Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Article: Confessions of a soon-to-be ex-Mac user

patrick0brien

patrick0brien

macrumors 68040
Original poster
-All

Interesting take. Though methinks he's short on patience, understanding, not a big-picture fellow (how well it works), not very well informed (WWDC Next week), and not to mention histrionic.

Article

I can see his points, but he stops short of really thinking them all the way through.

Yes, Macs selling now are slower than PC's selling now. Note I said now. In a year, we'll be talking about those selling then. The speed difference is always a moving discussion. Besides, he's a writer. How much speed does he need?!?

Expensive? Clearly he's no experience in accounting. TCO buddy!

And I don't see a mention of OS X other than "adopt Unix as the base for Apple's modern operating system"

"welcoming PC-born technologies such as USB and Bluetooth into their home." - Umm. Who was the first to use them? And integrate them into their machines? "PC-born"? That's stretching it reeeeal thin guy!

He seems frustrated, and wants to share it with the world, but his logic seems only half-baked.

You think he's writing that to drum up hits and perhaps is using it to pinch a new Mac from his editors?

What do you guys think?
 
who cares? that is opinion and no matter how flawed his critical thinking and arguements are he isn't going to change. His problem.
 
Sounds like a pitch for a writing gig

What better than to joine the washed masses by writing typical anti Mac Pap.

Funny he makes his decision the weekend before WWDC which basically should announce Apples nextgen hardware.

Frankly I don't care about whether he buys a Mac, PC or HP Calculator but I do like good writing and this just ain't it.
 
I agree with you, patrick. His whole argument seems half-baked. I'm amazed that he quotes the top bus speed of the Mac being 167 MHz while Wintel buses are 533 MHz... but fails to mention that EVERY component on a Wintel system is sharing that bus, while the Mac puts at most a couple of devices on the bus.

That said, it is sadly true that a 1 GHz iMac will be slower than the Dell he is planning on buying. But when you consider the ASDF (Average Slowdown Due to Frustration) he's probably coming out on top of the game with the Mac.

As for the website issue... I've had a total of two problems in my entire Mac history getting a website to load. One of the websites has since been reprogrammed (although I got it to work with Camino), and the other worked since the second public beta of Safari came out.

That said, he is entitled to his opinion and I doubt anything we can say or do will change his mind. In the end, if he decides he is wrong and that after a year of using a PC he longs for a Mac, he will return to the fold.

Edit:

More about the bus issue:
A 167 MHz bus on a 1 GHz G4 will have the same clock multiplier (6x) as a 533 MHz bus on a 3 GHz P4. As a result, the same amount of data per clock cycle gets fed into the processor whether you have the former or the latter. The moral of the story: don't open your mouth about hardware design when you know nothing about hardware design.

"Fuh fuh superscalar megahertz on the pipelined CMOS bus fuh fuh."
 
His argument is somewhat reasonable, the megahertz myth is a lie when compared to modern pc's (come on G5), however what really bugs me is when people have rendering issues with browsers. For a long time Microsoft have flouted W3C rules for CSS etc, by not implementing them correctly. The result most web sites are optimised for IE and any browser which follows the rules doesnt display them correctly. Indeed MS proved there bully-boy tactics when they blocked Opera users from seeing the normal Msn page, redirecting them to a lower quality version despite Opera being able to render the site properly. Normally i have no beefs with MS but i don't think they should have this much power over the internet.

astray
 
-Daveman Deluxe

Thank you for the additional perspective.

We see this crap all of the time, though rarely from a fellow Mac user.

What really gets me is that the sheep read this drivel and take it for gospel - especially when it is written by a Mac user.
 
My take:

1. I surfed the websites he mentioned with Safari - worked swell. Perhaps there was some content deeper down that was problematic? Who knows.

2. The WWDC will hopefully make the speed discussion less relevant.

3. Well, 533 MHz busses are yesterdays tech on Intels, to be fair, 800MHz is hitting the whole line currently.

4. Well, I think I had another point, but nm =P

/GulGnu
 
hmmm...

Is he really a Mac user? The generalizations he makes and comparisons to peecees make me think he's just pretending to be one. I would think a real Mac user (one that's been using Mac as long as he claimed) would know something about the 970 and have more faith in the company. Mac users on the whole know about their hardware, much more so than peecee users (at least, in my experience this has always been true.)
I agree his logic is flawed and his arguments are just weak.
I guess we're all in the "internet ghetto".. hahaha
🙄 moron
 
my lord..what a MORON
doesn't know s*it about anything but has the nerve to say all that 🙄
his rant is so one-sided and so biased against Apple that I'm surprised that he is a Mac user.
His major mistake: he has an iMac DV. He complains that OS X won't run like OS 9 on it. Well, if you had a PC as old as the iMac DV would you be able to run Windows XP on it and would it be as fast as Windows 95/98?
I DON'T THINK SO!!!!!!
thank god he's switching to a PC. the mac community doesn't need people like him 🙄
 
Originally posted by übergeek
my lord..what a MORON
doesn't know s*it about anything but has the nerve to say all that 🙄
his rant is so one-sided and so biased against Apple that I'm surprised that he is a Mac user.
His major mistake: he has an iMac DV. He complains that OS X won't run like OS 9 on it. Well, if you had a PC as old as the iMac DV would you be able to run Windows XP on it and would it be as fast as Windows 95/98?
I DON'T THINK SO!!!!!!
thank god he's switching to a PC. the mac community doesn't need people like him 🙄
Click to expand...

