# Losing faith in Apple?



## Gedankenspiel (Oct 29, 2002)

I am a die-hard Apple fan and even worked for Apple and some point in the late 90s. I grew up with LCII's, Performas and even until today have bought into just about every generation of Powerbooks Apple has released.

However, my passion and fascination with Apple products is starting to fade, and here is why:

1. Web browsing still unbearably slow
Come on - the web is not a new thing anymore. Many years have passed since Mozilla 0.9 and peoples attention span for slow downloads and slow app open times was long. I work on both platforms and many times have tried to use the Mac for flash and ColdFusion development. Every time I start a bigger project I decide to use the PC because using the web is a miserable experience on the Mac. IE still crashes all the time and renders pages incomplete. Navigator (the tiny version) is quicker but QT and Flash work horribly in it. Other alternatives are not really viable as a developer. So here is my quesiton:
What is it about the Apple platform that makes the web browsing experience so horrible?

2. Launch of web services too much for Apple to handle?
I just tried publishing some iPhoto pictures on .mac and once again it failed miserably. Thinking it might be my own DSL connection or my machine I eliminated any potential issues on my side with the same result. Everyone has been witness to the .mac website and mail fiasco last month and I thought Apple had finally gotten a grip on it. Yesterday I discovered yet again that .mac was temorarily unavailable - on a MONDAY morning?
The point is - is this really Apple's expertise? Not only am I questioning the value of the services i get from Apple for my $100, but I am also losing trust in the service itself.
Apple should focus on hardware and operating system and on developing partnerships and incentives for developers - not to create their own web ASP service - that's very 2000.

3. Where is the future?
This one is simple - where is Apple going? My emotional attachment to the brand is wearing off and my excitement for what's next is also limited. What happened to the anticipation before a Mac World Expo? The last 1 has left us with nothing much new to engage in. Sure, processors are faster - yet again - and video cards are slightly faster - yet again - and screens are slightly better - yet again. But that doesn;t make me dish out a premium for Apple machines anymore. Processor speeds are close to reaching a plateu and people don't abandon their old machine to buy one that is three times faster anymore. The only way you get people to switch is by giving them a REAL reason and that simply hasn't happened for a while.

So anyways, on I go with my PC on the left to make a living (developing) and my Mac on the right for fun (iTunes, iPhoto and Photoshop) on the right.

G


----------



## masternew (Oct 29, 2002)

Sir you have expressed my sentiments exactly, I think Apple should encourage developers and also the company itself should focus on what they do be which is innovation.



Just my two cents


----------



## ksv (Oct 29, 2002)

They are drowning in their own ideology.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 29, 2002)

My predictions will materialise. Apple will soon or later switch to PC for its software and hardware support starting by 2005. It is inevitable.

Apple can't close it's doors forever!


----------



## ksv (Oct 29, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> *My predictions will materialise. Apple will soon or later switch to PC for its software and hardware support starting by 2005. It is inevitable.
> 
> Apple can't close it's doors forever! *



That's the most laughable crap I've heard in a long time.


----------



## ScottW (Oct 29, 2002)

I have been a Mac user for a long time, and a Apple user before that. I have switched many people from Windows to Macs. But you know, when you can buy an awesome top of the line Dell desktop system w/ monitor for $600-$900, it makes you think twice.

I hate Windows, don't like it at all. But, I can run every program I run on a normal basis on a Windows box, with the exception of iMovie. All the graphics programs, business apps, you name it, I wouldn't feel limited in any way.

I don't see myself being a convert to Windows any time in the near future, but the price point might be a major factor in my next major purchase.

Aqua is slow, no one can deny.

Admin


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 29, 2002)

Apple will make a big, floppy, nose dive to the ground before they'll switch to a software only company.  It won't happen.



> _originaly posted by ksv_
> *
> They are drowning in their own ideology.
> *



You're completely correct in that one.  I think they need to make things a little simpler.


----------



## Trip (Oct 29, 2002)

I've only been using macs for about 5 years now but i've learned one great thing about Apple: they know what they're doing, even though they may not show it. They know what they want the future to look like and they're heading in that direction, not entirely fast, but they're getting there. Apple as a group doesn't like the public to know too much about their future idea's so they keep them quiet, and wait until the last minute to release information.

Give 'em at least 2 years...I, personally, assure you: you will not be let down.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 29, 2002)

BY 2 years, apple may have something up their sleeve! But I hope you dont think PCs will freeze in time. They will also innovate.

Windows Media Center Pcs is just one tip of the iceberg. The future holds many things, but it really boils down to who's machine will do stuff faster, better and cheaper, cost wise.

This is frankly the 3 basic fundamental needs for the consumer.

2 of these needs are lacking by apple right now...


----------



## ScottW (Oct 29, 2002)

Apple has never let me down personally, but when it comes to dollars and cents, one might choose differently. Now that I think about it, Dell has never really let me down either.

But, Windows always has and Gnome & KDE do all the time.

So, for now I stick with Mac.

Admin


----------



## Trip (Oct 29, 2002)

So, Admin, you're suggesting that in the future you *may* indeed make the switch to PCs?


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 29, 2002)

If Admin is doubtful of apple's future, then you are all doomed! Muhahah! 

BTW, why you hate windows?

I hated windows until Win2k and XP came out. Till then, MS has been on the right track. Longhorn looks to be incredible, but that's still far away.


----------



## Trip (Oct 29, 2002)

Was that a personal request aimed towards me?
if so i'll e-mail you a HUGE page on why i hate windows, personally.

Ack! my left shift key is dying on me1


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 29, 2002)

Nope, it was directed to the admin.


----------



## ScottW (Oct 29, 2002)

Manic, I thought your were banned, looks like I need to do some cleanup around here.

Well, if I only have $800 to spend, and my PMac G4/500 is ancient egypt... what would I buy? A used iMac or a "top of the line" dell system that is a current model?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.....................

I haven't given up hope on Apple... nor do I think thier future is dim, but it's hard to sell someone on a computer... example, a used G4 Cube for $600-$700 when a new x86 system would cost that and be fine.


----------



## fryke (Oct 29, 2002)

When Apple was at their perfect low the last time and everyone shouted "Apple's gonna die!" (remember... just before MS put some money into Apple...), I too was faithless for some time. Back then I was using a PowerMacintosh 8200/120 and a PowerBook 5300ce, and I just loved Mac OS 8. But with Windows 98 coming and Apple losing market share and image all the way, I was tempted by 'the other world', too.

I bought a cheap AMD K6/200 box. I thought, that if Apple dies, I want some more experience in the PC world (I worked for a PC store - that also sold Macs - from 1994 to 1996). It came with Windows 95, but I installed Windows 98 Beta 3 and the final version later on. It was a time of viruses. It was the time of 'Ping of Death', so when I connected to Mac Hotline servers with my PC, it got ping'd to death almost five times an hour. Incredible. Unbearable. So I went Linux on that box. It served as my webserver and internet router (I had a 28.8kbps leased line at the time!). And it did that job quite well.

The machine had one revival into productivity. I did some web development on it when I got my hands on Apple Rhapsody DR 2 for PC Compatibles.

Let me tell you this: Opinions and prophecies were everything that tried to tear me away from the Mac. It wasn't the Mac itself or the productivity.

And I've learned from those times. I keep a cheap or old PC in my house. It's used for web browsing and for watching TV. I have RedHat 8.0 and Windows 2000 on that machine. And while those OSs aren't all that bad, they just don't cut it for my productivity. It's not about the speed of that machine. But my productivity just lacks.

Frankly, I don't care how far behind Apple is in MHz or bus speed or whatever. Whatever you think, unless you buy a new machine every 6 months, your computer isn't going to be at the top end for most of its time.

And I rather buy something that's still good for productive work after 1.7 years (my TiBook 500) and pay a premium than having to keep up with the newest hardware add-ons and processor upgrades just to be able to ignore that I don't do productive work on my computer.

Saying "There's Photoshop for Windows, too!" is a bit like saying "There's sun in Canada, too!". If you're looking for holidays on a sandy beach, you shouldn't go to Canada.

The Macintosh experience is more than the sum of its parts.


----------



## ManicDevlin (Oct 29, 2002)

Hmm you simply ignored the issue of cost and peformance which everyone in this post was referring too.

You simply debated another Mac VS PC argument. Not only that, you backed up your argument with personal experience which is worth less than a paper cup.


----------



## solrac (Oct 29, 2002)

There's sun in Canada, too?

Ok well, a better analogy would be....

There's sun in Bali and sun in Canada.
There's hot summer heat in Canada as well as Bali.
You can get a great tan in Canada or Bali.

The only thing Bali gives you that Canada doesn't, is the great surroundings, atmosphere, beauty, etc.

Apple needs to do more than offer the better looking system. They need to up the speed and lower cost. If you can get to Bali for the same price as Canada (or for just a little bit more).... then hell yeah who wouldn't go to Bali?


----------



## Javintosh (Oct 29, 2002)

I just read this whole thread and it reminded me of the movie trailer for the movie Like Mike. Specifically the part during which a reporter is interviewing a basketball player and all the while littl bow wow keeps jumping up and down and butting in....  

about Apple. I think that there is a premiun to be paid for apple hardware, but I also think that people overestimate how much that premium is. You can get a desktop for $800 (from Dull), but $300 more gets you an eMac. Also, the Dell has a CD-ROM. 

A DVD/CD-RW upgrade sets you back another $130. 
A decent (not flat like the eMac's) 17" inch monitor will set you back another $110 (you could keep the one they bundle for $800, but then you'll have to look at it  )
FireWire sets your back another $50 (but you'll have to buy it elsewhere 'cause Dell does not offer it)
Without mentioning that the integrated graphics on the Dull probably sucks when compared to the NVidia card on the eMac, you are looking at $290 to make the hardware equivalent and then....

well, then you still have Winsucks to deal with!!

If it as my money, I'd spend teh $10 ($110 if you don't mind a 17' monitor with a 16" vieable area) for OSX, iMovie, iPhoto, Sherlock, etc....


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 29, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ManicDevlin _
> * The future holds many things, but it really boils down to who's machine will do stuff faster, better and cheaper, cost wise.
> 
> This is frankly the 3 basic fundamental needs for the consumer.
> ...



You are also forgetting that the majority of wintel users, many of which are deemed "power" users are not buying faster hardware.  It's only the die hard freaks that are worried about getting that last fps out of a UT demo or 1 more point on 3d benchmarks that are worried about buying the latest processor.  The majority are satisfied by what they have and what it can do.  If that is the case you won't see as much progress on the performance front that we have seen in the past few years.  That alone should give ample time to do some catch up.

If computers are getting to the point where nobody cares as much about being faster than anybody else the arguement comes down to better and cheaper.
I prefer my Mac. I therefore think it's better.  The resale value of my G3 is currently $600. I paid $1400 originaly.  Total cost to me $800.  That isn't too bad in my book.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 29, 2002)

Fryke, I couldn't have said it better myself.  

Frankly, ManicDevlin, some of us couldn't care less about cost vs performance.  If you do, I see why you would have a problem with the Apple platform.  But nobody is making you use it, why complain about it? If you have the funds to buy what you want, why should I care? We're willing to pay the premium for our choice of computing platforms....

Why buy a hamburger at Applebee's when you can go to McDonalds for 1/3rd of the price?  Why buy a BMW when a Kia gets you from point A to point B just as fast?


