Despite my bad experience with Apple all last month, which can be read in my earlier posts to this thread, Apple has restored my confidence in the form of a PowerBook G4 667 DVI replacement to my defective 550. It's certainly an entirely different machine when it comes out of the box flawless. Part of tomorrow will be spent finding the perfect laptop bag for this little beast.
My Month With XP.
- Thread starter themacko
- Start date
- Status
simX
Unofficial Mac Genius
A couple things before I venture into talking about the main beef of this post.
1) azosx: I'm glad everything worked out for you in the end. My dad got the second-generation 667 MHz PowerBook (the non-DVI model), and he loves it. The one thing that's aggravating is the AirPort reception, but I've heard the DVI PowerBooks improve on that. I'd like to hear your experiences with that, if you have a chance to play with that.
2) Neyo: You should be given a cease-and-desist order straight from Apple for what you're doing. We've discussed it to death in other threads, I know, but you're basically making Windows XP look exactly like Mac OS X, and Apple has the right to protect its intellectual property. One of the users in here even mistook it for OmniWeb running in OS X.
Actually, I question whether that is even Windows XP at all. But I digress.
3) Annihilatus: I think you're right about that comment way up there. If Apple had 95% of the market share, I think Apple would probably not be making its operating system as well as it does today. But that's not the situation we're in right now, so it's kind of a moot point.
My ideal world would be: Apple/Mac OS at 20%. Microsoft/Windows at 0%, with no support left Microsoft and Windows deserves to die a horrible death for Microsoft's past actions and its absolute refusal to support open standards. Linux, UNIX, and their variants: 20%. Three or four other competitors (I don't care what they are BeOS, DfOS, EgOS, WhateverOS
)with around 15-20% market share. And all of these operating systems would be very interoperable with each other all embrace open standards, each company works with third party developers to provide compatibility with all products with their operating system, all produce programs that can be exchanged easily with other operating systems.
Anyway, on to what I really wanted to address.
I doubt that. Most PC people you know are probably techie kind of guys that like to tinker around with Windows and install stuff everywhere and are not willing to take risks in order to figure out how their operating system works.
I think you're neglecting people like the elderly, the very young, the people who just want to check e-mail and do word processing and that's it, the first-time computer users, etc. The average user just wants their computer to work without them intervening.
It's a gross generalization to say that Mac users don't know what they're doing. I could say the same thing that you do: most Mac people I know know what they're doing and can fix their problems on their own. On the other hand, I cannot neglect my mom or my grandfather/grandmother, who get really frustrated when something doesn't work and sometimes don't know how to fix it.
The average computer user is like my grandparents and my mom, NO MATTER WHAT PLATFORM they are on Windows, MacOS, whatever.
I think this is where the main difference between Apple and Microsoft. Apple is willing to embrace open standards, to cut legacy support, and to move on with new and powerful technology. Microsoft, on the other hand, has been rehashing its interface for well over 5 years, still supports legacy software, and absolutely refuses to support open standards even popular ones. Microsoft makes you PAY FOR MP3 SUPPORT IN WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER. What a great philosophy.
Case in point: Almost all PC users I know find some benefit with floppy disks. That technology is well over 5 years old, and there has been just about no advancements with this technology for good reason: other technologies have replaced it. CD-Rs, CD-RWs, FireWire hard drives, the internet, even DVD-RWs and DVD-RAMs. But no, PC users must have their floppy drives! Funny, because probably there would be less problems if Microsoft just abandoned floppy disk support altogether: software for legacy technology inevitably causes problems.
So your distinction is pretty much flawed. A better distinction would be this: PC users are VERY reluctant to allow change and are even indignant about holding on to their set habits. Mac users are concerned with what is best for them overall, and if it requires them to learn something new, they will still embrace it.
Excuse me?! Give me a frickin' break!!! Apple needs to try harder to embrace PC users?!?!? Wow, that's a pretty ignorant statement.
The average PC user could care less about motherboards, and the internal hardware of a computer. They could care less about the processor type inside their computer. All they care about is their computer working.
In this respect, Apple caters to PC users perfectly. Mac OS X is a VERY easy to use operating system, and embraces open standards like MP3 audio, all sorts of video and audio formats with QuickTime, Java, etc. Microsoft has even made it easy for PC users by making Microsoft Office documents completely cross-platform compatible no modifications needed to open Windows Microsoft Office files on Microsoft Office for the Mac.
And your argument about moving the Mac OS to the x86 platform is totally unreasonable, unfounded, and infeasible. Why? Almost all pieces of software would have to be rewritten in some fashion in order for it to work on x86 processors. Plus, Apple would actually have to port Mac OS X to the x86 platform, something that is not trivial, whatever you may think. Furthermore, Apple would then have the problems of supporting all those different kinds of hardware out there, that no doubt cause many problems with Windows many a time.
In contrast, Apple has minimal problems with hardware and software integration. Why? Because Apple makes the whole widget. Software and hardware are tightly integrated. That's why it would be totally stupid for Apple to port Mac OS X to the x86 platform: it would obliterate Apple's main advantage: ease-of-use. Plus, Apple's profits would go down through the floor, because PC users would still be mired in their ways and would still not switch over to Mac OS X, despite whatever promises so many of them have. Hardware may not sell, but widgets do.
Hahahaha. Microsoft is one step ahead of the market? Microsoft isn't ahead of the market it STEPS ON the market. It tries to stifle competition, it stoutly refuses to embrace open standards (notice a pattern in my statements here?), and it keeps PC users on the platform simply because they make it so hard to switch to other platforms. It's not Apple that's making it hard or needs to embrace PC users it's Microsoft that needs to become a fair company and make a product that is actually good. Windows may be the most convenient OS.... TO YOU. But if a new computer user were offered a day to use a Mac and a day to use a Windows machine, I'll bet you $100 that more often than not a person would take the Mac. Problem is, Microsoft and its Windows operating system control 95% of the market, and the propaganda that Microsoft feeds new computer users make it sound like that you can't use a Mac and be able to communicate with other Windows users. That's how Microsoft maintains its massive market share.
If Apple moves to x86:
Not much of a leap in market share, because PC users would still be mired in Windows.
More processors, more hardware = more incompatibility and more tech support problems for Apple.
Offers customers much less quality and a much worse overall computer experience, because of hardware problems
Apple's profits go through the floor rather than through the roof, because Microsoft will no doubt still maintain 95% of its existing market share, because of software pirating, and because their hardware sales would go down
If Apple stays with PowerPC:
Apple can concentrate on converting PC users to the Mac platform because of maintained ease-of-use.
