There are certain perennial debates amongst the technical community, constantly revisited with differing outcomes for each person. Linux vs. Windows, KDE vs. Gnome, Mac vs. PC – they are unwinnable arguments, and although the outcome varies overtime with each successive release or new piece of hardware, they consistently gain our attention. When presented with the opportunity to borrow a Macintosh for a little over a month, I jumped at the chance to resolve one of these debates for myself. The question was: Can the Mac replace my PC?
The specs: Apple didn’t skimp on the unit they sent me: it was PowerMac G4 with dual 1.25 Ghz processors, a 120 GB IDE hard drive, 512 MB DDR SDRAM, a “superdrive,” which can record DVDs, a 64 MB video card, gigabit Ethernet, a 17″ flat panel studio display, and a fresh copy of Jaguar, Mac OS X 10.2. Total value, according to Apple’s website as of today: $4298.00.
The Challenge: Can the Macintosh, with no training, technical books, or prior knowledge, replace my PC running Windows 2000 and Red Hat’s Psyche?
The Background: I am not a standard PC user. I’m a network engineer, proficient in Windows, NetWare, BeOS, and Linux. I have set up complete domains from scratch, I understand networking and the components in a computer. I am a power user, and that makes me different from much of the audience targeted by Apple’s Switch campaign.
Fair warning: This is a fairly long, honest review in an untraditional sense. I didn’t write it in one sitting, it was written over the course of a few weeks and it includes lots of information is a disorganized but linked fashion.
My G4 arrived via FedEx in a beautiful box which pictures the contents in full color. Everything was packed perfectly. Setting up the Mac is easy, there’s a monitor that connects via a standard cable, a keyboard that connects via USB, and a mouse that connects to the keyboard. Booting the PC proved the first challenge – it gave me a classy white screen picturing the Apple logo, but it wouldn’t boot. I decided that this loaner was likely unused and therefore unformatted, so I set about installing Jaguar from disc. When I couldn’t get Jaguar to install, I decided to install OS X and upgrade to Jaguar. That didn’t work either, neither install could find a volume to install to. I decided I had to open the case. Painfully scared of voiding the warranty, I found the culprit – the IDE cable had disconnected from the hard drive, probably during shipping. This was the first point against Apple. Because the challenge was from a power user perspective, it was forgivable, but I still marked it in my head.
On reconnect, I successfully booted into Mac OS x 10.2. I was prompted to set up a user, password, and some preferences and then I was let loose in MacOS-land. The interface is not unlike any standard interface, more like KDE than anything else in that the “kicker” resizes itself to fit the icons. The desktop is clean, a la Windows XP default; everything seems to be ready to go.
The dynamic animation present in the OS at each step is immediately noticeable, the system updates icon began “dancing” to notify me that there were updates available for download. The update function works like Windows Update and Red Hat Network, it simply goes out and installs the updates with your approval.
MacOS runs smoothly. That’s what I noticed first off. There’s very little waiting, very little fussing, very little Ctrl+Alt+Del/End Task for behavior control. But from moment one, I had a some problems with the Mac, most notably – the mouse. The mouse has no buttons – rather, the entire body depresses to function as a single button mouse. The world has accepted the multi-button mouse, either two or three buttons, and scroll wheels are pretty much standard fare. Why Apple insists that single button is acceptable for their elite machines is beyond me, but
it immediately annoyed me.
My PC is an AMD Athlon 1700+ that runs at 1540-something Mhz. I have 512 MB DDR RAM. It’s got a 32 MB GeForce 2 GTS video card. In following, I’d expect the G4, running dual 1.25 Ghz RISC processors and a video card with twice the onboard memory to be noticeably faster. This was not the case though. My immediate feeling was that, loaded with expensive hardware, the Mac performs about as well as my PC. With all the complaining about Microsoft puffing their system requirements to bolster their relationships with hardware vendors anxious to sell more modern hardware, OS X seems to truly use every bit of what it’s given. Let down by the lack of supersonic speed, it certainly didn’t feel slow, but I have to acknowledge that this Mac is more powerful than most, and certainly more than I’d ever buy for myself. Certainly, it’s fair to assume that I might notice a slowdown on a more affordable machine.
Launching System Preferences, I immediately found that configuring the system was a breeze. The Mac jumped right online, and making the desktop look like I wanted was more than intuitive. Setting up MacMail was also a breeze. Since my webmail account is POP3 enabled, I hopped on and pulled down my mail without a hitch. MacMail is actually a nice program – not so much better than the equivalents in other worlds (Outlook Express, Mozilla Mail, Evolution, KMail), but certainly an attractive and matching app.
iChat, which is an AIM tool, is clearly one of the cooler Mac apps. Taking AIM to another level, it mimics conversation bubbles. Sherlock, the so-called “service provider that happens to use your browser,” is Apple’s answer to Ask Jeeves times 10 – ask Sherlock anything, and he can supposedly do it. I won’t get into making DVDs or using iPhoto or many of the other benefits of OS X, because there are scores of applications and features for which one should commend Apple’s product. But this review is not of the awesome superpower applications that come with OS X, it’s about the whole product.
What’s much more impressive than the apps bundled with MacOS is the installation of new software. No Installshield or Red Carpet or Red Hat Network to fool with. Simply download the file, decompress it, drop the directory in your Applications folder (or any folder, really), and BANG!, you’re ready to go. After downloading Fire, an e-mail chat program that can connect to MSN and Yahoo as well as AIM, I found it took me just seconds to get the application to run. In the day and age where disc space is so cheap, I think it’s smart to just have all necessary files in the same directory with the application. Should make programming and installing easy. Do most users care if they have a duplicate library, dll, or config file, at probably 4k, or even 4MB, installed? Probably not. This is the best and simplest application installation possible for a power user. While app installers like IRIS and Click-N-Run are probably the least work, I had complete control with Mac installation – I wasn’t confined to any defaults or preprogrammed file structures. In my book, this method, also used frequently by the BeOS, my favorite. It’s a real plus for OS X that software installation and management is so easy. Deleting most apps is as simple as deleting the folder it’s in.
Finding applications to install for Jaguar is not hard. Apple offers downloads on their own site, there are websites, most notably, macosxapps.com, a FreshMeat-like Mac counterpart. It’s generally pretty easy to find “Stuff-It archives,” which OS X can decompress a la Windows XP’s zip handling capabilities. I was glad to see OS X also handle zip and tag.gz files (it failed to decompress my .rar files.) A simple Google search will show you that many sites offer downloads of Mac apps. The UNIX-based core and inclusion of GCC make it possible to download source code and compile applications locally. Most apps, however, are easily installable via drag and drop to the folder of your choice within your file structure.
Speaking of file structures, the Mac is UNIX-based. Based on a (now dated) incarnation of FreeBSD, your Mac is super-stable. In fact, I experienced exactly ONE error the entire time I was in possession of the Mac. But what’s most clever about OS X is how it hides its UNIX underpinnings from you. In fact, if you didn’t know you were running on UNIX, what you’d see is a list of directories that look like logical divisions – like Applications. Masking the directory structure is a great thing for users. And for power users, like myself, it took virtually no effort to find a way to browse the actual directory hierarchy.
Let’s talk about “power users.” They’re not developers, at least in the traditional sense. I write a lot of PHP, but I’m not compiling anything for the most part, and I don’t need an IDE like Visual Studio or anything – any old “text editor” will suffice. They’re people who want to understand what the OS is doing without getting into the internals. They want to know how to troubleshoot to the detail when something is wrong, but not write their own patches to the OS. They’re people who are very loud about what they want from their computer, but usually can’t do too much to actually make that happen.
OS X has helped me understand a lot about what I actually want from an OS, and I think that I represent a good portion of people – said “power users.” I know that I want a polished UI that makes choices obvious. I know I want the advanced options generally out of sight but not buried. I want an easy way to launch applications and an easy way to kill them if they hang or eat up my memory. Jaguar does most of these things well. But most importantly – and this is the key to everything for me – I want the OS to be instantly responsive.
“Instantly responsive” might sound fine and dandy in description, but it’s much harder to actually deliver. To me, “instantly responsive” means that the OS responds to me without delay, without second guessing me, and without thought. I’ve griped before about the mouse in Linux; a premiere Linux authority tells me that the nature of the X Window system and lack of multi-threading prevent the mouse from feeling responsive. Linux based OS’s tend to feel a step behind. Windows does a greater job with the mouse but demands a lot of RAM to maintain responsiveness. And if an application crashes, even with all the advances of late, it still can swallow up the half gigabyte of RAM it’s been given.
OS X’s biggest problem is that it’s slow. And if you take nothing else away from this review, it should be that. OS X is slow. Even with incredible hardware, as I said, it just about compares to the speed of Windows. Even Linux, installed with all the bloat – Gnome, KDE, etc. – when running on the same hardware, is about as fast. The dual processors made a lot of the complaints I’ve read virtually transparent, such as Window-resizing delays, but nonetheless, the whole environment feels like it’s playing catch up to my will, and to me, this is killer.
Mac computers are gorgeous – no doubt. Since they retain the hardware specs, and therefore, a lock on the hardware on which Jaguar will run, they’ve done a great job at making said hardware sleek, modern, and fancy. They’ve done a lot of work to make the computer look like a futuristic device. Gone are the kernel messages and the terminal like prompts as the computer boots. It’s been replaced by a sharp stark white screen with a classy blue apple in the middle. The Mac knows what to do because there are so few options. Apple has designed the system from the ground up, so there is very little chance that anything unplanned occurs.
That’s all fine and good, but let’s just get to the meat of it, shall we? What makes Mac users so fanatic? What makes them appear to be an exclusive cult? Is it such a life-changing experience that people feel compelled to doodle apples on their notebooks and put decals on their car? Mac users are a community, and for that, you must acknowledge a certain satisfaction being in the Mac crowd. This community is not like the Linux community, which in my experience, is tiered, judgmental, and, I’ll even say i: elitist. The Mac community welcomes “newbies,” not shuns them and makes them feel stupid, unvalued, and generally unloved. I thought for sure that after a month with a Mac – a top of the line model, at that – that I would either be a die-hard Mac fan, saving for a Mac, or at a minimum, won over by OS X. I thought I’d be knee deep in a society of PC users who love and respect their hardware, software, and fellow users, and feel loyalty to a company that has done well by them.
But I’m none of the these. And although some will claim otherwise, it’s not because Windows has spoiled me or defined my expectations.
Apple has gone to great lengths to research user behavior and and user interface. Their much discussed Aqua interface is clearly attractive, although I find its behavior, after weeks of use, more show than action. While it’s very professional and sleek looking, at times, it feels like what it actually, like many Linux applications – a GUI front end to a much more powerful system underneath. With Jaguar, Apple has introduced the Quartz Extreme graphics engine which claims to render graphics at breakneck speeds. Although apparently successful, the OS is general is graphics heavy. While more attractive than Luna, for example, the transparency and animations are definite eye candy, and it’s RAM that, frankly, I could spare for more complex operations. In my opinion, while Jaguar looks like the most modern OS on the market, it also feels effortful at times. Even after weeks of use, the Mac environment felt alien to me. Not that it’s so obscure, just that it feels less natural to use a panel that doesn’t have an expanding “Start-menu-like” drawer. I feel more “at home” in Gnome and KDE.
Some of the tricks OS performs will impress many. For instance, when you use the yellow “minimize” button equivalent, the application will jump down to the application panel and reside in a thumbnail view. While “cool,” it’s annoying after awhile. Soon, these “features” begin to look more like tricks with tradeoff. In fact, when I became aware that the Mac wasn’t winning me over, I became almost jaded. I wanted so much to love my Mac, and it wasn’t impressing me. I had high expectations – maybe too high, and they were simply unmet.
However, there are plenty of features I did like. The best feature I can brag proudly about is that when an application is started, whether you close the app using the X or not, it doesn’t kill it from the memory. You’ll need to use a keystroke combination or actually choose Quit to kill it rather than click the the close button. This is a neat idea. Let me explain. For Mozilla users, or better yet, for anyone who uses Java applications or apps like Openoffice.org or StarOffice, you’ll notice a delay in starting these applications. However, launching a second Mozilla window, for example, barely takes a second. By keeping some of the program loaded, you’ll only experience these “startups” once per session. Of course, you can close them if you want, but it’s nice to launch, say, a Navigator browser window and not have to wait for the next succession of windows.