I'm sure Fryke wasn't ignoring the cost vs performance ratio.  He probably just doesn't care either.


----------



## Javintosh (Oct 29, 2002)

There is a local hanburger chain (Tom Wahls) that has a great ad that makes the point. The tag line for the ads is "Sure you can buy a hamburger for 39 cents, but then you'll have to eat it!"

I think that says it pretty well.


----------



## mindbend (Oct 29, 2002)

Answers:

Q: What is it about the Apple platform that makes the web browsing experience so horrible? 

A: I have no idea, but it's getting old. I would like to know as well. Downloading and page rendering on my machines is plenty fast on a DSL, but Flash is noticeably slower than my PC. However, A Shockwave 3D project I'm working on runs considerably better on my Mac (Dual 1 GIG vs. 800 PIII). I doubt Shockwave is DP aware. And don't even get me started on the whole window resizing thing. I've been complaining forever about that. As for Explorer crashing. I have never had IE crash once in OS X and I've been running OS X exclusively for a year. I do a fair amount of web development too. I still find IE the best browser. It simply works, like it or not. But that's a whole different argument.

--------

Issue #2: Launch of web services too much for Apple to handle? 

I have .Mac, but I don't really use it. When I do, I find it slow in navigation, but reasonably fast at UL/DL once it gets going. I think .Mac at its core is a good quality service that helps to complete the Apple experience as an integrated service. .Mac is brilliantly connected to the OS (desktop mounting, nice). For me, .Mac has never caused trouble, so I think it is of value.

--------

3. Where is the future? 

The future is steadily increasing performance on a constantly refined OS. I am very happy with my Mac today. It will only get better over time. Your point about the performance plateau is actually an argument vastly in Apple's favor. Apple has been very strategic, brilliantly so I might add, in positioning itself as the Digital Hub with a wonderful suite of very useful and usable apps. On the high end, they have again been incredibly smart in buying out quality companies and their software. As long as they can keep it all from becoming a hodge podge (like DVD Studio Pro is now), it will be a great move. This position as a smart, efficient tool helps soften the speed argument. I too am always lured by the speed of the dark side (I do a lot of video editing, 3D rendering, Photoshop, etc. so every bit helps). But I also know from experience that every time I move in that direction, I get burned. As for a "REAL reason to switch", I think Apple's digital hub and its simplicity and the fact that it "just works" is a damn good reason for some people to switch (I saw a couple in their seventies last month at the Apple store walking out with an iMac, their first computer ever). It's unfortunately, not much of a reason for a web developer to switch.

Final Note:
Most every anti-Apple argument is based on the speed thing. Yes, it bugs me too at times, but Apple is at the mercy of chip manufacturers that don't make the bulk of their money on said chips. It's kind of amazing that Apple is even able to be where they are given their market share. It really is. If Apple is ever able to close or come close to narrowing the speed gap, there will be nothing left to complain about except price, and I will gladly continue paying a premium for the best overall experience.


----------



## dave17lax (Oct 30, 2002)

I really don't understand what the whining is about here. Through my company I had the chance not only to buy one of those cheap dells, but I would've gotten $500 bucks off of it. Instead I am saving for an ibook or powerbook to compliment my g4 tower. I have not had any of these websurfing problems, though I do go back and forth between IE and Chimera, and I have dsl. I also run a server off of the same box 24-7, and only when it is really chugging do i notice a big difference in web surfing. 
I'd say that the only real problem with speed is u/dloading to an idisk, but even that has gotten much faster.
As for other things, I have several of the latest games, which run beautifully even on this 2 year old dual g4. Until I can upgrade to PS 7, I have learned to deal with PS6 running in Classic, and although that sucks, i know all I have to do is grab the upgrade.
I guess the only thing i can complain about for now is the idisk problem, and lack of printer support for my epson photo 700. 
I'd rather bug people about when halo2 is coming out or why I can't afford a 23inch hd monitor.


----------



## hulkaros (Oct 30, 2002)

...I don't smoke the thing which most of you seem to enjoy smoking!

I have seen ANYTHING that the Dark Side has to offer up to 2.6 GHz (Intel/Amd) and dual rigs up to 2.2 GHz (Intel/Amd)...

BUT, also I have seen ANYTHING that the Apple Side offers (Dual 1.25 GHz)...

And guess what? With the Apple box I can do MOST stuff at the same time... Or in the majority of apps the Apple performs if not faster than the PCs at least is very close to that (including the dual PC systems).

Where the Mac CANNOT touch the PC is the gaming... The PCs have more frames when it is time to play but then again the XBox beats 99% of PCs out there when it is game time!

I read all your whining for Macs NOT being fast enough or that they are TOO slow compared to the PC and I laugh with your whining... Why? Because I am sure that the majority of you JUST read about fast machines and NOT using them... Because ANYONE who used the dual Macs know the truth: Macs are TOO fast if not faster than the top PCs out there but Macs can do MORE stuff at the same time without resorting to instability, slow performance, REALLY slow interaction with it's user wishes and many other bad things that occur when you use a PC for many things at the same time... Encode a DVD on a PC while burning a CD, while listening to the music, while playing a DVD, while downloading from the internet, while doing MANY other things on a PC? Yeah, sure: Make me laugh some more...

And if you can do the majority of the above stuff at the same time, it is because you bought a PC which costs the same if not more than a modern Mac!!!

Go ahead and whine ALL you want: Macs ARE fast! Faster then PC? Yes and No! Hell, BMWs are NOT faster than Golfs (VW) but at least I prefer a slow BMW than ANY Golf VW out there!

The above is a repost from another posting...

Anyways, Apple may not be in its best form but it will be in January/March methinks... Losing faith in Apple? Yes if one is a sheep like a lot guys seem to be around here...


Windows experience is better/cheaper than Mac? Yeah... Sure... If you read the prices wrong... Check the prices again mates because you have this ALL wrong!


----------



## solrac (Oct 30, 2002)

hulkaros,
They weren't saying PCs are better / cheaper.

They were saying PCs are faster / cheaper.

Apple retains "better".

But you can't argue that PCs do the same thing faster and cheaper. They just do.

Apple just needs to raise speed a bit, and lower cost a bit. Everything else about apple is great.

As for web browsing.... try Navigator. Navigator (formely known as Chimera) solves all speed issues. It is still beta though!


----------



## toast (Oct 30, 2002)

As I'm bored with long posts, I'll try to make this one short 

Yes, it's a shame Mac is slower than Windows on the Web. I hate this .mac stuff. Apple's future ? Faster machines, faster OS, better OS.

Yes, Windows users have better hardware, more software, better overall speed than me.
But I'm a Mac user, and I'm more creative than all my PC friends. Plus, I have stability and simplicity on my side.

I'm not asking for more. I know I would be less creative with a PC. Even with this forum rendering faster or the Acid application on my desktop, I would be less creative. I think different : you think the processor speed is decisive, I think my own head is. And fcuk those who like to think the opposite : Apple has complete and persistent leadership in graphic design, and I know why.

wow


----------



## earthshine (Oct 30, 2002)

That was cool, Toast.

Some of these posts border on completely bloodless pseudo-analytical dissections of what is a simple matter. 

I don't buy these 'let's crunch the numbers...because I can add' approaches to the problem. The Macintosh remains the computer for the rest of us. Go with God if you decide to go Windows.

But OS X is fine, if balky, and the hardware can be improved. This doesn't amount to a betrayal. It's a transient problem that can be solved.

To say Apple is on the 'wrong track' is hubris. Show me the track. There IS no track. Half the time Apple MAKES the track that other, um, entities follow.

eshine&7


----------



## fryke (Oct 30, 2002)

Cost/Performance. I was TALKING about just that, wasn't I? 2.2 GHz is not a number of performance for me. Getting the job done in time is a number of performance for me. Getting paid for the job done in time is Cost/Performance for me. And having fun working on the project at the same time is certainly good paid performance.


----------



## toast (Oct 30, 2002)

> _Originally posted by fryke _
> *And having fun working on the project at the same time is certainly good paid performance. *



I completely agree. Good extrapolation of what I wrote three posts above, IMO.


----------



## Gedankenspiel (Oct 30, 2002)

Perhaps this discussion has gotten a bit off track so let me try to get back to the core. I didn't try to provoke the age-old debate on PC vs. Mac.  We are all past that. What I really wanted to express is my concern for Apple's future.

When Apple announced the first iMac in 1998 (or was it the year before) there was direction. It was a real eye-opener and the iMac along with Jobs' return meant a change in the personal computer indsutry altogether. I bought stock at $13 at that point and sold it near the peak at around $50. Why? Because I saw what Apple was doing and I was encouraged by it:

1. Innovation
2. Moving towards cost competitiveness with Wintel machines
3. Announcing new hardware that met the expectations of the community

But back in 1998 processor speeds doubled every 12 months and that's what people expected.

Today people are happy with their 1.5 year old G4/500 Powerbook. And that's where we are. Apple won't get another $3K out of my pockets to buy the next generation Powerbook because I don't need more performance in the next 2-3 years. What I really need is a better OSX that doesn't crash (and YES, OSX crashes, no doubt!), and runs more efficiently (no beach balls).

I am also less confident because of the diversion caused by .mac. Not only do I not understand how an ASP model fits in with Apple's strategy (eWorld all over again?) but being a subscriber I must also say it plain stinks. The service is unreliable and totally damages Apple's marketing say that MacOSX never crashes (I know .mac is not on OSX servers but most people don't). I feel like there is no value in it unless you consider a 100MB disc drive as a backup medium value.

In any event, Apple is not giving me the confidence I wouild expect from a company that I have poured thousands of dollars into year after year. Finally, Apple is stepping on a lot of people's toes by threatening no to attend MacWorld Expos in Boston. With their renewed committment to education they should be all over Boston with 350,000 students and about 100 Universities. 

Apple, make me believe again.


G


----------



## Luca (Oct 30, 2002)

People in this thread don't seem to know what they want. A more performing hardware? Yes&No: some compare to PCs and blame slow internet rendering; other's don't mind, they just find OS X to be crap, because in their PERSONAL user experience  OSX crashes all the time, and Aqua is slow. A better OS? Yes&No: OSX is just some new OS that needs a few improvements, much better anyway than Windows or Linux. So what's the topic here? Working faster and faster and faster? Having an uncrashable OS X (put the human factor aside, jaguar never crashed on my slow Beige G3 266 with 8 peripherals)?? Paying less for better Apple products? Switching to PC soon, as soon as iMovie is ported to XP?? C'mon guys, the level of discussion is going lower and lower in this forum.


----------



## fryke (Oct 30, 2002)

Well, the 'perfect' thread has two posts. A question and the right answer.


----------



## Luca (Oct 30, 2002)

So I come to the conclusion that the question (Losing faith in Apple?) was bad.


----------



## adambyte (Oct 30, 2002)

I have faith in Apple. I know some of you may be disappointed by the lack of "new" stuff at the latest keynotes, but hey, let's face it. You can only start a revolution only so often, otherewise, revolutions wouldn't be so... revolutionary. Apple started that with the consumer Apple II. Then the Macintosh. And then the first iMac, which, I believe, has served it's purpose. the little gumdrop became synonimous with the internet, and pop culture embraced it. iMacs started popping up everywhere, in front of people who hadn't even considered a Mac before...

My point is, there's no reason to lost "faith," just because a revolution hasn't started lately. We're now just sitting waiting for gradual improvements.

btw, I agree with Gedankenspiel... I'm perfectly happy with my almost 2 year old PowerBook G4... the longevity of Apple products are absolutely amazing... and don't even get me started about my iPod..... just read my sig.