Dependent on Motorola, granted. Hopefully Motorola will put its PowerPC segment up for sale, which then IBM/Apple could acquire.
Less expensive computers in the long run: it's been documented many times that Macs require significantly less tech support and significantly less money over its lifespan. Unfortunately, the average consumer doesn't care about anything other than initial cost.
Customers still have a better platform than Windows one which embraces open standards (there's that phrase again!), is easy to use, and is non-intrusive.
1) azosx: I'm glad everything worked out for you in the end. My dad got the second-generation 667 MHz PowerBook (the non-DVI model), and he loves it. The one thing that's aggravating is the AirPort reception, but I've heard the DVI PowerBooks improve on that. I'd like to hear your experiences with that, if you have a chance to play with that.
2) Neyo: You should be given a cease-and-desist order straight from Apple for what you're doing. We've discussed it to death in other threads, I know, but you're basically making Windows XP look exactly like Mac OS X, and Apple has the right to protect its intellectual property. One of the users in here even mistook it for OmniWeb running in OS X.
Actually, I question whether that is even Windows XP at all. But I digress.
3) Annihilatus: I think you're right about that comment way up there. If Apple had 95% of the market share, I think Apple would probably not be making its operating system as well as it does today. But that's not the situation we're in right now, so it's kind of a moot point.
My ideal world would be: Apple/Mac OS at 20%. Microsoft/Windows at 0%, with no support left Microsoft and Windows deserves to die a horrible death for Microsoft's past actions and its absolute refusal to support open standards. Linux, UNIX, and their variants: 20%. Three or four other competitors (I don't care what they are BeOS, DfOS, EgOS, WhateverOS
)with around 15-20% market share. And all of these operating systems would be very interoperable with each other all embrace open standards, each company works with third party developers to provide compatibility with all products with their operating system, all produce programs that can be exchanged easily with other operating systems. Anyway, on to what I really wanted to address.
I doubt that. Most PC people you know are probably techie kind of guys that like to tinker around with Windows and install stuff everywhere and are not willing to take risks in order to figure out how their operating system works.
I think you're neglecting people like the elderly, the very young, the people who just want to check e-mail and do word processing and that's it, the first-time computer users, etc. The average user just wants their computer to work without them intervening.
It's a gross generalization to say that Mac users don't know what they're doing. I could say the same thing that you do: most Mac people I know know what they're doing and can fix their problems on their own. On the other hand, I cannot neglect my mom or my grandfather/grandmother, who get really frustrated when something doesn't work and sometimes don't know how to fix it.
The average computer user is like my grandparents and my mom, NO MATTER WHAT PLATFORM they are on Windows, MacOS, whatever.
I think this is where the main difference between Apple and Microsoft. Apple is willing to embrace open standards, to cut legacy support, and to move on with new and powerful technology. Microsoft, on the other hand, has been rehashing its interface for well over 5 years, still supports legacy software, and absolutely refuses to support open standards even popular ones. Microsoft makes you PAY FOR MP3 SUPPORT IN WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER. What a great philosophy.
Case in point: Almost all PC users I know find some benefit with floppy disks. That technology is well over 5 years old, and there has been just about no advancements with this technology for good reason: other technologies have replaced it. CD-Rs, CD-RWs, FireWire hard drives, the internet, even DVD-RWs and DVD-RAMs. But no, PC users must have their floppy drives! Funny, because probably there would be less problems if Microsoft just abandoned floppy disk support altogether: software for legacy technology inevitably causes problems.
So your distinction is pretty much flawed. A better distinction would be this: PC users are VERY reluctant to allow change and are even indignant about holding on to their set habits. Mac users are concerned with what is best for them overall, and if it requires them to learn something new, they will still embrace it.
Excuse me?! Give me a frickin' break!!! Apple needs to try harder to embrace PC users?!?!? Wow, that's a pretty ignorant statement.
The average PC user could care less about motherboards, and the internal hardware of a computer. They could care less about the processor type inside their computer. All they care about is their computer working.
In this respect, Apple caters to PC users perfectly. Mac OS X is a VERY easy to use operating system, and embraces open standards like MP3 audio, all sorts of video and audio formats with QuickTime, Java, etc. Microsoft has even made it easy for PC users by making Microsoft Office documents completely cross-platform compatible no modifications needed to open Windows Microsoft Office files on Microsoft Office for the Mac.
And your argument about moving the Mac OS to the x86 platform is totally unreasonable, unfounded, and infeasible. Why? Almost all pieces of software would have to be rewritten in some fashion in order for it to work on x86 processors. Plus, Apple would actually have to port Mac OS X to the x86 platform, something that is not trivial, whatever you may think. Furthermore, Apple would then have the problems of supporting all those different kinds of hardware out there, that no doubt cause many problems with Windows many a time.
In contrast, Apple has minimal problems with hardware and software integration. Why? Because Apple makes the whole widget. Software and hardware are tightly integrated. That's why it would be totally stupid for Apple to port Mac OS X to the x86 platform: it would obliterate Apple's main advantage: ease-of-use. Plus, Apple's profits would go down through the floor, because PC users would still be mired in their ways and would still not switch over to Mac OS X, despite whatever promises so many of them have. Hardware may not sell, but widgets do.
Hahahaha. Microsoft is one step ahead of the market? Microsoft isn't ahead of the market it STEPS ON the market. It tries to stifle competition, it stoutly refuses to embrace open standards (notice a pattern in my statements here?), and it keeps PC users on the platform simply because they make it so hard to switch to other platforms. It's not Apple that's making it hard or needs to embrace PC users it's Microsoft that needs to become a fair company and make a product that is actually good. Windows may be the most convenient OS.... TO YOU. But if a new computer user were offered a day to use a Mac and a day to use a Windows machine, I'll bet you $100 that more often than not a person would take the Mac. Problem is, Microsoft and its Windows operating system control 95% of the market, and the propaganda that Microsoft feeds new computer users make it sound like that you can't use a Mac and be able to communicate with other Windows users. That's how Microsoft maintains its massive market share.
If Apple moves to x86:
Not much of a leap in market share, because PC users would still be mired in Windows.
More processors, more hardware = more incompatibility and more tech support problems for Apple.
Offers customers much less quality and a much worse overall computer experience, because of hardware problems
Apple's profits go through the floor rather than through the roof, because Microsoft will no doubt still maintain 95% of its existing market share, because of software pirating, and because their hardware sales would go down
If Apple stays with PowerPC:
Apple can concentrate on converting PC users to the Mac platform because of maintained ease-of-use.
