![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Vista Innovation @ [H] Consumer
- Thread starter Jason_Wall
- Start date
- Status
Kitebasher
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2007
- Messages
- 99
I can understand the Scotts frustration with people attacking, bashing, or flaming Apple and their products for what ever reason, it happens to Windows all the time. Personally, I always felt that Apple has great products, with great quality control and great aesthetics. At the same time though, I cannot fully respect this editorial for a number of reasons.
I normally respect the opinions expressed in opinion pieces. I use them as ways of shaping my own opinion because a lot of them contain valid points that I may or may not have taken into account or may present factual information that I have not been exposed to. Unfortunately this editorial does not do that. It attacks Microsoft for crimes against humanity, or at least that is the impression I garnered from this editorial, and yet the fact that Apple has committed the same crimes is completely ignored. To accuse someone of stealing from you does not absolve you of the crime of stealing that same object from someone else.
Also there were a lot of things that I personally felt should have been used to sway people over to Apple instead of as a crowbar to swat at Microsoft with. Such as comparing Widgets to gadgets, both on a visual level and on an implementation level. Comparing the Dos prompt in Windows to the Bash environment in OS X is another one that would have had grabbed my attention, and in a good way. But the implementation of such subjects was briefly touched upon and only so that it can be used to swat at Microsoft with. If you want to burn Microsoft put some effort into it and supply lots of fuel. The more fuel you add, the bigger the flame.
The author also goes and attacks the enthusiast market for doing what they love. Would they love a better OS? Hell yeah. Are they given one? Nope. Companies like Apple are to arrogant give it to us. It is for that reason, although not that reason alone, that Microsoft dominates the OS market. They can provide the market with the product it demands, while at the same time keeping it open enough that everyone can use it, even if it is getting harder to figure out what is so different about all the versions available. Personally, I think Apple should open its OS up. Allow companies like Dell and HP to distribute the OS on pre-built systems under strict quality control guidelines. Allow the enthusiast market to purchase and run copies of the OS, but only have software support and the headaches that come with having different support centers for hardware and software. Not that it would be any different than it is now, but if it is known that Apple does not support hardware they did not sell, then people who setup themselves up like that have no right to complain. Apple is only making it that much harder for their products to be adopted by separating themselves from the rest of the market, ignoring other sections of it.
I am pretty sure I had a lot more on my mind when I started this, but I forgot what a lot of it was, and will probably remember it again later.
I normally respect the opinions expressed in opinion pieces. I use them as ways of shaping my own opinion because a lot of them contain valid points that I may or may not have taken into account or may present factual information that I have not been exposed to. Unfortunately this editorial does not do that. It attacks Microsoft for crimes against humanity, or at least that is the impression I garnered from this editorial, and yet the fact that Apple has committed the same crimes is completely ignored. To accuse someone of stealing from you does not absolve you of the crime of stealing that same object from someone else.
Also there were a lot of things that I personally felt should have been used to sway people over to Apple instead of as a crowbar to swat at Microsoft with. Such as comparing Widgets to gadgets, both on a visual level and on an implementation level. Comparing the Dos prompt in Windows to the Bash environment in OS X is another one that would have had grabbed my attention, and in a good way. But the implementation of such subjects was briefly touched upon and only so that it can be used to swat at Microsoft with. If you want to burn Microsoft put some effort into it and supply lots of fuel. The more fuel you add, the bigger the flame.
The author also goes and attacks the enthusiast market for doing what they love. Would they love a better OS? Hell yeah. Are they given one? Nope. Companies like Apple are to arrogant give it to us. It is for that reason, although not that reason alone, that Microsoft dominates the OS market. They can provide the market with the product it demands, while at the same time keeping it open enough that everyone can use it, even if it is getting harder to figure out what is so different about all the versions available. Personally, I think Apple should open its OS up. Allow companies like Dell and HP to distribute the OS on pre-built systems under strict quality control guidelines. Allow the enthusiast market to purchase and run copies of the OS, but only have software support and the headaches that come with having different support centers for hardware and software. Not that it would be any different than it is now, but if it is known that Apple does not support hardware they did not sell, then people who setup themselves up like that have no right to complain. Apple is only making it that much harder for their products to be adopted by separating themselves from the rest of the market, ignoring other sections of it.
I am pretty sure I had a lot more on my mind when I started this, but I forgot what a lot of it was, and will probably remember it again later.
Not to shill for the "competition" so to speak, but Anandtech did that some time in the last year or two.
How about we use the guy that did the Ubuntu article, and have him install OS X on a PC, and see how that works after 30 days.
This elitist pro-Apple horseshit is 50% of what is wrong with Apple. The other 50% is proprietary nature of their OS. Every time I read something like this editorial, it reminds me of some wacked out "cultist" defending their "religion".
Hey Scott, you can bash Gates all you want, but, just HOW much money has Jobs given to charity vs. Gates?
Hey Scott, you can bash Gates all you want, but, just HOW much money has Jobs given to charity vs. Gates?
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,636
Yes, I read that article and it was a good one. Would still like to see something similar here, mainly because the [H] "perspective" is more my style.
You know, a couple of people have said this, and they're wrong. IPv6 IS in XP, it's just not installed by default:
And why on earth should it be installed by default? It's not as if ISP's are handing out IPv6 IPs automatically. In fact, 99% of the time, to get on the IPv6-Backbone you need to use 6to4 translation to a host that WILL give you an IPv6 IP/range.http://www.microsoft.com/technet/network/ipv6/ipv6faq.mspx said:
While IPv6 is "Nice to have", it's nowhere near adoption yet, so it's not essential for an OS to have. XP Supported it if you needed it, and Vista has it built in (Like OSX does). So this point is entirely moot.
Oh, and "Widgets" were stolen by Apple (From Stardock DesktopX/Konfabulator (Take your pick, they both launched at around the same time)), the "Sidebar" was part of Windows since before XP (It was built into Whistler WAY before XP was released, and removed as there wasn't really the tech out there (RSS) to make it work!), as was the "Search everywhere" functionality (Which was due to be improved by WinFS, which was dropped due to time constraints - a complete SQL-Based FS? Where's that in OSX?), the hardware-accelerated windows were stolen by both (From the Amiga, no less! - Check out "Smart Refresh" windows, introduced in Workbench 2.0 back in 1990).
Of course, the ultimate steal was Plug&Play, stolen from Autoconf on the Amiga - Plug in a device, and it's drivers are loaded automatically from ROM on-board the device. And the first versions of Plug & Play on the PC still had the "Autoconf ©1985 Commodore Inc" header within the binary (Hence the lawsuit that was quickly hushed up by both parties).
Gotta love these factually inaccurate rantings.
Just too many fallacies and misconceptions in the article to even keep it on the front page.
1) The already mentioned gadgets .net not HTML issue
2) The constant whine of Microsoft ripping ideas from apple - as shown, the dock and other features (UI, Mouse, etc) apple got from someone else! Mac fanatics ignore this entirely.
3) Comparison of IPv6 in osX.4 to XP.. they are years apart and XP has it as a free upgrade
4) Comparison of OSx.4 multimedia features (mac users have been importing video for at least 3 years) and acting like windows couldn't do this all along. It could, windows users have been importing video for at least 1 decade!
