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.
Why I want to sell my MacBook and never look back.
- Thread starter Dybbuk
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Yet another person who doesn't know what trolling is
How is this trolling , the guy bought a macbook and is displeased with the quality , this is a mac forum. Not all people who buy macs are happy with them & not every mac owner is a fanboy !, deal with it !
It's not only I that thinks so ...
I don't think the OP is a troll, because he hasn't started multiple threads. However other people that continually post the same FUD about OSX in every "I'm not happy with Apple"-orientated thread, put down other people and tell them "they're doing something wrong", etc are most definitely trolls. Even funnier when they have little to no experience in the business world with computers, yet spout opinion as fact and "truth". People that are incapable of discerning their opinion with fact are irritating, and really not worth wasting time on.
Luckily there's an ignore feature for that.
YES!!!!
So I am not the only one that got the definition wrong.
Although it's still a fact that the OP would be asking for both sides of the idiot stick to post on this thread. As polaris20 said, you will get a lot of people that will rant because the OP is downing OSX and a lot of people that will rant because they just don't like Macs.
It's best to leave that stuff alone I say, and YES (as a journalist) change your approach for the greater good. After reading through some of this thread, half of it is unnecessary. (yes, including the page filled with my misunderstanding of "trolling")
The Real Issue . . .
is that so many people expect perfection from Apple. The reality is that Apple is subject to the same design and manufacturing issues as any other company. I have worked with many different computers from various manufacturers over the years and ALL of them have had D&M issues. (Except the PC I built myself; solid as a rock! ) My MacBook has a cracked case. Doesn't bother me like it does others. I have never had a hardware issue that affected perfomance.
The OP built Apple up in his mind to be this mythical company that could do no wrong. Now that he sees reality he is crestfallen. I get it. No doubt, you got a flawed computer. But if you expect that Dell, HP, Gateway, Acer, Alienware, Lenovo, etc. will be any different, well then, lemme tell ya, you've got another thing coming. For me it is simple. I have never had a lockup or crash. I did have a problem with the A/C adapter, but Apple took care of that easily. I love Mac OS X. I hate Windows. So, yeah, it sux that my case cracked, but, I still love my MacBook. It has given me 2 years of flawless computer service, looks great in the process and I will be really sad when I hand it down to my son to get one of the new MacBooks or Pros.
is that so many people expect perfection from Apple. The reality is that Apple is subject to the same design and manufacturing issues as any other company. I have worked with many different computers from various manufacturers over the years and ALL of them have had D&M issues. (Except the PC I built myself; solid as a rock!
) My MacBook has a cracked case. Doesn't bother me like it does others. I have never had a hardware issue that affected perfomance. The OP built Apple up in his mind to be this mythical company that could do no wrong. Now that he sees reality he is crestfallen. I get it. No doubt, you got a flawed computer. But if you expect that Dell, HP, Gateway, Acer, Alienware, Lenovo, etc. will be any different, well then, lemme tell ya, you've got another thing coming. For me it is simple. I have never had a lockup or crash. I did have a problem with the A/C adapter, but Apple took care of that easily. I love Mac OS X. I hate Windows. So, yeah, it sux that my case cracked, but, I still love my MacBook. It has given me 2 years of flawless computer service, looks great in the process and I will be really sad when I hand it down to my son to get one of the new MacBooks or Pros.
Yikes man...
I can't believe you haven't got screamed-out yet
(I agree with you about this FYI).mosx:
WHAT DO YOU LIKE ABOUT MAC ANYWAY!?!?
You're the troll if anything.
Dybbuk:
Have you called apple yet? Did you get a replacement?
Yikes man...
I can't believe you haven't got screamed-out yet
I think everyone is finally sick of this thread. May it die in peace.
I hadn't seen him for awhile but knew if anything would resurrect him it would be this thread.
The world may never know.
Cheers,
I basically have switched back. I only use my Mac for syncing my iPhone, iPods, and doing light browsing. I don't even use it for email any more. I mean honestly, it's not really good for anything else. When I use OS X I feel like I'm using a much older system that isn't as modern as it should be. That feeling is amplified by the fact the integrated graphics. If the MacBook had dedicated graphics, I'd feel quite the opposite about my MacBook. But I refuse to spend $2,000 on a notebook that isn't even as powerful as $1,099 HP.
Not a lot of people do
But I do like Exposé. It's the only way to get through the mess of windows created by the OS's lack of a real window manager.
Well, honestly, it's not an "honest alternative to Windows". When you take into account things that real people like to do with their computers, OS X just doesn't cut it. Windows is better for importing pictures as well as the hardware support to get those pictures printed (and free ways to make your own high quality photo books), DVD/blu-ray and video playback in general is significantly better on Windows than OS X, game support isn't even an argument. Chat software is better in Windows. You have more hardware connectivity options with a standard PC.
