In most Macintosh-based companies I've worked at, users have had full responsibility for their own machines. In fact, one tech said to me on my first day: "Here's your new machine. It's a Power Mac G3. Here's the login info you need. You can install and configure it the way you want. Just let me know if you need any help." Obviously, that is not the norm, but it tells you something about the trust Mac users put in their stuff, and how good it is to work at Mac-based businesses, because you are encouraged to learn everything about your tools.
You have a point actually. I am a happy Mac user myself and see no reason to switch to any other platform. However, if there were no Macs, or if Apple had died back in '97 (if it hadn't been for Steve Jobs and the guys from NeXT, Apple WOULD have died for sure, and the Mac would not be such a very successful platform as it is now), I would be using Linux by now, probably Debian or Ubuntu, which is Debian-based and is a decent OS all around. I would probably NOT use Window sin any form, not even XP. I recently installed XP on my MacBook Pro just to check it out, but soon realized I had no use for it. Admittedly, XP and Vista are USABLE in the sense that you can use ut for everyday tasks, but in a very annoying and cloying way. If Apple made iTunes for Linux, that would be sweet.
I agree. I don't care one little bit about the inner workings of Apple. All I know is they make the best hardware and software around, and great products I want to buy. If someone who worked there ten years ago feels bad, what's that got to do with anything?
Apple's stranglehold...? There are plenty of alternatives if the iPhone is not your bag. It's not as if Apple has 95 percent of the market, such is the case with Microsoft's position with Windows. The portable market is radically different from the PC market, because there is no single dominating system. Nobody owns the mobile market - it is still wide open. What we could hope for is that mobile developers all use SyncML and open standards, even if the platforms themselves are sometimes closed source hardware and software.
The iPhone is a product aimed at consumers, and perhaps secondarily, businesses. It is not and never will be an open platform for hackers. I doubt Google's Android will be all open either, though I am not an expert on Android. If you want a hacker platform to perform software brain surgery on, which might be fun, there are many Linux-based portables out there. Personally I don't want various hacks on my iPhone. I want a phone that works as smoothly and efficiently as possible, and I think most iPhone owners agree.
I hope you are right, but it seems a lot of people buy the ASUS Eee PC and in stall Windows on it. I guess they have this strange idea Windows is a requirement in today's world. As a Mac user, I don't know what they are talking about. I have ZERO use for Windows. The Mac has all the apps I need and more, and the system is super solid. I did use Linux for several years and it was a trouble-free experience too. Let's hope Linux REALLY catches on with the kids out there, but for that to happen I think it needs a few (commercial) killer apps that kids MUST HAVE.
Apple needs to have control over what runs on the iPhone as well as over the hardware. It's simple really. How could a serious hardware and OS vendor support and maintain a platform that consists of bit of code here and there, and apps over which they have no control and zero insight? I think many of us don't want another Windows hell. The open source model works well in some areas, but Apple is a consumer electronics company and NOT a venue for hobbyists and NOT a development lab. The iPhone is supposed to actually WORK when the customer out there in Userland boots it up. Most people won't buy the iPhone because they need a new toy that may or may not work, but because they need all the functionality and usefulness the iPhone provides. Do you see what I mean?
I don't know what's gotten into Cringely. He seems to have lost his touch. There is nothing refined, intelligent, clever about Microsoft's attempts to take over Yahoo: it's just a simple hostile takeover attempt, and that's it. No hidden agenda, just a desire to get back at Google. And it will fail of course.
Why? Because Dell and Alienware don't know the difference between their own rears ends and good industrial and GUI design. They would have to use someone else's crappy operating system and UI, and it would be just another stupid Windows handheld device. No go.
That joke is still funny, but not for much longer. I expect soldiers to be court-martialed for it soon. Also, I still think Mac OS X has a better-looking Colonel Panic than most other UNIX-based operating system.;)
Feelings mean only one thing in businesspeak: money. The only reason somebody at NBC Universal admires Apple and is a fan of Steve Jobs is that Apple and Steve will fill their coffers with pure gold.
