Author Topic: Seriously, wtf is going on with Apple's Mac vs. Pc ads? (Read 66,483 times)

Ralf Maximus · « **Reply #50 on:** November 27, 2007, 02:43 AM »

Assuming one does install a beta SP on their primary workstation (IMHO, about as safe as coating your penis with honey and sticking it in a beehive) does the beta expire? And then can you install the legitimate SP over it later?

Renegade · « **Reply #51 on:** November 27, 2007, 03:46 AM »

Quote from: Ralf Maximus on November 27, 2007, 02:43 AM

Assuming one does install a beta SP on their primary workstation (IMHO, about as safe as coating your penis with honey and sticking it in a beehive) does the beta expire? And then can you install the legitimate SP over it later?

HAHAHAHAHA~!

I suppose the answer is kind of like coating your penis in honey and installing it in a beehive - You can uninstall it later... But it's still gonna hurt!

Ralf - you kill me!

f0dder · « **Reply #52 on:** November 27, 2007, 11:38 AM »

Quote from: Renegade on November 27, 2007, 03:46 AM

Ralf - you kill me!

Is it really Ralf that's killing you - or your regular beehiving sessions?

zridling · « **Reply #53 on:** November 28, 2007, 09:58 AM »

It's never a good idea to insult your potential customers, but given my own year-long bad Vista experience, I find them amusing. The "downgrade back to XP" one especially ("Where by 'downgrade' he means upgrade to an older, more stable version.") I don't think these commercials are working, but the shortcomings of Vista occurred to create a perfect storm against the Windows platform:

— UAC gets turned off
— Poor driver support
— Slower, requiring faster hardware
— Vista's EULA compared to OS X's (where "every version is the ultimate") or change your hardware, buy another copy of Vista!
— DRM; Trusted Computing; WGA
— MS-OOXML and Office 2007; OGA

All this came at a time when both Apple and Linux were putting out the best versions of their OS software in years. It's a practical fact that what Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away — I just wanted a faster computer that was more reliable. Instead I was handed the utter mess that is Vista Explorer, and my brand new expensive, superfast computer ran slower with Vista than my 5-year old machine ran XP! And for that fact alone, I call bullshit on Microsoft.

It's no mistake that Wal-Mart just sold 200,000 $200 gOS Linux machines in two weeks. People will always take value. I can't stand Apple, but trust me, I've seen more than a dozen people I know personally switch to it in the past year, and this includes two IT admins!! And all of them were Windows users. So it's safe to say that virtually every new Apple user is a former Windows user.

______________________
PS: mouser, the mac vs. pc rap video is great!

Darwin · « **Reply #54 on:** November 28, 2007, 02:48 PM »

Quote

I just wanted a faster computer that was more reliable. Instead I was handed the utter mess that is Vista Explorer, and my brand new expensive, superfast computer ran slower with Vista than my 5-year old machine ran XP! And for that fact alone, I call bullshit on Microsoft.

Thank you Zaine! I had the same experience and have posted about it a number of times here. I've been secretly wondering if I was being histrionic, so it's nice to read that someone else had the same dramatic result. BTW, I'd add to the following to your list of Vista blunders:

I can buy Tiger in Canada for ~ $99. This is one version to rule them all - virgin install, upgrades, Home, business, Pro, etc. Compare this to Vista's pricing and you start reeling and vomiting in the street
Vista breaks many applications - either they don't run at all under it or that run with broken functionality. Many 3rd party suppliers are releasing new versions to run on Vista but guess what, they're CHARGING for them, in some cases BIG money. This isn't in and of itself a terrible thing, and it happened at the 95 and NT/2k/XP transitions, but it is a coinsideration because it greatly increases the cost of upgrading - either via OS install or through a new computer purchase

Crazy. I'm telling you, if Steven Jobs got his head out of his own rearend and released Tiger into the wild to run on non-Apple machines, Apple would exponentially increase its market share in weeks. I'd buy it just to try it out - for the price, why wouldn't I? My hope if this happened would be that Microsoft would get their collective act together and respond with something amazing. Actually, I think XP is great - a service pack that added some of the features of Vista, like its searching capabilities, would be great. Heck, they could even charge $99 for it...

