Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'd be interested to know what they are.

I have only one Mac app that I simply have to use. Keynote. It does things that I need, that powerpoint can't do. It's that simple.

Everything else, I'm OS ambivalent.

Well, Adobe CS is of course dual platform, but here are a few of my favourites which (I think) are Mac only, in no particular order:

Billings, Time Machine, Transmit, Pages, iPhoto, iCal, PopChar, SpamSieve, TextWrangler, Toast, Unison, ChronoSync, Little Snitch, MailTemplateEditor, Address Book, BlueCrab.

Some I use more frequently than others, but all have been well used.
 
Apart from a few minor changes (such as revamped explorer) imho Windows 7 is only a streamlined version of Vista... The free upgrade the consumers deserve for all the hassle caused by the Vista debacle. Microsoft really should take a page out of Apple's history on this one. (OS X 10.0 was a major failure—and Apple's response was to release a less buggy, streamlined version 10.1 for free.)

Vista SP1 and SP2 are free, I think that pretty much takes care of any "buggy" issue.

Perhaps Microsoft, however, could discount the Windows 7 upgrade kits from Vista a bit more than in the past.

No need for "free", though. It might not even be possible - the anti-trust supervision of Microsoft is still in place, "free" might be viewed as misuse of market power.
 
Well, Vista did have it's fair share of problems to scare off consumer trust ("say it ain't so" http://blip.tv/file/340692).

Yup. No argument there.

And that is what the Mojave Experiment is supposed to bring back—and ~failed~. Again.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-...1&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=120&qpnp=4

The green line is Vista. You'll note the line is steeper than Mac OS X 10.5. Seems public confidence has - at least in part - been restored.

Of course Vista will always be tarnished in some people's eyes so W7 is a necessity for MS. And yet it's still growing faster than OS X 10.5.

Go figure.

Yeah. It helps to know what one's talking about, and frankly, you don't.

Simple questions then:

1) Do MS have a consistent business practice of allowing downgrades to previous versions of Windows? Yes or no.
2) Is Vista's market share going up roughly in parallel to XP's decline allowing for a small amount of leakage to Mac OS X? Yes or no.
3) Is Vista's increase in 2009 greater than that of Mac OS X 10.5's?
4) Is Mac OS X's 10.5 market share still tiny in comparison to Vista's? Yes or no.

Feel free to take your time on this one. :)

Apart from a few minor changes (such as revamped explorer) imho Windows 7 is only a streamlined version of Vista... The free upgrade the consumers deserve for all the hassle caused by the Vista debacle.

Which is? Aside from the Vista capable scandal - where people quite clearly do deserve to be compensated - I can't think why they would. Certainly Vista was a mess when released in terms of driver support for some devices but then those of us who remember XP's launch will tell you what an absolute horror that was.

Microsoft really should take a page out of Apple's history on this one. (OS X 10.0 was a major failure—and Apple's response was to release a less buggy, streamlined version 10.1 for free.)

As has been mentioned, SP1 has fixed the issues and driver support exists. The 'Vista Capable' people should be compensated everyone else is fine now. I also believe that MS will allow a free upgrade to W7 to anyone who buys a Vista equipped PC after end June. I don't recall Apple offering anything similar.
 
I have only one Mac app that I simply have to use. Keynote. It does things that I need, that powerpoint can't do. It's that simple.

Everything else, I'm OS ambivalent.
Im with you there. I am addicted to Garageband (i dont need anything fancy for what i do so GB is perfect) and i occasionally dabble in video, which you cant beat iMovie for because its so easy and with a little bit of work you can make prett decent little clips.
Everything else i do doesnt make a difference if its OS X or Win7.


Well, Adobe CS is of course dual platform, but here are a few of my favourites which (I think) are Mac only, in no particular order:

Billings, Time Machine, Transmit, Pages, iPhoto, iCal, PopChar, SpamSieve, TextWrangler, Toast, Unison, ChronoSync, Little Snitch, MailTemplateEditor, Address Book, BlueCrab.
Most of these have windows equivalents though not direct copies.

Time Machine - Shadow copy (unless you want a ful system backup, then you want Norton Ghost) which has been around since XP Sp2
Transmit - There are really just too many FTP clients to choose from. I always use Filezilla though, i like that i can use Filezilla on any OS
PopChar - Character Map
SpamSieve - Just use Thunderbird. I get no spam at all.
TextWrangler - Editpad
Toast - Nero/ashampoo/roxio/etc...
Unison - Grabit (?) There are a ton of usenet apps for windows, take your pick
Chronosync - Synkron
Little Snitch - Any rule based firewall. Comodo has a great free one.
Address Book - Windows Address Book

The other apps i dont know because i dont use anything like them. The point of me typing out this list is just to show that there really isnt anything that requires you to be on OS X. You can do the exact same work on windows, you just might not like it. SyntheticKiller is looking for those apps that you cant find an alternative on windows. Something can be done only on a mac.
 
