Once you go mac you never go back!

[J. M. Pescado]

They've made it even worse in Vista with something they call User Account Controls, or UAC for short.  This time, they darken the screen and it pops up with a "Are you sure you want to do this?" dialog even when you're copying files to say your Program Files directory.  COPYING.  EVEN NOT OVERWRITING.  Luckily, you can turn this thing off but then there goes the "security" that Vista was supposed to give you.  This idea was just as retarded as hiding the Program Files and Windows folders to make you safer.

Yeah, well, you know how it is. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, right?

Given the choice of dancing pigs and security, users will choose dancing pigs, every single time. Given the choice between pictures of naked people frolicking on the beach and security, roughly half the population will choose naked people frolicking on the beach. Couple that with the fact that users do not understand our security dialogs and we have a disaster. If a dialog asking the user to make a security decision is the only thing standing between the user and the naked people frolicking on the beach, security does not stand a chance.

The thing with frivolous security popups is that users quickly get into a habit of ignoring them if you insist on asking them too many stupid questions, and dismissing them becomes an automatic reflex, thus undermining their value.

[Mirelly]

Running Linux in Windows in Linux...

My ex did that one time. I asked him why. 'Because I can' he said.
Ran like a dog of course.

Presumably not a greyhound ...

[OpiumGirl]

I actually have almost the same exact setup as amjoie.
I have a Dell XPS and a 21" iMac....(yeah, amjoie is better)
They both have their merits.....
Acutally, the only biggest merit I've found that keep me using a peecee is the Sims :)It simply doesn't run as well on mac...not that I've found, but then again, I don't have a top of the line video-card like I do on my pc. I guess, the availability of software and compatibility of different applications is another good reason.  You can do everything on a mac, but there are less choices in software to get you there.
The fact is though, even though there are less choices for software, the quality of these choices (imo) is far better and most of the really important apps such a Photoshop and the like, come out at the same time the pc apps come out.
Games, on the other hand, you have to wait awhile for, which is another reason I like using my pc.

Anyway, aside from how gloriously beauteous they are, they are very stable machines and the security alone (lack of viruses) would most likely save you the money from having to buy all of the security applications!  It would likely make up for the difference in price with that issue alone.

My old grandmother of a G4 is still kicking like you wouldn't believe....Never even had a hickup from her.
And, lastly, there is my Sony Vaio windoze machine which I use for all of my internet use because, well, I simply don't care about it.

Sony sucks but since I installed a BareBones version of Windoze, it runs like a dream...Took out all of the Sony crap, used driver genius to get the essential drivers that I needed, and boom, the machine is better than it was brand new.

Sorry to bore you all. My point is that Mac is amazing, but it's handy to have a good pc around....

[notveryawesome]

I've heard that OSx86 is pretty much dead, so there probably won't be a Leopard release.  I never got the thing to work on my computer without wanting me to reformat the entire drive anyway, not to mention torrents for it are a lot less common than ones of Linux.  I wonder if Boot Camp works...

It's a shame that I never got it to install, it'd probably freak people out seeing Mac OS X on a HP Laptop.

Yes, BootCamp works. AFAIK, that's the only way to get a Windows partition on a Mac, or at least it's the easiest. I'm not sure about vice versa, though.

@Pseudonymous: The beauty of having a Mac is that hackers mostly target Windows users. Secure or not, Macs just don't get the same trojans and other crap that Windows machines do. That justifies the expense, IMO.

[kuronue]

My mother, a photographer, insists that Mac is the only type of computer that will A) run her software (Photoshop  and then I guess she uses Quark occasionally for layout stuff?) and B) run the resolution she needs (she has a better computer than I do because she wrote it off as a business expense, including dual processors and a huge screen so she doesn't understand why I can't make her website into a 6-column layout with the huge photo files she sends me, because it looks just fine on her screen).

and apparently it has some mysterious color options and better control over the color tweakings for her monitor than a windows machine could give her, so her photos won't look distorted color-wise when she prints them.


all of which sounds like a hardware issue to me.

[Sagana]

I'm a print production artist - which is to say, a mac person I love my mac but it was very frustrating in Sims 1 days not to get the EPs for a cow's age and not to be able to use the user-created tools to make my own stuff.

When Sims 2 came out I let my husband talk me into the PC he and the kids had been wanting for ages for games - the idea being that PCs are not so expensive also - ha! A cheap PC (which is what I have) won't run games. You need a good one with a good video card and lots of ram and you need to update the parts lots more often than we've ever needed to update the mac to run new games on it and such-like. It costs the same, or perhaps a bit more for the PC.

But I'm still glad to have both, and still hate the PC interface. Macs are user-friendly. :p And your mother is correct, macs are better for art/print.

[Marhis]

and apparently it has some mysterious color options and better control over the color tweakings for her monitor than a windows machine could give her, so her photos won't look distorted color-wise when she prints them.

That part is because - I think - of different gamma correction of screen; also, Mac manages color calibration profiles in a different way, to match screen and print results together; after all Macs were aimed to art/graphic professionals, so it make sense that those issues are maybe best supported on Mac systems.

So, this part it's a software - not hardware - issue; anyway, the rest sounds to me like the regular artist/graphic designers interpretation of web usability concept - lol  - if you had ever discussed with an artist who wants his webpage background in a specific - mandatory - PANTONE color, you may understand what I mean.

[Sagana]

Try matching some person's idea of 'salsa' in screen, vinyl, and digital print from 'do it like my web background - oh and use that image but print it 72" x 54" also'. You'd give anything for a PMS match and so would they because it'sa nota gonna match - the one pixel visible after blowing up a 2"x2" 72 dpi square is going to be the wrong color.

