Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I suppose hackint0sh didn't come across your mind?

PS. You must've missed quite a bit of my post. There are those who are willing to pay for quality, and there are those who don't. That's why Apple serves a niche instead of racing to the bottom.

No, I do not consider hackint0sh has any significant value for discussion purely because very few people use it.

pay for quality is a statement, or rhetoric, and its meaning is, most of the time, vague.

1. hardware wise, apple computer has pretty much mid-quality computer parts as any pc out there.

2. software wise, despite flaming war about windows vs. OSX, the truth is for most people, they are both good enough. I admit OSX is more elegant looking than windows. But practical usability is about the same, and windwos, fair, or unfair, has many 3rd party software advantages, e.g., for a user addicted to online flash video-- which there are numerous, and everywhere today-- an expensive mac does worse than a netbook, where is the quality argument coming in here?

I heard total ownership, and quality argument a lot, so far nobody can give me a convincing explanation of those. You are welcome to offer your ideas about them.:)
 
I personally am split between the different interfaces of the operating system. I can't say I like one over the other completely. For example the accelerators on windows is far better than Mac OS. You can practically navigate through everything without a mouse. But on Mac OS you cannot.

Interface Winner

Menus windows (each window has its own menu system that does not change and easier to access)
Toolbars macosx (toolbars on the max were always superior but the ribbons isn pretty interesting)
Docks macosx (better organized with more features then your start menu)
Windows macosx (window arrangement and visualization is better but i hate those circicles at the top. they are just too small to click, bring back the boxes)
Accelerators windows (you can practically do everything through the keys navigating through the menu system)
Icons macosx (icons are always superior on mac)
Finder macosx (more features and better organization)
Desktop macosx (desktop organization is better)
Kernel macosx (more stable)
File System macosx (none of that stupid drive C or D crap as well as those fake link files)
Storage windows (better disk management)
Games windows (more games and better support like directx)
Software windows (more software)
 
No, I do not consider hackint0sh has any significant value for discussion purely because very few people use it.

oh, i dont know about that. the percentage would probably be somewhere around the same mark as what apple's market share is ;)

thats enough for me.

Accelerators windows (you can practically do everything through the keys navigating through the menu system)

you can go thru all mac windows via keys too...
 
Where did you get the "As with all Mac OS X discs, they contain the FULL version of the thing. You can install, wipe, and install again, unlike "Upgrade" discs where you are supposed to have XP or Vista installed then "upgrade".(I've pointed that out in my previous post and the one before that.)

Windows upgrade discs come with the full version too. You can upgrade your existing installation if that's what you want, but you can also wipe and do a 100% clean install from an upgrade disc. It just needs to verify the eligibility first.

PS. The devs were given time to expect this to happen and rewrite everything. Vista? Nope. You wake up one morning and your drivers don't work with the current version of Windows anymore...
Huh? You're making it sound like Vista dropped out of the sky one day, which is funny considering few products have been in development for a longer time. Developers had access to Vista builds for ages. Many of the 3rd party/OEM drivers included with Vista were submitted to Microsoft several months, in some cases a year before Vista was released. The ones who did their homework (like Intel, ATi and a few others) had stable drivers in place when Vista was released. The lazy procrastinators (NVidia, among others) submitted buggy drivers. 80% of the drivers worked spiffingly on my machine when I first got Vista (the day after the launch). There were some that had minor issues that were corrected in the weeks following release... and then there was NVidia, who needed 2 months to produce a driver that didn't crash and another 4 months to produce one that didn't suck.
 
a 300$ matte touch tablet + Chrome OS = a happy toy for the kids to grow up with and the parents to use on vacation.

Oh wait... that's the future of the iPhone. :cool:
 
I think it's so funny how a thread about Google's OS can turn into a Mac vs. Windows argument. This is either indicative of A) Google's attempt to split opinions and take those undecided buyers, or B) the fact that Google's OS will be yet another forgotten alternative.
 
No, I do not consider hackint0sh has any significant value for discussion purely because very few people use it.

pay for quality is a statement, or rhetoric, and its meaning is, most of the time, vague.

1. hardware wise, apple computer has pretty much mid-quality computer parts as any pc out there.

2. software wise, despite flaming war about windows vs. OSX, the truth is for most people, they are both good enough. I admit OSX is more elegant looking than windows. But practical usability is about the same, and windwos, fair, or unfair, has many 3rd party software advantages, e.g., for a user addicted to online flash video-- which there are numerous, and everywhere today-- an expensive mac does worse than a netbook, where is the quality argument coming in here?

I heard total ownership, and quality argument a lot, so far nobody can give me a convincing explanation of those. You are welcome to offer your ideas about them.:)

1. Quality control. And guarantee... That's why any problem with Apple products usually get publicity.

2. Elegant and less bloated (Vista) and more advanced (XP). Yes, for most people XP is good enough, and maybe Vista too, but this is where the "niche" thing (gosh, how many times more do I need to type that) comes in. People want to do more complex tasks more productively.

