Pros and Cons of Switching From Windows To Mac 629
It's been a couple of years since Apple ran their Switcher ads — but folks are still making the switch. Rockgod writes to point us to his list of pros and cons after he switched from Windows to Mac recently. From the article: "It took me a long time to be convinced that Windows 3.1 was a better program launcher than X-Tree Gold, but it happened eventually. Since then, I have been a sucker for every upgrade — 95, 98, NT 4.0, 2000, XP... I bought the cheapest Mac available, a Mac Mini with a single-core Intel chip and the minimum of RAM — 512 MB. It cost me AU$949. Since plugging it in, I have barely used my $3000 Windows desktop... All this time later, I have almost exclusively switched to the Mac."
well... (Score:3, Funny)
CON - Your sexual preference could come into question...not that theres anythign wrong with that of course
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Right, nothing wrong with that, unless the answer is...
Re:well... (Score:5, Funny)
That's right. Once you stop using Windows, people won't think you're so gay.
To: Mac Users (Score:4, Funny)
Re:well... (Score:5, Funny)
Look, man, I love my mac.. but even I won't take it THAT far.
Besides, they don't have a port for that yet.
Re:well... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:well... (Score:4, Funny)
bytesex (Score:5, Funny)
Re:well... (Score:4, Interesting)
So let me get this straight. What you are basically saying is "Don't judge them by what they do, judge them by what they say!".
It seems to me that you need a good beating with a clue-stick if this is your position in everyday life. Now, it might just happen to be true in this specific case, with this specific company, in this specific time-period. And you may have other data to back this assumption up with. But from the data presented so far, I would consider the closed DRM-enabled platform with more skepticism then a competing open platform.
stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:5, Interesting)
First, it isn't 10 Pros, and 10 Cons, it's 10 Pros and Cons (which I guess is technically what the article "says").
I recently ordered and am expecting a Nov 29 ship date (why?) for a new Mac Mini, the very first Mac I'll have ever owned. I'd never hesitated in the past to recommend to friends and family an Apple over a Windows box, and those who chose Mac virtually never came back with support issues.
As the blogger states, he's never looked back - my reasons for getting a Mac are more for being able to test my software on all platforms. I will review my experiences in my journal when the box gets here and I've burned it in for a few laps. I'm looking forward to it.
For the record, though the author loves his machine, I'd guess anyone considering today a Mac should look at a heftier configuration. (I'm getting the dual-core, super drive, 2G memory, 160G drive configuration.) I guessing I'll be happy with this box.
Re:stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:4, Insightful)
The rationale for this is broad and based solely on my own user experiences with that machine and with my supervisor's Dual G5 Power Macintosh (with 8GB of RAM, which was nice for the 3D modeling we were performing). I'm not going to troll and say Mac is better for everyone or Windows or Debian is better for everyone, I just think that articles like this are useful for seeing what people like and dislike in an OS. There are some things I like a great deal about each OS - Debian has never... ever... crashed on me (My Mac Mini did it regularly, as did my supervisor's Mac, with the "Sorry, an error has occurred" box popping up in 5 or 6 languages on an almost daily basis) - maybe we both just had lemon hardware, though. Windows is nice because of its broad compatibility and user base for support.
Example: I was trying to burn a DVD using the Mac Mini. I was using some new Memorex 16x compatible DVD+R discs that the lab had purchased. Our lab has a policy of burning the data at a low speed - 1x or 2x - since some IT guy decided it ensures the best chance of a successful write. Anyway, I try to burn the CD using Mac OS's built in software - basically by dragging and dropping files on the DVD, then clicking the "record" button once I'm done. I set the record speed to 1x. The system hums along for about 2 minutes... then pops up with an archaic error: "There has been an error recording the disc. Code 0x981fa192." or something like that. We tried 2 other DVD+R discs. Neither worked. Searched google for the error - couldn't find it. Searched Apple's support site for the error - couldn't find it. Finally, using Yahoo and searching through the archives of a forum (forget its name at the moment) we discovered what the error means: The disc is incompatible with a 1x burn speed, you must select a speed of 2x or higher. That's simplicity for you, I guess. I have other examples of why the Mac still hasn't won me over, and I'd be happy to elaborate on them if anyone is interested. But I knew that if I just posted with a single statement on this OS in particular, people would fire back with more childish comments about "but see how bad it is on Windows or OS/2 or whatever else you want to list!?!?!?" type accusations. I'll be less verbose in talking about the problems with the other two OS's... see:
Example of how I dislike Debian: Try updating anything to the latest version. Period.
Example of how I dislike Windows: Do I really need to list all the reasons?
