"...And the more deftly constructed and wittily argued their defence, the more terrified and wounded they secretly are." But don't let that put anyone off defending them here. posted by RichLyon at 8:50 AM on February 5, 2007
Wow, someone hates macs. Is this really the best of the web? Its just someone's rant against other people's choices in computers, which really is pretty lame in and of itself. posted by anansi at 8:51 AM on February 5, 2007 [3 favorites]
I like cake. With ice cream. posted by jeff-o-matic at 8:53 AM on February 5, 2007
At least he was more coherent than Bill Gates' defense of Windows. Though I suspect he's taking the piss out of PC users' stereotypical defensiveness moreso than simply attacking Macs. This is my bias talking, he's a good writer so he must be intelligent enough to dump his PC. posted by Space Coyote at 8:55 AM on February 5, 2007
So how come Nathan Barley didn't use a Mac? HOW COME CHARLIE? posted by Lentrohamsanin at 8:56 AM on February 5, 2007
The first person to do a point-by-point rebuttal loses. posted by Luddite at 8:57 AM on February 5, 2007 [5 favorites]
So Charlie Brooker is kind of a British John Dvorak, then? posted by keswick at 8:59 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Mac, PC... who cares. People who use any computer are assholes. posted by iconomy at 9:02 AM on February 5, 2007 [4 favorites]
SLOE GYOB posted by Plutor at 9:02 AM on February 5, 2007
And the more deftly constructed and wittily argued their defence, the more terrified and wounded they secretly are.
Using a Mac really is terrifying. I'm terrified that I get to use my computer while you reinstall Windows after another spyware and virus fest. Scary stuff, truly. I'm shaking. posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:03 AM on February 5, 2007
He put way too much thought into this. Somebody light Charlie Brooker a joint and show him Electric Sheep. posted by baphomet at 9:03 AM on February 5, 2007
I like cake. With ice cream.
posted by jeff-o-matic at 11:53 AM EST on February 5
I don't. I like them separately. Let's pretend this actually means something in regard to character, intelligence, taste, creative ability, etc. and so forth. posted by juiceCake at 9:03 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
did you see that the first comment on the article was the author criticising the editor the article? priceless. posted by shmegegge at 9:04 AM on February 5, 2007
He has a point with the Feng-Shui. I know of one rich guy type who has had intel iMacs installed around his house simply because they look good. He is booting them into Windows posted by Gungho at 9:06 AM on February 5, 2007
It's a well-known fact that Macs run by having tiny little Critical-Mass riders smoke severed foreskins as they take their even tinier dogs to the tiny little bar in the computer. posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:10 AM on February 5, 2007 [4 favorites]
Yawn. I had this debate in CS courses 10 years ago. Everything was settled when Macs moved to UNIX and then PCs were stomped on when Macs went Intel. Nothing to see here...move along. posted by christopher.taylor at 9:12 AM on February 5, 2007 [2 favorites]
LOL digiman posted by The Deej at 9:18 AM on February 5, 2007
The best invective I've read in days. Thanks.
Doesn't hurt that most of it is true. posted by koeselitz at 9:19 AM on February 5, 2007
What anansi said. Those "I'm a Mac" ads are pretty awful, though. posted by brundlefly at 9:19 AM on February 5, 2007
From the comment:
And the reason there are far more games available for PCs than for Macs is because Mac users have better things to do with their time that fannying around getting some unfeasibly-breasted posh totty to another level, while making her flash her arse at the same time, then stropping when their Mum comes in to ask if they want an eggy and some soldiers.
Man, I love the English. I really need an unfeasibly-breasted posh totty. And when I find her I WILL take her to another level. posted by spicynuts at 9:19 AM on February 5, 2007 [11 favorites]
I am working on my post about a Fundie Christian super-conservative Mac user who drives a Humvee (NOT a Hummer, a Humvee) and supports the war in Iraq, and has solid PROOF that global warming is a communist hoax. Oh, and he reads Fark.
I hope this FPP hasn't ruined it for me. posted by The Deej at 9:20 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Flagged as "whining blogger trash." posted by drstein at 9:20 AM on February 5, 2007
Hey, Rush Limbaugh is a big mac fan, or was in the past. But yeah, Hardcore mac fanbois are pretty easy to hate. posted by delmoi at 9:24 AM on February 5, 2007
Stop objectifying Mac users please. posted by Mister_A at 9:24 AM on February 5, 2007
OH MY SHITTING CHRIST WHAT AN ASSHOLE THIS GUY IS. PC'S BETTER THAN MACS?
First of all:
1) Macs never crash...
2) PC's on the other hand, well let's just say BSOD, AMIRITE?
3) PUTTY COLOR IS A BAD COLOR...
4) I'm just fucking kidding I don't give a limping purple shit what kind of computer any of you use or like, mostly because no one has caved in the side of my forehead with a rusty iron frying pan.
Of course, that hasn't stopped me slagging off Mac owners, with a series of sweeping generalisations, for the past 900 words, but that is what the ads do to PCs.
And we all know the best way to counter argue a fallacious argument is offer the identical argument with the parties reversed.
Whatever. I'll keep my pretentious ass hole Mac Charlie. I've just decided that, in fact, yes, it does make me better than you. posted by smallerdemon at 9:27 AM on February 5, 2007
Jesus - I've loved Macs since OSX, but I loved this too. What a great rant - how can you not enjoy:
you have inadvertently put your finger on the dark fear haunting their feeble, quivering soul - that in some sense, they are a superficial semi-person assembled from packaging; an infinitely sad, second-rate replicant who doesn't really know what they are doing here, but feels vaguely significant and creative each time they gaze at their sleek designer machine.
[...]
Myst, the most pompous and boring videogame of all time, a plodding, dismal "adventure" in which you wandered around solving tedious puzzles in a rubbish magic kingdom apparently modelled on pretentious album covers, originated on the Mac in 1993. That same year, the first shoot-'em-up game, Doom, was released on the PC. This tells you all you will ever need to know about the Mac's relationship with "fun".
I think he's really complaining more about the ads than the computer itself. I can't entirely blame him, either, but annoying stereotypes or no, they ARE pretty funny.
Anyone could play Mac Guy, but John Hodgman is awesome. I don't think they'd work without him. posted by Malor at 9:28 AM on February 5, 2007
I'm typing this on a giant dusty Wang.
I'm convinced most MeFi posts are typed with a wang, small w. posted by spicynuts at 9:30 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Not sure that I care a bit about the perpetual question of Mac v. PC, but I switched this year, first with a purchase of a Macbook, then when our desktop dropped dead after three years of frequent glitches, bought an iMac. My sense is that, in a perfect alignment of fortune, one could do as well as a Mac if one bought a PC, assuming the OS functioned properly, and that whatever bundle of parts in the box actually was designed to do more than break down after a year. PC's are sold because of an intimidation factor about learning a new OS, from what I can tell, and little else.
And yes, they do work better. By a long shot. And yes, they are beautiful to look at. Which may be shallow, but apparently there are millions of people who actually feel that an object that consumes a significant portion of on'e assets and takes up space in one's home ought to look reasonable nice.
Anyone could play Mac Guy, but John Hodgman is awesome. I don't think they'd work without him.
