My Father has that exact machine and hasn't had a single problem with it maybe yours was just a lemon he gets 4-5 hours on a battery and he is running vista, he also has the upgraded LCD and it looks better then my macbooks Crappy one. Apple is nice but they use the same components as dell so don't think that the same thing can't happen.
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.
Just bought a Dell Vostro instead of a MacBook -- Here's why
- Thread starter K-Funk
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My Father has that exact machine and hasn't had a single problem with it maybe yours was just a lemon he gets 4-5 hours on a battery and he is running vista, he also has the upgraded LCD and it looks better then my macbooks Crappy one. Apple is nice but they use the same components as dell so don't think that the same thing can't happen.
My system preferences (MBP in sig + 10.5.1) are different. The option for "For secondary clicks, place two fingers on the trackpad then click button" isn't there.
Attachments
oh i see the issue, you have "clicking" enabled. Try turning it off, and it'll change the "tap secondary click" to "two finger + trackpad button" = right click.
if you have clicking enabled you essentially never use the trackpad button. All functions are on the trackpad itself.
Ah - you clear the mists of confusion - thank you.oh i see the issue, you have "clicking" enabled. Try turning it off, and it'll change the "tap secondary click" to "two finger + trackpad button" = right click.
if you have clicking enabled you essentially never use the trackpad button. All functions are on the trackpad itself.
Although the trackpad button does work with clicking enabled - this is probably why I didn't notice.
Cheers
SL
lol ya i know. I meant to say that they're not going to activate a feature that would require a trackpad button click if you have the trackpad clicking feature enabled. They'll much rather have you do the 2 finger tap then.
but i'm glad i could help.
And how is including a $200 OS upgrade making it "the same as possible"? If you want 64-bit then you don't need to go up to Vista Ultimate. If you're talking about backup features... well, that kind of boils down to not being stupid enough to delete important files, doesn't it? I honestly don't like Time Machine. I just simply backup the files I need on my own. Using an external HDD that can be read and written to by multiple OSes is better than a built-in backup that renders the file system and backups useless by anything other than that particular OS and software.
In fact, if you go up to Vista Ultimate, you're getting features that OS X doesn't have. Such as full drive encryption based around a hardware TPM chip. Not just "Home folder encryption".
Many MacBooks had issues with their backlight. The backlight would flicker. Or like my first MacBook, the backlight was uneven. The right side was about 25% brighter than the left.
As opposed to discoloration that still occurs.
Hundreds of people over at Apple's site have had their MacBook battery die after a year of light use. I only have 16 cycles on my MB battery (hardly use the system at all any more) and the battery is down from 5200mah to 4800mah.
K-Funk,
* You want a maximize window function.
* You dislike the dock and prefer the Windows taskbar.
* Having a one-button trackpad is a major issue for you.
* You're not interested in iLife and the strong app integration.
* You don't "get" why Mac OS X is considered a superior OS by many.
From these things you mention, it sounds like you don't generally care for Mac OS X at all. Then, respectfully, may I ask-- What exactly fascinated you about Macs all this while? Nice cases?
To me, the heart of the Mac is in its OS. The hardware specs are nice, surely, but nothing you couldn't get from some other manufacturer, or by assembling a computer yourself. The case the design is definitely nice, which fits into the whole Apple vision, but no case design is worth switching a platform for. Forgive me if I've missed something; I skimmed the thread, but didn't stop to read every post in it's entirety. But, what is it you do like about Macs?
As it is, I don't think the Mac is for you.
* You want a maximize window function.
* You dislike the dock and prefer the Windows taskbar.
* Having a one-button trackpad is a major issue for you.
* You're not interested in iLife and the strong app integration.
* You don't "get" why Mac OS X is considered a superior OS by many.
From these things you mention, it sounds like you don't generally care for Mac OS X at all. Then, respectfully, may I ask-- What exactly fascinated you about Macs all this while? Nice cases?
To me, the heart of the Mac is in its OS. The hardware specs are nice, surely, but nothing you couldn't get from some other manufacturer, or by assembling a computer yourself. The case the design is definitely nice, which fits into the whole Apple vision, but no case design is worth switching a platform for. Forgive me if I've missed something; I skimmed the thread, but didn't stop to read every post in it's entirety. But, what is it you do like about Macs?
