Macs: Where Everything Costs Money.

[.Neo]

..... What planet are you from?

Frustration Prime, part of the Troll solar system probably. :yes:

[d3nuo]

Frustration Prime, part of the Troll solar system probably. :yes:

troll? no.. sorry

frustrated? because i didn't overspend for underperformance? no!

i didn't mean to offend anyone if i somehow did, or seem as a troll.. i just find it funny how amazingly overpriced macs are for what they do. am i poor in $$? no.. i am preparing to spend several grand for a few new computers and i have a great job for a college junior, so i can afford one.. but i also realize how much of a waste it would be after having done some thorough research before deciding not to get a mactel and instead opt for 2 much faster computers for the same $$.

again, the bottom of my last post spoke of opinions. I hold my own and respect all other's, but my own opinion is it's stupid to waste $ if it cant compare performance-wise to something that's actually cheaper. I've spent over 6 grand since last summer on high-performance computers, about 5 of them. what could that have gotten me with same-performing macs? well if there were macs that could perform on-par with a dual-core opteron proc, then i'd only have at most 2 macs to show for that 6 grand.

so am i trolling? no. im stating my opinion in a very relevant topic. am i trying to be rude? absolutely not! and i hope no one takes me as attacking them personally or in general disrespecting mac users.

[hifive]

Well the new Macbooks are relatively cheap even compared to HP, Compaq, etc. I can't say it'll become my primary laptop during college, but I do want to get my feet wet with OSX. I do anticipate using programs like Matlab which I've heard doesn't run well on OSX, so I may end up buying an el cheapo $700 Compaq or something, unless Leopard makes Windows run flawlessly. I do love Compaq. Furthermore, all this talk about iTunes: I like iTunes so that's fine with me. I wish it would support Flac though. I'm practically on the verge of ordering the Macbook.

Although I do agree that Mac zealots are rather stubborn. Not any of you kids, but some forums are insane.

[.Neo]

so am i trolling? no. im stating my opinion in a very relevant topic. am i trying to be rude? absolutely not! and i hope no one takes me as attacking them personally or in general disrespecting mac users.

In that case I'll give you my opinion: Your first post was the exact opposite of giving us a nuanced opinion about the product in questing and the arguments used were bound to be interpreted as hateful trolling.

Edited June 4, 2006 by Neowave

[Miuku.]

Although I do agree that Mac zealots are rather stubborn. Not any of you kids, but some forums are insane.

I don't think there's a single over zealous Mac users here, well Neowave.. :shiftyninja: Just kiddin'!

It seems the forum here is quite balanced - a little defensive, a little offensive, lots of reason.

[.Neo]

I don't think there's a single over zealous Mac users here, well Neowave.. :shiftyninja: Just kiddin'!

;)

Honestly, I think Apple did a great job on their software. But some of their new hardware can be a bit problematic which is, I guess, something to be expected when using new technologies all the time. The Mighty Mouse for example. That's also the reason why I'll never buy a Rev A Mac, but that's just me.

Edited June 4, 2006 by Neowave

[semaja2.net]

When will people wake up and learn APPLE USES TOP OF THE RANGE HARDWARE they use the top of the range most of the times (except the machines that arnt ment to be) they always use top quailty products as well. When you pay for a apple product like a MacBookPro it may seem like a lot but remember compare it to a dell laptop you may be spending a extra 200 bucks but you get heaps of software (that you will use) plus no spayware included

[aristotle-dude]

How did this go so far off topic?

1. Some software on the mac costs money (shareware) because the mac community has zero tolerance for spyware/adware.

2. The mac equivalent of software is usually of higher quality than the windows version and it does not come with unpleasant surprises (see point 1).

In some cases, the mac version is freeware/opensource whereas the windows version would be either shareware or adware supported.

Edited June 4, 2006 by aristotle-dude

[hifive]

Just caught this off Digg.

