digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

The truth about switching

utilware.com — If you go looking for information on what it's like to switch over to a Mac, you'll quickly run into hyperbole, zealots, bigots, and naysayers... from both the Windows and Mac camps. So here's what it's like to switch to a Mac, without the hysterics:

show profanity settings
expand all
  • magus_melchior, on 10/12/2007, -40/+32Now why did he (or the HTML generator) set a fixed height...? Thanks to that "interesting" choice, I can't read all the text when I resize the font.
    • wolphcry, on 10/12/2007, -35/+23Must be an IE problem... Looks good in Firefox & Safari
    • ani-pockdotnet, on 10/12/2007, -35/+21The truth about switching: The grass really IS greener on the other side!

      ^_^
    • replica, on 10/12/2007, -40/+13Must be a Firefox & Safari problem... Looks good in IE.
    • Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -26/+6wow i completely misread replica's response... so now my post is useless
    • timf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21Why is everybody modding him down?

      The height is indeed fixed, just look at the source: height: 2858px;

      I'm using Firefox 1.5 on a Linux box
    • yellowmix, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Parent poster is correct and the problem should show up on every CSS-compliant browser. For some reason, the main content div has a height of 2858 pixels. This normally wouldn't be a problem because the default overflow behavior would allow the browser to display scrollbars. However, the parent DIV has overflow set to hidden, which the content DIV inherits, resulting in the text clipping if you increase the text size.

      There is absolutely no reason to set an absolute height for the content DIV. There are many people with vision difficulties who need to set the text to a larger size. On the bright side, text-to-speech programs like JAWS would still read it in this particular instance. Still, it's not hard to make a page accessible, especially this kind in which it was explicitly made inaccessible by setting two unnecessary CSS properties.
    • cecil_t, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3I guess they were busy "doing more with the Mac" rather than "tweaking". You're correct that it gets cutoff with an enlarged font; I had to copy / paste the article to a text editor so I could read the whole thing with a more reasonable font size.
    • Utopian, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Turning CSS off in your browser solves that problem (View -> Page Style -> No Style in Firefox).
    • joelhardi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Totally unreadable in Konq/KDE 3.5.2, no matter if I try to enlarge or reduce the font size. Switching to firefox ... I guess when all browsers become ACID-2 compliant, this article will become completely unreadable.
    • magus_melchior, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@Utopian:
      Aha, thought there was an "easy" button in Firefox, thanks for the tip.

      Now back to reading at 6 ft. away...
  • wolphcry, on 10/12/2007, -18/+7Kind of old, but still very true.
    • ywong137, on 10/12/2007, -8/+26This article is very true.

      A few months ago, after being a lifetime Windows user, I switched to a Mac. (a couple months later, I switched back, due to a critical piece of software I needed only being available on Windows) The experience is largely similar to mine. The Mac is a very slick, well-made combination of hardware and software, pleasing in many ways while sometimes frustrating in a small number of ways.

      Now that I have switched back, I do have moments of regret ("Man, the Mac never gave me this problem" or "I really miss that translucent terminal on the Mac"), but certain things that made me frustrated are also now no longer a problem. Overall, the experience made me decide that I'd certainly take up a Mac again in the future, and it was too bad that my work required me to use a piece of software that I couldn't find an adequate replacement for on the Mac.
    • thejadedmonkey, on 10/12/2007, -24/+1nvm
    • SkeletaLlama, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9If your software doesn't require a lot of power to run you can use the Virtual PC program to run it on a Mac. Or better yet you could install Ubuntu Linux on your Mac, install WINE and run your PC program from there for free.

      I know the feeling you're talking about. After years of being a Windows snob I finally got my hands on a Mac and I won't switch back to Windows again unless a piece of software requires me too. But now that I've discovered WINE under Ubuntu I don't know if I'll ever need a Windows OS again. Here's to hoping!
    • zweben, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Ywong- with the newer Intel Macs you can dual boot Windows and Mac OS, so next time you're buying a computer, you can get a Mac and run Windows only software on it too.
    • tciny, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I guess installing Parlells or dual booting with Windows would be more effective than installing Ubuntu and emulating via Wine. You'd have to pay for XP, but I think if it's really a mission critical app its well worth the price.
    • ywong137, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@zweben

      Yeah, the whole thing happened *right before* the intel Macs came out. Believe me, the next time around, I'm getting one of those things.
    • patnakajima, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1next time around, you wont have a choice. They're all going to be intel.
    • TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3why would I want to switch!? I'm a gamer.
    • andyd273, on 10/12/2007, -3/+42 reasons that make it unlikely that I'll switch:

      1) Even though you can now duel boot (and I'm sure it'll get even better in the future) that's a lot of money for a computer, especially when I'd much rather build my own anyway, and I don't run any software that I can't run on a PC.

