APFPilot1985
Topic Author
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 12:51 pm

Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Tue Jan 03, 2006 11:40 am

Amongst other reasons;

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/0d644d5e-7bb3-11da-ab8e-0000779e2340.html

"The news marks the latest security setback for Microsoft, the world’s biggest software company, whose Windows operating system is a favourite target for hackers.

“The potential [security threat] is huge,” said Mikko Hyppönen, chief research officer at F-Secure, an antivirus company. “It’s probably bigger than for any other vulnerability we’ve seen. Any version of Windows is vulnerable right now.”

The flaw, which allows hackers to infect computers using programs maliciously inserted into seemingly innocuous image files, was first discovered last week. But the potential for damaging attacks increased dramatically at the weekend after a group of computer hackers published the source code they used to exploit it. Unlike most attacks, which require victims to download or execute a suspect file, the new vulnerability makes it possible for users to infect their computers with spyware or a virus simply by viewing a web page, e-mail or instant message that contains a contaminated image.
Stand Up and Be Counted Visit Site Related to Voice your opinion
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3081
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Tue Jan 03, 2006 1:19 pm

Holy bonkers !!!!

Glad I have G5..!!!
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
ArmitageShanks
Posts: 3766
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 5:30 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Tue Jan 03, 2006 2:33 pm

I have used Macs at university for about a year now to write papers and do some serious photo editing and I can't stand them. They are so much more inconvienient to use.

One mouse button is atrocious
Hard to quickly open and switch between files and folders
No easy taskbar
You can't "minimise" things like on PC's

Those are my biggest gripes.
 
Tom12
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 7:29 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Tue Jan 03, 2006 2:45 pm

Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
They are so much more inconvienient to use

I totally agree i dont understand the systems on the damn thing. Our modern languages department uses them but when you are in there it takes half the class to try and get the thing going....the other half to close it down

Tom
"Per noctem volamus" - Royal Air Force Bomber Squadron IX
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:04 pm

You'll simply need to use them properly. They are not Windows machines (thank Jobs! )

Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
One mouse button is atrocious

It's no big deal - even though I personally prefer multi-button mice (new Macs come with the multi-button-plus-scroll-ball Mighty Mouse by now as well). It's simply a matter of getting used to. And under MacOS X you need context menus a lot less than under Windows. Drag & Drop actually works!

<Command> + Click will still give you a context menu, or simply click and hold the mouse button for a moment.

Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
Hard to quickly open and switch between files and folders

Huh? I can't even begin to understand your problem here. Try using the column mode, for instance (<
Command> + 3).

Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
No easy taskbar

The Dock does actually offer a lot more than that measly task bar where you can't find anything as soon as you've got a few windows open. Running applications appear in the Dock, with all windows of each application neatly collected under the application's icon. Not the indistinguishable mess as under Windows.

<
Command> + <Tab> navigates among running applications (there's a neat tool called Witch that extends this to navigation among all individual windows either globally or within the current application - highly recommended).

Then there is Exposé, which developers under all other systems are trying to emulate to varying degrees since Apple introduced it:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/expose/

It makes a huge difference in practice. It's a big step down when I have to work on a system without it by now.

Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
You can't "minimise" things like on PC's

That's what the yellow window button is for! If you want to hide an entire application with all its windows, use the "hide application" menu item or press <Command> + H.

Quoting Tom12 (Reply 3):
when you are in there it takes half the class to try and get the thing going....the other half to close it down

It takes a lot to damage and misconfigure a Mac to that point, especially a current model under MacOS X.


You just need to be open to the fact that you're not having to deal with Windows here, so things will work differently, in most cases they're simpler and more straightforward.

[Edited 2006-01-03 07:12:50]
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:09 pm




Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
One mouse button is atrocious



I LOVE my Mighty Mouse!





Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
Hard to quickly open and switch between files and folders



To test his Mac, a guy I know opened thirty-something programs in an attempt to lock it up. It lagged a little, but did the job just fine.

A Windows machine would have been glowing orange and smoking.  Wink




2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
hawaiian717
Posts: 3139
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:11 pm

Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
One mouse button is atrocious
Hard to quickly open and switch between files and folders
No easy taskbar
You can't "minimise" things like on PC's

Don't like the one button mouse? Plug in any two button mouse and it will work. Apple even has their own now, the Mighty Mouse. If you have a one button mouse, Control-click will get you the same contextual menu that right clicking does.

How is it hard to open a folder? Same double click as on Windows, and Windows doesn't have anything like the column view.

What you call a Taskbar we call a Dock.

And yes, you can minimize. See that little yellow button on every title bar? Click it and watch your window slide into the Dock. But who needs to minimize when you have Expos�? F9 and you can see every window, and click the one you want to bring it to the front.

This WMF exploit is huge. Microsoft hasn't patched it yet, and every version of Windows back to 98 are known to be vulnerable, and it is believed that everything back to 3.0 may be vulnerable. And this isn't just a theoretical exploit, the exploit has been spotted in the wild in actual use, including in spam email.

http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?storyid=994
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Metafile_vulnerability
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:21 am

I'm about to shoot mine at this point. (HP) My next computer will be a MAC, I assure you.
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
nhgrafx
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:21 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:32 am

Quoting Tom12 (Reply 3):
Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 2):
They are so much more inconvienient to use

I totally agree i dont understand the systems on the damn thing. Our modern languages department uses them but when you are in there it takes half the class to try and get the thing going....the other half to close it down

Tom

All you people need to do is get used to them. Someone using a Windows based system for years and years like me (15 years) will have trouble at first with a MAC, but after a bit of use and getting used to, its not a problem. I am a graphic designer/artist and MAC is king in my field, even though I don't actually own one, I use them quite a bit and like them better than Windows for most things.

As for people complaing about MAC's at their schools or colleges not working good, thats no surprise since so many people use them and things always get screwed up by people messing with things. Same goes with Windows based computers at schools or colleges. At my college, we have one lab with top of the line Windows based workstations, yet many of them run like an old 486 because so many people have screwed things up.
Is it weird I have a RemoveBeforeFlight pitot cover on my car rear view mirror?
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:42 am

Ever tried solving a PDE using Mathematica / MATLAB's symbolic toolbox / any Mapel-based software? Compare the results to the results you get from a Wintel machine, then understand why no engineer uses a Mac.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:59 am

What are you talking about? Those packages are based on the same sources as the versions for other platforms. And if they produced false results under MacOS X they simply would not be offered (and the compilers under MacOS X would have to be broken so severely that practically nothing could work at all which is obviously not the case).