A perfectly imbiased piece of writing. And I think it's fully pushed me over to the mac side. Yep, I think I've decided. I'll be purchasing a Macbook within the next two weeks. The article's not anti mac, but nor is it pro mac, but it delivers a feeling of desire to test out the mac life. It's exciting.

:)

[hifive]

Haha, I'm a wishy washy freak, but I'm gonna wait until I see a review of either the HP DV2000 or Compaq V3000 before I finalize my purchase. Still, I should have a new laptop within the next two weeks; right now, chances are that it'll be a macbook. If only Apple didn't have to have a heat issue; I would've purchased it days ago. I do like using my laptop / notebook on my .. lap.

[Stunna]

Here is a list of some laptops you might want to look at some of them are comparable to the mac book PRO

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16834115224

small factor

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16834115235

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16834115225

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16834220027

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16834115223

The apple computers are a little bit lighter (2 pounds i believe) and are about .5 inches thinner

if that really makes a difference for ya

and comparing windows to osx you'll probably find them to be just about the same except you have to do a little bit more work to keep windows more secure

the new intel chips will be interesting and so will the new amd x2 mobile chips

[Miuku.]

The apple computers are a little bit lighter (2 pounds i believe) and are about .5 inches thinner

if that really makes a difference for ya

That's a *very* important thing for anyone who really looks for a laptop - I personally drag the thing half across the globe so..

comparing windows to osx you'll probably find them to be just about the same except you have to do a little bit more work to keep windows more secure

Not really, with OSX you have a familiar (well to me) BSD style shell interface available - much more powerful than I can ever get for Win32 platform.

[semaja2.net]

That's a *very* important thing for anyone who really looks for a laptop - I personally drag the thing half across the globe so..

Not really, with OSX you have a familiar (well to me) BSD style shell interface available - much more powerful than I can ever get for Win32 platform.

I couldnt agree any more, seriously i complain my ibook weighs to much, atleast i dont have that dell brick that i could of brought for 1000 bucks, also having thta BSD interface is really great and i just love having it there

[Stunna]

That's a *very* important thing for anyone who really looks for a laptop - I personally drag the thing half across the globe so..

Not really, with OSX you have a familiar (well to me) BSD style shell interface available - much more powerful than I can ever get for Win32 platform.

May you show me some good examples of what the shell allows you to do?

[hifive]

Yeah, same here. I wish people would actually give concrete examples to why OSX is better.

Anyways, with the new free ipod promotion, it's getting very difficult to skip out on a brand new macbook.

[raskren]

May you show me some good examples of what the shell allows you to do?

I agree. Please come and elighten us, daPhoenix.

[.Neo]

I wish people would actually give concrete examples to why OSX is better.

The other way around you could become a bit more pro-active and do some research and testing of your own, instead of waiting for people to provide it for you.

The question "Why Mac OS X is better" differs for each person and depends on what you expect from an operating system.

[Rudy]

May you show me some good examples of what the shell allows you to do?

it's well known that the *nix shell is way more powerful than the command prompt or mSH for that matter

[raskren]

it's well known that the *nix shell is way more powerful than the command prompt or mSH for that matter

Can you give some examples of things you can do in Terminal that you can't do in CMD or MSH (Monad/PowerShell). Thanks.

You can't stop PowerShell.

Edited June 5, 2006 by raskren

[hifive]

The other way around you could become a bit more pro-active and do some research and testing of your own, instead of waiting for people to provide it for you.

The question "Why Mac OS X is better" differs for each person and depends on what you expect from an operating system.

Research provides the same repetitive answers about safer operations, no spyware / malware, easier interface, prettier gui, blah blah. But I have none of these problems in Windows. I also hear about people stating that OSX is more powerful and advanced. Well even after researching, I have not come up with any necessary, powerful features that Windows does not provide. The only reason I'm wanting a Mac right now is due to aesthetic reasons of its software and hardware. Functionality is a moot point as it's on par with Windows. [Hopefully compatibility will be too].

[hifive]

Well, I did it. I ordered the Macbook with a new $90 30 GB iPod [which will be a gift as I already have one]. Cannot wait!