5) The idea that windows has no program/user control.. It has had this since at least Windows 2000 via the policy editor.
6) Comparing 1 month of apple bugs to 10+ years of windows bugs.. flagrantly misleading
7) the Run box dissappearing.. please, enable it or use the key combination! a non-starter.
8) the enthusiasts who 'rough it' Well, the author really shows his ignorance here, I guess he's been buying push-marketed solutions too long to be able to go out and find an optimal hardware setup for himself that works well.
9) The 'Fake DOS Prompt': Vista has the new MSH that you apparently aren't aware of - it's just as capable as your mac equivalent. Another fallacy or the author exposing his ignorance.
10) pain and torture of choosing a vista OS for parents and grandparents.. again, a fallacy situation. These people will keep whatever OS comes on their dell (vista home) and be happy with it.
11) All the lethargic, crumbling empire' talk sounds like it gets its birth in .mac chatrooms. Please, separate your wishes and what's real!
In conclusion, the author seems to focus on features and applications that are push-marketed to him, and because they are brought to his attention, he thinks they are now 'new' and the competition doesn't have them. This exemplifies the views of the ipod and other mac fans who buy simply because it's the easy thing to do. Well, that works for you, but the rest of us know how to find the hardware and applications that fit our needs: even if they aren't put on a pedestal during a big media expose. And usually, with a PC, if you search hard enough, you can find an application that will suit your needs for FREE! I don't see mac users doing that very often.
1) The already mentioned gadgets .net not HTML issue
2) The constant whine of Microsoft ripping ideas from apple - as shown, the dock and other features (UI, Mouse, etc) apple got from someone else! Mac fanatics ignore this entirely.
3) Comparison of IPv6 in osX.4 to XP.. they are years apart and XP has it as a free upgrade
4) Comparison of OSx.4 multimedia features (mac users have been importing video for at least 3 years) and acting like windows couldn't do this all along. It could, windows users have been importing video for at least 1 decade!
5) The idea that windows has no program/user control.. It has had this since at least Windows 2000 via the policy editor.
6) Comparing 1 month of apple bugs to 10+ years of windows bugs.. flagrantly misleading
7) the Run box dissappearing.. please, enable it or use the key combination! a non-starter.
8) the enthusiasts who 'rough it' Well, the author really shows his ignorance here, I guess he's been buying push-marketed solutions too long to be able to go out and find an optimal hardware setup for himself that works well.
9) The 'Fake DOS Prompt': Vista has the new MSH that you apparently aren't aware of - it's just as capable as your mac equivalent. Another fallacy or the author exposing his ignorance.
10) pain and torture of choosing a vista OS for parents and grandparents.. again, a fallacy situation. These people will keep whatever OS comes on their dell (vista home) and be happy with it.
11) All the lethargic, crumbling empire' talk sounds like it gets its birth in .mac chatrooms. Please, separate your wishes and what's real!
In conclusion, the author seems to focus on features and applications that are push-marketed to him, and because they are brought to his attention, he thinks they are now 'new' and the competition doesn't have them. This exemplifies the views of the ipod and other mac fans who buy simply because it's the easy thing to do. Well, that works for you, but the rest of us know how to find the hardware and applications that fit our needs: even if they aren't put on a pedestal during a big media expose. And usually, with a PC, if you search hard enough, you can find an application that will suit your needs for FREE! I don't see mac users doing that very often.
I can't get the commerical out of my head, Vista and Mac.. so with that in mind.
I click on the link
Vista prompts: A Mac guy would like you to read his opinions. Allow / Deny
Allow
I read the article
Vista prompts: A Mac guy would like you to stop using your brain Allow / Deny
Deny
Vista prompts: You want to send the Mac guy a note that Apple didn't design the core OS they are running. Allow / Deny
Allow
Ahh.. all better now.
I click on the link
Vista prompts: A Mac guy would like you to read his opinions. Allow / Deny
Allow
I read the article
Vista prompts: A Mac guy would like you to stop using your brain Allow / Deny
Deny
Vista prompts: You want to send the Mac guy a note that Apple didn't design the core OS they are running. Allow / Deny
Allow
Ahh.. all better now.
ThreeDee
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2001
- Messages
- 11,377
I believe the intention of the article was to spur discussion more than anything ...and on that level it has done it's job ...
WTF ... This is the most pointless idiotic pile of web junk i have EVER read. Not only did it not prove one F-ING THING, but it pissed off a lot of [H]'s readers.
I love how the article denounces the enthusiast market, when that is who Hard is geared towards. I also love how it complained about Windows errors, and drivers when the whole reason windows has those issues is it is flex able enough to take new hardware, and change with it. Apple would have the same issues trying to create a stable OS with support for 97% of the entire computer market.
I don't know why this article is even here. It makes me sick
I love how the article denounces the enthusiast market, when that is who Hard is geared towards. I also love how it complained about Windows errors, and drivers when the whole reason windows has those issues is it is flex able enough to take new hardware, and change with it. Apple would have the same issues trying to create a stable OS with support for 97% of the entire computer market.
I don't know why this article is even here. It makes me sick
Modred189
Can't Read the OP
- Joined
- May 24, 2006
- Messages
- 16,322
SO I read this article, and I went back and read the original vista article. I also speak from a standpoint of as middle-of the ground as you can get on OS's, in that I inherently like none better than others. However, I think a lot of the issues with MacOS whatever are mirrored in the Ubuntu article (or its gist) written recently, and many of the posts and threads spawned from it.
When you look at an operating system, you have to ask yourself what you want to do. What do you NEED to do should be automatically supplied by the software anyway, and represents basic functionality. What you WANT to do is a completely different matter.
Us [H] readers and members are FAR more concerned with what we want to do. We don't need to be able to open up the hood of our PC's, overclock them, TEC cool them, or mod the cases. We don't need to upgrade every couple of months. We don't need to do insane cable management jobs. We want to. But what we WANT to do is, in many ways, more important to our purchase than any other factor.
I look at Apple products as a weird antithesis of Microsoft. MS is the ultimate capitalist. Advertising, spreading compatibility, licensing like crazy and expanding at every opportunity. As far as computers go, Apple seems to be ok with what they have. The major ity of their ads focus on Ipods or how bad MS is. They're like the dirty politician in this respect. personally, i don't care why Apple thinks Windows is worse than OSwhatever, I want o know why Mac OS is good for me.
At the end of the day, THAT is the question. Why is your product good for ME? Why would I like your product independent of other competitors? And when it comes down to it, the OP defeats his own argument in many ways:
For example: He basically tells us that, Now, Vista can do alot of the entertainment things that Mac OS can. Ok, so who cares who was first? Ultimately, it doesn't matter. Also, Windows can integrate with the rest of your house far better than Mac OS can. So what if you can make a movie? What if I want to show that movies on my home theater system? On a mac, you have to compile and burn a DVD, and then take it out to your stereo and TV etc. On a PC, even one with XP, all you do is send it wireless to your system. And you can do the same with music and pictures. Anyway I digress...
Lack of compatibility is what keeps ANY linux distro like Ubuntu/SUSE/Kubuntu/FC etc from spreading at all, and it is what keeps Apple from spreading, and may eventually lead to it bowing out of the PC market.
