Why buy a Mac?

[domromer]

Doesn't that illustrate my point? Although you can hardly compare these auto makers. You comparing a luxury manufacture against cars like the Echo and Neon. Try apples to apples.

 

[Sideburns]

Then it's a recent MS innovation. Macs have been able to do it for 15 years or so.
One more example of PC's trying to copy Macs


BTW Did you know that Bill Gates programmed the first Apple OS that utilised the concept of the Desktop?
And it was Apple Corp that invented the mouse?
Makes you think.

Microsoft could "open with" since 95...maybe even before, but that's too long to remember.

Also, Apple never invented the mouse. Nice try though.
Xerox invented the mouse, AND the point and click desktop environment.
Bill Gates did not program the Apple OS...I don't know where you heard that from.

 

[usayit]

Doesn't that illustrate my point? Although you can hardly compare these auto makers. You comparing a luxury manufacture against cars like the Echo and Neon. Try apples to apples.

Yes it does.. Apple can be equated to a luxury manufacturer. Apple has never passed off their products as "value" buy.

Dell and Apple can both pretty much accomplish the same tasks.
Neon and BMW can both take me from point A to B.

 

[usayit]

Microsoft could "open with" since 95...maybe even before, but that's too long to remember.

Also, Apple never invented the mouse. Nice try though.
Xerox invented the mouse, AND the point and click desktop environment.
Bill Gates did not program the Apple OS...I don't know where you heard that from.

Technically.... you are both wrong... Douglas Engelbart invented the mouse. Xerox and Apple leveraged it .. the later actually licensing it from him.

IIRC, Apple and WIndows both "borrowed" the idea of a trash can from xerox... perhaps the GUI as well.. no idea.

 

[Atropine]

Then it's a recent MS innovation. Macs have been able to do it for 15 years or so.
One more example of PC's trying to copy Macs


BTW Did you know that Bill Gates programmed the first Apple OS that utilised the concept of the Desktop?
And it was Apple Corp that invented the mouse?
Makes you think.

This post contains so much rubbish I simply can't keep quiet...

File type association has been a natural feature in the windows os's i've been using (win3.11, win95, win98se, win2k, winxp, vista). But in XP and Vista it has become even easier for normal users to manage. MS were way ahead of Apple using file extensions making it a lot easier for users to actually see what kind of files they had in their computers without having to click them. I remember the pre osx era when you got files from a mac. There was no way of telling if the files were .eps, .jpg, .tif or any other file type for that matter. Stupid!

The computer mouse was NOT invented by Apple as someone already mentioned. Douglas Engelbart invented it in the mid sixties and the first company to use his patent was a company called Computer Displays. That mouse actually had three buttons so I have no idea which genious at Apple, several years later when they introduced their first computers, decided that there should be only one.

And now you got me started about mouse design. Apple is actually one of the companies that has designed some of the most retarded mouse designs ever. Round mouse anyone? Very bright indeed. You never knew which way the cursor would move, suspense every time you used that piece of crap. Yeah, let's make the whole top of the mouse one big button and leave two tiny spots as the only place you can grip the mouse without clicking it... Genious, not. Yeah, lets make the mouse cord in the exact same thickness as the play beneath the shell of the mentioned giant button mouse making it impossible to depress that precious giant button every time the cable came near the mouse. Sigh... Inventors you say... I am actually laughing now!

 

[usayit]

File type association has been a natural feature in the windows os's i've been using (win3.11, win95, win98se, win2k, winxp, vista). But in XP and Vista it has become even easier for normal users to manage. MS were way ahead of Apple using file extensions making it a lot easier for users to actually see what kind of files they had in their computers without having to click them. I remember the pre osx era when you got files from a mac. There was no way of telling if the files were .eps, .jpg, .tif or any other file type for that matter. Stupid!

Actually file extensions were used because of the limitations in the original FAT file system used by DOS. In other words... it had nothing to do with making it easier for users. In fact, Windows by default hides the file extensions.. So yes.. there is rubbish in there but you are spreading it as well. Unix (MAC OS X based on) was already using "magic" numbers that were embedded into the file itself to determine file type. This was a far superior method for assigning file types. Lets not forget the ol'crappy limitation of the 8.3 filename structure.

You wanna go farther... wth is up with batch files? Microsoft is more than capable of implementing a decent procedural based scripting language but they are still stuck with the old batch. Oh even better... why is that most windows applications cannot/or do not take in command line arguments. Even tiny little notepad.exe takes at least a file name.

