The Mac perspective of Geekdom


Why I'm an Apple fan

By Loweded Wookie, in , posted: 19-Nov-2006 17:19

Mac FanBoy, Jobs Lover, you name it we've been called it. While many think that we Mac lovers are condescending pratts the truth is that we are somewhat overzealous perpetrators of technology that is better built than the stuff out there.

I have had my Intel Mac Mini for a few months now and the more I go to work and use my HP DC7100 the more I can't help but ask, why isn't there anything like my Mini on the market? More and more I find myself asking "Why do Windows based machines get heavier the smaller they get?". I work in IT and I have to lug these things around all the time. Compared to the Mac Mini all PCs are monsters. Even the iMac weighs less and that has a builtin monitor.

I think that's one reason I love Macs so much. There's a lot of thought gone into everything that Apple does and that sort of thing doesn't go unnoticed by me.

Take the Mac Mini. Small, light, Dual Core. The iMac, PC built into the screen. The iPod, small, simple to use, and amazing as a hard drive.

Mac OS X. There's a rumour that Leopard is going to have fast user switching for Windows. Instead of rebooting into Windows you simply log out of Mac OS X and into Windows. Personally I'd prefer a Wine style approach but this approach still works well. That's well thought out as well.

iLife has been well thought out as well and is simple, yet powerful. Sit down with GarageBand and you'll see what I mean.

The simplicity of Apple's software while at the same time still retaining their power is something short of brilliant and something sadly lacking in much of the PC world. Trying doing what iLife does for its price on Windows. Simply can't be done.

But I've just recently taken up MacOS X programming using XCode and this is where Apple shines. Forget about universal binaries for a second. Apple's frameworks are nothing short of brilliant. I can literally create a functioning but basic web browser using Apple's frameworks in less than 10 minutes while writing a grand total of 0, that's right zero, lines of code all using Interface Builder. That's well thought out development.

To me it's the little things that count and Apple's attention to minute detail is what puts it ahead in this world of boring PCs. A lick of paint makes no difference. It's still a boring Windows based PC and if they stick Linux on it then it's still a boring Linux based PC. A look at the box of a Mac gives you that feeling that you are going to have an experience as opposed to a bland cardboard box experience. Some may think paying $99(US)/year for .Mac is a waste of money but they haven't used it to the fullest. While iTMS is not yet available to NZ those overseas that use it can't help but enjoy the experience.

Apple doesn't sell machines, it sells an experience like nothing that is in the market today. The machines may be expensive, the services may be the most expensive but the truth is that the experience is worth all of it.

Buying a PC makes me feel like nothing more than a money tree or a dupe and that doesn't compell me to buy their products. I work with them all day all week except weekends and weeknights and I bore of them too quickly. I'd rather have a pitchfork driven into my brain than put up with the complete lack of attention to detail and development that goes into a whitebox PC. It is that attention to detail that is why i love Macs.


Other related posts:
Mac Vodem Software on Vodafone NZ
Vodafone Mobile Connect - How's it stack up?
It's here it's here it's here (giggles like a little school girl)


Permalink to Why I'm an Apple fan | Add a comment (12 comments) | Main Index




Comment by JAMMAN2110, on 19-Nov-2006 21:05

So are you just complaining about the cases that PCs have or?


Author's note by lowededwookie, on 19-Nov-2006 23:47

It's more than just the case.
Apple is a progressive company, it doesn't rest on its laurels for very long. It progresses technology by forgoing older technology.
How many of you use PS2, Serial, or Parallel ports on your PCs? And yet they are still there. Look at any Mac since the first iMac that was released. All legacy ports have been removed.
Look at the current crop of Macs. What video port do they use? VGA? No. They are using DVI.
Apple sets standards by getting rid of old standards. Would USB be where it is if it wasn't for Apple? NO. USB got where it is because Apple ditched all legacy ports with the first iMacs forcing hardware developers to build USB devices.
What's in something like a Mac Mini? Does it have anything that doesn't need to be there? No. It has SATA, FireWire, USB, and DVI as its main connectors. It adds WiFi, Bluetooth 2, and DVD Writer (SuperDrive). By only having the necessities could Apple build the Mini. And they did so using Core Duo effectively giving the little bugger 2 processors.
As I mentioned Apple has put a lot of thought into every little piece that makes up the Mac including the Operating System. They've made it easy for the end user and with XCode they've made it easy for the developers developing the software for the end user.
It's not just a case and an OS that puts Apple ahead, it's the thought gone into providing only what people need while not supporting old stuff that people don't need. Sure there is the odd occasion that requires older technology - stingy service companies for example that won't pay money to upgrade their systems with later technology, but most of these don't use Macs and therefore Apple can get away with killing off already dead technology.
Microsoft is locked into providing backwards compatibility whereas Apple has basically come out swinging saying if you want to remain in the past then do so, but we aren't supporting you. And so they should. They did it with MacOS 9 and they even do it with MacOS X to a certain extent (software written for MacOS X.4 won't neccesarily run in MacOS X.3 for example).
It is interesting though isn't it? The company that propelled Intel into the future wasn't a PC company. It wasn't Microsoft, IBM, Dell, or Sun. It was someone who was traditionally the "Intel Outside" regime. Microsoft wouldn't have done that. Microsoft has never pushed new technology ahead. It took them forever to bring out a WIMP OS, a GUI OS when just about everyone else (bar maybe UNIX) had one.
It's the thinking that makes Apple a great company. I fail to see any of that in the PC world. But then hey, it is my opinion.