Malor: well, he's writing from the UK, where they got diffrent actors to play the systems. "David Mitchell and Robert Webb". posted by delmoi at 9:33 AM on February 5, 2007
I use both. Every day.
A Mac is like a Hoover. A PC is like an Electrolux.
(They both Suck.)
A Microsoft mouse plugged your Mac=
Right-click Goodness. posted by squalor at 9:34 AM on February 5, 2007
your favorite operating system sucks. posted by empath at 9:36 AM on February 5, 2007
I think my favorite part is the first comment on the article. posted by moss at 9:37 AM on February 5, 2007
*sigh* Again? Ok, here goes.
Macs are for people who don't want to (and shouldn't have to) learn to use a computer. Like my mother.
Windows is for people who have to use some windows-only piece of software. Nobody chooses windows because it's better as an OS, they choose it for the apps.
Linux is for people who need their computers to be tools above all else.
Are we done yet? posted by Skorgu at 9:38 AM on February 5, 2007
10 Print "your favorite operating system sucks."
20 Goto 10 posted by Divine_Wino at 9:39 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
A single link post on the topic of Mac Vs. PCs. This thread will possibly be a contender for most comments ever.
Shame it wasnt a single link post on the topic of Mac Vs. PCs to a You Tube Video.
"Mac, PC... who cares. People who use any computer are assholes." Iconomy I agree.
Infact. Everyone is an asshole. Useage of computer format aside. posted by 13twelve at 9:40 AM on February 5, 2007
I even hate people who don't use Macs but sometimes wish they did
Ouch.
Come on, this was a funny article and more than a little bit true at the same time. I don't use a Mac but he described the part of me that wants one pretty much perfectly.
He needn't have bothered with the played-out one mouse button thing though. posted by teleskiving at 9:41 AM on February 5, 2007
Methinks the man doth protest too much. posted by Mr Pointy at 9:44 AM on February 5, 2007
My sense is that, in a perfect alignment of fortune, one could do as well as a Mac if one bought a PC, assuming the OS functioned properly, and that whatever bundle of parts in the box actually was designed to do more than break down after a year.
Macs and PCs are made out of the same "bundle of parts" Literally the exact same components. In almost all cases, whether or not a PC goes all glitchy on you won't have much to do with the actual hardware.
The thing is, some PC makers make crap, and some PC makers spend the time to make things work well. People are going to associate the crappiest E-machine or Compaq Presario or local shop slap-together with the best put together DELL as if they were made by the same people.
And yes, they do work better. By a long shot. And yes, they are beautiful to look at. Which may be shallow, but apparently there are millions of people who actually feel that an object that consumes a significant portion of one's assets and takes up space in one's home ought to look reasonable nice.
Well, that's a mater of opinion, obviously. You can buy PCs with lots of different case designs.
And they are incredibly quiet.
Dells are also very quiet.
But yeah a big problem with the PC was all the spyware and garbage that accumulates under windows. If you know what you're doing, it won't be a problem. I've never once had an issue with spyware, but I never download any software unless I'm certain it doesn't contain any. But obviously most people are not computer experts.
The thing is, though the reason Macs don't have this problem isn't because they're "just better" but because they don't have the same market share and are not targeted. Yes, you don't run as "root" on Mac OS, but you don't need to do that on windows either. posted by delmoi at 9:44 AM on February 5, 2007
Most people, here and in the article comments, don't seem to realize it's satire. Which is understandable because it's not very good satire. Charlie Brooker is often devastating when he's using humor as a blunt instrument, but here he aspires to subtlety and can't bring himself to commit to it and the result is wishy-washy. It's completely kneecapped by the note at the end, too.
Still, a few classic lines here. posted by George_Spiggott at 9:45 AM on February 5, 2007
If you truly believe you need to pick a mobile phone that "says something" about your personality, don't bother. You don't have a personality. A mental illness, maybe - but not a personality.
Bought an Intel Core Duo based mini and now run both Windows and OS X.
I have half a mind to take it back. posted by hal9k at 9:47 AM on February 5, 2007 [2 favorites]
Looks like Mr. Broker's piece struck a nerve.
The fact that there is such an outcry over this opinion speaks volumes for his case.
(Ice cream with cake? Overkill.) posted by wfc123 at 9:49 AM on February 5, 2007
Heh, I loved it an a Mac user. But unlike most of the metafilter herd mind I actually read it all the way through to the money shot in the last paragraph, where he opens up the curtain and reveals that it's all a put-on. posted by KirkJobSluder at 9:49 AM on February 5, 2007
Brooker posted by wfc123 at 9:49 AM on February 5, 2007
Man, I love the English. I really need an unfeasibly-breasted posh totty.
I can't help you with that, but can I introduce you to my friend, Buster Gonad?
From the article:
"Macs are glorified Fisher-Price activity centres for adults; computers for scaredy cats too nervous to learn how proper computers work."
Or alternatively, computers for people who want a reasonably priced Unix workstation, with a very nice GUI.
But I guess Charlie Brooker doesn't know enough about computers to know anything other than what Bill Gates tells him.
God, why am I even bothering to respond to this sort of trolling? It's like wrestling with a pig. posted by PeterMcDermott at 9:50 AM on February 5, 2007
Windows is for people who have to use some windows-only piece of software. Nobody chooses windows because it's better as an OS, they choose it for the apps.
I would say that people who use windows are people who don't care what OS they use. Nothing I do on my computer couldn't be doneon Linux or OSX, I just use it because it's easy to use and hassle free (compared to Linux) and it will run on a PC I put together myself.
I've tried Linux a few times, and it's always a been a kind of a pain to configure. Maybe it's made great strides lately, but yeah. I'm really lothe to get Vista though, unless all the DRM crap can be stripped out. So I may switch to Linux. posted by delmoi at 9:53 AM on February 5, 2007
I truthfully have not seen the Apple Macintosh campaign and don't know who David Mitchell and Robert Webb are.
Should I? Is it worth following up on?
For the record, I hate Macs but love Mac users. posted by MtDewd at 9:53 AM on February 5, 2007
Haha, apparently Mac users don't have a monopoly on irritating snark anymore. Suck it, PC haters! posted by Afroblanco at 9:56 AM on February 5, 2007
Are we done yet?
posted by Skorgu at 12:38 PM EST on February 5
No. Macs, PCs, etc. are for a wide variety of users and individuals and their computer of choice is subject to any number of preferences and needs. posted by juiceCake at 9:56 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Mitchell and Webb (who have done much good stuff, such as Peep Show and That Mitchell and Webb Sound) have really let themselves down with this Mac/PC stuff. Just thought that they had enough credibility not to take on someone else's roles.
As for Brooker, he makes money from hating on things. Sometimes he hates on things I like (Macs, cricket), sometimes he hates on things I hate (Pop [American] Idol, etc.). It's what he does.
And Nathan Barley did use a Mac "shaped like a fucking lampshade" - can't remember on which TV Go Home it was, but one of them. posted by athenian at 9:57 AM on February 5, 2007
The fact that there is such an outcry over this opinion speaks volumes for his case.
I happen to be typing this on my main desktop, which is a PC
A PC with both side panels off, and the fourth hard drive located outside the main case, beneath a small mountain of cigarette ends -- as it has been for the past nine months or so.
