mac attack

[TheFaQQer]

A propoer computer? With Windoze on I assume?

Windows has a spell checker.

Mac clearly doesn't - proper.

[daviejones]

Windows has a spell checker.

Mac clearly doesn't - proper.

No, Office has a spell checker, Windoze does not. - proper...

[NickFitz]

Windows has a spell checker.

Mac clearly doesn't - proper.

Some Windows applications have a spell checker. Mac OS X has a spell checker built in, so every Mac application has one too.

(But I agree, spelling it "Windoze" is pretty old by now...)

[daviejones]

But I agree, spelling it "Windoze" is pretty old by now...)[/SIZE]

It may be, but it is apt.

[Keldin]

Not without a bit of hacking and fiddling....

It's pretty easy actually. The fact that it runs on Intel Apple boxes is proof enough. It's also possible to run OS X in VMware installed on a PC. Again the only thing preventing it is Apple's licensing control to restrict the use to only hardware that they sell themselves. VMware have stated they could make it easy to do but have been been prevented by Apple (actually threatened is probably more to the point - Apple are a litigious bunch).

It's Apple's monopolistic behaviour that prevents it from being as easy as plugging in a cd. A software and hardware manufacturer that requires their software only be installed on their hardware? And then does everything they can to control the price of teh hardware so no-one can buy it any cheper than the price they set? I can't believe people idolise them.

K

[AtW]

A curious definition of "winning" by IBM that I've never previously encountered...

Gates "won" and Intel "won"... not so sure about IBM...

Well, let's just say that IBM won but then quickly lost for another reason, of course here I meant Apple PC vs IBM PC that lives without IBM involved now

[AtW]

You now get the following extra benefits included in the OS;

Virtual Desktops (Spaces)
Autobackup (Time Machine)

You also get iLife included, which is pretty much all the photo editing/music making/movie editing/dvd burning software a "normal" user will ever need.

No sale buddy, I'd be more likely to convert to Christianity with one of those crazy types knocking on the door promising salvation

[daviejones]

It's pretty easy actually. The fact that it runs on Intel Apple boxes is proof enough. It's also possible to run OS X in VMware installed on a PC. Again the only thing preventing it is Apple's licensing control to restrict the use to only hardware that they sell themselves. VMware have stated they could make it easy to do but have been been prevented by Apple (actually threatened is probably more to the point - Apple are a litigious bunch).

It's Apple's monopolistic behaviour that prevents it from being as easy as plugging in a cd. A software and hardware manufacturer that requires their software only be installed on their hardware? And then does everything they can to control the price of teh hardware so no-one can buy it any cheper than the price they set? I can't believe people idolise them.

K

People will buy things that work. Mac OS X works and is reliable. I buy Mac because it works and I can do what I need to without having some carp software crash, the PC slowing down to do some virus scan or spyware scan, BSOD or MS updates that eventually break some other part of the OS.

I have no interest in whether or not they are monopolistic. I have no interest in whether or not IBM were better way back in time. When it comes down to the nitty gritty, people that have used Mac will tell you it does what it says on the tin, to coin a phrase. People that have never used it but claim that Windows is better, should try it.

[NickFitz]

Well, let's just say that IBM won but then quickly lost for another reason, of course here I meant Apple PC vs IBM PC that lives without IBM involved now

Which brings up the key point: people seem to think that Apple and Microsoft are in competition, but they're actually in two separate businesses: Microsoft make operating systems designed to run on commodity hardware; Apple make computer systems.

These are two distinct business models. The fact that Apple have invested time and money in developing BaseCamp, allowing Macs to run Windows natively, is proof that Windows is not seen by Apple as something that competes with their core business. There are many Mac users who also run Windows (I've just been debugging stuff in Visual Studio running on a Parallels VM, and have now switched to Safari to type this), but the vast majority use their machine primarily as a Mac, because it is the superior environment.

(Microsoft also make applications, of which MS office is far and away the most significant in terms of revenue and installed base; it runs on both Microsoft and Apple operating systems.)

[AtW]

Which brings up the key point: people seem to think that Apple and Microsoft are in competition, but they're actually in two separate businesses: Microsoft make operating systems designed to run on commodity hardware; Apple make computer systems.

Of course Apple and Microsoft are not in competition, heck, noone is competing with Apple apart from Mr Bankrupcy. Frankly it is amazing they managed to survive for so long, but no way in hell they will ever have more than 5% share of Personal Computers. iPods, iPhones and other iCarp is what will probably save Apple, but as far as PCs are concerned it is all done and dusted: IBM PC won.

Frankly the more Macs become IBM PC-like in terms of CPU, same memory the less point it is to buy Mac because you might as well save money and buy PC.