Mac users' elitism

alexakasloth · 15 Jan 2007 at 22:06

Al Vallario said:
A mac may not be suited to your individual needs, but bare in mind that you are in the minority. 99% of computer users in the UK have no idea what overclocking is, couldn't care less if they have the latest graphics card and have never even thought about upgrading their computer. It would be stupid of Apple to down all tools and cater to your obscure needs and ignore 99% of the market for their products.

Whilst that is true, is it not also true that macs are in the minority? A less than 5% sharehold in the OS market (MS have 85% iirc) would make you think that.

benjo plz. · 15 Jan 2007 at 22:13

Jet said:
There's also a 20" NEC for £434 and a 20" Samsung for £240. The 20.1's don't cost loads more to make.

And there's a 32" for £370. Go figure.

Plunk13 · 15 Jan 2007 at 22:17

This thread makes me go "WOW". I think the PC fanboys and the Mac fanboys should go outside and sort this out like real (14 year old) men.

Jet · 15 Jan 2007 at 22:53

Phnom_Penh said:
And there's a 32" for £370. Go figure.

Not sure what that has to do with anything but ... anyway, your argument that 20.1 cost loads more to make is defunct.

Al Vallario · 15 Jan 2007 at 23:11

$loth said:
Whilst that is true, is it not also true that macs are in the minority? A less than 5% sharehold in the OS market (MS have 85% iirc) would make you think that.

Apple's current market share in the desktop computer market bears very little revelance as to the quality or suitability of their desktop computing products for the home computing market.

benjo plz. · 15 Jan 2007 at 23:14

Jet said:
your argument that 20.1 cost loads more to make is defunct.

Wasn't my point.

chesterstu · 15 Jan 2007 at 23:15

Why do people get involved in these arguments? because no side will ever win.

Will_3rd · 15 Jan 2007 at 23:43

chesterstu said:
Why do people get involved in these arguments? because no side will ever win.

because people keep restarting them

TheVoice · 15 Jan 2007 at 23:44

Interesting that a number of people have said that Macs don't need to be defragmented. We ran iDefrag on my housemate's iMac (it's about 6-7 months old) and the drive was very heavily fragmented. We let it do a full defrag (which was a huge hassle, because it requires the drive to be offline i.e. OSX running from another disk). The system is now a fair bit quicker now.

I've also seen his and my other housemate's Macs crash or kick up errors (inluding one that asks you to switch it off at the power button...), so they evidently aren't as problem-free as some people are making out.

I get on OK with Macs myself, but I haven't been converted in the way that Mac users seem convinced will happen as soon as somebody looks at one. I know where everything is, I know how to use one, but I still wouldn't want one as my main machine, regardless of price differences. Did look at getting a Mac notebook back in March/April (think the iBooks were still around then) but even with the NUS discount, it was still too expensive. Went for a Dell 630m instead. Would have been cool to have a different type of computer to play around with, but chances are I'd find myself wishing it was a Windows notebook after a while.

Will_3rd · 15 Jan 2007 at 23:59

TheVoice said:
Interesting that a number of people have said that Macs don't need to be defragmented. We ran iDefrag on my housemate's iMac (it's about 6-7 months old) and the drive was very heavily fragmented. We let it do a full defrag (which was a huge hassle, because it requires the drive to be offline i.e. OSX running from another disk). The system is now a fair bit quicker now.

Defragging haha it is not really necessary due to the HFS+ File System used by Mac OS X, haven't to defrag my iBook in more then a year (since I've owned it) probably need more RAM or something, Mac OS X loves RAM

TheVoice said:
I've also seen his and my other housemate's Macs crash or kick up errors (inluding one that asks you to switch it off at the power button...), so they evidently aren't as problem-free as some people are making out.

Kernel Panic, happens from time to time, rarely in my case only seen it twice on my iBook

TheVoice · 16 Jan 2007 at 01:11

He's got 1.5GB of RAM. As I said, I saw the results of the analysis prior to us actually defragmenting the drive, and it was heavily fragmented. Looks far better now.

