Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Un-switchers

Un-switchers (Page 4)
Thread Tools
Janaka Cooray
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Leeds, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 11:23 AM
 
Here's my 2 cents...

Switched to the Mac just over a week ago. Switched because of the legendary reputation the Mac has for 'just working' and being free of the 'techie maintenance' that PCs require.

The arguments I've read seem to revolve around a few issues:

1) Speed - Mac vs PC
2) Reliability
3) Value for money

So regarding speed..

I remember when a 200 MHz machine seemed to offer instant responsiveness. My 60 yr old father is learning how to use computers; he uses an old 800 MHz PC donated by work to employees. This machine actually frustrates me because it seems so unresponsive - I get tempted to believe it hampers his learning because it seems so slow. He assures me though that it is plenty fast enough - he actually looks a little irritated when I bang on about he could do with a faster machine. 'I'm a basic computer user and don't need a fancy computer' he says.

I think this brand new computer user reminds us that speed is a perceived thing when it comes to computers. We only realize a computer is slow by using faster ones. I believe it tends to be people who have a tendancy to be computer enthusuats anyway who start to think that speed is important.

Reliability..

The recieved wisdom is that Macs are more reliable. This is a general public perception and is based on industry analysts and recognition of where the Apple products are positioned - they have never been manufactured to be as cheap as possible. Like all products - you get what you pay for. As a recent switcher - the Apple product does feel like a higher quality product (particularly the keyboard and system unit.).

Value for money..

There are potentially many factors in this and the reasoning will be individual - for me, I will spend lesss time tinkering and more time doing. My time is valuable to me, so the Mac represents value for money and I am happy with it. In my opinion, value for money should be determined simply by whether you are happy with the product - it is possible a product can always be had for cheaper, but then you will never be satisfied.

PS I'm using Safari and the 'Instant vB Code' buttons don't seem to work (I have to enter vB Code manually - which is a pain.) How do the buttons work?
     
msuper69
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 11:40 AM
 
Another "us" vs. "them" thread.

What a waste of bandwidth, CPU and disk space.
     
StonedRose
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Haiku, Maui, Hawaii
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 12:18 PM
 
Originally posted by theolein:
I don't mean to flame you, but if you really are a certified Apple tech and you came to repair my hardware with an attittude like that and such incredibly bad grammar, I would throw you out the door. I used to be a windows sys admin, and I had a nummber of Dell technicians with poor communicative skills similar to yours. I raised hell with Dell until they finally got people who could write an intelligable report out to us. I don't know if you were perhaps drunk or stoned when you wrote that, but it really is shoddy.
What attitude? But...Im really glad that you used to be a windows sys admin. That must make you...umm....cool or something. Perhaps my grammer does not bode with you too well, but there is actually nothing wrong "grammatically" with the post. And yes; I'am a certified tech. Portable and Desktop. And with the really EASY proper path of troubleshooting steps that Apple provides for repair proccesses even you could probably swap out a logic on a 17 inch PowerBook. Oh wait...you would have to read and comprehend. Not just read and bash on posts (like 5000+ cuz your loser ass life cannot provide for anything else.) If your a windows admin guy...go to another board...loser.
     
the Rebel
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bowling Green, KY USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 12:38 PM
 
Originally posted by limepi:
As for spyware and viruses, let me be brunt. I feel that any system is vulnerable to these kinds of malicious attacks, especially when the user is unaware of the threat. The simple truth is that virus and spyware writers simply don't target the Mac because it's not worth their time. The only "reward" that virus writers get is the sociopathic thrill of causing harm to others. The bottom-of-the-barrel companies that employ spyware tactics usually don't have the resources to port their efforts to the Mac. We are safe at the moment because we are under the radar.
That is simply bogus.

Thousands of people have been trying for years to develop an exploit to take down Mac OS X. Can you imagine the "reward" that one of these malicious programmers would get for being the first person to succeed? There is no significant notariety for being the one millionth person to exploit Windows.

Prior to Mac OS X, since the classic Mac OS was not as secure, Mac users were more vulnerable to viruses and the like. Throughout the 90's, the Mac OS was far more "under the radar" than OS X is today, but yet several dozen Mac viruses existed. When most of those viruses were developed, most people did not even know what the Internet was, let alone have access to it. So propogation of malicious programs was much more difficult and generally had less widespread impact, but still people were motivated to write malicious code for the Mac platform.

Now today we have millions more Mac connected to the Internet where these malicious minded individuals could potentially reach out and access them, but we have zero known threats. You claim that it is because OS X is low profile, but OS X is much more high profile than Mac OS 9. The difference is that OS X is more secure.

Stop believing the propaganda. OS X is more secure because of the way it is written; it is not because no one is trying. There are a lot of people out there who for whatevr reason hate Macs and they would love to see OS X compromised. They have the motivation, but the task is just very difficult. It is much easier to compromise Windows security and that is why there are so many exploits for Windows.
Mark Bitterling
[email protected]
     
macintologist
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Smallish town in Ohio
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 01:08 PM
 
Why are flash animations and flash games so damn slow on the Mac??

If any of you have both a Mac and a PC..check this out:

http://www.teagames.com/games/bmxghost/play.php

Play that game on the Mac. Then play it on the PC. It will be 2-3x faster!
     
the Rebel
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bowling Green, KY USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 01:42 PM
 
Originally posted by zzarg:
I love my PowerBook. It's a Rev.A 12" - 1.12gb RAM, 867Mhz. It's got Panther and I usually use VPC to make windows stuff work

but last week I bought a new Vaio T27GP/S ... because it just wasn't cutting it.... performance was good but every now and then it would just freeze. it would run of of RAM and just not handle it properly.