I don't use any of these packages, but many other people do - including many scientists and engineers.
 
lesmainwaring
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 12:47 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:01 am

after 10-plus years with a PC, i finally had enough in november (after the 3rd PC i had in 3 years died an unceremoneous death) and switched to a Mac ... i love my powerbook g4
I want something under my wheels thats plenty long and mighty dry --- Vern Demarest
 
Notar520AC
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 6:53 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:13 am

Mac really does have a nice system- we use G5s for our school yearbook & they perform great. It's funny though how everyone freaks out because the simplicity is such a shocker.
BMW - The Ultimate Driving Machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:21 am

When you've had a painful upbringing under the Windows monopoly, at some point you're simply conditioned to expect everything to be tedious, difficult and frustrating.

In earlier times most people had contact with several different systems and had an idea of what was fundamental and what was specific to a certain system. Nowadays people are learning only to cope with Windows and believe they know how computers generally work - big mistake!

[Edited 2006-01-03 19:22:11]
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:30 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 10):
What are you talking about? Those packages are based on the same sources as the versions for other platforms. And if they produced false results under MacOS X they simply would not be offered

Maple-based packages and MATLAB toolboxes work alright on a Mac, but partly because Maple was written for Wintel machines, and partly because of the way programmes like MATLAB and Mathematica work. Back in the day, Mathematica and MATLAB needed to be programmed in pretty basic C, now they all have built in functions where in a few lines the kernel will take over and give you an answer.

The problem is that the Maple and Mathematica kernels are slower on a Mac and will produce false results every now and then. Now, I admit I don't like Maple, and don't really use Mathematica, but we tested out both a Powerbook G4 and one of our standard Wintel machines (512kb RAM, P4 3GHz) running XP Pro, and the Mac had problems with quite a PDEs and even some integrations.

There's a reason Macs aren't used in the engineering industry.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 6:48 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 14):
Maple-based packages and MATLAB toolboxes work alright on a Mac, but partly because Maple was written for Wintel machines, and partly because of the way programmes like MATLAB and Mathematica work.

Oh my. Sorry, but you're exposing your complete and utter lack of understanding how such things actually work with nonsense like that.

You're apparently remembering the FDIV-disaster Intel had a few years ago (the then-current Pentium versions actually screwed up certain mathematical operations and returned false result values which is pretty much catastrophic for the reliability of any mathematical application!) and from that you're simply guessing that the PowerPC CPUs Apple uses for the Macintosh up to now would certainly have even more severe malfunctions to account for your observations.

But sorry, that disaster was PC only. PowerPC CPUs have been developed to higher standards than that and have not been afflicted by any comparable maladies as the Pentium.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 14):
Back in the day, Mathematica and MATLAB needed to be programmed in pretty basic C, now they all have built in functions where in a few lines the kernel will take over and give you an answer.

Sorry, but that sentence makes no sense whatsoever in real-world technologies. It seems you cobbled together things you may have heard a while ago and now tried to fit to your argumentation.

Without knowing the specifics of the respective packages, I can assure you almost with certainty that "the kernel" (the execution core) of a mathematical package will very much be implemented in C or C++.

And that has nothing whatsoever to do with where an application has been implemented first - the whole point of C and C++ has always been cross-platform portability. And although it is possible to screw that up, such a screwup will have pretty similar consequences regardless where the original code has been written for the first time. You seem to believe in magical powers instilled in certain platforms, but in the real world it just doesn't work like that.

Your claim above is completely nonsensical, as anybody with any experience in software development will attest.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 14):
The problem is that the Maple and Mathematica kernels are slower on a Mac [...] we tested out both a Powerbook G4 and one of our standard Wintel machines (512kb RAM, P4 3GHz) running XP Pro

And you reached this monumental conclusion by pitching a PowerBook G4 with 1.67 GHz maximum clock speed in the latest models - your testing machine may well have been slower than that - against a 3 GHz Pentium?  crazy 

The G4 is no slouch, but your conclusion is completely worthless under those circumstances. You would have had to make such a comparison with a decent G5 machine to have any merit whatsoever, with halfway comparable system setups too.

One of the primary reasons why Apple is right now switching to Intel CPUs is exactly IBMs unwillingness to make a low-power mobile version of the G5 for use in the PowerBooks, so they were stuck with slower G4s for quite a while already. That is about to change, but you tested a speedwise outdated Mac against a current PC and then drew nonsensical conclusions about the software versions from that.  crazy 

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 14):
[...] and will produce false results every now and then. [...] and the Mac had problems with quite a PDEs and even some integrations.

There are several possibilities here; Cross-platform comparison isn't always as simple as the layman imagines, although application developers could make it seamless in most instants (Microsoft Office, incidentally, is a relatively positive example here). But in all too many cases, applications demand extra attention when transporting data and documents across platform boundaries.

Some of the potential pitfalls between a PowerPC Mac and a Pentium PC could very well have played a role in your tests:

Binary data is encoded differently between the PowerPC (in its default mode used under MacOS) and the Pentium. Every single numerical multi-byte value must be transposed when transporting binary data between the platforms. Some applications do that transparently, some don't care and leave it to the user to know about that and to use textual data formats instead.

Textual data uses different end-of-line formats under Windows, Unix and MacOS. All Mac applications I've used so far recognize all of them, but some packages may differ here and may run into problems.

• It is not that rare (if unfortunate) that the same application has quirks in its setup on different platforms which need to be properly synchronized in order to make true cross-platform usage possible.

• It is obviously necessary to compare identical versions of the same package on both platforms. Comparing a buggy older with a fixed newer version will of course give you discrepancies.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 14):
There's a reason Macs aren't used in the engineering industry.

Fortunately there are quite a few engineers who don't make as many mistakes as you do.

Better luck with whatever you're working on - I hope you're less sloppy with that!
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 7:22 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 15):

You're apparently remembering the FDIV-disaster Intel had a few years ago (the then-current Pentium versions actually screwed up certain mathematical operations and returned false result values which is pretty much catastrophic for the reliability of any mathematical application!) and from that you're simply guessing that the PowerPC CPUs Apple uses for the Macintosh up to now would certainly have even more severe malfunctions to account for your observations.

