Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Top 5 Reasons why Leopard will be Apple's tipping point
iconnectdots.com — I believe that Leopard will mark the tipping point of Apple's acceleration in the PC marketplace. Here are the top five reasons why.
verge- 1689 diggs
- digg it
- superalamar, on 10/29/2007, -17/+50No mention of the highly improved (an no doubt resource hungry) finder, which will wow entry level consumers as they shop.
Still, a very good article though.- phoomp, on 10/29/2007, -37/+11It's always amazed me how obsessed Mac users get over something as dull as file management.
- a Mac user who doesn't care about finder- Shiner6, on 10/29/2007, -5/+21Yes being able to organize, find and store your files faster isn't an important part of using your computer. I assume you don't use file cabinets either?
- Peavey, on 10/29/2007, -0/+6I prefer to tag files and just search for them. I love spotlight comments and metadata.
But I still agree with you, having an organized file system is nice as well.
- Peavey, on 10/29/2007, -0/+6I prefer to tag files and just search for them. I love spotlight comments and metadata.
- michaelb1, on 10/29/2007, -1/+4file management is everything!
- Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1I agree with the sentiment - doing work should be much more important than finding the work. However, given that this is a fundamental fact of life it has to be given a high level of attention. Spotlight went closer to what we needed by allowing us to search for files based on their contents rather than their location. However, Spotlight didn't answer the question "is this the file that I wanted?" without actually opening it - a combination of Spotlight and Quick Look should make a major impact, especially if you have 1000's of documents to hunt through (like me).
- Shiner6, on 10/29/2007, -5/+21Yes being able to organize, find and store your files faster isn't an important part of using your computer. I assume you don't use file cabinets either?
- moofer, on 10/29/2007, -4/+43latest developer release... Finder is taking up 1.2% of one cpu on a quad-core system, and 22 MB of memory. That's hardly resource hungry.
- superkendall, on 10/29/2007, -3/+28The new finder appars to be much more multi-threaded, and therefore consuming many light snacks instead of your whole system waiting for one &*($%&$%*( network drive gone sour!
- Zippo, on 10/29/2007, -1/+6Oh thank god... I've cursed on Tiger's Finder a number of times for freezing up when a network drive's connection dies.
- bradleyland, on 10/25/2007, -0/+4Does anyone have any specific reports on that issue? There's nothing more aggravating than connecting to a network share while at someone's house/office, Closing the lid on your MacBook to head home, only to have finder lock up for 5 minutes when you wake your computer up at home.
- Zippo, on 10/29/2007, -1/+6Oh thank god... I've cursed on Tiger's Finder a number of times for freezing up when a network drive's connection dies.
- willynilly, on 10/29/2007, -22/+7"Highly improved"? You are full of crap. It is the same old ***** Finder, riddled with the same defects, as ALWAYS. Seriously, WTF?
Everybody was hoping for a new Finder, and the lack of any significant improvement was a major disappointment. Where have you been?- enicholas, on 10/29/2007, -3/+22Have you actually used Leopard?
I'm running the latest developer seed, and as far as I'm concerned you are the one who is full of crap. Finder is indeed dramatically improved.- darkvad0r, on 10/29/2007, -16/+2does the green button labeled "+" works as expected or does it still have a will of its own? (Running one of the first leaked Leopard builds and I don't see any significant improvements)
- MtheoryX, on 10/29/2007, -1/+7It has always worked as expected...that is, if you read the manual to find out how it works.
Does it work like the Windoze maximize button? No.
Does it work as expected? Yes, if by "expected" you mean according to specs in the manual.
And if you're running one of the first builds, you're WAY behind.
- MtheoryX, on 10/29/2007, -1/+7It has always worked as expected...that is, if you read the manual to find out how it works.
- ahmadazwa, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3Quote: "does the green button labeled "+" works as expected or does it still have a will of its own?"
Hahahaha, LOL! The green button is NOT a maximise button if that's what you're expecting it to do. It's a resize window to fit button. When clicked, the window will resize to accommodate the content inside it.
- darkvad0r, on 10/29/2007, -16/+2does the green button labeled "+" works as expected or does it still have a will of its own? (Running one of the first leaked Leopard builds and I don't see any significant improvements)
- enicholas, on 10/29/2007, -3/+22Have you actually used Leopard?
- ramo13, on 10/29/2007, -2/+13i'll have to disagree on that, the new finder is so much slicker and faster on my mini.
- Rudiger81, on 10/29/2007, -1/+2As said before but want to confirm. The new finders CPU usage seems the same. Dashboard however seems to use a hell of a lot less memory and therefore the system seems to run better. I think the reason why the fairly high CPU specs for apple (nothing compared to Vista) is because of Time Machine that uses a decent amount of CPU but only during back up. A worth while trade off IMO
- over90000, on 10/29/2007, -2/+10This is the year of the desktop OSX!
- hottyson, on 10/23/2007, -2/+4Agreed!
Not because of Leopard.
BECAUSE MY WINDOWS VISTA PC SUCKS BALLS!
- hottyson, on 10/23/2007, -2/+4Agreed!
- Spuy767, on 10/29/2007, -2/+7Ahhh, vut it is there that you are mistaken. You see, when Apple adds features, it does not necessarily introduce bloat. The new finder is improved, but it is also even faster than the Finder in Tiger, and this is when I was running it on my 1.25 GHZ eMac that I bought second hand for a low end testing platform.
- XXStallionXX, on 10/24/2007, -6/+2How can the introduction of leopard get peopl excited about gamin on a Mac?? Where is SLI.Crossfire support? where is PhisX support? Sorru, I'm holding out.
- rye425, on 10/24/2007, -1/+4I just hope this OS fixes all the Macbooks cause they suck balls compared to the previous G4s stability.
- CookieTrain, on 10/23/2007, -2/+1Did anbody notice that the recent mac craze only started when they started using intel processors? Compatability is the answer here folks. Not search tools.
- bowe, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2I'm not interested in any of those 5 features. : (
- phoomp, on 10/29/2007, -37/+11It's always amazed me how obsessed Mac users get over something as dull as file management.
- notbob, on 10/29/2007, -63/+31Top reasons it won't be tipping me and people I know, PC games.
Mac hardware at best meets minimum/recommended requirements for new games.- cquinnd, on 10/29/2007, -40/+10We can always hope that Apple finally "gets it" and starts building systems more to the liking of gamers.
- TremorX, on 10/29/2007, -27/+17Hopefully gamers will "get it" and realize that PC gaming is dead.
- natenovs, on 10/29/2007, -7/+8http://www.digg.com/pc_games/PC_Games_We_Just_Can_ ...
- TremorX, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Almost all of those are coming out on a console (or already have), and the rest are yawnworthy.
Sorry, try again.
- TremorX, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Almost all of those are coming out on a console (or already have), and the rest are yawnworthy.
- natenovs, on 10/29/2007, -7/+8http://www.digg.com/pc_games/PC_Games_We_Just_Can_ ...
- Cymrubeats, on 10/29/2007, -10/+8Didn't you notice that the most column inches that article gave in its 'top 5' were dedicated to xp on a mac. That tells you something. a lot even. You do also realise things like bootcamp make developing a lot of software specifically for the mac a redundant act?
- gr3i, on 10/29/2007, -0/+7Name one
- PaulPinfield, on 10/29/2007, -0/+6You are dreaming.
- MtheoryX, on 10/29/2007, -0/+4Yes, I'm sure we'll see Adobe step out of the Mac market because, according to you, there's no point in developing for the Mac anymore.
Oh, and I suppose that Microsoft will just put the whole Office for Mac 2008 project on hold and totally scrap the whole Microsoft Mac BU as well.
/sarcasm
- ahmadazwa, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3Having XP bootable on macs makes software development on macs redundant? Your logic is flawed. There are lots of advantage making software on a mac using os x technologies. Examples? Core Animation! This makes it easier to create interactive, futuristic apps, with a-lot-less hassle than having to code the animations manually.
- jrbrewin, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2a lot simpler than .net 3, with it's declarative language? doubt it.
- tao52nyc, on 10/23/2007, -4/+3Why? I hate to burst your bubble, but gamers are a minority, even in the PC world. And the rest of us grownups REALLY DON'T CARE. We just want to Get. Work. Done. That's the reason Macs market share has increased domestically to 8.1% - people who actually work for a living and don't have time for narcissistic indulgences like Halo just want to be more productive with less hassle.
- jrbrewin, on 10/23/2007, -0/+5thus explaining how gaming recently saw the largest entertainment launch ever, within the last month? yeah, games suck, and don't at all drive revenue.
- Monk22, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3pishaw to your multi-billion dollar industry its worthless! maybe apple should try getting some work done in the advertising market since an 8.1 share in the market after 30 years doesnt really impress me.
- TremorX, on 10/29/2007, -27/+17Hopefully gamers will "get it" and realize that PC gaming is dead.
- NeoRicen, on 10/29/2007, -10/+31I've been playing the Call of Duty 4 Demo on my new iMac for days now (in XP in BootCamp), Runs VERY well, World in Conflict Runs very well, BF2 works great also. They are fine for playing games out now and coming out in a few months but long term since you can't upgrade they aren't the best.
- Heembo, on 10/29/2007, -28/+5He was talking NEW games, not the pansy ass old ***** you are talking about.
- CanadaMan87, on 10/29/2007, -2/+17Call of Duty 4 and World in Conflict are "old *****"?
gtfo the internets. - yabos, on 10/29/2007, -0/+9It comes out Nov 5 you idiot, it's brand new
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_Duty_4:_Moder ... - jrbrewin, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1is CoD4 demo out for mac? hrmm.. no, you have to use bootcamp.
Therein lies the point. if you're booting to windows to play a game, how is it mac os that allows you to do this - surely it's down to the fact that after years of slagging off intel, jobs decided to side with them purely to allow people to boot in to other more popular operating systems.
- CanadaMan87, on 10/29/2007, -2/+17Call of Duty 4 and World in Conflict are "old *****"?
- Heembo, on 10/29/2007, -28/+5He was talking NEW games, not the pansy ass old ***** you are talking about.
- craig4, on 10/23/2007, -9/+20Do you have any proof of this? I'm pretty sure your just talking out your ass, I have never had a problem with any game and am using an almost 2 year old Macbook pro.
- dagamer34, on 10/23/2007, -17/+7But you need to buy a $2000 laptop to get that kind of performance and therein lies the problem. For your typical college kid with their fashionable MacBook, it requires them to have a separate Windows-gaming PC because a Intel GMA 950 won't cut it.
- MacEnvy, on 10/23/2007, -5/+6The cost of a MacBook combined with a separate gaming rig can get you to the price of at least a refurb MacBook Pro.
- CATSCEO, on 10/23/2007, -5/+3I think it would be more than 1 new MacBook Pro...
