“With all the buzz around thin clients, Microsoft execs are trying to find targets for thicker installations of Windows Vista. Maybe they should take a look at how Apple has executed on its thick computing strategy, and the resulting bonanza of upgrade sales.”
I noticed a few of my friends’ Windows boxes got 100% CPU usage when nothing was going after iTune was installed.
I suspect that might be an attempt to push iPod users to the Mac platform.
I never had that happen. Even running the Windows version of iTunes through Parallels on my Mac (I open the Mac version, switch full screen into Windows, open the Windows version and use Bonjour to listen to my music in Parallels without having to switch back to OS X to change songs) I’m not getting 100% CPU usage, and that is with BOTH the OS X and Windows versions running in parallel (pardon the pun) on the same computer.
I’ve got a better way of doing it. Put the mini-player always-on-top in iTunes OS X preferences, then click iTune’s zoom button to shrink it to the mini player, switch to full screen in Parallels and iTunes will stay above Windows at all times!
I then use Exposé corners so I can I can quickly go back and forth between OS X and Windows. Seemless as it gets, all we need now is Drag + Drop support for parallels and I’ll be happy.
Yes, but then it is sitting on top of all of the work you are doing in Windows, which is a pain on a 15″ monitor. Using Windows iTunes, I can simply minimize iTunes and work with all of the screen dedicated to Windows.
Are you talking about easily copying files from OS X to Windows, because using VMware on my computer I’ve worked out something you could try if you haven’t thought of it already.
The gist of it is to have network file sharing (CIFS/samba) running on the guest and host OS, then share a folder on the host. The guest should be able to access that share if all was set up properly, thus making it easier to move files back and fourth.
Of course I have no experience with parallels, I don’t even have a Mac so I can’t tell you if it’ll work or not in your case, all I can tell you is it works for me.
I think the problem is that you are running windows, and perhaps just didn’t notice this prior to installing iTunes.
I tunes in Windows resorts to a custom theme that probably isn’t as optimised for Windows as for OS X, and most macs have more horsepower in the video card than your most common off the shelf wintel machines will have. In fact many of the off the shelf windows machines people buy tend to have integrated graphics cards, if I’m not mistaken both the CPU and ram are shared with the video card in that case.
What is probably happening is the processor is working harder to handle the custom theme. iTunes doesn’t seem like the kind of application to be heavy on the graphics card, but it can work lower end integrated graphics cards pretty hard.
When I am using Windows I monitor CPU usage and have seen it jump to 100% on many occasions. And this is without iTunes installed. Next time it happens tell them to look at the processes running. I would be extremely surprised if it was iTunes that was the culprit.
CTRL-ALT-DEL and select the processes tab at the top. You will get a very nice breakdown of what program is using resources.
Bring back the newton, with ipod sexiness and a new version of the newton OS. Keep something like the battery life of the old one, if that’s possible. Upgrade the stats too, with 128mb of ram and upgrade the ARM.
Add wifi and usb support, of course.
At least, I think there would be a decent demand for these. Perhaps my ideas drive up the power use too much – I don’t know. Still, with apple’s high profile in the mobile market I think that a long-lasting pda would go over very well. My main worry is that they’d upgrade the hardware a bunch just to support a fancy ass GUI.
I think the real problem with apple is they want to make their own hardware. They think they are mostly a hardware company. They could make a killing selling OSX, if they managed to get all of the device support.
Great, then I have to put up with WGA style crap in OS X, activation keys, check-ins, phoning Apple everytime I change a piece of hardware, etc etc. Hunting down drivers just to use the hardware inside of my computer (nevermind perephrials). One good thing about Apple only shipping OS X on their own hardware is they don’t have that crap in OS X, since they make most of their money from hardware. I guarantee you it will all be there (maybe even worse than Microsoft) if Apple ships OS X for regular PC’s, because piracy will have a much greater potential for harming Apple. I really hope they don’t bother shipping OS X for regular PC’s.
Just my 2 cents. For me, the total lack of activation codes is a plus for Apple, and I don’t pirate OS X.
From my point of view it’s idiotic to pay loads of money for new hardware, with the benefit of ooh, no activation keys to enter when I have nice hardware already.
Stop being so lazy and idealistic! This really is an example of the Mac mentality – everything has to be served on a silver platter and the cost don’t matter, or else it’s shit. Activation keys aren’t that big of a deal. Popular drivers can easily be included on the installation CD/DVD.
With a proper driver system driver hell wouldn’t be bad at all. They would probably be able to use most of the opensource drivers anyway.
From my point of view it’s idiotic to pay loads of money for new hardware, with the benefit of ooh, no activation keys to enter when I have nice hardware already.
