A
AVB19Peace
Apple Macintosh OS X 10.4.7
Peace,
AVB
Peace,
AVB
Non MS Computer Operating Systems.
- Thread starter madmedic
- Start date
Mac people check this out WWDC Keynote 
A
AVB19Peace
The Mac Pro is awesome. Not for your average consumer, but when you're doing video, it will do quite nice. Now if Adobe would quit playing games and create native binaries for After Effects, Photoshop, etc...then everything will be great.Tito said:Mac people check this out WWDC Keynote
There's some great new features and tweaks with the latest OS, OS X 10.5 Leopard, that will be coming out. Check it out: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard
While I do like MacOS X, I must say that from what can be seen in the keynote, this new release is the least interesting one since the birth of MacOS X and it's new releases.
I too was a little let down. But I guess they did just rework their entire product line and that's no small feat. Does anyone else feel that Apple now has turned the corner so to speak with the masses? And do you think that this time it will take?
Ashe said:
I agree with you and did feel a little let down, that said they did outright say that there were some new functionalities that were being kept under wraps until release. I think for the most part the things they talked about at WWDC were new/better toolsets for 3rd party developers to use (WWDC does after all stand for World Wide Developers Conference)... I don't think that his Steveness has pulled the rabbit completely out of the hat yet for this iteration of OS/X if anything I'd say we've just seen the ears.
A
AVB19Peace
I'm new here, but I gotta get in this. You guys have been spoiled with Mac OS X. 
Like TheYoshi has stated, this is the WWDC, not MacWorld or soon to be MacExpo. Those are the places for the "One more thing" types of releases.
Saying that, we haven't seen everything with 10.5 yet. They can't give everything away so Microsoft can try to imitate it when they finally release Vista in 2010. The new features and tweaks look like they have great production value. If you don't use the features built into OS X, then they won't seem that useful, but I do and think they will add to my productivity.
64-Bit - Built for both Intel and PowerPC processors so both get to take advantage of it.
Time Machine - OS X is damn stable as it is, but how cool is it to have a built in backup system? This thing will back up your entire system and do incremental backups. You can also retrieve individual files instead of having to turn back your entire system to a previous state which never really worked that well.
iChat - Being able to video chat with screen sharing opens up a ton of possiblities. Showing a Keynote presentation while you're video conferencing is awesome. Built right into the OS, no third party junk which people try to do with PowerPoint. The background and video effects are for consumers to goof around. Keep in mind, Apple once again, is the first to adapt technology and make them standard in their machines with the iSight camera built in.
iCal - Being able to share calendars, schedule meetings, equipment, check user availability, etc...is a great thing that a lot of people want and need to do. I dig iCal as it is, but having this capability is great and built into the OS. No third party software to have to do this. My previous boss spent $5,000. on Scheduall to do this and was Windows only, didn't have internet features and couldn't do quite a bit. That was the $10,000. version of scheduall.
IMHO, Apple has the most stable OS built on UNIX. The best looking (will be even better in Leopard) and most userfriendly OS out there. The most secure OS with not one (maybe one) true virus that's been written. For almost a third of the price of Windows (depending on which version out of the 8 or 10 they have out), it's a no brainer to upgrade. Remember, this is all built into the OS, so you don't have to add on third party software just to get going on what most people need to do.
Not to mention, when you get a Mac and want to do what most people do nowadays, it just works. It's hard to beat that on it's own, but Apple seems to do it.
Like TheYoshi has stated, this is the WWDC, not MacWorld or soon to be MacExpo. Those are the places for the "One more thing" types of releases.Saying that, we haven't seen everything with 10.5 yet. They can't give everything away so Microsoft can try to imitate it when they finally release Vista in 2010. The new features and tweaks look like they have great production value. If you don't use the features built into OS X, then they won't seem that useful, but I do and think they will add to my productivity.
64-Bit - Built for both Intel and PowerPC processors so both get to take advantage of it.
Time Machine - OS X is damn stable as it is, but how cool is it to have a built in backup system? This thing will back up your entire system and do incremental backups. You can also retrieve individual files instead of having to turn back your entire system to a previous state which never really worked that well.
iChat - Being able to video chat with screen sharing opens up a ton of possiblities. Showing a Keynote presentation while you're video conferencing is awesome. Built right into the OS, no third party junk which people try to do with PowerPoint. The background and video effects are for consumers to goof around. Keep in mind, Apple once again, is the first to adapt technology and make them standard in their machines with the iSight camera built in.
iCal - Being able to share calendars, schedule meetings, equipment, check user availability, etc...is a great thing that a lot of people want and need to do. I dig iCal as it is, but having this capability is great and built into the OS. No third party software to have to do this. My previous boss spent $5,000. on Scheduall to do this and was Windows only, didn't have internet features and couldn't do quite a bit. That was the $10,000. version of scheduall.
