The big advancement, and what Jobs figured out once he went on to found NeXT, is that it's good to have a command line present, as long as it's not required to use the computer. As long as everything a typical user could want to do is available in the GUI, the addition of shell access doesn't detract from anything, and only benefits advanced users comfortable in that environment. The main point is that the GUI is rich enough to make the shell optional. Linux isn't there yet, and only Windows offers a viable alternative (to the MacOS) for novice users afraid of or unwilling to use the command line. MacOS X, like Windows, has shell access available, but doesn't require its use for the computer's operation. You could even make a point for classic MacOS having shell access, as you could access the debugger shell with a key combo or programmer's switch on earlier Macs, as well as booting into Open Firmware, though they are of much more limited use than a proper shell in a Unix or DOS/NT-based OS.
You're right that it's a dead horse, and Apple's early shell-phobia was likely more of a marketing tool than design paradigm, but it was important to motivate the programmers at Apple to design nice, intuitive GUIs for all their programs' functions; for that, I suppose they found it useful to not give them the option of having shell access available to end users. Now that developers are used to making GUI apps, and that users expect everything to be accessible in the GUI (and will let developers know if you stray from these expectations), Apple no longer finds it necessary to block all shell access to get developers to design GUIs for all their functions. It's certainly understandable that doing so was useful in the early days of the Macintosh, to shift developers' paradigms from command-line programs. The status quo of application design probably owes much to this radical policy at Apple. They were so successful in changing the mindset of developers, that even with shell access now available, developers know that their program won't get widespread use (and they'll get a boatload of complaints) unless the user is able to use it exclusively through its GUI. It's certainly not too hard to see that this seemingly irrational distaste of command lines is at least in part responsible for (and most likely fundamental to) the intuitiveness of current day computer applications.
Something is messed up with your OSX install. I'd contact Apple about that one. It sounds really annoying, so I could understand how that would piss you off (actually, it sounds like the way Windows does things), but that's not how it's supposed to work. Maybe you should try reinstalling MacOS X, or at least creating a new user, and seeing if that account behaves the same way. Something has definitely gone awry on your computer, and I couldn't imagine what might make it behave like that, unless maybe you installed some strange interface hacks or÷åÊ_ething.
I am very thankful MacOS X doesn't have that kind of behavior. It's very nice to be able to mix windows from different applications without calling them all up to the forefront. If you do want to easily call up all of an app's windows, simply click on its Dock icon or command-tab until you reach that app. For most things, however, being able to call up only a single window from a particular app to the front is a godsend, especially as you work between apps, and use drag-n-drop...
FYI, I just switched from AT&T's TDMA network and a crappy Nokia phone to their GSM network with a Sony-Ericsson T637. With the old phone and service, I had the same problem, and quality was terrible. With the new one, the quality is DRAMATICALLY improved, almost to the level of a landline phone. Reception and service is also wonderful now. I tried AT&T's GSM service about a year and a half ago, and it was totally useless, with incredibly poor service; but it seems that since then, they have greatly improved their coverage. I have nothing but good things to say about this phone and service, and their GSM plans are even cheaper than the TDMA one I was on, so I'm a happy camper. If you're still stuck on the TDMA network, or with a crappy phone, I'd suggest upgrading, as it will really make a difference.
Note that GSM networks (at least as far as AT&T Wireless is concerned, and now Cingular too apparently) have been dramatically improved this past year. I tried AT&T's GSM service a year and a half ago, and it was so unusable, I had to switch back to their TDMA service for halfway decent reception (and having to give up my sweet Sony-Ericsson phone). As my 1-year contract ended, I switched to AT&T's GSM service a month ago, with a sweet Sony-Ericsson T637 bluetooth phone, and the service now rocks, with excellent reception everywhere, and this phone kicks ass. I will definitely be staying with this GSM service for a long time. The service I get now is worlds better than the TDMA service I had, and the sound quality is unbelievably better. You might do yourself a favor and check out the GSM service again now, as they've really done a huge amount of work on improving their new networks over the past year.
