[Northform]

It's time for Apple to put up. I love the company and have always loved the Macintosh, but as I sit here in the basement of Lowell house using a Pentium III PC I question my allegiance to Apple and the Macintosh platform for many reasons.

Internet Explorer is fast, rendering many pages instantly. It doesn't have some of the nice features of OmniWeb, but it works with every page, plugin, and whosit. OW is currently too slow to use and Chimera is obviously incomplete. The attage of "how often do you use..." is great until you really need the feature.

The taskbar is nice. Yeah that's right. I can have many full screen windows open and flip between them effortlessly. The dock, although technically more advanced, is not as useful. In the windows taskbar you can add icons like in the X one and all open windows are displayed down there, not just minimized ones.

It is snappy! One of the major reasons that I never considered the Windows platform is that, until now, the interface was dogged slow even on premium hardware. Now, on regular hardware, the GUI screams along at speeds better than classic and that are currently in X's dreams.

"Oh, but the new orange and blue UI looks horrable." Yeah it does, but you can change it to the classic windows look using built in features and with add-ons you can use true themes, not the crap we can't move the widgets ones for X (I'm not really into themes). Anyway, Aqua really isn't that appealing to me. The reason it is tollerable is that it does a good job with visual cues and such, but it's a little bright (personal preference). Classic looked so brilliant with its muted tones and professional look. Many elements (like the horizontal bars of Aqua) have no purpose and are an excersise in extravagance. The fading buttons waste a lot of CPU time and do a worse job of displaying the active button (not to mention that you can't use the keyboard to shift the active button).

"Don't feed the trolls." I am not looking for a response really and I'm not going to post after this one in this thread. I am simply stating what has driven me, for the first time, to consider a Windows machine. It doesn't mean that I am going to purchase one, but it is a problem that shouldn't be treated by the Mac community as a "see no evil hear no evil" problem. Apple could loose a considerable ammount of their core constituancy here.

Price. The price of Windows machines is less. Sure one can argue that if you get one with name brand parts like Apple uses and such they would be the same, but the fact that I feel ripped off buying an Apple remains.

"OS X will get better." I am sure that it will and I am sure that it will surpass Windows someday. That day is not today and I need a computer now. It might take a few years or it could be Jaguar that bridges the gap. I don't know (I haven't "previewed" Jag like the rest of the world). Apple is a constant innovator, but innovations take time to become refined. OS X hasn't reached that stage yet. The problem is that I want the best now; not in a year or three years. By that time I may wish to buy a new machine and who knows what may be out then. Linux may have taken over the world, OpenBeOS, Cosmoe, Syllable, or the like might gain steam. Who knows, Amiga might even make a comeback.

"OS X is superior to Windows." While its technical attributes (the Mach microkernel, Cocoa, Quartz,, and such) are much better than what Windows has to offer it hasn't translated into a better user experence yet. Quartz is slow for the moment (QE might fix that). It does allow for the great font display and minimization effects, but I believe that the snappyness is more important to me (I know that X doesn't get a preformance hit rendering these effects because it uses a third generation display engine, but the 3rd gen engine puts a hit on everything). Cocoa, while much better for programming, isn't great for porting programs from the Windows world. Maybe it's just developer unfamiliarity with it though and that, in the long run, it will give X more apps and allow easier ports, but that day has yet to come.

I know that I have said that I don't intend to post again in this thread, but if someone comes up with something I have not addressed I will try to respond. I don't intend to respond to posts of "traitor" or "troll" since they have disrespected the time and effort I have put into articulating the feelings I am having right now.

I have written this as a piece to encourage new thought in the Mac community. I dislike Microsoft as much as anyone reading this, but I may, like the rest of the world, decide that they are unavoidable. Does anyone else feel this way.

I guess that I am fortunate that I never really have to commit to one specific platform since I have never made an investment in high-priced apps. I know that for many a switch isn't possible for this reason.

I know that this is one of the more controvertial issues, but I like the raster based interfaces and icons of 9 and Win. They provide a nice rigidity. More importantly, less people screw them up. X icons do look great, but in many ways they are impractical. I don't have the resolution to handle 128x128 icons (or even above the normal 32x32).

A lot of this is personal opinion and some points have been written as I thought of them so please don't critisize me for that. I simply wish to ask Mac uses if we are loyal to Apple or our principals for buying a Mac? Does the current state of X no longer represent the reason we have always bought Macs? Is it better to stick it out or defect until times get better? I do not have answers for these, but they will be addressed, probably unconciously, when it becomes time for us to buy our next computers.

