OS X: an "alternative paradigm" to XP? [split]

Discussion in 'Community' started by SPUY767, May 8, 2005.

  1. SPUY767 macrumors 68000

    SPUY767

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    GA
    #1
    Apple needs another iPod ad like I need rogaine for my ass. The iPod has reached that pinnacle of consumerdom that allows it to sell itself with little or no advertising. Word of mouth is more that adequate to keep iPod sales high, and Apple, instead of investing money into a redundant marketing campaign should be investing it into the promotion of its alternative computing paradigm sans the negative connotation associated with PCs.
     
  2. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #2
    hold on there pardner - put the thesaurus down and back away from the keyboard

    Do you really think that OS X is an "alternative paradigm"? LOL!

    OS X and XP are far more alike than different - once you turn off the CPU hogging eye candy that's been violating Apple's once sacred UI guidelines.
     
  3. sparkleytone macrumors 68020

    sparkleytone

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC
    #3
    And remove the UNIX powering the OS. And start accumulating virii and spyware. And get rid of all the iApps....go home troll.
     
  4. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #4
    demi-god - you're demoted to newbie

    You got "demi-god" status by calling people names? Grow up and get a life (that's "life", not something with a cheesy "i" prefixed to it).

    It was a "paradigm shift" to go from terminal apps to a GUI. (Oops, OSX has brought the terminal back to Mac users - guess that's a step backwards, no?)

    A pretty GUI and a couple of integrated apps isn't a "paradigm shift" in my book. Every computer today looks more or less like a Xerox Star - that was the last true "paradigm shift" in computer interfaces. (And don't try to argue "noun" vs. "verb" - that's so lame.)
     
  5. SPUY767 thread starter macrumors 68000

    SPUY767

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    GA
    #5
    . . . Is mad 'cause I'm smarter than him. :-(

    . . .Also clearly has no idea how the UI in X is actually rendered or would know that Apple's CPU hog is actually a great deal more efficient than even the Windows 2000 theme in XP.
     
  6. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #6
    You are kidding right? Just forgot to add the smiley face, right?

    Mac OS X (Based on Unix with a graphical interface) and Winders XP (A patchwork OS based losely on Windows NT) are about as much alike as Mac OS 7 and DOS.

    Sushi
     
  7. SPUY767 thread starter macrumors 68000

    SPUY767

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    GA
    #7
    Good to see folks defending my valid point. :)
     
  8. SPUY767 thread starter macrumors 68000

    SPUY767

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    GA
    #8
    First off, you trolled to my post looking for someone to insult. Second, paradigms needn't be so vastly different as you describe. A paradigm shift, you're new favorite word with which to impress all the ladies, can be as simple as switching from a manual to an automatic transmission. I definitely feel that there are sufficient differences between OS X and Windows to constitute a separate paradigm. The paradigm shift that most people experience with the transition from PC to Mac is the change in feeling toward their computer. They no longer merely tolerate it, and its faults as a consequence of needing to get work done, but they start to enjoy using the machine which is something that most windows users don't often experience.
     
  9. nagusjim macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    #9
    By the way, virii is not a word. The plural of virus is viruses. I was actually shocked to learn this. What first drew my attention to it was when I was writing a computer security paper and I used "virii" in it. Then I had my mac read my paper to me, and it didn't know how to pronounce that. Hardly concrete proof, but it started me looking, and I found the following article:

    http://www.linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html

    It's a fun read from someone who has actually done a fair amount of research in this, so it's informative as well.

    Not to mention that my mac can pronounce "viruses" just fine. :p
     
  10. JeffTL macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2003
    #10
    While we're on the plural of virus, if you have a real problem with "viruses" most people will understand "virora" by analogy with "corpus," a third declension neuter pluralizing to "corpora," and any other Latin 3rd declension neuters that have found their way into English usage with the original plural at least sometimes intact.

    "Virii" would be the Latin plural of "virius," which is not a word in either English or Latin, and "viri" already means "men."

    "Viral programs" also works and you don't get flamed by anyone.
     
  11. guifa macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #11
    I don't understand what the difficulty is. Go to the Oxford English Dictionary, look up the word "virus":

    It's quite clear, the plural is "viruses". Also, it should be noted that you can simply say "virus programs" in lieu of "viral programs" and be equally understand. Remember, when in doubt, look it up. I promise you, the people at Oxford have done plenty of research on the subject and are a tad bit more reliable than random internet pages (although that page is quite accurate, it's also not nearly as "official" as the plural designation in the Oxford).
     
