PC strikes back against the Mac?

[Drave]

I'm running both platforms atm, from a custom XP rig & laptop, to a 20" iMac, just to see what the fuss was about.

It's just nice to have a different (not better, but different) way to use a machine without using the same old UI, file system, etc. for the last 10+ years. /shrug. YMMV, I'll leave it at that.

[Aethn Anvel]

The only reason the 30-something crowd loves MAC is the fact it was pushed on them since they were in Kindergarten. Nearly every grammer school, high school and college in the US got either Free MAC's or greatly reduced priced MAC's for use in the 80's and early 90's.

Steve Jobs realized the only way to get his product in widespread use was to 'indoctrinate' an entire generation as early as possible by using cash starved, willing to "sell a 3rd grader's kidney for an administrators salary increase" american public education system as his guinea pigs. After having MAC cramed into your brain from First Grade to College graduation, its hard for many of those same students to even consider something that might actually work better.

Did you know the first Apple 1 sold for $666.66 retail? Coincidence? I think not. Steve Jobs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia if you dont believe me.

[Millie]

Originally Posted by Aethn Anvel

Did you know the first Apple 1 sold for $666.66 retail? Coincidence? I think not.

OK, now it's crap like this that really annoys me -- not as a "Mac fangirl," but as a more-or-less unbiased consumer. You and I both know that Steve Jobs may be a weirdo with an inexplicable penchant for black turtlenecks, but he's not Satan*. If that $666 figure is accurate, then yes, it was a coincidence.

Let's try to keep things at least moderately realistic here. I realize you're probably joking around and all. But just because blind Mac fanboyism is annoying doesn't give the PC crowd license to be the same way.









*Satan is actually Dick Cheney. I mean, come on. Isn't it obvious?

[James]

No, Dick Cheney shot a lawyer in the face with a shotgun. By that alone he cannot be Satan, because we all know that lawyers are his minions on Earth.

[Ennya Dragonslayer]

If you ythink hardware has ever had anything to do with the Mac/PC debate you've been deluded. That hardware debate ended when the //gs came out with vastly superior everyting for any user in any home or business and it flopped. The (educated) debate has only been about 2 things since the 70s. Software and Useability. Software is all about who makes what and compatability. This is where each platform has had an individual edge, but the PC edge was not specific to education and design. PC clearly won this fight years ago when businesses adopted PCs (think IBM folks) because they communicated with their mainframes and mini-computers and the old saying "No one ever got fired for buying IBM"

Designers never gave a shit about that, they wanted something pretty that made their work easier. Education wanted something cheap and apple machines were sold to education for more than 50% off making them way cheaper. (It's more complex that that, but this will do.)

The other part of the arguement is about useability. Microsoft has been chasing MacOS for 20 years. Hell, in terms of a UI, it's pretty much the worst choice out there and always has been. Windows was an application on top of DOS and was till XP. And if you look really hard, it still acts like it on XP as well. There is nothing intuitive about it unless you grew up on Windows or grew up on a command line. I constantly hear windows used bitching about not having enough mouse buttons on a Mac. The problem isn't that a MAc doesn't have them it's that on Windows you need all kinds of buttons and rollers and jack-me-off devices just to get your shit taken care of. MacOS is much more simple and intuitive to the new user so it doesn't need all that.

Now I havn't used Vista yet but given DOS->Win3.11->Win95->Win98->WinME->WinXP have all had the same insufficient upgrades to try and give you what MacOS has always had, I doubt that Vista will some how magically be better. Give Scot Finnie says "sayonara" to Windows... a read. Former windows fanatic at computerworld.

The bottom line is that PCs have dominated because of compatability and availability. The cost to consumers has been useability, quality, and short obsolessence. Maybe Vista will fix this, but I seriously doubt it. Macintosh computers continue to be easier to use and look and feel more like home than just a simple house.

[Zeste]

will it work on my "IBM compatible"?

All I know is that one day my banks ATM was on the fritz, and instead of the regular welcome screen on the monochrone 5 inch display, I saw the desktop of OS/2 Warp.

That is no lie. No more than a few weeks ago. My banks ATM's run off of OS/2 Warp.

[Ahnkosis]

Originally Posted by James

No, Dick Cheney shot a lawyer in the face with a shotgun. By that alone he cannot be Satan, because we all know that lawyers are his minions on Earth.

And you don't think Satan would cannibalize one of his own minions for notoriety and the possible disassociation from his true form? All well within the realm of possibility.

[Yermum Onceme]

Dick Cheney is the antichrist. He shot one of Satan's minions to keep his partner in line.

[Vorph]

Originally Posted by Ennya Dragonslayer

The other part of the arguement is about useability. Microsoft has been chasing MacOS for 20 years. Hell, in terms of a UI, it's pretty much the worst choice out there and always has been. Windows was an application on top of DOS and was till XP. And if you look really hard, it still acts like it on XP as well. There is nothing intuitive about it unless you grew up on Windows or grew up on a command line. I constantly hear windows used bitching about not having enough mouse buttons on a Mac. The problem isn't that a MAc doesn't have them it's that on Windows you need all kinds of buttons and rollers and jack-me-off devices just to get your shit taken care of. MacOS is much more simple and intuitive to the new user so it doesn't need all that.