Great! None of the Pentium machines have any problems with mathematical operations.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 15):

Without knowing the specifics of the respective packages, I can assure you almost with certainty that "the kernel" (the execution core) of a mathematical package will very much be implemented in C or C++.

And that has nothing whatsoever to do with where an application has been implemented first - the whole point of C and C++ has always been cross-platform portability. And although it is possible to screw that up, such a screwup will have pretty similar consequences regardless where the original code has been written for the first time. You seem to believe in magical powers instilled in certain platforms, but in the real world it just doesn't work like that.

You know nothing about the packages, but then you go on to talk about how they work? Right...

Quoting Klaus (Reply 15):
And you reached this monumental conclusion by pitching a PowerBook G4 with 1.67 GHz maximum clock speed in the latest models - your testing machine may well have been slower than that - against a 3 GHz Pentium? crazy

The G4 is no slouch, but your conclusion is completely worthless under those circumstances. You would have had to make such a comparison with a decent G5 machine to have any merit whatsoever, with halfway comparable system setups too.

Your editing of my quote notwithstanding, I'm talking about factors of 2 and 3 times slowly, and significant computational errors.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 15):
There are several possibilities here; Cross-platform comparison isn't always as simple as the layman imagines, although application developers could make it seamless in most instants (Microsoft Office, incidentally, is a relatively positive example here). But in all too many cases, applications demand extra attention when transporting data and documents across platform boundaries.

Some of the potential pitfalls between a PowerPC Mac and a Pentium PC could very well have played a role in your tests:

• Binary data is encoded differently between the PowerPC (in its default mode used under MacOS) and the Pentium. Every single numerical multi-byte value must be transposed when transporting binary data between the platforms. Some applications do that transparently, some don't care and leave it to the user to know about that and to use textual data formats instead.

• Textual data uses different end-of-line formats under Windows, Unix and MacOS. All Mac applications I've used so far recognize all of them, but some packages may differ here and may run into problems.

• It is not that rare (if unfortunate) that the same application has quirks in its setup on different platforms which need to be properly synchronized in order to make true cross-platform usage possible.

• It is obviously necessary to compare identical versions of the same package on both platforms. Comparing a buggy older with a fixed newer version will of course give you discrepancies.

As someone who has to use packages like MATLAB as well as software not even avaliable for a Mac, I couldn't care less. All I care about is speed and accuracy of results, as well as easy consultation with my colleagues. A PC provides that. A Mac doesn't.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 15):
Fortunately there are quite a few engineers who don't make as many mistakes as you do.

Really, is that so? I don't know any mechanical or aeronautical engineers who use Macs regularly for work. None of the major engineering companies I've worked for, which is a few, use Macs. Most of them can't use Macs, the software just doesn't exist! The only people I know who use Macs have to use PCs in their professional life at some point. Most companies and colleagues I've worked with just don't want the hassle of using a Mac and a PC when they can just use PCs.

I'm not a software engineer, I couldn't care less how my computer works, just as long as it does what I want it to do. PCs do, Macs don't, sorry!

Quoting Klaus (Reply 15):

Better luck with whatever you're working on - I hope you're less sloppy with that!

Less of the insulting attitude, please.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:17 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
Great! None of the Pentium machines have any problems with mathematical operations.

...after the catastrophic bug had been fixed in newer iterations of the Pentium and the affected models received crutches to hobble along on (patches to be installed so the error was circumvented, at least in a patched system).

You are drawing the wildest conclusions in ways you don't really understand from tests whose circumstances you apparently didn't have under control as much as would have been necessary.

Actually know what you're talking about or be more careful with your conclusions!

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
You know nothing about the packages, but then you go on to talk about how they work? Right...

I qualified my statements accordingly. What I know is how applications are usually implemented, which options developers have and which failure modes exist under various circumstances (and which ones don't).

What you were talking about simply doesn't make any sense at all for any kind of application. Wild conjecture without the knowledge to back it up.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
Your editing of my quote notwithstanding, I'm talking about factors of 2 and 3 times slowly

I didn't "edit" what you claimed, I merely separated your claims about a) speed and b) discrepancies to properly answer each one in turn.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
[...] and significant computational errors.

You were apparently unable (and not even caring) to properly control the circumstances of your superficial test. Simply throwing a few files at a hastily installed complex package is not a test, it's a quick-and-dirty first glance. And as such worthless for a well-founded statement.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
As someone who has to use packages like MATLAB as well as software not even avaliable for a Mac, I couldn't care less. All I care about is speed and accuracy of results, as well as easy consultation with my colleagues. A PC provides that. A Mac doesn't.

In your case apparently not at the first lazy attempt, so you promptly gave up and reveled in the expected confirmation of your prejudice. Well, that's simply sloppy work. Maybe you can get away with that elsewhere, but when you're drawing outlandish claims from it, expect to be called on that.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
I don't know any mechanical or aeronautical engineers who use Macs regularly for work.

Your claim was "nobody does" and "it's impossible". Both are false generalizations from your personal observation and from one superficial attempt. Sloppy work.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
I'm not a software engineer, I couldn't care less how my computer works, just as long as it does what I want it to do. PCs do, Macs don't, sorry!

When I'm discussing topics where my expertise is limited, I don't deduct absolute claims from my limited observations and limited insight. Very simple, and standard procedure in any scientific or engineering field.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
Less of the insulting attitude, please.

Don't lean out of the window if you can't hold on to the ledge. Carelessness breeds accidents.

[Edited 2006-01-04 00:30:05]
 
APFPilot1985
Topic Author
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 12:51 pm

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:44 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 14):
(512kb RAM, P4 3GHz)

what was it? a calculator with a Pentium sticker on the pack? 512 kb??
Stand Up and Be Counted Visit Site Related to Voice your opinion
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:54 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 17):
Actually know what you're talking about or be more careful with your conclusions!

How about this for a conclusion?

The software nor the economics nor the will exists for most industries to use Macs.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 17):

What you were talking about simply doesn't make any sense at all for any kind of application. Wild conjecture without the knowledge to back it up.