While Apple, with Jaguar loaded PCs, offer a great system, I hope it’s just a step, because at the price, unless you’re a multi-media author, it’s simply too expensive. Users each have special needs from their computers. I know that I use my computer primarily for web surfing, e-mail, office documents, and web development. I also know that not everyone has the same wants or requirements that I do. Some computers have specialized purposes and excel at those things specifically. Some try to be everything. Apple has offered up the Mac as a solution for everyone, and while gorgeous and smart in some subjects, it didn’t impress me as such. If it were a high school student, it would be good at art and might be voted homecoming queen for it’s looks, but it probably couldn’t serve on the debate team, be captain of the football team, or pass that damned Trigonometry class.
I know this has been a long, convoluted, stream-of-consciousness review. I know it’s covered many aspects in detail and virtually ignored others, lingering on some points longer than it should. But over the course of my Month with a Mac, I found myself simply drawn back to my PC. For the same money, I can build myself one hell of a PC, be just as productive, run twice as much software, have tons of OS choice, and not be slave to the will of any one company.
In summary, if that’s possible, the Mac is clearly loved by many. It presents the cleanest, sleekest, most modern interface I’ve seen to date. It provides UNIX-proven stability, ultra-modern flexibility, intuition, and friendly animation unlike any other computer system available. However, doing the job best has to be proportionate to the value, and Mac’s hefty price tag along with some of the (admittedly trivial) pet peevish annoyances along with an untraditional layout left me PC hungry. While the Mac and Jaguar are compelling, for my buck, I’m content with the PC alternatives. Can the Mac replace my PC? Nope. But check my desktop in 2005, we’ll see who wins this challenge yet.
good idea…oh that culture commnet was not me.
Some people have said that because replacement time is increasing and speed is no longer that much of an issue for most tasks Mac’s are better because they basically just work.
The problem is that it has nothing to do with replacement period or what speed is needed. When Joe decides he is going to replace his machine or just get one, he is going to look for value and he determines the value based on easily comparable characteristics such as Mhz, Ram, Hard Drive Size, Screen Size, Type of Memory, etc. At least the sales guy or his friends are going to tell him that.
If he is a bargain hunter he goes for the lowest priced and gets the most of the characteristics mentioned above. If middle of the range guy like myself he does the same in that segment. Name brand may play a role but computers for the individual user are largely commodities.
Fuzzy concepts which are difficuly to compare and quantify, like ease of use are not really considered by most.
Macs have another problem. PC’s are the status quo. They will really have to provide a some real reason for people to switch. The Digital Hub may be that but MS seems to be headed there as well.
For all those CRAZY people out there that somehow think Mac’s are good value. YOu are smoking something. The baseline Mac’s are just about useless (128 megs of Ram on OSX is not really useable). You need to add Ram. Give me any base spec mac and I will find you are better equiped PC alternative that won’t use archaic SDRAM for less.
I tried a Mac, wanted to love it, sold it because it was just soo slow. Lost $600, but at least I got something back.
When Mac at least catches up to FreeBSD hopefully by MAC OS10.3 or 10.4 and come out with the G5 or IBM Power Desktop processor I’ll look again (I’d love a TIBook).
I must admit thought that Linux, KDE and SuSE have gotten so good this year, I doubt I’ll try Mac again.
Do you want your operating system to be used by 94% of the computer users? Or do you want somethin
g that just works great?
Actually, betamaxes worked great too. But guess where all the movies/support was? There is an advantage to having 94% of the market using our OS, and that is that companies pay more attention to it. Of course, this leads to other things such as security holes and spyware, but this is not a trait of Windows, but more a product of corporate scum, who would trash any OS. Of course, just like living in a large city, there’s a lot of good that comes with the territory – you just have to decide whether you want to take the good with the bad. For example, people in some rural towns don’t mind having to drive 300 miles for a roll of toilet paper, if it means they don’t have to put up with the city. Different strokes for different folks .. know what I’m saying?
Don’t like the company? Fine, throw a cake in Bill Gates face when he comes to your country, but stop bitching about how all osses should be like windows.
I try, I really do. But unfortunately, I always seem to have a bunch of hardcore OS zealots breathing down my neck like a bunch of rabid Bible thumpers .. this is simply a defense mechanism
oh, can we all grow up now and move beyond highschool?
If you really want to be able to right click on a Mac, just press the control key on the keyboard, and then click the mouse. It does the exact same thing as right clicking.
“Btw, I still think it is pretty hypocritical to bitch about a loose cable on a mac, but don’t dare to bitch about a non-working digital camera on WindowsXP! ”
Hehehehe. Wanna know a good digital camera story? One I always think of when I see that switch ad.
Truth be told, I was doing some volunteer work at a film fest, and the “Computer Store” had donated a bunch of iMacs and a Nikon CoolPIX 775 (you know, the one Apple sells?).
So the doods need to take pictures for the festival passes, and the plan was to use the digi camera and the crapin(WOOPS) MACintosh, with i(whatever the hell).
These guys putzed around for hours trying to get the Nikon working in OS X, you know what? They couldnt, so they had to switch to OS 9 so they could use the camera.
So, tell me, first of all, I thought it “Just Worked”, and secondly, aside from that marketing drivel inspired LIAR on the switch ads, I highly doubt anyone with XP and a high speed internet connection would spend more that 5-10 minutes getting their camera installed and working in XP.
Now whether they have cool photo software like iPhoto is another story, but as far as I can tell, explorer does a damn good job of helping me look at my photos in my little windows.
I could have answered the author’s question without his going through the motions of trying a Mac. Here’s the obvious and simple answer to his question: “No, if you want to build your own a PC with gonzo gigahertz for pennies on the dollar, you can’t replace your PC with a Mac.”
The author sets out grudgingly acknowledging some of the many nice things about OS X. So far so good. But then he has to start laboring hard to find things to complain about – a loose IDE cable (big whoop); the one-button mouse; and, wait a minute, that was about it as far as specific problems about the OS or hardware. Again, the real complaint is “I can’t build a cheap very fast Mac myself.” (Not that the Mac can’t be as fast as Windows – he flat out says it is. But this is an expensive dual 1.25 gig machine.)
In a nice maneuver, the author totally slides by most of the Apple applications. Yes, this is “OS” News. But this guy asked the question whether there’s a compelling reason to shift to the Mac. How can you answer that question by skipping over what is currently setting the Mac apart — more than the OS — for most consumers, namely the Apple apps?
The author seems to start out well intentioned. However, he throws in a sprinkle of “mac users can’t possibly be rationally choosing the mac, they are a cult,” and “macs just look pretty,” and in the end you have your typical PC user drivel just dressed up a little bit.
This is not complicated folks. The mac is superior, in a whole lot of ways. So if you want to build your cheap PC, or run the latest 3D shoot em up or nonmainstream business or specialized app, you have to have the inferior system (at least part of the time). That’s just the way it goes. Get over it.
One thing that Apple does well is to keep “journalists” like these in business. They get to write reviews – which really do not matter. They rile some people and please others. Eventually, it does not matter what the reviewer said or did – everyone sticks to their own position.
Humans are pack animals by nature – 94% of human computer users run in the “MS” pack – the others run in smaller packs.
Most UNIX lovers I speak to bash MS for the “lousy” Windows – yet ALL (yes ALL 100%) of them use Windows at home.
These “reviews” dont matter to me and it should not to you.
AM
If you really want to be able to right click on a Mac, just press the control key on the keyboard, and then click the mouse. It does the exact same thing as right clicking.
Please tell me you aren’t serious. Why would I want to hold ctrl while I click when I could just right click. Let me try that one handed, sorry can’t do. Now there is a really elegant Mac solution, “Hold down the ctrl key and click”.
The Mac mouse does not even have a wheel, which is useful for many things.
Let me say I love the Mac designs. But doing things the same old same old is like walking around with a bag over your head. Just because the first mouse only had one button doesn’t mean they should never evolve.
Sorry but
you guys just are like children..
When I plug my mouse into my XP Box it freezes…
My Mac is faster than your PC AND its more usable …
OMB costs about $25, if you spent $5000 … how can he talk about $25 …
This is a summary of the comments of the Apple Lovers. This is a kind of are eye catching…
Relax people…
It’s not about Platform War it’s about what you get done with your equipment…
And yes I have a g3 @ 400 Mhz with OBM…
I don’t like it that much because my Mouse on X86PC has 6 Buttons and Scrollwheel which I regulary use… BECAUSE IT WORKS GREAT FOR ME!
But I use the OBM too, I have not bought a new one…
I don’t need it on my Mac…
Who cares…
Good night!
PS:
I found this review good(no point to diz it)
-A
I thought it was a fair review. I’ve gone from a System 6-system 7 to windows 95 (because I worked in technical support and suffered the most awful ribbing) to NT and now to linux. Of all of these I like linux the least, and I’m now thinking about a mac again, just so I can buy good software. (I’m sorry. There’s a lot of people done a really great job, but I do lots of graphics work and I just want a decent DRAW package and a nicely integrated clipboard.I’m quite happy to pay for it, but it’s not there) However, OsX does look slow, the effects are irrelevent, if cool and the question remains about apple’s market position.
>One thing that Apple does well is to keep “journalists” like these in business.
No one is getting paid over here sweetheart for his/her articles.
Wow, this string of comments is FUD central. Most of you Microsoft bashers have no idea what you’re talking about and neither do most of you Apple bashers.
Eugenia, you said:
I am not saying that in order to have a great OS you need to mimick Windows. What I am saying is that if you want to GAIN *Windows* USERS and create a marketshare, you HAVE to. Some open minded users might not need that, but the rest 99% of these users, will need that.
Quite simply put, you’re wrong. I’ve sold a few hundred Macs over my years to various PC people, Mac people, Unix people, “first time computer” people, etc. Though some have expressed dismay at the close widget looking a bit differently, NOONE has ever walked away from the obvious advantages the Mac provides because “it doesn’t talk like a duck” (the lame duck that is Windows).
Your comment is unsubstantiated, and in my experience, WRONG. Mod away. It’s sad that you’re a troll on your own site.
Eugenia,
Putting a list of your programs (ala the Start Menu) is as easy as dragging your Applications folder to your Dock. As for the single button mouse issue, the Mac simply doesn’t need it as much as WinXP does. This is not a good thing or a bad thing, it’s just true. I OS X, there just isn’t as much call for it. It’s just a usability difference. If I need it, I can plug in one of
Same functionality with the added bonus of being able to go into nested folders (versus just shortcuts).
I’m not sure why your Mac is unresponisive. I have a Powerbook 667 and it runs just fine.
I build my own PCs. I have a Windows2k Server box, a WinXP box, and a Mandrake box. I had a Dell Inspiron laptop, but got rid of it once I saw OS X in action on a Powerbook.
My problem with the Dimension was purely subjective. In my opinion, the construction of the Dimension was just horrible. They used the cheapest plastic they could find, heck, the back of the LCD would warp if you pushed on it gently to close the lid. Furthermore, if you didn’t pick it up levelly, the the whole chassis would warp. The screen was awesome and the speed was great, but the build quality was just horrible.
I’ve said repeatedly to friends (most of whom barely know how to use Windows, yet feel competent enough to abuse me for my Mac) that the reason I bought a Powerbook was ease of use. It’s stupid simple. I don’t play games on laptops, so the overall speed wasn’t an issue. All I need it to do is network and run productivity apps which this thing does in spades. Is it slower than my PCs? Yes. The interface is not quite as “snappy”, but it’s never really been an issue for me on day to day usage.
I won’t say I’m a convert to the Mac, but I’m finding my rationale for not having a Mac desktop is getting thinner and thinner as I find myself playing fewer games. I’ll still have a PC for playing Quake 3, but I may move to an iMac for just general use. The iApps are much more compelling than their Windows counterparts and they seem to work in a much more integrated manner.
One thing I want to say about this whole argument (not directed towards anyone specifically):
If your experience with a Mac is limited to the 10 minutes you futzed around with an iMac once at CompUSA, your opinion on OS X is irrelevant. Likewise, Mac users, the hardware is slower, there can be no doubt.
A lot of so called Windows experts spend more time bashing an OS they don’t use, likewise for Linux or Mac users. Why? What does it matter to you? Use what you want and shut up about it. Mind your own business.