Ummm... I bought a 1 Ghz AMD the same time my friend bought his iMac DV... Windows XP runs fantasic on mine 🙂
 
What a shame... I don't know.. I had started with windows and used that platform 3 years before I ever used a mac-->He sounds more like a windows user posing to be a mac user.... maybe he's trying to be on the "new winblows switch" campaign... 🙄
 
i like his last paragraph regarding the g5, maybe he will rewrite that monday, he will just have to wait and see like the rest of us. if nothing changes all i have to say is bye, noboy is missing you.

iJon
 
Originally posted by übergeek

thank god he's switching to a PC. the mac community doesn't need people like him 🙄
Click to expand...

And the rest of the tech community wonders why Apple users are so elitist... 😛 🙄
 
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Ummm... I bought a 1 Ghz AMD the same time my friend bought his iMac DV... Windows XP runs fantasic on mine 🙂
Click to expand...

Umm, yeah, but the iMac DV wasn't brand new at that time and if you're going to compare pcs to macs, at least compare them in the same category...
A 1 Ghz PC ( at the time ) was NOT an entry level consumer pc (400 Mhz) with more memory, disk space and a dvd-rom (which I bet that PC didn't come with)..... It was more close to the top of the line pc at the time, right??

I say ( like a few others have ) good riddance to bad rubbish.
And I feel the same about anyone that has used both and still prefer the PC for any reason. Using ANYTHING because everyone else is doing it is childish.

I have used Macintosh computers for longer than most here ( notice I said most, props to my long standing peeps out there, keep the faith ) and Apple and their products have been nothing but what they claim to be. How many currently running 16 Mhz Pcs do you know of that still run the way they did when they were bought? I know of at least one and it runs the best os available to 16 Mhz pcs ( Mac OS 7.5, which some would argue is better still than OS X )

I personally have an iMac 233 Rev A, and while I won't suffer through OS X on it, I revel in the fact that when I can afford a new mac ( in about 8 months ) I am going to have to find new ways to spend my time on it because it is going to be the fastest computer out there, even if it's just a measly 2 GHZ 970. The megahertz myth is TRULY a myth, anyone with experience on comparable computers can tell you that!

I have to agree with patrick0brien when he said
What really gets me is that the sheep read this drivel and take it for gospel - especially when it is written by a Mac user.
Click to expand...

People like Dale Tournemille should not be given the priviledge of a podium to voice his opinion. I'm sure his lies gained him that priviledge!

Sorry, for the rant. I just can't swallow this type of crap anymore ( Don't get me started on MicroSoft ).
 
Originally posted by JackRipper
I have used Macintosh computers for longer than most here ( notice I said most, props to my long standing peeps out there, keep the faith ) and Apple and their products have been nothing but what they claim to be. How many currently running 16 Mhz Pcs do you know of that still run the way they did when they were bought? I know of at least one and it runs the best os available to 16 Mhz pcs ( Mac OS 7.5, which some would argue is better still than OS X )

I personally have an iMac 233 Rev A, and while I won't suffer through OS X on it, I revel in the fact that when I can afford a new mac ( in about 8 months ) I am going to have to find new ways to spend my time on it because it is going to be the fastest computer out there, even if it's just a measly 2 GHZ 970. The megahertz myth is TRULY a myth, anyone with experience on comparable computers can tell you that!
Click to expand...

1) My first Mac was a Mac II with a 256-color graphics card. Screwed that one over with a ResEdit hack (edited a copy of the Finder with a "guaranteed" hack. Wouldn't restart, so I couldn't even replace the clean copy. No Disk Tools disk. Whoops!) I still remember playing Tristan, Crystal Caliburn, and Crystal Quest on that thing. It rox0red!

2) The Megahertz Myth still is a myth... but in all honesty, it doesn't stretch far enough to make up the difference between a 1.42 GHz G4e and a 3.06 GHz P4 in performance for the average user. However, OS X runs much leaner than XP does and all of those 1.42 GHz G4s are dualies. The problem is that the P4 kills the G4 in integer performance. That's why the Mac works better for Photoshoppers and 3D rendering. The G4 easily outstrips the P4, cycle for cycle, in FPU and vector operations. Unfortunately, it appears that unless the PPC 970 can maintain a roughly 2:3 clock speed ratio with the P4, the 970 will be the loser on integer execution as well.
 
