PC vs MAC

[phyz]

So you consider an iPod a a "no-name" product but isn't the iPod a "name" product?

Evidence?

Claims about iPod sweatshops were overblown. And Apple corrected the minor management issues involved.

But please, hold up for public praise the MP3 player that you know to be manufactured by well-paid, union workers. I'll wait...

 

[Zygar]

No one who hates iPods should ever get one. Apple will buck up and try to survive without your patronage.

And if you've got a better interface idea, go for it and see how it fares in the marketplace. As far as I can tell, Apple doesn't have a gun at anyone's head.

I always vote with my dollar. But that doesn't mean I can't voice my opinion.

 

[geni]

I musta got lost. I don't recall reading that specific claim. Dell? Kindly point me to it.

The original claim I was responding to was on page 4 of the thread

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2253548#post2253548

Macs are price competitive with similarly configured Windows machines from large manufacturers.

So far I've always been able to get better hardware for less money from dell than from Apple.

Realisticaly there is no way you can claim that dell is not better value in terms of hardware.

 

[El Greco]

No one who hates iPods should ever get one. Apple will buck up and try to survive without your patronage.

Let me ask you a simple question:

Why would anyone who hates iPods buy one in the first place ? Because he's a masochist maybe ?

 

[phyz]

Realisticaly there is no way you can claim that dell is not better value in terms of hardware.

I don't recall that I did. Or ever would.

The purchasing decision is a simple matter of personal preference.

A Kia will always be a better value than a BMW, too, in terms of hardware specs. And yet enough people seem eager enough to shell out the extra cash for a BMW. Even if you point out the obvious difference in value. Such is the nature of the marketplace.

 

[merentha]

there is no such thing as an intuitive interface

My Sony mp3 player comes close to delphi_ote's specs. I was able to operate the basics without referencing the manual the first time. Plus it plays wma and aac formats in addition to mp3 and Sony's own proprietary atrac.

I hate the wheel thing on the iPod. Almost blew my ear drums trying to control the volume on my friend's iPod.

 

[delphi_ote]

there is no such thing as an intuitive interface

There's a whole field of computer science that would disagree with you. There's a technical term, and standards by which experts attempt to measure it.

 

[kevin]

Ah, the iPod. That wonderful feeling of discovering that my 250 euros Nano doesn't have the gapless playback that my friend's totally unknown 30 euros player has.

mine does. apple added it as a feature in iTunes 7 and it carries over to at least all the video models and I believe the shuffle. It attempts to figure out gapless albums on it's own, but you can tag them manually as gapless as well.

 

[kevin]

There's a whole field of computer science that would disagree with you. There's a technical term, and standards by which experts attempt to measure it.

There is no such thing as an intuitive interface. By definition intuitive means it can be figured out from intuition, without reasoning or observation. That doesn't exist in computer interfaces (and I doubt it ever will.) All computer interfaces require some training, observation or reasoning to use.

Human-computer interaction studies may develop an interface that is easy to use, perhaps one that requires no training but I'm pretty sure the user will need to observe the results of their actions to learn the interface on their own.

The original ipod was a bit easier to learn because the wheel was a real wheel with buttons around it. When you ran your finger on it you felt the wheel move. The current model doesn't do that (for good reason, the mechanical wheels wear out) so it isn't quite as obvious when first presented with one on how it works. There are limitations to the interface, but to be honest I prefer the simpler, but more limited, 5 buttons and a wheel. Figuring out the buttons on my phone is a nightmare and I still don't have muscle memory on most of the functions to get things right.

Oh, and I've locked the max audio on my ipod to prevent blowing out my eardrums by accident.

 

[rockoon]

Is it true? Apple puts 5 buttons on an iPod and only 1 button on its mice?

 

[phyz]

Is it true? Apple puts 5 buttons on an iPod and only 1 button on its mice?

It turns out that quite often, people use the mouse in conjunction with a keyboard. And the keyboard has a whole lot of buttons!

Much less common: people using a keyboard in conjuction with an iPod.

That might have something to do with it. But I'm willing to entertain alternate theories.

