Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Hypothetical move to Mac (Read 26857 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #25 –
Jumping in with snippets from everyone:

Quote
Macs are no good, but neither one actually offers a particular criticism.


Well the major one is the Mac doesn't have the market and without that the majority of software companies stay away. Chicken and the Egg (see next about my remark on Standardization).

Quote
But because Intel and Microsoft have been more successful marketing wise, those platforms are now standard.


Exactly, and Apple instead of jumping onto this Standards bandwagon have to have their own propriety systems, if they really wanted to I think they could push relatively high % use on the desktop (at least 25%), but that would mean using the hardware everyone has (ie buy a Gigabyte/Asus motherboard, AMD/Intel processor), there is no reason why OSX shouldn't run on these. Imagine if Microsoft tomorrow said Windows Visa will only run on a Microsoft PC, it would never make more than 5% of the market and that is using Windows past popularity. I know, bad drivers... will make OSX look bad...lessening the Apple experience...YADA YADA..no profits in software - not the real reason, Apple could have certified drivers like Windows does with testing labs.


Quote
Whereas Apple has their own closed formats like ALAC, and will only let you play it on their player, but that is kind of their philosophy.


Exactly - Apple=closed mentality

Quote
There is a open source ALAC decoder available. See http://crazney.net/programs/itunes/alac.html


Which is broken by iTunes v5, there are updates in the pipe I hear but as Apple a) release 0 documents then others who support their stuff does it always 'after the fact', same goes for iPod - new feature, only Apple knows the ins and outs until months later when other programs are able to reverse engineer it.


Quote
NTFS is a totally closed and proprietary filesystem and nothing but windows can write to it reliably


I have Ghost that and read / write NTFS files from DOS, no MS dlls are used...it is possible if someone large enough wants to put the effort in (ie if Apple wanted to they could have full NTFS support in a matter of weeks).

Don't get me wrong, competition is great, but as each new release of Windows comes out they get better and better, until end game for anyone else (there is a ‘Window’ of opportunity that is closing), take Vista finally programs run under restrictive accounts, less exploits, system popups asking if a program should access a certain part as it tries to dynamically, Unix has had this for years (sans dynamic asking end user), Apple inherited it for OSX, now Microsoft have it. These are fundamentals that a rival software company should have punished Microsoft for, but propriety over priced gear stopped all that.

In short, if Apple are serious - make OSX run on other computers, and concentrate easing the development shift from Windows to OSX, any coca freaky development which 'takes awhile to get used to, but then is better', cuts no mustard. Look up the road Apple, Microsoft are changing the Windows API to be basically .NET, a 'standard' - put some effort into making OSX+APIs and Mono part of OSX and head MS off at the pass.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #26 –
Slackware (or some other Unix/Linux) owns you.

A combination of Crip, Ogg Vorbis (or FLAC), mpd + ncmpc/mpc (+ gmpc) beats all.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #27 –
I have been using/programming computers since i was 5 (started with Logo, very basic). I have had an TK83, Texas Instruments TI994/A, Commodore 128, Commodore Amiga 500, IBM PC XT (640KB RAM, 20MB HD, CGA), and from then on, always IBM PC compatibles. Have used DOS, DesqView, DesqView/X, OS/2, Linux, Windows (95-XP). As much as i love my ThinkPads, my next computer would be a MAC. Macs have the best: the stability of UNIX, the best GUI, and all the programs other *nixes can only dream of: MS Office, Adobe *, Macromedia *, etc.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #28 –
Quote
In short, if Apple are serious - make OSX run on other computers


Yeah, that'd be a really clever move for a hardware company.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #29 –
Quote
<snip>


I'm sorry Spoon, but you don't seem to know what you're talking about 

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #30 –
Quote
Yeah, that'd be a really clever move for a hardware company.


You are saying it is not possible to make money on software operating systems? Microsoft must be really struggling.

Quote
I'm sorry Spoon, but you don't seem to know what you're talking about


It takes counter-argument facts to prove your point, your statement is seriously devoid of such.

I am talking as a software company who have run projections of converting Windows based programs on the Mac, and projected revenue - and they fall well short. Take MacAMP, they had to close up shop, you might mention iTunes as the cause, well on the PC there is iTunes and WMP, still PC based jukebox applications that are pay for use, they seem to survive - bigger market.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #31 –
Quote
Quote
Yeah, that'd be a really clever move for a hardware company.


You are saying it is not possible to make money on software operating systems? Microsoft must be really struggling.