I hope you have found this article to be interesting rather than bait for an argument.

[GnOm]

Just a short overview of whet I don't like in Windows:


- the window in window concept (e.g. Photoshop opens a big window and then its palette and document window in that big window)

- each window has its own menubar (too much aiming)

- no menu bar on top of the screen (easy to reach)

- Wizards everywhere

- it tries to hide stuff from the user (unused apps dissappear from the Start menu, everything is hard to find even if you are used to previous Windows versions)

- DLL hell


Of course some of that is configurable but it takes a lot of time to find out how.
Overall I like the look and feel of the Mac much better than the Windows one.


bye.

[diamondsw]

I find the best reason, ultimately, to use a Mac is that it works. I never really worry that plugging in new hardware won't work. I plugged in a new USB mouse to my Win2K box at work ad suddenly couldn't suspend - the Logitech software prevented it, and it took forever to remove it (using Add/Remove program won't clean out drivers). I don't worry about one software install clobbering another.

OS X is also much more sensibly designed and laid out than Windows. The higher layers (things in the Library folders) are very organized and make sense. Te UNIX foundation requires a bit more knowledge to understand, but it's widely documented everywhere. So if I'm saavy enough, I can tell exactly what my machine is doing, find all of its preferences, and fix things quickly. With Windows, it's all too frequent that when something breaks, no one can tell you why. Could be a DLL, the registry, an INI file, or something else.

So cost, snappiness, etc all aside, I like my Mac because it just works. Windows still doesn't.

[mahoney2]

I work IT for a company that is all windows (except for about 30 macs) I have 3 Win2k boxes of my own and really can say that I really dont enjoy using them.

I for one hate the fact that every window has its own button in the taskbar. When I have like 8 windows open I can't read any of them which makes them useless.

In all honesty after workin all day on W2k I really do enjoy comin home and using my mac. Its never a problem and it just works. If I left the platform id miss stuff like iTunes/iMovie, Mozilla (the mac client works so much better), Interarchy (stuff like CuteFTP are absolute garbage) etc. Just the overall quality of the experience. I'm a tester and am on 10.2 c115 now and a lot of what you dont like about the mac has been fixen in jaguar. Use what ever you like and fits your needs

[mahoney2]

One more thing. The thing about Windows boxes bein much cheaper I really dont think is true anymore to that big of an extent. I was on a few sites and pricing machines circa. 1.9ghz witha 15-17 CRT with modest components, 256ram/40gig hd etc. and they really weren't as cheap as I was expecting. Most of them were in the 1400 dollar range. Id rather have a fp g4 iMac for that.

[Guy Incognito]

I know that I have said that I don't intend to post again in this thread, but if someone comes up with something I have not addressed I will try to respond. I don't intend to respond to posts of "traitor" or "troll" since they have disrespected the time and effort I have put into articulating the feelings I am having right now.

Yeah but what good does it do to you to articulate your feelings on message boards? Do you regularly waste 'time and effort' like this? This post is obviously a troll and while you say you will not respond to people that treat you as a troll you very well know that expressing feelings like in an inappropriate place like this will get you nowhere and do nothing except piss people off.

Send your suggestions to Apple if you want something done. But don't come here not expecting to be called a troll when your post is obviously one that is meant to enrage people.

And with this...I will say that I agree with some of the things you mentioned in your post. But as I said...wrong place if you want any of these issues addressed.

[(s)macintosh]

So you wanna switch to Windows, eh?

Read the most current EULA... If that doesn't frighten you to ANY other platform, I don't know what will...

Some sweet snippets:

"You agree that in order to protect the integrity of content and software protected by digital rights management ('Secure Content'), Microsoft may provide security related updates to the OS Components that will be automatically downloaded onto your computer. These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and use other software on your computer. If we provide such a security update, we will use reasonable efforts to post notices on a web site explaining the update."

Thanx for the rewted b0x, billG.

Or this little jem:

"You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version of the OS Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the OS Product that will be automatically downloaded to your computer."

Sounds like this could be back door for future DRM technologies. Such a clause was smuggled into a security patch in June.

On the other hand, users already consent to similar conditions whenever they use the Windows Update facility - and few complain.

Whatever...

Think Diff... Ah hell, you've been Borged...

