Mac OS X Leopard -- Introducing Vista 2.0

Excuse me.

Stop.

I have at work a 64-bit processor on a windows machine. Hm, the Operating System doesn't seem to be capable of taking advantage of that.

Let me go home, where the machine I have /is/ capable of taking advantage of a 64- bit processor.

I have a sense of humour. You have yet to engage it - I do not suffer fools gladly.
As for "plays well with others" - I have demonstrated to my employers over the years more technical skill, expertise, and judgement with regards to every system they ever threw at me than I am allowed to reiterate on these forums. I don't use Excel. I use SQL.

Superiority complex? HAAHAHAHAHAHA. Yes, being thoroughly and professionally informed about everything that goes into one's machine - including having read the source code and thus being able to trust the operating system - is a "superiority complex". Paying $500 more for a machine that comes with customer support that is capable of comprehending actual technical issues instead of running a script - because I use my computer for professional reasons and not just as a toy - is having a 'superiority complex'. Knowing that Apple will actually issue a recall on an identified defective part (and exhaustively researches and quality controls the sources of their parts) - superiority complex. Not having a cheap piece of junk that was assembled in Singapore that will break down somewhere in the thirty-month age period - superiority complex. Did I mention not having to have a processor-and-memory-hungry firewall and active virus scanner added onto my machine at an extortionate subscription rate - a product that doesn't actually work because it's a reactive slow kludge that the virus writers test their work on before releasing into the wild /anyway/ - ?

Macs are the best widely available commercial computer platform available today, /period/. To get equivalent quality, hardware, and customer service from a PC manufacturer - not to mention power and security of operating system and ease of use - you must spend ~$1500 more than for the equivalent Macintosh.

Gee.

I'm done here.

Imagine if Dell decided to make their own OS, and made it compatible with Windows applications, and decided that all Dells would only come with that OS, and that their OS would only run on Dells. They'd be laughed out of the industry. But Apple has been doing this since the beginning, and no matter how much the computer industry changes, they seem to stick with that same philosophy. They make a great OS, but they're still stuck in the mindset of the late 80's when proprietary hardware/software combinations was a common, normal thing. Now that they have hardware that is pretty much the same as windows hardware, they still want to lock their software ONLY to their hardware, and they treat their consumers as if all poor people are idiots (almost computer illiterate) and all rich people are wizards (computer geeks). It's asinine.

If Commodore wouldn't have went under from having idiots in their marketing department, they still would have been toast if they would have kept up their proprietary ways by the time the late 90's rolled around. Apple somehow survived that, their use in multimedia saved them there, and now they're still trying to survive on the same principals.

If the rest of the computer industry was still using propriety as the standard, I wouldn't be complaining about Apple, but propriety went out of style in 1996.

Apple doesn't believe in competition, they believe in elitism.

That was really mean and not really called for. If you have a problem with what is being said, argue what's being said. There's no need to put people down and name call in the crude manner that you have.

Try installing 64-bit XP. Then you can take advantage of the 64-bit processor.

LOL!!!!

Please don't make statements that are as blatantly false as that. That statement was so ridiculous it was funny.

The most widely available? In what reality?

i have a 64bit os at home. its called windows xp 64 and my next version of windows will also have it.
there are not many virus's for macs because again 8% of the market share isnt worth anyone's time to code a virus.
i soff at your customer support and price question. you people pay an extra grand just so you can have a glowing fruit on your computer and feel special. welp you guys are at least one form of special...
after all for a "professional" machine why doesnt the rest of the professional world use them? i know for a fact an apple machine could not survive in an enviornment that an industrial thinkpad (pre-china take over) could. and before you say that you've put your machine through hell and back, carrying your little Ibooks in your man purse back and forth between your 'pad' and the coffee shop doesnt count as hell...
okies now im done.

Excuse me, but Apple doesn't sell low-end towers at all. It's either "buy this computer that's built into the monitor you can't upgrade" or "buy the latest and greatest new tower for over $2100".

If they made low end towers, your statement would hold completely true, but they currently don't, and according to Apple customer service, it's not in their plans to do such either. They want to ensure that their computers are for the elite only, and elitist attitudes won't get them any further than 10% of the market.

