Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Return of the Mac

Posted by Zonk on Tue Mar 29, 2005 01:55 PM
from the it-went-away? dept.
Ben Gutierrez writes "Paul Graham has posted a new essay on the Return of the Mac which begins with: 'All the best hackers I know are gradually switching to Macs.' Tim O'Reilly said some similar things in Watching Alpha Geeks . From the article: "My friend Robert said his whole research group at MIT recently bought themselves Powerbooks. These guys are not the graphic designers and grandmas who were buying Macs at Apple's low point in the mid 1990s. They're about as hardcore OS hackers as you can get."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • OS-X based on BSD (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ackthpt (218170) * on Tuesday March 29 2005, @01:57PM (#12078724) Homepage Journal
    I always throught basing OS-X on BSD was a good move. Sounds more attractive to me than the old MacOS, especially from someone with a long background in c.

    That said... BSD is dy^H^Hthriving.

    • by Shag (3737) * <.dan. .at. .birchalls.net.> on Tuesday March 29 2005, @04:24PM (#12081641) Homepage
      Heck, it's even attractive to those of us whose background in C is more of the "int" variety.
      • Re:Then why....? (Score:5, Informative)

        by jericho4.0 (565125) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:18PM (#12079119)
        Apple killed OpenStep for non-Apple systems. The alternative is GNUStep. GNUStep, while an amazing project, is hobbled, IMO, by trying to look like OpenStep, which looks like crap.

        I wish *Step was more popular. Learning Objective-C is a snap if you know C already. GNUStep makes an amazing range of functionality available to apps 'for free'. On OS X it's even better. For example, Tiger will give every app an undo function, automagicly. The included tools, and overall design of the OS, make developing on the platform a pleasure.

  • unix laptop = key (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jabella (91754) * on Tuesday March 29 2005, @01:57PM (#12078725) Journal
    Since around 1993 I've been messing with Unix. SCO, Slackware (1.0-ish), RedHat (pre 4.0...on Sparc!), Caldera, Irix, SunOS, etc.... both in userland, on the desktop, on my own servers, and a professional sysadmin.

    I've got a mac now. The first of my life, from someone who wasn't ever a mac guy (and was probably more 'anti-mac' than most.) My g/f has one too -- more than once I was like 'just open a terminal and do....'

    The fact that she doesn't need to know what the terminal.app is? That's the best part..... I get what I need, she gets what she needs.
    • What amazes me most (Score:5, Interesting)

      by bonch (38532) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:33PM (#12079373)
      What amazes me most is how short of a time it took for OS X to get put together. Most everyone agrees that the first release was more of a public beta, but even X.0 was an amazingly mature product for something completely new that had been started mere years earlier. I heard a report that as many as 10,000 engineers had worked on OS X at some point in the course of its development years.

      I'm sure it didn't hurt to have NextStep to build off of.
      • by Coryoth (254751) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:19PM (#12080470) Homepage Journal
        What amazes me most is how short of a time it took for OS X to get put together.

        What really made MacOS X work is that Apple already had a very secure decently sized niche market for Macs. That is, there was a guaranteed devoted userbase that:

        (1) Hardware manufacturers bother to write and include drivers.
        (2) Software companies bother to release OS X versions of their applications.

        That means that "things just work" - hardware works, and there is enough software, all built for the specific platform, that it all plays together nicely.

        Imagine, for a minute, that there was a Linux distributor (Call them X) that standardised on a fixed platform (say GNOME for example), and had enough guaranteed userbase that Adobe wrote a version of the Creative Suite (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.) for GNOME, Microsoft released MS Office for GNOME, and lots of other serious software companies also wrote GNOME versions of their commercial applications. All of a sudden distribution X would be a viable platform that had all the software you need, and it all works seamlessly together inside GNOME. Presuming you also have hardware coming with distribution X drivers, dsitribution X would be quite reasonable competition for OS X - it would certainly have the "it just works" factor.

        You can redo the whole gedanken experiment with KDE if you like, you'll get similar results.