Safari and iTunes together would be a real problem.. it was more stable if I didn't run iTunes at the same time, but I think VPC was pushing it over the edge.

VPC also had some problems of its own - despite the promise it's not a 'seamless' integration - while not an OSX/Apple fault, it made my ability to work in a maixed environment harder than I could justify.

I'd thought about getting a new 15" PB but the is-it-isn't-it saga (thanks rumourville) or Tiger was offputting (I so don't want to pay AU$229 for an OS a couple of weeks after spending $5k on a new laptop. It's different in the WinTel world where Microsoft don't sell that hardware as well but Apple as a single vendor create an expectation of loyalty but never seem to follow through.

Then there was the dealer when I went to look at the new 15" ... "...well, what do you expect, your current PB is more than a couple of years old, you should think of upgrading every 24 months...".... I have a 4 year old Vaio that works well, and even a 5 year old Compaq which I recently gave to a friend who's now running their small business off it - no complaints. The 12" case is warping, the little screws keep trying to fall out and the palm rest is corroding. My Vaio is pretty much spotless, and the Compaq has lost the cover to one of the ports.

I am really missing OSX. The consistant UI, the range of quality tweaks, the integration (BLuetooth for OSX users is a reality. FOr Windows it's a nightmare), the integrated spell-checker (you can tell when I post from a PC... typos !)

But, at the end of the day for $1000 less I got a machine with the same amount of RAM, a higher resolution screen, an RW+/- DVD and the same size hard drive and much better battery life. I don't get the virus/trojan problems that plague the windows world and are often held up as a reason to switch - because I'm careful, paranoid and use up-to-date protection.... but I realise the benefit of a 'safer' environment for many

I still use my PB for email etc when I'm at home and I'll probably get another one day.

If anyone needs a 'simple' computer for surfing, mail and office apps... I'd always recommend a Mac. For me as an ASP/SQL developer... today a PC is a better solution (sorry !)
I understand your financial reluctance to buy a new PowerBook every 2 years.

I also understand that the new VAIO that you bought last week runs Windows better than your 2 year old PowerBook.

I even understand why Windows is a better platform for development of applications that use Microsoft's propriatory ASP scripting.

However, I do not understand your comparison between VIAO and PowerBook. If your focus is on using Microsoft technology then obviously a Windows computer will have an advantage.

Your complaint about VPC hindering your ability to work in a mixed environment makes no sense to me at all. I understand that the performance of VPC may be inadequate for your needs, but at least with VPC it is possible to run a OS X and Windows mixed environment on one computer. Your new VAIO can not do it at all. So I do not see how VPC is a strike against the PowerBook.

You say that you have a 4 year old VAIO that works well, but obviously when it was only 2 years old, you decided that it was not meeting all your needs or else you would not have purchased a new PowerBook. Now 2 years later, you have decided that the PowerBook is not meeting your needs and so you bought a new VAIO. You did not like the dealer suggesting that you should consider upgrading your PowerBook every 2 years, but it sounds kind of like you are upgrading every 2 years already.

Lastly I am confused about your references to pricing and features. Why do you say that the VAIO has a higher resolution screen when the VAIO has 1280x768 and the 15" PowerBook has 1280x854? It seems to me that the resolution is about the same, but the PowerBook has a larger screen. Of course if video is to be considered at all, you should not ignore the fact that the VAIO's integrated Intel video is stealing 64MB of memory from the main system memory whereas the PowerBook has 64MB of dedicated video. Also I do not know where you are buying your VAIO computers, but I can not find anywhere that sells the T27GP/S for $1000 less than a 15" PowerBook. Where did you get the idea that a 15" PowerBook costs $5000 (AU)? According to the Australian Apple Store, the 15" PowerBook with Superdrive is $3,649 (AU) and the 17" PowerBook is $4,299 (AU). Perhaps if you posted your specs and pricing it would make more sense, but what you have said in your post seems to indicate that you have been misinformed.
Mark Bitterling
[email protected]
     
TRRosen
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 01:46 PM
 
Originally posted by Apple_John:
[BMy next major desktop purchase will be a Dell. I never like Dell. But it is dirt cheap compare to Mac, and give me zero problem.
[/B]
So how are things there in fantasy land? Here in reality we don't believe everything we see on TV. Over and over again we hear people saying Dells are so cheap and Macs are so expensive. Problem is if you equip a Mac and a Dell the same and add in all the extra costs there usually within $100 bucks of the same price with the Dell costing more, many times. (that $99 shipping charge really effects that $399 computers total cost).

Of course there are some things you can't get on a dell...like a new computer free of adware and spyware (Dells come standard with those)....or an actual disk that allows you to install a virgin copy of the OS.
     
the Rebel
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bowling Green, KY USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 02:05 PM
 
Originally posted by theolein:
I don't mean to flame you, but there is one trojan for Mac OSX that is in the wild: http://securityresponse.symantec.com...04.trojan.html This is one that is a simple applescript "rm -rf ~" shell script wrapper, but it has a Microsoft Word 2004 Web Install icon. Someone in the Mac OSX section saw it on bittorrent warez sites, and apparently one user was even conned by it and lost his home folder data.

Now, obviously, this is nowhere in the league of the legions of remote exploits that abound on the Windows platform, and it does involve a bit of social engineering (greed and gullibility) and it needs the user to download it and run it. But it does exist.

Obviously, this is possible on any platform. It says almost nothing about OSX security. What it does show, is that no platform is safe from the user itself, but that is a tradeoff that computer users will have to accept as part of computer using life.
There will always be Trojans. No operating system can prevent a user from actively executing a program that will delete the user's files.

