As a long-time Windows user who got a MacBook last year, I love the slickness of OS X and the integration with the hardware, but I loathe the window management. I thought it was just because it's novel, but it seems just as illogical after six months as it did on the first day.
What is it that makes people hate Apple so much?
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,094
- Location
- Surrey
Lack of blu ray, no firewire support on later MBP models, thunderbolt, no USB 3 option, mini-display rather than HDMI, paying extra for matte screen coatings, Lion being download only rather than on DVD (yes you can buy an overpriced USB key but sod that), in Mac Pros the upgradability is pretty limited, all things that could change if Apple didn't want to dictate to the market, having to use iTunes with an iPhone (I don't care about his per-se, more the principal of it). I could go on but I think you get the gist.
Most of your points are completely irrelevant.
Blu-Ray - storage is supported via software, just not watching movies due to licensing reasons. (Plus a vested interest in iTunes)
No Firewire on later MBP models - Wrong. The MBP has always had a Firewire port.
No USB 3 option - as with almost all other pro notebooks it's not supported in the chipset therefore missing. Wait for Ivy Bridge. In the meantime it has Firewire 800 and Thunderbolt for fast external storage so it's no hardship.
HDMI - It's a pro notebook. Displays in company offices don't use HDMI. Mini-DP is smaller and far more adaptable supporting VGA/DVI and HDMI via a small adaptor.
Lion - all new Macs come with internet recovery. It can recover the latest version of the OS via EFI and an internet connection. If you really need a DVD then burn your own as it's simple enough.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,094
- Location
- Surrey
Do any models come with a blu ray drive? No.
Firewire 400 is missing, 800 is there, but how would I hook up my HDV camera or tape deck to it, you can't get as far as I'm aware an 800 to DV cable.
Firewire 800 is a hell of a lot slower than Thunderbolt or USB 3. Even Esata is faster, which thankfully I use on my MBP which has an express slot. (discontinued WHY!?)
HDMI > DVI is not a pain. Not tried HDMI to VGA, not sure that's possible so you may win there.
Lion - Apple don't seem to realise that there are people who live in areas with slow internet, that there are people who might only have 10GB download allowance on their contract per month. That's some bullcrap right there.
So that would be 90% of my points where my argument stands up...
Firewire 400 is missing, 800 is there, but how would I hook up my HDV camera or tape deck to it, you can't get as far as I'm aware an 800 to DV cable.
Firewire 800 is a hell of a lot slower than Thunderbolt or USB 3. Even Esata is faster, which thankfully I use on my MBP which has an express slot. (discontinued WHY!?)
HDMI > DVI is not a pain. Not tried HDMI to VGA, not sure that's possible so you may win there.
Lion - Apple don't seem to realise that there are people who live in areas with slow internet, that there are people who might only have 10GB download allowance on their contract per month. That's some bullcrap right there.
So that would be 90% of my points where my argument stands up...
So what you're saying is that the MacBook doesn't have certain features, and therefore you're being 'dictated to'. How is that different from any other laptop or computing product in the world? They all have certain combinations of features and not others. All products are a compromise to some extent... it's not a matter of you being 'dictated to'...!
It's not officially supported. End Of. Given that a vocal minority of Apple consumers are foaming at the mouth requesting they remove all optical drives to save weight, Blu-Rays days appear to be numbered. If you really do need one then fit one internally to a Mac Pro or buy an external drive.
Wrong. The "DV" Cable is Firewire 400 without the power pins. Cable to convert to Firewire 400 or "DV" are widely available. I'm looking at one connected to my Panasonic DVR.
Of course Firewire 800 is slower than Thunderbolt and USB3 - it's a ten year old standard and they are not. Firewire 800 is at least twice as fast as USB2 which came out around the same time and has far less overheads.
HDMI to VGA (i.e. analogue) is not possible. HDMI also supports far fewer resolution and refresh rate choices then DVI. DisplayPort covers just about everything and has a smaller connector. Mini-DP is therefore better.
In which case you can pop into the nearest Apple Store and borrow their connection, or ask a mate and pop round for a brew. If you really are on 56k dialup in a jungle somewhere then they've provided the USB key option, assuming UPS can locate you.
I think not.
It's not Apple per se, it's more how a significant portion of their users, particularly those in the media seem to portray them as the second coming of Christ, in terms of the media coverage they give them.
No other company seems to get this sort advertising and **** sucking from the media apart from maybe Facebook.
No other company seems to get this sort advertising and **** sucking from the media apart from maybe Facebook.
