Anyone who is certain there will never be a virus on OSX will probably be among the first to get one. Yes, the lack of viruses is great, but that's like saying 9-11 could never happen until the day it does.
I never said that it couldn't happen. I simply meant that at the current rate, Macs won't seem to need it. I have been hearing basically the same "soon, Macs will have viruses again too!" speech for a decade now and nothing has yet appeared.
It's simply faster than typing the codes for bold or having to pick up the mouse. Since caps are supposed to be "loud" and "bold" indicates emphasis, I see little difference. It's only when all caps are used all the time that it's hard to look at.
I wasn't a Mac "hater", but I had no interest in them until OSX came to be. I used an Amiga 3000 up until 1998 and bought my first PC. I upgraded that one a few times and bought another PC in 2006. I got my first Mac in 2007 (used PowerMac at a computer show in Allentown, PA next to the pinball show I was attending) just to play around with it. I liked the interface so I upgraded it to have enough power to be useful and then used it to power my whole house audio/video system based on iTunes + 2 Apple TV units + multiple Airport Express units controlled by "Remote" on my iPod Touch. I bought a new MBP in late 2008 (the late model 8600M GT one since it was $600 off on closeout on Amazon at the time. I got it to do home video editing (I have since moved all my VHS and Laserdiscs into my iTunes collection) and to write music with Logic Studio 2.0 (Logic Pro 9.1) in combination with my Roland Digital Piano, Beherenger Mic setup and Fender Strat guitar (I play guitar and piano). I just finished another song today for that matter. My PC mostly gets use these days just for gaming and compressing movies. I used to make recreations of real world pinball games on it, though for 7 years, though and I had no trouble doing that kind of work or using things like Photoshop on it.
You are putting words into my mouth. You completely ignored my line of "I don't mean to imply anything about you as a person; the style is just similar." I never accused you of being a hater. It was just a passing observation that I probably shouldn't have said in retrospect. Again, I don't have a problem with it, it was just a simple observation. I have no problems with what you do on either platform. To each his own.
You weren't looking very hard, then. Not everything posted in this thread is an opinion. You seem to have a hard time telling the difference.
And likewise, not everything posted was a fact. As long as it isn't a blatant lie, where is the problem? If it is one's opinion that they want an OS to work out of the box without the need to download any additional software to be productive, that should be up to them. Microsoft has been pushing for years that Windows does it all. I'll admit that it is in their best interests: if they don't, it will probably lose even more sales to more experienced users. If one likes OS X, they can state why, can't they?
Your problem is that you are inventing points that were never made. I never said any such thing. I was simply making the case that the Mac is far from 100% secure despite the fact that many Mac users believe it to be invulnerable. People on here act like Windows machines are the only machines to ever crash, get bugs or have security issues. I've had both my Macs freeze several times and get "kernel panics". They happen about as often as my XP SP3 machine. I've seen no real advantage in terms of stability over Windows. I've had both machines run for weeks or even months without a reboot and I've had plenty of times when I HAD to reboot the Mac (typically after a number of sleep/wake cycles on the MBP; Logic starts getting "static" and other weird behaviors after awhile which a reboot fixes. Logic itself has a number of odd errors and crashes from time to time. It's not a brick wall.)
The point was made by somebody else. This debate does not center entirely around you. As I said, a few pages back, somebody noted that the developer in Pwn2Own says that because Flash is included on OS X unlike in Windows, it was easier to hack. That could be rephrased as "if Flash was included in Windows by default, it would be easier to hack it." I never said that Mac OS X is perfectly secure. The only time that an OS is perfectly secure is that if it has no internet connection and runs off of non-writable media (i.e. a CD). Mac OS X has holes. In fact, you could probably just brute-force a password on a local network to get in. If I wanted to, I could probably whip up an Applescript to do just that in an hour or less. Not stealthy, but it could happen. That is simply one of many unavoidable problems on any networked OS. The only kernel panic I have ever had was on July 16, 2009. YMMV, but to me, Windows is a bit less stable than that.
OSX fans often like to blame everyone but Apple for the problems it does have. I've never had any problems with Flash on either of my Macs EVER. I don't see what the big deal is. But if you don't like it, don't use it.
Then you are one of the lucky ones. Flash on my computer regularly caused Safari to hang and require a force quit. This plus a proven track record of insecurity and frankly terrible optimization for anything made before 2009 is a big deal for me. Your milage may and apparently does vary.