Yes, I definately sold my PC and bought a Mac for this very reason (sarcasm)…. If you would re-read my comment you would see I said the lack of activation codes is a plus for Apple….meaning, I bought my Mac for other reasons and I enjoy that none of that crap is on my system as an added benefit.
Stop being so lazy and idealistic! This really is an example of the Mac mentality – everything has to be served on a silver platter and the cost don’t matter, or else it’s shit. Activation keys aren’t that big of a deal. Popular drivers can easily be included on the installation CD/DVD.
No, they’re not (keys), but when I change a friggin hard drive (I think that’s what it was, it was a few years ago) because the old one quit working and I have to phone Microsoft and make them believe I’m not a pirate, it’s a bit annoying. Or when I have to do an extra 5 steps to download a stupid update (WGA). Or when one Microsoft employee on the phone tells me it is OK to use a plain OEM CD from computer #1 to install on Computer #2 if I use the license key from #2 (Compaq restore set got lost), so I do that and it won’t activate, so I phone Microsoft again and the next person tells me I can’t do that and starts asking a bunch of questions, so after talking to him for 10 minutes, I get bumped to the next guy, who says it’s alright and gives me the unlock code (those 2 phone calls combined, including hold time, took about an hour). All I wanted to do was use the plain XP OEM disc (not a OEM restore disc) from one computer on the other, with both computers being fully licensed (little stickers on the outside and everything!) and I had to waste an hour of my time dealing with Microsoft. Would you like me to get my Dad to come on here and post his experiences dealing with Microsoft over license key issues (Office I believe it was)?
So yes, although these aren’t the only reasons I switched to a Mac, they are a plus for me, and I would like it if things stayed the way they are, because it is less hassle for users. What exactly is the problem with that? How is not wanting to deal with the morons at Microsoft’s customer service dept. being “lazy” or “idealistic”? And how exactly is that part of the “Mac mentality”? Could it not just be that it is a pain in the ass I don’t like dealing with?
True, MS’s implementation of selling an OS is pretty crappy.
I’m saying apple should emulate MS in a very general sense, just selling an operating system. All the details would hopefully be up to Apple’s usual niceness standards.
I haven’t actually had problems with license keys, going as far as selling an old computer and using the XP install disk on a home build.
[quote]Yes, I definately sold my PC and bought a Mac for this very reason (sarcasm)…. If you would re-read my comment you would see I said the lack of activation codes is a plus for Apple….meaning, I bought my Mac for other reasons and I enjoy that none of that crap is on my system as an added benefit.[/quote]What I meant was that if Apple had a key system and released OSX for all x86 computers, I wouldn’t have to buy new hardware. I could just triple boot windows, linux, and OSX. The benefits I seek are in the OS, not the ‘full platform’.
As far as the mac mentality thing, that’s a reference to this:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=15288
I don’t see how that Mac Mentality thing applies to what I said? In-fact, I’ll sing the same praises about Linux not requiring Microsoft’s overbearing and annoying activation scheme, or Windows 2000 even for that matter. I’ve publically, on this very site, criticized Apple in the past, even while I continue to buy their products. There are numerous things I don’t like about Apple (espescially their short support times for operating systems), and I’m not afraid to say them publicly, so I’m not part of the Mac herd. I’ve even said Apple should learn some quality control instead of just being another Dell and slapping crap together and hoping it works. I was just saying I hope Apple doesn’t emulate Microsoft’s activation schemes.
Not everyone has problems with license keys. Some people and their computers are cursed, plain and simple
“From my point of view it’s idiotic to pay loads of money for new hardware, with the benefit of ooh, no activation keys to enter when I have nice hardware already.
Stop being so lazy and idealistic! This really is an example of the Mac mentality – everything has to be served on a silver platter and the cost don’t matter, or else it’s shit. Activation keys aren’t that big of a deal. Popular drivers can easily be included on the installation CD/DVD. ”
When I bought my dual processor G5 almost three years ago I actually did some research into the purchase. To my surprise I found that given comparable HW the G5 priced out about the same as the Intel and AMD equivalents.
To my thinking you seem to be making the same mistake most people do. People like to look at that $400 Dell system and then say Apple equipment is too expensive because they have no $400 system. I have always preferred to buy high end systems. You pay a premium for a high end system no matter who makes it. What makes that high end system perform is the OS that is powering it. Right now, laziness has nothing to do with it. When I have work to do I want things to “just work” and at this point in time OS X comes the closest to that ideal.
What finally drove me to OS X was Windows XP. I came into my computer room and sat down to do a 15 minute task before going to bed. Unfortunately things did not “just work” and I spent over an hour fixing an OS problem before I could do my task. The next day I ordered my G5 system and in three years of use things have “just worked” with only 2 exceptions of any note.