"If this is true, then Lenovo looks to have some heavy competition for the Macbook Air." Not really. The Lenovo thing doesn't have Mac OS X. It has a completely different target audience. It also lacks style. But is does have all the ports and stuff I would like in the MacBook Air, I'll give it that. Credit where credit is due. But what I really want is a Sony Vaio TZ with Mac OS X.
I don't want to whine, but though the products are nice, I had expected a lot more from Apple. The Air is much too limited for my needs. A single USB port? (I need three) No Firewire? (I need two ports, preferably FireWIre 800.) No audio in? At any rate I won't get version 1.0... The services are VERY impressive, though, much more so than the hardware.
Yeah, since it doesn't even say WHICH god it refers to: Jehova, Jesus, Wodin (Oden, Odin, Wotan) or any of the Roman, Greek or Phoenician gods? Mammon, perhaps?
Yes, and I think it is inevitable that Linux will replace Windows as the mainstream operating system in most business applications - especially if you consider what a strange creature Windows Vista has developed into, and the direction Windows appears to be moving generally - and perhaps in the homes, though that will require more work. However, this will take some years. To speed up the process, there ought to be a movement towards standardization, so that any given software application or hardware device will work seamlessly with any flavour of Linux, or preferably the establishment of a common base system, so that any variations between the various distributions will be more or less cosmetic and superficial. But even if this happens, the user interface is a most important aspect: this is what the user experiences, and this is how he or she gains experience of what it is like to use the appliance. At the moment, many desktop environments for Linux, notably KDE, try to look and feel a lot like Windows. My gut feeling is this is the wrong way to go forward. But I'd better leave that to the KDE and Gnome camps to figure out.
...needs to be promoted to people who "don't care". If Linux is so great, free and open, how come only 5 percent of all computer users utlilize it as their main operating system? I don't have the answer, but I suspect it has to do with the fact that there are at least 10 major distributions that each work slightly differently, and virtually no brand awareness to speak of in the market place. Also, maybe Linux (and by that I mean the various distributions, not the kernel or underlaying systems) has a way to go yet before it can be an operating system for "everybody".
I'm a Mac user myself, so maybe I don't have the right outlook. But I think for most users, a computer is just another machine: they don't care, as long as it looks the same and does the same boring stuff. So, most of the time, Windows, MS Office and Internet Explorer (or maybe Firefox) make up "the computer", teh "enabler". Maybe that's what Linux needs to become: a generic appliance that people associate with a particular activity: "the thing that does that", so to speak, if you know what I'm getting at. Just like the Mac is "the thing that does what I want to do", Linux in its many guises and shapes needs to be something you just turn on, like a TV or radio, and just use. Mu wife has that relationship (!) with her computer, an iMac 20" Core 2 Duo (oh yes, I am in the Mac business): she never turns it off. It goes to sleep and she just uses it. It had been three weeks since the last restart when we had some people over the other day and I felt I had to look for software updates, which prompted a restart... It's an appliance that does text editing, a little coding, photo editing , records and plays music, and so on. It's no longer a machine that's a great mystery: its just works, like a hi-fi system or TV. And that's part of the beauty of good software and hardware design, in my opinion.
The article could be construed as advertising. But then again, I tried out WriteRoom and liked the whole idea. Both programs could be useful if you write for a living. And yes, I definitely agree with you: most word processors are a pain to use and are riddled with useless features. Most writers (or coders) are only interested in the actual creation of articles or code, not the one million and one features of Microsoft Word or some other software. That's why I use tools like TextEdit or Smultron.
I use TextEdit for everything that's just plain text, and for code, it's Smultron all the way. In the past, I used TextWrangler (freeware) or BBEdit a lot, and they are still good. But Smultron (free!) is great!
