[mistoffolees]

Mac users do sometimes get defensive, but that's not unreasonable when something they like is attacked by mindless morons who don't know anything about it. You see that with cars, stereo equipment, cameras, etc. People make a choice to use something and when it is attacked, they get defensive.

What spurs someone to go on the attack against something simply because it's something that they don't use. Is it blind hatred of anyone who makes a different choice? Jealousy? Narcissism? Whatever it is, it is clearly the sign of an unstable mind.

To make things worse, he refuses to learn anything about Macs before attacking them. His posts are full of errors - in fact, it's hard to find ANYTHING that he writes that's close to accurate. Let's choose a few:


"Good thing MS doesn't make hardware.....we won't be able to read that article......"

I guess no one ever told him about the xBox. Granted, it's a stupid argument in the first place, but Microsoft DOES make hardware.



"Try installing OSX on an ipod......yea, that's right......Apple doesn't even support "their own hardware"......"

As I said, it is a stupid argument, but the iPod Touch DOES use OS X.


"What data do you have that says it will run "semi-half-assed" on new hardware? Based on my experience with XP and Vista, they both worked straight out of the box. When XP first came out in 2001, I put it on my brand new custom PC which I built myself....there were NO compatibility issues."

That's nice. Maybe you can explain why tech support for Windows PCs is a multi billion dollar business - while tech support for Macs hardly exists at all - with the difference being far greater than the difference in market share. Even PC Tech support people admit that it's true. Not to mention, of course, the repeated surveys by PC and consumer magazines which constantly show that PCs have far, far more problems than Macs. And the studies which show that Windows malware costs American business tens of billions of dollars per year.

Not to mention, as well, the fact that anyone who claims that Windows always works flawlessly and never causes problems is a flat out liar.


"Umm.....how did he hack it? Please tell....."

Did you read the article? They spent hours futzing with drivers and getting BSODs. That's essentially the same thing required to get OS X working on non-Apple hardware.


"If older Mac computers are so "rock-solid", why do they need updates for security and performance?"

So you're incapable of understanding the difference between a system which is excellent and one which is perfect. I'm not surprised. OS X is a great system - far better than any version of Windows when measured by problem ratios or customer satisfaction. No one ever claimed that it was perfect and could never be improved.


"I take that as a good thing. Microsoft's "sand" foundation allows them to be more flexible...... just like sand."

What a stupid statement. Did you build your house on sand? And using 'flexible' and 'Microsoft' in the same sentence is just plain laughable.


"What maintenance? What cost of maintenance? Have you ever "maintained" a Windows machine? I made my last one back in the summer of 2008 and I have yet to "maintain" it."

You've already been given plenty of examples and choose to ignore them because you're living in some dream world where Windows is perfect and no one has ever had a problem with Windows. Or you're flat out lying.



"Oh come on.....every single Mac fan out there besides you will say that Snow Leopard is a NEW OS and not just an update, or "refinement"."

I wish you'd let Mac fans speak for themselves. I don't know of any Mac users who claim that Snow Leopard is an entirely new OS. This is typical of mindless Microsoft shills - make up something completely absurd and pretend that Mac users said it.


"Windows 7 does support older hardware than OSX. The author got it to install on a 2001 PC....lets see the new version of OSX do that. It can't be done. Apple got rid of PPC support."

How do you know? Did you try to install OS X on a 2001 PC? Have you talked with the folks at the OSX86 group?


You really need to determine what is is that makes you want to spend so much time and energy attacking people simply because they chose a different tool than you did. Then, once you get that resolved, you might try to learn something about Macs before you spend so much time mindlessly bashing them.
Message was edited by: smax013 - no personal attacks please

[pnosko]

TheCrow93 said:

Most people can't afford to run out and buy a new computer every two years.

You write this like you're getting a cost savings. Perhaps up front you are since you didn't have to buy a new PC. And if you're happy with the performance on that box, more power to you.

But because MS wants Windows to be the "be all" and support such a wide variety of hardware, that in itself comes with measurable costs. Whether or not you're willing to acknowledge it or realize it is another matter.

[TheCrow93]

Pnosko,

I realize that MS wants windows to be the "be all" but it doesn't have to be the be all right now. I can give the people that can only afford a few hundred every six months something that they can grow with. Even though you and I know that it would be cheaper in the long run to buy a new computer fully ready to function with windows 7. But the people that I work for have to take out loans just to make ends meet. But they know they need a computer to be able to interact outside of this po dunk town and maybe find that job away from here.