You'd also have to explain to your typical Mac user how to get to/Library/StartupItems (and create that directory if it doesn't exist, as it doesn't by default). Most MacOS X users don't know how to find stuff beyond their home directory. A script to do it would be a lot more effective, but would require the user to enter an admin password. Overall, taking into account the difficulty of installing this manually, the requirement of an admin password for executables to install this, and the current MacOS X marketshare, there is no way that this could spread far enough to attain a sufficient critical mass for this to be a problem, even if it did email itself to everyone in the address book. In fact, if it did mail itself, that would definitely clue in the compromised user that he's got a problem, and they would then get it fixed and change their account passwords and close the unneeded remote access services. Since there's no malicious payload beyond password harvesting and service launching, this would not be a very serious issue for most people, unless there is very sensitive data that got compromised through remote access.
Sorry, I made some factual errors (just some info I had incorrectly remembered from a long time ago), but the overall argument remains intact. Actually, the numbers I quoted are reversed. Blue-Ray has a 0.1mm cover layer (depth of data layer from transparent surface), while HD-DVD has a 0.6mm cover layer, which is the same as DVDs and CDs, and can therefore be manufactured using existing equipment. More info here.
OK, I admit I fired off the response a bit early, without fully reading the parent. Apple will never make users launch the force quit dialog, due to the damage that can be done there (accidentally forcing a program with unsaved work to quit). It's really not even a consideration as a solution to this problem. Not entering your admin password for an untrusted executable is only common sense.
That's the stupidest solution I've heard all day. Just how long do you think it would take malicious coders to spoof the required key combo as well? Anything Apple can do can be imitated by other coders. The solution is to NOT RUN UNTRUSTED EXECUTABLES!!!!!! I cannot stress that enough. If you launch an executable from an untrusted source, you can get hosed.
Yes, a trojan could be written to do that. It would prompt you for an admin password, even if you launched the trojan executable as an admin user, but it could definitely be done, and if done correctly, a lot of users might be duped by it. Basically, if you run executables from untrusted sources, you could get bitten by this. This is true of any operating system. Trojans are always going to be a problem. Careful users probably won't be affected by it, but others might be. This is a far cry from a worm or virus, in that there is no vector that will allow this to propagate to any significant level. That being said, it's always crucial to keep updated with the latest security patches just to be safe. For now, this is not even a concern, but it could make script kiddies' lives a little easier, especially with this added publicity.
That would be HD-DVD. It uses the same production process as current DVDs and CDs, with a 0.1mm data layer depth from the surface. Blu-Ray, on the other hand, requires a 0.5mm depth, and so all the manufacturers would have to reinvest in all new equipment to produce them, whereas HD-DVD manufacturers could simply re-tool their current equipment and switch over to HD-DVD very rapidly. It's obvious that from a production standpoint, HD-DVD has a significant advantage that Blu-Ray will have a tough time overcoming, even with its head start. My money is definitely on HD-DVD.
That's still better than the MacOS X calculator, which instantly gives the answer "Infinity" with a warning triangle symbol on a 2x2GHz G5. It was very quick at giving me a completely useless answer, huzzah. It seems anything over 170! = Infinity.
You would still have to download and install the widget manually. If you use a widget from an untrusted source, just like any other application or executable, you can get yourself into trouble. What it won't do is allow for remote installation and execution of unauthorized code, such as ActiveX does.
It's because our current technology can't ensure that the artificially cloned human will be healthy. Would you want to be the scientist responsible for bringing a defective (excuse the term) human being into the world? If that person had to spend their life with terrible illnesses, premature death, or some bizarre mutation? Once our cloning technology has progressed to the point where we will be confident the cloned person will be perfectly unharmed by the procedure, then maybe there will be a case for human reproductive cloning. Until then, it should only be used for creating stem cells, or perhaps even organs or body parts. It would be unconscionable to actually allow a human clone to progress to the point of viability in the near future.
You can do that in OS X by right-clicking on a file, choosing Get Info (selecting and hitting command-I also works), going to the 'Open with' section, setting an application for it, and if you want it to be a default for that filename extension, hit the 'Change All' button.
Automator is an interesting new feature of Tiger (10.4), due in the first half of 2005. It's basically a graphical way of writing scripts. I'm sure app developers will also be adding Automator plugins to ensure that their apps are easy to script visually. I think that's really going to broaden the appeal of AppleScript, to the point that your grandma just might be writing scripts, even though she might not think of it that way, since it looks to be so intuitive (for some things). I'm keeping a close eye on that one, and hope that it pushes more app developers to add native AS support.
