Should I buy an Apple or Windows

Raghav

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 1:11:59 PM6/9/07

to

Hi Guys,

I am a programmer, been doing stuff on PC since "whenever". I already
have a Dell Laptop running win-xp, and things are fine.

However, my need is to have have a unix based system to work with.
Needs include :

- a genuine unix like environment to work with
- a reliable system in general. Windows have its own issues.

A rough example of what I intend to do on mac is -
- program with perl, c, java etc..
- play along oracle and related stuff and experiment
- general internet browsing and related usage

I have spoken to two colleagues, who happen to use windows-at-work-
mac-
at-home. They have told me very many "great" things about mac.

Here I am looking for opinions about what i intend to do and whether
mac is any better a choice for that as against PC.

Looking for helping tips...

regards
raghav..

Jolly Roger

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 1:17:26 PM6/9/07

to

This news group (comp.sys.mac.advocacy) is full of Mac-hating assholes
who only want to demean Mac users and cause disruptions. I'm afraid
you've come to the wrong place for non-biased feedback.

--
JR

MuahMan

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 1:20:23 PM6/9/07

to

If you love MP3's and iTunes. Get a Mac.

If you want to do all of the above plus use your computer for other things.
Get another Windows machine.

Timberwoof

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 1:56:33 PM6/9/07

to

In article <1181409119.9...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Guys,
>
> I am a programmer, been doing stuff on PC since "whenever". I already
> have a Dell Laptop running win-xp, and things are fine.
>
> However, my need is to have have a unix based system to work with.
> Needs include :
>
> - a genuine unix like environment to work with

Yup. Mac OS X has BSD under the hood. In fact, development of BSD has
picked up again after a lull of a few years now that Apple has started
using it. OS X has rearranged some directories to be more friendly to
Mac users, but there are aliases for the ones you'll be looking for as a
Unix user.

> - a reliable system in general. Windows have its own issues.

Yup. I have used Windows, Linux, and OS X professionally and at home. My
preference is for Mac OS X.

> A rough example of what I intend to do on mac is -
> - program with perl, c, java etc..

Yup. OS X comes with all the gnu developer tools as well as OS X
application development tools.

> - play along oracle and related stuff and experiment

OS X comes with MySQL server, an open-source SQL server.

> - general internet browsing and related usage

Yup. OS X comes with all the stuff you need for that.

> I have spoken to two colleagues, who happen to use windows-at-work-
> mac-
> at-home. They have told me very many "great" things about mac.
>
> Here I am looking for opinions about what i intend to do and whether
> mac is any better a choice for that as against PC.

If you get a PC, then your choices for operating systems are limited to
Windows, Linux, and a few BSDs. If you get a Mac, then you get OS X
(which is what Linux desktop distributions try to be) and you can run
Linux and Windows.

If you're just poking around and experimenting, and you don't need a
whole lot of speed, then get yourself an old G3 or G4 for a coupla
hundred bucks. Make sure you get the OS CDs with it, or buy a set on
eBay, and you're set.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com

Alan Baker

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 2:04:07 PM6/9/07

to

In article <1181409119.9...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

A Mac will let you do everything you want and will run Windows as well
(just in case).

A Dell (or similar) will let your run Windows, but won't do what you
want.

You decide.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

gimme_this...@yahoo.com

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 2:10:30 PM6/9/07

to

Oh yeah. You get it all baby. X11. rdesktop.

Personally, I've ended up compiling my own versions of Apache, MySQL,
and Perl.

Ruby and Python are available as well, although I haven't played with
those toys.

But with OS X you get Office, so you can read and write to MS Office
using MacPerl::Applescript. Can't do that in Linux!

gimme_this...@yahoo.com

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 2:17:27 PM6/9/07

to

Inspite of the fact that Mac computers are way cool, they are not for
everyone.

If you want to learn Dot Net, PowerShell programming, ASP, C#, Active
Directory or MS-Office VBA then XP or Vista might be a better choice.

Also, if you're one of those 20 something wipper-snappers who grew up
on Windows and love Eclipse or Visual Studio and your used to *not*
using the command line, then Windows is "better".

OTOH, if you want to focus on Video Production, or Perl, Python, Ruby,
ksh, or Oracle, or MySQL, or do something original with AppleScript -
then the Mac is "better".

Raghav

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 2:54:51 PM6/9/07

to

On Jun 9, 8:17 pm, "gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com"

Hi Guys,

I have now heard views from quite a few people. In person as well as
through discussion forums (including this one).

And I must say this, I did not find a single person who said a
negative thing about macs. But then, isn't it a bit all too nice. Is
it really the case that there is Nothing wrong with mac. Some small
glitch, some issue.. or something that needs a tweak here or there ??

Well, I am just trying to see the flip side as well. If there are so
many good things about mac, why is the world still using windows ? So,
are there no negatives to it.. really ??

Considering the suggestion, buy a mac, if its fine, great. If it
doesn't suit me, run windows using parallel. Sounds great really.

I plan to ask my colleagues to let me use it for a while (I would
assume it to be in minutes, but then you can only know so much in such
a limited time).

Keep flowing ur views....

regards
raghav..

gimme_this...@yahoo.com

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 3:32:26 PM6/9/07

to

The world is still using Windows because most Windows users are doing
their jobs and that's what their employers purchase for them. Most
companies have a legacy investment in Windows software so it's not
practical, or economical for them to switch.

Also, what is the point of an employer giving employees a computer
that is FUN to use? You're there to work.

