

Oh my...

[adh0c]

I've seen a trailer for this thing previously, and I am amazed. Macintosh users have their heads stuck up their own asses so far they can lick the back side of their tonsils. It's one thing to behave like an elitist jerk with your striped tight clothes, thick-rimmed glasses, writing on your Web 2.0 blog about geopolitics while you sip a coffee at a local Starbucks and flipping the pages of a book written in French, but to make a documentary about how much of a pretentious fanboy you are - I think only Mac users can do that. Congratulations, Apple, iHateYou. Also, this will be modded "troll" because I used a politically incorrect word, and, what's worse, presented an un-hip opinion.

Re:Oh my...

[MindlessAutomata]

While lamenting about the plight of the lower classes all while spending money on overpriced coffee and overpriced computers.

Re:Oh my...

[NoMaster]

I spent 8 years or so doing field networking repairs & installations. Big stuff & little stuff, from home PCs to corporate and ISP networks. In all that time, it was rare to see a Mac outside of graphics shops.

Now, I'm back studying at university; y'know, those big buildings where smart people with open minds go to learn useful and interesting things? I see a lot of Macs around here ;-)

Re:Oh my...

[Anonymous Coward]

What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?

What part of District of Columbia v. Heller do you not understand?

Not just Macs/OSX

[MindlessAutomata]

I find the worst part about these "MacHeads" isn't just Mac fanboyism. It's worse than that. It's Apple fanboyism. They'll cheer on the Ipod, buy their overpriced peripherals, etc, when there are so many better MP3 players. Sansa Clip/Fuze, Creative Zen, and Cowon D2, so on and so forth.

For example, check out this Sansa Fuze story on digg I found, with one comment by a so-called "macslut":

http://digg.com/apple/Sandisk_fights_back

The main complaint is inferior video (which is true, but it's a @^!!ing MP3 player!) and incompatibility with iTunes. As far as I'm concerned, not having to use iTunes to even UPLOAD the music is a plus.

Even funnier is that while the Fuze doesn't support AAC, Sansa did add (after this post was made, I will admit) ogg and flac compatibility. The Ipod, however, is lacking there...

"The author of this article is positioning this player as a new threat to the iPod, but like all superior spec'd players before it, people are going to see that there's subtle advantages to getting the iPod that go beyond the specs."

That is the crux of the Apple fanboy's complaint about non-Ipod MP3 players. There's "subtle" advantages to the Ipod, which is really just the fact that it's locked down to their stupid iTunes software.

Addictive obsession anyone?

[evanh]

It's obsessive! No, it's addictive! No, it's obsessive! There's another asteroid ... Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!

Yup.

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

The Handbook is valuable (but not necessarily the best source) for showing that Unix is, in many ways, a regression in OS design. Unix basically tossed out a bunch of problems that other OSes regarded as central to the OS, and put the burden on the user programs to deal with those. Things like deadlock detection, record-based I/O, or device support (the Unix policy of "everything is a terminal"). None of these were the great paragons of OS design that today's revisionist Unix history makes them out to be; they were first due to the fact that the PDP machines that Unix first ran on weren't powerful enough for a "real" OS by the standards of the day.

So, basically, Unix punted on a lot of OS problems, and solutions for these have had to be bolted onto it ever since.

p.s.

[ClioCJS]

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/05/picasa-finally-hits-the-mac-squares-off-with-iphoto/

Okay - now add Picasa to the list of things I was just talking about. One of the most popular photo management softwares used by the 'common man', especially for new internet users who never had the opportunity to use stuff that was out before.

Personally, I don't like it and use Photoshop and my own scripts to upload to flickr using the flickr API and a few thousand lines of code to transform my proprietary tagging system (that I invented before the word "tag" existed on the internet, in 2000ish) to the types of tags a common person would use ("thing-animal-cat" just doesn't look right when normal people would simply say "cat").

Anyway... These stories keep coming out. I wish I saved them as a collection, haha.

Re:p.s.

[dangitman]

(that I invented before the word "tag" existed on the internet, in 2000ish)

Are you delusional or something? The word "tag" existed on the internet since the internet began, decades before 2000.

The Ultimate tool

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot decided that your post just had to have an ad attached, and the titanium spork couldn't be more appropriate, certainly not just another tool.

my cpu overheated

[ClioCJS]

I found a fan in a form-factor i didn't realize existed: the 5-inch cd drive. It's only an inch or two deep, but it fits right there in the 5-inch bay. If you have one at the VERY top, it's awesome. It has a knob so you can control your speed. Might be useful. Not because it's the best, but because it's a way to cram in another fan without taking up room otherwise.

Re:my cpu overheated

[mjwx]

I saw one of those when looking for a new heat sink, A$50. My case isn't getting too hot with the stock cooling (mobo rarely goes above 50), its just the CPU. Its nearly two years old so the heat sink is full of dust and the fan just cant keep up with the Australian summer any more. I could just clean the heat sink properly but to do that I'd need to remove it from the CPU for A$30 and no extra effort I could have this PC around for another 2 or 3 years (albeit not as my gaming box).

I have a Coolermaster C830 case, so if need be I could buy an insert that allows an additional 4 120mm fans bearing down on the Mobo and CPU, but its just the CPU having the problem.

It's pretty clear who this film is really for...

[ltrm]

This film is the equivalent of any tabloid new paper article aimed at riling up it's readers with stories about immigrants or any minority group that gets up someone else's nose.

All they needed to make this was interview enough people who bought Apple products and filter out everyone but the Nimrods.

...and look it works.

Post after post here of people basically saying "I've never met an Apple-hater[sic] they don't exist but as we all know people who buy Apple stuff are fanbois 'cause... [insert some piece of anecdotal evidence, probably involving a latte]". This film is for you so that you can feel superior to the people you think all feel superior. After all they're only interested in shiny stuff / don't know how to 'build' a real computer / are gay / etc., etc.

Get over yourselves, you're just as bad as the nimrods interviewed in the film and you're just as easily manipulated.

okay

[ClioCJS]

So what sites out there prior to 2000 let people tag and upload images? Don't say Kodakshare or anything like that. Those didn't even let you write captions.

Re:okay

[dangitman]

But you claimed that the word "tag" did not exist on the internet prior to 2000. That is clearly false. You didn't say anything about it being related to picture uploading.

Either way, you're wrong - people have been tagging and sending pics over USENET for a very long time.

Re:okay

[ClioCJS]

Pardon me for not being specific enough for you. Tagged pictures on Usenet? That's really weak. How does search work when you don't have infinte retention anyway? But yea yea, the devil's in the fucking details, I get it. We've lost sight of our original conversation.