mental_floss magazine
SUBSCRIBE >
GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS >
DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTIONS >
subscriber services >
A story in The Economist last week dropped the following facts in its lead paragraph to set the stage for an interesting article:
“Endless Love” by Diana Ross and Lionel Richie was at the top of the charts. Ronald Reagan was staring down the Soviet Union. And Princess Diana, aged 20, was on her honeymoon with Prince Charles…
If the summer of ’81 doesn’t come rushing forth from the dim recesses of your memory, that might be because The Economist forgot to mention a certain swim meet in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, where I was probably busy finishing last in the 100-meter freestyle.
Ahh, now it’s all coming back to you, eh? No? Well let’s continue on with some more facts from the article and see if you can guess the story:
Roughly one billion are now in use across the world
In America there are 70 for every 100 people
The combined stockmarket values of the firms involved exceed half a trillion dollars
Yes, they were talking about the PC — and the one that started all the hubbub back on August 12th, 1981, was, of course, the original IBM 5150, which turns 25-years-old this week.
Clearly IBM wasn’t the first PC on the market. There were many others, including the Apple II, which predates the 5150 by a few years (ding! IBM: 0, Apple: 1). And while early Apple architecture allowed cloning, that soon changed with the introduction of their Macintosh line, enabling the PC platform to proliferate and, let’s face it, take over the personal computing world. (ding! IBM: 1, Apple: 1)
Over here at my house we’re a multi-platform family: my wife prefers PC, while I swear by Apple. It’s kind of like we’ve each married out of our respective faiths and we often joke about which platform we’ll bring our kids up on.
While I could go on and on (and on!) about why I prefer Mac to PC, we’d rather hear which you prefer, dear reader, and why. So gloves off now, and may the best platform win!
Apple all the way! I am forced to use a PC in my office, but other than that, all my computing is done on one of my two Apples.
However, like you, my husband prefers the PC. Interestingly he’s Catholic and I’m Jewish — coincidence???
My daughter shall be raised on the Apple! And when she lands in Cupertino she can declare herself a citizen.
posted by Marcy on 8-7-2006 at 10:21 am
I prefer apple. I have a G4 iBook that I use at home and would have it no other way.
I have found Apple to be a better overall experience because of their control of the hardware. Windows, though not nearly as much as NetBSD, has to run on anything and detect sound cards and video cards.
With my iBook, and OS X, I feel that the operating system gets to, uh, operate, in a much more closed environment, and therefore performs better.
posted by David Johnson on 8-7-2006 at 12:04 pm
I have an important question to ask:
Given that Macs now run on Intel processors and can be booted to Windows, what is the difference? (besides a fancy case and a slick ad campaign)
posted by Lucres on 8-7-2006 at 12:54 pm
Windows is hands down better for scientific applications, due to multi-tasking, ease in file naming, handling, archiving, and a multitude of software providers. And graphics handling is improved since gaming applications made high res monitors universally available. That used to be the edge that made Apple an unavoidable requirement to doing commercial graphic art.
Apple is the paranoid uncle hiding in the cellar, who refuses to let anyone see what he is doing because he’s afraid they might “steal” his idea and do it better.
Now they can, using Windows.
Proof? Do you see anyone scrambling to create PCs that can be booted to run like a Mac?
posted by Stan Penkala on 8-7-2006 at 2:06 pm
PC.
posted by Iain McTurk on 8-7-2006 at 6:46 pm
Apple. Even now it’s easier to use when it works properly and easier to troublshoot when something goes wrong. Plus it comes bundled with a de facto linux system. What’s not to prefer?
posted by Daniel K. on 8-7-2006 at 8:27 pm
All interesting comments! To heat up the debate a little more, I once read an article in The New York Times (I think) that said Steve Jobs had something that Bill Gates, and the like, would trade all their financial success for: namely, a monopoly on “cool.” Any thoughts?
posted by David on 8-7-2006 at 8:50 pm
“cool”? more like arrogant elitism… (take their latest ad campaigns which implies only stupid nerds and accountants use windows while the cool and hip use Macs…)
…and Apple’s ads are filled with LIES:
• “Macs can communicate best with your digital camera, while PCs need to download the drivers first”…
a brand-new PC is just as plug&play as a brand-new Mac!