Remove your bias towards one OS or the other for a moment. Ask yourself about the hardware. if you could buy two similar systems, X and Y. X was cheaper, more upgradeable, and would therefore last longer, BUT wasn't as cool looking, which would you buy?
If aesthetics matter that much, then buy Y, by all means.
However, to argue that Vista shows lack of innovation, and therefore makes it suck more than OS X... that does not follow, and is a subjective opinion. Look at the numbers. Look at the compatibility. Look at the upgrade ability. Finally, look at your pocketbook:
I priced out a gateway and a Mac, and tried to get things as close as possible. It was hard, as Macs give little or not real information about the parts you buy (rpm of the HD, , what connections on the video card etc...), and where possible, I spent the extra money on the gateway to get things closer. A good example is the extra $50 for security software, and monitor cable. Neither would be necessary for the Mac.
A 20" Imac, with 2Gogs of ram, 2.33 GHz C2D, 250G HD, ATi x1600 and three years of service was $2160.
A gateway DX430s, C2D E6400 ($125 to go to the 6600), 2Gigs of ram, 250 G HD, 7600GS with a 19" widescreen and 3 years service was 1575, round to 1600
Even if I add the E6600 and upgrade to a 22" monitor, it's only $280 more, and would constitute a significantly better system than the Mac. So you are talking $560 less for a similar Gateway or $280 less for a more powerful, and upgradeable gateway.
Edit:
And as a final note, you don't need the 'run' command box much anymore. For exmple, if I type 'dxdiag' into the search bar and hit enter, the directX diagnostic tool runs, just as if i had run it through the run box.
When you look at an operating system, you have to ask yourself what you want to do. What do you NEED to do should be automatically supplied by the software anyway, and represents basic functionality. What you WANT to do is a completely different matter.
Us [H] readers and members are FAR more concerned with what we want to do. We don't need to be able to open up the hood of our PC's, overclock them, TEC cool them, or mod the cases. We don't need to upgrade every couple of months. We don't need to do insane cable management jobs. We want to. But what we WANT to do is, in many ways, more important to our purchase than any other factor.
I look at Apple products as a weird antithesis of Microsoft. MS is the ultimate capitalist. Advertising, spreading compatibility, licensing like crazy and expanding at every opportunity. As far as computers go, Apple seems to be ok with what they have. The major ity of their ads focus on Ipods or how bad MS is. They're like the dirty politician in this respect. personally, i don't care why Apple thinks Windows is worse than OSwhatever, I want o know why Mac OS is good for me.
At the end of the day, THAT is the question. Why is your product good for ME? Why would I like your product independent of other competitors? And when it comes down to it, the OP defeats his own argument in many ways:
For example: He basically tells us that, Now, Vista can do alot of the entertainment things that Mac OS can. Ok, so who cares who was first? Ultimately, it doesn't matter. Also, Windows can integrate with the rest of your house far better than Mac OS can. So what if you can make a movie? What if I want to show that movies on my home theater system? On a mac, you have to compile and burn a DVD, and then take it out to your stereo and TV etc. On a PC, even one with XP, all you do is send it wireless to your system. And you can do the same with music and pictures. Anyway I digress...
Lack of compatibility is what keeps ANY linux distro like Ubuntu/SUSE/Kubuntu/FC etc from spreading at all, and it is what keeps Apple from spreading, and may eventually lead to it bowing out of the PC market.
Remove your bias towards one OS or the other for a moment. Ask yourself about the hardware. if you could buy two similar systems, X and Y. X was cheaper, more upgradeable, and would therefore last longer, BUT wasn't as cool looking, which would you buy?
If aesthetics matter that much, then buy Y, by all means.
However, to argue that Vista shows lack of innovation, and therefore makes it suck more than OS X... that does not follow, and is a subjective opinion. Look at the numbers. Look at the compatibility. Look at the upgrade ability. Finally, look at your pocketbook:
I priced out a gateway and a Mac, and tried to get things as close as possible. It was hard, as Macs give little or not real information about the parts you buy (rpm of the HD, , what connections on the video card etc...), and where possible, I spent the extra money on the gateway to get things closer. A good example is the extra $50 for security software, and monitor cable. Neither would be necessary for the Mac.
A 20" Imac, with 2Gogs of ram, 2.33 GHz C2D, 250G HD, ATi x1600 and three years of service was $2160.
A gateway DX430s, C2D E6400 ($125 to go to the 6600), 2Gigs of ram, 250 G HD, 7600GS with a 19" widescreen and 3 years service was 1575, round to 1600
Even if I add the E6600 and upgrade to a 22" monitor, it's only $280 more, and would constitute a significantly better system than the Mac. So you are talking $560 less for a similar Gateway or $280 less for a more powerful, and upgradeable gateway.
Edit:
And as a final note, you don't need the 'run' command box much anymore. For exmple, if I type 'dxdiag' into the search bar and hit enter, the directX diagnostic tool runs, just as if i had run it through the run box.
InorganicMatter
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 15,461
Something I'm surprised no one has mentioned is that Vista is much cheaper in the long run. An OEM copy of Ultimate will cost you $200 with hardware, and not one dime for the next five years - Service Packs and major software updates like Media Player, Internet Explorer, Movie Maker, Defender, etc. are all free updates for Microsoft customers. OSX will come "free" with (atrociously overpriced) hardware, and will cost you $100 per year in service packs, along with the ala-carte updates to add functionality (such as the Wireless N update).
AaronP
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 11,527
I have to be honest with you, I didn't like that article. Not because it wasn't true, but because I've been reading the same crap for 2 years every place BUT [H].
Hahaha..
Another typical pro-mac rant featuring the completely unwarranted pretension of a typical mac user. I mean come on, using the word "homuncular" is a stretch in itself, but to actually link to the definition as well is just down right insulting. I hope, for your own sake, that you had nothing to do with that and it was an addition by the editor.
Also, regarding these three questions:
Where’s the disc for my motherboard?
Do I have a PCI-E or AGP video card?
Does this machine have an on-board audio solution, or do I need to buy one?
Finally you've done something useful! You've summed up what makes the PC so much better than the Mac!
Oh? I have a PCI-E video card you say? Well gee, I guess I'll upgrade the video card myself!
Really? My Mac has a problem with its motherboard? Oh it's a logic board? Wait.. what's the difference? Sorry, what? You need me to mail the whole thing back to you? Can't I just fix it myself? No? 800 dollars!?!? Kiss my ass.
Not to mention the G5's I'm forced to do my graphic/web design work on crashes more in an hour than my PC does in a year. Pinwheel of death anyone?
What really got me was your whole rant about iLife. What a load of trash that is. I really love loading a card into my flash reader and being prompted with "Do you want to use iPhoto?" <No> "Loading iPhoto anyway.."
jasonstjohn
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2006
- Messages
- 67
Loved the article.
And Linux >>>> Windows for DIY.
And Linux >>>> Windows for DIY.
Shotglass01
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2005
- Messages
- 1,992
Yea, so Windows and Apple didn't come from Xeox. The mouse, the GUI, the start of everything. Linux didn't come from Unix. And, x86 code can't run on new Intel processors.
