What is Digg?193 Comments
- procdaddy, on 10/12/2007, -16/+80yeah and where is Final Cut Pro for Windows? I'm far from a Apple fanboy, but I see pluses and minuses of both. Be a bit more open minded, n00b.
- Drgn547, on 10/12/2007, -6/+51I run Windows, OSX, and Linux boxes, all of them suiting their own unique purpose. Calling OSX Users noobz isn't going to fix your technological inadequacies, Chex. Oh, and next time you write an OS that's better than OSX, let everyone know.
- Tryke, on 10/12/2007, -4/+46Lots of fluff. Summary:
- Ballmer says "no more 5 year waits"
- OS X Leopard will come with Boot Camp
- Bringing home your work is no longer a problem with Intel Macs. - procdaddy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+47there is more than one app that makes Macs very appealing, but thats one MAJOR app that is very popular.
- Lacero, on 10/12/2007, -16/+43RAWR, can't wait!
Hasta la vista,Vista. - procdaddy, on 10/12/2007, -14/+40that is like using MS Paint as an alternative to Photoshop...
- vanadaar, on 10/12/2007, -9/+34Spoken like someone who has never used a Mac.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+23@CiXeL
Go spend some time with OS X and decide for yourself. Nobody gives a rat's ass if you switch. - gcnaddict, on 10/12/2007, -26/+39"the damage may well already be irreparable."
What damage? - superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15You know what is the most important thing? Bringing Macs into work is not as much of a problem either...
- zodieman, on 10/12/2007, -7/+19I guess Macs are not allowed to have exclusive apps for them?
Now you know how it feels to be a Mac user at times when we can't get certain Windows apps. At least we can now run Windows when we need to for that occasional program now. - delvach, on 10/12/2007, -10/+21"please mac-philes tell me what the advantages are to using a mac? id really like to hear it. ive never seen anyone give me a decent reason to switch. until i see that im convinced you are fan boys."
- Single hardware & software platform eliminates the need for installing drivers and reduces compatibility issues
- Higher resale value (My Powerbook is 3+ years old and will still sell for $1k)
- Stability and flexibility of UNIX
- More secure and stable than Windows
- Well-researched UI that assumes an intelligent user who doesn't need 200 "Are you sure..." dialog boxes.
- From the perspective of a cross-browser/platform web developer, IE is the worst browser on the market, and people using it make my life difficult.
Don't get me wrong, if you're just using your computer for checking mail and reading news, Windows is fine, especially if you have a good warranty, know someone proficient in troubleshooting, and/or don't mind re-installing when things get hosed.
Without being a smartass, my experience is to treat Windows like a virus and keep it contained, which is why Parallels is such a great solution for me. I can start up XP or 2K when I need, address issues arising from IE bugs, and keep it suspended the rest of the time. When I run Windows update and it gets completely screwed up, I just copy a cloned disk image and go from my last stable installation.
That said, I used to hate Macs before I used one, too. :) - superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17@PJBonoVox:
Ok, where is Aperture for Windows? Lightroom, the closest thing, does have have nearly the featureset and is still only in beta. That's just one more example, but there are others.
You are living in the past, the Mac has more than closed the software gap in just about any area you care to name - the only category left where it's definatley far behind is games.
But all of that is irrelevant since with the move to Intel, I can run any Windows app I like in Parallels and run any PC game using Bootcamp. Meanwhile I also get the category kilkler applications that only the Mac has.
How is being able to run both Mac and Windows apps ever going to be worse than just being able to run Windows apps? - kevinmotel, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17i believe we will see a growth in people owning a mac, but keeping their XP or 2K machines. i for one wish to buy a MBP, as well as build a media center PC with windows MCE
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+19http://www.duggmirror.com/apple/Apple_Leopard_ready_to_pounce/
@ Bloekle: The mirror needs be closer to the top. - JayClark, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Forcing us to upgrade? No, they're not making anyone do anything. I know people who still run Panther and are perfectly happy with it. On a similar note, those of us who do upgrade will do so because we get a lot of value for our money.
If you don't see that value, there's a really simple way to not waste your own money here: Don't buy it yourself.
As for the comment about the Windows library being bigger, that's true. I have found, though, that the Mac software library has a higher concentration of good and affordable titles, so that I don't miss the extra options. Given thew choice between having 100 titles to choose from, 10 of which are real contenders, or 40 titles to choose from, 10 of which are contenders, what good do those extra 60 titles do you?
