I don't read much hype about those products. They're pretty much what you expect from apple at the price.
All the talk is distracting from objective observations.
I've read a very balanced test from the hifi on ipodlaunge that was 100% more helpful than all the bitching and whining elsewhere, all based on perception.
See, apple indeed does marketing. That may be vexing to some. But just stating opinions isn't somehow more worthy than that.
btw, the article doesn't say what the post suggests.
Linux desktop does not exist. No, it doesn't. There ARE a lot of distributions around that can give you a decent desktop experience. And I can believe it's actually a lot better coded than Windows, but that doesn't mean you can switch the average person just like that. I bet that out of any 10 users, you'd be lucky to be able to switch one, provided you're there to solve their problems.
If you really really want linux desktop to succeed, start ONE project with ONE distribution and ONE consistent GUI and make it easy to switch, make it at least as easy as XP, never mind Vista, and make conversion as painless as possible.
All other efforts are fine for large business, small geeky business or geeks and their friends provided geek likes to offer support.
I'm not saying you should do this, but you can't complain about users not switching "en masse" and at the same time disregard what the average user needs to feel comfortable. This article, while educational, doesn't address any of the real issues involved. - work with windows documents without having to reformat the buggers, send windows users documents that don't go screwy - plug and play - get support from people who don't have to first find out what distro and windowing system and whatnot they use, and who don't totally change their setup because geeky support guy prefers it that way - have similar user experience (not necessarily identical) as windows users - not having to deal with all this source code and license stuff...
And while dumbing down is part of the process, it's not about dumb users, it's about trouble free computing for those who aren't into their computer like you are. And it's about consistency, recogniseability (is that a word?), even appeal. And the feeling that you're using a great OS instead of a free but strange alternative.
OS X does all this to the extent that most mac users feel good about their computer, and that could make you realize three things: 1) you don't have to mimick windows, just take it into account to a very large extent. 2) you can't underestimate the effort involved. 3) even having great marketing and huge halos and stuff doesn't change the fact that some people need to run windows even if they don't want to.
I added examples of hardware software integration.
Which means: you have a set of hardware, which does stuff. You have software functions inside the OS, no matter at which level that makes use of this hardware.
With windows this means: hey, want to write a CD? Just fire up one of many CD writer programs and fiddle with the settings. With os x this means: hey want to write a CD? drag and drop and click burn.
That's what I mean.
Again, I'm not suggesting OS X is magically better integrated with its hardware, or that its hardware is better, I mean - and I hope that I explained it right this time - that OS X adheres to KISS and integration with its hardware is a huge factor.
I'm not talking about what you're talking about, that's clear. I don't care that a stock Dell is very comparable to a stock Apple computer, I'm talking about the stuff OS X adds that makes all this work as if it's all one thing instead of an OS on top of a computer.
And to get back to my point, I don't think you will disagree with me that a lot of this will go boink if you try to transplant that to just ANY PC setup. I stated in my original post that this would be a different situation if Apple would license to specs.
I don't care how similar most pc hardware is, compared to the millions of combinations that are out there, the amount of stuff inside the boxes Apple has to take into account is MINIMAL.
You may be an apple user, just as I am partly a PC user. I think we both know that parts change more in dell lineups than Apple lineups, that - while apple has its share of issues when it comes to keeping everything compatible with all their configurations, it is still pretty usual to buy a pc that has issues out of the box because somewhere along the production line some piece of crap got changed for another piece of crap. It's not like 5 years ago when that was almost a given, but still, it's a problem and one you hardly get with Apple (not that you don't get other problems, mind).
I hope you don't just take me for an advocate of the church of Jobs. I'm talking about stuff I see daily, and I'm not exaggerating or claiming PC's are crap and Apple is bliss. We may be at cross purposes when talking about hardware-software integration. I see what you mean, it's just not what I meant.
Well each to his own I say. I'm sure the windows experience is just as nice as the mac experience. And all windows users are dell users.
Propaganda my ass.
I liken the integration of for instance my disk burner to the windows experience, thank you very much. If I need to fiddle with settings, I'll use a different program, but for 99% of my time, drag and drop or pushing one button is way preferable to having to choose at which speed my disks may burn etc etc etc...