        What made OS X really work was the guaranteed userbase and the fact that it could run old mac software to ensure a smooth transition of that userbase and an immediate supply of software. Honestly, if a small startup company wrote a brand new OS that was as good as OS X but lacked the userbase, and hecne software and hardware support, it would just potter along and probably eventually die or get bought out (see BeOS, NeXTStep etc.)

        Jedidiah.
        • by node 3 (115640) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @05:50PM (#12082805)
          Presuming you also have hardware coming with distribution X drivers, dsitribution X would be quite reasonable competition for OS X - it would certainly have the "it just works" factor.

          GNOME is great, but it certainly does not 'just work', and it's not lack of hardware support, or lack of Photoshop and Office, that are the reason for this.

          When people say, 'it just works', they aren't referring solely to the hardware (although that is part of it), but the software (OS) as well. How do you set up the firewall in GNOME? How do you format and partition a hard drive? How do you integrate your digital camera with your screensaver? These are just a few random examples--all possible under GNOME, but not even remotely as well designed as under OS X.

          I'm guessing you aren't very familiar with Mac OS X. GNOME is great, and I use it daily, but it's not just lack of hardware vendors' and application vendors' support that's keeping it from 'just working'.
    • Re:unix laptop = key (Score:5, Interesting)

      by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:18PM (#12080445)
      > I've got a mac now. The first of my life, from someone who wasn't ever a mac guy (and was probably more 'anti-mac' than most.)

      Me 2. I couldn't agree more.

      Three of my good friends who are power users (they used to run Linux on the desktop and server) have all switched over to Macs. Apple has one thing that Linux lacks -- consistency. But that's the advantage of "commercial" software.

      For power users:
      Pre OS X felt like such a straight-jacket. I used to ridicule the "menu bar at the top" GUI. Now that I've done some dev on it, the whole Mac experience is just more consistent, then the half-baked Windows UI. Apple really has taken the best from Next, Mac, and Windows. Is it perfect? No, but for the most part, things seem to "just work." Ever try coping multiple files totaling over 1+ Gig across on a Windows Box with some of the files already there? Where is the "No to all" button? It's all the "little" UI touches that Windows misses. It all adds up.

      For developers:
      XCode - doc markup, version control, and a half decent IDE "free" on the 4th OS CD. This is a great way to "win" Window's developers. Microsoft learnt this long ago -- without developers, your OS is going no where.

      My next PC is going to be a Mac.

      The 17" PowerBooks are sweet -- the next revision should have great 3D performance. The current ones have "good" 3D performance. Gaming is the only real reason to stay away from Macs.

      --
      XCode tip - trying to add a file that doesn't show up in the file dialog? (Stupid Mac File Dialog :)
      Press '/' and you can type in any path you wan to add any lib(s) you want.
      • Re:unix laptop = key (Score:5, Informative)

        by jeremy f (48588) <jmf_24@hotmail.com> on Tuesday March 29 2005, @04:16PM (#12081511) Homepage
        I used to ridicule the "menu bar at the top" GUI

        Hopefully you don't anymore -- hell, I used to myself. If you do, take a look at Fitts' Law [wikipedia.org], from which can be concluded that such a design is actually best for users.

        If you want to see this in action, try moving your mouse to any point on the center of your screen as quickly as possible, and see how much you overshoot or undershoot. Also, count the number of corrections you have to make -- using the mouse normally, I overshoot targets at least two or three times. If I'm really slow and deliberate, I can get there on the first try.

        What does this mean then? Apple's "menu at the top" allows you to select commands without worrying about Fitts' law. It's impossible to overshoot a target at the edge of a screen; despite how far you use your mouse, your pointer shouldn't extend beyond the top boundry of the screen. Which means it's quite easier to hit the menus in an Apple environment than it is in a menu-under-the-application-title-bar environment such as MS Windows (as well as KDE and Gnome).
  • It's UNIX-based! What hacker doesn't want something that uses UNIX. Besides... Linux is sooooooo 90s.
  • by qw(name) (718245) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @01:58PM (#12078753) Homepage Journal

    Last year's Usenix conference was full of Powerbooks. Most of the top dogs in the industry. That prompted me to buy a PowerMac. It's the best computing decision I've ever made.
    • > Last year's Usenix conference was full of Powerbooks.