If a user is downloading files from a warez board with he intent to pirate software then they have no one to blame but themselves if the program is a malicious Trojan. There could be a million Trojans for OS X and it would not affect Mac users unless they were downloading files from untrustworthy locations.
Mark Bitterling
[email protected]
     
TRRosen
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 02:46 PM
 
Originally posted by zzarg:
But, at the end of the day for $1000 less I got a machine with the same amount of RAM, a higher resolution screen, an RW+/- DVD and the same size hard drive and much better battery life.
If anyone needs a 'simple' computer for surfing, mail and office apps... I'd always recommend a Mac. For me as an ASP/SQL developer... today a PC is a better solution (sorry !)
exactly how does one spend $500 more for a Sony then for a better equiped but admitedly heavier 12' powerbook and claim to have saved $1000. gotta tell you a 1.33 Ghz G4 will run circles around a 1.2 Ghz pentium M any day.
     
theolein
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: zurich, switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 03:53 PM
 
Originally posted by StonedRose:
.... Perhaps my grammer does not bode with you too well, but there is actually nothing wrong "grammatically" with the post. ... If your a windows admin guy...
Sigh.
weird wabbit
     
Zak Nilsson
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 03:55 PM
 
Originally posted by theolein:
I don't mean to flame you, but there is one trojan for Mac OSX that is in the wild: http://securityresponse.symantec.com...04.trojan.html
That's not a virus, that's an applescript with a Word icon on it. Even I can make one of those. A virus is something that infects your computer without you being aware of it. Furthermore, that applescript does not and cannot have admin rights, unlike most Windows viruses that can use security holes to delete your entire hard drive. And then you have to actually run it yourself. If you don't run it, it will sit harmlessly on your hard drive. And then when you do run it, it will give you a warning about it being the first time you've run that application and are you sure you want to run it. And all this is assuming you didn't notice your "Word" application is only 300k.

Originally posted by msuper69:
Another "us" vs. "them" thread.

What a waste of bandwidth, CPU and disk space.
And we thank you for contributing to it.

     
macimmortal
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 04:21 PM
 
Originally posted by macintologist:
Why are flash animations and flash games so damn slow on the Mac??

If any of you have both a Mac and a PC..check this out:

http://www.teagames.com/games/bmxghost/play.php

Play that game on the Mac. Then play it on the PC. It will be 2-3x faster!
Wierd. I played this on my Gateway 2000 Pentium 133 and it barely played. I put it on my DP G4 tower and it screamed. Don't know what I did wrong.
     
theolein
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: zurich, switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 04:36 PM
 
[quote Originally posted by resuna]
This hardly qualifies as being "in the wild"... it was released through bittorrent, yes, but it's gone extinct because there's no mechanism for it to propogate. It's like the "Phage" exploit on PalmOS (which Symantec made a big thing of when they were trying to convince people to install Norton for PalmOS). It's funny how all popular platforms have one "weak" piece of malware that shows up "in the wild" for a short time and then vanishes, but gives the antivirus companies something to point to in their scare marketing.

And one logical way to make that tradeoff is to avoid using software that encourages exploits, and adjust the settings of the software you do use to ensure that you never open even "safe" objects without a deliberate action on your part. For example, in IE on Windows never select "always trust software signed by..." when that's presented to you. In Safari on Mac OS X, disable the automatic unpacking of "safe" objects.
[/quote]

Originally posted by Zak Nilsson:
That's not a virus, that's an applescript with a Word icon on it. Even I can make one of those. A virus is something that infects your computer without you being aware of it. Furthermore, that applescript does not and cannot have admin rights, unlike most Windows viruses that can use security holes to delete your entire hard drive. And then you have to actually run it yourself. If you don't run it, it will sit harmlessly on your hard drive. And then when you do run it, it will give you a warning about it being the first time you've run that application and are you sure you want to run it. And all this is assuming you didn't notice your "Word" application is only 300k.
I knew it was not going to go down well, and I certainly agree that it's not exactly an example of great programming skill or that it's even effective. It was just an example, that's all. I don't think I pointed out well enough that this so called trojan is in no way a good comparison to the likes of sasser and mydoom on windows.

I actually think that resuna has a good point about the suspiciousness of one single lone virus for OSX turning up conveniently at a time when both Microsoft needs some FUD fodder in order to distract from the crappy security record of Windows and Symantec needs to boost its business in light of its not incredibly good reputation with respect to security and system tools products.

And I certainly did notice the 300k size of the item. But, whoever made it, thought of that as well, since they called it "Microsoft Word 2004 OSX Web Install", obviously with a mental reference to the fact that Microsoft, on the Windows platform, frequently makes updates and products (IE6SP1 is one such example) available on the web as so called "Express" or "Web" installs, generally small executables, with sizes in the order of a few hundred kilobytes, which then download the rest over the web.

What is certainly a bit fishy, is that web installs of that type are almost unknown on OSX. It does, if one is the type that likes conspiracy theories, point a hand to someone in the Windows world having a hand in it. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if either Microsoft, in a lame attempt at scaring of people who use warez, or Symantec, in an equally lame attempt at generating business revenue, created this little gem. I wouldn't put it past them in either case. It's virtually untraceable, and interest is guaranteed to be small enough not to get the FBI in on the deal, although I would so love it if one of those two companies were caught red handed doing something like this.
weird wabbit
     
siflippant
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: England
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 05:12 PM
 
Originally posted by mbryda:
Uh, yes they do. Security experts have long since concluded that if you put an unprotected Windows machine on the Internet it will be infected within 15-30 minutes. WITHOUT THE USER DOING ANYTHING.