For me it is not laziness to want my computer to be a tool to actually get work done instead of spending my time fixing problems. I have lots of other things I can be doing with my spare time.
Will I buy another Mac when they come out with the Desktop Intel systems? Probably, but mostly because that would give me the option to use Linux if I became dissatisfied with OS X. I won’t rule out a return to Windows, but given what I have read about Vista it is highly unlikely.
Linux runs just fine on PPC Macs.
I did know that, it is just easier if I can run them all on the same machine using something like VMWare. I have too much computer stuff here already.
Besides, given the switch to Intel processors I figure there will be less serious development work on the PPC versions.
I just purchased a used IBM Netvista from IBM and was very quickly reminded of why I switched to a Mac three years ago. I had to phone MS to do the initial setup because at that point in the process it couldn’t detect my network. After getting up an running, last-night, then it was on to the update fest, at least after activating, that is.
SP2 was the first item on the agenda. Then it was a list of over fifty critical updates to go through. Sure you can use the express option here, but if you do that you also get WGA installed as a critical update. Excuse me, critical to who? Certainly not to me. After checking the hide box for WGA I get a warning message from MS that hiding that little item might put my system at risk of being exploited. Yeah, right…
Anyway, I still have about 30 items to review and install today before I am finished. Hasn’t MS ever heard of regular combo updates for this stuff?
It all makes me want to run right out and buy a, (wait a minute. I all ready have a Mac). Now when are the professional desktops coming out? I need another one.
I think the real problem with apple is they want to make their own hardware. They think they are mostly a hardware company. They could make a killing selling OSX, if they managed to get all of the device support.
That is true to a certain extent, but the problem is that they would also need to raise the price and at the same time, extend the release cycle out to 2 1/2 to 3 years; I also doubt very much that Microsoft would be so inclined to provide Microsoft Office for MacOS X if it could run on whitebox hardware.
Now, in a perfect world, and Apple has $50billion in the bank, it would be simply a matter of buying out Quicken, Adobe, Corel, Sun and investing $5billion into IBM to get middleware support; Corel ports Wordperfect Suite accross to MacOS X native, and heck, since its a dream, lets say they port it completely over to Cocoa; They port all the adobe applications to MacOS X natively and kill of the Windows ports, and Quicken and consumer application from Adobe/Corel are all sold seperately; in that scenario, they would have insulated themselves being being totally dependent on operating system sales, but like I said, that would be in the perfect world; unfortunately, the above can’t happen.
For Apple to take marketshare, they need to do a Dell; as hardware sales increase, they drop the price of their hardware to spur more sales – they also need to increase the amount of middleware titles they have; buy out Corel for example, and Wordperfect Suite would be the ideal tool for MacOS X; and to make it more fun; bundle iWork with all computers, and sell Wordperfect Suite as the more ‘professional grade’ office suite, above iWork.
apple won’t drop prices, they’ll add more features instead. Apple doesn’t want a price war with the other PC makers.. it’s a waste of resources. Just like Accura doesn’t wage a price war with Honda, because it’s about getting people in the door willing to pay a little more, not just selling units to look better.
The “more units at all cost” is what’s given Microsoft so much power over PC makers to begin with. Like a crack dealer, MS gave PC makers “freebies” to keep the OEM numbers growing, but now they’re all addicts and customers are addicts too.
Apple is a healthy company, Dell and such are not, they’re just working for Intel and Microsoft as “marketing contractors”. Whenever the powers say jump they must comply or Wintel will cast them aside.. just like american auto parts makers. That’s a nice place to be in when they want to pay you, but they “name their own price” and eventually they want your lunch for their profit this quarter.
I think it’s funny that on OS News, of all places, people want their favorite OS to take over the world.
If there’s been any trend in software over the past few years, it’s been away from platform-specific WIMP-style GUI programs and towards cross-platform and server-side software. Really, this is nothing new; the C language made processors interchangeable, POSIX made text-based OSes interchangeable, and now scripting languages and Qt and the Internet are making the rest of the OS interchangeable.
Apple has very good reason to keep their OS and hardware so tightly coupled. They use standard components, but they’re selling a platform. Macs can’t run Outlook, but they can access GMail as well as any other computer, and there are a lot more GMails being written right now than Outlooks.
By selling a platform, Apple guarantees that all of the “little things” work nicely (no driver problems or DLL hell or random crashes). For most users, OS X is nice not because of Unix or Cocoa, but because in general they /don’t/ have to install any drivers, and because installing an application means dragging and dropping one icon, and because stuff just works.