----------



## hazmat (Oct 30, 2002)

> _Originally posted by hulkaros _
> *
> Go ahead and whine ALL you want: Macs ARE fast! Faster then PC? Yes and No! Hell, BMWs are NOT faster than Golfs (VW) but at least I prefer a slow BMW than ANY Golf VW out there!
> 
> ...



Ummm.... who the hell said that?  What stock Golf is faster than my stock M3 (not stock anymore, but that's besides the point)?


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 30, 2002)

well, I think I said something about a BMW and a Kia but it had nothing to do with speed.  I was speaking about quality and ambiance.

I was trying to convey the point that although both will do the job some of us prefer to spend a little more and do it in style.

BTW:  Just for the record, I don't think that Kia would produce anything that would come close to touching BMW in performance.  I've had a few Z3's and some of the M series that have gave my SS a good run for it's money


----------



## MacLuv (Oct 30, 2002)




----------



## MacLuv (Oct 30, 2002)




----------



## Luca (Oct 30, 2002)

Faith in Apple or reasoning with my own Apple stuff?
I prefer reasoning. True, Jaguar on my G4 867 is a bit slower than their XP. But I don't care. Know why? Because "my neibourgh's grass looks always greener than mine".
Social psychology has explained it for decades with the term "social comparison". Ads and marketing strategies play on that. From my own standpoint, XP is not so ugly, less handsome than OSX though, somewhat faster, and so what? A friend owning XP is happy with it, but still meets several problems that we ignore under OS X.  I'm a Mac user for about 10 years, and had also a walk on my neighbour's grass a few years ago that didn't feel me bad about my Apple experience. I need a real professional, stable OS, and Jaguar meets the standard 24/24, 7/7. We know Apple is still improving it. We know they trying to find better hardware solutions. It's fine like that. All other rumors are nothing but speculations, pure mind productions, like 99% rumors.


----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 30, 2002)

MacLuv,  there are freeware apps that will convert Mac fonts to PC fonts.  I've used them to move many of the fonts I had on my PC to my mac and vice versa.
Also, if it is a commercial font set, many companies sell both versions.  You should be able to get the PC versions at a very low cost, if not free.


----------



## Javintosh (Oct 30, 2002)

and why shouldn't apple cure lung cancer? I think they can!  

I mean, if coffee enemas can help pancreatic cancer, http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,56072,00.html maybe apple can come out with iColon or something like that.


----------



## MacLuv (Oct 30, 2002)




----------



## MacLuv (Oct 30, 2002)




----------



## Rhino_G3 (Oct 30, 2002)

MacLuv, I was mearly pointing out the fact that it can be done.   I'm not sure what the photoshop reference is about.  Graphic converter isn't even near the same league as GIMP... let alone Photoshop.  Much of my work is done on photoshop as well. I was pointing out the fact that there is an application available to you for free.

The utility that I had at the time would batch convert.  I started the convert before I went to bed and it was done the next morning.  It only took 2 hr total, but that's beside the point.  Out of about 2000 fonts I had 3 that didn't work. 

You obviously found time to move them from one machine to another, I felt that if you did want to switch in the future you could find the time to convert them. I was purely pointing out your options if you felt so inclined.  

Some of my font collections I got on CD, all I had to do was call the company up.  Give them my info and they sent out the Mac collection rather than the PC that I already had.  The freeware fonts were the ones that I converted.

I do know how easy it is to switch, I switched from the PC to the Mac a few years ago.  If you've lost the info for your collections, I'm sorry I guess you would be in a bind then.

I'm sorry I tried to help


----------



## plastic (Oct 30, 2002)

The few "let downs" at the last few Macworld events are showing and taking its toll on the community I feel. And the emphasis on Apple is on the switchers and not us old faithful.

I sometimes feel left out by Apple when they release new stuff. But taking into consideration how Jaguar has improved by life with iSync and Address Book and iCal, I still have my fair share of loyalty to them.

But they, on the other hand, has to, as mentioned in earlier posts, get their act together for faster running OS, faster machines? Hmmm... questionable, .Mac getting up to par since they have Akamai running fantastic bandwidth so there must be some serious problems here. 

Like many of you here, the anticipation of reaching the studio and wanting to turn on the Mac is getting weaker and weaker, like how jaded Yoda must have felt. I am not sure why "the force" is getting weaker, but Jobs better get our fav fruit company together before the sith lords (PC) does more damage to them.

All the rumours are also not helping the Mac community. 

I hope Apple have not forgotten to "Think Different".


----------



## solrac (Oct 30, 2002)

MacLuv, Mac OS X comes with "$10,000+" worth of fonts included right in the box!!!


----------



## plastic (Oct 30, 2002)

Is that so? Wow!


----------



## Javintosh (Oct 30, 2002)

MacLuv, 

I would have imagined that MacOSX's new font capabilities (e.g. Zapfino). I don't do design anymore, but I would have imagined that you'd find the new font capabilites of OSX pretty exciting.


----------



## malexgreen (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Gedankenspiel _
> *I am a die-hard Apple fan and even worked for Apple and some point in the late 90s. I grew up with LCII's, Performas and even until today have bought into just about every generation of Powerbooks Apple has released.
> 
> However, my passion and fascination with Apple products is starting to fade, and here is why:...
> G *


The thing that attracts me to Apple  (and is starting to be "was" attracting me) is the fact that you could get features in Apple computers that you couldn't get as standard on a PC. Like for example:

1) Desktop/multimedia friendly UNIX
2) Gigabit ethernet
3) CD-RW/DVD-R Drives
4) built in WiFi
5) Bluetooth support
6) Hi Res flat panel display
7) Firewire
8) notebooks with large  15.2" and 14" screens
9) Elegantly designed notebooks (the TiBook,e.g.)

But that was a few months ago. There are now PC-based *notebooks* on the market that have CD-RW/DVD-R drives. By the end of this year, Microsoft will support bluetooth in XP for mice and keyboards. Flat panels for PC's are getting cheaper everyday. PC laptops now come in the 15.2" size. And there are Tablet PC's on the market. The Pentium 4 will be at 3GHz by the end of this year.  

Apple needs to either get with the program and either innovate faster, i.e. come out with a tablet-based powerbook/ibook with built-in bluetooth and/or lower their prices significantly. It seems that Apple doesn't realize that there's been a big downturn in the PC industry and that everyone else has lowered their prices and bumped up performance to compete.


----------



## MacLuv (Oct 31, 2002)




----------



## hulkaros (Oct 31, 2002)

Ok! Some say that this post was about losing faith and then it became obvious that the problem of losing faith is because of speed of Apple's products, the price of them and innovation/revolution compared to products one can find on the Dark Side...

Well, I came to this conclusion: You DON'T know what you are talking about!

Losing faith? Maybe the correct question should be:
Are Apple's customers losing their mind?

GUYS WAKE UP!

Visit an Apple store and use the Dual Engine computers and then let me know if you find them slow compared to the so called Speed Demons of the Dark Side... Which I'm sure if one wants to be truthful, he/she will be blown away by their performance!

PCs have better number crunching capabilities? So big freaking BOO! That's DOESN'T matter because in the end it matters what the user is able to do with those capabilities and we all know that Windows get in user's face ALL the time...

PCs are cheaper than Macs? On what alternate reality? I told you to check those prices and YES even from Dull!

Also, about Apple controlling the hardware/software and so this is a BAD thing... BS... Total BS... Isn't the same thing with M$/Intel/Amd? If you think otherwise SOMETHING is ALL wrong with yourselves...

On the contrary Apple embraces MORE standards than M$ ever will... Hell: Macs can run Windows too!

Yes... I can see innovation and freedom on the PC world:
PS/2, COM, LPT, Floppy, USB, CRTs, Speaker, Jumpers, Switches, VGA, etc.

I think that most of you guys here, you really are, as Al Pacino said in one of his GREAT performances:
I'M IN THE DARK HERE...

I do not know how many of you know this: But US of A in the past decades and now MORE than ever teaches people all over the world to accept things in general because they supposedly are No.1 and they try to convince that something is number one with benchmarks! In the end we all know that ANYTHING in this world is better than something else if we know what to make of it... If a person is stronger than me... Faster than me... Smarter than me... Does that make him/her a better person?

Get over your complexes and try to see the truth! I know... It's TOO hard! But in the end you may find that your iMac G3/500 isn't all that bad compared to that Dull 2.4 GHz just because Dull can browse faster, play faster, work faster... And if you call yourselves professionals and you want TOP performance in Photoshop, et al, give a shot to the Dual Engine stuff: They will NOT let you down...

As for me being Apple's addict: Why should I not be! I get products which let me DO my work the way I want to... NEVER let me down... Apps that DO NOT exist anywhere else... Unix capabilities... VERY cheap products! A Server product with awesome performance, UNLIMITED licenses, awesome expandability, etc. with just a few thousands of US$? Dual everything with SO little money? As for notebooks which supposedly offer the same stuff compared to PB, in the Dark Side? Make me laugh! Last time I checked, X, wasn't available! On the contrary a lost soul can have XP on PB... Call me addict, call me anything you like... In the end I'm doing things that you cannot possibly match on the Wintel wither you like to admit it or not... 

I know, ignorance is bliss! So, why don't you thank yourselves for being ignorants?


----------



## Hypernate (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by solrac _
> *There's sun in Canada, too?
> 
> Ok well, a better analogy would be....
> ...



Well, that isn't really as good over here in Australia, seeing as it does cost like a quarter of the price to go to Bali rather than Canada


----------



## toast (Oct 31, 2002)

Amen too.


----------



## ksv (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> *Amen too. *



This discussion is a prime example on how capitalism is completely flawed.


----------



## terran74 (Oct 31, 2002)

Apple needs to move away from 32 bit.  Screw the P4 and screw the G4.  It needs to focus on the G5 or IBM Power 970, if those are not good enough then the AMD 64bit chip or Itanium2.

It's time to stop looking at the P4 as the answers to everything.  We have a really kick butt OS and a GUI that surpasses anything I've seen on the PC and it is being held back by the dinky 32bit processors we have today.

I don't care what anyone thinks.  You can slap Quartz on a P4 and it will still be hella slower than the Windows UI because Quartz uses PDF for 2D and OpenGL for 3D.  PDF is slow.  OpenGL needs a fast GPU like the GeForce 4 or Radeon.  

That one technology alone is proof why we need to focus on 64bit technology.  Sure it runs fine on a 32bit system and srue we could pump up the G4 to 5 Ghz in 10 years but why should we when 64 bit is around the corner.

I have not lost faith in Apple.  They are thinking ahead of the ball game and thinking like a consumer.  They design pretty boxes with sturdy technology.  A nice OS with state of the art interface design (all be it incomplete because it's still work in progress as far as I can tell with the user experience).

Apple innovated by getting rid of the floppy.  It innovated by moving away from ADB and Serial by adopting USB.  It moved away from SCSI to Firewire.  You still cannot find a good PC out there that does not have these legacy components that frankly, outside of the business world I would never use.  Furthermore, inside the business world I've only used them to connect devices like my stupid ex employers Motorola phone WHICH SHOULD support USB or Bluetooth anyway.  Not the dinky serial connector.