- jrbrewin, on 10/23/2007, -1/+1plus the two year old mac book pro has a radeon mobility x1600, which is about good enough for WoW, but not much else.
- MacEnvy, on 10/23/2007, -5/+6The cost of a MacBook combined with a separate gaming rig can get you to the price of at least a refurb MacBook Pro.
- dagamer34, on 10/23/2007, -17/+7But you need to buy a $2000 laptop to get that kind of performance and therein lies the problem. For your typical college kid with their fashionable MacBook, it requires them to have a separate Windows-gaming PC because a Intel GMA 950 won't cut it.
- edicius, on 10/23/2007, -12/+20That's why people prefer consoles.
- Heembo, on 10/23/2007, -19/+6I agree with Leo Laporte - for your average brainless consumer, Get a mac and a XBOX. If you are a businessperson and actually use your computer to make a living, get a PC.
- dnields, on 10/23/2007, -6/+15I actually use my computer to make my living... and I use a Mac.
- mynameisjesse, on 10/23/2007, -1/+12I make a living off of my Mac as well, but hey whatever makes you feel better.
- sv650touring, on 10/23/2007, -2/+6I think you mean "If you work in a cubicle, then you get a PC" Since this definitely seems true where I work. The Macs are in nicer offices and labs.
- Spuy767, on 10/23/2007, -0/+4Whatever helps you seep at night fool. I generally get in arguments with folks when they see my Macintosh in my office. It usually goes something like, "Why do you use a Macintosh? There's so much that it can't do, it's not for 'real' work." All this while I'm running Photoshop Illustrator and any number of FinalCut Studio Apps simultaneously, "Like what?" I ask. "LIke games and stuff." That's usually when I reboot into XP and play the Top of the Line Game du jour at full speed.
- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3I'd be curious to hear what activity for "making a living" you can do with Windows that you can't do with a Mac? The only difference between the two I see is playing games, not working.
- BrainInAJar, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3CAD is about the only thing, and that's mostly just because Microsoft paid the AutoCAD people a lot of money to ensure that this was the case
- jrbrewin, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2rubbish.
i suppose you think microsoft also paid off every developer that works to deliver products on windows only.
out of curiosity, how's the tin foil hat holding up? - Jimzip, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2MS doesn't usually pay people off... they usually just buy their company.
Jimzip :D
- WhiteRaven, on 10/23/2007, -4/+3You meant to say *some* people. Either that or you're from another planet.
- Heembo, on 10/23/2007, -19/+6I agree with Leo Laporte - for your average brainless consumer, Get a mac and a XBOX. If you are a businessperson and actually use your computer to make a living, get a PC.
- davidrossiii, on 10/23/2007, -9/+9Although I will agree there aren't a ton a games out for the Mac, you are clearly misguided when you say that Mac hardware barely meets the minimum requirements for new games. First of all, where's your proof. Pair up any new, cutting-edge game with a brand-new Mac and you will probably see no difference (maybe even an improvement) over PC graphics.
- natenovs, on 10/23/2007, -4/+3video cards do mac a difference
- aaronm67, on 10/23/2007, -2/+7Jesus people are idiots.
Mac hardware = PC hardware. Mac graphics wont be an improvement over PC graphics if you buy a laptop with a Radeon X1600, because they will be the exact same video card.
- Chirp08, on 10/23/2007, -13/+6Brand new macbook pro gets 30fps outdoors with an occasional but playable dip, 60fps indoors on COD4 with the only setting not maxed being the AA (i have it at 2x instead of 4x).
"universal binary" games run like ***** though, COD2 can't hold a candle COD4 graphically yet runs worse than COD4 (the osx version of cod2 that is).
Games like bf1942 which to me is just classic, I love to fly around and shoot planes down when im bored, runs flawlessly and with the drivers provided for the nvidia card I can enable 4x+ fsaa and a bunch more modern graphics tweaks to get the gaming looking pretty damn sweet for its age, with absolutely no slowdown ever.
I can't help but to say the macbook pro is one of the best windows gaming laptops out there, especially considering its portability compared to your typical "gaming laptop" - DOGPARTY, on 10/28/2007, -7/+26BAWWWWWWW IM 15 YEARS OLD I NEED MY PC GAMES WHICH ARE ALL THE SAME AND ALL CRAPPY AND FULL OF SPACE MARINES AND ORCS
- msc20, on 10/23/2007, -1/+8ahahaha.. my Thumbs up of the year! Great response senor!!!
- jrbrewin, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3although i know you're being sarcastic, or moronic, or ***** for comic effect, you forget, of course, that it's all about choice. Without having to a mac + windows license, the best choice for work, recreational, and creative software / hardware is still a pc + windows. it's a fact.
mac owners get ***** about it because they know it's true, the same way they get ***** about anything they know they're ultimately wrong about. - Herostratos, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2I don't think it is notbob's comment that sounds the most like if it was written by a 15-year old in here...
- Phych, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Actually...the games with space marines and orcs have mac versions...yay Blizzard!
- Squidly, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Running Bootcamp on my Mac Pro (with ample memory and an X1900) I have no problem whatsoever running Quake Wars: ET, HL2 Episode 2/Portal.
Yeah, I own a pretty buff system, but the point is there are options out there for Mac gamers all across the gaming spectrum. - hackmyballs, on 10/24/2007, -4/+3Games is the only stupid excuse M$ has to fight any alternative OS
THE ONLY ONE!
I know they are scared, we are patiently waiting to rip their heads off!- jrbrewin, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3how about much wider application, and hardware support, and vastly better enterprise management tools?
p.s. when trying to put across a mature, relevant post, using childish names does nothing more than make you look like said child.
- jrbrewin, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3how about much wider application, and hardware support, and vastly better enterprise management tools?
- cquinnd, on 10/29/2007, -40/+10We can always hope that Apple finally "gets it" and starts building systems more to the liking of gamers.
- KSUdesigner, on 10/24/2007, -3/+64"I just cannot emphasize enough what a game-changer this could be. Every single day I connect with someone that wants to show me something or have me show them."
The new iChat does look promising, but keep in mind that this feature will most only work from one Mac to another, both running Leopard.- theokandroid, on 10/23/2007, -24/+7*bzzz* wrong! It's just displaying video so all you need is AIM and a webcam.
- ChromaVita, on 10/26/2007, -2/+16I think he meant the screen sharing option...
- haydesigner, on 10/23/2007, -5/+1Then I would suggest that *saying* that part would have been an important addition to his comment.
- Spuy767, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Actually, he's mostly right. The screen sharing option worked in my beta with any AIM client supporting a video display. iChat appeared to encode the screen in real time and send it as video. That was a rather old beta tho, so the implementation may have changed.
- Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1The problem here is that the AIM client for Windows is awful. Given the relatively poor quality Skype video that I get with my parents back in the UK I thought I'd see if AIM could be a solution but I gave up with the client. That said it really made me appreciate how good iChat is.
- ChromaVita, on 10/26/2007, -2/+16I think he meant the screen sharing option...
- ramd3z, on 10/23/2007, -10/+2plus he said "connect" ..maybe next he's going to "flesh that out" a bit.
- tracydanger, on 10/23/2007, -4/+10I love iChat. I also hate that my windows using friends and family have no decent option to video chat with me unless I use Skype or oovoo (beta for mac). I want to be able to use iChat and have them use whatever other crap they want that can connect to me with my iChat. The AOL client connects, of course, but the windows client for that sucks big time. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. I would love it if windows friends could use Skype or oovoo or something else and they could see me using presentations and such (but maybe not have ability to share a desktop). There is no good solution to this problem that I've found. I just want to use the default video chat client cause it's got cool features. I at least like that oovoo lets you have multiple people in a video chat like iChat does - actually you can have more people that iChat allows (but I imagine it needs more bandwidth and processor speed). If anyone knows of a solution to this, feel free to share...
- blackbelt88, on 10/24/2007, -13/+1Run Windows.
- tracydanger, on 10/23/2007, -3/+5Another Game-changer for me would be if you could create widgets with the ease of dashcode or especially the new widget creator within Safari and then sync/port them to your iPhone - that would rock.
- meatmcguffin, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Im pretty sure that someone will take the initiative and come out with an engine for the iPhone in February that lets you run your own widgets, sort of like how Amnesty Singles works.
- ratdiggr, on 10/23/2007, -2/+3Good point, re: Mac/Leopard-only. Just read about Yuuguu....same idea, but extended CROSS-PLATFORM. Not just screen-sharing, but screen-control-sharing (think VNC or NetMeeting). Plus they've announced a "Web Share" version is under development where the receiver won't even need to download any software...! Talk about potential game-changing...if they can keep it free/very cheap and stay around...
http://www.yuuguu.com/
http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/09/24/yuuguu-takes- ...
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2007/10/03/yuuguu-you ...- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1I don't know why anyone would digg down a comment that refers to a product that does what iChat does -- it's pertinent. People shouldn't be using the digg commenting system to "VOTE" on whether or not they LIKE what is being said -- but whether or not what is said is relevant and informative.
>> By the way, I prefer Slashdot's system, where a few trusted people at a time get votes, and you can only go +5 or -5. We get too many 400+ votes for someone saying "Ron Paul kicks ass." It's way too slanted to how popular a comment is, rather than how valuable.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1I don't know why anyone would digg down a comment that refers to a product that does what iChat does -- it's pertinent. People shouldn't be using the digg commenting system to "VOTE" on whether or not they LIKE what is being said -- but whether or not what is said is relevant and informative.
- ukmountie, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3In my opinion the bigger problem with iChat is the firewall changes necessary to make it work. However once they're done it is clearly superior to everything else. Hopefully the new version will raise the game even higher.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1From what I've seen with iTunes -- and how totally locked down our Proxy is at work... I think Apple has gotten much better at navigating these roadblocks.
Time and experience will tell -- but you raise a good point. I don't understand why people have dugg down your comment. - sarnford, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Firewall issues and it seems to only work well hardwired, wireless seems to kill it every time.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1From what I've seen with iTunes -- and how totally locked down our Proxy is at work... I think Apple has gotten much better at navigating these roadblocks.
- Zippo, on 10/23/2007, -1/+7Apple's made iTunes and Safari for Windows... If Apple were to make iChat for Windows, iChat's popularity would explode.
And if they made iChat natively compatible with MSN/Yahoo, it would dominate... I love iChat, but I love Adium more.- blackbelt88, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3Yes because Safari has been such a huge success on Windows and everything...
- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -2/+1I'd say it was a pretty big success...especially since it was only a beta.
After all, there are Windows users still talking about it at this very moment, right? - VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1You forgot the /sarcasm tag.
