Microsoft Bad, Apple Fluffy, WTF?!

[ECA]

This puzzles me.

Ok I am not a huge fan of M$, but Apple? they are EVEN WORSE.

Can you imagine if M$ started making their own pcs with custom processors effectively meaning you could only run windows on microsoft PCs?

Thats basically what Apple do. If apple want to make nice hardware fine, if they want to make an operating system only cranks and idiots use and force us to use single button mice ( I am aware you can buy a REVOLUTIONARY DUAL BUTTON MOUSE OMG! ) but quite frankly wtf? You don't have to tie the OS to the hardware to succeed do you? Not unless both products are not quite up to standard and thats the only way to sell them.........

Apple are retarded, ipod is retarded, can people please stop buying their shit.

 

[nath]

Actually - despite the fact that I don't use Apple machines, they're fucking good. The hardware can run other stuff (i.e. linux etc.) Mac OS can only run on Power PC architecture but that'll change when they change from PPC to x86.

Plus, why do you give a fuck? If you're happy with PC's stick with PC's. Apple machines are great for lots of stuff. I'd probably move to one if I didn't play games.

 

[ECA]

Ipod = Itunes only, software dependancy on the hardware is very annoying.
Its there simply to generate more revenue and it fucks me off, which is why I don't use Apple.

 

[nath]

Not true - you can use other software for your iPod.

 

[babs]

This looks like a well founded and researched rant then

PCs haven't exactly been like this have they, or is that forgotten in the mists of time.

IBM PC or 100% compatible ring any bells?

 

[nath]

Well, MS don't own IBM so I think that's the point ECA was making. However, one of the reasons that Macs are so stable, solid and well made is that the software is designed to run on very specific hardware - no fucking around with compatibility which can lead to problems.

It could also be because it's based on unix, but who knows.

 

[UndyingAngel]

This puzzles me.

Ok I am not a huge fan of M$, but Apple? they are EVEN WORSE.

Can you imagine if M$ started making their own pcs with custom processors effectively meaning you could only run windows on microsoft PCs?

Thats basically what Apple do. If apple want to make nice hardware fine, if they want to make an operating system only cranks and idiots use and force us to use single button mice ( I am aware you can buy a REVOLUTIONARY DUAL BUTTON MOUSE OMG! ) but quite frankly wtf? You don't have to tie the OS to the hardware to succeed do you? Not unless both products are not quite up to standard and thats the only way to sell them.........

Apple are retarded, ipod is retarded, can people please stop buying their shit.

Microsoft Run in x86 processor which means it will run anything.. the processor(x86) is designed todo many things hence which we see lot of emulators out for the Windows / Linux

Apple atm run Power PC (RISC) which is designed to todo only a number of jobs but do them well.. where at the PC can do all the stuff that a power PC can do the Power PC will do it better / faster becuase that is what the processor was designed todo. hence why a consol which has a slower processor but (RISC) will run things much smoother than an emulator on a PC which the process will have to be passed thought the process many times b4 its complete.

that might not make sence to a lot of ppl but what the hey


RISC = reduced instruction set computer,
x86 = the generic name of a microprocessor architecture first developed and manufactured by Intel

 

[Penguin]

Personally i like to be different, if everyones on the nokia phone dash i go and buy a sony ericsson. I'd love to have an Apple, a friend of mine has a laptop and desktop which are both apple and they look great. However they lack compatibility big time so i'll stick with Windows for now.

I don't quite get this part, but hey i'll say/ask anyway, apparently his mac which is only 800mhz can work as fast as an XP machine with a 1.8GHZ processor? (He's not the kind of person to talk rubbish, but i still think thats odd so...)

As for the IPod, actually nearly everyone has one now at my school - You're the odd one out if you don't! A few people have the "Creative Zen" ? Which looks quite nice. My Phones an MP3 Player too so i'm happy and don't have to make a decision there

 

[nath]

I don't quite get this part, but hey i'll say/ask anyway, apparently his mac which is only 800mhz can work as fast as an XP machine with a 1.8GHZ processor? (He's not the kind of person to talk rubbish, but i still think thats odd so...)

