I hate Macs!

Millions of people display their individuality on Macs.

Yea, totally! You can get black, OR white macbooks these days! Talk about individuality!

I don't know why people argue these points. Macs, by their very design are meant to be uniform, locked down, and limiting. For some people, this is just the ticket. They don't want to mess with things, and the way apple tells them to do things works for them. They don't need the overwhelming majority of software titles because they can do most of what their limited needs require with the small set of mac software that either came with it is available, or they are willing to pay more for inferior hardware and go ahead and install windows on it so they can do things macs aren't meant to do, which is the only real head-scratcher for me. The appeal of the mac OS is it's closed design. Less opportunity to mess with things means they will all mostly work in the same way.

Unfortunately, MS seems to be thinking they want to follow suit. Windows 8 started out as a locked down crap pile. You did things the way they told you to, or you used a different OS. It seems as though back-lash has spurred some reversal, and although they are still being as stubborn as they can get away with, slowly, changes are happening in 8 to allow more customization and options as older windows versions did. I previously refused to use it, but frankly, at this point, it's better than 7 except for the damn start window taking over the screen and some of the "metro" crap.

In the end, though it's the options that can get people into trouble. Windows deals with all manner of hardware and software on the market and nobody could ever test all the combinations like you can in a smaller closed environment.

They're different things. I would never suggest my mom not use a mac, she couldn't handle all the "stuff" going on with a good PC, and she doesn't want to.
 
Last edited:
I don't know why people argue these points. Macs, by their very design are meant to be uniform, locked down, and limiting. For some people, this is just the ticket. They don't want to mess with things, and the way apple tells them to do things works for them. They don't need the overwhelming majority of software titles because they can do most of what their limited needs require with the small set of mac software that either came with it is available, or they are willing to pay more for inferior hardware and go ahead and install windows on it so they can do things macs aren't meant to do, which is the only real head-scratcher for me. The appeal of the mac OS is it's closed design. Less opportunity to mess with things means they will all mostly work in the same way.

Unfortunately, MS seems to be thinking they want to follow suit. Windows 8 started out as a locked down crap pile. You did things the way they told you to, or you used a different OS. It seems as though back-lash has spurred some reversal, and although they are still being as stubborn as they can get away with, slowly, changes are happening in 8 to allow more customization and options as older windows versions did. I previously refused to use it, but frankly, at this point, it's better than 7 except for the damn start window taking over the screen and some of the "metro" crap.

In the end, though it's the options that can get people into trouble. Windows deals with all manner of hardware and software on the market and nobody could ever test all the combinations like you can in a smaller closed environment.

They're different things. I would never suggest my mom not use a mac, she couldn't handle all the "stuff" going on with a good PC, and she doesn't want to.

Well yeah, that was my point earlier. The Mac for me is a tool to get stuff done, I don't want to marvel at how I get it done, I'm too busy for that.

My last point was the irony of demonstrating against big corporations but using that big corporations' products to help in the process. I guess Apple will forever be thought of as those two kids building that first Apple in a garage ;)
 
This cannot be fixed in XP and is an integral part of the system.
Nonsense. Open user manager, add a user, do not put them in the administrators group. If you omit them from the "power users" group, they won't even be able to edit the registry. To install things you can either use "run as" or simply log out the low level user and log in as admin. I run dozens of networks, hundreds of PCs, about half still XP and almost never do I allow users to run with any sort of "root" access, which is really more of a *nix term. The macs I have to manage are actually a bit of an issue, because unlike Windows, the tools to manage large groups of users and computers for macs are the pits.

This isn't to say that folks shouldn't upgrade to 7 or 8, though. Both are more secure in other ways, and MS doesn't want to keep fixing XP holes.
 
It's funny you point out 'Inferior Hardware' Watso. This is where I have to disagree.

On paper, power against price, yes - Macs are more expensive. When you start to move into other categories like build quality, Macs start to become a good option. How many Ultrabooks are as well-built, reasonably-specced and have the battery life of a MacBook Air? Not many. In fact, as far as I'm aware all of them make some kind of horrible compromise to compete, usually battery life, screen quality or a 5400 HDD rather than SSD storage. The low-end Air is a compromise machine but to me the compromises are balanced reasonably against each other. Would I buy one? No. I'd want at least the 13.3 with the i7 and 8Gb of RAM and even then I want an optical drive, it's not a machine that meets my needs - but neither are any of the Ultrabooks and none of those are any cheaper.