As it is, I don't think the Mac is for you.
Fair question. Basically, every "OS X vs. Windows" article I read comes down on the side of OS X, so I figure I must be missing something.
I'm confused. How do you 'close the window to exit' without the 'manually' part. Does Windows read your mind or something?
You're confusing 'closing a window' with 'quitting an application' here. They serve two different purposes. If I want to close the Window, I don't want the OS suddenly deciding for me that I want to Quit (although OS X does helpfully make that decision if it's an App that can only have one window).
For example, I'm working in an app and close the last window with the intention of working on something new. I certainly do not want the hassle of having the app quitting on me. The 'close the last window should quit the app' idea, makes the assumption that I never need/want no windows open which is a false assumption. OS X solves the problem by separating the two commands: command-Q; command-W.
Its only because OSX gives a little more features then what Windows give. Does it matter what OS you run? It only matters to the end user if they wish to use OSX or Windows. I use both, I also use Linux, all is the same. I find OSX to be a little easier then Windows, and linux being a little more difficult to wrap around with the directory, but thats just me. The only real reason I find OSX to be easy is how everything is nicely integrated, Address Book, iPhoto, iTunes, Spotlight being able to search files from my iPhoto or Mail, etc. It is a lot nicer, to me, then what windows offers (pre-vista, vista has some of these features now, mostly the calendar, mail, contacts, etc.).
So far, I have no major problems with switching back to windows or to any other OS, I just have the problem of moving my large 300 GB media files thats actually integrated into iTunes.
I'm not "confusing" anything here
For example, I have Safari open right now. If I click the red X bubble/button, the window closes but the application remains running. Why? That is stupid. Same with iPhoto, DVD Player, Garage Band, and every other piece of software I can think of. If I close the main application window, the application continues to run just with no window. What's the point?
If I close the main window then the application SHOULD CLOSE.
If I close IE in Windows, the application closes. If I close Safari, iTunes, Firefox, Windows Media Player, Winamp, whatever in Windows then the application closes.
It's not stupid. If you want to Quit the program, then Quit the program with the Quit command, don't just close the Window. Like many beginners you are confusing Quitting with Closing a Window. Why not just Quit when you want to quit? You are trying to force your habits on users who require the ability to close the last window without quitting despite the fact that OS X already gives you what you need : command-Q or File > Quit.I'm not "confusing" anything here
For example, I have Safari open right now. If I click the red X bubble/button, the window closes but the application remains running. Why? That is stupid. Same with iPhoto, DVD Player, Garage Band, and every other piece of software I can think of. If I close the main application window, the application continues to run just with no window. What's the point?
If I close the main window then the application SHOULD CLOSE.
If I close IE in Windows, the application closes. If I close Safari, iTunes, Firefox, Windows Media Player, Winamp, whatever in Windows then the application closes.
There is not really a concept of main window in many of the programs you mention. Many users need the ability to have more than one window open in an app.
For example, go to iTunes, play some music, close the Window. The music continues playing. I don't want iTunes to Quit on me. There are dozens of occasions where I want to close the last window and not want the program to quit.
Or answer this question:
I'm running Photoshop. I have one document open. I'm finished working with it. I want to close it and open a new document. How do I do that with your suggestion? Photoshop would go and Quit on me causing me to waste time reopening it.
OS X makes it easy:
This is the habit you need to learn:
Quit: command-Q
Close: command-W
So your fascination purely with the the opinions which you have heard or read, not with any particular aspect of the Mac itself. I'd rephrase your original statement to say "I've had a fascination with why so many people consider the Mac to be so great for a while.", rather than say you've had a fascination with the Mac itself.
No disrespect, but I believe that you cannot see why the Mac (or any other OS) is "better" because you are still clinging to your old Windows habits, and have been too accustomed to its familiar ways of doing things. You have to let go of those preconceived, conditioned notions and see an OS for what it is. And this applies to any OS (or more generally, anything in life). It's really about the underlying design philosophy of what you're using. There are many layers to this.
Back in the old days, I used to swear by the then current Classic Mac OS, and shun UNIX for its archaic way of doing things and antiquated interface. As I become more exposed to UNIX-y OSes though, I saw some benefits of the UNIX philosophy, as well as some weaknesses, but the fact is that it works-- it's been around for more than 30 years!