I liken the experience of plugging something in and having it working to "blablabla has detected new hardware... etc etc".
You suggest I speak of somehow OS X being magically better integrated, I suggest the experience is better, and indeed, integration of software and hardware is a HUGE part of it. The difference is not in Jobs' aura, it's in dedication to KISS. It's not for all people, since everything is subject to taste, and some people like to for instance tune their car, but if you really think a Dell and Windows are just as seamless as a mac and OS X I bet you can't figure out why people like the iPod so much. Hint, it's not the pretty colors.
If you don't get what I mean by these examples, just think potatoes potatoes and let's agree to disagree.
But I know which computer is suitable to my parents and which not. And I know which setup makes me lose more time, which btw has nothing to do with taste.
Not only is this story bull, I can't believe people still think a hacked OS X is good for Apple's market share.
I'm totally OK with all the hacking, it's not mine, I kind of understand the fascination and am sure I understand a geek's wish to fire up any OS on his hardware of choice. Hell, I don't even like windows and can't wait until they have it running on Mactel.
But fact is, it won't be a good experience for your average possible switcher. And keep in mind, they're not computer lovers, they are clueless just like most people are clueless about a lot of things they're not really into. So they'll go "yeah, Apple, I tried that, a friend of mine installed it. It sucked and *broke my computer*.
Mark my words.
And for those not totally with me, let me explain: a very large part of the Apple appeal is lack of frustration. Plug and play, extreme integration of hard and software, everything supported that's supposed to be inside your computer so that the hardware part of the story is largely irrelevant. That's why most mac users will happily report "oh, I updated the OS and it seems so much snappier". Yes, they are clueless, and no, that's not a problem. And that's what they tell their windows friends. Variations of "I don't know, I don't care and you know what, I'm happy".
Now picture that sort of expectations with hardware that isn't supported. A nightmare. None of the familiar Windows panels and shortcuts to all your "places", not a hint as to where to find the hardware inside and outside your box and only pretty and shiny to look at. Oh, and a spinning beach ball.
If Apple would license to certain specs that would be a different story, but a hack is only interesting for those interested in that sort of thing, and we are.001 of the total market (I just love made up statistics, but you get my drift, no?)
In other news, Windows is good for you, and Linux, ready for the desktop? And why not link to Thurott when we're at it?
Disclaimer: depending on your sense of humour, you may get angry at this, but at least I've been able to get a laugh out of this great post, all by my self!
I think it is just you. Seriously, what's your point, are linux penguins gay, is a mac gay, is a mac user gay? Do the mac crowd enjoy it because it's like gay porn, don't they because of that? I like all the mac hacking, am I now into gay porn or am I not? so confusing all these gender questions.
Now I won't look at a firewire connection the same ever again.
Re:Crackers lack ability to actually create anythi
on
OSx86 Cracked Again
·
· Score: 1
Not a cracker myself, but if you can't see the charm of taking something apart and putting it together again, well...
All the rest is secondary to this indeed childish desire to see what makes something tick. I love it that it's still possible, I cheer the effort and accomplishment and see no need to measure all this tinkering against other qualities like creativity. After all, I may be pretty creative, but could never do what they do.
I even see the charm of having a windows box just for the kick of maintaining it and extending it with the most crazy functionality until it blows up. I know quite a few people who're into that. It is pretty cool, and half the time they indeed have a very interesting setup - until something goes boink and they go "oh well, back to the lab" with a big goofy smile on their face.
You used the word "if". any chance a fix is as simple as you describe it should be? Just curious, not really interested in the debate (and no, I didn't brickify my iMac, I'm still in the wait and see what the next revision and my wallet say phase...;-)
Only yesterday I got a little window telling me there was "Security Update" and wanted me to "click to install".
I trashed it before it could do more harm, thank god!
Serious though, while I agree with the guy in general (yes we are smug, no we don't care) I'd like to see more proof from him that lots of mac users aren't updating their computer when asked to. Everybody I know does the intelligent thing the moment Software Update pops up and has their firewall on at all times. This apart from maybe being a bit smug about it. That may not be enough for real security maniacs, but has proven to be more than sufficient for all regular (professional or home) mac users the last five years. So, what else does he want us to do? Shout "the end is near"?