      2) The whole Apple philosophy bugs me. They've always been about making stuff simple, which I can appreciate, but they way they do it is very very annoying. The way that make it hard to mess up with their machine is to only tell you one way to do something. For example, to make a shortcut to a program on a PC there are three ways to do it: hold alt and drag; copy and paste a shortcut; or right click, add a new shortcut, and then map it to the program you want to open. I don't know how you do it on a mac, but in their basic philosophy would make it necessary to hide all but the most simple way, and make it next to impossible to find the other ways to do it. Another example is the mouse. Macs have been able to run a two button scroll mouse since USB was built in, but they assume that the choice of mouse buttons would be to much for their customers, so they only let you use one by default. I just don't like giving that much money to someone that assumes I'm stupid and can't handle decisions.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Let's see - to make a shortcut on OS X:

      1) right-click, select 'Make Alias'.
      2) command-option drag the item
      3) there is no three
      4) Select item, select 'Make Alias' from file menu
      5) Select item, hit command-L
      6) ln -s

      So, that's evidently the 'force the user to work only one way' approach at its finest.

      The 'make a broken shortcut and then fix it' method sounds like a fairly bad idea to start with, especially from a support point of view.

      MacOS had aliases long before Windows had shortcuts, and OS 9 aliases were vastly superior things (OS X ones are not so good) as they were effectively unbreakable.

      Being grumpy because it doesn't use the same keyboard shortcuts or terminology as Windows is not Apple's problem.
  • Woofcat, on 10/12/2007, -24/+20I think that Mac's is just Linux for lazy people. I own a mac, and a windows box and indeed i am typing this from a Linux box, i would have to say i like Linux the best Mac second and Windows 3rd in terms of stuff randomly messing up.

    How ever for odd ball devices working, Windows, Linux, Mac. Many silly impulse buys i make work fine on windows, work on Linux with some googling and irc help and don't work on mac.

    Well what ever, to each their own.
    • thepharmacist, on 10/12/2007, -2/+35Well, lazy people, or people not willing to invest a significant part of their time in learning to program. Seriously I tried installing linux on my PC, but when I read something about a kernel recompile that was supposedly needed in order to get my sound card to work, I promptly gave up.
    • ywong137, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I agree, but without the pejoriative implication. Computer programmers are lazy people, and Macs (the new OSX kind) seem to be well-tailored to them. I do think Macs supply the one thing that Linux needed (yes, I know Macs are BSD) in order to make it truly useful to a USER (rather than a hacker): a truly good interface.
    • thejadedmonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3yeah, that's when I gave up with linux too... Ubuntu is better about it then Suse 9.0 was (at least for me) if you ever want to give Linux a go again.
    • solidcube, on 10/12/2007, -8/+9pharmacist: Kernel recompile != programming.
    • DigitAl56K, on 10/12/2007, -8/+8Stuff does not 'randomly mess up' on a computer. Computers do what they're programmed/told to do. If stuff 'randomly messes up' it's because you changed settings/files somewhere, or installed software that changed settings/files for you.

      Maybe it's easier to do that on Windows than it is on Mac, but don't blame the OS. There is no ghost in the machine, everything is causal.
    • SkeletaLlama, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I know what you mean pharmacist. Luckily the latest distro of Ubuntu seems to have fixed that problem for me. Truth be told I think Dapper Drake, Ubuntu's latest distro is even more user friendly than Windows, believe it or not. I'm still finding my way around the system but most of what I'm seeing is better than Windows.

      I still use Mac OS X Tiger for most of my computing needs because I find that Mac OS X is just better for most things. I like that it comes ready to use out of the box, I don't need to configure anything if I don't want to.
    • chewbaka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@solidcube

      True, but recompiling your kernel isn't exactly for the faint of heart either. How many times have you typed make and just have everything work? not very often is probably the answer.

      Saying Apple is Linux for lazy people is like saying C is assembly for lazy people. Sometime you just want something to work without scouring the web for that obscure library dependency so you can download the source and spend 2 hours figuring out how to compile it correctly.
    • drakethegreat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Well considering users don't have to do all the things that Linux users have to do just to get things to work correctly, if thats a definition of lazy then oh well. I prefer getting work done on my computer systems. Kernel recompiles and depedency hell don't help me with that. Also macs have a lot of software that linux doesn't have and thats just something Linux can't get around. I can run photoshop, office, games, etc. on my Mac while still have all the luxaries of a unix system to a certain extent.
    • HackWithRamzi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yes, Mac OSX Tiger is a complete joy to program. Cocoa is incredible!
    • node3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Digit

      Computers may be causal (this is almost a meaningless distinction as everything above the quantum level in our universe is causal), but that does not mean they are fully predictable. Look up the "halting problem" for proof of this.

      But more specific to the top at hand, in Windows things "randomly messing up" refers to the fact that Windows has a tendency to acquire problems from fully legitimate usage under no fault of the user. They did not deliberately command the machine to malfunction, nor were their actions ones that are, or should be, inherently risky. They were operating the computer properly, exactly as they had always operated, yet this time it failed.

      Yes, this can happen on any OS, but the fact is that Windows is significantly more prone to this than Mac OS X or Linux. This is evident by the fact that even highly experienced and skilled users will have had to re-install Windows due to system abnormalities *far* more often than they will have had to do so for Linux or OS X.
  • Rndm_Tngnt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22The article is only three years old, eh?

    That's some good timing.
    • anonymonk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Yeah, I know, it's kind of old... but most of what he says still applies.
  • greenbox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10are macs capable of being gaming machines, I've never seen a G5 at an unreal tournament or anything. when i look at a mac mini I'm thinking "would i be stuck with what ever graphics card inside or could i upgrade?" also, is it possible to switch your mouse with something better? i hate how the mighty mouse is designed, it feels so cheap. I'm not trying to say anything really bad about mac users but i am curious.
    • ywong137, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6In those cases, I think you'd be looking at the intel dual core models. Penny Arcade seems to think so:

      http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/03/03
    • gleffler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24Nope, sorry, you can't switch the mouse. Une button uber alles!