The defensiveness regarding this issue is just amazing. To those people who seem to take OS selection as a personal affront if someone chooses something other than what you use: get over it. No one, but you, cares about your opinion. People are different, why shouldn’t OSes be?
Variety improves the breed. Be glad that we still HAVE choices.
to “appleforever,” and anyone else who has to belabor these points:
Mac users seem to always say the same thing: Mac is better. But WHY? Is it so unfair to say that I can build a PC with twice the hardware that runs twice as quickly and accomplish everything I need faster?
It’s simple: whether or not Mac has better/nicer/etc hardware, I’m more productive with a PC, and I still have a lot of money leftover. If I were a digital movie guru, maybe I’d think differently, but there is no truely compelling reason to switch to a Mac for the “standard” user who just wants a change from Windows.
I’m using two boxes at home – Windows and Linux. I’m much more impressed by Linux and the strides it’s made than by Mac. Mac is nice, but it just doesn’t offer me anything I can’t get with a PC.
And to put this issue to bed: one button mouse – GET – OVER – IT. What’s the substance of the resistance to providing a mouse that “94%” of the world has accepted?
The people who have written me with flames or left them here – no one has truly refuted any of my points – they’ve just told me I’m wrong or a typical whiny PC user. You certainly haven’t been a demonstration of the open-armed Mac community I discussed.
the argument over speed, is just a lame excuse, having been in both worlds and always gravitating back to the mac. why , why you ask, because it just works, nad just works is a lot better than being the fastest, the fastest does not usually mean the best it just means the fastest. when you take ease of use and that’s what people want (outside of the gaming world) but we all know that gamers will always want the fastest machines. you ask your average office worker, they just want it to work and mac’s just work.
>Mod away. It’s sad that you’re a troll on your own site.
I expressed my opinions. And if I would mod you down would ONLY be of your LAST sentense! The rest of your comment was nicely written, it expressed your opinion and I liked that. But your last sentense, was REALLY not needed, because it is not true.
..done by Scot Hacker. I hold nothing against this one, at all. I just thought it would be interesting to see another ex-BeOS user’s opinion on the same subject.
Too bad it will never happen. Scot has been using MacOS X for way too long.
“In that case, why not have it as an option? I mean, it probably isn’t any more expensive to have a 2 button mouse than a 1 button, so why not let the user decide which one they want?”
It is an option, isn’t it? The question however goes straight to the heart of UI — UI is not icons and graphics, it’s user interaction.
Someone mentioned how they don’t use shortcuts much in Windows… I find this to frequently be the case.
Someone mentioned how a lot of PC users do not use right-click. I find when someone comes to me with a question–I’m not in IT–the first thing I can do is say: “Right-click.” Some say: “What? Oh, okay, I didn’t know that feature was hidden there.” Others say: “How come I always forget that, it seems everything is right click.”
The whi(n)ners who are always crying for a 2-button mouse are the opposite, they are right-clicking to access every function, all the time. Maybe this is productive for them, but it doesn’t really inspire “Context,” does it? You expect a grab gab of features always like the task panes for dummies.
How does this get to Apple preserving the OBM? Well, Windows may have the advantage of accessing menu functions through Alt-combos and Ctrl-combos, but providing these constantly shifting shortcuts destroys the ability to promote universality of keyboard shortcuts…
(Why is it, that people cry for the right button, but they gave up crying for the delete key or Alt-combos? Huh, I wonder, what is the fanaticism with the right-click? I can easily add a “right-click”, I can’t add a “delete” key.)
Apple’s metaphor seeks to enable the user by providing universally available keyboard shortcuts. These shortcuts are further nuanced by generally having Shift, Control, Option modifiers. These same modifiers also work with clicks–try option, control, or command clicking various elements of the Mac UI: if you option click on the desktop from an app, you hide the app; if you command click a menubar widget you can move it, etc, etc…
The question is: if you provide this so-called “option”, who provides the one button, universal shortcuts, and modifier keys metaphor? The fact is: Apple supports it’s own original and innovative metaphor that even many power Mac users haven’t gotten their hands around yet, but some users truly love this fucntionality… AND at the same time they can support the traditional Windows/Nix behavior. We’ve already got the best of both worlds.
Someone was asking about differences? Jeez, there are so many–one of the most basic is to look at how Windows handles cursor and end-of-line behavior… an arcane, hard to describe topic, but the Mac method is superior. How ’bout keyboard mappings to special characters? Even though the Mac is Unicode now, people know that shift-8 is asterisk, option-8 is bullet, shift-option-8 is degree, etc… As for keeping apps open, when files close–I’ve always considered this an advantage… And it’s not as if this works on Wintel–it’s the most broken metaphor in the world… some apps are docs, some apps have multiple windows with the app menues available in all windows, some have file windows only, some apps you “exit”, some you “close”? That just sucks… With XP it’s gotten worse, the task bar is a joke now. Access can easily have 6 or more taskbar entries including one for the base app and one for a dialog box, but still all the windows are tied to each other and bring the underlying windows forward? That’s another big difference. But anyway: the advantage: don’t you have apps like Access, or Photoshop, or any number of other apps that take a few moments to load? Why would you want to go through that every time you close a document?
Just raising a few differences, and want to point out that: yes, at work I alt-combo through menues all the time, and I sometimes miss this behavior on the Mac, but at the same time, even though the shortcuts refer to a smaller set of functions, I find them more useful, memorable, usable, and intuitive. And I wouldn’t want Apple to abandon it’s own metaphor.
Even if Eugenia thinks that’s what they should do… or are trying to do… or would be good for them? I don’t know, I’m not sure what Eugenia is getting at… Apple should stick with it’s strategy–do it’s own thing, and allow “switch” users to behave the way they are used to, as much as possible, without compromising their own vision or their ability to attract defectors.
Scot Hacker?
done and done: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=421
>A cable disconnecting in shipping? That’s not a reason to be annoyed at the Mac
Same thing happened to my Dell… except it was the floppy disk cable.
I think a little humour and perspective is called for here…
Parable:
A long-time coca-cola drinker takes one sip of a pepsi-cola which he had been hearing so much fuss about, and then indicates that he doesn’t care for the pepsi all that much, and won’t replace all his cans of coke in the fridge with a case of pepsi anytime soon.
The coke drinker says, “Well, right off the bat, I was peeved because when I opened the can of pepsi, it sprayed pepsi-cola all over me. (Apparently, the case of pepsi cans had gotten shaken up during the drive from the supermarket to the coke drinkers house). Anyways, I find that the pepsi-cola is maybe as fizzy as my coke, but it has a taste that’s just not as tart as what I would like or am used to. Sure, the pepsi can is more colorful and prettier to look at, but the carbonation takes longer to subside when I pour it into a glass.”
Having also drank jolt cola in the past, he also notes that neither the coke nor the pepsi is as caffeine-strong as the jolt, and that in some situations he likes jolt over coke, but maybe he might be willing to give the pepsi another try again sometime in the future.
Some pepsi drinkers hear about the coke drinker’s little taste test, and say “Hey, we don’t think you really gave the pepsi a fair taste test. Pepsi is really a cool drink and we think it tastes better than coke!! If you were to try it for a while longer than you did, and perhaps with different foods, you might find that you like it better. Besides, you can’t really blame the pepsi-cola plant for the can being shaken up during shipping. It’s not their fault.”.
Now, it so happened that some die-hard coca-cola drinkers heard the pepsi drinkers talking to this coke drinker, and they didn’t like what the pepsi drinkers had to say. One of the die-hard coke drinkers says “Pepsi-cola stinks. It’s for kids who can’t handle grown-up sodas like Coke!!”. Another coke drinker says “Oh, but it _is_ Pepsi’s fault for the can being shaken up during shipment. they are responsible for the drinker’s beverage experience out of the can!”.
One of the pepsi drinkers says “Not so!! Soda-container shaking, though an unpleasant and unfortunate experience could happen to any cola-manufacturer during transportation. Besides, coke is more gassy than pepsi!”
Some pepsi-cola drinkers who used to be coca-cola drinkers but switched, happened to wander into the heated discussion between the two soda-drinking groups, and decided to offer their own views. “It’s true!” one of the switchers said, “when i was a coke-drinker, i used to get a lot of gas and indigestion all of the time. I couldn’t get alot of work done because I would have to frequently stop and take antacids for the all the BSOD’s (Bloating, Stomaches Or Diarrhea) I used to get. Now I drink pepsi and it’s sooo much better!”
The coca-cola die-hards then retorted to the pepsi-switchers and the original pepsi-cola die-hards and soon, they were calling each other names and insulting each other. This went on for a while and eventually, everyone just walked away. The coca-cola drinkers went to the cafeteria and drank cokes while they ate and played games, and the pepsi-cola drinkers went to movies and drank pepsi while they ate their refreshments and snacks watching the movie. A couple of jolt-cola drinkers met up with some RC-cola drinking friends and they went over to the cafe and surfed the web. while they chatted. One smart guy went to the pub and had a beer with a pretzel and met a nice lady there and had nice time chatting with her.
The morale of the story?
It’s all matter of taste and personal preference. We tend to get used to having things a certain way, and when presented with change, oftentimes we get all upset. Some accept the change and continue on. Others resist the change and continue on.
Unfortunaltely, _all_ mac vs. pc discussions are like this. It never ends and neither side is willing to capitulate completely to the other. Let’s learn top accept each others opinions and viewpoints with polite courtesy and dignity and move on with our lives.
Good Post.
Why not make those options you had for control click and option click available on the mouse?
how could I have forgotten? But probably the information was peeking from within my subconscious, and made me think that it would be a good idea if he wrote such an article
:->
Very good article, Adam. You did an excellent job, in presenting your experience with the dual G4 and MacOS X.
Disclosure: I’m not a MacOS X user, neither am a fan of Microsoft Windoze. Neither am a fan of Linux, actually :o)))
thank you for making me laff out loud! I felt mostly impersonated by the beer-drinking smart guy, even though I don’t drink any alcohol.
burner was on second channel without DMA enabled, Ill have to reboot, but either way thanks for the tip.
Either way though, out of the box my ibook worked properly
I use both Windows XP and Mac OS X. I think they both do a very adequate job. Each system has good, bad and ugly points. Power users will likely argue the merits of each along with the merits of linux and a few other more obscure systems for as long as there is a forum to discuss the differences.
I have found, however, that I prefer the OS X because I seem to much less time trouble shooting the system. I have never quite figured out how mysterious problems just seem to pop into my Windows machines even when my virus detection software claims that my system is virus free.
Even if my Mac ran twice as slow as it does now, I would always get more work actually done on it than on my Windows machines. I spend much more time trouble shooting problems on the Windows machine than on the Mac.
Prior to the advent of OS X, I had given up on the Mac platform. I only used Windows for the last few years. I actually loaded OS X on an older Powerbook that I wasn’t really using anymore to try this new system out. Within days, the multitasking and stability convinced me to reincorporate Macs into the machine mix. As OS X advances, I may be convinced to start replacing older Windows machines with new Macs.
You see, I am more impressed with OS X than the reviewer seems to be. I did take note that he invited the readers to see what his favorite desktop might be in 2005. I suspect he thinks that OS X has great potential.
Sure, you can prefer a PC for a given application. Businesses or large schools with a staff of PC caretakers; playing games; absolutely cheapest available machine for email and web browsing; etc.
But if you make those choices, you ought to acknowlege reality and stop the denial game. There is simply fewer problems on the Mac because with one company making it all, there are fewer chances for errors. And if there is a problem, you go to one company.
Several of the core Apple apps rock and blow away the junk on the PC – there is no iPhoto or iDVD for the PC. There is nothing like the overall package of included, built-in, updated continuously for free, work similarly set of Apple apps. Instead, there’s a confusing melee of inferior product with crappy tech support and confusing UI. And I haven’t even started talking about windows for OS X yet.
PC users, many of them, are just in a massive denial process. I have no problem with admitting the facts – you can buy a cheaper desktop PC and faster. There are a lot more games for the PC. There will be some software titles unavailable for the Mac, and some of these are not that esoteric (Delorme street navigation software is an example).
But then certain PC diehards just seem unable to admit what’s better on the Mac. You can say all day long that Apple’s production of the whole widget – although having a downside in that you can’t upgrade and you pay more — also has an upside in fewer problems and more rapid implementation of new stuff (because most of this takes hardware, OS changes and an App working together).