It matters to people who love the MacOS... OS makes a huge difference in computer use, much moreso than motorcycle manufacturer to riding. Riding a Honda is a lot more similar to riding a Harley than using MacOS is to using Windows or Linux (for most computer users, at least). Operating Systems are so complex, and so widely different, that losing choices can have a huge impact on people's use of computers. It would be a shame for any of the OS choices to disappear, as they each feed on the ideas and advancements made by the others. If Apple were to stop making the MacOS, they would become completely irrelevant to all of their users. It's not a question of "cool" or image, but of implementation and legacy of innovation and quality. Everything Apple does is completely secondary to the MacOS itself; however, a significant part of the user experience of a Mac is related to having a tightly controlled hardware platform with stringent quality control and usability guidelines. While the current state of operating systems and applications (including the web) is largely taken for granted, we wouldn't be here today if it weren't for the original 128k Mac running System 1.0 (along with the Lisa before it). Today, Apple still makes the best designed OS widely available, and continues to push usability and end user empowerment to new levels. It doesn't do so in a vacuum, but does still have the focus necessary to recognize good ideas and discard or improve mediocre ones.
The falling price of components will also drive down the prices of Macs. There will always be a market for higher end computers, with actual though put into design and implementation, with the unified vision of a central authority. In fact, the rise of Linux and other open-sourced operating systems will only help Apple integrate Macs with other common OSs, as standards will be truly open. If Linux had the marketshare to define standards, that would open the door to any number of competitors who could make inter-operative software. A rise in the Linux platform's popularity (at the expense of Microsoft's marketshare) would only help smaller players gain traction. While the future of PowerPC is uncertain, depending largely on IBM's dedication to it, Apple and the MacOS are bound to have markets well into the future. If a company can assure tight integration and thoughtful design of hardware and software, there will always be those willing to pay a premium for a premium user experience.
Actually, it's true that it's usually not cost effective to upgrade most components of Macs, but not for the reason you thing. Macs keep a very strong resale value, so it's usually cheaper to sell your old one and buy a new one than to upgrade things like processors and other expensive components. For basic upgrades such as drives and memory, it does make sense, but for more substantial upgrades, it's usually a better value proposition to just trade up for a new model. It's not uncommon to see Macs several years old going for >$1000 used, decreasing the upgrade cost significantly.
OK, it seems ZIF isn't in use anymore, but you can still get CPU upgrades for more recent Macs, and Sonnet is currently working on CPU upgrades for G5s.
Wow, no kidding... That would have saved me some time... How fiendish of them to have hidden away those instructions in the user's manual, of all places.
Sure it is (possible to do it at home). Just open the sucker up and go for it. It's really not hard to figure out. Make sure you have a torx screw driver set for the HD screws. Just make sure you group the screws you take out by type and location so you don't misplace any. It looks like the screws to get inside the case are under the feet. Get info on how to remove the feet here (foot and socket instructions).
That's a load of crap. Macs have standard parts just like any other PC. Everything is pretty much as upgradable as possible (except for iMacs and eMacs, which are somewhat limited, unless you're really dedicated). I've always mucked around inside my PowerMacs and PowerBooks, and purchased standard high-quality PC parts, and they've pretty much all been a joy to work inside of. The cases are thoughtfully laid out (since the days of the infamous Performa line), and upgrades of all kinds are about as easy as they can be. The drives are ATA, RAM is standard DDR, the cards are PCI or AGP, the CPU is on a ZIF socket in most cases (in the PowerMacs), power supply is standard, etc., etc. Apart from the initial building of the machine, Macs are ideal for tinkering, thanks to very good case design and layout.
Then there's the OS. Since it's POSIX-compliant (all except in name thanks to licensing issues), and all the config files are either text or XML, there's a whole world of tinkering to be done. This includes compiling your own nix software, building apps in XCode (free and included with all Macs), hacks aplenty, etc. This is in addition to all the main commercial titles available. It's really a tinkerer's nirvana; one where you aren't limited by anything, and yet can still forget all that and just be productive. It's amazing how liberating an experience it is to use hardware and software that were crafted with care and thoughtfulness. Macs are not about dumbing down, but about excellent design and efficiency, as well as quality. You can still muck around the internals to heart's content, but you'll find you're too busy getting stuff done, and playing in OS X. In short, it's the perfect system for geeks who don't feel they have to prove themselves with completely custom setups and a dremel tool.