JennyB · « **Reply #55 on:** November 28, 2007, 05:05 PM »

Quote from: Darwin on November 28, 2007, 02:48 PM

Crazy. I'm telling you, if Steven Jobs got his head out of his own rearend and released Tiger into the wild to run on non-Apple machines, Apple would exponentially increase its market share in weeks. I'd buy it just to try it out - for the price, why wouldn't I?

Probably not going to happen because op the range of hardware they'd have to support, but how about a Hackintosh?

Quote

If the high price tag for Apple hardware has kept you from buying a Mac but you're willing to roll up your sleeves and get adventurous, you can build your own "Hackintosh"—a PC that runs a patched version of OS X Leopard. What?!, you say. Apple's move to Intel processors in 2006 meant that running OS X on non-Apple hardware is possible, and a community hacking project called OSx86 launched with that goal in mind. Since then, OSx86 has covered major ground, making it possible for civilians—like you and me!—to put together their own Hackintosh running Mac OS 10.5. Today, I'll show you how to build your own high end computer running Leopard from start to finish for under $800.

Lashiec · « **Reply #56 on:** November 28, 2007, 06:07 PM »

Hackintosh is an interesting thing, and makes me raise a question I've been pondering since Apple moved to Intel. Why everyone wanted to run Windows in a Mac, and no one was interested in running Mac OS X in a PC? Weird, I told to myself when everyone was jumping with joy: "Oh, now we can run Windows in a Mac!". Perhaps this is the final proof that the greatest strength of a Windows PC is the software available for it?

Of course, it'd be nice if Apple made Mac OS X officially available for any kind of FrankenPC

, like say, we provide a cleaner and less hackyish way to run our OS in your PC, but WITHOUT any kind of support. I know it's not going to happen, but hell, why do you have to pay so many money to have hardware already available for much less, only to be officially able to run another OS?

Darwin · « **Reply #57 on:** November 30, 2007, 01:26 AM »

Here's an interesting piece on Leopard from a columnist at PCMag, who warns:

Quote

Before Apple makes any more smug OS-related attacks on Microsoft, it ought to take a good look in the mirror.

Leopard is the New Vista, and It's Pissing Me Off

Darwin · « **Reply #58 on:** November 30, 2007, 01:32 AM »

PS This line had me laughing out loud (yes, I'm juvenile):

Quote

But Apple marketing has the swinging pair of crabapples to actually print "Leopard Just Works" on its Web site.

Darwin · « **Reply #59 on:** November 30, 2007, 01:44 AM »

As did this:

Quote

For Leopard, the sad bundled app-as-feature is Time Machine. To hear Mac moonies tell it, this is the best thing to happen to backup since the letter b. In reality, however, it sucketh and it sucketh huge.

Okay, the screen looks like Star Wars. That's cool in an I-want-to-stay-a-virgin kind of way. But "easy to use"? Which groupie said that? Try putting a new Apple user in front of this app and see what happens. For one, you can't set up Time Machine from within Time Machine. How is that easy? You'll find some of the settings buried in System Settings and others in Time Machine. And if you want to kick off a manual backup, you've got to know to right-click on the Time Machine icon in the dock. Is Britney Spears moonlighting as Apple's UI designer?

Note: careful observers will have now clued in to the fact that I am just now actually reading the article

Ralf Maximus · « **Reply #60 on:** November 30, 2007, 02:02 AM »

What a seriously amusing rant!

And informative too: I learned more about Leopard's new features (and what they're supposed to do) than in most of the press releases.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #61 on:** November 30, 2007, 11:37 AM »

It's interesting that TimeMachine is considered both less user intuitive and less effective than Vista Ultimate's built in backup app - given the converstaion elsewhere about Time Machine on the DC forums

zridling · « **Reply #62 on:** November 30, 2007, 11:40 AM »

[Lashiec]:
Why everyone wanted to run Windows in a Mac, and no one was interested in running Mac OS X in a PC?
________________________________________________
Same goes for the Linux crowd; probably half or more of them run a virtual copy or dual boot one version of Windows for the obvious reason: applications, applications, applications. If you've invested thousands of dollars in high-end Windows software, you're likely to need it for your work or personal business. Most everyone finds virtualization the best solution to spending a fortune on new licenses or trying to get a complex Windows app to work under Boot Camp or WINE.

zridling · « **Reply #63 on:** November 30, 2007, 11:41 AM »

What Carol said is so true. Vista system backup has worked flawlessly for me twice now, while everyone is carping about Time Machine's glitches.

