I worked with my father in construction for a few years. I lost my sense of smell for five years after I stopped working with him. He lost his sense of smell of 50 years, working for three generations of owners at the same company. Surprisingly, he didn't suffer too severely from cement poisoning.
My father was a masonry construction worker. He lost his sense of smell 50 years before he died from throat cancer (doctors gave him six months, but he died six weeks later). The study was off by a factor of 10.
So, IOW, your prior employers are moving to Mac because they lost the REAL programmers that can do this shit in a real programming language, like ASM.
AFAIK, Cisco, eBay, Facebook, Google, Intuit and LinkedIn don't use ASM as one of their programming languages. Mac laptops are replacing PC laptops at these companies. I guess they don't have any REAL programmers on staff.
Meanwhile. I've got an OS that is feature-parity with OSX and fits on a floppy, with a bootup time FROM A FLOPPY faster than your 5,000x the size bloated OS.
Sorry, Grandpa, no one uses 8" floppy discs anymore.
Son, if you only did *REAL* IT, you'd know better than to champion Apple *ANYTHING*
Please define what *REAL* IT is supposed to be. I'm curious. Most Silicon Valley companies I worked for had 99% Windows and 1% Mac/Linux. Some of the newer startups I interviewed for have 50% Windows and 50% Mac/Linux.
Because what I do day-to-day on the Mac doesn't require a better processor. OS X works so fantastically great that I don't have to think about the OS at all. I can spend more time on what I need to do. You don't have to think twice about a Mac.
Slashdot exist to provide me amusement while I'm waiting at work for the tier three technician to explain why he pooch-screwed the server (again). I never take anything on Slashdot seriously. If I did, I'll post as an AC.;)
The adoption of Apple Computers in the corporate environment seems to have more to do with it's penetration into the consumer market (i.e. home and academic use) in the US and other first world countries than anything to do with security. I haven't seen any evidence that it is being adopted by enterprise users, especially those that handle classified information, due to security. Rather, it tends to be banned from such environments because it is harder for network security officers to lock down and manage.
Many of the Silicon Valley companies I previously worked at are adopting Apple computers because its a mainstream operating system with a underlying BSD kernel. For programmers and engineers with a Linux/Unix background, a Mac laptop is a lot easier to use than a jury-rigged Windows laptop. Security at the corporate level has nothing to do with security at federal level.
Since my eight-year-old MacBook has a 32-bit CPU, I didn't rush out to get it fix. The money would be better spent on a used Mac with a 64-bit CPU.
If a local shop charged a customer that much for that job, I'd recommend that people avoid them.
Actually, the Apple technician broke the cable between the keyboard/mouse top and motherboard. Despite being a six-year-old laptop at the time, Apple had a replacement in stock and didn't charge me for it. That practically made my MacBook as brand new as the day I got it.
Never mind that Apple computers and devices are surging in the enterprise enivornment because it has more secured OS unlike a more popular OS that provides me job security.
You still need Apple drivers to run Windows. My 2006 MacBook could run Windows XP back in the day. Not sure if it could Windows Vista or later. Why would I run Windows on the MacBook when I have PC with 3X the hardware specs?
I was looking at the used computer listings at Other World Computing. The used Macs they list for sale that supported Mavericks/Yosemite came out in 2009 or later. Doubling checking their listing against the Wikipedia list you provided, none of the 2007 Macs they have are compatible with Mavericks/Yosemite.
there is a lot more money poured into Windows development than OS-X.
Also a lot more money being poured to fix the problems with Windows in the enterprise environment. As a security remediation technician, I get paid to deal with all the problems that Windows causes when it can't get patched, the anti-virus doesn't get updated, and users install out-of-baseline software that opens the network to new vulnerabilities. Thanks to Microsoft, I have job security. I can't say the same with Apple.
you have to be loaded or have really poor financial decisionmaking to drop an extra grand on a piece of hardware
You need $300 for a used "late 2009" Mac to run the current OS X version. Considering that I spent $1,200 on a brand new Black MacBook (yes, I paid the extra $200 premium to get it in black) in 2006 that lasted eight years (or $150 per year), it was a good investment. Apple computers are quite durable.
Macs before 2009 can't run the current version of OS X. For $129, I could get a 17" iMac, pull the memory and SSD from my MacBook, and continued running Snow Leopard. However, it will still be an obsolete 32-bit system running an older OS that everyone is dropping support for because its not 64-bit. Buying a more recent used Mac to run the current OS X would be more cost effective.
Wrong answer. OS X is a much nicer operating system than Windows. Nice to see that Win8 is finally catching up to OS X. So much so that the next version of Windows is WinX!
