Apple, the iPod, the Mac and the Future

[achbed]

Mintel and Fine WINE

Is anyone besides me wondering if Apple is taking the WINE project and porting it internally? It would make a lot of sense to add the capability to run *most* Windows apps via a compatability shell (kinda like Rosetta). Waiting around for Microsoft to release Virtual PC is kinda like waiting for the wolves to let a deer go.

With the Virtualization coming to 10.5, add WINE as a virtual machine, and you're good to go - on top of that, windows viruses would be minimized if every Win App ran in its own sandbox...

 

[seand]

Have you ever used Linux...

Have you ever used Linux recently? Specifically the more user friendly distros like Ubuntu or Xandros or Mandriva? Installing Ubuntu on my laptop (a thinkpad that's a few years old) took about 20 minutes and installed all the device drivers I needed. That's a lot more than I can say for Windows, which after the base install (which takes considerabley longer) requires numerous reboots for driver installation, and the base install comes with just enough drivers for the mouse, keyboard, and display to work.
I would argue that Linux, in the state it is today with the more popular distros that include Gnome or KDE, is actually easier to use than Windows. Why? Well, consider installing applications. With Windows, the steps have always been download program, run wizard to configure for your system, and it's installed. Not too difficult, unless the thing you want (ie most decent software) is not free. On Ubuntu, I open the package manager (from the system menu, a completely graphical interface) and search for what I want. When I find it, I tell it to install, and it downloads, installs, and configures, all from secure servers and without me needing to do anything. Plus it's (almost) all open source.
Though it is possible to do things through the command line in Linux (as it is in OS X) it is not generally required. I'll admit that someone more used to Windows will probably find Linux somewhat intimidating, but no more than a new user would find Windows intimidating. In general, people will have someone who knows what they're doing install their OS for them (not true in all cases, but for the average user it is common), and a well configured Linux system will run better and be easier to use than Windows (assuming you are equally used to Windows and Linux).

 

[Spagolli94]

The point here is that the general user KNOWS that Apple hardware is overpriced. Try to justify it all you want but at the end of the day the same components elsewhere ARE cheaper. I was comparing apples and oranges because I spec'd out a system with a gig of ram and a 160gig SATA drive (which isn't even possible on a mini). So then let's up the ante to (and i'm being generous here) $800 for the mini. That's a $500 diff. If I was to add iLife and OS X seperately i'm STILL well under that $800. Now let's say I'm a major manufacturer who pays FAR less for those components. I can then make an OS X capable machine for FAR less than the MINIMUM buying of $600 for a mini.

The consumer knows all of this already. This is why they don't buy Apple systems. I can get the same power for less. It's a fact of life.

The point is, you're not in Apple's target market. They typically market to high-end consumers - people who aren't worried about bargain hunting, who pay for design, image, whatever you want to call it. It's not that different from Porsche's business model. You know my old neighbor's kid has a Civic that will SMOKE many Porsche's out there. Like building your own PC, he built it with many aftermarket parts, etc.

But at the end of the day, I'll take the Porsche, thank you very much.

 

[mark88]

It won't. But it would be false to describe what I said as "not correct" on that basis. What I said, which is completely compatable with the above scenario, was:

But yiour initial statement is false, that's what I'm getting at.

"OS X: Look for Application Icon > Click = document"

This is correct:

OS X: Look for Application Icon > Click = Application

If I qualify something, I'm not looking for a generic opt-out, but at the same time, I think you'd agree my comments were fundamentally true: saying "It doesn't happen to me because of my big-ass monitor" doesn't contradict what I wrote

I think we have crossed wires here. My inital comment about the taskbar on page 6 of this thread was the following

"I still think the taskbar in Windows has many more things going for it than the dock or expose, only though if you have a large screen."

Which IMO it does, simply because I can get to any document I want within 1 action. Something I struggle to do in OS X. I can only speak for myself. All the OS X methods of switching between applications and documents within those application require more than 1 action. Every single one, and I haven't seen a third party app that will get me from Mail to Finder Window X within 1 action. That's just my personal beef with OS X.

Sure, but in the majority of cases, most users aren't in that situation. Again, this is an important distinction. Saying "Mac OS X is inferior to XP because in a specific situation, namely a situation where large numbers of Finder/Explorer windows are open, presumably overlapping, and where I have a screen far, far, larger than average, then it takes one click less to select the window I want" doesn't work.

I think you're going off a tangent here, I never said OS X is inferior(see above), I said am I able to switch documents/applications faster in Windows, therefore I prefer XPs method of app/doc switching than OS X's.

In the majority of cases, either you don't have many windows open, in which case both OS X and XP will let you find your window with one click,

Again, this is where I disagree, your statement "OS X and XP will let you find your window with one click"...is not true. It is for XP, not for OS X. Not many windows to me means 2 Finder windows, 1 Safari Window. Even in this scenario you cannot go from Safari to the 'exact' finder window you want with 1 click on the dock. You just cannot do it. The statement only becomes true when you have 1 Finder Window and 1 Safari Window, which doesn't really fit in with the statement "not many windows"

in which case both OS X and XP will have advantages and disadvantages with their respective window finding techniques.