I just come on these boards and see the PC guys and gals squirming around playing the denial game. Why? Christ, if you acknowledge Apple is ahead, maybe MS will do something more faster that would otherwise be the case. Sticking your head in the sand and pretending the Mac advantage has been dreamed up by a bunch of cultists is sad, and that seems to be the prevailing PC diehard response.
I’m a die-hard Mac user but even I felt that this review was fair. It sounds to me like the two issues were speed and the ability to adapt to the way the Mac OS (OSX) interfaces with the user.
OSX in it’s current incarnation (10.2.2) is slow, even at times relative to OS9. But each major upgrade brings speed improvements so after some point in time the speed issue won’t be such an issue. This OS is only 1.5 years old! It’s amazing to me that it works as well as it does.The current Motorola processors are another part of the speed issue and have been a thorn in Mac users sides for quite some time now (and I greatly suspect Apple’s as well). That should turn around in 2004 when the rumored IBM processor takes over and Motorola is shown the door.
With that said, speed is also relative and user dependent. I don’t find myself waiting around for screen redraws and the like but while others will agree some will disagree. When is fast fast enough? For some, never.
As for missing the Window’s interface, that doesn’t surprise me. If a person is accustomed to a particular OS, especially after years of usage, change will be tough. I doubt a feeling of comfort can be accomplished in a month’s time. But again this is also tough to pin down as it’s very dependent upon the person using the computer. Some would find the switch easy, some not, and a bunch of people will fall in between.
It’s far more important to me as a Mac user that the platform simply garner the respect it deserves. When people are out computer shopping most of them should consider a Mac as naturally as they would consider a Dell, Gateway, or HP.
I find my new 1ghz superdrive equipped powerbook more that ample for all my needs and don’t have a need at this time for more speed. Even the MPEG-4 encoding time for a 40 minute movie went surprisingly fast. It took about 80 minutes which is the 2X movie length that Apple had advertised in the past when using iDVD. And no other hardware was required.
As I’ve said a few times now, it’s a personal decision. Just give the Mac platform respect when deciding and I’ll be happy with whatever is chosen.
No kidding, after reading the article I had a certain appetite for MacOS X that I didn’t think I’d ever have. Now I’m really fired up to try it out and started considering it a viable platform.
I really don’t understand why are the Mac users so mad at the writer, really. The article was balanced enough to allow me to make my own conclusions, which are favorable to the Mac!
Something I forgot. I pretty much use all the same key combos on the Mac OS since for every application they stay the same. Not true on Windows.
An example. I am on a win2k box right now
In MS word find is CTRL+F
In Eudora it is CTRL+SHIFT+F
In the Windows Explorer it’s not even in the menus, you have to pick a drive and right click and it’s called search
Don’t give me the search/find argument
Thats really annoying.
For Windows people thats not annoying
I hope people here are reading the article and understanding that the comparison here is between PC and Mac, not Windows and OS X.
I use Linux and Windows 2000 at home on my workstations and NetWare on my servers. I am not a Windows diehard, although I certainly don’t blindy hate Windows as many do. Problems with OS X do NOT indicate a love of Windows. Too many Mac fans seem quick to slight Windows rather than look internally. I’m certainly not anti-Mac, I’m just saying it wasn’t right for me now.
Maybe now people will understand the “unresolveable perennial debates” comment.
You asked: “Mac is nice, but it just doesn’t offer me anything I can’t get with a PC.
Wrong, you can’t have one company making the hardware, OS, apps and online service integrated together. Try again.
HERE! HERE!
I’ve had exactly the same experiences… just too slow and unresponsive… I ended up tweaking everything all the damn time. That’s why there are more than half a dozen replacements for the Dock!!! Isn’t that a clue to anyone that the UI was just thought out and it not mature enough? (The Dock is just but one example!)
The same goes for the OS, it is slow and unresponsive. I have used the same dual processor machine but with ~750 MB of RAM! Again, the OS and hardware are not mature enough or new/fast enough – respectively.
Time will tell and I may get one… but not now!
> Wrong, you can’t have one company making the hardware, OS, apps and online service integrated together. Try again.
No, but he can have another company making the office suite, web browser, online service, OS and qualifications for hardware, integrated together. Try again.
We really, really should celebrate diversity in computing. I think that is much more fun that hair splitting and looking for things to complain about, real or imagined.
This is the situation with us Mac users: for years we screamed for an OS that gave us true multitasking and protected memory. Well, we got it with OS X. And, its front end is as resource hungry as can almost be imagined. Because it is Unix, it does work – with that front end and those not-so-fast processors, it does not work with lightning fast speed. And, it appears that is what the situation will be for the time being.
The Mac (and really, I’m pretty much referring to consumer Macs) has developed a very nice package that comes out of the box: iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, iCal, AppleWorks and .Mac if you want it. The iApps are really outstanding, especially considering they are part of the package. With Jaguar, we have Rendeveus, Mail and the Address Book are tightly integrated now. I may be wrong, but I don’t know of another platform that offers something that tightly integrated out of the box. That is worth paying a little extra for, whether Macs are overpriced or not. Unresponsive performance is not worth paying extra for, so Apple has a problem in this area.
The one button mouse: it is the Great Macintosh Mystery. Nobody seems to know why Macs *still* come with just a one button mouse. With OS 9, there is a freeware program called Finderpop that brings up the contextual menu if you press the mouse button down and hold it. I don’t know if there is something like that for OS X or not. I have a Kensington Studio Mouse and it’s fabulous.
About the Mac community: it is a wonderful thing to be a part of. It really helps make computing fun. There have always been little things with the Mac that have made it more fun, but also have made it seem like a toy to some. One is Clarus the Dogcow, who appeared (for no reason at all) in every print dialogue box (of Apple print drivers). Nobody could decide if Clarus was a dog or a cow, so Clarus became a dogcow. Not very business-like, but fun. That is just one example. But, the user groups, the feeling of being the underdog, the untold number of death knells for Apple have all served to galvinize the Mac community over the years. Here is a secret – Mac zealots, no matter how much they defend Apple, are, in private, Apple’ harshest critics.
Here is an astonishing thing: go over to eBay at any given time and you’ll see that there are an almost equal number of Desktop PC’s and Desktop Macs up for auction (right now about 8-9,000 each). How can this be? It doesn’t make any sense. Well, many things don’t make any sense. But, what you’ll see is people selling and buying Apple IIe’s and Apple IIgs’s, original 128k Macs, all types of iMacs, Power Macs – and the big one that you can always count on for getting a profit – the Mac Color Classic. It only has a 020 processor! And I read that someone, somehow, managed to put a G3 in one. People make aquariums out of old Macs. It goes on and on.
Computing is so much fun – why castigate each other over what is so wonderful. Me, I’m hot for one of those new RISC OS computers!
In reference to OS X, Adam says, “If it were a high school student, it would be good at art and might be voted homecoming queen for it’s looks, but it probably couldn’t serve on the debate team, be captain of the football team, or pass that damned Trigonometry class.”
This is a common observation that OS X offers a “pretty” interface but “under the hood” simply doesn’t have what it takes (presumably in comparison with Windows XP and Linux). But it’s highly doubtful that Adam would find fault with the “under the hood” internals of other Unix-based distributions which don’t offer as much in the way of graphics.
This is the paradox Apple faces–if it shipped only Darwin (its BSD-Unix implementation) with X-Windows and Motif (as well as KDE or Gnome, which do run under OS X), I’m sure Adam would not find fault with its “intellgience” or ability on the “debate team.” And yet by offering this additional UI option of Quartz/Aqua, suddenly Apple seems to lose out. Let me repeat–by adding a UI option users like Adam seem to think it SUBTRACTS from the system.
OS X allows power users to operate strictly in the command-line interface of Unix shells or within X-Windows if they wish. So how is it that by ADDING Aqua suddenly OS X doesn’t have the power under the hood any longer? If you take the debate team captain and dress him in a tuxedo (or her in a dress), does he (she) suddenly become stupid?
It’s as if Adam sees OS X as the “dumb blonde” of operating systems–pretty, but lacking in other areas. Hey, Adam–it’s UNIX. It’s as much a Unix implementation as any other. The major difference is that it ADDS a new UI option.
Personally I find aspects about the Mac appealing but it immediately becomes evident that the price/performance ratio is clearly an advantage the PC has over the Mac. And Eugenia is right it is going to take something that is better than MS Windows to get people to change. Microsoft has done a really good job with Windows 2k/XP in terms of stability and performance. Personally I’m very open to an alternative to Microsoft . But not one where I have to pay twice as much for the same or even a decreased level of performance.
Even with your handle, you seem to be a level-headed guy … about some things
But if you make those choices, you ought to acknowlege reality and stop the denial game. There is simply fewer problems on the Mac because with one company making it all, there are fewer chances for errors. And if there is a problem, you go to one company.
Even assuming you’re right (and for the sake of argument, let’s assume you are), there’s still a slight flaw in your logic. If something on your Mac breaks, you call Apple. But what if your Internet connection breaks and you have to call your ISP? Is there going to be someone there who is familair enough with Macs to help you out? Or are you going to get some Windows guy on the phone who once played with a Mac for about 10 minutes back in the days of OS 8.5?
Several of the core Apple apps rock and blow away the junk on the PC
I hope you’re not talking about iTunes, because I personally can’t stand it. I’d much rather use Winamp for playing MP3s and Nero for burning CDs. Why? Dunno, just a PERSONAL PREFERENCE I guess
there is no iPhoto or iDVD for the PC
Couldn’t comment on these two .. have never used them. But we’ll assume for the sake of discussion that they kick ass …
PC users, many of them, are just in a massive denial process. I have no problem with admitting the facts – you can buy a cheaper desktop PC and faster. There are a lot more games for the PC. There will be some software titles unavailable for the Mac, and some of these are not that esoteric (Delorme street navigation software is an example).
So, if I use my computer soley for playing games (a lot of people do) and you have acknowldged that the PC has more games, then what am I in denail of? That iDVD in OSX kicks ass? Why do I care? I play games!
Christ, if you acknowledge Apple is ahead, maybe MS will do something more faster that would otherwise be the case.
Ahead? Ahead in what way? Certainly not in gaming, as you youself even admitted this. The fact that there are fewer problems on the Mac (as you say and as I am agreeing with you) becomes completely irrevalent to the diehard gamer. If I want to play the latest bleeding-edge games, I don’t care if Macs don’t force me to reformat every 6 months because by owning a Mac and being without these games, THE COMPUTER HAS JUST BECOME COMPLETELY USELESS TO ME!!!
I don’t think anybody is denying the Mac advantage, but what you must understand is that the ‘Mac advantage’ is far less important to some people than it is to you, and I happen to be one of these people. I have been a Windows user for about 8 years and problem rarely do pop up, so it is a non-issue for me. On the (very rare) occassion that a problem comes up that I can’t instantly fix, I have a Ghost image of my entire C drive partition and i can wipe it out and restore clean with all my apps and NO DATA LOSS (because I have a seperate partition where all my data files are), and be back up and running just as i was in less than an hour.
Lastly, I have to say that I definitely would be willing to spend more time with the Mac and really give it a run for its money, but the f**king hardware doesn’t grow on trees
I’m really struck with how Adam (the author of the original article in this thread) makes a point in his opening paragraphs about how he is less OS-centric than he is networking-centric. He describes himself as a power users with networking and DNS expertise. And yet in his lengthy commentary on OS X he didn’t say a single thing about its networking capability, and in my mind this casts doubt on his credibility.
Presumably he has Windows and Linux machines at his command–and one would think that a networking guy would be eager to connect OS X to the LAN in order to witness the results. But Adam says nothing of this. He says nothing of OS X’s seamless support of SMB/CIFS, NFS, and Rendezvous, (the ZeroConf technology).
This supposed networking person speaks more of the iApps than he does of OS X’s networking components.
>and in my mind this casts doubt on his credibility.
Adam works for the US Navy as a network engineer using Novell Netware.
I would like to chime in on this point with two comments.
* Mac OS X is still a unix like any other… sharing the resources as it is set up to do. I know I have found Solaris to be very slow (on some quad processor Sun boxes, ie. big $$). Perhaps there is a setting in the keyboard or mouse control panels (on your Mac) where you can increase the responsiveness of the computer to your input, in the same vein I think Redhat is soon to release an edition geared for developers with these sorts of “prioritizing” for the desktop.