Just two cents from small town america.

[mistoffolees]

"I can give the people that can only afford a few hundred every six months something that they can grow with. Even though you and I know that it would be cheaper in the long run to buy a new computer fully ready to function with windows 7. But the people that I work for have to take out loans just to make ends meet. But they know they need a computer to be able to interact outside of this po dunk town and maybe find that job away from here. "

This is a silly argument. If you can't make ends meet, why would you be spending $200 (or more?) on a Windows 7 upgrade if you already have a perfectly functional computer?

For that matter, you can buy a refurb computer in the 2.4 GHz range with Windows XP installed for under $150 (gearxs.com, for example). Why would any rational person spend $200 or more to upgrade a 2001 computer to Windows 7 (including use of drivers that don't work and having to use XP compatibility mode) when they can get a much more powerful computer for less money?

There's no reason for pre-2005 Mac users to need Snow Leopard. Almost all of the benefits (except a few like Exchange support) don't apply to PPC systems, so it's a ridiculous argument, anyway.

[pnosko]

mistoffolees said:

This is a silly argument. If you can't make ends meet, why would you be spending $200 (or more?) on a Windows 7 upgrade if you already have a perfectly functional computer?

For that matter, you can buy a refurb computer in the 2.4 GHz range with Windows XP installed for under $150 (gearxs.com, for example). Why would any rational person spend $200 or more to upgrade a 2001 computer to Windows 7 (including use of drivers that don't work and having to use XP compatibility mode) when they can get a much more powerful computer for less money?

Well said!

mistoffolees said:

There's no reason for pre-2005 Mac users to need Snow Leopard. Almost all of the benefits (except a few like Exchange support) don't apply to PPC systems, so it's a ridiculous argument, anyway.

I believe I know what you were thinking-- and it was well intended, but telling other people what they need and your interpretation of the benefits are going to get you in trouble. One of my main gripes with Apple is their habit of forcing me to do many things their way. It sounds like this has rubbed off on you. ;)

BTW, I run an XP SP3 virtual machine on my Mac, and that's the last version of Windows I'll every buy.

[mistoffolees]

"I believe I know what you were thinking-- and it was well intended, but telling other people what they need and your interpretation of the benefits are going to get you in trouble. One of my main gripes with Apple is their habit of forcing me to do many things their way. It sounds like this has rubbed off on you"

I don't agree at all. Apple isn't forcing you do do anything. You're free to buy any computer you wish.

Apple has elected a strategy which involves tight integration of the hardware and software. That has pluses and minuses. The plus is great ease of use, reliability, and 'it just works'. The minus is a limited selection of hardware and some restrictions in what you can do. As part of that strategy, they have elected to make a clean break with PPC. Again, the advantage is smaller footprint, greater speed, and they could dedicate all of their resources on Intel systems rather than diluting their effort. If you don't like that, you don't have to buy it.

The problem is that people expect miracles. They expect Apple to offer a great system based on tight integration of hardware and software - but they want it to work on all hardware. They expect Apple to create a great new system every year or two, but then demand that Apple dilute its resources by supporting obsolete hardware, supporting cloners, or whatever.

I'm getting very tired of people who want to have their cake and eat it, too. Apple has a great business with millions of satisfied customers. If you stop being satisfied, then stop being their customer. But it's up to THEM to decide how to satisfy the most customers - NOT YOU.

[pnosko]

mistoffolees said:

I don't agree at all. Apple isn't forcing you do do anything. You're free to buy any computer you wish.

You misunderstood because I didn't elaborate.

mistoffolees said:

> I'm getting very tired of people who want to have their cake and eat it, too. Apple has a great business with millions of satisfied customers. If you stop being satisfied, then stop being their customer. But it's up to THEM to decide how to satisfy the most customers - NOT YOU.

If you're suggesting Apple should not listen to its customers, you're crazy. You're probably happy they don't listen enough.