[BlackGriffen]

Cocoa is essentially for RAD (rapid application development) of GUI based stuff where you don't care about cross platform compatibility. For cross platform work, and to write in an language other than Java, C/ObjC, Carbon is your friend. Some complain about it, but I find that the apps done in it work just fine if programmed well.

BlackGriffen

[Marc Nadene]

The man is absolutely correct. Where the hell is this huge motive for me to switch? Everything on the PC is snappier. I just tried jaguar. A little better, but it's not the epitome of human creation like you guys make it out to be. XP still rips it a new ******* on my "slower" machine. Like he said, I want the best now. And in the direction apple is headed, looks like MS/Intel will remain the best for quite awhile.

[Marc Nadene]

[MacManMikeOSX]

Northform you should read "Macintosh the Naked Truth" by Scott Kelby.

[clebin]

99% of what you say has been true since Windows 95 and NT4. The interface has barely changed in that time, particularly if you disable Luna as you say. Putting icons on the taskbar came in Win98 and 2000.

Compare NT4 for to System 7.5, and isn't what you say more true? I sneakily installed 8.5 on a 'blackmac' in university (they ran software that would automatically reinstall 7.5 on reboot) and it was slower than X, that's for sure.

So, what's changed? Why has it taken you seven years to come to this conclusion?

Chris

[Stanley K]

If snappy commands is purely what you want, try DOS or a CLI Unix. When you type a command BAM! it executes - no hourglass or beachball no graphics to get in the way. Heck my Apple IIe was more responsive using Appleworks than any machine I have since used. Computer hardware has been consistantly getting faster while software has been bloating fast enough to null most of those gains. I select computers for functionality not for how quick the MSN homepage resizes or loads.

I have found quite the opposite of your experience. Where I used to work I used new Pentium machines with XP and yes they are "snappier", but I always missed using my Powerbook. When I get home to my Powerbook G4 running "only" 400 Mhz I find I am happier with the way things look and work. I don't miss or think of anything I'd rather have.

[pelorus]

Originally posted by Northform:
as I sit here in the basement of Lowell house using a Pentium III PC I question my allegiance to Apple and the Macintosh platform for many reasons.

As you're sitting there on the P3, I question your allegiance as well

I have the "opportunity" to use Windows as an employer-supplied tool but find it severely lacking in its ability to multi-task and for all the vaunted MHz, the performance is simply lacking.

I'm amazed at the variety of different experiences with Windows that are on these boards. I spend a LOT of time scrubbing the task bar in Windows looking for a document out of the twenty or thirty little truncated bars there - I don't have anything like that problem when using OSX.

I'm tired of "putting up" with Windows. It's a fine time for you to be considering going the other way.

[Steve Bosell]

For the first time my 700mhz Atalon pc feels slower than my iBook 700. Upgrading to Jag makes a big difference, I even reinstalled xp recently. Ie 6.0 is still the fastest/most compatible browser, but mail is now better than OE, itunes is 100x better than WMP or winamp, plus everything I need is osx native now, office, photoshop, dreamweaver, real player ect. F' XP !

[pliny]

Originally posted by Northform:
as I sit here in the basement of Lowell house

if you are in fact sitting in lowell house than you cannot possibly be a student of any kind there, your spelling is simply atrocious. *why have you broken into lowell house?*

I have written this as a piece to encourage new thought in the Mac community.

for pete's sake you are a fool. wasn't this ridiculous crap locked before, and here it is open again, lord knows why. the number of poosts like these lately has just been through the roof, Jaguar has the peecee crowd running scared or something.

[clebin]

Originally posted by pelorus:


As you're sitting there on the P3, I question your allegiance as well

Oh ****, I'm half a mile from Apple HQ doing performance testing on Windows 2000 Advanced Server. What does that make me?

Chris

[ratlater]

Originally posted by pelorus:


As you're sitting there on the P3, I question your allegiance as well

I have the "opportunity" to use Windows as an employer-supplied tool but find it severely lacking in its ability to multi-task and for all the vaunted MHz, the performance is simply lacking.

I'm amazed at the variety of different experiences with Windows that are on these boards. I spend a LOT of time scrubbing the task bar in Windows looking for a document out of the twenty or thirty little truncated bars there - I don't have anything like that problem when using OSX.

I'm tired of "putting up" with Windows. It's a fine time for you to be considering going the other way.