I just find it funny how they feel the need to point out the price difference and no other.

When comparing a BMW to a Ford you can see there is a price difference but the question is WHY is there a difference....

Munch on that PC fanboys.
 
When comparing a BMW to a Ford you can see there is a price difference but the question is WHY is there a difference....

We've been through this before. The BMW is built with higher quality parts, the macbooks are built with the same components (for the most part) as any other laptop. Car analogies dont work so stop trying.
 
We've been through this before. The BMW is built with higher quality parts, the macbooks are built with the same components (for the most part) as any other laptop. Car analogies dont work so stop trying.

They don't work eh, so tell us why some PC companies charge more than others if all the components are the same, I mean they are all PCs. Why does Sony Vaio's cost more than Dell's, HP, Acer, etc.
 
Most of these have windows equivalents though not direct copies.

Time Machine - Shadow copy (unless you want a ful system backup, then you want Norton Ghost) which has been around since XP Sp2
Transmit - There are really just too many FTP clients to choose from. I always use Filezilla though, i like that i can use Filezilla on any OS
PopChar - Character Map
SpamSieve - Just use Thunderbird. I get no spam at all.
TextWrangler - Editpad
Toast - Nero/ashampoo/roxio/etc...
Unison - Grabit (?) There are a ton of usenet apps for windows, take your pick
Chronosync - Synkron
Little Snitch - Any rule based firewall. Comodo has a great free one.
Address Book - Windows Address Book

The other apps i dont know because i dont use anything like them. The point of me typing out this list is just to show that there really isnt anything that requires you to be on OS X. You can do the exact same work on windows, you just might not like it. SyntheticKiller is looking for those apps that you cant find an alternative on windows. Something can be done only on a mac.

I had a feeling that someone would reply in that vein. I'd take things a step further and say that I've no doubt all of them have Windows equivalents, not most. Sorry, I should have mentioned this before and saved you the bother.

As far as I can see, he asked for apps only available on the Mac, he didn't specifically ask for apps that have no Windows alternative. I think he simply wanted to know what keeps people on the Mac.

It's very difficult to explain, but it can be something as simple as a pleasant GUI, as in the case of Transmit, which blows away any FTP client I've used on both Mac and Win, and is clearly made by people who "get it".

Or it can be ease of use, as in the case of doing a mail merge with Pages and Address Book - I never thought I'd be doing boring stuff like that for myself.

Or just the fact that something is so brilliantly implemented it just makes you smile, as in Time Machine.

All of those apps may have Windows equivalents, but where they differ is that you can instantly tell they were developed by Mac People. Devs who care about making a great product for a minority platform that they love to support, as well as making a bit of money for themselves.

Sorry, but the Windows world will never have that sense of trust and camaraderie in a million years.
 
I just find it funny how they feel the need to point out the price difference and no other.

When comparing a BMW to a Ford you can see there is a price difference but the question is WHY is there a difference....

Munch on that PC fanboys.

EPIC FAIL.

Stop trying to use the car analogy. It just. does. not. work. Mac's and PC's are exactly the same under the hood.
 
They don't work eh, so tell us why some PC companies charge more than others if all the components are the same, I mean they are all PCs. Why does Sony Vaio's cost more than Dell's, HP, Acer, etc.

Different size hard drives, different speed processors, different amounts of RAM, different video cards, etc.

The point is that the if the same speed processor is in a PC and in a Mac - neither has a "quality" advantage.
 
PC vs Mac

I've used both PC's and Mac's. Owned a Dell for many years.

I just find that using a Mac is a more enjoyable experience.

Just another tool to get things done, but with much less aggravation.
 
Different size hard drives, different speed processors, different amounts of RAM, different video cards, etc.

The point is that the if the same speed processor is in a PC and in a Mac - neither has a "quality" advantage.

No this is not about Mac or PC. This is about PC vs PC, why does Sony charge a premium over Dell, HP, Acer for sometimes even lesser speeds, ram, etc and people don't harp on them and these guys don't even have the problem of building a superior operating system. Apple charges a premium and they have to actually build their own operating system and support it and people are up in arms over it.
 