Considering that I spend almost all of my time in the web browser, if OS X had the same erratic hardware support that Windows and Linux do (note, before I get flamed: erratic means that sometimes installation works like it should and sometimes it doesn’t, not that it sucks), it would offer absolutely no advantage over the alternatives.
For what I use computers for, Linux is just as nice as OS X; the advantage of OS X is that it just works. Take that away, and what’s left?
Macs can’t run Outlook, but they can access GMail as well as any other computer, and there are a lot more GMails being written right now than Outlooks.
I very highly doubt that. Gmail has a fraction of the amount of both users and daily traffic that both Yahoo! Mail and Hotmail get (or even Myspace Mail). OTOH, practically every person using an ISP supplied email address, working for a major company, etc etc is using Outlook. I find it very difficult to believe that Gmail could possibly have more marketshare than Outlook. I doubt even Hotmail has more marketshare than Outlook, and Hotmail is much larger than Gmail.
If you’re not a geek, and your friends aren’t geeks, you don’t come across too many Gmail accounts. And geeks are a small fraction of all people.
http://weblogs.hitwise.com/bill-tancer/2006/05/google_yahoo_and_msn…
“the advantage of OS X is that it just works. Take that away, and what’s left?”
I believe it is more than that. Why else people would go to great lengths to build non-Mac Computers capable of running Mac OS X?
And even if it were only that, do you think it a minor advantage? You’ll be surprised to hear that I am beginning to have enough of Linux, exactly because too often “things just don’t work”
I think it’s a very major advantage! That’s my whole point. The reason OS X is so loved by its users is precisely because it just works, and I think that this is such an important quality that, without it, there wouldn’t be much left.
You’ll be surprised to hear that I am beginning to have enough of Linux, exactly because too often “things just don’t work”
What is more important? A little inconvenience now and then, but overal have no restrictions on software use whatsoever. Or have everything convenient, but restricted in so many ways through the EULA’s, that you are bound to become a license violater out of the sheer complexity these EULA’s entail.
It is your call. Try to remember why you started using GNU/Linux. If Freedom is anywhere on the list, try to determine why your definition of Freedom changed.
Unfortunately it is more than “a little inconvenience now and then”. With the exception of Debian and Slackware (but they haven’t released for quite some time now), virtually every major distro has released way before reaching a decent stability. And then there is the issue of having to wait before your hardware becomes supported.
As to freedom, Mac OS X doesn’t “feel” that bad (yes I know they have a pretty restrictive EULA, but not having to enter a 25 figures key and not having to register feels better than Windows).
For me, that everything is conveniant. Not everyone shares RMS’ views, try to remember that. For most, computers are a tool.
“Macs can’t run Outlook,” lol
Office went on mac before being on PC ;-), and is usually better than its windows counterpart.
“Outlook” is named “Entourage in Office 2004(or whatevernumber)
For what I use computers for, Linux is just as nice as OS X; the advantage of OS X is that it just works. Take that away, and what’s left?
Applications from big name vendors like Adobe, Macromedia, Lotus/IBM, Quicken, MYOB, Corel etc.
If all the Windows applications could run flawlessly under Wine, then no one would be running Windows, but like I keep saying, people run the operating system to run the applications; their concern is running applications and getting work done, not whether or not a particular operating system necessarily does something better.
Hence, you *never* hear Apple, when marketing the Mac, talk directly about the operating system, they talk about the *whole* machine, and what the *whole* machine can do for you; the operating system and hardware are marketed as one component rather than seeing it as a difference.
Hence, you *never* hear Apple, when marketing the Mac, talk directly about the operating system, they talk about the *whole* machine, and what the *whole* machine can do for you; the operating system and hardware are marketed as one component rather than seeing it as a difference.
Exactly…they can delve into great detail at their developer conferences, but when it comes to consumers, they almost market it like an appliance as opposed to a computer. In a Dell commercial, you hear about all these specs and then “Dell recommends Windows XP Pro” or w/e, and then the Intel dong. With Apple, it’s just a single piece device that does things, much like a toaster. They are obviously much more powerful than that, but Apple doesn’t market them like that.
Was that an article or an apple advertisement? By the way David, please don’t use the words performance and Mac in the same sentence. It makes you sound like a total ass.
Why not use performance and Mac in the same sentence? are you being a total ass?