      This is an example of Principle of Similarity and Principle of Social Proof including "The Number of Sources" Effect.

      > Most of the top dogs in the industry.

      This is an example of influence using authority, including High Status

      > That prompted me to buy a PowerMac.
      Aha! The requested target action!

      > It's the best computing decision I've ever made.
      Principle of Consistency

      p.s., I'm not mocking you. I just noticed a bunch of statements that match the midterm I have Thursday night. Thus, this post counts as "studying"

      p.p.s., I love my PowerBook

      p.p.p.s., Please note, reading the above post qualifies you to place out of a graduate level Consumer Behavior marketing class.
      • by lux55 (532736) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:28PM (#12079293) Homepage Journal
        Some of these are also the names of standard logical fallacies, which it appears your Consumer Behaviour class is teaching you to exploit. These include:

        - Appeal to authority: Most of the top dogs...
        - Appeal to popularity: Last year's conference was full of...

        A logic course would teach you the same thing, minus the exploiting part. For that you'd need a course in rhetorical persuasion, or marketing by more popular terminology (ie. your course). It's interesting how long this stuff has been around, yet how fresh it can sound when presented with the psychology/marketing spin. :)

        For more fallacy fun, see:

        http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
      • Re:Lemme guess... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by revscat (35618) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:20PM (#12079143) Homepage Journal

        I bet you also voted for whoever your favorite actor told you to.

        Sheep. Baaaaaaa! B-a-a-a-a!

        Sometimes taking unspoken advise from those whom you respect is a conscious choice, not mindless groupthink. There are developers out there who are better than I am, and when they speak, I listen. I also pay attention to what tools they use. This is neither blind nor foolish, when not taken to an extreme.

      • by As Seen On TV (857673) <asseen@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:30PM (#12079332)
        Replace "cooler" with "smarter" and you're right on. When you see people you've admired for years walking around with Powerbooks, you start to get the idea that maybe they know something you don't, you know?
          • by As Seen On TV (857673) <asseen@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:04PM (#12080144)
            Smarter? Because they bought a certain product?

            Um, no, smarter because they're smarter. We're talking about people we admire here. You don't understand my comment at all, do you? I said that when you see somebody smarter than you carrying a Powerbook, you notice. I didn't say that people who carry Powerbooks are automatically smarter than you.

            They built their own Altair? They know the registers on an Apple II? That earns my respect. That quantifies "smarter" in my book.

            Okay, so your definition of "smarter" hinges around having a pathological interest in stuff that's utterly obsolete and of no practical use to anybody. That explains so much.

            You know, I really wish your nickname were literally true.
  • And? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Quasar1999 (520073) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @01:58PM (#12078754) Journal
    What's your point? I don't like Dell laptops... IBM sold their laptop division to some no-name, can't be yet trusted for quality company over seas... what's that leave us? Yes, Powerbooks... they're great hardware... I'm not a Mac lover... but I have had to work on PPC hardware, and I do like the power it has over similiar x86 based laptops... and OSX is a nice unix environment with a pretty shell... now if the powerbooks still had OS9 on them, there would be no way I would buy one...

    That's the seller, an OS that's stable and powerful, on hardware that's powerful... Less to do with it being Apple, more to do with being better than Dell and HP and the rest of the crap out there.
  • Self-righteous Apple fanboys in one corner.

    Foaming-at-the-mouth Linux zealots in another.