In the end though, it comes down to personal choice. How sad a human being are you if you feel the need to rag on people who choose to use a different OS that you? How empty must your own life be to expend this kind of energy trying to convince people that your opinions are correct? - bepe86, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12I agree, I'll take a OS X or Ubuntu with Gnome and Compiz over Vista any day.
Mac OS X:
+ (subjective) clean, yet nice interface
+ (subjective) simple to use
+ performant
- expensive (to get it to work properly, you need Apple hardware)
Ubuntu w/ Gnome and Compiz
+ free (as in beer and freedom)
+ good performance
+ (subjective) fun to play with
- unstable, still in beta
- requires an ATi or nVidia card
Vista:
+ (subjective) looks good
+ runs almost everything
- requires 700MB RAM on my PC, which is 1/3 of my 2GB, and then I haven't opened any apps
- (subjective) I don't like the interface, it looks too messy for me - emeidi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8"irreparable" - Although this sounds compelling to me (I'm a Mac user), it's far from reality. As long as almost all major businesses run Windows on their client computers, there will be profit for Microsoft - whether they release software in time or not.
- ZergyPoo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10I agree, there is nothing groundbreaking here that will get any significant number of people to switch.
What people here on Digg don't seem to realize is that Windows XP is not nearly as bad or unstable as Mac users claim it is. It isn't hard to use. Installing hardware and software is simple, and it works with a much broader variety of software and hardware than OSX does.
Most people see those Mac commercials and think: "but my computer can already do all that stuff."
There is nothing here that is going to "kill" Microsoft. - estvir, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12What's so special this time ? I remember hearing the same propaganda back when Tiger was released and prior versions (And other products).
Apple has great products, yes, but even with Vista delays and all the [apparnt] bad press has anyone bailed on MS (And I mean more than a single person or a small group, I'm talking corporations with thousands of pcs.. or even small businesses with 10 or 20) ? Nope.
Everyone remember the "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" ? Sound [somewhat] familiar ?
Summary: Apple has excellent products and a strong [albeit small] following.. but this WWDC (With Leopard and whatever) isn't going to magically push Apple up unless they make some incredible announcement (Virtualisation.. wait, that was already denied).
Sorry for being blunt, but it has to be said, pipe dreams aren't really good for anyone. - ucbrave92, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7i can't wait for leopard, and I am a recent switcher myself. i still run 2 windows boxes but they are only for games and my pvr. all of my real work is done on my mac, and as for the newb comment i am far from it, i work as an it consultant. my reason for buying a mac was that i have to put up with so much of a headache at work fixing windows boxes all day that i didn't want to deal with a crappy os when i came home and had limited time to get work done. if not for the pure stability alone, i love os x, not to mention that all of the apps are great and even most of the freeware/shareware available is written much better than the majority of the apps you can run on windows.
- Angostura, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6As a Mac user, I think you need a slap, you patronizing oik.
- count_z, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10What damage? People aren't going to switch (which implies buying a new machine and buying new software and potentially losing some apps because they aren't supported) just because Vista is late.
Most people don't care all that much about the OS... they care more about their programs.
People will be more likely to switch because of the hardware (the machines are very nice... particularly their laptops) and only because of the OS. - theonlyvlad, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I'd just like to add my 2 cents...
Those who said that premiere is to final cut is as MS Paint to Photoshop -- funny joke, but nothing more. FCP has some features in it that go above Premiere's... however, I believe that most people who *really* need those features will edit in an editing house, or on a project where a workstation is provided by them, and that'll usually be a mac.
However, if you are just a PC owner, mac or windows, and you want to add video capabilities for home movies, or more advanced projects, I do not believe that a PC owner buying Premiere Pro 2.0 will deliver a final product that is worse than a user of FCP 5.
As far as Aperture... I haven't used it myself, just read about it. From the sounds of its features, I'd say it's comparable to the application I use to manage my photo collection: ACDSee Pro 8.0 ; very powerful software, very fast (well maybe not on bootup, but after that, nothing I could find is faster), has basic editing features and RAW editing galore. Many tagging and cataloging features, etc.
So please Apple people........ I agree that in a professional editing environment, when doing installations for editing booths with FCP and ProTools, Macs are great, and powerful. But we're talking about users who buy computers for their homes. - aonghusflynn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5By including Boot camp Apple will help Windows sell more copies, just because it's Dual Boot doesn't mean that you don't need a license for MS. I can't see how this will damage Microsoft at all. Or am I missing something?
- ridgelawrence, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8http://digg.com/apple/Windows_games_to_Mac_without_porting
- gcube9x, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Why do people get so riled up about something like this? Let people do whatever the f___ they want, if someone wants an expensive system with a pretty OS, let them. If someone wants a cheaper box with a working but lacking OS, let them. If someone wants something ultra-customizeable based on the effort put in, let them.