The point of all this is that with each iteration of the operating systems, features are added, refined, removed, and rethought based on experiences like those had by the author of this article. It's not valid for someone to sit back in their chair and say "This OS (put your favorite OS's name here) is the best one for everyone." It's like saying a particular model vehicle is most fitting for every individual. It's great to see that there is such dedication to the various camps, but I think that sometimes people need to just calm down, look at things rationally, and think about what this means as a whole for the future. It's just childish to post so many "plonk, sounds like you're describing Linux!" or "plonk, sounds like you finally saw the light and experienced the semi-religious conversion to Apple-dom," comments. Grow up, Slashdot.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:5, Informative)
Anyone who really cares should be willing to sacrifice a few discs to burn them at different speeds, then check the results with any of a variety of programs. [cdfreaks.com]
Re:stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:4, Informative)
(In theory, 1x write strategy should be a standard across discs of all make. So say the rainbow books and, by extention, the DVD+-* standards. In practice, not so much...)
The right answer, the one your IT guy should already know if he has a clue, is to burn at the minimum speed the disc supports. I'm not familiar with the Memorex discs in question, but most 16x discs only contain write strategies for 4x - 16x.
"Write Strategies for high performance DVD+R/RW" [philips.com]
Re:stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:4, Interesting)
And so, everyone attempts to justify and defend the helpless mac - it's my fault. It's the IT guy's fault. It's common sense to burn archival research data at a very high speed since that should work better than a lower speed (disregarding the prevalence of errors created in the data-set). OK, so I'm wrong and Mac is right. I still won't buy one after this experience or the dozens of others I had during my three month forced stint with a Mac which I did not elaborate on.
Re:stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry to say, but you're just the type of Mac user that keeps people who are actually interested in switching, but run into problems with their new Mac experience, from ever becoming a Mac user. It's the typical "Macs work great; say otherwise and YOU MUST BE THE PROBLEM" mentality that has always crippled Apple's campaigns to reach out to users of other platforms.
Re:stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:5, Informative)
Uses for "I never looked back!" (Score:5, Funny)
"I was miraculously born with no neck, and I never looked back!"
and so on...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Never looked back" to me says "completely satisfied" or "can't find any reason to look for alternatives" or "haven't missed anything from my previous situation" or even "see no reason to change". If it's that good, it's that good. We shouldn't have to expend the energy and time to critically examine our OS choices as we do religion. It's just a computer for crying out loud.
Basically "n
Re:stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:4, Funny)
Re:stay tuned, I'm waiting for my new mini (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't that unbalanced. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It wasn't that unbalanced. (Score:5, Informative)
This being said, and while OS X mostly runs fine despite a few annoying bugs (no showstoppers), I still find KDE way more comfortable to use. Notably because of much better network integration and the fact that windows don't have to be in front to get focus (none of this is really KDE specific though, more a Unix desktop thing).
Re: never looked back (Score:5, Funny)
Worked for Lot. Too bad about his wife...
Lack of Mac Games is not a "Con" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Lack of Mac Games is not a "Con" (Score:5, Funny)
Hang on... how much material do you think needs to go into the average Slashdotter's jeans?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Lack of Mac Games is not a "Con" (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Lack of Mac Games is not a "Con" (Score:4, Funny)
$3,000[!] (Score:4, Funny)
Re:$3,000[!] (Score:5, Funny)
Re:$3,000[!] (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:$3,000[!] (Score:5, Funny)
Re:$3,000[!] (Score:5, Insightful)
Example: I built my own machine, AND paid 3000$ for the thing. Obviously at the time it was a total monster in that case. #1 I regreted building it myself, because when shit hits the fan, I had to maintain it. However, thats not my point here. #2 The reason I spent so damn fucking much on a computer, is so I wouldn't have to deal with it. This box is like 4 years old (or something, I didn't keep track) and runs very, very respectably just about everything. Aka: I didn't have to upgrade it in 4 years, and its still an upper tier machine (save for the video card, and the only reason the video card has issues is Nvidia's rediculous DX9's implementation in their first batch of cards). And the way things are going (aside the video card), I still won't have to touch it for at least another year, while still running high end apps like Visual Studio and most games.
That buddy, when you have a busy life, is priceless.
Re:$3,000[!] (Score:4, Interesting)
How about: Visual Studio is an ass-end app that requires a high-end machine to run.
Actually, if you change your editor settings to no longer track changes (the almost invisible green and yellow bars in the left-hand gutter that you don't pay attention to anyway) and if you disable the [mostly useless] navigation bar, VS performance almost improves. Of course, there is no fix for the mysteriously obstinate Properties dockbar that stays pinned no matter how many times you click the damned button. Don't even get me started on "Pending Checkins".
This post has made me so depressed, I think I'm going to go install Eclipse, Mono, and be done with it.