I disagree completely.

I've used pretty much every platform and OS of any significance created since the late 70's (including Apple stuff from the Lisa to various OS X machines) and I find Windows (2000 Classic UI) to be the most 'intuitive' and easy to use. Fluxbox would be second, and third place would be so distant it's not worth mentioning. I absolutely despise UIs like Aqua, KDE, Gnome, Aero, etc. and to me they are the epitome of form-over-functionality. (By Gnome and KDE I mean the way they are stock--I have no idea if you can make them not suck because I never use anything but Fluxbox as a X wm)

[Ennya Dragonslayer]

Originally Posted by Vorph

I disagree completely.

I've used pretty much every platform and OS of any significance created since the late 70's (including Apple stuff from the Lisa to various OS X machines) and I find Windows (2000 Classic UI) to be the most 'intuitive' and easy to use. Fluxbox would be second, and third place would be so distant it's not worth mentioning. I absolutely despise UIs like Aqua, KDE, Gnome, Aero, etc. and to me they are the epitome of form-over-functionality. (By Gnome and KDE I mean the way they are stock--I have no idea if you can make them not suck because I never use anything but Fluxbox as a X wm)

I can respect that.

My point is not, however, about aqua, gnome, etc... it's about a shift from being an interface to what's on the hard drive to an interface to your stuff. From the MacOS finder to aqua, apple has understood this the whole time, and microsoft hasn't. (Or at least MS did a crappy job of trying do it.)

It is about how applications work with the content you create, or get from others. It's about focusing on the work itself, not on the administrative tasks to do that work.

For example, recently I wanted to convert a power point slide presentation used as a blank to a template. I know, windows uses the .xxx as the marker for a file type so I"ll change that to .pot as a template. Click on the name to high light it, then wait a moment, and click again to edit the name (crap it opened insetad. Exit power point and try again) Chaneg the ending to core.ppt [WARNING!!! you ar about to change the file type....] [OK] Now open it up... hmm, that didn't work... rename back to .ppt [WARNING!!! ...] okie, double click to open it -- crap the player opened it, how do I change associations again? nevermind close the player and right click and choose edit -- oke now it's open. File->Save As... Hey that's handy a templates folder for my templates! lets see it's under C:\Documents and Settings\EnnyaDragonslayer\Application Data\Microsoft\Templates
wait, I want it with the rest of my templates not just the microsoft ones. (And what happened to My Documents?) Change directory to MyDocuments Strange there is no template directory. (Click new directory). now save it. Ok, time to use the thing. Start->New Office document ... Hey, where is my template?

I can keep going, but look how much time is spent trying to create a template and then use it. It's crazy because everyting is still centered on the "cd" commands and exposing the user to that level of detail. Good for the power control users, bad for my mom. It even feels like you have to do all that. The core of the MacOS design to remove that virtual clutter and get to the point. Sure, it also takes away commands from the front and makes more gymnastics to do some special power operations, but that's not the point for most users.

Most users want this experience: Double click, Save As Template, click SAVE.
Yes, the same thing could be done on a PC, but it doesnt FEEL like it to most users. This is why MS tries to hide directories and file types (but only for known file types of course) from the user. The modern OS is about look and feel for ease of use. This is a quote from the article I mentioned in my last post and is made by a long time Windows advocate:

Originally Posted by Scot Finnie

Microsoft's marketing materials for a past version of Windows used the phrase, "It just works." But the only computer that tagline honestly describes is the Macintosh.

[Millie]

The problem cropping up on this thread, and that crops up on just about every Mac vs PC thread I've ever seen, is that people aren't making the right (no pun intended) apples-to-apples comparisons.

Mac Hardware vs PC Hardware = Apples to Apples
Mac OSX vs Microsoft Windows = Apples to Apples
Mac OSX vs PC Hardware = Apples to Oranges
Mac Hardware vs Microsoft Windows = Apples to Oranges

Sure, you might argue that the Mac -- as both a piece of hardware AND an operating system -- is really one package. One invariably comes with the other, for the most part. And thus, you might think it's appropriate to compare the average Mac (hardware + software) to any element of a typical PC (either the hardware or the software). But really, that's fallacious logic.

The same goes for the PC lovers who compare PC hardware to Mac hardware and then declare that Windows is a better operating system.

It sounds to me as if the consensus on this thread, so far, is the following:

- Mac OSX > Windows
- Mac Hardware = PC Hardware

Now those are the broad strokes. If one really bought a computer simply because of those two reasons, then everyone would buy a Mac. There'd be no reason not to. But obviously, other factors come into play that complicate the matter:

- Price
- Selection/availability of software
- Compatibility with office or school software
- Availability of support in present location, job/school situation, etc
- Proclivity towards (or against) gaming
- Personal level of comfort with and understanding of computing
- Etc.

