[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Few that can be put succinctly in a thirty-second ad.

The usability concept that pervades the entire Mac interface and dictates how apps work (with notable exceptions like Office and Adobe) is still a *huge* advantage.

There was a slew of iLife-themed Get a Mac ads that still hold true.

The usability advantage is most relevant to people who have never used a computer before. The advantage that exists is more than offset by familiarity people have with the platform they have the most experience with.

Besides, the apps that are used the most these days are arguably the social media apps which don't have a platform specific UI.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

The usability advantage is most relevant to people who have never used a computer before. The advantage that exists is more than offset by familiarity people have with the platform they have the most experience with.

Besides, the apps that are used the most these days are arguably the social media apps which don't have a platform specific UI.

Both of your points are completely wrong in the private market.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Both of your points are completely wrong in the private market.

Define and elaborate, please....


Yes, I was thinking of Joe public when I wrote what I wrote, since that seems to be Apple's bread and butter market.

[macaddict0001]

What about shake, isn't that mac exclusive as well?

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I'm also not sure I buy the argument that Macs are inherently more secure than Windows machines any longer. I don't think Apple takes their security as seriously as Mac users think.

I agree, but there are inherent design differences that make mac os more secure. As well as more of an obscurity from a programmer perspective.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Both of your points are completely wrong in the private market.

It isn't cheap to keep having to pay to train people every time Microsoft changes the UI to Office.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by macaddict0001 

What about shake, isn't that mac exclusive as well?


I agree, but there are inherent design differences that make mac os more secure. As well as more of an obscurity from a programmer perspective.

What are the design differences?

[macaddict0001]

Telnet, admin accounts that let you do anything, crappy included firewall, the way things are installed.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by macaddict0001 

Telnet, admin accounts that let you do anything, crappy included firewall, the way things are installed.

Windows 7 is installed with telnet on by default? Creates admin/root users by default? What do you mean by the way things are installed? How is the included Windows firewall inferior to the OS X one?

[seanc]

Windows 7 doesn't even have the Telnet CLIENT installed by default. Damn that's annoying!

[macaddict0001]

The windows firewall is off by default, in Mac OS X installs often are handled by a disc image or by the installer app. In windows not being able to drag/drop something to the recycle bin should be a tip off that things get installed in way too many places.

[seanc]

Unless I'm very much mistaken, the Windows Firewall isn't off by default, unless you tailor your installation image to do so, install another firewall app or turn it off yourself.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by seanc 

Unless I'm very much mistaken, the Windows Firewall isn't off by default, unless you tailor your installation image to do so, install another firewall app or turn it off yourself.

Correct, the Windows firewall is on automatically, at least for 7.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

It's your fault for sticking to Vista.

The Mac/PC commercials are finito because Win7 doesn't have any critical disadvantages over 10.7

My PC at work got significantly worse after upgrading from Vista to Win 7. For me, Win 7 has been a huge disappointment.


While I appreciate a few of the improvements in Win 7 over Vista (never mind XP), every day I pine for a Mac. I honestly don't understand how any rational human being, having used both, would ever voluntarily pick Windows over Mac.

[seanc]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

Correct, the Windows firewall is on automatically, at least for 7.

I'm 99% certain it's on by default in Vista and XP as well.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

The Mac/PC commercials are finito because Win7 doesn't have any critical disadvantages over 10.7

How can you judge a product that hasn't been released?

[finboy]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

It's your fault for sticking to Vista.

Vista is my work machine, the one with the hard IP for all my expensive online stuff. Got an email last week that we'll be updating all machines to Win7 in the next few weeks. I had no choice in the matter. Plus, all of our classroom machines are Vista. It bites.

[Funny Vista story: Our computer folks have spent a lot of time and energy buying/upgrading RAM for new employees with Vista on their machines. Because we were originally upgrading to Vista for the whole organization, they settled on Vista 32 as the standard, even for new machines (until a few months ago). So they've been buying and putting mega ram in Vista 32 machines. Like upgrading from 2 to 8, throwing RAM out, etc. For Vista32. At a meeting a couple months ago I pointed out that Vista32 only uses 4G, max. Turns out the upgraded machines aren't using the new RAM. At all. I don't know what's funnier, the new employees requiring 8G of RAM in their machines (to do word processing most of the time), or the tech morons not realizing what they were doing all that time. For like 2 years now.]