Read undyingangels post - it explains it well.

 

[inactionman]

Apple atm run Power PC (RISC) which is designed to todo only a number of jobs but do them well.. where at the PC can do all the stuff that a power PC can do the Power PC will do it better / faster becuase that is what the processor was designed todo. hence why a consol which has a slower processor but (RISC) will run things much smoother than an emulator on a PC which the process will have to be passed thought the process many times b4 its complete.

Except:

1) There's no such things as CISC and RISC processors anymore. The Power chip started as a RISC processor, but they ended by putting more and more instructions on (Ali-something or other) so it became CISC. And the x86 processors started as CISC but they actually now internally run pretty much as RISC processors, there's a translation that goes on

2) Apple are switching to Intel soon

The Power processor is ok, quite a nice chip, basically just like AMD processors it can do more per clock than Intel processors. It's good for a Router or something like that (what it's designed for), as it's fairly power efficient and good bang for buck (despite Apple selling it at a premium). Apple are switching for 2 reasons:

a) IBM/Motorola can't/won't speed the Power chips up enough to compete with x86 anymore, and Apple is a very vocal and small customer (most of the chips go to companies like Cisco who put them in their switches and routers), and what Apple wants is not what the other customers want

b) It's not the best thing for laptops, can't scale down to very low power consumption (neither can Intel yet, well not on x86)

It's going to be very fun seeing how Apple fanatics justify their expensive Apple computers when you can build one yourself for a lot cheaper... Hell you'll be able to get one from Dull cheaper!

The main thing about Apple is that they have truely fanatic fans, and a lot of them are in the publishing industry (journalists, editors, etc.) so they get a lot of press, more than they probably would normally (see the press recently about being able to download episodes of Lost etc. from itunes at a crappy quality for $2 a pop, hardly groundbreaking and certainly not good value).

 

[UndyingAngel]

ah well im not too upto date with apple last time I looked at them they where RISC with a few extra added on

 

[Trem]

Nerds

 

[yaruar]

This looks like a well founded and researched rant then

PCs haven't exactly been like this have they, or is that forgotten in the mists of time.

IBM PC or 100% compatible ring any bells?

Yeah, but IBM compatible (after BIOS reverse engineering, which happened very quickly) based around x86 processors has lead to innovation in components. Remember it's only recently that Apple started adding compatibility for decent consumer gfx cards to their systems.

People did produce apple clones way back when but apple sued them into non existance.

 

[yaruar]

Except:

b) It's not the best thing for laptops, can't scale down to very low power consumption (neither can Intel yet, well not on x86)

True, there will never be a G5 powerbook, not unless you want a battery the size of a suitcase and asbestos underpants

 

[Turamber]

I remember back in the mists of time when Apple were the kings of the home pc and pc gaming (circa 1980-4 or so). Every comic had adverts for their games and systems, everyone at school wanted one of their systems.

Then suddenly ---- dead as a doornail. PC mags full of your BBC micros, VIC-20's and Spectrums. I don't think I even saw an Apple Mac in person until the early 90's and then they were few and far between.

Yet it does seem that Apple can now do no wrong whilst Microsoft, who have arguably done more for the mass use of computers than any other company, are seen as the devil. 'tis bizarre!

 

[Will]

I'm posting from my new Mac mini. You are all shit, and I have obtained a far higher level of leetness than you can ever dream of.


I see to get very evil when I've not eaten dinner.

 

[Shovel]

Bah, I'm going to sound like a fanboy now, but what the hell, Will got in first so I'm safer.

OK, so Apple are very much a 'product' company. Selling the hardware and software together directly is their business model and always has been. As much as I'd fucking love to have OSX on the PC under my desk, Apple doesn't do that and that's their call. You certainly can't change the way you do business that dramatically in an instant (though the switch to Intel processors next year is fuelling rumours, naturally). The point about increased software stability by not running on infinite hardware configurations scores some points too.