OS X is fine if you want to limit yourself in what you can do with the computer and your hardware. But people like options.
Apple needs to bring OS X up to the same level as Vista (and XP in many ways), and they need to bring down the prices of their hardware. If the economy continues the way it is, their growing trend is going to reverse quite quickly. It's also time to start lowering the prices of the iPods.
I still find Vista performing better on the same or similar hardware. Like I've said before, my HP was roughly $500 less than my MacBook and included much better hardware out of the box (dedicated GPU, HDMI, twice the RAM, bigger screen, etc). Why should anyone even consider a MacBook at $1,099 when it won't perform as good as a PC with dedicated graphics costing signficantly less. Why should someone consider a $1,099 MacBook with 1GB of RAM, 120GB HDD, Intel integrated graphics, 2.1GHz Core 2 Duo, and a COMBO drive when $1,099 at HP will get you a 1680x1050 15.4" screen, 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 2GB of RAM, 250GB HDD, DVD writer, HDMI output, eSATA, fullsize ExpressCard, fingerprint and memory card readers, and a 512MB GeForce 9600M GT? For the cost of a MacBook with a DVD writer you get all of that and blu-ray!
Flash in Windows takes advantage of hardware acceleration for video. But how can it in OS X? Mac OS X has no frameworks, API, or anything that would allow an application to take advantage of the GPU for video playback. Not only that, but the Intel GMA 950 and X3100 in most of the computers Apple sells have very very limited video support. You get HWMC and iDCT and thats it. Dedicated GPUs had that in the 90s.
Modern hardware acceleration for video means taking the raw bitstream of the video and sending it to the GPU, where the GPU does all of the decoding, deblocking, de-interlacing, everything. OS X simply does not have anything like that. And most of the computers Apple sells don't even have GPUs that CAN support that. All of that stuff is built-in to Windows in DirectX and even integrated graphics from nvidia and AMD/ATI support full bitstream decoding and nearly all or all of the same features that their dedicated GPUs have for video enhancements.
Flash can't do something that OS X doesn't support.
As I said, everything I use in Vista.. no flickering, everything is hardware accelerated.
I "claim" OS X is crash prone because it IS. I've had 2 Macs with 2 major revisions of OS X and several point revisions in-between. All of them have crashed randomly running OS X while doing various tasks. Windows on the same hardware, however, does not crash.
They're only trolls to you because you can't stand hearing the truth.
Nobody is spreading any so-called "FUD". For me personally, everything I say is based on EXPERIENCE (imagine that!) and facts. For example, it's a fact that OS X does all video decoding in software and the hardware in their most popular computers is incapable of modern video decoding. Thats not "FUD" thats a fact.
In your eyes, you want people who prove you wrong and show the truth to have "no experience in the business world". Because you don't want to be wrong and shown that you're wrong.
Somebody who has been building computers, configuring them, and selling them for well voer a decade has just a little "experience in the business world" with computers. Far more experience than someone who calls up the manufacturer to arrange shipments for repairs.
My HP is nearly a year old now, just a couple of weeks "younger" than my MacBook. In that time I've had OS X crash more than a dozen times and I've had numerous build quality issues that had to be resolved by sending the system in for repair multiple times. On the other hand, my HP has not crashed once, it's been ROCK solid, and it has no build quality issues. Despite the fact that I take it everywhere with me (can't take the Mac anywhere, case might crack or OS X might lock up while I *need* it to run), it looks as good as new, just like the day it showed up.
And what are your reasons for this irrational hate of Windows?
I love my iPods and my iPhone. I bought the Mac because I had good experiences with OS X up until that point. Even though I spend roughly 100 hours or so with OS X before buying a Mac, you never really know how bad OS X is going to treat you until you have a Mac in your house.
I bought the Mac because I had heard from people here and at other forums that Apple has the best build quality, best support, etc. But thats not the case. It's not built as well as my $500 cheaper HP, it doesn't run as good as my $500 cheaper HP, and it can't do as much as my $500 cheaper HP.
I'm not a troll. I come here telling people my EXPERIENCE with MY MacBook. I don't want people to fall victim to Apple Hype the same way myself and far too many other people here have.
Everything else I say, like OS X's inability to hardware decode video, is a fact. "Trolls" don't name facts
Cross your fingers and hope you don't have to deal with Ken Bell.
part of me wants to unblock Mosx to see his trainwreck of a post, rambling about "truth and facts" and his vast experience with his 4 laptops, because it's always good for a laugh or 2. Or 6.
The other part of me enjoys the fact that his post now takes up much less of my screen.
The other part of me enjoys the fact that his post now takes up much less of my screen.