In the meantime, we Mac people humbly accept the thanks of the PC Nation for bringing the mouse and GUI to the masses. Keep following us; we'll take you places! (Places you would never go if we didn't take you there.) Someday you'll do something nice for us.

 

[tsg]

Am I the only one who sees a computer as simply a machine to do certain things with, and care not at all about what software, exactly, is used to do it?

No, but you happen to have wandered into a thread most likely to be populated by people who are passionate about computers. Personally I don't see how people get all worked up about cars. But some people do and my not understanding them doesn't make their passion, or their needs of which I may be blissfully unaware, less real.

While I will have to upgrade eventually, I suppose, I find it absurd that people find it necessary to buy a new computer strong enough to run the new operating system... which in effect, simply allows you to do all the stuff you could do with the OLD machine, anyway. What's the point?

Isn't a car just a means of transportation? I find it absurd that people find it necessary to buy a new car every couple of years when all it does is let you do stuff you could with the OLD car. What's the point?

That you can't think of a reason doesn't mean there isn't one.

 

[a_unique_person]

Ah, the iPod. That wonderful feeling of discovering that my 250 euros Nano doesn't have the gapless playback that my friend's totally unknown 30 euros player has. And that I can't simply drag 'n' drop some files in it to play them, I have to transfer them via the iTunes.

Have the same problem. Not being able to just drag,n,drop is a fascist slap in the face from Sony as well.

 

[a_unique_person]

It turns out that quite often, people use the mouse in conjunction with a keyboard. And the keyboard has a whole lot of buttons!

Much less common: people using a keyboard in conjuction with an iPod.

That might have something to do with it. But I'm willing to entertain alternate theories.

In the meantime, we Mac people humbly accept the thanks of the PC Nation for bringing the mouse and GUI to the masses. Keep following us; we'll take you places! (Places you would never go if we didn't take you there.) Someday you'll do something nice for us.

Correction, it was Xerox who invented the GUI, and then proceeded to do absolutely nothing with it.

 

[delphi_ote]

There is no such thing as an intuitive interface. By definition intuitive means it can be figured out from intuition, without reasoning or observation. That doesn't exist in computer interfaces (and I doubt it ever will.) All computer interfaces require some training, observation or reasoning to use.

Some interfaces are more intuitive than others. Maybe they're not perfectly intuitive, but they conform to the user's expectations. Either the interface is like other interfaces they've used before, or the interface behaves like they would expect it to based on some real world phenomenon.

 

[phyz]

Correction, it was Xerox who invented the GUI, and then proceeded to do absolutely nothing with it.

I was very careful and deliberate in what I wrote. It needed no correction.

 

[HarryKeogh]

Some interfaces are more intuitive than others. Maybe they're not perfectly intuitive, but they conform to the user's expectations. Either the interface is like other interfaces they've used before, or the interface behaves like they would expect it to based on some real world phenomenon.

I appreciate the fact that some interfaces are more intuitive than others but if some guy can't learn to use an iPod in 3 minutes (there's an instruction manual and a quick reference sheet) time then I have to wonder who he stole the iPod from because he's not smart enough to hold a job so he could buy one for himself.

 

[Darat]

Learning how to use it and being able to easily use it I find two quite separate matters. I don't have an iPod but the other half does. I know how to use the iPod but it always takes me a minute to remember how to, whilst my cheapo <£50 mp3 player (which had a colour screen OLED screen long before Apple seemingly new anything about colour and was smaller overall then any Nano, but not quite as thin and a battery that lasts for 20 hours of playback) he can just pick up and use.

(Obviously this might just be that I am thick...)

 

[Powa]

(Obviously this might just be that I am thick...)

As you're an administrator with banning privileges, don't expect an honest answer to that.

 

[phyz]

my cheapo <£50 mp3 player (which had a colour screen OLED screen long before Apple seemingly new anything about colour and was smaller overall then any Nano, but not quite as thin and a battery that lasts for 20 hours of playback) he can just pick up and use.

Why is it that with the market lousy with better and cheaper MP3 players, nearly everyone seems to want the expensive, inferior iPod? Did Apple put something in the water?