    This could get ugly, folks. I'm sure the *BSD crowd would chime in too, except that a judge recently orderd the feeding tube to be removed.
  • well (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sv-Manowar (772313) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @01:59PM (#12078761) Homepage Journal
    at least at my university, it seems as if apple have changed their image. No longer for graphic designers - it's for people who wanna 'get stuff done' with their computers

    Also, their laptops are pretty much class dominant, and compare favourably on price with the high-end thinkpads in the powerbook range.
    • Re:well (Score:5, Interesting)

      by The boojum (70419) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:23PM (#12079205)
      Yes, I've noticed this too. I've just gone back to grad school in CS. It's interesting to me to hear how many of the profs and students love their Macs and how those who'd got Intel based machines wished they'd gotten a Mac. I used to think that raw processor clock rate was everything, but I've seen the Macs run circles around Intel machines with half-again as much clock rate. And this on CPU and numerically intensive tasks. And the folks who are using the Macs are hard-core alpha-geek types too. I've also heard very good things about the dev tools from them.

      When it came time to pick a machine for myself for the lab, I ended up going with the Mac -- and I'm someone who's never had a Mac before. Part of my motivation was the "getting stuff done". I don't care if it doesn't play games like my home Wintel box. I need good Unix/X compatibility for when I deal with the big iron. And I don't want to have to futz with dozens of /etc files like in Linux either. I'm there to study, do research and write some code and go home. From this point of view, the Mac wins.

      But I'll admit that the design and prettiness of the environment doesn't hurt. If I'm going to be spending hours every day looking at the screen, it might as well look good. (No badly aliased, bitmapped text in Emacs windows, thank you.)
  • Anecdotal evidence: (Score:5, Interesting)

    by oostevo (736441) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:03PM (#12078843) Homepage
    Here's some more anecdotal evidence (that doesn't have a statistically significant sample size, I know, I know):

    I'm at university, and I know a lot of computer scientists (particularly of the theoretical sort) and scientists of various other disciplines around here that love OS X. Just like using a functional language like Lisp versus using assembly, using OS X takes some of the responsibility for mundane, largely unnecessary tasks out of your hands and frees you to do the computing work that you need to do.

    Sure someone well versed in systems or operating system design would be able to get more out of Linux if they took the time to optimize it, but most "hardcore hackers" I know around here sure don't have that sort of time.

  • Why not? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Realistic_Dragon (655151) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:09PM (#12078969) Homepage
    The hardware is beautiful. It's well thought out, well laid out, lasts forever (battery wise and durability) and *gets girls to come over to your table look at it*. The alternative, at least for laptops, is IBM... at twice the price.

    Now they even have a working scroll implimentation (which was a crippling omission, my NEC had a scroll stub for ~3 years before Apple thought of something).

    And yes, your brand new very pretty computer will work well with Linux just fine, so there seems to be little downside at all*.

    *Apart from lack of 3D card support, and for some reason Apple use crappy propriatery 802.11g cards with no Linux drivers. Mystifying.
  • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:15PM (#12079074)

    I work at a development house that makes network security products. Three years ago there were a couple people with powerbooks running OS X. Today it is about half of the company. Last week a senior developer was talking to me about our latest hire. He's an experienced, professional coder. It had taken him a week to get the thinkpad we gave him up and running the Linux distro of his choice and configured to work with all our servers and testbeds. Thats 40-60 hours of work gone. How many powerbooks could we have bought him with a corresponding amount of cash. He was considering mandating powerbooks for all new hires unless they had a good reason to use something else.

    OS X is making some huge inroads into the computer security field. It has certainly gained a huge amount of penetration here in just 3 years. Even some of the the managers have switched after looking over a developer's shoulder for a bit. You'd never guess Apple had a 5% market share from a walk around this office.

  • So, I was a die hard Windows user, been that way since 3.0 (3.11 and 2k were my favorite releases), but 18 months ago I switched to Linux (first SuSE and more recently FC3). And now I'm thinking of a PowerBook.

    Leaving Windows wasn't a problem, but sticking with Linux is. Sure it's very fast on my machine, and I have all the familiar Unix tools from the GNU chain, but so much doesn't work right. Linux on the desktop is close to a joke. I've tried both GNOME and KDE and neither is bug free (cf. Win2K which was very, very stable), and there are so many hardware incompatibilities that it's a pain.