Some tens of thousands of employers and millions of users are using
OS X. So if you go OS X it's not like you're alone.

As to hidden issues. It depends on what you're working on. Nothing
stands out in the OS itself which is a dream to use. OTOH if you need
Visual Studio to create an DOM application OS X isnt for you.

Mitch

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 7:11:10 PM6/9/07

to

In article <1181415291.0...@n4g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have now heard views from quite a few people. In person as well as
> through discussion forums (including this one).
>
> And I must say this, I did not find a single person who said a
> negative thing about macs. But then, isn't it a bit all too nice. Is
> it really the case that there is Nothing wrong with mac. Some small
> glitch, some issue.. or something that needs a tweak here or there ??

There are many things that could be better; or at least, different.
There are also several issues that are related to what is offered for
use on Mac OS.
The key difference to understand is that Apple has always been in total
control of what goes in -- and since they have many conscientious and
intelligent and creative types there, that means some great stuff is
done very well.
But where tools have to be provided by third parties, some desirable
ones have not been available in Mac OS.

> Well, I am just trying to see the flip side as well. If there are so
> many good things about mac, why is the world still using windows ?

People don't make buying decisions based on full and informed
knowledge. They choose the lowest-cost which seems to be able to do
what they want. For years, that meant Windows. Once a purchase decision
is made, they support their own decision (even if they don't know
anything) because to do otherwise would mean showing how their own
decision was foolish.

> So, are there no negatives to it.. really ??

Aside from the development ones above, it is different -- and different
is always seen as risky. That also is a principle keeping Windows and
other major apps common in the business world -- anyone wanting to
choose a tool besides the common one has to justify it, personally.

KDT

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 10:22:02 PM6/9/07

to

On Jun 9, 2:17 pm, "gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com"

<gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Inspite of the fact that Mac computers are way cool, they are not for
> everyone.
>
> If you want to learn Dot Net, PowerShell programming, ASP, C#,

http://www.mono-project.com

>Active
> Directory or MS-Office VBA then XP or Vista might be a better choice.

VBA? why would anyone choose to use VBA?

>
> Also, if you're one of those 20 something wipper-snappers who grew up
> on Windows and love Eclipse

http://developer.apple.com/tools/eclipse.html

>or Visual Studio and your used to *not*
> using the command line, then Windows is "better".

The Mac has plenty of GUI development tools.

ed

unread,

Jun 9, 2007, 11:38:07 PM6/9/07

to

"KDT" <scarf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1181442122....@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...

> On Jun 9, 2:17 pm, "gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com"
> <gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Inspite of the fact that Mac computers are way cool, they are not for
>> everyone.
>>
>> If you want to learn Dot Net, PowerShell programming, ASP, C#,
>
> http://www.mono-project.com
>
>>Active
>> Directory or MS-Office VBA then XP or Vista might be a better choice.
>
> VBA? why would anyone choose to use VBA?

because it's the right tool for some jobs, eh?

<snip>

Bruce Grubb

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 12:16:28 AM6/10/07

to

In article <1181417546.7...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
"gimme_this...@yahoo.com" <gimme_this...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> The world is still using Windows because most Windows users are doing
> their jobs and that's what their employers purchase for them. Most
> companies have a legacy investment in Windows software so it's not
> practical, or economical for them to switch.

The flaw here is unless they use a lot of speciality software that has no
mac equivalent the cost of upgrading to a new version of windows and all
the long out of date (at in 2 to three versions ago) software it just as
high if not higher than going Mac.

> Also, what is the point of an employer giving employees a computer
> that is FUN to use? You're there to work.

It is not so being fun to use but that it is easier to troubleshoot and the
software on the large part is far better designed. The Gartner Studies
have showed for nearly a decade that the Mac costs *less over all* than a
comparative PC (though WIndows has been closing the gap each time the study
is done). Sadly because too many businesses are in a three month cycle
mode you hear more about initial cost rather than TCO

> Some tens of thousands of employers and millions of users are using
> OS X. So if you go OS X it's not like you're alone.
>
> As to hidden issues. It depends on what you're working on. Nothing
> stands out in the OS itself which is a dream to use. OTOH if you need
> Visual Studio to create an DOM application OS X isnt for you.

Problem here is DOM is from the W3C
<http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=DOM&i=41676,00.asp> which
Microsoft and others on the windows side have long ignored-about 90% of the
problems with websites is due to poor to non existent use of W3C guidelines
on HTML, scripting, and about everything else they put out (IE
'compatibility' shares most of the blame here). The remaining 10% is
thanks to crappy or mind numbingly stupid design
<http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/>

Bruce Grubb

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 12:21:06 AM6/10/07

to

In article <DmKai.17020$C96....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>,
"ed" <ne...@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> wrote:

Since Microsoft itself is planing on replacing VBA with VSTA it must not be
the right tool for *any* job-otherwise Microsoft wouldn't be replacing it
now would they? (This is where such simplistic thinking as above leads you
and yes is is dumb)

gimme_this...@yahoo.com

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 12:41:13 AM6/10/07

to

Hi Bruce,

Where you wrote ....

>
> The flaw here is unless they use a lot of speciality software that has no
> mac equivalent the cost of upgrading to a new version of windows and all
> the long out of date (at in 2 to three versions ago) software it just as
> high if not higher than going Mac.

For something like a Dr. or Dentist office, or a small financial
trading company I agree with you.