Yes, some people do try to put Apple in the best possible light. A lot of times, it is OS X's fault that something goes wrong. Other times, it is a third party's fault. I don't think a blanket statement can apply to all computer problems at all. It depends on the specific issue. If you have problems with Logic as above, that is Apple's fault as they made both the computer and the software. If it were Photoshop or some other app, there is a much greater chance that it is a third party's fault.
Where's the smilie? Were you being serious? I give a lecture that says people need to stop acting intolerant, smug and arrogant about opinions and you accuse ME of being intolerant??? That's hilarious. But it shows you are not reading very carefully or do not understand what's being said.
The all-caps indicate shouting. One person's
opinion that the reason that XP's support was extended to 2014 was because they are incapable of delivering an equal or better OS at this point in time. Then you shout that "My point is I cannot STAND either side acting smug. … Throughout the ages people have demonstrated (whether it be cultural, religious, race, personal preferences or any other number of areas) that they are INTOLERANT of other people having different opinions than their own." It sure looked to me like you were screaming at somebody for having an opinion that differed from your own. Nobody can prove such an opinion right or wrong without an interview with Steve Ballmer or another MS high-up and thus it is not a lie or a fact. Just slow down and listen to yourself.
I've heard Linux users say the same thing, but there is a point where you realize what you were missing if you have more than one platform. I could not stand the unavailability of Photoshop in Linux, for example and emulators just don't work that great. Similarly, I'd miss Logic in Windows and Linux and I'd miss a lot of games on my Mac if I didn't have Windows also.
I am all for a dual-platform or better yet multi-platform world even given disadvantages in compatibility. Without it, there wouldn't be much innovation and the one company would drastically raise prices as they would be the only choice. You will note that I said "a lot of software," not "all software" in my previous post. Although I didn't say it, I'm positive that a number of lesser-known Windows titles are better than Mac equivalents if they even exist. The Mac OS is simply my comfort zone. And yes, Linux is a quirky beast. It always seems like something doesn't work right in my experience whether it be automatic updates or Airport.
I feel I shouldn't have to hack to get 3rd party applications. I don't feel Apple should be allowed to do what it's done with the app store an the 30% fee with no other official ways to install 3rd party software. It limits the user's options, it demands a lot of money from the developers and ultimately there's a lot of software that Apple simply won't allow because it competes with their own software. I hate when Apple tries to avoid competing instead of simply letting the best software win.
There is a point there. I do think that now that jailbreaking is legal, it has some merit. I believe that I calculated once that the average iPhone app generates $10,000 of sales. If an app you release fits those, you still get $7000, which is still a significant amount of money to most people. You could also simultaneously upload it to the Cydia store and get a few extra sales from braver users. I really can't say as I am not an iOS developer. I'm still not sure how it directly costs developers extra money to post to the app store. You could charge $1.50 instead of $1, for instance. I do agree that Apple seems a little bit afraid of competition in the iOS arena and I wish they would be a bit more open. When the iPad was announced, I was really hoping for a Mac OS-based tablet for that very reason.
Oh please. I've got OS9 on my PowerMac still. I know what its browser options are like. Yes, I know this site works with the last version of Mozilla I have for it, but there's a HUGE number of sites that don't work right; there's a huge number of features missing and it's a shame. But then I could gripe that my last browser for the Amiga 3000 doesn't work with many web sites either (even less...far less), but I'm sure I could find a few that DO work fine if you want me to pretend that it's still relevant today as you seem to be with OS9.
This isn't Mozilla 1.2.1, Wamcom or IE5 from 2003. You said "Hardly ANYONE is using OS9 by comparison because Apple provides ZERO support for it and almost no software will run on it today (browsers are useless, etc.)." I simply stated that Classilla, a project that began in 2009 IIRC is more than capable of displaying the vast majority of websites today. While an infinitesimal amount of people still might be using Mac OS 9, the information that you provided on browsers being useless was either hyperbole or simply outdated information. Browsers really
were useless in 2008. Now it is better.
I see you REALLY want to go there. Well then, my Amiga 3000 from 1993 runs its AWeb browser with lots of ram to spare and I have a mere 18MB of ram on it! Yes, that's the COMPUTER that has 18MB, not the browser that needs that much. It feels pretty fast, about as fast as Safari 5 on a dual 550MHz G4. It got pretty good support via FTP and AmigaNet the last time I checked. Space Invaders was updated for it just the other day. See how modern it is?