Why would Apple want to change from a successful hardware company into a direct competitor with a company who would stop at nothing to destroy them if they were seen as a serious threat ?

Quote
I am talking as a software company who have run projections of converting Windows based programs on the Mac, and projected revenue - and they fall well short. Take MacAMP, they had to close up shop, you might mention iTunes as the cause, well on the PC there is iTunes and WMP, still PC based jukebox applications that are pay for use, they seem to survive - bigger market.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329052"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


MacAMP died because it was pretty crappy in comparison to iTunes. I always preferred SoundJam back in the OS 9 days, certainly compared to Audion which has also fallen by the wayside. Apple made the clever decision of snapping up the SoundJam people and a lot of the app's best moves.

Since when was iTunes pay for use ?

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #32 –
Quote
Quote
I'm sorry Spoon, but you don't seem to know what you're talking about


It takes counter-argument facts to prove your point, your statement is seriously devoid of such.

I am talking as a software company who have run projections of converting Windows based programs on the Mac, and projected revenue - and they fall well short. Take MacAMP, they had to close up shop, you might mention iTunes as the cause, well on the PC there is iTunes and WMP, still PC based jukebox applications that are pay for use, they seem to survive - bigger market.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


The Mac software business is a really lucrative market, much more than the market share might suggest. If I were a shareware developer that wanted to make a quick buck, I'd develop for OSX instead of Windows in a heartbeat.

Heh, found this presentation that backs me up: [a href="http://wilshipley.com/blog/WWDC_Student_Talk.pdf]http://wilshipley.com/blog/WWDC_Student_Talk.pdf[/url] (Seems to be done by some cocky bastard, but there's some good points in there)

As for MacAMP, well I've never even heard of it..

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #33 –
I am new to posting but I often check these boards and thought I would offer my opinion after reading through this thread.

Some of the people replying here sound as though they have never used an Apple and they definately don't understand the way the company works. There are two types of Apple:
1. Mac Mini, iBook, iMac
Suitable mainly for home users, Listening to music, watching DVD's, Word Processing, browsing the web etc
2. PowerBook, PowerMac
Computers designed for professionals in graphics, audio production, video - top end PowerMacs are some seriously powerful machines.
Apples are not just for home users, so whoever said that, I'm pretty sure you have little experience with Macs, if I am wrong sorry but it just sounds that way.

Now thats out the way,
To the Original Poster-
In your specific situation I probably would reccommend sticking with Windows XP as it will probably better suit your needs with Monkeys, NTFS situation etc
(see I am not just a mac fanboy  )
However, if there was room for change in the codec department, then perhaps give a Mac some serious thought, ALAC has served me very well and when the second generation of Intel Macs come out, they should be some great machines

I was on a Windows box (actually I am on it at the moment) but moved to a PowerMac mainly for the musical production side. I found that (basically) everything I could do on Windows I could do in OSX if I was willing to make a couple of changes, one of them being moving from FLAC to ALAC.
But I wouldn't suggest this move to everyone, it just depends on what is important to you about computing, and I decided it was stability.

As a user of both Windows XP and OSX I hope I have been of some help and sorry to start my first post off in such a negative manner.

Thomas

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #34 –
Quote
Quote
Quote
If one only needs to Surf + Email + Listen to music and casually rip => buy a Mac.
It is a much better experience than Windows.
=> I have an Apple laptop for these.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329020"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

How is that experience any different on a Mac?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329030"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Easy.  No spyware or viruses to have to contend with.

I would also argue that the respective applications for doing that kind of stuff on Mac OS X are more polished than the Windows counterparts (e.g., Safari vs. IE, Mail vs. Outlook Express, iTunes vs. WMP).

Of course you can make the Windows experience quite a bit better with some customization, such as downloading better programs for these things than what comes with Windows, but the point is that most "casual users" do not do this.  In other words, there's less effort required to get a nicer experience in such a scenario with Mac OS X than with Windows.  Some people regard this as "much better."
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329031"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I could then argue that some Macs still come with a one mouse button and that severely decreases that great experience...

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #35 –
Quote
If one only needs to Surf + Email + Listen to music and casually rip => buy a Mac.
That sounds as if Macs are only suited for grannies.
Many Unix guys have switched to Macs (often PowerBooks) like quite a few Apache developers and many from the Chaos Computer Club.


Quote
Exactly - Apple=closed mentality
Yeah, that's why most of their file formats are based on open standards and Apple is giving the source codes for many programs (e.g. the Darwin Streaming Server) away for free....