Let's do the math. Spend $130 to get the CPU fan replaced at the Apple Store (which was what it cost two years ago), and another $130 for a Windows 10 CD. That's $230. For about $300, I could get a used Mac that could run the current version of Mac OS X. I think the answer is obvious.
My Windows 8.1 machine has a 3.0GHz AMD quad-core processor and 4Gb of RAM. When I rebuild my seven-year-old system next year, it will probably have a 4.0GHz Intel quad-core processor with 16Gb+ of RAM. I left minimun hardware specs years ago.
It was the first Apple computer I bought. It will be the last Apple computer I ever buy.
That's a stupid attitude. I have first-generation Black MacBook (2006) with a 32-bit CPU that the Apple Store repaired in 2012 for a broken CPU fan. Most PCs are obsolete the day after the warrantry expires, and no manufactuer would repair an out-of-warrantry PC. The fan went out again on my MacBook this summer. Since the CPU is 32-bit, and Google is no longer supporting the 32-bit version of Chrome, it's time for me to get a newer Mac.
My 1st-generation MacBook (2006) ran fine until this summer when the CPU fan gave up the ghost for a second time. I didn't bother to take it to the Apple Store for repair since some applications (*cough* Chrome *cough*) are no longer being updated because CPU is only 32-bit. Since I'm getting back into programming, I need a 64-bit Mac to run the latest and greatest.
No one should be using Windows with minimum hardware. A lot of people bitched and moaned about Windows Visita when it first came out. A better CPU and more memory made a huge difference for Vista. If you want to run minimum hardware specs, install Linux, pick a desktop manager (I prefer Blackbox), and install your favorite non-IE web browser.
As a software testing intern, I found a crash bug on the test server that I could reproduce 100% of the time. My supervisor couldn't reproduce the bug despite watching my steps, decided it wasn't important, and approved the code release to the production servers. The production servers ran for a day before entering a crashing loop. The company was forced to take the production servers offline and lost three days of revenue ($250,000+ USD). Three months later they declined to renew my contract and two-thirds of the division got laid off the following month. This cost cutting move saved the company more than $250,000+ USD for the year..
Slashdot Mirror
I worked with my father in construction for a few years. I lost my sense of smell for five years after I stopped working with him. He lost his sense of smell of 50 years, working for three generations of owners at the same company. Surprisingly, he didn't suffer too severely from cement poisoning.
My father was a masonry construction worker. He lost his sense of smell 50 years before he died from throat cancer (doctors gave him six months, but he died six weeks later). The study was off by a factor of 10.
So, IOW, your prior employers are moving to Mac because they lost the REAL programmers that can do this shit in a real programming language, like ASM.
AFAIK, Cisco, eBay, Facebook, Google, Intuit and LinkedIn don't use ASM as one of their programming languages. Mac laptops are replacing PC laptops at these companies. I guess they don't have any REAL programmers on staff.
Meanwhile. I've got an OS that is feature-parity with OSX and fits on a floppy, with a bootup time FROM A FLOPPY faster than your 5,000x the size bloated OS.
Sorry, Grandpa, no one uses 8" floppy discs anymore.
Son, if you only did *REAL* IT, you'd know better than to champion Apple *ANYTHING*
Please define what *REAL* IT is supposed to be. I'm curious. Most Silicon Valley companies I worked for had 99% Windows and 1% Mac/Linux. Some of the newer startups I interviewed for have 50% Windows and 50% Mac/Linux.
Nah... They're too busy looking for Davy's locker.
In what world is that reasonably sane?
Because what I do day-to-day on the Mac doesn't require a better processor. OS X works so fantastically great that I don't have to think about the OS at all. I can spend more time on what I need to do. You don't have to think twice about a Mac.
Slashdot exist to provide me amusement while I'm waiting at work for the tier three technician to explain why he pooch-screwed the server (again). I never take anything on Slashdot seriously. If I did, I'll post as an AC. ;)
If you don't like my citation, go find your own. I'm not your personal researcher.
I'll try to remember that when the Nessus scan kicks out a spreadsheet of 800+ Windows vulnerabilities that I need to remediate for this week.
The adoption of Apple Computers in the corporate environment seems to have more to do with it's penetration into the consumer market (i.e. home and academic use) in the US and other first world countries than anything to do with security. I haven't seen any evidence that it is being adopted by enterprise users, especially those that handle classified information, due to security. Rather, it tends to be banned from such environments because it is harder for network security officers to lock down and manage.
Many of the Silicon Valley companies I previously worked at are adopting Apple computers because its a mainstream operating system with a underlying BSD kernel. For programmers and engineers with a Linux/Unix background, a Mac laptop is a lot easier to use than a jury-rigged Windows laptop. Security at the corporate level has nothing to do with security at federal level.
