Are Mac's worth the price premium?

[Dao]

Yes I agree, I hope your right. The virus issue will remain small on the MAC due to the still much much lower market share, having to use anti virus software will take away some of the joy of mac use!

Tell me about it though, I spent 3 hours the other day sorting out the computer of a lady I work with, she installed the trojan fake antivirus program and paid for it when it came up and told her she had 33 viruses on her computer. But it was an easy mistake to make if you are not computer minded, she thought it was her existing anti virus program bringing up the prompt. It would seem a good business move for the hackers, that was 40 pounds profit whilst offering nothing. They do a good job of making the software look authentic aswell, only when you read the way they write stuff do you know its a complete scam i.e 'Your computer is going to crash at any second due to viruses, install this before you lose all your data!'

These particular trojans seem to be the most common right now from what I can tell, my Dad has had two, my Mum has had one and now the lady I work with is the fourth computer I have had to sort out for this particular issue! Getting tired of it.

Lack of security sense is also an issue. Especially for a Mac users that think they are not targeted. And believe the system is so well build that they do not need to worry. When it strike, it may cost more. What about trojan that hidden in the computer with key logger? Bank information? Even so, your home wireless router or regular router maybe the target. What if someone tap on to your wireless network and start sniffing? Without security sense, if someone hack into your router, they may do something on the router and make your Mac think the fake bank of ameraica site is the real bank of america site. (DNS hijacking on router).

So even if people are using Mac, it is still better to have some security sense and have protection.

 

[Natalie]

Anybody care to reply? Can Win-doze or Linux do anything like this?????

I don't know if you can do that in Linux because I have never tried... Honestly, I don't think it would be a feature I would use, so I'm not going to waste a lot of time finding out how to do it...

I delete the 'crap' photos, so I would never have a need to find them all later on. I guess If you just put everything in one big folder, color coding everything would make sense. I don't do that though. I create different folders for different things...


Sounds like a nice feature, but one that I would never use...

Your response is hilariously short-sighted and frankly, stupid. You are a nice guy and everything Josh, but your comments make you seem, well, dense. Have you ever heard of organizational methods? Is the phone book all just "one big letter"? Is a filing cabinet all filed under "One Big Effing Mess?" lol Ah...WiN-dOzE...the colorful clown suit for DOS...

The idea that separate folders for "everything" is the way to organize things is laughable Josh! You might want to think about this: the color-coding of files allows a person to sort, search,organize,delete,move,re-move,delete, update,back-up,or re-name files according to the CHATACTERISTICS or properties OF THE FILE....not simply by their location or according to their "name"!!! My God...Windows users simply have no clue about the potential power of a Macintosh in terms of getting work done, and instead spend all their time working around the lame file-management limitations of Win-doze! Hilarious! And I say this knowing full well that you are a sincere, wonderful person Josh... See, the idea is that by labeling files, or folders, or applications, the ****USER***** can make the computer his or her own system ans can get chit done efficiently...AND that more than one person can look at files, and can KNOW what has been done to them, or needs to be done, based on simple color-coding/naming of the file's "characteristics" or "state of progress".

Download a wedding to the computer....label the files say, Brown....tell assistant to open the brown files and edit them, and then once edited, color-code them Green...with 1,300 fikles, the ability of two, or three people to simply glance at a folder of images and KNOW, not guess, but KNOW what state the files are in is simply invaluable...

When sitting down with a client, you can tell the absolute best pictures, from the B-list, form the C-list images....without the need to ever open one single image...and this goes on and on over many types of situations.

...the inability to sort files on Windows, is such a limitation of a crude, outdated computer system. My mind boggles to think that WIndows users cannot even imagine how this feature would be useful. I'm laughing right now!!