That's exactly my feeling with PCs and XP W2K specifically. I have to use them at work, and performance wise they should beat the crap out of a lowly 600mhz iBook, but they don't. If you use a single application Windows might work better, but I like to use many applications at once. Here are my thoughts on Windows and multi-tasking:

Windows general paradigm works against multi-tasking. Most windows apps will monopolize the screen and like to run with a full screen single window. I can't stand this, if a window doesn't need to fill the screen it shouldn't. Yes, the task bar shows every open window, be it minimized or not, but this only works if you have under 5 windows open. There is no indication of whether a window is minimized or not, and the text becomes to small to read, so you have to hover the mouse over the tab to wait for the tooltip. Some will say that this works, but try dealing with a situation where you have 5 windows with the same name. I use a lot of shell windows, and often have 5 or more windows ssh'ed into the same server. When minimized they are all identical! The only way to find the one you want is to keep opening them until the right one shows up.

Enough about the task bar, let's talk about performance. Windows has this nifty feature where it will freeze your mouse whenever the CPU is being used heavily. Try to open up word and then switch over to IE to look at a website and the mouse will just stop moving! My personal theory is this a failsafe mechanism that MS put in to stop people from taxing the computer too much. Another problem with Windows is their application paradigm. When you open up 2 IE windows you opened up 2 entirely separate instances of the app, each using 15 or MB of RAM. Now open up 5 or 6 IE windows and watch the computer chug because a web browser is using 100 MB of RAM. One more thing, Windows is not threaded well at all. If IE is having problems loading a page, the whole computer bogs down, same with Word or any other app. It was designed to only use 1 app at a time.

Now switch over to OS X running on my puny iBook and it's a different story. I can run OmniWeb with 5 windows, instant message software, mail.app, the terminal with 7 or so windows, watson to keep track of stocks, iTunes for entertainment, and photoshop and the machine runs fine. When switch to the Finder to navigate around the computer is chugging, when I render something in Photoshop I can jump over to OmniWeb and surf the web and it seems like OmniWeb is the only app open. OS X multi-tasks unbelievably well. I've tried doing something similar on Windows and the machine crawls. If I do something intenvsive with Photoshop I can't do anything else. Hell I can't switch from the app because the mouse won't move. That's on my weak 600 mhz iBook too, when I go home to my Dual 500 G4 all I can do is smile

Performance can be argued forever, but what it really boils down to is the user experience. For me Windows is frustrating, ugly, and counter-intuitive. I'm not happy while using it. With OS X I find myself being productive and doing more with a computer than I ever thought I could, and enjoying myself the whole time. If you like Windows more, or need to have fastest computer on the block, then go ahead. No one made you buy a Mac. But if you are thinking about switching to a PC, be sure you know what your getting into.

sorry for rambling,
-matt

[pirloui]

Originally posted by pliny:

the number of poosts like these lately has just been through the roof, Jaguar has the peecee crowd running scared or something.

Yes, it's the same over at MacAddict.. I'm tired of discussing such threads, which are also generated by os9 users who can't show the flexibility to switch to osX, and have to tell everyone how this will make them go windows..

[TNproud2b]

my mouse never freezes in Windows.

You've got a resource conflict or a flakey driver.

Sorry it ruined your Windows experience because you were using an flawed installation of the OS.

[ratlater]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:
my mouse never freezes in Windows.

You've got a resource conflict or a flakey driver.

Sorry it ruined your Windows experience because you were using an flawed installation of the OS.

This has happened to me on multiple PCs with different hardware configurations and either W2K or XP. It does it with USB or serial mice too. Maybe it has just been driver problems, but it's damned annoying when your mouse just freezes for a couple of seconds.

-matt

[karbon]

Originally posted by ratlater:


This has happened to me on multiple PCs with different hardware configurations and either W2K or XP. It does it with USB or serial mice too. Maybe it has just been driver problems, but it's damned annoying when your mouse just freezes for a couple of seconds.

-matt

Tell me about it! I have an USB switch box between my PowerMac and WinXP machine... Sometimes, with no way of knowing when, XP won't respond when I switch the usb keyboard and mouse... I have to plug the usb in the other port, then it sometimes understands that something is going. But often that isn't enough, so a hard restart is all I can do! Plug and play? No way, still plug and pray..

[mrtew]

I use WindowsNT at work everyday, and I and everyone in my studio complain all day about how much it sux. REALLY bad... I sure hope that XP is better than what I deal with every day.