IMHO, Apple has the most stable OS built on UNIX. The best looking (will be even better in Leopard) and most userfriendly OS out there. The most secure OS with not one (maybe one) true virus that's been written. For almost a third of the price of Windows (depending on which version out of the 8 or 10 they have out), it's a no brainer to upgrade. Remember, this is all built into the OS, so you don't have to add on third party software just to get going on what most people need to do.
Not to mention, when you get a Mac and want to do what most people do nowadays, it just works. It's hard to beat that on it's own, but Apple seems to do it.
I thought the "Redmon, start your photocopiers" was again rather unprofessional. While I always have had admiration for Apple for me it's becoming less of an interesting company to buy products from seen their attitude. I will leave out the "irregularities" that have been found on their financial side. The once so clean Apple company seems to be not so clean after all but anyway, let's not jump to conclusions and let's await the extra investigations. Anyway, this is the IT industry where alot is being copied from eachother. Apple certainly is not the holy grail when it comes down to copying. They all learn from the pro's and con's of functionalities in different Operating Systems and know what eventually works and what does not. It's only normal that a company includes that what seems to work, otherwise their business model wouldn't be correct.
The "it just works" is a very good statement if you only limit yourself to specific hardware that Apple does support fine. Considering the huge amount of hardware that Microsoft supports I'd say that's pretty damn impressive too from Microsoft.
The "possible" combinations were ridiculous. Okay, there are more possible combinations compared to their old product line but come on, is it really that "wonderful"? Every commercial vendor has much more configuration possibilities than those listed by Apple.
Wat Steve mentioned was incorrect: MacOSX was not all of a sudden ported to Intel architecture, as far as I know it was developed in parallel which is a huge difference but of course that's less impressive to state.
The comparisons with Vista that were made by the SVP of Software Engineering were ridiculous from what I could see from the keynote (the keynote stream was cut off a few minutes after the SE SVP was doing his thing but I assume the guy only mentioned a couple of things that Microsoft has been working on). Microsoft has done some major changes in Vista but those aren't really touched upon (normal since it's not a MS WWDC).
Anyway, despite the fact that I do like their products and the OS I think they need to refocus their presentations towards the outside and have a more professional attitude.
The "it just works" is a very good statement if you only limit yourself to specific hardware that Apple does support fine. Considering the huge amount of hardware that Microsoft supports I'd say that's pretty damn impressive too from Microsoft.
The "possible" combinations were ridiculous. Okay, there are more possible combinations compared to their old product line but come on, is it really that "wonderful"? Every commercial vendor has much more configuration possibilities than those listed by Apple.
Wat Steve mentioned was incorrect: MacOSX was not all of a sudden ported to Intel architecture, as far as I know it was developed in parallel which is a huge difference but of course that's less impressive to state.
The comparisons with Vista that were made by the SVP of Software Engineering were ridiculous from what I could see from the keynote (the keynote stream was cut off a few minutes after the SE SVP was doing his thing but I assume the guy only mentioned a couple of things that Microsoft has been working on). Microsoft has done some major changes in Vista but those aren't really touched upon (normal since it's not a MS WWDC).
Anyway, despite the fact that I do like their products and the OS I think they need to refocus their presentations towards the outside and have a more professional attitude.
A
AVB19Peace
Typical, Apple has one thing or one so-called virus and it's all over the news, but people seem to forget the hundreds of thousands of known viruses on Windows and they're, oh so, squeaky clean business practices. Do we really want to get into what Microsoft's business practices are and have been?Ashe said:
Ashe said:
This statement is completely false. That's my whole point of using Apple. Interested in purchasing ProTools with an MBox? Yep, just about any Mac will do. Plug it in and it works. PC side? Sure, once you wade through the two pages of configurations that only will work with certain chip sets, etc... Just got a new or old external hard drive, digital camera, digital video camera, scanner, printer, etc... Plug them in and they work. You want it to be simple to network and print wirelessly? Using OS X, it can't be easier.