In fact a coworker did just that with a virgin machine, didn't touch it, and it was tost in a day or so.
     
krimsal
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 05:29 PM
 
I really love windows users talking about speed.

It's true OS X might have a slower GUI. But where it count's Mac's beat PC by speed of light.

Don't Windows Users ever look for files on their PC's? No. Aah, yes I know, they don't because it makes no sense to wait for ages to find a simple file.

That's why lots of companies I work with, write akward signs from the last century below their correspondence like this: C:/Marketing/2005/Germany/......

So to find the correspondance on their computers they first need to have the paper document, which is of course on their desktop piles of paper, easy to find. And then they can find the document on their prehistoric PC.

Some companies asked me to find their correspondance on my macs for them. And I can find any document created even before I switched to the mac in 1992 on our server, within a minute.

So, I don't know how PC users define speed, but I can't be the same definition I'm using.

As soon as Tiger hits the road, I'll ebay my 1 year old PC and buy myself a beautiful 20" iMac for my huge iTunes library, which doesn't fit on my iBook.

PC nearly spell's like WC.
     
resuna
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 06:28 PM
 
Originally posted by macintologist:
Why are flash animations and flash games so damn slow on the Mac?
Last I checked Flash was a product of Macromedia, not Apple Computer. Apple has no control over the amount of resources Macromedia applies to them, and since Flash is a closed-source product there are no "unofficial builds" with all the tuning and G4 or G5 options turned on like theer are for Firefox.

I will note that the recent return of "popup ads" to the Mac was caused by the advertisers using Flash as a backdoor, so I'm rather cheesed off at Macromedia and Flash right now and wish it never existed... the best I can manage is to install the Firefox Flashblock extension. Greatest Hack Ever!
レスナ
     
resuna
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 06:43 PM
 
Originally posted by the Rebel:
Why do you say that the VAIO has a higher resolution screen when the VAIO has 1280x768 and the 15" PowerBook has 1280x854? It seems to me that the resolution is about the same, but the PowerBook has a larger screen.
Resolution is measured in pixels per inch. The definition of resolution is the size of the smallest object that can be perceived... a laptop with a smaller screen and the same number of pixels per inch has the same resolution.

This is Apple's achilles' heel, as far as I'm concerned. They have, since Jobs took over, had a tradition of providing lower resolution displays than is typical for the "comparably priced" hardware they're competing with.

I have a work-provided 14" Thinkpad with a 1400x1050 display. That's not only a higher resolution display than any Apple screen, but it's got more physical pixels than the 17" Powerbook. I REALLY REALLY want a Mac laptop, but between the lousy screens, the lousy keyboards, and the damn one-button mouse I can't bring myself to spend a grand and a half (after upgrades and applecare) on something as just plain cheesy as the iBook screen and keyboard.

The 12" iBook, as the "entry level" model is the only one that should have as small a display as 1024x768. The 12" Powerbook should be at least 1280x1024, the 14" and 15" models should be 1440x900 (well, maybe the 14" iBook could be 1280), and the 17" model should be 1600x1200 at a minimum.

If I could get a *book with the physical fit and finish of this old Thinkpad T23, and comparable resolution, I'd be all over it, but Apple simply doesn't make one for any price.
レスナ
     
Spliff  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Canaduh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 06:52 PM
 
Originally posted by resuna:
Last I checked Flash was a product of Macromedia, not Apple Computer. Apple has no control over the amount of resources Macromedia applies to them, and since Flash is a closed-source product there are no "unofficial builds" with all the tuning and G4 or G5 options turned on like theer are for Firefox.
Given how animated gifslike the smilies when composing a message here in the forumsbrings Safari to a crawl, it's only natural to assume that the problem isn't with Flash, but with Apple.
     
Link
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hyrule
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 07:29 PM
 
Originally posted by Spliff:
Given how animated gifslike the smilies when composing a message here in the forumsbrings Safari to a crawl, it's only natural to assume that the problem isn't with Flash, but with Apple.
That's a totally different thing -- the GIF image renderer IS apple's problem -- flash in OS X is a seperate program.
Aloha
     
zzarg
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 07:52 PM
 
Originally posted by theolein:
As an asp/sql developer you could probably have saved even more money by buying a desktop, (with which you could also develop using VNC) to be honest, but obviously, if asp/sql is your bread and butter, you're better off with a dedicated machine, even if that ties as much to Microsoft as OSX ties you to the Mac. I don't think I'd like to develop asp/sql stuff in VirtualPC.

However, the fact that there are other languages and applications, especially for the web, doesn't strike OSX off a professional developer's shortlist at all, if you ask me. Anything done with php/perl/python/ruby/java/mysql/postgresql/oracle/sybase can be done as well if not better on OSX. And that's ignoring the C/C++ and X11 crowd, many of whom have switched to OSX as a development platform. Or the OSX developers themselves, who, since Apple is gaining in marketshare, now have a real market and a real chance.

Also, the phenomenal resolutions offered on many PC laptops are a bit of a two edged sword in my eyes. At my last job, as a Windows sys admin, I had a Dell 15" Laptop with 1600x1200 resolution. Even at the higher dpi setting, with the large fonts, I had difficulty reading what was on the screen.