Originally posted by JackRipper
Umm, yeah, but the iMac DV wasn't brand new at that time and if you're going to compare pcs to macs, at least compare them in the same category...
A 1 Ghz PC ( at the time ) was NOT an entry level consumer pc (400 Mhz) with more memory, disk space and a dvd-rom (which I bet that PC didn't come with)..... It was more close to the top of the line pc at the time, right??

I say ( like a few others have ) good riddance to bad rubbish.
And I feel the same about anyone that has used both and still prefer the PC for any reason. Using ANYTHING because everyone else is doing it is childish.

I have used Macintosh computers for longer than most here ( notice I said most, props to my long standing peeps out there, keep the faith ) and Apple and their products have been nothing but what they claim to be. How many currently running 16 Mhz Pcs do you know of that still run the way they did when they were bought? I know of at least one and it runs the best os available to 16 Mhz pcs ( Mac OS 7.5, which some would argue is better still than OS X )

I personally have an iMac 233 Rev A, and while I won't suffer through OS X on it, I revel in the fact that when I can afford a new mac ( in about 8 months ) I am going to have to find new ways to spend my time on it because it is going to be the fastest computer out there, even if it's just a measly 2 GHZ 970. The megahertz myth is TRULY a myth, anyone with experience on comparable computers can tell you that!

I have to agree with patrick0brien when he said


People like Dale Tournemille should not be given the priviledge of a podium to voice his opinion. I'm sure his lies gained him that priviledge!

Sorry, for the rant. I just can't swallow this type of crap anymore ( Don't get me started on MicroSoft ).
Click to expand...

Just to clarify, he was the one making the analogy... but to be honest, I paid exactly the same amount that my friend did for his computer... 🙁
 
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Just to clarify, he was the one making the analogy... but to be honest, I paid exactly the same amount that my friend did for his computer... 🙁
Click to expand...
Yeah, once again, sorry about that. I had a rough night and that article set me off!

The price difference is disappointing to say the least, I'm now very interested in how the new PMs are going to be priced. *crosses fingers*
 
he wont switch.

If the G5 should suddenly come to Apple's rescue, pushing the price of a 1.4 Ghz G4 down substantially, then maybe I will reconsider. But it's doubtful that will happen anytime soon. And it certainly wouldn't solve the compatibility issue.
Click to expand...

the loser gave himself an out. and it leaked the night he posted the article. so haha. way to get into a tizzie for nothing mr. bad writer guy.
 
Timing

Talking about timing, this is the worst timing to leave the Apple platform ever, see you all on the party coming monday!
 
I run Jag on an indigo iMac DV 400 and don't think it runs bad at all. But, you've got to remember, I haven't been on a G4 yet. 😉
 
As someone who writes for a living, what I find most ridiculous about this column is the obsession about computer speed ... for a writer? What the hell does he need a 4 Ghz machine for if he's writing? Is he looking for some procrastination friendly games? Is he looking to change careers and become a video editor?

Personally, I think the 12" G4 PB is the greatest computer ever made for writers ... not only is it light, it has the best laptop keyboard I've ever used. And it runs MS Word, Final Draft or any other piece of writing software any magazine, studio or publisher would want you to use. And it's no more expensive than Windows laptops (I won't say similarly equipped, because there are no similarly equipped in the Windows world.)

As for his complaints about the iMac's price, it's a completely unique product ... please, find me a Windows machine with a 17", landscape, fully-adjustable screen. Any hard-working writer would love the way you can shift into any position on your chair and still have a perfect straight-on view with a small nudge of the screen.

I switched less than two years ago and I think the two Macs I own are the best career tools I've ever bought. Apple design trumps megahertz for me ... I couldn't care less that I can't render video as quickly on my PB as on a Dell.
 
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
Ummm... I bought a 1 Ghz AMD the same time my friend bought his iMac DV... Windows XP runs fantasic on mine 🙂
Click to expand...
like jackripper said, i highly doubt that your PC was a sorta low-end, not so new computer. It might run Windows XP pretty well but will it run Windows XP as well as a 3ghz Pentium 4? Or on a dual Xeon machine? I highly doubt it. An iMac DV can run OS X, but not as well as a top of the line Power Mac or a high end flat panel iMac.
This moron isn't thinking. He's comparing the price of some high end Macs to some low end Dell PC's. That's pretty stupid.
Mac users aren't elitist. I suppose we're just like this because we have no need for people like him.
 
well this guy needs to learn how to spell "Later, my LC 475 screamed along as a watched QuickTime clips and clicked about a snappy OS 7." as "I" not a, or is it? Then the websites he mentions are canadian, no offense to our canadian buddies, but that would only mostly affect the canadian users trying to access them, not the WHOLE rest of the WORLD. And as a writer, how many programs could he really use? it's not like if he needs to use quark for writing his articles and photoshop to make sure his paragraphs look good. Anyone heard of him before???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back