And BTW most people I know really don't know who this mythical ROOT person is and wouldn't know how to log in as him anyway.
That's really really impractical. I'm talking about myself now, but I think a lot of people (especially those who don't really like computers per se) are in the same position. I'm evaluating an iMac and a portable to run two systems, maybe even simultaneously. Two computers you can put in your living room without too much intrusion. Why have a tower and monitor next to that?
There's lots of good reasons to have two, but I've been there and don't want to go back.
"I can't really think of anything where Windows does it better than Mac OS X or Linux."
Well, there's no environment better for testing stuff in Windows than, um, Windows...? And, um, not that I don't enjoy stating the obvious, but it still feels silly to do it. Anyway: Windows is WAAAAY better in running programs that only run on Windows.
So, apart from contesting your banter in the same spirit I'd like to add that this actually does mean that a lot of people could switch that couldn't before. There are a lot of people sort of interested in the mac, if only because they're pretty, shiny and seem to be more fun... But, but but, there's that one program they need that only works on Windows...
And in my experience it doesn't do any good to say for example "stop using that crappy Access, just use Filemaker". Unless you are prepared to talk to their boss, department, IT managers etc that yes, it does make sense for the whole company to switch, of course it does. You can tell, can't you that even if it made perfect sense, it would still be a BWOT.
One example of a friend who is going to switch, he's an architect and uses a.o. autocad. You can't tell him there's something better than autocad. Or the programs he uses for measuring stability. It doesn't matter what you use, it matters what his firm uses and the firms his firm works with. But he's had mac-envy for years, and boy does he want to switch.
I don't know, imo whatever google does, it does pretty good, .
I'm totally into design, GUI's and yes, the mac. But when accessing a service, I don't care how pretty it is, as long as it's easy and gives me useful results. Did I mention fast there? Any online service should be fast before anything else. If not, don't bother, I'm sure I won't.
Fast, easy, useful.
Apart from that, I try to judge free stuff differently from stuff I pay for.
So, let's see, free, fast, useful, and um, not so pretty.
In short, I don't agree with you. I think Google gets it and gives even better.
"At the end of the day they're really making a huge mistake here. They want to be a hardware company whose competitive advantage is derived from their software. This is an excellent strategy for limiting growth and market penetration. What they should be doing is selling boxed copies to all comers and bundling the OS with the offerings of PC vendors that meet the technical specifications Apple sets."
The first question you should ask yourself with any professional decision is "what do I want to do". I think Jobs has asked himself that question repeatedly.
Your analysis could be perfect (whatever I think about it) but it doesn't consider the all-important question.
Afaic no mistake on Apple's part. I enjoy their hardware (not all good, have to be picky and price conscious) and their software. Since OS X I've also enjoyed heaps of OSS. From people who imo have asked themselves that all-important question and for the most part are having a blast.
"The EU is never going to get anywhere this way. At least one country is always going to throw a tantrum if it doesn't get its way, and it'll usually be the same one country. De Gaulle was right from the beginning; for the sake of the union, throw us out, NOW."
Funny, here I was thinking you meant the UK, who don't seem to want the EU evolve into anything beyond a free trade zone;)
It'll be interesting to see if the enlargement of the EU will enhance the cacophony or make individual candidates less important.
A major defecting to SABAM? Meaning a label defecting to a copyright collector? I don't get this at all, but am very intrigued. I hope you don't mind explaining this in more detail to me, would love to know more! Sorry if I'm slow to catch on, I promise I will drink that second cup of coffee before I read your reply:-)
"I'd like slashdotters to tell me one cross-platform application that is more beautiful and therefore more pleasant to look at, [and use] on Linux, as compared to its Windows counterpart."
A lot of internet website products. Or let me turn this around: you show me one proprietary (windows or whatever) BBS product that is as beautiful as e.g. Simple Machines. I'm a usability flunky myself, so I'm not used to complimenting linux, but it needs to be said. A lot of FOSS server products blow away expensive alternatives both in functionality and beauty.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't read much hype about those products. They're pretty much what you expect from apple at the price.
All the talk is distracting from objective observations.
I've read a very balanced test from the hifi on ipodlaunge that was 100% more helpful than all the bitching and whining elsewhere, all based on perception.