I think the difference between M$ machines and Macs can be summarized with one observation.... Nobody ever said they Love their PC computer, but most Mac users will freely, openly and honestly tell you they Love their Apples.

[ratlater]

Originally posted by mrtew:
I use WindowsNT at work everyday, and I and everyone in my studio complain all day about how much it sux. REALLY bad... I sure hope that XP is better than what I deal with every day.

I think the difference between M$ machines and Macs can be summarized with one observation.... Nobody ever said they Love their PC computer, but most Mac users will freely, openly and honestly tell you they Love their Apples.

We are getting XP dumped on our boxes at work slowly. From what we've found it's about 20-30% slower than W2K, with no new features for us. I wish we could go back to W2K.

-matt

[snerdini]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:
my mouse never freezes in Windows.

You've got a resource conflict or a flakey driver.

Sorry it ruined your Windows experience because you were using an flawed installation of the OS.

I have the exact same problem with my mouse freezing under heavy load.
It's not a resource conflict, it's not a flakey driver, and it's not a flawed installation of the OS.

It's the installation of a flawed OS.

[(s)macintosh]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:
my mouse never freezes in Windows.

You've got a resource conflict or a flakey driver.

Sorry it ruined your Windows experience because you were using an flawed installation of the OS.

Why does it have to be a "resource conflict" or flakey driver? We use our Windows machines at work REALLY hard, 24 x 7, "hot seated" (someone always in front of the machine), non-stop for:

databases, spreadsheets, ssh'ing to other servers (2 connections minimum), emailing, fileserving, and as a print server for our SOHO.

That said, we're using a Dell computer, bone stock from the factory, with Win2k pre-installed and things sometimes will mysteriously "break." Sometimes software refuses to start, or print services will not print. My favorite is when programs crash and just bog down the operating system, unlike OS X, where a program crashes quickly, you get a text box notice and you can restart the app asap. It still annoys me to no end that I can't empty my Recycle Bin in Windows without it asking me questions.

Mac OS X is the same way too though, the only difference is Win2K is generally regarded as Microsoft's BEST operating system to date, while OS X is 10.1.x is a huge transition from 18 year old technology.

[highfalutin]

I'm a switcher. I came over from the PC world about two years ago and haven't looked back. Now, when I have to deal with a Windows box, I'm amazed at the level of abuse the OS heaps upon its users.

My most recent example came when a company I'm working with sent me some audio files encoded with an unusual codec. They sent me the codec and, of course, it was for Windows only. So I go to the token PC in the office and start to install this thing. I was blown away at the installation process. The last time I needed to install a codec on my Mac, it was a 5 second drag-and-drop affair. This took 20 minutes and requred multiple restarts. A look at the instructions:

Audio Codec Setup for Win2000

Procedures to Add Audio CODEC Device:
- Logon as �Administrator�
- Go to Start\Settings\Control Panel
- Select Add/Remove Hardware
- Click �Next�
- Select �Add/Troubleshoot a device�
- Click �Next�
- Select �Add a new device�
- Click �Next�
- Select �No, I want to select the hardware from a list�
- Click �Next�
- Select �Sound, video and game controllers�
- Click �Next�
- Select Manufacturer: (Standard system devices), and Models: Audio Codecs
- Click �Have Disk��
- Click �Browse�
- Select �Falclient\ACM_NT�
- Click �Open�
- Click �OK�
- Click �Yes� to continue the installation
- Select �Mercom OKI ADPCM Audio CODEC�
- Click �Next�
- Click �Next�
- Click �Yes� to continue the installation
- Click �OK� to accept the CODEC configuration
- Click �Finish�
- Click �Yes� to restart your computer now


Procedures to Install Audio CODEC Driver
- Logon as �Administrator�
- Go to Start\Settings\Control Panel
- Select �Sounds and Multimedia�
- Click the Hardware tab
- Select �Mercom OKI ADPCM Audio CODEC�
- On General tab, Device usage field, select �Use this device (enable)�
- Go to Device tab
- Click on �Update Driver�
- Click �Next�
- Select �Display a list of the known drivers for this device so that I can choose a specific driver�
- Click �Next�
- Select Manufacturer: Unknown, and Models: Mercom OKI ADPCM Audio CODEC
- Click on �Have Disk��
- Click �Browse�
- Select �Falclient\ACM_NT�
- Select file name �Oemsetup.inf�
- Click �Open�
- Click �OK�
- Click �Next�
- Click �Next�
- Click �Yes� to continue the installation
- Click �Browse�
- Select �Falclient\ACM_NT�
- Select file name �okiadp32.acm�
- Click �Open�
- Click �OK�
- Click �OK� to accept CODEC configuration
- Click �Finish�
- Click �Close�
- Click �Yes� to restart your computer now

It absolutely flabbergasts me that Windows users can claim with a straight face that this is a superior computing solution. I find this abusive. Computers should help you accomplish tasks, not fight you at every turn. At least, I'm sure I read that somewhere once...