That said, I'm really not sure about the Mac Pro.

I've had the same Macbook Pro since 2009. It's been a trusty companion and compared to cheaper PC laptops with similar specifications (except the eight-hour battery life), mine is the one that has survived the best. It's been dropped multiple times but it still works and the screen is still as good as the day I received it. All of the other computers I've had from OEM manufacturers in the past have developed major faults or were overly-noisy and generally unpleasant to use. My 2006 iMac still runs and has nothing wrong with it, all I've done is doubled the RAM. I've never had that with any desktop before even though my iMac is getting long in the tooth as a 32-bit only machine and can't run anything beyond OS X 10.6 (which is still probably the best version of OS X).

I'm not saying that Macs are for everyone. I'm a Linux dabbler too and really enjoy the customisability of the Linux systems that I've used and in the past used full-time and can absolutely see the appeal of a truly open operating system. I think that Linux is great and improving hardware support upstream can only be a good thing.

As for this disagreement over XP. Yes, you're right. You can lock down the Admin privileges and not allow users access to the root.

That's not the default setting though and how many people that buy computers that aren't advanced users like yourself will even know they can do that? Not many. If the default is to run as root user (yes, it's a *nix term but it's the best term I've got) permanently then when little Billy downloads that file from the Internet, it's going to compromise his machine and he doesn't have to give it permission to do so. At least in Vista, Microsoft made it harder to access root privileges by default.

So if Mum, Dad, whoever is running XP as a layperson, they are inherently more at risk than somebody running Vista, 7, 8, Mac OS X or any form of Linux.
 
It's funny you point out 'Inferior Hardware' Watso. This is where I have to disagree.
You don't disagree at all.

On paper, power against price, yes - Macs are more expensive.
That's really all I care about.

When you start to move into other categories like build quality, Macs start to become a good option.
How could you possibly make that comparison? I can easily spend more on a souped up PC that has more attention to detail and "build quality" than a mac, I also have the option to look at the thousands and thousands of options in-between rather than letting apple decide on a "build quality" for me and everyone else. I've bought "hardened" PC notebooks literally designed to be submerged, thrown around, work in dust-filled environments, etc. They typically cost about the same as a "high end" mac which is costlier still by a slight margin, and I can make fucking bombs with it if I like. Steve doesn't allow you to make bombs with your apple.

How many Ultrabooks are as well-built, reasonably-specced and have the battery life of a MacBook Air?
Since I think both "ultrabooks" and the "mac book air" are a joke, (the air being the funnier, more useless joke) I'll ignore this. My current Asus notebook gets around 9 hours use if I'm careful, more like literally 90 days of standby, and I (well, the company) spent 700 bucks on it, windows included. It's a hybrid SSD with some platters that only spin up when I need them.

If you buy a mac, you pay a premium to be a part of their closed-hardware system with all it's faults and benefits. End of story. Why anyone argues this is beyond me.

As for this disagreement over XP. Yes, you're right. You can lock down the Admin privileges and not allow users access to the root.
I was correcting you, not disagreeing. Of course I'm right. I'm an omnipotent being and the only time I was wrong was the one time I thought I might be wrong.

That's not the default setting though and how many people that buy computers that aren't advanced users like yourself will even know they can do that? Not many.
That's because when XP came out, it wasn't such an issue for that OS. That OS is older than the big kit vs small kit debate. XP is no longer the best option for the average home user, and I don't think anyone would argue. *nix operating systems were designed for larger-scale stuff than just desktop work, to be used by people who know what they are doing, and had least-priv built in. Older macs allowed software install without rights elevation, too. Before XP came out, I used macs because back then the hardware really was different, and the software gap wasn't so gargantuan.

So if Mum, Dad, whoever is running XP as a layperson, they are inherently more at risk than somebody running Vista, 7, 8, Mac OS X or any form of Linux.
With exception of the last one, this is true. Linux machines must be constantly updated just like windows, because they are historically hacked more than anything else, and even more open than windows is. I worked for an ISP for about 3 years, it was always the nix machines that got "rooted" which is (or used to be) a term for a hacker gaining access to root, even though it was locked down. It's a huge code-base with plenty of attack vectors...