See, apple indeed does marketing. That may be vexing to some. But just stating opinions isn't somehow more worthy than that.
btw, the article doesn't say what the post suggests.
Linux desktop does not exist. No, it doesn't. There ARE a lot of distributions around that can give you a decent desktop experience. And I can believe it's actually a lot better coded than Windows, but that doesn't mean you can switch the average person just like that. I bet that out of any 10 users, you'd be lucky to be able to switch one, provided you're there to solve their problems.
...
If you really really want linux desktop to succeed, start ONE project with ONE distribution and ONE consistent GUI and make it easy to switch, make it at least as easy as XP, never mind Vista, and make conversion as painless as possible.
All other efforts are fine for large business, small geeky business or geeks and their friends provided geek likes to offer support.
I'm not saying you should do this, but you can't complain about users not switching "en masse" and at the same time disregard what the average user needs to feel comfortable. This article, while educational, doesn't address any of the real issues involved.
- work with windows documents without having to reformat the buggers, send windows users documents that don't go screwy
- plug and play
- get support from people who don't have to first find out what distro and windowing system and whatnot they use, and who don't totally change their setup because geeky support guy prefers it that way
- have similar user experience (not necessarily identical) as windows users
- not having to deal with all this source code and license stuff
And while dumbing down is part of the process, it's not about dumb users, it's about trouble free computing for those who aren't into their computer like you are. And it's about consistency, recogniseability (is that a word?), even appeal. And the feeling that you're using a great OS instead of a free but strange alternative.
OS X does all this to the extent that most mac users feel good about their computer, and that could make you realize three things:
1) you don't have to mimick windows, just take it into account to a very large extent.
2) you can't underestimate the effort involved.
3) even having great marketing and huge halos and stuff doesn't change the fact that some people need to run windows even if they don't want to.
um, the same reason every finished product is expensive? Duh...
Well how about that.
Will try this out, don't know where to look for it though.
Why thank you.
I added examples of hardware software integration.
Which means: you have a set of hardware, which does stuff. You have software functions inside the OS, no matter at which level that makes use of this hardware.
With windows this means: hey, want to write a CD? Just fire up one of many CD writer programs and fiddle with the settings.
With os x this means: hey want to write a CD? drag and drop and click burn.
That's what I mean.
Again, I'm not suggesting OS X is magically better integrated with its hardware, or that its hardware is better, I mean - and I hope that I explained it right this time - that OS X adheres to KISS and integration with its hardware is a huge factor.
I'm not talking about what you're talking about, that's clear. I don't care that a stock Dell is very comparable to a stock Apple computer, I'm talking about the stuff OS X adds that makes all this work as if it's all one thing instead of an OS on top of a computer.
And to get back to my point, I don't think you will disagree with me that a lot of this will go boink if you try to transplant that to just ANY PC setup. I stated in my original post that this would be a different situation if Apple would license to specs.
I don't care how similar most pc hardware is, compared to the millions of combinations that are out there, the amount of stuff inside the boxes Apple has to take into account is MINIMAL.
You may be an apple user, just as I am partly a PC user. I think we both know that parts change more in dell lineups than Apple lineups, that - while apple has its share of issues when it comes to keeping everything compatible with all their configurations, it is still pretty usual to buy a pc that has issues out of the box because somewhere along the production line some piece of crap got changed for another piece of crap. It's not like 5 years ago when that was almost a given, but still, it's a problem and one you hardly get with Apple (not that you don't get other problems, mind).
I hope you don't just take me for an advocate of the church of Jobs. I'm talking about stuff I see daily, and I'm not exaggerating or claiming PC's are crap and Apple is bliss. We may be at cross purposes when talking about hardware-software integration. I see what you mean, it's just not what I meant.
Well each to his own I say. I'm sure the windows experience is just as nice as the mac experience. And all windows users are dell users.
... etc etc".
Propaganda my ass.
I liken the integration of for instance my disk burner to the windows experience, thank you very much. If I need to fiddle with settings, I'll use a different program, but for 99% of my time, drag and drop or pushing one button is way preferable to having to choose at which speed my disks may burn etc etc etc...