There hasn't been any innovation or groundbreaking feature sets in more than 25 years on the desktop. It's all been rehashed in one form or another by one OS or another.
You tout Apple because it can do X.
When Microsoft can do X, you get mad because they "copied" Apple.
(Yeah, you guys probably don't remember who Apple copied, do you?)
You say Apple is all about the experience, but when Bill starts talking about experience, you start complaining that Apple has been letting you load and edit pictures for years, so what's the big deal...
Woohoo for Apple! There have been a lot more people loading and editing pictures on previous Microsoft OSs too. The point wasn't that loading pictures is a new thing, it was that the experience is different, and since the question was about upgrading to Vista, if you own a Mac, upgrading is not an option. (You have to buy new, or try to install a new copy of Windows on your Mac.)
If Apple has such a great OS, let it run on a PC as well as Mac hardware.
If Apple has such great hardware, let it run Windows as well as the Mac OS.
(Oh yeah the two are tied together.)
The whole FreeBSD thing wasn't always there, so now Apple is just copying the Open Source community, but that's OK in that case. As far as I'm concerned Apple wrote the book on proprietary.
You mention the Apple's "Widget" concept. It's certainly not a bad idea, and so nobody should be surprised if Microsoft decides to implement something similar. Did you complain about Apple when they copied it off from Konfabulator?
We won't talk about manageability here because most Mac zealotts don't have to worry about that.
Why should some people be, so offended that most people use Windows?
(I know why it bugs me that people use Macs. I'm an IT guy and I can't not support them, so I'm sort of forced into dealing with them. Still if people want to buy them for home use because its preppy, fashionable or whatever, I have no problem with that. I wouldn't do it myself, but nobody is forcing me to go one way or another.)
Personally I don't see what the big deal is about iPhoto, iDVD, iPods, iPhones or whatever. It's still a bunch of proprietary junk marketed as a bunch of "cool" fluff.
But all of that has nothing to do with Vista.
When Microsoft can do X, you get mad because they "copied" Apple.
(Yeah, you guys probably don't remember who Apple copied, do you?)
You say Apple is all about the experience, but when Bill starts talking about experience, you start complaining that Apple has been letting you load and edit pictures for years, so what's the big deal...
Woohoo for Apple! There have been a lot more people loading and editing pictures on previous Microsoft OSs too. The point wasn't that loading pictures is a new thing, it was that the experience is different, and since the question was about upgrading to Vista, if you own a Mac, upgrading is not an option. (You have to buy new, or try to install a new copy of Windows on your Mac.)
If Apple has such a great OS, let it run on a PC as well as Mac hardware.
If Apple has such great hardware, let it run Windows as well as the Mac OS.
(Oh yeah the two are tied together.)
The whole FreeBSD thing wasn't always there, so now Apple is just copying the Open Source community, but that's OK in that case. As far as I'm concerned Apple wrote the book on proprietary.
You mention the Apple's "Widget" concept. It's certainly not a bad idea, and so nobody should be surprised if Microsoft decides to implement something similar. Did you complain about Apple when they copied it off from Konfabulator?
We won't talk about manageability here because most Mac zealotts don't have to worry about that.
Why should some people be, so offended that most people use Windows?
(I know why it bugs me that people use Macs. I'm an IT guy and I can't not support them, so I'm sort of forced into dealing with them. Still if people want to buy them for home use because its preppy, fashionable or whatever, I have no problem with that. I wouldn't do it myself, but nobody is forcing me to go one way or another.)
Personally I don't see what the big deal is about iPhoto, iDVD, iPods, iPhones or whatever. It's still a bunch of proprietary junk marketed as a bunch of "cool" fluff.
But all of that has nothing to do with Vista.
WTF? Kyle, you must REALLY be losing it to allow this king of boased BS to be posted on your site, let alone PINNED. Most of what's said is BS, and what isn't is pure !!!!!!. Are the number of hits down, so that you think you need to sink to tabloid-level journalism and DIGG in order to get hits? I can't see ANY other reason you'd allow this level of BS to be posted on your otherwise-great site.
1. As much as MS stole from OSX, OSX stole from the early press conferences on Vista. The people who've been paying attention for the entire time Vista was in development know that many new features that showed up in Tiger and Panther appeared AFTER Microsoft announced them being in Vista at early press events. MS took so long getting Vista out that Apple had time to launch two "new versions" of OSX, which conveniently had several of Vista's announced features in them.
2. Apple controls less than 3% of the computer market. Of those, a good portion are buisnesses who want their cool-looking hardware, but run Windows on them (That's right, most busnesses who buy Macs now don't run OSX) so they can be compatible with the other 95% of the world, and use software that their users are familiar with. If their "innovation" were all that, you'd think they would be more successful.
In the end, people don't want innovation, they want progression they can deal with - the ability to use the software they need, slight improvements on the interfaces they already know. They don't care if the OS is full of *NIX goodness (if you can call it that on the desktop), they just want to do what they want to do - which is run the software they see at Target or Wal-Mart. Guess what you CAN'T do on OSX?
1. As much as MS stole from OSX, OSX stole from the early press conferences on Vista. The people who've been paying attention for the entire time Vista was in development know that many new features that showed up in Tiger and Panther appeared AFTER Microsoft announced them being in Vista at early press events. MS took so long getting Vista out that Apple had time to launch two "new versions" of OSX, which conveniently had several of Vista's announced features in them.
2. Apple controls less than 3% of the computer market. Of those, a good portion are buisnesses who want their cool-looking hardware, but run Windows on them (That's right, most busnesses who buy Macs now don't run OSX) so they can be compatible with the other 95% of the world, and use software that their users are familiar with. If their "innovation" were all that, you'd think they would be more successful.
In the end, people don't want innovation, they want progression they can deal with - the ability to use the software they need, slight improvements on the interfaces they already know. They don't care if the OS is full of *NIX goodness (if you can call it that on the desktop), they just want to do what they want to do - which is run the software they see at Target or Wal-Mart. Guess what you CAN'T do on OSX?
I agree with the original premise of the article, that Vista is not an innovative operating system, but like many here I also found the author's methodology to be severly flawed. The article was a typical mac vs. pc rant, rather than expounding on the original premise of the article - i.e. Vista lacks innovation. Vista lovers, please bear me no ill will, but it is hard to argue against the original premise of the article. Regardless of the OS used for comparison (Mac, Linux, XP, etc...), most, if not all of the new features that vista brings to the table can already be found in other operating systems. The few changes that have been made that are not already found in other OSes ("enhanced" UAC, etc...) can hardly be described as innovative (mostly evolutaionary). For Microsoft, lack of innovation in a new OS is hardly new, and as a company that must protect it's bottom line, that's understandable (innovation is a real risk). Lack of innovation in Vista is hardly a "nail in the coffin," but it does reinforce the ultimate question: "Are the evolutionary enhancements and changes to Vista worth the money?" This is of course a personal question, which will be answered differently by many. I like the original intent of the article, but found it to be another mindless, emotional PC vs. Mac rant. It would've been a great opportunity for the author to examine trends in the OS market (related to innovation) and discuss whether or not OSes in general are beginning to reach a plateau (or did some time ago), etc... Oh well, just thought I'd pass along my $0.02 as well and try to demonstrate what this article "should" have been about. Thanks.
