How is that not an upgrade? I'm sorry, but I haven't touched a Mac in almost 3 years. Does it have similar constant updates?
Since Windows XP SP2 this is no longer true. By default almost nothing is open. Vista is even more locked down by default.
MacWorld SF 2007 - Apple Moves the Earth Again
How is that not an upgrade? I'm sorry, but I haven't touched a Mac in almost 3 years. Does it have similar constant updates?
Since Windows XP SP2 this is no longer true. By default almost nothing is open. Vista is even more locked down by default.
Beleth
FAQ Creator
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2002
- Messages
- 4,125
Why doesn't Apple have a bigger computer market share?
A cow-orker of mine put it best:
"Because everybody can't be cool."
Apple doesn't market to everybody. They market to cool people. People who for some reason feel the need to use a cool computer. Where bells and whistles are as, if not more, important than gears and pistons.
I'm not saying that's bad. I'm just saying that is.
Because when you get right down to it, you don't really need to carry around a year's worth of music with you wherever you go.
They will probably have the same success rate with the iPhone as they did with Macs - about 10% or less of the market share. They are cool phones, but they're just phones, and everybody can't be cool.
A cow-orker of mine put it best:
"Because everybody can't be cool."
Apple doesn't market to everybody. They market to cool people. People who for some reason feel the need to use a cool computer. Where bells and whistles are as, if not more, important than gears and pistons.
I'm not saying that's bad. I'm just saying that is.
Because when you get right down to it, you don't really need to carry around a year's worth of music with you wherever you go.
They will probably have the same success rate with the iPhone as they did with Macs - about 10% or less of the market share. They are cool phones, but they're just phones, and everybody can't be cool.
Almo
Masterblazer
Explain why Macs have such a low market share, if they are so superior.
Preferably without sounding like a conspiracy nut.
People don't trust Macs because they work. This MUST mean that they are less powerful, if they don't need so much maintenance, right?
They also don't know how bad it will be when Windows finally crashes under the weight of the poorly-designed registry. You have to reinstall Windows and all other applications. On a mac, if you have a system crash for whatever weird reason, you just copy everything over, and it works like new. Mind you, I've never had this happen on any of my Macs, but I have done full operating system upgrades (from system 7 to OS8) and didn't have to move anything around. Try going from Win2000 to XP or something like that. Gotta reinstall all applications again.
I have a friend who works at an Apple store. When someone comes in and asks why Macs are better, they often leave the store with a new computer after she shows them how they work.
People assume that computers are computers, and go for the cheapest. But you get what you pay for. I see this over and over and over again.
Other excellent products in the past have had low market share for various reasons. I can't say exactly why Macs have ended up this way. But it's certainly not because they are inferior at a functional level.
Oh yeah: I perfer PROGRAMMING on Macs, too.
The market focus for Mac's and Windows PC's is quite different in my opinion. It really makes any direct comparison of the two rather futile. Most people love being on one side or another of an arguement as this thread at times has shown very nicely. Nothing is ever so clear cut and black and white.
In the grey area of real life Mac's and Windows PC's both have pro's and con's, and business and home computing scenarios for which those pro's and con's weigh differently for different people doing different things.
Since I've seen plenty of misconceptions going both ways lets just agree that the arguement itself is dumb and rather pointless and move onto something else.
As for the iPhone, it looks like a nice unit, I'm sure it will be an economic success for Apple...but revolutionary? Hardly. It's Apples PDA. Full fledged Windows Mobile devices have been available for a while now. I've been using one for almost 2 years, works great.
That being said I will not be surprised if Apple's unique marketing strategies see a much faster proliferation of iPhone's than of say HP iPAQ's with Windows Mobile.
In the grey area of real life Mac's and Windows PC's both have pro's and con's, and business and home computing scenarios for which those pro's and con's weigh differently for different people doing different things.
Since I've seen plenty of misconceptions going both ways lets just agree that the arguement itself is dumb and rather pointless and move onto something else.
As for the iPhone, it looks like a nice unit, I'm sure it will be an economic success for Apple...but revolutionary? Hardly. It's Apples PDA. Full fledged Windows Mobile devices have been available for a while now. I've been using one for almost 2 years, works great.