I’ve started work at new company that is all Windows based, I’m amazed people can put up with XP, now these machines arn’t new, they are 3.0ghz P4s but god are they slow and buggy, many times the programs freeze, takes ages to load up, everything, my 2 year old G4 12″ powerbook feels faster (let alone a G5) so it makes me wonder the truth on what I have being reading all these years about PC & Mac performance
Edited 2006-07-30 00:13
I’ve started work at new company that is all Windows based, I’m amazed people can put up with XP, now these machines arn’t new, they are 3.0ghz P4s but god are they slow and buggy, many times the programs freeze, takes ages to load up, everything, my 2 year old G4 12″ powerbook feels faster (let alone a G5) so it makes me wonder the truth on what I have being reading all these years about PC & Mac performance
The reason why the Windows boxes run that way is because they’re not set up properly. In other words, a machine set up by either an incompitent IT staff (or a competent IT staff who has to load a bunch of shitty apps on the machine because of corporate policy) is not a fair representation of what the OS can do in the hands of a seasoned power user. I’ve always said that Windows is an OS for power users. Geeks belong on Linux/*BSD, while Joe ‘Just Make It Work’ Average is better off on a Mac.
As for iPod, I think the iTunes combo works as an ‘easy-as-pie’ tool for the masses, but I really wish they’d release a version of it that is uncoupled with iTunes and just make it a UMS device. That coupled with a good file manager (see http://www.dopus.com) along with a lightweight audio player (the one I use consumes about 1.5MB RAM while in use) is a better choice than iTunes for my personal use.
Edited 2006-07-30 00:39
“I’ve always said that Windows is an OS for power users. Geeks belong on Linux/*BSD, while Joe ‘Just Make It Work’ Average is better off on a Mac.”
Yor statement is a bit odd. Windows for power users? But then I find it always on boxes which belong to people who don’t have a clue.
Linux/*BSD for geeks? Perhaps. But then I can tell you, after so many years I am beginning to have enough of having to repair all the time and to wait at least 6 months/a year before my new hardware is supported.
So I don’t see what is wrong with getting enough of being a geek and moving to OS X. There is plenty of space there too if you want to exercise your geekness.
I see someone had fun modding me down just because I fail to fall right in line with the rest of the Mac fanboys on this site. No worries. I could really care less and if it makes these idiots feel superior by doing it, o well.
spook are you really trying to counter my statement about Mac performance (or lack thereof) by comparing it to some bug ridden, bloated windows install? Where I work most of the administrators, including myself, bring in their own hardware. Lately I’ve seen several of these MacIntels roll in and not one of them has managed to keep up with my Opteron 246 that cost half as much. They do make great heaters for the winter though.
I see someone had fun modding me down just because I fail to fall right in line with the rest of the Mac fanboys on this site. No worries. I could really care less and if it makes these idiots feel superior by doing it, o well.
========================
No, you got modded down cause it was Troll like statement, as is the above.
Troll if you want, but don’t feel sorry for yourself and act all wronged when you get modded down and try and blame it on fanboys
No, you got modded down cause you called David a total ass, and this comment is getting modded down because you resort to more name calling. Grow up and learn to act like an adult and maybe people will pay attention to you. Acting like a child will only result in people ignoring you.
Maybe you guys have trouble reading. In regards to the modding, I really don’t care. If you don’t like hearing the truth, no matter how painful it may be, and must mod someone down go for it.
Now back to my original point about this “article”. Please, for the sake of my own sanity, point out where at any time this article offered any new information or even encouraged original thought. the whole piece was basically “I love Macs, and I’ve convinced myself that the extra $1000 I wasted on it was well worth it, because of the performance.” In all honesty, do any of us care how much David loves his little Mac? Now before pulling out the mod points or resorting to smart ass remarks, please attempt to answer the question or don’t bother replying at all.
No one is saying it did for God’s sake. I even agree with you on that point. I modded you down because you seem incapable of making an argument (one that I agree with, Macs ARE overpriced) without calling names to prove your point, what is so difficult to understand about that? What are you, in grade school?
You are making this site less enjoyable to read. People don’t come here to read people getting called an ass, or being told they are idiots, etc etc. I quite often mod people up, and then turn around and respond to their post disagreeing with them, and I do it because even though I disagree with them, they do raise good points or make a persuasive argument. I’ll sometimes even mod two people arguing up, because they both raise good points.
However, even if you have the same viewpoint as me, if you are going to sit there and call names like a whiney 4 year old, you’re going to get modded down, cause most of the readers don’t want to read trash comments like yours’ above.
Now here’s an idea, why don’t you try going back, re-posting your above posts WITHOUT the name calling, and chances are they won’t get modded down (hell, I’ll even mod them up).
You can save your mod points. Now if you’ll go back and read my above posts you’ll see that I never called David an ass. I said that silly statements that are completely ridiculous “make him sound like a total ass.” Now instead of calling me childish and ranting on about how I’m acting like a 4 year old, please increase your reading comprehension to that of someone above 4 years old and stop trolling. I’m really so very sorry if my comments make this site less enjoyable for you. However, the site is called OSAlert. This means that while I’m okay with a bit of fluff every now and then, I actually come here to read articles about (gasp) operating systems, not fluff pieces about why some guy adores his Mac.