• at the end of one spot the Mac guy hops out of his box and gets right to work while the PC guy has to download patches first (and the rest of him is in other boxes)…
you have to do the same with a new Mac (and the reason the Mac guy is in one box is because, unlike Dell and Gateway, Apple doesn’t include things like a monitor and printer in their package deals)!
If Apple is so great, how come they had to completely ABANDON their own operating system for a Unix SHELL?
And when OSX first came out it was so buggy it was practically useless, yet that didn’t stop them from charging their own customers hundreds of dollars for patch after patch (naming them “Tiger” and “Panther” etc)
I’m a professional graphic designer and I work with both platforms, but ONLY use a Mac when I HAVE to work with someone ELSE’S files (most designers are brainwashed into believing that they can ONLY design on a Mac)
IMHO: Macs have consistently been overpriced and under-powered. A status symbol for elitists.
posted by Rob D. on 8-8-2006 at 10:25 am
Awww…it’s so cute when someone screams elitism without understanding the real arguments. Add the word ‘brainwashed’ and the debate takes on a real objective tone.
Why do I doubt that any ‘professional’ graphic designer would voluntarily use a PC?
OSX since day one has been rock solid. I have never crashed an OSX Mac, running audio apps (which are far more demanding than graphic design), nor have any of my friends who run film editing software (in turn even more cpu-intensive). Why is it that so much film work is done on Macs? Oh, I get it: those people are brainwashed non-professionals.
“at the end of one spot the Mac guy hops out of his box and gets right to work while the PC guy has to download patches first (and the rest of him is in other boxes)…
you have to do the same with a new Mac (and the reason the Mac guy is in one box is because, unlike Dell and Gateway, Apple doesn’t include things like a monitor and printer in their package deals)!”
Apparently you haven’t seen an iMac in person. Your credibility shrinks with every point you’re trying to make. Macs come with everything you need - a printer is not mandatory in today’s world.
Apple doesn’t charge for patches. Those can be downloaded for free and a convenient updater built into the OS alerts you when there are updates available for download and auto-install. Oh, and painless installations for a wide variety of Mac built-in software (not just the OS), most of which don’t require a reboot. I’d love to see your PC box do that. Don’t worry, I know it can’t.
Speaking of patches, when is the last time anything has changed in the Windows OS? SP2? When do you think Vista might come out? Maybe after MS developers have had enough time to reverse engineer all of Apple’s OS innovations (again)?
The WWDC was just yesterday - if you want to see what a REAL OS looks like, hit the Apple website and get a preview of Leopard.
BTW, as for overpriced, why don’t you actually compare spec for spec a PC and a Mac before spouting off the usual PC mantra? I have, so I know that I’m not overpaying for my beautiful, crash-free, secure Mac.
-proud Apple user since 1988 who has had to use PCs at work and knows the difference first-hand
posted by squid on 8-8-2006 at 10:52 am
“Why do I doubt that any ‘professional’ graphic designer would voluntarily use a PC?”
I don’t know… perhaps you too were brainwashed into believing that only professional graphic designers use Macs?
If that were the case, Adobe and Quark wouldn’t release Windows versions of their software.
And $1,700 gets you a 20″ iMac with zero ability to replace the monitor without trashing the entire unit. You can get the same features in a PC package with a separate (replaceable) monitor for under a grand.
“Apple doesn’t charge for patches.”
So why are “Tiger” and “Panther” still considered “OSX” and not “OSXI” and “OSXII”?
“When do you think Vista might come out? Maybe after MS developers have had enough time to reverse engineer all of Apple’s OS innovations (again)?”
MS has a far greater customer base with far greater demands. Unlike Apple, they try to make their software compatible with older computers and software. At the launch of OSX, Mac customers had to trash all their older computers and older software to keep pace.
By the way, I noticed that one of the latest “Apple innovations” is a “2-button scrolling mouse”.
Wow.
Welcome to the 20th century!
posted by Rob D. on 8-8-2006 at 11:57 am
Adobe and quark are after all businesses and are concerned with keeping their companies lucrative and just simply in business, when PCs are such a plague to the US they have to port there programs to PC to get the extra business.
A PC under $1000 (unless you are pro and build it yourself) will also have a lifespan of 2 years before it is an obsolete piece of trash, whereas that $1700 Mac is going to last about 6 years and continue running at the top if its game if you aren’t shoving bagels in its disk drive.