You can tell that my belief in Feng Shui is strong... posted by PeterMcDermott at 9:59 AM on February 5, 2007
I don't think I could love Charlie Brooker more. But, having read this, I want to. posted by terpsichoria at 10:01 AM on February 5, 2007
blah blah blah its Unix, bitch. posted by four panels at 10:02 AM on February 5, 2007
this guy is like maddox, only he takes himself seriously. posted by mosessmith at 10:05 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Sigh. CakeAndIceCreamFilter again? posted by Kwine at 10:06 AM on February 5, 2007
I guarantee you I know more about bit-twiddling with computers than this author. I own and use a Mac, and don't know a damn thing about feng shui.
Hmm...
I also happen to think that iMacs are damn beautiful. So appreciating beauty makes me shallow? Give me a fucking break. My iMac is also a damn functional PC. My wife is a damn functional mate: I don't find any problem or shallowness in also finding her beautiful. Fuck, appreciating and creating beautiful things is one of the greatest pleasures in life. Utilitarian concerns need to come first, but once you can afford to think about more than that, beauty is not at all a "shallow" way to spend your energies.
Idiot. I have a home-built Wintel machine running XP, and a Dell laptop too.
I came to the Mac from Debian Linux after 8 years (Win95 was just too much broken-ness to bear).
This author doesn't have a clue about what has happened to Macs in the last 5 years. With OS 9, he still would have been wrong, but at least a little less wrong. Today, with the 4th major iteration of OS X out, the guy is just fucking stupid.
If you're going to dog on Macs, at least pull your head out of your 1999 ass first. posted by teece at 10:09 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Yet another debate that is argued almost exclusively from one side of a fence.
Complaining about a one-button mouse on a Mac is sooo 1999. Plug in ANY third-party mouse and enjoy total left-click, right-click functionality.
Also, I run a Mac and a PC, synched together to make one giant audio workstation. The Mac rarely crashes, while the PC is being reconfigured after a VERY nasty hard drive meltdown. Mileage varying and all that... posted by tantrumthecat at 10:10 AM on February 5, 2007
Good thing he wasn't slagging off Mac users for not having a sense of humor! :-) posted by facetious at 10:13 AM on February 5, 2007
Ya'll DID see this part at the end, yes?
This week: Charlie watched some episodes of Larry Sanders (on his PC). He played the customised Fawlty Towers map for Counterstrike (on his PC). He listened to the Windows startup jingle every 10 minutes as his PC repeatedly rebooted itself.
He's clearly in the closet, with a shiny new iMac. posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:13 AM on February 5, 2007
he's a good writer so he must be intelligent enough to dump his PC.
Charlie Brooker worked for many years as a journalist on the PC games magazine "PC Zone". Regardless of his brainstuff quotient, he is unlikely to buy a Mac because they suck giant hairy bollocks for gaming.
But I guess Charlie Brooker doesn't know enough about computers to know anything other than what Bill Gates tells him.
Charlie Brooker worked for many years as a journalist on the PC games magazine "PC Zone". He has probably spent enough time around Windows -- and has certainly complained about its foibles enough in that time -- to be able to see around the life-size effigy of Bill Gates that doubtless adorns his desk. posted by ArmyOfKittens at 10:16 AM on February 5, 2007
To quote keswick, you are all dorks. posted by Mister_A at 10:19 AM on February 5, 2007
And yes, they do work better. By a long shot. And yes, they are beautiful to look at. Which may be shallow, but apparently there are millions of people who actually feel that an object that consumes a significant portion of one's assets and takes up space in one's home ought to look reasonable nice.
Experiences differ. I've had as many problems or lack thereof wth Macs as PCs over the years, which is to say, very little. As for the interfaces I find they each have their strengths and weaknesses each of which, in turn appeal more or less to any number of individuals.
As for looks, subjective of course, but I find most of my computer time is made up of looking at the monitor(s) and what's on them (and that too has a degree of flexibility, ave my Windows desktop is Aqua themed.) I rarely see the case(s). But I loved the look of the Cube with a large LCD. But the features (and price) were nonsense (for me.)
I work everyday with people who use a mix of platforms and I have to say none of us quite understands how that ever becomes an issue outside of what you like to work with. But we all have differences and maybe a computer can define peoples' personalities and what is important to each of us varies greatly, as do our interests.
That said, I'll never buy into the reductive Macs are for this type of person and PCs are for this type of person argument. Frankly, I believe they're used by a diverse set of people. For me, the person is the key, not the tools they use or the shoes they buy.
And this piece, obviously, is just having fun with that. posted by juiceCake at 10:24 AM on February 5, 2007
Well I for one had fun lawling at people who haven't read the article all the way through. Thanks for ruining the dumbass watching fun. posted by Suparnova at 10:25 AM on February 5, 2007
The beauty of the U.S. Mac vs. PCs commercials is that John Hodgeman is far more interesting and fun than the bland hipster that personifies the Mac. I would be far more inclined to buy a John Hodgeman than I would a generic Mac hipster actor guy whose name I don't know, so, for me, the commercials do the exact opposite of what is intended. posted by MegoSteve at 10:25 AM on February 5, 2007
Wasn't there a (USian) Mac ad with a walk-on by Unix? I seem to remember that being kind of funny. posted by Mister_A at 10:30 AM on February 5, 2007
I meant Linux. posted by Mister_A at 10:30 AM on February 5, 2007
The only practical difference between Macintoshen and Windows machines for most users is whether they're more familiar with one or the other. They're both computers and for most people they do the same damn thing.
Tech heads can get all up in arms about this that and the other difference under the hood, but it doesn't really matter to most people. posted by Captaintripps at 10:32 AM on February 5, 2007
Just a minor pet peeve-
"PC" stands for "Personal Computer," not "Windows." posted by TechnoLustLuddite at 10:32 AM on February 5, 2007
Charlie Brooker worked for many years as a journalist on the PC games magazine "PC Zone".
I didn't realize playing video games made someone a fully competent computer scientist. posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:45 AM on February 5, 2007
Hehe, this is becoming one of the best trolls since the Bonsai Kitten outrage. posted by KirkJobSluder at 10:45 AM on February 5, 2007
Just a minor pet peeve-
"PC" stands for "Personal Computer," not "Windows."
GM stands for "general motors" but it dosn't refer to motors in general. The term is generally used to refer to "decendants" of the Origional IBM PC. Of course Macs are now based on that same descendant architecture, but for a long time they were not. Words are defined by how they are used, not by their etymology. posted by delmoi at 10:46 AM on February 5, 2007
The only practical difference between Macintoshen and Windows machines for most users is whether they're more familiar with one or the other. They're both computers and for most people they do the same damn thing.
I use both. I started with a PC. I would classify myself as "power user" for what I do. So I am not most people. But I would rather have a Mac if I HAD to choose only one. Because for what I do they just DON'T do the same thing. Not reliably, anyway. But that is me.
As for average users. I think of my parents. The entire idea of a computer frustrated them. They are in their 70's. My dad had a Dell Laptop that was so over run with the typical Windows XP problems he simply stopped using it. It sat for a year literally unused.