*Second, I have two macs, both are 400mhz G3s with ~500Meg/1G ram respectively. I have not found the os to be noticeable slower on my older hardware. However, if you would like to pass along your test box, I’d gladly adopt it.
I can’t believe I actually read so many of these lame comments from zealots on both sides and people who just don’t see the problems they are conditioned not to see.
What I’d like to see isn’t a comparison of Apple vs. Wintel. Or Windows vs. Linux. I’d like to see someone make an objective comparison of COMPUTERS against OTHER APPLIANCES. You know. VCR, TV, TiVO, Fridge, Car, Washing machine, Stove, CD player, DVD player….
Right now, computers are trash. All of them. They take too long to be ready to use. They take to long to turn off. They have no warranty (don’t tell me you can use the thing without software, and software has ZERO accountability). They have a stigma attached to them that tells people “I can’t use this because I’m stupid” when it is the computer that is stupid and badly designed. They are not designed to solve needs; they create needs that can never be fulfilled. They are inconsistent, big, loud, hot, wasteful of energy, error prone, and require managment and caretaking beyond any other consumer appliance. Problems that users have are often inconsistent, hard to reproduce, hard to track down and almost always unfixable (no, workarounds do not count).
The tech world is mostly conditioned to not see what is wrong. The tech world takes great pains to bash users for lack of know-how, when the users are the people that feed the tech world. There is an entire industry focused on work-arounds to unfixable problems, instead of a system to once and for all rid the industry of those problems. The tech world seems to be quite content maintaining lousey systems just to make sure there is always a need to fix things. Job security in the tech field is directly related to the quality of the technology. If it stays junk, the need to “fix” problems will remain.
Computers have problems far beyond the lame nonsense arguments being spit back and forth here.
When will there be an article and 200 posts about that?
Folks, this isn’t hard. Apple provides a one-button mouse because that’s all that’s required in order for the average user to complete tasks. They have a better designed OS that doesn’t need a multi-button mouse. But they do have the good sense to design an OS that supports multi-button mice.
I have a multi-button mouse on my PowerBook. I love it. I don’t mind one button, but I prefer a multi-button mouse. I put a multi-button mouse on my mother’s iMac when I set it up for her a few years ago. She was baffled. She never knew when to click which mouse button. I gave her the one button mouse and she stopped calling me.
The idea that more buttons is better is based solely on complete ignorance of user interface design. Would your pants be better if they had two flies? Would your face look better if you required two noses? Would your front door be any better if it had two knobs — one for opening the door and one for closing it?
Use your heads, folks.
I love it when PC users discount the enormous amount of time spend dicking with OS glitches as well as discounting the steeper learning curve the PC OS’s require just to keep them running. Is your time really worth nothing?
Run twice as much software,
I also love it when it comes down to how much software you can run. I always have 6 different text editing programs, doesn’t everybody?
and not be slave to the will of any one company.
WHAT?? You’re not a slave to Bill Gates and Linus Torvold?
In summary, if that’s possible, the Mac is clearly loved by many. It presents the cleanest, sleekest, most modern interface I’ve seen to date. It provides UNIX-proven stability, ultra-modern flexibility, intuition, and friendly animation unlike any other computer system available.
And that’s not enough?
However, doing the job best has to be proportionate to the value, and Mac’s hefty price tag along with some of the (admittedly trivial) pet peevish annoyances along with an untraditional layout left me PC hungry. While the Mac and Jaguar are compelling, for my buck, I’m content with the PC alternatives. Can the Mac replace my PC? Nope. But check my desktop in 2005, we’ll see who wins this challenge yet.
Again with the money?
Sorry, I’ll stop with the ridicule and sarcasm, let me cut to the
chase.
There’s a context to consider and that is the fact that OS X is in it’s 2nd year of existance. The reality is that Apple had to put X out sooner than they should have because as you fairly state, OS X is, frankly, sluggish. Hell, I have Windows 95 running inside Virtual PC on my 500mhz iBook and it’s more responsive than OS X on the same machine. The sad fact is that the OS X is more than what the current processors can handle. How many generations of Intel chips and Windows versions did it take for the PC’s to finally get it right?
Faster chips are on the horizon for the Mac and I’m predicting that the responsiveness we both want will be there sooner than 2005
So while I’m highlighting parts of a document, right clicking, copying/cutting, and then pasting with my mouse… What are you doing?
I am currently a Mac OSX user, Linux user, and former Windows fan. I found your review to be fairly dead on.
Good:
I love the fact that I have an extremely nice and polished interface with the power of unix underneath. I like the fact that the entire experience is geared toward the desktop user (whereas my Linux box is still very rough around the edges). I love love love the extremely simple administration of the machine (while still allowing me to muck about in the command line). I have yet to feel that I am missing anything in terms of available software.
Bad:
I hate the fact that all those damn drop shadows and transparency is dragging my computer to a standstill at times (NT on a 180MHz machine seems snappier). I also miss the quickness of keyboard equivalents for every little thing ala Windows or KDE. I also hate having to click twice to activate a button on a window that is not the topmost window (one to raise the window, and one to click the button) – it makes the os seem even more unresponsive.
Ugly:
But, when push comes to shove, I turn to my Mac. I just feel better using it. It gets in my way less than the other two. It seems (to me) to be a better foundation for a really solid interface. It is my first choice (although I am not a zealot and I understand those who prefer Windows or Linux or IRIX or whatever is out there).
So while I’m highlighting parts of a document, right clicking, copying/cutting, and then pasting with my mouse… What are you doing?
I’m doing the same with my multi-button mouse. Do you not read very well?
I think what you meant to ask was this: What are one-button mouse users doing? The answer is easy: they’re going up to the “Edit” menu or hitting Cmd-X, Cmd-C, and Cmd-V. Very, very few users understand contextual menus. The vast majority of computer users navigate their system by way of the menus (as one ought to expect), and a certain percentage of power users learn the various shortcuts provided by the operating system.
Would your pants be better if they had two flies?
Umm, if I had two ….. it might.
Would your pants be better if they had two flies? Would your face look better if you required two noses? Would your front door be any better if it had two knobs — one for opening the door and one for closing it?
Um, what kind of fucking logic is this? Would you be able to hear better if you only had one ear?
Also, I don’t understand why you go through so much trouble to diss multi-button mice, when you yourself prefer them. You say OSX is designed well enough so that it doesn’t need a multi-button mouse, but how is using the Edit menu more efficient than using the right mouse button? And how does this differ from a PC, where it works the same way? How is the Mac method of clicking on the Edit menu any different than the PCs?
In summary, if that’s possible, the Mac is clearly loved by many. It presents the cleanest, sleekest, most modern interface I’ve seen to date. It provides UNIX-proven stability, ultra-modern flexibility, intuition, and friendly animation unlike any other computer system available.
And that’s not enough?
Um, if I want to play Madden 2003 on my computer, the answer is no.
Yeah that’s all I have to say to that. I have two very nice PC’s and my Mac, and the Mac is already my computer of choice, I spend 5 times as much time on it as my PC’s.
If you don’t like Mac’s it’s your opinion, I don’t hold a grudge against you for having that opinion. But please keep it to yourself.
It’s not like I come out every other week and tell people that PC’s suck and that Intel and AMD should die.
I meant “YOU” as in “You mac users”
Yes I can read, thank you very much for asking. Can you do me a favor and say what I just typed outloud before replying? Thanks buddy!
How would the review gone if Apple had sent Adam an iBook?
OS X doesn’t run worth a darn on an iBook.
How about if Adam had spent his own hard-earned money to buy an EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE, SLOW and INFLEXIBLE computer?
The review was far too kind. Adam didn’t even mention how damn loud the new dual 1.25 PowerMac is. While Dell has made of their computers whisper silent, Apple is ramping up the noise.
Anything to “punish me harder” as it is what the submissive Apple faithful want.
– Red Pill
The one-button mouse stems from Jobs’ minimalist UI philosophy. The Aqua desktop, the Mac hardware, and even the Apple stores interior design all reflect this philosophy. If Apple errs, it does so in favor of a clean, feature-controlled design than a cluttered, feature-laden approach.
For my part, I think Apple could design a two-button mouse which could still meet its UI “elegance aesthetic.” But I do think that in the scheme of things it’s a very minor point. It would be different if OS X failed to support context menus altogether–but it doesn’t. Instead the user accesses these menus only in a different way. Now you might contend it cumbersome to hold down the control key while clicking the mouse–especially in contrast with a right-mouse click, and indeed I might be inclined to agree with you. But it’s a very small matter, (not to mention that OS X DOES support multi-button mice; it simply doesn’t SHIP with one).
I take no pleasure in finding Adam’s OS X commentary quite unbalanced. A true power user with no axe to grind would not highlight irrelevancies like a loose cable (isn’t it fortunate that this never happens to Windows/Linux boxes in shipment), while saying NOTHING about the ease of access to PCI slots and to user-installable expansion options. A true power user would not focus on the burning issue of a one-button mouse while saying NOTHING about networking–all the while advertising himself as a network guy.
From what I’ve read the main reason for the slowness of OSX’s GUI is that everything is being rendering in software as pdf files. Not sure of all the details but I would imagine that _eventually_ apple will try to get hardware accelerated video programmed. Microsoft took a better route and put the window management subsystem into the kernel and went all out hardware acceleration for the GUI via DirectX. This is what people wanted – trade a bit of stability for speed. I believe that I read somewhere that OpenGL acceleration is planned for OSX for the GUI, but apple just moves slow on stuff like that since most mac users are willing to wait for eternety if neccesary to get that feature. Look how long they all waited for protected memory. Eventully apple will get it right.
If there is any real reason to dislike apple, it’s because they move too damn slow with important technology. They were slow to get AGP, slow to get DDR Ram, and even now they don’t use DDR Ram’s bandwidth fully, slow to get OpenGL, slow to get OSX up and running, slow to get their CPU situation resolved, slow to get developer friendly, etc. Now they are trying to make up for their mistake with motorola CPUs by stuffing more of them into machines instead of getting a chip with faster clock speeds and better system memory bandwidth. I mean come on, yes they put in firewire, zip disks, but why is intel kickin their ass so bad at 533 Mhz memory bus and now onto hyperthreading in the CPU? Why are they lagging behind – because in order to have the next best thing, you have to buy a whole new machine. So in order to milk their customer base they have to wait a few years so they’ll be ready to buy technology that is still behind the state of the art. PC users can just drop in a new motherboard, CPU and RAM and be good to go. One of the main problems with the dual G4 is the shared system memory bus. You have a potential of 2.7GB/sec transfer rate with DDR 2700, but the CPU bus can only handle 1.3GB/s between two processors. AMD can use a separate memory bus for each processor where Intel uses a quad pumped 533Mhz memory bus (133 x 4). All the fault of motorola’s chips. IMO that’s the real reason why apple should be hated. Slow changes and mostly stupid decisions.
The apple consumer doesn’t realize that they are not really getting the best hardware technology for their money. For those people who just like the GUI above all else then they don’t mind overspending on hardware to get the GUI they enjoy since the overpayment on the hardware finances the “pretty” GUI. For those who want maximum performance, they use x86 with windows or linux or whatever. The fact is that the x86 and apple hardware are not equal, no “G4 at N mhz is equivalent to N*2 x86 CPU” propaganda. x86 can run at 533mhz system bus, 3Ghz, SCSI subsystem if desired, 14000 rpm drives, and dual CPU’s. If you get a Xeon, forget about it, apple is just too far behind in state of the art. In all honesty, if apple sold state of the art hardware, I wouldn’t have any reason not to try a mac. Until they do, I won’t overspend on hardware just to get a alpha blended GUI, blah and a “cool” minimize animation. Yay!
The person who goes by the name, Venom, says “Microsoft took a better route and put the window management subsystem into the kernel…”
My comment: This is better only if you want to trade a little performance for system instability.
The one mouse button thing might be a ‘small matter’ to you, but huge to other people. And as far as it supporting multi-button mice, that’s not the point …
The point is that it gets old having Mac users tell me what is and is not a ‘small matter’ to me, what is and is not important to me, etc.