And guess what? With Mac OS X, I saw the primary weakness of UNIX, it's not-so-freindly user interface, become strengthened with the Mac's excellent UI design philosophy, while the Mac gained the strength of UNIX's under-the-hood design philosophy.
But if you cannot see beyond the Windows design philosophy, then you will not be able to appreciate another platform's design philosophy, because you will be locked into constantly comparing it the Windows philosophy, instead of seeing it for what it is and discovering its own design philosophy. Only then will you be able to appreciate the Mac, Linux, or any other OS and truly decide if you like it or not.
I'm not "confusing" anything here
For example, I have Safari open right now. If I click the red X bubble/button, the window closes but the application remains running. Why? That is stupid. Same with iPhoto, DVD Player, Garage Band, and every other piece of software I can think of. If I close the main application window, the application continues to run just with no window. What's the point?
If I close the main window then the application SHOULD CLOSE.
If I close IE in Windows, the application closes. If I close Safari, iTunes, Firefox, Windows Media Player, Winamp, whatever in Windows then the application closes.
Just because an application's main window is closed does not mean an application should quit. When I close Mail.app, I expect it to continue running, so that it can notify me of new Mail. When I close BOINC's main window, I want it to continue crunching work units. And when I close Safari's browser windows, I expected it to continue running, so that I may look up another web page a few minutes later, instead of unloading the app from RAM and loading it all back up again a few minutes later.
This is a strength of the Mac. If a developer wishes for his application to quit when its main window is closed, he can code it to do so. Simpler applications often do this. Calculator.app, for example, behaves this way. But the default behavior gives you more granular control, and is generally better design.
At any rate, it can be considered a personal preference. However, hitting Command-Q instead of Command-W will quickly solve your issue, as will doing Command-Tab and hitting "Q" when you come to the application you want to quit.
Your inability to see the strength of this design however, is probably due to the same ailment I tell K-Funk about above. It's not "stupid". You simply cannot see beyond the design philosophy you are conditioned to.
I'm not "confusing" anything here
For example, I have Safari open right now. If I click the red X bubble/button, the window closes but the application remains running. Why? That is stupid. Same with iPhoto, DVD Player, Garage Band, and every other piece of software I can think of. If I close the main application window, the application continues to run just with no window. What's the point?
If I close the main window then the application SHOULD CLOSE.
If I close IE in Windows, the application closes. If I close Safari, iTunes, Firefox, Windows Media Player, Winamp, whatever in Windows then the application closes.
Dude, why do you even bother posting here? I cannot recall the last time you actually posted something.... i don't know..... that wasn't bashing on Apple/OS X in some way. It doesn't matter what you are talking about, you have found a flaw with it, and your general solution seems to be "Just look at what Windows does".
Let me pitch this scenario to you.
You are at Nikon's website, you think their cameras are ok, but frankly, prefer Canon. Which pitch do you think is better?
Option A:"You know, I like the idea of Nikon's cameras, but their execution is a little lacking when it comes to ergonomics. I think if they thin down the right grip a little bit, you will be able to hold it better."
Option B:"You know, compared to Canon, Nikon's ergonomics totally blow. They really should be more like Canon... their ergonomics rock hardcore, and fit my abnormally large hands really well, and is the only thing that I have used for the past 8 years. I only ever picked up a Nikon once, about 3.5 years ago, and didn't really like it, never touched them again since, I think it is for the best. Nikon should just copy everything that Canon does since they are so much better at the game"
You see what I did there? I talked about the same thing, in two different ways. The first way was polite, cordial, and constructive. The second option was well.... d0uc|-|e-baggish. Now tell me, which one is you? And don't lie... we all know it's the second one.
Back on to topic however. Anytime I am sitting in Windows and have to click 28 times on the address bar of the browser in order to highlight the whole line, I simply take a breath and say to myself "This is Windows, it is not the same/as easy as OS X." And a few months ago, when I would try to quickly share a folder on my Tiger system, and found (yet again) that I couldn't just right click on the folder and say "Share", I had to take a breath and say to myself "This is OS X, it is not the same/as easy as Windows". Each OS does things their own way. OS X seems to often just magically install drivers in the background, completely without my knowing (or they are already there). Windows has a well established driver installation system that is more prone to hits than misses these days, and for that, I applaud them. Linux seems to laugh at you as you attempt to install whatever drivers you could find for your device.
