PDA

View Full Version : A Buddhist Monk's Nightmare with Apple


Kobutsu
Aug 19, 2003, 12:17 AM
http://www.engaged-zen.org/Apple001.pdf

LethalWolfe
Aug 19, 2003, 12:25 AM
Sounds like they were dealing w/some guys on the local end.


Lethal

tazo
Aug 19, 2003, 12:39 AM
"Thats not going to be good for business. Thats not going to be good for anybody"
-Seinfeld

Flowbee
Aug 19, 2003, 01:16 AM
Bad karma, dude. :rolleyes:

rhpenguin
Aug 19, 2003, 08:35 AM
I appreciate the fact that theyre pissed, but seriously now, expecting for your gear to be under warranty forever is pretty laughable. I had a 21" Trinitron monitor and the tube went in it after 3 years. Sure i was pissed off, but things die and i have to live with that because my gear is not going to be under warranty forever!

As for them getting screwed on hardware, i believe that that would be the retailer mentioned (which if i read the article right is out of business and there is probably a good reason for it) problem, not Apple. If the machines came direct from Apple they would have all rights to complain but it was an independant retailer.

But now im just rambling. So im going to stop now.

patrick0brien
Aug 19, 2003, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by Flowbee
Bad karma, dude. :rolleyes:

-Thanks! I'll be here all week! <Mwaaah!> Goodnight everybody!

idea_hamster
Aug 19, 2003, 10:41 AM
and not to belittle that in any way -- but I would have thought that a Bhuddist Venerable zenji would be able to be on hold for 17 or 29 minutes without getting all bent out of shape...;)


(I know that this is not the point -- it just struck me as, well, incongruous.)

Vlade
Aug 19, 2003, 10:50 AM
Well a dell would have broke in half the time, this seams to be the local repair shops fault.

Mblazened
Aug 19, 2003, 11:25 AM
what a tool

blaming apple for other idiot's mistakes. obviously the company at fault here is the retailer. They're just trying to get a handout by bitching.

catalyst
Aug 19, 2003, 11:58 PM
hey... lay off dell.. I still have my 486 running linux and W2K (all original parts)... Would you be able to run the latest MacOs and ALL new apple apps on your brand new PB a year from now?

I started dropping by on this forum while waiting for the PB update, however after reading the postings, I want to switch less and less.

mangoduck
Aug 20, 2003, 12:13 AM
Would you be able to run the latest MacOs and ALL new apple apps on your brand new PB a year from now?

yes.

fyi, my mac is almost 4 years old, and runs 10.2.6 and any app i can think of (none too shoddily).

GeeYouEye
Aug 20, 2003, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by catalyst
hey... lay off dell.. I still have my 486 running linux and W2K (all original parts)... Would you be able to run the latest MacOs and ALL new apple apps on your brand new PB a year from now?

I started dropping by on this forum while waiting for the PB update, however after reading the postings, I want to switch less and less.

You're lying. It takes a 586-based processor (possibly a PII) to run Win2k. And if it is all original parts, that means it came with no more than 16 MB of RAM. Win2k can't run on less than 128 MB RAM, and even most linux distros require at least 32 or 64. To say nothing of the fact that you would have, at most, a 2 GB hard drive (since a 486 would not have come with anything higher than Win95, and Win95 could only support FAT16 drives, with a maximum of 2 GB). Which means you might have room for Win2k alone, and nothing (not Linux, no other programs) else. Which leaves it effectively useless. Assuming you're telling the truth at all, which I seriously doubt.

And to answer your question, yes, and quite well at that.

Daveman Deluxe
Aug 20, 2003, 12:27 AM
I suspect part of the problem lies with the reseller. However, that is not a period of time where Apple was noted for incredible quality and longevity of its products.

Most high-tech products these days aren't built to last. They're built to fail so that you have to buy a new unit soon. This is not a joke, and Apple is no exception.

Fortunately, computer makers such as Dell and Apple are slowly turning that around. Dell makes excellent products as long as you're willing to pay for more than the minimum.

If this guy is having so much trouble with his Mac products, he should switch. That's called being a smart consumer. Most of us can attest to Apple's quality products (compared to the competition), but this gentleman cannot.

Catalyst-
My dad uses an iMac from late 2000 that's running OSX just fine, and I plan to install Jaguar on it when I upgrade to Panther. I'm not pushing the iMac hard with heavy-duty video editing, but it's three years and still does what dad needs it to do and he seems to have fewer problems today running OS X than he did running OS 9. I haven't heard him call me for help on it in at least three months. It used to be something that happened almost daily.