      Of course you can switch the ***** mouse. It's a regular USB mouse and any USB or Bluetooth mouse you find will work fine, including the *gasp* extra buttons. (Only two in the core OS, but more with USB Overdrive or the mouse drivers supplied with the mouse, same as Windows.)
    • TheCheeks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3im sure you can use any gaming-grade usb mouse, and there IS mac versions of quake4 and UT2k4
    • adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3"Of course you can switch the ***** mouse. It's a regular USB mouse and any USB or Bluetooth mouse you find will work fine, including the *gasp* extra buttons. (Only two in the core OS, but more with USB Overdrive or the mouse drivers supplied with the mouse, same as Windows.)"

      I'm not flaming but are you sure? I hooked a Logitech USB mouse up to my aunts mac after she used one on her computer at work and I had to actually install some software to get the second button to work. No for me that wasn't a big deal, but to your "I just want it to work when I plug it in" crowd I can see where something like that would turn them off. She's using the original OSX, did they fix that in the later releases?
    • coheedcollapse, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Yeah there are two button mac mice, we use them in the Journalism department of IU and they work the same way windows do. I can't stand using the one button mouse so I think that's the first thing I'd do if I'd get a mac...although i wouldnt. Windows/Linux combination suits me just fine, and I don't have these errors and crashes that everyone seems to have with their XP systems. It's probably because I'm the professor of awesomeness.
    • SkeletaLlama, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I think the reason you don't see PowerMacs at tournaments is that they're really expensive. They're fantastic for professional applications like intensive graphic and video editting (most design companies and a lot of movie companies edit their materials on PowerMacs) but they aren't good bang for the buck for gaming purposes. Plus lugging around that massive tower to a tournament makes my back ache just thinking about it.
    • jpt62089, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I hooked up my Logitech MX 1000 to my teachers iBook once and it worked instantly, no driver installs or downloads! Literally Plug and play! And all the buttons worked too! well except one, but that thing won't even work on my Windows PC!
    • ElJefeGrande, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I don't mean to flame, but some people talk about Macs like they are some wonderful piece of machinery specially designed for video editing and graphic design. But what does that really mean? Have you ever actually used a Mac to edit 400-600MB files in photoshop (which, when open take up nearly 1.5GB in RAM)? I work at a design company and I do exactly that on a new $5500 G5 with 4GB of RAM and there really is not much of a difference between the mac and my dual core dell running windows (which only cost about $1500). I'm not saying that I hate the mac (or the pc)! What I am saying is that I don't notice any differences as far as being a "designer" goes.
    • magus_melchior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I've never seen a G5 at an unreal tournament or anything."

      I've seen a bunch of iMacs playing UT2k4 at this year's MacWorld.

      Granted, they were most likely Intel Macs...
    • demesisx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ ElJefeGrande what about the gamma curve differences?
  • PayneX, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14"I was the ultimate tweaker in Windows... At first it seemed to be restrictive, but I've realized it has actually freed me to do things other than tweaking."

    Eventually, you will come to realize, "who am i to question the mac?" and submit to the way things should be...according to SJ.
    • thecwin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Eventually, you'll come to realise that the little registry tweak for making the passport stuff stop bugging you isn't important any more... seriously though, I use Linux -- and I love the "tweaks" you can apply, such as applying your own patches to [nearly] anything on the system. I like OS X too for it's lack of thought required when doing anything. It's nice for when you just can't be bothered with life any more. Windows probably has it's uses too but it's just not for me.
    • RyeBrye, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7There are LOTS and LOTS of things a power user can tweak on a Mac. The nice thing about them is that you don't ever HAVE to tweak things - but you can change around a lot of junk under the hood if you really want to.
    • ElJefeGrande, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1There are also TONS of things to tweak in Windows. XP service pack 2, right out of the box, does not NEED tweaking. But then again, our definitions of "tweak" may differ. I wouldn't consider setting up an email client to be "tweaking" (because it is necessary to set up email clients on both XP and OSX).
    • t3hX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Grab a program called TinkerTool, and tweak away.
  • cranium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"switching?" That's a false dilemma. I use Linux at work, OSX at home, my little kids use Windows, and my teenagers use Linux. I don't see anything wrong with using them all, at least you'll know what you're talking about in discussions like this.
    • superal1394, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5so true. My bro uses Red Hat and Windows XP, I use XP usually, but I'm looking at ubuntu. My mom still uses 3.1 and DOS, and I'm pretty good with Mac OS 7-10. I have had to manage all of these operating systems at one time at my house. I am the computer whiz among my friends. ahh, OS's are fun.