So we bought them an iMac a couple of years ago. Total sea change. These crazy old people are sending me slide shows and movies and shit now through .Mac. They do not experience problems. There is no impediment to doing what they desire on that machine. My mom spends eight hours a day on Wikipedia now. So. Please won't you think of the old people.
BTW. Doesn't John Hodgman use a mac? posted by tkchrist at 10:48 AM on February 5, 2007
Charlie Brooker is funnier and smarter than you. Official. posted by Artw at 10:48 AM on February 5, 2007
I didn't realize playing video games made someone a fully competent computer scientist.
Are you a "fully competent computer scientist"? And how would you determine if someone was, some kind of turing test?
Ignoring someone's opinions about Macs vs. PCs biased on their grasp of "Computer Science" makes as much sense as dismissing someone's opinions on cars based on their grasp of quantum thermodynamics. posted by delmoi at 10:48 AM on February 5, 2007
The only way to have fun with a Mac is to poke its insufferable owner in the eye.
Funny. posted by ND¢ at 10:52 AM on February 5, 2007
Is there such a thing as quantum thermodynamics? If there is then I have a Ph.D. in it. posted by tkchrist at 10:53 AM on February 5, 2007
PCs are better than MACs.
PCs are better than network card address protocols? If you say so. posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:54 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Macs can run linux now, right...
Why are we arguing? posted by phrontist at 10:55 AM on February 5, 2007
If you can't run a PC without it becoming virus infested, or crashing you either shouldn't be using a computer, or should get someone in to set it up properly for you in the first place. posted by lilburne at 10:56 AM on February 5, 2007
Are you a "fully competent computer scientist"? And how would you determine if someone was, some kind of turing test?
I'll bet our video game expert would know. posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:56 AM on February 5, 2007
Linux is for people who need their computers to be tools above all else.
Nope, Linux is for people who enjoy spending their lives making their computers work, or are paid for it. posted by Skeptic at 10:57 AM on February 5, 2007
I use both, a lot, I'd have to say that while some of the usual contrasts are true, the standard "Mac is more stable" position is absolute bullshit. OS X gives me the spinning beachball of death far more often than XP gives me any equivalent, and with less reason -- my OS X machine is more 'stock' than the PC, with a lot less third-party stuff. And I haven't seen the BSOD in years, whereas I see the polyglot system crash notice on OS X about once a month. OS X is also an irrational pig for memory.
But overall I generally still prefer OS X for its ease of use and approachability, comprehensible software installation process (installshield is a horror, OS X's "just drag the image to the Application folder" is a dream by comparison) and the ability to open a terminal and have a full unix is really nice. posted by George_Spiggott at 10:58 AM on February 5, 2007
Funny article...but what's even funnier are the mac users lining up to prove his point. posted by rocket88 at 10:59 AM on February 5, 2007
FWIW I had my *first* BSOD on my Windows 2000 Pro machine the other night. The thing is that I've had this box since October 2002. I've had unspectacular crashes before but this one was kind of scary; came right back when I re-booted though. [NOT MAC-IST] posted by Mister_A at 11:04 AM on February 5, 2007
Linux is for people who need their computers to be tools above all else.
There, fixed that for you.
Actually, I use Linux most of the time, but it was too easy to pass up. posted by davejay at 11:04 AM on February 5, 2007
Hoo hoo hoo! I wouldn't want to be a Mac user after that article! posted by mazola at 11:06 AM on February 5, 2007
Macs can run linux now, right...
I bought my first PC because I got sick and tired of all of the apps that wouldn't compile under MkLinux DR2.
Cue 10 years of nasal bleating from Mac-likers who profess to like Macs not because they are fashionable, but because "they are just better".
Yeah, I don't get it. How are they supposed to be better, anyway? Because you can make movies on them? Well... sure... that just takes software. It seems like the things they mention in the commercials are all concerned with software. ::shrug:: I'm content with my PC. posted by CitrusFreak12 at 11:08 AM on February 5, 2007
However, I've got a desktop PC and a Dell laptop at home, and we just recently added a used eMac that we got for free about a month ago, and whenever I just want to use a computer for something, I almost always use the mac instead of the PC, even though it's older and slower than the windows box.
There's just something about it that feels better. I can't put it into words why, but it's true. posted by empath at 11:10 AM on February 5, 2007
Right on with George_Spiggott. I use all three (mac/win/*nix) platforms mentioned here pretty regularly, because of work I do in two different fields. The thing that drives me nuts about these futile arguments (which, at root [Hah!], are not about computers at all) is how they conflate two separate things: hardware and OS.
I've seen mac and pc hardware go futsy at roughly comparable frequency, which makes sense because as has been pointed out, it's pretty much the same stuff. I have yet to see an OS that handles hardware problems truly gracefully. They all suck at it.
Without question, the one truth that must be applied across all boxen, regardless of OS and hardware, is that a working configuration is something to be valued. That's the thing that people just don't get for some reason.
"Oh, a downloadable exe of 'new smileys'! Huzzah, I must have it!"
"This box is reliable, let me add a cheap-ass tuner card and use it as a PVR!"
"Oh, this 'pro applications patch' must be something safe I should install or it wouldn't be pushed to me, right?"
Reliability != funness, but unreliability == unfun posted by Pliskie at 11:10 AM on February 5, 2007 [2 favorites]
Is there such a thing as quantum thermodynamics?
well, sort of - one might say that statistical mechanics using b-e or f-d statistics, as opposed to a classical distribution function, might constitute "quantum thermodynamics".
but ya, if you called it that, you might as well claim you have a degree in technical computerology, or computational macintoshery, or whatever. posted by sergeant sandwich at 11:11 AM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Windows lets you do a lot more than mac. Of the set of things that windows allows you to do that mac does not many of the things are very stupid. Windows is like a myspace page in that you can do a great deal of things most of which you probably shouldn't. Mac's are like face book in that you can't do manythings that are all that stupid and it is easy to do most of the things that you might want to do, but there are somethings that maybe you'd like to do that you won't be able to do. And of those things many of them... you probably shouldn't do. posted by I Foody at 11:13 AM on February 5, 2007 [4 favorites]
Macs never crash...
posted by Divine_Wino
that's what i always tell my mac using co-workers when their macs crash! posted by crawfishpopsicle at 11:17 AM on February 5, 2007
Just wanted to pop in and say:
I like PCs because, unlike Macs, they allow me to use open-source software like Linux rather than the extremely closed-source operating systems that Microsoft and Apple have thrust upon us.
My Windows users are constantly breaking silly shit on their PCs that usually takes a few minutes to repair.
My Mac users rarely break shit, but when they do it's really broken.
I suppose that means something. posted by mr_crash_davis at 11:20 AM on February 5, 2007
Do you read a lot of Gertrude Stein, I Foody? posted by cgc373 at 11:21 AM on February 5, 2007
Oh, to stay on topic: I use an iBook for personal stuff and a desktop Dell for work stuff. Mac do I love; PC do I tolerate, at best. posted by cgc373 at 11:22 AM on February 5, 2007
Indeed, I Foody. Some years ago, a friend of mine opined that as time went on, the Mac vs PC debate would cease to have any real significance—network requirements were continually driving the two operating systems to greater compatibility, and soon the choice would come down to a Chevy vs Cadillac situation, rather than a Chevy vs Ford decision. Linux is Dodge, of course.