PhilB66 · « **Reply #64 on:** December 28, 2007, 12:56 AM »

[attach]

tomos · « **Reply #65 on:** November 01, 2009, 08:35 PM »

I thought I'd post here and leave the serious mac vs. windows debate to the other thread
I was looking for icons for a couple of filetypes and came across this beauty

[attachimg=#]

I really like it, unfortunately I dont use large icons now but I'm saving it up (it's a bit lost at small size)

Ironically it was in with a bunch of very slick looking 'Macintosh icons' ('Generic PC' it's called). I think the 'PC' one is the only one with character though...

Hey, maybe it's really cool - to be uncool

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #66 on:** November 01, 2009, 09:16 PM »

It's interesting there is a blue screen - my memory of working with the early Macs in the 80s was of a blank screen with a picture of a bomb in the middle. At least BSODs give you some info as to what has gone wrong - Mac never did (apart from a cryptic undocumented long number).

f0dder · « **Reply #67 on:** November 01, 2009, 09:20 PM »

Quote from: Carol Haynes on November 01, 2009, 09:16 PM

It's interesting there is a blue screen - my memory of working with the early Macs in the 80s was of a blank screen with a picture of a bomb in the middle. At least BSODs give you some info as to what has gone wrong - Mac never did (apart from a cryptic undocumented long number).

And pre-OSX, macs were godawful unstable. One crashing app? *b00m*, crashed OS. Even Win9x felt more resilient - I can't remember getting a BSOD from browsing the web, apart from maliciously crafted websites... with the macs at the local library, it was quite a different story.

Did pre-OSX even have preemptive multitasking? I seem to recall that a busy app could more or less lock up the entire system, but it's been quite some years...

40hz · « **Reply #68 on:** November 02, 2009, 12:30 PM »

Quote from: f0dder on November 01, 2009, 09:20 PM

And pre-OSX, macs were godawful unstable.

System 6.0.4 wasn't too bad. But everything from 8.0.1 forward got a little dicey. Especially once they started releasing those Centris and Quadra model Macs.

I remember this definition from back then:

Multifinder (noun) - the part of the Macintosh operating system that allows a user to crash in more than one application at the same time.

tomos · « **Reply #69 on:** November 02, 2009, 02:23 PM »

Quote from: Carol Haynes on November 01, 2009, 09:16 PM

It's interesting there is a blue screen [...]

it's the cliché isnt it - well, the mac propaganda cliché I mean.

It was the only one of the icons though with character, and is very lovingly drawn - all the other icons (all mac) look pretty much like something from a mac catalogue. Maybe the illustrator has a subconscious or deeply supressed love of 'pc's

disguised by a blue screen

f0dder · « **Reply #70 on:** November 02, 2009, 04:56 PM »

Quote from: tomos on November 02, 2009, 02:23 PM

Quote from: Carol Haynes on November 01, 2009, 09:16 PM
It's interesting there is a blue screen [...]
it's the cliché isnt it - well, the mac propaganda cliché I mean.

Cute that they're still using the Win9x BSOD screen... it's probably out of ignorance, but it's imho it's pretty fitting... NT very rarely crashes except for flawed hardware or buggy 3rd-party drivers

Innuendo · « **Reply #71 on:** November 02, 2009, 07:57 PM »

Quote from: f0dder on November 01, 2009, 09:20 PM

Did pre-OSX even have preemptive multitasking? I seem to recall that a busy app could more or less lock up the entire system, but it's been quite some years...

Nope...no pre-emptive multi-tasking until OS X. It's funny...before OS X Mac users insisted the Mac didn't need pre-emptive multi-tasking due to the way the MacOS worked. Of course, now that OS X has it Mac users say they're glad to finally have it.