Apple makes a fine product. They /did/ try to let other companies make hardware for them at one point - it was a disaster. They keep control over their hardware sourcing specifically so that they can keep a high level of quality in their hardware. I've talked to second-tier apple support technicians who, in the initial phone call, were able to not only diagnose a low-level hardware problem, but also determine that the issue was due to parts from a specific source. Apple's third tier of support are the actual Electrical Engineers and logic designers that Apple employs - I guarantee that at HP, Dell, etcetera, the only time an actual HP/Dell employee ever sees hardware failure data is after it's been logged into a database and they're having to sort through it to figure out why they have so many warranty claims at the thirty-month mark. Respond nimbly to actual product issues? Whoa! how radical.

The reason Apple's market share is low is because a large number of computer users do not need their computer for anything other than surfing the web and checking email - and would be perfectly fine (if not for the security problems) running an 800 Mhz generic Windows98 machine - $300, at most, perhaps even less nowadays. Most people aren't aware of the /seriousness/ of the security problems, and if they're concerned about them, they load their machine down with virus scanners and firewalls that break their network stack every two weeks. They accept that the experience they've had all their lives, both at home and professionally at work, is /just the way it has to be/. They've never been fully informed, they've never experienced the sheer power and ease of use of a modern Macintosh.

They do get more market share, all the time, from people who've bought iPods and then try out a Mac and who aren't misinformed Electrical Engineering snobs who (like I once did) believe that the PC/Microsoft combination is 'better' because it's what they know / lets them play fiftybazillion obscure and crappy churned-out game titles/get a two percent performance increase in a non-network-connected clean install in exchange for a ten percent discount over a network-connected 7-month install of a Macintosh.

Oh, yes, let me go and install a 32-64 bit thunking kludge of an operating system.

There are no virii for Macintoshes because the security model is superior. I should know - I used to work securing Windows networks. Part of my job was to be intimately familiar with the security internals, including reading the source code for Windows 200o and WinXP. I've also read the source code for Darwin. Gee, I suppose being /fully informed/ has a different definition between us - ?

Extra grand? Extra 200 dollars, which you're going to pay /anyway/, or more, if you're buying a quality PC as opposed to a cheap Dell.

I've hiked fifteen miles with a G4 desktop (thirty pounds) strapped to my back for an installation project.

I am, by the way, a "girl". I am unimpressed by your supposition that "girly" is "inferior".

Why doesn't the rest of the world drive pre-Ford-takeover Volvos? Oh, yes, some people are concerned with 'buying american'. Some people are concerned with saving ten thousand dollars on a purchase that will last them five years, at which point they will have to invest another twenty thousand on an entirely new POS car. the rest of the professional world doesn't use them because Microsoft ate the rest of the professional world.

It's like showing card tricks to dogs.

Nope, they don't make low-end towers. They sell iMacs that are capable of running the next three major operating system revisions - to move from Windows 98 to Windows XP, required an entire new machine. To move from OS9 to OS X 10.3 could be done on the same machine with very little performance problem. And that was the bondi blue iMac. The machines they sell now are capable of doing real work and one does not have to wait 60 seconds for a simple web browser to open, nor is it going to thrash the hard drive to death with a page file that's five times the size of physical memory. For the people who need to just surf the web, read email, IM - they're never going to try to upgrade their system by opening it up in the first place. For the people who need power to run computing-heavy applications and games, they have a quality machine standard - not after tehy've spent another $1500 to upgrade it, and without having to buy an anti-virus product, without having to install - literally - 1.2 GIG of security patches.

People who enjoy building their own systems enjoy the PC experience. Most people don't build their own cars - why should they have to know how a transmission works to drive a car? Why should they have to know how to upgrade and turbocharge their car/computer to get a decent experience out of it?

I've never had to pay for the hardware nor the licensing of the PC's I've owned - they were /given/ to me as an expense by employers, and I've had and used some very nice PC equipment. I make /very little money/ at the moment - and I pay for things outright. I am currently saving money to buy a new Power Mac out of my own pocket, because it is worth it to me - when I /could/ have a topoftheline professional HP system for far less.