      XP is still the best in my humble opinion, cause it does EVERYTHING, it has support, and its FINALLY stable.
    • robbyt, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6"stable" is objective...
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I think you meant subjective... Anyway - it's about time too - XP is getting on for 5 years old!
  • OAKsider, on 10/12/2007, -10/+12Personally, this 'Windows to Mac Switch' is getting tiring. I don't think I need 27 articles telling me how exactly it will go during my transition. Seems like Mac advertising to me. If I want a Mac, I will surely find a way and be quite alright in my decision without people patting me on the back all the way through. digg rejected
    • SkeletaLlama, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8It is Mac advertising and I'm grateful for it. I always heard all the myths about how bad Macs were and how switching over was a bad decision for whatever made up reason. I believed them. It wasn't until I read articles like this that I decided to switch. Now that I have I can say I'm sticking with the Mac it's computing bliss. I don't have random system crashes, hardware/software conflicts, annoying driver updates and all the other thousands of tiny annoying things in Windows that add up to a major headache. Macs just run great all the time.
    • ElJefeGrande, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Why don't you try out a Mac or a PC before you cave into people's opinions.
  • CheapDigWannbe, on 10/12/2007, -11/+8"You'll play pretty well on a Windows network"

    - Ha ha ha ha Our family friend from Boston came to visit us with his dauther and they both have macs, I have open Wifi (let's share people, I have a PDA and always happy to find an open hotspot in other places). So it would connect alright, but the way the Mac conected to shared folders was hilariously ridiculous.... You would have to go through about 5 steps to get to another shared HDD on one of Networks PC's, Then it would add that as a Virtual Drive or something on the Mac... I've never used a Mac and that was a fun experience, i am sure many things can be better on Macs, but come on, just Shut up and use them, Every OS has some things that are just better than on others. You Mac people talk too much about your computers, go use them.
    • thecwin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I think this is really a YMMV thing. I've had Windows laptops have extreme difficulty dealing with Windows file sharing before.. hanging explorer and such. Similarly there are setups that Macs find extremely difficult. It's something to do with the whole cruft of having netbios and all that other stuff still hanging around with smb, I reckon.
    • Nougat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I had to configure a Windows 2003 domain to allow a Mac to access a file share. It was a complete pain, but I managed it. I couldn't even really tell you what I did exactly, but it had something to do with changing default security in Windows to be more open, so the Mac could talk to it.

      Everyone says they like Linux and Mac better than Windows, though I suspect there should be a qualifier there: for a stand-alone machine or a very small network. I know of no other OS that allows you the central accounts database (and machine system management) that Windows domains do. If someone else does, do tell.
    • MechaFenris, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0It's not a problem... if anything Windows machines are the ones that are the pain on linux/mac/solaris networks. The only problem I've ever ran into on a Mac with regards to a network is connecting to an NFS mount on a Solaris machine. Solaris is quirky about its implementation of NFS, and lo, Mac has its own.... (I work for a defense contractor... so the amount of Windows machines are limited to unessential work... Even the Macs are scarce...)

      Other than a few esoteric implementations like NFS, it's brain-dead simple. Most people don't even have to do anything more than plug them in.... Your experience is, shall we say, unique.... My last experience with a home network was with 10.2 and Win 98... worked fine. I ditched Windows 98 quite a while ago (donated the machine to a charity...), but I still have a linux machine that handles my networked Mac as simply as the Windows machine did long ago...

      Believe me, I'm a recent switcher (been about 5 or so years), and the sole reason for switching? OS X. It's an amazing OS, and it supplements my linux machine (and at the time, Windows machine) quite well. I had to wait for Apple to mail me my copy of 10.0.0.4.... so I've used both eras of Apple's OS, and I have to say, OS X is great. I'm glad I switched. Since I don't even own a Windows machine anymore, you can see that Apple makes a complete OS. There's nothing to "leave behind" as it were when switching. And now with the Intel Macs, you don't even need to leave your OS behind. :-D




  • NeoNevermore, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Just curious...how many pirates are Mac users?
    • Tom_Riddle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I am a pirate and a mac user.

      thing about mac.

      theres even better software to pirate. ; )

      and "Backing up" your friends DVD ISO's is a no brainer with the disk management utility.

      not to mention if u just have the video and not an ISO you can import it to iDVD and burn away.
    • RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The is a large community based around the goal of making OS X run on non-Apple commodity hardware.
    • Cronus6, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I've worked in the PrePress/Print Production industry for about 8 years now, and the simple answer to your question is... all Mac users are pirates of some sort or another.

      This includes ALL of my past employers. Let's face it Adobe/Quark products are just too damned expensive to buy a copy (or a massive site license) for every Apple in the shop.

      BTW... I make my living using these odd little machines and I really don't care for them. There's nothing on the Mac side you can't do on the "PC" side... and usually it's cheaper on the "PC" side as well. The Mac community (at least at the "graphic arts" level) is full of Mac zealots... I really don't care much for them either.

      OSX IS a huge improvement over the past OS's (most of which were horrid at best). But I still do my freelance work on a Windows box.
    • gocleaver, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4Hahaha. Not too many relative to Windows pirates. That's cause Mac users are generally (I said generally) people who really don't know their computers, and usually aren't in IT. I would hesitate to compare using a Mac to using Linux, as one above person did. Macs are what artists and people who care about pretty interfaces and graphics design use. I'm not trying to put Mac down, I'm just stating that that is what Macs are built for. Macs aren't built for gaming or for easy, functional networking, and they're no less bug-free than Windows. And we all know the only reason of course why Macs hardly ever get viruses is that hackers just dont care....they would rather write a virus for Windows, which is what the majority of people use.
    • StoneWolf, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I use a Mac at work and I'm not a pirate. I am, however, a ninja.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5"There's nothing on the Mac side you can't do on the "PC" side... and usually it's cheaper on the "PC" side as well."