What I was talking about with forcing was usability issues. On windows, I can resize a window on any edge. Apple decides I can only use a tiny area at the bottom left corner. I have a 30" display, and move windows around a lot. Where on Windows I could resize from the top/left, I now often have to move the window (that is near the bottom/right) and then resize on OS X. This is a PITA and only one of many examples. (And yes, I know about Spaces and Expose and use them.) I saw user complaints on Apple's forum when Leopard changed the dock to a reflective surface. Some users didn't like it, and wished Apple had given them a choice to keep Tiger's dock via a setting. But no, Apple decides things like this and the user base can take it or leave it.

I complained to Apple about the inconsistency of OK/Cancel buttons on the platform. Not that the ordering is reversed from Windows, but that too often there is no cancel option. Go into system settings and make a handful of changes, and try canceling. You can't. You have to undo every change one by one manually. When I explained this to Apple, their attitude was "why would you change several settings and then want to cancel?"

Two keys labeled Delete that do different things. 'nuff said.

Like it or not (and I don't), Windows has a usability edge with some interface tasks. It almost seems like Apple won't adopt something that is friendlier because that's how Windows does it.

You're attitude once again is fanboyish. It's one of the reasons I believe Apple's Mac line isn't gaining market share as fast as it could. That is only my opinion, but I'm sticking to it.

[mistoffolees]

"You misunderstood because I didn't elaborate."

I didn't misunderstand anything. You said Apple forced you to do something because they didn't offer some option you desired. They never forced you to do anything. They just don't offer an infinite array of options. As I explained, they CAN'T offer an infinite array of options.



"If you're suggesting Apple should not listen to its customers, you're crazy."

I never suggested any such thing. Maybe you should start by responding to what is said rather than making things up as you go along.



"What I was talking about with forcing was usability issues. On windows, I can resize a window on any edge. Apple decides I can only use a tiny area at the bottom left corner. blah, blah, blah, blah "

They still don't force you any more than BMW forces you not to drive a pickup truck. Apple offers a UI which has been well tested over and over again and offers superior usability in most cases. No one said it was perfect, but I'll trust Apple's work on UI development more than some anonymous whiner on a PC World forum.



"I complained to Apple about the inconsistency of OK/Cancel buttons on the platform. "

So they didn't think your complaints were valid or worth the time to fix. By now, Apple has many millions of hours of UI experience. They don't have to agree with every suggestion offered by every person.



"Two keys labeled Delete that do different things. 'nuff said."

Just like Windows which has a "del" and "delete" key which do different things.



"Like it or not (and I don't), Windows has a usability edge with some interface tasks"

That may well be true - but you haven't provided any evidence. All you said is that YOU would prefer something different than what Apple does.



"It almost seems like Apple won't adopt something that is friendlier because that's how Windows does it."

This is just plain absurd. Just one example. Look at where the refresh button is in Safari 4. It is in the same location as IE8 - which is different than Safari 3. Apple is quite willing to adopt ideas from others. It's just that Apple is more often the innovator and others are too busy copying them to come up with their own ideas.



"You're attitude once again is fanboyish"

Sorry, pal, but my argument is based on how businesses work. Resources are finite and tradeoffs are made. You are the one with the mindless "Apple needs to do everything my little heart desires or else they're evil" attitude. Funny how anyone who ever agrees with anything Apple does is labeled a fanboy (or, in one of the greater proofs of how stupid the Mac bashers are, a 'fanboi'). I've stated repeatedly that Apple isn't always right - but they're far more likely to be right than their attackers - especially those like you who have no rational arguments, just "I want it my way. Now". Oh, and btw, it's "Your attitude", not "You're attitude". Why should Apple allow illiterates to tell them how to operate?



"It's one of the reasons I believe Apple's Mac line isn't gaining market share as fast as it could. That is only my opinion, but I'm sticking to it."

You're welcome to any opinion you want. But you're not running a multibillion dollar company which is growing its market share against incredible odds. So on one hand, we have a company that is very successful with its strategy of hardware/software integration and their own UI research against a PC World forum whiner who thinks that they should drop what they're doing simply because he wants something different.

Thanks for proving my point.

[pnosko]

mistoffolees said:

Thanks for proving my point.

Likewise, fanboy.

[mistoffolees]

"Likewise, fanboy."

Your inability to either comprehend or respond to intelligent discussion is noted.
Message was edited by: smax013 - no personal attacks please

[pnosko]

mistoffolees said:

Your inability to either comprehend or respond to intelligent discussion is noted.

I reread your post and just could not find any intelligent discussion. Sorry.

