One more reason to hate Microsoft

Why do people always write MAC in capital letters? It's a Mac, short for Macintosh. Or do you spell the shiny red apple MACINTOSH as well?

 

Why do people always write MAC in capital letters? It's Mac, short for Macintosh. Or do you spell the shiny red apple MACINTOSH as well?

 

Why do people always write MAC in capital letters? It's Mac, short for Macintosh. Or do you spell the shiny red apple MACINTOSH as well?

 

Because when capitalized like that it means "Mac's Are Cool"

I don't know the real answer, but that one sounds good enough to me

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Jan 23 2007, 04:30 PM) [snapback]379664[/snapback]</div>

Yeah my mac doesn’t crash daily or hourly. I can run all my photo and video software at the same time; no closing one program to use the other and then back again. I surf the web without worry. When an update is available I don’t have to read a bunch of crap that I have no understanding of and then find out later I should have waited for the security update that makes the security update compatible with the current security software that is leaving a security hole in my computer.

I don’t play games other than World of War Craft and I don’t have it crash on me like other non-Mac players do. Oh and unlike the PC I can have a video rendering wile playing a game online. To do that with a PC I would need a 4k system and it would still crash. My Imac has a 2.18ghz processor and 2gigs of ram with a 128mb video card. It runs faster smoother and more stable then the $3k pc I used to own.

I can run high end photo software and have a video playing in a small window so I can watch a DVD and do work all in one spot. My PC would get super slow and all screwy with one photo editing application open and trying to play a DVD.

So for $1800 and that includes the screen I have a computer that blasts my old $3k computer out of the water; oh yeah did I mention that the $3k was before u added a monitor and speakers and all the other cool stuff u need and it took up the entire desk and floor then went on to make ungodly amounts of noise making 500watt speaker a necessity lol.

All in all id say I like my Mac and don’t have a need to tweak it and all that stuff. Sure PC’s are easy to change settings, work on, replace the parts, and that’s good because you have to do all that stuff with them.

Oh oh oh did I mention that when Mac releases its new major OS upgrade this fall I know that when it says my current computer can run it all I have to do is buy it and install it. Lets see Microsoft’s new OS needed new computers and even then it didn’t work on them. Then all your software may not work with it. I can go on and on with complaint about it.

My complaints about my Mac hhhhmmmm lets see. Oh got it I cant run one of my favorite games on it because its only on PC. So I don’t have to worry about the important stuff but cant play one game I really like; I can accept that.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wan @ Jan 23 2007, 02:42 PM) [snapback]379717[/snapback]</div>

Open Office will run on OSX without having to install Linux first. Even better Magic!


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(parrot_lady @ Jan 24 2007, 01:15 PM) [snapback]380226[/snapback]</div>

That's what Windows is good for - Games! My 3 year old Dell PC still has plenty of power for games. My 6 month old MacBook is for my more serious interests like photography and video production.

 

Last time I checked, Macs still ran my most important software in emulation mode (i.e. Macs SUPER-suck for certain software). Maybe with CS3 that doesn't happen anymore for some (photoshop, flash, illustrator), but I don't know about Maya, which I use most, and which was the buggiest, most awful thing to use on Mac, but smooth as butter on PC.

You can't make everyone happy, until all hardware and software is open-sourced. Then instead of 2 solutions (idiot-consumer vs. power user), there'll be a broad spectrum of choices, and all of them customizable to your heart's content. And Apple will stay in business because there will still be people who "just want it to work."

p.s. Macs are a nightmare in network environments. They introduce all kinds of weird problems in certain software (again, Adobe Creative Suite) and are a PIA to manage more than a few at a time... and don't try to recommend MacAdministrator or some garbage like that because that only makes matters worse!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Jun 27 2007, 02:47 PM) [snapback]468996[/snapback]</div>

We've had networked macs for years.

Apple Remote Desktop 3.1

 

I like PCs. I especially like the problems that happen on them, since it keeps me employed . I decided not to roll out IE7 to all the users in my office, because of how craptacular it is. Mozilla or Opera FTW.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Jun 27 2007, 03:47 PM) [snapback]468996[/snapback]</div>

I am not an IT guy and know nothing about networks or any of that. I have heard both arguments that Mac’s work well in a network and that they don’t. I have also heard its better to use one OS on any given network. Again I know nothing about networks or any of that.

What I do know is my Mac works great on our home network. It integrated just fine but then it’s a small network used for the internet (no its not a shared router) and so we can print off one printer and share some small files and whatnot.

My two house mates want a Mac after seeing my Imac and how stable it is and all.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wiiprii @ Jun 27 2007, 03:28 PM) [snapback]468975[/snapback]</div>

i love the video and photo work I can do on my Mac. I especially love Aperture if you are into photography and not just putting some text on a pic you will love Aperture. For pure photo work it blows Photo Shop away imho.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Jun 27 2007, 02:47 PM) [snapback]468996[/snapback]</div>

Not the experience I've had (disclaimer: I haven't added a Mac to a network in 10 years). With a PC, you have to configure EVERYTHING by hand (disclaimer: I haven't done THAT in three or four years). With a Mac, you just plug it into the network and you're good to go. If you want to get fancy, you can give it a network name, but all the I.P. stuff is done automagically.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Jun 27 2007, 05:59 PM) [snapback]469114[/snapback]</div>

Pffftt. No way!