Sorry for getting off-topic here, but there ARE Mac zealots on this forum. You just have to learn who they are and take what they say about Macs and PCs with a grain of salt. This forum is likely not the best place to get objective information about Macs (or PCs), the best places for that are sites such as cnet.

Vlade
Aug 20, 2003, 07:00 AM
Originally posted by Vlade
Well a dell would have broke in half the time, this seams to be the local repair shops fault.

Sorry for saying Dell, they do have some nice computers, its not their fault, what I meant is any cheap x86 product that will fail, or Microsoft's OS.

ExoticFish
Aug 20, 2003, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by GeeYouEye
You're lying. It takes a 586-based processor (possibly a PII) to run Win2k. And if it is all original parts, that means it came with no more than 16 MB of RAM. Win2k can't run on less than 128 MB RAM, and even most linux distros require at least 32 or 64. To say nothing of the fact that you would have, at most, a 2 GB hard drive (since a 486 would not have come with anything higher than Win95, and Win95 could only support FAT16 drives, with a maximum of 2 GB). Which means you might have room for Win2k alone, and nothing (not Linux, no other programs) else. Which leaves it effectively useless. Assuming you're telling the truth at all, which I seriously doubt.

And to answer your question, yes, and quite well at that.

Windows 2000 will run on Pentium based hardware, but you're going to have be more patient that any monk could ever be. But a 486? while it might technically RUN there's no way that you'd be able to use that machine at all. But Linux would run alright on a 486 as long as you don't try to install X or anything.

ima_pseudonym
Aug 20, 2003, 10:15 AM
What I found tacky about the letter was the picture with his "friend" the Dali Lama. From another page on their site, it seems like they have met with the Dali Lama once (an audience granted in 1999 - when that picture was taken). I wonder how he would feel about his image being used for bargaining power?

sitting on my desk
darkness fills its once bright face
oh, apple vision

catalyst
Aug 20, 2003, 10:18 AM
it did fail to install latest Redhat distro as a matter of fact. I did upgrade the mem to 256 and added an 8G hd a while back. I used to use it as a web server and going to retire it this week.

The point of my post was that any company is in business to make money and it really has nothing to do with Dell.

Buying an Apple (at least for me) does include an expectation of an extended lifetime and outstanding customer care.

jayscheuerle
Aug 20, 2003, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by catalyst
Would you be able to run the latest MacOs and ALL new apple apps on your brand new PB a year from now?


'97 beige G3. Running 10.2.6

Won't be supported in Panther though...:(

Raid
Aug 20, 2003, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by catalyst
Buying an Apple (at least for me) does include an expectation of an extended lifetime and outstanding customer care.

As for life extenstion I can vouch for Apple, I used a Mac Plus (bought in 1986 or 1987) until 1995. I belive the last system on that machine was System 7, that little trooper only needed one $15 (that's $15 Canadian) repair job (resoldering a monitor connection). Infact when we gave it away 2 years ago I booted it up from the old 60MB hard drive we bought for it and both worked like a charm... ok it was slow, but that's compared to the speed of my G4... ;)

At my parents place my Mom is still using the 6320CD That I purchased in 1995, we upgraded the ram and disk space and it's been running System 9 pretty well (system extensions are limited to getting her on the net and working with the printer).

I could go on and on, but bottom line is that my family has seen many years of usefull service from the Macs we've bought. My only advice is ask around and see if you can get recomendations for a good Mac dealer; It can make a big difference, especially if you have to go in for repairs or upgrades.

ExoticFish
Aug 20, 2003, 10:56 AM
as with any company, someone is going to have a bad experience and not everyone is going to be happy. The important thing is that Apple still ranks #1 in customer satisfaction each year.

rueyeet
Aug 20, 2003, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by catalyst
Buying an Apple (at least for me) does include an expectation of an extended lifetime and outstanding customer care.

You're in luck then; Apple's products are currently of reasonably high quality, and I believe their customer service recently won high marks in one of the PC publications.

I find it odd that these monks had so much trouble with both of their monitors. I wonder if there were environmental conditions--improper ventilation, power fluctuations, dust buildup, etc--that could have contributed to both monitors failing in such a short time. Not to mention that before driving a 32-mile round trip for servicing, I'd call first. Especially when dealing with a local mom-and-pop retailer or service center. He talks about their going out of business as if it's somehow Apple's fault.