EPIC FAIL.

Stop trying to use the car analogy. It just. does. not. work. Mac's and PC's are exactly the same under the hood.

You know, I really want to believe you, but my lying eyes are telling me otherwise.

A Dell Optiplex GX280:

1109711992470delg407.jpg


A Mac Pro:

photos-apples-xserve-and-mac-pro_2.jpg


What specifically are you seeing that my eyes are deceiving me otherwise that enables you to claim they are exactly the same? Or more to the point what are you not seeing. Or can't see. The difference is chalk and cheese and plain as day to me, yet for yourself and others you claim to see these two vasty different things as identical. I'm just not getting it, sorry.
 
You know, I really want to believe you, but my lying eyes are telling me otherwise.

Oh THAT'S how you use a computer.

I'll put the mouse and keyboard back in the box. I was using those, in conjuction with a monitor, to do work, create things, communicate with people. And all this time I was missing the entire point of a computer - to open the side and look at it.
:rolleyes:

Why oh why does anyone give a damn what a machine look like on the inside. Seriously. Both machines can sit there, have 4gb of Ram, a quad core processor and perform, essentially, the same tasks at the same speed.

Incidentally - to make the comparison fair - you should have one cheap Mac Pro (£1899) and SIX Dell Optiplex machines. That's equal monetary value. That could be an 8 core Mac Pro, in which case you would need to have EIGHT of the Dells as a comparison.
 
You know, I really want to believe you, but my lying eyes are telling me otherwise.

A Dell Optiplex GX280:

1109711992470delg407.jpg


A Mac Pro:

photos-apples-xserve-and-mac-pro_2.jpg


What specifically are you seeing that my eyes are deceiving me otherwise that enables you to claim they are exactly the same? Or more to the point what are you not seeing. Or can't see. The difference is chalk and cheese and plain as day to me, yet for yourself and others you claim to see these two vasty different things as identical. I'm just not getting it, sorry.

What you are missing is that the CPU (and to a lesser extent RAM & HDD) are from the same vendor. Unless Intel is making Apple specific CPU's and isn't telling anyone...
 
Why oh why does anyone give a damn what a machine look like on the inside. Seriously. Both machines can sit there, have 4gb of Ram, a quad core processor and perform, essentially, the same tasks at the same speed.

Wait a minute, are you agreeing they look different? But your last post you were very definite and adamant that they were exactly the same. So how come now you can see they look different where before you couldn't?

Of course I'm being facetious because I see from your question that neither the internal or external design matters to you so you simply exclude it as factor when making comparisons between objects. And you expect others to accept that too with this part of your argument taken as an unspoken given before every claim of similarity:

"Apart from their clearly different design.."

Which pretty much instantly excludes Apple's strongest point from any counter point to your own argument, so you win. Bravo.
 
1) Do MS have a consistent business practice of allowing downgrades to previous versions of Windows? Yes or no.

NO.

As I have already pointed out to your closed ear flaps, in ALL previous releases, Microsoft merely stated that "downgrading" was an "acceptable" practice by end-users. It *WAS* a violation, however, for resellers to INCLUDE the downgrade disks as a part of the product. Users were told to search other channels to find the downgrade OS copy.

Try actually READING the HP product literature you posted earlier: it states clearly that users should not contact either Microsoft nor HP to get a downgrade OS disk set.

I pointed it out earlier, but you continue to ignore it for ego reasons.

IN THE CASE OF VISTA, my friend, Microsoft, under extreme pressure from the PC manufacturers, has agreed that the PC manufacturers are allowed to INCLUDE the "downgrade" version of XP on disks in the box as a part of the actual sale of units. That is not at all a "consistent business practice" from the previous releases to the Vista release. Allowing the manufacturers to advertise "XP INCLUDED" on the box is a huge admission of failure by Microsoft. It is a completely new business model for the "downgrade" concept -- the revenue for an "INCLUDED DOWNGRADE" now flows directly to Microsoft and the manufacturers, where it never did before -- the revenue used to go to 3rd party after-market channels.

AND WHAT'S EVEN WORSE FOR YOUR MICROSOFT-EGO, my friend, is that Microsoft is now being SLIMY and counting the revenue from XP downgrades (demanded by enough consumers that HP vigorously negotiated the right to extend the NEW ARRANGEMENT OF INCLUDED XP MEDIA) as Vista purchases. And THAT, my friend, is where you are getting your silly bubble-gum-boasting figures about Vista market share in comparison to XP:

2) Is Vista's market share going up roughly in parallel to XP's decline allowing for a small amount of leakage to Mac OS X? Yes or no.