OTOH, no. You may not be familiar with the latest killer software from
the evil empire, but nothing in the Mac or Linux or Sun world compares
to Sharepoint/ReportServer. For enterprise companies where you have
business anaylsts responsible for the administration of dozens of web
sites, there's nothing there.

Oh yeah, there's Vignette the start of the art UNIX portal solution.
And BEA they have a portal solution too. Sorry, they aren't there yet.
Even if they were, it gets back to the marketshare issue. If only a
few people know BEA portal, how many developers are going to want to
spend their careers supporting it?

Another example:

There isn't a spreadsheet in the UNIX world that has the equivalent to
VBA. There is no there there.

> It is not so being fun to use but that it is easier to troubleshoot and the
> software on the large part is far better designed. The Gartner Studies
> have showed for nearly a decade that the Mac costs *less over all* than a
> comparative PC (though WIndows has been closing the gap each time the study
> is done). Sadly because too many businesses are in a three month cycle

> mode you hear more about initial cost rather than TCO.

It sounds like you love saying that. But it isn't true.

For starters, Enterprise companies have a lot of money and they are
willing to waste money of that means getting the job done. That's it
*get the job done*. One, two million dollars? What's the difference.
If the job gets done and they rake in 30 million what's an extra half
a mill?

Nobody cares about a some Red Hat paid for Gartner study except
Gartner and some Sun or Linux marketing executives.

(Gartner thinks Apple should license OS X to Dell - so they are
obviously wrong at least some of the time. How ridiculous is that?)

The only thing that matters is what's going on at a company right now.

And if you're a former Sun executive and you say "OK Everyone we're
going to stop using XP and we're going to use OS X from now on"....
Well you might be looking for a new job in a few months.

It isn't M$, it isn't blind acceptance. It's the way it is. Thousands
of people just wanting to do their jobs like they're used to doing
them - only better. Job knows that, that's why he moved on to iPods.

gimme_this...@yahoo.com

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 12:53:45 AM6/10/07

to

Who says VBA is *necessarily* going away? I understand the replacement
will be to allow you to use VB, or C#, or dot net language.

BTW, VBA isn't the tool for every job. VBA has problems reading Active
Directory stuctures. But you can do the real work in C# and leave the
presentation to Excel or Excel like reporting tools.

That's the plan.

ed

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 1:22:47 AM6/10/07

to

"Bruce Grubb" <bgr...@zianet.com> wrote in message
news:bgrubb-275CC0....@news.zianet.com...

execpt your assumption is wrong- there's been no announced plans to sunset
vba- vsta and vba live together peacefully, and can be integrated in the
same apps.

gimme_this...@yahoo.com

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 1:29:40 AM6/10/07

to

Well .... We know for certain VBA is going away in Office 2008 for
Mac.

We don't even know for certain if AppleScript will be supported.

2008 might be an OpenXML reader, a charting program and a rebranded
Entourage.

Steve Hix

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 2:04:08 AM6/10/07

to

In article <1181415291.0...@n4g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 9, 8:17 pm, "gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com"
> <gimme_this_gimme_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Inspite of the fact that Mac computers are way cool, they are not for
> > everyone.
> >
> > If you want to learn Dot Net, PowerShell programming, ASP, C#, Active
> > Directory or MS-Office VBA then XP or Vista might be a better choice.
> >
> > Also, if you're one of those 20 something wipper-snappers who grew up
> > on Windows and love Eclipse or Visual Studio and your used to *not*
> > using the command line, then Windows is "better".
> >
> > OTOH, if you want to focus on Video Production, or Perl, Python, Ruby,
> > ksh, or Oracle, or MySQL, or do something original with AppleScript -
> > then the Mac is "better".
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I have now heard views from quite a few people. In person as well as
> through discussion forums (including this one).
>
> And I must say this, I did not find a single person who said a
> negative thing about macs.

Oh, give the trolls here a little time to spool up. They'll say
everything un-nice that you might imagine, and then some.

It will mostly be untrue, but what do you expect for free? :}

C Lund

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 2:05:04 AM6/10/07

to

In article <1181415291.0...@n4g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> And I must say this, I did not find a single person who said a
> negative thing about macs.

Guess you haven't heard from the wintrolls yet.. ;)

> But then, isn't it a bit all too nice. Is
> it really the case that there is Nothing wrong with mac. Some small
> glitch, some issue.. or something that needs a tweak here or there ??

There are plenty of glitches and issues with the mac. But they're all
minor stuff I couldn't even be bothered to remember at the moment.
Just keep in mind that the people who work at Apple are mortals and
make mistakes like the rest of us.

> Well, I am just trying to see the flip side as well. If there are so
> many good things about mac, why is the world still using windows ?

That's because 1) MS inherited IBM's monopoly instead of creating heir
own and 2) marketing. Also, Apple has made a few dumb moves in the
past.

> So,
> are there no negatives to it.. really ??

Well, if you're a hard-core gamer then you might want to stick with
Windows. Not that there aren't games on the mac, it's just that there
aren't as many as on Windows, and they're usually ported later.

However, there is one thing you need to keep in mind if/when you start
using a mac:

OS X is not Windows. If you try to use OS X as if it was Windows,
you'll end up being confused and annoyed. The first step of switching
to OS X is to forget everything you know about Windows. Some of the
differences are cosmetic and irrelevant. Others are profound.

Or so I gather by reading the comments from others who've gone from
Windows to OS X.

> Considering the suggestion, buy a mac, if its fine, great. If it
> doesn't suit me, run windows using parallel. Sounds great really.