Have you tried to connect devices on XP?  It's still not 100% plug and play.  Most devices still need to be "shut down" properly from the OS before you can disconnect them and power them down yourself.  Palm devices still have major issues via USB as well.

My only wish from Apple is that it had more enterprise friendly basic tools for disk management (like a defrag or better disk scanner)  but that's abotu it.  I like their consumer electronics ideas like the iPod.  The digital hub marketing paradigm and the switch campaign.

I love being able to connect to my PC easier.  I would love to see 2D performance sped up to the point that it is as fast as our PC counterparts.  It has become smoother with Quartz Extreme but honestly that won't happen even with a 2.5 Ghz G4.  It will only happen on 64bit.  Still looks d@mn nice though.


----------



## plastic (Oct 31, 2002)

Anyone runs hardcore processing work around here or merely downloading porn and stealing music?

Sorry for the sacarsm, but I have to point out the fact that in all the professional suites in my studio, you can never find a Wintel machine. Because to build a Wintel machine that would run like a Mac would cost me three times the price... and it will still throw a tantrum once every three months, usually on important clients' projects.

Sorry if I am PC bashing again. I have tried to give Wintel machines a chance again, and it only comes back to me like a unrepentent fool. 

After many dollars going down the drain and being a fool too many times listening to "IT Professionals who knows how to build the ultimate system", I came back to the Apple platform and embrace it like the good child I neglected. 

I have had a Alienware system for gaming once... and I thought this would be the ultimate gaming console since it cost me more than US$5000 to assemble every butt kicking parts you can think of... now it is sold and I regret everyday that I have been made fool thinking Britney Spears would give me the time of day if I only have to go to her concert and see her backstage. 

In summary. Mac just works. I am sorry, Mr Jobs. You have a better system and I took you for granted before. I am back to the orchard to pick my apples again. Lemons are just not as tasty. Wintel machines roll out too many lemons. Apple is still my favourite fruit company.

Sorry for PC bashing. I had spent more than $50k to learn my lesson. And $5k to get a dual 1G machine to rectify and keep my clients happy. And thank God they came back.


----------



## hulkaros (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by MacLuv _
> *Actually, I'd like to thank you for proving that Apple is indeed a cult and people like yourself would gladly drink the koolaid if Steve Jobs gave the go-ahead... you better keep your eye's in the sky, huuuulk becuase theres a UFO-shaped airport base station flying in the tail of Hayley's comet and it has your name on it.
> 
> Attention world: APPLE IS NOT A RELIGION.
> ...



To your mumbo-jumbo-voodoo you tried to post I simply say:
You DIDN'T use a Dual Mac or a Dual Wintel. I did and I know what kind of dust the PC eats...

And to conclude: What is your religion? M$ in one hand and Intel/Amd at the other? And above your head is Dell? That's your holy Trinity?

As for prices OBVIOUSLY you didn't check Dull's online store and compare it to Apple's online store, now, did you? Hmm, something tells me that ACTUALLY you DIDN'T...

Give my best regards to your uncle Bill, or is he YOUR God?


----------



## serpicolugnut (Oct 31, 2002)

Hulkaros, you're wrong. 

The new high end Macs - the dual ghz and 1.25ghz, are nowhere near as powerful as PCs running AMD2200XP+ or P4 2.8ghz, which are the the top or near the top of the PC CPU heap.

It really bothers me that this is true, but true it is. My home grown AMD 2200 XP w/ 512MB runs circles around my G4/800DP w/ 1.5GB of RAM on just about every application. Photoshop launches on the PC in about 3 seconds, where on the G4 its at least 15 - this with 3X the amount of RAM.

Couple this with painfully slow web browsing, flash playback, diminished value (having to pay for .Mac), and  Apple is losing face in several areas.

BTW - that AMD PC I built cost me $750. My G4/800DP cost me $3499. 

Apple still retains an "ease of use" edge, but that edge shrinks every year, and now with OS X the standard, and WindowsXP, Windows isn't nearly as hard to use as it used to be. It still doesn't do basic stuff like Plug N Play as good as a Mac, but you've got a broader support of more peripherals than on the Mac, so it's almost a wash....

I love my Macs (so don't try to paint me as an Apple basher), and still admire Apple as a company, but they have been doing more wrong than right lately, and I hope they correct it soon.


----------



## edX (Oct 31, 2002)

editor's note - if your post in this thread is missing or changed, then perhaps you should go back and reread the site rules. these include things like no profanity, no name calling or threats, and no sexual references. Either people in this thread start playing nice or it will be promptly closed.

'nuff said.


----------



## solrac (Oct 31, 2002)

Ed....
You suck.

You deleted my entire post, as well as MacLuv's reply to Hulkaros' post.

I spent some time writing that and now this thread is missing two big chunks. I just wasted my time here.

I wonder if I'll post here again.


----------



## hulkaros (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by serpicolugnut _
> *Hulkaros, you're wrong.
> 
> The new high end Macs - the dual ghz and 1.25ghz, are nowhere near as powerful as PCs running AMD2200XP+ or P4 2.8ghz, which are the the top or near the top of the PC CPU heap.
> ...



Try to find a new Dual with PS7 and X.2 and load the app... I'm sure you will find a different story than the one you describing... Supposedly, I could give you the exact number but as of anything so far I've posted here, you or anyone else like to argue just for the sake of arguing...So, do yourself a favor and find that new Dual Mac. Also, when you find one, do this AND try to do it also on ANY P4/2.8:
-Load an MP3 app and let it play while
-You are playing a movie while
-Encoding a DVD while
-Downloading from the net while
-Recording a DVD while
-You are typing text on a word app while
-You are compiling an application while
-You are sychronizing your iPod while
-You are printing a picture while
-You are importing a picture from a Digital Camera while
-Doing anything else at the same time

After all the above, let me know if your Dual Mac is underperforming compared to ANY Dual Wintel and NOT just a single proc box...

In the above, I know what gives but still I will just say to whiners go and try the above stuff on ANY box and let me know if the new Dual Macs are underperformers... Methinks that you will be surprised which one is the best performer! Enough of BSing about speeds: Just check the above out...


----------



## mindbend (Oct 31, 2002)

Several have mentioned Apple doing things wrong. Like what?

IMHO, Apple has done everything as well as it can possibly be done given the meager economy and market share issues.

For example:

1. buying out quality companies
2. iPod
3. OS X with Unix core
4. Digital hub apps

These are just a few examples. I can not think of a specific example of what Apple is doing WRONG. Sure, the PPC chip is underperforming, but that is not Apple's fault. You think Apple isn't aware of the speed gap? If there was something they could do about it they would. All they can do is what the rest of us are doing...wait for chip makers to increase the speed. Sure, Apple can put pressure on them and help in design etc, but it still boils down to the fact that Moto or even IBM is NOT going to make a fortune selling chips for Apple, so the incentive and market demands are not there.

You could argue that the OS X core is too demanding on today's hardware (read:slow GUI), so that in itself is wrong. But considering the alternative (dwelling on a dead OS), it's still the right move. OS X will be unbelievable on tomorrow's hardware. OK, maybe the day after tomorrow. Apple has shown great vision and long term thinking.

Again, I seriously ask, what specifically has Apple done wrong? Switch to AMD you might say. Yeah right. Like they can just switch to a whole new manufacturer in a week and AMD will have a 4 GHZ PPC equivalent overnight. 

Apple isn't perfect. But all things considered, let's give credit where credit is due. I'd like to see any of you keep that ship afloat. If you were Steve Jobs, what would you do differently? And fantasy land answers like "Come out with a faster chip" don't count.


----------



## ksv (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by solrac _
> *Ed....
> You suck.
> 
> ...



Yeah, it's called democracy


----------



## kendall (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ksv _
> *Yeah, it's called democracy  *



No, actually it would be a fascist dictatorship because we were never given the option to vote whether or not solrac and MacLuv's replies should be removed or not.


----------



## hulkaros (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ksv _
> *Yeah, it's called democracy  *



So, some of you think that Democracy or freedom of speech really is to swear other people or to post whatever you want in a forum which goes by the name of Mac News & Forums?

Yeah, sure! That must be Democracy at its best! Next time when you don't like someones opinions and you have that person in front of you beat him or even better kill him just because you can do so! That's Democracy too, ain't it?


----------



## ksv (Oct 31, 2002)

It's called irony


----------



## kendall (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by hulkaros _
> *So, some of you think that Democracy or freedom of speech really is to swear other people or to post whatever you want in a forum which goes by the name of Mac News & Forums?
> 
> Yeah, sure! That must be Democracy at its best! Next time when you don't like someones opinions and you have that person in front of you beat him or even better kill him just because you can do so! That's Democracy too, ain't it? *



If a majority of people feel that everything that comes out of your mouth is idiotic and absurd, then I think we should be able to vote whether or not to kill you.


----------



## edX (Oct 31, 2002)

yes, it was a shame that 2 long posts that obviously had a lot of time and effort behind them had to disappear because the posters didn't bother to adhere to the site rules. I regret it, but i also am not going to search thru long posts like that to find the multible infractions and correct them. that's not my responsibility. it is the responsibility of the poster to do it right the first time. So the easiest way to make it conform is to delete it in such instances.

as for democracy - well this is a private site. you signed up and agreed to abide by the rules - remember? you weren't born into being a member here. you joined. so either follow the rules or go somewhere that has rules to suit you. and keep in mind, i enforce the rules, i don't make them. But the current rules have been pretty much agreed upon by all the moderators so there was some group process behind them. 

These rules are not new, and neither are you. play by them or risk your work vanishing.


----------



## Ricky (Oct 31, 2002)

"Faith."
What is faith to you?  Is it something you believe in?  A religion, perhaps?  Or is it something else, such as belief that something will succeed or come through hardship?  Or are these just two different definitions to the same word?
Sorry about all the questions, but I have to get you guys thinking for a second.
Now, suppose that Dell takes over the computing market (Not saying it hasn't already...).  What would happen?  Would we use Apple?
No.
Apple is a strong company, with plenty of innovation and leadership in the industry.  Companies like Microsoft need Apple around, otherwise there would be no fresh, new, exciting ideas to go around.  I would think that Microsoft would even buy out Apple (God forbid  ), if Apple was struggling.  But I digress.
You see, what has kept Apple going through all the years is exactly this--technological innovation.  Apple is a leader in the industry, and continues to bring new technologies into the mainstream, such as the Junk Mail filtering in Mail.app, or perhaps even futher back to the very first Mac, an all in one computer.  I'm not saying these technologies haven't been around before, but just simply saying how Apple brought it into the mainstream.
Let's go forward in time a bit further now.  Apple was struggling.  Every Wintel user was hoping for the death of Apple.  Motorola had recently put out the G3 chip, and the new high-end desktop Macs were using it.  But it wasn't enough to revive the company.
Then Apple introduced the iMac, a simple solution for the home market.  It was fast, it was cheap, and it had everything a normal Joe-Blow guy wanted when he walked into a computer store.
Dell is monopolizing on this strategy.  An affordable computer that's fast and cool looking?  No way!  But Apple brought the all-in-one design into around 6 million people's homes.  Now they need another breakthrough.  Apple will come through.  Desperate times call for desperate measures.  If we can get another cheap, easy to set up computer, it would do wonders.  People just want an affordable solution when it's time for an upgrade.  I think Apple will do this shortly.  The eMac has a lot of potential for the average consumer; if they fix what's wrong with it, lower the price, and offer the same options that Dell has at a competitive price point, that's all they'll need.