    Ultimately, I want to support F/OSS, but I may have to switch because it's a productivity drain for me to discover that gnome-panel has crashed something and now Evolution can't open the File dialog. Ugh. Or figure out why gaim's icon disappears in the tray some of the time, or have gdesklets eat the CPU for no apparent reason, or...

    John.
  • ...personally, I made the OS X switch in 2003, and it was my first ever exposure to Apple's world, and my days had been spent in Linux/UNIX, PC and MVS realms... ...I even liked running Linux on the desktop, but spent a lot of time tinkering to get stuff to work, and frequently simple stuff that just works on Mac/Win platforms is a chore on Linux (USB back a few years ago, wireless, syncing other hardware...).

    However, my powerbook purchase brought the joy of computing back into my life. I frequently read the comments of those who decry the overpriced Mac when compared to constructing your own box (which I used to do - and I still believe that a Mac is equivalently priced with Dell/Gateway/IBM hardware, when all things are factored in properly) and while true on one level, it misses the mark on the total picture. That is depending on your interests and usage desires:

    • Time spent on system administration tasks is time not spent on other activities. Time is a non-renewable resource and I'd rather spend it writing software, using software (i.e., playing a game or other activity) than fiddling with the system to figure out why things arn't working or what's gunked up the box. I never see this factored into "cost" metrics -- that is, if you figure conservatively, your time at $20 per hour (maybe more, maybe less, I'm just gauging on median 40K salary), each additional 10 hours you spend a month administering your Win box is $200 per month difference. Which means in the span of 3-6 months, the Mac OS X will prove its cost superiority.

    • It really is the best of both worlds -- the shiny, eye friendly Aqua GUI plus having a full fledged *nix/BSD system at your disposal. Running MySQL/Apache/Perl/Python/PHP all on a local box where I can have my own testbed sandbox before presenting to clients. Yes, Win platform is capable of doing same thing, but to me, it's a kludge, and again, back to that time thing, where I waste time setting it all up and then dealing with the discrepancies between that environment and the *nix environments where the software will eventually run. And running PuTTy or Exceed is a weak substitute for an anti-aliased terminal window, custom setup. The one major thing that bugged me about OS X, that I missed from running Linux, was the virtual desktops, until I discovered this gem [sourceforge.net].

    • I realize there are specialized software needs that may not be met with OS X, but for most, the available software plus the F/OSS normally primarily in the domain of Linux OS is available to run on Mac OS X. And I don't even run Fink anymore, I just have a few X11 apps (Gimp, and a few others...) that I compiled and built and placed them within the X11 environment.

    Life got a lot simpler when I replaced my wife's Win XP box with an iMac. No more weekly degunk sessions, antivirus, malware consternation and constant admonitions for her to be vigilant about keeping her machine clean were necessary. And she took to it like a charm -- things were unfamiliar (and still sometimes she stumbles on a Win -> Mac how-to-do question) but she is enthralled with it now and spends more time on email/web browsing than she ever did on the Win box. The iLife/iPod deal is just gravy and really we've experienced firsthand on how much more hassle-free life became after the Mac switch.

    So, I'm not swayed by saving a couple hundred dollars. Just like I wouldn't buy a Kia or a Yugo, I'm not going to opt for a bargain basement PC over a quality machine like a Mac. No, it's not perfect and presents its own set of flaws, but at this juncture, it seems to be the product of greater quality for me.

    • by cmorgan47 (720310) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @01:58PM (#12078752) Homepage
      get a g3 ibook. runs all but the greediest of os x apps just fine and i picked one up from a guy at work fro $100....they go for about 3-400 on ebay.
          • G3 and OSX is fine (Score:5, Informative)

            by CdBee (742846) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:20PM (#12080480)
            Anonymous-Cowarding doubtless in admission that this is a troll.

            I run OSX 10.3 on a 366mhz G3 iBook with 192mb of RAM, it's fine for wordprocessing, surfing, and multimedia use and isn't any slower than Windows XP on a Pentium-2 366.. which most people would agree is a workable pairing.

