I Hate Macs

[Quatrux 4]

I can't say I hate Macs, but sometimes I think they are over priced, sometimes I think having something from apple is like to be fashionable, even though you don't need most of the features, every time people who have money seems to buy a new apple product which is "better" or more "fashionable"It makes waste resources, as you need to through out your old hardware.. Even though it's the same with other non mac laptops, it's hard to upgrade them, unless you want to add RAM or change your hard drive.. When upgrading your PC case, it's easy, it's cheap, it's effective. :)I don't use macs as I don't see the reason to do it.

[abazi16 0]

Yup, where ever you heard that, its true But only because no one wants to spend looong hours developing a hacking program that can only attack THE SMALL PERCENT OF PEOPLE WHO USE MACs, instead they make a pc one.
I'll never used a Linux before, but i used the Mint version or something... the one that can boot from the cd. Does that count as a Linux? Well, anyway I would pick Windows 7 over that anyday! It was so slow... and the only thing I liked about it was the desktop backgrounds.

Yes Linux Mint is a Linux distribution, but I don't know why it was slow because I've never encountered this problem, maybe you've used a Beta version idk.

[deadmad7 4]

Yes Linux Mint is a Linux distribution, but I don't know why it was slow because I've never encountered this problem, maybe you've used a Beta version idk.

Hmmm... I got it for free on the net. And I have a fast computer and even installed it in a own partition. I never figured out the problem. Maybe my computer is just made to handle windows. And it wasn't a beta version. It was the first standard release. But I'm glad that Linux is working out for you

[Bikerman 2]

Macs are just too specific. They built a system where you are suckered in. Everything you buy has to be built or made for specifically for the Mac, hence the higher price. And people who use macs are just as brainwashed as the mac employees themselves. It's like the iPhone. Touch screen has been around for a while, but since Mac got it's hand int o the mix, everyone thinks they invented it. They did not. Just as microsoft didn't invent windows, xerox did. They all steal from one another and claim it innovations.
Well i don't fall for it. Everything I have is generic, for a reason. Something goes bad, i can go get another piece and replace it. I can upgrade cheaper, I can rebuild cheaper, i can do everything cheaper on a PC.

Hwere's another way of looking at it. I am the network manager for a large business - this is make-believe so make it any business you like. My graphic design/advertising department want Macs. I know that I can offer them the same, or better functionality using a pc platform at a lower cost and without any of the attendent problems with interfacing new kit onto an existing network. Am I going to make it an issue? No. They know what kit they want and why. It is because people train on them and people learn to trust them - much more so than with a pc. The home user is not always an enthusiast for technology and anxious to explore the computer. Many regard it as a professional tool - writers, graphic designers, creative visuals of all sorts. They like it partly because of what you think is a vice - restricting what bits you can plug into it. What that does (or certainly has done over time) is make the platform more stable. You ask any IT network manager and they will tell you stories of hardware incompatibilities where they shouldn't exist, according to the specs for the standard. You get a graphics card designed for a particular motherboard implementation, and built cheaply, fitted to another model and maybe even generation of motherboard with another bus configuration or some other important change, a load of other extension that have exactly the same issue, and it leads to sub-optimum and often unfit for purpose machines. That is a fair description of pc history. Apple have managed to minimise that experience for their users and that is a big reason for their popularity amongst the more creative/artistic users. Keeping control over peripherals is making sure, as much as you can, that dodgy incompatible kit isn't used in the build or expansion of the machine..doesn't always work (as the new Iphone 4 seems to show) but it does have a better record as far as many users are concerned, and I'm not going to argue with that, even though it means more work for me...