  12. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #12
    window=window
    mouse=mouse
    explorer=finder
    task bar=dock
    iexplorer=safari
    windows media player=quicktime player
    ntfs=hfs
    wow=classic
    end process=force quit
    64-bit UI=nothing comparable

    More alike than different....

    "Paradigm" is typically used to describe something more fundamental than moving the min/max/close buttons from the top right of the window to the top left.

    Your comment that XP is "based losely on Windows NT" is laughable - XP is "Windows NT 5.1". Please explain why it is "loosely" based on NT?
     
  13. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #13
    Using this, ALL computers are alike. "64-bit UI=nothing comparable" I'm confused by this one..
     
  14. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #14
    So by your definition:

    a. Then, Mac OS 6 is the same as Mac OS X.

    b. Then, Windows 95 is the same as XP.

    Correct? :D

    Sushi
     
  15. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #15
    Uh, Windows NT 5.1 is commonly known as Windows 2000, not XP.

    Need I say more?!

    Sushi
     
  16. SiliconAddict macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #16
    Its a name. Who cares. The core of the OS is based on the NT kernel and overall architecture of Windows NT 4. This is why numerous worms and viruses all effect Windows NT 4, Windows 2000 Workstation, Windows 2000 Server, Windows XP, and Windows 2003. Because MS put the same sloppy code in each iteration of Windows.

    PS What part of this has to do with iTunes ads? :confused:
     
  17. SiliconAddict macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #17

    PS.....Umm no it isn't.

    [​IMG]

    :D
     
  18. johnzoidberg macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2004
    #18
    While it is true that Mac OS X is sufficiently different from Windows, in the end, a computer is a computer. It's just that with Windows, much more can go wrong and is not unlike a house of cards, which leads to a much poorer experience. But to say the Mac OS X is enough of a paradigm shift away from Windows? PLEASE. Let's not kid ourselves. It's certainly much, much better in terms of technological advances, but fundamentally, it's still a GUI controlled by a mouse and keyboard. They way you use a Mac or a PC with the skills you learned (typing, mousing, etc.) don't change.

    What I think do is a paradigm shift is a much less general concept than, say, the way you use a computer. It's Spotlight. The way you move from a file-based hierarchical system to a query-based folder-less system is a much more dramatic change in that field, in which you dispense of the old concept of file navigation.
     
  19. SPUY767 thread starter macrumors 68000

    SPUY767

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    GA
    #19
    Moof!

    You might want to check your sources there bud, cause I believe it was MS that moved the window controls from the left to the right. I can tell that you're a windows user with an inferiority complex. Explorer can HARDLY be compared to the finder, just as iexpolore can HARDLY be compared to safari. Explorer is an extension of iexplore, and iexplore is about 5x the size of safari. (To accomodate all the file browsing utils). The only "advantage" that someone could even claim that ie has over safari is direct ftp browsing which isn't relaly an advantage such that safari merely directs the finder to open an FTP connection, a more secure and logical process I might add. All we need to do is wait for Longhorn to come out and see just how much crap was ripped off of X. Your arguments are futile. While you can point out meager errors in other posts, the simple fact is, that you don't really have a leg to stand on.
    Tiger is a superior OS in almost every respect, while the install my consume a large amount of hard drive space, Tiger is easily one of the most streamlined OSes out there, easily smiting Windows in the effeciency department. Windows has dug its own grave by attempting, not very well mind you, to maintain a rediculous amount of legacy support, and has thus made itself unsable to adopt many newer and better standards of operation. Until a major revamp that breaks all of the current Apps, much like the jump from 9-X, windows will remain a mediocre Franken-system.
     
  20. johnzoidberg macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2004
    #20
    Weren't windows controls always on the right side of windows on Windows? I believe he was referring to the fact that Apple's controls are on the left side of the window, and they could have taken that cue of grouping window widgets to a certain side of a window from Windows.

    Great job on making all Mac users sound like elitists there.

    I thought this other guy just said that even though OS X is much better than Windows, FUNDAMENTALLY, it's still the same. Which it is. A window is a window is a window. Are you going to be more productive and happier on a Mac? Sure. But is the Mac revolutionary enough that it changes the way computers are used and operated? Of course not.
     
  21. whatever macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2001
    Location:
    South of Boston, MA
    #21
    iPod Ads

    Alright first off. The average computer user, does not care that OS X is out. An ad highlighting features of Tiger is a waste of money.