Yup. B)

--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

Snit

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 2:28:10 AM6/10/07

to

"ed" <ne...@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> stated in post
MULai.17040$C96...@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net on 6/9/07 10:22 PM:

VBA has been called the "predecessor" of VBSA... and comments have been made
that it is understandable that people might not want to jump to VBSA
immediately... implying that VBA just may be on its way out, but not for a
while.

--
€ OS X is partially based on BSD (esp. FreeBSD)
€ OS X users are at far less risk of malware then are XP users
€ Photoshop is an image editing application

ed

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 3:16:51 AM6/10/07

to

"Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C290E80A.83005%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...

largely irrelevant, eh? the og plan was that vsta was going to replace vba,
but that's not currently the case.

> and comments have been made
> that it is understandable that people might not want to jump to VBSA
> immediately... implying that VBA just may be on its way out, but not for a
> while.

microsoft has specifically said there are currently no plans to sunset vba
(on windows) in the foreseeable future.

Raghav

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 3:56:56 AM6/10/07

to

On Jun 10, 9:16 am, "ed" <n...@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> wrote:
> "Snit" <C...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
>
> news:C290E80A.83005%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
>
>
>
> > "ed" <n...@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> stated in post
> > MULai.17040$C96....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net on 6/9/07 10:22 PM:

>
> >> "Bruce Grubb" <bgr...@zianet.com> wrote in message
> >>news:bgrubb-275CC0....@news.zianet.com...

> >>> In article <DmKai.17020$C96.2...@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>,
> >>> "ed" <n...@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> "KDT" <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

Hi All,

Not that I dont like the thoughts flowing, I just thought I should
stick to my original question about the buying decision.
Thanks to all of you, now I know a bit more about apple and its own
world then windows.

Just to mention, I am not a hardcore MS technology programmer/
developer anyway. My core area is going to be Oracle and some tools
surrounding it. Which, AFAIK, are either open-source or are ported by
the vendor already, and therefore are available to Mac as much as to
any other OS.

Honestly speaking, I dont really have anything negative about windows,
well, may be some, but not the "hatred" kind of thing. However, I LOVE
Unix and its flavours. I have already been doing experiments with diff
flavors of Linux on one partition of my Dell here. But, now I feel
that those arrangements are limiting in many ways and therefore want a
dedicated box to help me.

And, once I came to know that Mac OS X is FreeBSD based, I immediately
fired up these questions to my colleagues and to forums like this one
here.

For the thoughts mentioned by some of you, I am not really a gamer
(hardly played any games), or any serious stuff to do with active
directory etc. However, after reading your posts, my belief about the
fact that apple is really not catering to enterprises has gone one
step ahead. OTOH, now I believe more and more that its more a computer
for individual rather than for a corporate. ..My view.

Thanks to all for your views and thoughts, please keep flowing.

regards
raghav..

PS: I have just been doing some calculation going from that, the
latest MacBookPro is going to cost me in the range of 3000 CHF (Yeah,
I am in Switzerland), with the following config
2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB 065-7020
SuperDrive 8x (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW) 065-7025
Apple USB Modem 065-7027
Hintergrundbeleuchtete Tastatur (US) & Mac OS (Englisch,
international) LL065-7034
MacBook Pro 15" Breitformat-Bildschirm mit Hochglanzanzeige 065-7038
Landesspezifisches Kit 065-7036
160GB Serial ATA-Laufwerk (5400U/Min.) 065-7023
2,2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo 065-7017

I have seen the posts about Mac prices now being comparable to PC, but
somehow my calculations are going way above my expectations... :(

Jon Harrop

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 5:57:24 AM6/10/07

to

Raghav wrote:
> I am a programmer, been doing stuff on PC since "whenever". I already
> have a Dell Laptop running win-xp, and things are fine.
>
> However, my need is to have have a unix based system to work with.
> Needs include :
>
> - a genuine unix like environment to work with
> - a reliable system in general. Windows have its own issues.

Why don't you just install a Linux distro? No need to buy new hardware. No
need to buy prebuilt machines. Better compatibility. Benefit from primary
releases of all Linux software rather than OSX ports...

--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
OCaml for Scientists
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/?usenet

Raghav

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 6:24:36 AM6/10/07

to

On Jun 10, 11:57 am, Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> Raghav wrote:
> > I am a programmer, been doing stuff on PC since "whenever". I already
> > have a Dell Laptop running win-xp, and things are fine.
>
> > However, my need is to have have a unix based system to work with.
> > Needs include :
>
> > - a genuine unix like environment to work with
> > - a reliable system in general. Windows have its own issues.
>
> Why don't you just install a Linux distro? No need to buy new hardware. No
> need to buy prebuilt machines. Better compatibility. Benefit from primary
> releases of all Linux software rather than OSX ports...

To be really honest with you (or others who have suggested the same),
I dont really have the bandwidth.
My current laptop has a 40GB HDD and I am not yet hooked up to huge
external hard-disks. Also, I am short on storage space.

It has a P4 of which I have come to be "sick of". Really, there are
many things which prompt me to go for another set of hardware.

Moreover, I have already had some experiments with Linux flavours on a
partition.

thanks for the idea though. :)

regards
raghav..

Jon Harrop

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 9:27:36 AM6/10/07

to

Raghav wrote:
> To be really honest with you (or others who have suggested the same),
> I dont really have the bandwidth.
> My current laptop has a 40GB HDD and I am not yet hooked up to huge
> external hard-disks. Also, I am short on storage space.