OS X does not like things maximized, and even after closing all the windows, likes to leave things in RAM so you can get at it more quickly. Here is a test. Open up Mail if you use it (oh, and by the way, iPhoto 08 quits when you close your last window) and simply close the window. Now, click on it in the dock. Came back up pretty quickly huh? Now, quit Mail and once it is totally gone, click on it again. Took some time didn't it? Certainly longer then when the window was simply closed. That is why Apple made the differentiation. In case maybe, just maybe you don't need that window anymore, but I don't know.... want to access the app again quickly. Heck, when I was in school, I had Word open all the time, just for that reason. And the same applied to eclipse, terminal, textedit, emacs, safari, mail, address book, ical, activity monitor, transmission, adium, itunes, omnigraffle, keynote, firefox, vmware and a couple others that I am probably forgetting. Because if you just thought of something, and want to do it right then, having to wait even 4 seconds for an app to open is annoying, and when you have as fleeting a short-term memory as I do, you need to do it right then before you lose it.
Another way of looking at this issue:
Imagine you are at your local library('the application') and you have taken a few books off the shelf, and plonked them on the table. As you finish reading them you put them back on the shelf ('close the window').
You put the last book back on the shelf when suddenly out of nowhere a librarian appears, carries you to your car, bundles you in and drives you home. "I'm just being helpful", he says. "You put the last book back so I took you home."
You explain to the librarian that you didn't want to go home, you were just about to take another book off the shelf. The librarian doesn't really get that. He keeps saying, "well you just need to drive back to the library, don't you".
"I have a suggestion", you say. "When I put back all the books, I'll then decide whether I want to drive home. Just leave me alone. But when I do drive home (quit), if I've left any books out put them away for me". The librarian says, "That's a good idea but you're not in an OS X library and us librarians are here to **** up your life, not help you. Beside I think, I've caught a cold, so you might want to leave anyway"
Very good analogy. I agree. It is a major annoyance in windows if you shut a window accidentally, close the wrong program, etc. To have to a) go find it in a plethora of menus, b) start the program c) wait for it to load d) Click through a series of error messages e) Finally begin being "productive" before another error message starts up.
It's even more annoying because it doesn't even have to be accidental - you may have closed the window on purpose but not realized that it was the last window.
In other words to close a window in Windows you need to go through this thought-process:
I want to close this window, but I need to check that it's the not the last window; if so then I need to open up the other window that I want to open, then go back to the original window and close it.
And some people think this is better than Command-W or clicking a red X
Some of my thoughts
Here's some of my random thoughts after reading trough this thread..
First, a short introduction - I "switched" about 7 years ago, but still use both OS X / XP on a daily basis.
My general first feeling is that newcomers to OS X just don't know how to make the best out of the OS, exposé, dashboard, closing iTunes window while it keeps playing music etc. is just things I can't live without. Not to mention finder, in it's "default" view it plain sucks, put it into "columns" view, altough it may look wierd and feel funny at first, you'll soon realize it's awsomeness.
I remember when I used to lug around both of my laptops to/from school, switching between wired/wireless networks and the different ip-settings on the mac was "just working" - flawlessly, on the pc - not so much, having to dig myself trough tens of setting-dialouges..
One funny thing about OS X, they claim it's so oriented against handling photos - now to the part where XP beats the crap out of OS X - how come OS X "preview" is so ****** (yes, ******!) compared to the simular feature of XP? I wan't to be able to just open an image in a folder and just click myself to the next one, not using ****** drawers that don't work like they should. Now I know "Xee" is a great app that does exactly that, but why didn't the get it right from the beginning?
And don't get me started with preview/icons in OS X, have you ever tried opening a folder with over 100 pics and waiting for OS X to load preview icons for the pics while you try to scroll down, gets me pissed every time, it's just so painfully slow (even on my Quad core Mac Pro with 4GB ram)..
Ever tried doing the same on a ****** old pc with XP? Yep - works way better..
I guess switchers will have to get used the the different way of working on macs, stuff works, you don't need 100's of settings for easy things.. You can't simply compare OS X to XP in a weeks time, the benefits of OS X shows after months..