      Technically, sure. It just won't be as pleasant an experience. Cheapness often comes at a cost, and certainly doesn't always mean better - sounds like you'd consider a $1 mouse better in every way than a decent Logitech. Oh, so you'd be willing to pay more for a device that does it better? So where exactly is your real complaint?

      "Macs aren't built ... for easy, functional networking"

      That's hilariously wrong! Macs have had built-in, instant plug-and-play, auto-discovering networking on pretty much every machine since 1986. Get 2 Windows PCs, sling an ethernet cable between them. Does it, without reservation, 'just work'? If any of the terms 'ethernet card', 'driver', 'crossover cable', 'netbios' or 'DHCP' even cross your mind, it just tells everyone that you're as much a victim of the inferior experience MS has forced upon you as those who don't even want to know what those things mean. It just doesn't have to be that way.
    • Cronus6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1coolbru :""There's nothing on the Mac side you can't do on the "PC" side... and usually it's cheaper on the "PC" side as well."

      Technically, sure. It just won't be as pleasant an experience. Cheapness often comes at a cost, and certainly doesn't always mean better - sounds like you'd consider a $1 mouse better in every way than a decent Logitech. Oh, so you'd be willing to pay more for a device that does it better? So where exactly is your real complaint?"

      So you can now "technically define" pleasant huh?

      The fact is the hard drives sold as upgrades or replacement drives are the EXACT same drives you can buy at Newegg or Directron or (god forbid) Best Buy for about $65 less. The Apple Cinema display is really nice, Gateway and Dell both have similar products for A LOT less.

      RE: The mouse, you bring up a good point.
      The mouse/keyboard combo is the single most important part of daily computer use IMO.
      I use a cordless MS Explorer, and an (original) IBM model "M" buckle spring keyboard that I've owned since 1988. It's built like a Mack truck, with FULL TRAVEL keys, and I adore the CLICK. When it breaks I will buy a new one just like it... (and YES they still make them for about $85)

      BTW thanks for pointing out Apple keyboards and mice are ***** I'd almost forgotten to mention that as I refuse to use OEM Apple input devices at work. (USB 5 button MS mouse and an older Kensington keyboard.. they have cloned the Apple garbage with their new ones).
    • obezyana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"That's cause Mac users are generally (I said generally) people who really don't know their computers, and usually aren't in IT."
      Um... okay.
      I'll agree on the "not in IT" bit, but (not counting IT, programmers, other comp-sci pros) how many Windows users really "know" their computers? Sure as hell not the general public.
    • tompahoward, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@gocleaver
      "That's cause Mac users are generally (I said generally) people who really don't know their computers, and usually aren't in IT"

      I strongly disagree. I was working last year for a game developer in Sydney, by the time I left about 50% of the programmers (I'm not counting any of the artists, I'm talking pure programmers), myself included, had switched to using an Apple of some sort for their personal computer. This was at a windows shop (Only the GM, Lead Designed and Director had G5s) as well so there was no influence from "what was being used at work".

      Get over your misconceptions and just accept that Mac's are no longer toys for people who don't know how to use a computer. I've used windows for years, I've previously used Linux over a 3 year period (at home and work) and now I use OS X; For me, OS X rocks (for you it may be different). It is IMO the best consumer OS on the market and as a programmer, my favorite platform to develop on.

      BTW Pre OS X, I used to hate Macs with a vengeance.
  • Akram, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9do you think now boot camp is around, people will just have the best of both worlds?
    i think when i get a macbook i'll just resort to windows whenever i need to, but spend most of my time on mac os x
  • daleallenbaker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Even old, this article contains many insightful comments. I recently "switched" (typing this on my ThinkPad) by adding a MacMini to my network. Integration was amazingly easy and secure. Linux config, though extensive, is no where near as easy as Windows (which rarely works the first six times you configure the machines unless you have a very very simple network), but not so with the Mac - it was laughably easy.
  • blackcanoflysol, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I use XP and Knoppix, never used Mac.

    But for everyone who switches, don't agree to film a switch commercial when you're high (or after you take benydryl).
  • SuperSunny, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Most problems that occur for most of you are most likely fixed in the newer intel macs. Most mouses work, two buttoned, if plugged in. Worked for me. Actually all of them worked for me, hahaha! If you want a Windows app, gasp, Parallels or Bootcamp!
  • shakeyshakey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Nice. Somebody need to do a similar article, only this time, involving Windows to Linux switch.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4They were going to, but the guy who was doing it missed the shoot because he accidentally screwed up a kernel recompile and couldn't get to his flight reservation details. ;^)
  • jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I just convinced a mother of three with limited PC knowledge to switch to a Macbook Pro from an old Dell 1100 Pentium 4 notebook. In the three weeks she has owned it she managed to tackle the following : organize her pictures, sort her music, rely on her email application instead of it crashing consistantly & make DVD's from her old home videos of the kids. On her old p4 she was using Outlook 2003, Picas and Pinnacle Studio for about two years in an effort to try and tackle these tasks. She will not be going back to a PC anytime soon, her words not mine.
    • cbreaker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I don't know man, I see most people using PC's without too much trouble too. Everyone works differently and some people might use a Mac easier then Windows but it's not always the case. If you can't figure out Office or Outlook, you're going to have trouble with everything.