That was in 2002, as the friend in question was assembling my then-overbuilt, now-adequate Windows box. I'd say that recent events, like the advent of dual-bootable Intel Macs, support his prognostication. posted by Mister_A at 11:23 AM on February 5, 2007
You know who else hates Macs?
Osama bin Laden.
(Is this thread Godwinized yet?)
Oh yes, vi users are knuckle-dragging troglodytes.
And dog owners are emotionally needy saps. posted by KirkJobSluder at 11:26 AM on February 5, 2007
koeselitzwrites"I like PCs because, unlike Macs, they allow me to use open-source software like Linux rather than the extremely closed-source operating systems that Microsoft and Apple have thrust upon us."
I like PCs because, unlike Macs, they allow me to use open-source software like Linux rather than the extremely closed-source operating systems that Microsoft and Apple have thrust upon us.
Why are you going on about dogs, KirkJobSluder? ARE YOU ANTI-CANINIST OR SOMETHING posted by Mister_A at 11:29 AM on February 5, 2007
The fact that there is such an outcry over this opinion speaks volumes for his case.
*heh* You say that almost with a straight face, as if you weren't aware that this discussion has been going on since 1984.
Other Mac vs PC types of "arguments":
•Abortion vs Choice
•God vs Atheism
•TOS vs TNG
•Picard vs Kirk
•Coke vs Pepsi
•Nike vs Reebok (if you're from the 80s)
•Ford vs Chevy (if you're from the 60s and 70s)
•Marlboro vs Winston vs Camel
•Episodes I-III vs Episodes IV-VI
•Freddy vs Jason
•Ash vs Anything Supernatural Inhabiting A Human Body
•Lotus123 vs Excel (from the 80s and 90s)
•Folgers vs Maxwell House (if you're from the 70s and 80s)
•Starbucks vs That Coffee Shop Down The Street (now)
•Burger King vs McDonalds
•HD-DVD vs BluRay
•3.5" Floppies vs 5.25 Diskettes
•ATI vs GeForce
•XBox 360 vs Playstation 3 vs Wii
•XBox vs Playstation 2 vs Gamecube
•Sega Dreamcast vs Playstation
You get the idea. You know what wins these arguments? Time. After a while nobody fucking cares that much. Or they buy what works best for them. As long as someone can make money from one or the other, nobody really cares about what's better. It's all mental masturbation, and nobody bothers cleaning up after themselves. posted by smallerdemon at 11:32 AM on February 5, 2007
I spent the last few months writing a book on my Mac. Didn't talk about it. Did it. And I've got a publisher. If I'd done it on a PC it would have been rubbish.
Article [and comments - over there and here] made me laugh. posted by meech at 11:37 AM on February 5, 2007
Metafilter : You are Wrong ! No, YOU are Wrong ! posted by elpapacito at 11:37 AM on February 5, 2007
How can I tell which kind of computer I own? posted by Postroad at 11:38 AM on February 5, 2007 [5 favorites]
I can no longer differentiate between those of you who are being subtly sarcastic by pretending to miss the fact that the article is satire and so posting fanboy commentary based on decades-out-of-date or counterfactual premises just to carry on the joke, and those of you who are idiots. posted by ook at 11:40 AM on February 5, 2007 [2 favorites]
the good doctor would not run windows. (freebsd maybe?) posted by Dr. Boom at 11:41 AM on February 5, 2007
Macs are [...] computers for scaredy cats too nervous to learn how proper computers work;
[...]
"Why has this rubbish aspirational ornament only got one mouse button?"
Stopped reading there. Maybe this dumbass should start taking his own advice, and learn something. posted by triolus at 11:41 AM on February 5, 2007
I, sir, am an idiot. I take offense that you would think otherwise. posted by smallerdemon at 11:47 AM on February 5, 2007
ook, we're all idiots here. When you find yourself unsure how to respond, feel free to deploy one of the old reliables. This will only embolden the idiots and cause us to embrace you as one of our own. posted by Pliskie at 11:47 AM on February 5, 2007
Postroad:
As with many animals, simply look under the tail. If it's a Mac, you will see a smooth white plastic pip. If it's a PC, there will be a huge glowing cock. posted by Mister_A at 11:50 AM on February 5, 2007 [2 favorites]
I didn't realize playing video games made someone a fully competent computer scientist.
No, but writing for a PC games magazine -- and playing PC games extensively -- from the days of DOS to the early 2000s means that someone likely knows enough about all flavours of Windows, PC gaming hardware, and the PC "scene" in general, to make an intelligent decision about whether they want to use Windows or OSX.
I would have thought this was implied by that much shorter sentence I wrote up there, but apparently not. posted by ArmyOfKittens at 11:50 AM on February 5, 2007
•Starbucks vs That Coffee Shop Down The Street (now)
I currently fret over the "This Starbucks vs The Starbucks a Block Away" argument. posted by peeedro at 11:51 AM on February 5, 2007
Been using computers for, oh kill me now, 30 years or so.
Had an Apple II originally. Great, expandable box, lots of cool apps, Mountain Music system, Decillionix (sp) sound sampling card, lots of other coolness. Softalk Apple, best computer magazine in history (besides Byte).
Had an original IBM PC, and I loved the keyboard, though not as much as the one that came with the DEC Rainbow. DOS sucked, a little more than Apple DOS.
Got a Mac 128 in January of 1984, and though it only shipped with MacPaint and MacWrite, it was superb. Telos Filevision made my brain implode, I must have been up for 4-5 days in a row, making crazy linked graphic madness. I took a copy of "The Way Things Work", and started making Filevision renditions of ball point pens and nuclear reactors.
I've been using this stuff far too long to want to even remember, and I can tell you this:
The Mac, with all it's issues and Apple's weirdness, has always been a better creative platform. Period. There have been times that I've wanted certain apps on the Mac that were simply never going to migrate over - 3D Studio Max stands out as the best example - but for the most part, I've always turned to the Mac first for most of my work. I have a Windows box on my desk - yeah, a Dell my brother put together for me, customized blah blah blah - but it's the Mac that gets pushed to the wall.
And I'll share a little something with y'all - the sensitivity and responsiveness of the mouse are non-trivial, qualitative aspects of the different platforms.
Let's take the simple example of Photoshop. Use the rectangular marquee tool to make a pixel-precise selection.
Click the Mac mouse, drag, select. Pixel-level precision, no problemo.
NOW, do it with a Windows box and ANY mouse.
Jumpy BS, yeah, try to position the mouse over a specific row of pixels, press down Cap Locks for that crosshair in Photoshop (yours truly spec'd that feature out for Photoshop 1.0), and go ahead, MAKE THE FUCKING SELECTION.
Bingo.
Can you get Artmatic Pro, Studio Artist or Metasynth for Windows?
Nope. Not now, probably not ever.
Some folks are more than happy to drink that Lipton's teabag full of dirt. Me, I'll choose the loose, luscious Red Fruits black tea, steep those leaves in a teaball, nice ceramic teapot, a touch of honey and some fesh lemon. FUCK the Equal and reconstituted lemon juice drink shit.