Yes, there are advantages to having a completely closed system, but there are many more disadvantages than there are advantages, especially considering that they refuse to make low-end towers, they give the choice of buying either their computer built into a monitor or the latest and greatest--nothing inbetween.

The propriety doesn't ensure that their hardware is the best quality, it just makes it easier to look things up because there is a limited amount of hardware configurations. Apple uses Maxtor drives for instance. That's supposed to maintaining a high quality? Maxtor drives are rubbish, absolute rubbish. At least they're not using Western Digital drives which should be considered paperweights.
No, Win98 doesn't cut it for people anymore. It's too old of a standard for even web surfing anymore. But you're right to a degree though, about people spending a small amount for their computers. Apple doesn't want to make affordable upgradeable computers, they want upgradeable machines to be for the elite.

People use PC's for a huge number of things, and it's common for people who use PC's to know a lot more about their hardware than people who use Apples. Many people who have PC's are used to the idea of being able to upgrade even if they only spent $600 on their machine.
Ever considered that the reason why the Macintosh doesn't have the problem with viruses and security problems is because they're not much of a target being that they have less than 10% of the market?And the amount of games on the mac is, hmm, a tiny handful. How about naming a store that sells games for all the common platforms that actually include games for the mac. There are NONE.

On even the gaming platforms like the X-Box or the PS2 there are plenty of crappy titles out there.

People want computers that are
1. affordable ($2,100 is NOT considered affordable for most people)
2. not limited to a crappy 16ms latency display (for the macs that actually ARE affordable)
3. able to play most games
4. able to run most software out there
5. able to surf web pages that only work in IE (like Yahoo videos and such)

And for businesses, even the server versions of the OSX haven't quite caught up with all the options available on server versions of Windows. They'll eventually get there, but they're not there now.

Hooray, at least you're better informed (and you do have a better attitude) than another remainsnameless poster on this thread!

I can take a Win98 machine running on a 600 Mhz processor, give it a gig of RAM, stick it behind a firewall, and it will run /brilliantly/ for surfing and email checking. I can even stick firefox or opera on it. The point of having web standards is that even older machines can have new technology installed on them. I've actually done this, by the way - it was the "guest" machine at the last real house I lived in.

I used to professionally secure Windows networks. I was paid very well, and did my job very well - but even the best sailor can't bail the Titanic. I know the UNIX security model (which is what Macs use - FreeBSD, a UNIX OS), and I know why there are no real virii for it - it's not obscurity or lack of targets - most of the web servers in the world running Apache are run on a Linux or FreeBSD or *NIX-variant machine, and web connectivity - web /server/ connectivity, where the machine has to be right out on the Internet itself and not really behind a firewall - is the single largest potential vector. Microsoft's IIS, with a smaller install base, was infected two orders of magnitude more often than systems running on UNIX - the operating system security model is superior. File systems permissions, thread permissions, kernel mode security, all superior.

Now - since the teenager seems to be gone - I will publicly lament the quality issues that Apple has seen lately. Batteries that catch fire (not nearly as much as Dell! single largest hardware recall in history!). Plastics discoloration. ... Maxtors ... and first-gen laptops that apparently needed a lot more shakedown before hitting the shelves, not to mention the DRM in iTunes Music Store pisses me off no end. They're /still/ better machines than the Dell/Gateway/HP products I see foisted on clueless consumers.

And I just don't understand why anyone would willingly put up with web pages that only work in IE. They paid taxes to keep that from happening!

And their Imacs are RUBBISH. People don't want to be forced into having a computer with a shitty display on it (16ms latency) just so they can afford to run OSX.

They're like the Sony and Gateway computers that are built into the monitors that don't sell well because they're a stupid idea that only look cool--which will be capable of running Vista when it comes out.

The macs that were made before OSX came out don't run OSX that great, just like machines that were made before Windows XP came out don't run XP that great. Try again.