Dependent on Motorola, granted. Hopefully Motorola will put its PowerPC segment up for sale, which then IBM/Apple could acquire.
Less expensive computers in the long run: it's been documented many times that Macs require significantly less tech support and significantly less money over its lifespan. Unfortunately, the average consumer doesn't care about anything other than initial cost.
Customers still have a better platform than Windows one which embraces open standards (there's that phrase again!), is easy to use, and is non-intrusive.
I thought I'd comment on why I think Apple should move to another processor type, not necessarily x86 though.
All Joe Average Consumer sees when buying a computer is GHz, GHz, GHz! A PC user's conversation when casually talking to another computer user will always start out something like this. "How fast's your computer?" They are programmed by society to think this way. So I'm in the store and know nothing about computers, other than I want mine to be fast because that's what society has programmed me to think. Apple just recently broke 1 GHz, the rest of the computer world is over 2. Why is Joe Average Consumer going to buy that 800 MHz iMac, not even a GHz for $1799 when he can get this 2.4 GHz Compaq for $899 with a monitor? 9 out of 10 times he's not and it's absurd to think a pretty GUI or computer case is going to change that. Apple can throw all the money in the world into advertising, it's not going to change that 5% market share by much if at all.
As far as I can tell, only two things are going to change Apple's market share.
One, get the hell away from Motorola. Intel and AMD have released two generations of processors in the time it's taking the G5 to come out. MHz are not a myth and are killing Apple. Just because Photoshop can render some image with some filter faster in OS 9 than Windows means absolutely squat to most people. People want and need faster processors for Mac, that can do more for them than just work faster in Photoshop. I'm not saying go to x86, but find someone who can reliably produce a processor in adiquate speeds for todays consumer market.
Two, lower your prices. There's nothing more expensive inside a Mac than most PC computers. If Apple was still using SCSI, maybe I could understand to some degree but that's not the case anymore. Most of the components in a Mac are the same as a PC, other than the processor and motherboard and the motherboard has AGP, PCI, USB and Firewire so it can't be much different than most PC motherboards today other than the processor that plugs into it. Is the G4 really that expensive to manufacture? If so, it's killing you. Get away from it. The cases are tops in style but does that really justify hundreds of dollars more over the price of a PC as well? Find a way to lower your prices without hurting quality. The rest of the computer world has, why can't Apple?
Apple is a niche market and if that's what they want, then by all means don't change a thing. I don't think Apple is hurting finacially at the moment, but they may be a different story after their "real stories" campaign, but that's a whole different topic entirely. All I can say is, as a PC and Mac user, Mac being the latter, all I see in the "real stories" commercials is Mac users belittling PC users. It may appeal to Mac users for obvious reasons but is nothing more than insulting to PC users, many of whom love their PCs as much as Mac users love their Macs. I see no reason why one would run out and buy a Mac, especially one at half the speed and twice the price. If that's the attitude the Mac community has towards anything not Apple then their in for a rude awakening.
All Joe Average Consumer sees when buying a computer is GHz, GHz, GHz! A PC user's conversation when casually talking to another computer user will always start out something like this. "How fast's your computer?" They are programmed by society to think this way. So I'm in the store and know nothing about computers, other than I want mine to be fast because that's what society has programmed me to think. Apple just recently broke 1 GHz, the rest of the computer world is over 2. Why is Joe Average Consumer going to buy that 800 MHz iMac, not even a GHz for $1799 when he can get this 2.4 GHz Compaq for $899 with a monitor? 9 out of 10 times he's not and it's absurd to think a pretty GUI or computer case is going to change that. Apple can throw all the money in the world into advertising, it's not going to change that 5% market share by much if at all.
As far as I can tell, only two things are going to change Apple's market share.
One, get the hell away from Motorola. Intel and AMD have released two generations of processors in the time it's taking the G5 to come out. MHz are not a myth and are killing Apple. Just because Photoshop can render some image with some filter faster in OS 9 than Windows means absolutely squat to most people. People want and need faster processors for Mac, that can do more for them than just work faster in Photoshop. I'm not saying go to x86, but find someone who can reliably produce a processor in adiquate speeds for todays consumer market.
Two, lower your prices. There's nothing more expensive inside a Mac than most PC computers. If Apple was still using SCSI, maybe I could understand to some degree but that's not the case anymore. Most of the components in a Mac are the same as a PC, other than the processor and motherboard and the motherboard has AGP, PCI, USB and Firewire so it can't be much different than most PC motherboards today other than the processor that plugs into it. Is the G4 really that expensive to manufacture? If so, it's killing you. Get away from it. The cases are tops in style but does that really justify hundreds of dollars more over the price of a PC as well? Find a way to lower your prices without hurting quality. The rest of the computer world has, why can't Apple?
Apple is a niche market and if that's what they want, then by all means don't change a thing. I don't think Apple is hurting finacially at the moment, but they may be a different story after their "real stories" campaign, but that's a whole different topic entirely. All I can say is, as a PC and Mac user, Mac being the latter, all I see in the "real stories" commercials is Mac users belittling PC users. It may appeal to Mac users for obvious reasons but is nothing more than insulting to PC users, many of whom love their PCs as much as Mac users love their Macs. I see no reason why one would run out and buy a Mac, especially one at half the speed and twice the price. If that's the attitude the Mac community has towards anything not Apple then their in for a rude awakening.
simX
Unofficial Mac Genius
I wholeheartedly agree that Apple needs to get the hell away from Motorola, but unfortunately, that's not going to happen for a while, because as I said before, there are major technical hurdles to bringing Mac OS X and all its software to another processor. And since Motorola is currently the only manufacturer of the G4, we are stuck with Motorola at this point.
I disagree about the price point, though. There are several reasons why Apple's prices are so high.
1) They strive to maintain VERY healthy profit margins. Apple has around a 25%-30% gross profit margin, which is outstanding for the computer market. By contrast, Dell hardly makes a profit on each computer unit they sell, and certainly not up in the high 20%s.
2) Apple uses very high quality parts to ensure that the machine doesn't break down as often as your run-of-the-mill PC. This makes for a better experience, and less time and money spent in the long run.
3) Apple has high quality design, and uses some things that the average PC maker doesn't use. Unusual cases (especially given something like the iMac), flat-panel screens, 2 FireWire ports standard, built-in wireless antennas (even if you don't have an Airport card), and some proprietary ports, like the Apple Pro Speaker ports and the Apple Display Connectors.