Okay, that's just my two cents.  Don't blow my head off now...


----------



## Ricky (Oct 31, 2002)

Double post, meant to hit edit, hit quote instead.


----------



## plastic (Oct 31, 2002)

Can I say something without you guys flaming me?

I know everyone who loves Apple has your piece to say in this forums, and this place is more like coffee shop talk more than anything else, because do you think Mr Jobs will come in here to read the posts? 

(Sir, if you do, please reveal yourself) 

LOL.

But what I want to say is, we can show how much we love our Macs and iPods and whats not, but let us not get carried away and make these "hot discussion" threads into flame threads and arguements. 

This is like our virtual home, where everyone of us chills out here and discuss and gossips about all things Mac (and sometimes Wintel). 

Bottom line is, I am not sure about some of you guys, but I feel I am part of this community and I would love to keep this community different from the one in the real world. Enough of terrorists.


----------



## solrac (Oct 31, 2002)

> _Originally posted by hulkaros _
> *So, some of you think that Democracy or freedom of speech really is to swear other people or to post whatever you want in a forum which goes by the name of Mac News & Forums?
> 
> Yeah, sure! That must be Democracy at its best! Next time when you don't like someones opinions and you have that person in front of you beat him or even better kill him just because you can do so! That's Democracy too, ain't it? *



I don't know whether to love you or hate you. You just tilted the scale back toward hate a little bit.... (because this post is ultra-hypocritical and you've been more belligerent and attacking in some of your previous posts)


----------



## MDA (Nov 1, 2002)

> _Originally posted by serpicolugnut _
> *Hulkaros, you're wrong.
> 
> It really bothers me that this is true, but true it is. My home grown AMD 2200 XP w/ 512MB runs circles around my G4/800DP w/ 1.5GB of RAM on just about every application. Photoshop launches on the PC in about 3 seconds, where on the G4 its at least 15 - this with 3X the amount of RAM. *



If it takes Photoshop that long to launch on your computer you may want to reinstall it. It takes about 7 seconds on my Dual GB with 512 of RAM.



> *Couple this with painfully slow web browsing, flash playback, diminished value (having to pay for .Mac), and  Apple is losing face in several areas.*



How, may I ask, are you surfing the web? Using a cable modem on my Mac web browsing is almost instantaneous.



> *BTW - that AMD PC I built cost me $750. My G4/800DP cost me $3499.
> *



Why in god's name did you pay $3499 for a G4 800 Dual? My Dual GB was only $2499. Where do you buy your computers?



> *Apple still retains an "ease of use" edge, but that edge shrinks every year, and now with OS X the standard, and WindowsXP, Windows isn't nearly as hard to use as it used to be. It still doesn't do basic stuff like Plug N Play as good as a Mac, but you've got a broader support of more peripherals than on the Mac, so it's almost a wash....*



Almost a wash? If you think it's almost a wash you really should be using a PC.



> *I love my Macs (so don't try to paint me as an Apple basher), and still admire Apple as a company, but they have been doing more wrong than right lately, and I hope they correct it soon.*



I think they're doing more right than they've done in a long time. In fact the latest figures have their market share as actually having increased over the past year.

MDA


----------



## edX (Nov 1, 2002)

solrac - i'm going to stand up just a wee bit for the hulk man here.

yes, he has been as guilty of these things as anyone in the past. But he also has taken note of what he was doing that wasn't allowed and seems to have made efforts to tone it down. I would have said the same thing about you solrac, up until the post that is gone now.  

The point is that, we are not the same people today that we were in the past. we learn, we grow, we correct our mistakes. that is a good thing. stubbornly being a rebel without a clue is not. You have the option to change your behaviors. in fact, that is what warnings and things like public deletings are all about - to give people a clue and a chance to change. If you don't take it, then you're the one who loses.  Don't waste my time by making me have to carefully hunt for rules violations in a post and i won't waste your time by deleting it.

of course, if you would rather i kept your rule violation posts and arranged for your membership here to be deleted, that's another option.But really, i see no reason why 99% or more of the userbase here can post regularly without doing anything worse than bore me or make me move a thread to the right forum, while the other 1% is constantly arguing with me and amongst themselves about how they've been treated unfairly for violating the rules. 

more than 'nuff said.


----------



## solrac (Nov 1, 2002)

No, Ed, the thing with me is, my natural state of mind, my natural state of being, includes cuss words and sarcasm.

It takes GREAT effort to not use them. In a professional setting it's easy but this is not a professional setting.

Writing a post on this forum, bashing MacLuv for his stupid post... I actually did not mean to break any rules here. I don't even REMEMBER what cuss word I used or anything. In my memory, I kept it clean.

The rules here are a little too strict and it severely detracts from the enjoyment of this forum.

I have great ideas, and good thoughts, and I stand up for my principles. But in a forum or community where the rules are too strict, I will never fit in. It just doesn't work for me. I'll always slip up.

But Hulkaros in the past completely outright belligerently called someone else names and etc. etc. etc., so if he's completely changed that, and is now an evangelist of the forum rules, then more power to him. But his intonations and mannerisms and mis-typings have not changed, and it has not been that long either, so his post is still completely hypocritical.

'nuff said times eleventy-billion!!

p.s. Go ahead and delete my posts in the future that break the rules. I'll remember this and try and put on my fake professional job face when I'm in this strict forum and not slip up again.


----------



## hulkaros (Nov 1, 2002)

> _Originally posted by solrac _
> *
> But Hulkaros in the past completely outright belligerently called someone else names and etc. etc. etc., so if he's completely changed that, and is now an evangelist of the forum rules, then more power to him. But his intonations and mannerisms and mis-typings have not changed, and it has not been that long either, so his post is still completely hypocritical.
> *



I didn't want to reply but I'll just say that someone is telling lies here about me...

Also, methinks that mostly in the last few pages of this post we lost control and at least I can guarantee that I will NOT reply again in this post... So less trouble for Ed


----------



## solrac (Nov 1, 2002)

oh, c'mon I'm not lying Hulkaros.

I remember a super angry post you wrote a couple months ago or so.


----------



## MacLuv (Nov 1, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Ed Spruiell _
> *editor's note - if your post in this thread is missing or changed, then perhaps you should go back and reread the site rules. these include things like no profanity, no name calling or threats, and no sexual references. Either people in this thread start playing nice or it will be promptly closed.
> 
> 'nuff said. *



Actually Ed, you deleted my post and I didn't swear or use profanity or anything...  I spent a great deal of time replying to Hulkaros' comments and yet he/she gets to comment on MY posts????? I don't think so.


----------



## solrac (Nov 1, 2002)

i don't remember using profanity or threats either....

We both got screwed.


----------



## MacLuv (Nov 1, 2002)




----------



## toast (Nov 1, 2002)

I just realized that, if you take all the freedom-of-expression stuff out of this thread, it's one of the most interesting threads I ever read here about the Apple company.

BUT

The freedom of speech discussion is ALSO very interesting ! I've been working on the topic a lot, I study politics in my country (France). What I can recommend to you all is to start a thread somewhere else if you are yearning for a chat about democracy, freedoms, civil liberties and self expression. MacLuv tried it recently.

I like your answeer to my "Amen, too." very much, ksv    . I've aalso studied anarchy a lot you know !


----------



## solrac (Nov 1, 2002)

MacLuv, although I completely disagree with your post that Ed deleted, and even claimed your idea of Apple selling pretty boxes with XP on them is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard, that's my opinion and you are totally right about this forum and the censorship here.

If you start your own mac community which is not nazi-moderated, let me know.


----------



## toast (Nov 1, 2002)

solrac, you just wrote the following line:



> "If you start your own mac community which is not nazi-moderated, let me know. "



I hope your stupid dumb self will be censored for that. And I hope my stupid dumb self will be censored for quoting, and insulting you.

This is democracy. I won't develop more, I'd be afraid to shock you.


----------



## solrac (Nov 1, 2002)

if I'm moderated for typing the word nazi in the phrase "nazi-moderated" then I will never EVER visit this forum again.


----------



## toast (Nov 1, 2002)

The problem is not using the term but using it in an inappropriate way. I personnally find your own usage of the term very inappropriate. I think Ed will find it very inappropriate too !

I HOPE you will be moderated, though I'm not sure you will be.

Nothing against you personally, just against the use of the term "nazi". I think you can understand I'm against the use of the "nazi" qualificative each time there's a post moderated somewhere on Earth. There are LOADS of appropriate words for saying the situation was unfair, if you think it was. I don't know how to interpret your use of the word "nazi": provocative ? I hope so.


----------



## solrac (Nov 1, 2002)

nazi! Everyone says that for overly-strict situations. It's verified certifiable slang nowadays.

Strict teacher? She's being a nazi.
Strict moderator? You got nazi-moderated.

It's slang and means nothing innappropriate or racist.


----------



## toast (Nov 1, 2002)

Wow !!!

Okay, well, it's SO MUCH different here in France... and in Europe in general, BTW. Thanx for explaining .


----------



## ksv (Nov 1, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Ed Spruiell _
> *editor's note - if your post in this thread is missing or changed, then perhaps you should go back and reread the site rules. these include things like no profanity, no name calling or threats, and no sexual references. Either people in this thread start playing nice or it will be promptly closed.
> 
> 'nuff said. *



**goes back to see if any of my posts are deleted...


Seriously, does anyone want to join my project on creating a non-moderated and completely free community?


----------



## solrac (Nov 1, 2002)

yes. Please start a new mac community.

Just get phpbb from phpbb.com

easy to install. The challenge is to find a fast, cheap web server that can handle lots of traffic.


----------



## toast (Nov 1, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ksv _
> *a non-moderated and completely free community? *



I knew those under the name of Usenet groups.
Same link in English : click here.


----------



## Gedankenspiel (Nov 1, 2002)

Hmmm... once again the topic got off track. Not sure how words like "democracy" or "Nazi" made it in here. In any event, I think the thread is one of the first that has allowed some concern around Apple to surface - without too much bashing and with many quality comments.

I take away from this that there is still much emotional attachment to Apple and the Mac platform - for the good and the bad - and I thank everyone for participating.

The reason why I chose to use the word "Faith" in the original subject is because it is a word most commonly associated with religion and lets face it - the way Apple enthusiasts believe in Apple and love their platform parallels religion. A following that few other companies can call their own.

However, the strong belief in something can reduce ones ability to think objectively. Apple has done a tremendous job at developing faithful followers. But maybe - just maybe it is time to open some eyes and give a shout of concern to Apple which we have done here.

I was hoping for some feedback regarding Apple's armtwisting with MacWorld Expo. Still have no idea why Apple is crying like a little baby and why they don't see it as a tremendous opportunity with hundreds of thousands of students living in Boston.

G


----------



## kendall (Nov 1, 2002)

Anytime there are more than 12 posts to a thread, it'll always start getting off track.  

Considering there are around 90 posts to this thread so far, I don't know why you're so surprised?