      Windows is fine for most people, and I just don't see this whole "nobody can figure out that dang start menu" attitude that Mac users seem to think everyone that's not in IT has.
    • obezyana, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@cbreaker: True story, positively ridiculous.
      Last year, for everyone who lived in the dorms, my university insisted on having *their* student-run section of the IT department hook up the internet for all us students. Which was kind of silly, as I watched at least three separate students work on my computer, and could have done everything they did on my own.
      Anyway, I don't like my Start button showing, so I'd fixed up my computer so the button didn't show.
      It's a bloody Dell, with a standard Windows keyboard. There is a Windows button you can hit that will pop up the Start menu. Not very complicated, right? Right?
      Every single tech worker had to ask me: "What happened to your Start menu?!? What's wrong with your computerrr?!?"
      *tap*
      "Oh."
      *long pause*
      "Where's Internet Explorer?"

      So... apparently some aspects of the Start menu *do* confuse some people. Though, I think if you get confused by any part of the Start menu, you shouldn't be allowed to handle anything more complicated than a TI-83 calculator. And even that might be pushing it.
  • cbreaker, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2For an article being touted as "the truth" and without hysterics, I find these subject lines from the article a bit concerning:

    People will ridicule you for owning a Mac
    You'll feel like you're in a little club
    People will help you for no reason
    Fewer people will try to attack your computer
    You'll actually have to plan your reboots
    Random strangers will stop you to talk about your Apple
    You'll get more things done

    Yes, there's some "negative" points in there, but they're candy coated. It's hardly objective and it's mostly opinion and little fact.

    No Digg.
    • Books, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Well you've obviously never switched...so you have no idea what you're talking about. After using Windows based PC's for several year, all the things he listed are completely true for me.
    • cbreaker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I own three Macs. OSX is great and I use it on a regular basis. I've been using PC's since I got that new PCjr. I enjoy using PC's more then Macs.

      They're computers. Use what you want to use. Don't try to shove this ***** "switchers" in our faces all the time.
  • Books, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Wow, that is so damn right. I always find myself talking to people about their Mac. As soon as I find out they own a Mac, the conversation begins.
  • sych0, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1the comments are from 2003! reported as old
  • Pacotheparrot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
    "Everyone is up in arms about market share
    Apple's share of the overall PC marketplace has fallen to less than five percent. Lots of people say that this is a harbinger of the eventual destruction of Apple, but I think it's just a side-effect of the market being flooded with cheap Windows boxes. As long as Apple can make a decent profit with their product line (and therefore continue the business), that's all that matters to me."


    Sounds outdated to me. I'm pretty sure Apple's got more market share than that.
  • flog4file, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6wow i switched to an imac about 3 months ago and this perfectly describes my experience so far.
  • Drahknon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I'll echo some of the sentiments above that reflect a bitter-sweet experience. I have a Mac for "work" and a PC for "play." My PC worked great (XP/Linux) 95% of the time, but man... that 5% made me lose some pretty critical data. So I got a used iBook about 6 months ago, and though I love it, I don't really consider it a "replacement" for my PC. Rather, it's something of an adjunct.

    Things I like better...
    --Spotlight: I use it every day, and often every hour or so. It's indispensable to me, and Google Desktop can't compare. I open the bulk of my files and programs with it, effectively replacing, conceptually, the Windows Start menu.

    --Programs close: every time, without fail, when I want to close something, it closes. I know it's a small thing, but after 15 years with Windows, it's revelatory... programs aren't supposed to stay open when you close them.

    --Hardware: better built than my Dell, though, admittedly, other PCs I've used are about on par with the iBook in terms of sturdiness and design (Sony is particularly good).

    --OS generally: it's pretty damn solid. My PC never crashed much, but I feel like I don't have to babysit my Mac quite as much. No registry to mess with, no defragmentation... nothing. Leave it on for weeks on end and install/uninstall whatever you like. Your Mac will work great.

    --Integration: I like how all the i-apps work together. It's something totally lacking in Windows, but mostly because...

    --i-Apps are great: they really are. Apple spent some time on these and it shows. They work well and are nearly always superior to the alternatives (though MS Entourage is O-K)

    --Compatibility: Macs have come a long way in this regard since I last used them. A lot of the peripherals I didn't expect to work on my PC and Mac work just fine... flash drive, portable HD, mouse, etc. They all work just fine, and I didn't expect that.

    Things I don't like better:
    --No games: forget it. Just put games out of your mind. Beyond a few stand-outs, gaming is a no-go on Macs. This makes me get more work done, but it is a bummer.

    --My old programs: Oh, how I miss Onenote. There%u2019s nothing like it for the Mac (really, nothing) and I%u2019d give anything to have a Mac-native version of it. Then there%u2019s GTalk%u2026 yes, I know Adium lets you log into it, but I miss the program itself. There are many other PC-only programs I miss. I guess it%u2019ll have to wait until my Intel-Mac. Heh.

    --$$$$: like the author of the article says... Mac stuff is pricey. You'll generally spend more

    --Mac Users/Zealots: They bug the ever-living ***** out of me. Once I got my Mac, it's like they appeared out of thin air, striking up little rant-fests about how crappy and inferior PCs are. I will never understand why people can't just accept that different platforms have different strengths. Everyone wants to belong, I guess.