Excatly, which is why I mentioned in my initial comment "only though if you have a large screen".....again, I'm only speaking for myself. If you run 640x480 with XP you're screwed. Agreed.

 

[SpankWare]

Actully "YOU" priced yourself out of the switch... there are plenty of older macs within your budget (used) but you want new so your gonna have to pay for it... ever wonder why an old dell or other pc box is worth less than a hundred bucks just after you bought it and opened the box??? Substandard parts that won't work with the next "update" to the WIN OS. Not true on a macintosh (or APPLE if you prefer)... Titaniums running 10.4??? G-3's running 10.4??? See my point why the mac is actually cheaper in the long run??? What you should be asking yourself is why do I want the latest and greatest when something else would do???

I owned a macintosh G4 Sawtooth desktop that had a measley 500mhz processor for 6 years before I upgraded... how many 300.00 pc's did you build for yourself during that time??? This is the equation that everyone wants to figure out...

Actually Apple priced me out. I was willing to bite when the base price was $499. I didn't like it but I was willing to do it. I had the money set aside for the configuration I wanted. When they released the Intel mini's and bumped the base up $100 that put me out. I realize we're only talking about $100 but that was enough to push me over the top. Ignoring the processor I wanted at least a gig of ram, 80gig HD and a superdrive. With the core solo that puts me at $799. For me to build a near equivalent machine I spec'd out an OS X compatible system for $300. A $500 price gap is huge and more than twice the generic options.

On the subject of used Macs I already have some. I'm not willing to invest significant money in outdated hardware unless I have to. With the new move to Intel it makes even less sense to invest in a PowerPC based unit. It's not a matter of wanting the latest and greatest it's a matter of effectively spending my money. Investing in dead technology is a bad idea so the logical way to go is Intel. This is why I waited for the Intel mini.

Apple raised their minimum buy in to $600 and that priced me out of their product. It had nothing to do with me and had everything to do with them. I didn't select their pricing scheme they did. I like many others believed in the $500 Mac. It was a great idea and would have done Apple a great service. Unfortunately that doesn't exist anymore and even $100 is enough to push plenty of people away.

 

[Maxiseller]

Actually Apple priced me out. I was willing to bite when the base price was $499. I didn't like it but I was willing to do it. I had the money set aside for the configuration I wanted. When they released the Intel mini's and bumped the base up $100 that put me out. I realize we're only talking about $100 but that was enough to push me over the top. Ignoring the processor I wanted at least a gig of ram, 80gig HD and a superdrive. With the core solo that puts me at $799. For me to build a near equivalent machine I spec'd out an OS X compatible system for $300. A $500 price gap is huge and more than twice the generic options.

On the subject of used Macs I already have some. I'm not willing to invest significant money in outdated hardware unless I have to. With the new move to Intel it makes even less sense to invest in a PowerPC based unit. It's not a matter of wanting the latest and greatest it's a matter of effectively spending my money. Investing in dead technology is a bad idea so the logical way to go is Intel. This is why I waited for the Intel mini.

Apple raised their minimum buy in to $600 and that priced me out of their product. It had nothing to do with me and had everything to do with them. I didn't select their pricing scheme they did. I like many others believed in the $500 Mac. It was a great idea and would have done Apple a great service. Unfortunately that doesn't exist anymore and even $100 is enough to push plenty of people away.

Yes but you can't have everything:

You are happy to use a celeron (the syetm you previously priced) but want a gig of ram? And you're arguing about a core duo?

Your argument, whilst making sense, doesn't in effect price you out of the market - you have. In the majority of peoples eyes, that dual core processor is going to pay its worth in dividens...can you imagine the reaction if apple had used a celeron processor!!

 

[demallien]

Have you ever used Linux. Linux would have to have some real commercial programmers to make a dent. Ever try to print over a network with cups....yikes! Linux will never be a real player on the desktop. Every thing has to be done at the command line for reliability. The GUI is written by so many wanta be programmers, most utilities do not work.

Yes, I have actually used Linux. I use Suse and Red Hat every day at work, along with Windows, before curling up lovingly with my Mac in the evenings .

Your point about earlier versions of Linux is on the money, but seriously, have a look at the latest Suse. Finally the world of plug and play USB has come to Linux. Samba works for networking. I haven't tried printing recently, but from memory it works fine if you're on a Linux network, but isn't so flash for a Windows network...

The point being that with each release they get closer and closer to the minimum needed before the average user can bumble their way through much as they do on Windows today. When that day arrives (and it is really close now, Microsoft will have some real problems justifying the price that they charge for their products. It's already the case for MS Office. I only have OpenOffice installed on my Mac, and I have never noticed the difference when sharing files with colleagues.

