Leopard Vs. Vista 420
Rockgod writes to point us to an ongoing series of articles, "Leopard vs. Vista," by Daniel Eran. The latest is part 4, Naked Sales, and it's a meditation on hardware without Windows, Apple's strategy of hardware-software integration, and the dissatisfactions that arise from the creative tension between Microsoft and hardware manufacturers. (The earlier articles in the series are linked form this one.) From the article: "The vast majority of PCs come with Windows pre-installed, and actually can't be sold without it. Leading PC hardware makers can't freely advertise PCs sold without Windows, or with an alternative OS such as Linux, without having to pay Microsoft significantly more for every other OEM license they ship. That's why all name brand PCs prominently repeat their own version of the cult-like phrase 'Dell recommends Windows XP Professional,' as if there were a choice in the matter and they thought it would be helpful to provide some guidance... Apple's current Get a Mac advertising campaign doesn't compare Mac OS X to Windows, it compares the complete experience of a Mac with that of a PC. After all, Windows is only half of what's wrong with the PC as a product."
"Macs aren't more expensive..[shipped] with an OS" (Score:4, Informative)
Macs aren't more expensive because Apple ships them with an OS, just as Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer does not raise its cost for Windows. Windows would not be cheaper if the company removed IE, just as Apple wouldn't save any money by shipping Macs without Mac OS X.
Err...well, yes Macs are more expensive because Apple ships them with an OS. That's because Apple has to recover the cost of developing that OS through sales of Mac hardware. Note that I'm not comparing the cost of Macs and PCs here, I'm talking about the cost of a Mac as an absolute. A Mac would be cheaper if Apple didn't have to develop OS X. Whether it would be worthwhile for them to do that I leave as a (rather obvious) exercise for the reader.
Cheers,
Ian
When you write for specific hardware.... (Score:5, Informative)
I built a Smoothwall firewall last week, that kept crashing. I finally tracked the problem to a bad NIC (that was just good enough to run in Windows and to not to generate error messages in the log).
Does that make Macs better than SW? maybe h/w-wise
Do I blame SW for the crappy NIC? I shouldn't, although I cursed them repeatedly while trying to find the problem
Do I blame Microsoft for the crappy NIC? of course, this is Slashdot
Vertical
Re:Hardware and software... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Hardware and software... (Score:5, Informative)
why do they feel that the only way they can compete is by
forcing people to use it? What are they afraid of?
1) Piracy. By making you buy complete Macs they know they got paid for OS X as well, the hardware is the biggest and most complex dongle possible.
2) Support. By having just a few fixed configuration, testing and support is much easier. Many crappy experiences with Windows is due to crappy hardware and crappy drivers.
3) Image. Apple wants to have an image, for example they've never released a low-end machine. The iPod was built on image, like "You can have any color you want, as long as it's white" which most people thought died out with Henry Ford. They're not going to give up on their hardware image easily.
4) Pricing. Apple doesn't really charge a fixed price for OS X, they can price-gouge you based on what hardware you intend to run it on. If they had to offer one price that'd run on anything from Mac mini-class to Mac Pro-class machines, they couldn't.
Apple still sells systems (Score:3, Informative)
When the IBM PC was introduced, the whole "system" idea was almost completely forgotten by the general public. In 2006, when you say "computer" most people think "I buy a box from someone and install an OS from someone else on it".
Apple simply never stopped selling systems, but we still hear people "I want to buy the Apple OS for my beige box" comments.
Apple sells complete systems, you can't have the software without the hardware, or vice-versa.
Re:the silent mac minority (Score:2, Informative)
> how do i assign a user mount permissions in fstab (to mount floppies etc.)?
In the options section of the fstab, add the option 'user' to the mount
point, e.g.:
First up on da google for "mount permissions".
PenGun
Do What Now ???
Re:subject (Score:5, Informative)
Delicious Library
Comic Life
Grid Computing out of the box
Handbrake (although I hear there's a Windows beta now)
MacTheRipper
iLife (iMovie, iPhoto, iDVD, GarageBand, iWeb)
Shake
Logic, and Logic Express
Final Cut Pro
This list of Mac-only software was written from my memory in less than 30 seconds. I'm of the very strong belief that tides have turned, and now OS X has the strongest line-up of software available on any platform at any price. Sure, there may be 10x more contenders for various tools (like DVD rippers, editing software, etc.) but the best in class is on the Mac. And it keeps getting better all the time due to technologies like Core Data, and Core Image, (and now Core Animation) that means that one person developing for the Mac can produce something that would take ten people to do the same on Windows.
Re:the silent mac minority (Score:1, Informative)
> On a Mac, this would have been simple, easy, intuitive. (...)
> So the "Mac user experience" is about how not to waste time.
Lets go on with Mac:
1. I use BlueTooth on daily basis to sync my phone with Mac. One day the BT just stopped working with dialog "It does not work". Easy, intuitive.
2. My Mac can't connect to WPA2 protected wifi network. Windows machines (my friend's mind you) and Linux (my ThinkPad laptop) have no problems with my Linksys router. Mac will just say "Cannot connect to {foo} network" just this. Easy, intuitive, simple.