I don’t care if this gets a -5, but really, you really are a total arse arn’t you, the bloke above has explained why you was modded down for and then you carry on in the same vein
Thank you for proving me exactly right. If this is going to be a Mac user wank site, then just say it. No need to pretend it’s anything else. I used to really enjoy reading some of the articles posted on this site and most all of the comments, but it’s gotten way out of hand. Seriously in the past month every other article is just like the one we’re currently commenting on, and the others are the same old Windows bashing threads. I don’t even use Windows but I find that highly offensive after a while. Not to mention the group-think on this site has surpassed even slashdot. I have my own opinions and I’ll be damned if I’m going to drop them and pander to you guys just because you don’t like it. Grow up.
Still at it I see, I don’t know whats worse, your foul comments or the self righteous indignation.
Bash the mac if you want but at least make it have some points
I take it you missed the recent slew of mac bashing articles?
Here, I’ll post some of the ones you left out:
…with the rest of the Mac fanboys…
…and if it makes these idiots feel superior…
And the only part I can see David mentioning performance is when he is comparing a Mac to a $500 Dell. Now here, I’ll help you along with my suggestion, give you a boost I guess.
Your comment: Was that an article or an apple advertisement? By the way David, please don’t use the words performance and Mac in the same sentence. It makes you sound like a total ass.
Improved comment: That article wasn’t exactly informative. David says that Mac users are willing to pay for performance, but I think they’re just willing to overpay for performance. Generally, other systems manufacturers (insert example) give you more bang for the buck.
See, it really isn’t all that difficult! I’m sure you’ll get the hang of it in time.
Let me know if you need some help!
Oh, and read this if you think I’m an Apple fanboy…I’ll post more links to me criticizing Apple if you want?
http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=15326&comment_id=147462
Oh, here’s another good post of mine about Apple:
http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=15150&comment_id=142050
Edited 2006-07-30 03:11
I’ve started work at new company that is all Windows based, I’m amazed people can put up with XP, now these machines arn’t new, they are 3.0ghz P4s but god are they slow and buggy, many times the programs freeze, takes ages to load up, everything, my 2 year old G4 12″ powerbook feels faster (let alone a G5) so it makes me wonder the truth on what I have being reading all these years about PC & Mac performance
I totally agree; it wasn’t actually until the new processors released by Intel, when I actually seriously considered looking at something else besides Apple; until then, you basically had two choices, you had P4’s being sold by Dell which could heat a moderate size room and sucked power like its nobodies business, and the other side, you had the iMac G5 1.8Ghz.
My brother and my computers were bought at around the same time, and believe me, he may have a 128MB graphics card and a P4 3.2Ghz processor, but seeing the grief with things going wrong, I’m happy to have a computer that out performs and causes less problems when doing my regular stuff – surf the net, chat in MSN/AIM, using iWork etc.
“until then, you basically had two choices, you had P4’s being sold by Dell which could heat a moderate size room and sucked power like its nobodies business, and the other side, you had the iMac G5 1.8Ghz.”
A little puzzling. Could not you have considered AMD…?
Name a high profile hardware vendor that sells AMD computers direct to the customer in New Zealand.
No, I’m not going HP/Compaq; I have one rule; if they can’t be bothered selling directly to the consumer, I can’t be bothered dealing with them; obviously if they have that snobbish attitude, it tells me that they don’t want my money; and as such, I’ll vote with my wallet. Hence the reason that Sun New Zealand won’t get my business either.
There aren’t pc-shops where you can buy cpu’s in New Zealand?
Ah yes, third rate crap put together by some pimply faced teenager who doesn’t have a clue; if I was going to resort to that, I’d buy the parts and assemble it myself! I purchase a computer from a big name manufacturer for the long term warranty and security knowing taht they’ve actually spent time ensuring that the systems they sell are stable, reliable and do the job as intended.
Read my statement carefully. I didn’t say that there are a lot more people using GMail than Outlook, but rather that there are a lot more GMails being written. The next killer app will be cross-platform and it will run in a web browser. Maybe it hasn’t been invented yet, but it will soon.
The fact that Outlook has a much higher installed base doesn’t mean anything. IE has 80% of the browser market, and yet Firefox is all the rage. Some tiny fraction of all cars on the road are hybrids, but hybrids are in the news constantly.
Your example, in this case, works against you. Yes, most people use Outlook, but a huge percentage of them use Outlook Web Access. Every ISP offers webmail.