Quick--find and locate ALL the images that have been readied for printing on your hard drive, in 15 seconds, across 6,000 folders....that's probably impossible on a Win-doze box. If I search for "images" labeled "Gray"...I can find every single file in 6,000 folders, and have them in a list on my desktop in 15 seconds...no matter where they are, across multiple drives, and no matter what the file names are. I find it amazing that you do not "get" how that feature would be useful. Oh well, enjoy that file management system composed of chewing gum and baling wire!!! (A joke that's probably about as old as you are...)

Despite your rabid enthusiasm, it really doesn't sound like an amazingly useful function for someone who already knows how to organize their photos. How many other Mac users on here make such heavy use of this color-coding thing? And for what it's worth, it sounds like it works exactly like the rating system on Windows 7, which I also don't use. I can rate individual images or whole batches of images on a 1-5 star scale and look through the folders and instantly see 5-star images, or 1-star images, or whatever I want. If I enter "*****" into the search bar, it will bring up a list of every 5-star image on the computer in about two or three seconds, or just in a specific folder I want to search.

Useful for some people I guess, but again, my photos are already organized and I don't need it.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Mac's are only for those who refuse to purchase "second best products"

^^^^^ that for page 5 too

 

[boomer]

A computer is only as good/organized/safe as the person using it. It's really as simple as that...

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Anybody care to reply? Can Win-doze or Linux do anything like this?????

I don't know if you can do that in Linux because I have never tried... Honestly, I don't think it would be a feature I would use, so I'm not going to waste a lot of time finding out how to do it...

I delete the 'crap' photos, so I would never have a need to find them all later on. I guess If you just put everything in one big folder, color coding everything would make sense. I don't do that though. I create different folders for different things...


Sounds like a nice feature, but one that I would never use...

Your response is hilariously short-sighted and frankly, stupid. You are a nice guy and everything Josh, but your comments make you seem, well, dense. Have you ever heard of organizational methods? Is the phone book all just "one big letter"? Is a filing cabinet all filed under "One Big Effing Mess?" lol Ah...WiN-dOzE...the colorful clown suit for DOS...

The idea that separate folders for "everything" is the way to organize things is laughable Josh! You might want to think about this: the color-coding of files allows a person to sort, search,organize,delete,move,re-move,delete, update,back-up,or re-name files according to the CHATACTERISTICS or properties OF THE FILE....not simply by their location or according to their "name"!!! My God...Windows users simply have no clue about the potential power of a Macintosh in terms of getting work done, and instead spend all their time working around the lame file-management limitations of Win-doze! Hilarious! And I say this knowing full well that you are a sincere, wonderful person Josh... See, the idea is that by labeling files, or folders, or applications, the ****USER***** can make the computer his or her own system ans can get chit done efficiently...AND that more than one person can look at files, and can KNOW what has been done to them, or needs to be done, based on simple color-coding/naming of the file's "characteristics" or "state of progress".

Download a wedding to the computer....label the files say, Brown....tell assistant to open the brown files and edit them, and then once edited, color-code them Green...with 1,300 fikles, the ability of two, or three people to simply glance at a folder of images and KNOW, not guess, but KNOW what state the files are in is simply invaluable...

When sitting down with a client, you can tell the absolute best pictures, from the B-list, form the C-list images....without the need to ever open one single image...and this goes on and on over many types of situations.

...the inability to sort files on Windows, is such a limitation of a crude, outdated computer system. My mind boggles to think that WIndows users cannot even imagine how this feature would be useful. I'm laughing right now!!

Quick--find and locate ALL the images that have been readied for printing on your hard drive, in 15 seconds, across 6,000 folders....that's probably impossible on a Win-doze box. If I search for "images" labeled "Gray"...I can find every single file in 6,000 folders, and have them in a list on my desktop in 15 seconds...no matter where they are, across multiple drives, and no matter what the file names are. I find it amazing that you do not "get" how that feature would be useful. Oh well, enjoy that file management system composed of chewing gum and baling wire!!! (A joke that's probably about as old as you are...)

There are comparable ratings systems on Windows (5 star rating system, tagging, grouping) as well. Windows has advanced their file indexing system so this type of organization and workflow is possible in Windows 7. However, I don't think that the feature is as commonly used as you think on either platform. It surely isn't enough of a reason for me or for others to opt in to a completely different system.