This argument could continue forever. My IIvx from 1993 with 8 MB of RAM could get online if I really wanted it to and from my experience, Wannabe (text browser) would be equally fast compared to the above, though much less useful. In fact, my 512k upgraded to a Mac Plus could probably get online as well. And somebody wrote a Twitter client and TCP/IP stack for the Timex Spectrum, a computer with 1 KB of RAM. You invented a point. I never said that OS 9 as an OS was modern. One browser is. I said that OS 9 was usable. Useful != modern.
You can argue all you want. It makes no difference to me. I know there's plenty of professional software that works just fine on Windows and software like Photoshop is ahead of the Mac version (i.e. 64-bit support) as well. Otherwise, there's little difference between individual packages assuming their features are on par.
I believe that CS5 is now 64-bit native. I can't think of any missing features between CS5 versions off the top of my head. The delay in 64-bit capability on the Mac was partially Apple's fault for discontinuing Carbon 64, partially Adobe's fault for failing to transition to Cocoa sooner, but now it seems better. By your own admission, if one needs Photoshop and has CS5, both platforms should be equal. Then it is simply personal preference.
I don't know what this "we" is. Speak only for yourself. Some of us use more than one operating system and don't have an irrational hatred of Windows just because it's Windows. I used to hate Bill Gates and Microsoft, but then I watched Apple and realized Steve Jobs makes Bill look like a nice guy by comparison. Since Linux still doesn't have jack for commercial software that means I just got over it and use what is useful to me.
The point of Linux is to generate a OS based on free software. Because of that, CS5 and other commercial apps probably won't sell extremely well on it versus Gimp, for instance simply due to the $1000+ price difference. We as in people that don't really care whether other people think Windows is better because we like Macs. Blunderboy said it pretty well:
I think the 'we' he was referring to was everyone who was trying to tell some of the Windows-only (or Mac users with strong Windows preferences) people to stop insulting Mac users and blaming every single problem that people had with Windows on them.
My problems with Windows aren't just 'because it's Windows'. I don't think that Microsoft should go out of business, or that people should stop using Windows. I have more of a problem with the fact that Microsoft has an operating system monopoly, and there should be more OS choices in the market. It's from years of Windows use and frustration with it. I used to be fairly neutral towards Windows, until I discovered operating systems that I liked better and impeded my workflow less than it did. I really dislike Windows, but that doesn't mean I think it shouldn't exist. My problem was primarily with people who insinuated that disliking Windows was a fault in and of itself, and the people who were spreading unmitigated FUD about the Mac OS. I stopped using Windows; I don't need to have people constantly shouting me down about how 'omg, WINDOWS IS GREAT! YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE IT, WHICH IS THE ONLY REASON WHY YOU DON'T LIKE IT.' No, I don't like Windows. I don't need to constantly justify my choice of operating system on a Mac forum.
Adobe added 64-bit support to Mac Adobe Suite apps in CS5, IIRC. A quick 'get info' on Photoshop CS5 shows me an 'open in 32-bit mode' option, indicating that it opens in 64-bit mode by default.
I don't think Steve Jobs and Apple are perfect. While I think Steve Jobs is extremely bright, I do think that he needs to stop antagonising other companies to Apple's detriment. (Read: Adobe, Google.) I've had problems with Macs. I've had problems with PCs. All computers have a particular set of odds for failure. They're complex machines made of moving, mechanical parts. Neither Apple nor other computer makers have complete control over components like hard drives and RAM when 3rd parties make them.
In case you hadn't noticed, I have BOTH. I'm here because I have a Mac. That doesn't mean I like to see absurd nonsense posted against Windows JUST because it's Windows. Both operating systems are capable of running modern software. Preferences are fine; insults are not.
I did notice and indeed, I agree with you here. I don't hate Windows because it competes with the Mac. I just don't really like the way that it doesn't at all integrate with my workflow or work for me out of the box. I didn't intentionally insult you. I apologize if you took it personally. I just disagree with a few of your points, but that is the nature of an online forum and indeed, most if not all debates. People make a point and somebody else makes a counterpoint. Just because I disagree doesn't mean that I label you "condemned" and instantly hate you. It is also the nature of the forums to bring many people together from all over the world with differing viewpoints, priorities, perspectives and beliefs. It is inevitable that conflicts will arise because of any one of the above.