[kuronue]

I had to teach her how to find the hex value in photoshop, can you imagine? she spent years getting an art degree and she doesn't know how to find the hex value... finally I had her send me a swatch of her preferred background color.

Then I had to explain why she can't have all her text in her special, elite font she purchased that not even I have on my computer that she used for her logo. For a time half the headings on her site were image files so she could have her fancy font.


then she said, "Make it like the Martha Stewart site." 

[Paperbladder]

Macs are no better for design than PCs, this "color advantage" as you call it doesn't matter.  If you're designing for print, you'll use a sample sheet for the color and not the color of the monitor since they're very different..  If you're designing for the web, there are so many different ways that someone can see something due to their Gamma settings and monitor type that it doesn't matter if your Gamma is slightly different.

As for software?  It's all available on Windows and currently runs faster than it would on Mac OSX (x86).

[Sagana]

a sample sheet hm? The company that makes that very fancy piece of equipment that calibrates all 3 rip stations and the 15 macs (the only macs in a fairly good size office btw) will be happy to know they can be replaced by a sample sheet - and that just for digital print. The ink dept., and the 100s of test samples (and 3 months of time) to provide the proper curve from the film output company for screen will as well, I'm sure.

If you don't have a pretty good idea what color you're printing before you start running expensive backlit, wallpaper or enough vehicle vinyl to wrap a van, you've got some problems. If you don't have a pretty good idea what color you're going to get before you've ripped and saved the files (large enough to wrap a bus, for example) at several hours worth of expensive art time (we bill out at $75 an hour, which is pretty cheap for the market), you've got some problems. A sample sheet does not cover what it takes to provide adequate color match in the print world. Even with decent PMS colors (not 'specific company's specific flourescent orange logo' which is not a PMS color), it's a lot more complicated than that.

[Paperbladder]

Monitor colors do not match real world colors no matter if what you're a PC or a Mac.  I guess you could say, adjust the colors but you can do that on Windows with Adobe Gamma and/or Graphics Drivers.

When I did some print work, the color was always different on the monitor than it was printed.  If we went by the colors shown by the Macs and not by the sample sheet, we would get something completely different than we wanted.  This was a newspaper type publication though.

[amjoie]

I have a friend who is a professional geek (ie it is his bread and butter). For years we bantered back and forth about the merits of Mac vs PC. He was a diehard PCer. Note I said "was."

For almost two years he has used a Mac as his main computer, reserving the PC for only mandatory testing, etc. He told me when he switched that there is a quiet revolution of professional geeks. They are making the switch in droves to the Mac. Once they do, they don't look back. And they talk amongst themselves, in their own geeky way. At first it was whispers, but now it is open talk. The upshot of the whole thing is that the Mac, once the object of abject derision, is now more than "respectable." It is well on its way to being a status symbol within the geeky set.

He also told me that a lot of the newly switched geeks are gamers -- and that this trend has not gone unnoticed by the gaming community. The waiting time for games to port to the Mac is getting less and less. He expects simultaneous releases in the near future. He may be right. Look how quickly Pets was ported to the Mac. It used to take a year or so. Pets was released in mere weeks after the PC version went on sale.

You can argue all you want about particulars, but it won't change the facts. The Mac market share is gaining at a steady rate. Apple stocks, on average, are head and shoulders above Microsoft, and have several times nearly equalled IBM. That means the business community is also legitimatizing Apple's status as a company for the future.

When the iPhone is offered by Cingular in a few months, it is going to take off much like the iPod -- and if you don't know what I'm talking about, visit the Apple website and take a glimpse at the future of cell phones.

And you just have to see the latest Mac commercial about Vista. In view of the discussion in this thread, it is hillarious! Click on the "Security" ad under "see the latest ads." ROTFLOL

http://www.apple.com/getamac/

[OpiumGirl]

He also told me that a lot of the newly switched geeks are gamers -- and that this trend has not gone unnoticed by the gaming community. The waiting time for games to port to the Mac is getting less and less. He expects simultaneous releases in the near future. He may be right. Look how quickly Pets was ported to the Mac. It used to take a year or so. Pets was released in mere weeks after the PC version went on sale.

I agree, I've noticed mac games coming out faster and faster. I was really surprised about the release of Pets so soon after it was out on windows. It used to take many months, and in some cases, years for mac games to come out.
With the advent of the iPod alone, Mac usage is taking a turn toward the upside.

[notveryawesome]

There's a programme currently under development, called Cider, that allows Mac games to be developed at the same time as Windows games, without porting. I believe it's in beta testing at the moment, but it looks like it could possibly revolutionise the gaming industry if it actually works.

http://www.transgaming.com/index.php?module=ContentExpress&file=index&func=display&ceid=24

[Cons]

Transgaming also has Cedega for Linux, which if it and Cider both work....why have anything else but a linux box or a Mac?
 My B-I-L was a Beta Tester for Microsoft for Vista and even he's not sure he wants Vista on his machine. Think he's staying with XP and Ubuntu Linux. Vista has the "eye candy" which as one tech on another BBS said was like they just discovered 3D and went nuts with it. It's slower to navigate, has endless pop ups asking if you really wanted to do that and my B-I-L made a comment that when you first install it does not set up an Administrator Account or password. However if you want to change things, then it wants an Administrator password, which of course you don't have. I don't need that.

Then there are the hardware requirements. At least 2 gig of ram if you actually want to do more than load the OS and a video card that can handle all that "eye candy".

[dizzy]

The thing about Cedega and Wine is that they are lacking in Direct3D support, so at the moment you have to use Windows for Sims. Rather ironic since TS2 doesn't even work that good in Windows. 

I have to admit, Direct 3D is easier to program in than OpenGL but that just makes life harder in the long run (encourages laziness in driver support and coding, etc).