Re:$3,000[!] (Score:4, Funny)
Oh man, are you going to be busy round here. Just try not to loose sight of the discussion!
a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:5, Informative)
"It's Unix!: You've got a very, very nice GUI but under the hood is good ole' Unix"
"It is only when you open the Terminal and get to a shell that you see all the ancient Unix directory structures, combined with Apple's more hip and happening directory names like Applications, System, etc"
"Notice I didn't say anything about viruses, trojans, spy-ware? I haven't been infected in three months on the Apple
"unless you are a rabid freedom-fighter it is a step above any Linux distribution out there. KDE and GNOME are still a long way away from achieving the polish that Apple has delivered with Mac OS X"
Re:a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I just did exactly that in Ubuntu.
Re:a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, if only it put the file where you actually dragged the text to, instead of in a completely different place that you can't see so you think it didn't do anything.
Which kinda reinforces the original point. Even when Gnome does get the functionality right, the implementation is wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
But that's so much more work (Score:5, Insightful)
And I claim that for the vast majoriy of software, doing the actual "polish" work is much more bang for the buck.
Re:a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:5, Informative)
Let's see, OSX's interface is...
simple..............check
uncluttered.......check
low color...........most interface elements are black/white/grey, so check
high contrast.....if not enough so, you can increase the contrast, I suppose, so check
has a terminal...check
So you're an OSX fan, then?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Exactly, and that's where OS X delivers. The KDE GUI is extremely cluttered, loaded with busy toolbars and lengthy menu's. Mac gui's are simpler, cleaner, and yet they're just as powerful (imho, your mileage may vary).
And remember, underneath OS X is BSD (even if Terminal is a somewhat sucky terminal).
Re:a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:5, Insightful)
A few good examples of what people mean by polish are in TFA under #8 "Lots of other nice little things". Not a single one of them is "eye candy" they are not even related to visual design at all... but they are exactly what people mean when they say that Mac OS X is polished.
Why I dropped MacOS in favor of Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
I needed a workstation, but I have no use for a quad-core machine, so a Core 2 Duo or Athlon64 could easily meet my needs. I also needed a large RAID array and a scratch disk, as well as other things like multiple ethernet ports, PCI/PCI-E slots, and so forth. With Apple hardware, the only way to get what I want is to spend large amounts of money on stuff that won't benefit me (like that extra Xeon). When I tried to price out a Mac Pro to meet the same requirements it couldn't be done without more than doubling the price. Even if I were willing to go around upgrading the thing with cheaper 3rd party hard drives, RAM, etc, that stuff wouldn't be covered by Apple's warranty, and that's a big downside for me. Even then, it would still cost thousands more, and it wouldn't even be that much easier than a homebuild when all was said and done.
A secondary reason was that I've had an iBook up until recently, and getting the various *nix software I need was significantly more annoying there. A good distro's package manager will have many times the selection of the Mac alternatives such as Fink and Darwin Ports, and the time I spent compiling the missing stuff by hand on MacOS was significant. This easily overwhelms any savings of effort that I might have gotten from MacOS initially, and that's not even that much with easy distros like Ubuntu. I'm not a rabid freedom fighter, I just know empirically it's a lot more trouble for me to use MacOS.
Another way this advantage applies is that the software I need comes almost entirely from one place. With MacOS, it was a mix of Fink, Darwin Ports, stuff I've compiled myself, various
I've seen what Macs have to offer, and I don't think I'd be interested even if it didn't cost so much more to meet my needs.
Re:a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:5, Insightful)
vain: [reference.com] excessively proud of or concerned about one's own appearance, qualities, achievements, etc.; conceited: a vain dandy.
It's not vain to want a nice GUI. First because people don't usually show their GUI off, it's something they use, unlike say a flashy car or clothes (although those don't necessarily reflect vanity).
A nice GUI is useful to some people. It's not just about the shiny buttons, but it works differently/better. The GUI is part of the function of the software, so to say it's "vain" to want a nice GUI is to say that it's "vain" to want nice software.
And some might say wanting "several hundred dollars in your pocket" is a "vain" act, anyway.
Re:a step above any Linux distro ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Migrate to GNU/Linux and have more pros than cons (Score:3, Insightful)
No need to put yourself through pains when you can improve security, save money and achieve a good deal of vendor independence all at the same time. Why exchange overpriced software (Microsoft) for overpriced hardware (Apple), when you can run Free software on the industry standard (and thus inexpensive) hardware?
Knowing everything I know now, I only regret that we did not migrate to GNU/Linux sooner.
Ex-Linux desktop user... (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, I get more and more sick of postings like this.
No need to put yourself through pains when you can improve security, save money and achieve a good deal of vendor independence all at the same time. Why exchange overpriced software (Microsoft) for overpriced hardware (Apple), when you can run Free software on the industry standard (and thus inexpensive) hardware?
