Apple must DIE...

[chillzatl]

Quote:

---

About Xerox. While that's true... Xerox computers were never sold in the homes... So Xerox brought nothing. Had it not been for apple, this technology now called windows would not have seen the light of day.

That's simply not true man, you need to go read up on computer history a little more. Both Microsoft and Apple "borrowed" what they saw on their trip to Xerox/parc. You're just recycling what you read somewhere else. What xerox had was simply an idea, not a functional product and technically neither of them stole it. They simply took that idea and made it into functional products.

[chillzatl]

Quote:

---

I don't know Chillz. If Mac prices were competitive with Dell and Gateway prices... and the software availability had always been even... There would be nobody else. I used a mac for 10 years straight without having it crash or have a virus. I bought a gateway and it had a virus in the first month.

In my last mac, the one thing I really liked was the self updates. I didn't have to wait to use a certain application before I'm given the option to update the software. The Mac would update itself... which was pretty time saving.

As far as Business need...

I think part of that is the historical problem of software availability. However, I think I told you that once Mac made a computer than was Windows capable, they could possible change the face of computer sales.

You didn't have a crash or a virus because nobody writes virii that will only affect 100 people and it's hard to crash a system when there are no apps to install on it beyond the ones that come with it and the few the manufacturer creates for it. Apple products limit your options and by doing so, they create a more reliable environment. As any honest Mac user who admit to, as they have become more open and more software has become available for them (from non apple sources) , the stability simply is not what it used to be.

The difference between the two platforms is that one tries to limit what you can do in order to maintain the appearance of stability while the other does not limit you, but requires that you be somewhat educated and responsible in what you're doing in order to maintain that stability.

The last virus I had in my home was back in the dos/win31 days. I used XP for years with no A/V software installed and never had a virus because I'm an educated user who doesn't click on or install just anything that pops up in front of me. Apple products have plenty of security flaws and bugs and if you do some searching you will see that apple is dead last in lead time on patching those bugs and security holes.

The fact that Mac's can now run Windows does nothing to help them. They make great hardware, but hardware is still generic and people running Windows on a piece of apple hardware actually does more to hurt them than help them in the long run. I've set up two Macbooks in the last month for clients who spend all their working time on these systems in Windows. The only reason they purchased an Apple product was so they could say they owned a Mac. All their day to day activities take place in Windows and who does that benefit?

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

About Xerox. While that's true... Xerox computers were never sold in the homes... So Xerox brought nothing. Had it not been for apple, this technology now called windows would not have seen the light of day.

That's simply not true man, you need to go read up on computer history a little more. Both Microsoft and Apple "borrowed" what they saw on their trip to Xerox/parc. You're just recycling what you read somewhere else. What xerox had was simply an idea, not a functional product and technically neither of them stole it. They simply took that idea and made it into functional products.

Is this arguing without reading...

My first statement:

Quote:

---

About Xerox.

While that's true...

Xerox computers were never sold in the homes..

I have saw/ read about the pirates of the silicon valley and I do know that both Jobs and Gates supposedly stole technology ideas. What I'm saying is this Xerox had no plan to take their product to market in the manner in which Jobs did. Xerox allowed Jobs to view the technology for shares in his company according to one Executive with Xerox PARC.

The point is that while Xerox was more focused on copiers and printers, that portion of their computer R&D was going down the drain.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I don't know Chillz. If Mac prices were competitive with Dell and Gateway prices... and the software availability had always been even... There would be nobody else. I used a mac for 10 years straight without having it crash or have a virus. I bought a gateway and it had a virus in the first month.

In my last mac, the one thing I really liked was the self updates. I didn't have to wait to use a certain application before I'm given the option to update the software. The Mac would update itself... which was pretty time saving.

As far as Business need...

I think part of that is the historical problem of software availability. However, I think I told you that once Mac made a computer than was Windows capable, they could possible change the face of computer sales.

You didn't have a crash or a virus because nobody writes virii that will only affect 100 people and it's hard to crash a system when there are no apps to install on it beyond the ones that come with it and the few the manufacturer creates for it. Apple products limit your options and by doing so, they create a more reliable environment. As any honest Mac user who admit to, as they have become more open and more software has become available for them (from non apple sources) , the stability simply is not what it used to be.

The difference between the two platforms is that one tries to limit what you can do in order to maintain the appearance of stability while the other does not limit you, but requires that you be somewhat educated and responsible in what you're doing in order to maintain that stability.

The last virus I had in my home was back in the dos/win31 days. I used XP for years with no A/V software installed and never had a virus because I'm an educated user who doesn't click on or install just anything that pops up in front of me. Apple products have plenty of security flaws and bugs and if you do some searching you will see that apple is dead last in lead time on patching those bugs and security holes.

The fact that Mac's can now run Windows does nothing to help them. They make great hardware, but hardware is still generic and people running Windows on a piece of apple hardware actually does more to hurt them than help them in the long run. I've set up two Macbooks in the last month for clients who spend all their working time on these systems in Windows. The only reason they purchased an Apple product was so they could say they owned a Mac. All their day to day activities take place in Windows and who does that benefit?

The thing about it is that Mac is the only maker who is original. There are all kinds of PCs... all kinds of generic this and that. However, Mac seems to lead the world in innovation and PCs follow suit. Many of the New features from windows to windows was done "generations" ago on a mac. I think that's really the problem you have. Is that you don't want to believe the hype. But the hype is true. Mac leads the way for these other computer systems.. And while what you said is true about Viruses not being written for Macs, the average computer user don't want to have to be "responsible" when they use their computer. They don't want to worry about weather or not the isp that they are using will be compromised by a virus. How much do you think Symantec and McAffee and Norton makes annually just because you're trying to be "responsible"?

Quote:

---

Symantec is ranked # 728 on the 2007 Forbes 2000 List

If we haven't learned anything, we have learned that there's profit in security.