Safari isn't on Windows to blow the doors of Explorer (yet) -- it's there for people to develop applications for the iPhone, and probably widgets in the future. The kerboros engine is cross-platform, minus whatever Apple has been doing to modify it. The main work would have been adding all those iPhone and widget APIs. This is a trojan horse into Microsoft's development camp. As the iPhone and the Webapps that Apple is going to grow start taking over, it will be the gateway for developers whose only choice is Windows. It's really a brilliant strategy.
But Safari is about developing for the Mac on Windows -- not having another browser (yet).
- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -2/+1I'd say it was a pretty big success...especially since it was only a beta.
- Spuy767, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3Safari's "Private Browsing" feature has been a huge success in the Closet Porn Junkies community.
- Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1Actually, I like that idea - iChat for WIndows. MSN compatibility would be useful, definitely, but even a decent port of the existing client would be a step in the right direction. That said the "hardcore" users probably wouldn't be interested unless you could skin the application and that's never a feature for Apple's applications.
- blackbelt88, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3Yes because Safari has been such a huge success on Windows and everything...
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1iChat is a bit MORE than just a video conferencing tool from what I saw of the Leopard preview. I wish I had in professional video the ability to take a picture of a still background and then remove it on the fly from video -- no GREEN SCREEN. I could use that on kiosks right now.
It's also a remote-control application, a VNC, a file-sharing tool, and entertainment. I don't know if this will replace Instant Messaging for kids at home -- but I do know this will allow me to do more than just chat.
- theokandroid, on 10/23/2007, -24/+7*bzzz* wrong! It's just displaying video so all you need is AIM and a webcam.
- quickjack, on 10/23/2007, -17/+1How about an Imac "Enlistment" (vs. bootcamp)
(Apple installed Windows, maybe new stripes on the next cat) - natedouglas, on 10/23/2007, -8/+20Job's didn't say that. That was actually a quote from M. Dell... about Apple 10 years ago.
- CJUNIT, on 10/23/2007, -16/+34I like the "Mac at home. Windows at work" mantra. Apple has definitely poised itself to take over the domestic front.
- Ireland, on 10/24/2007, -16/+39I prefer the Mac @ home, Mac @ work one. Windows are to look out of, nothing more :P
- DarkSamus, on 10/23/2007, -8/+6glad to have that setup as well
- Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1Parallels helps a lot on that front. It still means that I have to use Windows but I can at least be 100% compatible with my colleagues while still being able to take advantage of the stuff that makes the Mac a pleasure to use. Being able to do without Windows entirely would be nice but that's not realistically possible where I am. Honestly, it's frowned upon that my computer comes from home and doesn't have Dell written on it but it is at least tolerated and that works for me.
- moofer, on 10/23/2007, -15/+14If I had to spend my work life on a windows box, I'd quit.
- FireStrife, on 10/24/2007, -6/+13have fun at the unemployment line.
- omnivector, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1You're on crack. Every job I've worked for the past nearly, 4 years, I've been able to do on a Mac. ProZ.com, I did all my programming on a G4 PowerBook. BrandLogic (did web programming on a mac mini). Yahoo, I worked on the mac version of yahoo messenger, and now Apple (big surprise there, I work on Macs at Apple). Still my point is there are PLENTY of mac jobs.
- mynameisjesse, on 10/23/2007, -3/+2Because you don't understand what it's like having to pay bills obviously.
- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -4/+5I've worked exclusively on Macs for 2 years now. And there's no unemployment line in sight.
I suppose you just have to know where to look.
If you just want to work in a cubicle taking Customer Service or Support phone calls, yeah, a Windows box is your friend I guess.
But I've done everything from web design to multimedia integration to server administration, and never required anything other than a Mac.- asauterChicago, on 10/24/2007, -1/+3haha, what a narrow minded view: "If you just want to work in a cubicle taking Customer Service or Support phone calls, yeah, a Windows box is your friend I guess."
Oh yeah, I guess you forgot everything else that makes a company run BESIDES web design, oh say Accounting, Sales, Marketing, Developers, Payroll, HR, Operations, Finance, Business Development, R&D, Engineering... that use primarily windows programs, or programs developed only for Windows to get their job done. Other issue is cost. I think for most companies, view new computers as Loss on investment (rather than any sort of ROI), so they want to minimize that loss as much as they can. And buying 3000, $1800 iMacs is not as attractive as buying 3000 $300.00 Dells.
Don't get me wrong, I love my Mac, I have an the 24" Quad iMac in my home office, a Mac Mini for my daughter and we have a Mac Book Pro for our personal laptop. But for work we still use Windows. I would love for that to change, but unless Mac comes out with enterprise pricing and solutions, I don't think that's going to happen soon (and I'm not sure if I want them to compete in that market anyway).
Basically, ***** you for insulting everyone who doesn't work in web-design.- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1A Quad iMac? Really? That's amazing. When did those come out?
Oh yeah, ***** you too, kindly :)
- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1A Quad iMac? Really? That's amazing. When did those come out?
- asauterChicago, on 10/24/2007, -1/+3haha, what a narrow minded view: "If you just want to work in a cubicle taking Customer Service or Support phone calls, yeah, a Windows box is your friend I guess."
- FireStrife, on 10/24/2007, -6/+13have fun at the unemployment line.
- one1plus1one, on 10/23/2007, -2/+11I actually like my Windows-XP-Media Edition too much to make the switch to anything else for the moment.(Vista or Leopard just don't hold the sway for me that XP media edition does.)
However, having said that, I'm considering getting a second machine into my home, and might just make it a Mac. I wonder how many others out there like me, just might go dual at home, and have 2 machines. (That might be how the switch is made -- a gradual phasing over and accostomization of the population to Mac, rather than a "revolution of abrupt change").- sudowrestler, on 10/23/2007, -2/+6Sounds like a plan. I switched to Mac about a year ago, and still have my Windows machines, although now I'm on the Macs (MacBook and G4 desktop) pretty much 100% of the time. Good luck if you give it a try.
- viruz, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3I switched 4 months ago. I had the intention of being a dual computer user, then eventually I only remoted into my windows box once a day to created new shared folders so I could get all my information.. then I'd put it into hibernate for days at a time. This weekend my old main windows PC is going to my mothers house so she can replace her old 800Mhz.
I still have a PC here, but it's just a linux fileserver, nothing more than network storage.- Angostura, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1One thing worth considering is to have the Windows box running headless and access it through VNC or somesuch in a Window on the Mac.
- bradleyland, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2Ditto. I started out like you. I bought a 20" iMac G5 to do a large job for a publishing client with the intention of using it for my graphic production jobs (I'm no artist). The volume of work was sufficient to pay for the machine, plus some, so I made the plunge. The funny thing was, once I started using the Mac, I didn't *want* to go back to my Windows machine. I didn't switch out of some grand plan or lust for everything Apple, I just started using the machine and found many things that improved my work day.
Three years later, my PC is a file server and occasional gaming machine, and I took a $700 hit selling my PC laptop so that I could get a MacBook.
- posure, on 10/23/2007, -7/+10I use my Mac for casual use and my Windows machine whenever I want to be productive - I'm on the Windows machine most of the time.
- takamalak, on 10/23/2007, -4/+3Then you don't have a Mac, liar. Oh wait, your 'job' is to 'test' and 'review' video games?
- Churnd, on 10/23/2007, -1/+7I'd actually like to see Apple make a move for the enterprise market. I run 2 Xserves at work along with a Windows 2003 server. The Xserves are simple to set up, easy to manage, and easy to secure. One is an older G4 that still runs like a top. Never had a problem with it.
Name one other platform that offers all the services OS X Server does right out of the box. I haven't seen one. It rocks. Leopard server will be better. The only things that keep it from becoming a presence in the datacenter is acceptance and price.- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -1/+2I can tell you for a fact that Leopard Server IS BETTER. Just wait, it'll blow you away.
- bradleyland, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1I'm setting up an XServe + XServe RAID for a client in the next 60 days. I'm really anxious to work with Workgroup Manager. Coming from a Windows AD environment, I have high expectations. I'm really interested in seeing how Apple tackles the problems that AD solves.
- Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1It's also important to note that XServe's and OS X Server are a lot cheaper than Windows Server when you start adding on all your client licenses.
- hackmyballs, on 10/24/2007, -3/+3Mac @ home, Ubuntu @ work
Can't beat that, believe me!
- Ireland, on 10/24/2007, -16/+39I prefer the Mac @ home, Mac @ work one. Windows are to look out of, nothing more :P
- Reaktor5, on 10/23/2007, -17/+57Leopard is the biggest reason that I'm switching over to a Mac.
- yichen, on 10/23/2007, -3/+20Leopard is the biggest reason that I'm upgrading to a new Mac. For most of people living in Windows world, Leopard is not enough to switch.
- nreynolds, on 10/23/2007, -16/+4I'm sorta switching when I go to college next year, but I'm still going to have XP (or maybe Vista by then) so I can use it for programming *****, etc. And I can use Leopard for like 3ds max and that kind of stuff (I know it works on both, but it's better on a mac, really).
- Kazbaeden, on 10/23/2007, -11/+18http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID= ...
"The 32-bit version of Autodesk® 3ds Max® 2008 software is supported on any of the following operating systems:
Microsoft® Windows Vista™
Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional (SP2 or higher)
The 64-bit version of 3ds Max 2008 software is supported on any of the following operating systems:
Microsoft Windows Vista
Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64"
"Note: Apple® computers based on Intel processors and running Microsoft operating systems are not currently supported."
As far as I can tell, 3ds max does not run on OSX or Apple hardware at all. Congratulations though; you're well on your way to becoming a true apple zealot! - bladefist, on 10/23/2007, -11/+5lol i prefer to call them sheep, zealot works
- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3Why, exactly, would you NEED Windows for programming?
Have you ever taken a look at Xcode? Especially Xcode 3 with Leopard. - thewfirestarter, on 10/23/2007, -2/+1@Kaz
Why not tell the whole story?
***
Hardware
At a minimum, 3ds Max 2008 32-bit software requires a system with:
Intel® Pentium® IV or AMD Athlon® XP or higher processor
512 MB RAM (1 GB recommended)
500 MB swap space (2 GB recommended)
Hardware-accelerated OpenGL and Direct3D supported
Microsoft Windows-compliant pointing device (optimized for Microsoft IntelliMouse®)
DVD-ROM drive
Note: Apple® computers based on Intel processors and running Microsoft operating systems are not currently supported.
At a minimum, 3ds Max 2008 64-bit software requires a system with:
Intel EM64T, AMD Athlon 64 or higher, AMD Opteron® processor
1 GB RAM (4 GB recommended)
500 MB swap space (2 GB recommended)
Hardware-accelerated OpenGL and Direct3D supported
Microsoft Windows-compliant pointing device (optimized IntelliMouse)
DVD-ROM drive
***
While they don't officially support it, they also list nothing that it can't provide. It will probably run fine.