Ashe said:
IMHO, this is what's wrong with using Windows. I blame Microsoft because I don't like them, but really a lot of it has to do with all this third-party crap that's out there. Yes, there's some good stuff, but anybody can open up "X Company Computers" and think they can build and sell them. And of course, I'm sure they're abiding by what Microsoft sets for their quality standards.
Business wise, yep, Microsoft & Bill Gates made a ton of money and they "won" which is the only thing he cared about no matter what the cost, but Windows and the average consumer is the one paying for it literally and metaphorically.
Ashe said:
This was not MacWorld or MacExpo showing off the new iPod. It's the World Wide Developer Conference. It's called, playin' to your base.
I agree with you, my statement was a bit too close minded, my apologies.AVB19Peace said:
I'm not sure whether I understand what you mean. The days where it took the average or popular hardware to be configured using multiple pages of options are behind us. Even exotic hardware is fairly well recognized from the moment you plug it in.AVB19Peace said:
No comments on that.AVB19Peace said:IMHO, this is what's wrong with using Windows. I blame Microsoft because I don't like them, but really a lot of it has to do with all this third-party crap that's out there. Yes, there's some good stuff, but anybody can open up "X Company Computers" and think they can build and sell them. And of course, I'm sure they're abiding by what Microsoft sets for their quality standards.
Regardless of the type of audience your conferences are directed to, I think a company like Apple should always retain the same attitude. Seen the amount of hype surrounding Apple, regarding of the type of conference, they should broadcast one consistent attitude. WWDC summaries in the forms of articles are not only read by developers etc.AVB19Peace said:
For the rest I do like the products that Apple ships, I just thought the WWDC conference attitude was a bit over the edge but that's my opinion of course.
A
AVB19Peace
Ashe said:
If that's the case, then I'm not sure I understand what you mean by:
Ashe said:
I wasn't talking about the manual configuration that is so fun like in Windows 2000. I'm talking about how for the most part you don't have to think if something will work or be compatible on a Mac.
The multiple pages I was discussing was for a specific product like ProTools with MBox. We wanted to purchase it, I looked at it and basically any Mac that was built all the way to a G3 would work. My boss (engineer) wanted me to look for PC side because he thinks they're cheaper and we had one already in the room. There are tons of things to wade through to see if it would work. Certain chip sets, graphics cards, etc...wouldn't work. You almost had to be an engineer just to see if you could purchase the software. Needless to say it didn't work on the Windows machine and hummed right along on a 4 year old Mac at the time and is still running.
That's one example, but there are numerous others that people go through on the Windows side which I feel is unacceptable, but a lot of people do because that's all they know and think "that's just computers."
You're right about Apple having an attitude, but I think they almost have to when you have 6% of the market share. If not, then you will just disappear. I'm pretty sure Linux users and developers have the same attitude towards their OS compared to Windows.
My wife and I are laptop only users and don't think we would ever go back to a true desktop. We switched to a Mac about a year and half ago and would never go back! I like the idea of the duel processor with the ability to run windows and associated programs on a Mac, but an interesting secondary viewpoint came up. If you install windows on your Mac, you must keep up with the updates and patches from MS or else you could be a risk for the typical windows viruses. Part of the reason I left the world of PCs is because of the virus issue. I would hate to then infect my Mac due to that. There is only one program that I want and need and use that is PC only. I currently run that on my old desktop and if needed, I would buy a cheap laptop to replace that if needed before attempting to install and run windows on my Mac. I love my mac and don't want to screw it up with windows and windows based issues.
Darren
Darren
I replied from work but it seems it didn't make it in the forum or I never pressed the final button.
The bottomline of my message was: XP in overall has very good support and alot of hardware works fine out of the box without any special configuration steps. Considering the huge userbase and all the hardware that is available, I think XP does a very good job in recognizing and making hardware work from the moment you plug it in.
Regarding the ProTools: I don't know the product but the only thing I can say is that products tend to be designed for specific platforms. This however does not mean that that is the only platform it is able to work on. I'm sure that if I did a little research I could easily find other software/hardware that is able to work perfectly by just plugging in a Windows box while extensive manual configuration would be needed on Apple but let's not go there.
Once Apple's possible combinationswink will expand when other products are released and once Apple gains more marketshare, they too will be having much more compatibility problems but that is a guess on my end so don't take it very seriously.
