what isn't great on X ... why Apple is wrong.

maccatalan

Registered
Hello.

First I would like you to know I like a lot OS X. It's a very great system and the most great is GNU Darwin, I think. That's all wonderful, but ...

But when you set the view of a window to list with sorting value to file name, then, if you change the name of a file then the list isn't resort (ex. : {Apple, Applications, Games}, you do Apple -> zApple, and you see (until you open again the window) : {zApple, Applications, Games} ).

When you select a file in a window and another in elsewhere (in some other window), the both are selected. Fortunately, Apple's Finder only considers the last selected one.

The speed is not shown on a PPP connection with "Internet Connect.app". There is no way (in "System Preferences.app") to use a Connection Script (very usefull when you use a terminal connection).

There's no more folder exploration by "1/2 click". I mean : when you drag a file on a folder it was opened using OS 9. This was very (but very very) useful.

(...)


Thank you Apple for including in OS X 10.1 all those brilliant ideas you got in the past. Thank you also to have made OS X, it's the best idea you got (thank you NeXT).

Pierre.

PS (-----> to Apple):

what about a Mac OS X for Intel ?

I use a Mac since I'm 3 (I began with an Apple ][e), but I've to recognize you're so crazy : how can you think dealers to sell your products when on an iMac they win only $15 (my father was AppleCenter in south of France).
Do you think a business, a familly can live with this few ?

What do you think of your after-sales policy ? When a customer comes to see us with an iMac we say : "We are sorry, but you will have to wait a lot. Or you buy an Apple Care service and some Apple's expert of Toulouse will come to see you, or you give us your Mac and we send it to Holland (to Apple). You wait in every case.
Bhe most often we are able to repair it. So why don't you allow us to fix the problem, why do you force this future ex-Mac lover the customer is to wait ??

Apple kills Apple, as the Human kills Humanity.

Yesterday a mother went to see me. She had a problem with her Mac. I fixed it, two hours later her child was using Adibou on. What would have happend if I didn't fixed it ? She would have waited, ok, but fo her child is the summer holidays. She want's her Adibou.

My friends always argue to convince me of the superiority of PC on Mac. I do as if I didn't agree. But even if I know Mac software (OS X first) to be better than Windows, I can't be without thinking about Linux. Even if I know Mac to be cheaper now than some years ago, I can't be without dreaming about a perfect Mac : just a motherboard (why not from Apple) but with the video card I want (a little one), with the number of processors I want, with the number of disks I want and with the PCI cards I want (no firewire, no sound, ...). This is the Mac I want. Do you remember Gassé : "Open Mac" ?
When my father looks for a network installation for a company who needs one I say : why don't you put some Mac Server with MacOS X as Firewall, why don't you put some Mac as ... He laughs. He uses every day a Mac but it does now many years he forgot to believe in Apple. He no longer is a dreamer. He is realist, now. He was one of the first (before Apple France creation) to sell Mac in France. He was enthusiast at the idea of changing the face of the society by a new computer system. He made a lot for the Macintosh. Today he is sad. He hates Apple, Apple strangles him, day after day : the margins melt as snow on sun.
Today for a non graphical but professional solution (as networking, office, ...) a PC is better than a Mac : try to sell 50 or 150 iMacs to a firm with MS Office when they can have cheaper 100 or 200 PC with MS Office & Windows, or cheaper : 100 or 200 PC with GNU/Linux with StarOffice. That's no realist. Do they need Firewire, do they need Sound, ... ? No they just need a mouse, a keyboard, a screen, a CD-Rom driver (or burner), a floppy disk (sorry), a Zip maybe, and a hard disk.
Others just need the same but with ability to put more than one CD-RW driver, more than one HD, more than one Zip, ... Today, there's no Mac which permits this. The G4 is a closed machine. Fortunately you can put more than one HD, but what about a RACQ ? Do you know how to put one on a Mac ?


Try to think about all of that, and I forgot a lot more, but this is a good start I think.

In spite of all, I will continue to defend Mac and Apple, and I will continue to hope for a better world : "Le monde Apple" (as one of my shirts says).