Chris_B
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 29, 2001
- Messages
- 5,361
Worst article ever, if i wanted to bother spending 20 mins reading\listening someone jerking off to apple id go and watch one of Steve Jobs keynotes.
THIS LCD IS .0002 INCHES THINNER EVERYONE PRAISE ME.
THIS LCD IS .0002 INCHES THINNER EVERYONE PRAISE ME.
I thought I was going to read something interesting and instead got treated to a summary of all of the MAC vs PC threads (started by a Mac zealot) that I have ever read. I stopped reading about 3/4 of the way through.
It's not like Apple didn't have chances to dominate the market and MS just forced us all to use windows. They chose the path of being proprietary and stayed on it all these years and they paid in market share.
Consumers are not concerned with who made what first. It just needs to work. Windows works and it has a broad range of compatibility across the various brands of hardware and software. Mac users conveniently forget this fact. Apple doesn't develop their OS for a broad range of devices and software and the situation would probably be really ugly for them if they tried to be as compatible and flexible as Microsoft is with Windows.
When I think about it, I think it's the software developers who decided which OS was going to win the war (if you can call it that). They have to support the software they make and it would be hell if they had to do it on two vastly different platforms. They could do it (I'm not worrying about whether or not it's econimical etc) but we would probably end up in a situation where the software is always better performing and less buggy on one particular platform than the other.
Blah, blah, blah, I wasn't expecting what I read in that article. I like the idea from the other poster who suggested that the Ubuntu guy get a month with a Mac and report back with his experience.
It's not like Apple didn't have chances to dominate the market and MS just forced us all to use windows. They chose the path of being proprietary and stayed on it all these years and they paid in market share.
Consumers are not concerned with who made what first. It just needs to work. Windows works and it has a broad range of compatibility across the various brands of hardware and software. Mac users conveniently forget this fact. Apple doesn't develop their OS for a broad range of devices and software and the situation would probably be really ugly for them if they tried to be as compatible and flexible as Microsoft is with Windows.
When I think about it, I think it's the software developers who decided which OS was going to win the war (if you can call it that). They have to support the software they make and it would be hell if they had to do it on two vastly different platforms. They could do it (I'm not worrying about whether or not it's econimical etc) but we would probably end up in a situation where the software is always better performing and less buggy on one particular platform than the other.
Blah, blah, blah, I wasn't expecting what I read in that article. I like the idea from the other poster who suggested that the Ubuntu guy get a month with a Mac and report back with his experience.
Same here but at least most of them are starting to run XP in a VM session. They bought Macs expecting to use software that isn't fully supported featurewise on the platform.
D
Deleted member 94167
Guest
of every f'ing MAC !!!!!! of accusing Microsoft of ripping off every feature of it's OS. The reality is that everyone's OS has borrowed somewhere from someone else's innovation. I had widgets in on my Sun workstation in 1987. So who is the innovator? Who knows? Sun probably borrowed the idea from someone else. You can trace the idea for the mouse al the way back to PARC Xerox and maybe that was some other guy's idea etc...
If Apple had a technology that they were the sole intellectual owner and innovator of, that Microsoft ripped off, don't you think they would be in court right now? Everyone else is suing Microsoft for something. Why not get in line?
Isn't OS "X" based off of Linux or Unix? Know why? It's because the previous MAC OS SUCKED BALLS! I can say that because I am an apple certified technician who spent the better part of 3 years supporting Apple's crap hardware and operating systems. I quit and went to work for a PC support company where I spent much less time reinstalling operating systems.
At then end of the day, there are Mac people and there are the rest of us. That's fine. We don't want to be Mac people any more than you want to be PC people. So go play whatever games you can find for your Mac and leave us the hell alone.
Also:
I hope Steve Jobs goes to prison where he belongs for the stock fraud he committed along with all of the other rich white collar assholes currently serving time for stealing from investors.
He may have cooler commercials, but that doesn't hide the fact that he's a thief.
If Apple had a technology that they were the sole intellectual owner and innovator of, that Microsoft ripped off, don't you think they would be in court right now? Everyone else is suing Microsoft for something. Why not get in line?
Isn't OS "X" based off of Linux or Unix? Know why? It's because the previous MAC OS SUCKED BALLS! I can say that because I am an apple certified technician who spent the better part of 3 years supporting Apple's crap hardware and operating systems. I quit and went to work for a PC support company where I spent much less time reinstalling operating systems.
At then end of the day, there are Mac people and there are the rest of us. That's fine. We don't want to be Mac people any more than you want to be PC people. So go play whatever games you can find for your Mac and leave us the hell alone.
Also:
I hope Steve Jobs goes to prison where he belongs for the stock fraud he committed along with all of the other rich white collar assholes currently serving time for stealing from investors.
He may have cooler commercials, but that doesn't hide the fact that he's a thief.
I didn't read the thread (but read through the editorial) so I don't know where discussions have been going, but I should say this editorial shows a very typical - delusional - mac user's point of view. On this context, the reason why Mr. Bennette let this editorial go live on front page of this site is also pretty obvious - This insecure person always needs a back-up from the folks who share the same viewpoints. But that's an off-topic.
Back to the topic: Let me ask the author of the editorial just one question.
Do you really think Apple is not opening OS X because it values the 'integrity' or 'esthetics' so much? Or is it because they're aware that they're not capable of doing it? If Apple had resources and knowledge, as well as experiences to support billions of different combination of hardware in their OS, do you think they would still keep their OS closed?
They can sell OS X to those ugly boxes and at the same time they can sell their pretty white casings with the best integration that no other company can match. But they don't. Wait, they can't.
A perfect example is iPod/iTunes. Apple is merrily selling iPods and even bundling iTunes with Quicktime to Windows market so that those with clunky, messy boxes with non-integral OS and Apples products can bed together. How the hell Mr. Jobs can stand such obscenity? You know, those beige boxes with black CD-ROM sticking out up front just don't mix well with that shiny piano-black iPod Nano.
The bottom line: Apple isn't capable of opening their OS to general public. Apple is a hardware company and they make money off their hardware. Software is of course one of the major attraction that draws people to buy their hardware. In current state of market, if apple opens OS X to X86 (and now X86-64) market, apple computer will go out of business in no time (and remain as a small electronics company that sells iPods) - partly because they won't sell enough hardware and partly because they'll be patching and fixing their OS 24/7, only to realize they could never succeed.
I love OS X and always wanted to try out, and I do indeed have a respect for Apple's way of business. But your editorial is just so blatant to the point of being religious.
Back to the topic: Let me ask the author of the editorial just one question.
Do you really think Apple is not opening OS X because it values the 'integrity' or 'esthetics' so much? Or is it because they're aware that they're not capable of doing it? If Apple had resources and knowledge, as well as experiences to support billions of different combination of hardware in their OS, do you think they would still keep their OS closed?
They can sell OS X to those ugly boxes and at the same time they can sell their pretty white casings with the best integration that no other company can match. But they don't. Wait, they can't.
A perfect example is iPod/iTunes. Apple is merrily selling iPods and even bundling iTunes with Quicktime to Windows market so that those with clunky, messy boxes with non-integral OS and Apples products can bed together. How the hell Mr. Jobs can stand such obscenity? You know, those beige boxes with black CD-ROM sticking out up front just don't mix well with that shiny piano-black iPod Nano.