In the end it all comes down to using the right tool for the job, regardless of hardware, software and operating system. If based on those requirements one decides to go for UNIX, Windows, Mac, Linux, whatever, then that's a good decision.
I agree with you that if you have a very small marketshare, one of the better ways to gain media attention is to scream to the public and compare your product with others (and make some nasty remarks), however this only has a limited impact to the big public. Eventually the great public will notice when there's a serious market shift going on by talking with relatives and friends and reading magazines, but I don't think the great public is waiting for one company to ridicule the other, regardless of its marketshare.
The bottomline of my message was: XP in overall has very good support and alot of hardware works fine out of the box without any special configuration steps. Considering the huge userbase and all the hardware that is available, I think XP does a very good job in recognizing and making hardware work from the moment you plug it in.
Regarding the ProTools: I don't know the product but the only thing I can say is that products tend to be designed for specific platforms. This however does not mean that that is the only platform it is able to work on. I'm sure that if I did a little research I could easily find other software/hardware that is able to work perfectly by just plugging in a Windows box while extensive manual configuration would be needed on Apple but let's not go there.
Once Apple's possible combinations
wink will expand when other products are released and once Apple gains more marketshare, they too will be having much more compatibility problems but that is a guess on my end so don't take it very seriously. In the end it all comes down to using the right tool for the job, regardless of hardware, software and operating system. If based on those requirements one decides to go for UNIX, Windows, Mac, Linux, whatever, then that's a good decision.
I agree with you that if you have a very small marketshare, one of the better ways to gain media attention is to scream to the public and compare your product with others (and make some nasty remarks), however this only has a limited impact to the big public. Eventually the great public will notice when there's a serious market shift going on by talking with relatives and friends and reading magazines, but I don't think the great public is waiting for one company to ridicule the other, regardless of its marketshare.
A
AVB19Peace
You're absolutely right and in this one case, the product is geared more towards Windows now. ProTools is a professional audio application which was bought by Avid. Avid killed their Mac video editing line when NT came out and thought it was cheaper. They've brought it back, but still definitely a Windows type of company.Ashe said:
Of course some things work plug-n-play on Windows. I gave one example and stated there are numerous others. Please don't insult my intelligence by insinuating that I cherry picked one product to prove a point. I've been using computers, including Mac and Windows way too long for that. I've been using them in a professional production environment including video post production, compositing, motion graphics design, DVD design & authoring, video compression and professional audio.Ashe said:
You seem to know quite a bit about Windows XP, but your points on OS X are wrong so it leads me to believe that (a) You haven't used any kind of third-party hardware on your Mac to experience the ease of use or (b) you don't use OS X and are speaking from a Windows only background giving wrong information. There's a lot of wrong information being spread on the internet and being a Mac user, I like to correct it so people can make an informed decision on what computer they would like to use.
The original point you stated, is that, it only "just works" if it's Mac hardware which is the exact opposite of what really goes on in OS X. Some other examples, plug in a USB camera into Windows XP and you still have to find a USB driver, not to mention there's no software to use it. Try using a FireWire device and see how well that goes on a regular basis. Hook up a wireless router and wireless printer. The main response I get from that is "you don't know anything about computers." RIGHT! I would've been a Computer Science major if I wanted to.
My point was with "it just works" is that all those things do just work on a Mac and all of those have software built right into the operating system that works great and is very user friendly for the average consumer. Windows users are constantly having to buy software to get anything to work and I think it's wrong.
I agree and disagree with you on this. You might be giving too much credit to the big public. It's worked for Fox News and their agenda.Ashe said:
Respectfully
Ok without jumping in guns blazing here let me start with two points of background:
1. for years I HATED macs, this was the system 7, 8, 9 and even early stages of osx years.
2. about 2 years ago I switched to a mac, and I am now a giant mac fanboy.
With that bit of background out of the way, I just say that I do agree that it's a bit risky to open up both barrels at MS like that both from a public perception standpoint and from a business standpoint. At the same time I CAN understand their corportate "feelings" around the issue as MS has taken pot shots both directly and indirectly at them over the years and they have an "underdog" mentality.
As far as the dell stuff goes, a couple thoughts. First I don't think they were so much aiming at Dell specifically as much as I think they just were showing off that price wise they aren't as overpriced as is commonly claimed by the PC bigots. I think it was more of a "hey compare us to the big PC vendor, see we're cheaper" thing and Dell just happens to be that vendor. On the other hand maybe it was a shot at Dell because Michael Dell has certainly been a complete dick about Apple in the past, suggesting that they sell their assets and split up the cash amoungst their share-holders... again can't say I blame Apple for firing a warning shot their either although I'm not sure that's what they were even going for.