But yes, I'm not going to argue about a new OS being more secure than a really old one. I don't know why I get sucked into this in the first place. I use and support macs when I have to, I also don't have any delusions about them being "better" for anything other than perhaps user preference.
 
Yea, totally! You can get black, OR white macbooks these days! Talk about individuality!

I don't know why people argue these points. Macs, by their very design are meant to be uniform, locked down, and limiting. For some people, this is just the ticket. They don't want to mess with things, and the way apple tells them to do things works for them. They don't need the overwhelming majority of software titles because they can do most of what their limited needs require with the small set of mac software that either came with it is available, or they are willing to pay more for inferior hardware and go ahead and install windows on it so they can do things macs aren't meant to do, which is the only real head-scratcher for me. The appeal of the mac OS is it's closed design. Less opportunity to mess with things means they will all mostly work in the same way.

Unfortunately, MS seems to be thinking they want to follow suit. Windows 8 started out as a locked down crap pile. You did things the way they told you to, or you used a different OS. It seems as though back-lash has spurred some reversal, and although they are still being as stubborn as they can get away with, slowly, changes are happening in 8 to allow more customization and options as older windows versions did. I previously refused to use it, but frankly, at this point, it's better than 7 except for the damn start window taking over the screen and some of the "metro" crap.

In the end, though it's the options that can get people into trouble. Windows deals with all manner of hardware and software on the market and nobody could ever test all the combinations like you can in a smaller closed environment.

They're different things. I would never suggest my mom not use a mac, she couldn't handle all the "stuff" going on with a good PC, and she doesn't want to.

I've used Macs since the 1980s and Windows since the 1990s, especially since 2000. I can tell you some things are easier with a PC, some with a Mac. This whole rubbish about Macs being more intuitive is bunk. Some simple things are much harder on a Mac and you have to jump through Apple's hoops. Yes, the user is kept away from certain things on a Mac, but other things are easier I am finding, like hardcore programming and Web development. Really, strip away the marketing hoopla and there isn't a whole lot of difference between them. They basically do the same things in the same ways.
 
Millions of people display their individuality on Macs.

That is the single wisest statement in this thread. Anybody see "Life of Brian"?
Brian (to crowd): "You're all different."
Crowd in unison: "We're all different."
Lone man in crowd: "Except me."

It also makes me think about kids who have to have the latest fashions to show their individuality.

I've been a professional software developer for a long, long time. There is much to hate about both Microsoft and Apple. However, I have noticed as time goes by, they are becoming much more like each other, and much more closed to innovation and outsiders (not that either was ever particularly 'open').
Although I use Windows about 90% of the time (and Linux the rest), I don't think I would give a recommendation of either Windows or Mac over the other. It mostly comes down to personal preference. The one difference is that Mac's are usually pricier, but easier to use and more reliable, although that is a vast generalization that is not always true. I will say that " Macs are best for computer programming," is a ridiculous statement. That's a bit like saying "everybody should drive a pickup truck". I am not saying Macs are bad, but they are definitely not 'best'. Mac, Windows, and Linux all have their strengths and weaknesses.
 
I'd never use a Mac simply because of the price/performance ratio, I can build a very nice PC for that. Sounds like you got a good deal on yours though.
 
Millions of people display their individuality on Macs.

This just makes me think of that South Park episode with the goth kids who were so non-conformist that they were, in fact, conformists lol. For what it's worth, I'm wanting to buy a laptop at the end of the year and the MacBook Pro is a front runner right now.
 
I have two computers, my Mac, which I'm on right now, and a PC my mom gave me when she got a new one. I like them both.
 
Brave new world, DMC?

With Windows, I find the releases alternate between good and bad:

95 good
98 bad
98 SE good
ME bad
XP good
Vista bad
7 good
8 bad

I am a late adopter. I not only wait for the decent upgrades, I also wait until Microsoft's guinea pi ... um, early adopters have unearthed the fatal flaws that cost them their data, sanity and money.

The company that most bothers me is Adobe. Apparently you can't but Photoshop any more - you lease if from the company in "the cloud" or some crap like that. You just have to pay and pay ever month.