Slashdot Mirror
The big advancement, and what Jobs figured out once he went on to found NeXT, is that it's good to have a command line present, as long as it's not required to use the computer. As long as everything a typical user could want to do is available in the GUI, the addition of shell access doesn't detract from anything, and only benefits advanced users comfortable in that environment. The main point is that the GUI is rich enough to make the shell optional. Linux isn't there yet, and only Windows offers a viable alternative (to the MacOS) for novice users afraid of or unwilling to use the command line. MacOS X, like Windows, has shell access available, but doesn't require its use for the computer's operation. You could even make a point for classic MacOS having shell access, as you could access the debugger shell with a key combo or programmer's switch on earlier Macs, as well as booting into Open Firmware, though they are of much more limited use than a proper shell in a Unix or DOS/NT-based OS.
You're right that it's a dead horse, and Apple's early shell-phobia was likely more of a marketing tool than design paradigm, but it was important to motivate the programmers at Apple to design nice, intuitive GUIs for all their programs' functions; for that, I suppose they found it useful to not give them the option of having shell access available to end users. Now that developers are used to making GUI apps, and that users expect everything to be accessible in the GUI (and will let developers know if you stray from these expectations), Apple no longer finds it necessary to block all shell access to get developers to design GUIs for all their functions. It's certainly understandable that doing so was useful in the early days of the Macintosh, to shift developers' paradigms from command-line programs. The status quo of application design probably owes much to this radical policy at Apple. They were so successful in changing the mindset of developers, that even with shell access now available, developers know that their program won't get widespread use (and they'll get a boatload of complaints) unless the user is able to use it exclusively through its GUI. It's certainly not too hard to see that this seemingly irrational distaste of command lines is at least in part responsible for (and most likely fundamental to) the intuitiveness of current day computer applications.
Something is messed up with your OSX install. I'd contact Apple about that one. It sounds really annoying, so I could understand how that would piss you off (actually, it sounds like the way Windows does things), but that's not how it's supposed to work. Maybe you should try reinstalling MacOS X, or at least creating a new user, and seeing if that account behaves the same way. Something has definitely gone awry on your computer, and I couldn't imagine what might make it behave like that, unless maybe you installed some strange interface hacks or÷åÊ_ething.
I am very thankful MacOS X doesn't have that kind of behavior. It's very nice to be able to mix windows from different applications without calling them all up to the forefront. If you do want to easily call up all of an app's windows, simply click on its Dock icon or command-tab until you reach that app. For most things, however, being able to call up only a single window from a particular app to the front is a godsend, especially as you work between apps, and use drag-n-drop...
That's a really uninspired name. XMan woulda been soooo much better. XMan: The walkman for superheroes...
FYI, I just switched from AT&T's TDMA network and a crappy Nokia phone to their GSM network with a Sony-Ericsson T637. With the old phone and service, I had the same problem, and quality was terrible. With the new one, the quality is DRAMATICALLY improved, almost to the level of a landline phone. Reception and service is also wonderful now. I tried AT&T's GSM service about a year and a half ago, and it was totally useless, with incredibly poor service; but it seems that since then, they have greatly improved their coverage. I have nothing but good things to say about this phone and service, and their GSM plans are even cheaper than the TDMA one I was on, so I'm a happy camper. If you're still stuck on the TDMA network, or with a crappy phone, I'd suggest upgrading, as it will really make a difference.
Note that GSM networks (at least as far as AT&T Wireless is concerned, and now Cingular too apparently) have been dramatically improved this past year. I tried AT&T's GSM service a year and a half ago, and it was so unusable, I had to switch back to their TDMA service for halfway decent reception (and having to give up my sweet Sony-Ericsson phone). As my 1-year contract ended, I switched to AT&T's GSM service a month ago, with a sweet Sony-Ericsson T637 bluetooth phone, and the service now rocks, with excellent reception everywhere, and this phone kicks ass. I will definitely be staying with this GSM service for a long time. The service I get now is worlds better than the TDMA service I had, and the sound quality is unbelievably better. You might do yourself a favor and check out the GSM service again now, as they've really done a huge amount of work on improving their new networks over the past year.