Don't get me wrong, I liked the Linux desktop, but I switched back to Win2k before ultimately moving to OS X. Free software is excellent when it's available. Even on Windows, I used loads of free software. If your company does a lot of office work, Linux is great. I've heard it's excellent for scientific work too. However, exactly how do you do things like desktop publishing, video editing and real graphics work (a la Illustrator and Photoshop). You don't.
Software availability has and will continue to cripple Linux on the desktop. People can scream about "choice" all they want and say, "See, I have 30 browsers to choose from (running a whole 2 rendering engines) and a bunch of IM clients, three office suits and a program that makes a pair of shifty eyes sit on my desktop. I even have two whole major desktop environments to choose from!" Of course, you have zero choices for much of the above mentioned software.
Linux works where it works, but just like Windows or Mac, it's not the be all, end all nor is it a universal solution.
Mac OS X vs. Ubuntu (Score:5, Interesting)
http://digg.com/apple/Mac_OS_X_vs_Ubuntu [digg.com]
Let me say that if I could go into a store right now and buy a reasonably priced copy of OX X that would run on a plain PC, I would be running OS X at the moment (Yes, I understand that running on *any* hardware would make OS X less stable, but I would be willing to take the risk...and huge amounts of people would rather pay more for Apple's hardware and stability, and I wish Apple could see that and make us both happy).
But since that isn't going to happen, I'm really considering going to Ubuntu because I think MS is just going insane with Vista.
As the above mention, he doesn't think Ubuntu is too far behind OS X.
I would be interested in hearing others thoughts on this?
Transporter_ii
Re:Mac OS X vs. Ubuntu (Score:4, Informative)
I installed Ubuntu this Monday. I really had to hammer at it to get the programs I wanted installed and get settings the way I wanted them. Linux still has a way to go before the average Joe will be able to pick it up and use it...
My first problem resulted from Ubuntu's installer assuming my system clock was set to GMT and not asking me. When I corrected the clock +4 hours from the LiveCD's meddling and installed Ubuntu, it adjusted my clock +4 more! I didn't notice until I had worked with Ubuntu off my hard drive for a bit. When I set the clock back -4... I was locked out of SUDO! This restriction would have to be lifted or at least EXPLAINED to the average user who is not going to understand why he must wait 4 hours to perform any administrative actions. Not to mention the fix is not intuitive... I had to adjust my clock +4 again, run sudo -k to kill my sudo timestamp, and finally set my clock correctly. Then sudo worked again. No way the average user could have done that.
Also the lack of up-to-date precompiled packages (Wine package is still back at 0.9.9, ScummVM 0.8.0) for my favorite programs was annoying enough for me to have to search out more recent binaries... now I really like the Linux idea of putting program files in /bin (which is also in the path env... ooh Linux has Windows beat on this!), settings in /etc, user settings in ~, etc etc. But most precompiled binaries aren't like this! They just throw everything in one directory... so if I want these "distributed" files, I need to compile from source and make install (right? well that was my solution >.>).
Also Linux will need out-of-the-box support for Windows apps. This is critical for it's success, I believe, as if you tell a Windows user he can migrate to Linux without having to give up any of his favorite programs while gaining all the advantages of Linux... well I think that would help alot.
Currently Wine seems OK, but it still has some problems with XP profiles (it tries to use hardcoded 9x profile paths... I can't figure out how to override them) MDI dialogs (they don't work quite right, fooling around with them crashes wine) and fonts (I can't get a font dialog to pop up, font changing doesn't work in my favorite app...).
Furthermore, I still haven't gotten some things to work QUITE right (Cedega overwrites Wine when I make install it! And it's broken... it complains a SO can't be found. I'll probably figure this out eventually). Also when I built Firefox 2 and Thunderbird 2, they ended up with the internal names "Bon Echo" and "Mail/News Client"... bah... plus Ubuntu's Firefox 1.5 and Thunderbird 1.5 have different program names than my compiled versions, so the old ones still occasionally pop up when another program runs them...
Re:Mac OS X vs. Ubuntu (Score:5, Insightful)
IBM's OS/2 had that. That was one thing that led to its demise. Ability to use MSOffice fles is fairly useful though. And Vista will have a whole new set of APIs and supporting apps that use them will be a huge task.
Re:Mac OS X vs. Ubuntu (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, you can get OS X to run natively on a PC [uneasysilence.com]. You just need to ask yourself if its worth the trouble. I'd think you're better off just getting a Mac mini.
There's no doubt that Mac is more polished and more user-friendly. But Ubuntu is a complete, polished, intuitive, full-featured environment. Provided you're not using non-standard hardware, pretty much everything works straight out of the box with very little tweaking.
