Twist anyway you want, split hairs any way you want, however - you said "there have been no virus issues since Windows 95". Windows the OS demanded like a petulant child does - every time I opened it (until I found one that came recommended). Reminding me constantly to protect my computer from viruses - the very viruses that you say have not been a problem since 95.
My point stands. Major viruses haven't been an issue since the early Win9x days. With a fully updated XP, Vista, or Windows 7, the user has to actively download, install, and run malware to become infected. That is a fact. You can't change that no matter how much you wish you could.
So whether you call it demanding or recommending, Windows told me to protect against viruses - and as I said - these would be the viruses you keep saying have not been an issue since 95
No, they would not be the same types of viruses from Windows 95. Don't get things confused. Viruses then were a real issue. It was easy to become infected. But now? You have to actively install and run malware.
As for the rest of your rant and attempt to divert attention from the FUD you were spreading, as I said before - same old, same old.
Please don't confuse FUD with truth.
So 50 million pop up balloons doesnt make you go nuts?
But OSX doesn't really have Alerts at all.
What 50 million popups? Vista shows UAC as often as OS X shows a password prompt, despite what Apple apologists would have you believe. The great thing about UAC is you can turn it off too! As long as you have a little bit of common sense you can go anti-virus and anti-spyware free.
And flaws in flash... and Socks. Oh and dont forget that nasty MS Java virus.
Let's also not forget that OS X is always the first one to fail at those "security/hacking" conventions.
Or an external BDR with VLC?
Sorry, doesn't work that way. VLC can play decrypted blu-ray video, but can't decrypt the various DRMs on a blu-ray disc. VLC doesn't offer bitstream decoding either (neither does OS X), so it would be entirely software based. Good luck getting a Core 2 Duo to decode up to 45Mbps H.264 and VC-1 video entirely in software, as well as the lossless audio, while doing all of the work to draw the picture too.
Because Mac owners are so interested in gaming. With all this medicore sludge thats on the market I don't blame many people. Most game reviewers are having to try find good games.
Yet when a game comes to the Mac, Apple fans love it and praise it as the next big thing. I love how double standards work in the Apple world. Games don't come to Mac? They suck. They're on the Mac? Oh they're the best games ever!
Plenty of triple A titles on Windows
I mean, obviously, especially since gaming is pretty much what drives hardware vendors to make faster and faster products.
So I wouldn't look to those that already do multicore programming, but those who today don't do it.
Like I said, any app that would benefit from multi-threading already does. Do we really need Adium being multi-threaded?
Well stating the obvious. A technology that is out for 2 years has more apps supporting it, then something that has been released a couple of months ago.
Ah, but see, OpenCL as a standard was finished almost a year ago. On top of that, those developer builds of Snow Leopard with OpenCL have been around for how long now? Exactly.
Just because you dont want to learn a new language/style doest mean other developers dont want to.
Like I said, if someone has years and years of code that is refined and optimized, why should they toss it out for new code and start fresh? And, again, anything that would benefit from being multi-threaded already is.
There are many Supercomputer owners and Universities that would disagree with you
Are those the same people who built "super computers" out of networked Playstation2s?
You might want to do some research/googling. Theres some very interesting benchmarks of the Cell running PPC apps being benchmarked against PPC Macs. Spoiler: the single core G5 iMacs outperform the Cell. Bigger spoiler: the original Core Duo runs circles around multi-core PPC chips and the Cell in the same benchmarks.
You seriously cant think that thats the only reason.
Well, if you do the math and take out Apple's siding with HDD manufacturers for measuring HDD space and ripping people off, you'll see that Snow Leopard's minimum install requires more space than Leopard did.
Just like Microsoft artificially Limits windows. Oh Snap!
At least going from Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit (or Vista) up to Ultimate 64-bit won't require the purchase of an entirely new computer to get a fully 64-bit OS. Funny how I can run Windows 64-bit on a 3 year old Core 2 Duo MacBook yet I can't run 64-bit kernel in Snow Leopard. The best part about that is Apple actually provides the 64-bit Windows drivers for every piece of hardware in that MacBook. So
. why can't OS X do it? Oh thats right, because Apple likes to force upgrades. Wheres MMS for the original iPhone again? Whats that? The "cellular antenna" isn't capable? Then why are there third party enablers that unlock the built-in functionality in the OS and allows completely native MMS?
BTW, you make yourself look bad. You're a well known troll
I'm not a troll at all. It's only the people who can't stand hearing that Apple isn't perfect that call me as such, because they don't like hearing the truth.
If what I say is actually wrong, it would be easy to disprove. But no Apple fan does. They just start calling me and others names and "trolls" and walk away with their hands covering their ears.
You said that macs dont do HDMI. m/Display Port can do everything
Mini DisplayPort can do everything HDMI can on a Mac? Hmm, well, then tell me how I can get uncompressed PCM (audio) out of my mini DisplayPort and to my receiver. Because the HDMI port on my PC does video and audio over HDMI. So if mDP can do it all, I should be able to do it on my Mac too!
Oh but wait, Apple's implementation of mDP doesn't support audio. The actual spec finalized and approved supports audio, but Apple chooses not to.
