Should I buy an Apple or Windows

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Raghav

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 1:07:13 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. The general image
that I have about mac is, "Its the best choice for Graphic related
work". Based on that, is it really worth a thought to think about a
mac for my kind of needs...

Looking for helping tips...

regards
raghav..

@I have posted similar message for mac.system, pls dont feel offended.
Just hoping to reach more people.

sbt

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 1:23:10 PM6/9/07
to
In article <1181408833.0...@p77g2000hsh.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
> - 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. The general image
> that I have about mac is, "Its the best choice for Graphic related
> work". Based on that, is it really worth a thought to think about a
> mac for my kind of needs...
>
> Looking for helping tips...
>
> regards

While I completely agree that Macs are best for graphics/personal
multimedia endeavors, they are also a clear choice for your stated
needs. Under that glistening OS X GUI, you have a full-blooded BSD unix
implementation and the included Terminal application is your window
into the shell of your choice (bash is the default, but you also have
sh, csh, tcsh, ksh, and others), with all the expected BSD unix
commands and utilities present. Additionally, there is a thriving
open-source community making a wide variety of unix/linux-based tools
available on OS X.

--
Spenser

gtr

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 1:47:47 PM6/9/07
to
On 2007-06-09 10:07:13 -0700, Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> said:

> 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.

I'd recommend bying a Mac. If it doesn't work out for it, you can run
Windows. I'm sure there are a few examples of folks who bought a modern
Mac and were dissapointed with the experience, but I am not aware of
any. Most switchers I am familiar with rapidly become boosters.
--
Thank you and have a nice day.

Raghav

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 2:43:52 PM6/9/07
to
On Jun 9, 7:47 pm, gtr <x...@yyy.zzz> wrote:

Hi,

thanks for the advice.

I have now heard advice from about 6-7 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.

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).

regards
raghav..

Richard Maine

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 3:20:08 PM6/9/07
to
Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is it really the case that there is Nothing wrong with mac.

No, that's not the case. You'll likely find "fanboys" who think that
Apple can do no wrong. And they will start arguing with fanboys of the
opposite persuation, who think that Apple can do nothing right. I'm
neither of those. I just think it is the best of the current choices,
all things considered. Though I realize you intended the question
hinestly, that's all too likely to start one of those flame wars between
fanatics of both sides.

As has been mentioned here not too long ago, one of the negatives of
Apple is that it seems to attract such vehement adherents and
detractors. :-(

I'll not participate in the flamewars, or even post further on the
subject, but a few negatives in my view are:

Macs are a bit pricey. Not as much so as some detractors say, as you
generally get a lot with a Mac that would be add-on cost with other
systems. But if you don't need all the add-ons, that doesn't matter as
much. Basically, if you want what's in the Mac, it is a decent, even
good, buy. But if you are looking for the cheapest basic box you can
find, it won't be particularly close to a Mac.

Somewhat related to the price thing... there isn't a mid-range Desktop
system without a built-in monitor. I love this 24" iMac. Beautiful
system. But I had to accept the fact that I had to buy a new monitor as
part of the system and that the monitor I bought as part of it was never
going to be transferred to any replacement system. The mini is too
low-end for my desktop (well, I have one as a media server), and the Mac
Pro is just way too expensive - I'd have paid about as much for the Pro
without a monitor as for the iMac with.

Games. Yes, the Mac has some, but lots of ones I might want aren't
available in Mac (and don't run in Parallels, even the new v3.0).
Fortunately there is BootCamp; they do run very nicely in that. And
there's a native Mac version of WoW. :-)

There are plenty of other negatives, mostly small. I don't even recall
them all at the moment, and I've listed enough.

Oh yes. Almost forgot. And it will probably get me flamed by some here
(which flames I'll ignore). But you'll want to buy a decent mouse
instead of junk ones Apple has. Fortunately, the Mac works fine with
3rd-party mice like Logitech. Just be sure to include one in your
budget.

--
Richard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain

sbt

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 3:24:14 PM6/9/07
to
In article <1181414632.5...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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 ??
>

It's called "being entrenched" -- DOS and then Windows became quite
dominant during a period when Apple was producing a superior OS on
vastly more expensive hardware and without the corporate sales force to
impinge on what was, at that time, an IBM-dominated market (the
Intel-based systems with DOS and then Windows from other vendors were
called IBM clones for a reason).

Mac OS and Macs aren't perfect, but they're less imperfect than Windows
and most of the hardware that runs Windows. I've been using DOS and
then Windows machines since 1980 and Macs since their release in '84,
as well as various Unix-based systems during the past three decades.
Since the release of OS X, it's been about 99% Mac and using the
Windows box only when necessary to check compatibility on a
cross-platform piece of software or when a client has a problem with
something that is Windows-specific (like an Access database).