2b. Software—having plenty of software doesn't mean the software is good; quantity ≠ quality. One of the reasons, stated earlier in the thread, why I stick with OS X is because of iWork, Quıcĸsıɩⅴεʀ, BBCode, and Pixelmator (Adobe is bloated).

And TCO. Yes, the usual argument. You know full well how that works. And that you've got to pay for too... In one way or another. Again where the niche comes in. Do you want to pay for it in the product itself or in the frustration of problems in using the product.

Even if you say OS X productivity is = to Windows, the lack of viruses, major plagued problems/driver/UAC/etc... naturally makes OS X more valuable, thus the higher price. For those who can cope or is willing to solve them, they can opt for Windows. For those who just want an error-free (more or less) experience, they need to pay more.
 
oh, i dont know about that. the percentage would probably be somewhere around the same mark as what apple's market share is ;)

is that really? well, i guess its impossible to get a number anyway....
1. Quality control. And guarantee... That's why any problem with Apple products usually get publicity.

2. Elegant and less bloated (Vista) and more advanced (XP). Yes, for most people XP is good enough, and maybe Vista too, but this is where the "niche" thing (gosh, how many times more do I need to type that) comes in. People want to do more complex tasks more productively.

2b. Software—having plenty of software doesn't mean the software is good; quantity ≠ quality. One of the reasons, stated earlier in the thread, why I stick with OS X is because of iWork, Quıcĸsıɩⅴεʀ, BBCode, and Pixelmator (Adobe is bloated).

And TCO. Yes, the usual argument. You know full well how that works. And that you've got to pay for too... In one way or another. Again where the niche comes in. Do you want to pay for it in the product itself or in the frustration of problems in using the product.

Even if you say OS X productivity is = to Windows, the lack of viruses, major plagued problems/driver/UAC/etc... naturally makes OS X more valuable, thus the higher price. For those who can cope or is willing to solve them, they can opt for Windows. For those who just want an error-free (more or less) experience, they need to pay more.

several points to consider, and Im being extremely frank about what I can agree and what I can not.

1. quality control and guarantee, My experience with my MB and some purchases of iPod and iPod Touch were't good, I will reserve a judgment on a general statement for this, but obviously its hard to convince me as an individual since I have two repairs of MB and 1 repair of iPod, and 1 exchange and 1 return of iPT, basically, among 5 apple products I ever owned/own, 60% of them went through some sort of quality problem and I stuck with no computer for a month for one time.

2. software bloat, just simply saying "bloat" won't convince me, and with everybody has 2GB+ Memory nowadays, I highly doubt that statement can convince many people at all.

2b. quality!=quantity, but when you confronted by the fact that there is no such software on mac at all, there is no quality to talk about. not to mention, I firmly believe competition produce superior products, and that means quantity will improve quality. You stick with Mac because of iWork, QS, etc, there are more people stick with windows because of office 07, games, professional softwares, etc.

TCO, I think what you listed can not convince me, mainly because I have none of the issues you mentioned. My pc has no more repairs than my MB, and I got free AVG all the time.

Major plagued problems are just mac world's fantasy, its far less significant than it sounds like.

All in all, prefer of an OS is your decision and I do not dispute it, you like things about OSX, by all means use it, but those are very personal preferences and do not amount to appealing enough reason to judge an OS on a massive scale.

TOC is, IMHO, FUD.

I dont really expect anybody to change minds, I m just saying, people in the Mac centric world have too many unreal ideas around them, many of them just aren't true.
 
Where did you get the "Snow Leopard only costs $29 to existing Leopard users, if I was a Tiger user I would have to pay the full wodge."? Might I ask the source of that?
Yes, it is just $29 for a single user license and $49 for a family pack (5 users) for Leopard users – you can find this info here (Apple WWDC 2009 keynote). Start listening at 45:30 ;)
 
microsoft

this will not work because the people os is aimed are people that use there computer for basic things and there is a lot of people like that but those people only know and trust Microsoft. they dont know that there is an alternative to it. or even if they do they will stay with windows because they know it.
 
Windows upgrade discs come with the full version too. You can upgrade your existing installation if that's what you want, but you can also wipe and do a 100% clean install from an upgrade disc. It just needs to verify the eligibility first.

That's the problem there. And it's the upgrade thing again if someone wants to be within legal limits. Anyhow the heavily discounted "upgrade" price is still 2x more expensive.


Huh? You're making it sound like Vista dropped out of the sky one day, which is funny considering few products have been in development for a longer time. Developers had access to Vista builds for ages. Many of the 3rd party/OEM drivers included with Vista were submitted to Microsoft several months, in some cases a year before Vista was released. The ones who did their homework (like Intel, ATi and a few others) had stable drivers in place when Vista was released. The lazy procrastinators (NVidia, among others) submitted buggy drivers. 80% of the drivers worked spiffingly on my machine when I first got Vista (the day after the launch). There were some that had minor issues that were corrected in the weeks following release... and then there was NVidia, who needed 2 months to produce a driver that didn't crash and another 4 months to produce one that didn't suck.