You could try a distro that runs off CD like Knoppix but why not just buy a
new HD rather than a whole new computer?

> It has a P4 of which I have come to be "sick of". Really, there are
> many things which prompt me to go for another set of hardware.

If you're after new hardware then I highly recommend the box I'm using now.
I built it for £800 last year and it is better in almost all respects than
a £1,700 Mac Pro:

2x 4400+ Athlon 64
nVidia GF7900GT 512Mb
2Gb RAM
250Gb HD

I also got a Hewlett Packard LP2465 24" 1920x1200 widescreen monitor for
£800, which is superb.

I am not a Mac user but, if you do go for the Mac, it looks like you'll get
a more bangs for your buck if you buy the cheapest Mac Pro and upgrade it
to a decent spec yourself. However, Apple hardware can't handle a decent
graphics card so you're stuck with yesteryear's technology and they'll
charge you twice what its worth. :-(

If I decide to buy a Mac I think it'll be an iMac because I just can't
handle being ripped off for last years technology in a Mac Pro.

> Moreover, I have already had some experiments with Linux flavours on a
> partition.

Debian is fantastic. I'm using AMD64 Debian here and the performance is
incredible and stability is rock solid.

> thanks for the idea though. :)

No worries.

Steve Hix

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 2:09:11 PM6/10/07

to

In article <466bcc79$0$8745$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> Raghav wrote:
> > I am a programmer, been doing stuff on PC since "whenever". I already
> > have a Dell Laptop running win-xp, and things are fine.
> >
> > However, my need is to have have a unix based system to work with.
> > Needs include :
> >
> > - a genuine unix like environment to work with
> > - a reliable system in general. Windows have its own issues.
>
> Why don't you just install a Linux distro? No need to buy new hardware. No
> need to buy prebuilt machines. Better compatibility. Benefit from primary
> releases of all Linux software rather than OSX ports...

Get the Mac, and along with MacOS X, he can run
Windows/Linux/BSD/Solaris at will.

Linux is fine on its own, but MacOS X is a good deal less fiddly; unless
your goal is to be tweaking it most of the time to get it where you want.

--
The System Has Failed

PC Guy

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 4:41:53 PM6/10/07

to

"Megadave" <megad...@invalidgmail.domaincom> wrote in message
news:atidnSTo6cKe_fHb...@comcast.com...

LOL! Yeah, stuck in the dark ages! Is that why all the Mac "advocates" are
recommending Windows?

Alan Baker

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 5:45:21 PM6/10/07

to

In article <466c4d5b$0$8752$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> Mitch wrote:
> > It's been pointed out to you time and again that Mac hardware is both
> > capable
>
> Apparently OSX will not boot if you put an GeForce 8-series in a Mac Pro.

From where did you get that tidbit?

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

Patrick Nihill

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 5:46:17 PM6/10/07

to

Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Guys,
>
> I am a programmer, been doing stuff on PC since "whenever". I already
> have a Dell Laptop running win-xp, and things are fine.
>
> However, my need is to have have a unix based system to work with.
> Needs include :
>
> - a genuine unix like environment to work with
> - a reliable system in general. Windows have its own issues.

I've found Windows and OS X (the latest version of OS X, anyway) to be
roughly equal in reliability and stability. Both are very solid systems.

> A rough example of what I intend to do on mac is -
> - program with perl, c, java etc..

Programming in Perl on OS X is pretty much identical to using any other
Unix-like system. C depends on what sort of programming you expect to be
doing, really. If you're just learning the language itself, then OS X
will do as well as anything else. If you're planning on developing GUI
applications against a particular API, things become trickier.

Java on OS X is fair-to-good these days. Back when Macs had PowerPC
processors, Java development was something of a nightmare, mainly due to
the crippling slowness of Java on OS X compared to Windows.

Sun don't port their JVM (Hotspot) to OS X, only to Windows, Linux and
Solaris, so Apple create their own. They were typically badly lagging in
both versions and speed. There's been plenty of improvement since then,
however, and on an Intel Mac Java is close enough in speed, and Apple
have a solid build of Java 1.6 for OS X available to download.

> - play along oracle and related stuff and experiment

Oracle 10g is certified on the Mac for all your Oracle needs. If you're
planning on developing Enterprise Java on the Mac, be aware that neither
Weblogic nor Websphere are supported on OS X. Weblogic will install and
run fine though, so you could develop on the Mac and deploy to a Solaris
box. Or you could use JBoss or Glassfish.

Apart from the major stuff mentioned above, it's difficult to know if
the Mac would be a good choice for you without getting an idea of your
workflow and the kinds of tools you're currently using. Some stuff might
not be available on the Mac. For example, you can't run Rational
Clearcase on Mac OS X. Mind you, I can't imagine why anyone with any
shred of sanity left in them would ever want to use Clearcase...

> - general internet browsing and related usage

Yes, OS X has plenty of good apps for all the general sort of stuff.

Megadave

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 6:03:05 PM6/10/07

to

I don't see any "Mac advocates" recommending Windows. Unless you mean that
you are now calling yourself a Mac Advocate.

Jon Harrop

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 6:50:04 PM6/10/07

to

Alan Baker wrote:
> From where did you get that tidbit?

There are various articles describing failed attempts to get a recent
graphics card to work in a Mac Pro:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=250851

Even if you replace the power supply (the Mac Pro literally isn't powerful
enough), OSX won't boot.