If you don't believe me, ask yourself why Microsoft is chasing gadgets so hard themselves? XBox 360, Origami, they're both designed for markets that are more resistant to the Open Source effect, as is MS's new emphasis on Net Services. QED.

 

[peharri]

But yiour initial statement is false, that's what I'm getting at.

No, my initial statement is true. I notice you're quoting it again without including the context, that it applies only for the majority of cases where a small number of windows is open.

It is 100% true that in that most cases, when there's not a lot open, "OS X: Look for Application Icon > Click = document" is correct. Indeed, right now I have a lot of Windows open and it's still true. The majority of the open applications on the Dock will cause one (count 'em) window to appear. This is true even of the Finder - I'm a spacial addict, but I don't generally keep large numbers of Finder windows open when I don't need them. Let's go through them:

Finder - like I said, I have one window open.
X11 - closed.
Terminal.app - the one exception
Entourage - one window. Rarely more than one, unless I'm composing something. But I'm not usually flitting between apps in those circumstances.
AIM - closed. If it were open, the likelihood would be none of the open windows would be overlapping anyway, assuming I have more than one open when the thing's hidden.
Firefox - one window. Aren't tabs great?
Safari - closed. If it were open, most likely only one window would be open, for the same reason as Firefox.
Chicken of the VNC - open, but not in use. Unlikely for me to be on more than one computer at once.
TextEdit - one window (I'm making notes in), I'll occasionally have more than one open.
Calculator - closed. Limited to one Window.
iTunes - closed. Most users aren't even aware this can have several windows open.
XCode - closed, usually just one window open if it's open.
RDC - One window (and rarely more, for the same reason as CotVNC)
Preview - One Window, I'm reading the infamous Tech Note 2034, heh.

Terminal is a bit of the PITA in having multiple terminal sessions open, but that said, having multiple DOS Windows or Cygwin windows open under XP is also handled badly, so it's not a major issue. Finder... well, if you're a spacial user, you're usually either using it, or you've cleaned it up a little. If you're not a spacial user, then you probably don't use multiple windows very often anyway.

In any case, I have a lot of Windows open, and it's still the case that in the vast majority of cases, clicking on the Application icon will cause one (count 'em) document to appear. What I said was 100% true.

While my selection of Dock'd apps is unusual, it's probably worth noting that the official selection would be even more likely to generate the results I'm talking about. iMovie? One window. iPhoto? One window. iCal? One window. Mail? One window, most of the time.

 

[FF_productions]

This has turned into the official "lets bitch about each other" thread!! Gonna head over to the nice community boards after this for a relax...

I thought however in the meantime, I'd just firmly throw my hat in the "I've switched, used windows since 3.1, XP sucks - get over it" category.

SpankWare...

95% of people use windows because its nice and comfortable. I see people loading up a webpage, clicking on pop up menus around 300 million times to "allow" an image to load - Ive never not ONCE done this in safari...and Ive never had a pop up. Explain this?

Explain why the other day I spent three hours just trying to get XP to recognise a usb input (music) keyboard that was supposed to not need drivers - but the same thing worked on mac.

Explain that when it did finally work, windows puts up a little fanfare "Hey, Ive just installed your new device - boy, aren't I good" and yet OSX...well, I just loaded up sibelius and played in some notes. No setup.

Explain why, in the past 12 months Ive reformatted dads XP system over 5 times. Mom's mac mini? Thats right...not once.

There are millions of reasons people switch. If you want to boast about windows, you're in the wrong forum. Most of us have switched because we need a better computing experience.

I literally couldn't write music without my mac. On a PC Id spend the best part of a morning trying to load up my latest score, get the external plug ins to work just right - get the outboard equipment to register with XP and vice versa...

And now? Well, I wander down to my studio a little later than I used to, click the mouse to wake my powermac from sleep and I'm writing music within ten seconds as I can leave logic open with no loss of ANY data.

try doing THAT on windows.

I think that was the best post I've ever read.

 

[mark88]

No, my initial statement is true. I notice you're quoting it again without including the context, that it applies only for the majority of cases where a small number of windows is open.

I think we could drag this out all day long. I'll quote your initial statement again, with the triaiing sentence this time...

"If you have a small number of windows open, then usually (but not always):

XP: Look for Window Title > Click = document
OS X: Look for Application Icon > Click = document"

"If you have a small number of windows open" does not translate to "if you have only one document window open for each application".....

therefore, it can't be true. That's all I'm saying. "small number of windows" means a whole bunch of different things to different people. If I am allowed to amend your statement, then maybe we can stop this:

"If you have a certain number of windows open in XP(depending on screen resolution), and only 1 window open for each application in OS X then:

XP: Look for Window Title > Click = document
OS X: Look for Application Icon > Click = application/document"

I think we would both agree, this is correct?

It is 100% true that in that most cases, when there's not a lot open, "OS X: Look for Application Icon > Click = document" is correct.