----------



## edX (Nov 1, 2002)

ok - a few points:

1) you may be adults, but we also have children as members here. hence the concern over profanity. The idea is that this should be a family oriented site. A 12 year old should feel as comfortable participating as anyone else and without the example that curse words are acceptable. 
2) please go elsewhere and start your own profanity allowed site if that is what you feel you must do. That would be much less trouble for us than having to ban you here to enforce the rules. 
3) i regret not having grabbed screen shots of the 2 posts before i deleted them. but basically solrac's post had multiple instances of profanity and MacLuv's post had 2 instances of attacking Hulkaros. I don't let Hulk attack others and i won't let anyone attack him. Believe me, he is very good at attacking and defending himself if we allowed that kind of thing. like toast pointed out, you can freely participate in that manner on usenet. The idea is that this site should not be like usenet. It should be a place for friendly and civil discussion among mac owners.
4) the nazi thing - once more a good example of how language has different meanings to different people and we don't always communicate what we mean because others don't always understand words the same way we do. i'm leaving that post for the sake of discussion here. but be clear, calling anyone a nazi here will not be tolerated in the future. Slang or not, it is still an insult.
5)anyone who wants to discuss this further should start a new thread in site discussions. anymore discussion of moderation and rules, my actions, etc., will be deleted if posted to this thread. posts related to the actual topic of this thread are still quite welcome here.


----------



## plastic (Nov 1, 2002)

Should I order french fries as well to go with my Quarterpounder with Cheese? Hmmm....

Come on guys... somethings are like that... and it happens in EVERY BOARD around the world. Just take it easy and ignore the flamers, because soon enough their flamethrowers will run out of fuel. You only need to ignore them. 

I am Asian, so I am commie right?


----------



## Luca (Nov 1, 2002)

I've gone through the whole thread which I left 2 days ago.
It's quite clear to me that as a community, mac people have an identity, a very strong one, and that they feel threatened now. In some way, bashing Apple is bashing the community which identifies itself with machines that are not only machines but something that made them HAPPY and FREE for years. Interestingly, I think I'm losing faith in the Mac community, which used to consider consumer's ethics as more important than faster-cheaper-increasing chips-boxes-ram etc. This doesn't mean I want a non-evolving computer environment. Of course I want improvements. But we really have to measure the non-technical consequences of switching to the Windows world: being part of a huge mass of PC users who depend solely on a M$ OS, on a SINGLE company owning 95% of marketshare. I'm sorry to say that I'm not ready to be eaten by Big Brother, or to put my freedom in the hands of Matrix$ Agents. By becoming UNIX and opening it's core to OPENsource, the Apple OS has given to every potential user a rock solid professional environment. I know nothing like the OS X environment that can manage so many file standards and formats. It's quite clear to me that I'm not ready to entrap myself faster and at low cost in a so called professional OS like XP.


----------



## Ricky (Nov 1, 2002)

STOP ARGUING ABOUT THE RULES.

It's not getting you anywhere.


----------



## kendall (Nov 1, 2002)

RULES?!?! 

We don't need no stinkin RULES!


----------



## edX (Nov 1, 2002)

are you guys just testing me or what?  


 


hey, there's a whole thread in site discussion related to the rules and getting rid of me. go there and post about this off topic incident and let this self serving, pointless thread continue.


----------



## edX (Nov 1, 2002)

> _ said by Luca_
> Interestingly, I think I'm losing faith in the Mac community, which used to consider consumer's ethics as more important than faster-cheaper-increasing chips-boxes-ram etc.



this is something i sadly agree with. fortunately i believe that the mac community really is composed of more everyday people who don't visit forums like this on a regular basis. what we get are the ravings of a few ultra geeks and dissatisfied switchers.  The views often reflected here are not those of most mac users.

I also think mac users come in 2 flavors - computer idiots who are just thankful to have a good computer that works so easily and intuitively (how i got started with macs) and professional specialists.

i don't think the average users are at all worried about how apple is progressing. in fact apple seems to be working overtime to provide them with what they need and want. pro users on the other hand might have a bit more reason for feeling ignored right now.  still, most of our pro users around here seem to think that they still work better on a mac than on a souped up wintel. 

I think anybody who isn't happy with thieir mac should just go ahead and switch back. Why do they feel the need to whine to other mac users about their view? It's not like we're going to change apple by discussions like this. 

sign me - just another average mac user who has advanced from being a computer idiot and still loves his mac.


----------



## plastic (Nov 1, 2002)

Well said, Ed. Let me know when you run for President. I will put in a vote for you.

Finally, there is hope after all.

Ed is definitely an old skool Mac User from the Mac Community.

/me wipes a tear from my eyes.


----------



## serpicolugnut (Nov 2, 2002)

Hulkaros,

I have tried the applications on a dual 1.25ghz running 10.2 . Unfortunately, the applications mentioned - Photoshop, any web browser, Flash playback, are all still woefully slow compared with my AMD XP 2200. Look, I'm not happy about it. I'm not gloating. It really pisses me off that my $700 512MB Athlon box is faster at most tasks than my $3500 G4/800DP with 1.5GB of RAM, but it is. Plus, even with 1.5GB of RAM, the G4/800DP (yes, under 10.2) still will enter "spinning cursor of death" mode every once and a while for no apparent reason. It's better than it was under 10.1, but it's still a very annoying problem (when it pops up)

The Mac still retains an ease of use advantage, but every revision of Windows diminishes the gap. 

I really want Apple to overcome it's problems, but I would definitely count myself as one who is losing faith in the company. I haven't lost it completely, but I'm no longer blinded by religion either....


----------



## ksv (Nov 2, 2002)

The majority of conflicts are between authorities and their people.


----------



## kendall (Nov 2, 2002)

Strangely enough, the "spinning cursor of death" rarely occurs in OpenStep 4.2.

Apple, what went wrong in the transition?  Actually, the speed of OpenStep on five year old hardware puts OS X to shame.

I don't know what happened but the more I use OpenStep, the more I realize something went terribly wrong in the process.

I think if more people had the opportunity to sit down with OS Xs roots, they'd be highly disapointed with where Jaguar is today.


----------



## toast (Nov 2, 2002)

I'd like to find OpenStep somewhere... just to look at it... any ideas ?


----------



## Boeing777 (Nov 2, 2002)

Well, the pc world won't frees and wait for apple to catch up for sure but remember that the pc evolved mainly because of its continuous purging on Apples ideas and creations to improve and sophisticated its OS. - Whether it's a machine's design or the GUI for the OS.
Remember folks that Apple faces many obstacles and mainly from Microsoft. However, the innovation of Apple's latest hardware releases and software development will make people think twice about what it valuable and what isn't reliable. - PC is faster indeed and Apple is looking into this problem. Sadly we know that Motorola sucks with its slow CPU's compared to Intel, but imagine OSX running on a 1.5GHz intel processor! I'm sure this thought is worrying some.


----------



## kendall (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> *I'd like to find OpenStep somewhere... just to look at it... any ideas ? *



I have an OpenStep 4.2 User/Dev PC for sale if interested.


----------



## toast (Nov 2, 2002)

Hum... no money to get in there, but is there any website with screenshots, or a free trial somewhere ?


----------



## RacerX (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *Strangely enough, the "spinning cursor of death" rarely occurs in OpenStep 4.2.
> 
> Apple, what went wrong in the transition?  Actually, the speed of OpenStep on five year old hardware puts OS X to shame.
> ...



So how long have you been using OPENSTEP? What apps have you been using on it? What kind of hardware?

There are very few people who have used NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody as much as me still around. As someone who was watching the total transition from the NeXT OS to Apples Mac OS X, I would be very happy to tell you what changed and why.

The first thing to remember is that not all of the technology used in NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody is Apples. The display engine was Adobes Display Postscript, which Adobe charges for the licensing of. Mac OS X would be something over $200 if Apple had continued to use Display Postscript instead of developing their own display engine based largely on Display PDF. It should also be noted that Display Postscript (used in not only NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody, but also CDE in Solaris) doesnt even come close to the abilities of Quartz. It was a trade off, a cheeper display engine that (with the right hardware behind it) could do much more than Adobes very expensive dated solution which Adobe had no plans on updating to provide better quality. I personally think Apple made the best choice given their options.

The second thing to remember is that Mac OS X is *not* a direct descendant of the NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody line. The last of that line was Mac OS X Server 1.2 (aka Rhapsody 5.6). Mac OS X uses two primary application environments, Carbon (based on the original Mac OS APIs) and Cocoa (based on Yellow Box which was based on OpenStep which was based on the NeXTstep APIs). In the NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody line the Workspace Manager was written in OpenStep/Yellow Box, in Mac OS X the Finder is a Carbon app. The Workspace Manager and the Finder are completely different applications (as is the Mac OS Finder and the Mac OS X Finder). 

So why make the Finder Carbon? That is a long story... here it is:
Apple believed that all they really needed to do was to bring the Mac GUI to the OPENSTEP operating system and provide an environment where legacy Mac apps could run (Blue Box).  They finished the project call Rhapsody (which was version 5 of the NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody line) and readied it for release. When Apple approach bib name Mac developers Microsoft, Adobe and Macromedia about writing apps for the new OS, they said the had _no_ intention of rewriting their apps for an OS that didnt have any user base. So on the even of the release of Rhapsody Apple pulled the plug on everything but the version paired with a suite of server apps (which became Mac OS X Server 1.0, aka Rhapsody 5.3). So Apple ask these developers what it would take to get them onboard with a new OS. The answer was to make it easy to use code they have already rewritten for the Mac OS. The idea of Carbon was Apples solution. But it wasnt enough for there to be this Carbon environment, which looked as if it was going to be a second class environment to the now renamed Cocoa. So Apple had to prove that they believed in this environment enough to make the center of the operating system out of it, the Finder. When developers saw that Apple was using Carbon to make the Finder, they started to believe that their apps would be running in an environment that had equal footing with Cocoa.

Now, as a long time NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody user who is still to this day using those operating systems, I can not only tell you that I am not disappointed with Jaguar, I can tell you that Jaguar is the version of Mac OS X that final removed Rhapsody 5.6 from my PowerBook G3. My PowerBook is my *most important[/i] resource when out in the field (it replaced my IBM ThinkPad which had Rhapsody 5.1 on it and OPENSTEP 4.2, 4.1 and NEXTSTEP 3.3 before that) and there was no way I was going to have any OS on it that I couldnt count on 100%. Sure Mac OS 9.2 was nice, and sure Mac OS X 10.1.5 was also good, but I wouldnt have put my business in their hands (the last thing a computer tech wants is to have problems with his own computer in front of clients). With Jaguar, I have made the switch and have not had any problems at all (though it should be noted that I keep all the information on my Rhapsody ThinkPad up to date just in case, you never know). And again, there are very few who have as much experience on the subject as me and I am very far from disappointed with Jaguar.

(btw, the reason I ask about the apps you are using is that you said you thought OmniWeb wasnt that stable, I have had no problems with 3.1 on either OPENSTEP 4.2 or Rhapsody 5.6, and 3.0 runs great on Rhapsody 5.1 for me as well. And PDFview is a much better app than OmniPFD for reading PDF documents, specially documents made by later versions of Acrobat.)*


----------



## RacerX (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> *Hum... no money to get in there, but is there any website with screenshots, or a free trial somewhere ? *



You could try this one.  I have posted a ton of screenshots here of all types of operating systems: NEXTSTEP, OPENSTEP, Rhapsody, Mac OS X DP releases, Solaris, Irix, etc.

Just do a search (you might have to go back a ways though  ).


----------



## Ricky (Nov 2, 2002)

(Is shocked by RacerX's return)


----------



## toast (Nov 2, 2002)

Hello RacerX,

Hmmm... I don't really have time to browse throught all those threads. Maybe you have a server address to give me where you store your pics ?


----------



## kendall (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by RacerX _
> *So how long have you been using OPENSTEP? What apps have you been using on it? What kind of hardware?
> *



I've has a NeXT slab for  years and run NeXTStep 3.3 on it.  

I recently built a 233MHz P2 PC and installed OpenStep 4.2.

There appears to be a memory leak in the Intel binarys of OmniWeb 3.x.  I've watched my memory consumption triple as I use it.  It doesn't crash but I will eventually get a "spinning cursor of death" and the program with grind to a hault.  Once I close it, all the consumed memory is released.  The 2.x NeXT binaries of OmniWeb run fine on my slab.


----------



## solrac (Nov 2, 2002)

Ok back to the beginning here.

Like I said, Apple has NO PROBLEMS except for

1) Slow processor
2) A little to expensive

All they need to do is get a new chip, and lower costs a bit. It would be perfect if the new chip was cheaper; that would kill 2 birds with one stone!

Then you would see Jaguar scream and be pretty much equal to any PC set up. If Apple goes for the right chip....

who knows.... we might even get Pentium-toasting commercials back again 

But until then, we're in the boat we are now. The transition to faster hardware might take a year at least.

I still and always will however, count on better software on the mac. A fast chip can't hold a CANDLE to good software.


----------



## kendall (Nov 2, 2002)

I don't know if the G4 is "slow" or not.  OS 9 cruises with a G4 processor.  Its OS X that seems to have problems.

Has anyone ever though about this?  Why is OS 9 so much more responsive and why do apps run so much faster in OS 9 than OS X?


----------



## solrac (Nov 2, 2002)

This was discussed before...

OS X uses Quartz, which supports native transparency, shadows, PDF, etc.

Jaguar with Quartz Xtreme enabled is like 30x faster than OS 10.1.5, but still slower than Windows.

OS 9 is like the original Doom. OS X is like Doom III. You need faster Hardware to support it!

Little known fact: With Quartz Extreme (or an upcoming update), the entire OS is a 3D texture. So a window could rotate and spin in 3D space, all native to the graphic card. Apple is working on this now and I even have a PDF from Apple describing this! I can't wait......


----------



## Boeing777 (Nov 2, 2002)

it's a more sophisticated OS and I guess the aqua GUI is rather heavy compared with the classic OS9. It's also an OS that has lots of modules within its main core system which is Darwin. - It's more stable than OS9 as it rarely crash.... Never I would say. 

Maybe some with a better knowledge will add to what I've already explained.

Cheers


----------



## fryke (Nov 2, 2002)

Great sum-up of history, RacerX. I'm glad you've posted. 

And to Boeing777: Why expand on your explanation? It's simple and basically true.

Going to Mac OS X from Mac OS 9, you lose some and win some.

Don't forget that you have a choice. If you don't care for stability and scalability (i.e. you only want to run two big apps at the same time), you can still use Mac OS 9. This is quite a good solution if you're using Photoshop almost exclusively.

If you don't care about Mac or Carbon (or even Cocoa applications), you can go with Linux. However, I think the Mac is too expensive a solution for Linux. I'd sell your Mac (or keep it with 9 or X) and buy a cheap PC for Linux.

If, however, you want it all (stability, productivity and a full box of new possibilities), your best bet is Mac OS X. There won't be further developments to the classic Mac OS aka 9.2.x. We might see improvements to it for use as Classic environment, but as we all know, new Macs won't boot Mac OS 9.x starting 2003. So let's just forget about OS 9 about now. X is the path Apple is walking down, and the later you adapt to its features (and obstacles), the harder your way is going to be. Jaguar is certainly the time to make THAT switch, too.


----------



## kendall (Nov 2, 2002)

Why was Micrsoft able to add "native transparency, shadows, PDF, etc" to there OS and still enable it to be amazingly responsive while newer apps launch and perform faster than older ones?

Faster infact then 95, 98 and 2000?


----------



## fryke (Nov 2, 2002)

Hm.

1) Ask Microsoft.

2) Not true. Application launch and execution time (plus the OS speed itself) is faster in Win2k than in WinXP.


----------



## Boeing777 (Nov 2, 2002)

.... and Win2K crashes often and conflicts with IE6 which is another MS application. No to mention the occasional crashes or "if it doesn't work well, reboot the machine..."

One more thing... don't compare Pc to Apple Mac OS X.... Win2k is a dos based OS whereas OSX is a Unix based OS. - Always bare this key information in mind.

Cheers


----------



## solrac (Nov 2, 2002)

I keep hearing Mac OS X uses a third generation display layer while Windows only uses 2.

This means Windows is faster but sometimes you see windows that aren't drawn completely or you can see the background behind a window that has crashed or hung for a few seconds. Apple never redraws part of the screen, only the whole screen. This slows down the OS, plus the G4 is so slow.

Apple is thinking of the future, when OS X is just as fast as Windows XP and will blaze and look 100 times better.


----------



## fryke (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by solrac _
> *Apple never redraws part of the screen, only the whole screen. This slows down the OS, plus the G4 is so slow.*



Huh? You must've gotten wrong information there... Quartz _does_ redraw elements. In fact part of its slowness (well, I wouldn't call Quartz Extreme on a good graphics card slow at all, but that again depends on what you compare it with, really) is coming from how it's handling the redrawing of the elements. And the remark that 'the G4 is so slow' also is a bit off, since Quartz Extreme handles most of the GUI in the graphics card.


----------



## kendall (Nov 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by fryke _
> *Hm.
> 
> 1) Ask Microsoft.
> ...



XP boots 3x faster than 2000.  It shuts down roughtly 2x faster.  The OS speed itself is not any slower than 2000.  In very few instances is XP actually slower than 2000 in lab benchmarks.  You can see for yourself at the URL below.

http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/microsoft/default.asp

The bottom line is why did OS X have to take such a performance hit to offer up all this great stuff compared to OS 9 whereas XP didn't compared to 95/98 and 2000?

Also, the only reason I bring up Windows at all is because when referencing OS 9s speed advantage over OS X, everyone brough up the fact that OS Xs improvements came at a cost.

Why didn't all of XPs improvements over older Windows versions come at a cost?

Why can't Apple get OS X up to snuff and not penalize us performance-wise?


----------



## GroundZeroX (Nov 3, 2002)

I too have com under pressure to go to PC. I am the only one in my family using a Mac, and my family is looking at getting a new computer. My step father fell in love with the 17' iMac, but then he found out about Windows Media PC Edition. For less money then the 17' iMac, he is seeing a computer that can do tha DVD R stuff, along with the ability to turn our big screen tv into a home theatre system. Try explaining to him that getting a  mac is better? I am personally regretting my .Mac subscription. I am seeing more value in MSN in Windows, and as my programing classes become more and more demanding, I am having second thoughts. Apple needs to do something. I personally don't care about the performance, but it woul dbe nice to have a good computer for under $1000 like everyone else.


----------



## GroundZeroX (Nov 3, 2002)

Boeing 777,  WIndows 2000 is based off of Windows NT 5.0 kernal. DOS isn't being used anymore in OS's from now on, over at Redmond.


----------



## GroundZeroX (Nov 3, 2002)

Itanium, in response to your question. Windows 2000 and Windows XP has transparency and ETC, but, its not PDF based. Its all bitmap based. It takes more to do all of this stuff with PDF then it does for bitmaps. Microsoft is working on technology that will do for Windows, what Quartz does for the Mac, I don't know how well its going though.

If Apple doesn't come out with something that truly impresses me in January, or maybe even before then, when I get my tax refund check, i'm seeling my iBook and getting a Dell laptop. I love Apple, but I'm being tired of being kept in the dark about everything. Intel, Microsoft, don't keep their customers in the dark like we are.


----------



## kendall (Nov 3, 2002)

I don't want Microsoft to come out with something that will do for Windows what Quartz has does for OS X. 

I understand what you're saying though, the next version of Windows is going to be 3D hardware accelerated.  

Should add  some nice looking new effects but the Windows GUI responsiveness is certainly not suffering as it is.

I just don't understand why Apple seems to think its ok that you can even resize windows properly.  Its annoying to say the least.

Multitasking as well leaves a lot to be desired.   Having several apps open and switching between them in OS X causes a lagged, slowdown effect.  The "spinning wheel of death" is more prone to happen when several apps are open  to.

Jaguar was a great improvement but I still don't think OS X is even close to where it needs to be.

I still intend of purchasing a Mac.  An iBook actually.  I had a PowerBook G4 DVI and realized $3500 didn't buy me anymore responsiveness or productivity than a $1500 iBook would have.  

At least when I can't resize a window properly or apps lag while going into/coming out of the dock or while being switched between, I wont be as frustrated with a much cheaper iBook.

Love OS X, just wish it performed as well as it looks.


----------



## GroundZeroX (Nov 3, 2002)

The thing about the resizing is this. Everything is being double buffered. This is done so that you don't get that ugly effect that Windows gets when messing with windows when the system is busy. What it does is, even though a window maybe shrunken so that not all the icons are viewed, the icons are kept ready just in case. When you resize, the window manager has to follow the cursor, render the drop shadow, arrange the icons in the proper order based on the preference yous et, as well as do anything that needs to be done to the high res icons. When you consider everything that its doing, Quartz is running pretty fast. The problem is, we're all used to having things happen instantly, and now there is all of this compositing that needs to be done at the same time. Microsoft's work is going pretty slow, from what i've read, the stuff tehy come out with is goign to be annoying. I've read documents from them that say they want the computer screen to be a room,a nd the applications that are running,t o be up against the walls for yout o chose what you want to run. Then theres all the stuff about the "Shelf" that Micrososoft has beenw orking on, and just released with MSN 8. I've used MSN 8.0's shelft, and its pretty much the Dock.


----------



## solrac (Nov 3, 2002)

Who says we're being kept in the dark as Apple customers????

The answer is this: OS X's GUI is years ahead of Windows, and the stuff it's doing is true transparencies and effects real time. Windows is not.

ALL WE NEED IS FASTER HARDWARE.

Windows XP is faster and did not suffer a performance hit as much as OS 9 to OS X because:
1) XP is on a 2 to 3 Ghz chip
2) XP's display technology is not doing nearly as much as Quartz

Less effects, faster chip. Do the math.

Once Apple gets a faster chip, XP won't be able to TOUCH OS X.


----------



## fryke (Nov 3, 2002)

Well put, solrac.  (your above post, not itanium's quote below, of course.)



> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *XP boots 3x faster than 2000.  It shuts down roughtly 2x faster. (...) The bottom line is why did OS X have to take such a performance hit to offer up all this great stuff compared to OS 9 whereas XP didn't compared to 95/98 and 2000?*



Well, first: I'm used to keep my computers running, so I (personally, I know) don't give a sh*t about boot and shutdown times, unless an OS is crash prone. My personal experience with Win2K, WinXP, Mac OS X and Linux are that (OS) crashes are a rare occasion.

Second: You *do* get that Mac OS X is not a straight evolution development from OS 9, right? Windows XP is a straight evolution from Windows 2K, although in some places I gather it's a backwards development, too.

Well, I'm a bit tired of those OS comparison stuff, as it seems futile to me. I think Windows is quite useable for Office stuff - and wouldn't buy a Mac if I only did that besides entertainment - but unbearably clunky and style-less for everything creative. I don't _feel_ well on Windows, whether it's running on a blazingly fast Athlon or P4 processor or a meager PII. I'm glad Win2K and RedHat 8 run amazingly well on my PII/350, but I only use that machine for Office, browsing and watching TV, which all are applications that can be done on a TV set and a 68K Mac, too, so I guess that doesn't count anyway.