One of the things that always bothered me about the Mac-heads hasn't been discussed much in this thread. When I worked at the Apple store, I was constantly irritated by a lot of the Mac users. It seemed there was some common invisible thread that linked all of these people together. I don't know if it's because of the particular market segment that Mac targets, or just that Mac users feel the need to justify their platform choice. But I've noticed on many occasions they seem to come off a bit snobbish and superior, looking down their noses at those who choose other platforms.

It's weird. At some point their choice in operating system/computer became eerily religious. Like a cult almost.

Sure Apple has their own culture, and that's fine. But it gets taken a little too far, most of the time by Mac users. My guess, since they are the minority they constantly feel the need to be defensive. But some Mac-heads in this thread just come off desperate, extreme, and irrational. It's a bit silly.

 

[chuasam]

When I worked at the Apple store, I was constantly irritated by a lot of the Mac users. It seemed there was some common invisible thread that linked all of these people together. I don't know if it's because of the particular market segment that Mac targets, or just that Mac users feel the need to justify their platform choice. But I've noticed on many occasions they seem to come off a bit snobbish and superior, looking down their noses at those who choose other platforms.

It's weird. At some point their choice in operating system/computer became eerily religious. Like a cult almost.

Sure Apple has their own culture, and that's fine. But it gets taken a little too far, most of the time by Mac users. My guess, since they are the minority they constantly feel the need to be defensive. But some Mac-heads in this thread just come off desperate, extreme, and irrational. It's a bit silly.

They let you work there without making you drink the KoolAid?

 

[usayit]

One of the things that always bothered me about the Mac-heads hasn't been discussed much in this thread. When I worked at the Apple store, I was constantly irritated by a lot of the Mac users. It seemed there was some common invisible thread that linked all of these people together. I don't know if it's because of the particular market segment that Mac targets, or just that Mac users feel the need to justify their platform choice. But I've noticed on many occasions they seem to come off a bit snobbish and superior, looking down their noses at those who choose other platforms.

I would only agree with you except ONE major thing just doesn't fit.

Almost each and every of this type of thread starts with someone (assuming Windows user)

* Apple is so expensive
* Apple sucks
* Why Apple?

I can't recall I single thread started by someone who (assuming an Apple user) saying, why Windows? Any response is automatically considered defensive even though most of those responding here have given responses that are completely rational.

It's only perceived as a cult simply because they are the minority. I guarantee if Windows were the minority, the perception of the Windows cult would be exactly the same. So yeh.. I would say that Mac users can be defensive but why are Windows users so OFFENSIVE simply because someone made a different choice?



You want to see a similar reaction along different lines? Google Leica.... People just can't help but attack things they can't or easily afford... Just like Mac vs Windows, the first thing people say... waste of money.. I can do the same with less.... completely ignoring the perfectly valid reasons other present.

Here's news folks.... sometimes... it isn't how expensive something is... but how darn cheap the alternative is.


As for security, part of the issue with windows is that for a long time the main users of a particular Windows machine was running with Administrator privileges while Linux/Unix (Mac OSX adopting) had a very rich way of managing User and Group access. Restricting those privileges on a Windows box resulted in a user experience that was frustrating limited to say the least. For one, applications couldn't be installed because Windows failed to design a proper software deployment strategy. This was not true for Linux/Unix. MAC OS X went even further allowing applications to be installed as a single self contained resource. Another example: Some key loggers relied on the I/O stack in kernel space. Any windows user with Administrator privs can be exploited to install on that stack. Regular non-root Linux/Unix (and Mac os x) users cannot and do not have access. Exploits are reliant on gaining "root" access to a system. Securing "root" is a whole lot easier. This earned Windows a bad reputation. Windows relies on a single community to improve security... Microsoft. Its security is reliant on their reaction and proficiency.