They just go ON and ON about the ‘clean and elegant’ interface, and ‘it just works’, as if they think other people are just like them and hold these two benefits to be the end-all of computers, all the while not seeming to give a shit about the kinds of apps people use or what kind of interface (single menu vs multi menu, etc) that each individual prefers.
Hell, the Linux zealots are the same way when it comes to security, as if I haven’t heard it 1,000 times before.
I thought of this when reading the review, but I’ll repost part of a comment from macslash.com that pretty much sums it up:
No, I don’t think he was just an inexperienced Mac user. I don’t think he made a mistake. I believe he’s lying. He said this:
Booting the PC proved the first challenge – it gave me a classy white screen picturing the Apple logo, but it wouldn’t boot. I decided that this loaner was likely unused and therefore unformatted, so I set about installing Jaguar from disc. When I couldn’t get Jaguar to install, I decided to install OS X and upgrade to Jaguar. That didn’t work either, neither install could find a volume to install to. Point 1. BZZZT. Wrong. If the drive were disconnected, you wouldn’t get a “classy white screen picturing the Apple logo.” You’d get a question mark as the computer looked for a boot drive.
Point 2: He thought the computer shipped without an OS installed? Huh? This guy claims to be a power user, but thought Apple shipped their stuff with bare drives? Anyone remember the first iMac ad? There is no Step 3, and Steps 1 and 2 sure as hell don’t involve installing the operating system! He’s making up a story here, folks, and not a very good one at that.
Point 3: He then “set about installing Jaguar from disc” but couldn’t get it to install. Yeah, buddy. No more details provided here by the author, but if the drive were disconnected the installer would have indicated that no available drives were found for the installation. For a guy who has performed such amazing feats as having “set up complete domains from scratch,” shouldn’t such a message have been a clue to check drive connections? Guess not for this self-proclaimed “power user.”
Point 4: When he couldn’t get Jaguar to install, he “decided to install OS X and upgrade to Jaguar.” Huh? Whatchu talkin’ ’bout, Willis? Jaguar IS OS X and is the ONLY operating system that would have shipped with the dual-1.25GHz machine Apple provided him. They wouldn’t have given him a 10.1 install CD with a Jaguar upgrade disc because this machine doesn’t support 10.1. The alternative is for us to believe that he happened to have an older version of OS X just lying around that he thought Apple would have expected him to install. This guy wouldn’t have had that software on hand, and no “power user” would have thought for a second that ANY computer company, particularly detail-oriented Apple, would ship a computer specifically for critical evaluation without an OS installed and with nothing more than an upgrade CD included in the box. What? Bullsh*t!
You must be f^&%&^ crazy to pay 4900 dollars for a so so PC!!!
That’s almost 7000 can dollars@!!!!!!!!!!!
I built my own 2 gig intel hyperthreading ready machine,
super optimized with xp, IT FLYES!!!!!!!!!, for less than 1000.
Or even better if your budget worried, buy a walmart lindows PC for about 400 can $, install a pirated copy of xp and your done. I think it’s kind of inmoral to give your money away just for the look of aqua, when for much less you can have MUCH MORE.
Contrary to Mac owners imagination Apple hardware is not premium quality. It is mostly standard OEM stuff found on many PC clones. Same with Dell, IBM etc. A quality clone usually has better componentry than more expensive brands. You won’t Kingston RAM or Antec power supplies in many ‘quality’ brands.
Mac hardware is old – at least 18 months behind the cutting edge. PC2100 RAM is fitted on base level PC clones now. GF2 video is obsolete.
You can build a faster and higher quality clone for less than 1/2 the price of comparable a Mac. Antec case, Logitech KB and mouse, Kingston RAM, GeForce4 video, Maxtor ATA133 HD etc.
The Apple machine in the test is about AU$12 000 in Australia (or the price of the cheapest new car). I can have a much faster, better quality clone built to order in one day with AMD XP2600+, 1 gig PC2700 RAM, 128 meg ATI Radeon 9700 video, DVD burner, 120 gig Maxtor HD etc and a 21″ Sony Trinitron CRT for about AU$4000 (US$ 2200) with Win 2000 Pro. A reliable XP2100+ clone with similar specs and performance to the test machine can be bought for less than AU$2000 (about US$1100)(with DVD burner) with Win 2000 Pro and no monitor.
I’ve owned 5 macs, the LC 630 was the biggest piece of junk in history.
Anything less than a midrange G4 tower is too slow to be worthwhile.
Within a 18 months you will be able to buy a decent PC clone with the same overall performance as the test machine for less than US$1000 with an 18″ flat panel monitor.
Linux is improving so rapidly that it will be a viable mainstream desktop OS within 2 years.
Sorry folks the party is over for the desktop Mac.
> Wrong, you can’t have one company making the hardware, OS, apps and online service integrated together. Try again.
No, but he can have another company making the office suite, web browser, online service, OS and qualifications for hardware, integrated together. Try again.
Bottom line, what you describe is different than what I described. So I am right — you can’t have what I described on the PC. So I don’t need to try again.
Also, Apple’s almost certainly making a web browser, and it does make an office suite. “Qualifications for hardware” – ain’t the same as making the hardware. Especially when the hardware doesn’t exist and you have to make it (e.g., firewire in the beginning of video editing on personal computers).
You’re in denial too, Eugenia.
To Darius:
My only point is that the lack of a one-button mouse is a small matter COMPARED to the lack of functionality which it represents. If OS X lack support for contextual menus, this would be more important than HOW one accesses them. Moreover, the failure of Apple to include a one-button mouse with its computers is a small matter COMPARED to the question whether OS X supports multi-button mice (which is does).
Remember, Adam advertised himself as a power user, one with a networking orientation. And yet he takes cheap shots with loose internal cables (which we all know was just a fluke and which happens with Wintel/Linux boxes as well). Adam nitpicks on the one-button mouse and places more importance on that than he does on the functionality it represents–not to mention that he said nothing of networking or Apple’s early adoption of 802.11 wireless standard, Firewire, bluetooth, etc–things that a true objective power user would find more compelling.
Now, Darius, if you think a one-button mouse is more important than these other things, then we simply disagree.
if you need to ‘right click’ on something… just control click.. is it that big of a deal to WHINE about??? ‘the mac didnt come with a 2 button mouse’ Boo Hoo..
Gern, you make excellent points and a great contribution to this thread.
> Booting the PC proved the first challenge – it gave me a classy white screen picturing the Apple logo, but it wouldn’t boot.
>I believe he’s lying.
Adam DOES NOT lie. Don’t foget these facts:
1. Adam has never used a Mac before in such a scale. He is not accustomed in the various boot screens.
2. The loosened cable happened MORE than a month ago. I remember clear as day the VERY FIRST day that Adam got the machine and he IM’ed me in PANIC that the Mac does NOT BOOT!! I told him to try a few things and then he took the decision to actually open the machine himself and fix it.
3. This review was written only LAST week. Adam probably does not remember the exact error message or boot screen, because for the whole month after that, he was getting the correct apple logo bootscreen.
Adam DOES NOT lie. Don’t foget these facts:
1. Adam has never used a Mac before in such a scale. He is not accustomed in the various boot screens.
2. The loosened cable happened MORE than a month ago. I remember clear as day the VERY FIRST day that Adam got the machine and he IM’ed me in PANIC that the Mac does NOT BOOT!! I told him to try a few things and then he took the decision to actually open the machine himself and fix it.
3. This review was written only LAST week. Adam probably does not remember the exact error message or boot screen, because for the whole month after that, he was getting the correct apple logo bootscreen.
Fair enough, but more the reason to edit and fact check before publishing a review of this nature, which you *know* will get nitpicked.
*I* don’t know that, so I can’t edit it! I never had a Mac with a losen cable, so I have never seen such a bootscreen. *I* could not have known! Neither anyone else who is part of OSNews could.
It is funny that you think that each sentence would need to undergo such “proofing” before going live. That would have been crazy! Adam made a mistake on his way of describing the error, as it had happened more than a month ago so he could nore remember the details! End of story.
To Darius and Appleforever:
OS preference is a personal thing and it all depends a hell of a lot on what you do.
It is not a copout.
I want a Unix box on cheap x86 hardware the same way old Linus did back in the day. Fortunately, I got linux or FreeBSD if so inclined. I am a Unix admin/Software Configuration Manager and I like the *nix way but I don’t make enough money to buy a decked out Mac. I use Linux.
XP is fine and actually with XP/2000 it is not terrible. You work with Windows. You have always used Windows. You know Windows. All the software you like is on Windows. You are a heavy gamer. You want inexpensive hardware that is fast as hell. Use Windows. Even if you hate Microsoft please continue to use Windows. Linux is not Windows and will never be Windows and really should not be if it wants to stand out from the crowd and eventually survive on its own merits. I don’t agree with you Eugenia but please have mercy on me. :->
Macs are great for some. If you do not know a lot about computers. Macs are easier and I have seen it. If you want the simplicity and grace and lovely interface of the mac and are not worried about speed or price. Buy a mac. If you want a Unix that “just works”, buy a mac. If you grew up on macs and prefer macs, stick with the mac. If you dislike Windows and want an alternative that “just works” and don’t mind spending a little extra, PLEASE buy the mac, linux is not ready for you I promise. If you actually want to do all that multi-media stuff you see in all the computer ads with you digital cameras and video editing and all that stuff without a lot of work use a mac. You can do it in Windows but the windows user that tells you it is as easy as a mac is fooling himself hard it just takes longer on the mac for it to actually happen due to slow factor.
heh….I use all the OS’s and computers that I can get,,curently have 7 networked 486’s, 586’s, 686’s, macs, etc….2 duelies 1 w/2_2ghz mp’s,,1 w/2 intel p111’s,,the pc’s are by far the cheapest to build,, am learning the mac’s that I have and would like to try one w/OS 10,,I use several different OS’s usually an assortment of windoze,linux,and beos,anywhere from 4 to 7 os’s per machine, I have to accesse a lot of different data for various customers and do data recovery…the point is *ALL* the OS’s need to come a long way from what they are now and they all have their pluses and minus’s ,, personally I think the BeOS was the best *EVER*, but that is my personal opinion from everyday use ,, oh, by the way I also use CAD…good luck to everyone in their endevers………
If his intention in this month-long experiment was to write an article about it, why did he not take detailed notes along the way? That’s sort of expected from a technical article, no?
Did you guys (OSNews) read this story before posting it to the web site? This is the least informative review I’ve ever read anywhere. Pick up a Consumer Reports some time for a good example. Even as an Op-Ed piece, the writing is severely lacking.
A good review consists of these things: Product Description, Features, Usability and questions like “Does the item do the job to the satisfaction of the user?”, “Was it easy?”, “Were there problems?”, “How do its features compare to those of the competition?”…
This ‘review’ did none of those things. The writing style was at high school level, at the very best. The text is meandering. It doesn’t set any objective goals – .e. “When I unpack a new computer, I should be about to do this, that, and the other, blah blah… Here’s how my experience went.” Even as an Op-Ed piece with the idea of “Can the Mac replace the PC?”, the objectives should have been spelled out. I.E. – “I do this, that and the other with my PC. How was my experience at using a Mac to accomplish those same tasks?”
All Adam Scheinberg seemed to say is “Well, it does this different than KDE, or that different from Windows… therefore I don’t like it”. Even in the parts he highlighted as positive, such as the ease of downloading updates to the OS, the writing is bland and uninformative.
He says it ‘feels slow’ (sic), yet discusses no actual real-world evaluation of accomplishing tasks on one operating system vs. the other. He complains that the price is too high, but makes very little comment about the quality of the bundled applications that are paid for with R&D money included in that price tag.
A good review should have included things like:
* How quickly and easily one can get online
* How easily is a software upgrade accomplished (touched upon lightly, but with too few details).
* What can I do with the computer out of the box? (included apps and user experience)
* What can’t I do with the computer out of the box – what extra software is available for me to do that? Is that kind of software available/not available for either the Mac or PC?
* How fast can I
1) Set up a home web server
2) Edit some video
3) Put together my collection of MP3’s
4) Etc…
And I don’t mean, “It took Photoshop x seconds to run this filter”, but real world tasks from a user standpoint. He claims to be a ‘power user’ but doesn’t include a single task that a ‘power user’ might do while sitting at a computer. How about a piece talking about setting up file sharing between the different computers? (as an example)
If I were a 9th grade English composition teacher, the article *might* get a C. As an editor, I would have passed it up for publication. It looks to me like OSNews published the article simply to generate page views of users saying “Yeah, I think the PC is better too”, “Oh yeah, well the PC sucks”, “No, the Mac sucks” in the comments section. The article does nothing to educate users to the positives or negatives of any platform (be it OS X, Linux or Windows); it seems to just try to cash in on the pages views of a flame ware that’s been going on since 1984.