[WinTard]

[quote name='pnosko']
@DMann
>

DMann said:

> Being that MS is, at the very least, 9 years behind OS X in terms of poor memory management, fragmentary DLL cache libraries, primitive file system, ancient BIOS firmware, redundant legacy (spaghetti) code, Registry, Product Activation, and it's monolithic nature overall, it is Microsoft which is lagging in the OS market.

I'm certainly not defending WinTard, but do you even know what you're talking about? Technology != Market. BIOS firmware?!? And redundant, legacy and spaghetti code are three completely different things.

Thank you for the reply. I merely ignore bigoted FUD+BS, thus won't waste my time replying to nonsense... But you sir, make sense. Thus the thank you. :)

~~~~~~~~~~
There is no wise response to a foolish remark.
{Romanian Proverb}

[quackadilly]

Let me help you with a few things:


-----
"I guess no one ever told
him about the xBox. Granted, it's a stupid argument in the first place,
but Microsoft DOES make hardware."



Microsoft does not make hardware....they are a software company. Just like Apple. All the chips, DVD drive, HDD......all other manufacturers.
-----
"As I said, it is a stupid argument, but the iPod Touch DOES use OS X."



It is not "OSX"...it's derived from OSX.
-----
"while tech support for Macs hardly exists at all"

Then why do Mac fans pride themselves on Apple tech support? You always hear how available and great it is..... they have tech support and it's not "hardly existant".



"Even
PC Tech support people admit that it's true."

Source please.....



"Not to mention, of course,
the repeated surveys by PC and consumer magazines which constantly show
that PCs have far, far more problems than Macs. And the studies which
show that Windows malware costs American business tens of billions of
dollars per year"

There are more PCs in the market which means that there are going to be more complaints.



"Not to mention, as well, the fact that anyone who claims that Windows
always works flawlessly and never causes problems is a flat out liar."

Try to prove that. YOU CAN'T.
-----
"They spent hours futzing with drivers and getting BSODs."

Please, that is far from hacking.
-----
"And using 'flexible' and 'Microsoft' in the same sentence is just plain laughable."



Ummm.... Apple's hardware support is limited. With MS, everything is supported. That is flexible. You can use whatever hardware you want.
-----
"You've already been
given plenty of examples and choose to ignore them because you're
living in some dream world where Windows is perfect and no one has ever
had a problem with Windows. Or you're flat out lying."



If you know what you're doing, it will run fine forever. I'm not lying, I know what I'm doing.
-----
"I wish you'd let Mac
fans speak for themselves. I don't know of any Mac users who claim that
Snow Leopard is an entirely new OS. This is typical of mindless
Microsoft shills - make up something completely absurd and pretend that
Mac users said it."



Go ask Asiafish. He and many others say that 10.5 was not an updated version of 10.4......they all say it was a "new" OS.
-----
"How do you know? Did you try to install OS X on a 2001 PC? Have you talked with the folks at the OSX86 group?"



Uh no....but Snow Leaopard does not support PPC anymore. So obviously it won't work on pre-Intel machines.....
-----
"You really need to seek
professional help to determine what is is that makes you want to spend
so much time and energy attacking people simply because they chose a
different tool than you did. Then, once you get that resolved, you
might try to learn something about Macs before you spend so much time
mindlessly bashing them."



I'm not attacking everyone that has a different opinion than me. If you express it as fact and not opinion, I will say something. I'm not bashing Macs....I'm bringing you back down to earth.

[rgreen4]

Gentlemen - Enough. If you have something constructive to add about the article, then do so. If you just want to blast someone else. Cease and Desist. Moderators have copied something from the MacWorld forums - if a thread gets out of control or devolves into vastly off topic conversation - it will be locked.

[DMann]

DMann wrote:
"Being that MS is, at the very least, 9 years behind OS X in terms of poor memory management, fragmentary DLL cache libraries, primitive file system, ancient BIOS firmware, redundant legacy (spaghetti) code, Registry, Product Activation, and it's monolithic nature overall, it is Microsoft which is lagging in the OS market."

pnosko wrote:
"I'm certainly not defending WinTard, but do you even know what you're talking about? Technology != Market. BIOS firmware?!? And redundant, legacy and spaghetti code are three completely different things."