You'd also have to explain to your typical Mac user how to get to /Library/StartupItems (and create that directory if it doesn't exist, as it doesn't by default). Most MacOS X users don't know how to find stuff beyond their home directory. A script to do it would be a lot more effective, but would require the user to enter an admin password. Overall, taking into account the difficulty of installing this manually, the requirement of an admin password for executables to install this, and the current MacOS X marketshare, there is no way that this could spread far enough to attain a sufficient critical mass for this to be a problem, even if it did email itself to everyone in the address book. In fact, if it did mail itself, that would definitely clue in the compromised user that he's got a problem, and they would then get it fixed and change their account passwords and close the unneeded remote access services. Since there's no malicious payload beyond password harvesting and service launching, this would not be a very serious issue for most people, unless there is very sensitive data that got compromised through remote access.
Sorry, I made some factual errors (just some info I had incorrectly remembered from a long time ago), but the overall argument remains intact. Actually, the numbers I quoted are reversed. Blue-Ray has a 0.1mm cover layer (depth of data layer from transparent surface), while HD-DVD has a 0.6mm cover layer, which is the same as DVDs and CDs, and can therefore be manufactured using existing equipment. More info here.
OK, I admit I fired off the response a bit early, without fully reading the parent. Apple will never make users launch the force quit dialog, due to the damage that can be done there (accidentally forcing a program with unsaved work to quit). It's really not even a consideration as a solution to this problem. Not entering your admin password for an untrusted executable is only common sense.
That's the stupidest solution I've heard all day. Just how long do you think it would take malicious coders to spoof the required key combo as well? Anything Apple can do can be imitated by other coders. The solution is to NOT RUN UNTRUSTED EXECUTABLES!!!!!! I cannot stress that enough. If you launch an executable from an untrusted source, you can get hosed.
Yes, a trojan could be written to do that. It would prompt you for an admin password, even if you launched the trojan executable as an admin user, but it could definitely be done, and if done correctly, a lot of users might be duped by it. Basically, if you run executables from untrusted sources, you could get bitten by this. This is true of any operating system. Trojans are always going to be a problem. Careful users probably won't be affected by it, but others might be. This is a far cry from a worm or virus, in that there is no vector that will allow this to propagate to any significant level. That being said, it's always crucial to keep updated with the latest security patches just to be safe. For now, this is not even a concern, but it could make script kiddies' lives a little easier, especially with this added publicity.
That would be HD-DVD. It uses the same production process as current DVDs and CDs, with a 0.1mm data layer depth from the surface. Blu-Ray, on the other hand, requires a 0.5mm depth, and so all the manufacturers would have to reinvest in all new equipment to produce them, whereas HD-DVD manufacturers could simply re-tool their current equipment and switch over to HD-DVD very rapidly. It's obvious that from a production standpoint, HD-DVD has a significant advantage that Blu-Ray will have a tough time overcoming, even with its head start. My money is definitely on HD-DVD.
That's still better than the MacOS X calculator, which instantly gives the answer "Infinity" with a warning triangle symbol on a 2x2GHz G5. It was very quick at giving me a completely useless answer, huzzah. It seems anything over 170! = Infinity.
You would still have to download and install the widget manually. If you use a widget from an untrusted source, just like any other application or executable, you can get yourself into trouble. What it won't do is allow for remote installation and execution of unauthorized code, such as ActiveX does.
It's because our current technology can't ensure that the artificially cloned human will be healthy. Would you want to be the scientist responsible for bringing a defective (excuse the term) human being into the world? If that person had to spend their life with terrible illnesses, premature death, or some bizarre mutation? Once our cloning technology has progressed to the point where we will be confident the cloned person will be perfectly unharmed by the procedure, then maybe there will be a case for human reproductive cloning. Until then, it should only be used for creating stem cells, or perhaps even organs or body parts. It would be unconscionable to actually allow a human clone to progress to the point of viability in the near future.
You can do that in OS X by right-clicking on a file, choosing Get Info (selecting and hitting command-I also works), going to the 'Open with' section, setting an application for it, and if you want it to be a default for that filename extension, hit the 'Change All' button.
Automator is an interesting new feature of Tiger (10.4), due in the first half of 2005. It's basically a graphical way of writing scripts. I'm sure app developers will also be adding Automator plugins to ensure that their apps are easy to script visually. I think that's really going to broaden the appeal of AppleScript, to the point that your grandma just might be writing scripts, even though she might not think of it that way, since it looks to be so intuitive (for some things). I'm keeping a close eye on that one, and hope that it pushes more app developers to add native AS support.