Think about that: $130 to replace a CPU fan.
Since my eight-year-old MacBook has a 32-bit CPU, I didn't rush out to get it fix. The money would be better spent on a used Mac with a 64-bit CPU.
If a local shop charged a customer that much for that job, I'd recommend that people avoid them.
Actually, the Apple technician broke the cable between the keyboard/mouse top and motherboard. Despite being a six-year-old laptop at the time, Apple had a replacement in stock and didn't charge me for it. That practically made my MacBook as brand new as the day I got it.
Top 10 Most Secure Operating Systems
Mac OS X is number three. Windows 8 is number six.
Never mind that Apple computers and devices are surging in the enterprise enivornment because it has more secured OS unlike a more popular OS that provides me job security.
You still need Apple drivers to run Windows. My 2006 MacBook could run Windows XP back in the day. Not sure if it could Windows Vista or later. Why would I run Windows on the MacBook when I have PC with 3X the hardware specs?
I was looking at the used computer listings at Other World Computing. The used Macs they list for sale that supported Mavericks/Yosemite came out in 2009 or later. Doubling checking their listing against the Wikipedia list you provided, none of the 2007 Macs they have are compatible with Mavericks/Yosemite.
there is a lot more money poured into Windows development than OS-X.
Also a lot more money being poured to fix the problems with Windows in the enterprise environment. As a security remediation technician, I get paid to deal with all the problems that Windows causes when it can't get patched, the anti-virus doesn't get updated, and users install out-of-baseline software that opens the network to new vulnerabilities. Thanks to Microsoft, I have job security. I can't say the same with Apple.
you have to be loaded or have really poor financial decisionmaking to drop an extra grand on a piece of hardware
You need $300 for a used "late 2009" Mac to run the current OS X version. Considering that I spent $1,200 on a brand new Black MacBook (yes, I paid the extra $200 premium to get it in black) in 2006 that lasted eight years (or $150 per year), it was a good investment. Apple computers are quite durable.
Macs before 2009 can't run the current version of OS X. For $129, I could get a 17" iMac, pull the memory and SSD from my MacBook, and continued running Snow Leopard. However, it will still be an obsolete 32-bit system running an older OS that everyone is dropping support for because its not 64-bit. Buying a more recent used Mac to run the current OS X would be more cost effective.
Wrong answer. OS X is a much nicer operating system than Windows. Nice to see that Win8 is finally catching up to OS X. So much so that the next version of Windows is WinX!
Let's do the math. Spend $130 to get the CPU fan replaced at the Apple Store (which was what it cost two years ago), and another $130 for a Windows 10 CD. That's $230. For about $300, I could get a used Mac that could run the current version of Mac OS X. I think the answer is obvious.
My Windows 8.1 machine has a 3.0GHz AMD quad-core processor and 4Gb of RAM. When I rebuild my seven-year-old system next year, it will probably have a 4.0GHz Intel quad-core processor with 16Gb+ of RAM. I left minimun hardware specs years ago.
It was the first Apple computer I bought. It will be the last Apple computer I ever buy.
That's a stupid attitude. I have first-generation Black MacBook (2006) with a 32-bit CPU that the Apple Store repaired in 2012 for a broken CPU fan. Most PCs are obsolete the day after the warrantry expires, and no manufactuer would repair an out-of-warrantry PC. The fan went out again on my MacBook this summer. Since the CPU is 32-bit, and Google is no longer supporting the 32-bit version of Chrome, it's time for me to get a newer Mac.
My 1st-generation MacBook (2006) ran fine until this summer when the CPU fan gave up the ghost for a second time. I didn't bother to take it to the Apple Store for repair since some applications (*cough* Chrome *cough*) are no longer being updated because CPU is only 32-bit. Since I'm getting back into programming, I need a 64-bit Mac to run the latest and greatest.
No one should be using Windows with minimum hardware. A lot of people bitched and moaned about Windows Visita when it first came out. A better CPU and more memory made a huge difference for Vista. If you want to run minimum hardware specs, install Linux, pick a desktop manager (I prefer Blackbox), and install your favorite non-IE web browser.
He got promoted to run what was left of the division.
As a software testing intern, I found a crash bug on the test server that I could reproduce 100% of the time. My supervisor couldn't reproduce the bug despite watching my steps, decided it wasn't important, and approved the code release to the production servers. The production servers ran for a day before entering a crashing loop. The company was forced to take the production servers offline and lost three days of revenue ($250,000+ USD). Three months later they declined to renew my contract and two-thirds of the division got laid off the following month. This cost cutting move saved the company more than $250,000+ USD for the year..