I think it causes frustration only because right now they're making a better Operating System than anyone else (and are supported by a lot of extremely well made software working exclusively on the OSX platform).

I have a few bits of Apple kit. I have an iPod from last year, which I maintain is the best gadget I've ever owned. I happen to like the way iTunes and the iPod work in partnership (rather than trying to cram the entire music management experience into your pocket, the iPod just does what it needs to play music and leaves the management down to the more capable iTunes).

It boils down to 'Why do you need to delete music from your portable player whilst on the move?' You don't, so on the iPod you can't. Simple design philosophy makes for a better product. 'Less is less', as the new saying goes.

Anyone that doesn't like the tight-knit iPod/iTunes relationship isn't going to be as fussed about an iPod, of course. But that's their call. It doesn't falsify the belief of those who like the iPod/iTunes design. I happen to think it's the best way of doing it, and that Creative Labs pitiful attempts at user interface will keep me tucked up with an iPod for some time yet.

I also have a fairly recent iBook. Exactly the same design principals as the iPod, which is why it's so good.

It's well built, has whopping battery life, provides everything I need and the operating system 'just works'. OSX is absolutely better than Windows in everything I've tried to do with it. Some of it is very different to how Windows works and was a bit of a shock when I switched, but 2 months in I can't named a single thing that Windows can do better than OSX.

That's the state of play right now. Maybe Vista will redress that (the feature set certainly looks familiar), but Microsoft will have to win me back. If they make a better operating system then they will. We'll find out next year.

I'm not convinced about the 'more expensive' argument. Apple just don't produce products for the low end. Compared to Sony Vaios, which share the design and build quality characteristics, the price isn't an issue. I think it's mostly a case of paying more for something better made.

For the record, you've been able to use third party multi-button mice with the Mac for a very long time indeed. The new one is just made by Apple. The reason for sticking with one-button so long is that they've historically always designed their software so that you don't really need a second button. Since Mac software tends to enable much more keyboard functionality than in Windows, demand for more has never been that high.
A far more informed argument would concern the absence of a scroll wheel for so long. That's valid.

And yeah, there is a lot of Mac zealotry. But from what I can tell, the quantity of mindless, stupid, childish and ill-informed munge voiced in favour of Apple is neatly cancelled out by the mindless, stupid, childish and ill-informed munge voiced against them.

 

[TdC]

iPod earbuds are shit though






*[highlight]jealous[/highlight]*

 

[Sharma]

Despite this arguement probably being ungrounded, I have 2 Mac Faboys from friends and needless to say, whenever they start booting off about Macs it all goes to hell.

But from what i've seen you can't really upgrade them either, maybe on a couple of parts but as opposed to upgrades, you need to keep shelling out for a new Apple every now and again which is to say the least, a heap of shit.

It is rather funny when they claim that their macs can run whichever game they choose on it and most of the games ive tried to play on their machines (World of Warcraft being an example), it's ran to say the least awful.

Also, Ipods are shit. Overpriced pieces of complete and utter shit, get a Zen!

 

[Calaen]

I love my I-pod as already posted by someone it does everything I need it to do which makes it perfect.

 

[TdC]

I too love my iPod mini, but then a mate brought it into Holland for me from Hong-Kong, where not only is it's capacity greater (6GB instead of 4) it was also 50eur cheaper than the 4GB ones they flog here :/ as for other mac things, they score high on the tdc-prettyness-ometer but also on the tdc-bloodyexpensiveness-ometer. imo macs tend to be over-priced for what you get, but then again every A-brand bit of kit is. my rambling point being that the point where macs become interesting for me (dual G5, 4GB mem, etc) they also become so stupidly priced that even my enthusiasm is curbed. I expect them to be expensive, but not that expensive.

the only possible mac for me would be one of their lappys. I like the iBook and love the powerbook. prettyness for teh win! thing is, I hardly ever do serious things on my computers unless I'm working, just games games and more games so no macs for me.