Jon Harrop

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 6:55:43 PM6/10/07

to

Tim Adams wrote:
> In article <466c4d5b$0$8752$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
> Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>> Apparently OSX will not boot if you put an GeForce 8-series in a Mac Pro.
>
> do you have a link to back up that statement?

Here's another one:

http://blog.aarlabs.com/2007/03/29/mac-pro-woes/

Alan Baker

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 9:43:58 PM6/10/07

to

In article <466c8191$0$8733$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> Alan Baker wrote:
> > From where did you get that tidbit?
>
> There are various articles describing failed attempts to get a recent
> graphics card to work in a Mac Pro:
>
> http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=250851
>
> Even if you replace the power supply (the Mac Pro literally isn't powerful
> enough), OSX won't boot.

What you fail to mention is that he was running two other cards in that
machine as well.

When he took them out the machine booted.

Alan Baker

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 9:50:43 PM6/10/07

to

In article <466c82e3$0$8756$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> Tim Adams wrote:
> > In article <466c4d5b$0$8752$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
> > Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> >> Apparently OSX will not boot if you put an GeForce 8-series in a Mac Pro.
> >
> > do you have a link to back up that statement?
>
> Here's another one:
>
> http://blog.aarlabs.com/2007/03/29/mac-pro-woes/

Sorry, but that link contains no text that supports your statement.

Tim Murray

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 10:37:25 PM6/10/07

to

On Jun 10, 2007, Alan Baker wrote:
> What you fail to mention is that he was running two other cards in that
> machine as well.

This Harrop fellow is taking quite the troll-like literary license in this
thread, isn't he?

Steve Hix

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 10:59:55 PM6/10/07

to

In article <466c4d5b$0$8752$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> Mitch wrote:
> > It's been pointed out to you time and again that Mac hardware is both
> > capable
>
> Apparently OSX will not boot if you put an GeForce 8-series in a Mac Pro.

Cite?

Steve Hix

unread,

Jun 10, 2007, 11:02:35 PM6/10/07

to

In article <alangbaker-88CE2...@news.telus.net>,
Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:

> In article <466c8191$0$8733$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
> Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> > > From where did you get that tidbit?
> >
> > There are various articles describing failed attempts to get a recent
> > graphics card to work in a Mac Pro:
> >
> > http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=250851
> >
> > Even if you replace the power supply (the Mac Pro literally isn't powerful
> > enough), OSX won't boot.
>
> What you fail to mention is that he was running two other cards in that
> machine as well.

I don't know of many machines that would be expected to operate normally
if you install enough add-on hardware to sink more current than the
power supply can provide.

> When he took them out the machine booted.

In which case "OSX will not boot if you put an GeForce 8-series in a Mac
Pro" isn't quite true, is it Jon?

Jon Harrop

unread,

Jun 11, 2007, 12:24:07 AM6/11/07

to

Alan Baker wrote:
> > Even if you replace the power supply (the Mac Pro literally isn't
> > powerful enough), OSX won't boot.
>

> When he took them out the machine booted.

Only into Windows. As I understood it, he could not boot into OSX.

Raghav

unread,

Jun 11, 2007, 10:15:17 AM6/11/07

to

On Jun 10, 11:57 am, Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

Dear Dr,

Taking cue from your advice, I have managed to find some free space on
my hard disk to install VMWare-Ubuntu 7.
Its only been a few hours and I would take some time to get the hang
of it.

Though I am a bit cautious about this, since MAC OS X sounds
(hopefully is) a lot more mature than any given Freely available Linux
distribution for real life daily usage. Please see, the developers of
linux will be just fine with tweaks, but with my focus probably
somewhere else, I would not love it so much.

Having said that, I like linux in general. The very idea that there is
a desktop OS option available other than windows excites me somewhere
inside.

OTOH, I would also want to use my box as a desktop user when not doing
my "default" experimentation/programming stuff... like browsing, voip
chats etc... I am still not sure how mature applications are available
on Linux for that purpose... A voip tool I use regularly on my
current windows env, already defaulted, they dont have a client for
non windows environment. :( I guess skype would work, but its twice
as costly...

thanks for everybody's time and energy. Kindly continue flowing
thoughts...

regards
raghav..

unread,

Jun 12, 2007, 2:49:41 AM6/12/07

to

In article <466c4d5b$0$8752$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Jon

Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> > It's been pointed out to you time and again that Mac hardware is both
> > capable
>
> Apparently OSX will not boot if you put an GeForce 8-series in a Mac Pro.

I'm fairly sure OS X can boot even if there is no video card.

If that particular card is incompatible with Mac hardware, then there
is another problem. But that's why people always need to buy compatible
hardware, right? Not a criticism of OS but of the fact that there are a
lot of hardware types.

ZnU

unread,

Jun 12, 2007, 3:29:17 AM6/12/07

to

In article <110620072049410378%mi...@hawaii.rr>,
Mitch <mi...@hawaii.rr> wrote:

> In article <466c4d5b$0$8752$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Jon
> Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>
> > > It's been pointed out to you time and again that Mac hardware is both
> > > capable
> >
> > Apparently OSX will not boot if you put an GeForce 8-series in a Mac Pro.
>
> I'm fairly sure OS X can boot even if there is no video card.

Yes. Apple will sell you an Xserve with no video card.

> If that particular card is incompatible with Mac hardware, then there
> is another problem. But that's why people always need to buy compatible
> hardware, right? Not a criticism of OS but of the fact that there are a
> lot of hardware types.