            10.1 and 10.2 were slow on G3s. 10.3 is fine. As a Windows-refugee I'm still puzzled by an OS that gets faster on older hardware with every release...
    • by falcon5768 (629591) <Falcon5768NO@SPAMcomcast.net> on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:01PM (#12078807) Journal
      My kid brother can aforde a mac mini on lunch money...

      Please this argument is old and false.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:12PM (#12079011)
        My kid brother can aforde a mac mini on lunch money...

        Tell your kid brother that I and all my geeky friends would like our lunch money from the last six months back, uh... please?
      • by JackAtCepstral (870238) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:09PM (#12078949) Homepage
        Here's the obligatory rebuttal. You're forgetting the software. You can put Linux on it for free, but you're not getting nearly the user experience you get with a Mac. Or you can pay for Windows and the software that runs on it. That will bring up the cost of that $450US system. Still, not the same user experience. With a Mac, it's the compete system your paying for, not just the hardware.
      • by RedBear (207369) <redbear AT redbearnet DOT com> on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:39PM (#12080871) Homepage
        But lets be honest, if I can get an AMD system with a 15inch LCD screen, Sempron 2200 proc, and half a gig of ram for about 450usd

        Show us this marvelous machine that costs $450 and includes a complete operating system and equivalent software to match iLife and AppleWorks (or iWork for another $80), and an LCD monitor that won't make your eyes bleed, and 512MB of RAM that's worth having. Seriously, show us this machine. You were talking about something with no software, right?

        how am I gonna convince my wife that I should buy a 600usd mac mini

        That's easy, just sit her down in front of one for a few minutes.

        , plus 250usd for the monitor, plus the keyboard and the silly one button mouse?

        (1) Odds are you already have a perfectly good CRT monitor at home or you can get one for $120. If you want a decent LCD, you'll pay for it whether you get a Mac or a PC. Any monitor with a standard VGA or DVI connector will work with the Mac mini.

        (2) Odds are you already have a keyboard. If not, USB keyboards go for about $25. You do not need to buy one from Apple. Any USB keyboard will work with the Mac mini.

        (3) OS X has been around for what, five years now? And for five years now, OS X has had context menus and support for mouses with two or more buttons. Mine has 5 buttons including the scroll wheel/button. You do not need to buy a "silly one button mouse" from Apple. Any USB two-button scroll mouse will work with the Mac mini.

        In the end, as so many of us have realized already, the cost is now very low, and very well justified.
        • by steve_bryan (2671) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @04:42PM (#12081898)
          So you are just itching to buy yet another keyboard, mouse and monitor? With iMacs that force one to acquire the built-in monitor there were complaints about the forced bundling. Now that Apple has an option that doesn't require you to buy a new monitor we still hear nothing but whiny complaints.

          For anyone who has owned a computer the cost of upgrading to Mac OS X is no more than $600. The excuse that it costs too much is gone. Find another one.
    • by rokzy (687636) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:03PM (#12078832)
      just do what I do - get a console and save hundreds on CPU and GPU upgrades.

      as strange as it may sound, I bought my Mac to do work.
        • by RatBastard (949) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:13PM (#12080344) Homepage
          I bought my PC for both. It's called economy.

          I used to think that way. Until I looked at the pile of games I have that I can't play anymore because of:

          • OS Upgrades
          • New graphics cards (less of an issue now, but I do have a lot of games that no longer work because of this)
          • New soundcard (see above)
          • RAM upgrade (I shit you not)
          • Driver upgrades for video cards or sound cards
          • Needed upgrades to get latest game working
          Then I looked at my PSOne and noted that with the exception of the CD I ran my chair over, every game I bought for it still works. Every game. The same is true for my Dreamcast and my XBox. With the exception of id Software titles, almost none of my games as old as most of my PSOne games still work. I have refused to upgrade from Win2K to WinXP because even more of my games will stop working if I do that.

          So, which is the better economy, a stack of games that no longer work added to the cost of constant upgrades to keep up with the latest titles or a stack of games that will continue to work until either the media fails or the hardware to play them on fails?