Same deal for Macs too, right? I keep reading about The Gimp being a good open source replacement - outstanding program for a freebie but sill a long way from pre-cloud PS.

Alas, I don't think Mac can cure these issues.
 
I'm another longtime hardware/software professional in my boring day existence: I'm a EE who specializes in microprocessor design (worked for Sun Microsystems on the Microsparc family of processors in the 80s and 90s). I've always been a Unix guy since my college days in the 70s, so I was quite happy when Apple came out with OS X (which is just a relatively decent Unix implementation with a pretty GUI stuck on top). It is easy enough to work around the GUI and use a Mac as a straightforward Unix box, which is what I do at this point.

I've participated in porting a number of the open-source software EDA tools I use (distributed logic and circuit simulation, primarily) to the Apple platform with good results. I've also fooled around with Linux quite a bit, but truth be told I like the stable hardware/software environment that the Mac Pros provide. I find the OS X platform to be as wide open as I want it to be: I build the tools I need as I go, if nobody else has already built them.

There's one good thing about Apple hardware users: they routinely abandon their current hardware to go get the latest and greatest. That is great for me, as I haven't bought a new machine since I bought my original Mac Plus back in the day. I only buy used machines a minimum of one generation back as a rule, and I've found that I've been able to maintain a very nice level of bang for my buck doing so. I recently replaced the last few Sun Ultrasparc servers in my compute farm with a number of used Mac Pros of 2010 vintage: less than half of the machine count, and less than a quarter of the power consumption, got me about a factor of 5 improvement in simulation throughput.

I still run Parallels under OS X to get a Windows XP seat on my desktop machine to do the handful of things that absolutely require Windows: Explorer for badly-written Web sites, and Visio for preparing documents in that bizarre proprietary format for for one specific client that insists upon it. But professionally I've moved completely away from anything to do with Microsoft. It is a personal bias after my Sun experience, but so it goes.

The DAW in the studio is still running Cubase on Windows XP, but soon it will be going down the road to someone who can tolerate its flakiness, and being replaced with Logic on a Mac Pro. Not looking forward to porting years of projects over, but I can't get the thing to stay up for longer than about an hour at a time, and my patience with it is pretty well spent at this point. It is interfering with my enjoyment of my music, and I'm not kindly disposed towards that. Getting the Blue Screen Of Death mid-take gets my blood to a boil very quickly.

You can do whatever you want with any of the platforms, to be sure. It all comes down to your experience, your training, and your personal threshold of patience- and pain.... (;-)

Regardless, buy used: let someone *else* take the depreciation hit. A little patience in buying your machines can save a great deal of cash. You do not need the latest and greatest of anything in the computing world: technology moves too fast. You may _lust_ for it, but you don't _need_ it to get work done...
 
With Windows, I find the releases alternate between good and bad:

95 good
98 bad
98 SE good
ME bad
XP good
Vista bad
7 good
8 bad

So true. I don't understand why they put their heads back in their asses every other big version... The biggest gripe I have is that this last one (8) would be really a great OS if they would just stop trying to be apple and force one particular interface on us. Metro sucks a lot with a mouse and keyboard, and it's not like we're quiet about that fact. But this time, everything else in 8 has been amazing. There's just no reason, and no excuse why the damn start screen needs to take over everything and be super clunky. We aren't dumb and we know that they could damn well put in a pop up start menu if they would just not be so stubborn.
 
There's just no reason, and no excuse why the damn start screen needs to take over everything and be super clunky. We aren't dumb and we know that they could damn well put in a pop up start menu if they would just not be so stubborn.

What's with that? They routinely foist major unwanted changes on users. Like when they introduced the ribbon into MS Office.

It wasn't an improvement and IMO was often counter intuitive. I had to create about 15 quick start shortcuts to maintain productivity at work. I think they created the Ribbon to isolate Open Office users - so anyone thinking of switching to the free open source alternative would be deterred by the learning curve between ribbon and menus.
 
I've only had it a few days but the only thing I don't like about Windows 8 is the start button being removed. It was so easy in 7 to just click that button and then search for stuff. I'm baffled by it's removal but it can easily be brought back in a Service Pack update.