On the online distribution point... Apple is ahead of the game here. Physical software distribution is on the way out. Look at game downloads via Steam, the various app stores, etc. I bet it won't be long before it's difficult to buy a disc copy of Windows in a shop as well.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,094
- Location
- Surrey
I see where you and others are coming from regarding specs but I still think Apple prefer the mini display port as they get to sell their overpriced adapters to you. I have a DVI out on mine which is perfect.
FireWire as I said 400 to DV connector work fine with my laptop also, but I'd need another adapter to go from 800 to DV, correct?
Much as I deplore what I think are Apples tactics, I use Apple products exclusively (MBP and iPhone) both which I'm more than happy with.
Mini-DP. There are non-Apple adaptors available - I'm using a £9 one for HDMI duties and there are similar priced DVI ones as well. The VGA and dual-link DVI ones have clever gubbins in in them so they are worth buying a reputable brand.
Mini-DP really is the future, Apple were ahead of the curve on this one. You'll mainly find HDMI ports on consumer kit so it's easier for them to plug into their TVs.
800 to mini-400 (or "DV") - yes.
Mini-DP really is the future, Apple were ahead of the curve on this one. You'll mainly find HDMI ports on consumer kit so it's easier for them to plug into their TVs.
800 to mini-400 (or "DV") - yes.
I agree with just about everything you said, however I don't agree with a number of people that say it is only because people have used windows a lot more. People just do things in different ways. I use a mac at home extensively now but I still find it very frustrating in a number of ways due to the extra time/complexity of doing some things.
Such as this. Window management is a pet hate on OSX, it's just not as productive. I know you can download things to make it better but that shouldn't be something you have to do with an integral part of an OS. My productivity at work would plummet if I had to use OSX instead of windows for just this reason (aside from the fact none of the programs I use would run and the issue with hardware specs - Mac pro has some holes).
Other people of course love it and loathe the way windows does window management. Personal preference is regularly more important than experience IMO. And that leads us to the OP's question... Users of OSX that insist that OSX is better for everyone and that you are somehow an MS fanboy/haven't used OSX enough if you don't find it better. (not pointing that comment at anyone in particular btw).
Last edited:
In regards to the title, I think it's ignorance mostly.
In my department at York Uni, we all started off with overclocked Window's PCs in first year.
By second year we were forced to use Linux (slackware) for software development for a whole year and ended up loving it.
By third/forth year nearly everyone was using Mac OSX, all the advantages of linux with the polish of a commercial OS.
When ever I have to use windows these days it's painful not being able to use Unix Commands in the terminal. Apart from .net development I never use Windows anymore, I just don't have a use for it and find it slow and prone to freezing.
In my department at York Uni, we all started off with overclocked Window's PCs in first year.
By second year we were forced to use Linux (slackware) for software development for a whole year and ended up loving it.
By third/forth year nearly everyone was using Mac OSX, all the advantages of linux with the polish of a commercial OS.
When ever I have to use windows these days it's painful not being able to use Unix Commands in the terminal. Apart from .net development I never use Windows anymore, I just don't have a use for it and find it slow and prone to freezing.
I do think Apple have missed a trick in all this as well though. Without trying to get this thread closed, they would have millions more customers who would possibly buy their hardware if their licensing terms allowed you to install their OS on non-Apple hardware. I'd pay £30 for OSX in that case, which is the only way (currently) they'd get any of my money!
I mean, seriously, a macbook must be the worlds most expensive hardware protection dongle, right?
I mean, seriously, a macbook must be the worlds most expensive hardware protection dongle, right?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
I doubt Apple would make much/any money on selling OSX for £30 a pop to any tom, dick and harry. If those millions of extra customers don't translate into appropriate increases in profit, or worse, a loss, why would Apple bother?
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
There's a reason Windows starts at at least £60+ to buy a license.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,830
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
Yup, £30.... to be run on your Mac that has made Apple a colossal profit so they can afford to offer the software for cheap. Run it on non-Apple hardware and the cost would have to go up to make it viable.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,094
- Location
- Surrey
Apple have always aimed themselves at running their software on specific hardware. Windows has always aimed themselves at running their software on anything. Macs are viewed that 'they just work' partly because of their stricter hardware policy. If Apples opened up OSX to be installed on any old hardware, the complaints would come flooding in about stuff not working and it would tarnish the brand. Not to mention that it would need a massive amount of work on Apples front to encompass the amount of hardware windows can cope with.
Oh guys I know all that. It was just a comment, simple as. But the point remains, I'd buy OSX to run on my hardware if the cost was reasonable. Which would mean I had a reason to think about buying their hardware if it performed much better....