In fact, Ubuntu on my laptop handles the various power-saving modes (sleep, hibernation) flawlessly and with no special configuration, whereas Windows XP would sometimes sleep, sometimes not, and refuse to come out of hibernation if and when it hibernated (which often had little bearing on how, or even if, it was configured to hibernate).
Much in contrast to a Windows install, the Ubuntu install is fast, easy, intuitive, contains all the software you'll need, doesn't require multiple reboots and separate installation (with more reboots) for installing software and device drivers, and doesn't require yet further instalalation and reboots for OS and software updates.
Last time I had to reinstall Windows after a drive failure it took over three hours and no fewer than 10 reboots to get the system installed (reboot), upgraded (reboot), upgraded to SP2 (reboot), updated again (reboot), install/update drivers (reboot), install Office XP (reboot), update to Office 2003 (reboot), security and other Office updates (reboot), more Windows updates since I now had Office installed (reboot), etc. Installing other necessary software required more reboots.
My last Ubuntu install (incidentally, my first) took all of 45 minutes start-to finish with OS and all software installed and upgraded. Much simpler than any other Linux I've installed (FC3, FC4, RHEL, Mandriva, SuSE) and in a completely different league than Microsoft.
But don't take my word. Try it out for yourself [ubuntu.com]. Installation is even easier with Automatix [getautomatix.com] for adding bits that aren't in the core Ubuntu distribution like all the multimedia codecs and various packages that don't meet Ubuntu's strict libre-only policy.
Re:Mac OS X vs. Ubuntu (Score:5, Interesting)
Macbook Pro:
* Nice eye candy, some people like the way windows do that slurpy thing when you minimize them, etc. Personally I don't like the dock, find it a bit big, clunky, and lacking real information about what programs I have open.
* Most everything 'just works' the way it's supposed to. If you can get into the "Mac way" of doing things, eg, iphoto, itunes, etc. then you'll be right at home. The drawbacks are that OSX is not very customizable the way Gnome (the default Ubuntu desktop environment) is.
* Terminal application is somewhat lacking. It has basic features but cannot be customized very much. If you do a lot of work on the command line you'll probably want a third-party terminal application to get your real work done.
* The wireless setup is not straightforward, and if you're not used to it can be a bit confusing.
* If you want an office suite, you have to pay quite a bit extra to get it. MS Office for Mac is something like $379 or so. If you're a student you might get it for less.
Ubuntu:
* Easy installer, even on newer hardware seems to work well. I had out-of-the-box wifi connection with the Atheros chipset adapter in my laptop, even with WPA and WEP. I've never had a Linux laptop working wifi before I tried Ubuntu.
* If you install EasyUbuntu, you'll have most of the proprietary codecs and other stuff that most people want to be able to watch DVDs, see Flash movies, play mp3s, etc.
* Takes a bit more hands-on tweaking to get it working exactly the way you want, but is much more flexible and customizable than OS X.
* The office type applications are finally getting to the point where a business user or student can be productive with them. For example, Evolution (the Outlook clone) has come a long way as far as usability goes, and it syncs just fine with my Palm Pilot.
* Free (as in beer).
* There are a few downsides. You won't be able to run some Windows-only applications without an emulator, but I guess that could be said for Macs as well. Also, with any Linux distribution you pretty much have to learn some command line to really be able to use your system to it's full potential.
Re:Mac OS X vs. Ubuntu (Score:5, Interesting)
"* Terminal application is somewhat lacking. It has basic features but cannot be customized very much. If you do a lot of work on the command line you'll probably want a third-party terminal application to get your real work done."
The defaults are stupid, but once you get it setup with white text on a black background and a reasonable font, it's pretty equivalent to Konsole for me. Konsole has the terminals in a nice tabbed bar that are nameable, while the Mac version just has different floaty windows, but the two operations I do (new terminal window and next/prev terminal window) are identical in behaviour.
"* The wireless setup is not straightforward, and if you're not used to it can be a bit confusing."
You just be joking. MacOS wireless is the easiest wireless I've ever setup. Even doing complex LEAP/PEAP stuff is yonks easier than on Windows. And don't talk to me about Linux wireless -- that's just a fucking joke.
"* If you want an office suite, you have to pay quite a bit extra to get it. MS Office for Mac is something like $379 or so. If you're a student you might get it for less."
Or you could get iWork for 49$ [wikipedia.org]. It's got what you're most likely needing (advanced page layout and presentation software) unless you're sitting down to do serious spreadsheet work, which would require Excel. Apple's supposed to be adding a spreadsheet application at some point. I expect it to be as well thought out and designed as Keynote and Pages, and will happily upgrade.
"* Takes a bit more hands-on tweaking to get it working exactly the way you want, but is much more flexible and customizable than OS X."