--

Jon Harrop

unread,

Jun 12, 2007, 9:52:31 AM6/12/07

to

Mitch wrote:
> If that particular card is incompatible with Mac hardware...

If the card was incompatible with the Mac hardware he wouldn't have been
able to boot his Mac into Windows. The problem is a lack of drivers in OS
X, which means you must be very careful when upgrading your Mac to put only
Apple-friendly hardware in it.

In the context of graphics cards, this means you can't use a current
(8-series) nVidia card in a Mac.

I'm surprised that nVidia give such excellent support for Linux users but
completely ignore Mac users.

Timberwoof

unread,

Jun 12, 2007, 2:59:58 PM6/12/07

to

In article <466ea691$0$8753$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>,
Jon Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> Mitch wrote:
> > If that particular card is incompatible with Mac hardware...
>
> If the card was incompatible with the Mac hardware he wouldn't have been
> able to boot his Mac into Windows. The problem is a lack of drivers in OS
> X, which means you must be very careful when upgrading your Mac to put only
> Apple-friendly hardware in it.
>
> In the context of graphics cards, this means you can't use a current
> (8-series) nVidia card in a Mac.
>
> I'm surprised that nVidia give such excellent support for Linux users but
> completely ignore Mac users.

Yeah. nVidia make the bestest video cards in the whole world; nothing
else even comes close. Once yo'uve used even the cheapest old nVidia
card, there's no point in using anything else, not even an ATI Radeon.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com

Timberwoof

unread,

Jun 12, 2007, 3:02:52 PM6/12/07

to

In article <znu-E63841.0...@individual.net>,
ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:

> In article <110620072049410378%mi...@hawaii.rr>,
> Mitch <mi...@hawaii.rr> wrote:
>
> > In article <466c4d5b$0$8752$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Jon
> > Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > It's been pointed out to you time and again that Mac hardware is both
> > > > capable
> > >
> > > Apparently OSX will not boot if you put an GeForce 8-series in a Mac Pro.
> >
> > I'm fairly sure OS X can boot even if there is no video card.
>
> Yes. Apple will sell you an Xserve with no video card.

I bought an older Xserve on eBay. The seller promised me the moon and
the stars, including a video card, but there was none. (I slagged him)
So I stuck in an old AT Rage 128 of the type found in G3s ... it works.
So at least OS X has drivers for any video card sold in any New World
Mac.

Steve de Mena

unread,

Jun 12, 2007, 6:20:45 PM6/12/07

to

Jon Harrop wrote:
> Mitch wrote:
>> If that particular card is incompatible with Mac hardware...
>
> If the card was incompatible with the Mac hardware he wouldn't have been
> able to boot his Mac into Windows. The problem is a lack of drivers in OS
> X, which means you must be very careful when upgrading your Mac to put only
> Apple-friendly hardware in it.

I think it is more than drivers. I believe the
card *itself* needs to support booting up [EFI]
into OS X.

Steve

Mitch

unread,

Jun 16, 2007, 4:27:40 AM6/16/07

to

In article <466ea691$0$8753$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Jon

Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> > If that particular card is incompatible with Mac hardware...
>
> If the card was incompatible with the Mac hardware he wouldn't have been
> able to boot his Mac into Windows. The problem is a lack of drivers in OS
> X, which means you must be very careful when upgrading your Mac to put only
> Apple-friendly hardware in it.

Very careful? You mean, you check once, to see if the device has a
driver available? Yes, Mac users do that.
So should Windows users, obviously, since there are a LOT of
incompatibilities with different versions of Windows, especially when
third-party devices conflict. But you have to actually search the Web
for problems and solutions beforehand, rather than merely checking for
a (Mac OS) mark on the box.

> In the context of graphics cards, this means you can't use a current
> (8-series) nVidia card in a Mac.

But you can use many others, right?
MANY others?
So why are all of your statements focused specifically on that series?
And do you not realize that similar hardware for Mac may be made under
different model names?

> I'm surprised that nVidia give such excellent support for Linux users but
> completely ignore Mac users.

They may not have -- ask them.
You may not know what they offered, or will offer, or are partnering to
do for Mac users.
It's possible (and Windows users should know it is common) that the
same components are being used in a product from a different name, or
in a different model, or being released at a different time.
(I don't know, either.)

Jon Harrop

unread,

Jun 16, 2007, 2:31:47 PM6/16/07

to

Mitch wrote:
> In article <466ea691$0$8753$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Jon
> Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>> If the card was incompatible with the Mac hardware he wouldn't have been
>> able to boot his Mac into Windows. The problem is a lack of drivers in OS
>> X, which means you must be very careful when upgrading your Mac to put
>> only Apple-friendly hardware in it.
>
> Very careful? You mean, you check once, to see if the device has a
> driver available? Yes, Mac users do that.

Actually a friend of mine used to be a staunch Mac advocate and blew too
much money on some swanky new hardware without realising that it ran fine
under Linux and Windows but not under Mac. I think he's a Linux user now...

> So should Windows users, obviously, since there are a LOT of
> incompatibilities with different versions of Windows, especially when
> third-party devices conflict.

I've never had a problem with high-spec cards under Windows or Linux but
apparently nobody get an 8-series to work in a Mac AFAIK. The moral is that
your hardware choices are very limited on the Mac compared to the two
mainstream platforms.

>> In the context of graphics cards, this means you can't use a current
>> (8-series) nVidia card in a Mac.
>
> But you can use many others, right?
> MANY others?

Of course, you could trawl through a dumpster to find an old graphics card
for your Mac Pro.