Forst Laptop
I am on the fence about my first laptop being a Mac. I have owned desktop PCs for all of my computers so far (about 5) and I have had great luck with them. Very few failures and the ones I did have I recovered from without too much of a headache. I am very concerned with paying so much for a laptop with the horror stories I hear. Not to mention, what if I just don't like it! I enjoy the freedom of a PC, where you can choose between many programs to do specific tasks, rather than being limited to a handful. Do you think Apple will let me test drive a laptop for a couple weeks?
I am on the fence about my first laptop being a Mac. I have owned desktop PCs for all of my computers so far (about 5) and I have had great luck with them. Very few failures and the ones I did have I recovered from without too much of a headache. I am very concerned with paying so much for a laptop with the horror stories I hear. Not to mention, what if I just don't like it! I enjoy the freedom of a PC, where you can choose between many programs to do specific tasks, rather than being limited to a handful. Do you think Apple will let me test drive a laptop for a couple weeks?
Not good for anything? I beg to differ. You can do just about everything in OS X that you can in Windows, except play games. There are many Mac only applications that have no Windows equivalent as well.
I agree! Where are my gaudy translucent windows and huge window borders? Where's my blinking lights and pop ups constantly alerting me of errors or things I have plugged in? I mean: I need my computer to alert me every time I plug in a USB drive.
Here you're comparing specs where specs don't quite line up. OS X takes advantage of hardware much better than a PC. I use a seven or eight year old 12 inch powerbook with Leopard and it runs just fine for browsing email, iPhoto and iTunes. Sure I wouldn't run photoshop on it, but I wouldn't dream of running vista on such old hardware or even XP unless I had just wiped the hard disk. That Computer has lived through a couple OS updates and neither time did I have to erase the hard drive; never once have I erased its drive. Try doing that with a Windows PC.
looks like you haven't discovered command+tab or command+~
This is all opinion. Personally I like expose more than a taskbar, especially when many windows are open since the taskbar becomes unusable with enough windows.Hundreds of thousands of people would beg to differ. In fact a few of those people are former Microsoft executives. Plus, you're not supporting this claim with any facts or anything really.
Really? How so? I've used both for importing and printing pictures and found them both about the same. Although iPhoto is a much better organizer than Explorer, or that photo viewer that comes with Vista. And Aperture is many many times better than Microsoft's attempt at a photo organizer no matter how you cut it.
it seems the only time I use Windows lately is for blu-ray
sure although that's not really that big of a deal considering how small the gamer market is (and continues to dwindle). They are an extreme, yet vocal, minority.
Really? Like what? I've found Adium to support more protocols than any other Windows chat client and iChat is more useful and beautiful than MSN. Especially since Leopard's iChat has the ability to screenshare.
Yeah, that's sort of the point of a Mac. You buy the hardware with the tight software integration. That way you don't have to hunt for drivers and have blue screens due to hardware incompatibilities.
If you really want options build a computer and install a flavor of Linux on it. No matter what Windows will never see the compatibility that Linux has.
Really? What ways? name some please. I'm curious. As for their hardware prices I had no idea that you worked for marketing at Apple. It's a pity that they don't have someone as smart as you to make their financial decisions for them.
What does that have to do with OS X? Ahhh I can take this as proof that you're just an Apple hating troll. You ventured off your original path just to bash Apple instead of presenting a logical and well thought out argument.
And anyway they just dropped the prices of their iPods like two weeks ago
Really? What's it look like? How thick is it? What's the build quality like? I'm running Leopard and Vista both on my Macbook and can tell you that Vista can be a snail on OS X and the fans are always spinning at a high RPM. Vista can't handle web browsing without stuttering a little.
Because some people like the OS more and they like to have a nice looking computer and if they can afford it they might as well.
because they'd rather have a smaller notebook running OS X. Why don't you post some pictures of that HP while you're at it?
Flash is a dying technology. Take your beef up with Adobe. What does Flash have to do with an OS anyway?
You mention the general population often. What does the general population do with their computers that a GMA 950 can't handle?
cool... I use Vista too and can't resize a window without some flickering.
Here's where your Windows fanboyism truly shows. You claim Windows doesn't crash. I've seen it crash so right there your statement is wrong. I've found Vista and Leopard to be pretty stable. I've never had Leopard crash and I've only had one blue screen with Vista and that's from when I first installed it and was updating the computer and installing the drivers, that is an entirely understandable crash. However, I use Windows less than 5% of my time, so maybe I haven't given it a fair chance to crash. The rest of my time is mostly spent in Ubuntu and OS X.
are you serious? What's your reason for the 'irrational' hate of OS X? They're just operating systems and they both do just about the same things.