1. for years I HATED macs, this was the system 7, 8, 9 and even early stages of osx years.
2. about 2 years ago I switched to a mac, and I am now a giant mac fanboy.
With that bit of background out of the way, I just say that I do agree that it's a bit risky to open up both barrels at MS like that both from a public perception standpoint and from a business standpoint. At the same time I CAN understand their corportate "feelings" around the issue as MS has taken pot shots both directly and indirectly at them over the years and they have an "underdog" mentality.
As far as the dell stuff goes, a couple thoughts. First I don't think they were so much aiming at Dell specifically as much as I think they just were showing off that price wise they aren't as overpriced as is commonly claimed by the PC bigots. I think it was more of a "hey compare us to the big PC vendor, see we're cheaper" thing and Dell just happens to be that vendor. On the other hand maybe it was a shot at Dell because Michael Dell has certainly been a complete dick about Apple in the past, suggesting that they sell their assets and split up the cash amoungst their share-holders... again can't say I blame Apple for firing a warning shot their either although I'm not sure that's what they were even going for.
TheYoshi,
The comparison with Dell was far better suited seen the fact that Apple is trying to get rid of the image that they're usually more expensive than their counterparts in the PC industry. I think it's good that 1) Apple realized this and 2) they're working on their pricemodel. There was a clear difference in comparing their Mac Pros and Xservers to Dell's systems and Leapord/OSX to Vista. But anyway, I think all of us agree on that one.
AVB,
Please note that I didn't mean to disrespect you in any way. If I would have, then please accept my apologies. It's clear from what I've read from you that you're working with Macs for quite some time and that you have far more knowledge on the platform than I have.
I also must admit that I am a person who doesn't have any real experience with Mac so indeed, my view will be rather biased from what I've been reading on the Internet. I've been working both personal and professional in environments where a multide of platforms and operating systems (mostly UNIX based) were used, however no Macs were there, so no experience yet.
Next to this and as I already stated in one of the above posts: I like Apple products and I think MacOSX is a very nice piece of software based on UNIX. I am planning to replace my computers at home with one or two very nice Intel based Macs once the 3rd gen is being introduced.
I am not saying that I'm a Windows expert nor that I have all the experience to know the ins and outs of compatibility with other products but I do know that the evolution from 98 to 2K towards XP has seen a tremendously increase in out of the box compatibility. The "out of the box" experience which all Mac users talk of is something I've heard from relatives and friends as well so I'm not countering that one either.
I cannot proove that XP has the same level of compatibility like MacOSX so I might as well stop defending my statement. I'm just stating that given the amount of hardware support provided by MS or Apple the out of the box experience will be largely the same. The big downside to the XP out of the box experience is that seen the gigantic marketshare, much more exotic hardware will be hooked up causing more compatibility issues to pop up. Again, I cannot proove this so what I state can easily be wrong.
I didn't mean to nor was it my intention to question your intelligence, let's make that clear.
The comparison with Dell was far better suited seen the fact that Apple is trying to get rid of the image that they're usually more expensive than their counterparts in the PC industry. I think it's good that 1) Apple realized this and 2) they're working on their pricemodel. There was a clear difference in comparing their Mac Pros and Xservers to Dell's systems and Leapord/OSX to Vista. But anyway, I think all of us agree on that one.
AVB,
Please note that I didn't mean to disrespect you in any way. If I would have, then please accept my apologies. It's clear from what I've read from you that you're working with Macs for quite some time and that you have far more knowledge on the platform than I have.
I also must admit that I am a person who doesn't have any real experience with Mac so indeed, my view will be rather biased from what I've been reading on the Internet. I've been working both personal and professional in environments where a multide of platforms and operating systems (mostly UNIX based) were used, however no Macs were there, so no experience yet.
Next to this and as I already stated in one of the above posts: I like Apple products and I think MacOSX is a very nice piece of software based on UNIX. I am planning to replace my computers at home with one or two very nice Intel based Macs once the 3rd gen is being introduced.
I am not saying that I'm a Windows expert nor that I have all the experience to know the ins and outs of compatibility with other products but I do know that the evolution from 98 to 2K towards XP has seen a tremendously increase in out of the box compatibility. The "out of the box" experience which all Mac users talk of is something I've heard from relatives and friends as well so I'm not countering that one either.