The bottom line: Apple isn't capable of opening their OS to general public. Apple is a hardware company and they make money off their hardware. Software is of course one of the major attraction that draws people to buy their hardware. In current state of market, if apple opens OS X to X86 (and now X86-64) market, apple computer will go out of business in no time (and remain as a small electronics company that sells iPods) - partly because they won't sell enough hardware and partly because they'll be patching and fixing their OS 24/7, only to realize they could never succeed.
I love OS X and always wanted to try out, and I do indeed have a respect for Apple's way of business. But your editorial is just so blatant to the point of being religious.
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,636
What is funny is that I too think that Scott totally missed the boat here. I said, Apple OS sucks, then corrected myself to say no, the OS does not suck, Apple sucks for not letting me buy it without hardware.
I could give a shit less if the chicken or the egg came first. Sometimes I eat eggs, but I like chicken more. But when I do want an egg, I don't want to be told what I have to eat with it. So for me personally, I will then skip the eggs.
Still Scott's angst came from an editorial by me that told my readers, they DO NOT need Vista currently and until DX10 came into need there was not much use for it IMO.
I could give a shit less if the chicken or the egg came first. Sometimes I eat eggs, but I like chicken more. But when I do want an egg, I don't want to be told what I have to eat with it. So for me personally, I will then skip the eggs.
Still Scott's angst came from an editorial by me that told my readers, they DO NOT need Vista currently and until DX10 came into need there was not much use for it IMO.
This article wasn't very [H]-like, IMO. It's nothing but hate propaganda. I think a good percentage of us here actually enjoy asking questions like "are there newer, better drivers available?" and "should I get AGP or PCI-E?". "How far can I push this CPU, baby!!!!!"
Is there even such a thing as a hardware enthusiast in the Mac world? Are they the ones that toil for hours over whether to get a mouse with one button or two?
Is there even such a thing as a hardware enthusiast in the Mac world? Are they the ones that toil for hours over whether to get a mouse with one button or two?
I don't agree with the overall tone of the article, but he brings up some good points (whether they're valid or not is another matter - enough people have proven at least some statements wrong). But kudos to him for basically putting his head on the chopping block. You can't satisfy everyone, and at least Kyle has put up a pedestal for the other side (as small as it may be), they deserve representation, not exclusion of their opinions. The article (rant really) was bound to piss off 99% of the [H] population. And it's nice to see that even a Mac user can be just as vitriolic (maybe that's a bit much) in the hatred for the 'other side' as us Windows guys. Still, if Steve and the boys in Cupertino opened up the OS to us, I *might* consider trying it..Never mind that those in the know, well know that it's possible to get OS X unchained NOW, I won't discuss any further (the RULES )..And besides the chance of it not turning into a blue screen festival is highly unlikely.
What really gets me on the Mac side is the rampant bull. Those commercials were stupid to begin with, and I'm sick and tired of them. Yes there may be (is) issues with compatibility in the vast array of DIY hardware choices, but at least we get the choice. And no, I don't think *nix is necessarily a good choice (or THE choice) for the DIY crowd (only maybe an even smaller subset of the DIY crowd). A lot of the DIY people, and [H] users in general are GAMERS, and a *nix system simply can not ever hope to compete in that arena. The price of their (Apple's) niche product is simply out of line for most people... Choice of Mac hardware upgrades? Miniscule in comparison to Windows (or *nix variants for that matter). And now that Stevie has gone to Intel to power their boxes, the comparison between the lesser capability of Macs vs Wintel widens..Overclocking a Mac? Not on your life.
Some things that annoy me on the M$ side of things...
1) that Redmond didn't force the hand of the various hardware makers a bit better in respect to support (primarily in drivers). It's not like the big players (hello Nvidia) didn't have WAY more lead time to work on drivers..Yet they still are lacking in proper support.
2) UAC - while I respect it in trying to help create a more secure OS, it downright annoying to have popup after popup after popup when you try to do something. And disabling it to get around the issue kind of defeats the purpose. Couldn't they have created a more intuitive UAC mechanism?
3) The new file system (WinFS was it?) that was touted as a major feature in earlier betas of what we now know as Vista? Oh yeah, they canned it..It being at least partially responsible for the delays in development. Not a deal killer by all means, but some major change (for the better) would have been nice M$.
4) No audio drivers for Nforce 4 users by default install (I wouldn't call that fully supported out of the box)? WTH? And Nvidia ain't providing them either - I had to goto Realtek for that one (NF41/eVGA using ALC850 AC '97).
5) No real firewall or virus protection included. I know it would piss off the EU, but screw them. The end user experience (stability/security) is paramount over adding 10s of GBs easily of programs to the install media just to give more of a well rounded choice to the PC user @ install. Besides it's easy to find stuff via GOOGLE..Still my point - should be some better coverage here out of the box.
6) The defrag utility. Stripped down pos version of Diskeeper in XP..This time even LESS informative tool included (still based on DK?). It may not be absolutely needed but a visual representation would be nice..And choices of defrag methods and the like (ala O&O) would be nice. Then again, I haven't poked around in my Vista install much yet, they may have added functionality since I last saw it in RC1.
I do like some of the increase in speed in Vista over XP..Specifically installation and boot times are greatly reduced. App performance has lowered, to some degree.. Specifically in photo/video creation, perhaps in part due to the heavier demands Vista places on the system, but that may improve as the OS matures (and various app makers support Vista a bit better).
)..And besides the chance of it not turning into a blue screen festival is highly unlikely.What really gets me on the Mac side is the rampant bull. Those commercials were stupid to begin with, and I'm sick and tired of them. Yes there may be (is) issues with compatibility in the vast array of DIY hardware choices, but at least we get the choice. And no, I don't think *nix is necessarily a good choice (or THE choice) for the DIY crowd (only maybe an even smaller subset of the DIY crowd). A lot of the DIY people, and [H] users in general are GAMERS, and a *nix system simply can not ever hope to compete in that arena. The price of their (Apple's) niche product is simply out of line for most people... Choice of Mac hardware upgrades? Miniscule in comparison to Windows (or *nix variants for that matter). And now that Stevie has gone to Intel to power their boxes, the comparison between the lesser capability of Macs vs Wintel widens..Overclocking a Mac? Not on your life.
Some things that annoy me on the M$ side of things...
1) that Redmond didn't force the hand of the various hardware makers a bit better in respect to support (primarily in drivers). It's not like the big players (hello Nvidia) didn't have WAY more lead time to work on drivers..Yet they still are lacking in proper support.
2) UAC - while I respect it in trying to help create a more secure OS, it downright annoying to have popup after popup after popup when you try to do something. And disabling it to get around the issue kind of defeats the purpose. Couldn't they have created a more intuitive UAC mechanism?
3) The new file system (WinFS was it?) that was touted as a major feature in earlier betas of what we now know as Vista? Oh yeah, they canned it..It being at least partially responsible for the delays in development. Not a deal killer by all means, but some major change (for the better) would have been nice M$.