- Kazbaeden, on 10/23/2007, -11/+18http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID= ...
- tracydanger, on 10/23/2007, -2/+14Leopard may be the reason you're switching to a Mac or upgrading to a new mac. For me, Leopard is simply the biggest reason I'm switching to Leopard from Tiger.
- nreynolds, on 10/23/2007, -16/+4I'm sorta switching when I go to college next year, but I'm still going to have XP (or maybe Vista by then) so I can use it for programming *****, etc. And I can use Leopard for like 3ds max and that kind of stuff (I know it works on both, but it's better on a mac, really).
- Heembo, on 10/23/2007, -20/+4Brainless fanboi.
- wilhel1812, on 10/23/2007, -4/+10welcome to the family! you wont be disappointed :)
- willynilly, on 10/23/2007, -16/+4Mac fan or not, Leopard is totally devoid of compelling improvements. Seriously, this idiotic cheerleading without any facts to back it up will do more to undermine your cause than anything. Leopard does not offer any "secret features"; it's the same hollow crap that Jobs outlined in his keynote last year. Face it: It's a ***** reflective Dock and bloated backup mechanism. That's it.
- enicholas, on 10/25/2007, -3/+11Every message you've posted in this discussion is the same stupid *****. You're obviously a troll and you have obviously never actually used Leopard.
- KyleMistry, on 10/23/2007, -3/+9You're right. Let's all use...Vista.
Hm.
Nevermind, a Leopard upgrade just got even MORE appealing. - MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1You may be right about the "secret features." I'm using the last developer seed, and so far, nothing new here. And they wouldn't have any features in the GM that wouldnt be in the developer's seeds, because they use the developers to test features.
However, for you to say there's no other features other than the Dock and Time Machine is about as stupid as can be.
You obviously have never used Leopard, and probably don't even have a Mac, so you're just spouting misinformed crap.
- yichen, on 10/23/2007, -3/+20Leopard is the biggest reason that I'm upgrading to a new Mac. For most of people living in Windows world, Leopard is not enough to switch.
- bbrosemer, on 10/24/2007, -26/+11Macs will be successful this year because the look cool. They control the hardware the the software runs on meaning that no matte what mac you have it will! be able to run all of the features of leopard.... You can not say this for a PC even one with XP... the lowest end PC typically requires some of the graphical enhancements to be turned off.
- derrickgossman, on 10/23/2007, -2/+9It is people like you that make us Mac users look bad.
- bbrosemer, on 10/23/2007, -3/+1Woah woah... just because ur a little fan boy... I love my mac I use it for comp sic... but anyway my point was what ill draw the new people in as they go to the apple store to buy an ipod they will see the cool features on the macs... And the snazzy interface that is why they will buy... Not because they know what other aspects of Leopard make it superior to Windows ...
- manitoba98xp, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2I'm a Mac user, but some things you said were just wrong (and difficult to read, but I'll let that slide). Any new computer, loaded with XP, will not require graphical effects to be turned off (for good reason, XP is six years old!). And though controlling both the hardware and the software smooths the line between the two and ensures a high degree of compatibility, I'm not aware of a Dell (or similar) computer that won't run Windows.
- Urzeitlich, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3Your posts make no sense.
- Billions, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2You are correct about 'no matte what mac' however
- Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1Buried for being incoherent rambling.
- NerveBand, on 10/23/2007, -17/+24I really want to see how Leopard performs on 512mb of ram and run Vista on the same mac just to see how they perform. It would be quite the battle, thats for sure ^_^
- moofer, on 10/23/2007, -10/+5you need to get out more.
- Shiner6, on 10/23/2007, -8/+13512mb of ram? Are you running it on your calculator or something?
- natenovs, on 10/23/2007, -1/+14thats what everyone is running vista on and complaining about performance.
- FireStrife, on 10/23/2007, -4/+4I wouldn't even run XP with 512 MB's of RAM of course its gonna be slow.
- lonnieh, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3xp runs decent on machines with 256 and it runs great with 512. my arcade cab has an off lease dell running windows xp. starts up fast, mame runs great, and i have no prob browsing the internet or running htpc apps
- r3zonance, on 10/23/2007, -4/+3Vista runs like absolute crap on 512MB RAM.
Insane amount of swapping (lockups) every 10 minutes or so (and the hard disk is perfectly fine).- antdude, on 10/23/2007, -2/+1512 MB is minimum!! Try 64-bit Vista. Even worse than 32-bit.
- FireStrife, on 10/23/2007, -4/+4I wouldn't even run XP with 512 MB's of RAM of course its gonna be slow.
- natenovs, on 10/23/2007, -1/+14thats what everyone is running vista on and complaining about performance.
- aaronm67, on 10/23/2007, -4/+30How about you spend $40 on RAM and enjoy having a usable computer?
- KMartSheriff, on 10/23/2007, -1/+6Seriously. I don't get these idiots who are still using 512 of RAM and have the nerve to complain. You say your systems running slow!? No *****, 512 RAM isn't much for anything. RAM is cheap.
- manitoba98xp, on 10/23/2007, -0/+6It's amazing how quickly these things increase. I remember when 128 was big. :)
Soon we'll have comments like this (not mocking you, just needed a template :) ):
"Seriously. I don't get these idiots who are still using 16 GB of RAM and have the nerve to complain. You say your systems running slow!? No *****, 16 GB RAM isn't much for anything. RAM is cheap."
- manitoba98xp, on 10/23/2007, -0/+6It's amazing how quickly these things increase. I remember when 128 was big. :)
- KMartSheriff, on 10/23/2007, -1/+6Seriously. I don't get these idiots who are still using 512 of RAM and have the nerve to complain. You say your systems running slow!? No *****, 512 RAM isn't much for anything. RAM is cheap.
- Shivetya, on 10/23/2007, -4/+1Actually if you have a discreet video card Vista will run with 512mb of RAM - just turn on Aero.
- shirini, on 10/23/2007, -2/+2i think you mean turn it off. if u were to turn it on you'd blow up your computer.
- ZehnFoH, on 10/23/2007, -0/+0Granted Vista won't purr if you only have 512mb of RAM, but it is quite functional. A lot of the panic over Vista consuming 2+ gb of RAM and whatnot is from people who don't understand how RAM works. Vista pre-loads a lot of applications simply to make starting them up faster, which is quite nice, and then drops and frees up space as necessary.
Honestly, at this point, the biggest hold back for me switching to Vista is the lack of support from NVidia considering I run a 680i board from them and a GT ultra.
- krnldmp, on 10/23/2007, -18/+4Yeah it'll be the tipping point alright.
- axle, on 10/24/2007, -8/+60The tipping point happened a long time ago when they moved to a unix based OS. Since that time, things have gotten better and better for Apple.
- Ireland, on 10/23/2007, -9/+8No, he means "the real" tipping point, as in 10%+ market share.
- adrianmonk, on 10/23/2007, -2/+3I guess the point is, are we talking about market share, the derivative of market share, the second derivative of market share, or something else?
Actually, if we are talking about a tipping point, we aren't even talking about anything as simple as the value of derivatives. We are talking about having crested the peak of potential curve and now gravity is taking us down the other side, and we are going to be stable in a different position.
What I'm saying is, maybe you're both right. Also, sorry for the math-nerdiness.- MtheoryX, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2The only people digging adrianmonk down are people that don't know what a derivative is and what an important indicator it can be.
- adrianmonk, on 10/23/2007, -2/+3I guess the point is, are we talking about market share, the derivative of market share, the second derivative of market share, or something else?
- willynilly, on 10/23/2007, -10/+1Too bad the UI hasn't advanced since the '80s.
- enicholas, on 10/23/2007, -1/+11If you're going to troll, could you at least not be quite so stupid about it?
- MtheoryX, on 10/25/2007, -0/+3Yes, because Windows has advanced leaps and bounds when it comes to UI, right?
/sarcasm - lolmax, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2HAR HAR HES WRIGHT ABOOT DAT UN JARVIS! FIRE UP DA DOS PROMPT SO WE CAN PLAY WORMS
- iainc, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Ah, so there's the block feature. Willynilly, you're muppet and you're talking ***** as usual. ***** off to the Microsoft section.
- Ireland, on 10/23/2007, -9/+8No, he means "the real" tipping point, as in 10%+ market share.
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/24/2007, -10/+149No. The tipping point was at Macworld in January '06. The tipping point was moving to Intel which cut the performance gap between Mac and PCs to zero, and cut the cost premium of owning a Mac from 25%+ to 5%+. That's what really got the Mac rolling again. Leopard is just icing the cake.
The Mac is finally recommendable. No longer do you have to say yes to, "But aren't they slower? Don't they cost more?" The answer is now no, and not really.- coldphoenix, on 10/23/2007, -20/+11True, they are cheaper than before, but competitive with the PC pricing, I don't think so.
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -10/+7Everything else EQUAL, yes they are very competitive.
- OdinEye, on 10/23/2007, -6/+16Do we have to rehash this old argument? Comparably equipped machines are comparably priced. Yes - if you want a very cheap beige or black box with windows, it will cost you less than an apple. Match them up on specs and the difference disappears.
- andafrouse, on 10/23/2007, -4/+2This is not true. I looked at the macbook pro a while ago (was 2800$), it's twice the price of a high-end similar laptop.
- OdinEye, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3Price them out so the are *actually equivalent* in terms of specifications and you will find the differences largely disappear. And a 15" MBP *starts* at $2k, not $2800. Your $2800 price is for the top end 17" MBP with some very high end features.
- Kamujin, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1This is definitely not true. Until recently a 17" from Apple meant 1680x1050. Well, the rest of the world got 1920x1200 in their 17". Thats why Apple only says 17" because they don't want you to notice they are screwing you on the resolution. BTW, PC notebooks had 1920x1200 monitors for like 2 YEARS before macBooks did. You could not even get a hi-res monitor from Apple until like April of 2007.
Also look at the DVD drives in the macBooks, their write speeds are generally slow vs their "comperable" machines.
Oh nm, you won't listen anyway.
Apple is great at hiding where they cut corners, but a comperable machine from apple is DEFINITELY more expensive.
- andafrouse, on 10/23/2007, -4/+2This is not true. I looked at the macbook pro a while ago (was 2800$), it's twice the price of a high-end similar laptop.
- expert01, on 10/23/2007, -5/+3Agreed. People use windows because they go to Office Depot or Best Buy or such and buy a cheap computer (You can get a vista machine for at least $250 after $150 MIR). Apple might start to get a bigger share of the new hardware sales market, but it'll never touch windows in the overall OS market share as long as they have to COMPETE price-wise against not only Microsoft, but Dell and HP and Gateway and Lenovo and Office Depot and Best Buy and Circuit City and Office Max and Wal-Mart and every other company that makes and sells Windows PC's.