It'ss that miss-use of language appearing again. The "not alot of window open" part is what's sinking you and causing us to keep aruging the same thing over and over.

2 Finder Windows = not alot of windows
3 Finder Windows = not alot of windows
1 Finder, 1 Safari = not alot of windows*
2 Finder, 1 Mail, = not alot of windows

If you fit all these into your statement, only 1 of them* proves it to be true. How can you prove that "most cases" only have 1 window per app open? I don't, hardly ever.

Finder - like I said, I have one window open.
X11 - closed.
Terminal.app - the one exception
Entourage - one window. Rarely more than one, unless I'm composing something. But I'm not usually flitting between apps in those circumstances.
AIM - closed. If it were open, the likelihood would be none of the open windows would be overlapping anyway, assuming I have more than one open when the thing's hidden.
Firefox - one window. Aren't tabs great?
Safari - closed. If it were open, most likely only one window would be open, for the same reason as Firefox.
Chicken of the VNC - open, but not in use. Unlikely for me to be on more than one computer at once.
TextEdit - one window (I'm making notes in), I'll occasionally have more than one open.
Calculator - closed. Limited to one Window.
iTunes - closed. Most users aren't even aware this can have several windows open.
XCode - closed, usually just one window open if it's open.
RDC - One window (and rarely more, for the same reason as CotVNC)
Preview - One Window, I'm reading the infamous Tech Note 2034, heh.

But this is specific to you, and you only. Just like my screen resolution is to me, the difference is I made that clear right from the start. You didn't make your scenario clear until now, you just kept saying "not alot of windows", and hence the reason (I guess) we've had this big debate over basically the same point.

 

[jbooo]

Re:

Hi, I love CAPS! IT MAKES ME SOUND SO MUCH MORE CONVINCING


Look dude, watch who you are calling a coward. People buy things for many reasons. Windows is purchased be perfectly intellegent people to do perfectly normal computing tasks other than browse the internet and pick up a trojan here or there.

What world are you on right now? MS IMPLODES?

1. Take a lesson in grammar
2. Get in touch with reality

Microsoft is as healthy as they have ever been. Vista is meaningless to the home user market...get a clue. ipod is doing NOTHING to their core businesses. Media Center makes more money than OS X. XBox has so much upside its silly. Windows Server System (SQL, Exchange, etc.) are FLYING off the shelves.

Microsoft is earning money that would give the CFO of Apple wet dreams. Apple is not killing Microsoft and no one should prance around here thinking OS X is about to destroy the MS user base.

Oh yeah huh? Got any data to substantiate this? Considering the fact that the mac marketshare has continued to expand (without ANY advertising other than word of mouth and the Switcher campaign on apple.com) says otherwise, not to mention the growth of Linux and all... Give me proof and I will submit however considering that Apple has 8 billion dollars cash in the bank with NO debt whatsoever says they know more about buisiness 101 than Microisoft with 20 Billion in the bank but 15 Billion worth of Expenses and Debt combined... hmmmmm who's your daddy now?
Considering Windows makes their money on software thats the rub... DELL and all the OEMs are the ones making ALL the money... It's obvious you haven't done ANY reaserch regarding your statements... read this
"It's remarkable that Apple Computer Inc., heading the BusinessWeek 50 list of the best corporate performers, was on the brink not so long ago... While the iPod gets most of the headlines, the Mac still brought in 39% of Apple's sales in 2005. And while most analysts think that iPod sales will continue to skyrocket for the next couple of years, they also believe that the music player market will come back to earth at some point. 'The Mac will be increasingly important [to Apple's growth] in the last years of the decade,' says Needham & Co. analyst Charles Wolf," BusinessWeek reports. "The reason is straightforward: On the whole, PCs are much bigger than digital music. Right now, Apple dominates the digital music player market, which is expected to hit $12 billion in 2009, with a share of more than 70%. But Apple has just 5% of the $75 billion home PC market. Each additional point of PC market share that Apple gains would equal roughly $750 million in sales. That's a big chunk for a $16 billion company. Shaw Wu, an analyst at American Technology Research, thinks Mac sales could grow 25% in 2007, vs. 10% for the broader industry. Beginning in 2007, says Wu, 'I think the Mac business will outgrow the iPod business.'"

 

[jbooo]

Re:

Actually Apple priced me out. I was willing to bite when the base price was $499. I didn't like it but I was willing to do it. I had the money set aside for the configuration I wanted. When they released the Intel mini's and bumped the base up $100 that put me out. I realize we're only talking about $100 but that was enough to push me over the top. Ignoring the processor I wanted at least a gig of ram, 80gig HD and a superdrive. With the core solo that puts me at $799. For me to build a near equivalent machine I spec'd out an OS X compatible system for $300. A $500 price gap is huge and more than twice the generic options.