Viva Apple! Viva Macintosh ! See you every body,
Pierre.
 

tismey

Official Bartender
Pierre, if you insist on posting a massive post like this, do you mind only doing it once? I see little point starting 2 threads (which will mean that the people discussing them will be split in half, so the discussion will be half as interesting).

Yes, yes, we all know that OSX isn't perfect, but the things you mention are tiny niggles when you consider that they've just reconstructed the Mac OS from the ground up. And your point about having OSX on Intel just doesn't make any sense, I'm afraid - there are plenty of threads discussing that here, saying pretty much the same thing - if it runs on cheaper hardware, then Apple won't sell any computers, and so they'll lose money and die.
 

maccatalan

Registered
You wrote "Apple won't sell any computers, and so they'll lose money and die". Ok. They do very good hardware but remember Motorola, PowerComputing, etc. clones. It worked.
My idea is to make Apple to do that they do the best : software. But you're right : why not still doing some hardware (but cheaper with larger margins for dealers).

In fact I just wanted to notice this little forgots or bugs of Mac OS X and I totally agree with you when you say : "we all know that OSX isn't perfect, but the things you mention are tiny niggles when you consider that they've just reconstructed the Mac OS from the ground up".
I program a little so I think I'm able to imagine all the work it represents (actually I can't it's too much important).

It was at the beggining just two words about OS X but finally I was writting all my displeasure about Apple. I'm sorry if I'm borring but you know, after that you feel so light and free (just like after a reconciliation after a quarrel in love :)

The fact is that I love Apple.
Pierre.

PS: about the 2 posts : I began posting at one thinking I was in another, when I noticed it I tried to rectify. Sorry, you're right again. :)
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
Software is nothing without hardware.
OS X is good only because it lays on top of grood hardware, and great hardware integration.

If OS X were on a PC platform, then the problem that exists with windows and all other PC OSes will hit apple too. TO many devices to support, not enough time to make drivers (good ones) for all of them, and apple becomes mediocre thus dies.


Admiral
 

jove

Member
Hello,

Just a couple notes.

I have owned a Power Computing machine. They did not rock. They continually sacrificed quality of parts. They pushed where they could afford to.

The clones of PCs or even the Macs do/did not have anywhere the cost of manufacturing and R%D as Apple. Mac clones did not increase market share. They saw an existing market they could bleed.

Apple does need competition. But not with their existing customers! I believe your Dell, Gateway and etc is plenty of competition.

Macintoshes will ALWAYS cost more money. Apple does the R&D for hardware, software, and the integration. People buy Apple's just as people will spend a little extra and get a VW Jetta. You are paying for style and engineering.

Apple is not just a software company nor just a hardware company. They sell the whole widget, the integration.

To achieve the renowned integration Apple has had tight control of the testing matrix (possible configurations of HW and SW). Introducing Intel machines, even tightly controlled ones, will dramatically increase the matrix, cost of development, and then cost of their products.

The death bells are no longer ringing. Apple is making top selling machines. Profits are being made in a slumping economy. M$ NEEDS Apple just as Apple NEEDS M$. The "unix" of X is giving Apple inroads into Markets they never had a chance before! Just this week the young programmers on my team have bought Macs - despite my dorky evangelism. They couldn't stand MS quality, wanted a superior unix box with decent hardware integration, and Apple has priced computers in their range.

Apple is doing fine. X.1 will rock.
 