Macintosh to me equals elegance. There is a fit and finish there that doesn't exist in Windows. Yes, my TiBook 400 can bog down under 10.1.5, but the alternative isn't worth it. You can have my Macintosh when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

[TNproud2b]

It doesn't work at all on a Mac, yet you complain that it's difficult on a PC.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


I reckon that's the price you pay when Apple forgets to include part of the 'whole widget'.

Ever wondered why Apple's OSes & iApps are humongous in size?

Because they include tons of drivers for hardware you probably don't have.

The 'whole widget' is a concept based on the premise that the device driver should ship with the application - not the device.

[Nonsuch]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:
It doesn't work at all on a Mac, yet you complain that it's difficult on a PC.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Errrrr ... not really.

You try to score a point by using "it" to refer to two different things. You clever thing you.

Filling out your misleading pronouns, your sentence would read "Playing audio with that codec doesn't work at all on a Mac, yet you complain that installing the codec is difficult on a PC." As you can see, these two points are in no way contradictory and his point is perfectly valid.

Originally posted by TNproud2b:
The 'whole widget' is a concept based on the premise that the device driver should ship with the application - not the device.

That has no bearing at all on his main point, which is that installing things like audio codecs on a Mac is a simple matter of drag and drop whereas on Windows it involves a wizard holding your hand through a dozen or more steps.

[CyberDave]

Originally posted by ratlater:


Performance can be argued forever, but what it really boils down to is the user experience. For me Windows is frustrating, ugly, and counter-intuitive. I'm not happy while using it. With OS X I find myself being productive and doing more with a computer than I ever thought I could, and enjoying myself the whole time.

Well said. My thoughts exactly. I happen to own a G4/500 DP with OS X and a Athlon XP-1500+ based system with Win XP Pro. While I have Microsoft Office for both platforms (though I've only actually purchased it for my Mac ) and most of the other software I need to get stuff done (IDEs, compilers, web browsers, MP3 players, etc, etc, etc), I find myself using my Mac for serious work and my PC mostly for gaming and other amusements (ie, TV tuner card, Kazaa, etc). My Mac just lets me get my work done without trying to help me out with everything and lets me control my computer in a much more elegant manner than Windows (damn "Wizards"--how dare you claim you know what's best for me and my computer). The Mac lets me do what I want to do, as opposed to what Microsoft and/or Windows thinks I want to do. The user experience on my Mac is just so much better that I cringe every time I even have to *look* at Windows.

That's my 11:30 pm-still-got-a-paper-to-finish-before-going-to-bed-and-am-procrastinating rant.

CyberDave

[Mr Scruff]

I'll make this quick (I have to go to work), but I have to say I'm dissapointed with your post Northfoam.

Why would you expect this to create debate in the macnn community when you haven't said anything that we don't already know? It's well established that most of the people on these forums already use Windows at work. I myself know more about Windows than the vast majority of Windows users (I've used and supported every version since 3.1), and probably know more about Windows than yourself and TNproud2b.

You're talking about things like the taskbar, a concept I'm sure we're all familiar with. As someone said, if it's taken you 7 years to figure out that you like the taskbar you must have really been isolating yourself from Windows. We also know that Windows has a faster UI.

Let me say this once and for all, nobody uses the Macintosh anymore for reasons of performance or stability. No one. If performance and stability are all you seek, and you are happy with the Windows interface, then there is no reason whatsoever to use a Mac.

The reason why most people here (including myself) use a Mac is because we prefer the OS.

A way of summing up why I prefer the Mac OS to Windows is to compare the differing philosophies of software design between MS & Apple. MS takes a potentially complicated procedure, and makes it simpler by including a wizard that holds your hand through the 5 steps neccessary to complete it. Apple looks at the procedure, and asks 'Is there any way we could make this simpler? In an ideal world, how would this procedure work with absolute minimum user involvement?' and then redesigns the procedure itself.