Well I exaggerated to explain and emphasize the point. But Microsoft wasn't clear with changing the driver compatibility until the beta was released... Manufacturers were therefore "slow" updating drivers—Vista was even pushed back, but there still wasn't enough time— and the "signing" requirement made it take even more time. Apple switched to intel (no similar move in Microsoft's history) and people started writing drivers in Universal Binary or in pure intel binary while Intel ran PPC binaries just fine... So now when PPC is dropped, the Universal and Intel binaries are all here, with less compatibility issues.

Yes, it is just $29 for a single user license and $49 for a family pack (5 users) for Leopard users – you can find this info here (Apple WWDC 2009 keynote). Start listening at 45:30 ;)

Yes, that's right, I got the same figure, but I can't seem to find anything about "10.4 users having to pay full price (i.e. at $129)"...
 
you can go thru all mac windows via keys too...

You are right but in total I've noticed there are more accelerators on windows than macosx. That's just my findings. I could be wrong. But using the accelerators (ALT, CTRL, SHIFT and WIN) to switch between applications and quickly access varies menu options which I found on windows to be easier. I'm one of those that don't like to use the mouse and prefer to do everything through keyboard. KDE and Gnome accelerator keys are the worst.

When I say its easier an example would be on the Safari browser I have to use both hands to get to the address field where on windows both internet explorer and firefox i just use one hand because of the placement of the keys.
 
You are right but in total I've noticed there are more accelerators on windows than macosx. That's just my findings. I could be wrong. But using the accelerators (ALT, CTRL, SHIFT and WIN) to switch between applications and quickly access varies menu options which I found on windows to be easier. I'm one of those that don't like to use the mouse and prefer to do everything through keyboard. KDE and Gnome accelerator keys are the worst.

i am a key person too, tbh i find navigating osx much easier then on windows. the alt key is handy but too annoying to use.

i am trying to remember the key-set to bring up the dock and the top menu bar, but i cant remember it haha (i normally just use the shortcuts of individual menu options rather then bring up the whole thing).
 
Yes, but I can't seem to find anything about "10.4 users having to pay full price (i.e. at $129)"...
How about this instead?
Upgrading from Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger.
If your Intel-based Mac is running Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger, purchase the Mac Box Set (when available), which is a single, affordable package that includes Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard; iLife ’09, with the latest versions of iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, iWeb, and iDVD; and iWork ’09, Apple’s productivity suite for home and office including Pages, Numbers, and Keynote.
The Mac Box Set currently retails for $169.
 
You are right but in total I've noticed there are more accelerators on windows than macosx. That's just my findings. I could be wrong. But using the accelerators (ALT, CTRL, SHIFT and WIN) to switch between applications and quickly access varies menu options which I found on windows to be easier. I'm one of those that don't like to use the mouse and prefer to do everything through keyboard. KDE and Gnome accelerator keys are the worst.

Well you can have one or the other—you can have a function key (no, not fn but a function modifier) or a symbol modifier key. Windows, with all their "user friendliness", lacks them, or rather, confuses them with alt. On a mac shift and alt are symbol modifier keys while command and control are function modifiers. With 2 symbol modifier keys, every symbol key can now represent 4 different symbols, thus the keyboard can effectively type 141 more symbols in addition to the normal 36 w/ 11 symbols.

On macs, command is usually for system-wide commands, control for small, task-specific commands (such as control-f in wikipedia to select the search box).

(further reading on history of how the keys came to be, http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/08/11/how-apple-keyboards-lost-a-logo-and-windows-pcs-gained-one/)
 
i am trying to remember the key-set to bring up the dock and the top menu bar, but i cant remember it haha (i normally just use the shortcuts of individual menu options rather then bring up the whole thing).

:cool: see.
 
How about this instead?

The Mac Box Set currently retails for $169.

It's not "required", right? It's just a "value package" for upgrading users to get iWork and iLife 09' too...

If not it would've said so in the requirements...

(Apple's Mac OS X licensing is that if you have the license you can have a copy on your machine... if you don't cannot. There's no "partial" upgrade license that will not allow you from using Mac OS X...)
 
Well if a google OS would allow me to install it in any external harddrive and then boot that harddrive from any box that i have in the office or at home, then i would might be interested. So far I know of only one OS that does that well: OSX. This is probably the main reason our biz has stuck with Apple. No downtime due to faulty hardware, ever. It's clear where the hardware market is really going: disposable mini boxes that cost a fraction of what the software does once loaded. So without the ability to boot off anything anywhere, the OS is useless.
 
On macs, command is usually for system-wide commands, control for small, task-specific commands (such as control-f in wikipedia to select the search box).

I do agree with you that Mac accelerators are better functionally organized but when it comes to quantity and placements I would side with windows.
 
I do agree with you that Mac accelerators are better functionally organized but when it comes to quantity and placements I would side with windows.

No arguments with that-- but when it comes to typing symbols, hell breaks loose when you have to navigate an insert a symbol that's not within the usual 26 alphabets, 10 numbers and 10 symbols...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.