--
Spenser

gtr

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 3:54:53 PM6/9/07
to
On 2007-06-09 11:43:52 -0700, Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> said:

> 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.

Not among the set of tasks you want to perform, no. If you want to hear
the negative side of the Mac, you should speak to people who are loyal
to Windows and have never actually used a Mac. They can give you lots
of reasons, most of them false, for the horror of being a Mac.

> 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 a good question that is being answered in the market place as we
speak. Right now the Mac offers far more possibilities than Windows
does. This is the way Windows fought the fight. Their marketing
strategy was to make of their OS an island that would be impenetrable,
"You're either with us or against us." Apple, as a smaller company has
endlessly worked to make bridges for transition. Currently their base
bridge is--their computers run both operating systems. How can you
beat that? Don't worry MS is working hard to address that some kind of
way.l

Why is the world still using Windows? Because the new approach to the
battle for market share by Apple is relatively recent. Everybody
doesn't sell their car the minute a more capable car is produced, they
aren't in the market for a new car, theirs apparently works fine thank
you. When it doesn't work so fine, or is outdated, then they'll replace
the products they own.

Many of my friends who are Windows users are replacing their computers
with an Apple computer, investigating Mac and finding a newer more
refined and less problematic operating system. That would only makes
sense, as it doesn't have the 20 years of baggage, isn't the biggest
target for viruses, spam, spyware, etc.

I think it is a vastly superior OS, and I use both everyday of my life.
Eventually it won't be superior; they'll goof up, get top heavy, or
face more elegant solutions elsewhere. Until then it's a wonderful
time to be on a clean newly-designed OS.

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

Comparitively speaking, Mac to Windows, there aren't any conspicious
negatives to it not. Someone mentions price upstream. I don't think
that's a particularly big gate. There aren't any others. This won't
always be the case. When you're comparing the mouse that comes with
the computer as a conspicious negative, you know you're really digging.

> 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).

That's true. And if you are a long-time user of another OS, a few
minutes of confusion won't represent your actual usage experience
either.

Jolly Roger

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 4:03:50 PM6/9/07
to
On 2007-06-09 13:43:52 -0500, Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> said:

> 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.

Well no platform is perfect, so of course there are problems with *any*
computer. Mac OS X has it's share, but you'll find the general trend is
that recovering from problems on a Mac is somewhat easier and more
straight-forward than on Linux or Windows.

> 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 ?

The world is still using Windows for a lot of reasons that have nothing
to do with the quality of Macs compared to Windows. Mostly the world
still uses Windows because corporations are heavily invested in
Microsoft and do not wish to change, especially with regards to
changing to something unfamiliar.

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

Of course there are negatives. The compelling point is that the
negatives are fewer than alternative platforms such as Linux and
Windows.

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

Parallels is most excellent. I use it daily.

> 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).

True, but don't forget, depending on your geographical location, there
very well may be an Apple retail store near you. You can find the
closest Apple store to you on this web site:

<http://www.apple.com/retail/>

--
JR

Dave Balderstone

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 4:27:01 PM6/9/07
to
In article <2007060915035050073-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>, Jolly Roger
<jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:

> Mac OS X has it's share,

Grrrr...

Possessive "its" has no apostrophe.

Sorry... Bit of an obession, I'm afraid.

gimme_this...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 4:59:04 PM6/9/07
to

> Oh yes. Almost forgot. And it will probably get me flamed by some here
> (which flames I'll ignore). But you'll want to buy a decent mouse
> instead of junk ones Apple has. Fortunately, the Mac works fine with
> 3rd-party mice like Logitech. Just be sure to include one in your
> budget.
>

Logitech mouse. Idiot.

Jolly Roger

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 5:11:27 PM6/9/07
to
On 2007-06-09 14:20:08 -0500, nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) said:

> Oh yes. Almost forgot. And it will probably get me flamed by some here
> (which flames I'll ignore). But you'll want to buy a decent mouse
> instead of junk ones Apple has. Fortunately, the Mac works fine with
> 3rd-party mice like Logitech. Just be sure to include one in your
> budget.

Actually, I find the included Apple Mighty Mouse with multiple
programmable buttons just fine for casual use:

<http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/>

For fast-paced gaming, though, Logitech is king, IMO.

--
JR

dorayme

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 6:19:55 PM6/9/07
to
In article
<090620071427018076%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>,
Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca> wrote:

You might have read or be interested in a book by Lynne Truss
called Eats, Shoots and Leaves. At least to the extent of giving
it for a present to any chief offenders in family.