Not many people actually thought Apple would really ever switch to Intel, but it happened, so maybe they'll do the unthinkable again and lift the hardware restrictions on OSX. Could be they've just been waiting for better linux/unix drivers for legacy hardware before they made the change. Is it so unfeasible to think of an EFI HP with OSX? And not only that, but with PowerPC, ARM, X86, and other platforms supported (with more supportable thanks to the OOP model of OSX), they might just be preparing themselves to meet Microsoft head-on and offer OSX on phones, PDA's, cars, and other devices. - gquaglia, on 10/23/2007, -1/+3Get what you pay for
- sinfony, on 10/24/2007, -23/+19I'm currently using a Dell Vostro 1500 that cost less than half as much as a comparably equipped Macbook Pro. I'm no mathematician, but I think that would be a 100% cost premium. Pretty steep price to pay for an operating system.
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -11/+14No you aren't. At least, not if it's actually comparable. To even get to the status of comparable, based on specs, a Dell Vostro gets into the $1,500+ range, assuming you are actually settings things equal and not just saying, "Well, I don't need that anyway." You've still got no Firewire 800, no value added from the iLife suite of software, and it's larger and heavier. At the end of the day you are 25% less and still not even "comparable". When you find something that actually IS comparable, you'll realize that the price differential drops even more, and you are looking at around 10%.
- moofer, on 10/24/2007, -10/+8Let's also see how long his machine is supported by the latest OS... My 4 year old machine will run Leopard. When it does, it'll also run better than it did when new. Vista on a 4 year old machine? Keep sniffing glue. My mac is a LOT cheaper when I only have to buy a new one every half-decade...
- natenovs, on 10/24/2007, -10/+6minimum requirements
vista: An 800 MHz processor 512 MB of RAM
leopard: 867 MHz G4 and 512 MB of RAM
youve got a weak straw man - rebotfc, on 10/24/2007, -1/+6Except Vista on that machine requires all its settings turned down and no aero interface.
Leopard runs full kilt. - rebotfc, on 10/23/2007, -2/+4Except Vista on that machine requires all its settings turned down and no aero interface.
Leopard runs full kilt.
- natenovs, on 10/24/2007, -10/+6minimum requirements
- salmonmoose, on 10/23/2007, -2/+11I run Vista on a 4 year old computer it's fine - invariably people who have trouble have bought budget machines and they're getting what they paid for.
- sinfony, on 10/23/2007, -14/+13My Vostro gives up .2 ghz of processor speed and 40 gigs of hard drive space to the Macbook Pro. It has a higher resolution screen than the MBP, it has a memory card reader and more USB ports, and the more versatile ExpressCard 54. The two machines have the same amount of RAM, same video card, both are wireless N, both have 8x DVD burners, etc. My Vostro cost $1200 before tax; the comparable MBP starts at $2499 before tax.
The lack of Firewire 800 is a minor irritation, but no more so than the inferior ExpressCard slot on the MBP. Not sure what value iLife is supposed to add; it's not as if there aren't superior (and free) alternatives to that software on both platforms. I'll grant that the Vostro is bigger and heavier, but not so much that it's a problem, and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay double to save a pound of weight.- terath, on 10/23/2007, -6/+13And does your Vostro have a motion sensor that halts the hard drive heads when you jar it? Does it have an integrated camera? Does it have a light sensor that dims the screen automatically when the ambient light drops? Does it have an illuminated keyboard that turns on based on the ambient light? What about a power cord that automatically breaks away if you trip on it? Does it wake from sleep and get to a usable state in 2 seconds or less? For that matter, can you leave it in sleep mode for days and not have the battery drain to zero? Is your burner a slot loader? What about the battery life? And for that matter does your battery have an external readout so you can tell its charge even when the machine is off?
And on the topic of firewire. It may be a minor irritation to you, but to musicians it can be a killer. Even for others, you're aware that a firewire external hard drive is actually much faster than USB because firewire is far better at sustained transfer rates? Now, add to that the bigger and heavier part and you can see why what you have is not equivalent to a mac book pro.
You just used the "well I don't need those things" excuse. - Kamujin, on 10/24/2007, -2/+1Yeah, and does your Vostro have a keyboard that sometimes misses keystrokes?
Does your Vostro sound like a jet engine when you run applications?
Does your Vostro burn your legs when you use it as an actual laptop?
Does your Vostro have a 1 button mouse circa 1978?
Some other "features" that you don't "need".
- terath, on 10/23/2007, -6/+13And does your Vostro have a motion sensor that halts the hard drive heads when you jar it? Does it have an integrated camera? Does it have a light sensor that dims the screen automatically when the ambient light drops? Does it have an illuminated keyboard that turns on based on the ambient light? What about a power cord that automatically breaks away if you trip on it? Does it wake from sleep and get to a usable state in 2 seconds or less? For that matter, can you leave it in sleep mode for days and not have the battery drain to zero? Is your burner a slot loader? What about the battery life? And for that matter does your battery have an external readout so you can tell its charge even when the machine is off?
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -8/+3So 10% slower, 30% less storage, and probably went with Vista Business. That's not "comparable". That's something different entirely.
And the MBP starts at $1999.- sinfony, on 10/23/2007, -3/+3What it lacks in speed and storage, it gains in screen resolution memory card and ExpressCard options. Given that, for most applications, CPU speed isn't the bottleneck, I call that a fair trade (those who actually need every ounce of processor speed they can get might fairly disagree, but that isn't the average user).
As it happens, I got a Vista Ultimate upgrade license for $25 through my university. Tell me again what the Leopard educational discount is? - HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -6/+3You call that a fair trade, that doesn't make it equal. Fact is, they aren't comparable because they aren't the same. There is no MacBook Pro in that price range, and so you can't say that you can get something just the same as a MacBook Pro for half the price. What you can get is something different, as you did.
And I believe the new education discounts for Apple products are 10% across the board. It used to be much more. Make no mistake though, $25 is NOT the educational price for Vista Ultimate Upgrade. If that is indeed the price you paid, then that's because your University is a Microsoft partner. It's one of the perks they give certain universities for signing contracts for a certain amount of Microsoft technologies for a certain amount of years. The educational prices are about the same as OEM prices, or typically a little more. Go to school in Texas by any chance?
- sinfony, on 10/23/2007, -3/+3What it lacks in speed and storage, it gains in screen resolution memory card and ExpressCard options. Given that, for most applications, CPU speed isn't the bottleneck, I call that a fair trade (those who actually need every ounce of processor speed they can get might fairly disagree, but that isn't the average user).
- aaronm67, on 10/23/2007, -7/+6Vostros are usually pretty good deals.
For example, the cheapest Macbook = $1099, features (main components):
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x512
80GB Serial ATA @ 5400 rpm
Intel GMA 950 Integrated Graphics
For $893, you can get a Vostro 1400 with:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T7250 (2.0GHz/800Mhz FSB/2MB cache)
2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz, 2 DIMM
160G 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive
128MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ 8400M GS
Now, the Apple comes with a bunch of other stuff, like a webcam/lightup keyboard/whatever the hell else they come with. That doesn't change the fact that you can get a MUCH MUCH more capable Dell for far cheaper then a Mac. To get a Macbook comparable to the $900 Vostro I configured, I would have to go to the $1999 Macbook Pro.
Macs are a LOT more expensive, even still.- octophobic, on 10/23/2007, -2/+3When I compared the Vostros 1400 to the Macbook the prices came out to be pretty close. $1423 Vostros vs $1524 MacBook. On the Vostros I added 2.2GHz Intel Core 2, 2GB RAM, 160GB HD, Wireless N-Card, Bluetooth Internal, and an Integrated Webcam. For the MacBook I chose 2GB RAM and a 160GB HD.
These machines seem reasonably comparable but the MacBook is not TWICE the cost of the Dell.
I will not play "Jump to Conclusions" with you no matter how shiny and new your play mat is. - aaronm67, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1@octophobic (wouldn't let me reply)
Funny, I configured a Vostro 1400 exactly as you said:
$1,182
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T7500 (2.2GHz, 4MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB)
Genuine Windows Vista® Home Basic
14.1 inch Wide Screen XGA LCD Display with TrueLife™
2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz, 2 DIMM
160G 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive
8X CD/DVD Burner w/ double-layer DVD+R write capability
128MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ 8400M GS
Dell Exclusive MediaDirect™ Instant Play Software Application
Dell Wireless 1505 Wireless-N Mini-card
Dell Wireless 355 Bluetooth Internal (2.0 + Enhanced Data Rate)
Integrated 2.0 mega pixel Web Camera
Integrated High Definition Audio
Which may not be twice as expensive, but $400 is a hell of a lot of money for almost the exact same system.
- octophobic, on 10/23/2007, -2/+3When I compared the Vostros 1400 to the Macbook the prices came out to be pretty close. $1423 Vostros vs $1524 MacBook. On the Vostros I added 2.2GHz Intel Core 2, 2GB RAM, 160GB HD, Wireless N-Card, Bluetooth Internal, and an Integrated Webcam. For the MacBook I chose 2GB RAM and a 160GB HD.
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/24/2007, -6/+4@aaronm67
But it's NOT comparable. It's significantly better. A $900 Vostro is not comparable to a $2000 MacBook Pro. It's different entirely. About the only thing those two might share is the physical size of the screen. So yes, for half the price you can get a significantly worse computer.
- moofer, on 10/24/2007, -10/+8Let's also see how long his machine is supported by the latest OS... My 4 year old machine will run Leopard. When it does, it'll also run better than it did when new. Vista on a 4 year old machine? Keep sniffing glue. My mac is a LOT cheaper when I only have to buy a new one every half-decade...
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -11/+14No you aren't. At least, not if it's actually comparable. To even get to the status of comparable, based on specs, a Dell Vostro gets into the $1,500+ range, assuming you are actually settings things equal and not just saying, "Well, I don't need that anyway." You've still got no Firewire 800, no value added from the iLife suite of software, and it's larger and heavier. At the end of the day you are 25% less and still not even "comparable". When you find something that actually IS comparable, you'll realize that the price differential drops even more, and you are looking at around 10%.
- frsrblch, on 10/23/2007, -8/+2^ Especially when you look at how much things cost to build your own computer.
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -5/+3Can you build your own notebook? Not really. Can you build your own all-in-one? No. Can you build something that's actually EQUAL (not I-like-to-play-FPS-games equal) to a Mac Pro for significantly less? Eh. I suppose that depends on where it is in its cycle. Towards the EoL of a particular model, probably. Otherwise, no.
- Heembo, on 10/24/2007, -16/+5Macs Cost A Lot More Than PC's. Still. If you think otherwise, you are terribly full of crap.
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -6/+5Everything else equal, no they don't. Everything else not equal, yes they do.
- kelly, on 10/23/2007, -3/+3You mean perceived performance gap.