Buyer's remorse, eh?
1. Sell your Mac.
2. Use the money to buy a PC.
3. ?????
4. PROFIT!!!
I mean seriously, instead of kvetching on an internet forum, sell the damn thing if you don't like it! Macs have such excellent resell value, you should be able to get a good percentage of your investment back. Unless of course your "Mac" doesn't actually exist and you're just trolling hardcore.
What excellent resale value do you speak of? Outside of dedicated Mac forums such as this one and sales between Mac fans, used Macs go for very little. My MacBook was $1406 after taxes. Even though its only a year old now (well, a little less), its barely worth $550 on the open market.
I've tried selling it and nobody would give me what is considered a "fair price" here on this forum. The only way I could have sold it was to take an $800 or so loss on the whole thing. It's better to upgrade it and use it as a Windows machine. Which is what I do.
In your 2.5 year ago previous post, you was complaining that your lousy HP laptop...spyware...malware..blah blah...AND THAT'S WHY U TURNED YOURSELF TO MAC...what!?
AND NOW...in this post....You was saying that Window is damn safe after Win 95 in this post, but 2.5 years ago when you start using your macbook white, you are so pleased that the Macbook/MacOSX was clean n easy n safe.
You are contradicting yourself.
I'm really sorry for you....you don't enjoy any machine that you use
A lot changed. That was before I had my first (of dozens) OS X crash. That was before the hardware started to fail within the first couple of months. Thats when I was still buying the OS X hype and, again, hadn't seen OS X's "True side". Other posters have tried to use this against me in other threads and it never works. Those posts were from the time I was still in the "honeymoon period" with my Mac and hadn't seen the true side of Apple, both customer service and "build quality", if it can even be called that.
How depressing. Bean counting, criticising what's on offer and having no regard for design and aesthetics just shows you to be the antithesis of an Apple consumer.
I don't mind a well designed PC. In fact, I do like Apple's MacBook "Pro" design. I liked it two years ago when HP first had it.
But a computers functionality is far more important than how it looks.
If everybody thought like you, Apple wouldn't exist because people would just be buying a tool which matches their checklist of features
Well, when you consider Apple's global market share of less than 4%, you have to wonder who does or doesn't agree with me about computer's functionality being more important than form.
Apple products aren't inexpensive, but people buy them because they think they're worth it.
Much the same way people buy Bose products. In fact, Apple and Bose have a lot in common. They both use the lowest end technology they can and sell it in the prettiest package they can while charging as much as possible.
And this rolls over to second hand products. Your Dell will be worth little in 3 years time, whereas I'm in the position of getting £500-£600 off any Apple computer because that is what I will get for my current iMac on the second hand market.
First of all, the only way you would get so much money off the sale of a used Mac is to sell it to another Mac enthusiast. If you try to sell that same computer to a regular person for that much money, you'll hear them laughing as you walk away. Any average person knows that new Macs are only worth about half of what they sell for. Theres no way an average or even computer savvy person would pay so much for a new iMac, let alone a used one.
I'd hate to think what your house is like - no nice objects, just dull, functional boxes.
Like I said, functionality is more important than form. I couldn't care less about vanity, I want whatever I buy to work as advertised and I want it to do its job good. After that I can worry about how it looks.
Look at my home theater system. It cost about twice as much as a "high end" Bose system, yet compared to the Bose system it's ugly. The subwoofer is a big box the size of an end table, and the speakers don't have a snazzy design, and aren't all small and "sensible". Yet with a blu-ray disc and DTS DVDs, I get better sound quality than any movie theater I've ever been in, including the high end Ultrastar theaters around here.
Saying a computer is only a tool is like saying a car is just an object that gets you from A to B.
My car is an object that just gets me where I need to go. It's not an extension of me, nor does it reflect who I am. Its a tool. My computers are tools for various things, from work to play. How they function is far more important than how they look.
If anyone else (Dell, HP, etc.) had any focus whatsoever on industrial design, these folks would suddenly appreciate its importance.
Its funny you say that, seeing as how Apple copied HP's glass screens, two tone designs, and Sony's keyboard.
"Industrial design"? Of all of the computers I've owned and built over the years, Apple's computers were the first computers I owned that had build quality failures.
That's like saying "Let's compare the storage space of a Ford pickup to a Mercedes SUV. Even though they're different classes of vehicles, Mercedes doesn't offer a pickup, so it must be a fair comparison".
Except the car analogy fails every time, because Apple uses the same exact components as other PC manufacturers, while high end car manufacturers actually use higher end components.
You seem to think that a well designed product is synonymous to a fashion accessory, and thus has no value to "real" computer users. Look at it this way, though: if I'm going to have to carry around and stare at a notebook computer for the next three years, I might as well buy one that's pleasant to look at and doesn't weigh much, because no matter what Mac or PC you buy now, there's still going to be a faster one in a few months.
But if you're going to spend $2,000 on a computer, you better get your moneys worth and not the equivalent of mid-range hardware from over a year ago.
And like I said, theres plenty of "good looking" PCs out there. Apple liked HP's design so much they used it for the unibody Macs after all.