    --Customization: like the author, I really didn't expect the MacOS to be so... rigid. I mean, you can't change anything beyond the desktop wallpaper, really. That's something I sort of miss.

    And that's really it. Some strengths, some weaknesses.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4About customisation - while it's true that Windows has more options for changing interfaces colours and type sizes out of the box, it doesn't amount to much. Apple are also keen to avoid the support calls from those who have switched their interface to black on black. Both platforms go much further if you use other software, on OS X, ShapeShifter (http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/shapeshifter/) is where it's at. Smaller behavioural tweaks (often simply exposing hidden built-in features) can be had with tools like TinkerTool and Cocktail.

      These days, there's simply no reason to be either/or - I've got OS X on my MacBook running Windows and Ubuntu 6.06 via Parallels - if it has not been said enough already, it's a really fantastic solution. Also, it's entirely feasible to buy a Mac just to run Windows on natively just because you like the hardware - there is simply no equal to a MacMini as an SFF PC - even a Shuttle XPC is over 800% bigger, and anything smaller tends to be severely CPU limited.
    • Drahknon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@coolbru:

      I'm going to have to disagree, on both counts.

      Windows is very customizable, orders of magnitude so compared to OSX. Beyond the basic options, programs like Window Blinds can make a PC look like pretty much anything (even a Mac).

      And if by "either/or" you mean a Mac machine or a PC, it depends. Lots of people simply can't afford to buy an Intel Mac, and wouldn't know how to get started with dual-booting in the first place. That is, if my grandma can't dual-boot on an Intel Mac, many, many others can't either. And please don't get me started on Linux as a replacement for XP/OSX... it just isn't.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Windows is very customizable, orders of magnitude so compared to OSX. Beyond the basic options, programs like Window Blinds can make a PC look like pretty much anything (even a Mac)."

      Did you actually look at ShapeShifter? It goes quite a long way in that direction - you can easily make OS X look like XP or whatever, for example: http://www.maxthemes.com/themes/?theme=Mac%20OS%20XP
      Did you know that WindowBlinds was originally a MacOS 9 app? OS 9 had complete built-in theming, but Apple never enabled it in public.
      Personally, I'm not really interested in that kind of thing anyway - I've got work to do.

      "And please don't get me started on Linux as a replacement for XP/OSX... it just isn't."

      Huh? I don't think I said anything in that direction. Here's a recent example that I think neatly illustrates the way of the world (and I think you might agree): My MacBook has a relatively uncommon 1280x800 screen resolution. OSX supports it immediately, out of the box. Windows supports it with a simple driver update. Ubuntu currently doesn't work at that resolution because I can't figure out how or where I'm supposed to tweak the modeline in my X11 config files and there doesn't appear to be an update to the 915resolution package to support this chipset yet...

      For the Mac Mini, the price thing doesn't hold a lot of water - you can't buy a mainstream PC that small for any price. A barebones Shuttle XPC with a core duo is slightly cheaper, but then it's 8 times the size, noisier and requires more money and work to make it do anything at all. Anyone even considering such a product would certainly have to know how to do things like install an OS, so it's unlikely your Grandma would even be in the market. I didn't say it's for everyone, just that it's a possibility that I've not seen mentioned.
    • Drahknon, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@ coolbru:

      "Did you actually look at ShapeShifter?"

      Yep, I have. It's not the same. forgetting for a moment, that OSX, as I said, is simply not customizable at all compared to Windows without special software, ShapeShifter is... as you said, a step in that direction but not the same.

      "Huh? I don't think I said anything in that direction."

      Nope, but because you mentioned it, I decided to head off the argument. As for your resolution example, you don't address the fact that many lay users simply can't handle dual booting. I actually don't quite get what the resolution example is supposed to do for you.

      "For the Mac Mini, the price thing doesn't hold a lot of water - you can't buy a mainstream PC that small for any price."

      This is kind of a bait and switch, though, isn't it? first you say the "price thing" doesn't hold water, but then say you can't buy a PC that small for the price. Okay, but so what? People don't buy computers just because of their size--they do so for value. For "the price" a Mac Mini is fairly undervalued compared to a PC. I don't see how size factors in at all.

    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"OSX, as I said, is simply not customizable at all compared to Windows without special software, ShapeShifter is... as you said, a step in that direction but not the same."

      OK, so you don't consider the ability to change the image, colour, shape, size, alignment and position of all interface elements 'customizable'? What else do you want? Here's another exercise for you: Make XP look just like OS X, using no additional software at all. Personally I can't find the 'load third party theme' button in the XP control panel.

      "This is kind of a bait and switch, though, isn't it?"

      Not at all. I did specifically cite the example of an *SFF* PC, where size *is* a significant value factor. My point was that the article I referred to did not mention the Mac Mini as an option, not because it was too expensive (many of the SFF PCs it did mention were far, far more expensive), but because it was a Mac, and therefore does not enter the world view of someone looking for a Windows machine *even though* it could be an excellent solution. It just struck me that this kind of blinkered outlook is all too common - and it's to the detriment of Windows users.