Oh yes, vi users are knuckle-dragging troglodytes.
while emacs users can't drag their knuckles because of carpal tunnel from all the key combinations posted by pyramid termite at 11:57 AM on February 5, 2007
vi. cats. That is all. posted by everichon at 11:59 AM on February 5, 2007
I take it back. In some cases, I can differentiate. posted by ook at 11:59 AM on February 5, 2007
> Oh yes, vi users are knuckle-dragging troglodytes.
esc:wq to you too.
Oh, and Mac zealots are such nouveau come-latelys. There hasn't been a real Apple since the ][. Apple lost its soul completely when they decided they were too hip to have a rainbow logo. posted by jfuller at 12:01 PM on February 5, 2007
I don't use a PC or a Mac. I do all the math in my head. posted by Uther Bentrazor at 12:03 PM on February 5, 2007
•Choice
•Atheism
•TNG
•Picard
•Coke
•Nike
•Ford
•Camel
•Episodes I-III
•Freddy
•Excel (I know some of the guys who developed Lotus, and theyre giant assholes)
•Folgers
•That Coffee Shop Down The Street (now)
•McDonalds
•BluRay
•3.5" Floppies
Wii
•Playstation 2
•Playstation
My first computer was an Apple ][. First machine I used in college was a Mac Classic. Then the next year my friend got a copy of Doom running on his 386. I learned my first DOS commands to make that game go. Now I play around with Linux and have owned Windows machines since Win95 came out.
Would I buy a Mac? Not sure. Vista seems a bit like a pig, given the DRM issues... I don't know that it is enough to make me switch at the moment. I couldn't seriously move to Linux, not yet anyway. My wife would be frustrated by a lot of things.
Hell, the primary reasons I won't go to a Mac right now are (a) the hardware issues - I do not like to have my OS be tied to any specific company's hardware, and (b) those smarmy ads piss me off.
Plus, I'll just come right out and say it: I do not want a PC that looks like a shiny plastic toy. Really. I don't want a beige box either, but I really just do not at all like the standard "Mac look". I do not want to think differently just like everyone else. The Mac look does not fit my personality. With a non-Mac system, I can actually buy or build a computer that has some of my own personal tastes reflected. How many people build extravagant case mods for PCs? How many elaborate case mods have you seen for Macs? And here I thought that Macs were for creative people...
Nope, Linux is for people who enjoy spending their lives making their computers work, or are paid for it.
I.e., people who need their computers to be tools?
You use whatever system you like, whatever one gets your work done, whatever IT makes you use. You want Windows? OS X? BeOS? IE 5.0 on Mac OS 9? Knock yourself out.
But for those of use who work on computers, not with them, computers need to damn well do what we tell them to do, now. We need Hole Hawgs, not Hello Kitty plastic drills or re-badged yum-cha imitation crap.
My entire family uses mac laptops. If anyone asks me, as they do, what computer should they get, I reply with "Apple." Because I charge to deal with Windows. posted by Skorgu at 12:04 PM on February 5, 2007
I don't use a PC or a Mac. I do all the math in my head.
wait until you see him do flight simulator x in his head posted by pyramid termite at 12:04 PM on February 5, 2007
klangklangston: You forgot Ash. Other than that I am amazed to find myself pretty much in agreement with you on nearly all counts. posted by caution live frogs at 12:06 PM on February 5, 2007
My entire family uses mac laptops. If anyone asks me, as they do, what computer should they get, I reply with "Apple." Because I charge to deal with Windows.
Skorgu, that was perfect. Thank you. posted by dbiedny at 12:07 PM on February 5, 2007
Yeah, but I prefer the Stones to the Beatles (and the Kinks to both). posted by klangklangston at 12:09 PM on February 5, 2007
Is there such a thing as quantum thermodynamics?
well, sort of - one might say that statistical mechanics using b-e or f-d statistics, as opposed to a classical distribution function, might constitute "quantum thermodynamics".
but ya, if you called it that, you might as well claim you have a degree in technical computerology, or computational macintoshery, or whatever.
Well, it has a Wikipedia entry. It means trying to combine Quantum Mechanics with classical thermodynamics. posted by delmoi at 12:11 PM on February 5, 2007
NOW, do it with a Windows box and ANY mouse.
I have pixel-perfect precision of this kind on my Windows PC, but I did buy a nice £40 gaming mouse; I'd be disappointed if I didn't :)
Since everyone in this thread is under contractual obligation to post their opinion on Windows PCs vs Macs, here's mine: now that they can run Windows (and therefore games) I'd be interested in a Mac if you could buy one cheaply that was upgradeable. As it is, all but the most expensive lock you into one screen, or one graphics chipset, or one... etc. To get a Mac that would offer me the same upgrade options as my current PC (which cost maybe £600, although that doesn't include the RAM, the screen, or the drives, which came from my previous PC) I'd have to pay £1700 for a Mac Pro, which just isn't happening.
PC gamers upgrade their CPU and GPU frequently, their motherboards and RAM less often, and their case and screen every few years. I wouldn't want the pace of my screen and case upgrades to be forced by my CPU and GPU upgrades, and I wouldn't want to struggle on with a PC with unsatisfying performance because I didn't want to upgrade my screen just yet.
I don't really understand the zealotry that seems to surround the Mac platform, nor the insistence that anyone who computes without the aid of OSX is some kind of artless spreadsheet monkey. I find the Mac vs PC adverts mildly perplexing: why insult the people you're trying to sell to? posted by ArmyOfKittens at 12:11 PM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
No, but writing for a PC games magazine -- and playing PC games extensively -- from the days of DOS to the early 2000s means that someone likely knows enough about all flavours of Windows, PC gaming hardware, and the PC "scene" in general, to make an intelligent decision about whether they want to use Windows or OSX.
Theorem: When I want to know something about how a computer works, a video game-playing monkey is probably least qualified to speak to that subject.
Lemma 1: It's called "Mac OS X", not MACs, nor MACS, nor MACOSX, nor MAC OSX, nor even OSX. It's hard to take someone seriously when they can't communicate properly.
Lemma 2: Driving a Hyundai doesn't make someone capable of driving or even knowing anything about a Porsche.
Yes, you don't run as "root" on Mac OS, but you don't need to do that on windows either.
I envy you that you've not run into this problem yet. It does exist, however. Lots of software requires (stupidly, yes) that you run it as an Administrator.
Particular scanner drivers and, strangely enough, lots of different accounting software, requires that you be Administrator while using it.
This makes it all but impossible to set up someone's computer with an Administrator and a Power User, then try to have them only use the Administrator account for special things.
Believe me, I've tried. It would really simplify a bunch of the spyware/adware problems, but it simply isn't a workable solution yet. Vista may fix this, but I guarantee it will bring with it horrors we haven't even imagined yet. So, that's cool. posted by odinsdream at 12:19 PM on February 5, 2007
I'm typing this on a giant dusty Wang.
Get your fucking hands off of me. posted by loquacious at 12:26 PM on February 5, 2007
klangklangston:
•Episodes I-III
This may sound judgmental, but people like you should go live on that creepy island in Papillon. [NOT LEPER-IST] posted by Mister_A at 12:29 PM on February 5, 2007
Theorem: When I want to know something about how a computer works, a video game-playing monkey is probably least qualified to speak to that subject.