How is that even remotely portable? And why is there this continued obsession with HDMI? Apple has already moved on to DisplayPort... they're not about to go back. If you had you're way we'd all still have VGA and floppy drives on our computers. God forbid we try to move on.
How is it not portable? I carry my MacBook or my larger PC in a back pack. Most people carry their systems in some sort of bag. So
?
Moved "on" to DisplayPort? DisplayPort is more of a step backwards, especially compared to HDMI 1.4. DisplayPort is just a royalty free version of HDMI 1.3, and HDMI 1.4 offers much higher resolutions, ethernet over the same cable, and other advantages.
Now you're just making sweeping generalizations. I've taken apart laptop PCs that are far more difficult to take apart than the current MacBooks.
Let's talk about swapping out the DVD drive in a current PC versus the current Macs. On a PC I pop the battery out, loosen a screw, pull the drive out. A Mac requires a full disassembly of the system.
Why should I have to check to see who manufactured the soundcard in the system? (And why should I check *before* reformatting?
Common sense? The same way you check to see what kind of problems people are having with the latest version of OS X before upgrading or even doing a clean install.
Would your solution be to not reformat?) The point is, you said drivers weren't an issue, and I provided a counter-example (for an OEM PC, too). And thanks, but Windows Update didn't bother to install the drivers.
Quite frankly, you're lying if you say Windows Update didn't install the drivers. For years now, Windows Update has provided drivers for every piece of hardware in my PCs. I can throw Windows 7 on my HP right now and click on Windows Update and it will install all of the drivers for every piece of hardware that didn't already have a driver included with Windows 7.
Like I said, its common sense to check the hardware manufacturers of your equipment. You don't change the oil in your car without knowing what type of oil it needs first, right?
I'm just saying that increasingly fast broadband connections will eventually allow for streaming HD that matches the quality of Bluray.
Not here in the US. Most of the cable companies here are slowly rolling out upgrades, if they are at all (TWC). They'd rather throttle your connection and impose caps than give you a connection that will compete with their own hideously expensive video offerings. Verizon is the only one offering respectable connections in SOME locations. In others they won't even upgrade their 1.5Mbps DSL beyond that. AT&T won't even run fiber to the home, just VDSL in U-Verse areas, and they're not upgrading every market either.
Again, I think you fail to understand the target demographic of the iMac. Very few people are actually concerned with overclocking their CPU.
Just showing whats a better value.
Given the choice of running wires behind their desk for video and sound, and then plugging all these things in, why not just sacrifice some performance (which they probably won't use anyways) for a nicer form factor?
Some performance? More like half of the performance. The biggest issue with the iMac is the price. You're paying $2,000 for about $600 worth of performance. Thats the real problem.
Honestly, if you care about performance that much, why would you even bother with the iMac? Buy a workstation, a Mac Pro, or build some insanely fast gaming rig
A Mac Pro? Hah! Don't make me laugh.
What is this improper multi-display support in OS X that you speak of (no snark intended; I'm genuinely curious).
Well, a couple of things. First, look at the menu bar. Its only on one display. If I have something going on the second display and I need to access a menu, I have to go ALL the way across two displays to access it. Thankfully in Windows, each application has its own menu on its own Window and I don't have to deal with that. Second issue is how Apple portables handle multiple displays. On a MacBook or "Pro", if I want to use ONLY the external display, I have to start the system closed or (this no longer works properly in Snow Leopard thanks to bugs) sleep the system and wake it up with the lid closed and connected to an external display. I can't just plug it in and, like Windows, use built-in software to switch over. For instance, in Vista and Windows 7, when you connect an external display, a window pops up. It asks you if you want to use the external display only, clone, or extend. You select, it adjusts, it automatically detects and sets the native resolution and you're good to go. If you ever want to change the settings all you need to do is right click on the desktop and go into display properties. XP works the same way with display properties but doesn't give you the popup window at first.
Just for reference, I configured a Dell Studio XPS with similar specs - core i7 3 Ghz - (they had no 2.8 and the base was only 2.6) 4 GB ram, 1 TB HD and a 27 inch monitor - and it came out to $2500.
Thats funny because I can build a desktop faster than the iMac for $1,000 less than the iMac's cost
Don't worry though, he'll run away again until the next Apple announcement, to spew the same crap again, i.e. personal anecdotes as fact, OS X isn't stable, Windows can do this and that, blah blah blah
That means a lot coming from the person who has yet to prove me wrong in any of our debates.
Forget BluRay, watch your BD on your home entertainment systems, it's not needed on your computer
Blu-ray is needed on my computer. I travel a lot and want to take my movies with me. Theres no reason I should have to own two different copies just so I can watch them on the computer.
iTunes is currently 720p but that doesn't mean that it will not eventually be 1080p.
With the current encoder that Apple uses, it won't matter if its 1080p, it will still look awful. Being 1080p doesn't automatically make something look good.
Just think of what you would have had to have subtracted in order to make BD an affordable option. It's not worth the cost.
What would have to be subtracted? Apple is already charging double the price of what the hardware sold for a YEAR ago.