3. I find it annoying that once in a time some update causes other things to stop work. Especially when you run more complicated setup than just ussing crappy iLife and iChat. And then comming after the stupid flaw and banging my head against keyboard thinking about what stupid decission Apple made this time is time saving really. And easy too!
4. Finder is full of annoying bugs. F.e. once in a time (I recall I encounter it at least few times a week) some window just can't be minimized or maximised. The buttons for minimise/maximise don't work till Finder restart.
5. Another annoyung Finder bug is that when I copy a folder from other computer (via NFS or when you unpack archive) to my Mac often it is marked as empty dir (but It is not empty!) and I cannot access it contents (it displays empty in Finder). When I open Terminal.app and do ls on that folder magically it is then not empty for Finder. Intuitive, easy, time saving.
6. There is no way to have NFS or SMB share mounted on system startup (nor login) in a way that is visible from Finder. You can do manual mount with mount command or
7. Oh and mounting NFS share with Finder is retarded since it mounts NFS share with the most retarded options you can imagine. So when netwok goes down (oh did I mention that this Mac sometimes looses wifi connection with no explanation?) all programs (including the Finder) freeze. Easy.
So please "Apple way" my ass. I am sad to said that as for now EVERY operating system (be it OSX, Linux, Windows etc.) sucks in some way. Really.
Re:Windows will continue to dominate (Score:2, Informative)
So true. That's the only time I find myself looking to Windows. The point being I should really just finally decide between getting a games console or giving up games full stop!
Smug sounding but true: the 3rd party software selection on OS X may be narrower than Windows but there's so much less crud there it's actually a comparative pleasure. Fresh app hunting seems to be the most popular game on the Mac these days if my observations are anything to go by...
Re:Hardware and software... (Score:2, Informative)
> why do they feel that the only way they can compete is by
> forcing people to use it? What are they afraid of?
Thats easy, they are afraid of MacOS X becoming another Windows clone, Windows just can't get the same integration with the hardware the way MacOS X can, because Microsoft just can't control the hardware that is used the way Apple can. If Apple to relinquish that control, MacOS X would lose it's Integration, and at least half of what MacOS X work so well is that integration.
Digitally signed Drivers is MicroSoft's attempt and forcing hardware manufacturer's to give MicroSoft that hardware control needed to get the level of Integration Apple has in MacOS X, but it's not working, because in the end, someone else makes the hardware and the driver. Apple actually has Manufacturer's making hardware to there's specs, allowing Apple to fully develop and maintain the drivers. as the article mention, this means when you have a fault, in Windows the Fault could be with Windows, but MS could just Say it's the Driver or the Hardware, and from there it could be several different companies to deal with. With MacOS X, you have Apple, but wait, they don't have anyone to "Pass the buck" to, the Buck stops there.
As a computer support professional myself, I have been there, and trust me, it's a nightmare when you get that round robin buck passing going on, the result is simply a waste of money and you dumping the whole thing to find a better product. I'll admit be being biased, I prefer Apple, and with Apple I always found the better product.
Re:the silent mac minority (Score:4, Informative)
Re:the silent mac minority (Score:5, Informative)
Not all tools are perfect (the Finder does have problems sometimes), but to blame the tool because the building won't go up, well, that's just uncool.
There is nothing you haven't mentioned that hasn't a resolution that requires you to spend a lot of time on it. Tired of using the GUI? Go around it; this is a BSD after all. It'll likely work.
Re:This is getting old... (Score:3, Informative)
The *only* complaints you could have in the ones you listed are the motherboard and (possibly) the processor... And Apple design their own motherboards, so that's what you get. Who *really* cares what motherboard you have, as long as it does its job ?
To break it down for you:
Either you're smoking something illegal, or you're woefully uninformed.
Simon
Shake (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shake_(
And as you can read there, but I'll say here because I just love saying it in any MS vs Apple discussion: Apple killed support of Shake on Windows shortly after acquiring NothingReal.
So yes, GP poster, it's "Mac-only" (actually, there's the Linux version - but they charge you considerably more.) - but only because Apple made it such.
Troll (Score:4, Informative)
That is equivalent to MSFT partner programs which cost a lot more than three and a half grand. It gives you access to compatibility labs at Apple and other perks including discounts on hardware and early access to the next version of OS X seeds. None of MSFT's programs offer that.
Compare that to Microsoft's approach to developers, which is reflected by Steve Ballmer's comic "DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!" dance. Eg. Microsoft gives away free versions of Visual Studio.NET, you can downlad all the SDKs for free, etc. Visual Studio is by far the best IDE out there. The other ones don't come close to it in long-term usability (as Carmack said on his blog some years ago).
Right.... MSFT gives away lite versions of their expensive VS.NET product which you cannot be used for large projects. Apple includes gcc, all the SDKs for shipping and previous releases of OS X, Xcode and interface builder with every release of OS X on the DVD. Anyone can sign up for a free account to download free updates to the tools and SDKs.
Speaking of MSDN:
Sorry, but you are going to have to try harder. I have the top tier MSDN subscription through work.Parent is wrong, not insightful (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, you have no idea what "TurboCache" [hardwareanalysis.com] means, do you? Let me enlighten you -- it's Nvidia marketing-speak for "fake memory." The "256MB Quadro NVS TurboCache" doesn't have 256MB of memory; it's named that because it can use up to 256MB of system memory. It's not actually much better (if at all) than Intel's integrated video. And it certainly isn't comparable to the MacBook Pro, "with up to 256MB of dedicated graphics memory!" [apple.com]
Second, the MacBook Pro is also most likely better in several other ways, so you'd have to upgrade all those other things on the Dell to make it comparable. You can't go around saying "Macs are more expensive" when you're cherry-picking particular aspects of the machine -- they have to be comparable in every aspect, not just (for example) graphics.
So, in other words, your argument is both wrong and stupid. Have a nice day.
Just a few problems in your post... (Score:5, Informative)
Control Panel -> Sharing -> hit the 'XGrid' checkbox. Done. I guess that qualifies as "best in class".
The parent poster's argument was that a lot of the Mac apps are "best in class", and I think he has a point. Certainly nothing you've said has managed to disprove it. As for "the only reason people buy
I blame the Windows OS (Score:3, Informative)
To code a Windows app on your own isn't particularly hard, but I don't think it scales as well to large groups - there's too much cruft in there, and too many ways to screw up with C++ because it's a complicated language. A group of 30 clever people, experts in the language, can be let down by one not-quite-so-expert person not realising some subtle interaction.
Apple, on the other hand, don't much care about backwards compatibility (just upgrade, and get all these extras too), have a much cleaner OS (basically unix), and a much simpler object-orientated language to work with. Objective C is 90% as powerful as C++, but it works in a different way and although it's very powerful, it's simple to pick up and use. Apple's guidelines are simple as well, and this helps when group A are relying on something that group B are developing, when groups A and B haven't even ever met.
So, Apple get to leverage lots of frameworks in an easier fashion. I think MS have a complexity-management problem forced on them by their language choice and their commitment to backwards compatibility. If I'm right, it's only going to get harder for MS as time goes by...
Simon
Re:laptops, clitmouse, touchpad, andmouse (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Just a few problems in your post... (Score:3, Informative)
Bottom line is that it's still a near useless app that can be replaced by freeware on any platform
Fundamentally, every program can be replaced by a monitor program, with the user typing in hex bytes into memory locations. There's this idea that having a program take the drudgery out of a task, automating common tasks, and generally making life easier is a good thing. So that deals with the "replaced by freeware" - *nothing* comes close. "Best in class", yes I think so.
"Near useless" is also a relative thing - a friend of mine uses it to entertain his kids no end, and it takes him 5 minutes to create something they love - far and away easier than any other way of doing it.
So it just randomly selects clients to connect to, network interfaces to use, and every other parameter? I call bullshit...
Ah, I see you misunderstand - using the client libraries is usually pretty easy (which you'd know if you'd ever written a bulk-synchronous parallel distributed application). It's the setting up of the server side that can be involved, with different machines having to know which other machines they can send tasks to. Apple use Rendezvous to automate that - all the complexity of managing which machines run faster, which ones have sufficient resources, which ones you have permissions for etc. is all managed automatically. Just write your code, link with the correct library, and your code will distribute automatically wherever it can. No bullshit. Trivial to set up and really easy to use - best in class, I reckon.
sounds to me like it does everything any other DVD authoring program does only with that pretty mac theme
Actually there are lots of themes, and yes that's exactly what it does. Really really well - the animation effects are provided by Quartz composer [apple.com] (which we mentioned earlier). We were discussing various application areas and which applications are the best within their own application area. I'm glad you've seen the light and agree with me that iDVD is "best in class".
The perfect ==extension== for Final Cut Studio.
I really did LOL at that one. Trust me, Shake is *not* a plugin. FCP is a fantastic video-editing application, Shake is a fantastic compositing application. It's not uncommon to have Shake compositions (which can be rendered to Quicktime movies) included within Final-cut-authored movies. That's why Apple sell the "suite". When Allen was hawking the commandline-only version around the post-production scene trying to interest people in a wonderful new product, we purchased one of the first licences in London. The graphical version came later and "Nothing Real" took off. Apple bought them a few years later.
You can still purchase Shake, but Apple have announced they are no longer developing it. It is possible for larger sites to buy the source code - I think it was only $50k, so well worth it for most of the larger effects houses. Given that *entire* *movies* have been done using Shake (and not using FCP either LOL), I guess its "best in class"
feel free to state your sources in a way that can be proven
That's easy. Phone up CNN and ask them. Or the BBC for that matter.
Seems to me like [core data] is nothing but a glorified template system
Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear. I don't even know where to start. I suggest you get a clue and read the developer docs [apple.com]. You'll notice how the user-interface can be bound directly to objects persisted into the database ? How there is no "glue code" needed for things like this. And they don't have to be UI objects - any object is transparently and automatically persisted as requ
Not this guy again... (Score:2, Informative)