    Ads for Macs, are nice, but the average person only sees another computer ad. Apple would need to explain why people should switch and basically there is not enough time to go into that in a TV spot.

    Ads for iPod. Are catchy. People hear the music, there is no dialogue and people look up and watch. They're catchy. Apple has done a great job marketing the iPod. People refer to MP3 players as iPod and if you happen not to have a iPod, well...You don't talk about it.

    Apple's computer sales are growing, just check the Top Sellers list on Amazon. The iPod is leading people to the Mac.

    Whatever
     
  22. SiliconAddict macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #22
    And thank god for that. I can run rings around people in Explorer. The command line and auto fill on Explorer allows me to blow past Finder at light speed. If you want an in depth reason why finder blows. Visit ARSTECHNICA'S Tiger review
    All I know is I can thrash any user who is using Finder with Explorer.

    FTP browsing sucks *** in IE.

    Blah blah blah blah blah. And should we talk about where Apple got the idea of Fast User Switching? Or from what app inspired Dashboard and where they got their idea? I’m sick of this. Everyone copies everyone else. Get over yourself.

    Not as a point upgrade it isn’t. The number of issues in an .x upgrade from Panther speaks volumes on Apple’s quality control. The fact that there is already a .4.x upgrade in the pipe should tell you something. If MS pulled this kind of **** they would be done. XP had its fair share of glitches but lets be honest here. They have 10 times as much ardware to support, 40 times as much software to support. And, again, an industry depending on them to make this as compatible as humanly possible.
    As for being s superior OS.... Depends on what aspect of the OS you are talking about and what OS. Tiger vs. Panther....hardly. Tiger vs. XP....ummmm yah. I can buy that. (Even though XP has its own strengths.)


    Yep.

    BS. You can maintain backwards compatibility without breaking the OS. What you think if Apple can’t do it, it can’t be done? :rolleyes:
    I don’t think you appreciate the fact that MS has an entire industry built up around them. If they pulled this fast and loose crap that Apple does with their OS you would have every CIO in the world ready to decapitate Gates. Do you think in house apps can be rewritten at the drop of the hat? Maybe in Mac land that may fly. But in the real world you can’t redo your app once every 18 months because Apple in innovating. Love or hate MS it doesn’t matter. The point is that they are consistent. 4 years with XP and 5 years with 2000 has lead to one thing…consistency and that is a beautiful word in the IT industry. You can’t play maverick with company’s IT budgets and that is exactly what you do when you bring out a brand new OS. Why do you think only a handful of companies in the IT industry have moved to XP SP2? Its because it breaks things. This is why MS is stuck. They really have no choice in the matter. You coming along saying they well they need to break all the various applications that have come before it and such demonstrates staggering short sightedness on your part. All I can say it think god you aren’t running an OS business. You’d put yourself out of business within a year.
     
  23. SiliconAddict macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #23
    Yes because we all know amazon.com is the world's barometer for computer sales. :rolleyes:

    Their growth is marginal verses the industry as a whole. (When you look at a per company basis though Apple is kicking everyone else’s ***. Remember that Apple is its own industry because of the nature of its business.)
    They will be lucky to be at 4% market share by next year and the fact remains I run into people who only know of Apple as "that company that makes the iPod."
    If you don't have mindshare you don't have market share. Its really that simple. MS has now started up a marketing blitz for Windows. I've seen Windows ads on all the major stations. So lets see who is going to even KNOW that Apple has a computer if all the ads you see on TV are for the iPod. Apple can make a hip TV commercial for the Mac. More accurately whoever does their commercials can make one. Just because its not about the trendy iPod doesn't it can't grab someone's attention and suck them in. There is a world of pissed of nontechy Windows users who don't even know that the Mac is an option. I can tell you this from experience. I recommend Macs all the time in the office I IT. Initially I get a blank stare and *blink..blink* Me: *nods* Yah really. Apple.
    "Wow. They are still selling computers?" *smacks forehead* Yep. Enough of this grass roots, get out the word BS. Apple needs to take the word to the world:
    YES FOLKS THERE REALLY _IS_ AN ALTERNATIVE TO WINDOWS!!
     
  24. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #24
    Thank you.

    In other words, it doesn't change the paradigm. :)
     
  25. SPUY767 thread starter macrumors 68000

    SPUY767

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    GA

Share This Page