Finally, I should point out that geeks tend to be early adopters. Twenty years ago, if I claimed that everyone would have a computer in their home, you might have pointed out that only geeks owned computers. Times have changed, and they’re still changing.
Read my statement carefully. I didn’t say that there are a lot more people using GMail than Outlook, but rather that there are a lot more GMails being written. The next killer app will be cross-platform and it will run in a web browser. Maybe it hasn’t been invented yet, but it will soon.
The fact that Outlook has a much higher installed base doesn’t mean anything. IE has 80% of the browser market, and yet Firefox is all the rage. Some tiny fraction of all cars on the road are hybrids, but hybrids are in the news constantly.
Your example, in this case, works against you. Yes, most people use Outlook, but a huge percentage of them use Outlook Web Access. Every ISP offers webmail.
First off, comparing Outlook to Gmail is ridiculous. One is an enterprise class messaging/scheduling groupware platform that is not free (and is available for OSX, BTW), the other is a free and convenient email service suited for personal use but wholly unacceptable for mainstream business use.
The browser as the platform isn’t a new concept, in fact the whole threat of it is what led to the browser wars. MS didn’t invest all that money for bragging rights to ensure people used their browser, they did it to ensure that control of the web as a platform couldn’t fall into the hands of any company that wasn’t Microsoft. Netscape’s whole business strategy was to make money selling their web servers as application platforms utilizing any client platform. The whole idea gave Bill and team a serious case of the willies. Many people have a revisionist view on history, and forget the fact that Netscape was a profit-based company that was seeking to displace Microsoft for control of your computing experience.
Fast forward a decade or so later, and while MS may have won the browser wars it has proven fairly impossible to exhert proprietary control over a platform based on open standards. Not that they haven’t tried, of course.
I’m a big believer in browser as a platform where it makes sense, but it doesn’t make sense everywhere. We’ll see more and more corporate applications using web interfaces, we’ll see more and more commercial companies basing application services around a web interface (salesforce.com being a prime example) and we’ll see more innovative, intriguing and commercially questionable free web-based services offered at consumers.
They won’t displace the OS as a platform though. Web services offer a degree of platform agnosticity for enterprises, but consumers are a whole different kettle of fish. Consumers will want browser-compatibility with popular web services, but they will not be willing to give up their rich platform applications.
The analogy about hybrids is an interesting one. Relatively few people drive them, but they’re in the news. The thing about hybrids is that by most standards, they cost consumers more over the long run. Study after study has shown that the gas savings do not compensate for the extra cost. In some cases government rebates offset that, but that’s an artifical influence. The fact is you pay more than you save in terms of cash. Even the environmental considerations of reduced fuel use are balanced against the question of what happens to all those batteries.
Hype generates headlines, but it doesn’t always generate results, or at least not always the results it promises. So it is with web-based apps, the returns are there in different measures depending on your priorities and requirements, but still not sufficiently enough to pry the average consumer away from their flashy rich client OSes.
The only comparison I made between Outlook and GMail is that the former is a desktop application and the latter is a web application, and that more work is being done to produce applications of the latter type than of the former. I could just as easily that more GMails are being written than MS Offices, and my point would be unchanged.
I won’t argue with most of what you’re saying — since you’re right — but I will point out that web applications have been getting ever closer to their rich client counterparts. Before Ajax, no one would have thought that a web-based email client would automatically update its inbox without refreshing the whole page. Whatever people like about “flashy rich clients” will be incorporated into web applications, and probably sooner rather than later.
Google is offering a trial version of gmail for enterprises. google it. you’ll see.
No, it’s not for enterprises, far from. Let me know when Gmail offers 20,000 email addresses for a single domain name and all of the enterprise features required by Sarbanes-Oxley like Lotus and Exchange do and then we’ll talk Right now, it is still consumer level with a different domain name….possibly small business worthy.
“The next killer app will be cross-platform and it will run in a web browser. Maybe it hasn’t been invented yet, but it will soon.”
I think it was a search engine called “google”.
“The next killer app will be cross-platform and it will run in a web browser. Maybe it hasn’t been invented yet, but it will soon.”
I think it was a search engine called “google”.
Ummm, by next, he means something that will be developed in the future, not a search engine that began its life almost 10 years ago :-P. That would be a past killer app. Google isn’t even all that much better than the competition now…I find Yahoo! to be about equal. If it weren’t for Google’s speed, I would have no reason to stick with Google.
Yes, I was supporting his point and google illustrates it perfectly.
Completely platform independent and the biggest threat to MS that exists today. All I’m saying is that the guy is correct it’s just that it may have already happened.
And if you don’t think Google is an app, then you are mistaken. Everybody is “googling” this and “googling” that. Search has become ubiquitous and at least the equal of any other office automation tool out there.