Tiger and Panther are not patches they are full updates that sometimes include entirely new features like widgets, Front Row, and iLife. When PC starts calling the new programs they make patches and give them away for free give me a call so I can also know hell froze over. And they are not OSXI or OSXII but they are OS 10.2 or OS 10.3.
When OS X came out it was high time for a new breed of computers anyway and the smart were proud to not trash their old computers but transfer everything from the old to the new with the click of a button, you can still run Classic when required and it doesn’t more than ten seconds. We can’t all drag or aged yellowed plastic 120 pound towers by the power chord into the 20th century and expect to survive like so many poor Americans have done some of us have useful programs to run and need a quality machine to do it on.
And is it a two button scrolling mouse? Or is it a four button scrolling mouse that can scroll in any direction and have customized shortcut buttons? I wonder, is Steve Jobs a copy cat? Or an innovator?
And lastly, a simple point but worthy nonetheless, macs are sexy, pcs are not, go mod the hell out of your pc make it look like a crotchrocket with its loud fans blinking lights clear cases to make the inside look like a disco tech but I will take my 60’s sheik supermodel sexy mac over a lazer show from a grey box anyday.
posted by Darren on 8-8-2006 at 1:17 pm
I’m not saying that PCs cannot run graphics apps, but most of Quark’s and Adobe’s user bases are Mac-based. There is a reason that artistic types use Macs overwhelmingly. Maybe you’ll figure out why should you ever sit down in front of one.
Show me the specs of your out of the box vaporware $1000 system that competes with the iMac. This oughta be good.
Meaning: a 20″ flat screen, and similar specs with regard to CPU, RAM, HD space, video card quality, OS license, and all the soup to nuts features that a Mac has built-in. And no counting “Mine Sweeper” or “Hearts” in your little calculation there.
Who the f$ck cares what the labeling system for Mac OSes is? If it helps you sleep better at night to consider Panther as OS X.1 or whatever nomenclature you prefer, have at it. Each new release of the OS has *major* functionality built-in - these aren’t the cobbled together patches you’re used to in Windows-world. Your lack of understanding of this is further proof that you are arguing from the heart and not the head. Maybe mommy didn’t hug you enough as a kid or something.
And you’re absolutely wrong about OSX forcing older customers to trash their hardware and software. Older OSes were supported with the rollout of OSX; you could dual-boot your machine OR boot into OS9 from within OSX in order to use legacy apps. I know because I did it for a year. You don’t know it because you don’t know your head from your ass.
BTW, I have had a 2-button scrolling mouse attached to my Powerbook for 5 years. Apple doesn’t make one, but it supports any mouse out of the box. Again, something that’s impossible on a PC without trying to find the right driver (and the inevitable software conflicts and crashes that arise from adding a simple driver within Windows).
The only things you’re right about is that Windows has a larger customer base and that as a result Microsoft is beholden to cater to tons of legacy applications and hardware. The result: a bloated OS that lacks flexibility, that cannot be upgraded without crashing, conflicts, viruses, and concomitant headaches for consumers, and that is WAY behind the cutting edge OS that Apple is carving.
People are switching over dude. When the next delay for Vista’s release is announced, expect to see a spike in Apple ownership.
posted by squid on 8-8-2006 at 1:25 pm
“you don’t know your head from your ass”
“Maybe mommy didn’t hug you enough as a kid”
I think you’ve shown who’s arguing from the heart and not the head.
“And you’re absolutely wrong about OSX forcing older customers to trash their hardware and software. ”
Tell that to the all the companies who had to shelve millions of dollars invested in older PowerMacs and OS9 applications
“you could dual-boot your machine OR boot into OS9 from within OSX in order to use legacy apps. I know because I did it for a year.”
Obviously your a glutton for punishment. I did that for about a month before I gave up — frustrated with the constant lock-ups with our brand-new “crash-proof” G3 (incidentally, our latest G5 still freezes when I do something as simple as install a client’s font).
I don’t need to reboot XP as Win95 to run any legacy software. And my PC NEVER crashes — thanks to multi-threaded protected memory (something Apple still can’t seem to get right).
“Show me the specs of your out of the box vaporware $1000 system that competes with the iMac. This oughta be good.”