I liken the experience of plugging something in and having it working to "blablabla has detected new hardware
You suggest I speak of somehow OS X being magically better integrated, I suggest the experience is better, and indeed, integration of software and hardware is a HUGE part of it. The difference is not in Jobs' aura, it's in dedication to KISS. It's not for all people, since everything is subject to taste, and some people like to for instance tune their car, but if you really think a Dell and Windows are just as seamless as a mac and OS X I bet you can't figure out why people like the iPod so much. Hint, it's not the pretty colors.
If you don't get what I mean by these examples, just think potatoes potatoes and let's agree to disagree.
But I know which computer is suitable to my parents and which not. And I know which setup makes me lose more time, which btw has nothing to do with taste.
Not only is this story bull, I can't believe people still think a hacked OS X is good for Apple's market share.
.001 of the total market (I just love made up statistics, but you get my drift, no?)
I'm totally OK with all the hacking, it's not mine, I kind of understand the fascination and am sure I understand a geek's wish to fire up any OS on his hardware of choice. Hell, I don't even like windows and can't wait until they have it running on Mactel.
But fact is, it won't be a good experience for your average possible switcher. And keep in mind, they're not computer lovers, they are clueless just like most people are clueless about a lot of things they're not really into. So they'll go "yeah, Apple, I tried that, a friend of mine installed it. It sucked and *broke my computer*.
Mark my words.
And for those not totally with me, let me explain: a very large part of the Apple appeal is lack of frustration. Plug and play, extreme integration of hard and software, everything supported that's supposed to be inside your computer so that the hardware part of the story is largely irrelevant. That's why most mac users will happily report "oh, I updated the OS and it seems so much snappier". Yes, they are clueless, and no, that's not a problem. And that's what they tell their windows friends. Variations of "I don't know, I don't care and you know what, I'm happy".
Now picture that sort of expectations with hardware that isn't supported. A nightmare. None of the familiar Windows panels and shortcuts to all your "places", not a hint as to where to find the hardware inside and outside your box and only pretty and shiny to look at. Oh, and a spinning beach ball.
If Apple would license to certain specs that would be a different story, but a hack is only interesting for those interested in that sort of thing, and we are
In other news, Windows is good for you, and Linux, ready for the desktop?
And why not link to Thurott when we're at it?
Disclaimer: depending on your sense of humour, you may get angry at this, but at least I've been able to get a laugh out of this great post, all by my self!
Five years ago I'd have shouted something like "Americans, wake up!!!!".
I'll just go with "Oh well, fits right in with your objective press".
Yeeeey, let's find some things to kill!
If windows were able to do that, I'd see only one reason for not advertising it and that's VPC.
I think it is just you. Seriously, what's your point, are linux penguins gay, is a mac gay, is a mac user gay? Do the mac crowd enjoy it because it's like gay porn, don't they because of that? I like all the mac hacking, am I now into gay porn or am I not? so confusing all these gender questions.
Now I won't look at a firewire connection the same ever again.
Not a cracker myself, but if you can't see the charm of taking something apart and putting it together again, well...
All the rest is secondary to this indeed childish desire to see what makes something tick. I love it that it's still possible, I cheer the effort and accomplishment and see no need to measure all this tinkering against other qualities like creativity. After all, I may be pretty creative, but could never do what they do.
I even see the charm of having a windows box just for the kick of maintaining it and extending it with the most crazy functionality until it blows up. I know quite a few people who're into that. It is pretty cool, and half the time they indeed have a very interesting setup - until something goes boink and they go "oh well, back to the lab" with a big goofy smile on their face.
You used the word "if". any chance a fix is as simple as you describe it should be? Just curious, not really interested in the debate (and no, I didn't brickify my iMac, I'm still in the wait and see what the next revision and my wallet say phase... ;-)
Only yesterday I got a little window telling me there was "Security Update" and wanted me to "click to install".
I trashed it before it could do more harm, thank god!
Serious though, while I agree with the guy in general (yes we are smug, no we don't care) I'd like to see more proof from him that lots of mac users aren't updating their computer when asked to.
Everybody I know does the intelligent thing the moment Software Update pops up and has their firewall on at all times. This apart from maybe being a bit smug about it. That may not be enough for real security maniacs, but has proven to be more than sufficient for all regular (professional or home) mac users the last five years. So, what else does he want us to do? Shout "the end is near"?
And BTW most people I know really don't know who this mythical ROOT person is and wouldn't know how to log in as him anyway.