You know, a large number of people don't change the defaults. I'm unconvinced it's that much of a big deal for people to make some small adjustments in how they work, especially when it allows you to be a lot more productive overall.
"* The office type applications are finally getting to the point where a business user or student can be productive with them. "
I'm going to talk about Keynote v3 here. I arrived at a presentation I was giving with my notes ready, but found I'd be standing on a platform far away from my laptop. Solution? I quickly customized the presenter display so that my laptop would show my presenter notes in 48pt font, and then pulled out my Apple remote which I could use to control slide next/previous while giving my talk. How awesome is that? It just works -- that's Apple.
I've yet to see anything that approaches their iWork suite in terms of being useful for me. Pages is a lot like LaTeX, except that it's easy to make your pages not be printed in Times New Roman (I've written 4 papers in TeX, and still don't know how to make it sans serif). In Pages, I just change the styles in the styles drawer, which are applied to the paragraphs/etc/tagged with that style. You can easily import/export from things like MS Word or PDF, and generally have full control of your document easily -- despite it being a GUI! Plus, I've yet to fight with it like I remember fighting with MSWord autoformatting when I learned to use word processors a decade ago.
iWork is not old -- the first iteration was released in 2005. Why is Linux office software stuck copying MS ideas when Apple so quickly put out a different suite and had it work so well?
Not that much of a sucker (Score:5, Funny)
He at least had the good sense to skip Windows ME.
Re:Not that much of a sucker (Score:5, Funny)
That's implicit in his statement. He said he took every upgrade...
Cheers,
Ian
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Huge Mac con: mouse acceleration sucks (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't get me wrong here, I love my Mac, but the mouse thing drives me nuts.
mouse acceleration is just fine (Score:3, Insightful)
As far as I can see, it works in exactly the way you describe as how you want it to work. Not so "retarted" after all... Maybe you need a better mouse ?
Simon
Mouse Acceleration Solution (Score:5, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
For looks (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:For looks (Score:5, Funny)
Your dad isn't doing it for her?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
PC Dad to son: you can have sex, but only with people you're sure about. And always use a condom, just in case.
Mac Dad to son: Go ahead and have sex with whomever you want, any way you like!
Getting used to... (Score:5, Insightful)
One simple example. I love Spotlight. This feature changes the way we work with computers. If you switch from Windows and no one told you to try if that feature is for you, than you're missing one potential benefit for switching. Same for many other features. Mail is very good too (I'm an open source fanboy, but hey, I'll use the best free/open tools available
Be curious. Try things. Discover your new OS. Maybe the icons view is not for you and you'll prefer the column view? It's worthed to attend to some Mac User Groups in your area. They'll be able to show you some nice tricks, and, important, answer the questions you have. (oh, there's some great mac-oriented mailing lists for that too)
Switching is *not* that easy, especially if you're not a geek (but since this is
Upgradability? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Upgradability? (Score:5, Insightful)
~Philly
Re:Upgradability? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Mac world mindset is different, for one very basic reason. An out-of-the-box Macintosh has all the hardware (most) people need: built-in Bluetooth, wifi, USB, FireWire, DVD burning, etc. There's little need to have an upgradable machine because each Mac has just about everything already.
RAM and hard drive are the only components people really upgrade. RAM is pretty easy in all Macs. Hard drives (and optical drives) can be done, sometimes easily and sometimes not so much. I've personally replaced hard drives in "non-upgradable" iBooks and PowerBooks with little effort.
Video cards are really the main stumbling point of the closed Mac models. But the 24" iMac has an upgradable video card, so expect to see some third-party offerings eventually. Or go with the Mac Pro, which is the upgradable tower Mac. The reality is, though, that 3D gaming lags on the Mac platform and you probably don't need the hottest video cards for the available games. If you're into professional video or something you'd be wanting a Mac Pro anyway, where you can swap out the video card.
OS X Satisfaction Chart (Score:5, Funny)
The OS X Satisfaction Chart [stunningabsurdity.com]
Unpopular on slashdot (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Unpopular on slashdot (Score:4, Interesting)
I had the same experience - Mac's are slick, better looking and all, but to me it just seems like their GUI is designed for idiots that like eyecandy. Stuff that would take me two clicks to accomplish in windows takes me four clicks to accomplish on a Mac. It just isn't as great as it is made out to be, at least not if you use it as a professional tool, and are more interested in getting things done than in awing at the amazing graphics...
Just my opinion
I go back and forth (Score:5, Interesting)
There is something about Windows XP that just makes me feel efficient. I can get things done really quickly. If I need to do any sort of tedious computing task, I'd like to do it on windows.
However, sometimes I get in a "mac" mood and want to use my laptop. But as flashy and cool as it is, everything usually feels clumsy and cumbersome. Simple tasks seem to have many steps and seem to take longer. I feel like I am swimming in molassas, as opposed to water with windows. But it's a warm and comfortable molassas.