On the subject of used Macs I already have some. I'm not willing to invest significant money in outdated hardware unless I have to. With the new move to Intel it makes even less sense to invest in a PowerPC based unit. It's not a matter of wanting the latest and greatest it's a matter of effectively spending my money. Investing in dead technology is a bad idea so the logical way to go is Intel. This is why I waited for the Intel mini.

Apple raised their minimum buy in to $600 and that priced me out of their product. It had nothing to do with me and had everything to do with them. I didn't select their pricing scheme they did. I like many others believed in the $500 Mac. It was a great idea and would have done Apple a great service. Unfortunately that doesn't exist anymore and even $100 is enough to push plenty of people away.

For bieng so smart and able to build your own machine you sure arent making much sense here... the PPC processor may be killed as a new purchase but it is hardly dead... most if not all the programs made for mac are written for PPC chips right NOW, it will take some time before the already available apps are converted to Universal Binaries. ie works on BOTH PPC and Intel. So unless I am mistaken my PowerBook G4 will last me some time yet... I think your complaint is really a pathetic excuse for what is really going on here... you want the NEWEST computer for NO reasonable reason... Grow up and get real with yourself That mac-mini you were lusting after will still be available via the refurb store and guess what? You can get it for even LESS than you could before the NEW ones came out soooo I guess you are back into the price range you were just bitching about... My PowerBook G4 is still workong and I expect it will be just as usefull in 2-3 years from now, why??? Because I can USE all the PPC aps NOW and into the future because of Universal Binaries, Thank you Apple for not abandoning me unlike Winblows Vista...
As of right now you can still purchase a mini for 429.00 to 599.00 (G4 version) on the refurb store at www.apple.com/store

 

[Tacitus]

It ain't gonna happen!

If I was Steve Jobs at the moment, I would be watching whats happening over at Microsoft with a big grin on my face. Why? Because the latest releases of open source operating systems and office productivity (Suse Linux 10 and OpenOffice 2.0) are getting awfully close to their Windows rivals in quality. Price conscious consumers are going to start to figure out that they can save the $500 they used to hand over to Microsoft evry couple of years.

When that happens (it has already started in fact), Microsoft is going to be in big strife. You just can't compete with Open Source, which harnesses the efforts of sooo many people, for free......

I agree. I think the break point is near where the old MS model of licensing software starts to break down. At some point hardware cannot get any cheaper. For software though you can't beat free, and legal under the GPL. In this new model the hardware makers gain the initiative, since there is always going to be a profit however small. Consolidation in the market and fewer manufacturers.

At the point where commoditisation sets in there will then be other differentiators - style, quality etc, which is where Apple will have the upper hand.

I've just installed SUSE 10 on my dual boot PC. Very, very close to XP for those looking for the Windows 'experience'. MS should be worried.

 

[peharri]

I think we could drag this out all day long. I'll quote your initial statement again, with the triaiing sentence this time...

"If you have a small number of windows open, then usually (but not always):

XP: Look for Window Title > Click = document
OS X: Look for Application Icon > Click = document"

"If you have a small number of windows open" does not translate to "if you have only one document window open for each application".....

Give it up already. Small number of windows. Usually. Not always. Clicking on App icon brings up document. Yes. True. Absolutely. 100% true. Not arguable, it's a fact. You can't just ignore those words and then claim I'm wrong.

2 Finder Windows = not alot of windows
3 Finder Windows = not alot of windows
1 Finder, 1 Safari = not alot of windows*
2 Finder, 1 Mail, = not alot of windows

If you fit all these into your statement, only 1 of them* proves it to be true. How can you prove that "most cases" only have 1 window per app open? I don't, hardly ever.

Some people have no legs.
Some people have one leg.
Some people have two legs.

Therefore, the statement "Most people have two legs" is false. Correct?

(And it's "a lot", you wouldn't say "alittle" would you?)

But this is specific to you, and you only. Just like my screen resolution is to me, the difference is I made that clear right from the start. You didn't make your scenario clear until now, you just kept saying "not alot of windows", and hence the reason (I guess) we've had this big debate over basically the same point.

No, it's just an example of a typical situation, and I went through and demonstrated how it's unlikely anyone would have more than one window open not merely for the examples I gave but also for the default applications installed on the Dock.

In the majority of cases, when only a few windows are open, it requires merely a click on the application icon to bring the appropriate Window to the front. Yes, you can find combinations of small numbers of windows being open where this isn't true, but they're not the most usual scenarios. For anyone.

FWIW, I cannot remember the last time I had to right click on an application icon to find a window, and I rarely use Expose.

 

[G.Kirby]

I would love to see the Airport Base Stations have an BBand port instead of a modem. I still can't beleive that an inovative company like Apple have not done this yet.

 

[mark88]

Give it up already. Small number of windows. Usually. Not always. Clicking on App icon brings up document. Yes. True. Absolutely. 100% true. Not arguable, it's a fact. You can't just ignore those words and then claim I'm wrong.

"Clicking on App icon brings up document" what document? honestly!!! it only brings up the document on top of the stack. How's about you argue with that statement? unless you remove "Small number of windows" from your sentences then it's hard for you to argue such a vague point.

Some people have no legs.
Some people have one leg.
Some people have two legs.

Therefore, the statement "Most people have two legs" is false. Correct?

LMAO, given that it is a known fact that humans have two legs, you can hardly compare it to your assumption that "usually" most people only have 1 document open per application. Maybe *you* do, but how do you know that just because you do it, others do it aswell?

It's like me assuming everybody runs dual displays or something.

(And it's "a lot", you wouldn't say "alittle" would you?)

That's smart, no where else to go, pick up on minor grammar mistakes.

No, it's just an example of a typical situation, and I went through and demonstrated how it's unlikely anyone would have more than one window open not merely for the examples I gave but also for the default applications installed on the Dock.

So basically you're saying it's unlikely that ANYONE has more than 1 window open per application?? man, good luck proving that. Given the fact that most mac users will be using safari, all target=_blank links will open a new window unless the user overwrites it. There's two windows right there.

In the majority of cases, when only a few windows are open, it requires merely a click on the application icon to bring the appropriate Window to the front.

You're using that term again. Like I pointed out already, it's only applicable to you because you consider "not a lot of windows" to mean "1 window per application". I don't, because your generalisation doesn't cross over to anyone else but you.

FWIW, I cannot remember the last time I had to right click on an application icon to find a window, and I rarely use Expose.

That is because you(note the word "you") only have 1 window open per application. I'd like to conduct some kind of poll to see just how many people only have 1 finder window open at a time, or 1 browser window. My estimation would be not many.

It seems you're arguing this whole thing based on an assumption, an assumption that most OS X users only have 1 window open per application. Therefore at any given time clicking the dock icon will switch the user to the exact document they want.

Like I said, good luck proving most people run their computers this way!

 

[Arnaud]

I agree. I think the break point is near where the old MS model of licensing software starts to break down. At some point hardware cannot get any cheaper. For software though you can't beat free, and legal under the GPL. In this new model the hardware makers gain the initiative, since there is always going to be a profit however small. Consolidation in the market and fewer manufacturers.

At the point where commoditisation sets in there will then be other differentiators - style, quality etc, which is where Apple will have the upper hand.

Uh, I don't see why we should rejoice here...

You (and Demallien) say we should be happy to see Microsoft (maybe) collapse in front of the Open software, because the user will like the fact that his OS is free. And how is Apple saved from the same demise ? The same money-minding user would be happy to buy his licences for OsX ?
I don't think so. OsX is cheaper than Windows but still expensive, and definitely not Open software. So ? My point: the money-minding user will skip all forms of non-free Os's, while the other user will still choose between OsX and Windows.

Additionally, open software is nice but has his inconvenients too. It runs on people's motivations and free time. I still don't like Open Office 2.0, despite the fact it took what, 5 years since the beginning of the project ? How much development can a company propose with a team of developpers hired to work xx hours a day in the same amount of time ? How much support ?

I like the concept of open software, but it has its limitations too. Sometimes, without a (paying) captain, two people in a project claim the paternity of the true idea as their own and split, and what happens then ?

 

[billyboy]

Give it up already. Small number of windows. Usually. Not always. Clicking on App icon brings up document. Yes. True. Absolutely. 100% true. Not arguable, it's a fact. You can't just ignore those words and then claim I'm wrong.

Wow, what a very pedantic argument. Who won?

Why not expend some energy and write to Apple asking to get tabs put on all apps in OS X - then you have the best of XP on OS X ie an efficient albeit rather ugly solution to one click document opening.

 

[Arnaud]

I'd like to conduct some kind of poll to see just how many people only have 1 finder window open at a time, or 1 browser window.

Well, I have one iCal window open, and one Safari window. But the one Safari window will be closed in 10 seconds, because your exchange of petty arguments regarding who-put-the-coma-where and my-screen-was-bigger-than-yours is really, er, not exciting.

 

[mark88]

Well, I have one iCal window open, and one Safari window. But the one Safari window will be closed in 10 seconds, because your exchange of petty arguments regarding who-put-the-coma-where and my-screen-was-bigger-than-yours is really, er, not exciting.

I agree, I did offer up a statement on which we could both agree, however. This seems to have been overlooked

weird that.

 

[jbooo]

Re:

Uh, I don't see why we should rejoice here...

You (and Demallien) say we should be happy to see Microsoft (maybe) collapse in front of the Open software, because the user will like the fact that his OS is free. And how is Apple saved from the same demise ? The same money-minding user would be happy to buy his licences for OsX ?
I don't think so. OsX is cheaper than Windows but still expensive, and definitely not Open software. So ? My point: the money-minding user will skip all forms of non-free Os's, while the other user will still choose between OsX and Windows.