      As for the 'but so what' - imagine you're looking for an SFF PC to sit on top of your TV; you have a choice between two: one is the size of a paperback, one is the size of 4 shoeboxes. The smaller one is $50 more expensive. You're saying that I'd be completely stupid to buy the small one purely because it's more expensive, no matter what other criteria I might have? I guess you'd also complain that a new car costs more than the same weight of scrap metal and plastic?

      "For "the price" a Mac Mini is fairly undervalued compared to a PC."

      OK, I'll call you on this: find me a PC of the same size and spec (I'll let you stop at matching the hardware) as a Mac Mini for less money. If you can't find a machine of a better spec for the same price (or the same spec for less money), then the price of the Mac simply cannot be considered undervalued because it is already the cheapest option, and therefore "the price thing doesn't hold a lot of water". QED.
  • BrandenWill, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I just did the switch in Feb. I love it. I have always wanted to use one and one day I just went out and bought an iBook. I have not used windows since. I love my mac. Each person will like what they like. There is no reason to fight about which one is better. To each there own. For me I will never use Windows unless I have too. That is just my two cents.
  • t3hX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7>That's cause Mac users are generally (I said generally) people who really don't know their computers, and usually aren't in IT

    I disagree - everyone I know who'se a Mac user really knows their computer inside out, and that's WHY they got a Mac- they are sick of fixing Windows. Anyone who doesn't know their computers will get that previously mentioned $499 Dell, because it's cheap.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1...in every sense of the word.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I meant to add, I agree. FWIW, I have two computing degrees and 25 years of IT experience, I'm a full-time web and application programmer and sysadmin for Linux and OpenBSD servers. Whenever I have to deal with Windows, it's like talking to a small child - use short words, speak slowly and clearly if you want to be understood... So much lowest common denominator crap.
  • CompIsMyRx, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3OS 9 ruined all of Apple's products for me. I won't even buy an iPod. I know someone is going to say "You should try it again, its gotten better" but they way Apple likes to feel important by suing anyone and everyone who leaks the tiniest of data about a product pisses me off. Never again Apple, never again!
    • obezyana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't completely agree, but I can see where you're coming from. I'm running OS 10.4.6, the computers in the lab where I was taking an animation class recently were running OS 10.3.9.
      Long story short, I won't even touch a computer besides my own for any major work anymore. I don't care what OS it's using. I'll buy the software I need myself before I mess around with computers with God-only-knows what version of the stuff I need on it.
  • MacGyverDXS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I just "switched"....love my 20" iMac, only had the chance to play with it for about 4 hours total since it arrived...but damn it's fast, the UI is slick and polished, and it's just easy as hell to edit video with it. For all my multimedia, web publishing, web surfing, chatting, and photo editing the mac will be my primary machine. My home built PC is running Ubuntu 95% of the time and I still have a XP partition on there too for my games.....but the pc will end up being my primary bitch work machine...doing DVD burning and duplicating, long downloads that I don't want to tie up my mac with, and rendering 3D files in Blender to keep my mac free. For me the switch to mac was more about getting away from the security and privacy issues that Microsoft has....If I could have gotten Dreamweaver, Flash, and at least one good video editor working in Linux I would probably not have made the jump to this awesome little machine....but I'm glad I did.
  • BarmyNick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well i'm waiting for my new 'MacBook' which is due this week. And i can't wait. :)

    But i will still be using windows and i'm also gonna be giving Ubuntu a try.
    Getting the best of all worlds so to speak.

    Also i aint gonna bash anyone for what OS they use.

    How i see it, if your happy then i'm happy.



  • bioret, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1so true
  • ejm508, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nice article...seemed to do a good job of showing both the positives and negatives, which I appreciated...
  • lopresmb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1rather old and slightly dated, but all in all a good bit of perspective about the switch.
  • diggnationdevon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The way I see it, deciding between operating systems is a toss-up between people, you should chose what best fits your needs.

    I do disagree what this guy said here:The Internet will be mostly the same
    Pretty much everything on the Internet will work like it does on Windows, including your banking site and your favorite homepage. However, once in a blue moon you'll find a frustrating page that refuses to work with Safari or Mozilla or some other browser, and you'll have to either find a Windows PC or just give up on the page.


    There still is Internet Explorer for mac! MS just isn't working on new versions.
  • MonaLisa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Several comments above posit that Mac users are generally "artist types" who do not posses a great deal of IT experience and knowledge. This is certainly not the case. Go to most any university, for example, and you will find droves of scientists who use Macs professionally, most of whom have a deep knowledge of unix, and definitely know their *****. Also, I know of several IT professionals working for AMD that use Mac laptops by choice to deal with a mix of Solaris, Windows and Linux machines.
  • CheapDigWannbe, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Ha ha ha ha I can't stop laughing at how Windows friendly comments are being dugg down, even if they're saying "I have no problem with windows".... ahhh flame wars make the world turn.
  • Hydraulix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Speaking of macs. I'm planning on upgrading my iBook with a new Macbook pro. Has the heat issue been resolved?
  • HackWithRamzi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I switched several weeks ago when I bought my new MacBook 1.83 GHz. I wish I had gone for 1GB of RAM... besides that, it's great! I've really had no problem switching at all. Programming on it is awesome, but I do miss gaming. I'm going to get a copy of Windows and use Boot Camp to play games.

    I can never go back to Windows. OSX is that good.
  • ersnyder, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Did you see how damned old that article was if the first place!?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.