- heydigital, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4At least Microsoft does not charge for their service packs.
- gajan75, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I prefer Amiga os
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"With Boot Camp, they've heard of Mac, maybe have seen it or used it."
This is unbelievable. You think the average home user even knows of the existance of the Mac? You think the average home user knows anything but Windows? You think they even know what 'dual boot' means?
Most of them, for christs sake, don't even know what an operating system is. Windows, to them, is the PC.
Please, stop spouting this ***** in an attempt to create a self fulfilling prophecy. It's never going to happen, you'll always be a minority. Please, just deal with it. - shmatt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6it's an optional upgrade
by that logic vista should be free too. - Dakana, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The release of a new version of an Mac OS is going to do absolutley nothing to Vista.
Sorry to spoil your incredibly clever ending line. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8The damage is not in market share but in mind share. Ford sells more sedans than Bugatti, Bentley, Ferrari, and Porsche sell altogether, but that does not mean that every other person does not desire a luxury, high performance car.
- bruce89, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Ach, 6 months seems long between OS's for me - Ubuntu.
- saleens281, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Maybe not *ALWAYS* but they definitely aren't stepping down anytime soon. I'm really sick of fanboi's saying that windows is going down. I think there must be 20 posts a week from mac and linux zealots alike. Guess what guys, you've been saying it for well over 10 years now and it still hasn't happened. Maybe just *MAYBE* Microsoft is getting the job done. It doesn't matter if you agree with HOW they're getting it done, they're still getting it done.
*the year of the linux desktop*
and
*apples can now own the workplace*
just isn't happening. - maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I'd just like to say, that i don't think microsoft could care less about OSX 10.5. I don't think microsoft could care less, that apple's can run windows.
Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company. Apple is, well a hardware company, simply put, OSX doesn't run on all PC's. I tried to install it on a HP laptop, yeah, that didn't get me very far. So it doesn't matter what PC you're using, as long as you're using microsoft software, they don't care whether you dual boot, single boot, VMware whatever. Apple makes money from their computers and OS, microsoft makes money from it's software, OS and Office. - suomi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7daven - proof positive that Digg is over-run by 13 year old know-nothings. It is getting to be intolerable - each and ever story ends up with a comments section that looks like a text message war between the kids on the special bus and several million chimps behind keyboards.
Take for instance "i don't think microsoft could care less about OSX 10.5. I don't think microsoft could care less, that apple's can run windows." from a post higher up.
Spelling errors I can forgive, we all make them - I make them... But what, in the name of all that is holy, is the ***** that supposed to mean? - Drgn547, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7CiXel:
Everyone uses PCs, Macs, or Linux Distros for different reasons. I prefer OSX (even though I use Windows XP SP2 and SuSE/Ubuntu/RedHat Linux) Just because I'm more comfortable on the system. I'm simply more productive with the OSX GUI. You just have to be willing to learn a new system. I sold a G4 eMac for $800, 2 years after I bought it for $1,100. Try selling a PC for that kind of return after 2 years. If you want to learn more about reasons to switch you can always read: http://www.apple.com/science/whymac/myths.html - belvedere, on 10/12/2007, -10/+13"the damage may well already be irreparable"
More "Boot Camp" will be the end of Windows nonsense. Linux can already dual boot with Windows, and it hasn't exactly made a dent in the home desktop market. To a typical home user, using Mac OS X still requires buying expensive Mac hardware, even with the new Intel platform, since Apple won't support anything else. Apple just isn't in the same league for overall flexibility in hardware support as Microsoft is, like it or not. No digg. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11Ya, I wonder if he's ever been to an Apple store
- Topher06, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Again and again, each revision of OSX is hailed as a Windows killer and Microsoft will not recover from its release?
Snicker, giggle, ROFLOL.
Sorry, but people have been predicting Apple's dominance in the computer industry for 30 years, and they are unsubstantiated pipe dreams.
Apple will happily continue its 5% dominance in a niche market with Leopard. Despite its advanced features, security, reliability and performance, OSX 10.5 will not initiate a trend for PC uers to switch to Mac's.
Simply put, the reason why Apple has never succeeded in getting more then 5% of the market it that their OS is tied to their hardware, and as long as Apple makes their hardware either too expensive (PowerMac's, PowerBooks, Mac Pro's MacBook Pros, etc), or too specialized (iMac and Mac Mini), this will not get PC users to switch from a platform that allows for ample choice and cheap configurations. You can buy a decent PC for around $300, and it outperforms a MacMini which is over two times more expensive and has limited upgrade potential.
