P
pixelsmith
Guest
DBTrek is sorta like a bad accident, it is hard not to look...
-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Ok you Mozilla users. Question.
- Thread starter Aaron LeClair
- Start date
- Status
Gene Steinberg said:
I offered you facts, Gene, and I offered pixelsmith the same sort of taunting he was offering.
Market share represents where the cash goes. Without doubt, the cash goes to predominantly to Windows. You've offered "Macs don't have as many viruses" and "go google some productivity surveys and you'll see".
Neither are compelling arguments. TRS-80's don't have many viruses. Neither do Commodore 64's. By your virus standard both of those systems would be superior to a Mac. Yet the standard is ridiculous (as I've just demonstrated) so I'm still waiting for the compelling pro-Mac argument.
I'm not going to 'go google' some survey because you're too lazy to bother defending your position.
Macs are fine. PC's are fine. Believing Macs are superior and PC users are idiots is ridiculous, and betrays an inner need to vindicate one's purchase or feel superior to others.
-DBTrek
Aaron LeClair
Paranormal Maven
If I was on a Mac, I'd be telling people how crumby they are so more people would buy PCs
The more popular a OS is, the more viruses and hacking attempts there would be I bet.
How often do you have a bad virus etc. DBtrek? I rarely ever have them. When I do they are easily fixed, except for a few over a decade. And that is probably because I'm clueless as to how to fix the problem, rather than the problem being something that is innately hard to fix. I read that if I had service pack 2 at the time of me getting this latest virus, I wouldn't have got it.
The more popular a OS is, the more viruses and hacking attempts there would be I bet. How often do you have a bad virus etc. DBtrek? I rarely ever have them. When I do they are easily fixed, except for a few over a decade. And that is probably because I'm clueless as to how to fix the problem, rather than the problem being something that is innately hard to fix. I read that if I had service pack 2 at the time of me getting this latest virus, I wouldn't have got it.
DBTrek said:
Please stop the strawmen arguments. The facts are that Macs are more productive and cheaper to maintain than Windows computers. This has been shown over and over again for many, many years.
Other than the lack of malware, which is a significant argument, check this, and I'm sorry you're too lazy to do it yourself:
http://www.apple.com/getamac/viruses.html
http://www.apple.com/getamac/macosx.html
PC Myths Debunked
The latter has lots of links you need to refer to in order to get the full picture.
I'm not going to comment further on this until you've taken the time to do your homework.
Rick Deckard
Paranormal Maven
Rick Deckard said:
Sorry, no chocolate.
Rick Deckard
Paranormal Maven
Back to the topic, sortof...
...I recently investigated the possibility of building my own Linux server from scratch. It's pretty easy to do, *except* it works out way cheaper to buy a pre-built machine with Windows pre-installed then to buy the components separately.
So, anyone with half-a-brain is gonna buy the pre-built machine, uninstall Windows and put Linux on it for no extra cost. Microsoft log another sale, yet a new Linux machine is born...
...sales figures mean nothing.
...I recently investigated the possibility of building my own Linux server from scratch. It's pretty easy to do, *except* it works out way cheaper to buy a pre-built machine with Windows pre-installed then to buy the components separately.
So, anyone with half-a-brain is gonna buy the pre-built machine, uninstall Windows and put Linux on it for no extra cost. Microsoft log another sale, yet a new Linux machine is born...
...sales figures mean nothing.
Rick Deckard said:
Now that Dell is going to be selling more Linux boxes, are they going to be forced to provide Windows too, because Microsoft charges them anyway? I just wonder what sort of deal this involves, or is Microsoft hoping that their efforts to exact royalties on the basis of all those alleged patents will compensate?
A.LeClair said:If I was on a Mac, I'd be telling people how crumby they are so more people would buy PCs
Using that logic why not resort to a Commodore 64 and 300 baud modem? I bet you would avoid all hackers and viruses that way.
Rarely if ever. I browse using Mozilla Firefox equipped with a pop-up blocker, No-Script, and reasonable security settings. I make sure my system stays clean by running AdAware and SpyBot Search and Destroy. Avast Anti-Virus is always actively running in the background. If anything manages to slip through that (and the firewall) I have the SysInternals toolkit that can find and remove whatever shouldn't be there. There are also system tools like regedit, msconfig, task manager, and windows services that can be very useful for people who bother learning how to use them. The 'stupid peecee' users actually have to learn something about their computers in order to maximize their performance.