Ubuntu is bringing a very polished product to the table. If open source ever catches up with applications and drivers, Ubuntu could be a very real choice for many people. Linux was my primary OS on and off through college. Mark Shuttleworth is doing a great service to the public with Ubuntu. If I ever made it big time like he did, bringing high quality open source applications to Linux (video editing, etc.) would be high on my list. As they stand, Linux applications are simply too limited/unstable for my daily needs which include music and video production.
I still think that a mac is an excellent choice for the "casual computer user," due in no small part to the fact that you can bring it back to that Apple store and they are going to fix it. Computers are complicated machines and they have problems. The Apple Store is not going to tell you it's a hardware problem and so it's not their fault. They're not going to tell you that it's a software problem so it's not their fault. They're going to fix it, and that's what casual computer users need - service and support.
The windows desktop/mac laptop/linux server setup has been working very well for me and satisfies all of my OS moods, so I will probably continue with this for a long while.
iMac G3 333 $35 at the GoodWill store !! (Score:3, Informative)
OSX Talks to Everyone (Score:5, Informative)
Overall I'd say OSX is an excellent choice for Windows users who want the advantages of UNIX without having to learn arcane lore, for Linux users who need a laptop that will just work without requiring a virgin sacrifice during a full moon and for people who need to talk to a variety of different systems in a heterogenuous network. It's a bad choice for Microsoft executives, MCSEs or anyone else who makes a living on Windows being the dominant OS in the market. If you're somewhere in the middle you should probably pick OSX for the better security. It's not perfect, but any improvement is better than nothing.
Happy after Switch to OS X (Score:5, Insightful)
After using OS X for a few months, I'm very happy to use it *all* the time. My 'favorite' apps--Firefox, PowerPoint, Excel, Word, iTunes, PhotoShop--all run there. After I figured out the OS it seemed slick and easy to use compared to Windows. And the things I like about Unix are all there at the command line when I want them. Now my PC is for games only, and with the amount of hassle of PC gaming, it is second string there to consoles.
-m
Easier then switching to Vista... (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple Overlooked The Shared Menu Bar (Score:3, Interesting)
"On a 19" [monitor], the available screen space is used more efficiently - the shared menu bar and the dock being the main reasons."
Yeah, but on a Apple's 30" monitor it sucks. When you have a window open and positioned, say, in the lower RH corner and you need to access the menu bar, it is a long drag to move the mouse to the upper LH corner. And often you can accidentally click on the desktop or other window along the way and lose focus of the application's menu bar causing you to go back and repeat the procedure.
I like OSX but this design feature should be a user's choice.
x-tree (Score:3, Insightful)
In the same way, MS Windows, if you run simple applications and games, was a very good choice, particularly through the 90's when people were migrating from Unix and Apple had trouble refreshing Mac OS. Now, however, with vista being increasingly delayed and features dropping away, Mac OS X is becoming a very viable alternative. It is here now, it works, it has a time tested CL interface, and in many ways there is much less vendor lock in than with MS. For instance, the OS Update does not require IE, although MS has gotten rid of that limitation in exchange for an update process that insures the User is running a version of MS Windows that MS believes is legitimate.
You know, I am on the other side of the fence. I appreciate MS for allowing a liberal development process which allows quick and dirty coding in the languages I know, particularly C and C++. But I never believed they were capable of producing an OS that would allow me to work without the OS getting in my way too much. Certainly MS Windows NT proved that they could, but it was never so good to make me move from my Mac. It does not look like MS Vista will do so either.
I couldn't agree with you more... (Score:3, Interesting)
There is simply no good reason to get a PC. If you want to run Windows, fine, get a Mac and dual boot. At the least you double your chances of getting things done. It also makes you more versatile and more marketable. Apple was genius to first change to a BSD based OS and then to move to intel. The BSD based Mac OS X has the best of both worlds. Simply the best most powerful command line interface, and the most impressive and user friendly GUI.
I recently wrote and article for the Ins and Outs Magazine.
Viva La Revolution!
http://www.insandoutsmagazine.com/content_tek.htm
I advise all my clients and students that, if you are going to get a computer, get a mac. Once you go Mac, you will never go back!
What do you want to do? (Score:5, Insightful)
As a game player and game developer (PC, consoles), using a Mac would be a painful exercise in disaster.
But if it runs all of the applications you want, in a more user-friendly and efficient environment, then why not switch?
Hardware is irrelevant - software rules. The OS is irrelevant, whether it runs the software you want is all that matters.