There's a little quiz/promo at

http://www.eatsshootsandleaves.com/ESLquiz.html

--
dorayme

Randall Ainsworth

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 6:37:22 PM6/9/07
to
In article <1181422744.6...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,
<"gimme_this...@yahoo.com"> wrote:

> Logitech mouse. Idiot.

Logitech makes some of the shittiest mice I've ever seen/used.

Dave Balderstone

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 6:56:29 PM6/9/07
to
In article
<doraymeRidThis-ECA...@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>,
dorayme <dorayme...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> You might have read or be interested in a book by Lynne Truss
> called Eats, Shoots and Leaves.

Yes. I might have.

patrick j

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 7:42:22 PM6/9/07
to
On Jun 9, 2007 Raghav wrote:

> 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.

Hi

Firstly, in response to your original posting, I think the reason to buy a
Mac is if you like it :)

It's difficult to think of things that you can do on the Mac that you
couldn't do with Windows. So I think the thing to do is to spend as much
time as you can exploring OS X and just see if you like it. If you do then
that is the reason to use a Mac.

There are imho things about Windows which are better than the Mac OS. The
most notable being that Windows has a very good global keyboard short-cuts
system.

For a long time Windows has "right-click" and Apple imho rather foolishly
didn't adopt this excellent thing, but now all Macs (I think) come
"right-click" ready so that one has been solved.

--
Patrick - Brighton, UK
If you wish email me from my web-site: <http://www.patrickjames.me.uk>
Inventory service in Sussex: <http://www.inventoryworks.co.uk>

Bream Rockmetteller dot at dot

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 9:40:57 PM6/9/07
to
On 2007-06-09 16:42:22 -0700, patrick j <usemyw...@googlemail.com> said:
>
> For a long time Windows has "right-click" and Apple imho rather foolishly
> didn't adopt this excellent thing, but now all Macs (I think) come
> "right-click" ready so that one has been solved.

Actually, Mac OS has had that "right click" thing for many years. I
think maybe even as far back as System 7 (but maybe it was System 8).
Anyway, the problem was that you had to either do it the Apple way,
which was hold the control key and click, or buy a third-party mouse
with at least two buttons. Although both options are still available,
the Mac is now bundled with a multi-button mouse. For die-hard
old-timers and those who just don't need it, the multi-button-icity can
be disabled.

The Windows flaw I discovered one day is that there are some functions
that can be accessed only by right-clicking... there are no menu
commands or modal dialogs for some things. I discovered this when I
brought my ThinkPad home from work and tried to connect an external
monitor to it. The only USB mouse I had at the time was a grape-colored
puck from my wife's iMac. Without the second mouse button and no
alternative approach such as control-clicking, I was dead in the water.

Frank

unread,
Jun 9, 2007, 11:44:58 PM6/9/07
to
On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 11:43:52 -0700, Raghav wrote:

>
> I have now heard advice from about 6-7 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.
>

> regards
>
> raghav..

Raghav,

I've only had a Macintosh since last October having used GNU/Linux
exclusively at home and occasionally Windows at school, therefore I have a
fresh perspective. Alas, there is something wrong with Macintosh
computers: There's a bite missing from the apple.

Otherwise, running Parallels Desktop with Solaris 10 in one VM, Ubuntu
Server in another, Ubuntu Studio in another, and - all right, all
right...XP Pro in another, I can accomplish things that were previously
only possible on my home planet.

The Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro laptops truly kicks the monkey's ass.

Frank

Leonard Blaisdell

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 1:13:48 AM6/10/07
to
In article <2007060912545316807-xxx@yyyzzz>, gtr <x...@yyy.zzz> wrote:

> Why is the world still using Windows? Because the new approach to the
> battle for market share by Apple is relatively recent. Everybody
> doesn't sell their car the minute a more capable car is produced, they
> aren't in the market for a new car, theirs apparently works fine thank
> you. When it doesn't work so fine, or is outdated, then they'll replace
> the products they own.

