Apple is a life saver :)

[Putin]

I've used PC's for a long time. Nothing but problems with software, hardware, and just the shittiest system ever developed thats full of holes...yes, WINDOWS. Then there is viruses and spam and all that shit to worry about. And the complicated installation and uninstallation processes among other things.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever since I finally decided to go with Apple Laptop. I've had this for over a year with no problems. Some minor problems are with Safari closing down, but that's it.

Some people will say "oh but apple is so expensive". NOT! If you do the math, it's cheaper. Add up all the extra software that you need to buy to protect your PC, and then add up the cost of updating that software time after time. And then upgradting Windows, etc. Also getting a virus that will wipe out your PC, costly.

Yeah, Apple isnt good for gaming nor does it have many games for it. It doesnt have as much software either. It's because its a closed system, it doesnt have as many holes that Windows does. But's Apple is coming back.

I no longer have to stress because I have constant ERRORS popping up all over Windows PC system.

Getting an Apple is like buying a Toyota. Getting a PC is like buying a Ford or a WV.

 

[Kaiser]

People have their own opinions on operating systems. Apple is now a Linux OS. It basically is nothing like the original version. And while good for home users, it still falls short in network capabilities, especially if Microsoft decides not to build any new versions of Office for MAC and cuts off it's ability to use the new Exchange and Sharepoint. True, I think Vista is a over cumbersome OS, that just sucks at this point. But XP still has its foothold on the business market. I go where the money is and where corporate network systems are dominate, so I work M$ systems. If it turned, sure, I would switch. I believe they all have their benefits and shortcomings, it just depends on what you are looking for and what mold you are trying to fit in. So home user, yes, corporate network, absolutely no, without bias. It just does not have the capabilities even with Novell's day old bread network technology behind them.

This brings up another interesting concept or thought. People say, I have my children on Mac and they love it. Granted there is nothing wrong with this, but my idea would be to mold my child in the area of what the mainstream language is. It all depends on how you look at it, but I'd want my children to be able to walk into any corporate infrastructure and have their OS skills synchronous with the home infrastructure. My thoughts would be to teach them the majority language, not the minority as to better prepare them for the future. After all, computer language, whatever it may be at the time will be their first language and their spoken language will be second in the future, if not today.

 

[Putin]

Agree on what you said. I think Apple laptops are good for general use only, it would not be good for anything else. But if you're going to school, just surfing the web, etc, it's good to use without any problems.

 

[Liphted]

Apple is now a Linux OS. It basically is nothing like the original version. And while good for home users, it still falls short in network capabilities, especially if Microsoft decides not to build any new versions of Office for MAC

I'm not even sure what is meant by "Apple is now a Linux OS", but its definitely incorrect. I'm not sure how it falls short in network capabilities either. If Microsoft stops building Office for MAC, which in my opinion would be a godsend, either Apple will step up their iWork suite or people will use OpenOffice. There is no issue here.

Agree on what you said. I think Apple laptops are good for general use only, it would not be good for anything else.

I'm guessing you've never worked within the scientific community. Macs run abundant within the sciences, you know people that actually use their computer for more than writing emails, text documents and surfing the web.

Its funny how people still look at Apple/Mac as they were in the past. They, for the most part, are the only innovators in the industry currently. Give them credit where credit is due.

 

[Kaiser]

I'm not even sure what is meant by "Apple is now a Linux OS", but its definitely incorrect. I'm not sure how it falls short in network capabilities either.

You need to do some homework buddy. You do not know what you speak. Macintosh IS Linux now as of Mac OSX and to top it off Apple does not make their own processor or chipset anymore. the architecture is obslolete. They use X86 and X64 Intel platforms with custom BIOS configs.

Corporate network? I dont even have to get into that. You look it up. Before they changed to linus the legacy Mac Hack was to simply hold down the control key when booting to get into administrator rights. That's something a company would want.

As far as Open Office. Are you for real with even bringing this up? So lets see, slow down the world for a user costing $2000, put them on OO so that we dont have to spend $400? There's something that will keep the US's head above water. Let alone no user collaboration. Do your homework and come back to argue your points.

 

[Liphted]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be a dick here, but I'll debate this with you.

You need to do some homework buddy. You do not know what you speak. Macintosh IS Linux now as of Mac OSX and to top it off Apple does not make their own processor or chipset anymore.

Macintosh IS NOT "Linux". First off, Linux is nothing more than a kernel, a monolithic kernel at that. OSX is vastly different from Linux.
For starters it's built upon a completely different kernel, Darwin to be specific. Darwin is comprised of the Mach 3 kernel (a micro-kernel)
and portions of FreeBSD (another monolithic kernel). There is nothing "Linux" about Darwin/OSX.

Apple never made their own processor. That was Motorala and later IBM, but I fail to see how that has any relevance. And yes, the
PowerPC architecture that was used within Mac hardware as of previous (the G4/G5 line) is obselete, as far as Apple is concerned.
But they've acknowledged that and have made the transition to Intels x86 because they decided in the long run it was a better move.

Corporate network? I dont even have to get into that. You look it up. Before they changed to linus the legacy Mac Hack was to simply hold down the control key when booting to get into administrator rights.

I'm not sure how they changed to "linus" (I'm guessing you're referring to Linus Torvaldis?), but I can understand why they would make
you do such a thing. A system should never be run with administrator rights by default (something Windows royally screws up).
There is no need for the average Joe to be in a position to destroy their system or have a system compromised due to the fact that they
are running that process with those privileges. It should take more than simply booting your machine before you start wielding the superuser
sword. The method is definitely clumsy, I'll give you that, but its also the Apple of old, not present.