Cons of Switching to Mac (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry, this article is cr@p (Score:3, Insightful)
$3000 Windows deskop? I guess it's possible, but $300 windows desktops are far more common. About a year ago I bought a complete brand-new windows system for my brother-in-law for $200 after rebates. It's not the greatest system, but it's perfictly acceptable for ordinary home use.
Now tell me where I can buy a brand-new complete Mac system for under $300?
Even with cons, I'm very happy! (Score:4, Interesting)
The pros are definitely that I have to worry less about the computer. Security is an issue, no matter what anyone else says, but things like installing software and upgrading versions of software are much more predictable. I have a very busy day-job, and the fact that I can come home to a working computer for my personal tasks is nice.
The cons stem from lack of industry support. If you're a gamer, your choices of ported games are limited. Certain specialized software either doesn't exist for the Mac, or the Mac version is inferior to the Windows version. To combat this, I keep a Windows machine to run the occasional Windows-only program. Also, virtual machine technology can be a help here.
The software support issue may be going away soon anyway, given vendors' rapid move towards hosted applications. Take Windows Live mail for example (the hotmail replacement.) The UI is almost as good as MS Outlook, even in browsers other than IE.
We'll see what happens in the next few years. Personally, I'm happy paying the premium for what I feel is a better designed machine.
Vista is helping me migrate (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll likely be making the switch before Vista is released.
Slow news day? (Score:4, Insightful)
Back to the insipid article - yep, I'm on XP, nope I'm not going to Vista. And I'm probably not going to Apple - too much of a pain in the ass for another vendor lockin.
When I get around to it (next year or so, perhaps), I will start playing with linux again and getting Photoshop and Vue to behave on crossover. Until then, XP just keeps on kicking (and rebooting and rebooting).
Well, I have to go know, Zone Alarm wants me to reboot and I really should do something more useful than sit in front of this screen.
Re:Not a good comparison (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Disappointed (Score:5, Informative)
I've never known anyone to consider OS X as crash-prone as Windows.
Programs are slow, crash-prone and things can be misconfigured? That's obviously the OS's fault!
The keyboard shortcuts are listed directly next to the menu option in drop-down menus. Example [stunningabsurdity.com]
It's under the FILE [stunningabsurdity.com] menu under "Make Alias" and in the right-click contextual menu [stunningabsurdity.com] under "Make Alias". I'm not sure how this could be implemented in a more effective manner.
A computer is not a GUI.
I think you mean to say "It's different from what I'm used to and it's closed-source, therefore I hate it."
Re:Disappointed (Score:5, Interesting)
One thing that annoyed me to no end was the apparent lack of a way to communicate with dialog boxes using only the keyboard. Most of the time command-first letter works, but often it doesn't. I found that if I turn on some of the accessibility options in system preferences, suddenly I can tab between buttons and use the space bar to activate buttons (enter always activates the default button, not the one you're highlighting).
Knowing about how to set shortcuts, the default shortcuts, and the accessibility options has really made OS X more efficient on the keyboard for me than any other OS (well almost -- I still like activating menus on linux and windows with alt-letter). Certainly it's not as bad you illustrate.
I agree that all GUIs are lousy to a degree. Case in point is CAD software. The old autocad shortcuts (still available on autocad to this day) are the way to fly. Puck in one hand, 2 and 3 letter shortcuts in the other. Modern GUIs just don't lend themselves well to CAD.
Re:Not every switcher falls in love (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Such as?
I've given this machine a go for a year as my primary machine, and find it slow, crash prone, and often inefficient in the hoops through which one has to jump to do otherwise simple tasks.
Such as?
Added to that is the relative lack of quality freeware an
Re:Apple Should Dump Their Hardware (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple has been running an Intel version of Mac OS X since the very beginning. They began developing it in a dual process from the git go. How do you think they were able to switch from PPC to Intel in less than a year? You don't think they actually DEVELOPED the OS Intel version from scratch in a year? D'oh! So, actually, Intel really was their first choice!
And given the fact that their US share went from 4.8% to 6.1 % in just one quarter, then I'd have to say that, yeah, there is an increasing number of people in the computing world that ARE willing to pay for Apple computers, and they aren't all higher priced anymore, either. (and along with the US market, their standing worldwide went up too, just not quite as dramatically.)
Re:Oh spare us... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, but since I mentioned that I've been working with UNIX systems of various flavors since 1976, a reasonable person might give my perception some consideration. I stand open to correction, but you haven't provided any further information.
Let me try to make my question more clear: Is there some feature set, some API, that OS X doesn't implement that makes it 'NOT UNIX'. Or perhaps you are refering to the fact that it is not 'UNIX(TM)'? If so, do you also correct people when they refer to "Kleenex(TM)" or "Xerox(TM)"? If Leopard Server [apple.com] is certified by the Open Group will it become UNIX with the stroke of a pen?