Comment by juha, on 20-Nov-2006 08:11

Heh. What's the difference between "a PC" and "an Apple Mac"?

Uhmm... none? ZOMFG! They use the same hardware!

You can get PC mini-PCs too, you know. Other than that, good one-eyed troll.


Author's note by lowededwookie, on 20-Nov-2006 08:43

I feel sorry for you man. So very very sorry for you man:

http://www.littlepc.com/products_wireless.htm

http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/744/xx/xx/105/9/criteresn.html

http://www.i-tech.com.au/products/334_Shuttle_Barebone_Mini.asp

http://www.littlepc.com/products_wireless.htm

Compared to:

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

Yes a PC is a PC is a PC but why is there so very little thought going into Windows PC boxes? So very very little thought.

And this is what I'm getting at.

Of course I don't expect Windows owners to understand.


Comment by portege, on 20-Nov-2006 09:56

I am about to ditch my world of Windows PC and buy a MacBook within the next week - I have never used a Mac before


Comment by bradstewart, on 20-Nov-2006 14:33

The reason Mac doesn't have to support  legacy applications is because its irrelevant and nobody uses them. Trust me having less than 2% market does not count towards anything. Mac occupy a niche market period.

And really why would you want to pay all that extra money for a pretty box which you don't spend all day looking looking at anyway. Unless of course you are a Mac user. They need to console themselves somehow... "hey at least it has a pretty box" cos they don;t have anything else going for them.

Mac used to be able to claim they were different, but now.. just a glorified PC, how on earth do you justify the huge price differential? Oh thats right... pretty box. How lame.


Comment by juha, on 20-Nov-2006 14:42

I can't afford Macs.... with the US pricing I probably could, but not with the high NZ one. Want a Mac Pro, but the 2.5GHz model is $6,799.00
including GST
Without Monitor

Ouch


Comment by portege, on 20-Nov-2006 15:21

The MacBook is only $2500 at education prices - it has Duo Core 2 - 2GHz, 4MB cache, 1G RAM, and 80G hard drive. Good value - the SZ 32 has only a 1.66 Core 2 chip with 2MB chache, 512MB ram and 80GB harddrive


Comment by freitasm, on 20-Nov-2006 16:54

AFAIK Windows supports the hardware. If the manufacturers don't use the hardware, how is this Microsoft's fault?

As for supporting legacy applications, if Microsoft stops supporting applications from one point release to another, like Apple does from 10.2 to 10.3 and 10.4 the world would come complaining on slashfud about how greedy the company is. Coming from Apple this is ok, and "progressive".

Simply use the best tool for your needs. If you like Apple Mac OS, don't try to force the others to like it like you do. As simple as that.

 


Comment by alasta, on 20-Nov-2006 16:55

Personally, I would rather use a Mac because I find that the OS has a more polished and intuitive user interface, and I feel that the applications integrate much better. Unfortunately I'm not prepared to pay a massive premium for these benefits, so I tend to use my Windows PC these days rather than forking out big money to replace my aging iBook.


Author's note by lowededwookie, on 20-Nov-2006 19:44

Freitasm, you have just fallen into a big trap that many people have fallen into.
Dot releases for MacOS X aren't the same as other dot releases for other software.
10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5 are ALL new versions of OSs in much the same way Win95 is a different version to Win98 or XP.
While many apps are backwards compatible they aren't always if coded incorrectly. Apps programmed using XCode on 10.4 won't run on 10.3 unless backwards compatibility has been installed into XCode.
While this may seem like a ploy on Apple's part to push its latest OS, it is actually more to do with pushing new technology. Look at the features of Leopard over Tiger and you'll see that they are not small changes.
Jaguar had over 150 new features over Puma whereas Tiger had over 150 new features over Jaguar. These dot releases are not just little version releases on Apple's part. Those are left to dotdot releases, e.g. 10.4.8.
By saying, this software won't run in Jaguar is generally due to a change in XCode or frameworks enabling features that just can't be added into Jaguar without major updates... Oh wait, that's what Itger was. ;-)
Software written for XP features won't run in 2000 as will be the case of software written for features in Vista. It's called progression, something Microsoft is NOT good at. Since XP was released there have been 4 and 1 upcoming release between XP and Vista. Hell, there haven't been anymore than 2 Service Packs for XP in that time.


Comment by freitasm, on 20-Nov-2006 20:48

I still don't see how this relates to "innovation". Your previous rant was about enabling new hardware. As I said, why is Microsoft's fault if manufacturers don't put new hardware in their machines? For Apple is much easier, being it a closed system.

 


Add a comment

Please note: comments that are inappropriate or promotional in nature will be deleted. E-mail addresses are not displayed, but you must enter a valid e-mail address to confirm your comments.

Are you a registered Geekzone user? Login to have the fields below automatically filled in for you and to enable links in comments. If you have (or qualify to have) a Geekzone Blog then your comment will be automatically confirmed and shown in this blog post.

Your name:

Your e-mail:

Your webpage:

lowededwookie's profile

Loweded Wookie
New Plymouth
New Zealand


I'm a Mac user and as such see some of the cooler side of the computing world.

I don't say this as a fanboy but as someone who lives both sides of the fence.