4) No audio drivers for Nforce 4 users by default install (I wouldn't call that fully supported out of the box)? WTH? And Nvidia ain't providing them either - I had to goto Realtek for that one (NF41/eVGA using ALC850 AC '97).
5) No real firewall or virus protection included. I know it would piss off the EU, but screw them. The end user experience (stability/security) is paramount over adding 10s of GBs easily of programs to the install media just to give more of a well rounded choice to the PC user @ install. Besides it's easy to find stuff via GOOGLE..Still my point - should be some better coverage here out of the box.
6) The defrag utility. Stripped down pos version of Diskeeper in XP..This time even LESS informative tool included (still based on DK?). It may not be absolutely needed but a visual representation would be nice..And choices of defrag methods and the like (ala O&O) would be nice. Then again, I haven't poked around in my Vista install much yet, they may have added functionality since I last saw it in RC1.
I do like some of the increase in speed in Vista over XP..Specifically installation and boot times are greatly reduced. App performance has lowered, to some degree.. Specifically in photo/video creation, perhaps in part due to the heavier demands Vista places on the system, but that may improve as the OS matures (and various app makers support Vista a bit better).
dgingeri
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,830
I find this article offensive. It insults me on levels I cannot describe.
First off, I want to make perfectly clear that I am not here to boost Windows Vista. It is an OS that is lacking any sort of enhancement and only makes things prettier at the cost of significant performance. The network security of Vista is better than Windows XP, but other than that, I see no reason at all to upgrade to Vista.
Now, on to how this article has insulted me as a build it yourself computer user.
1. I don't want to edit a DVD.
2. I don't want to edit photos
3. I don't want "Widgets"
4. I don't want pretty little things floating around my screen
5. I don't want 'pretty', I want something that works.
That's for these "Froo-froos" who usually mess up their computer with incessant unsafe web surfing, getting all the spyware under the sun on their machine, all the while not even running any sort of anti-virus. That is for people who mess around with stuff they shouldn't, install things they shouldn't, and constantly cause more problems than they are worth.
What I want is good performance and good stability, which I get with Windows XP. I have no need for a disk for my motherboard, since I know what board to buy and how to build it. As for the rest of the questions he asks, Those are the same questions I get from the people I described above, unneeded if people will just stop installing the crappy wallpaper changers, screen savers, picture viewers, and al that other crap that has the hidden spyware. (personally, I think they ought to prosecute spyware makers for computer hacking and put them away for life.)
I know what to install and what not to install to get a get a good performing and stable Windows PC. I know what to avoid. I know spending 10% more on hardware gets me hardware that is likely to stay working for the next 5 years. I know to actually research things before I buy them, so I know what is stable and what isn't. I am not the type to buy the cheap parts that most OEM's put in their machines, including Apple.
I don't ask a salesperson's advice on what system to buy. I research it for myself. I don't believe in marketing hype, nor fall for it in any way shape of form. I decide what I want, then go looking for it.
I also know how to build a machine, so no insults like that will be tolerated. I download the latest drivers before I start, I plan the whole set of components before I start, and I can build the entire system, parts together in less than an hour and Windows installed and fully updated in less than 2 total. The systems I build are stable, as my sisters and parents will attest to. I avoid manufacturers who think pretty is better than functional. (Hello Creative, Abit, DFI, OCZ, and Gigabyte, thanks for your wonderfully pretty but crappy drivers and colored hardware. I'll stick with Asus, Corsair, and XFX.) I just wish someone will build a decent sound card without the crappy special interface that takes more memory than Outlook.
I run windows with the old interface, for the best performance. I turn off the animations. I turn off most IE addins and I set up users with user level privileges, not administrator. If my sisters want something installed, they call me and I install it. I won't let them screw up their machines with spyware.
Windows runs the programs I want to run, and does it well. (Yes, I know World of Warcraft runs on a Mac, but how do you get decent hardware without spending $8k on an extra processor I don't need and an overblown memory interface that hinders more than helps?)
I still don't consider obscurity to be an adequate security model. It just doesn't make sense on something you want to sell to the masses. Windows Vista does do one thing very well so far, network security. You can't even tell a system is at an IP address if it's running a default configured Vista. They finally went with a "Closed unless Authorized" model instead of the old "Open unless there's a problem" model. The warnings to try to prevent something getting installed gets old really fast for Admins. I simply don't give the users a chance to install crappy software.
If the stupid people of the world would simply stop buying the crappy hardware and software, we would be much better off.
The day I can buy a properly balanced Mac for something less than the cost of my car, I may actually consider buying one. First they'd have to get my games, network, printer, and server to work properly with them without an extra 5 hours of tinkering. Second, they'd have to provide adequate support (10-14 working days is not good enough to replace a motherboard) and proper contacts for that support. (going to a Mac store is NOT proper contacts and a decent place on the web site to find contact numbers would go light years toward making things right.)
First off, I want to make perfectly clear that I am not here to boost Windows Vista. It is an OS that is lacking any sort of enhancement and only makes things prettier at the cost of significant performance. The network security of Vista is better than Windows XP, but other than that, I see no reason at all to upgrade to Vista.
Now, on to how this article has insulted me as a build it yourself computer user.
1. I don't want to edit a DVD.
2. I don't want to edit photos
3. I don't want "Widgets"
4. I don't want pretty little things floating around my screen
5. I don't want 'pretty', I want something that works.
That's for these "Froo-froos" who usually mess up their computer with incessant unsafe web surfing, getting all the spyware under the sun on their machine, all the while not even running any sort of anti-virus. That is for people who mess around with stuff they shouldn't, install things they shouldn't, and constantly cause more problems than they are worth.
What I want is good performance and good stability, which I get with Windows XP. I have no need for a disk for my motherboard, since I know what board to buy and how to build it. As for the rest of the questions he asks, Those are the same questions I get from the people I described above, unneeded if people will just stop installing the crappy wallpaper changers, screen savers, picture viewers, and al that other crap that has the hidden spyware. (personally, I think they ought to prosecute spyware makers for computer hacking and put them away for life.)
I know what to install and what not to install to get a get a good performing and stable Windows PC. I know what to avoid. I know spending 10% more on hardware gets me hardware that is likely to stay working for the next 5 years. I know to actually research things before I buy them, so I know what is stable and what isn't. I am not the type to buy the cheap parts that most OEM's put in their machines, including Apple.
I don't ask a salesperson's advice on what system to buy. I research it for myself. I don't believe in marketing hype, nor fall for it in any way shape of form. I decide what I want, then go looking for it.
I also know how to build a machine, so no insults like that will be tolerated. I download the latest drivers before I start, I plan the whole set of components before I start, and I can build the entire system, parts together in less than an hour and Windows installed and fully updated in less than 2 total. The systems I build are stable, as my sisters and parents will attest to. I avoid manufacturers who think pretty is better than functional. (Hello Creative, Abit, DFI, OCZ, and Gigabyte, thanks for your wonderfully pretty but crappy drivers and colored hardware. I'll stick with Asus, Corsair, and XFX.) I just wish someone will build a decent sound card without the crappy special interface that takes more memory than Outlook.
I run windows with the old interface, for the best performance. I turn off the animations. I turn off most IE addins and I set up users with user level privileges, not administrator. If my sisters want something installed, they call me and I install it. I won't let them screw up their machines with spyware.