Go to Dell.com and see for yourself. You can customize a Dimension Dual Core E510 to the same iMac specs (+ a free printer) for $1,049 (free shipping too).
“People are switching over dude. When the next delay for Vista’s release is announced, expect to see a spike in Apple ownership.”
Write back if Apple ever again breaks a 10% total global marketshare (currently at 4%… I wonder why).
posted by Rob D. on 8-8-2006 at 3:16 pm
Frankly, I’m happy if Apple never breaks 10% marketshare. The larger the user base, the less nimble the technology can be, ergo the dog’s breakfast that is Windows in its present state.
Technology changes. I’m really sorry that OS9-based hardware and software are no longer supported, about as much as I am that I no longer have a rotary phone. And damn those nefarious DVDs - making people give up their entire VHS libraries! And - what’s this?! - BluRay will change the standard again?!
CDs?! What about my precious floppies?
Pooh-poohing progress is a really lame argument. Really lame. I don’t WANT a bloated OS that can run OS 6 applications. Besides which, companies make more money with new releases of software. A forced OS architecture redesign = mandatory software purchases from an app developer’s consumer base.
Graphic designers are going to be far more efficient when those OSX-based UB versions of Quark and InDesign come out (and they will very soon). If Adobe and Quark don’t want to create new versions of their software, someone will come along with something better. Look what happened to Quark when it was hesitant to port to OSX. They lost huge marketshare to Adobe. Evolve or die: that’s today’s tech world, my friend. Welcome to it.
I have priced models on Dell, and the price differential is nowhere what you’re claiming. You’re not comparing similar specs. If you point is that you can buy a $1000 box from Dell, yeah, that’s not news. It will be smoked by the iMac in performance, features, etc. The iMac is $1299 for a 17″ monitor version. Post a link showing your $1000 Dell’s specs.
As for never crashing, I work in a Fortune 100 company’s IT department - our PCs are finely tuned (to put it mildly). STILL my IE crashes at least once/day. I get Outlook crashes from time to time. This is de rigueur for Windows - everyone knows it!
posted by squid on 8-8-2006 at 3:53 pm
“CDs?! What about my precious floppies?”
Yeah, my PC can still read those without purchasing an additional drive (yes, we still have customers who use them)
“Post a link showing your $1000 Dell’s specs.”
I would, but Dell’s site doesn’t work that way.
start at the base system:
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=04&kc=6W300&l=en&oc=dim915min&s=bsd&fb=1
and add anything you want
“Technology changes. I’m really sorry that OS9-based hardware and software are no longer supported, about as much as I am that I no longer have a rotary phone. And damn those nefarious DVDs - making people give up their entire VHS libraries! And - what’s this?! - BluRay will change the standard again?!”
Having two young children and having amassed a vast library of VHS tapes, I can tell you it’s a blessing that somebody came out with a DVD/VHS combo player.
I think you’re further making my point regarding Apple’s elitism. It seems that only the rich and those with disposable incomes can own a Mac. Obviously I’m not one of them (I just use them at my job). I know plenty of folks who live just above the poverty line and own a PC. I’m very grateful to Bill Gates for allowing poor shlubbs like me a chance to compete in today’s global market.
Have you heard anything about Steve Job’s charitable donations?
Me neither.
posted by Rob D. on 8-8-2006 at 4:35 pm
Wow. So your choice of technology is based on the charitable givings of its CEO. Noble, but foolish.
And on that note, you might find this interesting. I was particularly enamored of (and wholeheartedly agree with these:
“So, basically, it’s OK to make crappy software, ruthlessly drive competitors out of business and generally screw the public, as long as you’re seen publicly giving money to charity and political causes?
As your reporter states, he doesn’t know how much, if any, money Jobs donates to charity. If he really bothered to do any actual fact finding, then, why not call and ask Jobs for an interview?
Most people, don’t really care about how much anyone gives to charity. So what if Gates gives money to charity? I don’t really see what good it’s doing, since the causes he seems to support are aimed at raising taxes for the rest of us while he sits comfortably on a pile of money that would make Scrooge McDuck vomit.
Most people that donate money (i.e., you and me) are giving a large portion of their wealth away. My wife and I donate about 10 percent of our net income annually. I doubt Gates is doing anything in that range. (I’m not a journalist, so my fact checking doesn’t need to be that accurate.)”
and
“”Gates is giving away his fortune with the same gusto he spent acquiring it, throwing billions of dollars at solving global health problems.”
Of course he is. He’s following a time-honored tradition among robber barons. He wants to be remembered for how he spent his money, not how he acquired it. I hardly think the disgorging of a portion of his ill-gotten gains should make him a saint. But surely it will, as happened with robber barons past — and with a little help from Mr. Kahney.
Jobs is certainly no saint, and he may well go to the grave with his every penny in his pocket, but his drive for a better computer experience has been and is a positive contribution to society. He may say nothing of his politics and where he stands on the issues of his day , but do keep in mind that one of the harshest critics of the current administration — Al Gore — sits on the Apple board.”
Anyway, none of that matters to me when choosing the best technology, and let’s just be frank here: Apple wins hands down. Let’s also be frank about this: you haven’t actually sat down in front of an Apple computer in the last 5 years and I’m on Windows every freakin’ day. We both know who (between us) is best fit to judge both platforms.
Better luck next time.
posted by squid on 8-10-2006 at 6:13 pm
Sorry, forgot the link:
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,70084-0.html
posted by squid on 8-10-2006 at 6:13 pm
“you haven’t actually sat down in front of an Apple computer in the last 5 years”
Here’s me with our 9600 (which I’ve sat in front of and cursed at for locking up since 1997). The last SCSI Mac ever made. We still use it to run our Retrospect tape backup software which is not supported by OSX (we’re in the process of migrating all the tape contents to DVDs but with over 200 tapes, the process still isn’t complete).
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/1288/robdmac9600yu0.jpg
Here’s our fancy doorstop known as the Yosemite Blue G3 (a dog since day 1).
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/1917/robdmacg3ci5.jpg
Here’s our G4. Yesterday, this beauty gave me the “spinning lollipop of death” when I tried to update some images in Quark 6.5 (Mac Quark is also an aggravating piece of sh*t, but don’t get me started with THAT)
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/6871/robdmacg4qc8.jpg
Here’s our latest investment: the mighty G5.
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/5222/robdmacg5bv1.jpg
Right above it is our “Mac tool kit”: a collection of bent paperclips used to open the G5 DVD tray when pressing the eject key on the keyboard does NOTHING (why oh why does Apple deny its customers the ability to simply eject a disk with the button built into every removable drive? This dinosaur feature should have been retired with the Mac Classic).
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/8820/robdmactoolkitsw1.jpg
(and don’t think the reason for the drive not opening is because the disk contains an open file. This happens even when the drive is empty.)
I like how Apple installs handles on the top of all their machines now. It allows for great distance when thrown out the window due to Apple’s next OS rendering it worthless.
The description of someone who will “ruthlessly drive competitors out of business and generally screw the public” can perfectly describe Steve Jobs’ actions during the Mac clone war debacle:
“What actually happened was that the Mac clone makers started to outdo Apple at its own game. Faster, cheaper machines started appearing in the major Mac reseller’s flyers and almost none of them came from Apple. The real innovation was coming from companies like Power Computing, Umax, and even Motorola (and its sub-licensees). They didn’t have to support huge research and development facilities. They didn’t have to use proprietary peripherals. They used inexpensive standard PC hardware and were able to undersell Apple’s line. Even the cases they used were regular PC computer cases. Usually nothing fancy. They got the job done and allowed for upgrades or additions as wanted or needed.
When the clones were around, we as Mac Users were not stuck with whatever Apple designed for us to use. Power Computing, Motorola, and Umax were putting Mac motherboards and power supplies into standard PC cases to keep costs down. Coolness was not even a secondary issue (though Umax’s S900, a 604 processor based full sized tower, was a nice, easy to upgrade design). These machines may not have looked like Macs, but they acted like them. Let’s face it; you buy a Mac (or even a PC) not for the way they look, but for what you can do with them. People who buy computers because of a cool looking case really should have their medications checked because I think it’s time to up the dosage.
We all know what happened next (NeXT?). Steve Jobs returned and put the kibosh on the whole thing. Apple bought Power Computing outright and refused to allow the others a license for the Macintosh OS for their upcoming machines. Most of the Mac clone makers quickly went out of business.”
http://www.wap.org/journal/clonewars.html
And to revisit the issue of charitable giving, the Wired site you reference also has this:
“Until recently, Bill Gates has been viewed as the villain of the tech world, while his archrival, Steve Jobs, enjoys an almost saintly reputation.
Gates is the cutthroat capitalist. A genius maybe, but one more interested in maximizing profits than perfecting technology. He’s the ultimate vengeful nerd. Ostracized at school, he gets the last laugh by bleeding us all dry.
On the other hand, Jobs has never seemed much concerned with business, though he’s been very successful at it of late. Instead, Jobs has been portrayed as a man of art and culture. He’s an aesthete, an artist; driven to make a dent in the universe.
But these perceptions are wrong. In fact, the reality is reversed. It’s Gates who’s making a dent in the universe, and Jobs who’s taking on the role of single-minded capitalist, seemingly oblivious to the broader needs of society.
On the evidence, he’s nothing more than a greedy capitalist who’s amassed an obscene fortune. It’s shameful. In almost every way, Gates is much more deserving of Jobs’ rock star exaltation.”
http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,70072-0.html
As far as “MS developers have had enough time to reverse engineer all of Apple’s OS innovations (again)?”… take a look at the bottom of your Mac. See all the program icons down there? That’s something MICROSOFT developed way back in the 1980’s.
The next version of X (Leopard now? They’re gonna run out of cats soon) has a new feature called “Time Machine” which allows you to get a snapshot of your entire system from day one. That’s something XP users have been able to do for years now.
Who’s doing the “reverse engineering” here?
And btw, OSX still hasn’t included an “uninstall program” application. This is UNIX now… you can’t simply delete a folder anymore.
And what happened to your claim that a $1000 Dell will be “smoked by the iMac in performance, features, etc.”? If you actually took the time to follow my link, you would have seen that your claim is ridiculous. Apple is now using the same hardware as Dell, Compaq, etc. Only difference is: Apple charges much more. Now you know it, and it’s making you look bad for being a sucker all these years. This explains why you’re so angry: the truth hurts.
posted by Rob D. on 8-11-2006 at 11:31 am
In my experience, the people who hate Mac the most are programmers and computer-science types who know a hell of a lot more about computers than, say, my mom. I don’t know much about programming myself, and couldn’t build my own PC without setting fire to something in the process, which is why I own a Mac.
I’m sure there are plenty of jobs that a programmer absolutely needs a PC for, because for one reason or another a Mac just won’t cut it. Fine. But the Mac OS is geared toward being as simple as possible for everyday users, which seems to be the thing that sticks in the craw of the geekerati the most. They just can’t stand it when using a computer is made simple for Joe Six-Pack.
posted by Kevin on 8-13-2006 at 11:47 am
Rob, your contention that MS developed program icons is proof positive of your lack of understanding of the genesis of both the Mac OS and Windows.
A good 75% of what you see in Windows is Apple innovation - including the concept of a desktop, icons, naming conventions that actually make sense (how long were PC users forced to name a file with 8 characters plus an 3 character application extension?)
Judging from your photos, you’re not such a young guy, so I don’t want to hear the excuse that all of this happened ‘before your time.’ (By the way, you might want to invest some of that phantom money you’ve saved buying Windows machines in a new wardrobe).
By the way, what’s the average shelf life of a Windows box these days (before they completely fall apart)? 2 years?
For whatever extra money I invest in my Mac, I get the best OS on the planet plus durable, stable hardware. My Powerbook has been working flawlessly for 5 years.
posted by squid on 8-15-2006 at 9:35 am
Aw jeez… we just got reprimanded for beating a dead horse and you’re still going on.
OK. So while I won’t make anymore criticisms, I’ll just make a few corrections:
I was not referring to program icons, but the launch bar.
A good 75% of what you call Apple innovation was actually created in 1973 by Xerox
http://www.cedmagic.com/history/xerox-alto.html
The average shelf life of a Windows desktop PC is the same as a Mac desktop computer. We still operate PCs in our office which were purchased in 1997. However you reference a Powerbook to make your point — and I will agree that an Apple notebook computer is better made than the average el-cheapo PC notebook (of course you can spend a bit more coin and get a better one —like a Sony Vaio — that will hold up just as well). It all has to do with wear and tear: a desktop unit simply isn’t subject to all the rigors of a portable.