[pliny]

Originally posted by Mr Scruff:


It's well established that most of the people on these forums already use Windows at work.

Hey. Speak for yourself buddy.

Let me say this once and for all, nobody uses the Macintosh anymore for reasons of performance or stability. No one.

Hey. Speak for yourself buddy.

[typoon]

Well here is the thing. OS X Jag Looks like it will KICK Windows A$$. Speed is finally looking like it is where it should be or close to it. Aqua is alot more refined.

Troubleshooting XP is a nightmare. Troubleshooting Windows in general is a nightmare. Also setting up a Mac to get on the internet for dialup Especially in OS X it takes 1 otion and 4 tabs. in Windows it takes a stupid setup wizard. Talk about speed. I can be connected to the internet while the person is still going through the wizard.

Windows Multitasking is well not OS X. I can fire up a game and still play my MP3's in the background. Try that on Windows. Not going to Happen.

For me the Mac is Faster. I can work faster, and worry free.

[Stanley K]

Yes, my TiBook 400 can bog down under 10.1.5, but the alternative isn't worth it. You can have my Macintosh when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

HA! My words exactly!

[typoon]

Originally posted by Stanley K:


HA! My words exactly!

Agreed. With Jag it will be harder to pry from my cold dead fingers. Jag puts Windows to shame.

[TNproud2b]

Originally posted by typoon:
...*snip*...Windows Multitasking is well not OS X. I can fire up a game and still play my MP3's in the background. Try that on Windows. Not going to Happen.

For me the Mac is Faster. I can work faster, and worry free.

I run the DistributedFolding client with 'max RAM' tag (120MB), Winamp, Quake3, and a voice chat app all at the same time. Everyday. No hiccups, no glitches, no problems.

It works just fine in Windows98, WindowsME, Windows2000, and WindowsXP on a 500MHz Pentium3 with a GF2 GTS video card.

edited to add: and my mouse never 'freezes', even for an instant (if yours does then something is wrong, btw)

One of us is wrong.

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by typoon:


Agreed. With Jag it will be harder to pry from my cold dead fingers. Jag puts Windows to shame.

I've got Jag.. and if you want to take my iBook, you'll have to bring my dead body with it.. there's no way in hell I'm going to let it go (unless someone give's me a PowerBook G4).

[pliny]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:


I run the DistributedFolding client with 'max RAM' tag (120MB), Winamp, Quake3, and a voice chat app all at the same time. Everyday. No hiccups, no glitches, no problems.

It works just fine in Windows98, WindowsME, Windows2000, and WindowsXP on a 500MHz Pentium3 with a GF2 GTS video card.

One of us is wrong.

Who cares?

This is an X forum. Why can't people just ***get over*** the fact that many millions of people prefer the Mac� the OS and the friggin hardware itself for pete's sake�to other computers? It's really that simple.

[ratlater]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:


I run the DistributedFolding client with 'max RAM' tag (120MB), Winamp, Quake3, and a voice chat app all at the same time. Everyday. No hiccups, no glitches, no problems.

It works just fine in Windows98, WindowsME, Windows2000, and WindowsXP on a 500MHz Pentium3 with a GF2 GTS video card.

edited to add: and my mouse never 'freezes', even for an instant (if yours does then something is wrong, btw)

One of us is wrong.

Wow, how much RAM do you have? I'm not saying your lying but that is totally opposite of my experience. We used to have 66MHz PIIIs at my work with 512MB RAM with W2K and they couldn't multi-task for snot. They were dog slow just running a few IE windows, and a network mapping program.

I used to run distributed stuff about 6 or 7 months ago. I ran one on my 1.2GHz Athalon at home and one on my Dual G4 500. With it running on the athalon, even at the lowest settings the computer was dog slow...as in I couldn't use it for anything with the client running. With the Mac I barely noticed it.

You are very lucky with your Windows experience IMO.

-matt

[typoon]

Originally posted by Drizzt:


I've got Jag.. and if you want to take my iBook, you'll have to bring my dead body with it.. there's no way in hell I'm going to let it go (unless someone give's me a PowerBook G4).

What's that other OS called? Well yeah, I'd give up my iBook for a Ti too.

[Superchicken]

We have a PC up home, probably helps my hatred that the monitor only supports 640/480.