These three things add up, especially #1. In the long run, however, Macs are still less expensive, which is the most important point.
I think the best way for Apple to woo PC users is to educate them. And finally Apple is starting to do that, with their Real People campaign. It certainly is NOT belittling PC users! On the contrary, it's real people telling their own stories about their PCs, and how bitter they are about wasting their time with it. In contrast to something like car commercials where they take select quotes and put it in the commercial, Apple's Real People commercials are concentrated on the person themself: they are the only thing in the advertisement, except a brief 2 second image of a grey apple and "apple.com/switch", and it's ONLY the person's own comments. This is very powerful, and if preliminary statistics are any indications, Apple's advertising campaign is working. The only thing they need to do now is to have some commercials on Mac OS X.
I disagree about the price point, though. There are several reasons why Apple's prices are so high.
1) They strive to maintain VERY healthy profit margins. Apple has around a 25%-30% gross profit margin, which is outstanding for the computer market. By contrast, Dell hardly makes a profit on each computer unit they sell, and certainly not up in the high 20%s.
2) Apple uses very high quality parts to ensure that the machine doesn't break down as often as your run-of-the-mill PC. This makes for a better experience, and less time and money spent in the long run.
3) Apple has high quality design, and uses some things that the average PC maker doesn't use. Unusual cases (especially given something like the iMac), flat-panel screens, 2 FireWire ports standard, built-in wireless antennas (even if you don't have an Airport card), and some proprietary ports, like the Apple Pro Speaker ports and the Apple Display Connectors.
These three things add up, especially #1. In the long run, however, Macs are still less expensive, which is the most important point.
I think the best way for Apple to woo PC users is to educate them. And finally Apple is starting to do that, with their Real People campaign. It certainly is NOT belittling PC users! On the contrary, it's real people telling their own stories about their PCs, and how bitter they are about wasting their time with it. In contrast to something like car commercials where they take select quotes and put it in the commercial, Apple's Real People commercials are concentrated on the person themself: they are the only thing in the advertisement, except a brief 2 second image of a grey apple and "apple.com/switch", and it's ONLY the person's own comments. This is very powerful, and if preliminary statistics are any indications, Apple's advertising campaign is working. The only thing they need to do now is to have some commercials on Mac OS X.
Annihilatus
Banned
Originally posted by simX
My ideal world would be: Apple/Mac OS at 20%. Microsoft/Windows at 0%, with no support left Microsoft and Windows deserves to die a horrible death for Microsoft's past actions and its absolute refusal to support open standards. Linux, UNIX, and their variants: 20%. Three or four other competitors (I don't care what they are BeOS, DfOS, EgOS, WhateverOS
Microsoft is a corporation, as such it works as a corporation by trying to kill off competition and raise profits. Essentially, Microsoft is the perfect example of the American way, therefore it should not be 'punished' as such a thing would be hypocritical and ignorant of America's history.
FRankly, anybody who wants their computer to 'just work' can achieve that by using any flavour of Windows. It doesn't matter if it's 3.1, 95, 98 or 2000, it can happen as long as you install what you need and never tinker around like you stated. The reason so many problems occur is because a lot of conflicting software is installed. Why does this happen? Because the PC has a lot of software available to install. Whenever I talk to a businessperson, they usually install 2000 and whatever programs they need and that's it. Do they experience troubles? No. So essentially, if all that you're doing is email and word processing, you can get a 'working' computer for much less than you could a Mac.
I don't disagree with you there. The average computer user now is a newbie and for anyone who's never touched a computer before, I would simply recommend a Mac and nothing else. If you have experience with DOS and know the inner workings quite well, the reasons to get a Mac greatly diminish. I mean if you're only concerned about power and Windows doesn't scare you, you'll go the inexpensive route by building a powerful PC that will cost you a lot less than a powerful Mac. If however you know nothing, and know only that you want to get the job done, by all means go to the Mac. The Mac is a more welcoming computer by every means.
When your PC is totally messed-up and your CD-ROM is not bootable, that bootable floppy drive sure comes in handy. At this point in time, there are boot disks available for all sorts of configurations that would allow you to get back on the road in minutes. Sure the floppy disk has become useless as a storage medium, but it has its benefits. Plus, it's not like it takes a lot of room on the computer.
If they want a respectable market share and a way of surviving, they will have to do this eventually. Sure putting up 8 losers on TV and encouraging other losers to buy a Mac will bring in a couple of people, but what about the people like me who would LIKE to have a Mac but can't afford to pay 4000$ (canadian) to get something that's almost as powerful as something that I would get for 2000$?
I'd like to see this happen actually. It would not drive prices down, but at least the processors would be released faster. The way I see it, by the time Apple gets to 1.5 GHz, the PC will already be at 5 GHz. The average PC user does not give a shit about the Megahertz Myth nor the CISC architecture. All they know is that 5 GHz is a pretty high number.
Andre
Nero is the program that I was using .. and while I totally admit I am a complete moron when it comes to computers, I still had trouble burning a CD with it. I just wanted to COPY a cd I bought so the original wouldn't get all scratched, and it made me convert the original cd into wav files or something, and THEN burn the new cd from those files. It was a whole lot easier with Toast when you just put the cd in a hit copy .. and just wait to put in the cdr.
I dunno, I'm a goon.
simX
Unofficial Mac Genius
So stealing, lying, and illegal attempts to maintain market share are the American way? Hmm, who's being hypocritical and ignorant, here?
Like I said before, it's been documented many times that Windows machines inherently cost more in the long run because of the time and money spent trying to fix the machines. Macs are inherently much more easy to use and have much less problems. Macs have plenty of software available too, but only a handful of them have the potential to cause problems with the computer.
What in the world does someone need experience with DOS for? To use an aging and outdated system?
The Mac is simply not a machine just for newbies. It has many uses. Graphics, programming, video editing just about everything works on a Mac. Many video editors are increasingly using Final Cut Pro to do work. There are no competing programs to iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, or iTunes on the Windows side. Windows Movie Maker is so laughable.
You're a pretty ignorant computer user if you think the Macintosh is just for newbies who only want to do word processing and e-mail. Have you been living in a Windows world too long to see this?
Take it from Dave Haxton, one of the "losers" who is one of Apple's "Real People". But you know what? It's actually true the Mac is a great development platform. Apple offers FREE developer tools (and since you probably know all about it care to tell us how much Microsoft CHARGES for development tools?) that are pretty awesome. Project Builder and Interface Builder can create some awesome programs like Watson and OmniWeb, two beautiful and very functional programs. I made my own application, Memory Usage Getter, via Project Builder, Interface Builder, and AppleScript. Without the free developer tools that Apple offered, I never would have been able to do that.
Where you use the floppy disk to save your PC when your CD-ROM is not bootable, I would use a FireWire hard drive (a.k.a. my iPod). Oh, I forgot most PC manufacturers don't embrace standards, and don't put FireWire ports on the motherboard. Your loss. *shrug*
Plus, I have seen no instance in which the CD-ROM drive is unbootable. Therefore the point about the floppy drive is moot, anyway. Oh, wait, I forgot again. You're probably using a PC that uses the cheapest parts available, making them also of the lowest quality, where the Mac uses high quality parts which accounts for some of the higher price of the Mac. Your loss. *shrug*
Those "losers" are driving increased interest in the Mac through the Online Apple Store. Those losers are showing the average PC user that a Mac is for programmers, LAN administrators, and writers. You know who's a loser? The Dell dude guy. Geez, you really have messed up standards for losers.
That's because the average PC user is uneducated about most computer stuff. If Apple's push with their "Real People" campaign is successful, which it is by early indications, hopefully PC users will become more educated, and will be able to make more informed decisions, and they will realize that 5 GHz means nothing, especially with such a closed, proprietary, ugly and in-your-face operating system as Windows.
Unfortunately, people like you feel the need to perpetuate propaganda about Windows and Mac in order to help Microsoft maintain its market share.
Apple is trying to supply a computer to the market at an outrageous price compared to most PCs that most people don't have an additional need for over a PC. Hence, low demand and only 5% market share. You're right, Dell doesn't make 25-30% profit of ever every computer sold, but consider this for a moment.
Lets say Apple sells 5 out of every 100 computers, this reflects their 5% market share. To make this simple, every computer they sell costs $100 and they make $25 profit from it for a total of $125 profit, a 25% gross profit margin.
Now lets say Apple decides to lower their prices to compete with PCs. Their market share grows to 20% but they're only making 10% profit on every system sold. Are they in trouble? No. 20 computers at $10 profit a computer is $200. Apple was able to gain market share and make $75 additional profit as well.
I don't know. I've never seen statistics to suggest Macs last longer than PCs or break down less frequently. I know Apple's warranty is considered weak compared to other computer companies. You'd think if they were so much more reliable, they'd offer more to the end user and still be money ahead. I think the problem is though, will all the fancy design Apple puts into their products, it becomes rather costly for them to fix something if a problem should arise.
I disagree to some extent. Other than the processor, the inside of a Mac is almost identical to an average consumer PC. IBM hard drives, NVIDIA graphics cards, matsushita optical drives and so on. Is the sound on the motherboard? If so, that should save some money. The cost of soldering on 1 or 100 USB or FireWire ports is the difference of about 30c a port in materials. I don't understand the concept of Airport in desktop machines. Do people actually carry their desktop around the room with them? As for in laptops, 30ft of roaming from the base station really isn't all that great. Other wireless solutions can get your 300ft or more from the base. I don't understand why Apple shipped their new PB with DVI and not ADC. They didn't even enclude a DVI to ADC adapter. You can buy it thought for $150.
Rather than stylish design being their focal point when designing a computer, perhaps Apple should focus on cost effectiveness and durability. The PowerBook G4 is great, but despite being made of industrial strength titanium, is still rather fragile compared to other notebooks. The same can be said for other Apple products as well.
And yes, being told I am "unproductive" using "a horrid little machine" that makes me 6 figures anually is an insult. Hey, it runs just fine for me, just because you had a bad experience, why should I switch? Show me what the hardware can do, show me the OS and all the software that runs on it. Show me anything but don't just tell me my PC sucks. Some PC users love their computer as much as some Mac users such as yourself do. I don't expect you to understand this, being Mac-centric, looking from the inside out. Looking from the outside in is an entirely different picture. Those commercials are geared towards Mac users, who for some reason think if you're not using a Mac, you're commiting a crime to humanity. What if all the big PC companies ran anti-Mac ads? How would you feel? All Apple's new ad campaign is is anti-PC/Windows BS disguised as stories by "real people".
hulkaros
The Incredible...
Any loser who thinks that any PC is better than ANY mac he simply wants to be flamed! So here I flame him on:
Any PC luser (aka loser but NOT user) can take every GHz, RAM &, HD sizes and stick 'em where the sun does not shine! With their dumb attitude and mindset they driving technology back in the dark ages Floppies, RS232, PS/2, 32 bit PCIs and other ancient technologies they hold real technology companies back: Firewire for example just started to appear in PCs while they waited USB2 to appear when Apple is just about any time in releasing Firewire2 Windows and its software is plain garbage and create a wall between the user and the things he wants to create/use.
Anyways, I've been a PC loser (not just user) for MANY years up until December of 2001 when I bought my PowerMac, which kicks ass and I found out that it is better than ANY PC for ANY kind of work and guess what: It took me only half an hour to find out that it can let me work as I want to and not the other way around
Also, one other thing that a PC loser must understand is that we the Mac users know for SURE that:
-His PC crashes with even Windows Xtra Pain (only Windows 2000 server is ok on crashes/hours of usage ratio)
-His PC apps are no match for iApps and in general Mac apps (sputnix vs agsatellite, FCPro vs ?, OmniWeb/Chimera vs ? and the list can go on and on)
-His PC Operating Systems installation times are MORE than half an hour long on even the most powerful PCs while ours is just 15 minutes long
-His apps/games installations procedures are pointless and take too much of our free but expensive time
-His PC requires MUCH more money in any given period of its usage
Oh, damn all this: We, the Mac people know for sure that a PC is for tasteless losers who dance on the beat that M$ et al plays at
Mac is for creation, PC is for destruction!
Mac hardware works as one with its software whereas PC works in the mysterious ways of its CPU, RAM, HD, GPU, CD, OS, APPS, etc.
ALL of Mac OS X, Mac X apps and Mac hardware for X have half of the problems that M$ describes ONLY for its Windows Xtra Pain at their Website
¡NUFF SAID PC losers and now go and get a life or even better get a Mac
Any PC luser (aka loser but NOT user) can take every GHz, RAM &, HD sizes and stick 'em where the sun does not shine! With their dumb attitude and mindset they driving technology back in the dark ages Floppies, RS232, PS/2, 32 bit PCIs and other ancient technologies they hold real technology companies back: Firewire for example just started to appear in PCs while they waited USB2 to appear when Apple is just about any time in releasing Firewire2 Windows and its software is plain garbage and create a wall between the user and the things he wants to create/use.
Anyways, I've been a PC loser (not just user) for MANY years up until December of 2001 when I bought my PowerMac, which kicks ass and I found out that it is better than ANY PC for ANY kind of work
and guess what: It took me only half an hour to find out that it can let me work as I want to and not the other way aroundAlso, one other thing that a PC loser must understand is that we the Mac users know for SURE that:
-His PC crashes with even Windows Xtra Pain (only Windows 2000 server is ok on crashes/hours of usage ratio)
-His PC apps are no match for iApps and in general Mac apps (sputnix vs agsatellite, FCPro vs ?, OmniWeb/Chimera vs ? and the list can go on and on)
-His PC Operating Systems installation times are MORE than half an hour long on even the most powerful PCs while ours is just 15 minutes long
-His apps/games installations procedures are pointless and take too much of our free but expensive time
-His PC requires MUCH more money in any given period of its usage
Oh, damn all this: We, the Mac people know for sure that a PC is for tasteless losers who dance on the beat that M$ et al plays at
Mac is for creation, PC is for destruction!
Mac hardware works as one with its software whereas PC works in the mysterious ways of its CPU, RAM, HD, GPU, CD, OS, APPS, etc.
ALL of Mac OS X, Mac X apps and Mac hardware for X have half of the problems that M$ describes ONLY for its Windows Xtra Pain at their Website
¡NUFF SAID PC losers and now go and get a life or even better get a Mac
Congrats hulkaros. You are the first person to totally flame-out on this thread. Your little rant deserves no further discussion because narrow minded people such as yourself are unable to hold intelligent debates. You are nothing more than an embarrasment to the Mac community and make PC users such as myself shake their head and wonder why.
Annihilatus
Banned
You really are an instigator aren't you?
If you knew me, you'd know that I'm very much for the MAc. I'm just against bigots like you who think Apple is perfect and can do no wrong. I also hate people who are anti-XP when there's nothing really wrong with it and refuse to believe anything on the PC can possibility be good.
I'd say more but I'm at work.
Andre
simX
Unofficial Mac Genius
I never said that the PC was not good for anything, but I was battling the supposition that you were implying that the Mac is good for only newbies.
If you like Windows, good for you. But there are many out there who like Mac. There are also many out there who are ignorant about the Mac and who are afraid to touch one because of the perceived incompatibility with Windows computers.
What I want is for computer users to be educated. I want them to know about the iApps on the Macintosh. I want them to know that megahertz isn't everything. I want them to know that the Macintosh is cheaper in the long run. I want them to know that the Macintosh is easy to use.
Only THEN will they be able to make an informed decision, and will I let them go to Windows. But, Annihilatus, you seem to be perpetuating the opposite of the above ideal, and that is why I am arguing against your seemingly ignorant stance. Furthermore, some of your arguments seem to not be well thought out, like your argument to move Mac OS X to the x86 processor platform. I will reiterate that this is unfeasible and unreasonable, and there's no denying that.
You know the reason why it seems that Mac users think Apple can do no wrong? Because if it did make bad decisions, Apple would go out of business. Apple doesn't have the luxury to make bad decisions. They do make the occasional bad mistake, like introducing the G4 cube that had little market and turned out to be mostly a waste of time (even though I bought one myself). But basically all of Apple's decisions are right on target because they must be.
On the other hand, Microsoft has plenty of room to make bad decisions, and makes many unethical decisions too. Again, though, Annihilatus, you seem to perpetuate these decisions, by defending them by saying they are part of "American history". This is where I get disgusted, and why I feel I have to argue against your statements.
If you like Windows, good for you. But there are many out there who like Mac. There are also many out there who are ignorant about the Mac and who are afraid to touch one because of the perceived incompatibility with Windows computers.
What I want is for computer users to be educated. I want them to know about the iApps on the Macintosh. I want them to know that megahertz isn't everything. I want them to know that the Macintosh is cheaper in the long run. I want them to know that the Macintosh is easy to use.
Only THEN will they be able to make an informed decision, and will I let them go to Windows. But, Annihilatus, you seem to be perpetuating the opposite of the above ideal, and that is why I am arguing against your seemingly ignorant stance. Furthermore, some of your arguments seem to not be well thought out, like your argument to move Mac OS X to the x86 processor platform. I will reiterate that this is unfeasible and unreasonable, and there's no denying that.
You know the reason why it seems that Mac users think Apple can do no wrong? Because if it did make bad decisions, Apple would go out of business. Apple doesn't have the luxury to make bad decisions. They do make the occasional bad mistake, like introducing the G4 cube that had little market and turned out to be mostly a waste of time (even though I bought one myself). But basically all of Apple's decisions are right on target because they must be.
On the other hand, Microsoft has plenty of room to make bad decisions, and makes many unethical decisions too. Again, though, Annihilatus, you seem to perpetuate these decisions, by defending them by saying they are part of "American history". This is where I get disgusted, and why I feel I have to argue against your statements.
Annihilatus
Banned
I use a PC and I guarantee you that my SoundBlaster Live sounds better than your internal 10$ sound system, I guarantee you that my Microsoft Natural Keyboard is more functional and sturdy than your Mac Keyboard and I guarantee you that the refresh rate, max resolution and quality of my 21 inch monitor is better than what your Mac has. Why do I have all of these quality pieces? Because I had money left from buying my PC that would have gone into buying a less-impressive Mac, and because I chose my pieces rather than entertaining whatever some company threw at me. Hence I have the computer you wish you had.
Frankly, XP doesn't crash on me. Stop making generalizations.
I dunno but there isn't just AGSatellite on the PC, you can choose from a number of decent music search engines. Again, stop focusing on one aspect and generalizing. Besides, IE kicks the ass of Chimera and OmniWeb for the simple reason that most of the web pages on the Internet are designed explicitly for IE. You can't beat that.
Wow this is really a factor considering an installation happens just once and in most cases, the PC users themselves never experienced it.
What the hell does this even mean?
My PC cost me around 3000$ canadian with a graphics tablet, 21 inch monitor, laser printer, CD-Writer, DVD-ROM and quality parts that are upgradeable. I'd need another 2000$ to get the same out of a G4.
What if you're using BeOS or Linux?
This is too easy. Create all the Macs you want, the power of our PC's will obliterate them.