Okay, here it is, really simple:
1. I need to make a decision about which platform I prefer.
2. I like to play Windows games.
3. Can everything else that I would do under OSX also be done under Windows?
4. If the answer to 3 is yes, I should buy a Windows PC. If the answer is no, I need to decide whether games are more important to me than the applications that are only available on OSX.
Charlie Brooker, like many people, has decided that the answer to 3 is yes. He is now being called a joyless idiot by the Mac adverts, and so he writes a humorous rant about it.
You don't need to be a computer scientist to play Windows games. He probably knows as much as I do: how to build a PC from off-the-shelf parts, how to install Windows, how to keep Windows clear of horrible pathogens, and how to stick a game DVD in the drive and run it. He knows exactly as much as he needs to to make his decision.
Lemma 1: It's called "Mac OS X", not MACs, nor MACS, nor MACOSX, nor MAC OSX, nor even OSX. It's hard to take someone seriously when they can't communicate properly.
And I'll share a little something with y'all - the sensitivity and responsiveness of the mouse are non-trivial, qualitative aspects of the different platforms.
Let's take the simple example of Photoshop. Use the rectangular marquee tool to make a pixel-precise selection.
Click the Mac mouse, drag, select. Pixel-level precision, no problemo.
NOW, do it with a Windows box and ANY mouse.
I've never had any problem doing that, and I have the mouse speed turned up pretty high. I know on really old macs I would have to move the mouse over a larger distance then the size of the pad, while on PCs I can usually just twist my wrist to move all over the screen. Still, mouse speed is adjustable, and like I said, I've never had a problem selecting a single pixel in Photoshop on a PC. posted by delmoi at 12:33 PM on February 5, 2007
I need to decide whether games are more important to me than the applications that are only available on OSX.
Well, it has a Wikipedia entry. It means trying to combine Quantum Mechanics with classical thermodynamics.
Then call me DOCTOR TK, from now on if you please.
The idiotic "If you can't deal with virus, crashes and installs you shouldn't own a Computer" thing aside, the main debate between PC's and Macs seems to boil down, yet again, to this hipster hate thing. A substrate of the tiresome Meta-Taste "get yer hate on" threads.
I must ask. What is a hipster? And why do we all hate him, and everything he uses, so? Is it a class thing?
I find the Mac vs PC adverts mildly perplexing: why insult the people you're trying to sell to?
Most ads are insulting, right? At least on some level. I mean they are claiming: you smell; or you can't get laid; or your car is for poor people; or your tits or dick are small; or your fat; or you eat food for pussies.
An agency is essentially an insult factory.
PS. I really love my G5 and Mac Pro. On the Mac Pro I can run Apache and Windows and OSX. I have never had a single serious crash on either - when I did IT for the Agency I never had a single serious crash on any of the 15 or so OSX machines. I use my PC laptop for testing and for Office products. And it's fine. But I won't pretend the Windows machine is as simple to update, back-up, restore, and maintain as the Apple machines. It's just not. posted by tkchrist at 12:37 PM on February 5, 2007
When I want to know something about how a computer works, a video game-playing monkey is probably least qualified to speak to that subject.
However, apparently, when I want a relevant response to an article, a 'computer scientist' isn't particularly qualified either.
Nobody - if they were addressing the article, and not chugging happily away into a circular argument with themselves, which I realise is an ever-present danger around here - was talking about how computers work. If you bought an Apple computer because of some superiority in the hardware identified by your mighty computer-sciencey brain, good for you. You are categorically not the brand-focused, learning-averse, evangelising Mac 'lifestyle' zealot Brooker is ranting about in this article, and nor are you the target of Apple's vaguely obnoxious marketing campaign. Although you might want to get that persecution complex looked at. posted by terpsichoria at 12:37 PM on February 5, 2007
Theorem: When I want to know something about how a computer works, a video game-playing monkey is probably least qualified to speak to that subject.
Lemma 1: It's called "Mac OS X", not MACs, nor MACS, nor MACOSX, nor MAC OSX, nor even OSX. It's hard to take someone seriously when they can't communicate properly.
You knew what he meant, didn't you. Plus, I still don't know what you mean by "competent computer scientist" which you seem to think someone needs to be in order to have an opinion on Mac vs. PC. posted by delmoi at 12:42 PM on February 5, 2007
Most ads are insulting, right? At least on some level. I mean they are claiming: you smell; or you can't get laid; or your car is for poor people; or your tits or dick are small; or your fat; or you eat food for pussies.
Agreed, but I think these ads go further than most. Your average advert (on British TV anyway) tries to suggest that you will be sexier/more popular/etc. if you buy [product]. These ads specifically say, "You are a complete prat. You're dorky, you're unpopular, and you're no fun. If you buy [product] you will become young, attractive, etc." It feels like a step further to me. It's like a car advert that says, "People who drive Vauxhall Corsas, like you, are wankers. They should buy Ford Fiestas instead!" That doesn't feel like a successful ad; I wonder why these Apple ads succeed (if they do). posted by ArmyOfKittens at 12:43 PM on February 5, 2007
Boot Camp is stupid fresh, at least in theory. I am considering buying a Mac since my Windows box is nearing the end of its operational life; I would not have considered it prior to the advent of the dual-boot capability if the Intel chipsets.
One nice thing about consumer-level Macs is that you get some cool stuff bundled (video importing and editing, etc.) that you have to pay for (hardward and/or software, depending what you buy) on a Windows box. A big knock, though, is the lack of a "consumer"-level desktop box between the iMac and the zillion dollar Mac Pro workstation. I suspect that the iMac is virtually impossible to upgrade, as with previous iterations. The MacBooks look kinda cool, but they probably have upgrade issues too. posted by Mister_A at 12:44 PM on February 5, 2007
Nobody - if they were addressing the article, and not chugging happily away into a circular argument with themselves, which I realise is an ever-present danger around here - was talking about how computers work.
What, you didn't figure out that this thread is a big circle-jerk response to a troll by about 12:30*? And it's not obvious from the last paragraph of the linked article that Brooker is just trolling in response to the Apple advertising campaign.
* Not to insult circle-jerks by unfavorably comparing them to this metafilter thread. I'm certain that most circle-jerks are perfectly well adjusted group activities. posted by KirkJobSluder at 12:48 PM on February 5, 2007
This looks like a winner to me. I'm no dummy [NOT TRUE], but I do not have the time nor the inclination to figure out the best way to set up a home network. I need to set up an easy-to-build, easy-to-use home network; this looks like just the thing.
Smart of Mac to produce hardware that'll run with the other 94% of the market. posted by Mister_A at 12:49 PM on February 5, 2007
The apple ads have been very successful... when you look at them in the perspective of an augmentation of the iPod.
Here is what Apple did. The iPod was released at a time when the MP3 market didn't really have a solid dominant player. Maybe Rio? Certainly not one with the design and marketing muscle of Apple. But the iPod's (and iTunes and the Music Store) popularity caught even Apple a bit by surprise.
What they found was Windows users found the iTunes interface attractive and much easier that other MP3 software for Windows. But there were bugs. Bugs not found on Apple hardware.