Hopefully it'll be as amazing as you guys purport it to be.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Open Source software on the Mac (with a handy package manager): http://fink.sourceforge.net/

Darwin Ports is better :whistle:

How did this go so far off topic?

1. Some software on the mac costs money (shareware) because the mac community has zero tolerance for spyware/adware.

...

Yep, i have only 1 "ad-supported" app on my mac, and it actually uses WebKit to embed a page showing Google Ad's in it.

And for the CLI, i could do a spotlight search for all pictures updated in the last week that have cat in the filename (and are PNG), copy them to a folder on the desktop, create thumbnails of all of them (with ImageMagick), create a simple HTML listing of the images (easy), then finally upload them all to a FTP folder, then E-Mail a user to say it's done.

And that's fairly easy to do. :yes:

[.Neo]

Well, I did it. I ordered the Macbook with a new $90 30 GB iPod [which will be a gift as I already have one]. Cannot wait!

Hopefully it'll be as amazing as you guys purport it to be.

Congratulations, and let's hope so. I think Apple has a 10 day no-questions-asked return period, so you should be pretty safe. ;) (Y)

<snip>

Dude, go burn a Mac somewhere, spread the word about how evil Mac OS X is and get of my back for once.

Edited June 6, 2006 by John S.

[am_fek]

<snip>

Woah, cowboy.

MSH has only just come out and it is - at best - only as good as the Unix shell which has been around for how many decades now? Congratulations, Windows has finally joined the 2nd half of the 20th century. As for what we do with our shells... I used to use mine to perform repetitive tasks at work. The company basically was responsible for formatting and transmitting electronic data between major corporations' proprietary systems - essentially so each company could talk to its partners without having to do any of the legwork or change their own systems. A couple of examples:

- A cron job to gather up files that our AIX production system in another city had failed to process at various times throughout the day (roughly every 2h). It would find files matching certain criteria (date, file extension, ownership...), tally them up and assign each one ordinal numbers (1st error, 2nd, etc), output the first 100 characters of each file along with time / date / location / etc., match each extract to the log output of the program that had rejected it (i.e. to match up the file and the reason it failed), and send the results to a local printer.

- A shell script to deliver particular files to a major client every afternoon in the development stage of a project (before full automation had been built in). Our production system would process 8-10 different types of file for this client every day from different senders, and filenames for each of these would be stored in our DB2 database so we could find them. The script would run a DB2 query, find the relevant entries (by running 8-10 queries), collate the results, and use them to find and retrieve the files from the filesystem. From there it would pass each type of file through one of 8-10 other shell scripts to deliver each type of file in the appropriate format via sftp, e-mail, http - however the client wanted to receive each one.

I wouldn't call myself a Terminal geek, it was quite simple to do and wound up saving me at least 30-45 minutes per day.

Nice sig by the way. Reminds me of all the guys here on the Mac forum with pictures of exploding Windows laptops and "BURN! BURN!" written in their sigs. Guys, whatever you do - never forget - it's the Mac users who are the zealots, okay?

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

My father's business uses terminal on an old iMac G3 to run a customer database program stamping program. Essentially, the iMac is connected to a router which is then directed to the CNC mills in the machine shop. When a part is being produced, the CNC mill talks to the iMac via terminal which interfaces with a python script that was written specifically for terminal, and a corresponding folder on the desktop is created with information regarding the part. Then in return, that same python script writes a custom serial number or identification number which is conveyed to the CNC mill via terminal and stamped accordingly.

This same type of process is also run via an IBM laptop that we have running solely a *nix distro (not sure which one since I do not mess with any of that, I simply gave the guy in charge of that the iMac G3 which does the job beautifully) that will do the same process for other CNC Mills if the iMac gets caught up with slower parts being made.

All of that was tried under Windows 2000 originally on the work machine, but the interface just ended up being way way too inconvenient and slow as well as the fact that the interface that was being used to write the whole process just wasn't flexible enough to get the job done.