    • Re:OMG... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ackthpt (218170) * on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:04PM (#12078863) Homepage Journal
      It is true. Slashdot is a Mac advocacy site! I usually hate it when people say this, but it's true!!! Oh, the horror.

      Most /. advocacy seems to stem from the following:

      Macs aren't Microsoft (unless you used Word or something on them)

      You can install Linux on them (not that you can't even an electric toothbrush these days)

      They were an underdog, which made those really cool Apple ][ computers back in the day (some of us have the emulators installed on our PC's and still fiddle with them.)

      They had a sense of style, which the monolithic PC companies still can't seem to get (PC's, seen them lately? Was Dell/HP styling inspired by pinching a loaf?)

      They were evolving, which always inspires some hope.

      did I miss anything?

        • Re:OMG... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by aristotle-dude (626586) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @04:02PM (#12081292)
          # Sue fan sites
          Oh the shock and horror. Apple is a "corporation" which has to protect its IP and trade secrets from being leaked to the competition.

          # Tried to use the DMCA to remove content from source forge
          See above.

          # Use DRM to lock product(itunes) to device(ipod) and threaten to use the DMCA to protect the lock in
          I have news for you, the labels want and demand DRM. But it can be easily circumvented legally with a thing called a CD-R disk.

          # Reciever of numerous customer lawsuits from selling used products as new, and to lie about about the battery life on ipods
          Those lawsuits are being pushed by disgruntled resellers, not consumers. Have those cases been proven?

          Does the competition speak honestly about their battery life? No. Companies like Dell and Sony forget to mention that their "numbers" are based on testing using the lowest bandwidth settings with no user interaction.

          YMMV but I've experienced battery life on my 2nd generation iPod which exceeds Apples claims for battery life but then again, I don't use the backlight and I'm not deaf. What this means is I usually listen on Shuffle mode and my volume is less than a fifth of full volume.

    • by ctid (449118) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:06PM (#12078901) Homepage
      My favorite part of his essay:

      "If you want to know what ordinary people will be doing with computers in ten years, just walk around the CS department at a good university. Whatever they're doing, you'll be doing."

      Seriously, this guy lives in fantasy land. It's been a long long time since universities have done anything that has influence the software industry.

      Are you sure about that? Think about messing around on the Internet. Ten years ago that was just getting popular in universities and now it's perfectly normal in the home.

        • by Senjutsu (614542) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:48PM (#12079752)
          If you mean "they sent an email to a colleague (perhaps talking about tuning R.E.D. values)" then maybe. Yes- pointless websites existed 10 years ago (did you mean WWW as opposed to the internet?)- but so did printing out stereographic images from the internet (can you see the sailboat? Stare at it longer!). I haven't seen anyone doing that in ages. I also haven't seen too much quicktime VR (although some realestate web sites to have virtual tours like that).

          So ten years ago, they were using what was intended to be a research tool to communicate with their friends and download pointless and silly bits of entertainment, and you don't think they were ahead of the game?
    • by McSnickered (67307) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:16PM (#12079079)
      Google - 2 PhD students at Stanford
      Linux - 1 grad student at Helsinki University
      GNU - bunch O' long hairs at MIT

      You were saying something about the author being on crack? Those are 3 examples off the top of my head that have not only influenced but re-defined the software industry. I'm sure there are probably at least a couple more out there ...

      • Re:great hardware (Score:5, Informative)

        by Soko (17987) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:34PM (#12079400) Homepage
        The Linux PPC devs have a narrower set of hardware to support - you know pretty well what's in a iBook. The same cannot be said for x86 systems. I have a year old Dell D800 that still has a bit of trouble regarding ACPI events.

        As well, iBooks aren't too terribly over priced, they are normally very well constructed - IOW it's a nice notebook. The icing on the cake is Mac on Linux [maconlinux.org] - where you quite literally get to have your cake and eat it too.