With DHCP configured properly, any computer should just be able to plug in and work automatically, but the question is what advanced functionality can a Mac handle. The answer is, "not a lot".

Seemingly everything becomes more awkward on a network with a Mac, because, let's face it, they're not built to be business machines, they're built to be cute audio/video editing home computers with a slick interface. Just look at Apple's advertising. The Windows/Mac guys are a fat guy in a business suit running spreadsheets and reading C++ GUI Programming books while the Mac guy says how easy it is to edit home videos.

PCs have better business/gaming value, while Macs make great home computers.

Regarding the automatic install of IE7, I think it's a little unfair that people complain about security problems and the automatic browser update in the same post. Microsoft makes some big mistakes occasionally, and heaven knows the quality of some of their software is taking a nosedive lately, but I also realize that Microsoft is getting blamed for some mistakes their users make, so they end up taking precautions to save people from themselves.

Case in point, every operating system out there is susceptible to phishing attacks (because that sort of attack occurs on the web, not an OS). Microsoft, however, developed IE7 with greater security in mind, and they created a built-in phishing filter is part of the brower. Now Microsoft is left with a decision: get everyone using the new browser with the phishing filter and other cool features, or get blamed by consumers when the operating system didn't keep them from falling for, e.g. a phishing scam.

Microsoft opted for the former approach, and I don't blame them. There's really no reason to stay with the aging IE6 unless you're a company that had some poor decision makers decide to build or use IE6-specific web sites. In that case 1) whoever decided it was okay to use an IE6-specific site should probably be fired because you may as well just use a desktop app if you're not taking advantage of HTML's portability and 2) you can prevent domain computers from installing IE7 by administrative policy if you so choose.

I'm with Microsoft on their decision to upgrade old software (for free).

PS - Firefox is great if you like all your plug-ins to break with each release, and OpenOffice can't hold a candle to the robustness and usability of MS Office.

I have to admit, I use GIMP, though. It doesn't make sense for me to spend big money on Photoshop with as little graphics design as I do.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 27 2007, 05:09 PM) [snapback]469044[/snapback]</div>

Same here...no problems.

 

Yet another PC vs Mac thread! It's been a while since I had a good fight over this, so let the fun begin...

It always amuses me how the Mac camp uses arguments that are outdated by many years.

"PC's crash all the time". Fact is, my computers never ever crash, and some are working 24x7

"On a PC, you have to configure all the network settings manually". Fact is, in a properly working network, all you have to do is branch the cable.

"OSX has better security because it is built on Unix". Fact is, the original Unix was a horribly unsecure OS. I can only hope that Apple spent a lot of time fixing all the huge holes. In my opinion, the biggest defence Macs get is that they are only a small minority of the market, making them a less interesting target.

Some remarks by the Mac camp are even simply hilarious. Quote:
"Oh oh oh did I mention that when Mac releases its new major OS upgrade this fall I know that when it says my current computer can run it all I have to do is buy it and install it. Lets see Microsoft’s new OS needed new computers and even then it didn’t work on them. Then all your software may not work with it."

Continuity really isn't Apple's strong point. Can you say Motorola, PowerPC and Intel? Apple switched platforms 2 times, each time leaving the previous generation completely in the dark.

I like Apple for their excellent, innovative design and user-friendlyness. I'm enjoying my iPod every day, and will be the first to buy an iPhone. If I only would need a computer for Internet surfing, document, video and photo editing and other similar stuff, I would definitely buy a Mac.

But as a software developer, I prefer Windows. Microsoft has a tradition of well taking care of developers that work on their platform. Especially with .NET, there are more possibilities, better support, more resources, more openness. Microsoft is more business-oriented. OSX is cool and looks fancy indeed, and .NET sounds boring (few consumers even know what it really is about). But from a business perspective, it is a silent revolution, and quite a step forward. The industry doesn't care about fancy icons, they want continuity and standardisation. Remarkably, Microsoft has done a better job here, given the fact that so many different vendors are active on the PC platform. For example, in .NET you can easily integrate Excel functionality inside a CRM software package, simply with a little C#. This opens the doors to a lot of 3th party developers that add value to existing components, all in a standardised environment. And Microsoft is even taking more lead here in the recent years, but few consumers realise this because all they see is that Macs look better.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Jun 27 2007, 01:46 PM) [snapback]468948[/snapback]</div>

I entered this thread with trepidation, fearing I would find gay content. I wasn't mistaken.