That said, I don't want to come across as a mindless Apple zealot. I liked HP/Compaq machines for their quality (Vaios, however, I have mixed feelings about. They have a very bad rep) as well as IBM Thinkpads, and I don't really mind using Windows, which, if one knows what one's doing, is a perfectly good platform for work and play. Given the choice, however, I would almost always go for OSX and Macs.
point well taken. I should perhaps have mentioned that when the curent project is over I'll probably end up back on my PB (or a new one) for the PHP/MySQL work that I do.
While it is possible to develop ASP/SQL projects on a Mac with OSX and some of the available utilities (and I've had a couple of very successful projects) for the intensity of the current outing it was too hard.
I actually find the PB to be the better machine - the keyboard and general feel is far better than any of the PC offerings. If I could have got away with 100% RDC connection back to a PC I would, but where I am the wireless hotspot solutions are few and far between and 3G/GPRS connections are just too damn expensive !
     
joshh
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spartanburg, SC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 10:42 PM
 
Little bit of background:

I teach multimedia at a local High School (Videography with Premier and mixed GL2s And XL1s, Web Design with Studio MX, Animation with Lightwave 8) I also help maintain the schoo

After playing around with Final Cut Pro, I decided to axe our dedicated video editors (Screenplays) and Premier installs and buy Powerbooks with Final Cut Pro. It's just better (IMHO). And a render doesn't completely lock down the OS like under WinXP. And Apple Studio is only $500 (ed. Pricing).

Now, my 'book should be here next week, So I can learn how to really cook with FCP before I have to teach it to my kids next year. But the real thing I want to know is while I know it will be fine for editing, Can I run Lightwave, Studio, and Office on it effectively.

I have several problems in a lab of 30 windows boxes, that I want the mac to elliminate or at least alleviate.

1. Lightwave renders virtually lock up the machine. I know that this is an issue with multitasking under the windows os. I could take slightly longer render times, if other work could be done at the same time (btw, the windows boxes are 2.6Ghz p4s, 1 gig ram, quadroFX 980)

2. Spyware, Adware and Viruses. It's fracking impossible to keep out of a student lab. All machines run firefox, have no email client, use a current Sophos version. And I still have this problem. I finally gave up, installed a small hard drive for the os, and told all my students that if they saved work to it, it could be hosed at any minute. I made an image of a clean drive on DVD, and at the first sign of problems I re-image the os drive.

Now concerns about the mac are mainly about Studio MX. I've read over and over how bad Flash performs on the mac. But is it just Flash PLAYER? or will I have the same problems with Flash MX?

Any help or advice would be appreciated. I am a potential switcher, but only if I can get everything to work fairly easily for both me and my students.

Thanks
... time is fleeting...madness...takes it's toll...
     
joshh
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spartanburg, SC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 11:03 PM
 
oopsy. My last post should have read, "...help maintain my school network and teacher's machines" One day I'll learn to proofread.

But I did have a couple things to say that weren't related to the above post. I've seen a couple of people complain about windows questionable "snappieness" citing the delay in opening the start menu and control panels. To parrot M$, this isn't bug, it's a feature. The delay is set in the registry, and can be changed with only a little effort and regedit. But grandma isn't going to know that. And she couldn't run a command line app if she had to. But it's a poor UI design decision, not a fault of the OS.


And the people that justify windows spyware, adware, virus problem by pointing to their larger install base and that ms is a correspondingly bigger target...

SO WHAT?

In the real world, we deal with real problems. I have a lab that I want to keep running at a minimum effeciency level with the fewest problems possible. If a mac does that, then a mac is what we need. regardless of any reasons/justifications for windows vulerabilities

That said, I like my XP laptop. But I know how to keep it running smoothly too. And that level of profeciency just isn't something that can be expected of the average user (and it weighs 12 lbs. and is doing good if it runs an hour on batteries. Desktop replacement wasn't a joke!)
... time is fleeting...madness...takes it's toll...
     
mbryda
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 3, 2005, 11:44 PM
 
Originally posted by joshh:

1. Lightwave renders virtually lock up the machine. I know that this is an issue with multitasking under the windows os. I could take slightly longer render times, if other work could be done at the same time (btw, the windows boxes are 2.6Ghz p4s, 1 gig ram, quadroFX 980)
That's probably part of the problem. If you're doing 3d rendering, the P4 is a joke. You would have been better off with AthlonXP's or 64's. The P4 gets it's butt handed to it in 3d and engineering apps by the Athlon and the G5. It (p4) has a VERY WEAK FPU wich makes those tasks painful.

Also, Windows multitasking engine is quite poor as well. I've been doing a lot of video transcoding on my G4/800 iMac and while the transcodes are slow (about .5x-1x) I can do lots of work in the foreground while it grinds away. I'd imagine a more modern Mac would handle this much better and faster for all apps concerned. The same can be said of other CPU-intensive apps on the Mac.
     
Squozen
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 01:42 AM
 
Mac OS X 10.3.x on a 1.5Ghz Powerbook with 1.5gig of ram and 128meg video card-

Click on applications folder placed in the dock takes a painful 5 seconds to display, clicking the bookmarks menu or history menu in Safari painfully displays after a latent 5 seconds. Immediately clicking these menus again is almost instantly responsive, however if the menus have not been accessed for around 20 mins or so, the menus will again induce this horrific 5 second delay.
I tested this just now:

Also running 10.3.8 on a 1.5Ghz PowerBook with 1Gb RAM and a 64Mb Radeon...

Click on applications folder in the dock... *instant*

Scrolling through a 1.4Mb PDF full of images and tables... *no problem*

And this is running on battery power (reduced clock speed).

Perhaps your install is broken?
     
