Ummm,
Taking an opinion of OSX from ZDNet is well like taking an opinion of Windows from the developer forums here.
Apple got rid of the font rendering issues in safari 3. Fixed in 4, its a non-issue. The font renders the way the OS does it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Officially Ends 'Get a Mac' Campaign, Revamps 'Why You'll Love a Mac' Feature
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ummm,
Taking an opinion of OSX from ZDNet is well like taking an opinion of Windows from the developer forums here.
Apple got rid of the font rendering issues in safari 3. Fixed in 4, its a non-issue. The font renders the way the OS does it.
Get an iPad
Long: "Hi. I'm an iPad."
Hodgman: "And I'm a Wintel Tablet."
Long: "Hey, Tablet, you look down. What's the matter?"
Hodgman: "Things just aren't the same without my trusty old stylus."
[...]
Long: "Hi. I'm an iPad."
Hodgman: "And I'm a Wintel Tablet."
Long: "Hey, Tablet, you look down. What's the matter?"
Hodgman: "Things just aren't the same without my trusty old stylus."
[...]
Thanks for this link and info.
Looking at the examples on the link I see a night and day difference in the fonts. Maybe cause I am also a print designer, the Mac rendering seems so much more natural and clean. It's night and day obvious (to me).
But then again when I show the difference to people who know nothing about type they often say "wow".
Fortunately, Intel macs never had bios. They have EFI and later added a "BIOS compatibility module" for bootcamp to boot into windows which uses BIOS.
It was an example. Sorry for not investigating the neutrality of Google hits. I was under the impression that ZDNet had pro-Mac writers and anti-Mac writers just like all big tech sites that try to cover all bases.
Yeah, they mentioned on that page that it's mostly a problem when going out to a high-DPI source like print or film.
So for folks like that it DOES matter.
For everyone else, they're really free to like one or the other. It's not a big deal for them.
ZDNet is mainly anti-mac. Their favourite pass time is spinning off security events and keynote events in attempts to make APple look bad.
As much as I like to read about their new products, they should stop scattering full stops (or as some may call periods) everywhere. It makes sentences so fragmented and jerky to read.
Yes, I guess as a print designer, I take the look and aesthetics of type seriously more than the average user. Bad kerning also drives me crazy!
But I do find that the smoothness makes the mac much easier to read and more like the printed page.
-Better Hardware
Parts of that are true. The casing and general build are top notch, especially Macbook Pros. But most of the hardware (e.g., hard drives, video, etc) are the same stuff that PCs use.
-Better Software
Not really. Mac software can bite it just as bad as Windows stuff sometimes. And Windows certainly wins in quantity. Less junk with Mac, but the top notch Windows programs are just as good as teh top notch Mac programs.
-Better OS
I'd give a slight advantage to Mac over Windows 7. Mac does do some things more intuitively, for instance location network hardware profiles. And I like the overall look of MacOS better, it jsut looks prettier. But Windows 7 has come a long way to making things more even.
-Better Support
Better one on one support with Apple. But Microsoft's infrastructure (technet, MSDN and general online services) are better.
-It's Compatible.
I'm not even sure what they mean with this.
Parts of that are true. The casing and general build are top notch, especially Macbook Pros. But most of the hardware (e.g., hard drives, video, etc) are the same stuff that PCs use.
-Better Software
Not really. Mac software can bite it just as bad as Windows stuff sometimes. And Windows certainly wins in quantity. Less junk with Mac, but the top notch Windows programs are just as good as teh top notch Mac programs.
-Better OS
I'd give a slight advantage to Mac over Windows 7. Mac does do some things more intuitively, for instance location network hardware profiles. And I like the overall look of MacOS better, it jsut looks prettier. But Windows 7 has come a long way to making things more even.
-Better Support
Better one on one support with Apple. But Microsoft's infrastructure (technet, MSDN and general online services) are better.
-It's Compatible.
I'm not even sure what they mean with this.
OK, but the bias of ZDNet wasn't really the issue here. The discussion began with someone suggesting Apple should use superior font rendering on web pages as a sales pitch. I then responded, to make a long story short, that it's a subjective matter and maybe not the most effective or relevant bullet point. To illustrate that some actually do dislike the way Mac fonts render, I googled for "mac font rendering" and grabbed the two topmost hits which happened to be ZDNet and Coding Horror. If this leads to a subtopic about the bias of this or that person who wrote whatever opinion then forget it, let's instead agree that everyone prefers Mac font rendering with no dissenting opinions, and leave it at that.
Support is kind of a broad term, isn't it? Software support? Hardware support? I mean, if you buy a PC there are two support channels, Microsoft for the OS and the hardware vendor for everything else. If the PC was made by Packard Bell, you have the crappiest support in the world, if it was made by Dell you have excellent support in some countries and less-than-stellar support in others. Same with Apple, if you live next door to an Apple Store you can pester the Geniuses anytime you want, if you live in a grey area on Apple's world map you may be out of luck. "Support" simply can't be quantified in any universal way.
Microsoft isn't the enemy anymore, but Google is now
Microsoft was never "the enemy". They were the competition. And Apple blew them out of the water. Now, and I think this is the reason why the wildly successful "Get a Mac" ad campaign is ending we can all see that PC's are no longer the competition - Google is.
Apple finds itself with a true competitor. Don't hate Google for bringing the game to a new level.
Sit back and enjoy the ride. Two thoroughly dynamic American companies are locked in a fantastic battle for tech supremacy. Either way, the consumer wins.
and Mac's have a piece of technology that originates in the 70's called ethernet. big deal. most of today's tech is almost the same as it was originally designed in the 1960's and 1970's.
BIOS's have changed a lot. PC laptops have anti-theft built into the BIOS that's a lot better than anything Apple has. which is nothing
I was looking at the Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For list the other day and noticed Google at #4. Apple isn't in the top 100. Which brings me to my question... if working for Google is "great" according to its employees, and working for Apple is less than great, what does that really mean? To a lot of people, a great workplace means somewhere you can sit on your ass all day and still collect a fat paycheck, while a bad workplace is one where the boss pushes you to do stuff. To others, a great workplace is one where you're inspired to outdo yourself thanks to an environment buzzing with creativity and energy. So which company will get the most stuff done in the end?
Apple is on a secret nazi security regime. a lot of the problems mac's have are slap in your face simple that should have been caught in QA. but Apple is so obsessed about secrecy that people probably don't get the information they need to work. Google on the other hand is using tools like Wave internally to share more information between people
What? Better than the stoned teenager who claimed that the PC "ate her paper" (and it was a really good paper, too)?