For those who continue to bash Microsoft - A Question

René Damkot wrote in post #3189916
About summons it up.

Hehe, yup.

I should have known that people would have their own agenda in this thread. I am sorry I brought it up now. As usual the MAC faithfuls have come along to bash some more rather than answer the question I asked. Oh well.

bacchanal wrote in post #3189186
The thing is, Apple sells things. Microsoft sells software. Windows became the dominant player because it had the right combination of an easy to use GUI and supported many device drivers...and it came preinstalled on many systems.

This is simply not true..... sorry to inform you but Micro$oft did NOT have an easy to use GUI..... Apple has always had an easy to use GUI and it doesn't run over DOS. Whoever said Microsoft had an easy to use interface hasn't used much anything else. Hell even the Amiga with its Workbench was years ahead of Micro$oft, the only thing Billy boy did good was marketing and I take my hat off to the man for that. Anyone who could persuade businesses that they needed such a piece of rubbish deserves a medal as big as a frying pan or locking up for gross misrepresentation.

Simple fact is that Billy boy liked the Mac so much he blatantly ripped it off (years after Apple's incarnations of Mac OS)... and he's still at it with that nice thing called Vista.

Trying to be cool on the outside is one thing, but having the same inherant problems on the inside still doesn't make it any good.

Rant over
(and yes you guessed right... I'm a Mac User)

Paul007 wrote in post #3189962
This is simply not true..... sorry to inform you but Micro$oft did NOT have an easy to use GUI..... Apple has always had an easy to use GUI and it doesn't run over DOS. Whoever said Microsoft had an easy to use interface hasn't used much anything else.

I have no problems using Windows' graphical user interface, and neither do millions and millions of other people, perhaps billions. And I'm a user. So are those other people. They're users too.

I do believe that inherently makes the graphical user interface "easy to use."

Why should I have to use something else to find out what I already use is easy to use? Maybe OSX is easier but that makes Windows no less easy to use than it is.

It's like the old "latest and greatest" thread: "OMG SHOULD I WAIT FOR THE NEW 40D THAT HASN'T EVEN BEEN ANNOUNCED OR SHOULD I KEEP MY 30D??" Hate to tell you but your 30D does just as good as it did before the thought of a 40D ever entered your head.

Just like being a Windows user all your life doesn't make suddenly trying an Apple machine render the Windows machine useless or unusable. It's still the same Windows machine.

In2Photos wrote in post #3189955
Hehe, yup.

I should have known that people would have their own agenda in this thread. I am sorry I brought it up now. As usual the MAC faithfuls have come along to bash some more rather than answer the question I asked. Oh well.

I don't think we (Mac Users) bash anyone in reallity we just state the truth, because, we KNOW there is an alternative to Micro$oft, and a better one at that.

I wonder how many Mac Users have switched to Micro$oft because they were sick and tired of the Apple OS and all its troubles.

Paul

One thing that bugs me is how I hear from many of my mac friends how apple is virus free.
I've been using PC's for many years both at home and work and never had a virus (that I know of, or has affected my system). Simply install virus protection, and voila, virus free.

Regarding hardware, I purchased a nice 19" HP laptop, 200gb hd, 2gb ram, seperate video ram for around $1400 last October. This laptop walks all over my friends $3K Apple laptop bought at the same time. Why would I have spent double the money? I've also be running Vista now for about 2 months. I've noticed speed improvements and the thing is very stable. Not one crash.

And as for the apple ad compain beating up Vista's 'cancel or allow', that is not a security function. It's a user control so that when your mom is using it she doesn't change a folder name by mistake. Switch it off with one click.

In2Photos wrote in post #3189941
Do you? Please enlighten me then. Except for one small remark I have seen nothing in your comments that begins to answer the question that I posted earlier.

My response was to Village_Idiot's first post on this thread, not to your first post. VI has a habit of making spurious claims about Macs, including the ones he's posted in this thread. I personally don't care if someone uses Macs or Windows or Linux or whatever.

Paul007 wrote in post #3189962
This is simply not true..... sorry to inform you but Micro$oft did NOT have an easy to use GUI..... Apple has always had an easy to use GUI and it doesn't run over DOS. Whoever said Microsoft had an easy to use interface hasn't used much anything else. Hell even the Amiga with its Workbench was years ahead of Micro$oft, the only thing Billy boy did good was marketing and I take my hat off to the man for that. Anyone who could persuade businesses that they needed such a piece of rubbish deserves a medal as big as a frying pan or locking up for gross misrepresentation.

Simple fact is that Billy boy liked the Mac so much he blatantly ripped it off (years after Apple's incarnations of Mac OS)... and he's still at it with that nice thing called Vista.

Trying to be cool on the outside is one thing, but having the same inherant problems on the inside still doesn't make it any good.

Rant over
(and yes you guessed right... I'm a Mac User)

I was talking about why Windows 3.0 took off in the early 90's, the catalyst that caused MS to split from IBM. It wasn't something that Microsoft planned...the OS of the future was supposed to be OS/2. The hardware vendors and thus, the customers, chose Windows. Maybe 3.0 wasn't the best/most user friendly user interface on the market at the time, but it was the best OS that OEM's could buy...Bill Gates was smart enough to realize where the money was.

I actually remember when my dad first computerized his business. He went Unix...talk about user friendly. He now runs in a mixed unix/windows environment.

So back to the OP's thoughts. Yes, I think that Mac should revel in it's hardware safety. This not unlike why I buy dell laptops. the hardware is carefully selected, all the proper drivers are supplied on a backup disk. It's had the cheap hardware and badly written software weeded out.

There are many chop shop computer stores in my city. I think %50 of all asian exports end up in Vancouver. Lots of crap to install. I steer clear.

Former Mac user and Mac technical support guru here. I like Macs, but they don't offer what I want right now. For Mac users, they offer what they need. Simple enough.

Paul007 wrote in post #3189962
This is simply not true..... sorry to inform you but Micro$oft did NOT have an easy to use GUI..... Apple has always had an easy to use GUI and it doesn't run over DOS. Whoever said Microsoft had an easy to use interface hasn't used much anything else. Hell even the Amiga with its Workbench was years ahead of Micro$oft, the only thing Billy boy did good was marketing and I take my hat off to the man for that. Anyone who could persuade businesses that they needed such a piece of rubbish deserves a medal as big as a frying pan or locking up for gross misrepresentation.

Simple fact is that Billy boy liked the Mac so much he blatantly ripped it off (years after Apple's incarnations of Mac OS)... and he's still at it with that nice thing called Vista.

Trying to be cool on the outside is one thing, but having the same inherant problems on the inside still doesn't make it any good.

Rant over
(and yes you guessed right... I'm a Mac User)

Actually, if you look around, some of the features in Vista were in development before they were in OS X.

Paul007 wrote in post #3189987
I don't think we (Mac Users) bash anyone in reallity we just state the truth, because, we KNOW there is an alternative to Micro$oft, and a better one at that.

I wonder how many Mac Users have switched to Micro$oft because they were sick and tired of the Apple OS and all its troubles.

Paul

And that's an opinion, not a truth...

Tony-S wrote in post #3190008
My response was to Village_Idiot's first post on this thread, not to your first post. VI has a habit of making spurious claims about Macs, including the ones he's posted in this thread. I personally don't care if someone uses Macs or Windows or Linux or whatever.

obviously you do or your zealot type remarks would be of a completely different tone. I just posted that if Apple had 95% of the market's share, they would have a ton of security issues as well. Of course you can't accept this because Apple's mantra of "we're so secure we don't need virus protection". It's ok though, and it's not like anyone will ever prove other wise, because M$ will remain the OS giant it is an Apple will always be in their shadow.

The problem with Microsoft is that its operating system encourages people to conduct unsafe computing practices - like surfing the web while having full administrative privileges. That is about as safe as carrying a gun around with the safety off. You should have a user account for most of the stuff you do and only use the administrator account for... well... administrating - installing new programs and upgrades, etc. If your user account comes up against a virus the virus won't be able to do much of anything because you don't have the privileges it needs to establish itself.

Why do mac fan boys always have to take these off topic?

Back on topic here. I think this is what the OP was trying to say, and maybe will clear things up a little. Remember this topic on Luminous Landscape?

85% of cameras in a Antartica trip were Canon. Mainly 1Ds, but backups 1D, 5D, xti, etc. And 5 nikons. A ton of the canons failed during the trip, but non of the nikons did.

In the closing thoughts it says "As for why the majority of the camera failures seen on this trip were Canon, the answer is because 85% of the trip's members were shooting Canon. Simple statistics."

Point in fact with PC vs Mac. Now if you still can't understand this, please go buy a nikon and ship forums.

Village_Idiot wrote in post #3190051
obviously you do or your zealot type remarks would be of a completely different tone. I just posted that if Apple had 95% of the market's share, they would have a ton of security issues as well. Of course you can't accept this...

You're making a statement that is not founded in fact. There's a huge number of viruses for Windows and none for OS X. If it were simply an issue of market share (a fraction) then there should be some OS X viruses (another fraction). This isn't the case.

And for now, that's a truism.

Wow, you can even predict the future. Why didn't you buy Apple stock 7 years ago. You'd be a gazillionaire.

Gujustud wrote in post #3190142
Why do mac fan boys always have to take these off topic?

It was taken off-topic by Village_Idiot (a "PC fan boy", to use your terminology) in the second post of this thread. Personally, I think this thread should be moved to "General Chat" because it doesn't have much to do with "Raw, Post-processing and printing".