Look at it this way. PC users have the decency to look at the other platform and appreciate it for its strengths and likes to discuss that and its weaknesses while bringing up valid points. Mac users tend to flame at the first opportunity they get.
I do realize that I'm generalizing here, but your entire message was a generalization so I figured I'd enter your playing field.
Once again, I love Macs, but there are issues with it just as there are with the PC. Simply put, the issues are different.
Andre
Annihilatus
Banned
You're absolutely right here and I apologize. What I meant to emphasize was the fact that if I were faced with a newbie, as I have been times before, I would direct him to the Mac before the PC simply because it is a more user-friendly experience initially.
[QUOTEIf you like Windows, good for you. But there are many out there who like Mac. There are also many out there who are ignorant about the Mac and who are afraid to touch one because of the perceived incompatibility with Windows computers.[/QUOTE]
Well, it IS incompatible when you think about it. It's not like you can go into any computer store and just buy any video card and any piece of software and just stick it in. I dunno what it's like in the US, but in Canada there are 1000 PC stores to every Mac store. In Montreal, there are two chains called Microserv and BMac that sell Macs. That's pretty much it. FutureShop and CompuSmart, considered the largest chains here, don't sell them any longer. Let's just say the Mac world in Canada is just impulse-purchase-friendly since you really have to travel if you want to buy something for your Mac.
I work with PC users almost exclusively and just about every one of them stresses how easy the Mac is to use. However, they also emphasize that each new Windows release truly is getting better (except Millennium) and the PC is becoming a nicer platform. With Win98, there was no competition. Mac truly WAS better. But ever since 2000 came out and now with XP, you have the stability and operation PC users have looked for for years. There is no question XP doesn't look as good as Mac OS X, in fact I find this OS downright ugly. However, the interface is extremely convenient, the way to force quit applications hasn't changed since 1995 and it is VERY VERY customizeable (I mean when you can get a program that auto-changes your wallpaper, an email program that auto-alerts you of new mail with flash animations and first dibs on any new search engine, you're not in a bad position no matter what anyone says).
It is feasible because the core of the Mac OS X already exists on the PC. All that needs to be done is that the interface needs to be migrated. Of course, Apple would have to change OS X drastically to support the numerous choices of video cards, sound cards, network cards and everything else the PC has, but such a task IS possible (XP detects a lot of devices automatically, I know Apple can do it too).
I absolutely agree with you here and simply have to look at the many mistakes Microsoft has made in the past to show that Apple, in general, has a better track record. However, the fact remains that Apple does indeed make mistakes. Furthermore, it should be noted that the ways for Apple to improve its market share EXISTS and are feasible.
What I was trying to insinuate is that it would be hypocritical to say that Microsoft is a horrible company and should be punished because Microsoft was created by taking full advantage of the American political and economical system. Are you ready to say that the American political and economical system is flawless? I don't believe so. Its flaws are what allowed Microsoft to get as far as it did in so little time. They didn't achieve a monopoly by making illegal moves, they made a monopoly by making ALLEGED illegal moves. Microsoft's success has simply alerted Americans to the fact that there ARE problems, people ARE taking advantage of them and getting away with it.
I mean let's face it. Microsoft stole the GUI from Apple, did they get punished? Hardly. Microsoft DID force people to use IE, did they get punished? Hell no. Microsoft IS forcing people to use OE and MSN Messenger, will it be punished? Probably not. Frankly, they'll get a slap on the wrist.
With that said, is it really Microsoft that is being horrible or is it the government, that refuses to do anything about it?
Andre
Annihilatus
Banned
I suppose you're right, but all of this can and should be stopped. I like Windows but I'd like to have the choice to remove Outlook Express and Internet Explorer (even though I probably wouldn't).
Andre
Well, For someone to not notice its NOT X, is merely a compliment on my behalf! i now have Both Aqua and Metallic mastered Pretty well, with Shell32's in "snow, Graphite and Aqua" done by me! it all looks Superb! After a GREAT deal of effort and time, but it works for me, i find it much harder, to use Windows XP, now in its "Raw Form" than i do, with my Finder Bar, Dock and Left Hand Window Controlled themes!
On a Personal note, What Can apple do?! At the most, feel flattered?!
NeYo
Javintosh
Meember
Annihilatus:
About the hardware issue. I agree that you can't go down the street and buy hardware for the Mac like you can for the PC....
Then again, even if I used a PC, I would not go down the street to get gouged. I just bought a 120GB HD. I went to pricewatch, searched for 120GB HDDs and bought from the cheapest person on the list (that met my desired specs). I don't think you'll find a 7200RPM 120GB HDD for $150 (and free shipping and no sales tax) at any brick and mortar store.
Pricewatch.com, not the local store, is my first stop when looking for hardware. If I need something that's Mac-only, like my SoundSticks (which I looove), I go to Pricemac.com. I got my Soundsticks for $150 (vs $200) by looking there. The shipping cost was roughly in line with taxes.
As for hardware upgradeability. I kept my last computer for 3 years. After this I installed a CPU card (bringing me up to 266Mhz G3) and used it for another 3 years.
I have a new 677Mhz G4. I transfered *all* of my PCI cards from the old computer to the new one. Everything worked flawlessly under OS 9. UnderOSX all but one card works (the manufacturer has not made drivers). In addition to this I transfered an external HDD and an external CD ROM drive. I also transfered by trackball (after buying an adapter), the remote control for my computer, the graphics tablet and all of the other crap I had connected to the computer. None of this was a problem under OS 9. UnderOS X, drivers took a little while, but all devices are working.
The only thing I ditched was my old scanner. I wanted a faster scanner, so i got a firewire scanner.
Javier
BTW>Mac keyboards *are* by an large better. My 6 year old keyboard on my previous computer worked as good on the last day I used it as it did on the first day. Also, when I use a PC keyboard (maybe it's the crap my employer buys), they always feel cheap. I currently have Dell's "QuickKey" keyboards at work. They are the loudest of all the computers I have setup. I've used Compaq's keyboards (and Sony's and Packard Bells, but that last one is not a fair comparison => ). They just seem rickety. The only keyboards that I would rate as comparable to Apple's keyboards would be Suns. I have a FireStar 880 and a SlowBlade => (SunBlade) and both keyboards are impressive.
PC keyboards (at least the ones that come with your computer) seem to be an afterthought.
About the hardware issue. I agree that you can't go down the street and buy hardware for the Mac like you can for the PC....
Then again, even if I used a PC, I would not go down the street to get gouged. I just bought a 120GB HD. I went to pricewatch, searched for 120GB HDDs and bought from the cheapest person on the list (that met my desired specs). I don't think you'll find a 7200RPM 120GB HDD for $150 (and free shipping and no sales tax) at any brick and mortar store.
Pricewatch.com, not the local store, is my first stop when looking for hardware. If I need something that's Mac-only, like my SoundSticks (which I looove), I go to Pricemac.com. I got my Soundsticks for $150 (vs $200) by looking there. The shipping cost was roughly in line with taxes.
As for hardware upgradeability. I kept my last computer for 3 years. After this I installed a CPU card (bringing me up to 266Mhz G3) and used it for another 3 years.
I have a new 677Mhz G4. I transfered *all* of my PCI cards from the old computer to the new one. Everything worked flawlessly under OS 9. UnderOSX all but one card works (the manufacturer has not made drivers). In addition to this I transfered an external HDD and an external CD ROM drive. I also transfered by trackball (after buying an adapter), the remote control for my computer, the graphics tablet and all of the other crap I had connected to the computer. None of this was a problem under OS 9. UnderOS X, drivers took a little while, but all devices are working.
The only thing I ditched was my old scanner. I wanted a faster scanner, so i got a firewire scanner.
Javier
BTW>Mac keyboards *are* by an large better. My 6 year old keyboard on my previous computer worked as good on the last day I used it as it did on the first day. Also, when I use a PC keyboard (maybe it's the crap my employer buys), they always feel cheap. I currently have Dell's "QuickKey" keyboards at work. They are the loudest of all the computers I have setup. I've used Compaq's keyboards (and Sony's and Packard Bells, but that last one is not a fair comparison => ). They just seem rickety. The only keyboards that I would rate as comparable to Apple's keyboards would be Suns. I have a FireStar 880 and a SlowBlade => (SunBlade) and both keyboards are impressive.
PC keyboards (at least the ones that come with your computer) seem to be an afterthought.
simX
Unofficial Mac Genius
There are plenty of video cards for the Mac from nVidia and ATI. Take your pick: Radeon 8500, Radeon 7500, nVidia GeForce 4 Ti, etc, etc. And yes, the iMac, iBook, PowerBook, and eMac are all unupgradable, but then if you wanted to upgrade, you would buy a PowerMac, which would only set you back $1600 for a very powerful machine. If you don't want an Apple flat-panel display, I'm sure you can find a cheap CRT monitor for under $300 to complement that PowerMac.
oooOOOooo, you have a program that auto-changes your wallpaper, an e-mail program that auto-alerts you, and "dibs on any new search engine", whatever that's supposed to mean. If you haven't figured out that the Mac has a similar auto-changer, an out-of-the-box e-mail program that alerts you of new mail with a little icon and a sound (give me a break I don't need a flash animation), and since a search engine is accessible to anyone on the internet, I frankly don't see your point.
On the other hand, I challenge you to find a program as easy as iMovie to make movies. I challenge you to find a program as easy as iTunes to burn CDs, organize MP3s, and manage MP3s on an MP3 player. I challenge you to find a program as easy as iDVD to burn DVDs, with a sub-$2000 system. I challenge you to find a program as easy as iPhoto to download, organize and share photos. I challenge you to find a program as easy, inexpensive, and powerful as Final Cut Pro for making professional movies. I challenge you to find a program as easy as DVD Studio Pro to make professional DVDs. I challenge you to find FREE developer tools as easy as Project Builder and Interface Builder to make programs even Java applications. I challenge you to find a shareware app as easy, as clean, and as powerful as Proteus to do instant messaging on multiple IM services. I challenge you to find a program as incredibly useful as Watson to get useful web information such as movie listings, TV listings, package tracking, all without the use of a web browser. I challenge you to show me how Windows can leverage the same power that a UNIX operating system can while retaining the simplicity of Mac OS X.
I'll bet you the only challenge you might live up to is finding a program similar to iTunes. Even with that you might fail.
I think my point is made clear.
"All that needs to be done"? Heh, first of all, that's an enormous task. Second of all, all of the applications that currently run on Mac OS X would break with the x86 version, requiring developers to do ANOTHER rewrite of their programs after updating them to Carbon to run in Mac OS X. I doubt Apple could convince their developers to do that. Thirdly, the task of supporting all the numerous choices of video cards, sound cards, network cards, etc. is possible, but very costly and in itself is an enormous task. And it would cause all hell to break loose with Apple's tech support.
Maybe you don't get it, but Apple will never port Mac OS X to the x86 platform and release it unless Motorola goes out of business and nobody picks up the PowerPC assets, which has about 0.01% chance of happening.
And Apple is already taking steps to increase its market share. It's successfully done the impossible: made a UNIX operating system easy to use, and it is even, by any means, easier than Mac OS 9 which was not based on UNIX. That is quite a task, but it pays off: Apple now has the best development platform, hands down. I can, with free developer tools, make Cocoa applications written in Objective-C (which are the easiest kind of applications to create). But I could make AppleScript applications if I'm more comfortable with that, or Java applications, or applications written in regular C. And I could simply make an application that is a GUI wrapper for a powerful UNIX tool. I doubt any Windows developer can say that he can do all that on Windows... in his right mind, anyway.
Then there's the ease of use and the power of the operating system itself, not to mention all the apps that lack Windows substitutes that are all powerful even while being easy to use. For a list of Mac programs that lack Windows substitutes, read above.
Hmm, another hypocritical statement. I didn't say our political and economical system is flawless. I never did. And I never will. But as far as I know, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed that Microsoft MADE ILLEGAL MOVES, and as far as I know, there's no way to dispute that decision, short of getting some judge to make a competing decision in a future case.
So, no, Microsoft didn't make ALLEGED illegal moves, they made illegal moves, according to the American justice system.
Again, you dismiss Microsoft's tactics as trivial, and basically say that they are acceptable. MICROSOFT PERFORMED ILLEGAL TACTICS, and they should get punished with more than a slap on the wrist. It IS Microsoft that is "being horrible", and you can't deny that (well, you could, and you probably will, given your past statements, but that's a whole 'nother topic entirely). While yes, the government should be doing more than it is, it is STILL Microsoft who is making illegal moves, not the government.
Annihilatus, I think it's YOU who are defending Microsoft, saying they can do no wrong. But there's one important difference between my defending Apple and you defending Microsoft:
Microsoft actually DID do something wrong.
- Status