Spliff  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Canaduh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 01:49 AM
 
Originally posted by Janaka Cooray:
PS I'm using Safari and the 'Instant vB Code' buttons don't seem to work (I have to enter vB Code manually - which is a pain.) How do the buttons work?
I think half the vB code buttons don't work in any browser. They're either disabled or broken.
     
resuna
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 07:15 AM
 
Originally posted by mbryda:
That's probably part of the problem. If you're doing 3d rendering, the P4 is a joke.
If the problem was how long rendering took, that would be credible, but remember that Lightwave was originally developed for the Commodore Amiga, with a 7.14 MHz 68000, similar to the Mac Plus... and I was doing background renders on my Amiga in the '80s without the macghine locking up. So...
Also, Windows multitasking engine is quite poor as well. I've been doing a lot of video transcoding on my G4/800 iMac and while the transcodes are slow (about .5x-1x) I can do lots of work in the foreground while it grinds away. I'd imagine a more modern Mac would handle this much better and faster for all apps concerned. The same can be said of other CPU-intensive apps on the Mac.
I think you hit the nail on the head. NT is quite a capable kernel, but the Win32 subsystem has so many bottlenecks where processes can block each other it's not funny.
レスナ
     
nat
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 07:19 AM
 
Originally posted by limepi:
As for spyware and viruses, let me be brunt. I feel that any system is vulnerable to these kinds of malicious attacks, especially when the user is unaware of the threat. The simple truth is that virus and spyware writers simply don't target the Mac because it's not worth their time.
Originally posted by meelk:
I LOVE the high and mighty Mac user attitude when it comes to spyware,viruses, etc. Lets be frank, the only thing keeping you safe, is you reside in a paltry 2 or 3 percent of the market.
uh.... no

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/12...ll_stalks_mac/
( Last edited by nat; Apr 4, 2005 at 07:31 AM. )
     
msuper69
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 07:34 AM
 
Originally posted by nat:
uh.... no

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/12...ll_stalks_mac/
A well-written comprehensive article but he mistakenly refers to Internet Explorer as the Windows equivalent to the Finder. I believe he meant to say Windows Explorer, the file system navigation tool in Windows.

I'm going to save that for future reference. Thanks for posting the link.
     
ronjamin
Baninated
Join Date: May 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 09:24 AM
 
I read through many of the posts and have come to the following conclusions about OSX vs WinXP.

1. The Classic "speed" has really never been achieved by OSX. What??? Yea, you know, the snappiness that is constantly referred to. OSX always feels kind of silky smooth, whereas OS9 had a snap to it. OSX has matured quite well since 10.1, and one would expect this to continue. Rumors of Tiger point to this direction.

2. Interoperability: Mail is crippled, Entourage is crippled, I still cannot view certain .avi files, etc. etc. The list of interoperability is really small (games aside). But perception is sometimes greater than reality. When I cannot effectively use IMAP in Mail, and there are Windows attachments that are an effect of an Exchange Server, it leads to these problems. Small, annoying issues that people other than techies have frustrations dealing with. Remember, not everone is like us tech enthusiasts.

3. Web Site Compatability: I am finding that Safari (and Mozilla for Mac) about 15% of the time do not work on sites. These sites have components that are only visible to Windows computers, for one reason or another. Isn't this the reason why Microsoft was sued??? The web is supposed to be an open standard, but Microsoft is constantly injecting proprietary systems into the web (as well as most companies). Apple, unfortunately, has to deal with this reality. I hate it more than anything to go to a site that says I have to use Internet Explorer 7.0 (or whatever) that is WinXP compatabile only.

Of course, without our whining and bitching, these things would never get solved, so I rest my comments.
     
joshh
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spartanburg, SC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 09:28 AM
 
Oh well, the quote button won't work so:

*********************************************
mbryda said:

That's probably part of the problem. If you're doing 3d rendering, the P4 is a joke. You would have been better off with AthlonXP's or 64's. The P4 gets it's butt handed to it in 3d and engineering apps by the Athlon and the G5. It (p4) has a VERY WEAK FPU wich makes those tasks painful.
*********************************************
Yeah, I know. There are insanely complex purchasing reasons why I have P4s instead of A 64s. But I can get around them with macs, beacuse they are a sole-source provider and can make an end run around a bunch of red tape.

and:

*********************************************
quote:Also, Windows multitasking engine is quite poor as well. I've been doing a lot of video transcoding on my G4/800 iMac and while the transcodes are slow (about .5x-1x) I can do lots of work in the foreground while it grinds away. I'd imagine a more modern Mac would handle this much better and faster for all apps concerned. The same can be said of other CPU-intensive apps on the Mac.

I think you hit the nail on the head. NT is quite a capable kernel, but the Win32 subsystem has so many bottlenecks where processes can block each other it's not funny.

*********************************************

And this is true as well. XP is only marginally a true multitasking OS. Between the poor priority assignment of tasks, and branch mispredictions, it slows to a crawl. Lightwave, Premier, and any rendering app will monopolize the CPU, IF YOU LET IT! that's one of the reasons I'm strongly concidering the mac for everything.


Oh and it was cool to hear the words Amiga mentioned with lightwave. I started on a Video Toaster.
... time is fleeting...madness...takes it's toll...
     
mbryda
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 10:08 AM
 
Originally posted by ronjamin:
2. Interoperability: Mail is crippled, Entourage is crippled, I still cannot view certain .avi files, etc. etc. The list of interoperability is really small (games aside). But perception is sometimes greater than reality. When I cannot effectively use IMAP in Mail, and there are Windows attachments that are an effect of an Exchange Server, it leads to these problems. Small, annoying issues that people other than techies have frustrations dealing with. Remember, not everone is like us tech enthusiasts.

I have no trouble dealing with AVI files from my Mac - I use VLC and it plays most of them without a hitch. Those that are WiMP or whatever, I just avoid. We don't need more proprietary standards, esp since MPEG4 is so much better than WiMP.