[macaddict0001]

The last windows machine I bought (XP) had the firewall off, but it also had a norton trial, so I would not rule out Norton turning off the windows firewall in favour of its own.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

The usability advantage is most relevant to people who have never used a computer before. The advantage that exists is more than offset by familiarity people have with the platform they have the most experience with.

I could hardly disagree more.

I work at a Windows app development shop, and I see how my coworkers, all seasoned and talented Windows users, waste time on WIndows that on a Mac would be spent accomplishing work.

For example, the open/save dialogs in Windows are extremely inconsistent. There are at least two different open/save dialogs for files, and a third, completely different, one for selecting folders. Some show your Favorites from Windows Explorer, some don't. Why? I'll be damned if I can figure it out. When I asked my coworkers if they knew, they said theyd never even realized there were multiple dialogs.

Windows users are so conditioned to inconsistent UI that they have ZERO concept of what a consistent UI even is. Trying to explain it is pointless -- it's like trying to explain the concept of colors to a person born blind.

I see that at work, I waste tremendous amounts of time concentrating on the UI, because one false move easily causes hassle or destruction on Windows. Then Windows (or, more likely, some essential third-party utility) interrupts with a notification balloon telling me that there's an update, or often to tell me some useless bit of information that nobody needs to know. On the Mac, I can just focus on my work.

That brings me to a related issue: despite suffering from severe settings featuritis, Windows lacks a lot of essential functionality, so it's pretty much necessary to rely on third-party software for essential functions, like mounting a disk image or burning a CD (Win7 can finally do that out of the box, much like Mac OS 9 did ten years ago), having the mouse scroll the window it's over (rather than whatever element has keyboard focus), all kinds of drivers (especially graphics drivers -- what a goddamned nightmare), window management tools, etc. I have to use a lot of "glue" apps to make disparate software and hardware work together (for example, Skype add-ons to make it pause iTunes/WMP and to set the status message automatically when taking a call. Skype for Mac does this automatically.)

It still boggles the mind that anyone uses Windows willingly.

[sek929]

Microsoft's UI is the most inconsistent thing in the world, what I LOVE about mac apps, even from little 3rd part devs is that the UI stays consistent and easy to figure out.

I always hated how PS in Windows has its own title bar, that's retarded.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by tooki 

I could hardly disagree more.

I work at a Windows app development shop, and I see how my coworkers, all seasoned and talented Windows users, waste time on WIndows that on a Mac would be spent accomplishing work.

For example, the open/save dialogs in Windows are extremely inconsistent. There are at least two different open/save dialogs for files, and a third, completely different, one for selecting folders. Some show your Favorites from Windows Explorer, some don't. Why? I'll be damned if I can figure it out. When I asked my coworkers if they knew, they said theyd never even realized there were multiple dialogs.

Windows users are so conditioned to inconsistent UI that they have ZERO concept of what a consistent UI even is. Trying to explain it is pointless -- it's like trying to explain the concept of colors to a person born blind.

I see that at work, I waste tremendous amounts of time concentrating on the UI, because one false move easily causes hassle or destruction on Windows. Then Windows (or, more likely, some essential third-party utility) interrupts with a notification balloon telling me that there's an update, or often to tell me some useless bit of information that nobody needs to know. On the Mac, I can just focus on my work.

That brings me to a related issue: despite suffering from severe settings featuritis, Windows lacks a lot of essential functionality, so it's pretty much necessary to rely on third-party software for essential functions, like mounting a disk image or burning a CD (Win7 can finally do that out of the box, much like Mac OS 9 did ten years ago), having the mouse scroll the window it's over (rather than whatever element has keyboard focus), all kinds of drivers (especially graphics drivers -- what a goddamned nightmare), window management tools, etc. I have to use a lot of "glue" apps to make disparate software and hardware work together (for example, Skype add-ons to make it pause iTunes/WMP and to set the status message automatically when taking a call. Skype for Mac does this automatically.)

It still boggles the mind that anyone uses Windows willingly.

That does not argue against my point though. Regardless of whether the dialogs are consistent or not, they are familiar to users within the applications they use and are familiar with. Perhaps an argument can be made that users would be slower at learning new apps on Windows, but how does this fare against using a platform entirely unfamiliar to them, in addition to apps that are different under OS X than they are under Windows (where they exist on both platforms)?

A great deal of usability study is about leveraging familiarity, whether that familiarity is flawed, the rules that are formed in people's heads backwards or not... That doesn't mean that you can't form new rules, but in terms of people being able to pick up on a concept quickest, relating them to their personal experiences always helps.

The question is whether most users are willing to learn something entirely new, even if this means a little slower moving at first? To that I say it depends, but for most users it doesn't really matter what platform they type up a doc or surf the internet/Facebook on, so there is no major gain in using OS X if you are just that sort of learn-by-rote, basic computing sort of person or worker drone using a particular application or two.

Where the Mac gains ground is in younger generations of people that want more out of their computers than just the aforementioned. I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of switchers are under 50-60, maybe even under 40.

This is a good thing as far as Apple is concerned, younger crowds and customers are always vastly superior from a marketing/company health standpoint.

[ghporter]

I upgraded my 4-year-old, original MBP (Core Duo, NOT Core 2) to the very latest OS and the result was the machine basically telling me "thanks!" I kept an old Dell laptop running on XP for a very long time, but it got slower and slower with each update. It's still "usable," but it is certainly not anywhere near as fast as it was when I got it with pre SP1 Windows XP factory loaded (or with the drive wiped and my own custom pre-SP1 XP installation).

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

that does not argue against my point though. Regardless of whether the dialogs are consistent or not, they are familiar to users within the applications they use and are familiar with. Perhaps an argument can be made that users would be slower at learning new apps on windows, but how does this fare against using a platform entirely unfamiliar to them, in addition to apps that are different under os x than they are under windows (where they exist on both platforms)?

Originally Posted by tooki 

windows users are so conditioned to inconsistent ui that they have zero concept of what a consistent ui even is. Trying to explain it is pointless -- it's like trying to explain the concept of colors to a person born blind.

qed.

[besson3c]

I don't disagree with tooki's point about consistent UI, but that is different than familiarity with something by rote. That's what I'm talking about. Most people only use a small handful of applications which they can learn by rote.

[Spheric Harlot]

Yes, and that's precisely why "most" people hate computers: Which they HAVE TO learn by rote. What a sorry status quo.

On a Mac, most people will tend to do a lot more (iLife), simply because of the undauntingness of the task, and the fact that they know what they're doing, rather than running down a memorized list that will break when you leave out a step.

Apple's engineers take the responsibility for the interface. If there's something that doesn't make sense and forces you into rote memorization, it means they simply ****ed it up.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Yes, and that's precisely why "most" people hate computers: Which they HAVE TO learn by rote. What a sorry status quo.

On a Mac, most people will tend to do a lot more (iLife), simply because of the undauntingness of the task, and the fact that they know what they're doing, rather than running down a memorized list that will break when you leave out a step.

Apple's engineers take the responsibility for the interface. If there's something that doesn't make sense and forces you into rote memorization, it means they simply ****ed it up.

Maybe, but do you know old people? Many of them seem to *want* to learn things by rote, they don't even want to try understanding things conceptually.

[Doofy]

That ain't just old people either. I've had the misfortune to be exposed to a couple of computer newbs lately, both set up with Macs by yours truly. Otherwise normal people who're complete morons when it comes to computers and need to watch instruction videos to do anything on their machines. I figure that most people don't have the ability to learn the concepts behind the user interface and thus learn everything rote.

That said, Windows is still the work of satan and thus should be avoided like the plague.

[RobOnTheCape]

I recently bought an i7 chip PC running Windows 7 and I have to say that for 900(originally 1200 bucks on Newegg) I'm impressed. It came with Harmon Kardon speakers, large screen, lots of ram, many decent programs pre-installed, and very fast web browsing/gaming. After hating my vista machine I bought since my work programs would only function with a pc I tried Win 7, I now finally feel that this argument over which is better is much ado about nothing - except for the virus issue, which I'm always on the lookout for, but will still probably get nailed on eventually.

So far this machine for the money would be hard to beat performance wise by a mac. btw - since the eighties I've owned many macs from the Plus to a mac unibody I also now have.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

That does not argue against my point though. Regardless of whether the dialogs are consistent or not, they are familiar to users within the applications they use and are familiar with. Perhaps an argument can be made that users would be slower at learning new apps on Windows, but how does this fare against using a platform entirely unfamiliar to them, in addition to apps that are different under OS X than they are under Windows (where they exist on both platforms)?

There's a common misconception that once you learn a UI and become proficient at it, then you are the most productive with it. Windows users will perform lots of tasks where you can watch them press keyboard shortcuts, drag from window to window, all in a big flurry of activity, working very quickly. But in the end, 30 seconds have gone by, where if they took a few weeks to learn to use a Mac, they could do the same tasks in less steps in, for example, 20 seconds.

This is why I will pay an "Apple tax" - I don't care if it's a little more expensive feature for feature; in the end I get my work done quicker with a Mac.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by hayesk 

in the end, 30 seconds have gone by, where if they took a few weeks to learn to use a Mac, they could do the same tasks in less steps in, for example, 20 seconds.

"Macintosh, so that you can waste 2 weeks and $500 in order to save 10 seconds."

I have to agree with besson3c on this one; inertia is a very important factor. For many years now, the only reason I have ever given for people to switch to Mac has been the virus thing. That, and when my girlfriend asked I told her that I personally could only give tech support for Macs.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by RobOnTheCape 

So far this machine for the money would be hard to beat performance wise by a mac. btw - since the eighties I've owned many macs from the Plus to a mac unibody I also now have.

Windows 7 is a great release of Windows. But it's still Windows. Granted, the superiority of Mac OS X isn't a qualitative superiority of leaps and bounds over Windows, but it's still very much around. As I've said, if I were forced to use only Windows 7 I could grudgingly adapt to that - but I'd always rather be running OS X and use OS X the majority of the time.

Speaking of UI consistency issues, on an ancillary note I've noted that some iPlatforms OS applications will at times spawn their own smaller windows for certain features, and annoyingly I've seen one that put an X close box on the right side of the window. The window metaphor shouldn't be seen too often on the iPlatforms, but I hope that developers who choose to use them get some guidance from Apple that your app is not running on Windows!

[Shaddim]

For portables, I'll always buy Macs. They're the best designed notebooks you can buy, and you get OS X.

For desktops, I build my own workstation and run Win7 and Mac OS on it. For $6K I built the most ungodly dual Xeon machine (12 cores), it just destroys any Mac Pro.

[Big Mac]

Pretty awesome, Shaddim. Did you do any DSDT patching to get your Hackintosh running optimally? There aren't too many Hackintosh enthusiasts building $6K Xeon boxes, so I have to imagine you're doing a lot of the grunt work yourself.

[Shaddim]

Yes, I did, and it was a bit of a nightmare, mostly due to my Asus motherboard. I'm still hammering out a few kinks related to my ATI 5870s (I run a pair in xfire), but for 2D stuff it's excellent. It's not like I game in OS X anyway. Overall, it was more work and compiling than most would be willing to deal with, but it's been a challenging experience.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

That ain't just old people either. I've had the misfortune to be exposed to a couple of computer newbs lately, both set up with Macs by yours truly. Otherwise normal people who're complete morons when it comes to computers and need to watch instruction videos to do anything on their machines. I figure that most people don't have the ability to learn the concepts behind the user interface and thus learn everything rote.

Yes.

Even the Macintosh is *far* too complex to qualify as an appliance - it's worlds better than Windows (mostly due to the homogenous structure across most commonly-used applications), but there's about four levels of abstraction going on before you even deal with text in a letter you're writing.

This is why the iPad exists, and why it's such a Big Thing™.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

"Macintosh, so that you can waste 2 weeks and $500 in order to save 10 seconds."

…a hundred times a day.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Speaking of UI consistency issues, on an ancillary note I've noted that some iPlatforms OS applications will at times spawn their own smaller windows for certain features, and annoyingly I've seen one that put an X close box on the right side of the window. The window metaphor shouldn't be seen too often on the iPlatforms, but I hope that developers who choose to use them get some guidance from Apple that your app is not running on Windows!

Hello Firefox tabs.

****'em.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by hayesk 

There's a common misconception that once you learn a UI and become proficient at it, then you are the most productive with it. Windows users will perform lots of tasks where you can watch them press keyboard shortcuts, drag from window to window, all in a big flurry of activity, working very quickly. But in the end, 30 seconds have gone by, where if they took a few weeks to learn to use a Mac, they could do the same tasks in less steps in, for example, 20 seconds.

This is why I will pay an "Apple tax" - I don't care if it's a little more expensive feature for feature; in the end I get my work done quicker with a Mac.

In some cases you are absolutely right, but firstly this varies depending on the task and the user, and secondly there is a difference between operating speed and interface discovery.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

…a hundred times a day.

If you do any computing task a hundred times a day then the decisions that go into what you purchase are completely different. Aren't we just talking about the average lay person?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton

"Macintosh, so that you can waste 2 weeks and $500 in order to save 10 seconds."

…a hundred times a day.

Then it only takes 13 months before it's a net time savings

[Spheric Harlot]

OIC.

Redefining ergonomics as a time-based principle.

Okay, so I suppose the two weeks' pay I had to plunk down for my desk chair doesn't really outweigh the three days in hospital for back problems last year, either, eh?

I feel like such a fool for wasting my time on feeling less annoyed every day.

Thanks for the heads-up, dude!

[Uncle Skeleton]

I don't see any indication we were talking about anything but time

[Spheric Harlot]

Ah - it appears you're not, indeed.

I was coming from the actual context of this thread.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Ah - it appears you're not, indeed.

I was coming from the actual context of this thread.

Ergonomics? Really, that's what this thread is about? You and I disagree over this post about productivity:

Originally Posted by besson3c 

The usability advantage is most relevant to people who have never used a computer before. The advantage that exists is more than offset by familiarity people have with the platform they have the most experience with.

I responded directly to this post about productivity:

Originally Posted by hayesk 

There's a common misconception that once you learn a UI and become proficient at it, then you are the most productive with it.

Most of the thread is about productivity. Can you show me one post that is about ergonomics?

Edit: I don't even see what implication you're drawing, regardless of context. Does clicking 3 buttons instead of 2 give people carpal-tunnel? In what way is Windows less ergonomical than Mac OS?

[shiff]

For me this is pretty simple.

My Windows machine at work and my Mac at home are both brand new and both solid machines. I never have problems with either and get work done just as quick on both.

Yes, a Mac is more expensive but I feel it is worth the extra expense. I buy Apple products because I like the way they are designed and how well the operating system, software applications, and hardware interact with each other. On the other hand, I do feel that if Microsoft built and controlled all hardware that their software was installed on, we would see a similar experience. The design may be inferior but the stability would be much closer, if not, the same.

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Edit: I don't even see what implication you're drawing, regardless of context. Does clicking 3 buttons instead of 2 give people carpal-tunnel? In what way is Windows less ergonomical than Mac OS?

Who said anything about ergonomics? My post was about the difference between working quickly vs working productively.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by hayesk 

Who said anything about ergonomics? My post was about the difference between working quickly vs working productively.

Sorry for being confusing, that wasn't a reply to your post, that was me showing your post to Spheric (because when I quote it does the hyperlink for me). Nobody is talking about ergonomics, that's exactly what I was trying to say.