Quote
You are saying it is not possible to make money on software operating systems? Microsoft must be really struggling.
You are joking, right?
  • Compare the entire software lineup from Apple and MS. MS offers a lot more software. Microsofts biggest money maker is MS Office, not Windows. MS also makes games, image editing apps, desktop publishing apps, PC emulators, encyclopedias, ...
    Apple makes Mac OS X, iLife, iWork, some pro video apps (Final Cut,...), Logic and FileMaker. That's it more or less.
  • Apple doesn't want to compete directly with MS in the OS market and that has a logical reason: Apple people know they would lose. One of Apple key selling points of Mac is the fact, that Microsoft makes software for it - especially MS Office. You can bet, MS would stop these products.
  • Since Apple seels Macs, the software they offer is often cheaper than simmilar software from other companies. When Apple sells a server, they give the software basicly away for free. MS can't do that, because they don't sell server hardware. Final Cut Studio's price is quite low for what it does.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #36 –
Quote
Quote
Exactly - Apple=closed mentality
Yeah, that's why most of their file formats are based on open standards and Apple is giving the source codes for many programs (e.g. the Darwin Streaming Server) away for free....


I personally believe "closed mentality" applies waaaay more to Microsoft than Apple...

Sure, ALAC is closed. But they also support AAC (open), MOV (open), PDF (open), MPEG4 video and h264 (open), etc, etc. Besides, I heard from an Apple engineer that they would have gone with MPEG4 ALS if MPEG wasn't sooo damn slow.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #37 –
Quote
I could then argue that some Macs still come with a one mouse button and that severely decreases that great experience...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329077"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Huh?

You could only argue that if it was the case that having only one mouse button on Mac OS X severely hampers the experience.  Newsflash: it doesn't.  The OS is designed around the fact that one button is usually available, and context menus are pulled up with a ctrl-click.  Since the Mac UI has a more well thought through design, most applications don't need to rely on context menus even close to the degree that they do under Windows, hence, it's not a problem.

Now, if you're doing something like art, or gaming, that's a little different.  But in either case, the type of people doing these things are usually the kind of people that expect to purchase special hardware anyway.

And at the end of the day, it's not that hard to simply plug in a different mouse.  Even that is something that a casual user would be able to do, whereas downloading and configuring different internet browsers or email clients, is not always.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #38 –
Quote
Quote
Quote
Exactly - Apple=closed mentality
Yeah, that's why most of their file formats are based on open standards and Apple is giving the source codes for many programs (e.g. the Darwin Streaming Server) away for free....


I personally believe "closed mentality" applies waaaay more to Microsoft than Apple...

Sure, ALAC is closed. But they also support AAC (open), MOV (open), PDF (open), MPEG4 video and h264 (open), etc, etc. Besides, I heard from an Apple engineer that they would have gone with MPEG4 ALS if MPEG wasn't sooo damn slow.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329117"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Agreed.  But you see, for the wintel fanboys, it's always the opposite

If it's a new programing language they have to learn, or a new set of API's, it's "freaky" and damnit, Apple should just move from the well designed and easy to use Objective-C and Foundation Toolkit to .NET and C#.  God forbid programmers should actually expect to be able to learn a new language besides Visual Basic, C#, or Java (What? C or C++? No way, those languages are too complicated man).

If it's a format that Apple uses that isn't supported on Windows, then it's something marginal or pointless to use, or stupid, or whatever.  Obviously it's no good because if it was, Windows would already be using it and it would be the most popular thing EVAR (because look, all the IT departments that use Windows know best man, and they never use Mac!).

If it's the fact that their Win32 programs won't run unmodified on Mac OS X, then it's Apples fault for not providing a Windows clone in Mac OS X, or providing the complete win32 API bindings.  I mean, we shouldn't expect any decent programmer to have heard of "abstraction" before, and a little thing called "cross-platform" design.

If it's not an x86 processor, then damnit, it's just dumb.  Everything should be little endian (I mean, why should we use big endian when it's essentially the format we use already for the arabic numeral system, or even for writing in most western languages?), everything should be CISC (none of this "easy" load/store, RISC nonsense!  And who needs more than 8 general purpose registers anyway?!), and code optimized for the x86 should always run the best on any processor, or the processor just sucks.

And as for the UI, well, as a hardcore Windows user, if someone can't figure out how to remove an icon from the dock, or something else just as trivial (I mean, who in their right mind could be expected to understand Drag and Drop?  It's such a weird concept...), then the UI simply is lame.

I could go on, but I guess I'll stop.  The wintel fanboys probably won't get it anyway

Sometimes people need to learn to look beyond their own little world and try to compare things a little more objectively, instead of just bashing something because it's not what they're used to, and it makes them cranky to have to try and deal with that.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #39 –
Quote
You could only argue that if it was the case that having only one mouse button on Mac OS X severely hampers the experience. Newsflash: it doesn't. The OS is designed around the fact that one button is usually available, and context menus are pulled up with a ctrl-click. Since the Mac UI has a more well thought through design, most applications don't need to rely on context menus even close to the degree that they do under Windows, hence, it's not a problem.


I've never met a Mac user who didn't have a 2 button mouse 3rd party mouse, and now that Apple is selling 2 button mice themselves, I think they would agree that the 1 button concept is depreciated.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #40 –
Quote
Quote
I could then argue that some Macs still come with a one mouse button and that severely decreases that great experience...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329077"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Huh?

You could only argue that if it was the case that having only one mouse button on Mac OS X severely hampers the experience.  Newsflash: it doesn't.  The OS is designed around the fact that one button is usually available, and context menus are pulled up with a ctrl-click.  Since the Mac UI has a more well thought through design, most applications don't need to rely on context menus even close to the degree that they do under Windows, hence, it's not a problem.

Now, if you're doing something like art, or gaming, that's a little different.  But in either case, the type of people doing these things are usually the kind of people that expect to purchase special hardware anyway.

And at the end of the day, it's not that hard to simply plug in a different mouse.  Even that is something that a casual user would be able to do, whereas downloading and configuring different internet browsers or email clients, is not always.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329137"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Oh man... I mean, come on! Are you that biased? You can't tell me that you can e.g. replace the wheel with a "well thought through design". Yes, the whole system IS based on the fact that you only need one mouse button, but it doesn't feel like it is that way because it's the better way to do it, but it rather feels like it's obviously compromising in many places and you have to compensate for the missing button all the time. For example: with a mac, you always have the other hand on the keyboard, while on a win system I can comfortably scratch my balls. Errr, for example.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #41 –
I'm happy enough with a one or a two button mouse...it's the scroll wheel I miss when I use an Apple mouse. Didn't like the Mighty Mouse at all.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #42 –
Each OS has it's advantages and disadvantages.
Shouldn't we restrict this discussion to the audio ripping and encoding side of such?

...

Anyhow, as another person considering either the Apple or Linux route in the future, I'm wondering if anything else (non-windows) compares with EAC's handling of drives that cache?

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #43 –
@rjamorim

I happen to agree MS are possibly worse, but I am not here defending MS, rather this thread is about Apple - they need published documents for the iPOD database and ALAC, especially this one as it appears in .m4a files, supposedly a standards format.

@Dibrom

You are miss interpreting my point, if Apple want to grab market share they have to do something radical, right now they have momentum from something that is not OSX, that means trying to temp the 30x more software companies who develop on the PC. You really think Cocoa C++ would put me off developing on the Mac? (considering all our stuff is C++) no, pure economics. Put another way, lets talk games, they tend to be kings of cross platform programming, a game such as GTA will be released on the PC, XBox, Gamecube, PS2, so you cannot say they are not able to write portable code, yet most of these games will not appear on the Mac, why? no market for them.

The real question is - is Apple happy with 4% of the world market? I outlined possibility where Apple could compete with Microsoft head on. Lets guess that Apple make $150 profit on a system sold (perhaps less as there is the Mac Mini). If they could pull up market share to 20% then a $75 operating system would make them almost double profits (assuming $50 on software is profit), so it can be done.

Lets not hide behind...don't upset Microsoft as they will destroy Apple by withdrawing office, pure rubbish. Microsoft are far from infallible, they day they have an operating system that costs $1 and is 100% secure from viruses, etc then yes perhaps, until then there is leeway.

Lets not degenerate this thread into a 'Mac developers are better than Windoze devs, they are all Visual Basic noobs'. There are good and bad programmers on Windows as there are on the Mac.

In my ideal world Apple would have 40% or more of the operating system market (as long as it is not just Apple hardware), it would create more work for software companies, but would force a competition in the operating system area that could only be good for everyone.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #44 –
Quote
Anyhow, as another person considering either the Apple or Linux route in the future, I'm wondering if anything else (non-windows) compares with EAC's handling of drives that cache?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329152"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I contacted xACT's coder a while back as I was concerned about the caching issue. He said that whereas cdparanoia would not empty the cache, rendering correction rather pointless/impossible, cdda2wav + libparanoia did not suffer from the same problem. I'm still rather sceptical and I'm sure someone here knows the definitive answer.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #45 –
Quote
I've never met a Mac user who didn't have a 2 button mouse 3rd party mouse, and now that Apple is selling 2 button mice themselves, I think they would agree that the 1 button concept is depreciated.

Then you probably have not met many Mac users!
I have daily contact with 10-15 Mac users and none of them use a multi-button mouse. Either they use the mouse and trackpad on their PowerBook or they use an Apple Bluetooth mouse.

As Dibrom say, the Mac OS UI is written for single-mouse users. Finder have its own contextual toolbar button and in other program use ctrl-click.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #46 –
Quote
Quote
Quote
I could then argue that some Macs still come with a one mouse button and that severely decreases that great experience...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329077"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Huh?

You could only argue that if it was the case that having only one mouse button on Mac OS X severely hampers the experience.  Newsflash: it doesn't.  The OS is designed around the fact that one button is usually available, and context menus are pulled up with a ctrl-click.  Since the Mac UI has a more well thought through design, most applications don't need to rely on context menus even close to the degree that they do under Windows, hence, it's not a problem.

Now, if you're doing something like art, or gaming, that's a little different.  But in either case, the type of people doing these things are usually the kind of people that expect to purchase special hardware anyway.

And at the end of the day, it's not that hard to simply plug in a different mouse.  Even that is something that a casual user would be able to do, whereas downloading and configuring different internet browsers or email clients, is not always.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329137"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Oh man... I mean, come on! Are you that biased? You can't tell me that you can e.g. replace the wheel with a "well thought through design". Yes, the whole system IS based on the fact that you only need one mouse button, but it doesn't feel like it is that way because it's the better way to do it, but it rather feels like it's obviously compromising in many places and you have to compensate for the missing button all the time. For example: with a mac, you always have the other hand on the keyboard, while on a win system I can comfortably scratch my balls. Errr, for example.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329146"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


You mean, am I so biased as to think that the lack of two buttons on some mice for Mac computers, is not on the same order of spyware, viruses, and low quality packaged in software for Windows, and that because of this it does not "severely hamper" (better read that twice so you don't miss the qualifier) the user experience?

Well, if that's what you mean, I suppose that does make me biased -- whatever.

I never said that a two button mouse wasn't better, I just implied that it wasn't necessary, and that it wasn't even on the same order of being detrimental as the issues I pointed out with the hypothetical Windows situation.

I use a two button mouse myself when I dock my powerbook, but I don't have any problems using the single mouse button on my powerbook when I'm away.

And as for "compromising" because you have a "missing" mouse button -- again, it's not a compromise if it's designed that way.

As for not having one hand on the keyboard, well I don't know about you, but I spend far more time on the keyboard than with the mouse anyway, and it has been this way for any OS I use.  I use shortcut keys whenever I can, and tend to use the commandline interface for most simple tasks, again on just about every OS I've used.

So now, my question:  Are you so biased as to think that me not thinking that the lack of a second mouse button is such a big deal that it's on the same order as problems like spyware, viruses, and low quality pack in software, and that that makes me biased?

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #47 –
All I wanted to point out was Apples ignorance.

And if you can't see why and admit that it's a mistake that they still hold on to a one button mouse, then pardon me, but that's just blind zealotry.

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #48 –
Quote
Put another way, lets talk games, they tend to be kings of cross platform programming, a game such as GTA will be released on the PC, XBox, Gamecube, PS2, so you cannot say they are not able to write portable code, yet most of these games will not appear on the Mac
IIRC about 80% of PC games are being ported to Mac.


Quote
All I wanted to point out was Apples ignorance.

And if you can't see why and admit that it's a mistake that they still hold on to a one button mouse, then pardon me, but that's just blind zealotry.
Hey, you should leave the rock you are living under: http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/
And you are talking about "blind zealotry"...

Hypothetical move to Mac

Reply #49 –
Quote
Quote
All I wanted to point out was Apples ignorance.

And if you can't see why and admit that it's a mistake that they still hold on to a one button mouse, then pardon me, but that's just blind zealotry.
Hey, you should leave the rock you are living under: http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/
And you are talking about "blind zealotry"...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329171"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm sorry, but I was talking about the mouse they ship with their computers. Of course you can buy a different mouse...

Edit: Oh and btw, I work with macs at work for some good five years, so I think I know what I'm talking about.