[filmdesire 0]

I know there was a time where only the newspaper/tv press had Mac OS as it seemed reasonable due to the amount of work in relation to creativity and design involved in their works.The PC is ideal for 'real' IT solutions, or business in general. There is nothing a PC can't do that a MAC can. I'm hesitant to say the opposite about the Mac. I have used to MAC for design work, and when I studied film at university, I used Final cut pro to edit sequences. As far as PC Vs. Mac goes, I suppose it depends on your needs. If you'll be doing work largely based on photography, film and design, then go ahead and spend that money on a Mac.BUT if you'll be doing that alongside reports, business memos, networking, management work - then a PC is a better option. It is also seen as more conservative. Today Apple charges its clients a huge sum of money on a product that would cost you up to half as less, with more flexibility options in the future. This includes upgrading the hardware components, and inter-compatibility. I'm afraid to say the Apple laptops and desktops are far more complex in design and even more costly to repair!The demand for Apple is getting higher, but I bet only a few of their clients are real enthusiasts, maybe including students who are interested in the 'looks' rather than whats in the junk.That's my view, I currently run an i7 laptop/PC. Mainly for photography and design work, inc. stuff I do for uni (programming/comp science)

Edited September 15, 2010 by filmdesire (see edit history)

[inea 0]

The topic starter pointed out some interesting ideas. It seems the hard ware of a macintosh computer doesn't allow to change the configuration as much as another kind of personal computers does. The macintosh could be regarded to be a personal computer too, probably. It even seems that it is hard to buy the computer components that Apple uses in its computers. While the computer parts of a computer for Windows and Linux are available everywhere.Off topic to Abazi: operating programs that run from a live cd and a live dvd are slow most of the time. The information has to be read from the cd and dvd player first before the system of the computer can use it. And dvd-players have a low speed of transfering information. At least low in comparising to a hard disk. So the speed of a Linux distribution that is installed on a hard disk will probably be much higher.

Edited September 17, 2010 by inea (see edit history)

[mahesh2k 0]

It seems the hard ware of a macintosh computer doesn't allow to change the configuration as much as another kind of personal computers does.

Really ? Who told you ? Or is it "it seems" only ? Apple mac runs on mach BSD and they allow to modify configurations. I think you need to read about mac before saying this that misguides. Are you just posting by making assumptions.

The macintosh could be regarded to be a personal computer too, probably. It even seems that it is hard to buy the computer components that Apple uses in its computers. While the computer parts of a computer for Windows and Linux are available everywhere.

Ever heard of newegg ? Apple store ? amazon ? I think you're not familiar with apple at all. Which country you're from ? if Europe or US/CA then i think you're misinformed. Your statement that parts of a computer for windows and linux shows that you have no idea about apple computers. So i break it to you - apple os is hardware dependent and that is why parts are only available from vendors which are apple certified or known for selling items. Windows and linux doesn't have any hardware dependency hence there is no need for specific parts. So what i'm saying and what you're claiming in that statment, there is huge difference.

[k_nitin_r 8]

Hi!I'm sure someone in the development team of the game Destruction Derby 2 shares your opinion. They had a cheat code - Macs R Poo. I can't remember what it does, but I distinctly remember the developer's explicit expression of hatred against Apple Macs.

[Maltstick 0]

I find the whole thing a bit childish - sorry but there it is.

Why would you bother to invest a powerful emotion like hate in a consumer product? Are you forced to use one?

As it happens, Macs were revolutionary - they had a windows GUI when I was still struggling with a 512K IMB PC mark 1 with a 5.25 floppy and crappy PC-DOS on the command line.

Macs are more expensive because they have a different business model. IBM quickly decided that they didn't want to make the hardware so they franchised it out and now anyone can make PC stuff. Apple didn't. Both approaches have merits. The merit for apple is that by keeping control you make sure (or try to) than no incompatible stuff gets made that will crash your machine. The disadvantage is that it will inevitably be more expensive because there is no market driving the cost down.

 

Many professionals use Macs - anyone in professional graphics/art, most recording studios, most writers etc. It is a bit of a generalisation but Macs tend to be used by creative types who are not interested in how a computer works - they are a tool.

 

I am a PC person but that is mostly because I am in IT and know quite a bit about it. Therefore I can make my PC stable and useful. Many people cannot.

 

I totally agree with you.

By any means you could classify me as a Mac person, I've been using Macs since the original iMac came out (I was in preschool, i guess, I'm 15 this year). I've worked with Macs ever since, but I use Windows for some tasks that require Windows-only software. For example, I use Sony Vegas for fast video editing on Windows when iMovie '08 did not cut it right for me. Using sharepoint to manage one of my school's websites was also only possible on Windows, as Sharepoint websites do not have FTP (amazing, right?). But for sound editing, Website-creating, and basic uses, I use my Mac OS X instead, using Garageband, iWeb, and other apps. Thus, I know much about both operating systems, the pros and the cons.

 

Macs, or Apple, have a different business model. That is true. They strive to equip their machines with the best combination of hardware. That includes, but not limited to RAM, Graphics cards, Harddisks or SSDs, and processors. The best combination of these would give the best performance - even if the parts are not the best in the industry. Let's take the Macbook Air 11 inch (Late 2010) for example. It runs on 1.6Ghz, 4GB DDR3 RAM, and a 246MB Nvidia Graphics Card. Versus the Macbook Pro 13 inch, 2.26Ghz, 4GB DDR3 RAM, 322MB Nvidia Graphics Card (it's older). The results were remarkable - the Macbook Air beat the supposedly better Macbook Pro 13 inch in 3 out of the 4 tests while running in boot camp, Windows 7. Hit the source link for more info. Source.

 

Apple also makes its devices hard to 'edit' or customize. They want to maintain the stability of their devices, I assume. But their devices can still be easily taken apart and customized! The mac mini can be split into parts and re-assembled into a PC case, which a friend of mine actually did (it ran beautifully). Then the case can be used as a box for personal belongings; they're just too beautiful to send to the dump. Though customizing the mac is pretty tedious, it is definitely worth the effort. What's more, the difficult part would actually be only getting the cover off the Mac (any Mac), the rest can be extracted with just screws. And very little wiring (I just needed to unattach 5 wires to split the entire assembly - either that or I'm just lucky).

 

But the important thing is: Why boycott a software just because you have to learn to use it, or if you are just refusing to use it? It's like, boycotting Math because you do not want to learn it.

 

Even though I'm a Mac person, I do not go bias on issues like this. Windows or Mac OS X, does it matter if you just love to use it? I love Mac OS X for its GUI and user-friendliness, but I also love Windows 7 (only) for its features and the improvements in security and stability. In fact, I tried to port Mac Apps into Windows, and Windows apps to Mac (which partially worked for a few standalone .exe games)

 

So that's my view on this situation. Just treat each and every OS or piece of hardware equally, as each has its pros and cons.

 

A little piece of funny news: I upgraded my hard disk to a 'better' WD Caviar Black 500 GB SATA Hard Drive. It overheated and failed in just a month and I had to switch to a cheaper spare Hitachi 500GB hard drive which has been with me till today. Talk about better.

[rvalkass 5]

Apple also makes its devices hard to 'edit' or customize. They want to maintain the stability of their devices, I assume. But their devices can still be easily taken apart and customized! The mac mini can be split into parts and re-assembled into a PC case, which a friend of mine actually did (it ran beautifully). Then the case can be used as a box for personal belongings; they're just too beautiful to send to the dump. Though customizing the mac is pretty tedious, it is definitely worth the effort. What's more, the difficult part would actually be only getting the cover off the Mac (any Mac), the rest can be extracted with just screws. And very little wiring (I just needed to unattach 5 wires to split the entire assembly - either that or I'm just lucky).

In my experience, I would disagree. A PC's hardware is just as stable as a Mac's - generally stability problems are caused by software. The big difference to me is in upgrading the PC down the line. For example, when the CPU in my current PC gets a bit slow for the latest software, I can simply pop it out and stick a new one in. With a Mac, that isn't really an option. The same goes for new standards such as SATA 6GB/s and USB 3.0. With my PC, these can be added with PCI or PCIe cards - all made to a standard and just slot in. In a Mac that can't happen, so if you want USB 3.0 or SATA 6GB/s you have to replace the entire machine. That's just a massive waste, pain and expense.

The same goes for repairs. Parts will eventually fail, whether through bad luck or simply wear and tear. It'll happen in both a PC and a Mac, and it happens at roughly the same rate. Let's say a hard drive fails. In my PC, I can go to any one of a large number of physical and online shops, buy a new HDD and have it fitted within the hour. With a Mac, it's a huge hassle to the point you actually have to send the thing off to have it repaired, at huge expense and inconvenience of not having your machine for weeks.

Even though I'm a Mac person, I do not go bias on issues like this. Windows or Mac OS X, does it matter if you just love to use it? I love Mac OS X for its GUI and user-friendliness, but I also love Windows 7 (only) for its features and the improvements in security and stability. In fact, I tried to port Mac Apps into Windows, and Windows apps to Mac (which partially worked for a few standalone .exe games)

The GUI is entirely personal preference, but it isn't really all that important. You can make Windows look like a Mac, make a Mac look like Windows, and make KDE look like anything you feel like. User-friendliness depends on your situation. For example, I find Apple mice baffling - why can't you right click? But the same could be applied to someone used to Apple mice using a normal one for the first time - "Why on earth do you have this second button?". Windows tries to get stuff done quickly, but sometimes becomes over complicated. Apple tried to get stuff done simply, but often goes too far, making everything more difficult. Linux tries to give you complete control, but can therefore sometimes feel initially overwhelming.

[Baniboy 3]

Windows tries to get stuff done quickly, but sometimes becomes over complicated. Apple tried to get stuff done simply, but often goes too far, making everything more difficult. Linux tries to give you complete control, but can therefore sometimes feel initially overwhelming.

Exactly, one of my favourite quotes of all time related to operating systems:

Macs are like buying a foreign car that works great but is more expensive and needs special parts/mechanics.Microsoft is like buying a poorly made but cheap car. Parts are plentiful, but everything seems to always be breaking. But that is what mechanics are for.
Linux is like having a group of mad people down the street giving away tanks for free, and wondering why everyone isn't jumping to take one.
Most people can't drive a tank.

Excluding the foreign car thing which would most likely be a good comparison only if you live in the states or something but otherwise a great quote in my opinion.
I don't see why the non-enthusiast would need to update his or her parts unless they get way too old or simply break down. We have a 6-year-old computer in our house and I we haven't replaced a part once, I did have to fix it three times tho, I guess that would be when a normal consumer buys a new computer... I bet if we had hired someone to fix it, it would've cost us new parts, too
Edited November 14, 2010 by Baniboy (see edit history)

[AzureMusique 0]

I'm more of a PC user than a Mac user, though the funny thing is that my very first computer, at both home and school, is a mac. My very first Mac was a hand-me-down from my cousin, and it was an old, I think, 89 black-and-white one piece computer, with one of those switches you had to reach in the back for to turn it off. Too bad it broke down by the time I got to middle school (I had loved that computer because I loved playing the game Mahjong, which came on a floppy), and we got a win 98. I believed that since then, my family had bought PCs, just because it was cheap. It was also a relief that we had more than one computer because I didn't want to fight my sister over them. By high school, my school had both PCs and Macs to my delight, and I could switch usage between the two systems and bring my Mac shortcut knowledge up to speed. By college, my parents bought me my first laptop, a Windows XP. It was only recently last year we bought a Mac laptop, because of my urging. I knew there wasn't enough popularity so that viruses, trojans, and worms could attack, yet it was more reliable. Not only that, it was easier to use, and I wanted my mom to get the feel for use of a computer. By then, my first laptop had finally broken down, and I used it as my temporary primary computer until I found the laptop that I wanted using my scholarship money. As much as I loved the mac and some of its features that Windows can't use, I considered myself a hobby gamer, and most online downloadable games I liked don't have a Mac platform.Anyway, I wouldn't say I hate Macs, nor would I say I love them. The only thing I can agree on is that both PCs and Macs both have their pros and cons. If my parents bought a Mac right from the start after our oldest computer broke, who knows, I would have been a Mac user!

Edited November 14, 2010 by AzureMusique (see edit history)

[Maltstick 0]

In my experience, I would disagree. A PC's hardware is just as stable as a Mac's - generally stability problems are caused by software. The big difference to me is in upgrading the PC down the line. For example, when the CPU in my current PC gets a bit slow for the latest software, I can simply pop it out and stick a new one in. With a Mac, that isn't really an option. The same goes for new standards such as SATA 6GB/s and USB 3.0. With my PC, these can be added with PCI or PCIe cards - all made to a standard and just slot in. In a Mac that can't happen, so if you want USB 3.0 or SATA 6GB/s you have to replace the entire machine. That's just a massive waste, pain and expense.
The same goes for repairs. Parts will eventually fail, whether through bad luck or simply wear and tear. It'll happen in both a PC and a Mac, and it happens at roughly the same rate. Let's say a hard drive fails. In my PC, I can go to any one of a large number of physical and online shops, buy a new HDD and have it fitted within the hour. With a Mac, it's a huge hassle to the point you actually have to send the thing off to have it repaired, at huge expense and inconvenience of not having your machine for weeks.

True... true... But sometimes stability problems can be caused by incompatible hardware. So, well, since Apple assumes that normal users would not know how to (or even need to) upgrade their hardware, it happens like what you say above; they offer a new mac machine instead of offering them parts. In a way, that minimizes errors made by the customer, and preserving their warranties at the same time if they are bringing their machine to the store for a repair.
Upgrading the machine down the line by ourselves is mostly for advanced users (and we are definitely not the kind of customers that Apple builds their machines for) and we want more to what the standard machine has to offer. We want more from our machine, so we upgrade it with what we can. Though it is more convenient, we may sometimes make mistakes... like for example, the Western Digital HDD I installed in my Macbook Pro failed weeks after simply because the machine was not suited to handle a 7200rpm harddrive (cooling issues, the harddisk overheated and warped, somehow...). It efficiently voided my warranty for the drive. So in the end I reverted back to my old Apple drive which continues to work till today.

The GUI is entirely personal preference, but it isn't really all that important. You can make Windows look like a Mac, make a Mac look like Windows, and make KDE look like anything you feel like. User-friendliness depends on your situation. For example, I find Apple mice baffling - why can't you right click? But the same could be applied to someone used to Apple mice using a normal one for the first time - "Why on earth do you have this second button?". Windows tries to get stuff done quickly, but sometimes becomes over complicated. Apple tried to get stuff done simply, but often goes too far, making everything more difficult. Linux tries to give you complete control, but can therefore sometimes feel initially overwhelming.

Again, true. Nice insight, but just to note: there is right click on the Apple mouse. It's just that the left and right mouse buttons are fused together, to prevent users from clicking both at the same time and confusing the system.
An example for the Windows comment is when i try to connect my bluetooth mouse to Windows 7... having to wait for drivers to be recognized and downloaded, having to manually find the mouse in bluetooth settings, and worse, finding bluetooth settings. An example for the Mac comment is when I was using iMovie... It took me long enough to realise how to add a video to the project. It was previously drag-and-drop, but they changed it to 'import' in the UI for 'easy access'. An example for the Linux comment is when i tried to install some packages on Ubuntu... I did not understand the instructions... at all. Then I downloaded an installer which finally did it (why did they not offer me the installer when I clicked download...)

[Iniyila 2]

i have a macbook pro and i should say the performance is not bad at all but the price/performance is not enough. anyway u have never used mac for more than 1 hour, when i bought my macbook i turned it on and i just worked with it for 30 minutes and then i formatted hard drive and installed win7 and linux Fedora. the gui is nice but when it comes to professional use, mac has nothing to say. i was searching for any software for compiling my programs for arm based microcontrollers and i found that mac even doesn't support j-link (Programmer and Debugger for arm microcontrollers) but every linux distribution and every windows version (above win98) supports the drivers completely so this shows mac is not for professioanl use or atleast for embedded programmers it is useless.