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -1/+1No, I mean actual. You have to decide: either Apple was grossly exaggerating performance claims in the PowerPC era, or they are doing it now. Was the Core Duo twice as fast as the G4 it replaced in the PowerBook? Yes. Yes it was.
At the same price points between PCs and PowerPC Macs there was a huge performance gap. You could pay $2,000 dollars for PC that was as fast as a $3,500 PowerMac G5 in the kinds of applications that mattered the most, like video rendering. Sure, PowerPC 970 has it's merits, but not in desktop/workstation machines. It's merits are in select server and scientific calculations. Now you can just get the $2,000 Mac Pro.
- HerrEisenheim, on 10/23/2007, -1/+1No, I mean actual. You have to decide: either Apple was grossly exaggerating performance claims in the PowerPC era, or they are doing it now. Was the Core Duo twice as fast as the G4 it replaced in the PowerBook? Yes. Yes it was.
- seraph582, on 10/24/2007, -3/+2you have to be on crack to think they're not way more expensive. Really.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -1/+2Good points. But I have to say that even as an Apple fan that the "Macs are the same price" is only true if you are talking about a Laptop, or the most kickass workstation.
I just saw an Add today for a Dell computer with Windows XP Pro for $200 (cheaper than buying the OS). So, Mac's can't get the bargain areas yet. As a company -- Apple probably doesn't want to go there, because the margins are so tight they wouldn't be able to innovate. The Windows platform is a victim of it's own success -- it's only argument right now is "it's cheaper" and that's like being proud you have a Ford rather than a Mercedes. More people in this world are driving Fords and will continue to drive the cheaper vehicle and use the cheaper platform - because it is good enough. It doesn't provide much promise for all the venders that they have branded themselves as "good enough" and there isn't one PC manufacturer that has the credibility to fill the "Mercedes" niche.
The best PC right now is made by Apple. The Public, at least, has that perception. And when they use the iPod or the iPhone -- they GET that it is technology they can use.
Moving to the Intel platform was part of that equation -- but probably it's more about being able to run Windows apps during your transition, and about all the "i" gadgets getting people used to the idea that using a computer doesn't have to suck.
But Apple is NOT cost competitive -- it's a decent price for the BEST, which isn't a bad nitch at all as a company -- it just means that Apple won't rule the computer world until someone makes a super cheap Mac.
- coldphoenix, on 10/23/2007, -20/+11True, they are cheaper than before, but competitive with the PC pricing, I don't think so.
- FireSlash, on 10/24/2007, -14/+36As a developer, OSX has always had me at "low memory use". With adium, xchat, firefox, and itunes all open and running, I'll burn around 250mb of ram on OSX. The same machine with the same programs on Vista is around 500mb-- Twice as much.
I blame part of the memory consumption on the fact that so many windows applications have felt the need to associate themselves with additional hidden process and services that do practically nothing but waste resources (See: Adobe speed reader). While OSX itself may not move forward very quickly, I feel it may be gaining momentum. We sell macs at my store, and sales have been taking a positive trend. People are seeing and hearing more about macs since they went apple, and bootcamp is a major selling point. Hell, we're selling macs to run XP because nothing else we sell will run it anymore! Try finding XP drivers for pre-built vista machines; not a fun task.
Apple's product changes in the next couple months will be a large factor in what happens though. If they make positive changes to their machines while considering all of their market segments, things will go well. If they ignore the new segment they're starting to build and cater toward the diehard mac fanboys only, they will simply fall back into the corner they came from.- willynilly, on 10/23/2007, -9/+2I wouldn't be too smug about memory use until you try Leopard. We're back to rampant pinwheels and permissions problems, setting the OS back several years.
- meatmcguffin, on 10/23/2007, -0/+5People said that about Tiger until the first few software updates came out. 10.4.1 was released nearly immediately
- tgoose, on 10/23/2007, -5/+1I don't know if I'm way off, but that sounds like pretty enormous RAM usage just for that coming from Linux.
- zongamin, on 10/23/2007, -0/+6"People are seeing and hearing more about macs since they went apple" ????
Maybe you mean INTEL? - eclipse007, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1As a developer, you should be aware that a good OS uses up all the RAM it could for caching to make things run faster, and when an application needs RAM, it frees up the RAM. The fact that Vista uses a lot of RAM, in itself is not a bad sign.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2RAM doesn't make things run faster just by gobbling it up. You are caching things you need quick access too.
L2 Cache is faster -- and part of speed is having simple instructions that don't need to be constantly replaced with newly fetched instructions. The move to computing with the GPU, that now Vista is following, makes a huge difference in speed.
The one thing that NeXT did better than anyone else is Virtual memory. The Mac just handles memory better -- applications should request only what they need and let the OS decide what the user is accessing more. A single application cannot know what is best to be cached -- this is more a factor of "I'd better grab it or someone else will" which is why so many apps are loading redundant APIs in Windows. Most of them don't even pool from the same fonts.
I notice that when I open up Word and choose a font -- it takes a while to load up my 300 fonts -- because it is used to doing it's own caching. It could have been designed to use the font caching scheme of the OS for "free." That's a great example of what I'm talking about.
I'm not a "real" programmer -- I just program Multimedia. But I just take issue with how you are defining memory management here.
Looked at another way -- the OS takes up ALL the RAM, and shows free RAM for what is not in service. MORE of that is going to be better --- even cached RAM should be looked at as FREE, but you overwrite it when something else needs it LAST -- like a well managed hard drive.
OS X will almost never run out of memory as long as it has enough hard drive to spool -- though of course, any OS will start chugging at that point.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2RAM doesn't make things run faster just by gobbling it up. You are caching things you need quick access too.
- willynilly, on 10/23/2007, -9/+2I wouldn't be too smug about memory use until you try Leopard. We're back to rampant pinwheels and permissions problems, setting the OS back several years.
- silverwolfe, on 10/23/2007, -10/+4I believe Leopard will see a higher consumer adoption rate, but I don't believe it's for these same reasons.
- unmarked, on 10/23/2007, -3/+9Reports are that the pre-orders are twice that of Tiger.. so Apple must be doing something right.
- NanoHelix, on 10/23/2007, -1/+20Time Machine has nothing to do with keeping devices in sync. Why are they mentioned in the same paragraph?
- BigLick, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Because you would want to back up all of the really cool stuff that you have collected on your really cool IPhone.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2That was probably an error on the writers part.
But that would make 6 reasons (including the Home Mac Sync app), and everybody knows that these lists MUST be either 5 or 10 items.
- MrBlue999, on 10/24/2007, -5/+39What? No.
It's the iPhones and iPods that've drawn people to the Macs. On today's Apple investor conference call, they said over 50% of the people that buy Macs are new Mac users. Many of them know about the Mac because of the iPhone and iPod. It's well known in the investment community and they termed it the "halo effect". Leopard is just another piece of the puzzle that might facilitate the growth in market share but it's not the "tipping point".
This halo effect strategy extends overseas by first penetrating the European market with iPhones and iPods then following up with Macs. Yeah, yeah, no one bothers listening to these "useless" investor relations calls anyway.- willynilly, on 10/23/2007, -7/+5Every one of these new users will wonder why the hell they can't resize windows from their edges.
- Meccabilly, on 10/23/2007, -3/+1haha that's actually spot on.... If apple truly wanted to get more people switching they would consider implementing some of those small but handy interface changes... like when they added two button mouses (mice?).
- DROWE859, on 10/23/2007, -5/+2Mouses is correct.
- KMartSheriff, on 10/23/2007, -2/+2The fail train is waiting for you.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2I actually do prefer that ability in Windows. I don't like the ONE corner to size a window or only moving a window from the top bar on the Mac. A minor annoyance -- but it becomes an issue if you have to adjust a lot of Windows or you get one "stuck" under the menu bar.
There are a very FEW things I'd like to steal from Windows -- but that is one of them.
The other "biggie" if you can call it that, is to be able to COPY, CUT, or PASTE files without having to drag them to a Window. I don't mind copying the text of a series of file names if I'm in the text Window -- but it should behave like Windows for moving files.
Also I would like the ability to Synchronize more than one file when I move them into another folder with similar files -- let me know the size, date and other differences, and give me a "synchronize all newest" option as well.
I'd also like an option in the "finder" to keep all folders at the top of a file view.
Other than a few areas, I think that Windows has only improved by "borrowing" from the Mac or Next -- and really not well enough. All those things people think Apple copied from Windows -- they merely were BOTH copying from NeXT -- or in a few cases BeOS.
- Meccabilly, on 10/23/2007, -3/+1haha that's actually spot on.... If apple truly wanted to get more people switching they would consider implementing some of those small but handy interface changes... like when they added two button mouses (mice?).
- willynilly, on 10/23/2007, -7/+5Every one of these new users will wonder why the hell they can't resize windows from their edges.
- Protonz, on 10/23/2007, -27/+24I just started using a new iMac at work, and the bugger keeps crashing hard. Sometimes the graphics on the OS get messed up, like the Apple menu, other times it completely freezes. Get the feeling the graphic drivers are flaky.
In any case, I really miss the right click. REALLY miss it. And I keep trying to ctrl+c to copy, but gotta use the apple key. Nothing seems to want to maximize to take up full screen. Ctrl + arrow, doesn't skip words. If I was going to switch at home, I would just use Ubuntu, it feels very similar.
Guess I am just too accustomed to Windows.- lfernandez91, on 10/23/2007, -9/+6get a mighty mouse? or any other mouse with a right-click button for that matter? It will work fine you know...
- willynilly, on 10/23/2007, -6/+5Um NO. The Mighty Mouse's right button is actually DISABLED by default, thanks to Apple. They actually discriminate against people who select the Apple product by detecting and disabling it.
Third-party mice work fine out of the box. Which really suits everyone perfectly, since the MIghty Mouse is a piece of *****, like all Apple mice.- deepakhj, on 10/23/2007, -3/+0UM WHO CARES. If you don't like Apple mice, don't buy them. I personally hate them too.
- Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1I really liked the Wireless Mighty Mouse with the exception that the right-click only worked about 90% of the time, and that was unacceptable. If they ever manage to get the right-click to work 100% of the time then I'd get another since it was a good Bluetooth mouse (and there's seriously few of those) and I really liked the click action. However, at the moment I still recommend people avoid the Mighty Mouse unless they are old skool Mac users who are OK with Ctrl+click.
- willynilly, on 10/23/2007, -6/+5Um NO. The Mighty Mouse's right button is actually DISABLED by default, thanks to Apple. They actually discriminate against people who select the Apple product by detecting and disabling it.