ulrik

Registered
Mhz. Mhz. Give me more Mhz. MORE MORE MORE! Why does everybody want to cross the GHz barrier? The Macs are FAST! Read my thread "How?". Use Photoshop! Use Final Cut! Take a look at Maya beta! These things are FAST! FASTER than on the PC. We all know that the "Megahertz Myth" was just an excuse to tell people why Apple doesn't need to have high Mhz counts...it's not that easy, I admit that, but I can't understand this race for Mhz.
Fellow Mac users. We have an Altivec Engine. This thing ROCKS when it is supported (read Photoshop, Final Cut etc). We have a freaking large cache (read expensive PC server processors). We have an incredible system performance under 9.x and soon under 10.1. We are looking forward to having maybe one of the best, state-of-the-art operating systems once all peripherals and stuff is supported like we know and like it from Macs. We have computers which also look beautiful. We have high quality CHEAP flatpanels (Cinema display! compare prices!). We are the first to have DVD-R drives in consumer workstations. We have one of the best bus systems (firewire) which is now coming to the PC because Microsoft realized that it is better than USB 2 (XP will have no USB 2 but Firewire support). We have the biggest companies develop stuff FIRST for the Mac (nVidia with the GeForce 3, Adobe, Macromedia, Alias-Wavefront, Microsoft)...what do you want? Some more Megahertz? If the Macs would be slow, I could understand it, but our systems are some of the fastest machines on the market. No, I don't need some Megahertz more. I like the way Apple works at the moment. Call me a fanboy, flame me for it if you need it, but that's my opinion. I can't stand those PC geeks sounding off with their millions dozens hundreds of Megahertz......

Amen!
 

maccatalan

Registered
but you've to recognize that the actual version of MacOS X is so slow at launching application and running Finder ...
Personally I regret the past, when Finder was including search function into itself (not like now with Sherlock). But at the same I'm admirative (is this english??) at Apple, just see their new OS.

Ok, you're right about the GHz, you're right about our powerful machines, but just look at Windows (arg!! sorry, a bad word) : you click, the application is launched at once. Don't need to wait, it's all fast. (of course, when it crashes you wait all the time to repair you didn't wait at application starting up).

We all now we love Apple. We are all like a lover who tries to find the "bad thing" of the loved body, but we can't : we love Apple, that is all.

So have fun, may the mac be always our secret lover,
Pierre. :D
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
LOL let me bring you some holly water to wash your mouth after saying the W word my son :p hehehehe :D
 

RacerX

Old Rhapsody User
Originally posted by ulrik
Mhz. Mhz. Give me more Mhz. MORE MORE MORE! Why does everybody want to cross the GHz barrier?... I can't stand those PC geeks sounding off with their millions dozens hundreds of Megahertz......

Amen!
We should not forget that Intel is now have to live with the every MHz Myth that they had helped create. The Itanium is a great processor, a true leap forward... if only it wasn't a major leap backwards in MHz (it runs at 733 and 800 MHz currently). In the PC market, that is SLOW (even if it is faster than a Pentium 4 at 1.7 GHz), but in the world of real computer users, Intel has rejoined the race (which includes the current G4s at 867 MHz, as well as Sun's Ulta SPARC III at 900 MHz, and SGI's MIPS R12000A at 400 MHz). You have to remember that most PC users and IT have never actually needed there systems to be "Fast". How fast does a systems need to be to run MS Office? For gaming, the video/graphics card is more important than the processor (and most video/graphics cards are only good at gaming I might add). When REAL work is needed to be done, REAL systems are needed, and that does not include PCs.
 

maccatalan

Registered
As I said before, my father sells some Apple computers and some PC, and he makes some others PC.

This week he made a PC with a Pentium @ 1.7 (or 1.4 :confused:) Ghz.
Temperature : 88°C ( 190 °F) !!!!

He had to change the PC casing to have the space to put a new kind of fan, bigger than ever.

Every night we laught at the idea of a PC with a "water-cooler" fan ... :D It exists really !!!

So listen at your iMac ... [silence] ... at your Cube ... [silece] ... :D
No fan !!!

Just a last word : l.o.l.

Pierre.
 

Trilogy

Registered
Pierre

I am quite aware of the fact that the current service policy has some unfortunate sides to it. However, please keep in mind that Apple has nothing to gain by having her customers walking away. And while it is clearly inadequate to let customers wait for their top-of-the-range PowerBook's repair for two weeks, the current service policy is the best effort of securing the customer's loyalty.