As for Mac, I don't think I could justify buying one. If you look at the individual hardware components piece by piece, Apple inflate the prices. So you end up spending a grand and a half on a Macbook Pro when a laptop that is every bit as powerful is half the price.
 
What's with that? They routinely foist major unwanted changes on users. Like when they introduced the ribbon into MS Office.
Unfortunately, more and more they are trying to out-apple apple. It used to be that people would rag on MS OSes and programs because they were typically the opposite of apple products. Function over form, options over ease-of-use. Now more and more, they just want to force us into one way of doing things, and make it uniformly pretty. For those of us that aren't idiots or mac users, simple menus work better; but might be less pretty and less "user(idiot) friendly" than huge buttons with pretty pictures on them.

Also, they were probably getting things ready for their current attempts to push touch-screen use on us. One area where small menus get frustrating is when you're trying to use your finger instead of a pointer which is more precise and efficient.

I think they created the Ribbon to isolate Open Office users - so anyone thinking of switching to the free open source alternative would be deterred by the learning curve between ribbon and menus.
They don't really feel threatened by the open office crowd. They sell office to businesses, not individuals for the most part. Sure there is competition, but kinda like adobe and photoshop, everyone still wants the "real stuff". I think it's more likely about touch-screen plans and making things more pretty.
 
Unfortunately, more and more they are trying to out-apple apple. It used to be that people would rag on MS OSes and programs because they were typically the opposite of apple products. Function over form, options over ease-of-use. Now more and more, they just want to force us into one way of doing things, and make it uniformly pretty. For those of us that aren't idiots or mac users, simple menus work better; but might be less pretty and less "user(idiot) friendly" than huge buttons with pretty pictures on them.

I'm genuinely curious here... what is it about the Mac interface that compromises functionality for looks? When I say I'm genuinely curious, I am genuinely curious, not trying to be smart.

I mean, yeah, I'm a self-proclaimed Apple fanboy, but I'll probably be working with computers one day myself, so it'd be interesting to hear about your experiences.
 
I'm genuinely curious here... what is it about the Mac interface that compromises functionality for looks? When I say I'm genuinely curious, I am genuinely curious, not trying to be smart.
It's not always for looks, in fact, probably more often, it's supposedly for ease of use. I'll give you a few examples and hope a fight doesn't break out...

For example. Windows has always been very context-driven. Windows is designed with the requirement of more than one button on the mouse. This is because if you right-click almost anything in windows, you'll get a menu of options or popular actions related to what you're clicking on. Steve decided that multiple button mouses might be confusing and ugly so the OS is designed around one, and most models do not have extra buttons. Far less context driven, and generally tries to hide the extra options and controls. Speaking of mice. Talk about form over function. Just about every apple mouse ever designed has been really terrible. From mouses where the whole top is one huge un-comfortable button, to hand-cramping little tiny pucks, most serious users go buy 3rd party mouses and then map the "command" button to another one. Even so, the command menus are much less prominent and capable than how windows is designed for efficiency.

Another example is the way that unlike nearly every other device on the planet that accepts CD media, there's no damn button to eject it. Dragging an icon to "the trash" is really counter-intuitive and much more work, yet steve made the decision and most macs don't allow you to easily do this. Not a deal breaker for most, and as I said, Microsoft is trying to copy them a bit too much. Like the way they hide the damn shut down button and options in win 8. Clunky, hard to find and use... Not intuitive to anyone with computer experience.

I mean, yeah, I'm a self-proclaimed Apple fanboy, but I'll probably be working with computers one day myself, so it'd be interesting to hear about your experiences.
If you're going to work in the industry, get rid of the apple-fan-boi persona. It's one of the most annoying things we deal with when we come across the odd admin who prefers macs, they really can't shut up about how great their macs are, usually right before they install windows on dual-boot so they can actually use some business software. You can certainly prefer macs, just try not to be annoying, and be honest about the limitations and financial drawbacks of the system.
 
Spoken like a true politician ;)

I do try to be especially diplomatic on issues I know people have religious convictions about, like whether Windows or Macs are better. Perhaps I'm too diplomatic sometimes. Everything Microsoft makes is a crappy ripoff of somebody else's better idea, and everything Apple makes is ridiculously overpriced ;p
 
Back
Top