- Braxo, on 10/23/2007, -4/+7just plug in the mouse you used to use, the right click will be there
- unmarked, on 10/24/2007, -2/+9I haven't tried the silver iMacs, but hard crashes are very rare. As for right clicks and ctrl-c. Apple gives you a mighty mouse. Just go into the System Preferences and change the right mouse click to ctrl-click. Easy. Then *if* you really want ctrl-c to copy, go to the Keyboard preferences and swap the modifiers keys. You can swap ctrl and command keys. Again, easy.
- Protonz, on 10/24/2007, -0/+2Thanks, I now have a right click :)
They were both setup to do 'primary click' by default.
- Protonz, on 10/24/2007, -0/+2Thanks, I now have a right click :)
- tracydanger, on 10/23/2007, -3/+4Yes, just too accustomed to Windows. I was at one time, but now that I've been using OS X for over a year, it feels much more intuitive than Windows did after many years of use.
- soljin, on 10/23/2007, -10/+2Ohh my god I hear you. We use a lot of macs at work and they are ALWAYS crashing. FCP. Finder. and ohh man file sharing. USB hard drives disappear all kinds of crazy crap. My vista box will about once a month restart unexpectedly when I stick in a particular USB drive but NEVER crashes. What kills me as a coder when I end up on a MAC is the end key doesn't got to the end of a line of code. I've never been able to find a work around for that. I'm way more stoked about gusty gibbon than OSX. Apple at 75-80% market share would make microsoft look like a Scandinavian socialist paradise. They are the definition of a monopoly.
- DOGPARTY, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3cmd+left + right
***** idiot your a coder and you can't even find that out
plus system prefs in keyboard legs you remap all the keys
- DOGPARTY, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3cmd+left + right
- shadowpr0ph3t, on 10/24/2007, -3/+3A new MAC that comes with a one click button. WTF?
- warragul, on 10/23/2007, -3/+4Heaven help you if the US ever goes metric. You'll probably starve.
- seraph582, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1what a chic comment
/choke
- seraph582, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1what a chic comment
- zongamin, on 10/24/2007, -7/+5Complete ***** - All macs have a right click. You are a ***** liar.
- StuBeck, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2Except for the notebooks. They only have one button. Yes, you can use a button or two fingers to right click, but it doesn't have a right click button.
- frostieDude, on 10/24/2007, -0/+4By default the Mighty mouse is setup for one button use and it might not be obvious to him that he can change it. Give him a ***** break instead of calling him ***** names, you *****.
- copperdomebodha, on 10/23/2007, -1/+4Whenever you miss some feature on your mac that you are accustomed to on your PC. Read. The fact that you don't know how to do it does not mean that it is not there. OPTION is the most common modifier that willl provide the feature that you seek.
Option-aarow key will skip word by word.
Option-end will go to end-of-line
Option-Home will go to the begining of line
This disatisfaction with features that you don't know how to access is solved by education. It may not be the OS that you know so well, but it is not missing common simple features. If your complaint is simply that they are different then I agree.
However, maximizing windows is an example of the Mac OS's difference in approach. There is no "Consume-my-entire-screen-and-block-access-to-all other-apps-even-the-task-bar" button on the Mac OS. On the Mac the "Maximize" button does not exist. Instad there is an "Optimize" button which toggles the window size between current user-defined-size and a size that can display all, or as much as possible within the screen space available, of the data that the window contains.
I encounter this dichotomy from the other direction when I try to "Optimize" my web browser on Windows and I lose access to the task bar. I have learned to drag the window to the top left corner of the screen and the resize it to fill the screen. It is just a difference of opinion as to which is preferred. I wish that they both had both.- Veritascitor, on 10/23/2007, -1/+0You've obviously never used Windows. Maximize does not cover up the task bar, ever, unless you've disabled "keep the taskbar on top of other windows" for some god-awful reason.
- copperdomebodha, on 11/07/2007, -0/+0Which I have, and therefore it does. It is an option in the interface, why would you berate a user for selecting it?
- Protonz, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Thanks for those Option shortcuts. It is just different, not in a bad way (except for the crashing).
- Veritascitor, on 10/23/2007, -1/+0You've obviously never used Windows. Maximize does not cover up the task bar, ever, unless you've disabled "keep the taskbar on top of other windows" for some god-awful reason.
- Rudiger81, on 10/24/2007, -4/+4You firggen idiot. New iMac - new mighty mouse - right click you just have to turn it on in preferences. This alone means you have hated apple from the beginning because you have no intention to want to use it. You would rather complain about things then do a bit of work and find out how it works.
- veriix, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1Why would he do work to find out how it works on a product touted as "it just works"?
- Protonz, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1I don't hate macs, I didn't know what a mighty mouse was until I read it here just now. The way the mouse is molded makes it look like it has just one button.
I also just discovered that you can squeeze it, and that seems to act as another button. - Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1It's a fair point - if you have to look for the function then it wasn't designed very well. I understand why Apple turned it off by default but they should have made it easier to find this function for someone coming from Windows that expected it to be enabled already.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2I can't understand why people are ANGRY at this person for having a hard time with a new Mac -- what gives? He doesn't LOVE it enough?
It would be more constructive to TELL this person how to do what they want to do.
I'd also say that; The "Maximize" button on a Mac only spreads the window out to the size of the content or toggle's back to the previous size -- I've never found it useful. We need an Edge-to-edge mode. I like how Adobe Photoshop allows the "F" key to make the application take the whole screen -- you cannot accidentally click off of it into another application. We need that ability system-wide. Sometimes Macs are a little TOO fluid.
Get a third-party mouse for a few bucks. IT is the one great Quirk of Steve Jobs that he won't admit that people LIKE a two-button mouse. The Mighty-mouse does the second button -- but only by pretending it isn't there. Control+Click is annoying as hell for me, because I use complex apps with a lot of mouse work.
>> If your Mac keeps crashing there are a few things you can do;
0) First - check the applications this is happening in. There may be an update.
1) Did you add new devices? If so, you may have to push the "battery reset" button that forces the Mac to re-check it's hardware.
Check this link out for a good resource on Kernel Panics (computer freezes or you get a beachball); http://www.thexlab.com/faqs/kernelpanics.html
2) Did you run the Hardware Test CD that came with your Mac? Reboot, hold down the "C" key (forces a boot from a CD or DVD) and test.
3) Did you try running your mac with all the USB devices not connected. If there is a BAD usb device -- it can play havoc with the components.
4) Go to Versiontracker.com and download an application called "Applejack" and install it -- make sure you choose the option "memtest"
Restart and hold down the Applekey + "S" (as if you were trying to SAVE a file -- it boots you at the command line in Single User mode).
Type "applejack AUTO restart" and let it run through and fix things.
5) Test your memory. If it is bad -- there is nothing else that can make the Mac flakier -- normally, they are stable as hell, but bad USB devices and RAM are going to screw things up.
Link for Testing the memory; http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20050524 ...
6) Test your fonts -- the main software weakness with Macs is Application Permissions (not fixed by just choosing "fix permissions" in the DiskUtil by the way), and corrupt Fonts.
Create a New User. Don't add any fonts to it. Then go to [your hard drive]/Library/Fonts" and double-click any font. Select all the fonts and choose "Validate" from the File menu. I hope in general, you've been adding new fonts to just your user/Library/Fonts folder -- but there are a few lists on the web that will tell you the absolute minimum fonts that you need. This may not be your problem -- but if it is, things like a corrupt Helvetica Neue will cause weird problems.
7) Hardware Resets;
A) Reset the PRAM (Command + Option + P + R keys while booting)
B) Reset the NVRAM (Command + Option + O + F while booting, and then
"reset-nvram" and "reset-all" at the prompt -- without quotes)
C) [on a laptop] Remove power, battery, etc. and disconnect everything for more than half an hour, then start up without the drive plugged in or turned on. When you are completely done with startup, plug the firewire in and turn the drive on.
(article here; http://en.allexperts.com/q/Macs-Apples-1506/Extern ... )
8) If these don't work, check to see if you are under warrantee -- (Applecare is awesome and worth it in most cases). You may just have a bad unit and it usually shows up early when you get the computer. I've had one and nothing I could do would fix it -- it just had a bad motherboard -- it happens. A fully functioning Mac is pretty stable.- Protonz, on 10/24/2007, -0/+2Thanks for all those troubleshooting tips. I have a tricky time reproducing the hard crashes reliably, but these look like great places to start.
- lfernandez91, on 10/23/2007, -9/+6get a mighty mouse? or any other mouse with a right-click button for that matter? It will work fine you know...
- kidcodea, on 10/23/2007, -17/+6err NO.
the only tippin point for a macOS will be when it will run and install fine on regular PCs.- lfernandez91, on 10/23/2007, -5/+6or maybe NOT
- dunkin, on 10/23/2007, -4/+5Some of us are fine with OS X running on irregular PCs.
- WhiteRaven, on 10/23/2007, -4/+2Only because it hasn't dawned on you that being beholden to a single company is short-sighted and limiting.
- dunkin, on 10/23/2007, -3/+3it's dawned on me that I like Apple hardware.
- WhiteRaven, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Why? It's all standard components.
- skidooer, on 10/23/2007, -2/+1Linux is similar enough to OS X that someone who had to stop using OS X, for whatever reason, could easily start using Linux on generic hardware even. I'd be more concerned about Windows users. There's no real migration path to any other similar system for them.
- dunkin, on 10/23/2007, -3/+3it's dawned on me that I like Apple hardware.
- WhiteRaven, on 10/23/2007, -4/+2Only because it hasn't dawned on you that being beholden to a single company is short-sighted and limiting.
- soomprimal, on 10/23/2007, -3/+3Agreed. I am an Apple owner and user, but I can understand that when it comes to the pocketbook, many people will still go for the Vista ready piece of junk that Dell or some other cheapo hardware company is offering for under $500...WITH a monitor. Now if you could have OSX on that cheapo hardware without hacks, that'd be different.
- EXreaction, on 10/23/2007, -5/+2Yep, that will be the day...I'd love to give OSX a try, but I am not spending $2k on a new laptop with comparable specs to the lappy I bought less than a year ago just to try OSX.
- unmarked, on 10/23/2007, -1/+4just repeating it will not make it come true. Apple's bread and butter is hardware. That means they won't be selling OS X for non-Mac machines anytime soon, if ever.
- swoopdog, on 10/23/2007, -13/+23buried as more markoff story nonsense
"(disclaimer: I own a fair number of shares in Apple)."
well heehaw - wazzledoozle2, on 10/23/2007, -8/+3Leopard itself isn't a huge improvement, but there are a number of factors coming together that are going to help Apple grab marketshare.
The iPhone, iPods, and Macbooks are their strong points. People see an entire ecosystem of products and services that just work.- unmarked, on 10/23/2007, -2/+3Leopard isn't a RADICAL improvement, but it is huge in that the usability goes up dramatically. Apple spent more time under the hood for developers and put lots of polish on features from Tiger. Then they added automatic backups (Time Machine), a major improvement in Finder and lots of polish on existing functionality. The polish does make a difference because it wasn't just a matter of eye candy -- but actual usability.