What are you talking about? There are hundreds of thousands of people who are quite content with their Macs. How can you make such a blanket statement?
Let's see some numbers.
Ahhh I see: you're a switcher. Take this from someone who has been exposed to Windows about as equally as to Mac (I grew up with OS 7,8,9 Windows 98, 2000, and XP) OS X and Windows are just about the same in Most respects. However, for ease of use, power and media work OS X by far out preforms Windows. For Gaming and customizability Windows wins.
I am on the fence about my first laptop being a Mac. I have owned desktop PCs for all of my computers so far (about 5) and I have had great luck with them. Very few failures and the ones I did have I recovered from without too much of a headache. I am very concerned with paying so much for a laptop with the horror stories I hear. Not to mention, what if I just don't like it! I enjoy the freedom of a PC, where you can choose between many programs to do specific tasks, rather than being limited to a handful. Do you think Apple will let me test drive a laptop for a couple weeks?
If you're happy where you are, why change?
Not good for anything? I beg to differ. You can do just about everything in OS X that you can in Windows, except play games. There are many Mac only applications that have no Windows equivalent as well.
I agree! Where are my gaudy translucent windows and huge window borders? Where's my blinking lights and pop ups constantly alerting me of errors or things I have plugged in? I mean: I need my computer to alert me every time I plug in a USB drive.
Here you're comparing specs where specs don't quite line up. OS X takes advantage of hardware much better than a PC. I use a seven or eight year old 12 inch powerbook with Leopard and it runs just fine for browsing email, iPhoto and iTunes. Sure I wouldn't run photoshop on it, but I wouldn't dream of running vista on such old hardware or even XP unless I had just wiped the hard disk. That Computer has lived through a couple OS updates and neither time did I have to erase the hard drive; never once have I erased its drive. Try doing that with a Windows PC.
looks like you haven't discovered command+tab or command+~
Hundreds of thousands of people would beg to differ. In fact a few of those people are former Microsoft executives. Plus, you're not supporting this claim with any facts or anything really.
Really? How so? I've used both for importing and printing pictures and found them both about the same. Although iPhoto is a much better organizer than Explorer, or that photo viewer that comes with Vista. And Aperture is many many times better than Microsoft's attempt at a photo organizer no matter how you cut it.
it seems the only time I use Windows lately is for blu-ray
sure although that's not really that big of a deal considering how small the gamer market is (and continues to dwindle). They are an extreme, yet vocal, minority.
Really? Like what? I've found Adium to support more protocols than any other Windows chat client and iChat is more useful and beautiful than MSN. Especially since Leopard's iChat has the ability to screenshare.
Yeah, that's sort of the point of a Mac. You buy the hardware with the tight software integration. That way you don't have to hunt for drivers and have blue screens due to hardware incompatibilities.
If you really want options build a computer and install a flavor of Linux on it. No matter what Windows will never see the compatibility that Linux has.
Really? What ways? name some please. I'm curious. As for their hardware prices I had no idea that you worked for marketing at Apple. It's a pity that they don't have someone as smart as you to make their financial decisions for them.
What does that have to do with OS X? Ahhh I can take this as proof that you're just an Apple hating troll. You ventured off your original path just to bash Apple instead of presenting a logical and well thought out argument.
And anyway they just dropped the prices of their iPods like two weeks ago
Really? What's it look like? How thick is it? What's the build quality like? I'm running Leopard and Vista both on my Macbook and can tell you that Vista can be a snail on OS X and the fans are always spinning at a high RPM. Vista can't handle web browsing without stuttering a little.
Because some people like the OS more and they like to have a nice looking computer and if they can afford it they might as well.
because they'd rather have a smaller notebook running OS X. Why don't you post some pictures of that HP while you're at it?
Flash is a dying technology. Take your beef up with Adobe. What does Flash have to do with an OS anyway?
You mention the general population often. What does the general population do with their computers that a GMA 950 can't handle?
cool... I use Vista too and can't resize a window without some flickering.
Here's where your Windows fanboyism truly shows. You claim Windows doesn't crash. I've seen it crash so right there your statement is wrong. I've found Vista and Leopard to be pretty stable. I've never had Leopard crash and I've only had one blue screen with Vista and that's from when I first installed it and was updating the computer and installing the drivers, that is an entirely understandable crash. However, I use Windows less than 5% of my time, so maybe I haven't given it a fair chance to crash. The rest of my time is mostly spent in Ubuntu and OS X.
are you serious? What's your reason for the 'irrational' hate of OS X? They're just operating systems and they both do just about the same things.
What are you talking about? There are hundreds of thousands of people who are quite content with their Macs. How can you make such a blanket statement?
Let's see some numbers.