It's not easy keeping an eye on every single Apple office to ensure that the central policies are enforced everywhere. That doesn't mean there is nothing being done, please have some patience! The in recent times often proclaimed arrogance of Apple is not real, period. Please believe me: Apple does not take her customers for granted, and I am sorry for every second Apple made you believe it.
 

ulrik

Registered
maccatalan,

the speed of OS X has nothing to do with the processor. Trust me. I run MacOS 10.0.4 on a 450 G4, a Dual 500, a Cube 500, a 867 Quicksilver and a 500 Mhz Powerbook (not all mine of course) and the problems you mentioned are no caused by the Mhz or something. It's the OS. I mean, OS 9 is fast! You click on an app, there it is. Like under the OS with the "W" as starting letter and some crazy numbers and letters after it to make it different from others instead of simply putting version numbers their.

Wait till 10.1 (could we include a button into the forum which includes this sentence? I'm bored of typing it ;) and you will have faster app launch times.

All I want to say is that these performance problems are not caused by our "slow" processors.

And they will be solved soon....at least for most apps (OmniWeb still takes years to launch...)
 

littletiger12

Registered
I hear people talking about how Apple has to put X on x86, well I glade they don't, if they did it would suck( not for speed, but integrity). Apple is great in there business market. it product are of high workmanship. I would no want to ever see Apple software degrade to PC, no brain, no entrepreneurial, no style, no class, no new technology.

Linux sucks, My day jobs is to port linux to different platforms and develop the drivers (IDE, NET, USB, PCI) linux is crap, too big slow, crash like all crap on x86. The code is a hack, the hackers generally write really crappy code, just look at linux driver and network stack.

If companies want to de MS then let the dumb be dumb, they always will be in the dust of apple, even XP does not come close, it old crap technology for the dumb mases to was more on. With Apple I run much cheaper in the long run. Good quality and high tech.

Sorry about the long post I had to get this stuff of my chest.

I am new to MACS, never a PC man, Mac OS X is the most advanced OS in the world, it has unix, objective C, XML. And a the G$ vector engine, well all other processor goto hell next to it.

Thanks Apple for developing tools which work, and are works of art.
 

maccatalan

Registered
I use now OS 10.1 it's so faster (but some appls aren't still as fast as it). I'm so glad. But I was talking with a pro. Conclusion of our dialog :

-> Apple does one of the best OS & Machines
-> Apple Machines are directed to a non-pro public
-> Apple OS is directed to professionals

=> Contradiction

How do you want students to buy a Mac (~ 1200 Euro/$) when they can have a PC so powerful (or better said : powerful enought) for less than 1000 E/$ ?

My dream is Apple doing some good OS with some very well designed CPU but allowing on their webStore (if they want to control it) people to buy some motherBoard or some pieces of CPU in order to get a less expansive Mac with the only necessary. I'm sorry, but I don't need Sound, Microphon, integrated screen, CD-Rom, Floppy Disk, ... Just a way to plug the power, a "on-off" button, some network additions, a video card of my choice, and that's all. My dream is shared by a lot of little and medium sized firms (in french : "PME" -> "Petites et Moyennes Entreprises").
When we are all network oriented we don't need anything else than a very powerful and stable server and some light clients.

Apple : if you want your iMacs/iBooks/PowerMacs/PowerBooks to pass the door, to enter the houses of families of the world, so try first to get the professional market. You already have the creators one, try now the one of business, administration, industry, ...

You've got an OS designed for professionals, a chip so good (and more than "good" with G4 and soon G5), ... just try to be more open-minded : try to be "aware" (as Vandame :D ).

Here it is, Here we are, and I love this world. Thank you for being patient and tolerant with my approximative english.

Pierre.

iMac 233 - Rev B
OS X.1 - French
 

addiecool

Registered
Such childish Bickering!!!!! :):eek:

FOUR WORDS... Mac are the Best. Get it? :cool:

Why dont you people ever suffice with the thought that for everyday works PC are OK BUT for serious Work, Seriuos Gaming (We have got a lot new games) and Serious Fun nothing comes close to a MAC.

Well I dont want to spend my time fixing Windows, I'd rather use a MAC and do my work right and fast.
 
Top