Marty Walser
Web Applications Developer
> In regards to “Month with a Mac: Can the Mac replace my PC?”
>
> Did you guys read this story before posting it to the web site? This is the
> least informative review I’ve ever read anywhere. Pick up a Consumer Reports
> some time for a good example. Even as an Op-Ed piece, the writing is
> severely lacking.
Who said that this was a review?
Did you actually read the article first?
It has this title: “Can the Mac replace **my** PC?”
This is an editorial my friend, not your traditional review. And it has been marked as an editorial here:
http://www.osnews.com/article.php?kind=Editorial&offset=0&rows=50
> A good review consists of these things: Product Description, Features,
> Usability and questions like “Does the item do the job to the satisfaction
> of the user?”, “Was it easy?”, “Were there problems?”, “How do its features
> compare to those of the competition?”…
Sure, but this wasn’t one of these articles.
> This ‘review’ did none of those things. The writing style was at high school
> level, at the very best. The text is meandering. It doesn’t set any
> objective goals – .e. “When I unpack a new computer, I should be about to do
> this, that, and the other, blah blah… Here’s how my experience went.” Even
> as an Op-Ed piece with the idea of “Can the Mac replace the PC?”, the
> objectives should have been spelled out. I.E. – “I do this, that and the
> other with my PC. How was my experience at using a Mac to accomplish those
> same tasks?”
>
> All Adam Scheinberg seemed to say is “Well, it does this different than KDE,
> or that different from Windows… therefore I don’t like it”. Even in the
> parts he highlighted as positive, such as the ease of downloading updates to
> the OS, the writing is bland and uninformative.
>
> He says it ‘feels slow’ (sic), yet discusses no actual real-world evaluation
> of accomplishing tasks on one operating system vs. the other. He complains
> that the price is too high, but makes very little comment about the quality
> of the bundled applications that are paid for with R&D money included in
> that price tag.
Adam is talking about UI responsiveness. Being an old BeOS user, UI responsiveness means A LOT. And MacOSX doesn’t have that. It is not that iChat is slow, or that iPhoto is slow. It is the whole UI and how it responds to the user, how much you see that stupid wait cursor or how much IE is freezing the menu bar when it is loading something. Things like that.
> A good review should have included things like:
> * How quickly and easily one can get online
> * How easily is a software upgrade accomplished (touched upon lightly,
> but with too few details).
> * What can I do with the computer out of the box? (included apps and
> user experience)
> * What can’t I do with the computer out of the box – what extra
> software is available for me to do that? Is that kind of software
> available/not available for either the Mac or PC?
> * How fast can I
> 1) Set up a home web server
> 2) Edit some video
> 3) Put together my collection of MP3’s
> 4) Etc…
I am not saying that the article was complete at all its levels. But for Adam, these things (e.g. web server or video) might not matter a lot! The whole question was, after using that Mac for a month, if he was inclined to switch over or not. And his answer for HIMSELF was NO.
> And I don’t mean, “It took Photoshop x seconds to run this filter”, but real
> world tasks from a user standpoint. He claims to be a ‘power user’ but
> doesn’t include a single task that a ‘power user’ might do while sitting at
> a computer. How about a piece talking about setting up file sharing between
> the different computers? (as an example)
That would have been nice indeed to see the machine in its full potential. But you can expect a 10-page article from someone who does it for free and he is not getting paid for any of this.
> If I were a 9th grade English composition teacher, the article *might* get a
> C.
Thanks God you are not.
> As an editor, I would have passed it up for publication. It looks to me
> like you published the article simply to generate page views of users saying
> “Yeah, I think the PC is better too”, “Oh yeah, well the PC sucks”, “No, the
> Mac sucks” in the comments section. The article does nothing to educate
> users to the positives or negatives of any platform (be it OS X, Linux or
> Windows); it seems to just try to cash in on the pages views of a flame ware
> that’s been going on since 1984.
Yes, web page hits are always good, aren’t they?
But I do think that this article do brings perspective for a lot of people. Not for existing Mac users of course, but for Windows users. These articles are IMPORTANT even for Apple, to see what a Windows or Linux user is thinking and what are his stoppages on using a Mac.
This article, no matter how poorly you think it was written, it has value: It shows you the OPINION of a person and why he will NOT switch. This alone DOES has value.
If you do not understand all that, well, what can I say, more power to you. Goodnight.
It is impossible for anyone to have an informed debate on this matter since so very few people have actually used both systems for any length of time.
I have, and I can tell you that both have their strengths and weaknesses.
I go back to my comment earlier, if your experience with a Mac consists of playing with one at CompUSA for 15 minutes, your opinion means nothing. This goes the same for Mac users.
Jonathan Bailes has the absolute best summation of the argument I’ve seen here. OS X, Windows, and Linux are all just different. None of them is any better at everything than another. If you like full control over your OS, get Linux, but be prepared for a steep learning curve. If you like the interface, style, and iApps of OS X, get one, but be prepared to have great difficulty playing graphically intensive games. Want a solid OS with tons of apps? Go Windows, but be prepared for more and more onerous restrictions coming from Redmond.
I do not know why this causes such a heated debate or why it’s taken so personally. Who cares what OS you use? Why should you care what OS I use?
Many of the debates here (using the term loosely) boil down to “I know what’s best, anyone who disagrees with me is a moron”. Very few people seem to be openminded enough to dissassociate a difference in opinion on an OS choice from a personal attack.
It’s just a thing, a construct. If it is such a part of your psyche that you are willing to assassinate the character of someone who chooses differently, it’s time to push yourself away from the keyboard and go outside for some fresh air.
To Eugenia, you say this in a post above: “Adam is talking about UI responsiveness.”
In part, yes. But the basic thesis and topic of his article is supposed to be this: “Can the Mac Replace My PC?” This is taken from his own title.
In posing this question, he first needs to apprise the reader as to how he uses his PC and for what purposes and applications. Absent this information, his answer will be meaningless to us. He says he does a lot of networking–fine. And yet he says NOTHING about the extensive networking capability of OS X.
The answer to this question (as to whether the Mac can replace a PC) depends on how the computer is used. Is it used for software development? For desktop publishing and graphics? For database management? For office productivity (such as with word processing, spreadsheet, etc)? For video editing? For scientific applications? For gaming?
If the reader doesn’t know against what baseline these platforms are evaluated, then the article fails its OWN stated mission.
As I noted in a previous post, Adam likened OS X to a prom queen (or something similar) who looked good but who couldn’t make it on the debate team. This is his way of saying that OS X is the “dumb blonde” of operating systems. This reveals his bias and his blindspot. OS X is Unix–every bit as much as any other Unix implementation. And to suggest that Unix doesn’t have what it takes under the hood is ludicrous and unworthy of refutation. I don’t find this person credible for this and other reasons.
The whole question was, after using that Mac for a month, if he was inclined to switch over or not. And his answer for HIMSELF was NO.
The problem is it’s a faulty premise. Despite the positive remarks about the Mac, his reasons for sticking with PC are ones that he could have surmised fom the beginiing without opening the Mac box at all.
To make an unbiased judgement you *have* to eliminate variables such as cost/performance, because those are known quantities stacked against the Mac from the get-go.
>I don’t find this person credible for this and other reasons.
But you took time to read the article and spend time whining about it in a post. The title of the article was Can the Mac Replace MY PC?” Using the word “MY” in the title would seem to indicate that he is going to make his judgements based on what he finds important. At least he gave OSX a try. Just because he may have reached a different conclusion than you doesn’t make him wrong or not credible.
>> Even as an Op-Ed piece with the idea of “Can the
>> Mac replace the PC?”, the objectives should have
>> been spelled out. I.E. – “I do this, that and the other
>> with my PC. How was my experience at using a Mac
>> to accomplish those same tasks?”
I will make a couple more comments, then shut up.
Notice that I did comment on the fact that even as an editorial piece, it was lacking. You seemed to overlook that comment completely. Adam never specified how he uses his current PC and if he was able to accomplish those tasks effectively or with fewer crashes (etc) on the Mac. The article had none of that info. Therefore, the byline is completely mis-leading. It should have been titled “Flamebait: A Mac can’t replace my PC”.
> It shows you the OPINION of a person and why he
> will NOT switch. This alone DOES has value.
Not so much. He nitpicks about some very minor details and then decides he doesn’t like it. I understand about UI responsiveness and its importance, but he doesn’t say “the machine’s slowness caused me to take much longer in performing this or that task.” Some more concrete usability examples would have been nice.
All he said is that the performance “seemed” sluggish. But perception is not always truth. Did it actually take longer to get online and read his email daily? Browse web pages? Write a quick Perl script and upload it? I doubt it. I would have been nice to see an example or two of what he actually used the computer to do for a whole month.
Marty
Many people here have some pretty strong opinions about what OSNews is and what it isn’t. I’m going to clarify to make it crystal clear.
OSNews is owned by David Adams. Everyone else is a volunteer. We get no money or compensation. Every article you read here is shared with you, not provided for you. If any article isn’t what you want it to be, you have a few options.
1) Don’t read it.
2) Post intelligent rebuttals in the comments sections or forums.
3) Write your own article and submit it.
People throughout this comments section have gone to great lengths to pick apart this particular editorial, all the while ignoring the fact that it is simply one person’s experience (they’ve also invented author claims which simply aren’t there). Furthermore, it upsets me to see this community post unconstructive comments without even leaving an e-mail address. Aside from being perceived by many as cowardly, it lends to the trollish nature of “zealots.” If you don’t like what you see, don’t read it.
This isn’t Slashdot or Newsforge and doesn’t aim to be – this is a community web page. If you’re unhappy, be proactive – write something yourself.
No doubt, OS X can feel a bit slow. Most of this blame can be placed upon OS X graphic layer. Quartz is, more or less, a vector based graphic system, not a bitmap based graphic system like those found in Windows XP and MacOS 9.
Apple is, as always, a bit ahead of their time with this technology. Although nVidia and ATi are now reseaching accelerated postscript graphics, all current video cards have not really been geared toward this. Most of the compositing for quartz is done on the CPU, or the on GPU via an OpenGL wrapper for quartz.
All in all, I can’t say that I find speed to be a big problem with Jaguar on my Dual 450MHz g4 with a Radeon 8500 or on my 800mhz iMac with a gForce 2. OS X feels very responsive to me. Moreover, OS X feels a lot more intuitive then any of my XP boxes.
OS X is feels more “logical” to me. I typically reach the end of my tasks faster in X, and, unlike my XP boxes, I am a lot less likely to yell “arrrhhh, you should work, everything is configured perfectly, arrrr why aren’t you working…..don’t you want to work!?” and “damn, another security update?!”
Ohh and did I mention a lack of DRM software for consumer media apps? Ohh sweat bliss.
All those people who complain about the article shows how dangerous can Apple be if Apple wins any significant support. Apple and its followers have no respect to any people who oppose their ideas.
Apple is a company which used DMCA to threaten its partners to prevent iDVD to work with other drivers. Apple sued and threatened sites which distribute OsX GUI stuff which people use to customize their OS X. Apple threatened and sued companies not to use the word “Apple” as their product names. Apple phunishes people who gossip about its products. Ethically Apple is worse than Microsoft, even Microsoft is not that aggressive.
Apple doesn’t give any better value for your money. Worse you end up wasting money, since you get less of many things. Less applications, less games, less hardware support, less quality CPU, a doomed CPU architecture… etc. There is not much technological innovation. The whole new thing in OS X is the interface. Its interface is pretty, nice icons, beautiful windows. But when compared to Windows Xp it has not much chance.
My suggestion to people is that if you want to support something as an alternative to Microsoft, support Linux, not Apple. Apple is a greedy company who wants to sell more hardware and make money as much as possible. Their latest OS 10.2 upgrade is a proof. They demand a full price for an upgrade which fixes lots of problems in OS 10.1. Just check out how much money you would have to spend if you bought Apple when they first shipped OS X with their computers. You would have to upgrade to OS 10.1 which was free. But then you would have to spend more than 100$ for the new Jaguar.
Adam, I can’t speak for others here of course, but I have never taken your editorial or commentary as anything else. I simply find it lacking even by your own measure.
You ask whether the Mac can replace your PC–and your answer is no. But you don’t englighten us as to WHY you feel this way. Is it the loose cable? Please. You and I both know this was a fluke–unworthy of mention. (It would be different if shoddy construction gave rise to frequent reports of this problem.) Did you decision stand or fall on the one-button mouse?
You describe yourself as a network-centric power user. Well, does a power user ignore expansion options and ease of access to a computer’s hardware internals? By focusing instead on the freak loose cable, you remind me of the Oscar Wilde quotation of one who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
If you had explained to the readers how you use your computer and WHY OS X cannot meet those needs, then your article would have met its own mission. But instead you call your detractors cowards for failing to include their e-mail addresses.
Well, I get quite enough unsolicited mail as it is–thank you very much, and merely because I don’t want to add to it is not to say that I’m unwilling to be accountable for my posts here. (You will notice I’m one of the few who uses his real name.) This is a forum for the purpose of an exchange of views–and that’s what I’m doing here. You are welcome to take issue with my posts, as I am with yours–that’s certainly fair game.
man, that sucks about the IDE cable…. but hey give Apple some credit on the case’s “door” you had to open to get to that cable
. Those things are rad 
Sometimes computers don’t always come out of the box perfectly. That’s the way the world is. However it’s probably a bit easier to get your hands inside of a Mac to fix a problem if one should occur
“Several of the core Apple apps rock and blow away the junk on the PC – there is no iPhoto or iDVD for the PC. There is nothing like the overall package of included, built-in, updated continuously for free, work similarly set of Apple apps. Instead, there’s a confusing melee of inferior product with crappy tech support and confusing UI. And I haven’t even started talking about windows for OS X yet.”
In your opinion they blow away windows stuff. Do they beat the bundled apps, sure. Are they better then any apps for windows? Thats a big statement. There are tons of photo programs (irfanview, acdsee, windows own viewer, etc.) and tons of dvd burning software (easy cd creator has it now, haven’t used it but the program is simple enough for cds, don’t know why it would be hard for dvds). As for inferior product, crappy tech support and confusing UI those are your opinions. And tech support is usually crappy.
“Wrong, you can’t have one company making the hardware, OS, apps and online service integrated together. Try again.”
Of course if MS did that you would be the first in line calling for a lawsuit. Its the same with bundled apps, everytime ms includes something now they get to look forward to lawsuits. Can’t include a dvd burning program, its middleware. Can’t include a better photo program, its middleware. They’ll just have to settle for making the os, office suite, browser, email, im client and in many cases the isp.
It’s so tiring to hear this argument still going on. No one OS is really better with out the other. There would be no drive to out do anyone would there be?
It’s about time to finally hear those words–MACs are no better or worse than any other platform, PC, OS, etc.!!
I’m sick of hearing how great MACs are when PCs can do EVERYTHING a MAC can do. And, as the writer pointed out you can do it for a lot less money too.
I agree that MACs have a place in the Publishing world and other similar environments and that some people are more comfortable with these machines. One thing you MAC die-hards MUST agree on is that if it weren’t for Gates and Microsoft APPLE would have bitten the dust a long time ago. It’s not his fault that Apple can’t market its products…
In regard to the idea that it’s not Gates’ fault that Apple cannot market its products, gee, what a coincidence that no other non-Wintel platform in the desktop arena could effectively market its products either. What a coincidence that it was only Microsoft which could do so.
Guess what guys…why not just use whatever works for you and be happy with it…there is no one true godly OS…despite what many wanna say
i actually use three OSes…Windows XP Pro (gasp!)…Red Hat 8.0…and FreeBSD 4.7-STABLE
and they all have their pluses and minuses…use whatever works best for the job…Red Hat is great for most purposes…but it doesn’t play games or DVDs for shit on my computer…WinXP does mulitmedia like games and DVDs wonderfully…is compatible with any program i’d ever want to run on it…etc, etc…but it lacks the power and customizability of UNIX
FreeBSD is really powerful…but it doesn’t run well on my laptop…so i’ve relegated it to my MP3/print server, which it does very well and very securely
so anyway…enough with the pissing contests…and yes some people are going to say that OS X would be great for my needs…but it really lacks the flexibility and customizability i want…in hardware and software
-bytes256
Like Jeff said, the question here was “Can Mac replace PC”. To find that out, one should use Mac exclusively for that month and try to do everyday tasks on Mac and Mac only. If you failed to perform any of your tasks in that period, you should report about that.
David Coursey of ZDNet had done just that and his views are far more professional. If you want to read his stories, you can easily find them on ZDNet, and if Adam followed the subject of this review, we’d have much better story and less trolling around.
>David Coursey of ZDNet had done just that and his views are far more professional
Why? Because he actually did the switch?
>>David Coursey of ZDNet had done just that and his views are far more professional
>Why? Because he actually did the switch?
His article was better written – especially in terms of stated objective and how he measured his results to reach his conclusion
To all Macintosh users,
Please don’t be concerned. First, I should say that everything has it’s positive and negative points, even Macintosh, to make it clear I am at least trying not to be biased. Second, bear in mind that Apple is competing with the _entire_ computing world (on both hardware and software fronts).
Ok, enough niceties.
OS X makes people scared. These kinds of articles prove this conclusively, to my mind. Few people can walk the “unbiased” line – if people own a Mac they love them, if they can’t “afford” one then they hate them, simple. Why? Because the combination of OS X and Apple hardware is unrivaled by any other software/hardware combination (on an individual user level, not talking about servers where the GUI doesn’t count).
Apple hardware is beautiful, elegant, well-thought out. OS X is similar. Anybody who owns a Mac that can run OS X knows how most people react on sight – shame? (this is the Mac that I’ve been putting this down for so long?), fright (Oh my Gosh, it’s going to cause riots in the user-base), envy (those Mac users always talking about how good they are! I need to find a “dock” for Windows – where can I get big icons?), etc…
No my friends, be quite and confident that you have a computing system that is satisfying and _useable_ and _logical_. Drag and drop app install (I can install Office in under 3 mins, can you? Or just for fun how about a network install in under 3 mins?), all the major apps (Linux people dream of having Dreamweaver MX installed on their LAMP boxes – that is my life, but XAMP), many “special” apps (DragThing, Chimera, OmniOutliner, Searchling, Ben Haller, Chris Stone, Jordan Hubbard [not an apps as such but a great guys]), a choice in browsers, a KeyChain (not just a password manager, but system integration), system-wide AddressBook, iSync, Open-source apps (GIMP, film-GIMP, OpenOffice, etc. you know the deal), Big ICONS!!(and a dock, but that is a debatable point and a low blow, likewise fun window minizations – although for the average person these things make a really big “fun” factor difference – they will be dismissed by the PC zealots).
Now the hardware. No legacy ports. RISC (low power in laptops – Apple laptops rock the _house_ – only slot-loading _DVD-burning, widescreen, 5 hour battery, Gigabit ethernet, titanium cased, dual monitor support laptop I know of), looks to die for (case mods but mass production), OS integration (less OS install problems).
If you add all these together you have a powerful combination. So, back to my second disclaimer – that Apple is competing with the massed computing of the world – where does Apple lose out? Speed. If anybody is biased and wants to pick on Macs what can they pick on? Speed. (Price I hear you say? Well price is a very difficult one to compare… for all the things I listed _I_ feel that it is well worth it – couldn’t imagine the horror of purchasing a PC… A cheaper Dell is fully twice the size of an eMac – I had to set a Dell up for a friend, I felt like shouting “The box, look at the box!” it is a good version of a box, but nothing compared to the set up of an eMac. You _get_ what you pay for. Less money more hassel. No thanks, your mileage may vary)
I try not to be biased. I use PCs at work. But I can’t be as productive. The PC “maximise” (fill the screen) is _really_ limiting (Longhorn sideshow, verdict out). I have tried don’t tell me I haven’t tried. I wish some of the PC users would try so hard with Mac before they make a decision (but they don’t decide out of genuine interest, but, as pointed out above, out of fear). The registry – no more need by said (And I hear .NET is moving away from the registry idea – HA! back to INI files! How 3.1!).
No. In the final analysis I am satisfied with my purchase. I have to reassure myself with a dose of Windows now and again, but I am _happy_ (how many ways can I say it – My iBook makes me feel happy when I use it – How much is that worth? One _huge_ Dell box or two?)
Peace to my friends,
AQS
Ps These comments represent my current state of mind – If Apple should ever move to DRM and general lock-down/meglomania I might have to move to Linux, until then I’m having fun.
>His article was better written
1. David Coursey is a professional journalist doing so for living. No one at OSNews is.
2. I remember people dissing off his articles and being unhappy with him. I guess you can’t please everyone.
David Coursey devoted a number of months to using strictly a Macintosh with OS X and he wrote a series of articles on his experience of going “cold turkey.” He kept his eye on the prize and focused on the bigger usability issues and on his getting his work done–and he spoke of pros and cons as he saw them. He did not get distracted with trivial issues.
Also, I should note that Tim O’Reilly, publisher of the famous and highly respected O’Reilly computer books, is a big proponent of OS X–and has high hopes for its future. Let’s remember that OS X is not even two full years old yet–while Windows and Linux have been around MUCH longer. Considering the quick and promising start of OS X, I think O’Reilly is correct to hold outt high hopes for the platform.
Up to now, I have not even weighed in on which OS I find superior. I will say I can find pros and cons to all of them. I have used Windows 200 Advanced Server and OS X (both client and server) as well as Linux, AIX, SCO, and other Unix variants. I think the most exciting development in operating systems is taking place right now in Darwin and OS X, and apparently one of the two founders of BSD Unix agrees and has joined Apple, (unfortunately I don’t recall his name). In two years Apple has done what Linux still has not done yet in 10–which is to bring Unix to the desktop and to the consumer. And it has done this without sacrificing the power and customizability which Unix offers. You can use the bash shell or X-Windows with Motif to your heart’s content–even under OS X. Indeed, you can even install one of several Linux variants on the Mac/PCC platform.
OS X is unique in the Unix world insofar as it offers consumer apps, enterprise networking capability, system admin tools, (both GUI and CLI), vertical market apps, robust support for third-party peripherals, etc–all in a single platform. It has much growing yet to do–no question about it; but it holds much promise and I’m eager to see what the future will bring.
I certainly will be.
Just wanted to note that almost all windows keyboards include a key that does what a right click does. looks like a pointer on a menu. and i know a damn lot of people who can’t use a two button mouse properly (not even after 4 years with one).
So now, when all is said and done, it’s all Eugenia’s fault – again. You 13 year old’s, better get to bed – tomorrow’s a school day!
I am happy Eugenia will not have to put up with this crap any longer.
I invite OSNews readers to read (and comment on) a much more in-depth examination of issues encountered by PC-to-Mac switchers.
http://macbuyersguide.com/editorials/Switch2Mac_report.htm
OMB Shite… yeah why need to press CTRL (needs scroll)
MACOSX Dock, Great Awesome
Start Menu, Great Awesome, allows you to use the variety of apps that dont exist on the mac, hence the dock being so simple,
i have a i8200, and a tibook 800, the i8200, (1.8ghz) is soo much speedier, than the tibook, i like the tibook, as its a bit smaller and lighter, but has less battery life (the i8200 has 2 batteries, hence heavier, but lasts 6 – 7 hours, the tibook lasts max 4 hours…
i like macosx cause its flashy but the hype dies, i use my i8200 more cause more apps, and i usually shift the tibook to my girlfriend, (hello kitty) type girl, she loves it…
me, i like more flexibility, i use linux quite often for fun, but windows for work…
i find with windows… and osx it justs works….
but i find with linux, making it work, the challenge, is so much more fun,
hope i get a few comments,
P.S. Eugenia, your a champ, i always respect what you say, (an on occasion i dont agree with everything you say) you rock, but get some sleep, this website must be hurting you… oh yeah, and goodluck in the future, i wish you an your hubby the best of luck….
cheers
Mark
News at 11: Eugenia violates OS News Terms (I just read them, you have) and mods other readers down for calling her on it. When will the madness stop?