3. Web Site Compatability: I am finding that Safari (and Mozilla for Mac) about 15% of the time do not work on sites. These sites have components that are only visible to Windows computers, for one reason or another. Isn't this the reason why Microsoft was sued??? The web is supposed to be an open standard, but Microsoft is constantly injecting proprietary systems into the web (as well as most companies). Apple, unfortunately, has to deal with this reality. I hate it more than anything to go to a site that says I have to use Internet Explorer 7.0 (or whatever) that is WinXP compatabile only.
On the PC I do all my surfing with Firefox and have no issues. On my Mac I split it FF/Safari and have no issues either. Those sites that are IE only I always send them an e-mail or web feedback why they lost me as a customer.
     
garfield_online
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 10:22 AM
 
Originally posted by joshh:
Little bit of background:

I teach multimedia at a local High School (Videography with Premier and mixed GL2s And XL1s, Web Design with Studio MX, Animation with Lightwave 8) I also help maintain the schoo

After playing around with Final Cut Pro, I decided to axe our dedicated video editors (Screenplays) and Premier installs and buy Powerbooks with Final Cut Pro. It's just better (IMHO). And a render doesn't completely lock down the OS like under WinXP. And Apple Studio is only $500 (ed. Pricing).

Now, my 'book should be here next week, So I can learn how to really cook with FCP before I have to teach it to my kids next year. But the real thing I want to know is while I know it will be fine for editing, Can I run Lightwave, Studio, and Office on it effectively.


================
If you go to NewTek site, you should see

LightWave [8] version 8.2 - 01/18/2005
Windows 2000 & XP, Mac OSX 10.3.3

Hence I would say it is supported. As for Office, there a version of MS Office for Mac (except Access database), and in fact, it is actually surprisingly better looking than Windows version. I have played with Excel on Mac another day, and I found it has more and better template than its PC counterpart. If you want to save a bit of money, you may want to try OpenOffice, which is an open source alternative.

As for Macromedia, without a doubt, there is a version for Mac.

=========

I have several problems in a lab of 30 windows boxes, that I want the mac to elliminate or at least alleviate.

1. Lightwave renders virtually lock up the machine. I know that this is an issue with multitasking under the windows os. I could take slightly longer render times, if other work could be done at the same time (btw, the windows boxes are 2.6Ghz p4s, 1 gig ram, quadroFX 980)

=============
It should be better with a Mac. I recently got an old iMac for free. It is PowerPC G3 333MHz, with 256MB momory. Even with this low specification. It is usable with multiple applications running. At one time, I have VLC playing mp3, Adrium for messenging, Mail and Opera for web and even NereOffice for word processing. It is a bit sluggish, but still responsive.

As many here already mentioned, Mac like memory, and more is better.
=============


2. Spyware, Adware and Viruses. It's fracking impossible to keep out of a student lab. All machines run firefox, have no email client, use a current Sophos version. And I still have this problem. I finally gave up, installed a small hard drive for the os, and told all my students that if they saved work to it, it could be hosed at any minute. I made an image of a clean drive on DVD, and at the first sign of problems I re-image the os drive.

============
Well exe/ bat files for windows won't work in Mac ... so it certainly does reduce the chance of having a student to using the Mac to experiment viruses. (some of them can be a bit over curious sometimes)

If you may be on tight budget, you may want to keep practice what you are doing now. Re-image the trouble system when it shows first sight of trouble. As in classroom situation, it is quite different from home computers. In fact, you may want to do that more often to keep uncopyrighted material off the computers anyway.
============

Now concerns about the mac are mainly about Studio MX. I've read over and over how bad Flash performs on the mac. But is it just Flash PLAYER? or will I have the same problems with Flash MX?

============
Well, this could partially contributed by the graphics cards on the sytem. Since Mac uses hardware acceleration whenever it is possible to perform graphics redraw (which significantly differs to PC), hence ,Mac with better graphics subsystem would be better in this department.

(I am not an expert in Mac. In fact, I am only a casual Mac user, however I appreciate other operating system rather to beaten one to death)

I hope this helps.
============


Any help or advice would be appreciated. I am a potential switcher, but only if I can get everything to work fairly easily for both me and my students.

Thanks
     
omar96
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 10:41 AM
 
Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
it took me a long time to migrate and when i did... i still relapsed into os9... TWICE!
I have the same problem...were you using slower hardware at the time? I've found OS X to be UNBEARABLE on my iBook 500 (coming from Windows, especially, but there's also a night-and-day difference between a G4 with QE and a G3 with none. The hardware that Apple needed to run OS X wasn't available when the OS was launched. It's much better now; even the low-end eMac/mini (I lump them together given they use the same RAM, CPU speed on the slower mini, and graphics controller/video RAM) is pretty snappy, but if your Mac came out before OS X with QE did, don't try this at home.
eMac 1.25GHz | 1.5GB PC2700 | 250GB Maxtor HDD | 8x LiteOn DVD+-RW

Sawtooth 1.5GHz | 1GB PC133 | 120GB Maxtor HDD | 40x CD-RW (external) | 16x DVD-ROM | Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB
     
Will V.
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central IL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 01:06 PM
 
Originally posted by mbryda:
Uh, yes they do. Security experts have long since concluded that if you put an unprotected Windows machine on the Internet it will be infected within 15-30 minutes. WITHOUT THE USER DOING ANYTHING.