Fortunately, the following is not conjecture.  Smile

The software nor the economics nor the will exists for most industries to use Macs.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 17):

I didn't "edit" what you claimed, I merely separated your claims about a) speed and b) discrepancies to properly answer each one in turn.

So you edited what I said?

Quoting Klaus (Reply 17):
You were apparently unable (and not even caring) to properly control the circumstances of your superficial test. Simply throwing a few files at a hastily installed complex package is not a test, it's a quick-and-dirty first glance. And as such worthless for a well-founded statement.

The comparison we carried out was pointless anyway because the software nor the economics nor the will exists for most industries to use Macs. Nevertheless, simply running code in a programme that's meant to work on a Mac is a valid test, like it or not.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 17):

Your claim was "nobody does" and "it's impossible". Both are false generalizations from your personal observation and from one superficial attempt. Sloppy work.

Would you like me to clarify further? No major industry outside of video editing and development, picture editing and development and software engineering uses a Mac. Can you name any major companies outside of the media industry that use Macs? They're expensive, have poor speed compared to PCs and have very poor compatability. They're just not a good industrial computer.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 17):
When I'm discussing topics where my expertise is limited, I don't deduct absolute claims from my limited observations and limited insight. Very simple, and standard procedure in any scientific or engineering field.

My claim all along has been this, Macs can't do complex computations as well as a PC. Because of this, their cost and lack of comparability, they're not used at all in the engineering industry, and probably no where in any serious scientific company.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. People like you can moan about how great Macs are, but the evidence (market share) suggests they're not.

What's with the highly insulting tone? It's a computer, for crying out loud. Your petulent little attacks on people who don't love your your precious computers seem rather petty. All I'm telling you is my experience, and the experience of every single engineering company, which is that Macs aren't useful.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:25 am

You're starting with your personal disinterest and disdain for a platform you don't know - which is perfectly okay as a personal preference - but your mistake is that you derive absolute claims from that. Not from actual observation (absolute claims require complete knowledge which you don't possess), just backwards from your preference.

It is quite obvious that PCs dominate most areas, but the domination is almost nowhere as absolute as you claim.

The "inability to do complex calculations" is utterly laughable - that claim betrays a level of incomprehension of technology and products which simply disqualifies itself. Quite the same with the rest of your claims. With your obvious disinterest it's pretty redundant to go through each of them individually. Most have been debunked before in here and elsewhere or are easily verifiable at various web sites.

You can very well not know and not care. Fine with me. But you can't expect to be taken even halfway serious when you're making nonsensical claims about "never" "everywhere" "impossible" and the like.

And if you have followed me in various discussions you could have known that I have a rather strong dislike of attempts to spread disinformation. Different opinions are certainly debatable, but plain old disinformation is unacceptable. Regardless whether it's in a political, social, scientific or technological context.

If you want to make absolute claims, be certain and have evidence to back it up, not just lazy prejudice!
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:30 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 20):
You're starting with your personal disinterest and disdain for a platform you don't know - which is perfectly okay as a personal preference - but your mistake is that you derive absolute claims from that. Not from actual observation (absolute claims require complete knowledge which you don't possess), just backwards from your preference.

The knowledge I posess is this, I don't know any single engineering company in the world that uses Macs. I know no scientific companies or institutions that use Macs outside of the media industry.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 20):

And if you have followed me in various discussions you could have known that I have a rather strong dislike of attempts to spread disinformation. Different opinions are certainly debatable, but plain old disinformation is unacceptable. Regardless whether it's in a political, social, scientific or technological context.

Just what disinformation have I spead? Jesus Christ, I said I have personal experience of Macs not working as we like them. I went on to say that Macs aren't used in the engineering industry, because of this, their cost and their lack of compatability.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 20):

If you want to make absolute claims, be certain and have evidence to back it up, not just lazy prejudice!

So you've stopped defending Macs to the death, and instead bitch about me?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 10:47 am

Make your own choices as you see fit. No problem.

Just leave out the hyperbole. You don't know even the basics about the Mac platform, so just avoid making claims about it you can't support.

There are multiple solutions for many applications - engineering and scientific ones among them: Macintosh Products Guide | Science

And they're obviously being used: Apple - Science

The only way that would be reconcilable with your claims would be that they all were just created for fun and without ever selling a single copy to actual users. Which would be rather odd considering the various version numbers.

Both Mathlab and Mathematica list no platform-dependent issues, so they're distributing Mac versions to customers who apparently manage to use them as intended. Which is not surprising when you understand a bit or two about multiplatform software (especially when implemented in Java).

Your problem is not your personal preference, your problem is your false generalization from a superficial and incidental experience. It's that simple.
 
VonRichtofen
Posts: 4270
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 3:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:32 am

I played around with my cousins Mac laptop (powerbook?) a while back. It was pretty slick. My newer PC just bit the dust so I'm using my 4 year old P3 machine with a 10 gig hard drive that still runs normally, I guess they don't make PC's like they used to.

I think I could get used to using a Mac, they're just so bloody expensive  Sad

Kris
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:49 am

The main difference is that Macs are priced a bit below PCs which are built to similar quality standards - what's missing is mostly the price parity to low-quality PCs.

Although an iBook or a Mac mini isn't really that expensive - especially if you consider the value of the software package coming with it. You can't really compare them to a bare PC without any actually usable software and with a crippled (or stolen) copy of Windows.
 
APFPilot1985
Topic Author
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 12:51 pm

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:34 pm

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 21):
The knowledge I posess is this, I don't know any single engineering company in the world that uses Macs. I know no scientific companies or institutions that use Macs outside of the media industry.

http://www.top500.org/lists/2005/11/basic

numbers 15 and 20 say that you are wrong. Best part about them? The run regular OSX server and cost millions less than anything close to them on the list.....

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 21):
Just what disinformation have I spead? Jesus Christ, I said I have personal experience of Macs not working as we like them. I went on to say that Macs aren't used in the engineering industry, because of this, their cost and their lack of compatability.

You can respond to mine and klauses links when ever you want....
Stand Up and Be Counted Visit Site Related to Voice your opinion
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:57 pm




Quoting Klaus (Reply 22):
your problem is your false generalization from a superficial and incidental experience. It's that simple.



Spot-on.




2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
AC773
Posts: 1700
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:03 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:03 pm

First of all, bless you Klaus.

Secondly, I am really tired of people making performance-based comparisons of computers based on clock speed alone. I think Intel has done a bang-up job of blinding people with largely meaningless figures. For example, AMD processors average about 2.2 Ghz for a decent chip. It whips any Intel procs in its price range in any benchmarking software out there (3DMark, WorldBench, etc.). Macs are the same way. I have no trouble believing that a PowerBook G4 beats a 3.0Ghz Intel P4 in real-world tests, keeping in mind the P4 system might be a Dell and thus clogged up with bloatware. This doesn't mean that anything older than a year or two old Mac will do this, so don't get cocky.

Apple and Microsoft both make fine operating systems, althought the latter is admittedly less stable, secure (volume related), and easy to use. People need to evaluate their individual needs before buying a PC or a Mac and not blindly switch because of bad Dell experiences, case design, or just "because it's cool."
Better to be nouveau than never to have been riche at all.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 04, 2006 10:48 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 22):

There are multiple solutions for many applications - engineering and scientific ones among them: Macintosh Products Guide | Science

Have you even looked at the products they're offering? Most of the ones designed for 'mechanical engineering' are simply MATLAB and Simulink control boxes!

Quoting Klaus (Reply 22):

And they're obviously being used: Apple - Science

Go to http://www.apple.com/science/whymac/top10reasons.html and be amazed! There's nothing there but nonsense marketing claptrap.

1. Apple makes serious computers for serious research.

This bit simply talks about technical capabilities of the stuff in the box. Sorry, no scientific company cares about that, they care about whether it works. Macs have poor compatability, they're expensive and have a very very limited amount of scientific software for use. While they may be useful for limited areas of research, where specialised code is used, there's no advantage with fitting a scientific company exclusively with Macs.

2. Industrial strength UNIX-based operating system.

If I could get hold of software that works on the 'industrial strength UNIX-based operating system', then I'd love a Mac.

3. Focus on your research. Not the technology.

This is marketing nonsense. The jist, I think, is that you can reduce IT overheads by using 'simple and powerful' Macs. That may be the case, but the increased relative initial costs of Macs will surely overweigh any modest IT savings. I do focus on my work, not the technology. Fluent, NUMECA and our in house code don't work on a Mac!

4. Your favorite tools and applications work beautifully on the Mac.

No...they don't. Sorry.

5. Accomplish all your work on one system.

This one is completely laughable for any scientific company. Hell, I don't know anyone who uses a Mac who doesn't grudgingly use a PC at some point. A PC user can generally live without ever using a Mac, the same can't be said for Mac users.

6. The Mac simplifies and streamlines IT support.

They were running out of ideas at this point. You're telling me that completely switching from PC to Mac in a business is going to 'simplify and streamline' IT support? The requirement in any scientific business of having some PCs for software and code that's just not avaliable for the Mac is going to simplify and streamline? Right. Note how Mac say they don't help reduce costs. I can tell you, a business doesn't care about simplification and streamlining, they care about their IT costs, and there's no way they'll go down in the short or medium term switching to Macs.

7. The Mac fits in.

Uh, alright then.


8. Your peers love the Mac

Ahahahah, the best one by far! I'm sorry, but 8.5 million total Max OSX users in a world of over 6 billion people?! Is this a joke? I am in the bloody industry, if my peers loved the Mac, I would know. They do not.

9. Value in unexpected places.

And then the site goes on to list one obscure example, and ignored the increased cost of a Mac compared to a PC, the lack of avaliable software, IT cost increases, requirements to keep some PCs etc etc.

10. The Mac experience is like no other.

Maybe. A logical and simplier OS is one thing, but having to have a PC and a Mac is no use. I can use my 17'' Sony Vaio to do absolutely anything, including running CFD code

Quoting Klaus (Reply 22):
The only way that would be reconcilable with your claims would be that they all were just created for fun and without ever selling a single copy to actual users. Which would be rather odd considering the various version numbers.

Both Mathlab and Mathematica list no platform-dependent issues, so they're distributing Mac versions to customers who apparently manage to use them as intended.

MATLAB (Matrix Laboratory) and Mathematica have issues on the Mac, albeit not very large ones. The point is, why bother to switch to a Mac? There isn't any serious scientific software, save what are essentially ports of mathematical software. Mathematica and MATLAB will have a very small in-house Mac support unit, the costs of producing a Mac version will be very low. Indeed, another Maple-based piece of software, Mathcad, used to be avaliable for the Mac. A few years ago, Adept Scientific stopped doing the Mac version. Surely that's evidence that Mac simply aren't used in the scientific sector?

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 25):

http://www.top500.org/lists/2005/11/basic

numbers 15 and 20 say that you are wrong. Best part about them? The run regular OSX server and cost millions less than anything close to them on the list.....

Thank you for that link, you've made my job a lot easier! So out of the top 500 super computer sites in the world, only FOUR (4) use Macs! Don't you think this suggests something?

The fact of the matter is simply this: the scientific sector doesn't use Macs. The engineering sector certainly doesn't use Macs.

Can you tell me truthfully I could throw away all my PCs are replace them with Macs and get the same amount of work done quicker or cheaper? It can't be done, sorry!
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:21 am

Gawd....I thought this discussion was over with five or ten years ago.

Everyone who ever had a Mac has had a love-hate relationship with Apple. I had a IIVX that I bought as an undergrad in 1992. The CPU, monitor and inkject printer cost me $3,500.

I can't buy any near the computing power that I have with the current Wintel system from Apple.

That's the main difference now-it's first cost and bang for your buck.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:19 am

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 29):
I can't buy any near the computing power that I have with the current Wintel system from Apple.

So what exactly are you using your multi-core Opteron system for? That's what you've got, right? Far more expensive than the current top model from Apple (the PowerMac G5 quad), but then, if it's what you need...

Computing power still isn't the problem for 99.99% of all users - the fastest hardware becomes meaningless if the system steals hours and days of your time for simply staying up and uninfected and if you have to spend half your time fighting the system - instead of simply doing your work. That is what it's all about!
 
gusnyc
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:06 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:33 am

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 29):
I can't buy any near the computing power that I have with the current Wintel system from Apple.

What do you mean with that?
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 8:56 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16):
Can you tell me truthfully I could throw away all my PCs are replace them with Macs and get the same amount of work done quicker or cheaper? It can't be done, sorry!