Do you want to continue to process management... how about provide a seperate protected user space for processes to protect the rest of the machine? Linux, UNIX, OS2 Warp established that a decade ago...

As I said.. got a whole book full.

That mouse actually had three buttons so I have no idea which genious at Apple, several years later when they introduced their first computers, decided that there should be only one.

Looks like it had 1 button too....
http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/Archive/patent/Mouse.html


Sheesh dude.. it is a mouse.... you wanna keep going about the deficiencies of various Microsoft design.. Drop it already. If that is Apple's worst.. then they aren't doing too bad. How much of vista's interface was inspired by Mac OS X? ( I actually like Microsoft's keyboard the best)

 

[Hertz van Rental]

In the beginning the Mac was designed for designers - which is why simplicity was so important. Creatives just want to be able to use the things.
PC's took a different path, being aimed at the technical end - engineers, scientists and software developers. These folk have traditionally modified their stuff to do what they need and so PC's developed that way. Hobbyists and nerds had their say too and PC's became a sort of do-it-yourself kit that could be endlessly modified and tinkered with.
Macs were more of a concept. Designers are image concious so the look is important - as well as having something that you can use without understanding.
(And in terms of image, I still remember the IBM computer ad that had the CEO of IBM promoting his computers - but he had a Mac on his desk!)
You can see this image at work - virtually every computer seen in a film in the past 10 or 15 years has been a Mac. And computers in the Simpsons always start with the Mac chime.
PC's by comparison were for a long time just dull beige boxes. Not at all sexy. They started to change with introduction of the i-Mac - which has had a far-reaching effect on design as a whole. And finally PC manufacturers learned to be image conscious. Now you can get a Dell Inspiron laptop in a choice of colours.
But with Macs going down the UNIX route and having to make their computers more and more compatible with PC's, and PC manufacturers (and Microsoft) recognising that the Mac use of image and simplicity is a good way to make sales there is now very little to choose between the two. It's more down to personal taste - and deciding whether you want a computer that looks good and is designed for idiots, or one that you can modify and upgrade (although the pro Mac desktops have always been fairly modifiable - it's just that you have less choice of units to plug in).

The design ethic can clearly be seen in the second-hand computer market. You can still buy Macs that are over 25 years old. They are collectors items and still work. PC's of that age are generally in skips/dumpsters

 

[usayit]

In the beginning the Mac was designed for designers - which is why simplicity was so important.

.....

The design ethic can clearly be seen in the second-hand computer market. You can still buy Macs that are over 25 years old. They are collectors items and still work. PC's of that age are generally in skips/dumpsters

Honestly.. I didn't like mac for much of their history. Very little tinkering and using a mac meant doing things their way without much flexibility. I was very much the build it yourself PC mentality... I enjoyed it. The combination of recent design (for designers you say), their embrace of a UNIX core, my fustrations supporting Windows, and the limitations of Linux, made me switch about 8 years ago. I've got better things to do now-a-days... I needed something that works for me...

Btw.. collector items.. yeh.. this fellow went over board. But it is interesting what he has created:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/soyburger/

 

[Hertz van Rental]

Oh but the Mac Classic was the first true desktop computer - and it was so cute. They still sell for about £250 and they will work. I think they can only run OS9 and have limited memory but are fine if you just want to word pro. The i-Mac was an attempt to recreate this design icon.

 

[Alpha]

Just figured i'd throw this up to illustrate some of what i was talking about... dont let this fuel any further arguement or anything, just good for a chuckle. its a little NSFW (language)
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=macs_cant

Sidebar:

Craig, did you see DJ Q-Bert in that video? WTF?

 

[Helen B]

Oh but the Mac Classic was the first true desktop computer...

You've been drinking too much Apple Revisionist Hype Kool-Aid. The Commodore PET (1977) and 64 (1982), and IBM PC XT (1983) predated the original Macintosh, surely. The Commodore 64 was the first desktop I used, followed closely by the PC XT as soon as it came out in '83.

Best,
Helen

 

[Joves]

Makes me wonder why it is taking Microsoft so long to make a solid O/S?

I find XP to be extremely stable. The only time I have formatted a disk was when I was moving my OS to a larger hard drive. I have had this system running since XP came out and, had this machine on for a year solid without a single probelm. Another thing are you MACies still getting charged for updates? Also you guys pay through the nose for alot of programs that are standard with Windows OSes. Another thing I like about Windows is I can walk in any software store and, grab a program that works with it and, all the games too. Im no fan of Vista though. So when I do my next build it will be XP again.
Mac and Crack sound to close to me, plus their users are genrerally foaming at the mouth for their next iFix.

 

[usayit]

I find XP to be extremely stable. The only time I have formatted a disk was when I was moving my OS to a larger hard drive. I have had this system running since XP came out and, had this machine on for a year solid without a single probelm.

And I swore that my uncle's pinto ran for years without any issues.

So one desktop on your desk that runs your web browser means that XP is stable.. do you remember me saying up there somewhere that my main beef with windows is basic O/S design. We already established that it is possible to find one example of a dyeing Mac OS X box AND windows as well as good examples of both.. whats your point? Again.. are you login into that box as Administrator.. that in of itself is a problem. I work in an environment of a few billion USD in various UNIX, Windows, AS/400, and Mainframe boxes where we beat the crap out of boxes. By far the worst is windows and dell hardware BUT that doesn't prove anything.. different environment... thats my 1st job 3 days a week. My other job is spent beating on software and fixing them... Window boxes are a pain to maintain.

Try recovering a window's block level image on another window's hardware of different hardware... you can't do it easily until you go through that convoluted procedure to take care of dissimilar hardware. UNIX, Mac OSX, and to some extent Linux do not have any issues with dissimilar hardware.

Another thing are you MACies still getting charged for updates?

"MACies" do not get charged for updates...

Also you guys pay through the nose for alot of programs that are standard with Windows OSes.

Look again buster.. there's more built into MAC OS X by default. How about ftpd? ssh? There was a time you could ~not~ burn a CD on windows without Nero or something similar. MAC OS X had it from its first release.

Another thing I like about Windows is I can walk in any software store and, grab a program that works with it and, all the games too.

There was a time that all/most software had several builds on store shelves depending on the O/S of choice. Microsoft leveraged and won many years ago to "push" software vendors to only release Microsoft versions of various products. Thats just the tip.. as a business Microsoft has always been the bully on the block.. remember the browser wars that left Netscape in shambles and web developers dealing with incompatibilities. Lets not forget Sun Microsystems and their Java interpreter that gained so much developer support. A little while later Microsoft tries to bully Sun and release Visual Java which introduced mucho problems in the Java development community. (MS lost and is discontinuing the MS java JRE).

Yes... GAMES have always been superior on PCs Why? Because many of the fail safes that prevented processes from "abusing" the system in UNIX (and MAC OS X) do not exist on Windows. Games have full access to the entire machine... to run the graphics and engine in the game. This same design that helps games opens up Windows to a lot of problems...

I don't know about you but crack sounds more like Windows.. there are a lot of Windows people out there fustrated but feel like they have no choice... kinda like a crack junkie.

 

[jstuedle]

Another early personal computer.

In 1979 I had a Radio Shack TRS-80 model III (short for "trash-80) Used a Cassette Tape for data storage, 4 K for data storage, expandable to 16 K mono green screen monitor all in one case. Sort of like the I-Mac or Classic. It would do word processing crude spreadsheets, decent database work. And who could forget those advanced character-based graphics? For it's day, a decent "desktop" computer. It competed well with early Apples at a fraction of the price until the IIc came out.

 

[usayit]

You've been drinking too much Apple Revisionist Hype Kool-Aid. The Commodore PET (1977) and 64 (1982), and IBM PC XT (1983) predated the original Macintosh, surely. The Commodore 64 was the first desktop I used, followed closely by the PC XT as soon as it came out in '83.

Best,
Helen

the term "True Desktop Computer" is such a bogus loose term... HP under this loose term was the first (programable calculators). In a more familiar definition of the desktop computer, Tandy, Apple II, and Commodore PET were all released the same year. So it is difficult to mark a clear winner. If my memory serves me correctly.. the Apple beat out the commodore in sales by a long shot.

There were more traditional "PCs" that predated the PC XT.

Off topic: A few years ago I read an article about a well known journalist relying on a Tandy T-100 for their work away from office. Small size.. simple design.. tough casing and keys (mechanical ones!).. powered by regular AA's.. no worry about theft.. were all points this journalist liked... Now that is cool! My coworker has a cheaper build version of that "laptop" on display (T-102??)... I wanna steal it everytime I walk by.