That being said I will not be surprised if Apple's unique marketing strategies see a much faster proliferation of iPhone's than of say HP iPAQ's with Windows Mobile.
You make it sound as if each company puts out only one product, an adaptable PC and a monolithic Mac. This is quite simply not the case. In the real world, there are many models of each type, and they compete against a limited number of similar models.
Within the "Workhorse" categories of laptops, the Macbooks blew away the competition.
Within the "Workhorse" categories of desktops, the iMacs trailed the field badly.
In the "slim and light" laptops (mostly for travelers), the less expensive Macbook beat the more expensive Sony, Gateway, and Toshiba.
In the "budget model" desktops, the more expensive Mac Mini trailed less expensive Compaq, HP, and eMachines.
In both cases, Consumer reports defined what was needed first, then compared like with like ("apples to apples" would be misleading here). Sometimes one manufacturer's product was superior, sometimes the same manufacturer's product was inferior. If we relied on market share as our operational definition of superiority, we will get ratings, but they will not be nearly as sensitive to the actual capabilities of the product. As with beer and cars, market share of computers is dependent on more than the characteristics of the product itself.
Walk The Line
We ARE Virginia Tech
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2006
- Messages
- 936
Thus their need to market the Mac as a smug 20-something hipster.
[sarcasm]Yay! Let's all go buy Mac's so we can be smug hipster's too![/sarcasm]
That's not what I am saying at all.
Laptops are a whole different ballgame. Space is key here (as well as weight). Nobody cares if their stationary computer weigh a few extra kilos or not. With laptops, you cannot design your computer the same way you can with a stationary.
phyz
Muse
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 965
Well, there's the smoking gun: another smug Mac user. Dangit, Walk The Line, why do you have to wreck it for us humble, considerate Mac users?
Beleth
FAQ Creator
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2002
- Messages
- 4,125
Not to follow up my own post, but:
A (different) cow-orker of mine who was in the VIP section at the iPhone announcement said that their goal is to have 1% of the 950-million-a-year cell phone market by 2008.
A (different) cow-orker of mine who was in the VIP section at the iPhone announcement said that their goal is to have 1% of the 950-million-a-year cell phone market by 2008.
Pirate_Lad
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2002
- Messages
- 1,262
I realize that I don't need an iphone. I have a video ipod and a perfectly functional cellphone. That said, I see myself buying one anyway. I'm a slave to my technolust.
Any chance someone knows where I can get Jaguar or Panther or Tiger on CD and not DVD?
Vista = Windows NT 4 + Windows Skin 7.0
OS X is seriously nice to run compared to Windows, indeedy yes. The difference is that it does NOT require an intimate knowledge of the underlying technology to drive it. It just works, and works intuitively and beautifully. The downside is that if you do need to dive under the hood (which I find is very rare anyway), it's a proprietary and murky world.
Yes indeed. I have done so too, including in the Good Ole DayesTM (ever try to put an upgraded SCSI HDD and more memory in a Mac SE??) But it did require an intimate knowledge of low-level hardware and other compatibilities (plus the "special long torx security screwdriver" for the MAC SE case, of course).
Personally, back in the 80's and 90's, I thought the Apple product was better designed and built, and actually more "industry standard" than the early PC products. Some of the PC stuff was bleeding awful - everyone had their own standard, and new products DOA out of the box was not uncommon! Apple picked industry standards, and stuck to them for all their products - USB is one example that has since migrated to PC. Generally, I was much more confident that any external SCSI unit I bought would work on a Mac than on a PC. It wasn't until the mid to late 90's that PC products became reasonably reliable and NOT(user-hostile).
Today, the iMac and its siblings, plus OS X, is still a potent combination!