Additionally, open software is nice but has his inconvenients too. It runs on people's motivations and free time. I still don't like Open Office 2.0, despite the fact it took what, 5 years since the beginning of the project ? How much development can a company propose with a team of developpers hired to work xx hours a day in the same amount of time ? How much support ?

I like the concept of open software, but it has its limitations too. Sometimes, without a (paying) captain, two people in a project claim the paternity of the true idea as their own and split, and what happens then ?

SOOOOOOO True. This is where Apple comes in... in the form of a Captain who guides the project. OS X is UNIX with an addition of a GUI that resides as a kernel extension. What does this mean??? To the average person it is both the best of ALL options. The Kernel or core is still Free BSD designed over 20 years from College Professors and students. It was designed for primarily Goverment Entities but kept FREE because it is OPEN SOURCE... go download FREE BSD for FREE from thier website. For those who want SUPPORT with that FREE OS they need a middle man, hence APPLE is the go-between by mixing in OPEN SOURCE FREE SOFTWARE and wrapping it in all the EYE-CANDy you winblows freaks can't appreciate. Imagine, all the POWER of UNIX and everything WORKS, out of the box, seamlessly, tested and debugged by Berkley Professors and APPLE alike.... hmmmm sounds like bliss to me.... wonder why all apple owners who were once LINUX or WINBLOWS users have finally figured out... hmmmm sound like a cult??? It is for a reason. When everyone becomes more educated on MAC OS X they will come over to the lighter side by starting to "THINK DIFFERENT"

 

[jbooo]

Re:

Uh, I don't see why we should rejoice here...

You (and Demallien) say we should be happy to see Microsoft (maybe) collapse in front of the Open software, because the user will like the fact that his OS is free. And how is Apple saved from the same demise ? The same money-minding user would be happy to buy his licences for OsX ?
I don't think so. OsX is cheaper than Windows but still expensive, and definitely not Open software. So ? My point: the money-minding user will skip all forms of non-free Os's, while the other user will still choose between OsX and Windows.

Additionally, open software is nice but has his inconvenients too. It runs on people's motivations and free time. I still don't like Open Office 2.0, despite the fact it took what, 5 years since the beginning of the project ? How much development can a company propose with a team of developpers hired to work xx hours a day in the same amount of time ? How much support ?

I like the concept of open software, but it has its limitations too. Sometimes, without a (paying) captain, two people in a project claim the paternity of the true idea as their own and split, and what happens then ?

SOOOOOOO True. This is where Apple comes in... in the form of a Captain who guides the project. OS X is UNIX with an addition of a GUI that resides as a kernel extension. What does this mean??? To the average person it is both the best of ALL options. The Kernel or core is still Free BSD designed over 20 years from College Professors and students. It was designed for primarily Goverment Entities but kept FREE because it is OPEN SOURCE... go download FREE BSD for FREE from thier website. For those who want SUPPORT with that FREE OS they need a middle man, hence APPLE is the go-between by mixing in OPEN SOURCE FREE SOFTWARE and wrapping it in all the EYE-CANDy you winblows freaks can't appreciate. Imagine, all the POWER of UNIX and everything WORKS, out of the box, seamlessly, tested and debugged by Berkley Professors and APPLE alike.... hmmmm sounds like bliss to me.... wonder why all apple owners who were once LINUX or WINBLOWS users have finally figured out... hmmmm sound like a cult??? It is for a reason. When everyone becomes more educated on MAC OS X they will come over to the lighter side by starting to "THINK DIFFERENT"
Whilst the windows people are paying for patchworked swiss cheese software the mac is advancing through innovation by offering a stable platform for people who don't want to suffer at the mercy of the machine, they just want to create usefull things. You pay 100.00 to 129.00 bucks for support on the mac side, you get the OS for basically FREE at that price point. What's not to like about that? Does LINUX have that? NO! You buy a computer you get the ability to do just about anything you can imagine out of the box, free software from apple via the iLife suite, etc. What's not to like about that? Stability in a rock solid OS, Priceless. No Spyware, Pop-ups, adware? Priceless.
WInDOWS: Malicious code and software holes like swiss cheese giving someeeone else un-hindered use of YOUR computer and DSL? You got to be kidding me rigth??? What part of that last sentence sounds appealing? 300.00 for a build it yourself hole in the universe...pleaseeee...
Oh yeah, lets face it WINDOWS days are numbered, unless they can create a miracle in VISTA the demise of windows OS is immenint. There is simply tooo many viruses and malicious code, everyday there are stories of lost personal data due to hacks, viruses that take down even the most advanced WINDOWS deployments including GOVERMENT documents etc. You think the public will put up with that forever??? I think APPLE is in for a big next few years with astronomical defectors, no-one else has created a better option yet, and they have had over 10 years to do it.... pretty good place for apple to be in now. I can't wait for 10.5 to come out.Can everyone else say that about the next major release of an OS?? I think not, we are already starting to see a trend of windows delay's bieng downplayed more and more... the people are just NOT excited about it. It's almost over for them, I can honestly feel it in the air.
Or it could just be me....