It matters to people who love the MacOS... OS makes a huge difference in computer use, much moreso than motorcycle manufacturer to riding. Riding a Honda is a lot more similar to riding a Harley than using MacOS is to using Windows or Linux (for most computer users, at least). Operating Systems are so complex, and so widely different, that losing choices can have a huge impact on people's use of computers. It would be a shame for any of the OS choices to disappear, as they each feed on the ideas and advancements made by the others. If Apple were to stop making the MacOS, they would become completely irrelevant to all of their users. It's not a question of "cool" or image, but of implementation and legacy of innovation and quality. Everything Apple does is completely secondary to the MacOS itself; however, a significant part of the user experience of a Mac is related to having a tightly controlled hardware platform with stringent quality control and usability guidelines. While the current state of operating systems and applications (including the web) is largely taken for granted, we wouldn't be here today if it weren't for the original 128k Mac running System 1.0 (along with the Lisa before it). Today, Apple still makes the best designed OS widely available, and continues to push usability and end user empowerment to new levels. It doesn't do so in a vacuum, but does still have the focus necessary to recognize good ideas and discard or improve mediocre ones.
The falling price of components will also drive down the prices of Macs. There will always be a market for higher end computers, with actual though put into design and implementation, with the unified vision of a central authority. In fact, the rise of Linux and other open-sourced operating systems will only help Apple integrate Macs with other common OSs, as standards will be truly open. If Linux had the marketshare to define standards, that would open the door to any number of competitors who could make inter-operative software. A rise in the Linux platform's popularity (at the expense of Microsoft's marketshare) would only help smaller players gain traction. While the future of PowerPC is uncertain, depending largely on IBM's dedication to it, Apple and the MacOS are bound to have markets well into the future. If a company can assure tight integration and thoughtful design of hardware and software, there will always be those willing to pay a premium for a premium user experience.
minor correction there... woops.
Actually, it's true that it's usually not cost effective to upgrade most components of Macs, but not for the reason you thing. Macs keep a very strong resale value, so it's usually cheaper to sell your old one and buy a new one than to upgrade things like processors and other expensive components. For basic upgrades such as drives and memory, it does make sense, but for more substantial upgrades, it's usually a better value proposition to just trade up for a new model. It's not uncommon to see Macs several years old going for >$1000 used, decreasing the upgrade cost significantly.
OK, it seems ZIF isn't in use anymore, but you can still get CPU upgrades for more recent Macs, and Sonnet is currently working on CPU upgrades for G5s.
Wow, no kidding... That would have saved me some time... How fiendish of them to have hidden away those instructions in the user's manual, of all places.
Sure it is (possible to do it at home). Just open the sucker up and go for it. It's really not hard to figure out. Make sure you have a torx screw driver set for the HD screws. Just make sure you group the screws you take out by type and location so you don't misplace any. It looks like the screws to get inside the case are under the feet. Get info on how to remove the feet here (foot and socket instructions).
That's a load of crap. Macs have standard parts just like any other PC. Everything is pretty much as upgradable as possible (except for iMacs and eMacs, which are somewhat limited, unless you're really dedicated). I've always mucked around inside my PowerMacs and PowerBooks, and purchased standard high-quality PC parts, and they've pretty much all been a joy to work inside of. The cases are thoughtfully laid out (since the days of the infamous Performa line), and upgrades of all kinds are about as easy as they can be. The drives are ATA, RAM is standard DDR, the cards are PCI or AGP, the CPU is on a ZIF socket in most cases (in the PowerMacs), power supply is standard, etc., etc. Apart from the initial building of the machine, Macs are ideal for tinkering, thanks to very good case design and layout.
Then there's the OS. Since it's POSIX-compliant (all except in name thanks to licensing issues), and all the config files are either text or XML, there's a whole world of tinkering to be done. This includes compiling your own nix software, building apps in XCode (free and included with all Macs), hacks aplenty, etc. This is in addition to all the main commercial titles available. It's really a tinkerer's nirvana; one where you aren't limited by anything, and yet can still forget all that and just be productive. It's amazing how liberating an experience it is to use hardware and software that were crafted with care and thoughtfulness. Macs are not about dumbing down, but about excellent design and efficiency, as well as quality. You can still muck around the internals to heart's content, but you'll find you're too busy getting stuff done, and playing in OS X. In short, it's the perfect system for geeks who don't feel they have to prove themselves with completely custom setups and a dremel tool.