I believe that the reason the world is using Windows is that it came on
their computer, and in many cases, they bought that computer because
they had the OS at work or their friends had it. And I believe that the
vast majority of the world doesn't want to flip to any other OS once
they've learned the first one. I believe that Microsoft knows that as a
first principle.
Otherwise, their outrageous licensing terms and vulnerable OS would have
been seen as archaic many years ago much as OS9 and earlier are now.

leo

--
<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>

Raghav

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 3:57:31 AM6/10/07
to

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... :(

Jolly Roger

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 11:21:32 AM6/10/07
to
On 2007-06-10 02:57:31 -0500, Raghav <sharma.r...@gmail.com> said:

> 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/DVDąRW/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... :(

The prices are indeed comparable when you take into account the
additional hardware and design included in the Mac by default that the
Dell doesn't have. Some examples:

* literally runs *any* operating system you can think of
* only 1-inch thick and only 5.6 pounds
* 2GB PC2 5300 RAM
* 1000 Base-T (Gigabit) Ethernet
* track pad that supports two-finger scrolling, tap, double-tap, and
drag capabilities
* built-in iSight camera
* built-in omnidirectional microphone
* optical audio in/out ports
* included remote control with bundled Front Row (media center) software
* illuminated keyboard controlled by ambient light sensor
* MagSafe power adapter

These features are not optional on Macs. And some of them are nowhere
to be found on competitor laptops.

--
JR

Jon

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 11:59:12 AM6/10/07
to
Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:

> These features are not optional on Macs. And some of them are nowhere
> to be found on competitor laptops.

I know. And as you know I'm a Mac user and love it. But I admit
sometimes you may be in the market for a car and it doesn't really
matter that the BMW compares favourably to the Merc or the Lexus when
what you need is simply something to get you reasonably reliably from A
to B. Air-condition, automatic shift, six- or eight cylinder engines and
a 15-disk CD changer don't come into it. Hard, I know, but there it is:
that old Corolla might find a use yet. I don't like it, I don't think
it's sexy and I know there are better cars, it is just what my budget
allows and I am willing to pay for regarding the work to be done.

But if you are already in the market for a new Audi, by all means do
check out the Beamer, too! :-P
--
/Jon
For contact info, run the following in Terminal:
echo 36199371860304980107073482417748002696458P|dc

Jolly Roger

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 12:16:28 PM6/10/07
to
On 2007-06-10 10:59:12 -0500, see_si...@mac.com.invalid (Jon) said:

> Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> These features are not optional on Macs. And some of them are nowhere
>> to be found on competitor laptops.
>
> I know. And as you know I'm a Mac user and love it. But I admit
> sometimes you may be in the market for a car and it doesn't really
> matter that the BMW compares favourably to the Merc or the Lexus when
> what you need is simply something to get you reasonably reliably from A
> to B. Air-condition, automatic shift, six- or eight cylinder engines and
> a 15-disk CD changer don't come into it. Hard, I know, but there it is:
> that old Corolla might find a use yet. I don't like it, I don't think
> it's sexy and I know there are better cars, it is just what my budget
> allows and I am willing to pay for regarding the work to be done.
>
> But if you are already in the market for a new Audi, by all means do
> check out the Beamer, too! :-P

The Corolla also won't help you nearly as much when that 18-wheeler
smacks into the side of you car doing 50 mph. ; ) Personally, I'll
take the beemer! I agree with you - those of us who buy Macs buy them
because we appreciate features that your typical Windows PC user might
not even consider, but there *is* value in those features, whether or
not others appreciate that value.

--
JR

Jon

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 12:23:19 PM6/10/07
to
Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:

> The Corolla also won't help you nearly as much when that 18-wheeler
> smacks into the side of you car doing 50 mph. ; ) Personally, I'll
> take the beemer! I agree with you - those of us who buy Macs buy them
> because we appreciate features that your typical Windows PC user might
> not even consider, but there *is* value in those features, whether or
> not others appreciate that value.

Yes. Only sometimes you ain't got the $$... :-(

Jolly Roger

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 12:32:45 PM6/10/07
to
On 2007-06-10 11:23:19 -0500, see_si...@mac.com.invalid (Jon) said:

> Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> The Corolla also won't help you nearly as much when that 18-wheeler
>> smacks into the side of you car doing 50 mph. ; ) Personally, I'll
>> take the beemer! I agree with you - those of us who buy Macs buy them
>> because we appreciate features that your typical Windows PC user might
>> not even consider, but there *is* value in those features, whether or
>> not others appreciate that value.
>
> Yes. Only sometimes you ain't got the $$... :-(

I've been on both sides of that coin. I grew up with moderately low
income in new Orleans until I got into the software development
business and moved away. But even back when I was 18 and making
sometimes only 8k a year barely scraping by, and before most folks even
knew what the world wide web was, I found a way to purchase a used Mac.
Where there's a will, there's a way, right?

--
JR

erilar

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 12:59:08 PM6/10/07
to
In article <1hzib64.1scjwgkes379fN%see_si...@mac.com.invalid>,
see_si...@mac.com.invalid (Jon) wrote:

> Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > The Corolla also won't help you nearly as much when that 18-wheeler
> > smacks into the side of you car doing 50 mph. ; ) Personally, I'll
> > take the beemer! I agree with you - those of us who buy Macs buy them
> > because we appreciate features that your typical Windows PC user might
> > not even consider, but there *is* value in those features, whether or
> > not others appreciate that value.
>
> Yes. Only sometimes you ain't got the $$... :-(

Hey, they only cost a fraction what they did in 2000, when I bought my
big G4 8-)

--
Mary, biblioholic

bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.

http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo

Jon

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 3:52:37 PM6/10/07
to
erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:

> In article <1hzib64.1scjwgkes379fN%see_si...@mac.com.invalid>,
> see_si...@mac.com.invalid (Jon) wrote:
>
> > Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The Corolla also won't help you nearly as much when that 18-wheeler
> > > smacks into the side of you car doing 50 mph. ; ) Personally, I'll
> > > take the beemer! I agree with you - those of us who buy Macs buy them
> > > because we appreciate features that your typical Windows PC user might
> > > not even consider, but there *is* value in those features, whether or
> > > not others appreciate that value.
> >
> > Yes. Only sometimes you ain't got the $$... :-(
>
> Hey, they only cost a fraction what they did in 2000, when I bought my
> big G4 8-)

Not to mention 1987 or thereabouts when I bought my first Mac Plus at a
whopping 40% (!!) student discount for around $1,550 - plus tax! That
means the full non-student price of it must have been around 2,600 +
tax. And that was with no HD... Computing is far, ar cheaper now than
ten or twenty years ago in most meaningful senses. Far higher MHz
(GHz)/$, GB/$, GFLOPS/$, etc.

But _still_ you sometimes ain't got those $$... :-(
And I'm getting way off topic. Sorry.

patrick j

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 4:02:05 PM6/10/07
to
On Jun 10, 2007 Bream Rockmetteller wrote:

> Actually, Mac OS has had that "right click" thing for many years. I
> think maybe even as far back as System 7 (but maybe it was System 8).
> Anyway, the problem was that you had to either do it the Apple way,
> which was hold the control key and click, or buy a third-party mouse
> with at least two buttons. Although both options are still available,
> the Mac is now bundled with a multi-button mouse.

Yes the Mac had contextual menus with system 7. I remember very well for
example that Nisus Writer had contextual menus which appeared if you held
down the option key and clicked. Apple's own Launcher had a contextual menu
which came up if you held down the command key and clicked. This brought up
a menu which allowed you to choose size of icons in the Launcher, the
choices were, big, very large and massive :)

However I think that the great break-through with contextual menus was when
someone had the idea to combine them with a mouse button. This of course
became right-click. I don't know who had this idea but Microsoft adopted it
and then unfortunately Apple went into a state of denial over it and came
up with control-click. It was true that you could get Macs to do
"right-click" but I think it was something that should have been absolutely
there right out of the box. Over the years the single most common question
people have asked me after they've switched from Windows to a Mac is "how
to I do right-click?".

Fortunately today Macs do indeed come with a multi-button mouse, indeed a
mouse that is positively festooned with buttons. It's ironic that they have
switched from the "one button is best" thing to a mouse with so many.

Personally I find two buttons and a scroll wheel to be ideal for my uses. I
use a MacAlley mouse in preference to the Mighty Mouse that came with my
Intel iMac.

I have absolutely no doubt that for some one button mouse is indeed best
but I think this is a small minority. I entirely agree with you that it
should be that the contextual menu can be called from the keyboard if need
be because there are indeed people with a problem with using more than one
button.

For the vast majority of users, though, I think two buttons is a lot better
than one and "right-click" is great.

Frank

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 5:20:49 PM6/10/07
to
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 21:02:05 +0100, patrick j wrote:

> On Jun 10, 2007 Bream Rockmetteller wrote:
>
>> Actually, Mac OS has had that "right click" thing for many years.

<snip>

> Personally I find two buttons and a scroll wheel to be ideal for my
> uses. I use a MacAlley mouse in preference to the Mighty Mouse that came
> with my Intel iMac.
>
> I have absolutely no doubt that for some one button mouse is indeed best
> but I think this is a small minority. I entirely agree with you that it
> should be that the contextual menu can be called from the keyboard if
> need be because there are indeed people with a problem with using more
> than one button.
>
> For the vast majority of users, though, I think two buttons is a lot
> better than one and "right-click" is great.

Patrick,

Strong argument and clear history, but I enjoy my (first Mac) MacBook
Pro's touch-pad more than I anticipated.

I sat down at one of our wireless Dell Inspirons at school to demonstrate
a procedure and I must have looked like an idiot. First I touched the pad
with two fingers and clicked expecting a context menu, oops...had to
move my thumb - or my hand since I was crowding home plate - to press that
right button. Then I tried to scroll the contents of the window I was
working in by dragging two fingers down the pad, oops...I had to slide
over to the scroll bar, hold the button down - yes, the left one - and
drag my finger.

Seriously, I'm not exaggerating. After a few flubs I smiled and let out a sigh.

Now, I'm typing this on a Dell 470 Workstation with its two button plus
scroll wheel mouse, and all is well. No confusion. So I certainly
appreciate the difference between what I just describe regarding laptops
and the functionality of a separate mouse.

But I insist, on the laptop (and my other work machine is an older
ThinkPad with a trackpoint, which has its own strengths) the
multi-function track pad and single full-length button are very fast and
very efficient.

Frank


erilar

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 5:22:12 PM6/10/07
to
In article <0001HW.C292174D...@News.Individual.Net>,
patrick j <usemyw...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Fortunately today Macs do indeed come with a multi-button mouse, indeed a
> mouse that is positively festooned with buttons. It's ironic that they have
> switched from the "one button is best" thing to a mouse with so many.
>
> Personally I find two buttons and a scroll wheel to be ideal for my uses. I
> use a MacAlley mouse in preference to the Mighty Mouse that came with my
> Intel iMac.
>
> I have absolutely no doubt that for some one button mouse is indeed best
> but I think this is a small minority. I entirely agree with you that it
> should be that the contextual menu can be called from the keyboard if need
> be because there are indeed people with a problem with using more than one
> button.

I'm one of that minority 8-) I deliberately bought a one-button
wireless mouse when I bought my MacIntel laptop 8-)

Frank

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 5:29:01 PM6/10/07
to
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 00:57:31 -0700, Raghav wrote:

> On Jun 10, 7:13 am, Leonard Blaisdell <l...@greatbasin.com> wrote:
>> In article <2007060912545316807-xxx@yyyzzz>, gtr <x...@yyy.zzz> wrote:
>> > Why is the world still using Windows?

<snip>

> 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/DVDąRW/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... :(

Raghav,

Fallacy. If you're talking about laptops, and laptops of reasonable if
not superior quality the difference is fictitious:

Start with a very popular and very aggressively marketed laptop - Dell
Latitude 620, 820 whatever. Then add, if you can, the items, features,
and specifications of the MacBook Pro. The 15.4" (and now superior OLED
screen which I don't think Dell has), the video chip and memory, the Core
2 Duo 2.16GHz processor, the 1GB of high-quality RAM, the 120GB hard
drive, the GB wireless, BlueTooth, IEEE1394/Firewire 400 and 800, and the
do all/everything optical drive, oh yes the digital audio input, not to
mention its weight, thinness and all the
appearance/functionality/ergonomic touches and not only have you exceeded
the price of the MBP, you've also wound up with more compromises and less
of a computer.

I use one and own the other and speak from my own calculation and
experience.

Frank

Frank

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 5:31:35 PM6/10/07
to
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 10:21:32 -0500, Jolly Roger wrote:

>> I have seen the posts about Mac prices now being comparable to PC, but
>> somehow my calculations are going way above my expectations... :(
>
> The prices are indeed comparable when you take into account the
> additional hardware and design included in the Mac by default that the
> Dell doesn't have. Some examples:
>
> * literally runs *any* operating system you can think of
> * only 1-inch thick and only 5.6 pounds
> * 2GB PC2 5300 RAM
> * 1000 Base-T (Gigabit) Ethernet
> * track pad that supports two-finger scrolling, tap, double-tap, and
> drag capabilities
> * built-in iSight camera
> * built-in omnidirectional microphone
> * optical audio in/out ports
> * included remote control with bundled Front Row (media center) software
> * illuminated keyboard controlled by ambient light sensor
> * MagSafe power adapter
>
> These features are not optional on Macs. And some of them are nowhere
> to be found on competitor laptops.

Geez Jolly, you cited several I left out of the post I just made. High
performing microphone (is it stereo?), insight camera and magsafe adapter
are all of real significance and value.

Frank

Paul Mitchum

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 6:09:04 PM6/10/07
to
Jon <see_si...@mac.com.invalid> wrote:

> Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > The Corolla also won't help you nearly as much when that 18-wheeler
> > smacks into the side of you car doing 50 mph. ; ) Personally, I'll
> > take the beemer! I agree with you - those of us who buy Macs buy them
> > because we appreciate features that your typical Windows PC user might
> > not even consider, but there *is* value in those features, whether or
> > not others appreciate that value.
>
> Yes. Only sometimes you ain't got the $$... :-(

You can get a used G4 ibook/powerbook for pretty cheap. The thing is:
They retain their value, so while it might be about the same to buy a
new low-end PC laptop than a used high-end Mac laptop, you'll be able to
sell the Mac for much more than the PC when it comes time to upgrade.

This is because People Like Macs. :-)

--
http://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2007/070416_argument.html

patrick j

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 6:51:55 PM6/10/07
to
On Jun 10, 2007 Frank wrote:

> But I insist, on the laptop (and my other work machine is an older
> ThinkPad with a trackpoint, which has its own strengths) the
> multi-function track pad and single full-length button are very fast and
> very efficient.

Whatever suits you is best is definitely the right thing for you and no
doubt many others :)

Joseph Crowe

unread,
Jun 10, 2007, 11:51:14 PM6/10/07
to
Jon wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> These features are not optional on Macs. And some of them are nowhere
>> to be found on competitor laptops.
>
> I know. And as you know I'm a Mac user and love it. But I admit
> sometimes you may be in the market for a car and it doesn't really
> matter that the BMW compares favourably to the Merc or the Lexus when
> what you need is simply something to get you reasonably reliably from A
> to B. Air-condition, automatic shift, six- or eight cylinder engines and
> a 15-disk CD changer don't come into it.

The part about air-conditioning being optional depends on where
you live pardner.....for people in the SW USA, A/C becomes right
necessary for comfort.

Richard Maine

unread,
Jun 11, 2007, 12:15:58 AM6/11/07
to
Joseph Crowe <jcr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> The part about air-conditioning being optional depends on where
> you live pardner.....for people in the SW USA, A/C becomes right
> necessary for comfort.

If you can afford it...which was, after all the point being made. Seems
like it illustrates it quite well to me.

When I was younger and poorer, I had several cars without AC in the SW
USA desert. No, it wasn't particularly comfortable, but then it was what
I could afford at the time.

Indeed living thriftily then helped me get established enough that I
don't particularly have to any more, thank you. :-)

--
Richard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain

Raghav

unread,
Jun 11, 2007, 10:15:17 AM6/11/07
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...
>
> --
> Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
> OCaml for Scientistshttp://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/?usenet

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..

John Mayson

unread,
Jun 11, 2007, 10:56:45 PM6/11/07
to
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007, Richard Maine wrote:
> Joseph Crowe <jcr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> The part about air-conditioning being optional depends on where
>> you live pardner.....for people in the SW USA, A/C becomes right
>> necessary for comfort.
>
> If you can afford it...which was, after all the point being made. Seems
> like it illustrates it quite well to me.
>
> When I was younger and poorer, I had several cars without AC in the SW
> USA desert. No, it wasn't particularly comfortable, but then it was what
> I could afford at the time.

Growing up we had a 1973 Ford Pinto that was dark green with black vinyl
seats, no A/C, in Florida. AND WE LIKED IT!! :-)

--
John Mayson <jo...@mayson.us>
Austin, Texas, USA

Jon

unread,
Jun 12, 2007, 4:29:45 AM6/12/07
to
John Mayson <jo...@mayson.us> wrote:

Hey - a car's _supposed_ to be to hot to get into on a summer's day,
right? It's supposed to smell of almost-burning PVC and rubber, right?
(And 98 octane leaded gas...) Don't take my childhood smells away from
me like that. ;-) I "grew up in" a small Mazda in Central Africa in the
early 70's, and let me tell you there was no airconditioning - we hadn't
even heard of such a beast.

Howard Brazee

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 11:14:28 AM6/22/07
to
While the Mac is a Unix machine, you may want to consider a Mac with
Parallels with both Windows and Unix installed into virtual machines
within the Mac.

Having several environments quickly available for testing can be quite
nice for developers.

Howard Brazee

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 11:17:13 AM6/22/07
to
On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 12:20:08 -0700, nos...@see.signature (Richard
Maine) wrote:

>Oh yes. Almost forgot. And it will probably get me flamed by some here
>(which flames I'll ignore). But you'll want to buy a decent mouse
>instead of junk ones Apple has. Fortunately, the Mac works fine with
>3rd-party mice like Logitech. Just be sure to include one in your
>budget.

I'm curious - why don't you like the Mighty Mouse? I will criticize
Mac for lots of things, but I have had no desire to replace that
mouse.

Howard Brazee

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 11:21:45 AM6/22/07
to
On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 12:54:53 -0700, gtr <x...@yyy.zzz> wrote:

>Why is the world still using Windows? Because the new approach to the
>battle for market share by Apple is relatively recent. Everybody
>doesn't sell their car the minute a more capable car is produced, they
>aren't in the market for a new car, theirs apparently works fine thank
>you. When it doesn't work so fine, or is outdated, then they'll replace
>the products they own.

Some other reasons:

Clones are cheaper than Macs.
Mac is not the best choice for gamers.
Business have different problems supporting Macs (my terminal software
won't work with Macs), don't want to support two systems at once, and
cannot afford to replace all computers at once.

Howard Brazee

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 11:23:03 AM6/22/07
to
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 11:16:28 -0500, Jolly Roger
<jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:

>The Corolla also won't help you nearly as much when that 18-wheeler
>smacks into the side of you car doing 50 mph. ; ) Personally, I'll
>take the beemer! I agree with you - those of us who buy Macs buy them
>because we appreciate features that your typical Windows PC user might
>not even consider, but there *is* value in those features, whether or
>not others appreciate that value.

I suppose you will be deader in the Corolla?

Jolly Roger

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 11:29:09 AM6/22/07
to

You'll have a much better chance of surviving in the BMW.

--
JR

Marc Heusser

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 12:04:25 PM6/22/07
to
In article <v2qn731jdc21pgi0o...@4ax.com>,
Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:

> Mac is not the best choice for gamers.

At least my model flight simulator runs great on a 30" display at fast
frame rates.
No complaints over here about the Mac.

HTH

Marc

--
Switzerland/Europe
<http://www.heusser.com>
remove CHEERS and from MERCIAL to get valid e-mail

Jon

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 12:17:03 PM6/22/07
to
Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:

Highly dubious if they are both of roughly the same vintage.

Howard Brazee

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 12:55:39 PM6/22/07
to
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:04:25 +0200, Marc Heusser
<marc.h...@cheersheusser.commercialspammers.invalid> wrote:

>> Mac is not the best choice for gamers.
>
>At least my model flight simulator runs great on a 30" display at fast
>frame rates.
>No complaints over here about the Mac.

If you can find the game you want, great.

Richard Maine

unread,
Jun 22, 2007, 2:34:24 PM6/22/07
to
Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:

I like almost nothing about it.

Start with the fact that I generally prefer a thumb trackball instead of
a rodent. I don't like having to do the "pick up and reposition mouse"
game when doing a longish move. That's particularly bad when trying to
drag (pretty much impossible to pick up a mouse while also holding its
button down), and it is worse on big screens like the one on this 24"
iMac. (It's probably a good thing that I haven't sprung for a 30"
monitor). Yes, I know I could change the mouse sensitivity, but then it
would be too sensitive for fine work. This part is pretty generic to
mice instead of specifically the mightly mouse.

Specifically on the mighty mouse...

The darned thing has a habit of clicking when I don't mean to, when I'm
just resting my hand on it or moving the pointer. My mention of that
will probably get me criticized again (as it has several times in the
past) for holding the mouse improperly, etc. The criticisms are probably
accurate, but I regard that as sort of besides the point. That *IS* part
of why I don't like the mighty mouse and I don't care to debate whether
it is my "fault". My likes are, after all, mine. Other people don't get
a "vote". I like chocolate way too much also. I quite admit that is a
fault of mine... but I still like it. :-)

Also, I don't like the little ball thing. It is way too small and is a
bother to scroll with as a result. I find it the worst of both ends - it
is a bother to do long scrolls with it, taking too many
lift-and-reposition-finger actions, yet it also doesn't give me good
fine control for small stuff. The typical scroll wheel gives me a lot
better combination of smooth long scroll plus good fine control. Maybe
again this is all me. If the ball seems perfect for you, I wouldn't
argue, but it sure isn't for me.

Oh, and I prefer a distinct left and right button that I can see and
feel rather than just hoping that I'll push on the appropriate part of
the uniform top to get a right click.

Ockham's Razor

unread,
Jun 23, 2007, 10:20:27 AM6/23/07
to
In article <2007062210290977923-jollyroger@REMOVEpoboxcom>,
Jolly Roger <jolly...@R.E.M.O.V.E.pobox.com> wrote:

Nope.

--
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross."
Sinclair Lewis

Ockham's Razor

unread,
Jun 23, 2007, 10:20:01 AM6/23/07
to
In article <u9qn7392val0l4shs...@4ax.com>,
Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:

Less recognizable.

But happier with the Mac.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages