LITTLEBLACKDOG.COM

i just read this article, which was posted on macslash. basically, it hypothesizes that someone who defends windows and bashes mac may be a victom of stockholm syndrome.

i'd also like to extend this to defending the xbox over the ps2 (even though i own and xbox and not a ps2 Sad

), and defending any other hd based mp3 player over the iPod.

oh yeah, off topic, the OS - Apple / Mac forum is catching on like Gang Busters. i'm glad to see so many OS X resources in the pound!

Moderator Joined: 26 May 2001 Posts: 8155 Location: Borneo

windows, It is cheaper, faster, it is easier when you have a problem and you have more variety of hard- and software. So choosing windows is obvious a sign of mental illness

Posted: Sat Jan 31, 2004 5:59 pm Post subject:

It depends what you are using it all for.

Seems to me the assimilation has begun, however -

And to all of the plethera of WINDOWS folks who SWEAR their machine is just as strong/fast/hard/capable with graphics ----

wanna bet?
You ain't seen the likes of me behind an illustration~

Posted: Sat Jan 31, 2004 10:09 pm Post subject:

For all the prowess and might of the Mac at graphics, why oh God why can't it handle window resizing/moving decently? Your graphic apps may fly, but why can't web browsers be just as good?

Posted: Sat Jan 31, 2004 10:11 pm Post subject:

csign wrote:
windows, It is cheaper, faster, it is easier when you have a problem and you have more variety of hard- and software. So choosing windows is obvious a sign of mental illness

Not to mention the extra mouse buttons. Obviously having more than one is an unnecessary extravagence Razz

Posted: Sat Jan 31, 2004 10:36 pm Post subject:

Windows is left brain. Mac is right brained. I like using both Smile

Posted: Sat Jan 31, 2004 11:31 pm Post subject:

Lycander wrote:
For all the prowess and might of the Mac at graphics, why oh God why can't it handle window resizing/moving decently? Your graphic apps may fly, but why can't web browsers be just as good?

Alas, Dear Ly - that I cannot answer.....

Moderator Joined: 26 May 2001 Posts: 8155 Location: Borneo

IAmMarauder wrote:
csign wrote:
windows, It is cheaper, faster, it is easier when you have a problem and you have more variety of hard- and software. So choosing windows is obvious a sign of mental illness

Not to mention the extra mouse buttons. Obviously having more than one is an unnecessary extravagence

X (as in Free86) beats that. with its extra extra mouse button.

Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2004 11:22 am Post subject:

That can be said about a lot of things Ford vs Chevy Intel vs AMD. Each has there plusses and minuses. I do agree I dislike it when somebody says oh x is better than x because I say so and never really puts any reason why. My dad has always been a anti-ford guy for no reason. Several years ago I found a Ford Ranger for an awesome price and almost didn't get it because of the prejudices of my dad. I liked the truck a lot and had few more since then. Liked them all except the Escape we bought. I think it was because it was a first model year and didn't really fit with what we wanted to use it for. But I am getting off topic.

My first computer was an Apple IIgs liked it. Then I wan to a windows based machine used them ever since. When I was in college we had some macs to work on. I didn't like the "feel" of them it was just too different for me. I am just too lazy now to learn a new computer system\OS. That is why I have never made the swith to Linux.

Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2004 2:08 pm Post subject:

IAmMarauder wrote:
csign wrote:
windows, It is cheaper, faster, it is easier when you have a problem and you have more variety of hard- and software. So choosing windows is obvious a sign of mental illness

Not to mention the extra mouse buttons. Obviously having more than one is an unnecessary extravagence

if you run X windows along with OSX, you get that good old three button stuff if you want it. Logitech makes a nice 3 button USB mouse which the Mac picks right up on. My wife uses it. I don't really need more than one button on my Mac's mouse because of the control, shift and Apple keys on the keyboard.

Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2004 2:57 pm Post subject:

csign wrote:
windows, It is cheaper, faster, it is easier when you have a problem

this guy thinks that TCO of an apple system is cheaper then a windows system, unfortunately he doesn't provide figures to back up his claims.

faster is definitely debatable (though the window resizing/moving thing is an issues). the third fastest supercomputer is made of apple machines (i don't know any wintel boxes that even make the list).

it may be easier when you have have a problem, but when problems are so rare, i'd rather take the extra headache now and again then the constant headache of small problems. the last sixth months of virii and worms should be testament to that. though hardware choice can be an issue, you know that if you buy supported hardware you're not going to have problems (generally).

Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2004 3:11 pm Post subject:

TCO is generally bullshit. Take it from an IT manager.

In general, large businesses choose a platform and stay with it. TCO is negligible compared to Corporate Bottom Line. Unless of course your company is marginally profitable or small. In which case, TCO is still bullshit. You go with what works, primarily. And "total cost" is nonsense. You might not have an IT person around to be paid, or that salaried individual you are paying is working extra time to take up the slack. Nobody in the real world is going on total cost. The entire Linux thing, for example, is about up front costs, not TCO. Whether or not down the line costs are less (TCO doesn't take upgrade costs into the equation usually, at least Gartner doesn't) or application costs are factored in, etc, etc. It's bullshit. There is no easy way to standardize the total cost of ownership of a computer in any organization. You go with what works and you budget for it. If you have expensive up front computers, then they must be all singing, all dancing. If you have cheap up front computers, then they must work. Expensive up front? Better last. Cheap up front? Better last. Managers wot hold the purse strings remember the sales pitch better than the IT guys do.

I like my macs. They would not work for me at the place I work at. They work beautifully here, and at my son's school. TCO isn't the total story.

Moderator Joined: 26 May 2001 Posts: 8155 Location: Borneo

TCO cost may or may not be bull for companies but they are definitly bullshit for consumers. Their own time doesn't cost them any money (or not much anyway)