 

vtie said

fascinating

My wife's mac died an early hardware death last week. I set up a shuttle PC I had put together a couple of years ago, installed xp, and told her all was well. But I couldn't get xp to see the networked HP printer; I spent an outrageous amount of time figuring out how to burn an iso, and logging In and Out to use admin functions for a bit more security than MS provides is really annoying. Both of us tried to like xp, but failed. There must be a joke somewhere, asking how many MS wizards it takes to screw in a lightbulb.

It was annoying enough, that I didn't even bother leaving xp on the HD as a dual boot; I just erased and installed Linux Ubuntu. My wife does NOT get used to new things without a fight, but after two days she is delighted. All the hardware worked without configuration, installing new apps is now easy, and following instructions from the web got the printer up in about 15 minutes. It works, it works well, and clearly thought has gone into interface design. I'm just amazed at how far, how quickly Ubuntu-linux has come in the past 18 months or so from version 4 to 7. E.g., we have 5 (!) multiple portable hard drives running around the house, formatted for Mac in hfs+, for windows in FAT16, and for windows in ntfs. Half are firewire, the others USB 2.0. They ALL mount automatically to the Ubuntu desktop, without any fuss. Talk about easy migration !

The single irritation was finding a solution to write poetry in hebrew, which requires vowels. OpenOffice did a good job in xp, but oddly has bug(s) in the Linux version that cause a problem for this usage (Nisus on the Mac is the best WP, period). Eventually I found that AbiWord, used with the Arial Unicode font does ok, so now all wishes are granted.

Overall I prefer OS X for its aesthetics, consistency, LaunchBar, and truly excellent iApps, but Ubuntu-linux is a definite choice too. OS X is the Toyota Prius, Ubuntu-linux is a used Honda Civic hatchback (great car !), and MS is a GM-Russian-Rumanian frankenstein.

 

When I say "macs are a nightmare in network environments," I don't mean "they're hard to plug into a router to get on the intarweb." I mean, in a local network, with various OS's (e.g. windows XP, win2k servers, various flavors of linux), and where all home directories are network-based (which is really the only smart way to do it... localized storage = pfft), Macs have problems that can't be overcome and must be worked around.

I could give some examples that are an impact on my daily life, and hurt productivity, but for those of you who like Macs, you're clearly operating on a different level, and the problems I experience probably don't affect you. (Good for you... really!)

Re: remote desktop... Pfft, I say. I don't want to have to hold the hand of every stupid box on the network. Linux has the only really good solution, so I say CrApple and Windoze both lose on the network administration front.

And in closing, I'll add that I actually, honestly do want Macs to work for me, and I will buy one as soon as some of the major problems I have with them are cleared up.

 

These techno tools and toys are funny things. The vast majority of our clients have no idea what Microsoft installs on their computers. Its up to us to ensure their systems continue to work, even when we cannot stop the user from doing something foolish. Its a tough job, but we're real good at it.

After the Intel-Mac's were released to the public I got rid of all personal Windoze-based machines. I run Parallel's on my Macbook Pro for my various Windoze needs on the job, and with the latest version of Parallel's I can now play my Need for Speed!

I gave my wife one of the "old" company iBooks and she is so insanely happy about it. No problems like she had with her Compaq Laptop (no comment, heh).

So far this year, I have converted 100 clients over to OS X. Even for the ham radio guys who desired access to *nix, they LOVE their iMac's because they have it.

There are ways to block the installation of IE7 on Windows XP systems. Vista is IE7 so there is little to do about it. Though, most people call us to remove Vista ... or they buy an iMac.



Cheers!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Jun 28 2007, 02:29 PM) [snapback]469304[/snapback]</div>

Yes, fascinating indeed. Especially if you realise that both were developed by entirely different companies, by programmers that never talked to each other. Even better, I could do this as a 3rd party company, offering specific solutions for companies that want customised CRM functionality.

Anyone who thinks that a shiny looking desktop is more important than that has no clue about the future of IT.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(vtie @ Jun 28 2007, 06:17 AM) [snapback]469280[/snapback]</div>

Three times wow. Windows, windows 95, windows 98, windows xp, windows me Lol all had there problems. Large groups of people needed to upgrade their PC to use these OS’s.

Now I was a die hard PC supporter through all this (not ME though) and loved my Xp Media Center. Now in comes Vista and even if you buy a vista compatible machine doesn’t guaranty that you will be able to use all its features. Some machines are not powerful enough to run the built in security software lol. I am not talking old outdated compys im talking newer compy’s and lapy’s. Then you get the software problems like your Office suite will not work and you need to buy the new 2007 one. here is another example with Vista some people cant burn cd’s/dvd’s because the OS is using up to many resources to allow you to burn the disc. These are compy’s with 1 or more gigs of ram so that says something to me.

You say windows is a business tool then why does a business tool require that you have better video cards to run the OS. Seams a waist to have to buy a video card to run the OS if all you do is spread sheets in Exel.

Im not a die hard Mac fan but I do love it and since Vista came out I just don’t see me getting another PC anytime soon.