I would'nt trade my mac for a pc even if I got paid -lots-. In my critical workflow where I shuffle 500mb pics back and forth through CS3 at the same time I surf the web with 10 tabs and listen to music and monitor my RIP, my mac hangs about once every 3 months.. My pc, doing much less intensive stuff about twice a day..
Now to right-clicks, it's just plain stupid of apple to continue to stand behind one-button mice.. I right-click ALL THE TIME, surely I have a two-button mice, but come on, one-button sucks and have always sucked! Think different for sure.. At least there's now superb support for right-clicks in both osx, the macbooks and applications running in osx..simply not a problem anymore..
As for number of free applications and the likes, sure there are a ton more applications for XP - but as I described it for my brother the other day, if you need an application that does something, if you search for one for XP you get 10'000 hits, 9'800 of applications that costs money, 199 that's free but really ****** and hidden burried under tons of hits and if you're really lucky and you've fought yourself thrugh all the crap you've might be lucky to find one thats good..
While if you search for an app under OSX you get few hits, lets say 50, and 30 of thoose are free, good software..
Sorry for all the unconnected ramblings I just threw out there (may make me seem psycho) - just wanted to add some random thoughts..
bottom line - both OS'es have their strengths/weaknesses, you just have to give OS X time and patience before you realize it truly is the better OS.. and where OS X falls there's always some good freeware app to correct it!
If you bought a Dell, good for you! New hardware is always nice! It's just that Mac's simply are a little bit better =)
Here's some of my random thoughts after reading trough this thread..
First, a short introduction - I "switched" about 7 years ago, but still use both OS X / XP on a daily basis.
My general first feeling is that newcomers to OS X just don't know how to make the best out of the OS, exposé, dashboard, closing iTunes window while it keeps playing music etc. is just things I can't live without. Not to mention finder, in it's "default" view it plain sucks, put it into "columns" view, altough it may look wierd and feel funny at first, you'll soon realize it's awsomeness.
I remember when I used to lug around both of my laptops to/from school, switching between wired/wireless networks and the different ip-settings on the mac was "just working" - flawlessly, on the pc - not so much, having to dig myself trough tens of setting-dialouges..
One funny thing about OS X, they claim it's so oriented against handling photos - now to the part where XP beats the crap out of OS X - how come OS X "preview" is so ****** (yes, ******!) compared to the simular feature of XP? I wan't to be able to just open an image in a folder and just click myself to the next one, not using ****** drawers that don't work like they should. Now I know "Xee" is a great app that does exactly that, but why didn't the get it right from the beginning?
And don't get me started with preview/icons in OS X, have you ever tried opening a folder with over 100 pics and waiting for OS X to load preview icons for the pics while you try to scroll down, gets me pissed every time, it's just so painfully slow (even on my Quad core Mac Pro with 4GB ram)..
Ever tried doing the same on a ****** old pc with XP? Yep - works way better..
I guess switchers will have to get used the the different way of working on macs, stuff works, you don't need 100's of settings for easy things.. You can't simply compare OS X to XP in a weeks time, the benefits of OS X shows after months..
I would'nt trade my mac for a pc even if I got paid -lots-. In my critical workflow where I shuffle 500mb pics back and forth through CS3 at the same time I surf the web with 10 tabs and listen to music and monitor my RIP, my mac hangs about once every 3 months.. My pc, doing much less intensive stuff about twice a day..
Now to right-clicks, it's just plain stupid of apple to continue to stand behind one-button mice.. I right-click ALL THE TIME, surely I have a two-button mice, but come on, one-button sucks and have always sucked! Think different for sure.. At least there's now superb support for right-clicks in both osx, the macbooks and applications running in osx..simply not a problem anymore..
As for number of free applications and the likes, sure there are a ton more applications for XP - but as I described it for my brother the other day, if you need an application that does something, if you search for one for XP you get 10'000 hits, 9'800 of applications that costs money, 199 that's free but really ****** and hidden burried under tons of hits and if you're really lucky and you've fought yourself thrugh all the crap you've might be lucky to find one thats good..
While if you search for an app under OSX you get few hits, lets say 50, and 30 of thoose are free, good software..