Ummm…where exactly did I say Google isn’t an app? I said Google was a past killer app, and it was just a minor nitpick on your post. I was also just pointing out that the competition has pretty much caught up to Google (in my opinion).
Unix / Linux is used by UberGeeksTM
These guys are intelligent, technology driven people who know how to problem solve, and are adept at using large words
OSX is used by PowerUsersTM
the OSX guys are generally professionals, who choose Apple hardware due to its great ROI (Return of investment). Everything works, so they can get to work.
Windows is used by the consumer.
Windows people are predominantly, the general public, and office workers.
i use mac os and linux and windows
im a "Ubergeekpowerconsumer ?
You seem to have hit the nail squarely on the head.
I use my Mac to get work done, My linux machine to have some fun and play around and My windows machine because I am somewhat of a masochist at times.
Get a good laugh at the Inquirer’s expense:
Slams Apple for a little noise:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33335
Kisses up to Dell:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33337
When you change the world( Apple ) the losers will find anything they can whine about to stop the change and protect their fragile world view.
Dell’s now make junk.
Apple’s statistically are a higher quality brand.
You should be demanding Dell stop selling junk.
Or, buy an Apple, and eventually Dell will get the message.
Wow, I don’t think I’ve seen so many off-topic comments in a long time!
Anyway, regarding the article, I think Mr. Morgenstern has a great point to make. Mac users are generally demanding of their machines. They expect great graphics and multimedia performance, super-cool UIs, innovative solutions, excellent usability, attention to detail, etc. Whereas most Windows users don’t have that kind of mentality: they’re just happy to get something that works at all and doesn’t crap out or get bogged down with virii. Microsoft has a problem: they want to become like Apple, but because their OEM partners and their customers don’t have the Apple mindset, there’s a lot of friction going on.
Case in point: Microsoft releasing a design guide on how to build PCs that don’t look like complete garbage. Wow, is that lame or what? OEMs actually have to be told how to make stuff that looks halfway decent? It’s interesting to note that a lot of the third-party hardware and software in the Mac space also exhibits excellent design, usability, and innovative features. Some of the most exciting software/hardware concepts now in the larger PC world started out in the smaller Mac world. Apple set the standard, and the OEMs followed suit.
The Mac ecosystem is one built around user-centric design. The Microsoft ecosystem is one built around cheap practicality. Very different emphases — and that poses a huge problem for Windows Vista.
The article contends that there is about to be a sudden surge in Mac shipments. Presumably what he has in mind, to justify the ‘perfect storm’ tag, is that they will at least triple from last year’s levels. He doesn’t give any real reasons for expecting this other than a feeling he has. Is it likely? Is there any reason to think we are going to see 12 million Macs a year shipped in the near future – ie this year or next?
I am sceptical, but it is possible. What one would want to see is real evidence that the rise in recent sales is to switchers or new buyers. There was a hint of evidence in the figures Apple released about new users coming into their store – but when you broke that down, it turned out to translate into some tens of thousands, not enough to be a storm of any sort, let alone perfect. But this is what it would take. Not selling to the existing base, but making large conquests of the Windows base. Does anyone have any real evidence this is happening?
One would also want to see real evidence that the rise is of a nature to head up to the 12 million mark in a couple of years. So far, it is pointing to something more like 5 million in one year. But if anyone has any different data, it would be most interesting to hear it.
Apple is a healthy company, Dell and such are not, they’re just working for Intel and Microsoft as “marketing contractors”. Whenever the powers say jump they must comply or Wintel will cast them aside.. just like american auto parts makers. That’s a nice place to be in when they want to pay you, but they “name their own price” and eventually they want your lunch for their profit this quarter.
“Marketing Contractors” — that’a cool phrase, and nails it on the head. Did you make that up?
This is a little silly if you look at the ten year numbers readily available on Morningstar and elsewhere. A more accurate description would be: Dell is a consistent company, in one business line, with a long record of increasing sales and profits. Apple is a very volatile company, which has sharp ups and downs, and which has diversified into multiple business lines. When it makes a hit its a big one, when it makes a loss, its also a big one. Historically. Of course, right now, the market and the enthusiasts appear to agree that it will never make another big loss…
Neither of which has anything to do with company health. Neither of which has much to do with the stock market valuation – this varies with human feeling and the business cycle, and if you look at either Apple or Dell, it is hard to see how the stock price fluctuations correspond to the underlying business trends. They don’t.
Nor are Dell and HP and so on in the least like auto parts suppliers. The equivalents of those guys are the suppliers to Dell and HP. Dell and HP are much more like an auto manufacturer that has moved to heavily subcontracted manufacturing.