In fact a coworker did just that with a virgin machine, didn't touch it, and it was tost in a day or so.
Yes, I actually experienced this while helping a friend out with his infected machine. We would reinstall his OS, and it would become infected before we even had a chance to install antivirus software and update it. We checked the MBR, by the way. We finally concluded his computer was being infected with a virus via his DSL line, every time we installed the OS.

Regarding "snappiness" of Windows, I don't know if I agree, really. Windows may seem snappy out of the box, but once you get some bloated antivirus on there, and get a few other giant apps that need to have their own services running, Windows quickly loses its snappiness.
     
SomeToast
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: California - Bay Area
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 01:35 PM
 
Originally posted by resuna:
[...] but remember that Lightwave was originally developed for the Commodore Amiga, [...]
And it shows.

Lightwave is pain. Check out Cinema 4D. I am very glad I switched (especially for modeling).
     
mbryda
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 02:27 PM
 
Originally posted by joshh:

Yeah, I know. There are insanely complex purchasing reasons why I have P4s instead of A 64s. But I can get around them with macs, beacuse they are a sole-source provider and can make an end run around a bunch of red tape.
Grants fron Intel? Seriously, the A64's usually come in cheaper than the P4 and give you more bang for the buck.

I'm in IT and it amazes me how blindly most will buy Intel without doing the research and seeing that there are better options out there. When I was (and do) the PC thing, I always built AMD machines - never once an issue, even with those left on 24/7/365.

But, have fun with your new Mac!
     
resuna
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 04:07 PM
 
Originally posted by joshh:
Oh and it was cool to hear the words Amiga mentioned with lightwave. I started on a Video Toaster.
You're a Cool friend of NewTek too! Hoopy!
レスナ
     
resuna
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 04:22 PM
 
Originally posted by omar96:
I've found OS X to be UNBEARABLE on my iBook 500
I guess it all depends on what you're willing to put up with to get away from the "three Rs"... Reboot, Reload, Reinstall. Maybe I'm just an abusive computer user, but working on Windows or OS 9 feels like I'm juggling Faberge eggs full of toxic waste on a roller coaster. Either you don't juggle at all, or you make sure your hazmat suit is handy.

(I figure that's what the Intel bunnysuits were wearing)
レスナ
     
Kyros
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 09:47 PM
 
I run OSX no problem on my g4/450 cube. Does a 4-5 year old pc exist that can run XP without trouble? I mean things like basic photoshopping, iTunes, browsing at the same time and so on. I've had times with Graphic Converter, Photoshop, Safari, Camino, iTunes and Appleworks open at the same time and it will run almost as fast as if only one were open. My cube is also actually worth something, while a pc is worth next to nothing the instant you pull it out of the box. While I do not plan on selling my cube, it is nice to know that I could probably trade it outright for a mini. Also, while pc users like to boast of their upgradibility, I can upgrade the cube to a fast 256 meg graphics card, 1.5 gigs ram, dual processor, with a fan that is quieter than the stock hard drive. So much for not being upgradable.
     
sribe
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 11:30 PM
 
Originally posted by meelk:
Viruses, trojans and spyware just dont "magically" appear...
Really? So I guess the RPC vulnerability was just a figment of my imagination???
     
Link
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hyrule
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2005, 11:33 PM
 
Originally posted by sribe:
Really? So I guess the RPC vulnerability was just a figment of my imagination???
No, in his book unless you magically remember to plug in a router, firewall the machine, and install antivirus/antispyware software, you're an idiot.
Aloha
     
crazeazn
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: houston/dfw
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2005, 07:22 AM
 
this has got to be the thread of the year.

use both, when they get old buy new ones. the end.
12" AI book REV B, mac mini core duo 1.66
     
cineologist
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2005, 03:37 PM
 
HOMEWORK for the unswitchers: Go to CompUSA and COUNT how many display computers are showing some kind of windows error message.

First and foremost, I work on a Windows-based computer forty hours a week. I am a software engineer developing stand-alone and web-based applications. I know the nitty-gritty of regedits, DLLs and how softwares are deployed and installed into each computers. Thanks to Microsoft, I make a decent living.

I know how ugly and messy the Windows can be. I don't mind that as long as I get paid for dealing with that.

As soon as the day's over, I am eager to leave the Windows-infected world and do my personal stuff on my Mac. I love Expose!

Unswitchers, are you still whining how expensive Macs are? Do me a favor and allow me to guide you through finanical freedom for the remainder of your "switched" life. Yes, Mac may be expensive to start with (only because it's the best of the best and if you wanted a PC of the same quality, you'd be paying for the same dollar value anyway). Now, onto my personal finanical experience:

1. I bought my Dual 867 G4 in 2002 for $1600. I had added few RAMs to it.

2. In 2005, I sold the Dual 867 for $1025 (thus the value of 3-year use is theorically $575 just like your cheap Windows-based PC that you first bought and is now valued nothing after 3 years).

3. I got a new Dual 1.8 G5 priced at $1999 and only shelled $974 (plus taxes). I could become like you un-switchers and shell out $300 for a brand new iMac.

4. Selling my iMac in 2 years (2007), I could get another new Mac for $500 more and again every other 2 years just like you un-switchers who are more concerned about pricing over quality of Operating Systems.

5. I never have to shell out money for support services or the Geek Squad nerds.

Now, why are you un-switchers coming back to this forum. I thought you'd be long gone by now. Oh maybe you still have some love left and that is perfectly understandable.

Tiger, bring it on!

Longhorn... hello?
     
alphasubzero949
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2005, 04:10 PM
 
I swear, there should be a sticky somewhere on dealing with AVI files.

Just get the free DiVX plugin from www.divx.com and the problem is solved. No need to use VLC or other third-party players.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:03 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,