By simplifying the operating system to where a users sole option is generally 'click this icon and a single, limited, non-configurable action will be performed' it's easy for a Mac to avoid crashes. Mac is stable because they lock their OS down tight . . . 'idiot-proofing' it, so to speak. But along with that idiot proofing something must be sacrificed . . . things like configurability, compatibility, adaptability, and usefulness. Macs are the computer for people who don't know anything about computers. That's why it's amusing to see a bunch of one-buttoners boast about how superior their simplistic system is because there aren't too many 'viruses' on it.
That's Macs niche . . . the people who don't have the time (or ability) to figure out the few simple steps is takes to keep a PC safe. Not computer geniuses by a long shot . . . rather people who want to use computers without having to know anything about them. I can appreciate that market, but I refuse to go along with this ruse that they're somehow 'advanced' computer users.
. . . I'll read Gene's links when I get home (and have ample time to consider them and check the sources). I'll be interested to see if they have any explaination for Apple's inability to take over the PC market. Automobiles replaced horses, jets replaced bi-planes, flat-panels replaced CRT's, yet somehow the vastly superior Mac system just isn't able to replace Microsoft Windows. Ponderous indeed. It would be an utter economic anomaly, wouldnt' it?
-DBTrek
DBTrek said:Using that logic why not resort to a Commodore 64 and 300 baud modem? I bet you would avoid all hackers and viruses that way.
Rarely if ever. I browse using Mozilla Firefox equipped with a pop-up blocker, No-Script, and reasonable security settings. I make sure my system stays clean by running AdAware and SpyBot Search and Destroy. Avast Anti-Virus is always actively running in the background. If anything manages to slip through that (and the firewall) I have the SysInternals toolkit that can find and remove whatever shouldn't be there. There are also system tools like regedit, msconfig, task manager, and windows services that can be very useful for people who bother learning how to use them. The 'stupid peecee' users actually have to learn something about their computers in order to maximize their performance.
By simplifying the operating system to where a users sole option is generally 'click this icon and a single, limited, non-configurable action will be performed' it's easy for a Mac to avoid crashes. Mac is stable because they lock their OS down tight . . . 'idiot-proofing' it, so to speak. But along with that idiot proofing something must be sacrificed . . . things like configurability, compatibility, adaptability, and usefulness. Macs are the computer for people who don't know anything about computers. That's why it's amusing to see a bunch of one-buttoners boast about how superior their simplistic system is because there aren't too many 'viruses' on it.
That's Macs niche . . . the people who don't have the time (or ability) to figure out the few simple steps is takes to keep a PC safe. Not computer geniuses by a long shot . . . rather people who want to use computers without having to know anything about them. I can appreciate that market, but I refuse to go along with this ruse that they're somehow 'advanced' computer users.
. . . I'll read Gene's links when I get home (and have ample time to consider them and check the sources). I'll be interested to see if they have any explaination for Apple's inability to take over the PC market. Automobiles replaced horses, jets replaced bi-planes, flat-panels replaced CRT's, yet somehow the vastly superior Mac system just isn't able to replace Microsoft Windows. Ponderous indeed. It would be an utter economic anomaly, wouldnt' it?
-DBTrek
Apple's inability to take over the PC market had nothing to do with the quality of their products and everything to do with some smart moves Microsoft made early on and some stupid moves made by Apple over the years.
Having the best product doesn't help if you can't market it properly.
As to Macs being for people who know nothing about computers, how about all the Unix mavens who now bring Apple notebooks to public meetings? Do you know anything about the Terminal on a Mac, where you can get down and dirty with the command line and do lots and lots of powerful stuff? If you did, you'd realize your statement is entirely wrong.
Oh, and one more thing, if you can handle a somehow over-eager editorial stance, check out: www.roughlydrafted.com.
Rick Deckard
Paranormal Maven
Gene Steinberg said:
One thing I frequently catch myself doing is issuing *nix bash commands in a windows command prompt - you can get a lot done with a basic shell script..but the windows command prompt is a very light, poor imitation of it.
I suppose I ought to give Cygwin a try...when I can find the time...
Rick Deckard said:
You should try out a Mac's Terminal.
Rick Deckard
Paranormal Maven
Gene Steinberg said:
I expect it'll be no different from my Linux terminal - which is a good thing of course
Rick Deckard said:I expect it'll be no different from my Linux terminal - which is a good thing of course
Yes, pretty much I gather.