I think Apple has gotten more than they've bargained for with the introduction of the original iMac: Freeloaders. People who will ALWAYS think everything should be free and faster. People who aren't aware of what they're really getting when they get an iMac: A quality product, finished from technology to design, complete in its experience, from the first mouse-click to the shadow of a window in the GUI. Something I care to pay for.

The question of this thread alone shows that the Mac is more than your average computer maker: "Losing faith in Apple?" In order to do that, you must first have faith in Apple. Having faith in Microsoft is a paradoxon, you know. There's no such thing as 'the Microsoft faithful'. There sure as hell *IS* something as 'the Macintosh faithful'.

So, back to the original question: *I have faith in Apple.* They're to computers what RADO is to watches, what BMW or Mercedes are to cars. Or even more than that.


----------



## kendall (Nov 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by fryke _
> *
> Well, first: I'm used to keep my computers running, so I (personally, I know) don't give a sh*t about boot and shutdown times, unless an OS is crash prone. My personal experience with Win2K, WinXP, Mac OS X and Linux are that (OS) crashes are a rare occasion.
> 
> ...



The bottom line is that I can see how people might feel they are losing faith in Apple, especially when comparing Apple products to others such as Intel CPUs and Microsoft OSs.


----------



## GroundZeroX (Nov 3, 2002)

All I was really saying was that compared to Microsoft or Intel, we are left in the dark. You can go anywhere, and read about the current projects at Microsoft, or Intel. Like Project Longhorn, and Blackcomb over at Microsoft. Everyone knows that with Longhorn, the .Net will come into its full effect as software as a service. Intel, anyone can read about the new platform they are building for laptops that not based off of the Pentium IV, but is supposed to be just as fast but at lower clock speeds, and comes with 802.11b networking right on the board. What do we know about what Apple's doing? We know they may or maynot ever release a G5, if they don't they may or maynot use the new IBM 64-bit PPCs. As far as Mac OS X goes, it is great, but what is coming next? We've heard rumors, but we don't know in what direction they are going with from here. Its hard to have faith, when we don't know what to have faith in. We've heard stories for years about iMovie 3.0, but where is it? We've heard about a PDA, that we now thing might be a Phone/PDA, but no word beyond that. Part of the reason why Apple's stock is doing what its doing is that there isn't any information about what direction they are going in, to base a busying decision on. Yes, we've heard about the digital hub, but have we already seen all the iapps that will be released? Are certain iApps already hit their peak, never to get a revision again, like iMovie? We know that Apple bought a bunch of different 3-D companies back in the summer, but whats going to happen with it? All we've heard about, is a Mac OS X version of Shake, and thats all we've heard. This is what I meant by the dark. Yes, Quartz is great, Aqua is beautiful, but where are we going from here? When Steve Jobs came back, we knew there was goign to be a simplified product line, because he said it was going to happen, and it has. We knew that everything was going to migrate to Mac OS X, and we have, its great. But what else is there to come?


----------



## Boeing777 (Nov 3, 2002)

So fellas, I managed successfully to bring you back to the main subject. Don't praise me for that.
Indeed XP is faster since it's running on a faster CPU and has been designed for it. Now, you want to compare XPs performances to OS X? Right, then run XP on the same G4 OSX is running and check how fast XP is. 
Why compare the performance of an OS if they aren't running the same CPU nor the same hardware? Pointless really.

And yes, Apple to Computers is what Mercedes and BMW is to cars - Or Miele to Dishwashers and washer machines. - XP is a 0% financing Chevy. It works but it's simply not stylish.

Cheers


----------



## GroundZeroX (Nov 3, 2002)

Windows XP maybe more responsive, but OSX, Quartz and all is still faster. My friend has a Dell Pentium IV 1.7 GHZ, with 256 MBs or RAM, and while his system is more responsive, it hangs if you try to do more then 4 or 5 things. My iBook on the other hand, being only 600MHz, with no Quartz Extreme, and 256MBs, can run alot more without nearly as many hangs. I hardly ever see the spinning ball anymore. Now, this wasn't the case before 10.2 though. But, the system hangs in Xp are pretty irritating.


----------



## astrodawg (Nov 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> * As lovely as that idea is, its not very practical for home users to keep their computers running 24/7. For starters, its not very economical. Also, most people are trained that when you're not using something, you turn it off, *



Have you ever heard of putting a computer to sleep? Why would you want to turn your computer off? Putting it to sleep uses just about the same amount of power as turning it off... so sleeping is just as economical. And, OSX wakes up faster than booting.. osx or xp. 

I can't seem to get my mother to learn very much about her computer, but she does know how to put it to sleep.. if she can learn that, any users can be "trained" to put a computer to sleep. She likes the instant wakeup.

Your argument is rather lacking.


----------



## MDA (Nov 4, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *XP boots 3x faster than 2000.  It shuts down roughtly 2x faster.  The OS speed itself is not any slower than 2000.  In very few instances is XP actually slower than 2000 in lab benchmarks.  You can see for yourself at the URL below.
> 
> http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/microsoft/default.asp
> ...



What is wrong with you? Don't you have any idea that OS X is a complete rebuild of the system from the ground up? Not so XP, it's merely an update to Windows 2K. They have done a tremendous amount of work on OS X since it was released and they will continue to so in future versions.

MDA


----------



## solrac (Nov 4, 2002)

Well, everyone is so concerned with the fact that OS X is a complete rebuild of the system from the ground up.

That has NOTHING to do with the speed.

OS 9 could've been modified with Quartz, and it would've slowed down too.

The advanced Quartz effects coupled with the slower G4 processor is all that is slowing down the GUI.

I would love to see how fast the GUI is on a DP 1.25 Ghz G4 with a top of the line NVidia card taking advantage of Quartz Xtreme. It must be nearly as fast as XP.


----------



## MDA (Nov 4, 2002)

> _Originally posted by solrac _
> *Well, everyone is so concerned with the fact that OS X is a complete rebuild of the system from the ground up.
> 
> That has NOTHING to do with the speed.
> ...



I'm running it on a Dual GB Wind Tunnel with the ATI 9000 Pro and it is nearly as fast as OS 9. I don't bench mark against XP. Of course the fact that OS X is  a complete rebuild has something to do with the speed. There is an incredible amount of work to do in order to couple the Unix core and Auqa and everything else that makes up OS X. I doubt that in an operating system this new they have managed to optimize it for all of the speed they can get out of it AND keep up with all of the other pieces they are constantly working on and adding. I don't understand why people can't be more patient and wait for the OS to mature before the gripe continually about the speed. If the speed of XP excites you that much go use it. I have used XP and I'm not that thrilled, it's still Windows after all.


----------



## hulkaros (Nov 4, 2002)

...that I will not reply in similar posts, I apologize to everyone for the things I'm going to write below...

People whine and say their opinions without checking things first: Only one supposedly checked but I think that he isn't telling the whole story! Yes: G4 is slower than P4 and Athlon XP... But that doesn't mean that the new Dual G4s are slow... PLEASE! Did ANYONE for real tried to check what I've asked? Don't bother to answer! NO, is the correct answer! Because if ONE really show a Dual G4 in action simply knows that Wintels aren't fast enough in order for one to whine about the G4! Or in multitasking OS X+G4 really beat Wintels without breaking a sweat!!!

I said to people of this forum that they should give a real benchmark of computer power and NO ONE bothered to give it a shot just because they know that G4 is slower! Gimme a break! You don't know jack...

Time after time and one more time I'm telling people here... Find a Dual G4 and do the following and then do it in ANY Wintel/Winamd out there, for REAL:
-Encode a DVD while
-Listening to an Mp3 while
-Ripping an Mp3 while
-Watching a DVD while
-Playing a video clip while
-Downloading from the Internet while
-Uploading to the Internet while
-Surfing the Internet while
-Doing ANYTHING else you like at the same time

Then let us all know in this forum or any other forum out there if OS X+G4s are slower than the Wintels of this world...

As for X being slower than XP in what respect? Redrawing windows on screen? What about the time that I have to reformat my HD and reinstall all my apps just because the OS lost ALL of its so called speed? Or when I'm forced to reboot or reinstall or repair the installation because of BSODs? I've read for a 1000th time that BSODs in Win2k and/or XP are matters of bad hardware! Crap! Absolutely crap! If it is bad hardware how come after a reformatting and reinstalling everything the system continues to work just fine? I know the answer and it is simply because of crappy OS architecture (yes I know XP isn't all that bullet proof)... Or what about of defragmenting and/or fixing errors of my HD every once in a while? I would go on and say MANY things about Win2k and/or XP but what about that speed of Wintels?

Also, if Ed or Admin will allow me to do the following I would be happy to do so, just for the fun of it: As I said in the past, my real life work is a PC/Mac tech therefore I have MANY everyday BAD experiences with the PCs and with Macs that run M$ OSes and I have this idea... Could Ed or Admin let me post those experiences in these forums? So, each and everyday we will have things to show to the faithless croud that Wintels aren't all that hot! On the contrary for all its worth I never met a PC person when he/she sees a Mac in action feeling well about his 2K/XP Intel/Amd machine (EXCEPT when he/she wants to JUST play games!)... Maybe its because he/she sees on the Mac a beatiful computer with personality whereareas his/hers is just another PC... Also, one other thing that a PC user understands when he/she sees a Mac in action is that for SO long he didn't know the truth! They all know that Macs are slow, do not have apps, they don't work with PCs, they don't have or can't do this and that... How, untrue! But what am I telling here? Even the so called Mac users do not know the truth!

As for anyone who wants to succumb into the Dark Side: For a year or a couple of years you will may JUST may feel better but after that you will regret your decision, for sure! As for prices: Did anyone REALLY check Dell's site and compared their offerings to Apple's? If so, do you still think that Dells are THAT cheaper than Macs? I know that you may after all got a surpise! Macs AREN'T all that expensive now, are they?


----------



## edX (Nov 4, 2002)

hulk - if you would like to start a thread like that in this forum i would have no problems with it while things are slow and there isn't much real apple news. As long you keep it within the site rules and make sure you don't come off sounding like every PC user is an idiot, there should be no problems. i think many of us might find some of your stories entertaining. Give it a shot and we'll see how it goes.


----------



## serpicolugnut (Nov 4, 2002)

I think I can boil it down to two categories...

*What Apple does right:* 
iApps are great value added products
OS X (in general)
Systemwide use of PDF
innovative product design
ease of use
great high end turnkey video solutions...

*What Apple does wrong:* 
Lackluster CPU speeds (not exactly their fault, but it's still their problem - and we're not just talking mhz, as now the PPC gets creamed in many tests vs. mid level AMD/P4 chips)
high initial cost of hardware (although TCO/ROI over time usually favors the Mac)
slow web browsing (dump IE for an Apple branded version of Chimera and all will be well)
painfully slow Flash playback (Apple should send engineers over to Macromedia to fix this)
lack of a high end PROFESSIONAL 3D card
sells a product (Shake) that requires a 3 button mouse, but still only sells a one button (time to at least offer users an Apple branded 3 button mouse Apple!)
OS X performance, while markedly improved, is still in need of further optimizations. Personally, I believe that it's just the growing pains of moving to a highly taxing imaging system before the hardware is ready to handle it...

I could go on and on and make both lists alot longer, but that's the big picture from my view.


----------