That's really really impractical. I'm talking about myself now, but I think a lot of people (especially those who don't really like computers per se) are in the same position. I'm evaluating an iMac and a portable to run two systems, maybe even simultaneously. Two computers you can put in your living room without too much intrusion. Why have a tower and monitor next to that?
There's lots of good reasons to have two, but I've been there and don't want to go back.
"I can't really think of anything where Windows does it better than Mac OS X or Linux."
Well, there's no environment better for testing stuff in Windows than, um, Windows...? And, um, not that I don't enjoy stating the obvious, but it still feels silly to do it. Anyway: Windows is WAAAAY better in running programs that only run on Windows.
So, apart from contesting your banter in the same spirit I'd like to add that this actually does mean that a lot of people could switch that couldn't before. There are a lot of people sort of interested in the mac, if only because they're pretty, shiny and seem to be more fun... But, but but, there's that one program they need that only works on Windows...
And in my experience it doesn't do any good to say for example "stop using that crappy Access, just use Filemaker". Unless you are prepared to talk to their boss, department, IT managers etc that yes, it does make sense for the whole company to switch, of course it does. You can tell, can't you that even if it made perfect sense, it would still be a BWOT.
One example of a friend who is going to switch, he's an architect and uses a.o. autocad. You can't tell him there's something better than autocad. Or the programs he uses for measuring stability. It doesn't matter what you use, it matters what his firm uses and the firms his firm works with. But he's had mac-envy for years, and boy does he want to switch.
Cheers
I don't know, imo whatever google does, it does pretty good, .
I'm totally into design, GUI's and yes, the mac. But when accessing a service, I don't care how pretty it is, as long as it's easy and gives me useful results. Did I mention fast there? Any online service should be fast before anything else. If not, don't bother, I'm sure I won't.
Fast, easy, useful.
Apart from that, I try to judge free stuff differently from stuff I pay for.
So, let's see, free, fast, useful, and um, not so pretty.
In short, I don't agree with you. I think Google gets it and gives even better.
A lot of people seem to think Apple should only make software.
That's like saying Volkswagen should only make engines.
Could be a very good decision (It patently isn't, but I'm not going into that), but I think a lot of Volkswagen engineers enjoy making cars.
"At the end of the day they're really making a huge mistake here. They want to be a hardware company whose competitive advantage is derived from their software. This is an excellent strategy for limiting growth and market penetration. What they should be doing is selling boxed copies to all comers and bundling the OS with the offerings of PC vendors that meet the technical specifications Apple sets."
The first question you should ask yourself with any professional decision is "what do I want to do".
I think Jobs has asked himself that question repeatedly.
Your analysis could be perfect (whatever I think about it) but it doesn't consider the all-important question.
Afaic no mistake on Apple's part. I enjoy their hardware (not all good, have to be picky and price conscious) and their software. Since OS X I've also enjoyed heaps of OSS. From people who imo have asked themselves that all-important question and for the most part are having a blast.
And on the Ateth day he chooseth the Washing Machine...
"The EU is never going to get anywhere this way. At least one country is always going to throw a tantrum if it doesn't get its way, and it'll usually be the same one country. De Gaulle was right from the beginning; for the sake of the union, throw us out, NOW."
;)
Funny, here I was thinking you meant the UK, who don't seem to want the EU evolve into anything beyond a free trade zone
It'll be interesting to see if the enlargement of the EU will enhance the cacophony or make individual candidates less important.
A major defecting to SABAM? Meaning a label defecting to a copyright collector? I don't get this at all, but am very intrigued. I hope you don't mind explaining this in more detail to me, would love to know more! Sorry if I'm slow to catch on, I promise I will drink that second cup of coffee before I read your reply :-)
Cheers,
"I'd like slashdotters to tell me one cross-platform application that is more beautiful and therefore more pleasant to look at, [and use] on Linux, as compared to its Windows counterpart."
A lot of internet website products. Or let me turn this around: you show me one proprietary (windows or whatever) BBS product that is as beautiful as e.g. Simple Machines.
I'm a usability flunky myself, so I'm not used to complimenting linux, but it needs to be said. A lot of FOSS server products blow away expensive alternatives both in functionality and beauty.