Gene Steinberg said:
My 'homework' was done when I obtained a minor in computer science, and then spent years working on Macs, PC's, and Linux boxes professionally. However, I've reviewed the information you provided and my analysis is as follows:
http://www.apple.com/getamac/viruses.html - This link is Apple stating that Apple computers are superior products (big surprise). The reason offered: Windows suffers from a lot more viruses (this is apparently the holy grail of Mac arguments since it arises again and again). Brand names aside, I can't get that excited about a company saying "Our product is best because it has less viruses than the product used by the vast majority". Perhaps that's a convincing argument to some, I do not find it so. I would fully expect the most popular operating system to be the one with the most viruses/malware. I would also expect Apple to tell me Apple's are superior. I guess this just doesn't have the impact on me that it has on Mac users . . . what can I say?
http://www.apple.com/getamac/macosx.html - This is Apple again, stating Apple computers are superior (I sense a pattern). The reason offered this time is 'dashboard widgets', which are new to Windows Vista but have long been used by Apple. It's a matter of preference I suppose . . . and I'm not particularly excited about Vista either. However, while they're accusing Windows of trying to catch up they conveniently ignore their emulators and bootstrap programs that offer their users the option of loading a Windows OS intstead of using the Mac one. My point being that Windows steals ideas from Apple, and Apple borrows entire operating systems from Windows.
That having been said, I think being able to run Windows XP on a Mac is a nice feature, and it hasn't hurt Apple's market share any. One of my close friends bought a new Mac laptop last year just to compare and contrast the two operating systems. His preference (and mine) was XP. Unfortunately his laptop kept crashing on a near-weekly basis while running XP, and this frustrating experience led to him give the laptop to his wife. I see the 'dashboard widget' laden OS being a matter of personal preference not an indicator of OS superiority.
PC Myths Debunked - Ah, finally a non-apple site touting the virtues of Apple. My response is already long winded so I'll try to hit the points made here briefly:
1. Macs cost less over time to maintain - This link cites studies on (mainly school districts) the cost of maintining a PC vs. a Mac. These studies are fine if not highly subjective. The price of maintaining any computer is going to rely on what the user is doing, what hardware/software is involved, and their level of experience.
2. Macs are easier to learn and require fewer keystrokes to execute applications - I would agree . .. they're certainly 'simpler' computers. However, simplicity does not translate to superiority for me. I would prefer having an OS that can run a great number of applications even if it's not as 'simple' to do so. The vast disparity between the number of Mac vs PC owners indicates that I'm not alone in this preference.
3. Students can learn both Mac and Windows systems on a Mac - I agree. If the sole reason for buying a PC is for training on multiple operating Systems Macs aren't a bad choice. This is an extreme niche market. Most of us don't buy a PC to train on operating systems.
4. Macs have fewer viruses - Already addressed this one.
5. Data supporting Mac arguments are not outdated - Uh . . . ok. I encourage others to look at the arguments this site puts forth. Much of it is based on testimonials, and rebuttals based on opinions. Not much to say about this point since the author seems to be addressing arguments he's received from others regarding the age of the data he uses to support his points.
6. CPU Speed - Pure sophistry. CPU speeds can be argued in hundreds of ways and the author makes his case for the places where Macs excel. Several counter-arguments could be presented, but not without tripling the length of this already long-winded reply.
So . . . Apple, and this Mac fan's website both make an unconvincing case as to why PC's suck and Macs rule. There are certain niche markets where I agree that Macs excel, but I fail to see anything solidly demonstrating what makes Macs superior to PCs overall. The rest of the computer owning world seems to have missed it as well.
-DBTrek
I'm not going to quote your entire response, and I don't have a lot of time to delve deep. I will say this: You tend to put labels on things rather than make logical responses. So, for example, the study involving a Mac's greater productivity, which you just call subjective and toss away.
You are also sadly misinformed about the history of the PC and how Microsoft came to dominate the market, and, no, it wasn't because people preferred the product. Once you have your history lesson, we can proceed.
Have a nice day.
You are also sadly misinformed about the history of the PC and how Microsoft came to dominate the market, and, no, it wasn't because people preferred the product. Once you have your history lesson, we can proceed.
Have a nice day.
Gene Steinberg said:
Hahahah . . . Wow, that was a lame response. I took time to look at your points and address them, and you reply with a dismissal and an unfounded criticism of my knowledge of history. I had expected more . . . in retrospect I don't know why.
-DBTrek
DBTrek said:
In other words, you have no response. Figures.
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Apple borrows entire operating systems from Windows? since when? i thought you said you were educated? did you buy your degree?
pixelsmith said:
Since they took on the additional expense and research time to ensure their hardware could run Windows OS.
Duh.
Between your vacant proclaimations and Gene's citations of the Apple website as authoratative proof that Macs are superior I think we can safely put to rest the theory that Mac users are somehow smarter than PC users.
We have living evidence to the contrary.
"Hey! Hey! The #1 operating system has the most viruses on it! Hey!"
Hahahah
-DBTrek
- Status