Last edited:
Ian Osborne
JREF Kid
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2001
- Messages
- 8,957
yet you can run windows and quite a few flavors of linux on their machines. I have a mini that is running Fedora Core 6 on it because that software fit the need of my purposes. I needed a server that ran MySQL, PHP, Apache 2, and imagemagick. While I can run all those things on OSX, I preferred the server be a linux one. However with OSX, you can adapt any number of opensource applications to OSX because it is a unix environment. It uses Darwin for the kernel, and has a BSD layer. In fact, I can think of at least two opensource projects dedicated to porting unix/linux apps to OSX. Macports and Fink. While Apple's sofftware for Logic, iWork, iLife, Final Cut, etc are their own proprietary software, you can port open office, jahshaka, pretty much all of the gnome environment, all of the kde environment, and audacity to do the same things.
Last I checked, you could upgrade macs (just google "mac upgrade" and see how many companies sell parts for macs to be upgraded with") and you can run both OSX and various flavors of linux on ppc macs, and you can run just about anything on the intel ones. How are they "controlling" anything when I can load so many different OS's on my machines?
Why doesn't microsoft have the same hardware issues you want to throw at apple? last I checked microsoft doesn't deal in hardware. However, I will note that it is much tougher to port open source software to a windows machine than it is to OSX.
But all of that aside Claus, My chevy is totally better than your ford.
OS wars are retarded. OS functions are simply a factor of what is needed to the user. Nothing more. the rest is marketing hype. Any user desktop ready distribution OS is just as powerful as the others. You simply have to know how to use it.
El_Spectre
Lizard Scum
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2005
- Messages
- 1,206
Sure. Lemme install cygwin, perl, and a buncha network tools and windows is almost useful
Now, there's a myth!
Choosing OS is not solely about choosing brands. There are many factors that determine what brand of computer people will use. If you are in the slightest way going to exchange files with other people - and in a networked world, who are not? - it makes a hell of a difference if you send them a Word file or some format that very few people know.
Sure, Word can open most formats, but something will inevitably get lost in translation. Should we have different formats at all? There are pros and cons to all formats, but does it matter to most people? You can do something in one format that you can't do in another, but how often does that happen?
Nobody cares what format the documents are in, as long as they look the way you want them to, and they can be read by others. It's functionality and permeation that matters to the vast majority.
In a perfect world, kids would both be able to and be very interested in learning all the platforms. But you know what? A funny thing happened on the way to school...
Denmark is as IT-permeated as it gets. Yet, recently, we've had trouble getting the young'uns to attend computer schools, to the point where we are thinking of importing IT people.
Kids today have grown up with computers in a way that you and I haven't. From birth, they have been exposed to computers, and they have an amazing number of programs. They see computers as tools, but not something they can make a career out of. Computers are...just there.
It's a natural development, I guess. The hottest thing when I left high school was to study computers, because it was a very different world than the one we live in now. But kids these days...they are simply not interested, they have no need for diving in and exploring a lot of different OS. For them, computers work, and that's fine. They use them as a tool, and they use them extensively, because the demands today are much higher than just a few decades ago. They have so much to learn in a very short time. To ask them to learn programming for all platforms, some of which will inevitably be redundant before they finish high school, is merely a waste of time. Who will teach them? Who will pay for the equipment? Who will pay for the upgrades?
In a perfect world, sure. In the real world - not realistic.
Indeed.
webfusion
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 9,795
Indeed.
Here's the new catchy Ringtone that Apple says will move the Earth:
http://punani.ws/audio/iPhone.mp3
Here's the new catchy Ringtone that Apple says will move the Earth:
http://punani.ws/audio/iPhone.mp3
1)So what is incompatible?
2)What files have you recieved from a mac user you couldn't open?
3)What software suite can you name on the mac that cannot save in a compatible format for pc users?
Brought over from the larsen list I started in this thread.
Your Word file example is busted. iWork and NeoOffice (as well as OpenOffice) all save in Word format.
ETA:
So it seems you are the one perpetuating a myth here.
Last edited:
Please understand that your questions have nothing to do with what I actually say.
I'll requote what you said, just to remind you:
Now I have shown 3 suites of office productivity software available to macs that will save in word format. Answer the questions.
Since CFLarsen has now refused to answer those questions in the other thread, I assume he also refuses to answer them here.
Interestingly, I also see no response to my rebuttal of his example with Word.
Oh well.
Interestingly, I also see no response to my rebuttal of his example with Word.
Oh well.