My point is that fragmentation evidently can and does still occur.

Jet · 16 Jan 2007 at 02:11

TheVoice said:
He's got 1.5GB of RAM. As I said, I saw the results of the analysis prior to us actually defragmenting the drive, and it was heavily fragmented. Looks far better now.

My point is that fragmentation evidently can and does still occur.

I don't think anyone has said disk fragmentation doesn't occur, more that it isn't needed as often as Windows needs it. Since OSX Panther the hard-disks have cleaned up after themselves. The uninstall process with OSX is better than Windows reducing the need again.

Note:Mac OS X systems use hundreds of thousands of small files, many of which are rarely accessed. Optimizing them can be a major effort for very little practical gain. There is also a chance that one of the files placed in the "hot band" for rapid reads during system startup might be moved during defragmentation, which would decrease performance.

from Apple support.

I've owned my iBook for over a year and it's still just as quick (or slow) as it ever was.

NathanE · 16 Jan 2007 at 07:52

I've studied the HFS+/X specification and there's nothing there that would somehow prevent or reduce fragmentation. It has a design very similar to NTFS in fact... B-tree's used for every index. I suppose the fact it uses a binary tree is what causes Mac zealots to say it doesn't get fragmented. But that's not true. It's a lot better than using a linked list like FAT32 did, but still not perfect. And in any case, NTFS uses b-tree's as well.

Will_3rd · 16 Jan 2007 at 11:00

NathanE said:
I suppose the fact it uses a binary tree is what causes Mac zealots to say it doesn't get fragmented.

We didn't say that it doesn't get fragmented, Mac OS X doesn't take as much as a performance hit by running on a fragmented hard drive.

JKD · 16 Jan 2007 at 11:06

Chronos-X said:
If you could make a venn diagram of all the social groups, mac users, vegetarians and the gingers would have a pretty serious overlap.

Whats always amused me is the thought that programs that coexist on both main platforms are somehow better on a mac.

Is there a social group for mac using pony tailed designer gayers? Seriously, I respect the users who are quietly pleased with the OSX OS UNIX underpinnings, but those who bang on about the 'design asthetic' really are mac using pony tailed designer gayers.

Will_3rd · 16 Jan 2007 at 11:10

JKD said:
pony tailed designer gayers

wtf

some kind of social slur?

Visage · 16 Jan 2007 at 11:15

JKD said:
Is there a social group for mac using pony tailed designer gayers? Seriously, I respect the users who are quietly pleased with the OSX OS UNIX underpinnings, but those who bang on about the 'design asthetic' really are mac using pony tailed designer gayers.

Why does it have to be function versus form?

Whty cant people wnat a machine thats powerful *and* looks good, without being labelled by immature people such as yourself?

JKD · 16 Jan 2007 at 11:26

Visage said:
Why does it have to be function versus form?

Whty cant people wnat a machine thats powerful *and* looks good, without being labelled by immature people such as yourself?

They can. Shame there are Maz Zealots constantly knocking PC users for their choice of computing platform, and in most cases they have no idea why the Mac is better - they just accept the fact that Steve Jobs is God and can do no wrong.

I actually personally feel that the Mac form factor is stunning (esp laptop), and the OS is great - I just can't stand the uneducated zealots. The zealots I tend to come across also seem to be predominantly the aforementioned pony-tailed pillow biters.

Will_3rd · 16 Jan 2007 at 11:28

JKD said:
Shame there are Maz Zealots constantly knocking PC users for their choice of computing platform, and in most cases they have no idea why the Mac is better - they just accept the fact that Steve Jobs is God and can do no wrong.

Don't worry as a Mac and Windows user I don't like them either

JKD · 16 Jan 2007 at 11:38

Oh and I guess I should really apologise for my turn of phrase (my work mates once called me a pony-tailed gay when I happened to bring in an iBook to work - I found it amusing as I am actually bald and straight!). Some of you might not have found it so amusing.