The only reason why the Imacs sell well for Apple is because it's the only option apple gives people. Ever consider that?
and they're not upgradeableReally? You've obviously never made a business out of going to people's houses to work on their machines before. I have, and that is a common common thing. You're speaking out of ignorance.Funny, I've upgraded people's machines for $600 to get them to run the latest games, and I've done it many many times. It's a common thing, but you wouldn't know that sort of thing. I originally was defending you, but then you started spouting this sort of rubbish. Get a reality check! None of my customers have enjoyed doing that. None of them--that's why they hired me. And there are hundreds of thousands of those people. --and those people STILL save thousands by hiring people like me. And that's why most people who use Imacs are computer illiterate, and that's the way that Apple likes it.
If I had money flowing out of my pockets, I'd buy a new mac tower as well, but I don't, so I won't, and I don't feel it's worth it to save up for one being that by the time I'll be able to afford one, the price still won't have dropped on them and I'd be able to get double the power of a machine in PC form for the same price by upgrading my current one.

Well, thanks for that message. I was starting to think you were one of those religious mac people.

I'll give you credit though--the performance decrease between the macs you mentioned running osx is a lot less than the decrease in WinME machines running XP.

Nah, I'm not a Mac religious freak. I was 'unemployed' for over a year and during that time I used my PC knowledge to repair and upgrade people's PCs. Really, I'd been doing it my whole life. I was rooming with a Mac guy (this was in 2001, btw) and he introduced me to the iMac. I was very impressed. I have to use PCs at work, but at home, I prefer the Mac because part of my job at work is IT support, fixing all the zillions of ways that things go wrong and also dealing with security issues.

I don't like taking my work home with me. No-one has ever broken into or cracked my Mac. My tax returns are safe on it. My banking information - safe. There is no spyware. No trojans. I am extremely well-informed and cautious, but it's a fulltime job to keep all the machines in this tiny org's office clean and up to date, and I only do it a third of the time! I don't have to do anything like worry or upgrade or administer my Mac. And I can do extremely powerful things with it. Aaaaaand it's six years old.

The only reason I want to upgrade is so that I can run SL at the same time I crunch numbers!

Unfortunately for you though, an upgrade means going out and buying a whole new computer.

I love macs. Don't get me wrong. I think they're the most solid-running machines out there. I just wish Apple cared a little more about people that aren't wealthy. I will NEVER buy a computer that's built into the monitor, with only one exception--a laptop, and when I do get a laptop sometime, it WILL be a mac. If apple made a low end tower, it can be assured that they would get a lot more than 10% of the computer market--they'd probably get to at least 35%, and if they continued to make affordable low-end towers, they could easily start becoming viable competition to Microsoft. If they opened up their OS to non-apple hardware, they could take over the entire industry. Their OS is superior in almost every way.

A few months ago you would have been right..
I know, I made my system an AMD system.

But then intel came out with Core Duo and esp Core 2 Duo chips.
Not only is it as fast as AMD chips but even price competive.
If you don't believe me look it up

As far and MAC hardware being "over priced".. It does'nt matter
how much the hardware costs them, you always pay a premium for
mac hardware, its always been the case.

well 1500 dollars worht of upgrading is a huge, and buys you a very sexy machine. The beauty is 1500, worth of upgrades on an 800 machine buys you one ass kicking PC game system for 2300 bucks. 2300 bucks won't buy you a mac that can be upgraded (at a cost of another $1000 bucks). And well you can't buy a mac for less than 2400 bucks that can be upgraded.

I do a hell of a lot more on my PC than check the mail, and I have never had any issues with it, exacept when I took a strange foray inot the world of over clocking. I have run windows for a decade or more and never had any problems with virus and security. The security patches update seamlessly and I never have to think about them. And I can but a hell of a lot of software and upgrades for what I save over the mac.

Hey you like Macs fine. You like OSX better, fine. But please do not insult my intelligence by telling me you get more machine for the money with a mac, or that macs are superior in every way. I'll mock you for having more money than sense, yes, but then what you do with your money is your business.

Yeah but this discussion focused on Xenon processors, not core 2 duo.

Bwahahaha!

Toss Fmeh a stick. Maybe he'll follow it out of the thread.

Better than being such a mac fanatic that one uses circular logic like a fundamentalist religious person. Finning at least sees the logic in the fact that not everyone can afford the latest and greatest--maybe you can't, but then again, you think that Imacs are cool--what does that tell you?

Look, an Imac! Made you look.

they both suck your mind out like "the box" from Batman Forever. GET OVER IT!!!