 

[The Red Wolf]

The Future is Here

Make you're Future Perfect:

The All New Intel Quad Mac Pro:

So much power, so little time:

So much time, yet it violates quantum causality:

16 Cores, Four 64 but processors, OS-X Lion 10.6:

All in the space of an iPod Nano...

Quantum Computing... Right here, Right now:

New, from the future of Apple: The Intel 16 CORE LISA! w007 doesn't even cover it!!11

*LISA = Leading Industrial Strength Apple:

Quad Intel Quantum Hpti-hurt Processors

16 GB Backside level 1 1:1 ratio per core.

4 TB RAM @ 4444GHz

16 0.5" 4 TB Seagate Baracuda 20,000 RPM DRIVES via FireWire Ultra Extreme 2.0 (4 TB throughput per nano second)

Quad 10000X Quad Dual Blue Ray DVD-/+/x/? SuperMini DVDs.

Optional AMD Megaladon 9840 8 Core Quantum Extreme Processors.

Apple Care Life Plan + .Mac optical Mind Save via iSync Me Spirit of the Machine Pro.

Also comes in Bondi Blue, Key Lime, Steel, Carbon Fiber, Holographic Matrix, and the all new Mac Pro Teseract Pink A.K.A Hello Kitty (Lion OS 10.6)

4 TB iPod Nano in THX1128 White, 1984 Aluninum, Brave New World Aqua™ (Brave New and World are registered tradmarks of the Microsoft/Time/Warner/AOL/Republicanpatry Aglomeration †we own your soul!) Teseract Pink, VW Tornado Red, Sony Gray, or Alien/Googleware/AMD/ Green (*Classic Apple White or Aluminum have been discontinued to to loss of temporal storage: **Temporal Storage not compatible with OS 10.6 AMD Processors)

The uploaded Apple Music John Lennon has been upgraded to all new version 2 free with iLife 07 and iWork 07. (not compatible with AMD Processors or 10.6 Omni-versal Binaries due at WWDC 2007).

Optional Freescale 1024 Core G4 Apallo Twin Omnigrade 40 HeptiHz G4 array with Xsan Extreme and Meta Data Raid Controller via Quantum Reality Vortex... (Classic supported!)

Yea...

Apple Stock: $3,908,400 per diluted share for the Third quarter of 2007.

Give it to me now! Mahahahahahahahahahaha!

New Mac Book Unlimited Mind link Tuesday!

 

[Tacitus]

Uh, I don't see why we should rejoice here...

You (and Demallien) say we should be happy to see Microsoft (maybe) collapse in front of the Open software, because the user will like the fact that his OS is free. And how is Apple saved from the same demise ?

I didn't say I would be happy to see MS collapse. It won't but if its domination were reduced to it being just another, albeit large, player that would IMHO be a good thing. Apple would be better placed since it is a hardware manufacturer with other revenue streams. In the end they could offer OSX as open source for free, build the Aqua GUI on top of Linux - they have a world of possibilities. Why do you think MS is looking at hardware with the X-box?

Additionally, open software is nice but has his inconvenients too. It runs on people's motivations and free time. I still don't like Open Office 2.0, despite the fact it took what, 5 years since the beginning of the project ? How much development can a company propose with a team of developpers hired to work xx hours a day in the same amount of time ? How much support ??

Fair point but with open source there is nothing to stop a variety of vendors selling OSS and developing a broader market. So long as file formats are interchangeable so what?

I agree over patent problems which is how MS is looking to strangle OSS.

 

[yac_moda]

Hi, I love CAPS! IT MAKES ME SOUND SO MUCH MORE CONVINCING


Look dude, watch who you are calling a coward. People buy things for many reasons. Windows is purchased be perfectly intellegent people to do perfectly normal computing tasks other than browse the internet and pick up a trojan here or there.

What world are you on right now? MS IMPLODES?

1. Take a lesson in grammar
2. Get in touch with reality

Microsoft is as healthy as they have ever been. Vista is meaningless to the home user market...get a clue. ipod is doing NOTHING to their core businesses. Media Center makes more money than OS X. XBox has so much upside its silly. Windows Server System (SQL, Exchange, etc.) are FLYING off the shelves.

Microsoft is earning money that would give the CFO of Apple wet dreams. Apple is not killing Microsoft and no one should prance around here thinking OS X is about to destroy the MS user base.

YOUR writing NEEDS help, don't TRY to tell me about grammar.

And all your wining below your "Get in touch with reality" statement, very strange.

YOU DON"T KNOW MS is IMPLOADING, I am NOT surprised, WINlovers are ALWAYS the LAST to KNOW !!!

It makes me wonder WHY you are here, if you REALLY BELIEVE those things, WHY<WHY<WHY would you be here

Go look at MSs stock in the last 5 years ...

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=5y&s=MSFT&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=AAPL

... and compare it to Apple's -- NOT A PRETTY THING, for MS that is