NO.

How do you compute such a curve when XP is included with Vista, because the consumers demand it to be so? Which bin do the beans go in? Is it an XP sale or a Vista sale?

"Microsoft only allows Windows XP Pro or Windows XP Tablet to be bundled with new PCs as restore media, which the company refers to as an "XP downgrade." This enables the company to claim having sold a Windows Vista license for all new shipping PCs; it continues to insist that PC makers ship their machines with Vista pre-installed." From that silly fansite you hate so much:

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...p_to_wipe_windows_7_with_xp_through_2010.html

Sorry to say, you stepped right in it. Too much banging on your bong I'm afraid. :apple:
 
So how come now you can see they look different where before you couldn't?

Did I say Mac's and PC's looks the same?

No

Did I say they're the same under the hood.

Yes.

And they are.

If you honestly think that the strongest argument for using a Mac is the looks - then you've got trouble. It's a judgement call. I think Sony make far more attractive laptops than Apple, but frankly, I don't actually care. In terms of what you're buying - it's a Core 2 Duo chip, some ram, an Intel chipset. The exact same thing under the hood as a Macbook.

What point, exactly, are you trying to make. That Mac's and Pc's are, under the hood, in some way different? They're not. They're the same. If you want to continue the hideously inappropriate car analogy - then we have two cars. Both have the same engine, the same gearbox, the same suspension, the same chassis infact. One has alloys and a body kit. One doesn't. One costs twice as much as the other. Claiming one is a ford and one a ferrari or whatever todays flavour of car analogy is - is massively massively misleading and intentionally so.
 
Did I say Mac's and PC's looks the same?

No

Did I say they're the same under the hood.

Yes.

And they are.

Only one way to read "Mac's and PC's are exactly the same under the hood."

Exactly means exactly. 'Except in appearance' doesn't seem to be part of the dictionary defintion of 'exactly'. Unless you're now telling me my eyes are lying to me yet again.
 
Wait a number of weeks/months for Windows 7 to show up in the Microsoft ads.... :eek:
It's gonna be interesting to see the sales pitch for Win7, not to mention the critical reception. The biggest change this time around is that they've put this woman in charge of the Windows experience:

bilde


They recruited her from the Office 2007 team, she's the one who threw out text menus in favor of ribbons:

"Just as Vista was a magnet for complaints, Office 2007 won accolades from software critics and regular users. Larson-Green proved she had the stomach to challenge a Microsoft legacy. Her reward? The assignment to help fix Windows."

Apparently they liked her job so far... she's now in charge of Windows 8. ;)

Only one way to read "Mac's and PC's are exactly the same under the hood."

Exactly means exactly. 'Except in appearance' doesn't seem to be part of the dictionary defintion of 'exactly'. Unless you're now telling me my eyes are lying to me yet again.
I thought "under the hood" and "appearance" were pretty much mutually exclusive...?
 
Only one way to read "Mac's and PC's are exactly the same under the hood."

Exactly means exactly. 'Except in appearance' doesn't seem to be part of the dictionary defintion of 'exactly'. Unless you're now telling me my eyes are lying to me yet again.

Are you being intentionally obtuse. Do you even know what 'under the hood' actually means. Under the hood means exactly 'except in appearance'.

What's your point? People should spend six times the price to have the insides of a computer that they'll never, ever look at, be a bit shiny? Is that it? Is that all Mac's bring to the table?

I like my MB. It lets me use Keynote so I can give the presentations I want....but wow - being a Mac owner is embarrassing sometimes, really dreadfully embarrassing.

Incidentally, my partners MB just cracked another chunk of plastic of it's palmrest. It looks really good right now. :rolleyes:
 
What point, exactly, are you trying to make. That Mac's and Pc's are, under the hood, in some way different? They're not. They're the same. If you want to continue the hideously inappropriate car analogy - then we have two cars. Both have the same engine, the same gearbox, the same suspension, the same chassis infact. One has alloys and a body kit. One doesn't. One costs twice as much as the other. Claiming one is a ford and one a ferrari or whatever todays flavour of car analogy is - is massively massively misleading and intentionally so.

Try using the word 'similar' instead of 'same'. I know it will weaken your argument tremendously as it allows for differences, but it's more accurate and truthful. Your concept of 'same' automatically excludes parameters which make them not the same at all, so makes for discussing it properly very difficult.

PS. I didn't make the car analogy.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.