        Soko
    • by solios (53048) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:01PM (#12080065) Homepage
      Went from OS X server on a crotchety old blue G3 (upgraded to a g4/500 w/ a gig of ram) and a pile of firewire hard drives to debian on a cheapass x86 box with a 1tb SATA RAID. The box runs netatalk 2 and doesn't need to do anything else. Works perfectly.... and the PC and drives (with a stupid amount of ram, gigeth, etc) cost less than a base XServe.

      I've been using macs daily since '98, and with the move to OS X, file sharing went from ACLs to unix permissions and suddenly there was no essential difference between using linux and using macos to the end user.... Since X came out and netatalk got useable, I've never had a compelling reason to use OS X on the server - but then, a server is (ime) a thing you set up once, lock up, and leave sitting in a rack until hardware dies. It probably helps that I'm a lot more comfortable with debian on the command line- it's easier to update and maintain a debian system without having to be at the box, in my experience.

      But my job has no call for Serious Computers. So, YMMV.
        • Re:Service (Score:5, Informative)

          by bill_mcgonigle (4333) * on Tuesday March 29 2005, @02:36PM (#12079419) Homepage Journal
          Most large data centers have service contracts on their equipment. The vendor takes care of repairs under warranty onsite to minimize downtime and so that you don't have to have someone onsite who knows how to fix every piece of gear you own. Typically they commit to be onsite in a number of hours that gets smaller the more you pay. The bigger the data center the harder it is to have someone so trained.

          I recently had an XServe motherboard fail and it was 28 hours before the new motherboard arrived via DHL and was installed. With the IBM gear, that's 4 hours max.

          Sure, I could just have a second XServe on site but that costs 2x - the IBM service contract is approximately 10% of the machine's cost per year.
    • Re:Funny... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by g00z (81380) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:01PM (#12080048) Homepage
      Obligitory "Me to".

      The mac mini HAS to be as serious turning point. Finally, you can buy an economy mac without paying for redundant hardware you most likely have (monitor, ram, hard drives). It's as close as you can get to being able to buy a PPC motherboard, G4 CPU, copy of OSX, and do with it as you please. I got my mini last week and was pretty much able to take all of my old PC hardware and shuffle it over to the mini thanks to a USB 2.0 HD enclosure, spare ram, exisiting monitor and USB mouse.

      I've been one of those fence riders for a long while about buying a mac, but damnit, now there is no reason not to. If you were like me and liked Linux for the *NIX'ness, but also wanted mainstream apps like Photoshop, etc with a GUI that beats the snot out of Windows, get one of these mini's. It's the best of both worlds. You can be a geek with a crapload of terminals open and still be chic.
    • by grunherz (447840) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:12PM (#12080310)
      One reason Apple is more streamlined than Windows is that it refuses to keep backwards compatability.

      Not flaming you (although I think that's what you want). Most anti-Mac folks I run into these days haven't touched a Mac since the System 7 days and continue to carry that prejudice.

      Stating that Apple refused to adopt backward compatibility is ignoring the fact that you can still run ancient software in Classic layer and will be able to for some time.

      Can't use a floppy?
      I haven't missed it, but I can go buy a USB external for peanuts.

      No two-button mouse?
      Never mind, I'm not going there ...

      Seriously ... have you even used a Mac in this century? Or are you just busting on them because people are migrating from the platform you like and you don't: understand why, fear change, fear being a follower or that you just plain like what you're using and get a funny feeling when others find something they like better.

      Anyway, I guess I don't understand where you get "Apple thinks it's customers are idiots" out of any of this.

      All I can say is fear not, there is enough room in this town for two OS's.

      They can switch. I'll stick with *nix and free updates, and save myself $140 every other year in upgrade costs.

      Too bad, those $140 (sic) upgrades are friggin' awesome.
    • Re:right click (Score:5, Informative)

      by dick johnson (660154) on Tuesday March 29 2005, @03:21PM (#12080491)
      You're mistaken. If you want a two or more button mouse, you can buy one or use just about any pc usb mouse. I'm using a three button mouse as I write this. All three work.

      Secondly, even with the old mice, you just had to control click to get the same functionality.

      It'd be nice if you had actually used a Mac in the last four years before you state categorically that you can't right click one.