“By the way, you might want to invest some of that phantom money you’ve saved buying Windows machines in a new wardrobe.”
BWA HA HA HA!! EXCELLENT point! However my clothes are new — it’s my fashion sense that’s old.
Let me put a coda to this rant and give credit to where credit is due. In 1984, I was a senior in high school and worked evenings and weekends in the electronics department at Macy’s. I sold computers and stereos. When the Apple Macintosh out, I helped sell them. Microsoft was just another software company to me. What really got my motor running was that miraculous little computer with its rectangular mouse and tiny black and white screen. I lusted for that cute little computer the way any other teenager would a cherry-red Camaro. Back then, ten grand would get you a Macintosh and an HP postscript laserjet printer. Needless to say, I could never afford it.
When I went to college, I initially majored in graphic design but was frustrated with the curriculum’s insistence that all designers learn to make mechanical paste-ups (using such ancient tools as ruling pens and rubber cement). I knew the Mac had heralded a thing called desk-top-publishing a year earlier, so I refused to waste my time mastering a skill that I figured would be obsolete by the time I graduated… so instead I majored in illustration.
Because I went to a state school, they only had enough money in their budget to get about ten Macs. If I wanted to take the class, there was such a huge waiting list that I might be eligible to take it… if I came back three years after graduating. It didn’t matter to me because I figured I was going to set the world on fire with my career as the next best children’s book author and illustrator. I made the fatal mistake of putting all my eggs in one basket.
Fast forward six years and I’m still working at Macy’s as a middle manager — losing all my hair and hating life. I worked the occasional free-lance job doing illustrations for clients like the local hospital. When I heard they had an opening in their public relations department I jumped at the chance. I knew the last guy used a Mac there! They wanted to know if I could continue to create illustrations for the hospital as part of my job, but, as I was really interested in teaching myself desk-top-publishing, I told them I could only do it on the computer.
Unfortunately, they took away my Mac because it wouldn’t work on the new proposed network. And I had to work on an IBM 486 X66 (horrors!). But by that time, all the Mac-only programs like PageMaker and Illustrator were now available for Windows. I taught myself that computer inside and out and all the DTP software I could convince the hospital to buy. From there I got a job at an ad agency that only used PCs — but I continued to believe that I was working on an inferior platform. At my next job I was finally reunited with the elusive Mac. But now I failed to see how it was in any way superior. Sure it was built better, it looked nicer, but unlike Windows, I couldn’t work on several tasks at the same time. And if a program went a little flaky, there was no way of forcing it to quit without rebooting. It was then that I learned I had been lied to in all those Apple ads. According to their commercials, a Mac would always outperform a PC. But here I was working with them side by side and I just wasn’t seeing it.
I kept hoping that the next OS would be better. I really wanted Macintosh to be a better performer. I really wanted to enjoy them more than Windows. After all, their interface was SO much better looking (and still continues to this day). But they’ve continued to frustrate me with their performance. And through their obnoxious advertising filled with gross exaggerations and snobbery, I’ve grown to hate Apple and their products.
Still, they did introduce the concept of desk-top-publishing, and for that I am thankful.
Otherwise, I would still be behind a counter in Macy’s asking “Would you like to open a charge account with us today?”
posted by Rob D. on 8-16-2006 at 3:14 pm
I’m willing to call a truce, Rob, but in all honesty you might find this article interesting. It’s a review by AnandTech of the new MacPro. Of particular note is a price comparison with a Dell of similar specs. I haven’t yet read the entire article so there may be damning praise contained therein, but at least this addresses the price issue…
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=1
posted by squid on 8-17-2006 at 4:46 pm
Are you kidding bottom line is if you want to use your cpu as a game machine you probably should choose pc. Although why use a cpu to game when you have things like PS3/xbox360/Wii/ps2/Xbox/ds/gamecube/ect ect… by one of those if you want to game if you want to have a secure worry free cpu by a mac. I’ve had my mac for about 3 months now i just recently went to it after about 20 years of pc use and i suddenly noticed that it was the best move in my life, photo editing never better audio editing never better and moving around bloat free even better. The bottom line is Mac=faster/secure/clutter-free/beautiful PC=Slower/aging/114,000 virii and counting/clutter-filled/paperweights.
posted by Mike G on 12-3-2006 at 3:07 am