For most people that's indeed the case. I've never claimed that it would definitely work for you, but the point of contention was your unfounded claim that "nobody" in science or engineering could "ever" work with a Macintosh. That is quite simply false.

Which you yourself basically admitted in your first statement by referring to extensions of math packages for exactly those purposes. Why do they exist if what you say is true?

You have exhibited nothing even close to any actual knowledge about the Mac platform. You're simply reiterating exemplary tired clichés about Macs which have never been correct or are a thing of the past for years already.


The whole discussion has come about only because you took a very sloppy first glance at the Mac version of a package or two, screwed up that first test and simply didn't care to conduct it properly, then came in here and believed you could get away with tall claims based on such a pitiful excuse for an experiment. As it turns out, you've stumbled over your own feet in the process and are now dragging it out simply for not having to admit you've simply screwed up your grand entry to this stage.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:09 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 32):
For most people that's indeed the case. I've never claimed that it would definitely work for you, but the point of contention was your unfounded claim that "nobody" in science or engineering could "ever" work with a Macintosh. That is quite simply false.

The market speaks for itself. No engineering companies, and very very few scientific businesses and establishment uses Macs. For scientific and specifically engineering businesses, Macs don't work.

Which was my original point. No one in my industry uses a Mac. You proceeded to write numerous essays on pithy points, but the fact remains that Macs are expensive, have poor compatability and limited software.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:33 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
The market speaks for itself.

Does it? There are markets for guns, drugs and tobacco, too. That does not mean that any of those are actually beneficial to their users. Most people have gone the route of least resistance - or what they thought it was - but it has turned out to be a highly cost-intensive one with a large amount of overhead. When looking at the numbers, it seems people are beginning to wake up from their nightmares.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
No engineering companies, and very very few scientific businesses and establishment uses Macs.

I do understand your personal need to somehow justify your sloppy analysis of the Mac's potential after having loaded the whole weight of your argumentation on its back. But sorry, there is obvious evidence to the contrary. Whether you would have been better served by a Mac or not is still an open question - to which you may never know the answer.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
For scientific and specifically engineering businesses, Macs don't work.

An increasing number of users is apparently disagreeing with you there.


Either bring some facts to the table which can actually support your overreaching claims or - preferrably - re-adjust your claims to what your actual knowledge and evidence manages to support.

"But I say so!" is a bit weak as a substitute for actual evidence, you know...! Big grin
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:41 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 34):
Does it? There are markets for guns, drugs and tobacco, too. That does not mean that any of those are actually beneficial to their users. Most people have gone the route of least resistance - or what they thought it was - but it has turned out to be a highly cost-intensive one with a large amount of overhead. When looking at the numbers, it seems people are beginning to wake up from their nightmares.

So now you're going down an anti-capitalist route? Face it, the Mac market share is very very small, which is a large reason why many businesses simply would not consider using them. Granted that a lot of this comes from mistakes Mac made years ago, but nevertheless, the market has dictated that Mac aren't as popular as PCs, and nothing Apple have done to date has changed that significantly.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 34):
I do understand your personal need to somehow justify your sloppy analysis of the Mac's potential after having loaded the whole weight of your argumentation on its back. But sorry, there is obvious evidence to the contrary. Whether you would have been better served by a Mac or not is still an open question - to which you may never know the answer.

It's not an open question, it's a question I should ask myself. The answer is, for the work I do, a PC is the right solution. My peers think so too, despite Apple propaganda.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 34):

An increasing number of users is apparently disagreeing with you there.

One, you mean? Look, just look at the facts - very very few scientific establishment and NO engineering businesses use Macs! That's not due to Microsoft brainwashing, or some kind of nihilistic self-denial by the entire industry to somehow annoy people like you.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 34):
Either bring some facts to the table which can actually support your overreaching claims or - preferrably - re-adjust your claims to what your actual knowledge and evidence manages to support.

My claim is that Macs aren't used in scientific and engineering organisation, the evidence is that very few scientific establishments and no engineering businesses use Macs! Jesus Christ, just accept it!

Macs may be great for photo and video editing. They may have no viruses, be great for home computing, great for use as a true personal computer, they may even give you a blowjob every time you turn it on, but they offer no advantages and many disadvantages to many if not most businesses.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
AC773
Posts: 1700
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:03 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:55 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
No engineering companies, and very very few scientific businesses and establishment uses Macs. For scientific and specifically engineering businesses, Macs don't work.

The main reason for this is not that it won't work for them, but rather a matter of logistics.

Most companies "computerized" their operations many years ago when Mac wasn't together enough to be a viable solution. Typically, companies upgrade half their machines every two years or so. It would be a tremendous burden to IT departments not familiar with the Mac OS to have to run two kinds of machines in the same office. It would also be far too expensive for companies to replace their entire collection of PC's all at once, not to mention throwing their handy replacement schedule out of whack.

However good they may be, Macs don't yet offer advantages so great that companies would willingly put themselves through that. Although IT costs would decrease in the long run, it would likely put a lot of stress on the IT department in the short term as people get used to the new OS.
Better to be nouveau than never to have been riche at all.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:57 am

Quoting AC773 (Reply 36):
Most companies "computerized" their operations many years ago when Mac wasn't together enough to be a viable solution. Typically, companies upgrade half their machines every two years or so. It would be a tremendous burden to IT departments not familiar with the Mac OS to have to run two kinds of machines in the same office. It would also be far too expensive for companies to replace their entire collection of PC's all at once, not to mention throwing their handy replacement schedule out of whack.

Ignore the cost for a minute, it's just not viable to replace a PC for a Mac for many companies. The software, market penetration and compatability just isn't there.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
APFPilot1985
Topic Author
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 12:51 pm

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 11:26 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 28):
Thank you for that link, you've made my job a lot easier! So out of the top 500 super computer sites in the world, only FOUR (4) use Macs! Don't you think this suggests something?

Look above the ones i pointed out to you... see any wintel pc's? They all run on Sun Microsystems or IBM custom made machines. The apple ones though are made out of stuff that you can walk in and buy off the shelf. And you say they are more expensive :rotfl

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
but the fact remains that Macs are expensive, have poor compatability and limited software.

just because you say it doesn't make it fact.
Stand Up and Be Counted Visit Site Related to Voice your opinion
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 11:26 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 35):
Look, just look at the facts - very very few scientific establishment and NO engineering businesses use Macs!

Quoting myself:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 34):
"But I say so!" is a bit weak as a substitute for actual evidence, you know...!

You have not presented halfway plausible statistics.

You have not actually visited ALL engineering businesses as you would have had to in order to make that claim.

You have not given any explanation why there obviously are software packages exactly for the purpose you're claiming to be nonexistent.

You have exposed your lack of insight into a) the Macintosh platform and b) IT technology in general above.

You simply don't have any plausible authority to make such outlandish claims. You're merely peddling an apparently unsubstantiated personal opinion.

Sorry, but you're not contributing anything here.  Yeah sure

If there was anything of actual substance, I'd bite - gladly. There's just nothing there.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 35):
Macs may be great for photo and video editing. They may have no viruses, be great for home computing, great for use as a true personal computer, they may even give you a blowjob every time you turn it on, but they offer no advantages and many disadvantages to many if not most businesses.

And your entire wealth of knowledge about a rather more complex platform than you seem to comprehend all in one compact and rather embarrassing package...!

You would find more insight even in pretty much any Windows-specific magazine while leafing through it. Pretty weak form.  Yeah sure

Quoting AC773 (Reply 36):
However good they may be, Macs don't yet offer advantages so great that companies would willingly put themselves through that. Although IT costs would decrease in the long run, it would likely put a lot of stress on the IT department in the short term as people get used to the new OS.

...among other things, the stress of looking for a new job for a significant part of the IT department, according to many reports. A Windows infrastructure preserves bloated IT departments with the amount of user training, support and maintenance it requires. Mac infrastructures can have their own specific problems, but on a much smaller scale, apparently.

But there are valid points as well:

• There is no second source. Apple has proven more stable than most other computer manufacturers, but there is still no direct alternative.

• Apple has focused primarily on the user purchasing model, not on corporate purchasing beyond certain areas (publishing, video / TV / movie production, for instance). Having an easily fitting "corporate interface" is a factor for larger accounts.

• You actually need a Mac-trained IT staff. It seems to be a recurrent pattern that smaller organizations simply dissolve their separate IT departments after the switch, but there will still need to be at least some people with an adequate level of knowledge.

Some organizations have mission-critical software which is not available under MacOS X. Which can be remedied, but in some cases it may not be practical. It is quite possible, however, that the Intel Macs will make that a moot point before long through transparent multi-platform integration.

Compatibility is a much smaller problem than most people imagine. Documents and networks can be shared and can usually be worked with on both sides if required; Closed proprietary document formats are receding anyway. It can still be a factor in some cases, though.

There are numerous advantages as well, but making it work in practice will always require some effort, even if it's worth the trouble.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:58 pm

More emotive nonsense from someone who may be better suited being a salesman for Apple.

The important point you raised was

Quoting Klaus (Reply 15):
Fortunately there are quite a few engineers who don't make as many mistakes as you do.

Now, the highly insulting attitude notwithstanding, you implied some engineers use Macs, and are better off for doing so. I have comprehensively shown you how that is not the case. I just counted 12 programs on my laptop - undoubtedly more on my PC at work - that aren't compatible with Macs.

You say some engineering companies use Macs? Proove it. Show me some examples.

For me and my business, it is not feasible, whatever you've read in Mac Magazine recently.

This argument is getting beyond a joke. You've resorted to petty attacks, and only 39 replies in have you acknoledged any of my points, albeit rather vaguely.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 39):

• Compatibility is a much smaller problem than most people imagine. Documents and networks can be shared and can usually be worked with on both sides if required; Closed proprietary document formats are receding anyway. It can still be a factor in some cases, though.

Yup, a significant factor in my case, and the case of engineering companies! PCs would have to be used extensively were a switch made to Macs. What's the point?

Quoting Klaus (Reply 39):
• Some organizations have mission-critical software which is not available under MacOS X. Which can be remedied, but in some cases it may not be practical. It is quite possible, however, that the Intel Macs will make that a moot point before long through transparent multi-platform integration.

I've already made my point about engineering software. If a business wants to carry out serious CFD or FEA, CAD or numerical analysis, they can't use a Mac. An Intel Mac may be fantastic news, but until I can buy one, I don't care.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 39):
Sorry, but you're not contributing anything here.

Petty attacks...

Let me contribute this. Mac claim on their website there are 8.5 million Mac users. A whopping 0.013% of the global population! The market never lies. You can argue til you're blue in the face that Macs are fantastic, but most other people think otherwise.



The onus is on you to show me three large engineering companies that use Macs. If you don't, I expect an apology for the highly insulting tone you've taken with me.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
gusnyc
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:06 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:15 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 35):
but nevertheless, the market has dictated that Mac aren't as popular as PCs,

So what? Rolls Royce, Porshe or Mercedes aren't as popular as an Impala. The market it doesn't reflect the excellence of a product.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 35):
My claim is that Macs aren't used in scientific and engineering organisation, the evidence is that very few scientific establishments and no engineering businesses use Macs! Jesus Christ, just accept it!

Yes, that is true. It is a fact.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 40):
The market never lies.

Uh... I don't think so. Coming back to the mentioned example, there are hundreds of people who smoke... is that an indicative that the tobacco is a great product?

Windows is popular. It doesn't mean it is a good product.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:22 am

Quoting GusNYC (Reply 41):
So what? Rolls Royce, Porshe or Mercedes aren't as popular as an Impala. The market it doesn't reflect the excellence of a product.

But Rolls Royce, Porsche and Mercedes try to be market leader in their particular market. While Mac may have a large share of a niche market, Klaus implies that Macs can compete with PCs in every aspect. Hence Apple should have a large share of the total market, which they do not.

Quoting GusNYC (Reply 41):
Yes, that is true. It is a fact.

Yet Klaus doesn't accept it!

Quoting GusNYC (Reply 41):
Uh... I don't think so. Coming back to the mentioned example, there are hundreds of people who smoke... is that an indicative that the tobacco is a great product?

Tobacco is a product, it's not a brand.

Quoting GusNYC (Reply 41):
Windows is popular. It doesn't mean it is a good product.