Ahhh I see: you're a switcher. Take this from someone who has been exposed to Windows about as equally as to Mac (I grew up with OS 7,8,9 Windows 98, 2000, and XP) OS X and Windows are just about the same in Most respects. However, for ease of use, power and media work OS X by far out preforms Windows. For Gaming and customizability Windows wins.
Another Ubuntu user! My main machine at home is Ubuntu, and I've got it at work on an AMD Athlon X2 box I built at work. When I get the MacBook it'll replace my Thinkpad, at which point I can RDP into Windows servers and SSH into the Linux servers.
I've worked with Fedora (back to Core 2), Suse, and now Ubuntu (since 5.10), and Ubuntu is my personal favorite.
5th post from page 1:
not trying to start an "ad hom" attack, but true or not - that's funny (and quite prophetic)
not trying to start an "ad hom" attack, but true or not - that's funny (and quite prophetic)
it's the plastic
sorry man. it's the plastic. it expands too much when hot allowing too much room for mechanical parts to move. never had a problem with all my metal mac products. also main reason i wouldn't upgrade to iphone 3g. good luck in your future computer purchases.
sorry man. it's the plastic. it expands too much when hot allowing too much room for mechanical parts to move. never had a problem with all my metal mac products. also main reason i wouldn't upgrade to iphone 3g. good luck in your future computer purchases.
that all made sense except the underlined. That makes it sound like components are just floating around in there.
It's funny when people come into threads like this and, not having read any other posts in the thread or posts the user they're replying to has made, start the argument all over again.
There are far more Windows apps that are more relevant to the every day user than a half dozen or so Mac apps that most people won't use, that have no OS X equivalent.
Like I said in another post, one of the things people like to do is watch movies on their notebooks. DVD Player is a complete and utter joke compared to WinDVD, PowerDVD, and any of the other Windows DVD players, even the built-in decoders in Vista. Why? Because DVD Player is all software based, does NOT take advantage of the hardware at hand (not that there is any hardware to take advantage of in the MacBook, MacBook Air, or Mac mini), and it can't even decode the LFE channel in 5.1 soundtracks.
How about those depressing gray windows in OS X that can't even be fully maximized and can only be resized from one point. At least in Windows I can resize a window from any point thanks to those frames.
Let's see something real quick. Translucent windows that can be customized as far as color and translucency goes, or gray gray gray everywhere that is somewhat depressing to look at?
I'll take the large window frames too, thank you. At least if a window pops up that is larger than my desktop resolution I can shrink it from any angle, not just that one corner thats in the bottom right off of the screen.
What error messages? At least Windows will give you an error message. In my experience OS X just locks up!
Those pop-ups on flash drives and optical discs can be turned off. You can turn them off, or you can pick the default action for the media, etc. from the pop-up screen the first time it pops up.
At least Windows gives you options as to what you want to do. Is it really so hard to choose "open folder" and click default that first time?
Hah! You really believe that? You're joking, right?
If OS X takes advantage of hardware better, why is there no hardware acceleration for video playback? I mean beyond Apple's ancient and no longer used HWMC support they had back in OS 9. Why is there no hardware acceleration for audio playback in things like iTunes? Why do simple tasks such as browsing the web or even copying files over to my iPod use SO MUCH MORE CPU time than in Windows? Look at iTunes for example. With none of the new features turned on, just basic audio playback in the library window, iTunes likes to hover around 7% CPU use for playing LAME -v 0 --vbr-new encoded MP3s. Winamp? Might peak at 1%.
I have an 80GB 5.5G iPod. If I copy files over to in (in Finder) generally 30% total CPU use is gone to overhead! In Vista? Virtually flat.
And let's look at games for a second. Unreal Tournament 2004's engine was written natively for OpenGL and DirectX. On the same hardware with all of the updates for either platform, UT2k4 generally tends to run twice as fast using OpenGL in Windows as compared to OS X.
And, again, let's go back to video playback. If you play a 640x480 H.264 video encoded at 1.5Mbps video and 128Kbps audio in OS X using iTunes, Quicktime, or VLC, you'll see the CPU use hover around 30-35%. In Windows if you play that same video on a player that uses DXVA on a dedicated GPU or any non-Intel IGP, you'll see CPU use hover around 1-2%.
Saying OS X takes advantage of hardware better is a complete and utter joke.
You use a 7 or 8 year old 12" PowerBook?
Now I know you're lying. http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powerbook_g4/stats/powerbook_g4_867_12.html The first 12" PowerBook was introduced barely 5 and a half years ago.
That first PowerBook BARELY meets the requirements for Leopard. It officially supports 640MB of RAM. I had to upgrade my MacBook to 3GB of RAM to get Leopard to run acceptably. You're trying to tell me a system that is more than half a decade old can run Leopard good on on a system that only officially supports nearly 5x LESS RAM and only comes to the minimum CPU requirement? Oh and it has no hardware acceleration support for any of Leopard's "Core" services, like Core Image.
On such old hardware? Well 2003 was considerably different for PCs than it was for Macs. You had Pentium 4s breaking the 3GHz barrier on desktops, notebooks running over 2GHz.
For example, look at the notebooks eMachines had then. I have a friend who bought one and it still works to this day. For $1400 in 2003 you got an Athlon64 M 2GHz, 512MB of RAM (up to 2GB), Radeon 9700 128MB, 60GB HDD, and a DVD writer, as well as 3.5 hours of real world battery life.
You essentially hard hardware in PCs in 2003 that the PowerBooks were never able to compete with, and in some ways, the MacBooks still can't compete with.
Don't even begin to try to tell me that a G4 was better an Athlon64 or Pentium M, or that even the 1.67GHz G4 could compete with a 3.8GHz P4.
First, no matter what OS you use, it's NEVER a good idea to upgrade. Fresh installing is always the best way to go. Second, I've had to re-install Tiger and Leopard who knows how many times now. Just a few weeks ago I had another Leopard crash. What happened? Hell if I know. System was idle. I went to move the mouse cursor to open Firefox. Half way to the icon the system locked up completely. Waited a few minutes then did a force shut down. Upon restart, no matter what I did, I could NOT get the menu-bar to remain translucent. The gray menu bar is ridiculously ugly. So after hours of searching I only had one option: format and reinstall OS X. I can't tell you how many times stupid things like that have happened.
I've been running on the same Vista install for nearly a year.
Actually, if you read my posts, you'd know I complained about how stupid it is to have to use two separate shortcuts.
Taskbar in Windows can be resized and windows from the same app get grouped together when theres enough. Click one and get a list of all. A lot easier than having to search for the window you need through a whole mess onscreen at once.
Didn't care to read the rest of my post? I laid out my argument there. But of course you're trying to cut it up to benefit your own considerably weak argument
Oh and you say theres hundreds of thousand of people who like Macs. Sure. But theres hundreds of millions who prefer Windows
Aperture is a considerably expensive app meant for more than photo organizing.
iPhoto is NOT better than Vista's built-in "Windows Photo Gallery". It uses considerably more resources and is basically a giant ad for Apple's pay photo printing and Mobile Me service.s
As I already explained in several posts here and in other threads, Windows gives you far more options as far as software you want to use, speed at which photos are imported, hardware options for importing photos, and better support of photo printers and scanners. For example, neither my all-in-one or my dedicated compact photo printer need drivers to FULLY function properly in Windows. Yet in OS X I have to go searching for the right drivers and hope they work in Leopard.
Because OS X lacks the technology to play blu-ray, not just the player.
Your joking leads me to believe you're a comedian.
Gamers are an extreme yet vocal minority? There are more game consoles sold every year than there are Mac users in total.
Gamers are the sole reason the Core 2 Duo exists. Intel was taking processor technology towards better experiences for web services. But AMD went the gamer route. Intel was getting beat to the point of embarrassment because AMD processor were better for games and real world multimedia use. This caused Intel to go back to the drawing board and push out the Core 2 architecture. All thanks to gamers.
Gamers are also the reason high-end GPUs exist today. Gamers are the reason technology advances so fast and so cheap. It's the reason why you can find a GeForce 9600M GT in PC notebooks for less than $1100 now.
Gamers are only a minority on Macs. But don't drink the kool-aid and believe Jobs lies that the market isn't anywhere near as big as some would believe. If it was so small, why is the iPod touch being advertised as a gaming device? Gamers make up a very large market on PCs. If they didn't you wouldn't have 10m people playing WoW or games selling millions of copies.
If you find Adium to support more protocols than any other Windows client, then you haven't look at any Windows clients. You already lied about one thing, so its pretty obvious you're lying about another.
iChat is more beautiful than MSN? Well, iChat basically has no features. You can't customize, skin it, or even have more advanced features. You basically get a plain buddy list window and a plain chat window with bubbles. No truly advanced features.
If I wanted "Screen sharing" I'd use a VNC client.
What "tight software integration"? OS X runs on a standard Intel CPU on a standard Intel chipset with a standard Intel or nvidia or ATI GPU, with a standard Realtek or Sigmatel audio chip, standard ethernet, standard Broadcomm or Atheros wifi. One could make this argument back in the PPC days, but now its just flat out stupid to say such a thing.
Oh and for the record, I haven't had a bluescreen since XP first came out, and that was while trying to hook up a 6 year old scanner with no XP drivers (just seeing if it would work). And what hardware incompatibilities?
I've been building PCs for over a decade and I have NEVER ONCE experienced any of this "hardware incompatibilities" nonsense that Apple and the fans try to throw around. Never.
And me nor anyone else I have ever known has ever had to "hunt down drivers". Never. Every piece of hardware I have ever purchased has had a driver disc and a clear manufacturer website listed on the box, disc, and documentation telling where to get the driver. On the pre-built PCs I've had its been a simple matter of going to the manufacturers website and getting all of the drivers in one place.
This argument is just flat out stupid and it has never been valid, no matter how much Apple wants you to believe it.
Like I said in another thread, look at that "switch" ad from a few years ago. That girl saying her father had to hunt down drivers for his digital camera on Christmas day while she just plugged it into the Mac and it worked. That was a load of BS. Every quality digital camera (more than $60 in 1998) has worked as a USB mass storage device. Plug it in and it works.
HAH! Yeah, thats why none of my TV tuners have ever worked in Linux. None of my dialup modems. None of my soundcards. Linux driver support is even more of a joke than Mac OS driver support.
Well, first they need to make OS X more customizable. Overall, they need to realize that people don't buy into the "iWay or the Highway" way of doing things on a Mac, so they need to make OS X work the way people want it to work through configuration. Second they need to bring in modern technologies, like REAL OpenGL support, FULL hardware/bitstream accceleration for video playback and audio playback, etc.
With the exception of the 8GB iPod touch, they didn't drop prices. They just increased capacity at the same price point.
I brought that up because of the fact that people are buying into Apple as a fad right now and buying they're ridiculously overpriced systems. But as the economy worsens people are going to realize that Macs are not worth the money ($1100 for 2.1GHz, 1GB of RAM, integrated graphics, 13.3" screen, NO DVD writer?) and they're going to buy better hardware for significantly less.
You can try to make that out to be "trolling" all you want. But the more you do it the more it shows you're just another Apple diehard who can't stand to hear the truth.
"Vista can be a snail on OS X"? So you're running Vista in a virtual machine and trying to say that Vista is slow, right?
Come on. Be realistic.
Oh yeah, Vista naturally runs fans higher than OS X to keep the system cooler. One of Macs problems in general is HEAT.
Whats my HP look like? Well, it looks better than my MacBook. It has a bigger screen, its only a cm or so bigger in each direction. It is quite a bit thicker but *gasp* it has a proper cooling system! Unlike my MacBook, where the CPU can run up to 87c while encoding video (2.16GHz Core 2 Duo) my HP tops out at ~62c (2GHz Core 2 Duo)!
The build quality is significantly better than the Mac. If the Mac was a pinto then the HP would be a Viper in terms of build quality. Thats how much better it is. There are no places on it that can crack due to design flaws. And unlike BOTH MacBooks I've owned, it can't separate around the vents due to heat, it can't discolor from both heat and use, the case cannot separate at various points for no reason, and I can replace the optical drive in the event that it dies.
Form over functionality, eh? I guess thats why Dell and HP sell more computers every year than there are Mac users total.
I don't like the OS more. Everyone I know that I have let use both Vista and OS X prefer Vista more.
The size argument is so ridiculously flawed that it shouldn't even be used any more. As I've said countless times now, people DO NOT buy the MacBook because it is "smaller". They buy it because its the only Apple notebook they can afford. People prefer 15.4" notebooks. Sales prove this. 15.4" notebooks are the most popular out there. Don't try to tell me its because they're the cheapest. They became the cheapest because people preferred that size and bought enough of them to drive the prices down to where they are today.
No right minded person is going to say that a $1099 MacBook with a 2.1GHz Core 2 Duo, 1GB of RAM, Intel GMA X3100, CD writer/DVD reader, 120GB HDD is a better deal than a 15.4" 1680x1050 system with a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, GeForce 9600M GT 512MB, 250GB HDD, DVD writer, HDMI, etc.
And, really, don't even try to bring size up. As I said, sales show people prefer 15.4". If they wanted smaller, 14.1" generally sells for about $100 more than 15.4" with the same features. And those systems generally are almost the same size as the MacBook and lighter than the MacBook as well. The MacBook, again, is only a cm or so smaller than the average 15.4" notebook in every direction (I have it sitting right next to my HP right now) and its only slightly lighter than the average modern 15.4" notebook. The size difference does not justify the fact that the MacBook and MacBook Pros generally cost twice as much as an equivalent PC. You won't find a consumer PC notebook without a DVD writer these days and you'd be hard pressed to find one over $500 with 1GB of RAM.
The size of the MacBook and MacBook Pro is also a disadvantage. Mainly because of heat. MacBooks and MacBook Pros have no proper cooling system with no proper ventilation. The CPU in a MacBook or MacBook Pro can easily break the 80c mark under load, while a Core 2 Duo in a PC notebook will be at least 20c cooler under the same load.
Try reading the entire thread before making comments, okay? Flash was mentioned showing how OS X lacks key modern technologies.
How is Flash dying? Because Jobs says so? Flash is everywhere. If you haven't noticed, nearly all video on the web these days is using Flash. Sites moved to flash from Quicktime, WMV, and Real. Even some basic sites are all Flash. Don't wish Flash dead just because it runs bad in OS X.
Proper video playback perhaps? DVD and flash content.
You've already proven to be dishonest twice. Second, you said "Vista on OS X" which means you're running it in a virtual machine without proper hardware acceleration.
Fanboyism? Making up words now?
If you read what I said, you'll notice that I specifically said that Vista does not crash ON THE SAME HARDWARE as OS X. Windows can crash, but it is not anywhere near as crash prone as OS X.
Never once did I say that Windows does not crash at all.
And that would be the fault of your virtualization software.
Where did I mention anything about other people in that statement? Here it is again: "I love my iPods and my iPhone. I bought the Mac because I had good experiences with OS X up until that point. Even though I spend roughly 100 hours or so with OS X before buying a Mac, you never really know how bad OS X is going to treat you until you have a Mac in your house."
Wheres my blanket statement about other people? What I said is true, even if you use something somewhere else you really don't get to fully experience it until you have it in your house and use it the way you want it on your own time.
For? Why don't you try reading the rest of the thread or my other posts? My $500 cheaper HP is built better. It has a stronger plastic case, the bottom is not made of the same soft plastic as the rest of the case. It has no spots that can warp, separate, or discolor from heat or use.
As far as not being as capable, well, as I said, again, my HP has dedicated graphics. That says enough as far as 3D, gaming, and video performance is concerned. Of course, you can always look up the posts I made where I talk about how DVD playing in OS X eats up about 30% CPU use compared to ~2% thanks to the GPU on my HP. My Mac is not as capable in the sense that it does not have dedicated graphics, it does not have HDMI, it does not have a memory card reader, fingerprint reader, or full size ExpressCard. The Mac does not have VGA, S-Video, or user replaceable optical drives. Need I go on?
I've been using Windows at home since 3.x and I used Macs running System 7 all throughout junior high and high school in nearly every class I had.
And, like I've stated many times before and you've chosen to ignore, I spent more than a hundred hours using my friends Macs as well as quite a bit of time using Macs in the Apple store.
Ease of use in no way falls in favor of OS X. How can it?
Power? Again, PC hardware is cheaper and more powerful. Not only that, but I've already discussed many times in great length how Windows takes advantage of the hardware and OS X simply does not.
Media? Again, Windows takes full advantage of the hardware for general forms of multi-media, like video and audio playback, while OS X DOES NOT. Windows PCs also have better connectivity options for media playback, like HDMI outputs.. so again, Macs lose this as well.
As I've said in other threads, I have friends in the content creation business. Everything from film makers to website designers to artists of varying degrees (3D modelers, 2D artists, game artists) and not a single one will touch a Mac.
They must be very poor then, considering in the advertisement world Macs are the standard. Heck--even the new Windows ads were made on Macs. In the Film world it's basically split between Final Cut and Adobe's video editor. As for Photography there's about a 70% market share to Adobe Lightroom (a great app) Aperture has about a 30% market share, however, the photography market is split 50-50 (just about).
all opinion.... not even going to discuss any of that ridiculous argument.
I bought the black Macbook as a treat for myself last year. I'd say I am a right minded person considering all the photography and video editing I do. My Vista partition couldn't handle any of that. (Where did I say something about Vista in OS X? I meant Vista on my Macbook, it's got its own partition of 40GB. Could you point it out so I can fix my post?)
If the machine runs fine in such a size then I'd say it has managed to achieve a balance of form and function. It doesn't need to be bigger to have 'proper' ventilation.
maybe dying wasn't the best word, but in a world where everything is being indexed by google and google can't index flash since it's basically a video flash sites are showing up less in search results and thus are viewed less often.
This is a lie and you know it. DVDs play just fine, as does flash, even if it uses more resources
As for the bit about the 8 year old powerbook, I just assumed it was around that old. I inherited from my mom. The latch is broken (she dropped it down the stairs) so I use it as a media server mostly.
I'm not trying to start a fight about what OS is better. For my needs I prefer OS X. I'm just trying to balance your trolling out. Why else would you come to a Mac forum and tell everyone that OS X is a bad operating system other than to be a troll?
(a pretty funny part about your statements is you say you like your iPhone, but hate OS X; do you not realize that the iPhone is running OS X?)
nice post. Id like to point out that even microsoft is trying to move on from flash, i beleive the project is silverlight?
- Status