> So why are all of your statements focused specifically on that series?

Because the 8-series is the current generation. Just look at the Changelog
from the latest nVidia drivers for Linux:

* Added support for new GPUs:

GeForce 8600 GTS
GeForce 8600 GT
GeForce 8600M GT
GeForce 8600M GS
GeForce 8500 GT
GeForce 8400 GS
GeForce 8400M GT
GeForce 8400M GS
GeForce 8400M G
GeForce 8300 GS
Quadro FX 1600M
Quadro FX 570M
Quadro FX 360M
Quadro NVS 320M
Quadro NVS 140M
Quadro NVS 135M
Quadro NVS 130M

Linux users get 4-monthly release cycles from nVidia. Mac users get nothing.
When will Mac users get anything? Who knows.

> And do you not realize that similar hardware for Mac may be made under
> different model names?

If Apple supported decent graphics hardware they would tell everyone.

>> I'm surprised that nVidia give such excellent support for Linux users but
>> completely ignore Mac users.
>
> They may not have -- ask them.

No need:

http://www.nvidia.com/content/drivers/drivers.asp

> You may not know what they offered, or will offer, or are partnering to
> do for Mac users.

If nVidia supported Mac users, nVidia would list Mac alongside Linux,
Windows, FreeBSD and Solaris.

> It's possible (and Windows users should know it is common) that the
> same components are being used in a product from a different name, or
> in a different model, or being released at a different time.
> (I don't know, either.)

Indeed, I recently discovered that you can buy an over-priced ATi X1900
512Mb card from Apple for your over-priced Mac Pro. You might think that
such a card would bring the performance of a modern ATi card to your Mac
but no, the only such cards supported by Apple are downclocked because the
Mac Pro can't provide sufficient cooling for the real thing.

Mitch

unread,

Jun 16, 2007, 11:34:32 PM6/16/07

to

In article <46742dff$0$8758$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Jon
Harrop <j...@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> > So should Windows users, obviously, since there are a LOT of
> > incompatibilities with different versions of Windows, especially when
> > third-party devices conflict.
> I've never had a problem with high-spec cards under Windows or Linux but
> apparently nobody get an 8-series to work in a Mac AFAIK. The moral is that
> your hardware choices are very limited on the Mac compared to the two
> mainstream platforms.

'Conclusion,' not 'moral.'
And you have reduced the choices by ONE GPU. Not a LOT of reduction in
choices, dude. But the actual number is not really important; there
merely need to be SOME choices.
I laugh OUT LOUD that you think Windows and Linux are the two
"MAINSTREAM" choices of computers, and Mac is outside that. You must be
a fool.

> >> In the context of graphics cards, this means you can't use a current
> >> (8-series) nVidia card in a Mac.
> > But you can use many others, right?
> > MANY others?
> Of course, you could trawl through a dumpster to find an old graphics card
> for your Mac Pro.

Yes, and I have done that. Even from HPs and Gateways and Dells.
But you can also go to your local computer store and buy the hottest
card they offer (checking to make sure it has a Mac tag) and use that.

> > So why are all of your statements focused specifically on that series?
> Because the 8-series is the current generation.

Yes, it is -- the top of the current _NVidia_ generation.
Not the top of everything, always. There are others. You knew that,
right?

> Linux users get 4-monthly release cycles from nVidia. Mac users get nothing.
> When will Mac users get anything? Who knows.

Wow -- narrow minded and ignorant, now. You cited several products ffor
Mac from Nvidia a little while ago, didn't you? At least one other
person did, too. And that's ONLY the NVidia stuff.

> > And do you not realize that similar hardware for Mac may be made under
> > different model names?
>
> If Apple supported decent graphics hardware they would tell everyone.

Apple tells everyone about the ones they INCLUDE. The ones Apple keeps
track of are listed at http://guide.apple.com , but in my experience
they often list only general categories or company links, not details.

> >> I'm surprised that nVidia give such excellent support for Linux users but
> >> completely ignore Mac users.
> > They may not have -- ask them.
> No need:
> http://www.nvidia.com/content/drivers/drivers.asp

That's very foolish. Do you not realize that sometimes another platform
(like Mac) is given a separate site or section for support?
In fact, since Mac doesn't seem to be listed there, and we already know
they make Mac products, you should have assumed there was another
listing or site!

>
> > You may not know what they offered, or will offer, or are partnering to
> > do for Mac users.
> If nVidia supported Mac users, nVidia would list Mac alongside Linux,
> Windows, FreeBSD and Solaris.

You are making an assumption based on what you would do; unjustified
and foolish. I can think of two game companies that don't refer to
their Mac products on the Windows sites. They have other whole sites.

> > It's possible (and Windows users should know it is common) that the
> > same components are being used in a product from a different name, or
> > in a different model, or being released at a different time.
> > (I don't know, either.)
> Indeed, I recently discovered that you can buy an over-priced ATi X1900
> 512Mb card from Apple for your over-priced Mac Pro.

You just had to dump in your editorial comments? Do you need to be made
a fool of? You do, but I'm not wasting my time any more. You have
become totally antagonistic, and quit thinking long ago.

Go away, please. You no longer have any questions to ask or information
to share.

Jon Harrop

unread,

Jun 17, 2007, 11:21:54 AM6/17/07

to

Mitch wrote:
> And you have reduced the choices by ONE GPU.

There are currently 10 GPUs in nVidia's flagship 8-series. Dabs lists 80
products in this category with prices ranging from £50 to £560.