Windows runs the programs I want to run, and does it well. (Yes, I know World of Warcraft runs on a Mac, but how do you get decent hardware without spending $8k on an extra processor I don't need and an overblown memory interface that hinders more than helps?)
I still don't consider obscurity to be an adequate security model. It just doesn't make sense on something you want to sell to the masses. Windows Vista does do one thing very well so far, network security. You can't even tell a system is at an IP address if it's running a default configured Vista. They finally went with a "Closed unless Authorized" model instead of the old "Open unless there's a problem" model. The warnings to try to prevent something getting installed gets old really fast for Admins. I simply don't give the users a chance to install crappy software.
If the stupid people of the world would simply stop buying the crappy hardware and software, we would be much better off.
The day I can buy a properly balanced Mac for something less than the cost of my car, I may actually consider buying one. First they'd have to get my games, network, printer, and server to work properly with them without an extra 5 hours of tinkering. Second, they'd have to provide adequate support (10-14 working days is not good enough to replace a motherboard) and proper contacts for that support. (going to a Mac store is NOT proper contacts and a decent place on the web site to find contact numbers would go light years toward making things right.)
D
Deleted member 94167
Guest
This starts a little off topic, but I promise to get to the point eventually
If I may be so bold as to plagiarize the fine work on this site, every damn Mac user needs to read this shit. They should put it in the fine print of the gay anti-PC adds.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple Megapatch Plugs 45 Security Holes
According to C|Net, Apple has released a megapatch for 45 security flaws found in Mac OS X. All you Mac owners should head on over to Apple Downloads and grab the patch.
The megapatch is the seventh Apple security patch release in three months. It deals with vulnerabilities in Apple's own software, as well as third-party components such as Adobe Systems' Flash Player, OpenSSH and MySQL. Sixteen of the vulnerabilities addressed by the update were previously released as part of two high-profile bug-hunting campaigns.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did some independent consulting for a while. I cant tell you the number of Mac users that dont even run anti-virus software because the macthink is that they are invulnerable to such trivial things as viruses and exploits .. those are issues those stupid PC people deal with not us elite Mac users ..
Imagine the surprise when Id tell the completely computer ignorant Mac user that the reason that his hard drive was full and the system was running so slowly was that his system was infected with dozens of viruses and was currently being used to send email to his friends and family advertising porn sites
So, another reason that the Mac hardware / Mac OS sucks is the ignorant attitude they project on their users. Id have to lump the author in with my former Mac clientele although I respect his right to his opinion ..
If I may be so bold as to plagiarize the fine work on this site, every damn Mac user needs to read this shit. They should put it in the fine print of the gay anti-PC adds.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple Megapatch Plugs 45 Security Holes
According to C|Net, Apple has released a megapatch for 45 security flaws found in Mac OS X. All you Mac owners should head on over to Apple Downloads and grab the patch.
The megapatch is the seventh Apple security patch release in three months. It deals with vulnerabilities in Apple's own software, as well as third-party components such as Adobe Systems' Flash Player, OpenSSH and MySQL. Sixteen of the vulnerabilities addressed by the update were previously released as part of two high-profile bug-hunting campaigns.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did some independent consulting for a while. I cant tell you the number of Mac users that dont even run anti-virus software because the macthink is that they are invulnerable to such trivial things as viruses and exploits .. those are issues those stupid PC people deal with not us elite Mac users ..
Imagine the surprise when Id tell the completely computer ignorant Mac user that the reason that his hard drive was full and the system was running so slowly was that his system was infected with dozens of viruses and was currently being used to send email to his friends and family advertising porn sites
So, another reason that the Mac hardware / Mac OS sucks is the ignorant attitude they project on their users. Id have to lump the author in with my former Mac clientele although I respect his right to his opinion ..
Sheesh, and how long did it take for Apple to finally give Mac users a second button and that shitty scroll ball in their newest mouse. Didn't they call it the Mighty Mouse or something like that? Gimme a break.Are they the ones that toil for hours over whether to get a mouse with one button or two?
Exactly. But at the same time I wonder why it does. OS X is obviously not designed for the enthusiast. For the most part, it is designed and targeted for people who "just want their computer to work". Certainly it's not an insurmountable task to download a driver update or deal with hardware compatibility issues, but most people don't enjoy doing that. Like it or not, the enthusiast crowd is the minority in the world.
Several posters have also bashed the "OS X has no viruses" argument saying that if Macs had a larger market share there would be more viruses for OS X. You are right, but don't miss the point: There are remarkably less viruses out there for OS X. Is there potential for viruses? Sure. But nobody makes them...so your OS is generally more secure (at least until their Market Share grows).
I don't agree with everything in the article, far from it, but it does irritate me to see MS promoting Vista as a groundbreaking new OS that will improve your quality of life. Certainly they're free to do that, but it's not really true.
Scott Unzicker said:
Scott, most viruses, trojans and worms are written by/for criminals. The idea is to either turn the machine into a bot or collect personal info. Ultimately the goal is to make money.
Do the math. Apple has at most 5% of the worldwide PC market (probably closer to half that). if they manage to infect 10% of the Windows boxes, the payoff is greater than infecting every single Mac.
That's your perspective. Mine is that the ads are generally misleading at best and often flat out lie.
Bottom line is if Apple wants to sell me an OS, then sell me an OS, but don't ask me to pay hundreds of dollars more to get Apples OS (nevermind having to pay $100.00/year for incremental upgrades).
You know what most people really want? They want a usable system that costs next to nothing. For most people, windows is usable and it's ALWAYS cheaper than a Mac. For enthusiasts, they want the ability to choose a video card and upgrade their machine at will, which rules out the mac.
There's a reason less than 5% of the worlds computers are Macs. But if Apple ever became a major competitor to MS, then we'd see just how many attacks happened. Of course for those of us that know WTH we're doing, it wouldn't matter, because the attacks never get through.
AaronP
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 11,527
Mac stole Right Click from Windows
- This thread is getting ridiculous.
- This thread is getting ridiculous.
dgingeri
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,830
I want a chance to write a Vista article. I'm sure I could do well at it, and keep from making all the cheap shots against Windows in general and using all that Mac marketing hype that this author does. I could write many reasons that we don't need to upgrade without a single insult, well mostly without insults. So far, I have only found 2 compliments for Vista, DX10 and network security.
LightningCrash
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2000
- Messages
- 2,470
I fear voicing my true opinion in this thread for fear of it being deleted and/or me being banned for "Threadcrapping"
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,636
And why would you think that?
I really didn't mind the article all that much. The main point (challenging whether or not Vista innovates at all) is quite a good argument, although its reasons may be misinformed.
The only thing that really got under my skin was the reference to a "duct-tape and barbed-wire system", and linking a word to an online dictionary entry. The reference to a "duct-tape and barbed-wire system" alienates the target audience (this is [H], mostly DIYers) and the link is simply insulting to every reader.
The only thing that really got under my skin was the reference to a "duct-tape and barbed-wire system", and linking a word to an online dictionary entry. The reference to a "duct-tape and barbed-wire system" alienates the target audience (this is [H], mostly DIYers) and the link is simply insulting to every reader.
- Status