Granted... I will admit, I observed much improvement with Win7 and Windows Server 2008. Its about time.



So here we go again.... Would someone... anyone.. tell me the equivalent of the following command in windows? before I tell the Windows admin forget it and load cygwin on his windows server?

find . -name "*.jar" | xargs -I{} mv {} {}.old


PS> I wasn't a Mac user until MAC OS X... it fit me because I was a heavy Unix and Linux user.

 

[NE-KID]

Okay here's my view on this subject...I went with a Apple Macbook Pro laptop coming from a PC laptop I got tired dealing with sorry tech support from India (Gateway) no offense to anyone from India. I like my Apple Macbook Pro a lot yes I do have my laptop protected with Lojack since I do travel around the states so in case I forget my laptop or it gets stolen only thing I need to do is report it stolen get a police report and Lojack does the rest with the local police/sheriff office. What Lojack does is once I report my laptop stolen next time the person who stole my laptop gets on the internet it will take a picture using the webcam with out them knowing it and etc. I also do have Apple Pro Care as well which really worth it to me it cost me $99 dollars you get a clack card that has a Apple logo on it and serial number on the bottom of the card and if you have a Appointment with a Apple Genius at the Apple Store they will scan your card and you'll get your laptop, phone, iMac next in line for servicing.

 

[rexbobcat]

In my opinion, the seemingly inflated price is basically caused by proprietary parts, because as you'll notice Apple products only usually work with Apple products.

It's like the difference between buying a pure bred and a mutt. They could both perform the same at the task at hand, but because one is pure bred it will be more valuable/expensive

 

[TheBiles]

In my opinion, the seemingly inflated price is basically caused by proprietary parts, because as you'll notice Apple products only usually work with Apple products.

It's like the difference between buying a pure bred and a mutt. They could both perform the same at the task at hand, but because one is pure bred it will be more valuable/expensive

No, that's Apple screwing consumers out of $20 so they have to get their garbage proprietary cables instead of regular USB. The core components of their computers are the exact same as their Windows counterparts, only with a vastly inflated price.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

[cepwin]

As others have said, the price vs power edge goes to the PC...I would argue even store bought. That being said, a lot of people like the fact that the Macs tend to be more "just works" than Windows. In fact I do know of people that got so frustrated with their PC laptop they went mac and were happy with their choice. In the end, it depends what you need/want to do with it..that is the basis for all HW purchase decisions. If you need a beast, and especially if you want to also use it for gaming a PC is the better options.

 

[usayit]

Have you looked at the insides of an Apple... its pretty proprietary. A good example are the Mac Pro workstations. As for peripherals... there is a debate on the good vs bad of having third party people writing software that integrates (possibly taints) with your O/S. Unix has historically followed the same model. Windows and Linux the opposite.

If they wanted to screw customers out they could have easily not adopted USB at all...


BTW.. macsales.com is a good alternative to Mac related hardware.



So who is being defensive????

 

[usayit]

That's what I like about linux, lol - you can change stuff like that. You can basically make it look just like Mac, just like Windows, or different than both.

Here's a hint for a "project" for you to figure out.

Mac OS X comes equipped with X11 server/client and everything you need to start a traditional Linux window manager (it comes with the old TWM window manager). Try to find or build a window manager of your choice.

The MacPorts Project -- Home


I never did it... because I ended up just running Linux on another machine. It would sure neat to see it running though.

 

[Dao]

As for security, part of the issue with windows is that for a long time the main users of a particular Windows machine was running with Administrator privileges while Linux/Unix (Mac OSX adopting) had a very rich way of managing User and Group access. Restricting those privileges on a Windows box resulted in a user experience that was frustrating limited to say the least. For one, applications couldn't be installed because Windows failed to design a proper software deployment strategy. This was not true for Linux/Unix. MAC OS X went even further allowing applications to be installed as a single self contained resource. Another example: Some key loggers relied on the I/O stack in kernel space. Any windows user with Administrator privs can be exploited to install on that stack. Regular non-root Linux/Unix (and Mac os x) users cannot and do not have access. Exploits are reliant on gaining "root" access to a system. Securing "root" is a whole lot easier. This earned Windows a bad reputation. Windows relies on a single community to improve security... Microsoft. Its security is reliant on their reaction and proficiency.