But i mean, even when I use other people's PCs... it's like when you are at someone's house, and they like force you to eat something really gross cause they made it, and you don't wanna say no, but you feel like puking?

Yeah, most people though now are willing to put up with a computer that doesn't scream, so that they're not screaming while they're puking... well least those who see that the Mac is a viable alternative.

And if you get the same parts that apple puts in their comps, as a PC, it's just a bit more.
That's not a huge premium, and you get that with other companies like Sony too.

Try getting a 17 inch LCD WITH a PC, I have a friend who bought a 2 Ghz Dull, with 17 inch monitor, and didn't even get a DVD burner, paid 2500!
For a DULL!
those aer supposed to be cheap.
This whole cost vs proformance only exists in the power macs, not the iMacs or eMacs, and people still buy power macs so... yeah.
hehe

[Subzero Diesel949]

Yawn. People buy Macs for the OS and the hardware/software harmony. I question anyone's allegiance to a beige box, especially when they're foaming at the mouth about things that have existed for at least seven years now. Maybe the original poster should step out of that basement.

Repeat after me kids: OS X is just a little more than a year old; Windows, in its current incarnation underneath the imitation Aqua, is the same garbage since 1995.

Hmmm...DOS vs. UNIX...which one would you pick?

[Sharky K.]

Every time I see a screenshot or work with windows I say to myself: wow... I am glad I don't have that.

This week for example. My dad gets a pc from his work to work with an application that only works on windows.
He can work with windows and mac so that should be no problem....

He is still trying to install the application. Just one and the only application he need.
the installer replaced some dll's, there were problems with the c driver or d drive... (one of the disks)
because of the dll replacments nothing worked etc... etc... this is on a brand new computer with no hardware errors what so ever.

Just installing one application

A friend of me has Windows XP. First it was stable (he said) but now after some time it is unstable like ****.
Internet Explorer didn't worked anymore but he can't reinstall IE because it is integrated in the system and he now uses Opera or Mozilla .

[brainchild2b]

he was pretty honest. I can build a 2ghz AMD machine for $400 for the entire machine with 512mb of RAM. Price isn't really the issue for me with Macs. I chose macs because they are better and faster. However pcs have faster video, and pcs also have wayyyyy fasters processors for the time being.

If Apple were running nearly 3ghz processors like intel right now, the speed of the OS wouldn't be an issue anymore. Right now it is BIG issue. One that needs to change quickly. If Apple plays catch up in speed again there will be no need to switch.

The software experience on the Mac is better, maybe less software but defintely more polished. As far as IE goes, IE on PC rocks. IE 6 coming in January for Mac OS X has been completely re-written from scratch.

IE 5.2 that you use now was a "quick and dirty" port of IE 5 for OS 9.

Rumor is that IE 6 is finally as fast as it should be.

I offer you this: Since pc boxes are so cheep spend $400 and get one, set it right next to your mac, and share the screen and monitor between them. Now you have the ultimate computer

[workerbee]

Originally posted by brainchild2b:
IE 6 coming in January for Mac OS X has been completely re-written from scratch.

Do you know that for a fact, or is it a rumour?

I'd really like to have another good browser on my TiBook: IE 6, Chimera 1, and of course OmniWeb 5

[typoon]

Originally posted by brainchild2b:
he was pretty honest. I can build a 2ghz AMD machine for $400 for the entire machine with 512mb of RAM. Price isn't really the issue for me with Macs. I chose macs because they are better and faster. However pcs have faster video, and pcs also have wayyyyy fasters processors for the time being.

If Apple were running nearly 3ghz processors like intel right now, the speed of the OS wouldn't be an issue anymore. Right now it is BIG issue. One that needs to change quickly. If Apple plays catch up in speed again there will be no need to switch.

The software experience on the Mac is better, maybe less software but defintely more polished. As far as IE goes, IE on PC rocks. IE 6 coming in January for Mac OS X has been completely re-written from scratch.

IE 5.2 that you use now was a "quick and dirty" port of IE 5 for OS 9.

Rumor is that IE 6 is finally as fast as it should be.

I offer you this: Since pc boxes are so cheep spend $400 and get one, set it right next to your mac, and share the screen and monitor between them. Now you have the ultimate computer

Yes but most of Apple's Prices are not compared to computers you can build. You WILL always be able to build one cheaper. I could build the same machine configured from DELL on my own and get it for cheaper. That's not the point. We are comparing Jag to XP and in that comparison there is NONE.