And yes, the use of the picture of the Dalai Lama was just tactless.

admford
Aug 20, 2003, 11:17 AM
From what i read in the letter, it seems that the guy was had.

The PowerMac 8600 was discontinued a month after he bought it. Not to mention that the 233/266 G3 PowerMacs were allready in sale.

As for the thing with the RAM, from what i know it was a problem with Apple before Jobs came back. But most likely I think the RAM burned out, showing him less memory.

As for the monitor, it seems that it was effected by either jumps in current or drops of it. If he had a UPS, then the monitor shouldn't have given him any of those problems.

sedarby
Aug 20, 2003, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by catalyst
hey... lay off dell.. I still have my 486 running linux and W2K (all original parts)... Would you be able to run the latest MacOs and ALL new apple apps on your brand new PB a year from now?

I started dropping by on this forum while waiting for the PB update, however after reading the postings, I want to switch less and less.

I run Jaguar on a 1998 Rev A iMac and all software including the latest versions of Studio MX and Logic Audio so get off your high horse and hug your Dell!

mkaake
Aug 20, 2003, 12:22 PM
hmm... let's see. i'm using a beige g3 with os 9 (i'd love to run x, and i could, but i can't afford a new os). my family used a performa 450 from the time it was brand spankin new until last year (running os 7), at which time the hard drive (nothing else) died. good golly, the little 13 inch monitor that came with it still works fine...

crazy.

never had a single problem with any of my macs. since we got our first mac (a mac plus). seriously. not one. (except, of course, that hard drive - but a 120 meg hard drive that had been written and rewritten countless times? i'll tell you what - stuffit is what saved us from ever upgrading the hard drive in that thing...)

bummer bout the monitor, but you can't expect them to replace the thing now... i mean, it was bought in what? 1998? and it's almost 2004? *sigh*. take care of your equipment, and most of th time, it will last... that's all there is to it.

matt

antipeople
Aug 20, 2003, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by jayscheuerle
'97 beige G3. Running 10.2.6

Won't be supported in Panther though...:(

'97 G3 powerbook, 300mhz, running 10.2.6 and all the Apps quite smoothly.

lmalave
Aug 20, 2003, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by catalyst
hey... lay off dell.. I still have my 486 running linux and W2K (all original parts)... Would you be able to run the latest MacOs and ALL new apple apps on your brand new PB a year from now?

I started dropping by on this forum while waiting for the PB update, however after reading the postings, I want to switch less and less.

My friend still runs a beige G3, running Jaguar and all the new Apple apps, not to mention the latest versions of Adobe apps like Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. In that same time I've gone through 2 PCs: a Pentium desktop (lifespan: 3 years) and a Dell Laptop (lifespan: 2 years), before finally buying my iBook last November. I fully expect my iBook to keep me happy for several more years, at least until the G5s make it all the way down to the iBooks, in which case I'll be too tempted to upgrade even though I'm quite certain that my trusty ol' iBook would be perfectly fine running OS 12, Safari 3, iTunes 6, or whatever they have by that point...

themadchemist
Aug 21, 2003, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by GeeYouEye
You're lying. It takes a 586-based processor (possibly a PII) to run Win2k. And if it is all original parts, that means it came with no more than 16 MB of RAM. Win2k can't run on less than 128 MB RAM, and even most linux distros require at least 32 or 64. To say nothing of the fact that you would have, at most, a 2 GB hard drive (since a 486 would not have come with anything higher than Win95, and Win95 could only support FAT16 drives, with a maximum of 2 GB). Which means you might have room for Win2k alone, and nothing (not Linux, no other programs) else. Which leaves it effectively useless. Assuming you're telling the truth at all, which I seriously doubt.

And to answer your question, yes, and quite well at that.

I applaud your splendid retort.

I think this poster fails to remember that it has always been Macintosh that has been applauded for longevity.

Obviously, a newcomer to Macintoshes that witnessed the OS 9 to OS X changeover and thinks he knows everything. The last time anything nearly that bad happened was with System 6 to 7, if I recall correctly.

Although his point is that Macs from a year ago can't run software written today, his specific example may actually be somewhat accurate.

With another momentous change (this time not software, but hardware), a lot of software will have to change to adapt. In a couple of years (probably less than 4), the Mac OS, and every other OS, may become exclusively 64-bit. The same may eventually become true of other software, as well.

But I trust Apple and Mac developers to keep compatability for the longest time processor. Remember all the 68k and PPC versions of software packed together?