Apple needs to swallow a little bit of their pride and release a Mac that is basically their answer to the beige box PC. A computer with lots of choice in hardware configurations and price ranges. Start this "beige box" Mac at around $300 for a basic configuration, and then allow the user to configure it all the way up to a $3000 monster if they want. Compete directly against every configuration that Dell offers basically. That is, if Apple TRUELY wants to become a dominant player in the computer market. Nothing says they have wanted to in their entire 30 years.
Leopard combined with hardware that can run Windows might give Apple a few extra percentage marks in the total world market, but then that is only people people want a fancy and overpriced PC rather then getting a Mac because it runs Leopard. Few home PC users will want to run Windows in virtualization mode because fo all accounts, gaming will still suffer huge performance hits in that configuration. Dual booting a Mac into Windows will be more ideal, but then, I have already seen a person user their MacBook pro almost exclusively as a Windows workstation, he dabbles in OS X when he wants to load some photos up or do some movie editing in iLife, thats about it. This is not a WIN for Apple, but bascially the PC market saying that they would prefer fancier computer enclosures to run Windows. Apple will become an OEM PC maker like Dell in this case, albiet with a greater attention to detail.
Apple's other biggest flaw besides their arrogance in assuming they know that the market wants in a computer ( re, after 30 years, they still haven't created a computer that the market wants as bad as an iPod ), is their continuos need to slam PC users for their choice in OS and computer. I mean, Apple's entire Ad campaign over the last few decades has been to tell PC users that essentially their OS sucks and their PC suck, so switch to a Mac. Apple has been a little more tactful then most of the Apple fanboy's comments, but that is essentially the case. If your an underdog, trying to convert an very well established installed user base to your product, and you tell billions of people that their choice in product is stupid and sucks, how many people are going to say "Yeah, I am an idiot, let me buy a Mac!" Apple isn't competing in a market where a person that doesnt have a computer is looking at a PC and Mac on the store shelf and needs to figure out which one to buy, they are competing in a market where everyone has a PC, and they need to convince the market that they should invest money and time converting to a Mac. Telling the user base they are stupid is never a good advertising campaign.
It is amazing how these grand statements are made every time Apple is about to roll out a product, that Microsoft should cower while and new version of OS X or a new Mac will overrun the market and dominate it and cause Microsoft to loose their foothold in this computer market. Once Apple releases their new OS and new hardware and the initial super-hype about Apple plays itself out in the news, at the end of it all, Apple will still have 5% of the computer market because they don't have a clue as to what PC users want.
Apple's ignorance is only matched by their arrogance in this market. They have all the right components to make a computer that will dominate the market, yet choose to either overprice them or make them too limiting and specialized to initiate that trend, and this will never inspire change from a market ruled by $299 Dell computers. Its not about which hardware/software platform is superior (that is an arrogant pursuit) its about which hardware/software combination is cheap enough to do everything the end user needs to do. - Bloekie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8http://www.duggmirror.com/apple/Apple_Leopard_ready_to_pounce/
- nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I love my Mac, but I think more people will stick to XP till Vista comes out rather than buy a Mac, but I could be wrong. I'm thinking about companies mainly, I don't see them switching. Home users, sure some of them will.
- maninblac1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6And he's right folks, the home user would rather buy a dell than a mac.
- nuflux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Linux hasn't made a dent because most users don't want a "DIY" operating system. They want a seamless experience that works with commercial applications.
- soopafly, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7"Dream on... Mac is nothing but eye-candy for newbs."
Funny thing is Chex, you're going to pay for Vista, which will make your Windoes machine look and run like a Mac. - dpcamp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"the damage may well already be irreparable"
yeah... because Apple is going to take that much of a bite out of Microsoft's market share by releasinging an OS 4-6 monthes before MS does.
1)It's been done probably 15(i'm exaggerating before you down digg me) times since XP has been released and
2) we all know where Microsoft will always hold there place. The workplace. - DigitalOmnivore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If anything this release may help microsoft...you need a legit copy of windows to run boot camp.
I see Apple hurting Dell and other hardware manufactures more than Microsoft. - simong, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Hehe, yes macosx has some nice eyecandy. But beneath the eyecandy there is a nice fresh unix base. If you only have seen the eyecandy you can't judge macosx.
On the otherhand, how are you going to survive when vista is out. Vista is full of eyecandy. - IQ70, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4ban his bastard
-
Show 51 - 100 of 189 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is