- wilhel1812, on 10/23/2007, -2/+2well, if you think of os 10, i'd say that apple os 10 is a huge improvement leopard is just a "service pack" to use windows language
- Meccabilly, on 10/23/2007, -2/+0They do 'just work' and then at random intervals of heavy usage they 'just crash'.
- ffleming, on 10/23/2007, -15/+10Honestly, Leopard looks pretty lame. I don't want/need Time Machine, iChat isn't near as good as Adium, I don't use Boot Camp, and Dashcode looks pretty weak. If Finder is finally multithreaded, that'll be good, but honestly, who gives a ***** about cover flow?
- OdinEye, on 10/23/2007, -6/+5Thanks so very much for filling us in on your personal lack of need for Leopard. I feel much better informed now.
- unmarked, on 10/23/2007, -3/+8Nobody needs Time Machine until they lose their data. Time Machine solves a very fundamental problem in an incredibly simple way. Plug in a spare drive, turn on. Done. I do think they should have a plug-in mechanism for iChat to support other services. Dashcode is weak, but Xcode 3 is awesome. The new Finder rocks!! It's 100x better than TIger's Finder. Coverflow, when combined with Quick Look, is a great tool for looking at the content of your documents/files without having to open them in their apps. Once you try it, you'll get hooked.
- superkendall, on 10/24/2007, -3/+6Actually Quick Look and coverflow are pretty handy things in a filebrowser. Don't use them much for music myself, but for a quick glance at directory contents it is great.
- ffleming, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1I did not know that it applied to things other than music - that sounds pretty neat. Thanks for the info! You too, unmarked
- Kelmon, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1I'm honestly looking at the combination of Spotlight, the new Finder's CoverFlow and Quick Look to be the holy grail. I can find files pretty easily today but I never know for certain that they are the file I wanted until I open them - being able to flip quickly through the contents in the Finder to check is going to be very useful.
With respect to Time Machine, I'm just disappointed that support for it using a drive plugged into the new Airport Extreme has been dropped. I assume that reliability was the reason for this but it does mean that the Iomega drive that I purchased easier in the year isn't going to be doing the job I intended for it.
- OdinEye, on 10/23/2007, -6/+5Thanks so very much for filling us in on your personal lack of need for Leopard. I feel much better informed now.
- frsrblch, on 10/23/2007, -14/+16Such an amazing operating system must surely work for all hardware, right?
- dunkin, on 10/23/2007, -4/+6minimum requirement is an 867 MHz G4 with a DVD drive:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/techspecs/- natenovs, on 10/23/2007, -4/+3wow. i dont mean to troll, but i had yet to read the leopard specs. they actually require more than vista does.
vista: An 800 MHz processor 512 MB of RAM
leopard: 867 MHz G4 and 512 MB of RAM- sudowrestler, on 10/23/2007, -2/+1But one can only imagine how Vista would run with 512 MB. Microsoft has traditionally set *very minimal* minimum requirements for memory. Even XP isn't exactly a champ with 512. I wouldn't want to run Leopard on 512 either, but I'd guess that Apple is probably setting a minimum for "acceptable" performance, not just starting up and acting confused.
- natenovs, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1i ran xp on a 512mb laptop for over 4 years, and it ran great. i even put vista on it without aero and it ran well. performance was probably just as "acceptable" as leopard will be on a G4.
- sudowrestler, on 10/23/2007, -2/+1But one can only imagine how Vista would run with 512 MB. Microsoft has traditionally set *very minimal* minimum requirements for memory. Even XP isn't exactly a champ with 512. I wouldn't want to run Leopard on 512 either, but I'd guess that Apple is probably setting a minimum for "acceptable" performance, not just starting up and acting confused.
- natenovs, on 10/23/2007, -4/+3wow. i dont mean to troll, but i had yet to read the leopard specs. they actually require more than vista does.
- warragul, on 10/23/2007, -3/+2All supported hardware, yes. Doesn't run on home-made PCs or white-box crap. That's probably what you were getting at, right?
- Zippo, on 10/23/2007, -3/+4I'm amazed that Leopard runs on a G4... try running Vista on a Pentium III.
- dunkin, on 10/23/2007, -4/+6minimum requirement is an 867 MHz G4 with a DVD drive:
- dysonlu, on 10/23/2007, -12/+10I bet most people who will end up using Leopard wouldn't be aware of any of these features; they would only know that the computer they are now using is from the company who brought them the iPod and the iPhone.
- bingobongony, on 10/23/2007, -12/+4delusional.
- dunkin, on 10/23/2007, -5/+3yes, you are
- IndigoMoss, on 10/23/2007, -12/+20I'm a Windows user and none of those things that are mentioned in the article make me interested in purchasing a Mac. The only thing that makes me consider purchasing a Mac is their Macbook Pro line, but that's way out of my league as far as price is concerned.
- warragul, on 10/29/2007, -5/+2Well, I'm a Mac user and there are things that make me wonder about Windows. Like when you attach a USB flash drive and it grabs the same drive letter as a mounted server volume. What's going on there? Doesn't matter how many times you show the admin staff how to go into Manage... it still catches them every time. And it shouldn't happen in an "Enterprise Class" OS. It shouldn't need a 3rd party "fix". Is it fixed in Vista?
- Baelorn, on 10/24/2007, -1/+3I've been using Windows for about 10 years and Server for the past five. I've never had that happen, so I'm not sure about a fix...
- frostieDude, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3I am the biggest Mac biggot on the planet, but sometimes at work I have to use Windows (90% of my job is on Mac, 5% Linux, 5% Windows). I have never seen the problem your are describing on Windows XP or Vista.
The whole concept of drive letters is stupid and primitive, though.
- Rudiger81, on 10/23/2007, -1/+2Fair point but the author is pretty useless. See them in action and I'm sure you will at least start playing round with them and think, wow thats pretty damn cool.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Go to Apple.com and run the movie giving you a tour of Leopard.
I use both Macs and PCs and when you use a Mac for a while, the computer and OS cease to be a factory -- you just use it, and things just work. It's hard to quantify -- but I've got hundreds of apps on my computer and I rarely think about; "Should I try this?"
I have cloned by OS on another drive -- having more than one isn't an issue.
Believe me, you will want Leopard. For me, just the ability to back up and grab files from my home computer is worth it. There will be a lot of subtle things that will make it a lot better -- Apple usually has improvements that get released as time goes by. So Panther will be fixed and stable, but going forward, all the new things will come out for Leopard. I heard the same comments of "what's the big difference?" with Panther -- but nobody that I know uses the previous OS. With the Mac it is so much of the Gestalt. They just don't crap up the OS with useless things (for the most part), and if they do, every Mac user will bitch like Hell -- so often things are well thought out.
You should just google for the tirade people had about the changes to the new dock. The perspective was all off for it and the icons in the tray -- I kid you not, there are people ***** about this. For the most part, this attention to detail by the rabid fans is a good thing. It means there are very clean and clear ways to get things done.
- warragul, on 10/29/2007, -5/+2Well, I'm a Mac user and there are things that make me wonder about Windows. Like when you attach a USB flash drive and it grabs the same drive letter as a mounted server volume. What's going on there? Doesn't matter how many times you show the admin staff how to go into Manage... it still catches them every time. And it shouldn't happen in an "Enterprise Class" OS. It shouldn't need a 3rd party "fix". Is it fixed in Vista?
- Animal, on 10/23/2007, -12/+45I think the majority of consumers who don't know jack all about computers ask themselves basically two questions when they are buying a computer.
1. Does this do X? (X can be a single need or multiple needs)
The answer to this for a Mac is basically yes across the board except for games.
2. Is this one the cheapest?
The answer to this for a Mac is no.
So what does regular consumer decide? "I'll get that cheaper PC that does everything the Mac does and also plays games."
I'm afraid the subtleties of OS usability are lost on your basic consumer.- inkswamp, on 10/23/2007, -7/+6> 2. Is this one the cheapest?
> The answer to this for a Mac is no.
I think a majority of the computer buyers out there have owned more than one computer at this point and now know well enough what you get for going cheap. I'm not saying people are going to flock to Macs because the last cheapo PC they owned fell apart, but it will play a factor in decreasing the issue of cost. I suspect we're at the point where that kind of thinking does not dominate the typical computer buyer's judgment.- Bamborzled, on 10/23/2007, -2/+4"I think a majority of the computer buyers out there have owned more than one computer at this point and now know well enough what you get for going cheap."
Uh... no. I'm really sorry, but no. As long as there's a blue "e" icon, people will still buy it.
- Bamborzled, on 10/23/2007, -2/+4"I think a majority of the computer buyers out there have owned more than one computer at this point and now know well enough what you get for going cheap."
- skidooer, on 10/23/2007, -3/+5"2. Is this one the cheapest? The answer to this for a Mac is no."
That question is not easily answered. There's a lot more to the cost of ownership than the sticker price of the computer. I think you'll find the answer varies widely depending on who the user is and what they use their computer for.
But you're right, the average consumer would never take those attributes into account.- Meccabilly, on 10/24/2007, -0/+2When you compare two laptops, on a like for like basis as they sit in a showroom (or whatever) an Apple is likely to be more expensive. That is how it appears to customers.
- Berkana, on 10/23/2007, -3/+5If, by "subtleties of OS usability", you mean wrangling with spyware, and incompatible drivers and a sluggish OS using massive amounts of RAM just to run, I'd say no, the subtleties are not lost on your basic consumer; they ***** them off when they don't work right. When they do work right, you don't notice. If you switched from Windows, you do notice. It's like a breath of fresh air.
- Syphon8, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3What's spyware?
- veriix, on 10/24/2007, -1/+0It's software people install on their system because they don't know what they're doing and should be using a mac in the first place.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 10/23/2007, -0/+1Spyware is that thing people used to get back in 2008 when we still had PCs.
Back in those days, they even had people going to prison for smoking Marijuana -- can you imagine how backward they were?
/End message from the future.
- Syphon8, on 10/23/2007, -0/+3What's spyware?
- drakethegreat, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2While this is a simplified version of what people think, it has some truth in that a lot of people can't afford the mac but there are still a lot of people out there that can buy macs and they are still potential customers. The cheapness in PCs is what helps it survive but its also what makes macs survive at the same time. Over simplifications like this article or this comment have always existed and neither has ever been on the money.
- coolbru, on 10/23/2007, -0/+2I'd say an average user will be thinking - "will this new PC get infected once a week, lose all my data, inundate me with pop-up windows and require a trip to my reseller when it goes 'funny' every few months, like my last one did?". You may not suffer from this (as an able and enlightened Di
- inkswamp, on 10/23/2007, -7/+6> 2. Is this one the cheapest?