Sorry for all the unconnected ramblings I just threw out there (may make me seem psycho) - just wanted to add some random thoughts..
bottom line - both OS'es have their strengths/weaknesses, you just have to give OS X time and patience before you realize it truly is the better OS.. and where OS X falls there's always some good freeware app to correct it!
If you bought a Dell, good for you! New hardware is always nice! It's just that Mac's simply are a little bit better =)
Never say "never". History is replete with excellent engineering choices made based on form rather than function. The best example is the golden ratio, but there are many others. The emergence of the dome is another example. Why build all that extra volume when most buildings couldn't really utilze it? Answer: to inspire (most ancient domes were constructed for public spaces). Swept-wings were initially created because they were aesthetically pleasing (art deco was the rage in the '30s). Only later did wind tunnel testing indicate they were actually superior to non-sept wings, especially in high-speed jets.
Agreed. In fact, many people who talk about form vs. function seem to be unaware that a beautiful form does have a function: it makes me feel good when I look at it. (or 'her'
There's a fundamental issue that I think the people in this thread, indeed this forum, are missing.
OSX vs Windows
Mac's vs PC's
That's two very different issues.
OSX vs Windows - I'd give the nod to OSX. It's not perfect, but it's less unperfect than XP or Vista. To be honest, given the chance to use it - I think many more than the minority percentage of Max users would say that OSX is the better platform.
Mac's vs PC's - I'd give the nod to PC's. More power, lower price, less fragile. That's the driving force behind the limited appeal. Even the cheapest Mac is overpriced - significantly.
HOWEVER - Cupertino have dictated that you can't have one (OSX) without the other ( Mac ) and thus they can and do levy an OSX tax on every Mac.... because they can... because they have you over a barrel if you want to buy a machine to use OSX. That tax varies from product to product, but for laptops it's something like 40-60%. (£600 to £800 for MB's - £1000 to £1600 for MBP's).
It's not even a matter for debate if the Mac is a better machine - because we know what the parts inside are, its the same damn parts as every other laptop out there. The only thing that's better is the bundle - the bundle of the Mac WITH OSX. Mac laptops look nice, but they're delicate. This MB is flimsy as hell- it's pathetic. MBP's dent far too easily. I'd rather it didn't look quite so good, and was infact built properly. The price premium wouldn't be an issue if they could do both - but since the switch, they've struggled. The on going Macbook cracking issue is arguably the worst example of this.
We're all suckers for OSX, and are prepared to pay hideous prices to get it. If you're not prepared to pay over the odds - then a PC is the way to go. You'll get more laptop for your money.
Doug
OSX vs Windows
Mac's vs PC's
That's two very different issues.
OSX vs Windows - I'd give the nod to OSX. It's not perfect, but it's less unperfect than XP or Vista. To be honest, given the chance to use it - I think many more than the minority percentage of Max users would say that OSX is the better platform.
Mac's vs PC's - I'd give the nod to PC's. More power, lower price, less fragile. That's the driving force behind the limited appeal. Even the cheapest Mac is overpriced - significantly.
HOWEVER - Cupertino have dictated that you can't have one (OSX) without the other ( Mac ) and thus they can and do levy an OSX tax on every Mac.... because they can... because they have you over a barrel if you want to buy a machine to use OSX. That tax varies from product to product, but for laptops it's something like 40-60%. (£600 to £800 for MB's - £1000 to £1600 for MBP's).
It's not even a matter for debate if the Mac is a better machine - because we know what the parts inside are, its the same damn parts as every other laptop out there. The only thing that's better is the bundle - the bundle of the Mac WITH OSX. Mac laptops look nice, but they're delicate. This MB is flimsy as hell- it's pathetic. MBP's dent far too easily. I'd rather it didn't look quite so good, and was infact built properly. The price premium wouldn't be an issue if they could do both - but since the switch, they've struggled. The on going Macbook cracking issue is arguably the worst example of this.
We're all suckers for OSX, and are prepared to pay hideous prices to get it. If you're not prepared to pay over the odds - then a PC is the way to go. You'll get more laptop for your money.
Doug
Doug, is that really true, or is it the case the Apple simply doesn't offer cheap machines? I don't see Viao's as being too much cheaper than Macs, and although I'm sure Dell's are, do they have the same specs. I haven't really looked into it so I'd be interested to know.