The iPod came out when Windows was getting a great deal of negative security publicity and at the end of the typical Pentium life cycle. So a small percentage Windows users who had iPods were looking to maybe switch desktops and laptops.
So that's why the Apple ads are the way they are... Lifestyle users are the future.
Apple didn't have time for subtlety seeing how Vista was coming out soon. They had to nab these potential switchers fast. And surprisingly they did. Not that many. But enough to buy all the other Apple stuff like the video iPod, etc.
It was a smart move. posted by tkchrist at 12:53 PM on February 5, 2007
Boot Camp is stupid fresh, at least in theory. I am considering buying a Mac since my Windows box is nearing the end of its operational life; I would not have considered it prior to the advent of the dual-boot capability if the Intel chipsets.
Naw man. Use Parallels Desktop for Mac. It is the SHIZ-nit! You can then use it with fast user switching and not have to re-boot! posted by tkchrist at 12:58 PM on February 5, 2007
(with apologies to The Shaw Report)
OUT: Mac users
FIVE MINUTES AGO: Linux users
IN: People who are comfortable with any platform, depending on the application. posted by Slarty Bartfast at 1:02 PM on February 5, 2007
So if I got my mother a Mac, would she then not have to print out and immediately delete every email for fear of using up the 40 gigs of free space she has on her PC? posted by maxwelton at 1:02 PM on February 5, 2007
Man, this is a funny thread. The funniest posts come from people who take it seriously. It would be even funnier if we could still post images, but the serious people ruined that for everybody.
(they probably all use macs) posted by CCBC at 1:16 PM on February 5, 2007
I became a PC user the first time I shut down the Mac I was using, then tried to eject my floppy. I had to reboot the computer to eject the damn disk and I missed my bus by twenty seconds. Between that and the single mouse button thing I decided I liked the customizability and rawness of the PC better. posted by autodidact at 1:24 PM on February 5, 2007
Here's the only worthwhile part of the article [placed appropriately at the end]:
Ultimately the campaign's biggest flaw is that it perpetuates the notion that consumers somehow "define themselves" with the technology they choose. If you truly believe you need to pick a mobile phone that "says something" about your personality, don't bother. You don't have a personality. A mental illness, maybe - but not a personality. Of course, that hasn't stopped me slagging off Mac owners, with a series of sweeping generalisations, for the past 900 words, but that is what the ads do to PCs. Besides, that's what we PC owners are like - unreliable, idiosyncratic and gleefully unfair. And if you'll excuse me now, I feel an unexpected crash coming.
I hate the notion that someone would buy a certain brand of computer solely because it makes them look more professional or arty, and unfortunately i've come across this enough that Macs have this stereotype in my mind attached to them. So Steve, suppose it's time to make a clunky beige edition Mac and sell it solely for 5 years. Or open the market up completely [yeah right].
Personally i've been a pc person because the apparent aftermarket upgrades available always seemed quicker to market and a bit more affordable. Now that Intel is providing on the CPU end, i don't know if this complaint is still valid or not.
Can i, for instance, install a Geforce 8800 onto a new Mac?
The philosophy behind a closed-vendor platform most likely leads to a more stable system overall, curious if Apple maintains this position of primary vendor now that they've gotten Intel to provide the CPU. posted by phylum sinter at 1:28 PM on February 5, 2007
Why do Macs feel better to use than PCs? And why can't most people put their fingers on why?
The Apple Human Interface Guidelines spells out the little tips and tricks to app design that gives Macs that feel. Little tricks like the infinite border (that PCs didnt have for a while) andothers. Macs are better (yes, I use both) because the operating system, in so many ways, is designed better. Like any product, the more attention and thought put into the overall design of the product, the better the product is. It's why iPods are superior too.
By the way, whichever side of the argument you are on, if you "hate X users" then you are a hater. Useless and cruel. Stop hating. posted by Dantien at 1:31 PM on February 5, 2007
autodidact: isn't using a bent paperclip to eject a floppy from a drive 'raw' enough for you? posted by mazola at 1:32 PM on February 5, 2007
Boot Camp is stupid fresh
Just for using that phrase, then you, sir, are stupid fresh. And I mean that in the spirit you meant it.
Now onto the breakdancing! posted by grubi at 1:33 PM on February 5, 2007
I became a PC user the first time I shut down the Mac I was using, then tried to eject my floppy.
I'm sorry, but did you say "floppy"? Really? People still use those?
:-) posted by grubi at 1:36 PM on February 5, 2007
Mazola, it's just dumb, I wasn't aware I could do it, and I didn't have a paperclip on me... posted by autodidact at 1:38 PM on February 5, 2007
Hmm as far as my upgrading worries go...
I guess with 8 cores and 4 MB cache I wouldn't have to upgrade CPU anytime soon. posted by Mister_A at 1:38 PM on February 5, 2007
Um, I'd like klangklangston to explain his "Episodes I-III" preference. posted by papakwanz at 1:40 PM on February 5, 2007
Um, I'd like klangklangston to explain his "Episodes I-III" preference.
These are not the Episodes he thinks they are... posted by mazola at 1:46 PM on February 5, 2007
the first time I shut down the Mac I was using, then tried to eject my floppy.
Only a PC user could achieve this. The Mac ejects all non-startup disks on shutdown. posted by bonaldi at 1:46 PM on February 5, 2007
"•Episodes I-III
This may sound judgmental, but people like you should go live on that creepy island in Papillon. [NOT LEPER-IST]"
Hah. I'm not enough of a dork to instantly remember that the prequels were released after the sequels. I just thought "Yeah, the first three. The ones that just came out sucked." posted by klangklangston at 1:48 PM on February 5, 2007
Mister_A:
That's good, but i was talking more about the things that people upgrade much more often than CPU's -- soundcards, videocards, etc.
Also, quad cores are available for both platforms aren't they? I mean, since both Mac and PC are Intel-powered? posted by phylum sinter at 1:48 PM on February 5, 2007
Have you priced one of those fuckers on the Apple store web site? It's fun to just play around with the customizer, pick some upscale options, and wind up with a computer that costs more than a nice used car. posted by mr_roboto at 1:49 PM on February 5, 2007
Only a PC user could achieve this. The Mac ejects all non-startup disks on shutdown.
Your method of 'power down' is obviously not ripping the power cord out of the wall when you're done. posted by mazola at 1:52 PM on February 5, 2007 [1 favorite]
Have you priced one of those fuckers on the Apple store web site?
Compare it with a Dell or HP, you might be in for quite surprise how much less it costs. posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:54 PM on February 5, 2007
Ah we cool then klangklangston.
*dons, doffs dork derby* posted by Mister_A at 1:55 PM on February 5, 2007
"Your method of 'power down' is obviously not ripping the power cord out of the wall when you're done."
When you do this, you must also shout "I AM THE KING OF COMPUTERS!" posted by klangklangston at 1:57 PM on February 5, 2007
I don't know whether the quad core CPUs are available yet, and yes they will be stupid expensive. I also don't think the Mac Pro will take aftermarket (PC) video cards, and the available options totally blow. So yea, this box is not an option; as I said earlier, I wish there was a consumer-level Mac desktop to which one could make quick, ea
Subscribe
posted by RichLyon at 8:50 AM on February 5, 2007