13 ms·

Really? Kind of like the point that I was responding to? The one that made all those good points about how great Leper'd is? Oh, but since you mentioned it...n

by wizlb 18y ago

Really? Kind of like the point that I was responding to? The one that made all those good points about how great Leper'd is? Oh, but since you mentioned it...no I didn't mean any of the things you mentioned. I value the flexibility of being able to do what I want to do, the way I want to do it. For instance, Apple is always trying to lock you into: their hardware, their iTunes store, their AppStore, their ONE way of doing things (see the pattern here?) I can buy a Windows laptop that becomes a tablet. I can buy a Gyration (wii style) remote for my Media Center. I can get a CableCARD tuner. I can buy any graphics card under the Sun. Can you do that with Apple? No, instead Apple locks you into two choices: "somewhat expensive" and "really expensive". Besides hardware, I also have flexibility in how I can build programs. You got xCode and Objective-C and that's all Apple will really help you with. Sure, they let you build programs in other languages like Python but since it's not part of "the ONE true way", they won't really help you much. Microsoft OTOH supports C, C++, C#, F#, VB.Net and VB classic and they'll actually help you out with any of those (yes, even VB classic if you ask them nicely). Besides all of the officially supported languages, you still have every single language that's popular on *nix right now (Python, Perl, Ruby, etc.). Oh and the environment libraries are simply the best (.Net, WPF, DirectX, etc.) but if they aren't good enough for you there's a billion dollar market for third-party components that you can use. On the Mac? Not so much. Then we come to user experience. I'm a power user and I could go on for days about how bad I think the Mac user interface is. I simply don't want to get into that with you, it's a very, very long discussion. Suffice it to say that Apple is very opinionated about the way they think YOU should work and if you can't see that, you're blind. I'll take Windows over OSuX any day thx.

thomasmallen 18y ago
From my point of view, Vista could be very secure and usable, but at the end of the day I need to be on a Unix box, and Cygwin doesn't quite cut it. This isn't in response to any particular comment, but it's based on a personal preference so I'm burying it here.
- ivank 18y ago
  I don't mind running Linux in a virtual machine or PuTTYing into another host. If you have gigabit access to it, does it really matter if you must use two OSes to get the job done?
  - thomasmallen 18y ago
    Good point. I'm actually considering the opposite: Linux running XP or Vista virtualized (mostly for browser testing, but also for Photoshop). Right now, I run Leopard with XP virtualized.
unalone 18y ago
Really? Kind of like the point that I was responding to? The one that made all those good points about how great Leper'd is? Yes, exactly like it. That post was also pointless. For instance, Apple is always trying to lock you into: their hardware, their iTunes store, their AppStore, their ONE way of doing things (see the pattern here?) Apple has complete control over their product. I think that is a good thing. I would shudder to think of OS X running on a Dell or an HP: it would be incomplete. As for iTunes, you can add music from outside of it and it still works. The App Store I'm hoping becomes more open - you've got a point there - but it lies entirely outside of Leopard. Can you do that with Apple? No, instead Apple locks you into two choices: "somewhat expensive" and "really expensive". Apple has had a choice for a long time: the choice between compromise and excellence. I am glad that they have never dumbed down their products for the sake of cheapening their product line: it has kept the brand as pure and as good as it ought to be. but if they aren't good enough for you there's a billion dollar market for third-party components that you can use. On the Mac? Not so much. I'm not a programmer, so I can't argue with you here. You might have a point here: I'm not entirely certain. Then we come to user experience. I'm a power user and I could go on for days about how bad I think the Mac user interface is. I simply don't want to get into that with you, it's a very, very long discussion. I'm not a power user. I like getting things done quickly, absolutely, and Apple makes it possible to operate entirely out of the command line if you want. I don't go that far. And as far as "power casual" - intuitive AND quick - Apple is bar none. Its ease of use is staggering compared to Windows or Linux. Suffice it to say that Apple is very opinionated about the way they think YOU should work and if you can't see that, you're blind. Of course I see that. I see it and like it. Nothing good has ever come out of being mild. Apple is certain that its way is the right way, and I almost always agree with it, and because of that, they've created the far superior product. I'll take Windows over OSuX any day thx. See, people call Apple users smug, and then say dickish things like this. I've never understood that. Of course I love Apple, but I try to at least be mature about it. Windows users get so childish and then turn around and call us smug. If you don't want to debate, then don't debate. But don't jump in, insult something, and then get prim when the conversation doesn't end there.
- wizlb 18y ago
  That's because you're passive/aggressive and I'm aggressive/aggressive. Not a big deal. You say dickish things in a passive aggressive way like "Every part of it has been lovingly slavered over to perfection" or "I'm fairly certain there are more convert stories among people who have used the Mac than there are stories of people disliking them." or "I can't possibly imagine people liking Windows more once they get into OS X." or "Microsoft added features that look "Mac-like" but without the inherent usability." or "OS X feels like a complete solution in a way" And then you hide behind comments like "No offense meant..." or "I don't want to start a flame war" ...BUT.

by wizlb 18y ago

thomasmallen 18y ago

From my point of view, Vista could be very secure and usable, but at the end of the day I need to be on a Unix box, and Cygwin doesn't quite cut it. This isn't in response to any particular comment, but it's based on a personal preference so I'm burying it here.

ivank 18y ago
I don't mind running Linux in a virtual machine or PuTTYing into another host. If you have gigabit access to it, does it really matter if you must use two OSes to get the job done?
- thomasmallen 18y ago
  Good point. I'm actually considering the opposite: Linux running XP or Vista virtualized (mostly for browser testing, but also for Photoshop). Right now, I run Leopard with XP virtualized.

unalone 18y ago

Really? Kind of like the point that I was responding to? The one that made all those good points about how great Leper'd is? Yes, exactly like it. That post was also pointless. For instance, Apple is always trying to lock you into: their hardware, their iTunes store, their AppStore, their ONE way of doing things (see the pattern here?) Apple has complete control over their product. I think that is a good thing. I would shudder to think of OS X running on a Dell or an HP: it would be incomplete. As for iTunes, you can add music from outside of it and it still works. The App Store I'm hoping becomes more open - you've got a point there - but it lies entirely outside of Leopard. Can you do that with Apple? No, instead Apple locks you into two choices: "somewhat expensive" and "really expensive". Apple has had a choice for a long time: the choice between compromise and excellence. I am glad that they have never dumbed down their products for the sake of cheapening their product line: it has kept the brand as pure and as good as it ought to be. but if they aren't good enough for you there's a billion dollar market for third-party components that you can use. On the Mac? Not so much. I'm not a programmer, so I can't argue with you here. You might have a point here: I'm not entirely certain. Then we come to user experience. I'm a power user and I could go on for days about how bad I think the Mac user interface is. I simply don't want to get into that with you, it's a very, very long discussion. I'm not a power user. I like getting things done quickly, absolutely, and Apple makes it possible to operate entirely out of the command line if you want. I don't go that far. And as far as "power casual" - intuitive AND quick - Apple is bar none. Its ease of use is staggering compared to Windows or Linux. Suffice it to say that Apple is very opinionated about the way they think YOU should work and if you can't see that, you're blind. Of course I see that. I see it and like it. Nothing good has ever come out of being mild. Apple is certain that its way is the right way, and I almost always agree with it, and because of that, they've created the far superior product. I'll take Windows over OSuX any day thx. See, people call Apple users smug, and then say dickish things like this. I've never understood that. Of course I love Apple, but I try to at least be mature about it. Windows users get so childish and then turn around and call us smug. If you don't want to debate, then don't debate. But don't jump in, insult something, and then get prim when the conversation doesn't end there.

wizlb 18y ago
That's because you're passive/aggressive and I'm aggressive/aggressive. Not a big deal. You say dickish things in a passive aggressive way like "Every part of it has been lovingly slavered over to perfection" or "I'm fairly certain there are more convert stories among people who have used the Mac than there are stories of people disliking them." or "I can't possibly imagine people liking Windows more once they get into OS X." or "Microsoft added features that look "Mac-like" but without the inherent usability." or "OS X feels like a complete solution in a way" And then you hide behind comments like "No offense meant..." or "I don't want to start a flame war" ...BUT.