Granted... I will admit, I observed much improvement with Win7 and Windows Server 2008. Its about time.


So here we go again.... Would someone... anyone.. tell me the equivalent of the following command in windows? before I tell the Windows admin forget it and load cygwin on his windows server?

find . -name "*.jar" | xargs -I{} mv {} {}.old

The problem we are facing now is the hackers or botnet operators are not looking to gain root access. It was about 10 years ago, but not today. Not sure how that the botnet operate in the Mac machines back in 2009. But in most of the Unix machines out there, the bot usually running as a regular user and open a port back out. Or for botnet, the botnet script running as a regular user and contact a master server(s) out there (target port maybe 6666 or 6667) and waiting for command. Since Mac is running on top of a Unix OS, so I am not surprised that a Mac machine will become the botnet zombie.

As for your question about finding all the files with extension jar (*.jar) in the current directory and rename the extension to old (*.old) ..... I do not know enough to do it in windows. It maybe possible since Windows has powershell now. (similar to Unix shell I believe and with scripting support) see more in Windows PowerShell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[usayit]

The problem we are facing now is the hackers or botnet operators are not looking to gain root access. It was about 10 years ago, but not today. Not sure how that the botnet operate in the Mac machines back in 2009. But in most of the Unix machines out there, the bot usually running as a regular user and open a port back out. Or for botnet, the botnet script running as a regular user and contact a master server(s) out there (target port maybe 6666 or 6667) and waiting for command. Since Mac is running on top of a Unix OS, so I am not surprised that a Mac machine will become the botnet zombie.

As for your question about finding all the files with extension jar (*.jar) in the current directory and rename the extension to old (*.old) ..... I do not know enough to do it in windows. It maybe possible since Windows has powershell now. (similar to Unix shell I believe and with scripting support) see more in Windows PowerShell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dao, I am very familiar with what you are saying (worked in tandem with a security team).. A well secured server will not allow any regular user to open an arbitrary port out.... much less insert the code into a user account to begin with. The core idea is that no regular user account can be and should not be trusted. Most security breeches can be traced back to user error at the system administrator level and it takes effort. There are common behaviors in production servers that are known problems but many organizations (and home users) simply dont know or dont have the time to invest. For example, I was able to compromise the backup admins account on his console. His account is relatively low level so no one put much thought into it. But what happens when I back up a simple malicious application and restore it to a target machine overwritting /bin/login for example? I get access to people's passwords. Or how about restoring over Notepad.exe? It didnt dawn in people's mind that the backupmclient app is running as the windows system account or linux root? Properly configured, this would not have happened.... btw much easier to accomplish with Linux/Unix permissions or a properly configured LDAP (whole different chapter). Another is screwing with system paths; I cant tell you how many put the current directory path in path because they are lazy. There was a time that any windows user application can run an infinite loop malloc and brings the server to its knees.... not even enough cycles to hit ctrl alt del and bring up the process manager. Unix is a bit more resilient to this. there are dozens of ways but most can be traced to the user.

The key here is that it takes effort.. human effort... unix and linux are by design more secured out-of-box.... I am not saying that Windows cannot be secured it just is not as secured out of box. Mac OSX has root disabled by default. Linux has Unix have limits placed on root. As such Windows has earned a bad reputation...


It may be counterintuitive but my experience has lead me to believe that open source has resulted in much more secured systems.... it taps into the resources of wide intellegent community While proprietary software can only rely solely on a single organizations efforts. Security should be an active approach rather than relying on the mear fact that what happens under the covers is unknown. Algorithms and processes rather than secrets.

Powershell doesnt exist in this version of Windows. I guess cygwin it is....