Slashdot Mirror
In most Macintosh-based companies I've worked at, users have had full responsibility for their own machines. In fact, one tech said to me on my first day: "Here's your new machine. It's a Power Mac G3. Here's the login info you need. You can install and configure it the way you want. Just let me know if you need any help." Obviously, that is not the norm, but it tells you something about the trust Mac users put in their stuff, and how good it is to work at Mac-based businesses, because you are encouraged to learn everything about your tools.
Oh yes? Really? And where's the evidence to support those statements?
You have a point actually. I am a happy Mac user myself and see no reason to switch to any other platform. However, if there were no Macs, or if Apple had died back in '97 (if it hadn't been for Steve Jobs and the guys from NeXT, Apple WOULD have died for sure, and the Mac would not be such a very successful platform as it is now), I would be using Linux by now, probably Debian or Ubuntu, which is Debian-based and is a decent OS all around. I would probably NOT use Window sin any form, not even XP. I recently installed XP on my MacBook Pro just to check it out, but soon realized I had no use for it. Admittedly, XP and Vista are USABLE in the sense that you can use ut for everyday tasks, but in a very annoying and cloying way. If Apple made iTunes for Linux, that would be sweet.
There are alternatives, but it's only quite recently that customers have begun to value the different possibilities.
Im my eyes like something from out of 1993. Old and ugly, with a rather poor operating system. It has ZERO chance in the market place.
I agree. I don't care one little bit about the inner workings of Apple. All I know is they make the best hardware and software around, and great products I want to buy. If someone who worked there ten years ago feels bad, what's that got to do with anything?
The iPhone is a product aimed at consumers, and perhaps secondarily, businesses. It is not and never will be an open platform for hackers. I doubt Google's Android will be all open either, though I am not an expert on Android. If you want a hacker platform to perform software brain surgery on, which might be fun, there are many Linux-based portables out there. Personally I don't want various hacks on my iPhone. I want a phone that works as smoothly and efficiently as possible, and I think most iPhone owners agree.
I hope you are right, but it seems a lot of people buy the ASUS Eee PC and in stall Windows on it. I guess they have this strange idea Windows is a requirement in today's world. As a Mac user, I don't know what they are talking about. I have ZERO use for Windows. The Mac has all the apps I need and more, and the system is super solid. I did use Linux for several years and it was a trouble-free experience too. Let's hope Linux REALLY catches on with the kids out there, but for that to happen I think it needs a few (commercial) killer apps that kids MUST HAVE.
Apple needs to have control over what runs on the iPhone as well as over the hardware. It's simple really. How could a serious hardware and OS vendor support and maintain a platform that consists of bit of code here and there, and apps over which they have no control and zero insight? I think many of us don't want another Windows hell. The open source model works well in some areas, but Apple is a consumer electronics company and NOT a venue for hobbyists and NOT a development lab. The iPhone is supposed to actually WORK when the customer out there in Userland boots it up. Most people won't buy the iPhone because they need a new toy that may or may not work, but because they need all the functionality and usefulness the iPhone provides. Do you see what I mean?
I don't know what's gotten into Cringely. He seems to have lost his touch. There is nothing refined, intelligent, clever about Microsoft's attempts to take over Yahoo: it's just a simple hostile takeover attempt, and that's it. No hidden agenda, just a desire to get back at Google. And it will fail of course.
Why? Because Dell and Alienware don't know the difference between their own rears ends and good industrial and GUI design. They would have to use someone else's crappy operating system and UI, and it would be just another stupid Windows handheld device. No go.
It not dead yet, just resting and dreaming of Norway.
That joke is still funny, but not for much longer. I expect soldiers to be court-martialed for it soon. Also, I still think Mac OS X has a better-looking Colonel Panic than most other UNIX-based operating system. ;)
Feelings mean only one thing in businesspeak: money. The only reason somebody at NBC Universal admires Apple and is a fan of Steve Jobs is that Apple and Steve will fill their coffers with pure gold.