Like it or loathe it, Windows opened up personal computing to a huge amount of people. At the time when Apple was poo-pooing the idea of everyone owning a computer and keeping costs high, Windows, Microsoft and PCs make personal computing a reality. Windows being popular makes it go, in so far as the vast majority of software written and support given is on Windows.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:28 am

To your post #40:

You've based absolute and all-ecompassing claims on a single, sloppy and unprofessionally executed test by your own description.

You have not been able to reconcile the obvious contradictions in your argumentation.

You have not "shown" anything, you're simply repeating your original, still unsubstantiated claims.

You have attempted a few technological arguments which are simply nonsensical - IT technology is clearly not your forte. Which is not a problem, but then don't make wild claims about it!


Look, you would have saved yourself a lot of trouble if you simply hadn't made ridiculous claims about "nobody can" and "it's impossible" but instead had stated the apparently much more plausible "I wasn't really interested in finding out" and "I don't think it can be done".

That could have been a sensible contribution. But instead you jumped right into deep water with full emotional investment and made claims you're simply ill equipped to sustain.


My preference for MacOS X is not accidental - designing hardware and software systems is what I do, so looking at the quality of the available systems is just part of the job. Have I claimed that everybody would be better off with a Mac for every application? No, I have not.

But I can definitely recommend taking a closer look.

Or otherwise just putting up with what you've got and being careful with your claims.

[Edited 2006-01-05 17:56:35]
 
gusnyc
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 6:06 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:31 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 42):
Tobacco is a product, it's not a brand.

Computers are products, not a brand either.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:34 am

Quoting GusNYC (Reply 44):
Computers are products, not a brand either.

Yet but Apple is a brand!

As for Klaus, I asked you one simple thing:

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 40):
The onus is on you to show me three large engineering companies that use Macs. If you don't, I expect an apology for the highly insulting tone you've taken with me.

You haven't answered, yet you haven't apologised.  Sad
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:42 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 42):
Klaus implies that Macs can compete with PCs in every aspect.

Quite simply: No.

The entire argument is about your absolute claims based on insufficient evidence. Had you been just slightly less excessive with your claims, nobody would have had taken issue with it.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 42):
At the time when Apple was poo-pooing the idea of everyone owning a computer and keeping costs high, Windows, Microsoft and PCs make personal computing a reality. Windows being popular makes it go, in so far as the vast majority of software written and support given is on Windows.

Nonsense - the Apple II and later the Mac were explicitly intended by Apple for "everyone" using to use, and the IBM PC certainly didn't win on price.

Without the early personal computers (besides the Apple II there were the TRS-80, the PET and others) taking off and beginning to threaten IBM's mainframe business, the PC would never have seen the light of day - it was hastily cobbled together from second-rate components that happened to be cheap and available at the time by a back-room team of engineers at IBM, with no software strategy in place at all. It was always just thought of as a hesitant backup tactic at IBM - the mainframe department was top priority. The technological consequences of the mistakes made back then and subsequently have cost the industry billions in collateral damage so far - with no end in sight.

IBM basically duped themselves by contracting the OS out to Microsoft under very unfavourable conditions (which they didn't recognize before much later), but with IBM's corporate market position the PC was established by fiat as the "industrial standard". Apple definitely missed the boat back then - they never catered to corporate accounts the way they would have had to in order to make serious inroads, and the situation is just gradually different today.

The problem with the Windows PC is not its success, nor that IBM or Microsoft were its "parents". The problem is the uninspired and second-rate design at practically every level that went into it. It's quite impressive how far that patched and disfigured mess has been flogged onwards at great pains, but if you have a little insight in what could have been done instead it's hard not to mourn the effort that's simply wasted by constantly having to deal with avoidable shortcomings instead of getting your actual work done.

Apple has never been perfect either - make no mistake about that. They've got their fair share of screwups, failures and silly ideas. It's quite noticeable, however, that they've always been trying to pioneer ambitious concepts instead of just settling for "good enough" and "me too" implementations, following the goal of optimal usability instead of just "it does work somehow, doesn't it?"


People can get quite comfortable under the most dire circumstances if they feel they have no choice. But in very many cases (if not all) they actually do have an alternative. And you start noticing a chronic pain again - when it starts to go away!
 
AC773
Posts: 1700
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:03 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:12 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 39):
...among other things, the stress of looking for a new job for a significant part of the IT department, according to many reports. A Windows infrastructure preserves bloated IT departments with the amount of user training, support and maintenance it requires. Mac infrastructures can have their own specific problems, but on a much smaller scale, apparently.

I agree, but it's nowhere near as bloated as it would be if we all used Linux/UNIX. These are far less reliable than the Windows OS, according to a study I saw on Slashdot yesterday. The problem with Windows is that MS tends to just rush it out the door and patch like hell later. Apple goes through countless revisions until it hits the market.
Better to be nouveau than never to have been riche at all.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20648
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:23 am

MacOS X does have its own issues every now and then, but they are rarely severe and are generally fixed relatively quickly.

My guess why Linux and other remaining UNIX flavours may have fared badly in the study may be because those systems generally require a relatively high degree of knowledge to configure, manage and maintain. Once you've configured a UNIX system properly, it will generally be very stable (maybe the most stable of any system class at all), but getting there is another thing.

MacOS X is a UNIX incarnation, but Apple has put a lot of effort into easy configuration and management, with some success. You can still fiddle with all the details, but you normally don't need to...
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9393
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Why I Am Glad I Have A Mac

Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:26 pm

hmm.. I dont really like Mac.. 6 months ago, I decided to buy a Mac Mini, and was happy about it, but it freezed just as many times as my windows computer did. Especially sometimes when I copied some text from the internet and then wanted to paste it into a word document.. it totally freezed every single time. I dont like that macs dont have a left and a right mouse button, and it seems like they are trying to be different from windows, just to be different, and not thinking about if it is a convenient solution. I dont know if it has anything to do with trademark rights or copyright or whatever, but it was annoying. And then there is the problem about video games.. macs dont run a lot of video games compared to windows. There are some good things about mac aswell. I think they are easy to navigate once you get used to them, but I think it is easier to control a lot of windows at once with a windows computer.

Now I have a windows 3,2 ghz pentium 4 computer and I am very pleased with it. Windows is the best solution for me atleast.

just my  twocents   Smile

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DLFREEBIRD and 21 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos