You aren't a Mac OS X user, I presume? Unlike Windows, OS X cds aren't copy protected nor do they need keys. If you buy a Mac, you get the OS. My point was that if you already own a Mac (like I do) and you want to hack a Mac TV, then there is no "+cost of OS".
I'm not sure about Beta Max. Many film and news crews used Beta Max for well over 10 years, because VHS was never good enough quality for professional work. It wasn't until high quality 8mm tape in small consumer level camcorders that Beta Max started feeling the pinch. Then with DV, Beta Max had finally outlived its worth. Just because something got beat out in the living room doesn't make it a flop. Consumers are stupid. Look to what the pros use.
Zip disks can't be considered a flop, because they dominated several industry for many years in the early 90s (i.e., before bandwidth and before writable cds). Every print project we made was too big for floppy disks, so the Zip disk was the answer (and early EXPENSIVE external hard drives). I still have one that works (I think) but am hard-pressed to find a computer with a SCSI port to run it. I think they made USB ones later?
Let's not forget that plagiarism isn't limited to the intentional copy-and-paste cheating that everyone keeps talking about. Plagiarism is also failure to accurately cite sources, even unintentionally. The most moral of students with the best intentions can still be guilty of plagiarism for something as simple as poor proof-reading.
We maxed out our Mac IIfx model. I don't remember the cost, but it was well beyond what average users would spend. I believe it was in the "thousands" of dollars range. I think my boss payed over $10k for the whole setup.
I'd even settle for thoughts from a blatant fanboy at this point.
I'll take a stab. At the moment, I see no need to fork out $299 for this, because it doesn't do anything my MacBook doesn't already do. The only advantage is it offers the convenience of not having to get up and hook my MacBook up to the tv. Other than that, it offers nothing. Is that worth $299? Not to me. Not yet.
When (not if) third party add-ons become available for me to play other video formats other than what iTunes handles, and when it becomes capable of recording tv shows, I might spring for it.
Again, this may be a technically sound solution, but it is far beyond the ability of 90% of computer users. I'd bet your average user doesn't even know what Linksys is, let alone port 25. Hell, "ethernet" and "router" are probably foreign to most users.
It's posts like this that make me want to keep my Windows XP machines on and connected to the net 24/7, without virus software or firewalls. A seatbelt is easy to operate. Norton anti-virus and MS Windows are not.
Cut the fucking thing off the net until the user fixes the problem
No way. Never. It isn't the responsibility of the law-abiding citizen to cut down on criminal activity. If I want to keep my front door unlocked, that is my choice. If someone chooses to break into my house, they are the ones breaking the law, not me. More realisitically, I should lock my door, but I'm shouldn't be required to install cameras, fencing and hire a security firm. Asking average Joe computer user to spend hours on their computer configuring it for security reasons (cough, MS Windows, cough) is unrealistic.
This is such an aggravating direction our society is going. Why not hold the offenders liable? Why not demand easier, and more secure operating systems from Microsoft? I for one use Mac OS X with default everything for security settings and feel I've done MORE than enough to make my computer "secure enough".
Played or not, Maynor and Ellch came out swinging at Mac users and attacked them on attitude's sake alone.
This statement demonstrates exactly why those people who say the only reason Macs don't get viruses is becacause nobody uses Macs are wrong. There are so many angry nerds out there that hate Macs so much that they must be trying to hack them on a daily basis, just because of my happy-go-lucky Mac-using attitude. Hey, I'm happy to keep my Mac online 24/7 (wireless, even) with no spyware software, no virus software, and *GASP*, NO PASSWORD! Oh my God, I'm I crazy? No, I'm a realist. I haven't had a single bit of Macintosh data lost or destroyed due to hacking since my first ISP connection in 1991.
And no, this is not a challenge, as I'm sure many of you have already tried (without success).
Well, in a sense, it could be considered FUD by the person who posted the story. This person might have an ulterior motive (i.e. spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt) about the company Apple, Inc. and their tactics, because this person is, say, a Microsoft fan? Not that I agree with my own argument, but it is one viewpoint that I could be persuaded to accept.
In any case, this definitely isn't the classic FUD campaign by one company against another...unless the original story takes the angle that Apple is FUD'ing (can that be a verb?) these researchers?
This is not even debatable. If a Mac crashes, it recovers gracefully 99% of the time. If WinX crashes, it is usually a painfully drawn-out and aggravating process of trying to ctrl+alt+del an app that is not responding. My favorite feature of Windows is when the ctrl+alt+del window crashes. Good luck force quitting the force quitter. This simply doesn't happen on a Mac.
The previous poster was incorrect in bringing up the "uplug" troubleshooting technique. I don't have enough fingers in my house to count how many times I've had to remove a PC from the power supply to get it to reboot. This has never happened on any of my 10 or so Macs in the past 19 years. Killing a hung app in OS X is as graceful as a crash can be. Firefox, for example, even brings you back to the website you were on, and if it was a site that required login, remains logged in for you. You don't see Mac users yelling out their computer trying to figure out why in the hell it isn't responding. Mac users take a calm breath, then right click on the offending app and choose "force quit".
"Macs just feel weird. The laptops look really cool, but the keyboard is horrible. If you do a lot of typing... it just feels "wrong". Most PC keyboards feel ``natural'' (ie: IBM Thinkpad keyboard)."
You sound like a Bud Lite drinker trying to convince me that my nice locally brewed IPA "tastes weird".
The current line of Macs will not be outdated in three years, given the track history of Apple computers. I have a 6 year old G4 tower that still runs better than my 2-year old pc, for example. And if you haven't noticed, cpu-speeds (the traditional measurement of an outdated computer) have been holding steady, or even going down in the face of more efficient designs. Come back in three years from now, and if my Intel iMac or my MacBook are outdated, I'll buy you a new computer.
Nope, Pentium jokes still stand. Just because Intel lagged for years with poor Pentium chips (but great marketing), doesn't mean the Core 2 Duo architecture is crap. Most of us Mac users welcome Intel with open arms, now that they get the concept that bigger-numbers-aren't-better.
Slashdot Mirror
You aren't a Mac OS X user, I presume? Unlike Windows, OS X cds aren't copy protected nor do they need keys. If you buy a Mac, you get the OS. My point was that if you already own a Mac (like I do) and you want to hack a Mac TV, then there is no "+cost of OS".
Actually, I didn't REPLACE my PowerPC G4, I merely augmented it...with TWO new intel macs. That kind of kills our theory?
Wouldn't any of the three copies of OS X I have on CD now for my other Macs work? Why would it have to be pirated?
I'm not sure about Beta Max. Many film and news crews used Beta Max for well over 10 years, because VHS was never good enough quality for professional work. It wasn't until high quality 8mm tape in small consumer level camcorders that Beta Max started feeling the pinch. Then with DV, Beta Max had finally outlived its worth. Just because something got beat out in the living room doesn't make it a flop. Consumers are stupid. Look to what the pros use.
Zip disks can't be considered a flop, because they dominated several industry for many years in the early 90s (i.e., before bandwidth and before writable cds). Every print project we made was too big for floppy disks, so the Zip disk was the answer (and early EXPENSIVE external hard drives). I still have one that works (I think) but am hard-pressed to find a computer with a SCSI port to run it. I think they made USB ones later?
Let's not forget that plagiarism isn't limited to the intentional copy-and-paste cheating that everyone keeps talking about. Plagiarism is also failure to accurately cite sources, even unintentionally. The most moral of students with the best intentions can still be guilty of plagiarism for something as simple as poor proof-reading.
All your points PLUS the notion that Apple made about 50 million iMacs that only had USB ports.
We maxed out our Mac IIfx model. I don't remember the cost, but it was well beyond what average users would spend. I believe it was in the "thousands" of dollars range. I think my boss payed over $10k for the whole setup.
No offense dude, but if you can't afford $600 worth of stuff, I don't think you are Apple's target demographic.
This thing will sell to lazy people with disposable incomes.
not to mention the hdtv only claim has already been disproven
I'll take a stab. At the moment, I see no need to fork out $299 for this, because it doesn't do anything my MacBook doesn't already do. The only advantage is it offers the convenience of not having to get up and hook my MacBook up to the tv. Other than that, it offers nothing. Is that worth $299? Not to me. Not yet.
When (not if) third party add-ons become available for me to play other video formats other than what iTunes handles, and when it becomes capable of recording tv shows, I might spring for it.
Very lame. These videos go to show how good the Apple commercials really are.
Again, this may be a technically sound solution, but it is far beyond the ability of 90% of computer users. I'd bet your average user doesn't even know what Linksys is, let alone port 25. Hell, "ethernet" and "router" are probably foreign to most users.
It's posts like this that make me want to keep my Windows XP machines on and connected to the net 24/7, without virus software or firewalls. A seatbelt is easy to operate. Norton anti-virus and MS Windows are not.
No way. Never. It isn't the responsibility of the law-abiding citizen to cut down on criminal activity. If I want to keep my front door unlocked, that is my choice. If someone chooses to break into my house, they are the ones breaking the law, not me. More realisitically, I should lock my door, but I'm shouldn't be required to install cameras, fencing and hire a security firm. Asking average Joe computer user to spend hours on their computer configuring it for security reasons (cough, MS Windows, cough) is unrealistic.
This is such an aggravating direction our society is going. Why not hold the offenders liable? Why not demand easier, and more secure operating systems from Microsoft? I for one use Mac OS X with default everything for security settings and feel I've done MORE than enough to make my computer "secure enough".
Ok Mr. Jobs, I think it is time you drop the "zytheran" cover term.
This statement demonstrates exactly why those people who say the only reason Macs don't get viruses is becacause nobody uses Macs are wrong. There are so many angry nerds out there that hate Macs so much that they must be trying to hack them on a daily basis, just because of my happy-go-lucky Mac-using attitude. Hey, I'm happy to keep my Mac online 24/7 (wireless, even) with no spyware software, no virus software, and *GASP*, NO PASSWORD! Oh my God, I'm I crazy? No, I'm a realist. I haven't had a single bit of Macintosh data lost or destroyed due to hacking since my first ISP connection in 1991.
And no, this is not a challenge, as I'm sure many of you have already tried (without success).
In any case, this definitely isn't the classic FUD campaign by one company against another...unless the original story takes the angle that Apple is FUD'ing (can that be a verb?) these researchers?
So there really is at least one person who likes the Microsoft Vista User Account Control "feature"?
The OS X version works pretty well. Just sayin'....
Saying Apple should make better hardware is kind of like saying Porsche should make faster cars.
The previous poster was incorrect in bringing up the "uplug" troubleshooting technique. I don't have enough fingers in my house to count how many times I've had to remove a PC from the power supply to get it to reboot. This has never happened on any of my 10 or so Macs in the past 19 years. Killing a hung app in OS X is as graceful as a crash can be. Firefox, for example, even brings you back to the website you were on, and if it was a site that required login, remains logged in for you. You don't see Mac users yelling out their computer trying to figure out why in the hell it isn't responding. Mac users take a calm breath, then right click on the offending app and choose "force quit".
You sound like a Bud Lite drinker trying to convince me that my nice locally brewed IPA "tastes weird".
The current line of Macs will not be outdated in three years, given the track history of Apple computers. I have a 6 year old G4 tower that still runs better than my 2-year old pc, for example. And if you haven't noticed, cpu-speeds (the traditional measurement of an outdated computer) have been holding steady, or even going down in the face of more efficient designs. Come back in three years from now, and if my Intel iMac or my MacBook are outdated, I'll buy you a new computer.
Nope, Pentium jokes still stand. Just because Intel lagged for years with poor Pentium chips (but great marketing), doesn't mean the Core 2 Duo architecture is crap. Most of us Mac users welcome Intel with open arms, now that they get the concept that bigger-numbers-aren't-better.