I cannot proove that XP has the same level of compatibility like MacOSX so I might as well stop defending my statement. I'm just stating that given the amount of hardware support provided by MS or Apple the out of the box experience will be largely the same. The big downside to the XP out of the box experience is that seen the gigantic marketshare, much more exotic hardware will be hooked up causing more compatibility issues to pop up. Again, I cannot proove this so what I state can easily be wrong.
I didn't mean to nor was it my intention to question your intelligence, let's make that clear.
A
AVB19Peace
TheYoshi said:
Apple was aiming directly at Dell. It's widely known Steve Jobs dislikes Michael Dell. After he pulled that stunt about getting rid of Apple if he had it, Steve doesn't like that. Michael Dell wishes he had the innovative team that Apple has. The funny thing is he stated he wouldn't mind putting OS X on their machines for users if Apple would allow it.
Peace,
AVB
A
AVB19Peace
Ashe said:
No problem. The internet is a hard thing to determine when it's all text. My apologies to you if I did the same.
Why didn't you say so? Damn, A Mac with OS X is right up your alley. There's a lot of UNIX programmers that have two machines. One UNIX box and one Windows box to do their e-mail, office stuff, etc...They're getting rid of both and getting Mac's with OS X. They have both OS's right there on one machine. Now, with the Intel machines they can have three with Windows on it too if they absolutely have too.Ashe said:
You can spend your entire computing time in the Terminal in OS X with Man pages and everything from UNIX. The GUI doesn't even have to be there, it's totally up to you. On the other hand, the awesome Mac GUI is there with UNIX underneath for people that don't care about UNIX.
Check into it and let me know if I can help with any questions.
2 points. . .
1. Apple is clearly David to MS's Goliath--no one would disagree with that characterization, right? So why is Goliath scurrying around whining that David is making fun of him? What's wrong with this picture? So MS will get mad at Apple and stomp them into the ground? Uh, we're already there, with less than 10% of the installed base. It sounds to me like MS is running scared of Apple, and is responding by complaining that Apple is being "mean." Why should Apple have to keep its mouth shut and be all deferential to MS?--I love Apple's recent TV ads that contrast Macs and PCs, and personally think that Apple should be even more aggressive in their marketing, and distinguish themselves from the PC side by emphasizing their advantages. Those who are offended by the company with 6% of the market promoting themselves aren't likely to switch to Mac anyway, right?
2. Although I'm a big fan of the move to Intel--and bought a MBP several months back to prove it!--I just can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would buy a Mac and then run Windows on it. Why turn off that elegant Mac GUI and use the clunky, crash-prone monstrosity that is Windows? Granted, there are some applications that only work on the Windows side, and Boot Camp makes this possible, but--to me--running Windows on a Mac is like Wynton Marsalis trading his trumpet for a kazoo, or like Jeff Gordon swapping his race car for a bike, or like Brad Pitt leaving Jennifer Anniston for Rachel Ray.
Why ask for a burger when you've got steak right in front of you for the taking?
1. Apple is clearly David to MS's Goliath--no one would disagree with that characterization, right? So why is Goliath scurrying around whining that David is making fun of him? What's wrong with this picture? So MS will get mad at Apple and stomp them into the ground? Uh, we're already there, with less than 10% of the installed base. It sounds to me like MS is running scared of Apple, and is responding by complaining that Apple is being "mean." Why should Apple have to keep its mouth shut and be all deferential to MS?--I love Apple's recent TV ads that contrast Macs and PCs, and personally think that Apple should be even more aggressive in their marketing, and distinguish themselves from the PC side by emphasizing their advantages. Those who are offended by the company with 6% of the market promoting themselves aren't likely to switch to Mac anyway, right?
2. Although I'm a big fan of the move to Intel--and bought a MBP several months back to prove it!--I just can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would buy a Mac and then run Windows on it. Why turn off that elegant Mac GUI and use the clunky, crash-prone monstrosity that is Windows? Granted, there are some applications that only work on the Windows side, and Boot Camp makes this possible, but--to me--running Windows on a Mac is like Wynton Marsalis trading his trumpet for a kazoo, or like Jeff Gordon swapping his race car for a bike, or like Brad Pitt leaving Jennifer Anniston for Rachel Ray.
Why ask for a burger when you've got steak right in front of you for the taking?
Similar threads