"If this is true, then Lenovo looks to have some heavy competition for the Macbook Air." Not really. The Lenovo thing doesn't have Mac OS X. It has a completely different target audience. It also lacks style. But is does have all the ports and stuff I would like in the MacBook Air, I'll give it that. Credit where credit is due. But what I really want is a Sony Vaio TZ with Mac OS X.
Volkswagen is the biggest auto manufacturer in Europe, so that must be one heck of a skull! Or did they mean a VW model? Which one?
I'm thinking of a miserable future along the lines of The Island of Dr. Moreau...
I don't want to whine, but though the products are nice, I had expected a lot more from Apple. The Air is much too limited for my needs. A single USB port? (I need three) No Firewire? (I need two ports, preferably FireWIre 800.) No audio in? At any rate I won't get version 1.0... The services are VERY impressive, though, much more so than the hardware.
Yeah, since it doesn't even say WHICH god it refers to: Jehova, Jesus, Wodin (Oden, Odin, Wotan) or any of the Roman, Greek or Phoenician gods? Mammon, perhaps?
Yes, and I think it is inevitable that Linux will replace Windows as the mainstream operating system in most business applications - especially if you consider what a strange creature Windows Vista has developed into, and the direction Windows appears to be moving generally - and perhaps in the homes, though that will require more work. However, this will take some years. To speed up the process, there ought to be a movement towards standardization, so that any given software application or hardware device will work seamlessly with any flavour of Linux, or preferably the establishment of a common base system, so that any variations between the various distributions will be more or less cosmetic and superficial. But even if this happens, the user interface is a most important aspect: this is what the user experiences, and this is how he or she gains experience of what it is like to use the appliance. At the moment, many desktop environments for Linux, notably KDE, try to look and feel a lot like Windows. My gut feeling is this is the wrong way to go forward. But I'd better leave that to the KDE and Gnome camps to figure out.
...needs to be promoted to people who "don't care". If Linux is so great, free and open, how come only 5 percent of all computer users utlilize it as their main operating system? I don't have the answer, but I suspect it has to do with the fact that there are at least 10 major distributions that each work slightly differently, and virtually no brand awareness to speak of in the market place. Also, maybe Linux (and by that I mean the various distributions, not the kernel or underlaying systems) has a way to go yet before it can be an operating system for "everybody".
I'm a Mac user myself, so maybe I don't have the right outlook. But I think for most users, a computer is just another machine: they don't care, as long as it looks the same and does the same boring stuff. So, most of the time, Windows, MS Office and Internet Explorer (or maybe Firefox) make up "the computer", teh "enabler". Maybe that's what Linux needs to become: a generic appliance that people associate with a particular activity: "the thing that does that", so to speak, if you know what I'm getting at. Just like the Mac is "the thing that does what I want to do", Linux in its many guises and shapes needs to be something you just turn on, like a TV or radio, and just use. Mu wife has that relationship (!) with her computer, an iMac 20" Core 2 Duo (oh yes, I am in the Mac business): she never turns it off. It goes to sleep and she just uses it. It had been three weeks since the last restart when we had some people over the other day and I felt I had to look for software updates, which prompted a restart... It's an appliance that does text editing, a little coding, photo editing , records and plays music, and so on. It's no longer a machine that's a great mystery: its just works, like a hi-fi system or TV. And that's part of the beauty of good software and hardware design, in my opinion.
The article could be construed as advertising. But then again, I tried out WriteRoom and liked the whole idea. Both programs could be useful if you write for a living. And yes, I definitely agree with you: most word processors are a pain to use and are riddled with useless features. Most writers (or coders) are only interested in the actual creation of articles or code, not the one million and one features of Microsoft Word or some other software. That's why I use tools like TextEdit or Smultron.
BMW has something like 5% of the auto market, but who wouldn't say that BMW - or indeed Apple - are hugely successful?
http://smultron.sourceforge.net/