Yes, in fact, I do. FYI, Macs use an ultra-modern industry standard technology called EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface) to handle booting. Sadly, Windows XP, Vista, and even W7, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS. The main reason that EFI was developed in the first place was to overcome several limitations of Legacy BIOS, including the use of 16-bit processor mode and having only one megabyte of addressable space. To illustrate the benefits of EFI, a Mac clone, using a motherboard with both EFI and a BIOS module preinstalled on it, running OS X, takes 50 seconds to boot using BIOS, and 32 seconds booting via EFI. Running W2003 - BIOS boot takes 64 seconds, while EFI takes 45 seconds.

EFI is extensible. It's not Open Firmware (sigh), but it's more future-proof and configurable than "BIOS". It also offers the opportunity to have a standard pre-OS environment on computers, rather than Phoenix vs AMI, etc. Tragically, while Vista was rushed to release, MS scrapped all hopes of WinFS, Monad and, yes, EFI support. BIOS has significant short-comings - the biggest advantage of EFI or Open Firmware is the possibility of OS-independent device drivers. Read that again: The same driver for all versions of Windows, Linux, OS X, BSD! Can you imagine what a boost that would mean to roll-out new hardware and stabilize old hardware??

As for redundant legacy code, and spaghetti code, they are two different things; redundant was used as an adjective for legacy. It is no secret that Windows QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) began as a thin veneer for older, severely hacked software code, and that it has become an obese monolith built on an ancient frame - patching layers of code upon code, adding features, plugging security holes, fixing bugs, fixing the fixes that never worked properly, all while maintaining compatibility with older software and hardware ? all of which contributes to Window's challenges and compromise in stability and performance - resulting in the primary problem that Microsoft can?t speed up Windows 7 appreciably because it is Vista, and the reason Vista is so slow is simply because Microsoft didn?t have, or take, the time to worry about optimizing code in its 6+ years of gestation.

We run XP, Vista, W7 (beta) and OS X. Our IT department maintains its full-time hours solely on the presence of Windows and Windows servers. Overall, Windows has been counterproductive for us, causing hours of downtime per week for defragging, re-booting, etc. Macs running OS X, on the other hand, have caused far fewer problems by comparison. As for Windows Registry, that pretty much speaks for itself.

[Dom2354]

Isn't it funny that apple had to change there hardware to get windows to run on it. Must have sucked to have spent all that money to run a virtulazatin ( ok shoot me I can't spell)program from the competition. Snap. I can't say that Vista is groundbreaking but it does seem to be sturdy9 as all the latest reviews attest too) and it's on more computers (XP is even being run on your precious) apple's so all you apple loyalists bow down to your MASTER and never speak badly of him again.
Hey hows Jobs Pancreas. SNAP Again

[quackadilly]

"We run XP, Vista, W7 (beta) and OS X. Our IT department maintains its full-time hours solely on the presence of Windows and Windows servers. Overall, Windows has been counterproductive for us, causing hours of downtime per week for defragging, re-booting, etc. Macs running OS X, on the other hand, have caused far fewer problems by comparison. As for Windows Registry, that pretty much speaks for itself."
.
.
.
.
.
Seeing that where you work, you guys use 4 different operating systems......you have to question the sanity of your IT department. How can you have any sort of unity among your employees with 4 OSs? How many different versions of the same software do you guys buy?
.
.
My place of employment uses 1 OS and 1 brand of computer; IT spends their time developing needed applications and assisting he computer illiterate.
.
.
.
4 operating systems would be a mess in any company. I can see why there's so much downtime there.

[DMann]

"Seeing that where you work, you guys use 4 different operating systems......you have to question the sanity of your IT department. How can you have any sort of unity among your employees with 4 OSs? How many different versions of the same software do you guys buy?"

We run mostly XP - Vista and W7 are used for testing purposes. We'll be switching over to OS X in September after Snow Leopard is released. Needless to say, our IT department is not too thrilled about it.

[pnosko]

quackadilly said:

4 operating systems would be a mess in any company. I can see why there's so much downtime there.

In any company? Maybe your company doesn't need more than one. Computers and their OSes are tools. Some requirements require multiple tools.

[pnosko]

DMann said:

We run mostly XP - Vista and W7 are used for testing purposes. We'll be switching over to OS X in September after Snow Leopard is released. Needless to say, our IT department is not too thrilled about it.

Who is we? Not specifically. I mean, what function/area outside IT in your company tells the IT department it needs a specific OS?