As far as Open Office. Are you for real with even bringing this up? So lets see, slow down the world for a user costing $2000, put them on OO so that we dont have to spend $400?

My argument had nothing to do with spending $400, and everything to do with what the outcome would be if Microsoft stopped supporting their
shit office suite for the Mac. What I've stated are two viable options.

Do your homework and come back to argue your points.

I suggest you heed your own advice.

 

[BALDNAZI]

I WILL SAY THIS

I will leave the technical stuff to you guys, but I am the owner of a 17" MacBook Pro. I have had it since Christmas and I will say that this is BY FAR the best machine I have ever used. The operating system is fantastic and the ability to just plug in peripherals like cameras etc. without installing software is great.

I also agree that the vast majority of the sciences, graphic designers, movie editors, photography professionals etc. swear by Apple.

For the business world which is PC based maybe it is not everyones choice. But go to your local mall and try out the Macs at the Apple store. I am sure you will be convinced like I was.

My friend has the top of the line Dell XPS 17" and side by side we have compared these 2 machines. For game playing, yes he will take the cake. But for everything else,common things that everyone relates to, he is a jealous bastard,he loves my Mac. Dollar for dollar, I would take a Mac over anything out there unless I was a hardcore gamer which I am not. In that case I would immediately drop a few grand on an Alienware PC/laptop and be done with it.

Macs rule....

 

[Kaiser]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be a dick here, but I'll debate this with you.

Macintosh IS NOT "Linux". First off, Linux is nothing more than a kernel, a monolithic kernel at that. OSX is vastly different from Linux.
For starters it's built upon a completely different kernel, Darwin to be specific. Darwin is comprised of the Mach 3 kernel (a micro-kernel)
and portions of FreeBSD (another monolithic kernel). There is nothing "Linux" about Darwin/OSX.

Apple never made their own processor. That was Motorala and later IBM, but I fail to see how that has any relevance. And yes, the
PowerPC architecture that was used within Mac hardware as of previous (the G4/G5 line) is obselete, as far as Apple is concerned.
But they've acknowledged that and have made the transition to Intels x86 because they decided in the long run it was a better move.


I'm not sure how they changed to "linus" (I'm guessing you're referring to Linus Torvaldis?), but I can understand why they would make
you do such a thing. A system should never be run with administrator rights by default (something Windows royally screws up).
There is no need for the average Joe to be in a position to destroy their system or have a system compromised due to the fact that they
are running that process with those privileges. It should take more than simply booting your machine before you start wielding the superuser
sword. The method is definitely clumsy, I'll give you that, but its also the Apple of old, not present.

My argument had nothing to do with spending $400, and everything to do with what the outcome would be if Microsoft stopped supporting their
shit office suite for the Mac. What I've stated are two viable options.

I suggest you heed your own advice.

Again, it is based on Linux. That is a fact, so what I said is exactly correct.

Are you klidding me with the semantics of who made the processor? Who cares who manufactured it, it was proprietary Apple architecture.

So your naming Linus why? What does he have to do with the argument besides a desparate word of mention by you to gain backing to your statements? Anyone looking at Wikipedia can come up with that.

As a final argument, what do you think the real world corporations would do without the capabilities of Microsoft Office? Are you really that blind sided that you think that Star Office is a viable option? What about Exchange, what about Sharepoint, what about user collaboration? Give me a break. Get some real world experience in a corporate infrastructure as I have and come back in a couple years with some valid arguments.

 

[Liphted]

Again, it is based on Linux. That is a fact, so what I said is exactly correct.

Why is this fact again? Especially when there is no supporting argument? Let me try to state this as clearly as possible, OSX != LINUX. I hope that was succinct enough. The only thing OSX is based on is NeXT and the BSD families. Fact.

Are you klidding me with the semantics of who made the processor? Who cares who manufactured it, it was proprietary Apple architecture.

I was just pointing out the hole in your statement, "Apple does not make their own processor or chipset anymore", thats all.

So your naming Linus why?

For starters because you did and I had no idea why. Let me refresh your memory.

Before they changed to linus the legacy Mac Hack

But I'm guessing you meant "Linux" now that I read it again.

As a final argument, what do you think the real world corporations would do without the capabilities of Microsoft Office?

hmmm, possibly move the fuck on and maybe go with either of the options I listed.

Are you really that blind sided that you think that Star Office is a viable option?

Blind sided by what, the monopolistic 18-wheeler that is Microsoft? Yes, I have. But, I'll go ahead and assume what you meant was blind sighted, and to answer that - I guess so. I was more specifically referring to OpenOffice, but StarOffice works as well.

What about Exchange, what about Sharepoint, what about user collaboration?

Sure, I'll give you those. Its one of the few things Microsoft gets right.

Get some real world experience in a corporate infrastructure as I have and come back in a couple years with some valid arguments.

No thanks, I'd rather wake up every morning and stab myself in the crotch than support a company full of end-users. User is a four letter word you know.


I don't see this argument going anywhere productive, so I'm done. The whole point of my post was simply to state that Macs are used for MUCH more than what you and Putin were giving them credit for. I think BALDNAZI did a better job of it though. Obviously feel free to come back with any rebuttal, but I doubt I'm going to respond. I'll leave with the only absolute that is in this thread.

People have their own opinions on operating systems.

Take care Kaiser.

 

[Kaiser]

Before they changed to linus the legacy Mac Hack

I see what you are saying and I stand corrected. At least we agree that Mac's core is X86 Unix. Sorry for coming off like a prick. I had a really bad week.