What it all comes down to, really, is the point I was trying to make earlier: there's no "wrong" or "right" choice for everyone. You buy the system that makes sense for your (personal and individual) circumstances and preferences. Anyone making the blanket statement that "all PCs suck" or "all Macs suck" is just towing a nonsensical party line.

[Vorph]

Shrug, people are going to have anecdotal evidence against any OS. I use OpenOffice, so I only got part of what you were saying there.

I could talk about my most recent encounter with OS X where I had to give wireless access to a couple college girls renting the apartment over one of my clients' businesses. One of them had a Dell desktop, which took me all of 5 minutes to hook up and never had another problem. The other had a MacBook and the goddamn thing kept 'forgetting' the WPA key. Sure, I could've given her the key and showed her how to put it back in when it got lost, but she was hot so I didn't really mind going back there 5 or 6 times before Apple pushed an update that magically cured it.

Does that mean that Macs suck because I had problems with the networking? Nah... but it is one more reason I will never buy one myself and why I continue to believe that the ease-of-use thing is a myth.

Originally Posted by Millie

Mac OSX > Windows

Windows > Linux >>> Mac OS X

I'd agree that the hardware is equal only if you're ignoring price entirely. For equal money, PC hardware is a hell of a lot better (assuming you build your own, of course).

[MVerlie]

Originally Posted by Ennya Dragonslayer

For example, recently I wanted to convert a power point slide presentation used as a blank to a template. I know, windows uses the .xxx as the marker for a file type so I"ll change that to .pot as a template. Click on the name to high light it, then wait a moment, and click again to edit the name (crap it opened insetad. Exit power point and try again) Chaneg the ending to core.ppt [WARNING!!! you ar about to change the file type....] [OK] Now open it up... hmm, that didn't work... rename back to .ppt [WARNING!!! ...] okie, double click to open it -- crap the player opened it, how do I change associations again? nevermind close the player and right click and choose edit -- oke now it's open. File->Save As... Hey that's handy a templates folder for my templates! lets see it's under C:\Documents and Settings\EnnyaDragonslayer\Application Data\Microsoft\Templates
wait, I want it with the rest of my templates not just the microsoft ones. (And what happened to My Documents?) Change directory to MyDocuments Strange there is no template directory. (Click new directory). now save it. Ok, time to use the thing. Start->New Office document ... Hey, where is my template?

... are you serious

[Araysar]

Originally Posted by Ennya Dragonslayer

I can respect that.

My point is not, however, about aqua, gnome, etc... it's about a shift from being an interface to what's on the hard drive to an interface to your stuff. From the MacOS finder to aqua, apple has understood this the whole time, and microsoft hasn't. (Or at least MS did a crappy job of trying do it.)

It is about how applications work with the content you create, or get from others. It's about focusing on the work itself, not on the administrative tasks to do that work.

For example, recently I wanted to convert a power point slide presentation used as a blank to a template. I know, windows uses the .xxx as the marker for a file type so I"ll change that to .pot as a template. Click on the name to high light it, then wait a moment, and click again to edit the name (crap it opened insetad. Exit power point and try again) Chaneg the ending to core.ppt [WARNING!!! you ar about to change the file type....] [OK] Now open it up... hmm, that didn't work... rename back to .ppt [WARNING!!! ...] okie, double click to open it -- crap the player opened it, how do I change associations again? nevermind close the player and right click and choose edit -- oke now it's open. File->Save As... Hey that's handy a templates folder for my templates! lets see it's under C:\Documents and Settings\EnnyaDragonslayer\Application Data\Microsoft\Templates
wait, I want it with the rest of my templates not just the microsoft ones. (And what happened to My Documents?) Change directory to MyDocuments Strange there is no template directory. (Click new directory). now save it. Ok, time to use the thing. Start->New Office document ... Hey, where is my template?

I can keep going, but look how much time is spent trying to create a template and then use it. It's crazy because everyting is still centered on the "cd" commands and exposing the user to that level of detail. Good for the power control users, bad for my mom. It even feels like you have to do all that. The core of the MacOS design to remove that virtual clutter and get to the point. Sure, it also takes away commands from the front and makes more gymnastics to do some special power operations, but that's not the point for most users.

Most users want this experience: Double click, Save As Template, click SAVE.
Yes, the same thing could be done on a PC, but it doesnt FEEL like it to most users. This is why MS tries to hide directories and file types (but only for known file types of course) from the user. The modern OS is about look and feel for ease of use. This is a quote from the article I mentioned in my last post and is made by a long time Windows advocate:

I think your computer using license expired some time ago.

You might have to retake the test.

[Tbird]

Originally Posted by Ennya Dragonslayer

I constantly hear windows used bitching about not having enough mouse buttons on a Mac. The problem isn't that a MAc doesn't have them it's that on Windows you need all kinds of buttons and rollers and jack-me-off devices just to get your shit taken care of. MacOS is much more simple and intuitive to the new user so it doesn't need all that.

I have complained that a Mac has no middle mouse button used for scrolling up and down of internet browser windows before and for damn good reason. How am I supposed to browse porn without a middle fucking mouse button? Fuck Macs